^, IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) y ^ 1.0 1.1 ■a 128 12.5 !£ ti& 12.0 u |l.25 1 U |,.6 > < 6" ► Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STRiBT WEBSTH,N.Y. 14580 (716)t72-4S03 .m y.^ ^ <^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiqu les Technical and Bibliographic Notat/Notat taohnlquaa at bibliographiques to The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. ^ Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ □ Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur D D D Coloured ink (I.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ I I Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur □ Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autres documents D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion ie long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves addisd during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans ie texte, mais. lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires: L'initltut ■ microfilm* le meilleur exemplaire qu'll lul ■ At* possible de se procurer. Les details da oat aNamplaIre qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier una Image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modlfleatlon dans la mithode normals de filmage •ont indiqute ci-dessous. D D D G2 D 0' D D D D Coloured pages/ Pages da couleur Pages damaged/ Pages andommegAes Paget restored and/or laminated/ Paget rattaurAas et/ou peiliculAes Paget discoloured, stained or foxed/ Paget dAeolorAes, tachetdes ou piqudes Pages detached/ Paget dAtachAes Showthrough/ Trantparanee Quality of print varies/ QualitA InAgala de I'impression Includes tupplementary material/ Comprond du matAriel supplAmentaIre Only edition available/ Seulo Adition disponibie Paget wholly or partially obscured by errata tllpt, tittuet, etc., have been refilmed to anture the bett possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obtourclat par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, ate., ont AtA filmAes A nouveau de fapon A obtonir la meilleure image possible. Th po of fill Or be th( sio oti fin aio or Th< sha Ti^ wh Mai diff enti beg righ reqi met This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmA au taux de rAduction indiquA ci-dettout. 10X 14X 18X wm 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X ire details 108 du modifier ler une filmage &es errata to pelure, on A 32X : Th« copy fllm«d her* hat b««n raproducMl thanks to tha ganaroaity of: Douglas Library Quaan's Univarsity Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha bast quality possibia considaring tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in Icaaping with tha filming contract apacif icationa. Original copias in printad papar covars ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- sion, or tha bacic covar whan appropriata. All othar original copiaa ara filmad baginning on tha first paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- sion, and anding on tha laat paga with a printad or illuatratad imprassion. Tha last racordad frama on aach microficha shall contain tha symbol ^^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol y (moaning "END"), whichavar appliaa. Maps, platas. charta, ate, may ba filmad at different reduction ratioa. Those too large to ba entirely included in one exposure ara filmad beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames aa required. The following diagrams illuatrata the method: 1 2 3 L'axamplaira filmA fut raproduit grica A la g4n4roait4 da: Douglas Library Queen's University Lea images suivantaa ont At* raproduitea avac la plua grand soin. compta tenu de la condition at da la nattat* da raxemplaira film*, et en conformity avac las conditlona du contrat de filmaga. Lea axamplairas originaux dont la couvarture en papier eat ImprimAa aont fiimia an commandant par la premier plat at •n termlnant soit par la darniira paga qui comporta une empreinte d'impraaaion ou d'illuatration, aoit par la aacond plat, aalon le caa. Tous lea autras axemplairas originaux sont filmAs an commenpant par la premiere paga qui comporta una empreinte d'impraaaion ou d'illuatration et en termlnant par la darnlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un dea aymbolaa suivants apparaftra sur la darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: la aymbole — »^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planchea, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmte ii das taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un aaui ciichA, il eat film* A partir da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A drolte, et de haut en bas, an pranant la nombre d'imagaa n^caaaaira. Lea diagrammes suivants illustrant la mAthoda. 1 2 3 4 5 6 X-? CUD EfUl ^/|,*-<,-v— — METHODISM UNMASKED > IN A REVIEW OF K A Vindication of the MethodistiCburcU n (MO CAIiliED,) «m A PASTORAL ADDRESS/'. '; "BY BKNJAMIN NANKEVILL, WESLEY AN MINISTER.' 4 ^■^^^•■•-^^•■: < :'.■'.■■; BY J. A. MULOCK, PRKSBYTER OF THE CHTTRCH OF KNGf.ANU. li "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.' <*. OARLETON PLACE, C. W.: ' PRINTED BY SMITH tt OSWELL, OGDENBBURGII, N. Y. i^ 1850. ^^ ^^ Fioza ■ • • • • • • • • * ••• • » «« •• • • • • • « • • » » • • • REV. Sj vv and oflt'ii, displayed dosigned/j tion of su Primitive ( would bo J thereto, by .*• •. The Rev. J, Y; M CARLETON PLACE, March aist, 1850. REV. SIR; Wc, the undersigned, Cliurchwardons of your several Churches, being much grieved and ofl'cnded at the gross perversion of truth and the great want of even common honesty, displayed in an "Adrlrcss" of IMr. Nankoville, M«'tlio(iist Preacher, wherein we fear he has designedly slandered both the Ciiurch of England and yoursi-lf, having lu.-ard your refuta- tion of HJiid '-Address," showing modern Methodism to be at variance witli the Bible, the Primitive Church, the Cliurch of England, and Mr. Wesley, think the publication of it would be productive of niucli good, and request that you will be kind enough to consent thereto, by which you will much oblige your slandered Parishioners. (Signed) JAS. ROSAMOND, HENRY HAWKINS, JOHN HALPENNY, ABRAHAM CODD, JOHN BOLAND, RICHARD COLLINS. The Rev. John A. Mulock. 77907 CONTENT?^. INTRODUCTION. CHAP. 1.— Confirmation. " 2. — TiiF. CiiriKH OK Rnguani) nuioitr. the Kkfoiiimation. , •' 3. — SuTJ'OStD OkDINATION dV |)H, ('tl|\h, " 4.— Supposed Okdination or Mil. Afiuunv. « 5. — That thf, Genf.kai. Commuim t: iiki.d at Pai.timopvE did not AT THAT TIME UXAMMOIJSIA' ItaMVc Thomas Coke and Francis AscuiiY Bishops. " 6. — Supposed Ordi.nations ior FyntAND, " 7.~SurposED Ordi.vationh ion Hcotland. " 8.— En-coPAcy. 0. — Apostolic Succession. 10. — Ti;sTiMo:;iEs is favok ci rnr roRScoiro 11.— Bl: HOPS AND PREsnVTtR;. lox Tiir, ■•AMt Oiitirrv. 12.— The necessary Erudition or a CurustiAN man. ]3. — Licensing of Joiin Monuiao.s'. 14. — A charge of falsehoo;'. 15. — Wesley not a Di-stNTrji. ' l6.~Tnn force of Pkejud:cc. 17. — Prejudiced and uNPREJuDrcrp rflT!«t.\Ttoy or the Book of Ccmmon Prater. 18. — Nu.MEIUCAL strength NO PRUpr OF A TUUC CliUKCH. 19. — Wesley a Church.man. 20. — The early Methodist Pucacjiers and the decisions of Confereitce. 21.— Church and State. 22.— SciusM. ' 23.— POFERY outstripped. CONCLUSION. w n tl INTRODUCTION AT THAT SC13 ASEfJiV iMo:« Prater- ■RENCZ. The better to undentnncl tlic fo'lovving roirnrk», nntl to rrrlvo nt coned ideas as to tliev origin of :!ie oontrovei'-Y bclwce.i tlic Mothodists iiiul myscll', it will Ijc nocossnry to tnke ' a retrospective view, uikI tr.iwi llic maltor to ila fir-.l niul iiiovinif cnuso. Tlu; BisiKip of Toronto nnving hiy^/ifiod his intention of viMiiiiifr my parixli for tliu pur- po:io of lii.ldMiyc"ntir!i).it'on, I conceiveil it niv duty to oxpliiiii tim iwiUiio of thitt tipostoU ic and HwMpiun^l ntu, ami to pre-n npoii luy ln.Mi'er.i tlio iieuoHiiiV of l\•^\, vitiil, personal religion. My objcc: in iliis vVus iwot'old. 1st, tu remind IIiohc vvlio I'.r/l idro.uly been eontirincd, of tlic >io:eiiin vows whicii they ihon took, und of llio oHIijrntiona eonsequent tlitreon, to " live righteously, soberly and Rodly, in this presicnl world i"'--lo w.-irn the old' ftud grey-headed th:.t their lime on cnrth waH short, — thit a reckoniniT would soon be made witii thcin, whrii they v.-ouUI have to give ;i fiiUil'id nviimnt of tlu; doedB dorc in the llcah, whether they be t;ood or whether ihey bo o\il. 2dlv, to explain to those who were al'oui to be conUnned, ilie memin;; and orifjin of iheccri'inony ;--'ih(! i'"epTntion no- . cessarv to be made ;o be.-omo worthy p.a'Licitiatorr,: — lln' moiive-i by wliieh .iiey 'Should be I influenced; — the dnliea io v>luiii liiey vv-onld be oomid ; — ilin oblisfalory nnlnro of itH re- quirements, and ilic blcHsintrs that miphi be expceled by those wiio eiiiered upon ii with a pure and undivided heir;. In |;roi 'cudng tiio iubjeei. afier f;'ivin:f cstrneUi from Script- i ure, and from .snnio of 'ho. cirly ehrisii'-.r..-:, as well i^"-: from ihe KefuvminM, I merit'oiied t the nuncs of .Adam C'lurk and .John Wesley, and ^mvo a f"W fiuoi.TtionHfrom the Latter, to / show the esiimation in v/hieh he held this ordinnnee of the (Jhnreli of Ins \ows, — the - Chureli of En/^land. "Here id rhe lieMd and IVoat of my otfendmn',' — here in theciuso of.) all the l^;ingj dinder, and evil ■ pcikiny, poured upun the hend of one, luieonseious oi 'l?ie hostility Which his conduet Wiis about ■') provoke. In my diwotir:e ! made not one re- mark to hurt the feelinys of any individual. J pissed no eonnuent upon the words of .Mr. Wesley, .and eonelnded Ipv inviTin|)ped on the road by u leader of the .Mcihodist connexion and I charj^ed with 'attaekin^r their body and giving' extr.iets. as from .Mr. Wesley, whieh he ne- ver uttered." On beini^ ai^ked for ihose exlr.iels, 1 ;,t tuiee di unounled. tied my hor.so to the feme, entered ila hou-e and handed him my .Seiin ni. I rem.iinediin hour and t>Y-nty ininute.s, and on Mr. Siephenson takiui; whut he riquii'i'd and eNpressiiin' liimself sr- ''is a, he reiurned mo the Sermon, lieinp' in a ;;reai hurry, yet wisliini.f to ^rive all the sati>'> .e- tion in my power, F [iroj i.-.ed U) vealii, tellino him at iho same lime Io slop me whenever I eame to any part whieh he initrhr desire, to add to the I'.vlraeis he had already taken. — Upon eonjln.iii^s I :i>ked him wnetiier he nee led imylhiuLr nn)re, and beini; answered in the nega ive, .and thar.ked lor my kindiie.is, i nionnti'd eongratulatin^r myseli''Ai!h liio nope, lliat anythie elieei\ei 1!. iiul< e tiiy surprise .al bein!>' told ni\ luu'M', and proeei'ded homewards ike misreiircHiuilatiim would now bo v,,v.> ...v.. „„,..^,,., ,...,..,..... ..^...j, > — bci'oie the week was mil, lliat I had refused llse lixtraets referred to, louether witii other falsehooils, which, as they eoiicern myself per- sonally, are iniw niies and put tho lyin;,' lipn to Hiluiico ; but no; it was turned to iny ropro.u'h, and nut sat- isfied with Hccrct uinlicc. I was openly Attacked in my church, even Doibre the congregation had dispersed, nnd in tlu' most uneourtcous hmgua^e, charged with falsehood upon the steps of that wacrcd building'. All tliis I bore quietly, ancFon the following Wednesday having repaired to my church, according to notice, to examine and prepare candidates for Confirmation, the first person who presented hiinnelf before nic was tiie afonssaid redoubt- able champion of sciiism, i>rcpnred for the attack and armed with sundry tracts, and the " Centenary of Methodism." Having declined any controversy with this porxon, lie handed me a letter of the most insulting kind, to he perused at my leisure. Notwithstanding all this provocation, 1 held my peace until n.y forbearance was miscon- strued into u fear of the weakness of my cause. For upwards of three years had I been laboring in this parish, durin?,' which time I never mentioned even the name of Methodism, nor should I have done so to this day, had I been Hut!ered to pursue my course in peace, and to instruct those committed to my charge in the rites and doctrines of our most holy faith; but when our pure and apostolic Church wuh assailed — when the rite of confirma- tion was declared poiiish and unscriptural — when the candidates for that rite were called hypocrites, nnd myself branded as a. I'useyite ; I conceived longer silence on my part would be criminal, and stood on the defensive. Judge then from this the truin of Mr. Nauke- ville's assertion, that 1 haVe "dmwn the aword without provocation orcanse." Could I, I would ask with the vows of ordination upon me to give a ''faithful diligence to banish and drive mvay all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to Cod's word," suffer our church to be maligned, her usages traduced, her doctrines falsified, her children vilified, her ministers a. spevsed without raisiiifr my voice, however feeble in their vindica- tion 1 Would it be jiroper for me, one of Tier accredited Ministers, to sit calmly by while the spoiler was ;it work ; and yet we are told of the " wantun aiid unprovoked at- tacks of the Rev. Mr. Mulock:' In the "Introduction" to his " address" Mr, Nankeville " feels somewhat surprised iit the attack of the Rim: Mr. Midack ; for this reason, he was professing a great deal of friend- ship for me, at the time of the allack.'" When, where or to whom, I would ask, did I ever speak an unkind word of tiisit individual, until my character was assailed, arul my veracity impeached, and that before liis whole congregation? When, 1 repent; I ask for j»roof, — I demand it. So far iVom thiit being the ease ; on two evenings before "/ii'.s wanton and unprovoked attack '" ujion my ehnr.icter, we parted with mutual expressions of friendship, and a most wicked^'alsehood having been sludio\isly circulated of me; ;ui(l Mr. Nankeville having been .statett as the author of it, 1 n-pnrted on the Sunday previous to his attack, before my whole congregation, "That 1 considered it a libel upon liis character, as I (.on- ceived him a christian man and a gentleman, and that he would sulfer his right hand tn be cut off* sooner than utter a falsehood :" and yet this individual make.-t a jiersoiial attaek upon my honor and honesty, declaring in the aame bre.'ith that he " res[>ecls me as ,i friend." Faithful are the wounds of a friciul. but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.* To follow this individual through his erratic course in the fifty six pages of his address, would occupy not only a <)uarto volume. Init would tiike at the least two years of research : for the rnost casual observer will see that his object was to puz/le rather than to edify, aiid 80 satisfactorily has he succei'ded that in everv instance, where he has attempted his puerile argument he has puz/.led himself, and made his trumpet to give an uncertain sound, lint as this vindicator of Methodism has seldom informed us whence he took his e.\tr.act« it cannot be expected that I should ri'lmt them singly. Nevertheless, 1 have discovered a few of them, and I grieve to say tiiat every discovery thus made tends to justify tlie charge * Wistiinp as muih as possible In nvoiil pcrsomililif < in this lU'vicw. I hiivt! refmined from rcfiuinc thf> various ralsehoods relaUvc to iiiywlf ronliiincil in lh« " vindiialion." Tho tlillowinc notices roKil In my conKrci^iition on on two Snndny.H previous to thonppolnlcd nieetin)! Iipl'orc a large body of Mnthodidts. together with Mr. Nnnko- ville's brother prenclier on this circuit, will I tnist render furtlier e.vpliinatlnn needless. "Having twice in person cHlled upon Mr. Nankeville to meet 1110 on the subject of certain cross falsehoods relative to myself for which he h!ia been given as author, and he having declined. I now call upon him through you of ilio Methodist Society, to meet mo on Thursday, the 14th inst.,at W o'clock, in Curleton I'lace, to answer such charges as I sUhiI bring agiiinst him. The place of meeting may Ue chosen by himscit', and he is at liberty to have present whomsoever ho chooses. " I hereby pronounce the various extracts in Mr. Nankcville's ' vindication' to bo either wilful falselioods or gross niisreprescntatlons, and I call upon him to meet me at the aforesaid time and place to substantiate his as- sertions." Both of these invitations were declined. On three successive Kunduys 1 took tho original works of Wesley, Asbnry, minutes of CJonference, Rnrnctt, Buchanan's Christian Researches. &c., &c., to the churches under my caie, and culled upon the Methodists to come forward and examine f,)r theinac>lv(;s, or to appoint a deputation to wait on uie, on' any given day, to whoui I would go through tlie whole of the Itevlew, and point out to them the page from whence every extract wai taken ; but they decUaed doing so, taking for granted that the extracts wete correct- of miire ceed. During abuse up sp .'nketh excite di- refuge of less whc " The . tied to tai men will proof ulii to " bare Me pre fen ill whieh, It is ft pci from the tin handed (low the hou!?eof gation : upo to be "chiMi ner to keep i the prayers o Tlie eorres theless we fa of Acts We a niarit.ans and remaining at , of (toiI, they that they niigl they we're baf •nd they recei teild th;it that ♦ere confirmt Ohost." Thus you s Vecame ]>;irt.ic ancient cerem tice of the pal in the ii.anie oi hy I he express hands upon fh pre-eiiiineiifly ed Ihetn, an, and tlio lie liuudud lis nuHcon- lad I bci'ii lothodistn, ill peace, moHt holy ' conlirmu- tvero called J art would r. Naukc- il diligenco )d'» word," icr children ii'ir viiidicn- eahnly by provoked at- Hiirprificd iit 'id of tViend- k,did Icvor my voracity for proof, — wan It Ml and fiicndship, Nankevilii' Ills atUick, ,r, lis 1 (.011- liaiid t.i> he onal altack Is me lis a duccilful* his address, f researi-.li : |oodify, Miid his puerile niid. 15iit is oxlraetH iscovcrcd ii llic fliavj^e |i)i! tlip viir'KHls lin)iri't;!iiii)n on Ih Mr. Nanko- ln* fiiljtnhootlH 1 htmthrouiih lee, ttiniKwrr I U ut liberty IfalsphooiU or liiiilulc his as- l-nrp. Burnett, SlethnUists to lUiy, til whoui extract was of aiirepreoentatioQ on my opponent, which I shall n&ve no difficulty in proving «• I pro* ccfd. During the progress tif his addresH, lij has lavisiiod n copious supply of Hcurrility and abuse upon nie, your fii>poiiitid I'iistor ( "(Jut of the abundance of the heart th« mouth Hp.'nkctli,") but •' none of tlicso tliiiit,'.* niovu me." Sucli laiiguaj^o in only calcuUttd to excite disgust — audi iirrowa fill to llic ;^rioui:i.l " poiiitlf.vt and hariuless." Abune i* the refuge of iyiiormce, tlit piivilcf^'unf tlio base, and never yet have I seen it indulged in un. less whore truth nnd arj^uinent were wanting'. " The present !i(,'c,'" say.n Mr. N., '• sociiis full of o.iiteri>risii; and persons are not sati.s. tied to take tilings up on trust. Reason is not to be put otV witii bare nsnertions. No ; men will examine for tlicinsclvcs."' Why did not llmt individual yive us a little of that pmof which lie ooiummncs ho necuss'iiy .' — why lias In- cunfiiitMl hinmelf, almost exclusively, to " bare as^-crtions f I answer, bccauj-e he euiild in>l — because the truth was not in him. Me preferred abuses ntiil iiivectivt!, suppo: ing such to bo more pulatJiblo lo hia heureriti in which, lam happy to say, he lias been diyuppointed. ( • n A p T b: R I . (ON I I It M .\TUIN , It is a point beyond all doubt that ennrirmatidn has been pnicti(?ed in the Church of God from the times of iin' npo-^tles. It-; oriifin i^siip[ii>'HMl to have bicn derived from a custom handed down amoni^' the .lews, a-, mentioned by Joscpliu-, of brinfrinfj thvir children to the house of (rod, at the iii^e of tliirteeii years, to be publicly examined before the con,'»re- gation ; upon wliicti cccasitm. if they ar.i|uittc(! themselves well, ttiev were then declared to be "children of the precejil," when Ihcv plcdired themselves in Iho most solemn man- ner to kee|) the law, and be aii'-werable J',>r their sins; after which engagement followed tlie pr.iyers of t!ie eoinfreyiitloii that (irid would ernlile them to keep their promise. The correspondence heiwccn tiiis, and the pnietire cvistiiiL,' among ns is obvious — never- theless we take hifjflier ijronnd <'«>r this rite. 'I"o the law and to the testimony. In theSlh of Acts we are toJd lliat l*hilli|>, one of the lirs? deacons, pre.iched the gospel to the >''a. Biaritans and baptized tliosc by wlmm it \v;is einhraeed. At this time the apostles were remaining at Ji;riisalein. and wiien tliey heard that the S.ifiiaritans had received the word of (ind, they sent unto tlieui I'eter and .John, wlio, when they come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy (Jhost. for as yet he iiad tiiHcn upon none of them, only they were baptized in tlie name of tiie Lord Je^us; tlicn laid they their hands upon them ind they received the Floly (Jhost." .Again, in tlie H'tli chapter of the same book wo are fcild that that the disciples of Kjilie'us, "ficr tliey w.-r-' bapli/ed in the nainiM)f Jesus, Were contirmcd hv St. Paul, wlio laid hi-^ liuiids upon tiicni, and they received the Holy Ohost." Thus you si!e that this rile was not comiIik d to a feu, but that all who were baptized llPcame participators in it. The practice of •■laying on id" hands." was one of the most ancient ceremonies in the world, and seoia- tn !>(■ derived from tlie pious and simple prac- tice of the patrinrciis, .lacoti we are told laid his liiiuls iipmi Upliraiin and Manesses, and in the name of (rod. prononneed a pro])luM's lilcnsing. Mo-es. in his ministerial eapsicily, by the e.vprc^s command of (lod. laifl liis hands on .lo^hiia. Our blc.sscd [lord laid iiis luinds upon those that were sick and hi^ded them: and with that benevolence, which was pre-eminently characteristic of !iis nature, he laid his hands upon little cliildivn and bless- ed I'leni, and hi appointing persons for the ministry, the same custimi was invariably ob- aervcd. The same was the heantifn! and impressive pricticfof the apostles in c(immunicating the Holy Spirit in ( 'onlirmaticn, and so cdiistantly and generally was it obst-rved that St. Paul calls the ofhce "the laying on of hands." (Heb. VI: 2.) In referring to the ancient Patiier.'^ of the Churcli, we have abundant |)ro(d' that the practice of this holv ceremony was co-extensive with the Chrislian Churcli. Tei-tnllian. who flourished (udy 80 years al- ter St. John luiK these words; "After baptism sucweeds laying on of hands, by prayer call- ing for and inviting the Holy Spirit." Cyprian, wlio floiirisiied about 60 years after Ter- tuilian, remarks on the history of the Samaritan converts. "The same is practiced among in, tiiatthey who are biiptiTied in the Clinreh are presented to the governors of it, tliat by tiheir prayers and imposition of liands, they may obtain the Holy Ghost, and be perfected il r with th« t««] of Chriit** ** And though, (taith St. Auflfuttlne, the iipMklnif wlthtongUM And working of miraclCM do not now attend the laying; on of hani.l4, aH in thediyH of tno A\>o%- tlen, yet nny one may know now whether he hn» ret-oived the Holy Ghont, by the love ho beam to hi« brother.'and his desire of the pence and unity of the Church of Christ." And Jerome speaks of it distinctly an recommended by the cutttom of the whole christian world, ana then adds: "Where per.tons arc baptized in the inferior towns by priests and deacons, the Bishop travels out to them, to lay his hat.ds upon then and invoke the Holy Spirit." In the early age of Christianity this rite was frequently attended with miraculous powcn, •nch visible effects being then necessary to demonstrate the truth of the christian religion ; but when whole nations embraced the religion of the cross, the occasion ceased and God then worked by ordinary' and not extraordinarj* mcins. To suppose therefore that this rite was to tease, — that the Holy Spirit was no longer to be invoked when the extraordinary ef- facta ceased, as Mr. N. would have us to believe is too groundless an assertion to obtain weight with any thinking man. If such an argument were once admitted, it would under- mine the whole fifOHpel plan of salvation; since it iiiUHt appiv to one p.irt of the Apostles' practice as well a» to another. Then preaching, praying for the sick, ordinations must cense, because miraculous manifestations in those instances have censed ; nay, more than this, if such an argument were once admitted, we must necessarily become a nation of un- believers. St. Mark tells u« "Those iiipna »h ill follow them that believe: in my name shall thay cast out devils; they siiall suenk with new tongues, they shull take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it sliall not hurt them ; they shall lay hnndn on tliu sick and they shall recover." \Vill any one, therefore say. that beenu>'e those things do not now follow the act of belief, we are forbidden to exercise that grace? Surely these things are too preposterous to inlluencc the most humble believer. But what has been regarded as the clearest evidence, that this rite was not to bedispcnH- ed with when miraculoiis power ceased, but was to be retained in the Church in all asjes, is that passage of St. Fnul before alluded to. (Heb. VI : 2.) where the a|)ostle» couples the laying on of hands, which follows baptism witli repontance and faith, and regards tiiem as fundamentals; th.it is; things in wliich all are inten.'wted, and which should boobsened by all. The laying on of hands in ordinations, or in blessing, or in healing the sick, was confined to a few ; whereasi here, all who built upon tlie true foundation, all who did not leave the " principles of the doCirine of Clirist." were ex|K'ete(l to be partleipaters ; which exactly accords with tlic record in the 81h and 19ili of Acts, where all who enjoyeil the sacrament of baptism enjoyed aNo the suliseiincnt rite ol' Confirniation, by the " ini- position of hands." Thus you see that repenlanee, faith, baplisins, laying on of ham'.s, the resurrection of the dead ;rnd eternal judgnifnt, are rt'ganled by tin* apostle as " llu' foundation," the principles of the doctrine of Ciirist : that this layin).'' on of hands is joined with and follows after baptism ; what right have we to put a.^sunder wliat Si. Paul, writing under the inspiration of (Jod, hath joined together. That the Living on of hands in this passatre does not refer to (U'dination. but to the con- firming the baptized, we have the testimony of writers of ail w^as, and so fully convinced w;iH Calvin on this point, that he conci'ived tliat single text abundantly sutiicient to prove confirmation to be of apostolic institution ; anil indeed to tliink otherwise, would be eliarging the apostle with the heinous sin of " teaching for doctrines thecoramandnientaof men." But perhaps, some may say. this rite so much spoken of, is only a remnant of Popery, tiie invention of wicked priests and designing jtrelates. Such is not the case. We have the eon- sent of the whole christian world to the authority of tliis rite up to the period of the Retor- fnatiofi ; and.it this period, it was preserved in every piote'stant Cliurcli.tlirou;_'liout tiie world. ih.'it ret.iined the Kpiscopal office. The l.ntiieran f'liuiviies too, (see tlieconfes.sion — Sa\- onica de confirm.) retained toiifirination as of apostolic origin. laitbersays, "wo hold confirmation to be a cert;iin ecdesiaslie ordinance, resembli iw' the other ceremonies of consecratinir water and other things ; (in tliei\Ios;iic dispensiUion., For if every otiier creature is sanctified by the word of (Jod and prayer, wliy sliould wi not much rather sanctify mankind by the same." — (l.utlier on the captivity of Babylon,— Ed., Jhen, A. D. 15.57. Tom. 2p 293.) Thus while Luther denied it to be a sacrament, In preserved the use of it a.san apostolic rite of great utility. Calvin, in his commentary »<. the VI. lleb: 2 verse, speaks as follows : "The apostle here joins the imiiosition or tin l.'iying on of hands with baptism, bccau.^e. as there were two orders of catechumen- therefore the ceremony was two fold. For those who were without, were notadmiitc. to baptism until they had delivered their confession of faith. In these, therefore, catechi- ing went before baptism. But the children of believers, since they were adopted fron the womb, and belonged to the body of the Church by the right of promise, were bapti/ci while Infants ; and when the season of infancy passed away, and they had been instructs. in the faith, tliey tilso offered themselves to be catechised ; 'which catechising, in their case, |[ was sii ing on of thit, lion, a^ (Meb. ' wards t from fh this U>\ Bez.i npostoli lent .Mu " laying the font down ai sliijt, he ancH of With a nieinht was him In tlio IH;!,-). w( liisliop II hriuod, .1 wishwl t< looking } went will and the \i ' long hell tliix point In ft let we find tli these thiuj may be re mail's han in your be thinjy of V confirmed I wa< d«te since I bee ing and fr( In proo Church, r that even t confer the Tlie Cor of the Uni hands' wit to be subm And that tf a further re Spirit and BUS. Ed. ] To these non-episcoj of the pres rounded by of men and 'his form oi with questi is b;is'.'d, lift od, and for f the highest ( Bapti.sts and Witii regn prised when >«4id. Cahi thtonguw w4 m of tho Apo». by the love ho Christ." And ft'hole chrmllan \ by prie«ts and nvoko the Holy ■aculou* powers, nstiaii religion ; cased and God aro that this rite ixtraordinary cf- crtion to obtain , it would under- '>1' the Apostles' rdinntions must ; nay, mort' than c a nation of uti- ve : in my nnme take up serpents, hanilrt on tlio side >«c tilings do not urcly thuae thiiigH not to be dispcns- ;hurch in nil ages, npostles couples and rcj|{«rd8tlu'm hould bo obsei ved iliiig the siek, was all who did not be piirtieipaterH ; ri! all who enjoyed ti.m, by the " im- liyirif,' oil of ham's, I., iiposilu as " Uu' iir (>i> of hands i>, ler what St. Paul, jon. but to the con. so fully convinced iBufiicient to prove ICMwisc, would hv commandmeiita of laiit of Pop! ry, tlie Wehavothecou. Icriodof theRetor. lout,'houttiie world. l confession — Sa\- Inaiice, rescnibli i'^' Isiiic dispensulion./ Ir, why sliould wv iity of Babylon,— Ibe" a sacrament, In liis connnentary o' imposition or tin L oi' catechumen-. Iwcre not adniiitc': |therefore,catechif- lerc adopted fron. liise, were baptized lad been instructs, liaing, in their casi^^ was s\ibHflqncnt to haptitm Rut then another rile was applind to tliom, namely, the lay- ing on of haiulM. Thin one pannap', continues Calvin, abiintlantly proves that thr nrit;in of thitari-inom/ Jliiiiyif fmm th»' itiMistlen, altho(i(;h it wax afterwurdn turned into supcmti- tion, u<* the world alin<»»t always ncueiwrates from the best institutions into eorruptiorC (Jlcb. VI. Kd. Hal. A. I). |H:M.voI "J, p 1'J8.) This, be it remembered, was written to- wardH the ctoKe nf Ins life, when his mind was matured and hiH knowledi^e onlari;pd, and from thiH sentinu nt he never after varied. Dr. Owen a celebrated nmiconformist gives to this t4.>.\t a like niterpretation with Calvin. Uezti to^fetlier wiili mnn> more ot tJKt foreign Reformers acknowledged its utility and apostolic origin, and regretted thai it should be discKiilinucd U) any t'hurch. The excel- lent Mathew llcni), a Presbvicriaii. also commeiiliiig npiui lleb. VI. J., says that it means " laying on of li.ind.s on jier^diis pnssitiL'" solemi'ly from the initiated slate of baptism lo tile ('(inlirnuHl stale, by reliiiiiing the answer of .i good coiiscienco towards li«id and sitting down at the Lurd's Table. This passing from incomplete to complete Church member- ship, he sa)s, was perforiiied hy tho laying on of hands, whieh tho vxtraordinary convoy- aiieeiif the gtfl of the lliilv (liiost eoiltlllUCd." Willi regard to tin upiiiiuns of .Inlin Wesh^y, I need sny nothing, as h»i 'lived and died a member of the rimreli of Kngland;' I .shall therefore pass on to Dr. Adam Clarke, who was himself coiiliriiK d after he became a Wesleyan preacher. In tho account of his life, piiblishetl by the >[clho(list Hook Concern at New York, in 1833, we find till) fitiJKWing stateiiienl of this traiisaclioii. "It was .-it this time that the Bishop of Bristol iield a l'i»iJirwirdity andinipiety of this rite? a rite of uhich he has spoken so highly? Can anything be more humilitating than this? Yes, dear brethren, I have a iieavier tale of sorrow to narrate. In the in- stance just mentioned he falsifies a good man who in some points difl'ered/rom us; but in what I am now to notice, he aims iiis poisoned arrow against a bishop of our Church and not only misrepresents and falsities him, but uses his own words as though they were the Bishop's. He makes Bishop Burnett to say that "There is no express institution for confirmation, either by Christ or his apostles: no rule given to practice it. The wliole is merely a mat- ter of human arrangement.'' In tlie iirst place, the Bisliop tells us he is aboutto examine the other pretended saenmients "of tlie IJomish Chnrcl-.." 2. Mr. N. takes his extract from the middle of a sentence, after a connna, and then afier quoting one lino and a half, he finishes the extract in his own \\ords. liad he given even o\w word before the extract or one line after it, his inq)osture could nut have been hidden, and yet this uum, with un- blushing front, tells us, tliut he was "called to the otliceand work of the ministryby God, and the Churcli." The Jletliodist Society I jiresiime. " Lord what is man." To give all that Bishop Burnett says upon coniinnntion. as u.sed in our Church would be to repeat all 1 have said upon the subject ; 1 shall therefore confine myself to his con- cluding remarks. "It is higiily reasonable that they, who gave no actual consent of 'heir own, should come and by their own express act, make the stipulations of baptism, u may give grejiter impressions of awe and respect, when this is restrained to the highest order in the Church. Upon the sincere v<>ws and earnest prayers of persons thus confirmed, wc have reason to believe that a propovtiom-d degree of (iod's gnicc and Spirit will be poured out upon them. And in all this wt<'«are much confirmed, when we see such w.arranti for it in Scripture. A thing so good in itself, that has at least a probable authority for it, and was certainly a practice of the first ages, is upon very just grounds continued in our Church. Would to God it were as seriously gone about, as it is lawfully established." — (Burnett, Art. XXV : p. 320.) So much lor Bishop Burnett, and that Mr. N. was aware of the falsehood which he uttered or very careless in his research is evident from the fact, that there are hat eight words between his extract and that which I have just read. We proceed to consider the case of tlie Hampton Court Conference. It appears that King James was not satisfied with confirmation : " that .;ame seeming to imply that b.ap- tism is of no validity without it; he abiiored this opinion and the abuse which made it a sacrament," Such was his objection and upon the matter being explained to him by the Bishops, we are told they " fully satisfied the King." and so thoroughly w.'.s he convinced on this point that he resisted Dr. Reynolds a Presbyterian divine, pronouncing his objec- tion a mere cavil and declaring that it was not his intention to take from them ; the Bishops, what they had so long enjoyed. " I approve " sa'd he, " the calling and use of Bishops in the Churrh ; -ind it is my aplierism, no Bishop, no Ki.-g." Thus you see the dishonesty of this extract. Another infamons libel upon tiie truth is that which he professes to have taken from the Prayer Book. He says "there is a solemn declaration made by the bishop, in adminis- tering the rite of confirmation ' tliat the Almighty and Everlasting God has given forgive- neas of ail their sins' — all their actual, personal sins." From what source, I would ask, did Mr. N. get his information? Certainly not from the Prayer Book ; it speaks a difTerent language. There is no '■'^ solemn declnration m.ade there by the Bishop," or any one else. The Prayer used in the administration of the rite, when the bishop l;iy.s his hand upon the head of the person to be confirmed, is as follows ; " Defend. O Lord, this thy servant with thy heavenly grace, that he m;iy continue thine forever; and daily increase in tliy holy Spirit more and more, uniil he come to thy everlasting Kingdom. Amen." Is there a syllable of forgiveness of sins here, either actunl or personal > That which Mr. N. styles "a solemn declaration," is apr.ayer for those who are about to be confirmed and precedes the administration of the rite and refers to baptism, as would be seen by the most ordina- ry observer had a correct extnct been given. That yon may judge for yourselves, I will give the word.^ of the Prayer Book. " Almighty and everiiving Cod, who hast vouch- s.afed to recenerate these thy servants by WMter, and the Holy Ghost and hast given unto them forgiveness ofall their sins: stren^rtlien thetn wu beseech thee," ttc. Here you see there is no allusion whatever to confirni:;tion,but a plain and simple ret'cicnee to baptism, by which sacrament we lielieve original sin to he done away, though its elTects remain, bringing us under the bondage of sin and Satan. Such are the views of the Church of England — such are the views of John Wesley, and such I apprehend are the views of Mr. this point, " O, itumely to the -to make Calvin inat that Church liating than tlic (llty and impiety loreliumilitatinj,' rtite. In tlie iii- ed Jrom us ; but p of our Ciiurch lOUgh tlu'y wt'.re for confirmation, is merely a mat- iboutto uxainino alies his extract lino and a half, ;fore the extract lis man, with un- : uiinistryhy (Jiod, n." r Chmvli would yself to his con- consent of '.heir baptism. It may ! hifjhest order in us confirmed, wo •it will he poured ucli warraiitj for ;hority for it, and uontinued in our y establiahod." — ilr. N. was aware nt from the fact, ust read. It appears that imply that bap- ivhiih made it a. d to him by the '.as he convinced icing his objec- ?m ; the Bishops, le of Bishops in tie dishonesty of Ihavc taken from Ihop, inaJminis- Is given forgive- |ce, I would ask, beaks a different [or any one else. Is hand upon the iLhis thy servant 1 increase in tliy nen." Is there ch Mr. N. styles fcd and precedes lie most ordina- Inrselvcs, I will Iho ha.'^t vouch- ^ast given unto lIiTC you see lee to baptism, letTects remain, Ithe Church of views of Mr. Nankcville ; but that gentleman, reckless of consequences, hesitates not to falsify himself, if, in doing so hi; can inflict a wound upon the Churcii of his fathers. Hear his own words ; " Do not infants belong to Christ as partakers of the atonement .' Has ho not died for them, and risen again, delivering them from the curse of the law, "having been made a curse for them ? Are not infants as well a» believers in a justified .state, according to Paul ? Rom. V. : 18, 19. Hen; it may be observed, that tlio infant :ind the believer stand in the .<«iine relation to Christ as jiartakers of his death. Tliey are bol!i justified, as liav- ing no nrlual sin lying against them."* " This is enough to make any pious man trem- ble." He first mis-ealls, then mis-quotes, then mis-applies, then misrepre'sents, and in con- elusion brands hiiiisd/ with fal.seiiood. He eoukl not he ignorant tiiat tiiC expresbiou in the Prayer Book applied to baptism. No ; as a pniol" of this, he took the first and tiuh line of t!ie s^'nteiiee, leaving out the intermediate lines wliieli would have detected tlio fraud. Therefore, 1 repeat he brands liiniself witii I'al.^eiiood, by charging the Church with forgiving in baptism " actual sins," when it does no such thing. But he himself declares "that infants and believers stand in the same re.ation to Christ as jiartakeis of liin death — that they are both justified. as having no nclitals\'\ lying -'giiin;.'. ihem." (). the daring jiresiiniplion of that man! Can the Methodists ii.Jee J oai.clio;i such Pelagian heresy .' Xext conies his grand and swooping conclusion. "How eruld coiifirniatior, i^.vo an ex- istence, when Sponsurs ur Ciudfatliers, and Godmothers wa- a •erin iiiT'iijo;v:i to the an- cients ; but familiar in later times — hence it i's ;w/W)/ human. That S;.or.;ors v.-orc tirsi appointed by Hyginus a Roman Bishop, about the year 154, and the oih!ec was not in lull operation until the 4th or ."ith century." This I shall answer by a 'liort oxiraci IVoni Mr. Wesley's " Serious Thoughts concerning Godfathers and (jodniiitl',.'r~, a tract worthy of the notice of every Churchman and Methodist. "These (Godtaiiiers and Godmothers) have been retained in the Christian Church from the earliest limes, as the reaiOu for them was the same in all ages." " Who ihall decide when docton disagree." CHAPTER II. THE CHURCH IN ENGLAND BEFORE THE REFORMATION. We are told that " They (the Clergy,) were opposed to the Reformation ; and it was not till they found all resistance to Henry's power, to bo in vain, that they submitted to his pleasure and were modelled according to his will ; which dictated the plan of the Church of England. Hence, the Church of England dates its origin, from the time of the Refor- mation." Nothing but the most profound ignorance of history could have led Mr. N. to write thus. Had such an expression fallen from a Romanist, 1 should not have been surprised ; their aim being to class the (^hureh of England with the body of Dissenters from it. Coming from such a quarter J should have felt myself called upon to meet it with argument, but coming as it does frum a professed follower of Wesley, I can only meet it with a smile. — However, for his information, I will give ;i few facts ot' history which may lead him not t(^ be guilty of a similar error in tutnre. Eusehiusa'iserts tiiat some of the apostles pasM'd over into Britain and he, together with .lerome, lix tlie period of the establishment of Christianity in that Island in the 2nd year of Nero, in the year o'i, about 'J6 years after the crncilixion. The modern writers, Sealiger, (Jave, Stillingtieet and others coineid(^ with this chronologv.bnt Pearson and Hale ditfer from this computation, in iissigning it to the year (il or 6'I: but all these, together with Usher, place it as early as .57 years from the ,Sa\ionrs death, lietween the )st .-ind 2d imprisoiiiui'rit of Sf. I'aid at Rome." 'iVrtullian who lived in the 2n(l century tells us; " .\ll tiie extremities of Spain and the ditlerent nations of CJaiil and parts of Britain, inac- cessible to the Ucmians, but (were) subject to Chri>t." Theodoret attributes the founda- tiori of tlie lliitish Church to St. Paid, who is thought to have visited that Island, tlio ex- tremity of the then kuov. ii world, from Gaul or Sjiain. Origen, who lived in the next age, ijieaks of Britain eor,-,entiug to the worship of the true (Jod. In addition to this we have it recognised by all (he (-'liurch as a portion of the Christ'aii Community in the 2nd centu- ry. In the year 311 the Bi.shops of Vork, l.oiidun and Lincoln, sat as represenuitives of ■'.Mr N's Trii(Mag'iiiisinieB.ii>Uiriliiii!. This Reform. i- tion adopted liy lli>' HlHlidps and Cleiiry was submitted to botii Houses of the Legislature and solemidy ralilied and ronlirnu'd by Act of Parliament, and the Church thus purified and refornuui was accepted by the Slate and people, and bt'eame as she had been l)efore, " the pillar and ground of the truth." 'i'hns was the (^hureh of England relbruu'd by her own act, the aci ot' her I11-i1;o|ih ami ClcrijA. and tiiis relbrn'ation was sanctioned in the dilVerent stages of ils proiiiess by Ib'iM'v VMl. Edw :n-d V !. and Hlizabeth. Her I'rotestauisni is new, for the erior* asnun>aim>." And hereadinillin',' I'oi' ar;Mimenl sake, that Henry VIII was the leading agent in bring- ing .'iboui the ivetormatnm ; how does that afi'ect tli(^ t.iucsiion; what do our ndvers.aries gain by tli:tl f "The wmliiuan is not the work. The Temple of iSoloimm w:;s construct- ed will) cellars of j.eli.Hion. hewn bv woiKnien of hidl'.u'u'Vyvi'. .lehndnlnot please (iod : but his llefornialuin did. Nebneluidne/./ar and Ahasuerus were idid.il roes ; but their Edicts tor (iotlH si'rviei' were ri'li:.fions. The M'emple in wliich our Lord was presented and in which he pieaelied and \\orsliippcd had been repaired .and restored by the impiou.s and crueMlerod, w ho snuj^hl our Lord's life." The character and conduct of those en- gaged in the Hcibrmalion was not the ReUn-mation itself. 'J'hat was the work of Cod. whoso goodness, in raisin',' ii|i instrmneiils lo perform his sovereign pleasure, we shall have reason lo hle-,s in llii" world ami in lie' world to come. What ther, liecnnie* of Ihe /i-.^erlion that ••the Church of llnglaiid dates its orii,nn fioni the time cd' the Uelonnatioii.— that the clergy were oppo.sed to the Reformation ? — thai they sid)milted to llenryV pleasure only when they found all resistance vain ?" What rompulsion was used by I In- mild and youthful Edward, who blessed be God, took Craimn-r for his adviser and llie Ililile tor hi* L'uide ! Did he, at t!ie a^jo of n/m.' ?/(Vzrs force the Bishop and Cleigy id" the Church of Entrliind ' to submit to his pleasure, to be modelled according to his will f In tlio ' Western liisiirreclitnr when the people of Devonshire and Cornwall climmn^ei! tbr Hie return of popery, did the Bishops oi ihe Church of England lend their aid to proniole tlu'ir wishes ; Were they opposed to the Reiorrnation in the reign of bloody Abiry, when for four hmir years the fires of Smithtield were fed from the Bishops and Cleri!y™w hen the m)blest of England's Church quenched with their blooil the flames of pei'seention '. Were they o|)|'o.sed lO the Reformation when in the midst of the bnrnintf tlnno, Ihev repudiated the errors of Romaiiistn and the domination of Rome ' No, they prelerred deatli in its moxt agy:ravated I'orm to the ghostly control o!" papal tyran- ny; — to the Hurreiider of the pri'cioui truth known and tau.'>ht in Englnnd before Romo had spread her sable imnille over her fair inheritance. W'ere 1 di.sposed to harrow up your feelimrs and tell you of l hat noble army of Martyrs, the Bishops and Clergy of our Church ; ibough your hemtswere as liaril a- the neti.er inillstnno — though your eyes were ' not te weeping given,' you eonld not withhold the tear of pitv — you could not 'refu.se apassin;,' tribute. Loutr hud Ihe bcmlv of o'.ir Clmrch been marred — long had her vineyard been trodden down by i.imuj'ci'N'— loti^ had her pleasant phices been laid waste — long had she groaned beneath thn fury of the oppressor; until God in his mercy had pity upon her and nstantine. At ; of the Angli- ish Archbishop lodrjiiig to the ithelbert, from ,ed in England ; nc havinfr cxor- il was gradually riod of the Rc- udependencf, as r lieeii a part, rt/thc old:— wo n of throughout 1 hernelf; and in in wlienhef/«"'- , Jliuri'li after the I'tov he liad wnsli- rcstnri'd to her lie aet of a few ; II, wlio frei'ly ro- dielion and teni- the Sovon'i!,'n ol' id '• luMd ■, foree the Ve, to be modelled if Devonshire and liureli of Entdaiid formation in tlie kvere i'ed from tlio Iwitii their bloml III in the midst of lination of Home '. lol of papal tyran- land before Kfuno lo harrou- up your ty of ourChureh; fvc^' 'vore ' not lo 'refuse a passing; lier vineyard been |te — lonjT had slic T[)ity upon her ancl 11 armed her children for her rescue ; and were it not for the very clergy, whom we now hoar depreciated, we w ould at tliis day bo counting our beads and worshipping a consecrated wafer. And here I would ask, if the Church of England dates its orign from the the time of the R'fornuition, how is '■ Metlio lisiii founded on the Rock of Ayes?" Is the child old- er than its inoLher — i> the hratica more ancient than the stem that bore it ? This is too ri- dicuiiius to be treaced witli seriousness. Xevertheiess, I eaimot di!for Amerii-a; and for this purjioso, in the year 1781, •sent oNcr three regularly onlained clergy; but jirelerring the I'lpiscopul mode of Church • government to any other, he solemnly se\ apart, by the imposition of his hands, an I ' pra\er, one of them, vi/. : Thuiiiut^ ('oia; Doctor of Civil Law, h.te of Jesus Collejre, i the Uiii\ersity of Oxford, and a I'resb} ter of the Cluireh of iOntrland, for the E]iiseopal»] otuee ; aiul huviinr delivered to him letters ol' Kpiscopal orders, commissioned and direct ed him lo set apart i'".-(7C' /.v .i.^'/r/ (^JKHlpiwewm lor tin; same Ejiiscopid ollice; he, the said'' riiiir.i.'t A.siiiifi/, being 1 1 le s:iid Frc I'.rr ■si ordainJoDeacon anil yl'resbvter. in eonseouence of which. / ^^■hll|■|/, was solemnly .-et apart for the same Episcopal oiliee by prayer *1 anil the imposition of the hands of the said 'I' kumas Cnkr. other regularly ordained Minis..^ ;((■/.■■ '■ tersassisliii;;i: in the sacred ceremony. At which lime the General ('onferenee, held .U '■ Iviltiniore. did tmanimon-ly r(>;eive the snid ThoriKiy CV)/,(;apd Francix Aslmnj ix:i their •' lii'-iiops, b^'ing I'nliy salisii. li of the validity of their I'lpi.scopal ordinalion." [t is here stated that .Mr Wesley solemnly set apart Dr. Coke to be ti Bishop — that he delivered unto him letters ot Episcopal orders in which he coirimissioncd and directed him to set apart Francis Asbm'y to be a liishop also; the said Francis Asbury being first or- dained Deacon and Presbyter — that the (ienerat Conference, held at Baltimore, imrzn/wjott.s- i.y at that tim-2 received the said Tlnnn'is Coke and Francis Asbury as their Bishops. You wilt be surjirised when 1 tell you that those assertions arc untrue from beginning to end. In the first jilac( — * [ Hill indctitei! to " ii Letter lo a Meftiodlst" for this and the two following chapters, and have used his lan- gUB)!e with soiiii; Hddltioiis of my own, lor the sake of classifying the subject. * Crpibyter, I'tiost uml Elder, being one and the sanic, to avoid confusion, I shall use the word Presbyter throughout 12 h '♦• (U >r * • ■ r 1. Dr. Coke was not ordained to the Kpiticopal office, in other words, was not made BiHhop. '2. No such letters of Episcopal orders wore ever issued by John Wesley, and conse- quently no such commission was given to Dr. Coke to ordain Asbury a Bishop. 3. I'he General Conference, lield at Baltimore, did not at thai lime unanimously receive Tiiomas Coke and Francis Asbury as their Bishops. Now as the validity of the Methodist Ministry is made, by the Jfethodists themselvca, to depend upon the validity of Dr. Coke's ordination we shall treat of it first. Where did Wesley obtain aulliorilij to ordain Dr. Coke ? It certainly was not hinn with him ; for authority to ordain a mmister of Christ is born with no man. He could not have obtained it from any tem]>oral power; for all the Kings and Governors of the earth combined could not ordain a minister of Christ, nor confer the autliority to ord.-iin one. Was this authority conferred on Wesley at his ordination! Tiio most ignorant man could not say so ; since the authority to ordain in the Ciiurch of Kngland, of which We.;;; that I, John Wesley, think myself to be providentially called at this time to flct .-.;) wt s-orne persons for the work of tiu» ministry in America. And therefore, under the pv /.ecMo.i of .\hiii;^!ity God, and with a single eye to his glory. I have this day set I'.piir"^;; Ca'jC'<-iv.tend''nt, by the imposition of my hands and prayer, (being assisted by other or'^i'itci minl'^lers,) Thomas CokPttfiW^oT/)/^ Civil Law, a Presbyter of the Chnrcii ot E^n! \:.'l. v.v.;\ V. rc.:'X\ vvliom 1 judge to be well qualified for that great work. And i do hereby rf":omriry.d \vm to all whom it, may concern, as a fit person to ]ireside over the. flock (if Chri't. I testimony wiiereof, 1 have hereunto set my hand and seal, this second day of Septeuiber. i.a the year of our Lord one thousand, seven hundred and eightv I'our.f JOHN WliSLEV." Such is what is now pawned upon tlio credulous and unthinking as tlie letters of Epis- copal order.^, upon which so mucii stress is laid and upon which the whole fabric of Me- thodism depcnd-s. What are we lo tliink then of the bold assertion, contiiined in the Book of Diseipliiic, that Wesley set apart Coke for tise Ei»iscopal othce ? ft is no where to be found in Wes- ley's commission, but is a fabrication of later times. *In quoting this lettpr, Afr. NankpviUn says :— " The fdllnwInR is n, faithful cnpy ranfulltj trnnscribrit from thi- oriKinal, In Mr. WesluyNown liiind writing;" and yet he leuvos oiitthf; serDnil iilimso iilloB6llier, birininp .ii " VVh reas," and ondinf! with "Ministeis." Is not thishuiniliuting .' Is not tliis rcarl'ul 1 lie Iviivrs nut thai ■which spcalts of nrthcrnnoc to the Cliurch of England and calls it "n/aitA/u^ copy carefitllij tramcribtd from the original." Will Wmfatthfal copier and careful transcriber fcvor ns with a reading of the Autngntph I t Reprinted from a tract written by Ur George Feck, a Methodist rrcacher. Now- done ii thing; Uowev absurd ing of And 1 believe, should I wnt him he nevei action ! shall vei iiess, the Chun-h Had the. Seaburj) from the i'r, theref< the nieml " You teemed b the Metht of their p genuine, . Presbyteri their end j'lngiings nothing." Hithert( ley ordain( Church of 1st. We Church of dained Dr. Now what In a Iett( Coke) addi North Amc " I have , our Brethrt Let us ej L Wesk pointed" thi them ? Cei and Wesley luiles di.sUir pointed liini Btitute A.sbi it is evident Word "appc not mean to only a Inymi by Dr. Coke self Bi.shop; the ide.' of n •'Methodist! Church of ( perintondent divine to adc thodi.sts in E Superintend( 13 ras not made y, and conac- uusly receive Is themselves, was not hnrii mi. He could vernora of the rity to ordain ignorant man of which Wcsv- s, and Wesley luitiiority wiw that which he liops and Pres- 'sbyter was alno of Ministers and must also have n him." And if ; Not a Bishop, fer! What then ] wn to the Church lop, he had the tion contained in y. l,et Wesley writinp, which orders.*' if Lincoln Col- '/i merica, who de- ()/ the Church Sacraments of , and whereas lly called at this And therctV)r(', I have this day iiijl assisted by crof the Clmrdi vork. And 1 do reside over tlu' seal, this second and eiijhtv fonr.t WlfSLEY." letters of lipis- e fabric of Mc- |)k of Discipline, SCI 1)1 in\\ L foiiud in Wes \lrnn.ic.ribfii from the LBoiUcr, bi'Siiiniiip "i [lie W.nvp* (lUtthHi lij trnnecribrd from Tio Autograph 1 Now in all probabililw you are under the impression that this imposition of hands was done in a Church, or at least in a meeting house and o|)enly iiefore the people. No such thing; the whole business was " done in a corner," — in Wesley's hi d chamber at Bristol. — However it soon got noised abroad that Wesley had made a IJishoj) and so ludicrous and absurd did it appear to the Rev. Charles Wesley, wlio was not in tlie secret, that on hear- ing of it, he wrote the following lines, to the great mnrlilicaliou oi his brother: " So easily are Bishops made. By man's or woman's whim : Wesley his hands on Coke liatii laid, — But who laid hands on liim ?" And in writing to the Rev. Dr. Chandler, April 27111, 178,'), ho says, " I can scarcely yet believe, that in his eighty second year, my brother, my old. intimate, friend and companion, should have assumed the Episcopal character, ordained- fddcrs, consecrated a Bishop, and sent him to ordain the lay preachers in America. I was then in Bristol at his elbow; yet he never gave me the least hint of his intention. How ivaa hr ynrprispU into so rash an action! I have lived on earth a little too long, who have lived to see this evil day ; but I shall very soon be taken from it. What will become of these poor sheep in the wilder- ness, the American Methodists ? How have they been betrayed into a separation from the Church of England, which their preachers ,Mnd they no more intended than the Methodists? Had they had patience a little longer they would have si't-n a real [irimitive Bishop (Bishop Seabury) in America, duly ronufcraltd bij three Scotch liishojis, who had their consecration from the English Bishops, and are acknowledged by them tiie same as themselves. There ia, therefore, not the least difference betweenthe members of Bishop Suabury's Cimrch, and the members of the Church of England. " You know I had the happiness to converse with that truly apostolic man, who is es. teemed by all who know him as much as by you and me. He told me that he looked upon the Methodists in America as sound members of the Church, and was ready to ordain any of their preachers, whom he should find duly qualified. His ordination would be indeed genuiue, valid and Episcopal. But what are you poor Methodists now ? only a new sect of Presbyterians, and after my poor brother's death, which is now so very near, what will be their end 1 They will lose all their influence and importjince ; they will turn aside to vain janglings; they will settle again upon their lees, and like other sects of dissenters, come to notliing." Hitherto I have argued ihi^ question on the ground taken by the ifefhodists, that Wes- ley ordained Dr. Coke a Bishop; by a Bishop meaning the first and highest office of the Church of God, and that Wesley himself was such a Bishop. But this we deny, because, 1st. Wesley in the above so called letters of orders, styles himself a Presbyter of the Church of England. 2iidly. In that document he does not say a word about having or- d.iined Dr. Coke to be a Bishop, but merely that he " set him apart as a Superintendent." Now what did Wesley mean by setting him ajiart as a Superintendent ? In a letter dated Bristol, Sept. 10, 17S4. (only eight days after he laid his hands on Coke) addre«scd (not to Bisho[) C^oke, but) to Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury r ordiiMied Dr. Coke, much less, that he made him ii Bishop. Coi\e was placed on precisely the san;e footing,' with Asbury, who was a Imjiiiun. Wesley appointed them both iSuperin- lemlents ol' tlie -Mcthodiist Society in North America : and the only difference between them is. that in appointing Coke be did it in a more formal manner, by placing his handa on his head atid praying over him. I .'hall now show what Dr. Coke himself thought of his title of Bishop which he had the arrogance to assume ; and by giving you a few extracts from his letters to Bishops White and Seabury to ordain him and Asbury Bishops, the question will, I trust for the jiresent he set at rest, and every honest man lie convinced that the thing which I undertook 1(1 prove, namely, that Dr. Coke was not ordained Bishop by Wesley, i.i proved to a demon- htration. RicHMONP, April :J4tli, 1791. ni;. coKF, TO Risjiop wiiriK. Right Rrv. Sir: — Permit me to intrude a liltk; on your time in a matter of great im- portant'e. \'ou, I Ix-iive, are conscious that F was brought up in the Church of Hngland, and have been ordained a l'resi»yter of that (Jhurcii. For many years I was prejudiced even I think to lugotry, in ta\ourot' it, but through a variety of causes or incidenl.s,to men- tion which would be tedious and useless, uiy mind was exceedingly biased on the otiier side of the iiuestion. In consei)uence of tiiis I am not sure but I went farther in the sepa- ration of our Church in America, tiinn ^Ir. Wesley, from whom I had received my com- mission, did intend. He did indeed solemnly invest me as far as he had a right so to do, with PJpiseopal authority, but did not intend, I think, that an entire separation should take place. Me, being pressed by our frietuls on this side of the water for ministers to admin- ister the sacraments to them, (tliere ])eing ver\ • few Clergy of the Church of England then in the St^ites,) went farther I am -me. than he wonld have <.'one. if he had foreseen some events which followeci. And tiii-^ I am certain of — tliat he is now sorry i'or the sep- aration." lie then goes on to say : " What can be done for a re-union, which 1 nuieli wish fur ; and to accomplish which, Mr. Wesley, I have no doubt, would use bis inllnence to the utmost ' There are many iiindrances in the way. ('an they be removed ' Our ortlained ministers will not, ought not to give up their riglit of atlminislerin:,' the sacraments. I don't think tiiat the generality of tliem, perhaps none of them, will refuse to submit Uia re-ordinafion, if other hindrances were removed out of the way." lie then iroes on to ^iiow the dilHcnl- ties which are likely ti» ensue from the preachers being unac. eveii in his own estimation vvonld he nrojiose thai those, who had been ordained by him. should be re-ordaint'd by one who, he knew,'liad au- thority to do so: whose nrdinalion icniililh" ind'Til ','-'-!niiiip, rnlid rim! Eju.wnjinI > or wonlil he acknowledge the ordination by himself was invalid, although he was a I'resbyter ol' tln' Church oC I'^ngland ? The thing speaks for itself Let us now see what he says in his letter to Bishop Seabury : J'niLAonr.rnrA, May 14,1791. PR. roKi' TO Eisifor sr.\r,ff;v. R'ight Rrv. f'ir: — From your well known character, I am going to open my mind to vou oi; a subject of very great im]tortance. Being educated a uu'mber of the Church ei l-]ngland from my earliest infancy, being ordained of that Church and having taken tw" degrees in arts and two degrees in civil law in the University of Oxford, whicti is entirely under the patronage of the Church of England, 1 was almost a bigot in its favor when I first joined that great and good man, Mr. John Wesley, which is fourteen years ago. Fo: five or six years after my tmion with Mr. Wesley, 1 remained fixed in my attachment to the '" Tliiti iRtter i» reprinted rroin Bishop vVhlte's Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church, first edition pages iU to Vi9 Ciiun less t( induei of En eonsei error, r ed on pri'ciRely 11 both yuporin- tirence between lacing his haiida ip which he hnd Iters to Bishops I trust for tlie hich 1 undertook ovcd to a dcmon- ril •24th, HOI. ttcr of great ira- rch of Kiiglaiid, was prejudiced incidenls.tomcn- ised on the other irther in tlie scpa- roet'ived my eoin- 1 a riglit so' to do, ation sliould take iiiisters to jidaiin- lureh of England f he liad foresemi ion-y for the t^ep- ufli wish for ; an(! jiL-e to the ntino:-t '. >rdainvd ministers t^. 1 \ He then m>1;> lirn liis letter and liP propose thai lie knew,'hadaii. ifKfdl ! or would \\ I're^bvter of tlv I May It, 171)1. Ipen my mind to |)f the Cliurch o: laving taken tw" IwhieTi is entirely 1 its favor when 1 year:* ago. For Littachmentto tho Churcli of IJnglaiid ; hut afterwards for many reasons, wliicli it would be tedious and use- less to mention, I changed my sentiments, and promoted a separation from it, as far aa m\ inlluence reached. Within these two years I am eome buck again ; my lo\ e for the Church of England has returned. I think [ am attaelied to it on a ground much more rutional and conseqncntly much less liktdy to be shaken than formerly. I lia\e m.niy n time run- iiito error, but to he .'i^hanieil of eonfcsHing my error, when eunvineetl of it, lias never been one of my del'iei,. Thend'ore. when f iri/a fiilli/ cnay Inrrd nf mij error, and in the ste|is 1 look to liring ;ilioul ;isep;iration from the Cliuren of England in Europe, I dtdivcred, be- fore a congre;jation of aliont 3000 people, in our largest chapel in Dn'ulin, on a Sunday evening. aflei» preaching, sa\ exhortati;ni. whici; in I'act, nniounted to a recantation of my error. Sonu' time afterward. I repealed the s.-ime in our largest chapel in l^jndon, and in several other part^ of Mnglmid ;iiid Ireland : and I have reason to believe that my proceed- ings in thi^ respect have given a death blow to ail the hopes of a separation which may c\i:it in the iiiind^, of atiy in llmse kingdoms.'' From this he goes onto stale the extent of llieir missioni, and asks; "How great, then, would be the strength of our Church (will you give me leave to call it so ? 1 mean the I'rotestant Episeopal) if the two sticks were nnide one." He then goes on to say, what eoncessitms ii would he neeessnry to make and gives ti full aceonni of their preachfrs anil .so on ; after which he says ; " Now a re-miion taking place, our ministers, both elders and deacons, W(uild expect to lta\i', and ought to have, the sa?ne authority they have at present, of adniiiiistering the ordinanees 'U'ciu'ding to the respcctivn powers already invested in tlietn for this pnrpo.-e. I well know that they must submit to a re-ordination, whicii 1 hidie\e might lie easily brought about, if every other hindrance was removed out of the \\i\\. He then shows how tiiose liindr.inci.'s may be removed and defends himself .against the a Ji'ishnj) of the i'ruteular supply, on the death of their Bisii- (ips, and so, (id jitjrprliiuDi, l!ie grand ditlieully in respect to the preachers would be re- liioved."* Now take this in connexion wi^h Dr. Coke's letter to Lord Liverpool to whom he after- wards applied to leive himself eouseer.ited as a Bishop for India; saying that "if the Prince Regent and the Covernmetit should think proper to appoint him their Bi.shop in India, he would most eheerfullv and gratefully accept tlu^ offer, and return most fully and faithfully into the bosom of the established Church, and submit to all such restrictions, in the fulfillment ot his ofliee. as the (ioverament and liie bench of Bi.shops at home should think necessary." In sumnn'ng up the evidence of these letters, written six years and more after Dr. Coke'.s, 80 called ordination, it will appear to ;iny honest nsan, 1. That Dr. C.)kp does not for a moment claim to be n Bishop. 'J. His letter to Bishop White shows that he exceeded the authorilv given to him by Mr. Wesley, and that .Mr. We-ley disapproved of his proceedings. 3. In his letter to Bishop Heabury lie .>.o!icits to be made' " a Bishop of the Methodist Society." Thereby ackhowledjring, that Wesley, when he appointed him a Superintendent, did not ordain him a Bi-liop of thai Society. 1. In his letter to Bi.-hop Seabury he aiks hin, to ordain Mr. Asbury a Bishop of the Methodist Society, thereby acknowledging that his ordination of Asbury to be a Bishuj). w;is only a mock ordina'ion. a. In his letter to lji,>hop Seabury, asking for the admission of the Methodist,. preachers into the ProU-stant Episcopal Church, Dr. Coke says, that "he knows they must submit to ^ Church first edition * The original of this letter is in the possession of Or, .'?eabury, I'.dttor of the Churchman, New York, 1(( a reordination ;" of conrMo the MolhodiNt Society, ho did not ordain him a liisho)). 8. That hud Dr. Coke not boon fully convinced of the invalidity of Wesley's ordinationa he never would ha\o applied to Itortl'liivci'ijool to have bitnself connecrated a Bishop for India. 9. That he never would have Hiibiuitled to all such restrictions in the fulfillment of his office, as "the government aiul/j('«a'/i <'' Hixli^ps hIiouUI think necessary," did he entertain the conviction that he was a BUihnp already, 10. That '•BcinL'eilueateil a ineiulitM' oflho Church of England from his earliest infancy and being ordained in that Chureli," hi< could not be ignorant that the bench of Bishops would require him to be re-oriiaiued,(ir such a term bo applicable) since "no man shall bo accounted or taken to be u lawful UiHhnp, l*rie»t or Deacon in the United Church of England and Ireland, except ho liiid I'oi'Mierl y Episconal consecration or ordination." I shall now proceed to prove* that tlu< Mi'thudlstH themselves do not believe that Presby- ters and Bishops are /Ac same onlir, Becaus-e, if Presbyters and HIhIuiuk were the mme order, when a ni.in is ordained a Presbyter or Elder, ho would be a IiNliop, without any further ordination ; but the Me- \ thodists require those, whom they are about to uluvato to the,(|{^er of Bishop, to submit to a third ordination, and thereby iickiiowlcdge, that tlicy do not consider a Presbyter or El- der, to be a Bishop without such onlintition, and consequently deny them to be the same order. The Methodist form for the ordination of Prenbyters or Elders you will find in the 116th page of their Book of Discipline, before referred to ; and that for the ordination of those they call Bishops may bo found in paifo lUH of the nnme Book. And as these forms were drawn up by Wesley from the oidimition oflicei* in the Prayer Book of the Church of Eng- land; it is an additional proof (if such wern wuntintj) that he did not believe Presbyters and Bishops to be the sjime order ; bec-auHe if ho did, why did he — why do the Metho- dists now require those they call VreKhylurs, to submit to a {/ii'rd ordination, before they allow them to be called Bishops f Let those answer this question who can, To conclude : the question which I uiMlertook to prove was, that Dr. Coke was not or- dained Bishop by Wesley, in proof of wliloh 1 have shown that Wesley had no authority to ordain him. 1. That it was not born with him, 2. That he did not attain it from any Iffnfmrul power. 3. That it was not conferreil on hini Ml lii.i orJinulion by the Bishops of the Church of England. 4. That he did not ordain Dr. Coliea Hlshop. because if Bishop and Presbyter be the srtwi^orJer, Dr. Coke was alie.uly a Hixlmp wUhuiU Wesley s ordination — Dr. Coke being a Presbyter of the Church of KiiKiaiid. 6. That Wesley did not oninin l>r, t'olse a Bishop, but only appointed him a Superinten- dent of the Methodist Socieiy ; a-i in \<\ iiient iVoin his letter written only eightdnya after. a. That in (ippoiiiliiii( liini aSupei'inli'ndent. Wesley did not ordain him a Bishop. 7. Tliat Dr. Coke, in applyini,' to Bishop Seabury to ordain Asbury a Bishop, admits thai Ids own ordination of .\sliury, lo lie a Hi ■hop. was ii nmck ordination, without any real lo- lidliy. 8. That Dr. Ct)ke. by apiilyin^.f lo UiKJiops While and Seabury to admit the Methodi>' preachers into the I'rolesiiiiit K|ii>.i'o|i;il( 'hureh (when the condition of their admis.situ was that they shoidd lie rc-onlaini'd) sliewed that he knew, that Ai'.s' ordination of thei: was invalid. 9. ThalDr. Coke knew thai Wesley had no milhority lo ordain him a Bishop, othorwi-^ he would not have applied lo lli^lidji .Sr.ilini v to ordain him a Bishop. 10. That Dr. Coke aeknoulid'^eii llial In- ImiI exceeiled the authority given him by We- ley and that Wesley disapprowil of his iiroceeilinj^s, 11. That consequently he hiirw wlun VVexley appointed him a Superintendent of tli Methodist Society, ho did not ordahi him a HisKop of the Chuieh of God. 12. That Dr. Coke, by applsiny lo |,ord liiverpool to have himself consecrated a Bis'i op for India, showed that he re^^arded Ills I'oriner uppointmenl invalid. i,t i ops sho II. 'i her re(|ii 1.^. T "rdi'r, b *noth(tr i ealled Hi Uuvin< 'he vnlidi Wesley the whoh t'Okc's or tliodist Ml •o a demo Ihoir Bish iacniiuent as there e. 'nents, it i- Christ. Having co proved that i •^that he did one, althougt tiiat Francis , •ver is<(Hed b *"s given to pretended, he I, That Asbu] Written by W r- Coke, and ;; In this lette joint Superint That he did th»t Asbury w until the Confi ■By other proo •rf' Superintend waie, Asbury b not made Bisht _^We will now Ori Coke to set them, I will refi «d by John Wes Aooe so called 1 (Iw in them ? whiBre except in ^tt is certain M iofttzivff being i mjriiuthority up< M« general confi of an ap«8t]e ha^ ami I challenge 17 for nothing; Rain. - no poHseaaea therwJHe hi* cntly that ho y'rt ordinivtiouH ll\ercforc that lid not ordain y'a ordinations [ u Biahop for Ifillmcnt of hirt id he entertain earlicBt infancy rich of Bishops » no man shall lited Church ol" lination." jve that Presby. n ia ordained a n ; but tlic Me- hop, to ftubmit to Presbyter or bl- , to be the same 1 find in the 11 6th ■dination of those ithese forms were te Church of Eng- lelieve Presbyters hy do the Metho- tion, before they I Coke was not or- had no authonlu l.V Thdt Dr. Cok.! nrvcr would ha\p Aubniitlcd to mupH roMrlclioiio hh tlir hrvch of Binh- op>t Hhould think nt'oi'ssary, did lie conovivc thut lie wuhh Bimliop nIrt'Hdy. 1 1. Tliat bein;r eddcntt'd and ordained in thu Church of Kiitfiand h«> witHnol i^iiornitlof hrr retpiirpinentH, thn Hrst of widch would ben runrdination. 15. Thai the Mtilliodists do not iwliovc Pro.tb\ Ifrs and ilixliop.-* to lit< the unnm iinifr, btscuu-'f — they hiivi- two dlHtinct fm-ms ol' ordination ; oin' lor Prc.^ln tpti and Hiiothor lor Bisliop» ; and, l»i'Ciius«' tliov will not. sutVor iUow llioy f'.'dl I'rt'sliv l»«r:H to be cillcd Bishops, until tlicy linvti beon a third time orduiiiod, liuvine thui* niinutely cxainiiu-d every arifuinent by which it '\a prnd«'d to eittabli.sli the validity ot'-Wt^HleyV ordination of JJr. Coke, I have ttliown coneiuHivcly, not ordy tlmt Wesley did not ordaiii him, but that Coke did not Mieve that he liad ordaiiu-d liim,and liial tttc wliuie tranaaction was destitute of ewn the shadow of vulidiiy. The vahdity of Ur. Cokf's ordination, then, b«ins( completely deatroyed, (and the validity of thi' prcnent Me- thodist Ministry dt^peiidiiiL' ui>on Uiat — .so that they mu.sl stand or fall toffether) it is plain, to .1 demoiiatiiition, that tnc Methodiat^H have no /at(;/'u/ niiuiatry, and that thoso they call their Bishops, Presbyters and DeJicons, are only lajpnen. And as them can hi- no lawful .iiicriiiiipnts without n hwftil niiiii.sli'y, it Ik equally plain thcv huvi' no Hacrainenls. And as tliere cannot be a Church of Christ, uiilcaa there b«' a lawful miniatrv and lawful sacra- ments, it is rquullv plain, who, that the (so called) " Methodist Church'* is not a Church of Christ. 1 1 'l-ii iH J 1 1 .1 • I . Ml ■ tl, .) I/J M CHAPTER IV. THE SUrrOSED OUDINATIOS OF FUANCIS .V!' If tlieir admissK'i Irdination of thci Bisliop, othcrwi'^ Liven liim by W*'- Irintendent of tl' Lnsecratcd a Bist^ Having considered the supposed ordination of Dr. Coke to constitute liiui a Bighop,MA proved that no such tiling ever existed — having proved that Wesley did not make him one, •^thathedid not believe himself that he was one,— -thut the Mothodiats did nut believe him one, although for their own purpoaes they pretended to do so ; I will now go on to prove that Francis Aabury was not ordained a Bishop— that no letters of Kpincopal orders were fver iH.<4ued by John Wesley for that pnrpoae, and consequently that no aueii commission was given to Dr. Coke to ordain Francis A.sbury to the sante BpiMCOjial otiicc which, it >■ pretended, he himself possessed. ,, That Asbury was not a Bishop from Wesley's ap(>ointmoi>t ia evident from the letter written by Wealey, dat«d Bristol, Sept. 10, 1784, only eight duya after ho " laid hands" on ^r. Coke, and addressed to "Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury and our Brethren in North America." ; ;lii this letter Wealey aaya, " I have appointed Dr. Coke and JVIr. Frnncis Aabury to be joint SitperivlendetUs over our Brethren in North America." That he did not make him a Bialiop by that appointment is also evident from the fact (hkt Asbury was only a layman at that time, and was pot ordained (the ho culled) Biahop, UBtil the Conference at Baltimore, on the 27th day of December, 1784 ; and were there any other proof required that he was not made a Biahop by Wesley, when he waa appoint- t^' Superintendent, it is afforded in the fact, that he waa nearly 4U00 milea distont at the time, Aabury being in America and Wealey in England. Thus yuu sue that Asbury waa not made Biahop by Wesley. 'We will now examine these ' letters of Episcopal orders commissioning and directing' On Coke to set apart Francis Aabury to be a Bishop. And lest you may have forgotten them, I will refer you to what the Methodists call the " letters of EpiHCoptl orders,"'*' sign* e(l by •'ohn Wesley, and dated, Sept. 2nd, 1784. Is Mr. Asbury's name even mentioned in trifle so called letters of Episcopal orders? — is there the slighteat allusion to his ordina- ^iHi in themt Where then is this boasted commission to bo found? It is to be found no whltre except in the Methodist Book of Discipline, Chapter 1, Section 1 ! h is certain Mr. Asbury never heard of them, for on the aubject of succetsum nnd re* ioftizing being much agitated in New York, he says; " I will tell the world what I rest nyiouthority upon. 1. Divine authority. 2. Seniority in America. 8. The election of the general conference. 4. My ordination by Thomas Coke, ^, 5. Beeaaae the signs of f n apostle have been seen in me."f Not one word about these letters of Episcopal or* den! I challenge all the Methodists living to prodjice them. I defy them to prove that « rt(« IS. t JoiunsI, Vol. lU, p. ltd. tanri ;iM'--fSi <■' 'iU\<\;\ • !».:.i t'l It vl: t'l yj)ij.i 'it.n n'l ci C ■ :'. ^■.M;oif„ii' I III ■ » n< 1 ■9 tilis assrition in tlieir Book of PiAcipline is other tliiui a uilful liilttcliuuil, bourin;; ^vitli it iiotvv«n the Mhiidownl' truth ! Ht'iir wlmt Mr. VVcHlny liiiiiavit' miyn four years nflcr Air. Asliiiry was iii.kIi' the (no t- ill- cd) fiishop. .- ;. ■! , , "TO THE KEV. KKANCIS ASDUHV. ''••••'•• 'f •. LdNDON, Sl'|.t. "JO, 1788. There is iiulood a wido difference between the reliiti(»ii wliereiii you Htainl lo tho Ariieri- o'uiiH, and the relation wherein 1 st.iMid to nil tint MethodistH. Voii ure the elder lirolher of tho Am«irie«n McthodiHtH; I nm, under l)s,.rv,. l".v In, I „n| "\V('.'.;I<... ■^,,] •'•■'ill ANbiiin ' •'' l»i-l.>iii 111, tjl.i! Iii.-;;ij)j„ ' *f<'|- (his |,i,.,. alsi, lll.'.llls ; '('r means '• ; f"ii" tiican.s 'iviii.s.iction, . f'''"iiii.l (,„|| 'I'llOoM^.y ri , 1 I Atl ng aitl I it lo tli« Amt'ii- l.lcf l>rutlii'r "I" 'riivrt'lVui', I i, iiiauit-aMirf, LOuUl not i>io- liiil alrto hiip- Coki;) mid you .s/rn/ (»/o»V- ' J, bewurii 1 Uo kv cttii you, how 1 ,Trv thoiif^htl-- I . "l5uUlicy^i«iiil I ,r Clirist'rt sake, a thf M.'tluv.lirttH I this wh.'ii I mil and hrollii'i'i N VVESI.FA'.' luuhh-r, and pnH"- rli (lend vol slH-aK- fercly hulovpdllu' nflor hi' appointed -he now had time «bvter>» to ordnin: book of Sir I'o- vc't, now ho giv<'H "of the last clause Prcsbytors nre the U. In reference to l)"what tliey pleaxr, Isbytorians, if tl'^y ^xaInplc— let them i not. liter so ns to mai« U; "How can yo" lidforAsbuTy,pro; [over him; and it. irter, did not miikc >ke a Bishop; for ithorityalaH)botli J is proved olenvl: Iidenls"of tho^l^ Ltter to Bishop Sci Yinlendmt is a gro; ' Vrs and most of tm Tie should be coni-f Jf a reunion, a vim l"If thetwohoust' iMr.Asburyandui with regard to A'^ Litton of ttichnnii tt Episcopal Chiiri^ ■^ Coke) hadgon 10 Let us ni)\v suiii i)|i what we have proved on this oi'caNioii and then judye foryonrselvp.s \v1ieth(M' !M)'lliiidisiii can hi' a Church of Uod. I. 'I'lial WeMlev (hd nut oi-dain Anbury u Binhop when Uv a;>/f Epi*copttl order* were ever given by John VVesley to Dr. Cdki' to i}i-daiii .Ashury a Hisliup and therefore, that tiie atiaertion in the Uouk uf DiMiipline is fiilse. •A. 'i'liat tlio letter of John Wesley, dated Bristol, Sept. 10, 1784, only eight days after he laiil Ins hamls on Cuke, |)ruves him to bo a Huperintendent. 4. That Wesley's letter from London to Mr. Asbury, (written /our years after the prc- teniieil ordinatioiO (iateil Hept. 20, 1788, calls hiu to aceuniitfor liis presumption in usurp- ing' the name of liisliop. .0. That Dp, Coke iincw Mr. Asbury was not a Bisliop ; for hud lie been one, why did he apply to Bishop Soabnry to orduin him one ; thereby acknowledging that his own was a mock ordination and pos-tessed no validity. I'ut 1.11 tiicse tilings together and thtm judge for yours^dvcs. «l I .Mrlt , f- V I If . ^ I ,ot.. : ii CH A I'TE R V. <|). i- .< THAT tllR riF.SrnAI. CONrKnENCE HKI.D AT IIAI-TIMORE DID NOT AT THAT TIME UKAKI- < ■* MOUSLV RECEIVK THOMAS IHIKE AND FRANCIS ASBURY AS THEIR BISHOPS. f \mc. in his ".Siiort Ilislory," gives the following account of these men first calling theiii- solves iJisliops in the minutes of their conference. . " In the course of thin ye.nr (1787) Mr. Asbury reprinted the general minutes; but in a iliffh-enl fi>rm from wliattlicy were before. The title of this pamphlet was as follows: — "A I'linn ul' lisoiplint! for the ministers, preachers and members of the Methodist Epis- •' copal Chmcli in America; considered and (i/>proiewr t/'iii s aliri' this iV.iud uas committed — uiiy would he write to liord Liverpool to endeavour to olii:.in the ep, in liis "llislory," then goci* on further to r« word Huhup ri'innin: nnd ill tiieunniinl niinutcHfor tite next year, tlio liratqueMtion Ih: " Who are the BiMho^if uf onr Church for the United Htaleit" ? ThuM wuH con!«uniniatcd one of the moNt intartlinK fraudH of niodcrn tinicN ; and the whol<> MvthodJNt 84M!iety hns, ever Mince, been led to be'iieve, that WcMloy ordained Dr. Cok<> a KiHhou, and then conunixmoned him to ordain Aabury u Binhop und that theno two were nctunllv revopniHvd and (tailed BiHhopn hy the Mt^thodiHt Cnnferonvi' !«iiice the (int fountla- lion ot' tlieir Hociety in 1784 : and what in more, thiH fraud in perpetrated to the prenenl d:iy, UM may bo wen by referring to their Book of Dim'ipline (('hap. I, Hei-tion I,) whiih I have already quoted. Now when did thiM " imponition of hnndu" on Mr. Aabury by Dr. Coke take place? We learn from Anbury's Journal, vol. I, pave 378, that it took place at the conference in Kaltmions when he whh ordained Deacon, Elder and Superiniemlfnt on the 'JAth, 'J6th and •J7thday» of December 1784;* whcrciw it wan not until I7H7, thut the minutCM were alter- I'd ; and it wuk not until the " next Conference" nfterwurdH that the Sup«irintendcnts wen- " received" as BixhopH I And when the Conference did conHont to " receive them a« Huh- op," it woH not done " nnaniinoualy''* but wan the act of only "a majority" of the preach- ers. And thus are the MethodiHtn impoHed on until this very linui-. It iN enough to make one shudder, when contemplating tlie manner in which these men attempted to tlniist themselven into the chief oftice of tTiechri»tian uiiniNtry. The re- collection of it appenr> to have j^rievously weighed upon Dr. Coke's conncienct', when lif uHterwiU-dH so earnestly wrote to Biitliop Beubury to ordain him and Asbury Bkliops! Ami to Hiiihops White und Seahurv to ordain their preuclient over again I and well might it weigU upon his conscience ! The wonder is, it «iid not drive him into a madhouse. Ah- hnii) tflisuH, ''I \\a8Mhocked wlien first informed of the intention of these my brethren (Dr. Coke and Ricliard Whatcoat) in coining to this country ; it may be of God,^'t he says ; .Hiid Wesley hinibelf telU uk the eti'ect it had upon him, when he lieard of Asbiiry claimiiii>: to he a Bishop. He tells us it made liim " nhudikr ,-" and well it mi^ht. iNolwitli.standing their high>h»nded aiMuniption of the t'ak of Biidiop, still these men wJ'ie uneasy. The fact was still atarin^r them in the face, (and the world knew it) that Weslf.y hud only appointed them 8iiperintendent.s of the Methodist Society Hmi«>r /lim.uiul however lliey mitfht claim to be Bishops — and however they mi;,'lit alter the name in the niiiiuies — still, Bi.shops in the Church of (iod, they were not! Something then must he doiii- to ^ret uround this matter, and convince the |)eople ; I. That Wesley was a Bishop ; •S. That Wesley ordained Coke a Bishop : und 3. Tlial Coke ordained Asbury a Bisho|) ! One would sup|>ose, when Asbury had Wesley's letter, (dated Sept. "JO. n«8J in his pock- et, declaring that he, Wesley, was no Bishop, and that Asbury was no Bishop, that this would not he a very easy .matter to accomplisth. But these men did not stick at triHes ; they had already fabricated a new set of minutes for their Society to get tlie title of Bishops; aiid they weredet<'i-miiied to go all lengths sooner than fail In their project lobe accounleii (>'«/ Bishops. Tlic Bishops of the ProteslanI Episcopal Church in the I'niled Slates had now for some time been con.secrated ; Coke and Asbury knew that thfir commission was authentic : thut llw.y had Ijeen consecrated in England und Scotland by UtwJ'ul Bishops ; aiu) th.at the Church had received them as Bishops, in a regular succession from the apostles. — ( oko and Asbury know nil this : and akm^ side of these men, as Methodist " Superinten- dents," they felt their littleness, alt liough they had assumed the name of what thiiy s.j much coveted ! They knew that they had the itame of Bishop, and that was all I They dad no succession to point to ! Let us see, then, how they proceeded to get the reality. — At one of their Conferences, held in the year 1789, Mr. Lee, in his " Ilistery," informs iii (p. 142) that: "The Bishops (that is Coke and Asbury) introduced a question in the annual minutes, w hich was as follows : " Q. Who .ire the persons that e-xercise the Episcopal oftice in the .Methodist Church in Europe and America f " A. .lohn Wesley, Thomas (?oke and Francis Asbury, by regular order and Succfs- ilna.T 'J'lie next question was asked dijh-cnily from what it ever had been in any of the fornit-r minutes, which stands tlius : "Q. Who have been elected by the unanimous sufl'rages of the General Conference U superintend the Methodist connexion in America.'" " A. Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury." .,.;.,>!:. .. ,' * II \* Moilliy of remnrk lliHl in ihf rrrtirirRtc of nnlinminn 'In said pus**) jlVfn by Dr. <'ok« lo Mr. A-liiirv he. Iir llok*-, »ien* liiiii-'iiir SuperintenileiU and license* A'biiry a 'iuperiniradmt ulso. ' Ji.uriml, >>il. I p. IITtl. The, it aupfii and thai l)eied, t1 the full "Ut Jlli'j • '•ey t'ubi Asliiuy •A^hury nexioii V i'lL', or u aiiiliorili Let IIS I. Til! bury BIhI -•: 'i'i.« Iciid, in ;i. Tha proa<'hei>s ■1. Tlui e<'in|)leto .'>. Tha H Tlia making \\ hunv We BislMip. And no' ■ <'hurcli of linpOHlure ly. wiJIingl Jiliiif the n the " KocI; Mi'tliddi.si let him /ii4 OMI of his , But says Episcopal J sought the J Kiiglniid by tinu'.'" \V| t.iiily llic |)i iKilince jicr When di( from your n Aiuericaii Ui of all that y resolution tl admission y( that is hones „Ui e.vjunine i ' i«* ^V'c an- inf( :. I'^v ord.Miiied t '; ^(Tc Alcxaiid li'iheil ii (:oj)\ aiy JTth. ifs! nt »nner title (that Bi$kup rvmiiin : ire the Bi»hi>j>* I ; ntid the whole ned Dr. C^oke a theHO two were the ftrnt founda- I 10 the pronent I'tion »,) which I oke take plHC" ' he conference in B 'JMh, >J6th and nuten were alter- rintendcnts wen- vo them as WuA- " of the preach- r in which tliewe liiiistry. The re- wienct', wiien he ry Bishupn! And iiid well migiit it i inudhonrte. A»- lese mv bretliren .fGod;'t»'*'*''y'^' f Anhury claiming , Htill these men rid knew it) ihni etv uink>r him,im\ tlie name in liif inj( then ninst he ■y wuH a Binhop ; ^'sbury a BiHh(>l> ! n.S8) in his po* k- , Bishop, that thin ilk at tritles : they title ()f Bishops ; ctlobe nccounleii WnUfd States had V commiasion was Iwful Bishops ; and m the apostle**.— list " Superinteii- of what thiiy so was ull! They sret the reality.— [»ry," informs ui annual minntp«*. Ihodist Church i" [der and Succfs- (any of the forni.r Iral Conferent'e I" Icok* 10 Mr. A-li"'^ The ttrit'i uf ilii'M> r|iiostions und Answers oan Im> i>een at onee. Their objert ia to make il aupeiir (1) 'I'iial it Man lite Coitfi ifnce und not Wealey, which uupcdnted thom Su/itrin- 'I iiihiUa ! and (-i) to tiiiiKe il lippear, that WeHluy waw a Biithojt, and urdailutd th«m BiahopM, and that llnin iliuy liuve ii. ifj^ulur iiU4xe$»i:in from a la<' ful Bi»hoj>. Now let it b« raiDeB)- lieivd, (lifii iheM- i|Ui-MiuMH wire intrudueed by Coke ind Atthury themselven! They saw llie riill (Irifl uf ihiiii, iililioiii'li the < 'onfurenee nii^lit not have xeen it ' Calmly and with- • Mil pi'i'iiidio- review iliiw |in>t'eedini; : and then tiuliig it in comiexi<'li with the fact that lliev lubrieated ii new -.et of iiuiiuten to get tli>- luiine of a. Bi^top, unit with the fact that .\H()iiry Itud iw iii.s |KiKM!NMion \Ve»ley'!> letter did'ninj; that ht •f/U* nu Biidiop, and tlutt .'Voliuiy vsa^ iio Hi«li(i|>. I xay calmly and without pi iudice review thifi p'Oceeainp, In con- nexion vvitli llieNe hills und then niiy, whether mode:n or ancient times aflford a more dur inij', or uuiiillovved Kclieine. thiui this preiienlh uf men underli4kin(r to usurp the office and auiiiorily of u (yliristiaii liiHhop! ■I lJ»^ (// lliitl Unit. 2. Tliat lliey were not received an Bishops by the Conference until the ininutea were al- ien d. in yearn after, by tiiuMe dettiifning men. :i. That ihey were liot received unaiiini'iuiily even then, but only by a twyorify vf the primeiieiH I, That the tninnteH Imd lo be altered in two diH'eront Conferenceii before (hey could eontplele their unhallowed Hclieme. .'). That Wenley denied in his letter dated l^ndoii, Sept. UO, I7M8, that he wasH Bishop. ti. Tint tlierefoie the Answer lo tiie QucHtion in the miinileHofthe C-onference in 1789 niakin^r We.sjey a Hinimp is :i direct and wilful untruth, because told by men, who, not otdy hiew Wesley's MMitinieiilM, hut had his letter in their posse.->8ion denying that he was a jlisliop. And now, dear Brethren, I :ippeal to any honest, (lod fearing man, whether tliatcan be a Cluiceh of the iivinv' (>od winch in conceived in sehiisra, cradled in deception, matured in inipoHlure and eonliinied in falsehood ? Can that be a Church of Christ which, knowin^'- ly, willin^'ly and deni^niedly imposes upon the ignorant, by asHcrting in its Book uf Diaci- jiline ihe iiiosi tearful untrutio thai ever were uttered by men .' Can that be founded upon the " Kock of ajL;en," whose niiniHtry Ik built upon falsehood and deception i Iiet not the >lethodisi .-tny loniLier decry the pious fraudH and lyinfif wonders of the Church of Rome ; let hiui liisl pull the heuui out of his mm eye and ihen he will itee clearly to pull the mote out of his bivlhrr's vy. Unl siiys the .Methodist ; •' We have for some time shaken off our connexion with the Kpiscopal Methodists in the United States: we have found the .Htream impure and have sou^'hl the purer fountain ; we now derive uur ministry from the genuine stock, planted in Kn^lnnd by Wesley's own hands; there can be no mistake here ; we must be right this time." Wlint ! are you ashamed of the mother that bore you ! Do you stamp with baa> t:u'dy the piirciit lli.'ii he^rot yon .' do you tleny her Fipi^copaey, repudiate her ministry, re- ,ji«ystem as a, falsehood, a/able ? What then becomes of all llial yon iiave said in faniitrof I-j/nscoiittcy up to the year 1832, when you passed a resolution thai it " be superseded." if it it* false mom-, it was false then ; so by your own ailmi^ssiitti you wrote und preached lies up to that period ! I thank you fur your admission ; th.il iH honest, plain deaiinfr. Will, then, .as you j/o back to England for your ministry, let Hi e.vainine thut Muhject next and see what Aiethodi^m g.iins by the change. ■•r ,4 'f CIIAPTKR VI. TIIK StIFl'OSKK ORniNATlONS KOR ENP.t.ANn. We an- inforuieii that, " From other sources we learn that early in the year 1789 Wes- It'v ord.iiued three other ministers without sending them out of England. Their names Mere Alexander .Vlaiher. Thomas Rankan and Henry Moore. The last of these has pub- lislied a i((|>\ of ihe letters of orders given him on this occasion. They are dated Febru- arv J"lh. I7S9" I . '>'> Now, lliJit tliis whole stiiU'tneiit is n riibriciilioii, iiiiist :\mwin cvuUmU to every tliinkiiii,' man. In tho first plaee Mr. Wesley lells us, "2. Lord King's ' Account of tlie Primitive Cliurcli,' convinced me many yearsngo, tlinl Bishofis nnd Prenbytcrs are tlie same order, aiidconwec|ueMtly liavc tiie same right to ordain. For many years I iiavc been importuiietl, tVoni tiino to time, to exercise tiiis right, by or- daining part of our Travelling PrcMihers. But I have slill refused, not only for peace' sake, but because 1 was determined as little as possible to violate the established order ol' the national Church to which I belonged. "3. But the case is widely diflereiit between England and North America. Here there nri- Bishops who have a legal jurisdiction : in An-yrica there are none, neither any parish min- isters. So that for some hundred miles togetlier tiiere is none either to baptize or to ad- minister the Lord's Supper. Here, therefore, my scruples are at an end ; and I conceive myself at full liberty, as I violate no order, and invade no man's right, by appointing and sending labourers into the harvest." This letter bears date Sepr. lo, 1784, and is directed to "Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury and our Brethren in North America."' In it you see, although /'or mavij years imporhiiml, froni liim lo time, to ordain pnuchersfur En^hnd, Wesley re/used, heiiii^ delerviined ns little as jiossildi to violate the established order of tfie Church to which he belonged. And besides all this, lu' assigns liis reasons for refusing to oidain for England. 1. That there is a wide diU'erenci' between England and Anicrica. 12. That tlien> are Bishops in England who have a legal jurisdiction. 3. That in Auierica lor some hundred miles together there were no Minis- ters to administer the Sacraments : from whicii lie concludes that he is at full liberty to set apart some persons for that country : but that Ills scruples would not suffer him to ordain for England, as he would be not only riolaiuvj; ordrr, but iiivadirig the rights of others. ■ Mow is it likely that a man entertaining such scruples would in a few short years after- wards do violence to his conscience, by ordaining these men, and at the same time nevfi •• ofter one excuse in palliation of his conduct .' Can any reasonable man suppose that \n would be guilty of so palpable a eonlradiction and yet never utter one syllable in defeucr of such inconsistency ! Again : Upon his setting apart men lor America and Scotland, \^e find every publication in the United Kingdom, as well as in Scotland, engaged in the controversy, approving ol', • or condemning the act, — we find the voice of the Bishops of the Church of EngJanii. throughout the length and breadth of the land, protesiinj-- ag.ainst his usurped aulhorily. nnd yet, we find not, in the publications of those; days, one solitary expression in condem- nation or approval of his ordaining for Mngland. Can any one in his senses supi)ose thai those who combated n distant evil, would l;iv d:nmed the right of appointing PriMchei fir AmenVa and Seollanii I am ready to admit. He has reci^rded it — the Arminian Mag' zine defeuiled it — the jtublications ol' tho.-.o days aeknowledged it — the Bishops of Lu United Kingdom raised their voice a (ainsl it; but I catuiot lind the most indirect hint the sliglifest allusion whatever to his iiavingtlone so for Kngland in his Journal, .Sernnni-. Letters, Arminian I\laga/ines. IMinnles of Confereiiee, — or, in contemporary writings, Bisli ops' charges, &e. &,p. Wp are told, " ve leurn these things fmrn other sources,'^ and also, '• the /ireseut e see'ur full of enterprise, nrul jn^rsoiis ur<- im' sutlsjie.d to take thiin's njion trust. Reason is not lo ■■■■ put off with hare assertions. \o ; menvill e.vamirie for ^/ev/i.Nv/r/.s." Now surely the ]\lr thodislseaniiol be aiuioyed if wi- ex iminc foi' (un-sclves — if we call n|ioii them lo give n sonu'thing beyond hirmissirliuu.^. I'as! e\|ierieneo h;i;; lauuiil us not to take lhiu<;s upo trust ; We Would fherelore ask of tlieni to iji\e n ■■ a little information tou<'liing these o/h. Simrces of wliieii lliey sjieak. And iine I would Ibri'Wani them that we will expect sorm y(/-(«j/— something lieytnul the h/irr assiriimi.s oi' -.m i uteri yied biograjjlier : for mitil the;i olhi'r sources are clearly and distinctly pointed out, we shall regard the whole matter as un worthy of credit — in other words, a Folile. One would suppose that enough has been ^aid on this heail to disprove the alieucd oi dination of these men, hut tlie sulijeet is not \e1 examineil. There is nothing nmre eomnnni than lo hear .Methodists spe;Ji of the Sacrameuls b, i,e constantly udminisUred in the priwliliig hiuises at heme, ;in(l, from the arrogant assnmiitiei nnd false assertions of that body, II, e, ifrnoinut .and unwary are duped into the belief th:.: the Preachers were permitted to administer thi'se rites. Now, 1 wish it lo be clearly nndei ■ stood that, to the hour of Mr. Wesley's death, no Preacher ever j)resumed to admini^lt ken sni JH to ovory tliinluiij,' mny yearsngo, tliul imc right to ordain. se tiiis right, by or- ot only for peace' 'Htablislied order (if rica. Ilore there arc her any parish niin- baptize or to ad- nd ; and I conceive by appointing aiui Ir. Asbury and our ijiurlum'tl, from I iiiii (l as liUle as jmsslhli besides till lliis, lie is a wide dilVerenee 1 wlio liave a legal ere were no Minis- 1 at full liberty to si'l nift'er him to ordain righlf: of others. ,v short yoarh after- le same time nevi r an suppose tliat hi ) syllable in defence ind every i)ublicati(Hi versy, approving ol, l^huiVh of Kngianil. I nsurped anthoril\. •ession in eondeiu seii.-'es supj)ose, tiiai ^t/f siihmissidn ul r strenuous in tluii ■III, \vo\ii(l l)e '■'■dniiili Nevertheless \M -leii to lie iulniini- AleMiniler Mather ipointing I'reiieher Aruiiiiian Mae-' Bishops ul' 1,1' (ist indirect hint .lonniiil, SiiriUKii-, nry writings, liish- yirsritt age srein Rtii: '•■' (iw surely tiie Mr a them to give ii (> Idkf ihill;;^ II po jueliillg lliese nlh' will expect sonic ■r : I'l/i Miilil the I ih(jle mutter ;is m, |)Ve the alle^cil oi tSiiiTdiiii'iils hiiii. igiint ;issnmi)tiei lito the belief tii^> L) lie I'learly Ululei led to :i(linini-l< ?3 tlic Sacrnment!) with lii i permiMsion. Ft in true they were administered in the preaching iiou.sps occasionaMy ; hut it was iinariahly by irjriiliirhi nnlniiifrl ('li r^ymrn of (he (Jhurcli I'l Erii:,1inul. [\iv.\x Mr. Wesh'y on the subject. In \vriting to Mr. Hall, who prrxsrd him in rerwuncr. llie (Jlinrci), Wesley »:\y»; " We be- lieve it would not be riglit for us to administer either Baptism or llic Jiord's Supper, un- le;;s we had a eommis.sion so to do From those Bishops whom we a|)preliend to be in a suc- cession from the A|)ostles. .Xnd yet we allow these iiishops arc tlie. successor.s of thoisc who v\(ire dcpcMdenl on the Bishop of Koine.' " We believe there is, at\d alwa;s wa.s, in every ( 'hristiau Church, (whether dependent on the Bishop of Ri>me or not) an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an out- ward .'jiicritice olfered therein, by men authorised to act as ,\mba8sadori of Christ, and Stewards oi the mysteries of (ioil." \ ol. II, p. 1. Such were Mr. VVesley's views with rcg.ird to t!ie Sacraments in Dec. 30, 17-i5, and in his, Sermon oti " Tiie i\li"iiisterial oriicc. preached at Cork, May I, 178"J, and published in the Armituan Magazine in 171MJ, the year before he died, lie speaks the same language. — Hear iiini ; "11. hi 1714, all the Methodist Preachers had t heir lirst Conference. But none of them dreamed, that the being ealled to preach gave them any right to administer sacrament.s. — And when the question was proposed, 'In what light are we to consider ourselves?' it was answered, • As ix/raordinarii rm-ssciinrrs, rai.sed up to provoke the ordinary ones to jeahuisv.' [n order hereto, one of our fust rules was given to each I'reacher, ' You are to do lh(H part of the work which we appoint.' Hut irliat icorl: was this .' Did we ever aj)- ]>oint you to administer sucraments; to exercise tlic priestly othce I iSucli a design never entered into our mind ; it was the farthest from our thoughts; .-md if any preacher had tii- ken such a step wc should have looked upon it as a palpable breach of this rule, and con- scipiently as ii recantation of our connexion. " 12. For supposing (what I utterly deny) that the reocivirig you as a Preacher, at the same tinu' gave an autiiority to administer the sa<'rameiits ; yet it gave you no other authori- ty than to do /"/, or anything else,' wiiere I appoint. But where did I appoint you to (io this ? Nowhere at ail. Therefore by this very rule you are excluded from doing it. And in do- ing it, you renounce the first principle of .Methodism, which was wholly and solely to preucii the gospel. " 13. It was several years after our society was formed, before any attempt of this kind was made. The first was, I jijiprehcnd, at Norwich. One of our Preachers there yieldeil to the importunity of a few of the people, and baptized their children. But as soon as it was known, he was informed it must not be, unless he designed to leave our connexion. — He promised to do so no more : and I suppose he kept his promise. "18. I wish all (d" you who are vulgarly filmed iMethodists would seriously consider what has been said. And particularly you whom (ilod hath commissioned to call sinners to repentance. Tt does by no moans follow from heuec, that yo are comnussioned to bap. tize or to administer tiie Lord's Sujiper. Ye never dreamed of this, for ton or twenty years after ye began lo preach. \ e did not then, like Korah, Datlianand Abiram, 'seek the priesthood also.' Ye knew 'no m:in takeih this honour unto himself but he that is called of Cod, as was Aaron.' O contain yoiir.selvcs within your own boumls ; be content with preaching the gospel."' Vol. VII, p. 277. These we are told " urn: imrc Mr. Wcsiei/s ii''frs mid hi nrrrird tliem into praclice,'\ Ju other words Mr. Wenley never sullered ajiy of the Preaciiersto administer the Sacraments. We proceed to tlie alleged copy of tlic " letters of orders" given to Henry Moore ; (the only proof of Mr. Wesley's ordaining for Kngland :) and comparint: these two statements together any honest man must acknowledge, that the whole isafabric.ition,got uptodeceive- the creduhius and unsuspecting. '■ i\now all men by these presonts, tliatl. ,lo!in W'csley, late fellow of Ijincoln College, ni Oxford, did, on the day of the date iu^rcof. I)\ the JMiposition of my hands and prayer, (be- ing assisted by other ordained ministers) set apart Henry Moore, for the ottice of a Pres- byterin the Church of God, a man whom i judge qualified, Ui feed the lloek of Christ, and to administer the sacraments of baptism, and the Lord's Supper, according to the usage of the Church of England ; and as such, I do hereby recommend him to all whom it may con- tern. In testimony whereof, I st^t my hand and seal. JOHN WESLIiiY." This document bears date, Feb'y •i7th, 1789, and in it we .ire toldiliat Mr. Wesley set ap.irt Henry Moore to " luiviinisler tin- san-aw.'iils oflxip/ism and Ihr. hordes Supper:" huton 3[ay 4th, 1789, two monlhs and serpu days aflermirds, Mr. Wesley tUterly denies that he ever appointed any of the Methodist Preachers to administer the satrumeDts — that su4h adeiien iiflvrr entered intn liia mimt — that it was farthest from, his thoughts, and that j/" any preacher had taken such a step, he rmidd have looked upon it us a palpable hreuch of his rule and consC' ifuently as a recantation |mtsition," during tlin whole coufw^ ol' hiM lUt), protCHti'd npiiitrnt certain illegal and unwarranlablo proi-c-edings ; — that h(t advcrtiaad in thi> pulilic printii that he never gave a note of htind payable at .sight, to any individual in the llnitvd Kingdom of England and Ireland ; — tliat no note of tlie kind wa4 ever prcHentml to him or IiIh Bankers while he lived ; — tiiat after his decease a oer- 'tMin individual demanded payment of hill K.\ecutors, for a note of hand, pMyabi«^ un de- mand and due for many yunrM; — that the afor.sesaid individual was in a statu of insoheiu y for years and liard proHMud for money during that period ; — tliat notwithstanding his peeu< ninry embArraaanienlN lip n<«vcr sought either interest on the note or p.iyuient of the prin- eipa! ; — that to r«d«cai Ida itinking credit he never even hinted to any one that he held such a note ; — that he afterwardN put it into the court for collection ; do yon think tlint any jury of twelve men from Derry to C^'ape Clear, from Carlisle to the Straits of Dover, would re- cognine it as^«»m'n«?;— Wfiuld pronounce it other than nformri/.' Precisely In the awnie aituution stands the case of the pretended ordination of Alexander Mather, Thoroaa Riinenn and Henry Moore. Mr. Wesley, during his whole life, protested against any of his HreueherV administering the sacraments; — he publislicd ids protest in the Arminian Magaxinv, not only in the early period of his ministry, but at it^ close in 17'JV, and subsequent to thitt nrotended ordination; — lie was importuned, from time to time, to ordain his Preachers, wliicli he not only refused, but published his refusid in the abovr year ; — the Preachers were urged in vain by the people to administer the sacraments, and they dared not ;— the caum^ of Methodism was suftering from the want of the sacraments at the hand of the Preat*hers ; and yet neither Alexander Mather, Thomas Rancan nor Hen- ry Moore, ever eaine forward to prop their cticrished system by the administration of tlu- sacraments. No; they never put forth the least claim, — the slightest pretensions to tho Priesthood, althougli we nru told that they were ordained Presbyters of the Churcii of Gud for the alleeed purpose of udminiNtering the sacraments! ! The Methodista may rest assured these things will not pass. The evidence of every mtness is against them— the decision of the juri/ is against them — the sentence of the Cour/ is against thorn and they are pronounced (iUlLTV. To examine the matter hirther : In the Minutes of ('onforenue, iield at Bristol, July 27th, 1790, 1 tind the names of these three men in the Un/ of Prfitehfrii and not the slightest allusion is made to their allonfed or- dination. Alexander Mather is stationed at Wakefield, Thomas B^ncan in London, Henry 3Ioore at Bristol, Tliis Conference was held preci.sely one year and live months after the alleged " letters of orders wi^re given to Henry Moore," in wliich lie is called a '' l*re,! for England. " KunTiiRn riiotiOHTs on separation from the church." " 1. From a child I was tAUglit to love and reverence the Scripture, the oracles of God, and next to these, to eateoin the primitive fathers, the writers of the three tirst centuries. Next after the Primitive Churoli I esteemed our own (the Cluirch of England) as tlie most scriptural national Church In the world. I therefore not only assented to all the doctrines, but observed all the rubric in the Liturgy ; and that with all possible exactness, even at the peril of my life. " 3. In this Judfment. and with this spirit I went to America strongly attached to tiie Bible, the Primitive (Jhuroh, and the Church of England, from which I would not vary in one jot or tittle on any iwo«unt whatever. In this spirit I returned aa regidar a Clergyman ' Vol. VIII, p. 317. ifi to my ; the al- i^ y never ordaiiu'il '^, " « atioii," daring th.^ i iblo proceedings; d payiibic nt siglit. nil no note of tUe lii» decease a i-er- I, payable on de- tato of insoUemy landing \m peeu- vuient of the prni- c that lie held such think that any jury if Dover, would re- lation of Alexander lUole life, protested ed his protest in the I ils close in HDy, in time to time, to ?fusal in the above the sacraments, and t of the saeramentb las Rancan nor Hcn- drainistration of tlu- pretensions to tht^ »f the Church of God e evidence of every ^he sentence of the Id the names of these je to their allejredor- Ln in London, Henry ^ve months after the lis called a " /Vfls/x/- 4om Mr. Wesley tells |i>.s/Z(/ office. Would Ithey what they »r.> la pre-eminence over In vindication of their lijT the ''Ihkvvs and If his is too great an . when the teaehinL' in the Minutes of |r and authority of a ler in silence. Vtion, if such be re- ny of his Preachers leu." , , Ithe oracles of Ciod. Ihree first centuries. England) as the moHt .to all the doctrines, exaetnesH, even ai gly attached to the iwowld not vary in fegidar a Clergyman as any in the three kingdoms, till nfter not bein? pprniittcd to preach in the Churches,* I WRS constrained to prfnrli iv Ibf open air. "3. Here -as my first jnT^j-H/wri/v; and it was not voluniary, but constrained. The ^>ccond W8H extfinjiiyranj pniyer. Tdis likewist; I believed to be my bounden duty, for the >akc of tho.-^e wild di-;ired liio to M'ateh over their .souls. 1 could not in conscience re- frain from it ; neither IVorn Mcceittinjr those who desired to serve mc as .sons in the goapel." He then goes on atgrciit lomrtli to rauiimi his followers against leaving the Church and ironcludes by saying, •' 7. I never had any design (ifsepsiniting fmin the (.'liurcli. I have no such design no^^. I do not believe the .Metliodistx 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 that J can do, many of tlieni will .separate from it (although I am a])t lo think not one half, per- haps not a third of Iheni.) 'rhese will be so hold and injudicious as to form a separate [tarty, which coiise«inently will dwindle away into a dry. dull, separate party. In flat oj)- position to these. 1 declare once more, that I live and die a member of the Church of Eng- land, and that noin; who rcgnrd niv indumeiit or advice, will ever separate from it." Vol. Vlll, p. 2:W. •' .JOHN WESLKY." This is a most iinporf;inl dominent. iwiil li.'idwi' nothing else, from the pen of .fohn Wesley it is sntKcicnt tu disprove the libel upon his I'li.iraeter. that he ordained minislcrs fiyr EnglnruL in this he uieiUions all the irrroiiloritirs of wiiich he had been guilty as a Clergyman of the (Jhureli of Engl.oid. so Car as the discipline of that Church was concern- ed in that country: yet strange l»> say there is not one word iibnnt the ordination of Henry Moore or his associates ! Does this bear upon it the ''tamp of truth, — is it ;ir all probable that he who entertained such •irniii/cs abonl ordaining for Enghind in 1784. would in 1789 perpetrate one of the greatest irregnhirities of wliieh he had ever been guilty, and not ot- fer a svllabh^ to Justil'y his riulatinn nf lln- faUiblislird ordtr oi /hi ('iiiirrh lo which he hr- lovgrd ! 'I'his Traet vou will pen.'uivc isilated Dec. II. I78J>. /liiir months iiiul Iwelcfdays after tlw iillc^cd doll', of H'-iiri/ Moon's Ir/trrs nt vrdern. and iKtt ipiite tifteen months be- fore Wesley's deatii. In a former place of this Review, I iiiuc ])roved liiat Wesluy had no authority lo ordain ; but, tor the sake of argument, let us sn(»pose thai he assnmed the right to set apart these three men for England : Why did he confine himself to that number — w by did he not or- dain (/.// the preachers .' or wliv. after the death of .Mr. Wesley, did mn Alexander Mather, Thomas Rancan and Henry ]\loore. ordain others, a thing which they never pretended to do? If they were Prfuhyti-rii nf the Chnrrh of God. they had Jis niueli right to ordain others as Wesley had to ordain them. Why. then, did they not o/)«/(/yavt)W their commis- .sion and set apart others to administer the saer.unents '. VVhy. in ihe year 1797, did they suffer The New Metho'lists to separate fnnn the old connexion, because they were not pirmilted to receive the sncrainents of Baptism and the Lord's Supper at the hands of their Preachers ; or why. in 181.5. did they sntfer •• Tlu' Church or Primitive Methodists to sep- arate from the old connexion." because the t'onference in Dublin dcleitninfd \.\\t\.i their J'reiiehers should nduiinislfr the >SaciannMi(s of Haptisniand the r,ord"s Supper:" on which occasion ninf thousand h-ft. assignintr as their reason that the "The Conference party bad forfeited the name of Wrslnjon .'" Why did they permit these divisions in their body, when the open avowal of liicir ordination, and their ordaining others would have puta stop to the whole transaction : for if llie\ were ordained, they had as much right to ordain oth- ers, as Wesley had to ordain lliem ' VVhy did they suffer the whole Methodist body to go a« sheep without a shepherd until the year l8:Hfi, at "which time they held their FIRS'TOR- IMNATION : 15 ;/<'firs ufti-r the dmtli nf /heir Fionulcr ! Answer these questions who can? {jr\\Q proof : " Reason is not to he put otf uilh bare assertions." That I do not c()ntinc niyscli' lo hare i/ssi'riions has been abnndantiv shown; and as iu other instances I shall give pmofiw this al-o. " Minutes at the !);{ annual Coni'i'rcnce. began in Hirniingliam. .Inly 27. I83W. '• f \nestion XXIV. What is the decision of tin- (,'onrereiice on the ordination of our .Ministers by iju/KisitiiHi of hands T "Answer. 'J'he Cn was held in the year" 183f), by Messrs. Bunt- ing and .lackson, a very curious account of which appeared, sonic years since, in the "Watchman," a few numbers of which were put into the PostOfiice before the Confer- *This was oniv lor a sjiort period and in a few places. In his Journal January 10, 1783, Wesley tells u.*, '• 1 preathed at St. Tlioiiias' Chiirrh in ihe iiaorriooii, nnd Ht St. Swithon'ii in the evening; llir tide is now turned sv tknt Ihaue fiutrrinvilatinnt In prrar/i in Chnrttii:-- Ittan lean neeept of:'' and the last event recorded in hl» Jouraal i* that on Sunday ii4, 17yO, he preached in Spitallield's Church In ihc morning and iu St. I'aul'a, ijhad- wcll, in the allernoun. U 26 eiice men, who were ashamed ol'the husiiiebs, spnt, down an order to buppre»s the publication. At this ordination Mr. Bunting declared that he himself had never been ordained. What think you of that? Ho who never was ordained undertoolc to ordain otherH! yet, we are told "Methodism is founded on the Rock of Ages — Her 'place of defence* is amunitionof rocksi." Wiiat an absurdity — what a burlesque upon common kcusc ! ! How can a man give that which he lias not himself ? You or I could write out and sign magintratcs' commissions, or attornies' certilicatt's, but such documents would be useless — mere forger- ich, and would only l)ass among the ignorant and illiterate. Before tiieyear 1836, the Preaclier.s were received into full connexion by a vote of Con- lercncc, b\it since that time they go through a m/>r/c ordination with " imposition of handM." And here I would ask if the laying on of hands, in ordination, were requisite to constitute a valid ministry since the year 183H, why was it not practiced before? We have no in- hlunce of any Church setting persons apart for the Ministry without observing this prac- tice, and Calvin speaking of ordination sjiys : "Since wo see that this rite (the luyine on of iiands) was in perpetual use by the apostles, their constatU practice should be received by uSf in the place of a commami"' I repeat the question; if laying on of hands, in ordination, were requisite to constitute a valid niinistrv since the year 1836, why was it not practised before? Simply because the memory of .lohn Wesley was too fresh and they dared not go thus far ; — the facts were too glaring to be got over ; — the words of their Founder liad not ceased to be respected: and now that I have examined the alleged ordination for Eng- land ; what do the Methodists gain by the change? [I'hcy have gone from the frying pan into the tire.] :« m V. H A P T E K VII, J IlK Siri-OSLfl OKDINATIONS FOR SCOTLAND. In his Journal, August 1, 1785, Wesley says:" Having with a few select friends, weigh- rd the matter thoroughly, I yielikd to their judprnnt, and scit ;ipart three of our well tried preachers, .lolin Pawson, Thomas Hanby and Joseph Taylor, to minister in Scotland." Is not this an astounding acknowledgment, and coming from the pen of Wesley himself? — After having had a long discussion with his friends, who were interested in the matter, and who no doubt persuaded him that it was for the glory of God, he i/ielded to their jvdement, and set apart these men I He was now an old man of eiglUy-three, and for the sjike of pe.'ice and relieving iiiniself fnmi the importunate entreaties of his friends he consulted not his ou'H judgment, Itut g;ive himself up entirely to the judgment of o/Zwrs, to be twisted and turned at their pleasure : and what was the moving cause that influenced him to act thus fearfully ? Let Wesley speak for himself. "After Dr. Coke's return from America, nuuiy of our friends begged I would consider the case of Scotland, where we had been labouring so many years, and had seen so little fruit of our labours. Multitudes indeed have set out well, but they were soon turned out of the way ; chiellv by their Ministers either disputing against the truth, or refusing to admit them to the Lord's Supper, yea, or to bapti/.e their children, unless they would prom- ise to have no fellowship with the Methodists. ]\lany who did so, soon lost all they had gained, and became more tiie cliiliheii of hell than before. To prevent this, I at length lonsented to take the sauu' step with re^'ard to Scotland, which I had done with regard to America." Vol. XIII, p. 22:$. Here is the clue to the solution of tlic wliole proceeding. Wesley set apart men for .•\meri(;a because they had few ilorgymeu to administer the Sacraments, and for Scotland because, although they had abundance of clergymen, they either disputed against what he considered the truth, or refused the sacraments to tliose who attended the Metho- dist Meetings, and he winds up i)y telling us that those who obeyed the wishes of their Ministers, in leaving the Methodists and cleaving to Prcsbyterianism, became more the children of hell than they were before: that is to say; returned to the soul destroying er- ror of Calvinism, which he conceived was " not the Gospel." You are aware that the subject of election and reprobiition was the great absorbing top- ic of those days, and so warmly and zealously was it debated that it rung from every pul- pit in the length and breadth of Scotland. Mr. Wesley considered that such preaching was ruinous to souls, and that, even admitting they had the ordinances of religion, they w ould only »eceive them to their damnation, as they had " not the Gospel." Here is the •27 publication. iltd. What yet, we are amunition of ^ can a man inagiHtratcs' -mere forger- I vote of Con- ion of handn." ) to constitute e have no in- ing thisprac- he laying on of • receiDM fej/w-S in ordination, I not practiaed they dared not ir Founder liad nation for Eng- i the frying pan t friends, weigh- of our well tned n Scotland." Is •sley himself T— in the matter, and for the siiKC ot (Is he consulted ^erfi, to he twisted ■need him to act d would consider luid seen so little L soon turned out Ith, or refusing to Ithey would proni- \ lost all they l»ail this, 1 at le"e*'' lie with regard to let apart men for 1 Rnd for Scotland A against what he lided the Metho- 1. wishes of their [I'came more tlu> oul destroying er- Bftt absorbing top- from every pul- Lit such preaching of religion, they kel." Here is the unravelling of the mystery : he thought that Methodism, though defective, was better than no religion at all ; for there can be no religion where there is " not the Gospel :" and he- Hides all this, there were no Bishops in Scotland " with whose legal jurisdiction he could intertere." Entertaining such ideas lie set apart three well ^rierf preachers to minister in Scotland, hoping that the little leaven of their ministrations would leaven the whole lump, — that the Gospel, as preached by these men, would counteract what Wesley considered to be the baneful ettects of Calvinism. ' ' Hear Wesley's words and then judge for yourselves : In writing to Miss Bishop, Oct. 18, 1778, he says : ♦' Calvinism is not the Gospel. Few of the Methodists are now in danger of imbibing error from the Church Ministers ; but they are in groat danger of imbibing the grand error, Calvinism, from some of the Dis- senting (Presbyterian) Ministers. Perhaps thousands have done it already, most of whom have drawn back to perdition. [ see more instances of this tiiau any one else can do ; and on this ground also exhort all who would keep to the Methodists and from (Calvinism to go to the Church and not to tlie meeting. But to speak freely, I myself lind more life in the Church Prayers than in .iny fonnal extemporary pr.iyer's of Dissenters.'' Vol. XHI, p. 134. In his Journal, Voi. Ill, p. 27fi he writes: ' - " I was not glad to huar that some of the Seceders had settled in these parts also.* — Those of them who have yet fallen in my way are more uncharitable than the Papists themselves. 1 never yet met a Papist wlio avowed the principle of murdering heretics : but a Seceding Minister being asked, " Would not you, if it was in your power, cut the throats of all the Methodists ?" replied directly ; " Why, did not Samuel hew Agag in pieces before the Lord.'" I have not yet met :i Papist in this kingdom who would tell me to my face, alt but themselves must be damned. But I have seen Seceders enough wiio make no scruple to affirm, none but themselves could be saved. And this is the natural consequence of their doctrine." In writing to Ijody Sept. 30, 1788, who at the rei|nest oS a friend received mon- ey for the propagation of Calvinism, he says: " What then ? May I destroy souls because my friend desired it? ought you not rather to throw that monev into the sea ? O, let not any monev, or any friend, move yon to pro- pagate a lie." Vol. XIII, p. 124. Again, atter writing sixty three p.iges he concludes : "I think it (Calvinism) cannot be found in holy writ and that it is a plant which Learhi dismal fruit. An instance of which we have in Calvin himself, who confesses that he pro- cured the burning to death of Mich.'iel Servetus, purely for ditlering from him iu opinion in matters of religion." Vol. .\, p. i26ei. , Again, atler writing one hundred and ten pages on the subject he coneltides: "Ah, poor Predestinarian — Where is your help '. There is no help for you in yoiu- Cod. Your God I No ; he is not yours ; he never was ; he never will be, He that made you. He that called you into being, has no pity upon you I He nuuh' you for this very end — to damn you; to cast you headlong into a lake of Vire burning with loimstone I This was prepared for y<>u or ever the world began." Vol. .V, p. 480. In these opinions is the prime, the moving cause, of Mr. Wesley setting .apart these men for Scotland. He conceived that in Scotland they had not the Gospel — he knew that there were but a few Church of Fiiifiiand Clergymen in that eonntry, (Presbyterianism be- ing the established relifjion,) and lie believed it would be sinful in him not to do all in hii p«)W<*r to rescue them IVoni perdition. CHAPTER VIII. El'lSCOl'ACV. Lotus now weigh the actions of Mr. Wesley in an impartial balance, and I feel convinc- •d that there is not one disinieresled person in live thousand that will not give his testi- mony against the fearful responsibility which he assumed; and while engaged in this con- •ideratiori, I would ask you to divest your minds of any preconceived idea with respect to Church Government ; that is to say : forget for a moment, if possible, that you are Episco- paliaus, Presbyterians, Meliuidisls,'&c.. and thereby pliice yourselves ia a silnationto jjive an unbias'ted testimons . ' 'I'inJarapee m I liter '4H Up to the year 1'746, Mr. Wesley wan u riffid Cliurcliinan, believing firmly in tlieEpiaco* pal form of Church Government existing in Knglaiid, compriHeU of Uiree onler.<), Bi«bop8« Presbyters and De^u-onM. lu 1746, he reud " Lord King's Account of the Primitive Chureh" " on (he road" on his way to Bristol. '• In spite," lie says "of the vehement prejudice of my education, I was ready to believe that tliis was a fair and impartial draft ; but if ho, it would follow that Bishops and Presbyters are (essentially) of erne order." Vol. 11, p. t». Hfre Mr. Wesley admits that ;/' tiiis"))ot)k wore eorret't Bishops and Presbyters were the Slime order, and if so tiiat he had u ri. 179. Again in 1761, fifteen years after lie reud Ijord King's book, and years subsequent to his reading the "Irenicon,"' lie says "I believe, (the eccieaiasl ical order establislioti in England) is, in general, not only lawful, but liighly commeiidable."' Vol. XJll, p. 201. Add lo these the "Book of Disci|)line,'" that .Mr. Wesley "preferred tlie Episcopal mode of ("liurch Government to any other."' Chap. I, Section 1. Here Mr. Wesley tells US : I. That Bisho])s have a right lo ordain. 2. That Presbyti-rs have no right either to ordain or appoint. ','>. That aetordiiig lo /i ("5 judgment, the Episco- pal form of ('liurcii goveriniieril was scrijitural and .iposlolical. 4. That the Ecclesiastical older established in England was not only lawful, but liighly commendable. All this he tells us as the conviction of his DunjndgmenUMXvi'W years after he read Lord King's book and many years subsequent to !iis reading the "Irenicon."' Thus up to the year I76J, at least, whilst his judgment was in full viirour. he was a linn belitner in Episcopacy, notwith- standing all he had read to the contrary. He was now lifty-ninf years of age, strong in mind and body ; but in the year 1784, without reading, as far as we can learn, anything else to change iiis mind in this particular, anrl at the advanced age of eighty-tiw, when his jiidgment, if not impaired, was easily wrought upon by ambitious men, he set apart Dr. Coke and others for America : and in the following year JoiinPawson and others for Scot- land, fwldine to thjud^nwiit if 11 fir sclirt frii nds. Add to these things his acknowledg- ment "To tlie Printer of theJJnbiin Chronicle^ dated .Iniie 2, 1789, four years after the supposed ordination ;'^Wheii I said : •• 1 believe I am a scriptural Bishop," ("as much as any man in England and Europe,') " I spoke on Lord K\\\i/s supiMJsilioii, that Bishops and Presbyters are essentij.lly one order." Vol. .Mil. p. 2:18. Now comparing these thiiiifs tOjijether, I would venture lo say. there is not one in five iliousand disintere.-.ted men that would not condemn iMr. Wesley for disturbing the peace of the Christian world by assuming an authority to w liicli he had not the shadow of a claim. .•\nd what reason have the Methodists to be proud of their supposed Ministry ; seeing they derive it through the medium of dtsiiriiiiig men, who inlliieiiced their Founder, in his old age, to act contrary to his matured judgnuMit, and that on the A/t/>/>o.NjijoM of the correctness of a book which has been refuted a thousand tinn's. and for wliich the Author wti» sorr\ lone; before its leaves were turned over by .loliii Wesley '• on llif riMid" to Bristol. We are told liiat " Mr. Wesley"- opinions iinderweiii an iMitire eliaiiffe." which was in part if not cliii'tly effected, by •• the rcadinijof two work-, written by distinguished Chnirli- /rtf //. " The dishonest V v.liicli imuks the rot nf ihi.. "• \ iiidifatioii of ili^- .AU'thodist Church"' shows itself in this also. I.ord Kiii^- was not a ('liitrclunini. His family were Dissenters and he was educated in the priiK-i|)les of dissent from the fJhureli of England. His prin- ciples, as a Dissenter, not allow ins> Ins adniissicm into the English Universities, by the .id- vice of his unilc. the eelebr.ited .loliii lAwke. lie went lo the University at Leyden to p. • s'le his education. Shortly after his return in 1H9'J. and w liile a Dissenter when but twen- ty two years ot" age. he published his " ln(iuiry+ &i'., of the Primitive Church," in which owing to his immature judgment, lie drew his conclusions from terms rather than facts. — In 1 70*2 he published a " History of the Apostles' Crwd," and, although evidencing gretit res^circh, so objectionable was it. that Moslieim says of it : '• Such as read this valuable * Here you see lie belicvoil I'piscopary wiis tniishc in ScripiMro. hut lluK it wiis nrtt Inid dosvn rs r vommHnil. • To anaoh the more iMipormme to this work it i.< disliDne'th rnllfil liy MrtliDrilsts and others Lord King'f .itidiint ol the I'riinilive I'hiirrh, ullhotiu'h the Autliur (mIIj it un " liiijuirii." 20 V intlieEpiMO* ftlers, Bi«hwp«, iinitive Church" snt prejudiee of I ; but if tto, it ' Vol. II, p. «. »vter» were tl»c ry. He taoitly s' book " (»t lh>- to a (yierjiymaii. to do thiH. and .nine years alt«r hotel\»U8: "It It or ordain olU« jud^metU, 1 still ap«)8tolical.' • i t that it isprc- ihIv wipoHtiwii I Mil." VoLXIII, yewrs subsequent it estabJiftheii in jn,p.201. Add liwfopul mode of Tlittt PresbjiU iH iiioul, the Epiaco- tiie EeeleHiastical ble. All thisl'e Lord King's book he year 1761, at iscopacy, notwith- (»!" age,' strong in in learn, anythin"- ily-tim, when his he set apart Dr. d others for Scot- his acknowleds?- r years alter the ." '(• as much as that Bisliope and » not one in live lurbinj; the peace hadow of a claim, fstry ; seeinj? they )under, in his old )f the correctnehs Lnthor was sorrv Bristol. ' which was in liirnislied Church- I'tlitKiist Chureli"' J were Dissenter.x Hand. I lis pnn- Isities. by the aii- I,eydon to p. • wlien but twen- rarih," in whieh Jier than facts. — (pvideneing gretit this v.nluable hwn as A vommHiiil. Lthet^ Lord King'* work would do well to coiiHider tlint its learned Author, upon several occasions, has given us uo^iectuies instead of proofs, and also tliat his conjectures are not always so iiappy as to justly comntand our us.senl." In 17U6, ho published "The Rights of tlie Christian Churoh asserted," which struck at the root of all religion, and called forth the censure of fit. Calumy andotliers but especially of Dr. George Hickn, who e.xpressed himself as hav- ing doubts 9f liord King's belief in Christianity, and stuvastically pliwed him in the mjiiu- l^offue o/° Ike liberliiHs. Indeed, so great was the sensation produced by the last mention- ed work that the liou»e ul' (!unnnons jNissted tlie following resolution in relation to it and others, and tiiuA too, when Lord King was a Member in the Houhc : " Resolved, That the said books are Hcandalous, seditious and blasphemous libels, high- ly relteeting on tiie ('hristian religion, and tend to piomote immorality and atheism, and to i'rttate divLsiuns, schisms and liu-tions among her majesty's subjects, and ordered that tiie it>ooksbe this day burnt by the common haitgnian." '\ Such was the estimation in which i^ord King's works were held in his day. In 171. 1 he published a second edition of liis " huiuiry'' which, in part.eft'eeted the change in Mr. Wes- liey's mind, and so ably was it answered by the Rev. Mr. Sdater and so fully convinced was Lord King of the incompetency and inaccuriu-y of ^lis own work, that from a Disnen- tfr he became a Churchman ; and with that generosity which is ever found in a great mind, he advanced Mr. Sciater in the (Ijnirch as a proof of the favourable opinion which he enter- tainediof his work. So much for, Lord King's Churchmaimh i/t when he wrote his In- 4auiry,and thisiis the book so nmuh lauded by the Methodist body, though refiudialed by its i^uthor. Truly they are easily pleased in this particular at least ! , Let us now consider that text book \A' Modern Methodism, Stillingllect's " Irenicon," and tiien judge whether the followers of Wesley, or Dissenters in general, c;ni claim mticii I'lfon) him in support of their scliisniatical proceedings. ,, Were we to form an opinion from the importance attache«l to the above named individ- ual by the Methodists and their associates in .-iciiism, we must suppose that Bishop Stilling- ||^t was '• The Church^' instead of wlwt he really was, a humble Pre-sbyter in her com- munion, when he wrote the '■ Irenicon." To explain myself more fnlly npon this point it 4^)11 be necessary to go a little into particulars. ^.Bishop StillingHeet was educated during the time of the Commonwealth, when the (Church and Monarchy were all but annihilated, and the Universities of Oxford and Cani- ^idge were under the control of Presbyterian and Independent ministers. Such was tlie state of things when lie received his edneation. In IH.W, at the age of twenty -live, he f)lished his." Irenicon," which it appears was instrumental in effecting a partial change in mind of Mr. Wesley. Owing to the continued labours of that good, but erring man, had neither time nor opportunity to examine for himself ; consecjuently, as in the case of Lord King, he took every thing on Irasl and acted accordingly. Now, if it can be proved ^t upon mature deliberation and deeper research Bishop StillingHeet hud reason to change h^ views and correct the erroneous impressions which they were likely to make upon HJiak and unstable minds, 1 am of opinion that ins testimony will not go for much in the ^imation of any one whose opinion is worth tlie having. In the Preface to uii ordination Sermon preached by him in 168.^, he thus alludes to the "irenicon." " I did adventure to publish at that time, hoping by that means to bring o]f|^r those to a compliance with the Clinrch of England (tlien to be re-established) who st^pd oil' upon the supposition that Christ had appoinied a Presbyterian (rovernnient to be al|Ways continued in his Church, and therefore they thoiight Prelacy was to be detested, as JVa,,milawful usurpation. * * * | djire challenge any man to produce one passage in the whole book that tended to enconrage faction or scliism, or opposition to the Church of tjpghind; but, on the contrary / eudeamured to recommend the Episcopal gocemnient as har- im.the udvantagr of all others, and cumui^ nearest to Apostolical practice. I donotdeny that /|fp now think much more is to be said for the Apostolical institution of Episcopacy, than I al^ptai time apprehended^ in a|)ologizing for the mistakes of the work in question he ad- iii^s "the scepticalness and injudicionsness of yonlh. and the prejudices of education," UiO^er which it was written. This, be it retnembered was written tweiuy six years after he wrpte his Irenicon, the whole context of which goes to pntvc the necessity of a National Cljiurch Government and the sin of dissenting from it. and so able was his' defence of the Ef(tabli.shed Church on (his and other occasions tiiat he was subsequently raised to the nmscopute. In the preface to the llnreqsonahleness of Stfiaration. h iiu^st searching and unanswera- ble treatise, when speaking of the Nonconformists, among whom he would have clas.sed ^Wy '^'ethodist in this Province, he says ; •• God forbid that J should judge any one among them, as to their present sincerity, or filial condition ; to their own Master they innst stand oriall. But my business was to consider the nature and tendencv of their actions. Mv j^ldgment being tix&i a causeless breakiutr the peace of the Church we lire in, is really as ereaf «^ dangerous a sin as murder,and in so7ne respects angraiated heyonJ it." in the bodv' of the treatise itself, ho contends jllmt •'/*«• Mtlinff of mparate congregations far wonhip, where there is an aareenunt i/i tUmtriw, mid Ihe Huhtantiah of religion, itunlaufuimdtehtt' matical." In aiiotlier plnvo ho thuii MtittON \\u\ ^\\H'nilon of Mfparotion : " According to the Scripture tlierc can be no wuv M\ to jiiHtliy tho «»>piiriition from our Church, but to prove, either timtour worship iu itlulutroiiM, nr tliiit our ditctrine is false, or that our ceremonies are inudc neceswiry to wtlvution ; wliicli itru itll mi remote tVom any colour of truth, that none of my adversaritm liave yut liiid the hnrdliiesN to undertake it." And he thus con- cludes: "1 cannot but declare to the wtirlil, im one that believes a dav of judgment to come, that upon tlic most diligent seiuvh and cnrcfiil inquiry T could make into this matter, I cannot Hn*l any plea MullicitMit to jiiMtiiy, in point of conm;ieiice, the present Heparation from tlie Church of Kn^hiiul." 80 much for Bishop Htillingfllcet, mid yet the Methndists never cease from quoting the stripling of twenty five, wIiouIho contletnim llieni If they gave correct extracts, whilst they cast into the shade the full grown iiiiin, tlit* iniin nf riper age and greater accumulation of theological learning. Dr. Adam Clarke In his CoiiinuMiUiry on tli<> New Testament, says: "Episcopacy in the Church of God is of Divine Apnohitnient, ttiid sliould be maintained and respected." — Again: " Deacon, Presbyter anil «('.*i/i(i«, existed in the Apostolic Church; and may therefore be considered of Divhif oritrin," I Tim, Again ; " in revifwiiig the whole of tliis epistle, (I Tim.) I cannot help considering it of tlie tirst coiiHeqiicnco to the ('hureli of (iod, In it, we see more clearly than ehsewhere, wlml the Ministers of the gospel Nlioiihi hu; nnd wlint is the character of the true Church. Bishops, Preshijlers and Ih'unm., iiie puilleiilnrlv described : and their qualifications so circumstantially tietuiled, that it \* liiiposNlble to ne ignorant on this head." Mr. Ryerson, the late heiitl of I he Metlutdlst Society in Canada, in tlie " Christian Guar- dian," of 184-2, makes very strong adnilsHioim in fuvor of Episcopacy. He says: "The Kditor of the Church has undoulttedly Hiroiig ground in favor of Lpiscopal government — arising from its universality, its leuwonulih'iiesK, its etlleacy, its importance in promoting (Jhnrch union — " Did space permit, I conlil ^rjve lull and sallsfaetory extracts from almost all the leading Reformers of the Presbyterian biul\ ni suppint of Kniscopacy, as established in the Church of England, which they would ^^ladly have iidopleH iiitd they had any choice upon the sub- ject ; but they were eomptOled by necessity to adopt their present' fonn of Church gov- ernment. Calvin, in his Institutes eilited at (Jenevn. A. l>. IftDO, book IV, chap. XV, tells us in the most distinct terms that the power of ordliiittlon was possessed by the Bishops alone in which they were usmsted by the I'lesbyters; which is precisely in accordance with the practice oi' the Church of England. In this opinion he is supported by Adam Clarke, who says: " it most evidently appears tVom tills verso, (I Tim. IV: 14) and that above quoted, (2 Tim. I: 6.) that lie ('riinothy) leeelvcil this ilonhle imimsition; not probably at differ- ent times, but on one mul tlw sanif ittrasinn ," " by the iiupositioii of St. Paul's hands and by that of the Prcsbijlfry or Klikrshiii" Tints we of the Church of England follow not oiily the example of St. Paul hiinselt w ho laiii his hands on Timothy in which he was as- sisted by tlie Presbytery; but alsn of the Chiireh of (!hrist for l.'iOO years. Again, Calvin in writiiejf to Cardinal Hiidolel says: " We do not deny that the discipline, which the ancient Cliurcli had, is wanting to ns," ' " Episcopacy," he continues, « proceed- ed from God." And in his letter to Arehhishop Parker, after describing Bishops, such ax they ought to be, he says, " If there be iiiiy who do not behave themselves with reverencf and obedience towards them, there In no Hiiiilhemu but I confess them worthy of it." Indeed, so deeply sensible was (.'alvln of lht> Divine right of Episcopacy, that he. Bull- inger and others, in a letter to Edward VI, olVered to make him their defender, and to have Bishops in their Churches, as then- w.'^. In England; with a tender of their service to as. sist and unite together; which lellci v\as iiiteirnnled by (Gardiner and Bonner, two popish Bishops, who answered it in the niime ol' |lu\ Reformed Bishops, and checked him and slighted his proposals ; whereby Calvin's nverlnt'eitcrished : from which time John Calvin and the English Church were ai variance in several points; which otherwise, through God's mercy, had never been the easi«, had his proposals been discovered to Elizabeth during his life. But not being discovered until aboiil the sixth year of her Majesty's reign, .she la- nientcd that they were not found suniier; wliieli she expressed before her Council at the same time in the presence of her gr.>- ut the Hesloialion and was«it)i>red tliesee of Hereford, whit)' I he dechn ties again glory of ter, and a exhaustle paey, dec placed in til is." Melanc himself Romish " Here canonical will shall pute it to read, that their liandj The ce the Presby "Itisasl f«r that see of two Chi is to becho! without the Church." " But nov the Church the other iiii eMied i>y eq denco and ir the most anc uAlled Epiaco tiAfished in t that it was o stltnted in mi sixteenth cen ** Those wl peMectly well tht (Romish) trhie and man BMiops of th d4ke in Engln who set^eded I peaed from tli e**^ Andfm nMt, Hugo G ludit such as of Christian u lib. Hug. Grot Having noM foMu, togethei tion, through leartied of the I ihall concluc liRilcy: "When we(' narrow sphere WB see evidem a solitary port kiWMvn. Fron to fhe gospel < of tiie gospel 1 neMes from an enlightened Ei •liCefUInit is, out Ethiopia that] I? ■ X ^\ ont Jar worihip, iaufulandnehu- cc-ording to the ih, but to prove, our ceremonies iir of truth, that nd he thuscon- of judgment to into this matter, eaent Heparation from quoting the ractB, whilst they accumulation of Bpiflcopacy in the tind respected."— md may therefore p considering it of r than eteewhere, fthe true Church. qualifications hi» 1." « GhriHtiaAQuar- He says: "The Dpal government — ince in promoting ost all the leading ished in the Church loice upon the suh- m of Churvh gov- XV,tell8Usinthe Bishops alone in jordance with the Adam Clarke, who that above quoted, irobably at differ- PmiCs hands and ngland follow not which he was a-- lars. Ithat the discipline, itinues, " proceed- Bishops, such a" Ives with revereniT lorthy of it." Bcy, that he, Bull- iender, and to have Iheir service to as- lonner, two popisli checked him and he d<>clined, not hecaiiHe he thought it unlawful, hut licriiiiNt' i) nn^ht eiiKtt;;^ liitn in Ht ties againHl tlie conscienlioun ; whilst liiat eiiiineiil olivine, Dr. llt>yiiol(lM, " (Iik |iriiio niiH glory of the Presbyterians," accnpled the sou of Norwich, with the coiicurreiico of Biix- ter, and adorned it by his fervent pioty, " hisextmordiiiary piirln," and the alHuciice of his exIiaustlosH theological learning." And ovfii Millon, not the wiirnn'Ht frionti of KpiHco- pavy, declared " We {^rant tlicm Bishops — \\c i,'riinl them worlliy men — wr y equal Presbyters, to whom are joined from the pcoplo certain men of some pru- donce and irreproachable conduct. Those who have read without prejudice the remains of tht most ancient Christian writers, know well that the first form of discipline, which is ctfiied Episcopal, such as we see in the southern part of (Jreat Britain, was everywhere es. ti^ished in the very next age atYer the Apostles ; from whence it is reasonable to conclud*', that it was of apostolic constitution. But tlie other which they call Presbyterian, was iii- stitttted in many parts of France, Switzerland, (icrmany and Holland, by those who in the sixteenth century seceded from the Church of Rome." "Those who have read attentively the history of that age," fontinMi>s this writer, " know p^Hectly well that this hitter form of Church govcrumenl was introduced only bpcatise tht (Romish) Bishops refused to grant anv reformation in thosii points of christian doc- trhie and manners which were complained of as being corruptions. For otherwise, if the BMiopsof that day had been willing to do every where, that which was shortly afterwards ddiie in England, that same Church government would have ol it. lined at this dav among nil who seceded from the Church of Rome, and thus innumerable calamities whic)i have hap- pened from the confusions and convulsions of ecclesiastical atf'airs, might have been avoid- ed'.'^ And further on he says that whoever has read the writings of that most eminent nHNI^ Hugo Grotiua, knows that " he vehemently applauded the Episcopal form of (Jovern- nHttit such as obtains in England;" because when he had studiously examiiUHl the writings of Christian antiquity, he found it to bo " the prim(n-al form." .lohn ('len^ — Append, iid lib. Hug. Grotius de vcritat. relig. Christi. Ed., Boston. A. D., l«Oi», p, Htj-J. Having now presented to you tiie opinion of (Jalvin who honestly praised the Episcopal foWn, together with that of others, and also that of the l.utlicran hrnnch of the Reforma- tion, through their great organ, Mclaiictlion, witii he Clcrc and lingo (irotius, the ni(»sl lettflied of thoir age, and brought up in the tenets of the i'reshytcrian ("liurch of Holland. I ilh»ll conclude with the words of an eminent divine of our sister <'liuich, Bishop De Lagniey: "■When we look over the Christian world, elevating our view above and beyond the extending it to the widest circuit, sun above us does not shine upon I time John Calvin rise, *'??"''VB , . narrow sphere which lies immediately .around us, and e; lizabeth anring n^ wi» Uee evidence enough to justify the assertion that the lys reign, s ^^^ a solitary portion of Christendom where this office (of Bishop) and this officer are uii- l WMllam Cecil '*'**^"- *''""'" ^^^""y kindred and people and nation and tongue, that has bowed the knee »«fW to the gospel of Christ, there comes the testimony to the knowledge of its claims as part li linv this sin- ^^ *^® gospel system, with unv.irying uniformity in its behalf Call these national wit- |her eiyoy m neiles firom any quarter of the globe that pleases you. Let tiiem como from civilized and ' " " " ' * from the in- 1 d "red tlie ®"%'**®"®^ Europe, from the sad remnants of the christian faith in Al'rica,' in us. that he wa" • '•Cerlaln it i«, that, soon after the conversion of ihe Eunuch, llio Christian rullglnn spr« r t Itf'rcford whii t' •*• BtWopla that Bishops from that country nttendod coiwcils held at Alexundrlii." " Tho (. sprtiiul so IHr through- ' Christians ol' Egypt . 33 most rn-mtsf K of Asin.f or from otir »»» it show, thi> M((<>Atat>on is, thiit ihvit^ \n no nm dtv.- (ion of tlii'se divisions of tin- world, on which the goHpel now nhines, whether in thtfull ))rillianev of truth, or obsc-iir'■"".) V ■• <\J ».. i|K»f. If (• 11 A I' T E R 1 \ ., .M'OSTOI.ll' SI.Ci'tSSlON. 'I 'II ||, .u 111, II . •• I. !■ ; 11' .'I .ii.(i)-»(i«l'.tl/ •M M '! •|i|)l '!''»' M |. . • ( li' iH ikldii.!' A . r,>J »V»H •• i , ' xj In >ii,i(>ii. 1 rejoice to siy, is u ductriiie t!iul is widely ri'j/ainlnpf its uiKc undisputed inlluenee tltrouni tlio Chureh, who invotiUgates the subjeet tniiiutely. is eonipelled tu acknowledge it^ existence in various ptt)rU of the world. One of the irrentest dillit'ullies presented to the reception uf thix doctriuu is, thai men, witli confused iduiis of I'rotestinitisin and I'opery in tlieir heads, will not druw the proper distinetion between that which is Catholic and tltul which is Roman Catltoiic.— They stamp the doctrine of Apostolic Succession a^ a fablo, simply on the ^ound of it^ connn return \v the ([iiestion of apostolic Succession : As I have already stated, the brand of I'opery is set upon thisiloetrine ; audit is maintain- ed that because it conies through a vitiated cliannel, therefore it unist be false. Does gold, I would ask, lose any of its value liy passing through soiled hands .' Are the acts perform- ed in tlic exercise of hivvful and established authority, less valid, or rendered null, by rea- son of aiiy stjiin upon tiie character of the person who performs them '. l» a King's com- mission rendered void in consequence of the uiivvorlhiness of the individual on whom ii is bestowed? And why should God's connuission f was the promised seed of salvation, the blessed Jesus, uiinted or destroyed by passing through the meretricious wouib of Ra- hab, and tiie incestuous womb of Thainar .' .\nd il' not, is it reasonable to suppose that the spiritual seed for the ministration of that siUvation has sutiered injury by its transmis- sion through a vitiated channel .' (Jertainly not. Ilovv tlicu can the unwoithiness of tlit Bishops of Rome interfere with tlie subject of Apostolical Succession t I can cosily ini- ilcrstand the uneasiness which niodern Mi.'thodists feel under the teaching of this doctrin>', 'I'hey know full well it strikes at the root of their cherished system, and Ihey are not i^'- norant of the fact that the pillar and ground of JMelhodisui, Bishop Stillingtieet, rises in judgment against them. Hear him : "The universal consent of the Ciiureh iteiiig proved, there is as grcjit reason to bclievi the Apostolical Succession to be of divine institution, as the canon of Scripture or tin observation of the Lord's day. We do not doubt but it is unlawful to add to or to diinin- ish from tlie eanon of tScripture, and yet there is no plain text for it, with respect to all tin books contained in it; and some of the books were along time disputed in some Churuhe^ but the Churches coming at last to a full agreement in this matter, upon duo scJireh and enquiry, hath been thought sulHcient to bind all after ages to make no alterations in it.— And as to the Divine instilution of the Lord's day, we do not go about to lessen it, hv only to show that some examples in Scripture being joined with tlie univorsal practice ui are at thi-sday distlngiiislieU by this niinic, (The Copti) iinil i>peiik a language peculiar to themselves, whlrb they call Coptl." " These Coptl have a Patriarch, who generally resides at Ali^taiitfrla orCilro; MM nnrfcr him are eleven Bisho|M, who, all exercise the F!plHcopul authority in their own Diqceses." Hard om Bellgion> t Add to this the tostiinuny of the Nostorian Bishop, iMar Vohanan, from the Interior of Asia, the discov^rir^ of Buchanan In Hindoston and the testimony ol Dr. Grant : and adequate ground Is eflbrded fur thfi Above v •crjion. 1 hoth«>r in th* full lere tli« naitt« and J he wholly un- //•• ii"if.i-jf»*' .' — ,: ,.1 .iiiilMtfiljl' |, . . ( .li'iH il-(iii"i' ,1, .,,. ,•,■! ikii* II I , . 1, ..( II •!< duly icjjwning itn kfherc tiniiniiig tin , wlio i»ivo»tig»li'H riou* parts of the lift (locUiue its tbai , will not dmw tin- Loiniiii CiiUiolif.— 11 tlu! ifround «i' it* traiigc to say, tlic' xl to us tlirpugh liH ukd, tliv eucDiieH ui eniH«Ive» liftvo ti^i .dhoreiitA tliev gain ilwuyH HO bliiidiKl. ath»," who, uutil ol riiev ure no longi-r L We are oppo«P of Ri>- lie to suppose tliat iry by it» tran»nii>*- Inworthint'ss of tin I' 1 can easily un- ig of tliis dovtriiM Id lliey are not i;,'- |illingtieet, rise» in reajion to bclievi J»f fcscripture or tin (add to or to diuiin- 111 respect to all tli' [ju some ChurclK'> ])on duo aeJirch uini lalterations in it.- ^t to lessen it, bui iversal practice oi I to themselvoJ, whlot or Cairo ; dm nndi'i Hard ok Bellgton! Ir A»i», the dtacovV''» tdcd furtlwj (ttidvew the Church, in ilH purosl hms. Iiatli hctui nliowfd In be Hufticient ground, not only for fob lowing agen to observe it, but to look < at least an aitostolieAl institution. Now it rannot hut seem unequal not to allow the Hanic forci' where there is the tame evidence. — And therefore our Cluirfli lialli wisely and truly determined, tliat since * the Apostles' ijtnos thori) Imve lioen tlu'se ordern of ministers in (Christ's Church : Biahopa, Priests and Deacons; and in :i regn lux well (lonstituled (lliiirdi aro to continue till the world's end." — FVom Ordination Sermon, preached 108.5, twenty six years atler he wrote the Irenicon ; and yel Bishop Slillinjrtleit is made to admit that " the oHiee of a Bishop, as held in the Church of Kngland, has no fomidatioiiin the oracles of God" !I More, as you will percci\f, the Methodists are condemned by their own familiar friend, who boldly pronouru'os them in error. 'J'his doctrine of ,\porttolical Succession and its eonse(iuenee — the Divine right of Kpisinpncy have always Ixten taught in the Chureh of England, but that it should give such mortal otVeiiee to the followers of Wesley is very natural, as he has in poHi< live terms denied its existence; his words arc these; "The uninterrupted succession I know to be a fable, which no man ever did or cau prove. But this does in no wise interfere with my remaining in the Church of England; from which 1 have no more desire to separate than I bad fifty years ago. I still attend all the ordinances of the Church, at all opportunities. And I constantly and earnestly desire all tliat are connected with me so to do." Vol. .XIII, p. 2'20 A. D. 1786. The first part of this extract is used on all occasions by the Methodists, although I am at a loss to know with what fairness they can separate il from its (soiite.vt ; which nr^es an unflinching adhe- rence to the Church of B^ngland, and yet they always do so ; and tliis is the style of every extract used by that body. They take just what answers their purpose without the slight* est reference to the meaning of the eonte.xt, which in every instance would condemn thom. The Bible itself, although stainptfd with the seal of high Divinity, would not bear snch treatment. I will in-stance one verse, "The fool h.ith said in his heart, there is no God." Take the first clause of this sentence away and use the second : " How i-eadest thou?" " There is no God I" What, do you deny the existence of a Deity ? Horrible! Blasphemous ! ! and yet yon are not in as bad a situation as iVlr. Wesley has left his fob lowers; for "They have left the (Mtnrch of England and (Jod has left them." But the most remarkable feature in this particular is, that while individual Preachers, where they think it will injure the Chureh of England, repudiate the Succession as A fable ; the whole cotigregatfici hndy in Conference, iti their annual Address in 1846, pronounced it " Scriptural and necpsmnj." Let them speak for themselves: "The number of menioers is less than last year, owing to the exercise of discipline, and other causes ; but we apprehend that a diminution in this respect has been anended with a personal scrutiny, a self dedication, and a consolidation among our people of considerable spiritual advantage to them ; and that future accessions may be largely and confidently an- ticipated. One ground of anticipation is the unusually large number of Probationers for the ministry cordially and publicly received into the Conference, and ordained since weas* sembled, and likewise the hirge number of brethren who have been received on Trial for the Itinernney. Thus thei-e is a Snccfssimi. which we believe to be Scriptural and necessa- rtf for our rising country, and which strengthens the expectation we have of the perpetuity of the Wesleyan Ministry." Is not this astounding ? Was there ever snch n compound of contradiction as modern Methodism. Benjamin Nankeville tells us in Carleton Place, in 1849, that Apostolic Succession is a fable, (page 39), and the very identical Benjamin Nankeville, with his brethren in Conference, tells us ;vt St. Catharines in 1845, that it is " scriptural and neeessa- ry." And here I would say ; If it is xcriptural, it must be be apostolir.al, and ifit is necessa- rtj, there cannot exist a Church of God without it ; consequently as Methodism has it not, it cannot be a Church of God. The trutli lies here: They know Mial, it is Sivriptural and they see that it is necessary: they know at the same time tliat they can lay no claim to it. What then is to be done to keep their disorganised body together ! The spint nf enquiry is abroad, and men are seek- ing " the old paths." What is to be done .' Their system is not sufficiently developed to pavn upon its members the i)osse8sion of this • Scriptural and Necessary" aoctrme; a few feelers must therefore be thrown out to see how it will be received, and then, they will in- •Sert it in their Book of Discipline with as much unblushing effrontery, as though they had a legitimate right to it. Witness the alleged oidi nation of Dr. Coke — the letters of orders, &c., and say they will stop there ! No ; before long this also will be added to the num- ber ! ! In connexion with this subject I will give a remarkable document " on the subject of u union between the English and Canada Conferences," in 18S2. Resolved—" 3. That Episcopacy be susperseded by an Annual Presidency ; unless it will jeopard our Church property, or as soon as it can be legally secured." Page 50. ' llerA you see they htUl KpJM-opHry ii|> lo th*- \>m l8.i2,aiM mnintained it with a violcnc* only ef|UBlled by their oppoHition to it in IH4!). ' And murk : Although thev regard it •> imHcriptural ana jiopiMh, they are still to rtlain it, it' tin- rej«H,tioii of it would "jfopardlhfir Church woptrty. So, " for fiitliy Iucp-'h sjiko " tlu-y iirc prepared to adopt any coura*.^ Verily, the wordn of VVohley an- fullilKil; "Th<> Mclliodinls Imve left the Oiunli ofEng- l.ind, and Ood hna left thc.ni." I Nhall conclude the hubject uf iliiti UKriplural and Mrrtisanj »/w,f. We keep the t?abbath on thc^ first day of the week. We keep Christmas on the sjune day as you. Wo keep the forty days of Lent. We keep the day >viien Christ was oruLirted; the day when he rose from the dead; tlie day of his a.sceimion into heaven. We believe in Father, Son and Holy Uhost, three persons and one (iod as your Church. We teach repentiince and Ibrgiveness of sins by Josiis Christ, who lakes away the sins of the world." This coming from a Church that never had the slightest connexion with Rome, that ne- ver even heard the names ofCraniner, IjUtlier, Calvin, until visited by Missionaries, is impor- tant. On the subject of confirmation he is ocjually satisfactory. Witness the following eon vernation : "Have you the rite of Confirmation, and whence do you derive it ? Mar Yoh. ' Yes, al- ways; it came from the Apo.stlcs.' Who administers it J ' I do ; the Bishops do it.'— When? ' Just before young people come to communion the first time, 1 lay my hands on them,' Wo then recited the sentence of our own , the hood and bless them, and pray over Bishops in Confirmation. ' Yes, yes, 1 yes, 1 hear that in one of your churches, it is like our own. have We are told that "Dr. Buclianan in his Christian Researches informs us," — "That the Syrian Christians, having preserviid the simplicity of the primitive times, only two orders in their churches, the bishop and dejicon." ' I cannot find such an expression witliin the covers of that book. The opposite I can find in every page relative to tliat Oturch ; let it speak for itself: I lit withaviol«nc« thev regard it •• jiilH ''jeofardlhnt lopt any courM.— leChunhofCng- with the following .(! nst cons»;ientiouh1y lytliing to unlearn, lent and Hie Liturgy constantly, ii'dhnut hiiigis : wluch hIiows the words of Christ Huccessors through- ovince t« obtain re- ountry "The BpiB- ir and decided, as In on " the Ncstoriana owiuji passage : s, Fricats, and Bish- in an uninterrupted .ihops, Priests, Dea- to this the testimony 1 from the interior of |t Grace Church, Bos- am htippy to find il rayer Books are like J you do. We have Ithc t?abbath on tiit^ We keep the forty I when he rose from [her, Son and Holy luice and forgiveness Iwitli Rome, that ne- lissionaries, is iuipor- the following con JVIar Yoh. ' Yes, al- io Bishops do it.'— V 1 lay my hands on lentence of our own Iclies, it is like our Is ns, — Viraitive times, ha\ p opposite loan find " When the Portuguese arrivod, they were afjrceahly surprised to find upwards of a hun- dred christian churches on tin- coast of Malabar. But when they btrume acquainted with the purity ami simplicity of their w(trshi|>, lluy were olfended. These churches, said the Purluguusc, belong to the l'op«'. Who is lliu I'ope f said tli« natives; we never heard of hinj.' The European Priests wrii- still more alarmed when they found that these Hindoo christians maintained the onler and discipline of a regular church under Kplscopa! jurisdiction; and that fm three iiundred years past, they had enjoyed a success- ion of Bisliops appointed by the I'.ilt.uvli of Antioeli. We, srti,r them. His search, happily, was not in vuin, as he found them in all Ihcir uri^^'inal simplicity and purity ; their Ministry bvin^' composed, as it alwiiys had been of Hishops. Priests and Deacons. On one occasion he tells us he svas received at the dour lit" the church by three Presbyters habited in white vestments and with them were two Deacons. On another occasion he visited " Mar Dio- niysius, the Metropolitan of Malabar," and the subject turning upon Prote«tant Episcopa- cy, he observes, — "The Bishop was desirous to know something of the other churches which had separa- ted from Rome. I was ashamed to tell him how many there were, i mentioned that there was a Presbyter C'hurch in our Kini'dom in which (!very I'resbyter was equal to another. • Are there no Deacons in Holy Oriler.t .'' None. 'And what! is there nobody to over- look the PrcKhytcrs /' Not one. There must be something imperfect there," said he.— Pao'e 80. Let this suffice to show that Kpi^-opacy as lieltl in our church is held in the Syrian ehurches, and that they have never been withotit tlie three orders, Bishops, Priests and J)eacons. From whence, then, did Mr. Nankeville get his information .' Itru.st he will in- form us and produce tlie original. Produce the original, did Isay .' That I tear he will not be willing to do,— since the plain, straightforwunl statement of Dr. Buchanan is at utter variance with the tortuous wind- ings, and twisting perversions of this redoubted champion of Modern Methodism, and clearly proves him to be rather a dealer in fable, than a lover of truth. We shall now e-xamine the few passaires brought forward from tho New Testament in proof of Presbyterian ordination. ' Mr. Nankeville, to prove Bishops and Presbyters the same order, says: " In the i20th chapter ol the Acts of the Apostles, where wo have an .oceotint of St. Paul's solemn ^charge delivered to the elders of tlieeluirch of Ephesus, met together at Miletus, they are nil denominated by him, hishopn or ufersi'irs" The fact of St. Paul delivering this solimii ckiriie to the elders of the church of Ephe- •us shows thai he himself e.vercispd an autliority superior to those whom he addre-ssed.— If we deny the existence of a sujierlor order Uc.ausf il is iinl meiUionedy we luay, by the •ame mode of argument, deny tiial of Dfaaiii. since it is nuL mftilioned either. The Propli- *tH Hos4>a, Joel, iMicah, yA;pliaiiiuh and Haggai, mention Priests only ; Will any one on that account say, that, in their days there were neither High Priests nor Levites ; Again : " St. Paul, in writinL' to the church at Pliilippi, mentions only bishops and dea- cons. Now if there was another order distinct from thai of bishops and deacons, how Comes it to pass that there is not the least notice taken of it J" St. Paul's addressing a pastoral letter to the bishops and deacons of the Philippian church proves the existence of u iliini order superior to either of those addre.ssed. "The Prophets Isaiah, .leremiah and Ezekiel, uniformly designute the Jewish ministry »s Priests and Levites, with no allusion to any other otht-e ; and a man might as well ar- Iue, that therefore at that time, there was no superior ofhce, no high priesthood among the ews, as that tliere was no superior oflice, no chief episcopate, aniomr the christians when St. Paul wrote." Perceval. Iitistly. The case of Titus who was left in Oete that he "should ordain elders in every city;" which incontrovertibly proves thai the oflice of elder was .subordinate to that which he exercised. Thus von see that these passages stamp with the seal of truth the Three- fold ministry of the Church of Christ, as established in the Church of England. 'M In p^e 36th of the " Vindication," we Cfiur^h of ^Dglaad;" and in page 43 we are informed t}mt, " In the Church of^England theie are the oiiferent orders of Rector, Dean, are told " there are only three orders^' " in the "irmed tJiat, " In the Church of Archdeacon, Archbishop and Primate j" \ ;l making in sll^ve. The greater part of the " Vindication" goes to prove tlint Bishops and Presbyters are the same, but in page 26 we are informed that Dr. Coite was ordained, "not an a Sabbath iSchool Superintendent, nor as a Presbyter, (for lie was one before) but as a Bishop," there- by ahowiiig them to be different. Wonderful Vindication ! how clear and Uicid are tity self- contradicting statements! ! what wonders hast thou wrougiit ! ! ! We should be careful not to confound orders and office. Thus, in the Church pf Eng- land there are but three orders : Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons. Orders means those appoiniioents conferred by ordination ; whereas there are several offices which are mere!) dimrent grades in these orders : for instance an Archbishop is only equal to his brother Bishops in order, although superior to them in office, being their chairman, &e. An Arch- deacon is only a Presbyter in order, although superior to him in offire. ..,■■: ! .i . ; CH APTKR X I. , :! . I J . f • BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS NOT THE SAME ORDER. i -.(/ .1 . . Havin? satiafactorily shown from the Methodist " Book of Discipline," &c.,thut Bishops and Prewyters are different orders, I shall nosv consider the few of Mr. Nankeville's as- sertions on this head, which are worthy of a remark. He says : '* Bishop Burnett observes," : "Another thing is that both in this writing and the " Necessary Erudition of a christian Man, " bishops and priests are spoken of as one and tl.c '!ame office;" from which the Author of the ""indication" concludes: "N« determinations in the Church of England can have iiigher authority ;" and lastly, he men- tions the case of Archbishop Grindal's licensing one John Morrison to officiate in Scot- land, without having undergone a re-ordination ; lie having been previously ordained only by Presbyters. To put the views of Bishop Burnett beyond all doubt I shall give the whole extract, and then yoa will be able to form a correct idea of his sentiments. " Another thing is, that both in this writing (a document signed by Archbishop Cranmer and .several other bish- ops, &c.,) and in the Necessary Erudition of a christian man, bishops and priests are spu- ken of as one and the same offiee. In the ancient ehurcli they knew lione of these subtil- ties which were found out in the latter ages. It was then thought enough that a bishop was to be dedicated to his function by a new imposition of hands, and that several offices would not be performed without bishops, such as ordination, contirniation &a?. ; but they did not refine in these matters so much as to enquire whether bishops and priests differed in order and office, or only in degree. But after the schoolmen fell to examine matters oi divinity with logical and unintelligible niceties, and the canonists began to comment upon the rules of the ancient church, they studied to make bishops and priests seem very near one another, so that the difference was but small. They did it with different designs ; tin' schoolmen having set up the grand mystery of transubstantiatioii, were to exalt the priest- ly offiee as much as was possible ; for the turning the host into God was so great an ac- tion, that they reckoned there could be no office higher than that which qualified a man U< so mighty a performance ; tlierefore as they changed the form of ordination from what i' was anciently believed to consist in, to a delivering of the sacred vessels, and held thai :: priest had his orders by that rite ; and not by the imposition of hands ; so they raised their or der or office m high .is to make it equal with the order of bishop ; but as they designed to extol the order of priesthood, so the canonists had as great n mind to depress the epi> copal order. They generally wrote for preferment and the way to it was to exalt the |i;i paoy. Nothing could do that so effectually as to bring down the power of Bishops. Thi' only eould justify the exemptions of the monks and friars, the Popes setting up leganlinr courts, and receiving at first appeals and then original causes before them ; together with many other encroachments on their jurisdiction ; all which were unlawful, if the bishop" had, by divine right, jurisdiction in their dioceses ; therefore it was necessary to lay thfin as low as could be, and to make them think that the power they held was rather as deif gates of the apostolic see, than by a commission tVom Christ or his apostles ; so that tliu> looked on the declaring episcopal authoriiV t<> be uf divine right, as a blow that would bi fatal t< deavoi i^ckon Church itestof farmer ^*^On t tings, (irch, Wat del the fort! uty. S ^schie' mumei Thus ^deft ouhops the prie ant and tl^e pow( t(iey prei ctubonists * jprefei tlie cli to e f parti intJ most a tin t». So # the r ,] shall ciiivictioi: "It mu edvcated in a day from one en, and c tiM Refon idince on Qiranmer a 'ilB quote t >>To she a see ho e man tMi^of the the mo.st pio iw other coi to the body for leforma %». Hes \mAn, whici •Wfat a pre liWnett, vol In this nii these opiiiiu ference, unti be approved 1088, at whi served by Bi Divine Insiii " The l7ist tdf same yea 33 e orders'' "in the !hurch of England )p and Primate i" [Presbyters are the "not as a Sabbath a8 a Bishop "there- d lucid are thy self- le Church yfEng- cders means those { which are merely iml to hiH brotliBi inn. &c. An Arch- 1,1 , ■■•■■'• •,,r. n ilW •• lie," &c., that Bishops Mr. Naukeville's as- II this writing and sts are spoken of a« on" concludes: " Nt> and lastly, he men- I to officiate in Scoi- iously ordained only ^he M)/iote extroc/, ft"«i .nother thing is, thai, several other bish- , iind priests are spo- uone of tliese snblil- enough that a bish*)]) [d that several offices nation &c> ; but the\ Ik and priests differed \q examine matters oi in to comment upon Tests seem very near [different designs ; tlu^ pre to exalt the pnesi [was so great an at- eh qualified a man to Hination from what ii sels, and held that ;; lo they raised their or )ut as they designed i to depress the epi> was to exalt the p:! ^er of Bishops. Tin- * setting up leganliii' them ; together witl. awful, if tlie bishop- lecessary to lay thei« 1 was* rather as delf apostles ; so that Hit* L blow that would b> fatal to the court of Rome ; and therefore the^ did after this, at Trent, useall pos^ihl^ eil« deavours to hinder any such decision. It havmg been then the common style of thai »ra to reckon bishops and priosts as the si^me office, it is no wonder if at Uiis time thecler^ybfthis Church, the greatest part of them being htill leavened with the old superatitiopi 4Ui4 the ^st of them not having enough of spare time to examine lesser matters, retainedgUll the fbroier phrases in this particular. 'On this, I have insisted the more, that it may appear how little they have considenvi things, who are so far carried with their zeal against the established goveriunent of this '(ibarch, as to make much use of some passages of the Schoolmen and CAnoniats iiiat deny them to be distinct offices, for these are the very dregs of Popery ; the one i«i»- fthe priests higher for the sake uf transubslantiation, tiie other pulling t)ie bishops low- for the sake of the Pope's supremacy, and by sucli means bringing them almost to ab eqiiaU . So partial are some men to their particular conceits, that they make iise o^th* mo^t Mischievous topics when they can serve their turn, not considering now much i\ir^er titese iii^Cunients will run if they ever admits them." Burnett on the Reform : Addenda, Vol. I. ^ "^us you perceive had the extracts been given in full, it would have opefate'd unfavorably ii^ defeated the cause Mr. N. desired to serve. In it we have the reason .(unsigned why tiuhops and priests were spoken of as one and the same. The schoolmen dfd it to exalt the priestly office as high as possible, in the eyes of the world, to impose upon the ignor- aat and unthinking, by persuading them that no office could be higher titan that whicb had ^« power of making God, as they impiously termed the act of transubstantiation in which tj^tey pretend to change the bread and wine into the actual body and blQod or Chrigt. The cUlbnists, on the other hand wished to lower the episcopal order, because as ^ey wrote for preferment, their great object was to exalt the papacy. Besides this, the greater part m/tlie clergy were still leavened with the old superstition ; moreover, not having any spare ^Ite to examine leaser matters, it is no wonder that they retained the former phrases in *■ particular, although they were the very dregs of Popery. And so partial are some in their particular conceits, that, even at this day (how like Mr. N.) they make use of most mischievous topics to serve their turn : although they are aware that there never ^Aa a time in the Romish Church when bishops and priests were regarded as the a^uue or- f. So much for Burnett, and yet he is brought forward on another occasion as.favour- the notion. J shall conclude the examination of this point by another extract which will bring c^liviction to any mind. ** It must be borne in mind that all the Reformers of the English Church had been educated in the Romish faith. A complete change of sentiment could not be wrought in a day or a year. This change must be gradual; unless, as often hapens, it goes from one extreme to the other. But such was not the case with the English Reform- er!, and evidence of their progress appears in the productions of the various epochs of die Reformation. From this it will be seen, that the dale of a document cited a| ev- idwce on this head, is most material. If a given document contains the opinion of Qraniner and others who were afterwardx Reformers, while they were Romanists, then ttB quote tluu OS evidence of what the Reformers thought is gross mierepraaentatioli. ¥ To show how these various documents came to be produced, and thi^ our readers a see how far they are pertinent to prove the opinions of the RrforrrurSf we shall allude e manner in which the English Cliiirch was reformed. The first distinguishing tea- Xtti^ of the Englisli Reformation is, that it was tlie calm, dispassionate andieliberale act of tlumost pious ami learned amom the. clergy, approved by the great body of the laity, while iti other countries it was usually the act ot some rash and headstrong individaal, opposed to the body of the clergy. The second is the mode in which they ocmducted their efforts for reformation. This we cannot better state tiiau in the language of a hiaitorian of those iitfU. He says : " First, the whole business they were to consider was divided into so many hMds, which were proposed nsqueries. and these were given out to the Bishops and divines ; iMat a prefixed time, every one brought in liis opinion in writing on all the questions." — Iwnett, vol. I, p. 372. ta this manner all questions relating either to faith or practice, wei« examined. When these opinions had been handed in, the authors met and conferred upon their points of dif- ference, until they were able to agree upon something to bo laid before the convocation, U) be approved by that body. Om; of the first of these conferences was held in 1537, or 1M8, at which a number of papers were drawn up. Two of these papers have been pre- served by Burnett. One of them is entitled, " A Declaration made of the functions and Divine Institulion of Bishops and Priests." " The Institution of a Christian Man was compiled from these papers,* and published tjlf same year. This book contains the paragraph we have coi)ied from the foregoing " de * atrype Ann H I < 41 p :i|j ,. , claratton,^ hnd U t\M of the AUthoritiea usually cited t>y Anti-Churchmeh. With how inuoh fairne«N it oun )>u Uium quotfd, our readers can judge, Vhen w^e tell them, that this book, coinpil«d from Uh^mc douutnents, and signed by Crunmer and thirty six of the nioHt learned of the Clurgy, uHtabliithed the Romish doctrine of "Trunsubstantiation, communion in one kind.f celibnuy of the clergy, auricular confession, seven sacraments and purgatory." In all them) thingH tlu^y proved tneniselves staunch Papists, save in the single item of IIk^ Pope's Suuremacy, una perhaps the subject of monastic vows. This, therefore, was the opinion ot thoKe men uh Romanists, not ns Reformers, and the man who quotes them as such, is either too ignorant to write or too dishonest to be trusted." Rev. A. B. Chapin, M.A. Prom what han been sliown you will perceive that Cranmer and those connected witli him wera RomaniNtH at that time, and that their opinion was d9li vered in the first dawn of the Reformation, buforo thev hud had time or opportunity to examine the question. How difl'er- ont was the Hentiment of that good man when the night of superstition hud passed away and the morning of the Reformation hud shone upon his soul ; — how diiferently did he express himself Hubseqiifnliy In htM sermon on the power of the Keys when his mind was divested ol the errora o^Rome ; and this as his later and more deliberate statement of doctrine on this point, must be tUirly taken as his real conviction. " The mini»lriUion of Uo>Vk worJ, which our Lord Jesus Christ himself at first did in- stitute, UHtu derived /nnn thf Ajmsllcs unto others after them, by imjms^itiov^ of hands andgh- ■ing the Holy Oho)il,fr<»n the Aoostles' t'lTnetn our days. And this was the consecration, or- ders and unction of the Apottles, whereby they at the beginning made Bishops andPriests, and this ahull continue in the Chunih even to the ivorltTs end." I will conclude this point by an extract from the Prayer Book. " It is evident unto all men diligently rending the tioly Scripture and ancient Authors, that from the Apostles time there have been th0se orders of Ministers in Christ's Church ; Bishops, Priests and Deacons— and therefore to the intent that tiiese orders may be continued, and revcrenti} used and esteemed, in the united Church of England and Ireland, no man shall be account ed or taken to be u luwfiil Bishop, Priest or Deacon, in the united Church of England ami Ireland, or suflered to oxwnteany of tlie said functions, except to be called, tried, examin- ed, and admitted thereunto, according to the Form hereafter following, or hath had former ly Episcopal consecralioii or ordination." Such was the language of the Church in 1,549, when Cranmer was Primate, and suchi^ its rule and proctitie ut this day. , - \\\ mightj min ' a Dr. (pven,t Mr. to Mr. ry the , ^•uld ' VHearl e4 with ' . CHAPTER XII. Tlir. NBnEBHARV ERUDITION OF A CHRISTIAN MAN. i? Thii book WM pjerely n revision of the "Institution" already referred to, revised and corrected by the King ; hnnce it was called " The King's Book,'* or, in other words, " Hen ry'a Mlisa Book." It titught in common with tlie "Institution," that Bishops and Priest' were the aaiue order, and this is tlie lust we hear of that opinion, although it is declared ui this and that which we have just examined, ' 710 detenninalions in llie Church of Englam can have higher authority* iM us try the weight of this assertion. This Book waa publiahed Hve years before the death of Henry VIII, and seven years b<> fore the compilation of the Prayer Book, and taught 'Transubstantiation, sacrament in ow kind, oil in btptism, extreme unction, prayers for the dead.' Now if its testimony is worti: anything on one point, surely it is worth as much on another. What then does thi< prove 1 It pruvea conclusively that the Church of England was not reformed^ — that it was still incrusted with homan VuthoHv errors ; and yet we are told, ' No determinations in tin- Church of Rngland cun huve higlicr authority.' This is too absurd and would never br broached by any one whose heart did not incline to the errors of Romanism. ... Tk:; ,l; (MIAPTER XIII. MCENSINO OF JOHN MORRISON. ..( :■;« with regard to the HW of John Morrison, already referred to, I need only say thm Archbiflhop (Irindttl for this very act and other irre^rularitics was uuspended. Htrype'sliti of Grindai. t Htiyp* tnti Uiirntu m 35) turchmeti. With how |l^ tell them, that this thirty six of the most jtantiation, communion LmentB und purgatory." tlie single item of tlxt Dhis, therefore, was the I who quotes them as ' Rev. A. B. Chapiii, those connected with I in the first dawn of tiie e question. How difler- )n had passed away and fferently did he express lis mind was divested ol itent of doctrine on this himself at first did in- s^'Uiov^ of hands andgU- OS the consecration, or- ide Bishops and Priests, ' It is evident unto all hat from the Apostle's ; Bishops, Priests anil ntinued, and reverent)} o man shall be account [.'hurch of England un.i be called, tried, exaniiii ing, or hath had former as Primate, and such i- erred to, revised ano in other words, " Hen Bishops and Priest" hough it is declared ul e. Church of EngJan I, and seven years U- ;ion, sacrament in oin' its testimony is worti: Wi]at then doeii thi< reforinedt — that it was > determinations in tiir and would never hr lanisui. need only nay thHi lended. Htiype'slit' We are referred to the Bishop of London, who for aught that lit said to the contrary, might have been a Methodist Preacher, as some Teachers of that denomination (Benja< min Nankevilie, James Sylces and others) arrogate to theraselvcH the title of Bishops; to a Dr. Robertson, Dr. Cox, &c,, to whoso assertions, even supposing them to be correctly given, by ]VIr^ N., we can attacii no importance, unless we know whence they are derived ; yi[{B may therefore pass thero by without further notice. ■H \6 CHAPTER XIV A rHAKOE Ol lALSEHOOP. '• . ' I1U i ' "'"• 'f' "'.inn I- ' ••' . "l(j .7"' y ■.►•■• r-'JK .f.jln Mr. Nankevilie undertakes to prove mo guilty of falsehood for attributing an expression to Mr. Wesley, which, he says, he never tillered ; and charges me with " doing his memo- ry the createsf injury by making him say, that" " If the Methodists leave the Church, God >^fuld leave them." 'Hear Mr. Wesley, und tlien judge wiio has told the falsehood, and lest I might be charg- egiwith giving a detached passage, I shall quote the whole letter. TO MR. SAMUEL BAUDSLEY. Birmingham, March 25, 1787. '^ Dear Sammy : You send me good news concerning the progress of the work of God illColne circuit. I should think brother .Facksonor Sagar might set the heads of the peo- 1^ at Bacup right Brother Jackson should advise brotlier Ridell, not to please the devil 'preaching himself to death I still think, when the Methodists leave the Church of land, God will leave them. Every year more and more of the Clergy are convinced or Ihe truth and grow well affected towards us. It would be contrary to all common sense, as well as to good conscience, to make a separation now. Vol XII, p. 488. " I am, dear Sammy, your affectionate brother, JOHN WESLEY." us you see that the opinion which Mr. Wesley entertained in early life, he entertain- old age. I still thinh : such were my sentiments before and such are they now. — lat think you of that i Have / injured the memory of Mr. Wesley 1 No ; but his pre- ded followers do, by falsifying him, who never changed in this particular. i word more on this head. |n the " Tract," usually denominated "The Large Minutes," which "contains the plan ©^discipline as practised in the Methodist Connexion during the life of Mr. Wesley," we K||ye the following question : . J^VQ. 41. How should an AssLstint be qualified for his charge? M •• A. By walking closely with God, and having his work greatly at heart ; by under- ^tending and loving discipline, ours in particular ; and by loving the ('hurch of England, and reiving not to separate from it. Let this be well observed. I fear when the Methodists tffoie the Church, God will leave them." Vol. VIII, p. 319. •* These Minutes were last revised in 1789," and are " reprinted from a copy which bears the date of 1791— the year in which Mr. Wesley died, — collated with the edition of 1789." We have here the necessjiry (lualitications for an Assistant before he was suffered to enter upon his charge ; and that you may the better understand who is meant by an Assistant, I will give you the foregoing question. "Q. 40. Who is the Assistmt? "A. That Preacher in e.ich Circuit who is appointed, from time to time, to take charge of the societies and the otiier Prenchers therein." Is that man (lualified to be an Assistant, who neither walks closely with God — loies the Church of England— nor speaks the truth ? I trust to be favoured with an answer to this question. That you may more fully understand this matter, I will give you another question from thtoe Minutes. ,,.^i, .,, . , "Q. 61. What method may we use in receiving a new Helper? .j," A. Every person proposed is then to be present ; and each of them may be asked : Do VTO constantly attend the Church and sacrament? Have you read the " Minutes of the ^ferencc ?" Are you willing to conform to them ?" » When he has been on trial four Y^s, if recommended by the Assistant ho may be received into full connexion, by giving him the "Minutes" inscribed thus : " As long as you freely consent to, and earnestly en- OMvor to walk by these Rules, we shall rejoice to acknowledge you as a fellow labourer." TTins you see that no Preacher could plead ignorance of his duty, as the Minutes were not only given to him, but he was asked, had he read them, and was he willing to conform to them? Vol. VIII, p. 331 (ri ♦ iJv)iir^|/ r. (i'M.«< «»vm! hl'_4i(! CIIAPtER XY. WESLEY NdT A DISSERT^'^t'itd: ^« «re''ioM'«te'fee fcjv. Jbhn Weklcy, and all in cdn'kx/dW'With lillif W^'iiSWnt. ers from the Church of England, and proved to be so by Mr. Wesley's cbmhusit, by tfcie' Ck. nons of the Church, and by the Act of Toleration;" and that through his being a Dissen- ter, " thousands will have to praise God to all eternity.*"" These assertions I will set at nought by giving two Questions from the foregoing Min- utes, and leave Mr. Wesley (who wiid^rstood the Canous of the Church, and "The Act of Toleration" quite as well as any of nis followers) to decide the matter. **Q. 44. Are there any other advices which you would give the Assistants 7 " A. Several (9) Exhort all that were brought up in the Church, to continue therein. Set the awmple youraetf ; and immediately change every pUn that would hinder their, be- ingiAt church ntkast two Sundays in lour. Carefully avoid whatever has aibH^hcV to Mpanrte men from the Church; and let nil the servants in our pteacbih^ Uoudbs go to church once on Sunday at least. " b thewn^il oaune ? Are we not unawares^ by little and littl^ slidibjff iqt6' /« "iE^^ tion ftom the Church ? O, use every means to prevent this ! (1) Exhori ah 'dur ^^Pie to keep close to the Church and sacrament. (2) Warn then|i all against nl^eiie^ iti iiM'ring — a lirevailiogevii. (3) MTftrn them also, against despising the Prayers of the Church. — (4) > AfainatcaUing our .society " the Churi^h." (5) Against calling our Preachers, •' Min- istcfsi" oor Houses, " Meeting-Jiouses ;" call them plain preaching nousps or chapels. (6) Do iHVt UoeM* |th«m as Dissenters. The proper paper to be sent in at the Acisixes, SeS- sioM^'Biahop^s Court, is this : '^ A. b. has set apart his house lin C. for )>uMic worship, of n^iebJbe deshrwa.oerM^te." N. B. The Justice does riot Ticehse 4^' house, bat the Aol 9i, FirUsatiit. (7);Do not license yourself till you are coostraibM.: (tnd then., ibt as a Dissenter, but a Methodist. ■ ^.w. .-Vv"- ■.".■"'",'.'.." .."''^'..''V^ ',J'.-^ " Q. 46. But aro we not Diasenters? ** A.i No : jiUNogh we call sinners to repentance in all places of God's dolninion ; and althoogli.Wfl ft«mi^tly use extemporary prayer, and unite together in, a religious society ; yet w« at* not < Dissenters in (he only sense which our law acknowledges, natpely, th^ who rsooulice tte service of the Church. We do not, we dare, not, sopara^ flrotii ft. We are not Secedersr we do not bear any resemblance to them. We setout upon 4iii^ op|>^ site principles — we will keep in the good old way. And never let us mii!ke light of going tout not suchaasu* pei^des the Church Service ; it presupposes public prayer, like the Sermons at the Uni- veijpty. If it were designed to be instead of the Church Service, it would b^ eas^i^ally denctive ; for it seldom has the four grand parts of public prayer, deprecation, pettiioii, JDteT^waiioB and thank^nng." Vol. VIII, p. 320. Ffo«i these words of Mr. Wesley, you will perceive that neither he nor his followers were Dissenters f^om the Church of England, and consequently that this ossertioti, like tiw HMt, is not only fatsc;, but sinful (to Uie greatest degree), as it is brought forwi^ in jualificatioB of the'schismatica) position assumed by ppodern Methodism. ,, 1 ••/ '1 .,, » , 9iIj vi;t« it.>{ ibiU i* lli., !k") nh-'ii: .-'n'l U'iT J. ■i'l.'.> tlU bilimuJ'li'yir !,,]] ',~ '■■'^^**' ■'- ■'■' •'■ !»-''liu;Uii '''*"' ■''''■' '■' Vuv!'','A'.':l '\-> AatiSiV ) Mr. ItedieviHe liells us that while he remained in the Church of England, he, an'^ others " were hasting to everlasting destruction, until it pleased God to bring thfem to hear thr gospel preached with power, by these men of God, whom the Rev. g^oihiDM ^esmes.*' I'fBaitrSlivthAt ingoing farther you have sped worse. You dome injustice, good Sir, il' y«u Mupfoao tiiat I ise y«u.- I eould not despise one for whom Qtrist med; — I could iiQl^chdliise one of that iiunily whom the Author of our existence proQoaneea" veryg^^ -ffi.'MwiJiot'daipiaetbe vecjr meanest of GodV creation ;>-No Sir, I desi>ise von Qoj, I pity^mitiipnir, ibr you, and in the b^antifhl and iim)ressi>re language of oof titnr^ Mcadt thalliMlito ls#d in^ the wa^ of tiruth all such as hjive erred ana ar^ dec^ivf ilMr^ifimdt firam Mr. NankeviUe's, were the sentiments of thf Foui^tter of Ml«ihod- lan di«^ col shl col req vis twl eai in [ it, R» V( t, ''■'1 O. Will Benjaiila Nantoville be of the nnmier T A, Kdt tintera he raiMbtif ith liiA w^ dlsik^nu c6itdti6t,bytlie Qi. his being a Oisseii. the foregoing Min. 5h,and "The Act of r. stants 7 I to continue therein, iild hinder their, be- r has a (ch4^hcy to cbing houais go to dibgi^o a Kjif^ »rtihdur>>dF^to lidene^iti fi&Ang 8 of the Church r Preachens " Win- dsor chapels, (6) it the Asaixea, Sea. for puWfc worship; V» house, but th« led f and then, .hDt I*ii 'doWiiion'; i^nd religious society ; (is, Mtnely,thbse •tefto^ft. We upon 4ai^ opb6- ke light of gding not such aa su. nons ftt the Uni. d be essentially scation, ' pemioii, or his folloitrerH IB alwertloti.likc ught forward in ' it} 'i'-nb 3.1 . ',., 'S!^ ' ksTji (IO'|ll ?■- ;■/!'- ■i/ii •., ■'.nf ,;;.{fj il 41 iam. In writing to the Rev. Mr. G., whom he " M'wxea fenm God amlvm-hsrighteaiifinfss" Wesley says; " I quite agree, we " neither can be better men, mtr better Christians, than by ennlinuiiig members of the Church of Enlitu- |o ted a scriptural Liturgy as any tcaohrr of Modern Mi-thodism, and thin I will pretnine by iwyiiig that The Prayer Book woh lant revised in the year 1661, from which time it lui undergone no change. Bucer: *' When f thoroughly understood the Liturgy, I gave thanks to God who had granted to this Church, to reform her rites tu thut degree of purity." Saravia : " Among «)tliers thut have reformed their Ciiurches, I have often admired thf wisdom of those who restored the true worship of God to the Church of England; wlio so temperedthemselves, that tliey cannot be reproved for having departed iVom the ancient and primitive custom of the Church of (lod." The Divines of the Synod of Dort sav : " We have a great honor for the good ordor and diacipline uf the Church of Knghind, and lieartily wish we could establish ourselves upon this model." AlesiuH, a Scotch Divine, says : '' I^et it be seen and read by many for the honor of the English Church, — hope it may provoke the rest of the reformed to imitate this most noblr and divine work in settling the Church." Baxter, (a nonconformist) declared that almost every Church on earth had a worse Lit. urgy than ours, and furthermore says ; '■ I constantly join in my parish church in Liturgy and Sacntments." Alexander Knox : "I cannot doubt that, in the fulness of time, the Prayer Book will Itp accounted the richest treasure, next to the Cnnonicnl Scriptures, in the Christian CM)urcli." Dr. Doddridge says : " Our liiturgy — the languajje is so plain, as to be level to the ca- pacities of the meanest, and yet the sense is so noble us to raise the conception of tlie greatest." Robert Hall, (a Baptist,) says of the Liturgy : " I believe that the evangelical purity of . its sentiments, the chastised fervour of its devotion and the majestic simplicity of its lan- guage, have combined to place it in the very first rank of uninspired compositions." Grotius, says: " Our fjturgy comes so near tiie primitive pattern, that none of the re- formed Churches can coi-ipare with it." The members of the Dutch Reformed denomination give their testimony as follows : " Her spirit est oi irth — next to the Bible it i* e service of God's house ap- es the aid it aflbrds to the , by constant use, laid up in in Nunkeville, would present ling, hesitated not to oestou to her. The spirit whieli own to tlicm, who, weigliint' to give aji honest testimom 1 book of their love is unwnr- y :uid upprecintt' this ineMi- oii rnycr Book, ne.Yt^ the lii- and thai •• The beat of till is, (iod is with n:^" Huppo.iiii;^ this to be friie. which I very Aiuch doubt ; still I have yet to learii tlial numerical strength is a proof of a true Cliurdi of God. The Bilile speaks ii ditVeroiit Imigiiagc. The Jews are the most numerouw in AJoland, Mohoinelans ill Arabia, Braliiiiins in lliii(lo.stan ; and would tliat gentleman aflirm li|at one or all of these was ii branch of '■ the tine vine" — n part of the Church of Christ .' What ! The uiire|)eiitiiig cliihiren ol' .\l)raliaiii a part- of the (Jhureh of Christ — the fol- Miwers of the Arabian impostor a brnnch of "tlio true vine" — the worshipper-i of Brahma, »iicion of the parent .steui ! and were the Founder of Methodism on earth again, he would Mk with equal surprise : Can MctlnHiisni, as it now is, be a Church of God .' No; he would pronounce with a Iruinpei tongue the fultiliuent of his prediction, " They iiave left Ihe Church of England and God has left t!ieni." CHURCH. Ihodist Society: "That ihi' a lialfio one (.'hurehuKin- T. , ^r Ti . CHAPTER X I X . WESI.liY A ( JILKCll.VIAN. Mr. Wesley lived and tlit'd a nieinl)er ol' the Churiii of England and to his latest breath urged his followers to imitate his example. 1 am charged with "■ a wanl of comiium horns/ if for selecting ^^ detached pas/ta£;es I'tom Mr. Wesley^ works with a view of persuiwling the Methodists that they are departing fyma the principles of their Founder, without observing that Mr. Wesley's opinions under- went an entire change on these points." In following up this subject, 1 shall undertake to prove that Mr. Wesley's opinions never underwent a change ; — that lie lived and died a Churchman and that he invariably urged xmon his followers not to separate from the Church of England. I shall begin with 1746, tliat being the year in which he read "Lord King's .\ecount of the Primitive Church." 1746. — "I dare not renounce communion with the Church of England. As a Minister J teach her doctrines ; 1 use her otiices; I conform to her Rubrics; I suffer reproach for my attachment to her. As a private member, I hold her doctrines; I join in her oflices, in jirayer, in hearing, in communicating. Vol. VIII, p. 444. 1747. — " We continually exhort all who attend |mritiln^tVnni the Chnrcli, than I had forty years ago." Ii;iil riitiiily It'lt lilt' Cliiiiili I |iiil|u;(«il il im'ciHiiI to speiik Inrpply upon that head. Thev slimtl Improved and icMtlvt'd, i)iu< uiid idl, lo pt to It U)j[iiin." Vol. Ill, p. iTi. nK8. — " I mlvispttll, ovor wlioni I liuv«t iiny Inlhioiice, Hteudily to keep to the Church," Vol. Ill, p, 3;n. 1770. — " Wc had n poor h(M'nioii ui cliuruli. However, I went again in the afternoon, re- nu>niburin lli'iirv: 'It' the preacher does not know his duty, I I.K'SH (lod that I know mini'.' " Vol. II I, 'p. 401. 1772. — " I attended the C'hiiritli ol' Knulund Norvice in tlie morning and that of tlic Kirk in the atlti'rnoon. Truly, ' no man hnvliiK drunk old wine, Htraightway, desiretli new.'— ]{o\v dull and dry the liitter apptni lo return to it." Vol. IV, p. 64. 1777. — ''They (tlio I^letlunllHlH) hav»> nwl the writings of the most eminent pleaders for separation, liotli in the last and pri'sent century. They have spent several days in a Gen- eral Cdiiforcncc upon thiw very (|iumtion. ' Is It c.r/Wie/i/ Tsupposing, not granting, that it is Inwj'ul) lo separate from the KHtMltllshoddhtinMi V Rut still they could see noauflicientcauKt- lo depart from their lirst rosolutioii, Ho that their li.ved purpose is, let the clergy or laity use them well or ill, hy tiie ^raee of (iod, to endure all things, to hold on their even course, and to continue in the Cluueh, nuiu^re men or devils, unless God permits them to bethru^l out." Vol. VII, p. -128. 1778. — "The original MetliodlHt** 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 doctrine and discipline. Hence we iusei'ted In tl'io very first Rules of our Society : " They that leave the church leave ws." And this we did, not as a point of prtidence, but a point of con- scinice:' Vol. XIII, p 134. 178.5. — "Finding a report had been spread abroad that 1 was just going to leave the Church, to satisfy those that W( that I had now no mort Vol. IV, p. 320. 1786.—" Whenever there is any ( 'liuroh service, I do not approve of any appointment the same hour; because I love the (Jhuroli of England, and would assist, not oppose it, all I eiiii." Vol. XIII, p. 56. This is taken fron\ a letter to the U(w. Fi'eeboru Garretson of the Methodist Society in Amcrifa, and clearly shows that in iio limtancc did he suffer anything to be done to oppose the Chinch of England, whether in the Htutes or at home. 1787. — " 1 went over lo Deplford, but it seemed 1 was got into a den of lions. Most of the leading men of the Society were mad IVtr seoiirating from the Church. I endeavoured lo reason with them but in vain ; they had neither Kenne nor even good manners left. At length after meeting the whole Soelety, I toUl them, " If you are resolved, you may have yom- service in ehifrch hours; but remember from that time, you will see my face no more." This struck deep; and tVom that hour I have heard no more of separating from the Church." Vol. IV, p. 367. 1788.— "This is the peculiar iflory of the people called Methodists. In spit* of nil manner of temptations they will not' separate fVom the church. What many so earnestlv covet, they abhor. They will not bo » distinct b-idy." Vol. XIII, p. 232. 1789— "Unless I see more* reason for It than I ever yet saw, I will not leave the Church of England, as by law estublinhed white Ih brpnlh of God is in my nostrils.'* Vol. XIII, )). 238. " I never had any design of sepflrallng from the Church ; I have no such design now. I do not believe the IMethodlsts in general design it when I am no more seen. 1 do, and will do, all that is in uiy power to prevent such an event. Nevertheless, in spite of all that I can do, many will separate from II." "In fiat opposition to these, I declare once more that I live and die a member of the Church of England, and that none who regard my judgment or advice will ever separate from it." Vol. XIII, p. 240. b jj t, i " I believe one reason why God is pleased to continue my life so long is, fHf confirm them in their present purpose, not to separate from the Church. Vol. VII, p. 278. '• I dare^ not separate from the Chureh, 1 believe It would be a sin ao to do — I have been true to my profession from 1730 to this day." Vol. VII, p. 279, In this year Mr. Wesley wrote seven more reasons against separating from the church. 1790.—" 1 have been uniform both In doctrine and diseipline for above these fifty years ; and it is a little too late for mo to turn into n now path now I am grev-headed." Vol. XII, p. 439. The Methodists in general are memhoM of the Church of England. They hold all her doctrines, attend her service, and pcurtako of hor sacrBraenta." VoL XIII, p. 119. [""'■ " ly upon that head. Thtn i»i. Ill, p. 'J7'i. t to keep to the Church." I again in the afternoon, re. loeH not know his duty, I riling and that of tiie Kirk aightway, desireth new.'— istomed to the former."— e advice of Mr. — — , had . IV, p. 64. moHt eminent pieaderH I'ur Hit several days in a (Hen- sing, not grunting, that it is ■ouTd see no sufficient cauHc i is, let the clergy or laity ) hold on their even courm-, 1 permits them to be tliruiit if England, and the more i^ery point, both of doctrine Society : " They that leave dence, but a point of con- s just going to leave the ly declared in the evening' ,han I had forty years ago." )rove of any appointment lid assist, not oppose it, all ' the Methodist Society in thing to be done to oppose ) a den of lions. Most ot 5 Churi'h. I endeavoured n good manners left. At B resolved, you may have ou will see my face no • more of separating from :.hodist8. In 8pit« of nil What many so earnestly I, p. 232. will not leave the Church my nostrils." Vol. XIII, lave no such design now. no more seen. 1 do, and vertheloss, in spite of all and die a member of the advice will ever separate t so long is, t§' confirm Vol. VII, p. 278. in so to do — I have been rating from the church, r above these fifty years ; rrey-headed." Vol. XII, and. They hold all her >KXIU,p.ll9. \V.*\. — nilKI\ |iAV» lUllilM III, PIMM S»'p tliiit you never <;ivf' pimcto oni' tlmiijililitr Hf'|iiiriitiii{,' I'rnin vitiir lirethrt'ii in Kii. ropp. Lose IK) opportunity of (loil/uiiijf to nil men, lliiit (lie MoiIhuIi'^Ih nw out' people in till the world and llial it is their lull dctcrininiilioii mo Io * oiitiiMii'.'|^ Vol. MM, p. I'.'7. WKSl-EV ON ins DKATII IlKII. " We timiik thee, () Lord, lor these and nil thy lueieieH. UlenK (he ('hurrli iiiid Kin{,' - And frniiit us truth and peace through Jesus Christ onr Lord l'ore\c>" mid ever." Thusl'tir, 1 think, I have shown tliut the ojiinioiis of Wesley never eliimj I CHAP T K R X .\ I f/ [ . . I> II'. ,1 !..iir • ( . '. I .( TIIE EAIILV METHODIST I'HEACIIEUS AND THE |ii;i'IHlON»* 0|' cONI-KIIENrr,. We have now to consider the opinions of tlie collective lioily of I'leiuliers in (.!onter ence, as recorded by Mr. Wesley, and if they in every respect harnionise with whiil 1 have just stated, what becomes of Mr. Nankeville's assertion that I am guilty of "a want of com- mon honesty," in selecting ^^ detachetf passn^rfs' to persuade " the Methodists that they are departing from the principles of their Fonmlcr." 1756. — "We desired all the Preachers to speak llieir minds at large : "Whether we ought to separate from the Church ?" Whatever was advanced on one side or the other was seriously and calmly considered ; and on the third day we were ail fully agreod in that general conclusion, that (wliether it was lawful or not) it was no ways eximlknl." Vol. II, p. 329. 1766. — "We then largely considered the necessity of keeping in the Church, and usin^f tlie clergy with teiulerness ; and there was no dissentiiit; voic^'. (iod gave us ail to be ot one mind and of one judgment. My brother and I cioseil the (/'«inlereiic(! by a solemn de- claration of ourpurpo.se, never to separate from the Church, and all our iirctliren concurred therein." Vol. II, p. 385. 1760. — " 1 took my ease, riding in .i chaise to Limerick ; where on Saturday 6tli, ten ol us metina little Conference. By the blessing of (Jod, we were ail of one mind, particu- larly with regard to the Church. Even J I) , lias not now I lie least thought of leaving it, but attends there, be the Minister good or bad." Vol. Ill, p. !>. 176i). — "Let us keep to the Church over and above all the icasmis that were formerly given for this, we add another now from Uwg cvpirifrirr — they I lint leave the Church leave the Methodists." Minutes of Conference Works 1810. Vol. VI, p. :i88. 1778. — "Our little Conference began, at which about tw<^iity Preachers were pre.sent. On Wednesday wc heard one of our friends at large upon the duty of leaving the Church ; but after a full discussion of the point, we all remained tirm in our judgment — that it is onr duty t ft to leave the Church, wherein God has blessed us and does bless us still." Vol. IV, p. 131. 1786.-^"Our conference began ; about eighty preachers attended. On Thursday, in the afternoon, we permitted any of the Society to be present and weighed what was said about separating from the Church. Bui senting voice." Vol. IV, p. 343. " separating from the Church. But we nil determined to contiaiie •iglied w hal ) tlierein w itiiout one di:^ 1788. — "One of the most important points considered at this (Conference, was that of leaving the Church. The sum of a long conversation was : That in a eourso of fifty years wc had neither premeditatedly nor willingly varied from it in one article cither of doctrine or discipline. That we were not yet conscious of varying from it in any point of doc- trine. ." Vol. IV, p. 432. 1789. — THE LAST CONFERENCE MR. WESLEY EVEU ATTENDED IN IRELAND. " Our little ('onference began in Dublin and ended Tuesday 7. On this I observe I ncv- er had between forty or fifty such Preiichers together in Ireland before; all of them, we had reason to hope, alive to God and earnestly devoted to his service. 1 never saw such ' number of Preachers before, so unanimous in all points, purticulturly as to leaving the * The Work of Mr. Wesley from whicli I have quofpd l» the " Third LondoD EdlUoni with th« liut comctlons of (he Author, published by John Mason, 14 City itou, London " »'» \-'m'ii 'M i:.,'i A'Ait- i'tr- 't^'mn-'j I« i« ; I m riiiircli; wliiih none of tliom linrt the loiiit tlinii^hf of, If ,n no wonder, th«t there hns, been lliw year ho litrgf nn intTeiise «f the Societj." Vol, IV, p. 461. 1789. — THE I.A!^ CONKERENCK MH. WKHI.KV KVKR ATTENDED IN KN(iLANn. The Confurc'iieo beyuii ; aliout ii hundred FreachorH were prcHent, iind never wns our MiMtcr more emineiitlv prewuit with uh. Tho cum of Hcpnration from the Church whs l.irjfoly considered, and we were nil unMnimous »};niiiHt it." Vol. IV, p. 466, §0 far wc hear no* ont word of Hoparatiun from the Church of England, and Ichnllcnj^e all the MethodistR living' to convict me of wilful mixreprcsentntion in thin or in any other HlHtement that I have nmdc with regard to John Weoley. I have net down the extructn and (fivcn vol. and page, that every one may examine for liimHelf. Before concludinff thiH HiibjiHst I wIhIi to guard you againnt a vile |)erverHion of the truth adopted by the Metho- diHtH, in giving Wesley at authority for nutrering them to hold their preMching during Cliurch hours. It ap|)earH that in 1780 Wci^lcy sutt'ered the Methodius to meet at "the Room in Dublin, during Church hourn from which they take flw. exception for the rule, and thereby try to juHtify the course pursued by them in this country. Let Mr. Wesley 8|)eak for himself and we flhnll learn the motive which induced him to do this. " March, Sunday 29, 1789. Cnmo safe to Dublin quay. I went straight up to the new Room. Alonday 30. I began preaching at live in the morning ; and the congregation both then and the following mornings, was far larger in proportioi; than those at London. — Meantime, 1 had letter upon letter concerning the Sunday service ; but I could not give any answer, till 1 hod made n full inquiry botli into the occasion and the effects of it. The occasion was this : — About two years ago it was complained, that few of our Society at- tended the Church on Sunday ; most of them either sitting at homo or going on Sunday morning to some Dissontinu meeting. Hereby many of tncm were hurt ana inclined to separate from the Church. To prevent this, it was proposed to have service at the Room, which I consented to, on condition that they would attend St. Patrick's, every first Sunday in the month. The effect was : 1. That they went no more to the meetings. 2. That three times more went to St. Patrick's (perhaps six timen) in six or twelve months, than had done for ten or twenty years before. Observe ! This is done, not to prepare for, but to prereiu, a separation from the Church." Thus you see thai it was to decoy them back to the Church, that Wesley departed from hit) rule in this particular — it was tu pretenl a separation and not to prepare for it. II ' , lis # Cn.\PTER XXI CHURCH AND STATi:. i ; i , • All the si'urrilily heaped upon onr Church in consequence of h«-r connexion with the State is totally uncalled for, even were it true. The grievances alleged do not exist, either nl home or in this country. Nevertheless, that Mr. Nankeville may not again be guilty of expressing himself with so much rudeness and indecency as characterise his late produc- tion, I commend to his .serious consideration the defence of the constitution of the Church of England by Mr. Wesley in a letter to the Rev Mr. Toogood; vol. X, p. 601 ; which is loo lengthy for insertion ; and also to No. 11, Wesleyan Tracts for the Times, where in page 10 we are told ; "The Wesleyan Methodists are not Dissenters in the ordinary sense and application of thai term ; for they do not dissent from the principle of a National EccUsi- asdcal Establishment which derives a just measure of protection and support from its un- ion with the State ; nor do they dissent frotn the Doctrine or General Formularies of the Church of England.''^ ^ ,, I shall conclude this subject with the following extract. "The established Church is peculiarly "the Church of the poor man." Was there ever a truth more undeniable than this, or one more pregnant with vast and awful consequences .' The parish Church is open to the whole community. The humblest inhabitant of this wide realm, the most destitute pauper that knows not where else to seek a resting place, enters therein with a spirit, humble indeed, as befits him, towards his Maker, but, towards man, erect in conscious equality of Irotherhood with the wealthiest aud nrblest of his fellow creatures. Shut then, the do v' of this house of God, by taking away the legalized subsistence of its ministers and by refVising the fund which protects it from dilapidation — what follows! The rich and noble,the independent,the comfortable, the compet«nt,the trades- man, the artisan in competent employment— all who have wherewith to feed and clothe their families, And i6 ^y something towards the maintenance of a Church, and the support of its minister — all such can by money obtain a right of admisuon and can hear the word of Uo their preachinff during odiitH to meet at ''the ceptimi for the rule, and Let Mr. WeHJey 8|>eak thin. straight up to the new id tlio uongrcffation both iin tliOHc at London. — ; but 1 could not givo [1 the effects of it. The few of our Society at- nfl or going on Sunday iro hurt ami inclined to 'e service at the Room, ick's, every tirst Sunday Me meetings. 2. That or twelve months, than , not to prepare for, but t Wesley departed from > /^rf/wre for it. t-r connexion with the eged do note\ist, either f not again \wi guilty of ctcriae his late produc- istitution of the Chun^h ol. X, p. 501 ; which is iiu Times, where in page the ordinary sense and B of a National Ecclesi' id support from its vri- leral For inula rles of the man." Was there ever nd awf;.] consequences .' iblest inhabitant of this to seek a resting place, lis Maker, but, towards est aud noblest of his ting away the legalized i it from dilapidation — lie ooropetentfthe tmides- to feed and clothe their i,and the support of its 1 bear the word of Go lery opposite, to justify their separation from the Cliunli of England! Is not this fearful { t i !(»«■ I '- I. • 4M ......_ .♦ Ih not thin n .t»rtw o/" .S(//r/n .' An Cliunli Ih evidiMit, VVcsIfy liiinm>lt' hv\»K witneHn. H«iAr hint: " Al'ttT jiHiifyintf "Calvin itnd l.uthcr, with tlitiir lollowprH, for wporutinjr froid tin- tllmri'h ()f Konif,' on tlic plcn timl they could not "oontiniu'tlM-roin, uiwn any other torniM than HnUi-riliii)}^ to all lh(> t>rror>t of that Cliiircli und joinini^r in nil thnir HU|wrMtition and idolatry ;" VVcHlcy sjiyn: Tlu'rc wciv not thi- same rmwonH why varioiiH bodioH of mon sliould'aftorwiirdH m-parafo from thi' ('hun-h of Knj^land. No Minfiil tornin of rommiinion wt-m inipom'd npon th"in ; ni-ilhcr nrr at tliiHilay. Mont of them m«|mrntMl either bt'cnuHc of >\uuw o|iinionM ur homic niodcH of worship whirli they did not approve uf. Few of them aMsi^rnt'd the unlioliiit'NH either of the (.'ler^ry or l.iity an the cause of their Heparation. And if any did ho, it did nol appear tlittt they thenjHeives were a jot better than thoxe they uep- arnteil from." Vol. \'ll, p. 183. There are now in Kngland, hcHides Hcvernl minor brnnchoB, " Tho Old Connexion Methoeliismatie.il brethren. Marvel not at these tliiiiirs, — marvel not that they are no lonjjer "ow fHioiilif in nil thr WDiid." The reason is ohviouH: " They have left the Church of England ana God has left tliem." In the amials of time iliere has novor appeared before the world ho false and contrndic- tory a system as Modern Methodism. No assertion is too gross, no means too vile, when the Church of their /ir.v/ Inn' is to he assailed I Uut wliat else can be expected ? Are they not Si-hismalirs ! "They have lellt the ('iuirch of EuLfland and God has left them." Were more required to prove this, than what I have already brought forward, I could ad- duce abundance, liut will rest satistied with giving one of Mr. Naiikeville's extracts as a sfm-.ime.n of the rest. In page ST of his " Vindication," he informs us that Wesley " in a letter to n friend who taxed him with contradicting his subseription to the lS3d article, by allowing lay preachers," say« : "They (the Methodist Clergy) 'subscribed it in the simplicity of their hearts, when they firmly belie'cd noiie but episi'op.'il ordination valid. But Bishop Stilliugtleet has »iuce fully convinced t, m, that this was an entire mistake." Mr. Nankeville, to answer his own wicked ends and prop up a falling system, by pawning upon the world thebelief that tlmre wer(^ Methodist Minislfr.s in those days, says : "They (the Methodist Clergy) A'c." BUT— Mr. VVesley sjiys: "'I'liey (two or three Clergymen of the Church of England) &e." — Vol. XFIJ, p. "20.3. It is painful to be compelled even to allude to such a disreputable, such a dishonest course, as tiiat pursued by the Author of tlic " Vindication" of Methodism in foisting upon his readers for true extracts, the most bare-faced and shameless suppression of important passages — passages, which if given, would contradict his assumptions, — would prove him to l)e !i wilful and willinp deceiver. It is painful, but truth ret|uires it and to truth we must vi^'hl. •...:-„H <. .. , .... . y . ; . ,\oii uny other teriDH their MUperMtition urui nrioiiH budioM of nifii toriHH of coniiniiiiion KpariUMl eitlior bet'niisc Jrovo of. Few of them ■ tlieir Hepanition. Arul tor thuri thoHe they aep. The OKI Connexion (uJiHtH— 'I'he Frjrnitive ■The Tent MethodiMts (liHtH, viz : " MethodiHtH yiiK Aft'tliodistH — (Jer- III." Mill.(rili) Mtitho- tliodiHtClmrcli in Tan- KilhiimiteH-.Armiman are tlicHc divcrHidcd va- tTrt, that tlu'y will not r "one jieoiile in nil thr iglund and God hus left BO false nnd contrndic- ) nieanH too vile, when w I'xpi'cted I Are they d haH Intl them." ^'Iit forward, I could ad- ikeville's oxtraets us n a letter to n fricml who diowing lay preachers," tlit'ir hearts, when they liiigrtet't has since fully iij? sy.Mtem, hy pawninjr B days, says : ill of Rngland) &»•."_ >hlp, such a dishonesf inur career of amhilioM have been set forth hv thcuiMlv^^ or th«ir udvocat^s. In forty y«arw wr havo oiitslrippi'd Komc her*elf. in hi*r Erch to grandeur; and it wvuld ii^hii, thitt what some writer* liu\e aflirmed re'ipt'ctiiij; W«Rt«rn hemispherr, namely, that evrry (htnj^ in America is upon a briber and uraudi-r le, and that the natural productions sooner arrive at maturity here, ihim on the r'aslcm 4Mitin«nt, itt to -be verified in our church malUrs also. We beffim our church establish. flHinl a few yaars uifo, and rested the foot of our ecolesiasticnl ladder upon Mr. Wesley'^ ||lthorily ; but his authority was hooii rejected,* The lirst step of our ladder is the identi. to of bishops and prenbyters, or two orders. The second, " euisuopol authority" with lim- ilfttionn amf restrictions. The third three distinct orders. The fourth " a preabyterinn ordination and un epist'opal ordination as goo^ us any in the world." The liflli, Methodist Mshops " very much resemble" primitive evangelist.-i. The sixth. " divine authority" for Miacopal power. The seventh, u right " to over'< Mu hti death. Indeed I liille duiihi it. Kor iVoni ih« lime he wax inloriued of it, he lieRan to hsii| down hit betd and to think lie had lived lonij «non(i>. ' For a|i)H)arHiirc nuke, anil lo nltucli nitire iiiiporlunre to their Roclety, they ' mruck it on snitln in I7S9 :' liut lo lill up the iiientiure ol' their inrratliiide when Wesley died lu 1791, they would not mitt'er hin death to be recorded in their luiiiiueN. TlioniHn Wentherford, Peter Maiwie and Ueorge Brownlac, whone collective laboiirn in the .Vlethodixt niiuiel, ready In matlar* belonging to church Kuvcrnnieut to obey his commandH " i* without a |>arallel in the reli- gious world ; yet these luen call ibemseives VVesleyau ! nay. more ; the Methodists m Canada, in their nnnual ad dress lor 1043, < all upon their deluded folluwert lo 'tilVF. a PRIMITI VK WF.SI.FV A.N character to their wotd< tpitli and conduct.' ia not this enough to uiake itatan laugh— Is it not enough to make angels weep 7 Th<- mo iiient Mr VVeiley's uatue was struck ol)', the name ol' Bishop was assunieU : M' '. .(ft I ;>> ■ 9tf- " ■ I,, . . -^ ." ■ ■.! , , I!/ I.! • -.;..: I'i ■ I - ,••)!, i ,1 ■■ '. >.< 1 it . .:. ' '■■\lii :. t.. ' 'U I* "Ml'i' ! ■I'-'; . 'it • , , . ■ ..: - - ■■U: ... ., ., .,i/ ■ ...,/* ■ ■, I .'» .;ii . .-,, ,1-,. • .' .;. r t 1 .,■(,. »,'•« .;•; .. f ';.. .' .,11, 'i ..!; . ' .i'.> I.; !' !., ,: '_ - >■. \ ■: i" .,■■'! ■ ,1.1.. !. '.Ill ■ ; " i I. ' t, ^ ,.,i , I i -if, : i: •' ' ,; '•' I 50 n !>;■: CONCLUSION If! w Now that I have examined all the leading features of the " Vindication of the Metho- diHt Cliiii-eh ," will any honeHt, God fearing man Hay that that can be a Church of (lod which is begun, continued and ended in falsehood? Can that be a Church of God whose Preachers rtop at nothing, however gross, to bolster np their cherished Rvstem ? Can that be a Church of God which has not God's sacraments < Impossible. "Let God be true, but livery man a liar." Yes, but, says the Methodist, notwithstanding all this I am determined to remain a Me- thodist. I see such good fruit in Methodism— I see such holy men belonging to it. Be not deceived, my friend, by the outward appearance. Is this some ^f the good fruit of Metliodism that I have beon examining ? I do not dispute that there are good dnd sin- cere people among the Methodists. There arc good and sincere Roman Catholics ^— there are good and sincere Mahometans; — even in heathen Rome they could boast of a Regulus and Fabricius ; but what is that to the point i Because there are good Roman CathO'tics would you feel justified in becoming one ? or, because there .are good Mahometans Would you on that account embrace the false creed of tiie Arabian impostor? or, l)ecauHe heathen Rome could boast of its worliiies would you therefore desire to shake oft" the restraints of Christianity and become a heathen J But take cnre that you do not overrate the goodness which you ftmcy in Metliodism. I myself lliou},'lit Mr. Nankovillo a christian, — and declar- ed so in my congregation. You thought James Sy kes one of tlio chosen of God. Do you think so now? Allow me to tell you that it is only on the great day of account that the real character can be known. It is only when summoned before that " Almighty God un- to whom all hearts arc open, all desires known and tVoni wliom no secrets are hid," that the sheep will be separated from the goiits. Trust not llmrefore to fancied goodness ; — trust rattier to the words of tiie liviujif (iod and rend not the seamless garment of our Sa- viour; — tear not assundcr, by divisions, tlie Church of Christ, " which is his body." "It must needs be tiitit otfcnces come, but woe to that nmn by whom the otfence cometh." MEMBERS OF THE METHODIST SOCIETY: It is a source of deep grief to me to bo compelled to bring the conduct of your Preach- er thus prominently forward. There are many among you who, I feel convinced, condemn in severe terms the course pursued by that man : but after a personal attack had been nintle upon my honour and my honesty — after the truth of my statements had been impeach- ed in the inosi uncourteons and nnbccoiniiig language ; — after I had been branded as nmin, ilishimuurahk android of common honesty; — after I h.id been falsified in u public Jouruiil by, another of your Preachers, James Sykes, the friend of Mr. Nankeville, who before he went to the States, left me word that ' I might prosecute him if I could,' could I suffer such falsehoods to pa.ss by unnoticed, uncontradicted ? Charge me not with want of char- ity in exposing the system, which, |)erhaps in an unguarded mcmumt, you have espoused. A desire to be faithful to God, to his Church and your souls, deserves a different epithet. — Can yon call that man unkind who warns you of approaching danger and points to the path of safety ? Call nie rather your dearest friend, your most faithfnl counsellor. Your respected Founder said many hard things against some of the Clergy of tlie Church, and in doing so, lest iiis language might be misunderstood, he ttills us they are not the church — tliat " unless they are holy men, earnestly loving and serving God, they are not even iiifmber:^ of the Church : they are no p.irt of it. And niile»s they preach the doctrines of thethnrcli, contained in her Articles and Liturgy, they arc no true Ministers of the church, but are eating her bread and tearing out her bowels." Vol. XII, p. 240. Rut when was he ever known to speak a word against Thr Cliurrh nf Evi^hud ! In it he lived, in it he died, and even when the mysteries of another world were opening to his view ;md disdos- ing its awful realities, he bequeathed to her the last legacy he had to bestow, his dying blessing, " O Lord, bless the Church." Hear Ills language in this particular and then indge w'liether the course pursued by his followers is such as he would have sanctioni'd. " The doctrines we preach are the doctrines of the Church of England ; indeed the funda- mental doctrines of the ('liurch. clearly laid down botli in her Prayers, Articles and Iloini- lies." Vol. I, p. ;324. Again, "Methodism, so i-allcd is the old religion, the religion of the Bi- ble, the religion of the Primitive ("hurcli, the religion of the Church of England," V^ul. VII, p. 4'J3. Again,"! hold all the doctrines of the Cliurcli of England. I love her Liturgy, I approve her plan <»f discipline, and only wisli it couhl be put in execution." Vol. VII, |». J78, A. D., 1789. What fairness then is there in applying all lie said of a few of the cler- gy to the Church, whose doctrines he held and tiinoht f m E,i. i n% ^'rut : iii''tfiiii\ji ti) a ,,, Bdication of the Metho ;«'• be a Ch,m.|. of God J,&'^'''«* G«d whose nsh.d Hasten,? Can th„, I""- Let God be true, rnnnedto i«milin«Me. n belonging to Jt. •Boineoftheg^oorf/,,,,-, fj'««'*,8Podrtr,dHin. ■omnn Catholics ,v-there u'd boast of a Regul.n jood Roman CathWJs od M;.hon.etans wo.iM "r . or, hecauHe heathen '"keofttheroHtrainfl^o? overrate the goodness I tliristian,— and dechir- JoBenofGod. DoyoJ. .^y ot account that th« «t 'AlmightyGodun- «<;cref8 are hid," that ► fancied goodness ;— «« garment of our Sa. 'n 18 his body." ..jf- f" offence conicth." *' ^ndnet of your Preach- fJ convinced, condemn onal „tt.,ck had been "ta had been inipeacli- r«n branded as mean, "'"IHibh-cJourimlby '"«, who before he could,' could I suffer ot with want of char. you have espoused. a different epithet rer and points to (he il counsellor. Vo,„. o» the Church, and y are not the church ' I'lfy are not even »ch the doctrines of "<.. (it. I tt M>0 51 ' I rl ih 'tl Yon miiy po.j3ibly suppo-.e there is no great harm in separating from the Churth; — that t(he differeiiut* in only trifling between us, and thiit on that account no danger is to be ap- prehended. Hay not no, I bccjcecb you ; the difference is greater than you, at tir^t sight magine, and what warr.int have you that your error of judgment, aa youchooie to call it, ill be suffered to pa^s unpunished f Those who entered and kept within the ark were [safe, while tlio.iP who reiuiin'cd without, wlielher their distance was far or near, perished in the waters. Vimh, with the best intention possible, touched the aik which the priests only were suffered to touch, and he. was stnicK dead for his error. Your position, au Schismatics, is a fearfully dangeroui one ; the Bible being witness, Wesley being witness, the Minutes of your own CoufeVencc being witness, Stilliugffeet, your supposed Iriend, be- ing witness, who pronounces it "as great and dangerous a sin as murder, and in some re- spects beyond it." i call upon you, 1 beseech you, to ponder these things seriously in your hearts, hliow not such disrespect to that, good man, whose name you bear, by still sepa- rating from his Church and your Church, — from liia God and your God. May the God of unity and peace heal all your bickslidings, remove your prejuaicos and bring you buck to the fold which your Founder charged you never to abandon, the pure, the scriptural, the good Church oi' England. ME.MBliRS OF THK CIIIIUOH OF ENCiLAND: After what I have now said, 1 trust that this is the last time it will be necessary forme to warn you against the sin of entering a " MetiiodisL Meeting House." You have heard the fearful consequences of schism, you have seen the falsity of its teaching ; I beseech, you, therefore as one that watches over you for your good to " m irk them which cause divis- ions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them ; for they that are sucli serve not our Lord .lesiis Christ, but their own belly, and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of tiie simple." Think not that there is no harm in an oc- casional visit to the meeting-house, to indulge an idle curiosity or to hear a sermon. If it be a sin to gofrn'/uenthj, it is a sin to go once. One theft is a violation of God's holy word and 80 is one act of schism. It is these occasional visits that may cause you to become what at present may be farthest from your thoughts, a Hchixnmlk, an enemy to the Church of God. The progress of sin is easy and deceptive. When Hazael, King of Syria, was told the enormities which he afterwards would commit, he was surprised, and asfeed with indignation : " Is thy servant a dog that he should do this great thing?" and yet you all know the result; how he not only perpetrated the enormities but took pleasure in doing so. Who are the greatest enemies to the Church in this country, in this neighborhood .' — Men who, perliaps like you, thought it no harm to go once in a while to the " Meeting house." iSt. Paul cautions us to "abstain from all appmrnnve of evil," and Mr. WcMley tells us that a separation from the CImrcli, i|4t ever took place, would be an evil. In truth I cannot see how men can bow their knees before God, and day after day pray r»f him 'not to leiid them into temptatioM," and, with such words on their lips, go to the ' Me- tiiodist Meeting ;' and yet many not only go themselves, but thoughtlessly lead their chil- dren with theip Surely there can be iu> greater inconsistency than this ! You would not wish your child to freijuont a tavern, lest lie might contract a love for liquor — you would not wish him to go to a shanty, lest lie might become a swearer, and yet you send or take him to a meeting house, and at l!ic s;imo time say: you would not wish him to become a Dissenter! Was there ever such inconsistency as this? Exercise the same judgment in the religion of your children that you do in what concerns their temporal advantages, and I fear nothing. ' ^ O, it is wonderful 1k)w tenaciously error when once impressed upon the mind clings to ^ it! Keep then your children from Methodist Sunday Schools. As members of a Church ^ which challenges inquiry and s.iys to all her members : " Prove all things" we ought to be grateful ; but never should we allow those principles to be invaded, and above all, the religi- ous instruction of our children to becontiimiiiated with error and delusion. It is the willing yielding of unthinking churchmen to dissent that is crippling the energies of the Church — it is this thoughtless yielding to schismatical guides that is clipping the wings of truth. Were it not for it, we would have a Clergyman in every Township; the religion of Jesus would be known and appreciated throughout the length and breadth of the land. You who advance, dissent, either by your countenance or support, are retarding the progress of the gospel by assisting in disseminating error, and multiplying Societies. Whilst there is n Church of England Clergyman needed in Canada — whilst there is om single, congregation deprived of the ministrations of our holy Church, they who contribute the smallest, the most trifling sum, to the support of dissent are committing a deep and a lasting sin, by enabling the j enemies of the Church to perpetuate their errors and widen the breach from generation to / generation. ^ Schismatics arc in Scripture classed with " fornicators, covetous, idolators, railers, drunk- \ ards, extortioners," with whom Chistians are not to keep company. 1 Cor. V, 11. Rom, \ XVI, 17, 18. Judeia very explicit on this point: "These be they who separate them- I s«lvp t. spriiunl, )int hrt\i»g i\u< Spirit." (Jyprian, one of the early Fathers, says; " Let no inai) imii<;int> Mint good riU'it fiin dopurlfrom the Church; the wind Hcattereth not the wheat, nor dot!) tlie Htnrui o\'i«rthr»vv thu tree supported by a boiid root. Empty straws are tov sed by the tempest ; wmV trotis are proverd«tcr me IVom doing my duty. No, were it to estrange from mo those dearest lo my heart, 1 will, with Cod's blessing, fearlessly proclaim the truth and leave the rest lo llini. A word ntore : Having been inl'orined Itmt Mr. Nankeville was concocting another "Vindication," 1 iiercby eaiilion all whom it may eoneern I'rum regarding anything as truth which emanatei^ from thai iiidividuiil. •• Now 1 beNeeeh yon, brethren, liy the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, atid that there be no divixiom among vou ; but that ye be perfectly joined togetlier in the same mind and in the same judgment.'* " Mark them which cause divisions nod oltentes contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them." Endeavour- ing to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." 1 ■ '■ ■'■ 1 •> ■Ji' '■ •'Ml ■.. t . 1. ) li-l'. .. , •,"> ' -•; '• ■ ..f' «'. -' • ■. ^.u.^ . i i>*' t I ■■ i ^ M -nij fii •',11 ■ : .".,-! -T .1'.,' I . ,. .... . ..vj !!.- .•-i, ., Mil /"H / ,*■,; •- •■>.-i. :>; ;!;.. t ,.r, ^' .:»■' -•' «.: .1. . ■ , .•• 't - . ' .■ '• .il l^'.l . i' ' I . ' '-ji!?' ■;|')l( M W . (I'ff ,1-/ I'.i: ■ ■■' ••■: ;, I i ' ' •' ' f'i .•.!<■■ .'. • . -Ml''-! ■•• UiTl \r : ■■ .] • ■' , ' ' ,. ^. :.., I . -I 111' ^*>' • iS '•' li-.OTii ,*,'5'»]i , ,, ml. I./I" •»,-i'v' "»* iiit ••.. (i-'f > 1 »■«' . i:;:! ■■■.'..;■■ 'jh-- ■'>i>«riVii'')H "ii it ■ ■' '■• * ' 'tl '/I- . . ' ■.,,,■ i:i ! .,- iilv, 1,;.;/ ,.,* 'lUt ' ■•li'^i bjx .• WU : M'^"-..-- .''1.' h"^' ■'-'* ""' i'^' -riflhl '• I ' J I nil ';(,'''i«'it-i ■•> ..I' ;.' < ly Fathers, says. "Let no . ii'mptjK straws are to, f the whirlwind. Such^ ey went, out from un; '« M^odists weKmr 3 41 "lA''* principles o« of the Wesleyans.'^ Wc no^vingthatitsclainisio «'«ch M Pu«,y|t^, H ' we It to eatnuiM from y proclaim the truth Ind "Other « Vindication," l '« truth which emanate' ChrisUhat ye all speak o'dthem." Endeavour. i I '.h ■' '■■■v. ... . I > I, t "■ ■T ,1..,.. I "• ■ ' ■•» ■!■'! iU,, "" : ■■■■ v< ■ I. ».•(... , .. J. ,, ,, ' ■ •■ • .'I i*U. :. ,■ ..'■'... - ■ ■ t. ( , ' ■■ .1 ".mImi ■,.' ' i ■ ■ 1 ) ^ ■'! ,j'v,,>; • ' • •' ■■■ . -.,1 / . \' 'I ' <■'■■'■ ,; '''■'- ^« r{,iV/ ^I » 53 APPKNpIX.j-i I,, t„., lit- ">it:, « *.«>i/;(0 iH •t*»'^ ' '(It! I hnve lately heard that Mr. Nankeville has given up the idea of edifying the world with ^|iany mure " Vindications," and has turned his attention tu the writing of Lotters on Conti- tuation, Baptismal Regeneration, &.*:., &c., and something about Methodism. On the first, Confirmation, I had thought he had exhausted hi» supply of fulieliood, hut it would appear that I had underrated his capabilities in that line. He is not to be daunted by trifles, and when he cannot get material at hand to answer, can at all times forge in the name workshop to suit his purposes and supply the market. Next comes the subject of Baptismal Regeneration, and coming from the pen of Benja- niin Nankeville wi.I, I have no doubt, be worthy of a p'ace in the curiosity shop of every vender of schism. I had thought of treating the matter with silent contempt, well know- ing that in so doing I should have the concurrence of every upright man; yet, lest the i^'- uorant and unthinking might be led away by his sophistry and falsehood, I hereby subjoin "a form of sound words" in parallel columns, which will, I trust, show that the views of the Church of England, on this point, are in accordance with Scripture, and are those of four- fifths of Christendom — that they are the views of Mr. Wesley and of the Weslevan con- nexion in England, together with the Church of Scotland, whose " Confession of j^aith " is signed by all her Clergy. ' ''.'J, , i ■■■■■■■■• ("f', a ' The Ctnffs&ion of Faitk\ John VVhiJet i.°n1> Wb« ScRiproRi Rkfeucnce^. — " For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or (ien- tilcH, whether we be bond or I'ree ; and have been all made to drink into one Hpir- It."— ICor. XII: 13. "For as many of von ixisic have been baptized in.ril>' Christ have put on Christ. -y t le courage to come for if ««!!'/ """'^y ''ec'a'e that he «hn7i if •*'*'' P'«'8«i«, and '•e liVht and the day. «^i*S '^*^*.?'« ^*«« »« f«ce betbre th« „ .te''* "t^whenever he hw •» lOing to shelter Keif Uhll.7 ^'- ^' ^"'^t^*' ^Ke ofc£ > !•"" "«' *fr«i*l o? sundry affidavits for tS „„?! "'l^'l?*'*"'"''" of Dr sLm.«r ?u^ '"'' ''''"••''cter. jJe «''ich will soon mec b.HT ^"^ **'""' tf'e ey*" of hK "'' ""l'"'"' *« ' am inlbrmed any honcat bodyTLien"* Ai^T" ?"'^ ^'-^'""-t «»btK wl^n';'! "^^ ^«"*«'^S nnd I will take off* tho «- ,**' "'m meet me, or lat th^ n ff '" "ot screen liim wi«h nis talsehood, mpostnrB nn^ „i • ^ *" "'eet me he woiiw L* " K*^ *''"nv.„ce the world 'to'vhich extract 8ffrs me to pa^e nt; methmks, to S?,?*»y at their 'J." the Confer, jv. throw some ;t. Calvin, &c., y> and forgive '- '\ '^I'i ,^(.-1 j j '•*» }fU 'Ir, ,»,,, ■:Ui»Ot'r 01 'r ERRATA. In consequence of being obliged to use our type, we were compelled to go to press be- fore some of the corrected proof sheets were returned by the Author, which has caused a few triHin^ typographical errors, for which we ask indulgence. All that are worthy of no* tioe are as follows: — [Publishers. l*i^ In page 7, 4 linos from top, for "corruption" read "corruptions." * - In page 7, 29 lines from top, for %, read 94. In page 10, 21 lines from top, for "Bishop" read "Bishops." In page 11,18 lines from bottom, for "Francis Asbury in America" read "Francis Asbnry, In page 15, 27 lines from top, for "for the Methodists" read "from the Methodists." |iii^then general assistant of the Methodist Soi^iety in America." For "Elder" read "Presbyter" throughout, as per note. Ik^ In page 12, 18 lines from bottom, for "a Superintendent" read "as a Superintendent." In page 14, 20 lines from bottom, for "brother Bishop" read "brother Bishops." In page 28, 38 lines from top, add quotation mark after the word "Chrouicle," and reverse the one after "ordination" in next line. ^t