m 
 
 
 
 .;%t^Mi£7V^i:)«ZWIbM£^4 
 
 JM 
 
 ALOF 
 
 CHURCH PO'fTV 
 
 mm 
 
 .'< 
 
G.'^ :oij~ 
 
 ^ PRINCETON, N. J. ^ 
 
 Presented by^^V'SyvS \ <Z>. e^X^V V^-VVo X^ 
 
 BX 8956 .H6 
 
 Hopkins, Samuel Miles, 1813- 
 
 1901. 
 Manual of church polity 
 
S'?; 
 
 '^^'f*^^ 
 
 .^ 
 
MANUAL 
 
 CHUECH POLITY, 
 
 S. M. HOPKINS, 
 
 PEOFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKT AND CHURCH POLITY, 
 ATTBURX THEOLOGICAL SEMIXART, 
 
 AUBURN, N. Y. : 
 
 WM. J. MOSES' PL^LISHING HOUSE. 
 
 1878. 
 
"And, therefore, it is good we return unto the ancient bonds of unity in the 
 Church of God, which was one faith, one baptism, and not one hierarchy, one 
 discipline ; and that we observe the lea.iiue of Christians, as it is penned by our 
 Savior, which is, in substance of doctrine, this : He that is not with us, is against 
 us ; but in thin;?s indifferent, and only of circumstance, this : He that is not 
 against us, is with us. In these things, so as the general rules be observed, that 
 Christ's flock be fed, that there be a succession in bishops and ministers, which 
 are the prophets of the New Testament, that those that preach the Gospel, live 
 of the Gospel, that all things tend to edification, that all things be done in order 
 and decency, and the like ; the rest is left to the holy wisdom and spiritual dis- 
 cretion of the master builders and inferior builders in Christ's Church, as it is 
 excellently alluded by that Father who noted that Christ's garment was without 
 seam, and yet the church's garment was of diverse colors ; and, thereupon, setteth 
 down for a rule, in veste varietas sit, scissura non sit.'" 
 
 Lord Bacon, on the Pacification of the Church. 
 
ADYEETISEMEITT. 
 
 The followias; notes contain tlie substance of the 
 course of instruction on Churcli Polity given to the stu- 
 dents in Auburn Theological Seminary, and are now 
 published at their repeated request, and, primarily, for 
 their convenience. 
 
 They make no pretence, in their present compendious 
 form, to be a complete or exhaustive discussion of the 
 subject; yet, it is believed, they take up every point of 
 importance to a student for the Presbyterian ministry. 
 They may, possibly, be found of use to those who have 
 already completed their preparation, and entered upon 
 their work, as, for example, in the examination of can- 
 didates for licensure or ordination. In some directions, 
 they necessarily take the form of controversy ; but their 
 object is irenical and not polemic. The writer does not 
 expect that all, even of his own immediate brethren, 
 will concur in all his views. He has, at least, desired to 
 say nothing at variance with the spirit of Christian 
 charity. 
 
 So far as he is aware, no manual suitable to the pur- 
 poses above mentioned is in existence. The admirable 
 treatise of Dr. Jacob — : admirable for its fullness, learn- 
 ing and catholicity of spirit — was designed as " a study 
 for the present crisis in the Church of England." It, of 
 course, includes no discussion of the polity of the Pres- 
 byterian Church, and leaves aside many topics which are 
 necessary to be included in a study by candidates for the 
 Presbyterian ministry. 
 
 Auburn THEOLoaiCAL Seminary, Feb., 1878. 
 
TABLE OF OOE'TEE'TS. 
 
 SECTION. PAGE. 
 
 I. ;N"ature and Value of the Study, 9 
 
 II. Meaning of "Church" in the Xew Testament, - - 11 
 
 III. Reasons for the being of a Church, .... 13 
 
 IV. The Universal Church — Its Definition and Marks, - - 16 
 V. Substance of the " Preliminary Principles," - - - 20 
 
 VI. Relation between Church and State, - - - - 22 
 
 VII. Origin of Denominational Churches, - - - - 25 
 
 VIII. Definition of a Particular Church, . . . . 28 
 
 IX. Organization and Ministry of the First Particular Churches, 31 
 
 X. The Unofiicial Ministry of Gifts, 32 
 
 XI. The Official Ministry of Gifts, 34 
 
 XII. Attempts to Perpetuate the Ministry of Gifts, - - 37 
 
 XIII. Historical Evidence for the Supposed Perpetuation of the 
 
 Ministry of Gifts, 41 
 
 XIV. The False and the True Doctrine of the Apostolic Succession, 44 
 XV. The Ministry of Orders — First Class — Elders, - - 47 
 
 XVI. Only two Orders in the Ministry, - - - - 51 
 XVII. First Stage in the Ministry of Orders — Origin of the 
 
 Pastorate, 53 
 
 XVIII. Second Stage in the Ministry of Orders — Origin of the 
 
 Episcopate, 54 
 
 XiX. Ministry of Orders — Second Class — Deacons, - - 56 
 
6 CONTENTS. 
 
 SECTION. PAGE, 
 
 XX. Office of Ruling Elder — Its Warrant, - . - 59 
 
 XXI. Historical Justification of Episcopacy, - - - 62 
 
 XXII. Sphere of Woman in the Apostolic Church, - - 63 
 
 XXIII. Constitution of the Presbyterian Church, ... 67 
 
 XXIY. Advantages of Presbyterianism over Independency, - 69 
 
 XXV. Nature and Method of Ordination, - - - - 70 
 
 XXVI. The Christian Ministry not a Priesthood, - - - 72 
 
 XXVII. Doctrine of the Presbyterian Church as to Sacraments, 74 
 
 XXVIII. Doctrine of the Presbyterian Church as to Infant Church 
 
 Membership, 77 
 
 XXX. Doctrine of the Form of Government in regard to the 
 
 Authority of the Church, 79 
 
 XXXI. Doctrine of the Directory in regard to Public Prayer, - 81 
 
 XXXII. Advantages and Disadvantages of Liturgical Prayer, - 83 
 
 XXXIII. History of the Book of Common Prayer, - - - 85 
 
 XXXIV. Deduction of Presbyterian Ordinations in America, - 89 
 XXXV. Organization of the Church of Rome, . - - 93 
 
 XXXVI. Process of Organizing a Particular Church, - - 96 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 A. The Anglican Succession — Consecration of Arch -bishop Parker, 101 
 
 B. The Case of Timothy's Ordination, 104 
 
 C. Rise of Non-conformity in England, lO'^ 
 
 D. The Orders of T\^andsworth, HI 
 
 E. Rise and Fall of Presbytery in England, . - - - 116 
 
 F. The Westminster Assembly, 121 
 
 G. Independency, 125 
 
 H. Presbyterianism in Ireland, ISO 
 
 J, History of Presbytery in America, 132 
 
 K. Episc6pacy in the American Colonies, - - - - 135 
 
 L. Objections to the Episcopal Liturgy, ----- 139 
 
 M. The Schism and Re-union of ISSY-TO, . . - - 145 
 
 N. Plan of Union of 1801, 147 
 
 0. Accommodation Plan of 1808, 150 
 
 P. English Plan of Union of 1690, 152 
 
 Q. Directory for Worship on the Form of Invitation to the Lord's 
 
 Supper, --------- 153 
 
 R. On the Demission of the Ministry, 162 
 
 S. The Methodist Episcopal Church, IQl 
 
 T. The Scottish Kirk, 169 
 
 U. Church Parliamentary Law, lYS 
 
]S"OTES OiSr CHURCH POLITT. 
 
 SEC. I. — NATURE AND VALUE OF THE STUDY. 
 
 Churcla polity has for* its object the study of the con- 
 stitution of the Christian Church, as laid down in the New 
 Testament, w4th those modifications or developments to 
 which it has since been subject, together with a defense 
 of some particular system of church government, as 
 against all others. It relates to the external form and 
 order of the church, and not to her doctrine or life. It 
 raa}^ therefore, be admitted to be essentially a sectarian 
 study, and finds its apology in the divided condition of 
 the Christian Church. If all Christians, or even all 
 Protestant Christians, constituted one communion, there 
 would be little or no occasion for this study. At pres- 
 ent, it serves to supply a magazine of arms to each par- 
 ticular sect, by which it may be in a condition to defend 
 itself, and assail all other denominations. 
 
 This study, therefore, belongs, incidentally, to the pres- 
 ent imperfect and distracted state of the church ; and, in 
 her highest ideal condition, may be expected to become 
 needless and obsolete. While this condition lasts, how- 
 ever, church polity must be regarded as an indispensable 
 part of the preparation for the work of the ministry. 
 
 Leaving other churches to do in this department what 
 their views of trutli and duty dictate, it devolves on us 
 
10 NATURE XSl) 
 
 to justify, from Scripture and liistory, that form of churcli 
 government and order we, ourselves, adopt. 
 
 The study in our hands is a purefy defensive method ; 
 the Pjesbyterian Church makes no claim to any exclu- 
 sive divine right; we hold that only the general princi- 
 ples of church polity are laid down in the Scriptures, 
 and that, consistently with these, each church may adopt 
 its own order, and ordain rites and ceremonies according 
 to the demands of different times and places. We freely 
 admit that there are true Churches of Christ organized 
 differently from our own, w^ith a different constitution 
 and forms of worship. We refuse, so far as in us lies, to 
 sunder the bonds of unity that should unite all Chris- 
 tians, for any such immaterial differences ; but we are 
 met by others, who insist on an exclusive divine right 
 for themselves. We are obliged, therefore, out of self- 
 respect and fidelity to Scriptural and historical truth, to 
 stand in defense of our church order, to show its original 
 warrant, its reasonableness and expediency, and, by con- 
 sequence, to disprove the exclusive claims set up by 
 others. 
 
 This argument, therefore, is a matter of necessity with 
 us, and not of choice ; we would gladly welcome the day 
 when all polemical activity in this line shall cease, and 
 give way to mutual toleration respecting outward order 
 and things indifferent between the various parts of the 
 Christian body. " Polemical theology," an odious sole- 
 cism, though at present an unhappy necessity, is pecu- 
 liarly odious when it exhibits Christians arrayed in hos- 
 tile camps, and exhausting their energies in mutual 
 struggles, in regard to bishops, sacraments and prayers. 
 We may lay down, then, tlie following definition : that 
 " church polity, as a study, includes a view of the organ- 
 
VALUE OF THE STUDY. 11 
 
 ization, worsLip and discipline proper to the Charcli of 
 Christ, with the objections to other systems, and a justi- 
 tication of our own." 
 
 SEC. II. — MEAXIXG OF THE WORD CHURCH IX THE XEW 
 TESTAMENT. 
 
 The English word Church is probably derived from 
 the Greek xuptod dixuq. Its Greek equivalent is sy-xAr^ffta^ 
 from £zza/££v, to call out, or summon together ; the sy.ylrjtjta 
 is the aggregate of those who are called and meet 
 together ; in classic usage, it designated the public assem- 
 bly of the people of Athens, in the Prytaneum, or town 
 hall. (Grote : IV, 138.) In the Gospels, the w^ord sy./.Ar^(r>a 
 occurs in only two places, viz. : Matt. : xvi, 18; ^^ thou 
 art Peter, and on this rock I icill huild iJ.oo ttj'^ BAxXr^awy^'' 
 where the church universal is evidently intended ; and 
 Matt. : XVIII, 17 : ^' If he shall neglect to hear them^ tell it 
 {rrj ey.ylr^6ia) to tiic cliurch ; " referring to a particular con- 
 gregation. In the Acts and Epistles, zxylr^aia occurs 
 often, and in four different senses, viz. : 
 
 1. Of a particular or local Christian society ; Col. : iv, 
 15 ; '• Nyrai^has and the church,'' &c. 2. Of the whole 
 body of Christians in a place; Col.: iv, 16; '' The church 
 of the Laodiceans.'' 3. Of the w^hole visible church ; 1 
 Cor. : XII, 28 ; " God hath set some in the church,'' &c. ; 
 certainly, not in the spiritual church, nor in an}' one 
 local society. -1. The whole spiritual or true church of 
 sanctified men ; Col. : I, 18; ''He is the head of the ivhole 
 hody^ the church." 
 
 Ecclesia is never used in the New Testament for 
 house of worship. (See 1 Cor. : xiv, 34 ; Acts : xix, 
 37.) The usual term for the place of Christian worship, 
 in the T^ew Testament, is oty.n:: [ Acts: it, 46; " 77/ey 
 
12 MEANING OF THE WORD CHURCH 
 
 hrohe their bread xdr dUoix;^^ — i. e., in private houses. 
 But otxo<; Las a more specific meaning than this. It 
 does not so much signify a houae^ for which oixia is the 
 proper term, as an apartment or hall appropriated to 
 some special purpose, usually a religious purpose. The 
 ouoT, in apostolic usage, was the room in a private house — 
 the private chapel or room of prayer, in which Christians 
 were accustomed to meet for worship. It was not uncom- 
 mon, in Oriental houses of the better class, to have a 
 " large upper room," not occupied by the family, but 
 reserved for social or religious occasions ; a certain num- 
 ber of these uuuuq^ in Jerusalem, were used as places for 
 Christian meetings. Thus, when it is said, in Acts : v, 
 42, that the apostles preached Christ daily in every house 
 (oixov), the meaning is, not that they went along from 
 house to house making family visits, but that they met 
 regularly with the disciples in the several otxou^^ or " wor- 
 ship rooms," used for that purpose. So, when it is said 
 that Paul " entered every house" (oczov), &c., the reference 
 is, not to private houses promiscuously, but to those pri- 
 vate chapels in which Christians could be found assem- 
 bled for worship ; oikos, accordingly, continued for a long 
 time to be the name by which the Christian place of 
 worship was designated. In classic usage, it also signi- 
 fied the house of a god, a temple. In Palestine, it was 
 also called the synagogue. Thus, the Apostle James 
 reproves the Jewish Christians for discriminating improp- 
 erly among those who came into their "synagogue."* 
 Ecclesia is never used for national churches, as Church 
 of England ; nor for denominational churches, as Epis- 
 
 * In the Attic testamentary law, oikos was also distinguished from oikia ; the 
 former meaning all the propertj^ left at a person's death ; the latter, the dwelling 
 house only. {Vide Llddell and Scott, sub voce) 
 
IX THE XEW TESTAMENT. 18 
 
 copalian, Presbyterian, &c. As applied to a body of 
 visible believers, it ordinarily includes all the Chris- 
 tians in a place, Avhether it were large or small. All the 
 disciples in Antioch constituted " the church " in Anti- 
 och ; so of Ephesus, Jerusalem, &c. This, in an ideally 
 perfect condition of Christianity, approaching that of the 
 Apostolic Age, would be the proper and Scriptural use 
 of the term now ; all the Christians in New York, e. g., 
 would constitute " the church in New York," and would 
 be distinguished only by non-essential criteria, implying 
 no breach of the unity of the body. 
 
 SEC. HI. — REASONS FOR THE BEING OF A CHURCH. 
 
 The church under the New Testament is the Church 
 of Christ ; He said, I will build MY church. The Jewish 
 Church was national ; all Jews were members of it by 
 the fact of birth, irrespective of character ; the Christian 
 Church is universal, and at the same time eclectic ; all 
 those of every nation who believe in the Lord Jesus 
 Christ are members of it, and none others ; it is, there- 
 fore, a select society, formed out of the world, according 
 to John XVII, on the principle of a common faith and 
 mutual sympathies. Such a society must become visible 
 and take on outward form and organization, general or 
 particular, for reasons found in nature of Christianity 
 itself, viz. : 
 
 I. All Christians have a sacred literature in common ; 
 the New Testament contains their law, faith, example, 
 mutual relations, &c. ; any number of men having such 
 reasons for union are necessarily led to express it, more 
 or less positively, by outward organization. Men may 
 hold opinions in common on philosophy, history, morals, 
 or trade, without fieeling impelled to enter into any out 
 
14 REASONS FOR THE 
 
 ward relations with each other; but those who recognize 
 the same law, look to the same example, acknowledge 
 the same teacher, call themselves by the same name, and 
 assume the same obligations, are compelled, by the neces- 
 sities of the case, to recognize each other, in a larger or 
 more restricted sense, as members of the same society. 
 
 IL Christianity contemplates, not merely individual 
 worship, but worship in common. All religions are 
 more or less social ; Christianity is eminently social. Its 
 most elementary utterance is '^ our Father." All the 
 parts of its worship, such as reading, prayer, praise and 
 preaching are social acts. In order to such worship, 
 there must be Christian societies which will provide for 
 times, places, conveniences, &c. The only agency that 
 can do this is the church. 
 
 III. Christianity has certain positive institutions which 
 imply and require society. Baptism is the ordinance by 
 which those previously strangers are to be recognized as 
 Christians ; it presupposes, therefore, a church already in 
 being. The Lord's Supper is a social act by which 
 Christians recognize their family relationship, and their 
 obligations to each other, and their common Lord ; soli- 
 tary believers cannot celebrate the Lord's Supper. 
 
 lY. Christianity requires a ministry — an order of 
 men trained and set apart to be stewards of the mysteries 
 of the Gospel, interpreters of Scripture and ambassadors 
 of Christ. Such an order cannot be self-originated ; iso- 
 lated men will not volunteer for the work, nor could they 
 possess credentials of their authority and fitness. The 
 rule is, how shall ihey hear vjil] tout a preacher f and how 
 shall tliey preach except they he serd ? The ministry must 
 spring from the church, and the church must authenti- 
 cate their mission and provide for their support. 
 
BEING OF A CHURCH. 
 
 15 
 
 Y. . Christianity is a missionarj religion, to be propa- 
 gated from heart to heart, and from land to land, by suit- 
 able methods — by the living preacher, by the transla- 
 tion and diffusion of the Scriptures, and by the establish- 
 ment of new centres of operation as it extends. The 
 last command of Christ pledged his disciples to this 
 work. But this requires an organization to rest upon, 
 the selection of proper agents, their designation to their 
 work, some provision for their support, and for such other 
 expenses as are incidental to the enterprise. Nothing ot 
 this is possible without organization ; the missionary 
 spirit must become concrete and solid in a society devot- 
 ing itself to such ends — that is, a church. There have 
 been cases of solitary missionary enterprise, which sprung 
 only indirectly from the church ; these have proved 
 wholly abortive ; all persistent and successful missionary 
 work has been, in some form, originated and directed by 
 the church. This was true of the first mission from 
 Antioch, and of all the missions by which Europe was 
 converted during the Middle Ages, as it is also of all 
 modern missions. 
 
 YI. Christians are, by supposition and requirement, 
 saints — free, not only from the gross vices of heathenism, 
 but exemplary in moral character, just, temperate, truth- 
 ful, &c. ; a person of opposite character, making pretence 
 of Christianity, is to be disowned ; this implies the exer- 
 cise of discipline, and the exclusion of the unworthy or 
 offending party. But, in order to the exclusion of any, 
 there must be ihe inclusion of suitable and worthy per- 
 sons as Christians — in other words, a Christian society ; 
 therefore, Jesus said : '"'' If lie sliall neglect to hear them., 
 tell it unto the church.^'' 
 
 YII. Sympathy of opinion and the force of outward 
 
16 THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH. 
 
 circumstances will give this organic union of Christians 
 with each other, a larger or more limited scope. All 
 Christian believers throughout the world constitute one 
 visible church ; all believers interpreting the Scriptures 
 alike, and accepting the same ritual and discipline, may 
 constitute a sectarian church ; all the Christians, or a 
 majority of them, in a province or kingdom may com- 
 pose a national church ; this may be, at the same time, 
 sectarian, as " The Church of England^ Finally, all the 
 Christians, whose convenience or preferences lead to it, 
 may unite together for the purposes of worship, and con- 
 stitute a local churcL Thus, through the necessary oper- 
 ation of Christianity on the human mind, and with no 
 express command enjoining it. Christian Churches spon- 
 taneously grow up, and we have, 1. The universal 
 church of Christ's professed disciples ; 2. The national 
 or sectarian church ; 3. The particular church or local 
 Christian society. 
 
 SEC. lY. — THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH — ITS DEFINITION 
 AND MARKS. 
 
 " The Universal Church consists of all those persons, 
 together with their children, who make profession of the 
 holy religion of Christ, and of obedience to His laws." 
 (Form of Gov't, ch. 2.) 
 
 This definition includes all nominal Christians — Eom- 
 ish, Greek and Protestant — since they all make the pro- 
 fession required. Neither orthodoxy of faith, nor Scrip- 
 turalness of order, or worship, enter into the definition. 
 In this broadest sense, all who call themselves " Chris- 
 tians " are members of the church. 
 
 This church is distinguished by certain marks or 
 " notes,''' so called, viz. : 
 
ITS DEFINITION AND MARKS. 17 
 
 1. It IS ONE — " The Universal Church " — implying 
 that there are not two or more Churches of Christ, but 
 one only. 
 
 2. It is catholic, not being confined to one nation, like 
 the Jewish Church, but diffused among all nations. 
 
 3. It is holy — i. e., as distinguished from any profane 
 or secular society — being consecrated to the worship of 
 a holy God, and enjoining holiness on its members, in 
 conformity with His laws. 
 
 4. It is apostolic, as being conformed to the apostles' 
 doctrine, or organized according to apostolic instructions, 
 or founded on apostolic succession and traditions. 
 
 Instead of these notes, Calvin and other Protestant 
 writers lay down three criteria by which the true Church 
 of Christ may be distinguished from all counterfeits, viz. : 
 
 1. By the pure preaching of the Word. (Eph. : ii, 11 ; 
 Acts : II, 42 ; Epistles to Timothy, passim.) 
 
 2. By the proper administration of the Sacraments. 
 (Matt. : XXVIII, 19. 1 Cor. : xi, 23.) 
 
 3. By the exercise of Scriptural discipline. (Matt. : 
 xviii, 15-17.) 
 
 Where these three things are found, viz.. Scriptural 
 preaching, ordinances, and discipline, it may easily be 
 admitted there is a Christian Church ; but is not so easy 
 to say whether each one of these enters essentially into 
 the definition. Even evangelical Protestants would dif- 
 fer considerably as to what is implied in the pure preach- 
 ing of the Word, the due administration of Sacraments, 
 and the exercise of Scriptural discipline. Discipline is 
 one thing in a Presbyterian and another thing in an 
 Episcopal Church. In the Anglican Church, there is 
 no discipline whatever ; in the American Episcopal 
 Church but little. Shall we, for these reasons, deny that 
 
18 THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH. 
 
 they are true Churches of Christ? The due administra- 
 tion of the Sacraments is very differently understood in 
 Baptist and in Piedobaptist Churches. 
 
 According to the Episcopal theory, all these marks are 
 insufficient or false ; a true Christian Church is one in 
 which " the succession of bishops has been preserved 
 from the time of the apostles. This makes the Eoman 
 and Greek Communions true Churches of Christ, and 
 vitiates the claim of all Protestant bodies, to whose con- 
 stitution that element is wanting, to make a part of the 
 church. We must infer tliat there is no precise or infal- 
 lible criterion, by which a true church can be distin- 
 guished from a false one. Whether the Greek, Roman, 
 Socinian bodies, &c., belong to the true Church of Christ 
 will be affirmed or denied, as the tests are more strictly 
 or more loosely applied. Even if we lay down that all 
 are members of the Universal Church who agree in hold- 
 ing the fundamental truths of the Gospel, the question 
 returns, what truths are fundamental f Does the platform 
 of the Evangelical Alliance contain them? Neither 
 Richard Baxter nor Augustus Neander could have been 
 members of that body; neither of them would admit 
 anything to be fundamental outside the affirmations of 
 the apostles' creed. The truth lies somewhere between 
 the extremes of laxity and of exclusiveness. In regard 
 to some so called churches, however, there is no danger 
 of mistake. " The catholic or Universal Church has been 
 sometimes more, sometimes less, visible; and particular 
 churches, which are members thereof, are more or less 
 pure, according as the doctrine of the Gospel is taught 
 and embraced, and public wx)rship performed more or 
 less purely in them. The purest churches under Heaven 
 are subject both to mixture (in their membership) and 
 
ITS DEFINITION AND MARKS. 19 
 
 error (in their faith and worship), and some have so 
 degenerated as to become no Churches of Christ, but 
 Synagogues of Satan. "^ (Con£ of Faith: xxv, 4, 5.) 
 
 It may be added that the Universal Church is also 
 distinguished as visible and invisible, militant and tri- 
 umphant. 
 
 By the Romish and by a part of the Episcopal Church, 
 it is denied that there is any distinction between the 
 invisible and the visible church ; the two are held to be 
 identical— i. e., all who abide in communion with the 
 true visible church, of which St. Peter is the head, or 
 which enjoys a ministry derived by an unbroken succes- 
 sion of bishops from the apostles, are also members of 
 the true spiritual church. Their vital relation to Christ 
 is determined by their outward relation to the church. 
 But most Protestants distinguish between the visible 
 church of Christ's professed disciples, and that true spir- 
 itual church of penitent and believing souls, which exists 
 invisibly within it. The distinction between the church 
 as militant^ in its present earthly condition, and trium- 
 phant^ in the persons of all the redeemed in Heaven, is 
 universally admitted. 
 
 * Note.— The more advanced English reformers denied that theEomish Church 
 was catholic, or that the mere succession of bishops makes a true church. Arch- 
 deacon Philpott said, when on trial, that the church of which he was a member 
 would be catholic, if only ten persons belonged to it, because it agreed with the 
 true Catholic Church which the apostles planted. Bishop Barlow, the consecra- 
 tor of Arch-bishop Parker, said, in a sermon, that "wheresoever two or three 
 simple persons, as cobblers or weavers, are in company, and elected in the name 
 of God, there is the true Church of God." This corresponds with the saying of 
 Tertullian, "-ubi tres^ licet laid, ibi ecclesia.'" See Hunt's His'ory of Religious 
 Thought in England: 1, 36, 
 
20 FUKM OF GOVERNMENT OF 
 
 SEC. V. — SUBSTANCE OF THE " PRELIMINARY PRINCI- 
 PLES " TO THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT OF THE 
 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. 
 
 The ^^ preliminary principles^'' laid at the foundation of 
 American Presbyterianisni, define with great force and 
 precision the true doctrine of Christian liberty, and the 
 right relations of church and state, as follows, viz. : 
 
 1. Article first affirms the great " formal principle " of 
 Protestantism, that "the Word of God is the only infal- 
 lible rule of faith and practice ; " maintains the right of 
 private judgment in the things of religion, and discards 
 the idea of any other union of church and state than 
 such as consists in the government's extending just and 
 equal protection to all forms of worship. 
 
 2. Subject to these conditions, the second article claims 
 for each church the right of shaping its own internal 
 polity, according to the appointment of Christ, and fix- 
 ing its own terms of communion. As no person, there- 
 fore, can be lawfully compelled, against his own convic- 
 tions, to join or commune with any church, so no person 
 can intrude himself into membership with any church, 
 without complying with its terms of communion. 
 
 3. The third article is directed against Independency 
 and Quakerism, which either reject the Sacraments, or 
 discard the office of rulers in the church, whose right 
 and duty it is to preach the Gospel, administer ordinan- 
 ces, and maintain discipline. 
 
 4. The fourth article is directed against Antinomianism, 
 and rnaintnins that " the end and touchstone of doctrine 
 is the promotion of holiness." This was rendered neces- 
 sary by the existence of certain sects, who held that mere 
 faith was sufficient for salvation, and that, under the 
 
THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. 21 
 
 Gospel, men were set free from the restraints of the moral 
 law. 
 
 5. In accordance with this principle, the fifth article 
 maintains that all church teachers should be sound in the 
 faith, but admits that there are doctrines and forms in 
 regard to which good men may differ ; in respect to 
 these. Christians should exercise mutual forbearance. 
 The spirit of this article requires that all church teachers 
 should be held to a bona fide subscription to the stand- 
 ards of the church, while private members should be 
 required to assent only to the most necessary and funda- 
 mental doctrines of the Christian faith. In respect to 
 all thmgs non-essential, whether in doctrine or worship. 
 Christians should respect each other's honest convictions, 
 and exercise a liberal toleration. 
 
 6. Tlie sixth article^ while claiming that the character 
 and qualifications of church officers, as well as the method 
 of their ordination, are laid down in the Scriptures, 
 affirms that the election of their religious teachers and 
 rulers resides in each Christian society. This, on the one 
 hand, suggests that the Presbyterian form of church gov- 
 ernment is of divine warrant, and, on the other, forbids 
 any such intrusion of ministers upon congregations 
 against their will, as has been practiced in all Erastian 
 Churches, including the Kirk of Scotland. 
 
 7. As the sixth article forbids usurpation in the house 
 of God by the state, so the severdh forbids usurpation of 
 power by the church herself. No church has the right 
 to exercise any legislative power, properly so called, but 
 merely to interpret and apply Christ's laws. He is the 
 only law-giver in the church. No church action is legit- 
 itimate except such as is founded on the revealed will of 
 God; nor can any church judicatory pretend to make 
 
22 THEORIES OF THE RELATION 
 
 laws to bind the conscience^ by virtue of their own 
 authority. This article is directed against the claim of 
 certain churches to impose indifferent customs in respect 
 to vestments, ceremonies, &c., on the conscience of their 
 ministers, as a condition of their being permitted to 
 preach the Gospel. The article admits that, even in 
 undertaking to interpret Christ's laws, synods and coun- 
 cils are liable to err, yet holds that the liability is much 
 less than in their assuming to make laws by their own 
 authority. The inspired Canon, for example, " let all 
 things {in wo^'shij:)) he done decently and in order ^^ may be 
 misinterpreted so as to require ministers to pray in a sur- 
 plice, or use the sign of the cross in baptism ; but the 
 liability to error is not so grave as if a church should 
 claim the right, by infallible authority, to establish new 
 articles of faith. 
 
 8. The eighth and last article declares, that " a stead- 
 fast adherence to these Scriptural and rational principles 
 will contribute to th5 glory and happiness of any church ; 
 and, that since ecclesiastical discipline must be purely 
 moral and spiritual in its object, and not attended with 
 any civil effects, it can derive no force whatever but 
 from its own justice, the approbation of an impartial 
 public, and the countenance and blessing of the Great 
 Head of the church." 
 
 SEC. YI. — THEORIES OF THE RELATION BETWEEN 
 CHURCH AND STATE. 
 
 In all countries whose national churches formerly 
 made, or at present make, a part of the Romish Church, 
 the doctrine prevails .that the state is bound to exercise 
 its power for the defense and promotion of the true faith, 
 and for the suppression or, at least, the discouragement 
 
BETWEEN CHURCH A^D STATE. 28 
 
 of all dissent. This view exists under various modifica- 
 tions. 
 
 1. The Eomish theory is that the Pope, as the vicar 
 of Christ, is the absolute spiritual ruler of this world, 
 and that every human government is bound to support 
 the Papal, and suppress every other church. His tem- 
 poral authority is claimed to extend to all countries and 
 provinces that have been expressly made over to St. 
 Peter, and to all islands, absolutely. The forged dona- 
 tion of Constantine having assigned Sicily and Sardinia 
 to Sylvester, Bishop of Eome, and his successors, it was 
 argued by the Canonists that this is a property of all isl- 
 ands, that they belong to the Pope. 
 
 2. The Anglican theory, as expounded by Hooker, 
 Burke^ Mr. Gladstone, and others, is, that church and. 
 state are only one society under different names, and, in 
 order to the perfection of both, should be strictly iden- 
 tified. " The church and commonwealth are, therefore, 
 personally, one society, which is called 'Commonwealth,' 
 as living under a certain secular law and regimen ; 
 'church,' as living under the spiritual law of Christ." 
 (Eccles. Pol. : viii, 409.) " In a Christian Common- 
 w^ealth, the church and the state are one and the same 
 thing, being different integral parts of the same whole." 
 (Edmund Burke: ii, 454) " The state, in the exercise 
 of its sovereignt}^, adopts for itself the true religion, or 
 declares itself Christian. By so doing, it becomes a part 
 of Christ's Holy Catholic Church, or rather transformed 
 into it. Where the nation and government are avowedly 
 and essentially Christian, the state or nation is virtually 
 the church." (Dr. Thomas Arnold, Miscel. : p. 457.) 
 
 It should be added, that in tlie time of Hooker there 
 were no dissenters, and that both Burke and Arnold rec- 
 
24 THEORIES OF THE RELATION 
 
 ognize dissenters (except Unitarians) as making part of 
 the church, and equally identified with the state. It 
 belongs to this theory that the church has authority to 
 ordain rites and ceremonies, and require conformity to 
 them, under penalties to be inflicted by the state. The 
 laws of the land become the laws of God, and the same 
 persons are both ecclesiastical and civil rulers. This was 
 also the theory of the Puritan Fathers of Massachusetts, 
 and of the English Presbyterians, and was incorporated 
 in the "Confession " of the Westminster Assembly. 
 
 3. Bisliop Warburton's view varied from this, in hold- 
 ing that church and state are essentially distinct and 
 independent societies, and, for their mutual advantage, 
 must be intimately allied — the church exerting her influ- 
 ence in favor of the government; the government pro- 
 tecting and endowing the church. The results of this 
 alliance are a settled maintenance of the clergy and their 
 dependence on the state ; the ecclesiastical supremacy of 
 the sovereign, and the right of churchmen to a share in 
 the legislature. It proposed to include, in England, the 
 establishment of Episcopac}^ the toleration of dissenters, 
 and their exclusion from Parliament. 
 
 This was also Calvin's theory of the proper relation 
 between church and state, as applied- under his own 
 administration at Geneva. The two were distinct from 
 each other, but should be intimately connected and mutu- 
 ally co-operative, for a common end, viz. : The realiza- 
 tion of the kingdom of God in a theocratic common- 
 wealth. The church was to infuse a religious spirit intc 
 the state ; the state was to uphold and foster the church. 
 These views, in general, are denominated Erastian, from 
 Erastus (Lieber), a Swiss Jurist of the 16th centurj^ 
 (died at Basle, 1583), who advocated, in an elaborate 
 
BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE. 25 
 
 treatise, a union of church and state. His view, more 
 specifically stated, was, that no form of church polity is 
 laid down in the Scriptures ; no one church possesses a 
 divine sanction, rather than another ; and it is the duty 
 of the civil magistrate in each country to establish the 
 religion of the majority (being Christian) as the religion 
 of the state, with all the advantages that belong to an 
 establishment, leaving^ to dissenters a bare tolei'ation. 
 
 4. The theory of the Presbyterian Church and of other 
 Protestant bodies in America is, that the province of the 
 church and of the state is entirely distinct ; each church 
 being independentlj^ organized for its own ends, within 
 and separate from the organization of the state. This 
 system alone preserves the freedom of the one, maintains 
 the equity and impartiality of the other, and secures the 
 equal rights of all peaceable citizens, irrespective of their 
 creed, government or worship. Every "Erastian" sys- 
 tem, under whatever pretence of defending and fostering 
 the church, really degrades and enslaves her, and makes 
 her an instrument for oppressing and persecuting others. 
 
 SEC. yil. — ORIGIN OF DENOMINATIONAL CHURCHES. 
 
 No such thing as sectarian, or " denominational " 
 churches — i. e., churches organized separately within 
 the church catholic, on the basis of sympathy in respect 
 either to doctrine or practice — was known in the Apos- 
 tolic Age, nor until the middle of the third century. 
 The first instance of a " denomination " was the x^ova- 
 tian Church, originating A. D. 251, and deriving its 
 name from Novatus, a Presbyter and schismatical Bishop 
 of Rome. This being the first instance of an organized 
 schism, it may be interesting to inquire into its legiti- 
 macy. Schism is a breach of unity in the church. It 
 
'l^j ORIGIN OF 
 
 is strongly deprecated by the apostles and the early 
 fathers, particularh^ Ignatius, Clement and Cyprian. A 
 schism may be either elementary, as a violent quarrel or 
 party difference among Christians, or organized. In 
 neither case can it exist without sin ; but it will always 
 be a question at whose door the sin lies. Allegiance to 
 Christ is the primary law of the church. Truth is first, 
 unity afterwards; '" jirsl 'pure^ then peaceahley Where 
 unity with the body of the church cannot be maintained, 
 consistently with obedience to Christ, separation is a 
 duty, not a sin, and the guilt of schism rests on those 
 who, by violating Christ's laws, make* such separation 
 necessary. 
 
 Where a church is rent into two, therefore, the major- 
 ity may be the schismatical body. Take the case of the 
 English Non-conformists, in the reign of Queen Eliza- 
 beth. Christ has no where required that ministers shall 
 preach in surplices, or sign a child with the cross in bap- 
 tism, or join parties in marriage by means of a ring. 
 When the State Church insisted on these usages, and for- 
 bade any one to preach the Gospel who dispensed with 
 them, tiie Puritans, who regarded them as symbols of 
 Popery, felt bound, in loyalty to Christ, to separate from 
 the Establishment. In their view, the Bishops were guilty 
 of the schism, and not they. 
 
 The Bishops, however, maintained that these usages 
 being in themselves indifferent, the church had the right 
 to enjoin them, in order to uniformity and decorum of 
 worship, and that those were the schismatics who, out of 
 a superstitious regard to trifles, refused to yield to her 
 authority. 
 
 The legitimacy of a separation from the church must 
 depend on the question of its necessity ; and of this neces- 
 
DENOMINATIONAL CHUnCIIES. 27 
 
 sity an enlightened conscience mast be the judge. To 
 separate out of a morbid sensitiveness in regard to things 
 in themselves unessential, such as the mode of baptism, 
 singing of hymns, use of organs, &c., cannot be justified 
 on the ground of conscience, since Christians are bound 
 to have a conscience, not merely sensitive, but sound and 
 enlightened. 
 
 The history of the I^ovatian schism is considerably 
 obscure. It is represented by the " Catholic " writers 
 who were engaged in the struggle (Cyprian of Carthage, 
 and Cornelius of Eome), as having grown out of the 
 ambition of turbulent Presbyters, taking occasion of the 
 discipline of the church towards lapsed persons ; but 
 there are man}^ circumstances to show that it originated 
 in the resistance of the Presbyters to the organizing and 
 encroaching Episcopal power, which was just then grow- 
 ing up in Carthage and Rome. As a question about dis- 
 cipline, the separation of the Novatians may have been 
 unjustifiable ; as a struggle for the independence of the 
 churches, and the rights of the Presbyters, against a 
 usurping Episcopacy, it may have been legitimate and 
 necessary. The true schismatics may have been Cyprian, 
 Cornelius and their party, and not the Novatians. At 
 all events, this church, founded on rigid principles of 
 discipline, and embracing the more earnest and Puritanic 
 Christians, survived, with high reputation, for several 
 centuries. 
 
 That the multiplication of sects by repeated schisms, 
 since the Reformation, has involved grievous sin on one 
 side or the other, or on both, cannot be doubted. 
 
 The Roman Catholic Church, though embracing all 
 western Christendom, became schismatical, when, by 
 corruptions in government and worship, it departed so 
 
28 DEFINITION OF A 
 
 far from the purity of the church catholic, as to oblige 
 those recognizing the supreme authority of the Scrip- 
 tures to separate from it. The old catholics now claim, 
 that by accepting the blasphemous dogma of the Papal 
 infallibility, the Komish Church has forfeited her claim 
 to be regarded as catholic, and has become a sect. The 
 Romish and the Greek Churches mutually stigmatize and 
 excommunicate each other as schismatical. 
 
 The Russian Greek Church regards the Romish Church 
 as having become schismatical from A. D. 869, when 
 it rejected the Council of Constantinople, which had 
 endorsed Photius as Patriarch, and laid down a basis for 
 the reconciliation of the churches. 
 
 The various Protestant denominations arose, of course, 
 subsequent to the Reformation. The Episcopal Church 
 having broken off from communion with Rome, which 
 it acknowledges to be a true church, is the sect of a sect. 
 The Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists and Metho- 
 dists, subsequently broke off from the Church of England, 
 and are equally sectarian. 
 
 All these, according to the definition previously given, 
 make a part of the catholic , or universal church ; but 
 each of them is schismatical if, and so far as, by corrup- 
 tions in doctrine or worship, or unscriptural terms of 
 communion, it breaks the unity of the spirit, and makes 
 separation by others a duty. ^ 
 
 SEC. VIII. — DEFINITION OF A PARTICULAR CHURCH. 
 
 " A particular church consists of (1) a number of 
 professing Christians, together with (2) their offspring, (3) 
 voluntarily associated together (4) for divine worship 
 and Godly living, (5) agreeable to the Holy Scriptures, 
 
PARTICULAR OHURCH. 29 
 
 (6) and submitting to a certain form of government." 
 (Form of Gov. : I, 1.) 
 
 This definition includes the statement that the chil- 
 dren of professing Christians are members of the partic- 
 ular church to which their parents belong ; but it also 
 affirms that such a church consists of persons " volunta. 
 rily associated together ^ These two propositions are 
 mutually contradictory. The children have never " vol- 
 untarily associated " themselves with their parents for 
 the objects named. Indeed, on this theory, if we sup- 
 pose a community to exist in which the same families 
 have resided from the organization of the church,' and 
 have composed its membership, no members of it except 
 the very first ever did " voluntarily associate " themselves 
 together. The present children of those families are 
 members because their parents were members, and they, 
 because their parents, &c. 
 
 In what sense then are children members of the 
 church ? The Westminster symbols know but one class 
 of church members. They are all bound by the same 
 obligations, and subject to the same discipline. On con- 
 dition only of knowledge to discern the Lord's bodj^, 
 and freedom from scandal, every church member, young 
 or old, is bound to perform all the duties implied in the 
 relation ; and, in particular to come to the Lord's Supper, 
 and is liable to discipline for neglecting it. 
 
 This is the theory of all Psedobaptist Churches — a 
 theory which in Great Britain and on the Continent of 
 Europe is carried out in practice. In this country, on 
 the other hand, the Presbyterian and Congregational 
 practice is directly at variance with the theory. Still 
 holding to the definition which makes the children of 
 believing parents members with them of the same par- 
 
30 DEFINITION OF A 
 
 ticular cliiirch, we do in no wise treat them as such. 
 Their membership is connected neither with privilege, 
 duty, nor discipline. When any of them propose to 
 come for the first time to the Lord's table, we regard and 
 speak of them as ^\joining the churchy We receive them 
 in no other way than we receive the children of heathen 
 men and publicans. If they have a satisfactory religious 
 experience to relate, and give credible evidence of a 
 change of heart," they are received. If otherwise, their 
 supposed birth-right membership counts for nothing. 
 
 It would seem proper, therefore, either to amend the 
 definition, or to conform our practice to it. If we insist 
 on infant church membership, then we should treat the 
 children of believers as members of the sam.e church 
 with their parents; and, on their arriving at the suitable 
 age. should require of them the same duties and subject 
 them to the same discipline. If we wholly refuse the 
 practical recognition of infant membership, we should 
 admit the definition to be erroneous. 
 
 I suggest the latter alternative as the true solution. 
 Children are not members of the particular church to 
 which their parents belong, until they voluntarily asso- 
 ciate themselves to it. They are members of the " church 
 catholic,'' in the sense already explained — i. e., thej^ are 
 Christians in the generaF sense, because they are born 
 within the nominal Christian Church. They are neither 
 Jews, Pagans, nor Mohammedans. Their parents, though 
 perhaps far from possessing a Christian character, do, in 
 a general way, " make profession of the holy religion of 
 Christ." Ask them what religion they are of, and they 
 will say, " the Christian religion." If they affirm the 
 
PARTICULAK CHUKCII. 81 
 
 contrarj, of course tliey are to be legardcd as outside 
 the Catholic Church, the same as Pagans."^ 
 
 SEC. IX. — ORGAXIZATIOX AND MINISTRY OF THE FIRST 
 PARTICULAR CHURCHES. 
 
 ISTo express command was anywhere given to collect 
 or organize Christian Churches ; but the Jews were 
 familiar with the idea both of a national church and of 
 local worshiping societies. The synagogue was the 
 parish or local church. In large towns, like Jerusalem, 
 there were many synagogues ; but the idea that all the 
 w^orshipers in a place constitute the church in that place 
 w^as distinctively Christian. The first converts on the 
 day of Pentecost seem to have been regarded as forming 
 " the church " in Jerusalem. Afterwards, it is said, Acts : 
 II, 47, " the Lord added to the church daily," &c. ; and 
 this is the first mention of a Christian Church. In the 
 same way, churches were gathered in Samaria, Acts : 
 YIII, 12; Antioch, Acts: xi, 26; throughout Judea and 
 G-alilee, Acts: ix, 31 ; and in Syria and Ciiicia, Acts: 
 XV, 41 ; XVI, 5 ; '^ And so were ilie chiircltes established in 
 the faith ^ and increased in number daihjy 
 
 For these congregations of crude and untaught con- 
 verts, some provision for teaching and government was 
 a primary necessity. The apostles could not remain 
 
 *NoTE. — " From all these facts, it is evident that a person maj- be a member of 
 the Church of Christ at large and not a member of a particular church. A minis- 
 ter is a member of the Church of Christ at large, but is never, in the proper 
 sense, a member of a particular church. This I conceive to be the exact situation 
 of persons baptized in infancy. They are members of the Church of Christ — that 
 is, of the church general. Baptism renders any person capable of membership iu 
 a particular church, if he is disposed and otherwise prepared to unite himself to 
 it. Bat neither this nor his profession of religion will constitute him such a mem- 
 ber. This can be done in no other way but by means of that mutual covenant 
 between him and the church, which has been mentioned above." Dwight's The- 
 ology, vol. IV, p. 322. 
 
o2 THE UNOFFICIAL 
 
 long in any one place themselves, nor could a competent 
 native ministry, at least in Gentile Christian Churches, 
 be raised up on the instant. This necessity was met by 
 a temporary supernatural provision, that of the charis- 
 mata^ an arrangement wonderfully adapted, in the wisdom 
 of God, to bridge over the perilous period between the 
 departure of some apostle or evangelist from a church 
 they had gathered of converted Gentiles, and the devel- 
 opment in knowledge and Christian character of some 
 member of the church, itself, qualifying him to become 
 its pastor. This peculiar arrangement lasted only during 
 that interval, and, as soon as possible, gave place to that 
 ordinary and permanent ofiice called "the ministry." 
 
 The two forms of provision, therefore, for the care of 
 the infant churches, may be distinguished as, 
 
 ]. The ministry of gifts, consisting of, 
 
 a. The unofficial. 
 
 h. The official. 
 
 11. The ministry of orders. 
 
 SEC. X. — THE UNOFFICIAL MINISTRY OF "GIFTS." 
 
 This consisted of (1) prophets, (2) tongue?, (3) inter- 
 pretation of tongues, (4) discerning of spirits, (5) teach- 
 ing, (6) government, (7) healing, (8) miracles generally, 
 with some others of a more doubtful character. (1 Cor. : 
 xir, 8, 28.) 
 
 The charismata were a supernatural provision for 
 the instruction and government of the infant Gentile 
 Churches, during the interval between their organization 
 and their being provided with a suitable native ministry. 
 In the absence of any competent church officers, the 
 Holy Spirit provided for the training of the early con- 
 
.MINISTRY OF GIFTS. oo 
 
 verts, by conferring special "gifts" on individual disci- 
 ples, adapted to the various wants of the cliurches. 
 
 The yapidiia was apparently an exaltation, by the 
 Holy Spirit, of the individuars special capability for 
 usefulness. The man who had a natural or acquired fit- 
 ness for any particular line of Christian work, found that 
 fitness exalted, and himself impelled to its exercise by an 
 inward divine influence. Thus his special talent became 
 
 a yapi(7ij.a. 
 
 For the instruction of the cliurch, the gifts of '' proph- 
 ecy '' and '• teaching " were provided. The gift of " teach- 
 ing " (comprehending both the " word of knowledge ' and 
 the " word of wisdom ") answered nearest to the ordinary 
 work of '^preaching.'' The gift of "prophecy" seems to 
 have been a faculty for warm and impressive Christian 
 exhortation. Acts : xv, 82 ; " And Judas and Silas 
 being 'prophets^ also exhorted the brethren with many 
 words and confirmed them." 1 Cor. : xiv, 8 ; " But he 
 that prophesieth, speaketh unto men to edification and 
 exhortation and comfort." 
 
 The gift of tongues was partly to aid in the preaching 
 of the Gospel to strangers, and partly to manifest, sig- 
 nally, the presence of the Holy Spirit in the assembly. 
 The interpretation was necessary for the edification of 
 those to whom the tongue was unknown. 
 
 The gift of ^^ government'^ was the improvement of a 
 natural faculty for administration and practical work. 
 
 "The discerning of spirits " was necessary in order to 
 the detection of imposture. The gift of " healing " was, 
 perhaps, a supernatural exaltation of the medical skill of 
 some disciple, for the relief of sufiering in the church ; 
 and the "'gift oi miracles' generally, was for the purpose 
 
34 THE OFFICIAL 
 
 of overawing opposition and convincing unbelief. (Con. 
 and How. : I, cli. xiii.) 
 
 We have no reason' to believe that the possession of 
 these gifts was peculiar to the Corinthian Church. The 
 exigencies of other infant churches equally called for 
 them. It was the disorders connected with their exercise 
 in Corinth, that led to the more special mention of them 
 there. In regard to them, the following facts may be 
 noticed : 
 
 1. That they served as a substitute for the ordinary 
 ministry in Corinth, of which no traces yet appear. 
 
 2. That they were bestowed very liberally, not upon 
 a few, but upon many members of the church, and vv^ith- 
 out regard to the spiritual attainments of the recipients. 
 
 8. That they were sometimes exercised without discre- 
 tion, in a tumultuous and disorderly ^vay, and, in this 
 form, provoked the ridicule of "unbelievers.'' 
 
 4. That, when properly used, they tended to the com- 
 fort of disciples and the conversion of others. 
 
 5. That these gifts were often valued by the early dis- 
 ciples in the inverse proportion to their usefulness ; the 
 gift of tongues most, and that of teaching and prophecy 
 least. 
 
 6. That, being only an elementary and mechanical 
 method for the training of the infant church, they were, 
 as soon as possible, dispensed with ; and, that being only 
 "gifts" and not '■'■ graces^'^ the apostle regarded them all 
 as of less value than the single grace of Christian charity. 
 
 SEC. XL — THE OFFICIAL MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 
 
 This consisted of the apostles alone. The apostolic 
 ofi&ce was official^ because it included only a select num- 
 ber of men, expressly commissioned for a certain work. 
 
MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 35 
 
 At the same time, it belonged to the ministry of gifis^ 
 because it was adapted to the infant and forming condi- 
 tion of the church, and was, therefore, transient; and 
 because the apostles were fitted for their work by a large 
 bestowal of charismata upon them. They possessed all 
 these "gifts" which were- parcelled out singly among 
 other disciples — the gift of " miracles " in general, 
 including the power, not only of " healing," but of 
 " destroying ;" the gifts of " prophecy " and " teaching," 
 the gift of " tongues," of " discerning spirits," of " gov- 
 ernment," and the rest. Being themselves " unlearned 
 and ignorant men," these were rendered necessary by the 
 nature of their work, which was nothing less than laying 
 the foundations of the Christian Church. (Con. and 
 How. : I, 433.) 
 
 The apostles were special and "extraordinary " officers, 
 appointed to found and organize the Church of Christ, 
 by preaching the Gospel and testifying, as eye-witnesses, 
 to the resurrection of Jesus. The following particulars 
 belong essentially to the office : 
 
 1. Their number was limited to twelve, correspondino- 
 to the number of the ancient tribes (leaving out the tribe 
 of Levi). Mat. : xix, 28 : "Ye also shall sit upon twelve 
 thrones, judging the twelve tribes," &c. Eev. : xxi, 14 ; 
 " The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in 
 them the name of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." 
 
 "2. The apostles must have been called, personally, by 
 Christ. This was the case with all the original twelve ; 
 and when a vacancy occurred, by the lapse and death of 
 Judas, Christ returned in person to call his successor. 
 Acts : XXVI, 16 ; " P'or this cause I have appeared unto 
 thee, to make thee a minister and a witness," &c. That 
 is, the reason why Christ mAist personally appear to Saul, 
 
36 THE OFFICIAL 
 
 was to call him by his own voice to the apostolic office. 
 
 3. It follows from this, that the apostles must have 
 seen the Lord Jesus Christ. Acts : xxii, l-i, 15 ; " The 
 God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou sliould'st 
 know His will, and see that Just One, and hear the 
 words of His mouth, for thou shalt be His witness unto 
 all men," &c. 1 Cor.: ix, 1; "Am I not an apostle? 
 am I not free ? have I not seen Jesus Christ, our Lord ? " 
 By the challenge, " Am I not free ? " Paul affirms his 
 independent authority as an apostle. He was not made 
 such by any human election, and was under no obliga- 
 tion to any man for it. (See Gal. : I, 1 ; " An apostle, not 
 of man^ neither by men, but by Jesus Christ." See, also? 
 1 Cor. : IX, 19.) This passage, therefore, decisively 
 affirms, that if Paul had been called to the office by men, 
 and laad not seen the Lord Jesus Christ, he could not be 
 an apostle. 
 
 4. The apostles must be able to testify as eye-witnesses 
 to the fact of Christ's resurrection. Luke : xxiv, 46 ; 
 " And He said unto them, thus it behoved Christ to suf- 
 fer and to rise from the dead ; and ye are witnesses ot 
 these things." Acts: ii, 32; "This Jesus hath God 
 raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.^'' Acts: xxvi, 
 16 ; " For this cause have I appeared unto thee, to make 
 thee both a minister and a witness^^^ &c. If Paul had 
 merely been able to report on '^ hearsay'^ of the resur- 
 rection of Christ, and not as an eye witness, he would 
 have been incompetent to take part inlaying the founda- 
 tions of the Christian Church. {Vide, also. Acts: i, 21.) 
 
 5. The apostles must be able to work miracles. Christ 
 expressly promised this ; and the apostles appealed to the 
 fact in evidence of their mission. 1 Cor.: Xll, 12; 
 "Trulv, i\\e- signs of an apostle were wrought among 
 
MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 87 
 
 you, in signs and wonders and might}^ deeds." The 
 power to work miracles was a necessary attestation of 
 the apostolic office. 
 
 SEC. XII. — ATTEMPTS TO PEEPETUATE THE MINISTRY OF 
 
 GIFTS. 
 
 Notwithstanding the evidence that the ministry of 
 gifts was a temporary expedient, designed for the infancy 
 of the church, attempts have been made to perpetuate it, 
 both in the unofficial and the official form. In the prim- 
 itive church, it was believed that the power of working 
 miracles, by healing disease, casting out devils, speaking 
 with tongues, infallibly interpreting Scripture, &c., still 
 continued. The same claim is still made for the Romish 
 Church. Fanatical bodies occasionally arose during the 
 Middle Ages, and have arisen in later times, pretending 
 the power of working miracles, of which the Irvingites 
 in London and the Mormons in this country are recent 
 examples. 
 
 In all prelatical churches, it is claimed that the official 
 ministry of gifts has been perpetaated from the time of 
 the apostles till now ; that the order of apostles is still 
 in existence in great numbers — all bishops being suc- 
 cessors of the twelve, and inheriting the same office, in 
 all that is essential to it. The heads of proof for this 
 claim are such as the following : 
 
 1. The essential things in the apostolic office were not, 
 having seen Christ, and being called by him personally, 
 being able to testif}^ as eye-witnesses to his resurrection, 
 to work miracles, &c., but the power to transmit a special 
 grace of office by ordination of a lawful ministr}^, and to 
 govern the church in Christ's name. Therefore, Christ 
 breathed on the apostles and said. Receive ye the Holy 
 
38 ATTEMPTS TO PERPETUATE 
 
 Ghost^ and promised to be with them, even unto the end 
 of the world — that is, with their successors, who, ever 
 since the first century, have been called " bi's'hops." ' 
 
 2. There is no evidence that any others than apostles 
 exercised the riojht of ordaininof. 
 
 8. Various others besides the original twelve are called 
 apostles, as Barnabas, Epaphroditus, Andronicus and 
 Junias. (Acts : xiv, 14 ; Eom. : xvi, 7 ; Phil. : ii, 25, 
 and IV, 18.) 
 
 4. The apostles set the example of perpetuating their 
 office in the case of Matthias. (Acts : i, 20.) 
 
 5. Timothy, Titus and the angels of the seven churches 
 plainly exercised apostolic powers, such as ordaining, 
 governing the church, &c. 
 
 To these is added the historical evidence that an Epis- 
 copal constitution has prevailed in the church from the 
 time of the apostles ; that Ignatius and other primitive 
 fathers speak of bishops as having succeeded to the apos- 
 tles, and that no other form of government was known 
 in the church, till after the Reformation. 
 
 To these claims, we reply in order, as follows : 
 
 1. The apostles united in themselves two separate 
 functions. They were inspired and miraculously en- 
 dowed witnesses of the resurrection of Christ, and they 
 were preachers of the Grospel. In the first character, as 
 already shown, they could have no successors. In the 
 second, their successors are all faithful ministers of the 
 Grospel. It is with tliese^ and not with bishops alone, that 
 Christ promised to be, even to the end of the world. 
 
 2. As respects the claim that none but the apostles 
 and the bishops, their successors, could have the right to 
 ordain, it is replied, that Timothy was ordained by the 
 hands of the presbytery. (1 Tim. : iv, 14.) This act is 
 
THE MrXISTRY OF GIFTS. 89 
 
 Claimed in the Episcopal Church to have been Timothy's 
 consecration as bishop ; and the only escape from the con- 
 clusion that presbyters or elders took part in it is the 
 gratuitous and absurd assumption that all the Presbytery 
 consisted of apostles."^ 
 
 3. To the allegation that various others besides the 
 original twelve are called " apostles," it is re|)lied, that 
 ai^ostolos is used in the New Testament in two distinct 
 senses. 
 
 a. Its technical and official meaning, in which it is 
 applied only to the original twelve and Paul. 
 
 h. Its general etymological sense of delegate or mis- 
 sionary, in w^hich it is applied a few times to other per- 
 sons, as Barnabas, who was a specially appointed mis- 
 sionary (Acts : XIV, l-I), and Epaphroditus, who was the 
 messenger of the Philippians to Paul. (Phil. : ii, 25 ; 
 IV, 18. See Con. and How. : 1, ch. xiii, for a table of 
 the uses of apostolos in N. T.) 
 
 4. To the argument for the perpetuation of the apos- 
 tolic office, drawn fi'om the case of Matthias, it is replied, 
 that Christ personally called twelve apostles, correspond- 
 ing to the twelve tribes of Israel, and gave no intimation 
 that the number was ever to exceed twelve. After the 
 death of Judas, Peter (who was often hasty in speech 
 and action) proposed that some competent person should 
 be chosen, by lot or ballot, to fill his place. Nominating 
 two, they drew lots between them. Matthias was chosen, 
 and "was numbered with the eleven apostles." But 
 there is good reason for regarding this procedure as 
 wholly unauthorized and invalid, viz. : 
 
 a. The apostles were required to tarry at Jerusalem 
 until they should be endowed with power from on high, 
 
 * See Appendix A . 
 
40 ATTEMPTS TO PERPKTrATE 
 
 implying that they were to undertake no official work 
 till then. This power had not yet been bestowed. 
 
 h. No mention whatever of Matthias occurs after this 
 event — contrary to what might have been expected, on 
 the supposition that this was a legitimate transaction. 
 
 c. Christ himself, by personally calling Paul, supplied 
 the place of Judas, thus making the number twelve 
 good, and never called any others. 
 
 d. The election of Matthias is merely related as a 
 historic fact, without anything to indicate its approval by 
 the Great Head of the church. 
 
 It is no answer to these statements, that after the elec- 
 tion of Matthias and before the calling of Paul, the 
 apostles are spoken of as ^Uhe twelve.''^ "The twelve" is 
 merely the official title of the college of apostles. They 
 are so called after the death of Judas and before the 
 election of Matthias, w^hen there were certainly but 
 eleven. John : XX, 24 ; " But Thomas, one of the 
 tw^elve, was not with them." 1 Cor. : XV, 5; " He was 
 seen of Cephas, then of the twelve." 
 
 It is said there was a divine warrant for this election 
 in the passage quoted by Peter, ^^His bishopnch let another 
 take.'' We reply : another did take his office by the per- 
 sonal call of Christ, viz., Paul. 
 
 But it is said,"" The lot fell upon Matthias, and he was 
 numbered with the eleven apostles." 
 
 Answer. — The lot must have fallen upon one of the 
 two, and the statement only implies that he was reckoned 
 an apostle by those who elected him. But no subsequent 
 recognition of the act occurs. 
 
 Admitting, however, that the election of Matthias w^as 
 valid, the transaction makes, in the most explicit wa}^, 
 against the claim of Episcopal Ijishops to be apostles. 
 
THE MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 41 
 
 Peter states what, in his view, was an indispensable qual- 
 ification for the office, viz. : Having been so personally 
 acquainted with the Lord Jesus Christ as to be a compe- 
 tent witness to the fact of His resurrection. (Acts : i, 21, 
 23.) Whatever maj^ be said of the election of Matthias 
 as successor to Judas, no one can now pretend to be an 
 apostle who cannot testify as ej^e- witness to that fact. 
 
 If it is said that this view of the transaction is injuri- 
 ous to the inspired authority of the sacred writer, it is 
 replied, that the effect of inspiration is to secure a cor- 
 rect report of things as Vaey occurred, not to endorse 
 their legitimacy. 
 
 The conclusion will be, that the special ministry of 
 gifts, both unofficial and official, terminated at the close 
 of the Apostolic Period, and was succeeded bv the perma- 
 nent ministrij of orders. 
 
 SEC. XIIL — HISTORICAL EVIDE^X'E FOR THE SUPPOSED 
 PERPETUATION OF THE MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 
 
 The proofs alleged in favor of the continuance of the 
 w?zofhcial ministry of gifts in the church, are found in 
 the supposed cases of miraculous exorcism., healino- 
 restoration from death, speaking with tongues, &c., in tlie 
 ])rimitive church; and, in addition to these, of number- 
 less cases, in the Romish Church, of weeping or winking 
 images, control by saints, of birds, beasts and the ele- 
 ments, prophecy, liquefaction of blood. (St. Januarius 
 St. Peter of Arbues, &c.) 
 
 These are so easily explained as the fruit of supersti- 
 tion, or imposture, as to require no detailed refutation.* 
 
 * These pretended Romish miracles are mostly copied, with close imitation, 
 after those of Christ and the apostles ; many of them, also, after those of Elijah 
 Elisha and other Old Testament worthies. There is not a miracle recorded of 
 Jesus, that is not paralleled and even greatly exceeded in the lives of the monas 
 tic saints. ( Vide Legendes Pieuses, ch. 1.) 
 
42 EVIDENCE FOR SUPPOSED PERPETUATION 
 
 It is also claimed, that the official ministry of gifts, or 
 the apostleship, still abides in the church, having been 
 perpetuated by an unbroken succession from St. Peter, 
 or St. John. In support of this claim, lists are given of 
 the names of bishops extending from them to their pres- 
 ent pretended successors ; in the Eomish Church, from 
 St. Peter to Pius IX ; in the Episcopal Church, from St. 
 John to the English and American bishops. 
 
 In addition to the evidence already given, that the 
 apostolic office was not transmissible, we allege, histori- 
 cally, in disproof of this claim, as follows : 
 
 1. x\l though full lists of names are given, as handing 
 down an apostolical succession, evidence is entirely lack- 
 ino" as to a large number of the parties named — who 
 they were, whether duly qualified and canonically 
 ordained, date of service, &c. The only authentic 
 accounts of the succession of bishops, which anywhere 
 existed, were those kept in the church books, called 
 diptychs. But there is no mention of such books before 
 the fourth century, and any other supposed or pretended 
 church archives rest upon nothing but vague tradition. 
 
 The first to speak of any succession of bishops is Ire- 
 n^eus (circ. A. D. 180), and his arrangement is contra- 
 dicted by othey writers. Then, even as to the succession 
 in the Church of Kome — the greatest and best known 
 Qf all — there is irreconcilable confusion at the very 
 beirinning. Iren^us gives the first. four thus: 1. Peter; 
 
 2. Linus ; 8. Anacletus ; 4. Clemens, Tertullian, twenty 
 years later, transposes them thus : 1. Peter; 2. Clemens; 
 
 3. Linus ; 4. Anacletus. Augustine shuflles them again, 
 with this result: 1. Peter; 2. Linus; 3. Clemens; 4. 
 Anacletus. 
 
 To say nothing of the false intrusion of Peter at the 
 
OF THE MINISTRY OF GIFTS. 43 
 
 head of the list (there being no evidence whatever that 
 he was ever even in the City of Rome), the other dis- 
 crepancies show that it was drawn merely from tradition. 
 (See Jacobs, p. 71.) 
 
 The Romish line afterwards is full of confusion, uncer- 
 tainty and the most violent irregularities. 
 
 2. Besides this, and in preference to it, the Anglican 
 and Episcopal Churches claim to derive an unbroken 
 apostolic succession from the ancient British Church, 
 and from St. John through the ancient Gallic Church. 
 
 As to the first, which it is alleged was planted by St. 
 Paul, or some other person independent of the Church 
 of Rome, we reply : 
 
 a. That the history of the planting of Christianity in 
 Britain is wholly fabulous and conjectural. 
 
 h. That no records are even pretended of the succes- 
 sion of bishops in that church, for the first five centuries. 
 
 c. That whatever may have been the original British 
 Church, it was almost entirely extirpated by the heathen 
 Saxons (middle of the fifth century). 
 
 d. That, at the end of the sixth century (596), there 
 was found in Britain a feeble and scattered church, v/ith 
 an Episcopal constitution, independent of Rome, but 
 equally corrupt and superstitious. Obviously, therefore, 
 nothing of the pretended apostolic succession can be 
 traced through this line. ^ 
 
 As to the succession from St. John, we are told that 
 in A. D. 596. Augustine, the Monk, with forty others, 
 was sent, by Pope Gregory I, to convert the Anglo-Sax- 
 ons, and establish the authority of Rome in England, 
 both which he effected. B}^ direction of the Pope, he 
 went to Aries, in Gaul, and was there consecrated bishop, 
 by Etherich (or Yigilius?), bishop of that city : (Nean- 
 
44 FALS?: AND TRUE DOCTRINE OF 
 
 der: iii, 14j, and the Bishop of Aries, it is claimed^ 
 derived his succession from the bishops of Asia Minor, 
 and so from St John. To this, it is enough to reply : 
 
 e. That the derivation of the churches in Gaul, direct 
 from Asia Minor, is a mere matter of • conjecture. 
 (INTeander: i, 84.) 
 
 /. But, even if so derived, no names of any Gallic 
 Bishops are preserved for the first three centuries ; and 
 from thence to the time of Augustine the Monk, only 
 an imperfect and uncertain list, with no evidence accom- 
 panying it. 
 
 3. The succession of the English bishops from the 
 Romish Church, at the time of the Eeformation, is open 
 to very serious suspicion." 
 
 SEC. XIV. — THE FALSE AND THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF THE 
 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. 
 
 It has been already shown that the apostles, as such, 
 or in what constituted the peculiarity of their office, 
 could have no successors. As respects their work of 
 preaching the Gospel, all true ministers of Christ are 
 their successors. In the Episcopal Church, it is held, 
 that the peculiarity of the apostolic office was the right 
 to ordain^ and the power, received direct from Christ, to 
 hand down a certain mysterious grace of office to other 
 apostles, who should succeed them to the end of the 
 world ; that, in order to the transmission of this grace, 
 there must be an unbroken succession of apostles (now 
 called bishops), touching hand to hand all the way down 
 from the original twelve ; that without such a succes- 
 sion, there is no authorized ministry on earth, since there 
 is no one having the right to ordain ; and without such 
 a ministry, there is no true Church of Christ ; thus, mak- 
 
 * See Appeuuix B. 
 
THE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. 45 
 
 ing the very existence of the church depend on the min- 
 istry, and on the ministry constituted in one particular 
 way. It is boldly affirmed, that if there is no such suc- 
 cession, or if such a succession, having been begun, has 
 been broken off any time during tlie past ages, there is 
 not now on earth any true church, nor any lawful minis- 
 try, nor ev,er could be, unless Christ should return in 
 person to re-establish them. 
 
 If such vital consequences depend on an unbroken 
 apostolic succession, it is reasonable to demand that the 
 existence of such a " grace " should be made palpable, 
 and that every step in the process, from now back to the 
 twelve apostles, should be rigidly demonstrated. 
 
 We deny that any such succession is promised in Scrip- 
 ture, or can be historically traced, or can be in any man- 
 ner shown to be now extant. The lists of Bishops of 
 Rome or of Aries, reaching back to St. Peter and St. 
 John, consist, for several centuries, of mere names, with 
 no evidence whatever that they answer to real persons, 
 or that those persons were duly qualified and canonically 
 ordained. Percival (Apol. for Apost. Sue.) and others 
 claim that they are not bound to produce any such evi- 
 dence ; that it is enough to show the fact of an Episcopal 
 constitution through all periods, and that this includes, 
 of course, the regular and canonical ordination of all 
 persons who appear on the lists as bishops. 
 
 Archbishop Whately, on the other hand, affirms, with 
 the amplest historical warrant, that during long periods 
 in the Middle Ages there was gross disregard of both 
 Scriptural and canonical laws in the ordination of bish- 
 ops; that children, drunkards, illiterate and profligate 
 laymen, were consecrated ; that bishops obtained the 
 office by bribery, and were intruded into their dioceses 
 
46 FALSE AND TRUE DOCTRINE OF 
 
 by force ; and, " in fine, there were so serious disorders, 
 that there is not a minister in Christendom who can trace 
 11 J), wnth an}^ approach to certainty, his spiritual pedi- 
 gree." We have no objection to admit that for several 
 centuries past there may have been an unbroken succes- 
 sion of bishops in the Eomish and Anglican Churches ; 
 but it is of no avail to demonstrate the succession for 
 even a thousand years, if it cannot be equally proven 
 for the remainder. The strength of the chain is only as 
 the strength of its weakest link ; and every link in this 
 succession is absolutely worthless, the soundness of which 
 cannot be historically demonstrated. The Episcopal 
 claim, in this matter, is not only false and superstitious 
 in its nature, but is wanting in evidence even to the 
 extent of absurdity. 
 
 The true doctrine of the apostolic succession is, that 
 there has never failed to be a Church of Christ on earth 
 holding the apostles' doctrine, and that this church has 
 in all ages originated and lawfully commissioned a min- 
 istry, by whom the Word has been preached and the 
 sacraments administered according to Christ's appoint- 
 ment. This true church has been more or less obscure 
 under the Christian dispensation, as it often was under 
 the Jewish. Jn the time of Elijah, it had apparently 
 become extinct, but it still survived in the persons of 
 some thousand scattered and unknown believers. They 
 were within the membership of the apostate Church of 
 Israel, but they perpetuated the existence of the true 
 church of God's people. 
 
 During the apostolic and primitive periods, the visible 
 and outward church was also the true Church of Christ. 
 When that outward church became so corrupt as to be 
 Anti-Christian, the true church was perpetuated either 
 
THE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION, 47 
 
 by purer Christian communities, as the Waldenses, or by 
 scattered fliinilies and societies who were members of the 
 Church of Eome without being fatally involved in her 
 apostacy. 
 
 It only remains to add, on this point, that there is no 
 promise in the Scriptures of any " apostolic succession," 
 except on the petitio principii that Christ could only be 
 with His disciples to the end of the world by means of 
 bishops, and there is no evidence of the possession of 
 any special grace by bishops, which makes them better 
 men or better ministers of Christ than others, or gives 
 any special efficacj^ to the sacraments they administer.* 
 
 SEC. XV. — THE ]\[IXISTEY OF ORDERS — FIRST CLASS — 
 ELDERS. 
 
 The ministry of gifts being a special provision for the 
 churches in the interval between their foundins: and their 
 consolidation as societies, was superseded, as soon as 
 practicable, by the ministry of orders — a ministry per- 
 
 *Dr. Jacobs, haTin<? quoted Hooker to the effect that " in some things every 
 presbyter, in some things only bishops, in some tilings neither the one nor the 
 other, are the apostles' successors," observes : "It might, with equal truth and 
 force, be added, that in some things every Christian man is a successor of the 
 apostles. The apostles ordained presbyters, and so do bishops; the apostles 
 preached Christ, and so do presbyters ; the apostles believed in Jesus, and so do 
 all Christian men. But all this Las really nothing to do with the question whether 
 the apostles had any successors in their aix)s'lesJnp. In all the essential powers 
 and authority of the apostle's office, they had and could have none to succeed 
 them, and the question is not fairly met and argued by Hooker. Indeed, in spite 
 of the high estimation in which Hooker has always been justly held, in spite of 
 ^his great and admirable qualities, his genius, learning, eloquence and piety, a 
 thoughtful and unprejudiced man will hardly read through the whole of his 
 Ecclesiastical Polity (which I suspect very few of our modern Divinity students 
 do), without once and again feeling that he is listening to an advocate bent upon 
 saying all that can be said on one side, and not always having the best of the 
 argimient, rather than a fair investigator of the truth, and regretting that never 
 since his time has an authoritative and impartial judge summed up the case 
 betvreen Hooker and his Puritan opponents, and obtained a just verdict in the 
 cause." — Ecclesiastical I'olity of the Xew Testament, by Rev. Dr. Jacobs, late 
 Head Master of Christ's Hospital, London ; Randolph & Co., N. Y., p. 26. 
 
48 THE MINISTRY OF ORDERS. 
 
 inanently subsisting, that is, in two principal classes 
 adapted to meet all the ordinal^ wants of the church — 
 one for instruction and pastoral care, the other for fidu- 
 ciary and beneficiary trusts. These ofiices are those of, 
 1. Elders or bishops ; 2. Of deacons. 
 
 The office and name of elder were very familiar to 
 the Jews in their synagogue worship. h\ every syna- 
 gogue there was a body of elders, charged with the care 
 of public worship and discipline. They led the praj-ers 
 of the people according to a prescribed form, superin- 
 tended the reading of the Scriptures, and exhorted, or 
 called on others to exhort. Of these elders, the one w^ho 
 presided at an^^ time w^as called the Ruler of the Syna- 
 gogue^ ^^ the Angel of the Church^' and the Chazan^ over- 
 seer, or bishop. This latter title was particularly given 
 him because wdien the Scriptures were read, he stood by 
 the reader, watching him and carefully guarding against 
 mistakes. 
 
 Now the earliest converts were Jews by nation ; and 
 as synagogue congregations were quite small, it is not at 
 all unlikely that all, or nearly all, the members of a syn- 
 agogue might, in some cases, be converted at once. 
 There would then be no occasion for any change in the 
 arrangements for worship. Things would go on as before. 
 The elders would preside and conduct the service; but 
 the worship would be Christian and not Jewish. In other 
 cases, the change would be more gradual, but, in every 
 instance, existing usages would be preserved as far as 
 possible. This explains the ftxct that there is nowhere 
 any account of the first appointment of Christian elders. 
 There is no command to institute this form of govern- 
 ment. It is simply taken for granted. So far as we are 
 informed, therefore, aiid in all probability, the ministry 
 
FIRST CLASS — ELDERS. 49 
 
 of gifts (unofficial) was confined entire]}- to the Gentile 
 Churches, in which the ministr}^ had to be originated, de 
 novo^ and where there could be, at first, no suitable per- 
 sons to invest with the eldership. In these churches, as 
 Corinth, .Thessalonike, &c., the Spirit Himself was the 
 immediate teacher and ruler, through the charismata, He 
 imparted to the disciples ; but at the earliest moment, 
 probably, that suitable candidates could be found for the 
 ministry of orders, the temporary provision of gifts was 
 withdrawn. 
 
 Of this process, we find distinct intimations in the 
 Acts and letters of the Apostles. The earlier Epistles 
 (Gralatians, , Corinthians, Komans,) contain no mention 
 whatever of any church of&cers. They are addressed 
 to '-the church," or " the faithful," &c. The Epistle to 
 the Philippians, one of the very latest (A. D. 62, Con. 
 and How.), is addressed to ^^ the saints, luith the bishops 
 and deacons ; " and the Epistles to Timothy and Titus 
 (same year) give explicit directions as to the constitution 
 of church government. 
 
 The Epistles to the Thessalonians indicate the transition 
 stage. Spiritual gifts were still in exercise among them, 
 but apparently losing favor (1 Thess. : v, 19, 20), and, at 
 the same time, the disciples are exhorted to " hiow them 
 that are over them in the Lord, and admonish them^^ implying 
 official authority. In the Acts of the Apostles, the same 
 thing appears. In Acts : xi, 30, (the first instance in which 
 elders are^ mentioned) it is in connection with Jeivish 
 Churches. The disciples in Antioch made a contribution 
 in aid of the brethren in Judea, and sent it to the elders 
 by the hands of Barnabas and Saul. In these churches, 
 elders are taken for granted. But in gathering churches 
 in Gentile cities, we find that the missionaries first in- 
 
OO THE MINISTRY OF ORDERS. 
 
 structed Uavooq (Acts: xiv, 21) — able or competent per- 
 sons — and afterwards ordained them elders, in every cit}'. 
 They transplanted into the Gentile Churches, the same 
 arrangements which spontaneously grew up in the Jew- 
 ish Churches, so that the church constitution was uniform 
 everywhere. No other officers were known save elders 
 and deacons ; only a difference of title seems, to" some 
 extent, to have prevailed. ^^Elders " was a word of Jew- 
 ish orio^in. In the Gentile Church, the same office was 
 described by a term more familiar to them, " episcopos " 
 (bishop.) But the two titles are used by the Apostle 
 Paul interchangeably. Thus (Acts : XX, 17, 28), he called 
 the elders of the church of Ephesus and said, take heed 
 to the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you bish- 
 ops. Titus : I, 5, 7 ; " That thou should'st ordain elders 
 in every city, if anj^ be blameless," &c., " for a bishop must 
 be blameless," &c. 
 
 The qualifications and duties of the eldership are indi- 
 cated in these passages and throughout the pastoral epis- 
 tles. They must enjoy the confidence of the church, 
 and, therefore, be men of good repute, blameless in their 
 personal and family relations, studious, diligent, sound 
 in doctrine as in life, not novices ov new converts, nordis- 
 ])0sed to lord it over God's heritage. They were to 
 preach the Word diligently, both in public and private ; 
 to watch over the flock, instructing them in all the duties 
 of the Christian life ; to exercise discipline against offend- 
 ers, and to perpetuate the ministry by committing their 
 office and doctrine to faithful men, who should be able 
 to teach others also. So fixr as preaching, pastoral care, 
 government and ordination are concerned, there was 
 neither occasion nor room for any higher office tlian this 
 in the churches. 
 
TWO ORDERS IN THE MINISTRY. 51 
 
 SEC. XVL — ONLY TWO ORDERS IN THE MINISTRY. 
 
 It is claimed in prelatical churches, that the ministry 
 exists, by Christ's appointment, in three orders — bishops, 
 priests and deacons — and that the type and source of 
 the first is to be found in the apostolic office. It is 
 admitted that, in New Testament usage, the name of 
 bishop is given to the second order ; but it is claimed, as 
 already noticed, that the apostleship was to be permanent 
 in the church, that successors of the apostles were actu- 
 ally chosen, and that very early the name of bishop was 
 reserved exclusively for these, while the title of presbyter 
 or priest was given to the second order. To this, we reply : 
 
 1. The apostles ordained elders in every church, and 
 no higher class of officers. Acts: XIV, 23; "And when 
 they had ordained them elders," &c. 
 
 2. Bishops or elders, and deacons are the only church 
 officers mentioned in the Epistles. (See Phil. : I, 1.) 
 
 o. The apostles committed to the elders the entire spir- 
 itual oversight of the flocks, including instruction, gov- 
 ernment and discipline. (Acts: xx, 28-31.) 
 
 4. The apostles themselves, so far as concerned their 
 gjxide in the ministry, were only elders. 1 Peter : Y, 1 ; 
 " The elders which are among you, I exhort, who also 
 am an elder.'' 
 
 5. Timothy, Titus and others, who are claimed to have 
 been bishops and successors of the apostles, were merely 
 elders^ commissioned to act as evangelists, or traveling 
 assistants to the apostles. They were sent from place to 
 place, as the exigencies of the churches required, or left 
 behind to perfect their organization, while Paul proceeded 
 on his missionary progress. (1 Tim. : I, 3-7 ; 2 Tim. : 
 IV, 9, 11, 21 ; Titus: i, o.) 
 
52 TWO ORDERS IX THE MINISTRY. 
 
 6. The qualifications required both in elders and dea- 
 cons are carefully laid down in the pastoral epistles, but 
 none for an}- liigher grade. If bishops were an office in 
 the church superior to elders, more essential and more 
 responsible, it is incredible Paul should have said noth- 
 ing as to the qualifications for this office, when he thought 
 it necessary to give precise instructions as to the kind of 
 men to be chosen deacons. In the only instance in which 
 it is even pretended we have any account of a successor 
 of the apostles being chosen, Peter states, as an indispens- 
 able qualification, that he must have seen the Lord Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 7. The only Scripture evidence alleged for the perpet 
 nation of the apostolic office in the persons of bishops is 
 found in the case of Matthias and of Timothy (already 
 considered), and in the angels of the seven churches. It 
 is claimed, e. g., that the angel of the church of Ephesus 
 (Rev. : II, 1-8) evidently possessed powers superior to 
 those of the elders of Ephesus (Acts: XX, 28), showing 
 that he was the bishop of the church, while the others 
 w^ere only presbyters. 
 
 On the other hand, we affirm that a comparison of these 
 passages shows there was no essential distinction between 
 the powers and duties of the tw^o. The " angels " are 
 now^here called either " apostles " or " bishops," and no 
 evidence appears showing that the angel of the church 
 of Ephesus w^as anything different, officially, from the 
 angel of the Jewish synagogue, viz., the superintendent 
 of public w^orship in that church — in other words, the 
 pastor, or, in the Scripture sense, bishop."^' 
 
 * Note. — All this was thoroiighlj^ gone over by Smectymnus against Bishop 
 Hall, and nothing of any weight has been added to the controversy, on either 
 side, since. — Hunt i, 174. 
 
ORIGIN OF THE PASTORATE. 6S 
 
 SEC. XVII. — FIRST STAGE IN THE ]\IINISTRY OF ORDERS — 
 ORIGIN OF THE PASTORATE. 
 
 It has been already observed that the " ministry of 
 gifts " was superseded, as soon as practicable, by the 
 appointment of suitable persons to the work of teaching 
 and ruling in each congregation. A permanent ministry 
 was provided, who, not as the mere organs of the Holy 
 Spirit, but as suitably instructed and ordained officers, 
 should be charged with the instruction and pastoral care 
 of the flock. This consisted of a number of elders^ pro- 
 bably chosen by the people, and set apart by some apostle 
 or evangelist. These elders were charged, in common, 
 with -the entire spiritual interests of the flock. They all 
 might preach and administer ordinances, no one of them 
 being distinguished from the others as pastor. But this 
 arrangement soon led to difficulties and suggested a fur- 
 ther step in organization. St. Jerome, in commenting on 
 Titus : I, 0, 7, speaks of this as follows : " Idem est ergo 
 presbyter qui et episcopus ; et antequam diaholi instinctu 
 studia in religione fierent, et diceretur in populis ego snni 
 Pauli, ego Apollo, ego autem Cephce, coimnuni Preshytero- 
 rum concilio ecclesice guhernabantar. Postquam vero units- 
 quisque eos quos haptizaverat suos putahat esse, non Christi 
 discipulos, in toto orhe decretum est, ut iintLs de preshyteris 
 electus, superponentur coeteris, ad quern omnis eccleslm cura 
 pertineret, et schismatum semina tollerentury 
 
 The reference is plain to the condition of things in the 
 apostolic church. The converts gathered themselves in 
 groups, each around the particular elder who had bap- 
 tized them, and were inclined to magnify him, and depre- 
 ciate the others. The remedy was simple, and it was 
 wisely and timely applied. It was to select from the 
 body of the elders in each church one who was bestqual- 
 
64 THE MINISTRY OF ORDERS. 
 
 ified, and set him over the others, with the exclusive 
 right of receiving new members by baptism, and taking 
 the oversight of the flock — that is, he became the pas- 
 tor, or, as he came to be called distinctively, the " bishop.'' 
 The other elders limited themselves to the work of 
 exhortation and government, and were called distinct- 
 ively " presbuteroi." A little later, it came also to be 
 the exclusive right of the bishop to take p.nrt in the ordi- 
 nation of other bishops ; but, on the other hand, the eld- 
 ers had still the right of administering the Lord's Supper. 
 Before the close of the Apostolic Period then, probably, 
 the ministry of gifts had entirely passed away, and each 
 church was provided with a bod}- of elders, of whom one 
 w^as the episcopos or pastor. 
 
 SEC. XVIII. — SECOND STAGE IX THE MINISTRY OF 
 ORDERS — ORIGIN OF THE EPISCOPATE. 
 
 It has been already shown that, according to the apos- 
 tolic and primitive idea, all the believers in a place com- 
 posed the church of that place, and this without regard to 
 the size of the place or the number of believers. At 
 first, the church and the congregation in each city were the 
 same ; but, with the increase of believers, it soon became 
 necessary, especially in large towns, to distribute the 
 churchy for the purposes of ordinary worship, into differ- 
 ent congregations. Tliis introduced a new element into 
 the question. The disciples in Home, e. g., all composed 
 the one cliurcli of Konie For one church there needed but 
 one bishop. This came very early to be the fixed under- 
 standing: every church must have a bishop, and no 
 church could have more than one bishop. But each dis- 
 tinct congregation needed its own teacher and pastor. 
 This need was met hy ^\\])^\\\\.\\\g the i^reshyters ii^^^2>UyvSj 
 
ORIGIN OF THE EPISCOPATE. OO 
 
 in succession, over new congregations, as they arose. As 
 soon as it came about, therefore, that there were two or 
 ten distinct congregations in the one church of Eome, 
 there was, of necessity, a system of Episcopacy. Each 
 separate society was grouped around its presbyter, and 
 all the societies, with their presbyters, were grouped 
 around the one bishop. These presbyters were merely 
 local teachers or pastors. To the bishop it was reserved 
 to baptize all converts, to administer the Lord's Supper 
 (personally, or by the hands of a presbyter acting in his 
 name), to exercise discipline and to perpetuate the minis- 
 try by ordination. 
 
 Of the process by which this development was brought 
 about, it is true we have no contemporaneous descrip- 
 tion. The period of 150 years following the death of 
 the Apostle Paul is one of the obscurest in all church 
 history. Almost all reliable monuments of it have per- 
 ished. After the close of the inspired canon, we have 
 only the crude and corrupted writings of the apostolic 
 fathers and fragments of early apologies. Nothing 
 remains illustrating the church constitution in this period, 
 except the Ignatian epistles. In 150 years great changes 
 in society may take place ; and in times of simplicity 
 and confidence within the church, and of disturbance and 
 persecution loithout^ might take place unobserved or unre- 
 corded. 
 
 The result was that Episcopacy gradually and natu- 
 rally grew up out of these two principles. 1. That all 
 the Christians in a city constitute the church in that city. 
 2. That every church must have one bishop, and but 
 one. We find the system well established as early as 
 A. D. 250, in the great cities of Eome, Carthage and 
 Alexandria, where we know the one church was distrib- 
 
OG MINISTHV OF UKJ>EKS. 
 
 uted into numerous oongregations, and we have no knowl- 
 edge of it, at that time, anywhere else. Its extension 
 into the rural districts was a work of time, and went on 
 through the fourth and fifth centuries. The final result 
 was, that the system of the capital was extended so as to 
 embrace the adjacent churches. The country bishops 
 (chor-bishops) — i. e., the pastors of congregations, who 
 still retained the name and prerogatives of bishops, were 
 suppressed, and presbyters, subject to the city bishop, or 
 "metropolitan," intruded in their room. Ecclesiastical 
 geography shows that, in the fifth century, there were 
 great numbers of bishops whose diocese was only a small 
 town or village ; and early church canons even provide 
 for the election of a bishop having full Episcopal po'wers, 
 whenever twelve families would unite to sustain public 
 worship.^^ 
 
 SEC. XIX. — MINISTKY OF ORDERS —SECOND CLASS — 
 DEACONS. 
 
 The existence in the temple service of the Levites and 
 nethinims might naturally suggest the appointment of a 
 class of officials, in the church, who, though not strictly 
 " hewers of wood,'' &c., should devote themselves to the 
 secular concerns of the flock. In the synagogue, also, 
 there were the parnasim, whose business was to distribute 
 alms, &c. A demand for such a class would arise almost 
 at once, in the fact of poor, widowed and infirm disciples, 
 whose wants appealed to the Christian spirit of sympathy 
 and brotherhood. It is y)robaV)le, therefore, from the very 
 
 • * We equally hold that every church must have a bishop ; but this church, with 
 UP, is the local congregation of believers, of which there may be many in a city, 
 and, therefore, many bishoi)s. If there is a spot anywhere where there is but a 
 single Christian society, with its pastor, tliere is an Episcopacy precisely the 
 same as that of the most primitive church. 
 
SECOND CLASS — L>EACOXS. 0< 
 
 fbijiidiug of tlie cliiircli in Jcrasalem, there was an order 
 of ministers {d:ayjr^<rjz) on whom that charge was devolved. 
 These would also as naturally be Hebrews or home Jews. 
 It has been common to find the first appointment of 
 deacons in the transaction recorded Acts : vi, i ; but the 
 circumstances indicate that this was rather an increase of 
 a body already existing. It was the Hellenists who 
 complained of being neglected, and tlie seven chosen 
 appear from their names to have been all Hellenists, 
 except Parmenas who was a Gentile proselyte. It may, 
 therefore, seem probable that there was already in the 
 church in Jerusalem a body of seven Hebrew deacons ; 
 seven others were added — six for the Hellenist con- 
 verts, and one for the much smaller body of Gentile con- 
 verts. These are not, indeed, called deacons ; but the 
 nature of their functions shows that they filled the 
 same office to w^hicli the Apostle Paul applies that name. 
 His Epistle to the Philippians is addressed to the saints, 
 with the bishops and deacons ; and in 1 Tim. : iii, he 
 lays down particularly the qualifications for the deacon- 
 ship. , This list and the account in Acts : vi, show^ plainly 
 that the deacons were not a 'preaching order. They must 
 be '•' men of honest report, full of the Holj^ Ghost autl of 
 wisdom." (Acts : yi, 3). Being concerned with pecun- 
 iary trusts, it was necessary they should be men of repu- 
 tation for honesty ; having the difficult and delicate task 
 of distributino- the church funds amonu;- various and 
 somewhat jealous claimants, they must be men of wis- 
 dom ; ^ and having a laborious and self-sacrificing work 
 to perform, they must be men whose zeal and devotion 
 would sustain them in it — '"full of the JIolij GJiost''^ 
 
 * A member of the commit toe emploj'ed to distribute aid among the siiflerers 
 after the great fire in Pittsburg (1875 ?) observed, that he had never been engaged 
 in so difficult, laborious and unthankful a work. 
 
58 ]\1TNISTKY OF OKDKRS. 
 
 But not a word is said of any gift specially required in 
 the work of preaching tlie Gospel. So, in 1 Tim. : iir, 
 Paul requires that deacons should have prudence, gravity, 
 exemi'lary character and soundness in the faith — such 
 qualities as a Christian man of business, charged with 
 pecuniar}" trusts, ought to have — but nothing suggesting 
 the idea of the deaconship being a spiritual or didactic 
 office. On the other hand, this is implied in every men- 
 tion of the eldership. They w'ere to feed the flock of 
 God (Acts : xx, 28) ; to be " apt to teach " (1 Tim. : iii^ 
 2) ; to ''be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and 
 to convince the gainsayers (Titus: I, 9). 
 
 It was expressly that they might serve tables, and thus 
 leave the apostles free for the work of pi-eaching the Gos- 
 pel, that the seven w^ere appointed. 
 
 The fact that in the Epistle to Titus no mention is 
 made of deacons may suggest the doubt whether this 
 office belongs essentially to the constitution of the Chris- 
 tian Church, or whether, as the history in Acts: VI, would 
 seem to imply, it is a discretionary^ arrangement, depend- 
 ing on the exigencies of each particular church. But 
 this is at least plain, that wherever there is a call for dea- 
 cons, it is w^ith a view to the care of the poor and other 
 appropriate temporalities. 
 
 In the Episcopal Church, the deaconship is a preach- 
 ing office, and constitutes the third grade in their " three- 
 fold winistry " In support of this, it is said, that some 
 of the seven deacons preached, as Stephen and Philip. 
 But of Stephen it is only related that he disputed with 
 the Jews (Acts : vi, 8). It was only such Christian 
 argument and effort as was the duty of all believers. 
 All the disciples preached in this sense. Acts: viii, 4 ; 
 "Therefore, they that were scattered abroad" — i. e., the 
 
SECOND CLASS — DEACONS. 59 
 
 whole cliurcli of Jerusalem — '" went everywhere, preach- 
 ing the Woniy 
 
 As for Philip, who did preach and baptize (Acts: Yiii, 
 5, 08), we are expressly informed that he was an evange- 
 list (Acts : XXI, 8j, having, perhaps, been raised to this 
 office from his possessing greater gifts for usefulness than 
 were required in the deaconship. 
 
 Notwithstanding the claim above referred to, the office 
 of deacon, in the Anglican and Episcopal Churches, is 
 of no further importance than "as it serves as a kind of 
 probation for the priesthood. The Episcopal deacon is 
 merely a licentiate, who is permitted to preach and bap- 
 tize. All graduates of Episcopal Seijiinaries are imme- 
 diately ordained deacons, and none remain longer in the 
 office than until they are called to some congregation.'^'^ 
 Prof Jacobs observes, p. 60 : " The deacon seldom 
 retains his office for more than one 3'ear, regarding it as 
 a mere stepping-stone to the higher order ; and thus the 
 deaconate is stripped of its distinctive character and ren- 
 dered almost useless in our church." In the Episcopal 
 " Church Congress " (New York, Oct. 7, 1874), Eev. E. C. 
 Porter observed, that " some other Protestant Churches 
 have retained in fact, as well as in name, the deaconate^ 
 of which loe have the name^ but hardly anything more." 
 
 SEC. XX. — OFFICE OF RULING ELDER — ITS WARRANT. 
 
 Since the time of John Calvin, the doctrine has pre- 
 vailed in all Presbyterian Churches, that while there are 
 only two orders in the ministry, viz., elders and deacons, 
 the eldership exists in two forms, that of the teaching and 
 that of the riding elder. The Scripture evidence in sup- 
 
 *The ruloric, at the end of the oflace for "the ordering of deacons," directs, 
 that " the deacon must continue in that office for the space of a whole year, except, 
 for reasonable causes, it shall otherwise seem good unto the bishop." 
 
00 OFFICE OF Kl'LlNG ELDEK. 
 
 port of tliis is found in the fact of a plurality of elders 
 in each church, and the distinction tlie apostle secrns to 
 draw bet^veen the elders who rakd well and tiie elders who 
 labored in ivord and doctrine. (1 ^Fim. : V, 17.) 
 
 That some such distinction must have existed appears 
 from what has already been shown of the development 
 of the ministry of orders. As soon as one of the elders 
 in each church became the episcopos or teaching elder, 
 and had the exclusive right of baptizing and presiding 
 over the church, the others became, distinctively, ruling 
 elders, being confined to acting with and under him in 
 the pastoral care of the flock. But this was only a tran- 
 sient stage in the growth of the church constitution, since 
 each elder soon became the pastor of a separate flock. _ 
 
 Without claiming any divine right, or express Scrip- 
 ture warrant, for a ruling eldership, sufficient justifica- 
 tion for it is found in the importance (recognized by all 
 Protestant bodies) of having in each church a certain 
 number of judicious and responsible men to advise with 
 the pastor in regard to all the interests of the flock. 
 Whether they are called a consistory, or standing com- 
 mittee, or vestry, or class leaders, or elders, is immaterial. 
 Their object and duties are in all cases essentially the same. 
 
 The Presbyterian Church has retained the Scripture 
 title of ''elders.'' The 5orm of Government, chap, v, 
 says : " Ruling elders are properly the representatives 
 of the people, chosen by them for the purpose of exer- 
 cising government and discipline in conjunction with the 
 pastor. This office has been understood by a great por- 
 tion of the Protestant ' Peformed ' Churches to be- desig- 
 nated in the Scriptures, by the title of ' governments. 
 
 'J 
 
 ♦But note that ''governments" were only a " charism," not part of the min- 
 istry of orders. 
 
ITS WARKAXT. 61 
 
 (1 Cor. : XII, 28), and of those luiio rule laell, but do not 
 labor in word and doctrine." (1 Tim. : V, 17.) 
 
 Ruling elders are spiritual officers of the church, 
 belonging to the same order with teaching elders and of 
 equal authority, but ordained especial!}^ to the work of 
 ruling and not teaching. The teaching elder is also a 
 ruling elder, but not vice versa, since he takes part in all 
 acts of government, discipline, &c., while the ruling elder 
 does not officially teach. Ruling elders are declared to 
 be the "representatives of the people." But since, 
 according to the constitution and the heretofore prevail- 
 ing usage in the church, they are chosen: for lifo^ their 
 representative character is imperfect. The theory of a 
 representative system requires that the power delegated 
 to rulers shall return often enough to the people to ena- 
 ble them to give a fair expression of their own sentiments. 
 Representatives chosen for life are as inconsistent with 
 this theory in the church, as they would be in the state. 
 But this usage does not belong to the essence, nor to 
 the early history of Presbyterianism. • The Church of 
 Geneva, organized by Calvin himself, had a changeable or 
 " rotary " eldership. The Churches of France and Hol- 
 land adopted the same rule, and also the Scottish Kirk, 
 as organized by John Knox. This is also the practice of 
 the " Reformed " (Dutch) Church in this country ; and, 
 notwithstanding the provisions of the constitution (Form 
 of Gov. : XIII, 6, 7), had come to prevail extensively in 
 our churches. By the General Assembly of 1875, the 
 changeable eldership was expressly authorized, but with 
 the unfortunate incumbrance of retaining the indelible 
 character of ordination. 
 
62 HISTORICAL JUSTIFICATION 
 
 SEC. XXL —HISTORICAL JUSTIFICATION OF EPISCOPACY. 
 
 It has been shown already that Episcopacy sprung up 
 in post-apostolic times, through the operation of two 
 principles ; 1. The Scriptural principle, that all the 
 believers in a place constitute the church in that place'; 
 2. The imscriptural rule, that one church can have only 
 one bishop ; whereas, since the Scriptural bishop was 
 only the pastor of a single congregation, there should 
 have been as many bishops in a city as there were con- 
 gregations. So long as the disciples in Eome composed 
 but one congregation, they needed but one bishop. 
 When it became necessary to divide the church into two 
 congregations, the second should also have had a bishop 
 as its pastor — the independent and equal fellow laborer 
 of the first bishop. There should then have been as 
 many bishops in a city as there were congregations, just 
 as now in the Presbyterian Church, where every pastor 
 is an independent " bishop." This was prevented by the 
 silent but rapid growing up of the idea that there could 
 be but one bishop to a city — that is, to a church — be 
 the same larger or smaller. Under this principle, as 
 already explained, Episcopacy naturally and spontane- 
 ously came to exist, as soon as the church in any place 
 was divided into two or more cono-resfations. 
 
 This at once introduced a hierarchy, with all its subse- 
 quent evils. But in the primitive church, and during the 
 early infancy and struggles of Christianity, it may be 
 admitted to have been a salutary, as it was a necessary 
 development. Close uniti/ among the feeble and perse- 
 cuted disciples was then a matter of vital necessity. 
 Having no precedents, constitution, nor creeds, outside 
 the Scriptures — • the canon of Scripture itself, indeed, 
 being not j^et settled — they might be in danger of 
 
OF EPISCOPACY. 63 
 
 diverging widely from each other at the very outset. To 
 uphold the faith in its integrity, to enforce discipline, to 
 maintain harmony of rites and worship, it was necessary 
 that the church should be strictly one. The disciples, at 
 that time, having no competency for confederation, self- 
 government, or Presbyterianism, unity was best secured 
 by regarding all the Christians in a place as making up 
 the church in that place, and, no matter into how manv 
 congregations divided, all subject to one bishop. This 
 would go far to prevent those dangerous rivalries and 
 schisms, which the existence of a number of independent 
 bishops in a place might have occasioned, and, in fact, 
 did prevent them, until the church had well nigh passed 
 through the critical period of her early struggles. Then, 
 the exaggeration of this simple Episcopacy into a domin- 
 eering hierarchy led to those attempts at resistance on 
 the part of the presbyters, which have been already 
 noticed as the schisms at Carthage and at Rome. An 
 Episcopacy which had recognized itself as only an 
 arrangement of expediency, for the maintenance of unity 
 in the churches, and had forborne all pretensions to any 
 exclusive divine right to ordain and govern, might have 
 continued to be a wise and safe constitution. 
 
 SEC. XXII. — SPHERE OF WOMAN" IN THE APOSTOLIC 
 CHUECH. 
 
 As much as woman was raised by the Hebrew laws 
 and customs above her place in heathen societ}^, so much 
 was the Christian woman elevated above the Jewess. 
 Although there were a few cases of Jewish women occu- 
 pying public positions, as Deborah, Huldah, &c., jei no 
 woman was permitted to take any part in the temple or 
 the synagogue service. But in the birth and in all the 
 
1)4 SPIIKKE OF WO:\TAN 
 
 ])ahlic mini.stry of Jesus, distinguislied honor was put on 
 the female sex ; and in the rirst meeting of Christ's disci- 
 ples after His ascension (Acts : I, 14). women were pres- 
 ent, as well as men. In the Acts mention is, from time 
 to time, made of female disciples, as Dorcas and Rhoda ; 
 and the first convert made in Europe was a woman 
 (Lydia. Act^= : XVI, 14). 
 
 Female disciples shared in the " ministry of gifts," as 
 appears from the case of Philip's daughters (Acts: xxi, 
 9j, and the women in the Corinthian Church, who prayed 
 and prophesied (1 Cor. : XI, 5). When the ministry of 
 gifts gave place to the ministry of orders, room was also 
 found for the activities of ^voman. The customs of the 
 Levant not allowing free social intercourse between the 
 sexes, it was necessary to provide a class of female church 
 ofhcers, wdio could visit, without restraint, in the liornes 
 of the disciples, for the purposes of instruction, comfort 
 and discipline. Intimations of such a class are found in 
 the apostolic writings. Phebe was a servant {dtaxw^o^J) of 
 the church in Cenchrea (Rom. : xvi, 1). Priscilla wjis a 
 " helper " of Paul (Rom. : xvi, 8). The " elder women " 
 are spoken of in such a way (Titus : ii, 3) as to suggest 
 that they v^eve female elders {-petTiSuTtdsc). In 1 Tim. : ill, 
 this class of disciples is described as ^^ widows.'' For 
 those of them who were entirely destitute ("widows in- 
 deed "), provision was made from the church fond, which 
 was supplied by weekly or monthly contributions. Their 
 names were enrolled on a list (1 Tim. : V, 9) ; they 
 assumed some pledge or vow to remain single (1 Tim. : 
 V, 12), and were set apart to Christian labors, as sisters 
 of mercy, or deaconesses (1 Tim. : V, 10). At first, no 
 limit was set to the age of these deaconesses. Some 
 vounix women assumed the vo\\t; but instances occurred 
 
IN THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 65 
 
 in which they proved false to it, exhibited levity of con- 
 duct, and incurred the censure of the churchy for having 
 "cast off their first fliith (1 Tim. : y, 12) — i. e.. violated 
 their initiatory vow. Another inconvenience was, that 
 these young widows, in gadding about {-spt epyun^^ai) the 
 houses of their district, became mere tattlers and gossips, 
 "speaking things which they ought not." 
 
 These abuses seem to have led the apostle to direct 
 that no widow should subsequently be taken on the list 
 under sixty years of age, and wd:io was not already prac- 
 ticed in works of Christian charity. The younger wid- 
 ows he advises to marry, and devote themselves to rais- 
 ing up families, and other domestic employments (1 Tim. : 
 V, 14). Wido^vvs who were dependent on any believer, 
 whether man or woman, were to be cared for by them, 
 so that the church should not be burdened. ( Yide Con. 
 and How. on 1 Tim. : v, 16.) 
 
 Note Respecting Widows. — It may excite surprise 
 that loidows seem to ha\ie been so numerous in the apos- 
 tolic churches. This is probably explained by tlie pre- 
 vailing customs in regard to divorce. Although iMlycj- 
 amy (strictly so called) did not prevail in the Eoman 
 Empire, yet the liberty of divorce was such, tliat many 
 men had successively married and repudiated two, or 
 even six or more wives. These divorced wives were the 
 "widows" of living husbands {yjipa.'. — deserted and 
 afflicted persons), and had a just claim upon them for 
 support; and when such a polygamist was converted, 
 the church expected him to provide for them. (1 Tim. : 
 V, 16.) Under the Christian law, he could only live 
 with one as his wife; the rest w^ere his "wudows," until, 
 as advised by the apostle, they contracted a new^ and law- 
 ful marriage. Were a Mormon " elder " converted, there 
 
66 SPHERE OF woman; 
 
 would be a number of such " widows '' in his family, oil 
 of whom would have a moral claim upon him for sup- 
 port, while only one could be his wife. The " ividoios 
 indeecV (1 Tim. : Y, 3) may be such as had actually lost 
 their husbands by death, and had no one to look to for 
 support. These were to be " honored " — i. e., provided 
 with a maintenance by being taken on the church list, 
 and employed in charitable w^orks, as deaconesses. It 
 was required that the}^ should have been each " the wnfe 
 of one man " (1 Tim. : v, 9) — i. e., not women who had 
 been recklessly divorced and then unlawfully married 
 again. In the same manner, it was required (1 Tim. : ill, 
 2) that " a bishop should be the husband of one wife " — 
 that is, one who had not been guilty of unlawful divorces, 
 which left more than one woman with moral claims upon 
 him as her husband. A bishop must, in this respect, he 
 blameless. (See Con. and How., ii, 452, note.) 
 
 The activities of the " church widows " w^ere to be 
 exclusively private or domestic. . On the ground of that 
 inferiority implied in the fact that woman was created 
 second and sinned first, Paul forbids that she should 
 teach or usurp authority (such as teaching implies) over 
 man. (1 Tim. : li, 12.) If it is said that w^oman may 
 not teaclt, indeed, but may, in public, exhovi^ relate expe- 
 rience, &c., w^e observe, that Paul further (1 Cor. : xiv, 
 34) requires women to keep absolute silence in the 
 churches. If it is still said that woman may, indeed, be 
 bound to keep silence in the public assemblies, but may 
 take part in social religious worship, we reply, that the 
 "churches" {ey./lyjffiat) referred to by Paul were such 
 small neighborhood meetings as could find place in the 
 rooms {dixooq) of private houses. (See No. 2 ; note. ) If 
 
PRESBYTERIAN CONSTITUTION. 67 
 
 ^ht not teach or speak in these social meetings, 
 much less might thej in large assemblies. 
 
 SEC. XXIII. — CONSTITUTION OF THE PKESBYTERIAN 
 CHURCH. 
 
 Presbyterianisrn is the government of the church by 
 teaching and ruling presbyters, acting in courts of review 
 and control. The lowest of these courts is composed of 
 the teaching and ruling presbyters of a particular church ; 
 the next, the presbyter}^, consists of the presbyters of a 
 number of local churches ; the synod is composed of sev- 
 eral presbyteries ; the fourth and highest is the general 
 assembly, composed of representatives from all the pres- 
 byteries. Each of these courts has jurisdiction over the 
 next lower. Presbyterianism affirms (Form of Grov., ch. 
 XII, note), " that the several different congregations of 
 believers, taken, collectively, constitute one Church of 
 Christ, called emphatically the church ; that a larger part 
 of the church, or a representative of it, should govern a 
 smaller ; that, in like manner, a representative of the 
 lohole should determine in regard to every part — that is, 
 that a viajority shall govern^ and, consequently, that 
 appeals may be carried from lower to higher judicatories, 
 till they be finally decided by the collected wisdom and 
 united voice of the whole church." 
 
 This sj'stem differs from Prelacy, on the one hand, 
 which devolves the government of the church wholly on 
 bishops, as a grade in the ministry superior, hj divine 
 right, to presbyters ; and from Independenc}^, on the 
 other, which assigns the government of the church 
 exclusivelv to the membership of each local cono-re^i^a- 
 tion. The former system denies the parity of the clergy ; 
 the latter, the unitv of the church. Presbvterianism 
 
66 PKLiDiiYTEKiAN CO^'STITL'TIOX. 
 
 alone, of all existing fonns of church government, is in 
 perfect harmony with the representative character of our 
 political S3^stem. It is ecclesiastical republicanism, while 
 all other systems tend either tow^ards a despotic centrali- 
 zation, or a loose democracy. Inasmuch as the Form 
 of Government, above quoted, speaks of "the several 
 different congregations of believers as making up one 
 Church of Christ, called emphatically the clmrchJ' &;c., it 
 might be inferred that Presbyterianism claims to be that 
 one true church, and requires to be exclusively recog- 
 nized as such. But the ^'■preliminary principles'' to the 
 Form of Grovernment expressly recognize the right of 
 '' every other church, or association of particular 
 churches," to settle their form of polity and terms of 
 comm'iunion for themselves, and recommends all such to 
 exercise mutual forbearance towards each other. The 
 Presbvterian system, is no doubt set forth as most in liar, 
 monv with the Scriptures;* but no hint is given of any 
 wish to obtrude it upon others, or to deny that their 
 churches are also true Churches (jf Christ. How great 
 should be the geographical area, or how extensive the 
 organization of " the church^'' in its Presbyterian form, is 
 nowhere suggested, that point being left to be decided by 
 providential events. A limit is necessarily imposed by 
 the conditions of hunian nature and society. No denom- 
 ination can be universal ; but all true Christians should 
 recognize their essential Mxniy ^ under albtheir circumstan- 
 tial diversities, and confess that they make but a part of 
 the one universal Church of Christ. 
 
 * It must seem pingular th.it the " Prcsliyterian Church "has entirely waived 
 the title of " preshyter" for its ministry, and also the title of elder, except for its 
 ruling eldership. The Form of Government, ch. rv, note, i-ecomiuends the title 
 of ''■ '■bishop'' as one peculiarly osprcssive of the pa&tor's duty ap an (ycermer o^ 
 the flock, and one under which the ufiicf and character of the Goi^pcl minister ii? 
 fuliy described.'" 
 
ADVANTAGES OF PRESBYTERTANISM. 69 
 
 SEC. XXIV. — ADVANTAGES OF PRESBYTERIANIS.M OVER 
 INDEPENDENCY. . 
 
 The essential principle of Independency is, that there 
 is no other church than the local Christian society, and 
 that each society possesses, exclusively, all church power 
 necessary to the well being of the body, including ordi- 
 nation, government and discipline — i. e., it denies, m 
 terras^ the existence of an}^ visible church, catholic or 
 denominational. There is no churchy but only churches. 
 According to this disintegrating theory, the pastor is a 
 member of his own or some other local church ; disci- 
 pline is administered by the whole bod}' of the brother- 
 hood, and no appeal lies from their decisions to any other 
 churcli or body of churches. The defects of this system 
 are such that it is found impossible, in practice, to limit 
 it to the demands of the theory. A church cannot live 
 as a mere ecclesiastical atom, v^ithout support, direction 
 and restraint by other churches. Independency, there- 
 fore, has relinquished the right of ordination b}^ the par- 
 ticular church, a.nd has relegated this work to an asso- 
 ciation of pastors. Instead of conducting discipline by 
 the whole brotherhood, it, sometimes at least, devolves 
 this work on a standing committee. It provides for 
 organization by associations of pastors, by consociation 
 of churches, and by national and state conventions. All 
 these are declared, by Congregational authorities, to be 
 " gross departures from the principles of the system, and 
 only ' Presbyterianism in disguise ' '" (Sawj^er). Even as 
 thus modified, Congregationalism, having no written con- 
 stitution, and no system of appeals, presents but a feeble 
 safeguard for the rights of church mem.bers, for the main- 
 tenance of truth, or the enforcement of discipline. The 
 
(0 NATURE AND METHOD 
 
 attempt to realize the iimti/ of the church, contrar}^ to its 
 own fundamental principles, and secure efficiency of 
 action by borrowing features from another system, is a 
 confession of its own error and feebleness. 
 
 Presbyterianism, on the other hand, contains within 
 itself all the elements necessary to the most efficient 
 working of the sj^stem. It confesses the unity of the 
 church," and gives expression to it by an organization 
 which binds the parts, from a church session to the Gen- 
 eral Assembly, into a living whole. Instead of having 
 the entire brotherhood agitated with each case of disci- 
 pline, it is managed by a small number of discreet and 
 judicious persons, who are usually able, without public- 
 itv, to heal differences and prevent scandal. In case of 
 wrong in judgment, or error in doctrine, an appeal lies 
 to the representatives of a number of churches — a pres- 
 bytery ; then to a still higher court — a synod ; and, 
 finallv, if necessary, to the represented wisdom of the 
 whole church ; it being a fundamental principle of pres- 
 bytery, as of our national government, that the people, 
 by the voice of their representatives, shall decide in all 
 cases, under a constitution. No system can be devised 
 better fitted to maintain truth, defend character and enforce 
 righteous discipline than this.f 
 
 SEC. XXV. — NATURE AND METHOD OF ORDINATION. 
 
 Ordination, which is induction to the office of the 
 Christian ministry, is performed by the laying on of the 
 hands of the presbytery, according to Scripture example. 
 It is immaterial whether all the presbytery lay on hands, 
 
 *in Acts, IX, 31 : '• T/ien had the churches rest througliout allJudea, Galilee and 
 Samaria, and were edified'' &c. The Sinaitic, Vatican and Alexandrian MSS. 
 read : '" 2'Iccn had tue church rest, and was edifuid,'" ic. 
 
 tSee Appendix G. 
 
OF ORDINTATION. < 1 
 
 or only one or more, by tlie authority of tlie whole body. 
 The effect of ordination is not to impart to the subject 
 any " special grace^^ or to impress on him any mysterious 
 and indelible " character of office," but only to bestow 
 on him, by the authority of the church, aforraal commis- 
 sion for the work of the ministry. It is on this ground, 
 that ordinations in the Episcopal Church may be regarded 
 as valid, viz. : not that the bishop has any divine right 
 to act, or any apostolic grace to bestow, more than any 
 other minister, but that he is authorized by the church 
 he serves to commission others to preach the Grospel, and 
 that the ordinations are really by the hands of a pres- 
 bytery.- 
 
 The word " ordain " is used in our version to represent 
 twelve. Greek verbs; but only two of them relate to the 
 ordination of Christian presb3'ters. They are y.aOia-r^iu. 
 meaning to appoint or constitute, and ytipnTO'^iio, to elect 
 or designate to office by laying on of hands. Neither of 
 these words suggests the idea of anything more than a 
 simple appointment to the work of the ministrj^ b}^ com- 
 petent authoritv (Jacobs, pp. 117, 118). Tliat ordination 
 confers any supernatural power or grace, or stairips any 
 "indelible character," is a superstitious idea, having no 
 warrant in Scripture. Ordination merely amounts to a 
 commission given by the church to a certain person to do 
 a certain work, and the commission is naturally revoca- 
 ble whenever the abilitj^ or disposition to do the work 
 ceases. Provision should, therefore, be made, under suit- 
 able cautions, for the demission of the ministry in such 
 cases. The false conception of ordination as "a sacra- 
 ment," impressing an ineffaceable character on the sub- 
 ject, and making him " once a minister^ always a minister^^ 
 
 * See Appendix K. 
 
72 thp: christian ministry 
 
 is burdensome, alike to many individual ministers and to 
 the churcli herself.^'* (Jacobs, p. 131.) 
 
 This dogma which we have inherited from the Church 
 of Eome, was rejected by leading English reformers. Dr. 
 Field, the friend of Richard Hooker, and highest Epis- 
 copal authority against the Church of Rome, teaches 
 that " ordination is merely for the sake of order." (" On 
 the church : " Hunt, I, 118.) The continental ordination 
 by presbyters, subserving this end, was, in his view, valid 
 ordination. 
 
 SEC. XXYI. — THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY NOT A 
 PRIESTHOOD. 
 
 In the Romish and Episcopal Churches, it is taught 
 that the Christian ministry is a ijriesthood ; and in the 
 former, universally, and by a party in the latter, it is 
 held that Christian worship includes what is correlative 
 to a priesthood, viz. : an altar, and the offering upon it 
 of a true and proper sacrifice for the sins of men. This 
 idea took possession of the Christian mind very early 
 and in the third century is found well developed. As 
 there was a priesthood under the Law, with sacrifices and 
 a hierarchy, it was inferred there must also be under the 
 Grospel. Analogy was drawn from the temple service in 
 favor of an altar, sacrificing priests, and a three-fold con- 
 stitution of the ministry. Of the Christian fathers, Igna- 
 tius, Tertullian and Cyprian were particularly influential 
 in encouraging this idea, and out of this grew the whole 
 sacerdotal system of the Church of Rome. The Chris- 
 tian presbyter became a sacerdos — a cep^uq ; the com- 
 munion table, an altar ; the devotional service, a mass ; 
 the bread and wine became the true body and blood of 
 
 ♦ See Appendix R. 
 
NOT A PRIESTHOOD. id 
 
 Christ, which was daily offered up to the Father for the 
 sins of the living and the dead. The result v^as that 
 cojnplete system of sacramentalism, which enslaves the 
 cluii-ch under the hands of the clergy ; substitutes a mag- 
 ical charm, or ojms ojjeratum, of baptism and the Lord's 
 Supper, for the exercise of the Christian affections ; and 
 resolves the whole Christian system into a law of works 
 and c.irnal ordinances. For all this there is no warrant 
 whatever in the Nev7 Testament. The Christian elder is 
 never called a priest ; nor is any analogy suggested 
 between the Levitical orders or service and the Christian 
 ministry or worship. Ko such analogy exists. On the 
 contrary, the resemblance is close between the order of 
 the svniigogue and that of the church ; and we have 
 alread}' seen that the constitution of the latter was organ- 
 ized on that of the former. This disagreement and 
 resemblance appears in the following particulars : 
 
 1. The names of the office-bearers in the church, before 
 the third centur}^, were those of the synagogue, not of 
 the temple. 
 
 2. 'The places of ivorsJiip : Only one temple, but many 
 sj^nagogues and churches. 
 
 3. No different degrees of sanctity in the synagogues, 
 or in the churches. 
 
 4. The services in the synagogne^ but not in tlie tem- 
 ple, corresponded with those of the Christian Churches. 
 
 5. Yestmenls were emiployed in the temple : not in 
 synagogues nor churches. 
 
 6. A hereditary priestly class in the temple ; none in 
 the synagogues or churches. 
 
 7. Service in tlie temple limited to a certain age ; not 
 so in the synagogues or churches. 
 
74 PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE 
 
 8. Bodily defects excluded from the temple service ; 
 not from the synagogues or churches. 
 
 9. "In the temple, there was no pulpit; in the syna- 
 gogues and churches, uo altar." 
 
 10. The temple priests were formally anointed and 
 consecrated ; nothing of this in the sjmagogues or 
 churches. 
 
 11. The Epistle to the Hebrews is an elaborate argu- 
 ment to prove that all sacrifices and priesthoods have 
 passed aw\ay, being summed up in those of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ. The only priests, under the New Testa- 
 ment, are the entire body of believers ; and the only sac- 
 rifices are spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise. The 
 sacerdotal and sacramental system, therefore, is an at- 
 tempt to vacate the sole priesthood of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and to impose on the church the yoke of the abro- 
 gated Judaism. (See Yitringa de Syn. Yet: quoted by 
 Jacobs, pp. 96-110.) 
 
 SEC. XXVII. — DOCTRINE OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 
 AS TO THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 The Presbyterian Church teaches that there are only 
 two sacraments of the Kew Testament — baptism and 
 the Lord's Supper ; that the latter is to be administered 
 to believers, and the former to believers and their chil- 
 dren. It holds that these sacraments do not infuse but 
 only signify and represent the grace of regeneration and 
 sanctification. They are only made eftectual to the 
 elect. " The efiicacy of baptism is not tied to that 
 moment of time wherein it is administered ; yet, not- 
 witiistanding, by the right use of tliis ordinance, the 
 grace promised is not only oifered, but really exhibited 
 and conferred by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of 
 
AS TO THE SACRAMENTS. (O 
 
 age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according 
 to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed tinier 
 (Conf. : xxviii, (i) 
 
 " Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visi- 
 ble elements in this sacrament (the Lord's Supper) do 
 then also inwardly, by faith, really and indeed, yet not 
 carnally and corporeally, but spiritually receive and feed 
 upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of His death ; 
 the body and blood of Clirist being then not corporeally 
 or carnally in, with, or under the bread and wine, yet as 
 really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers m 
 that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their 
 outward senses/' (Conf : xxix, 7.)" 
 
 These sacraments, therefore, are not effectual mechanic- 
 ally^ or by any ^' opus operatum^' of the ordinances them- 
 selves, but only by an opus operantis of the Holy Spirit 
 attending the administration. 
 
 Baptism is not a saving ordinance, nor is the defect of 
 baptism fatal to the soul, as held by Augustine and the 
 whole Komish Church. It has no effect to wash away 
 sin, either original or actual. The phrase '^ lu ashing of 
 regeneration " (Titus : III, 5), may be properly interpreted, 
 " that v^ ashing which signifies regeneration ; " and the pas- 
 sage (Acts : XXII. 16), " Arise^ and he baptized, and ivash 
 away thy sins'' is merely the language of Ananias, and 
 not, necessarily, to be understood as conveying Christian 
 doctrine. (Hodge, ill, 598.) There is no " transele- 
 mentation,'' or 'special sacredness in the water employed, 
 as there is no change whatever in the elements employed 
 in the Lord's Supper. 
 
 The Church of Kome and that portion of the Episco- 
 pal Church which sympathizes closely with it hold, that 
 
 * See Appendix Q. 
 
ib PiiliSBVTERlAN DOCTRINE 
 
 the sacraments, properly aclmirnstered in the church cath- 
 olic, are the certain and necessary channels of grace to 
 the soul. Baptism is in the strictest sense "regenera- 
 tion;" and justification is a progressive work, which is 
 carried on to the end of life, through union with tlie 
 church and partaking of her sacraments.* 
 
 These views made a part of that " sacramental system " 
 which so early invaded the Christian Church, and which 
 to so ofreat an extent identified the Christian life with a 
 round of external performances. It was repudiated by 
 the reformers in favor of a religion consisting of union 
 with the church catholic, orthodoxy, the personal exer- 
 cise of repentance towards God, and faith in the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, and the cultivation of all Christian virtues. 
 The reformers, indeed, often employed language properly 
 belonging to the sacramental system, particularly as to 
 the efficacy of baptism ; but the evangelical features of 
 the Calvinistic theology, which they adopted, steadily 
 overpowered the sacramental, and their characteristic 
 dogma became justification by faith, and not justification 
 by outward ordinances. 
 
 As early as Augustine, a tendency appeared to en- 
 large the number of the sacraments ; but it was not 
 until the twelfth century that they were definitely 
 fixed at iseven, viz. : Baptism, confirmation, the eucha- 
 rist, penance, matrimony, orders and extreme unction, 
 which are alleged to correspond to the seven necessi- 
 ties of man, viz. : Birth, growth, nourishment, healing, 
 the family, government, and death. Of these, matrimony 
 and orders are necessary for some, and the rest for all 
 believers. 
 
 *See Appendix L. 
 
AS TO IXFAXT :MEMBEKSHIP, < . 
 
 SEC. XXViri. — DOCTRTXE OF THE PRESBYTERIAX CHURCfl 
 AS TO IXFANT CHURCH :^EMBER3HIP. 
 
 The doctrine of the standards on this subject is, 
 "that the children of believing parents are members 
 bj birth of the church catholic, and are to be baptized in 
 recognition of that fact. Thej are also members by 
 birth of the particular church to which their parents 
 belong, and are under its watch and care." Thev are 
 thus '' young Christians." " They are to be instructed in 
 the Scriptures and the faith of the church.; and, on arriv- 
 ing at years of discretion, if thej^ are free from scandal, 
 appear sober and steady, and have sufficient knowledge 
 to discern the Lord's body, it is their duty and privilege 
 to come to the Lord's Supper." 
 
 " The years of discretion in young Christians cannot 
 be precisely fixed. Tliis must be left to the prudence of 
 the eldership. The officers of the church are the judges 
 of the qualifications of candidates for commAinion, and of 
 the time when it is proper to admit young Christians to 
 the Lord's table. Before being admitted, they shall 
 be examined as to their knowledge and piety." (Direc- 
 tory : IX, 1, 3.) 
 
 Baptized children, therefore, are " 3'oung Christians," 
 and members of the church. They do not need to ^^joia 
 the church " in maturer years, being already within it ; 
 but their coming to the table of the Lord is conditioned 
 on their " knowledge and piety." The sum of the knowl- 
 edge required is, that (having been taught the catechism, 
 the apostles' creed, and the Lord's prayer,) they can 
 " discern the Lord's body ;" (1 Cor : xi, 29,) that is, 
 can understand the nature of the ordinance as a Chris- 
 
l6 PRESBYTERIAN DOCTRINE 
 
 tian sacrament.^' The sum of the "i^z'e/^" required is 
 that they are " free from scandal, and appear sober and 
 steady." How far '• young Christians " possess these 
 qualifications, and also what is the "age of discretion " 
 in each instance, is " left to the prudence of the elder- 
 ship," and to be ascertained by examination. But none 
 are to be excluded from any supposed defect of a '• relig- 
 ious experience," or inability to give a histoj-y of their 
 conversion. Having the above-named qualifications, 
 and on the ground of these alone, '• it is their duty and 
 privilege to come to the Lord's table." The opinion of 
 the eldership that they are or are not '• regeneratecV^ has 
 nothing to do with the question. Nothing should forbid 
 a "young Christian'' to come to the Lord's table, which 
 would not equally exclude one already a communicant; 
 but no communicant is to be excluded from any mere 
 suspicion or belief that he is not truly "regenerated." 
 (See Hodge's Theology, part ill, ch. xx, sec. 11, 12.) 
 -The sacraments, though not the necessary or exclusive 
 channels for conveying gjace to the soul, are " means of 
 
 * That '■'■ discerning the Lord's body'''' does not mean having a true spiritual 
 experience, or being regenerated persons, appears: 1. Because this is evidently 
 not the meaning of the passage 1 Cor. : xi, 29. The sin of the 'orinthian 
 communicants was not that they were unregenerate, but that they attended on 
 the Lord's Supper in a riotous and profane manner, taking no concern to distin- 
 guish between it and a common feast. 2. This interpretation is inconsistent 
 with the language of the Directory, which nowhere maizes " regeneration " a con- 
 dition of con.ingto the Lord's Supper. "The profane, ignorant and scandalous, 
 and those that secretly indulge in any known sin," are not to come. Those are 
 invited, who, (1) being sensible of their lost and helplesiiistate by sin, f^opend on 
 the atonement of Chiist for pardon. (2) Those who desire to renounce their sins, 
 and are determined to lead a holy and Godly life. (3) Those who, being instructed 
 in the Gospel doctrine, have a competent knowledge to.discern the Lord's body." 
 (Directory, viii, 4.) It would be clearly absurd to interpret a " competent knowl- 
 edge to discern the Lord's body," as meaning a true inward religious experi- 
 ence. "Free from scandal, sober and steady, and axe truly regenerate]'''' The 
 latter requirement would make the others quite superfluous. In chap, ix, 1, the 
 language is, " sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's body." Clearly, it can- 
 not mean sufficient regeneration. 
 
AS TO IXFANT MEMBERSHIP. / 9 
 
 grace ;'' and persons receiving either tlie one or the other 
 of them while still unregenerate, may be brought by 
 means of them to a saving experience of the truth." 
 
 These same views of the relation of baptized children 
 to the church were afQrmed by the earliest New Eng- 
 land pilgrims. The Plvmoutli and Salem churches both 
 agreed " that the children of the faithful were church 
 members with their parents, and that their baptism was 
 a seal of their being so ; only before their admission to 
 fellowship in a particular church, it was judged neces- 
 sary that, being free from scandal, they should be exam- 
 ined by the elders of the church, upon whose approba- 
 tion of their fitness they should publicly and personally 
 own the covenant." (Magnalia, i, 67.) 
 
 " The ministration of the table should never be with- 
 out a sharp examination going before, chiefly of them 
 whose life, ignorance, or religion is suspected. Who 
 cannot say the Lord's prayer, the articles of the faith, 
 and the sum of the law, should not be admitted." (First 
 Book of Discipline of the Scottish Kirk, Art. xiii.) 
 
 SEC. XXX. — DOCTRINE OF THE FORM OF GOVERNiZENT IN 
 REGARD TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 The doctrine of the Presbyterian Church on this subject 
 is, that all church power is only ministerial and declara- 
 tive. The Holy Scriptures are the only rule of faith and 
 manners ; and no church judicatory ought to pretend to 
 make laws to bind the conscience by their own authority. 
 Their decisions should be founded on the revealed will 
 of God (Ch , I, 7). These principles require the closest 
 possible conformity to the Scripture platform of worship 
 and discipline, consistent with a due regard to the modi- 
 
 * See Appendix Q. 
 
6U DuCnUXE OF (lUVEHN-MiiXi iX liEiiAltD 
 
 fications imposed by changes of times and circumstances. 
 
 Tlie inspired writers have not gone into details on 
 these points. Public worship consists of prayer, praise, 
 reading the Scriptures, preaching, administering sacra-- 
 ments, &c. But the method of performing these ser- 
 vices, as, e. g.^ whether prayer should be free or liturgi- 
 cal, whether praise by the use of versified hymns and the 
 aid of instruments, the frequency and order of reading 
 -the Scriptures, the times and manner of administering 
 baptism and the Lord's Supper, preaching with or with- 
 out certain vestments, &c., these, and many other points 
 are left to the discretion of eacii church. If a church 
 ordain that the Lord's Supper shall be administered 
 once a month, or only once a year, and .shall be received 
 kneeling^ it merely exercises the right of expounding 
 Christ's laws. But if it ordain that the sacrament shall 
 be received only under one kind^ or that ministers shall 
 not marry ^ it usurps the power of making laws for the 
 church. 
 
 This principle allows to each church '' the rigiit of fix- 
 ing on its own terms of communion, and the qualifica- 
 tions of its ministers and members, as well as the whole 
 system of its internal government, which Christ hath 
 appointed," (Form of Gov. : I, 2,) and it requires the 
 members of each church to submit to the not unscrip- 
 tural laws and usages of that church. 
 
 To the same effect is the doctrine of the xxxrx arti- 
 cles. Art. 34. "Traditions and ceremonies have always 
 varied in the church, and may be changed according to 
 the diversity of countries, times, and men's manners, so 
 that nothing be ordained against God's word. Who- 
 ever, on the ground of his private judgment, shall vio- 
 late such ceremonies, ordained hy common authoi'ity 
 
TO THE AL'THOKITY OF THE UiirRCH. >>i 
 
 and not repugnant to tiie Word of God, ought to be 
 rebuked openly. Every particular or national church 
 hath authority to ordain, change and abolish rites of the 
 church, ordained only by man's authorit}', so that all 
 things be done to edifying." 
 
 In accordance with this is the argument of Richard 
 Hooker, in the 3d Book of his Eccles. Polity. Against 
 the Puritans, who held that nothing was allowable, either 
 in worship or discipline, for which a plain warrant could 
 not be found in Scripture, he argued that the Scripture 
 laws on these subjects are, of necessity, both general and 
 liable to modification ; that while the faith is one and 
 unchangeable, polity and ceremonies may be various, 
 according to the changing conditions of society ; and 
 that the ritual of the Anglican Church being only an 
 exposition of Christ's laws, requiring propriety and deco- 
 rum in worship, was binding on the conscience of all its 
 members. 
 
 This celebrated argument, therefore, did not proceed 
 on the claim of a divine right f^r Episcopacy, either as 
 respects its polity or its ritual ; but only on the right of 
 each church to provide for itself in these respects, in 
 accordance with the general principles, and not in contra- 
 diction to any express provision of the Word of God. 
 
 But Hooker maintained the right and duty of the civil 
 magistrate to enforce the decisions of the church, by pains 
 and penalties, against all dissenters. His work, there- 
 fore, embraces the detestable principle of religious perse- 
 cution. 
 
 SEC. XXXI. — DOCTRIXE OF THE DIRECTORY IX REGARD 
 TO PUBLIC PRAYER. 
 
 The Director}' for Worship (Ch., Y, 3) observes, that, 
 " although we do not approve, as is well known, of con- 
 
82 DOCTKINE OF THE DIRECTOKY IN 
 
 firdny ministers to set or fixed forms of prayer, yet it is 
 the indispensable duty uf every minister to prepare and 
 qualify himself for this part of his duty. He ought, by 
 a thorough acquaintance with- the Holy Scriptures, by 
 reading, the best writers on the subject, by meditation, 
 and by a life of communion with God in secret, to 
 acquire both the spirit and the gift of prayer. Not only 
 so, but when he is to enter on particular acts of worship, 
 he should endeavor to compose his spirit, and to digest 
 his thoughts for prayer, that it may be performed with 
 dignity and propriety, and that he maj^ not disgrace that 
 important service by mean, irregular, or extravagant 
 effusions." 
 
 But there is nothing in the constitution or the history 
 of the Presbyterian Church to forbid the use of a judi- 
 cious liturgy. The early Churches of Switzerland and 
 France performed public prayer in this mode, using a 
 service drawn up by John Calvin. The early Scottish 
 Kirk employed a liturgy prepared by John Knox."^ Kich- 
 ard Baxter prepared a liturgy to be used by the united 
 Presbyterians and Episcopalians of England. The 
 Eeformed (Dutch) Church has a full liturgy, which is 
 usually employed, however, only in the administration 
 of the sacraments. When, after the close of the Revo- 
 lutionary War (1787), the Presbyterian Church (like the 
 Episcopal) revised her standards, a committee composed of 
 four of the most eminent ministers of the church reported 
 to the Synod of New York and New Jersey a lull Form 
 of Prayer, covering all the parts of the service ; but this 
 did not secure the approval of the Synod. (See Eutaxia, p. 
 228. Life of Dr. Grreen, p. 184.) The Directory contains 
 ample instructions as to the mode in which prayei", read- 
 
 * See Appendix T. 
 
REGAKD TO PUBLIC FiiAYEK. 83 
 
 ing tlie Scripture, adininistration of the sacraments, mar- 
 riage, baptismal services, &c., are to be cond acted. ^^ 
 
 SEC. XXXII. — ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF 
 LITURGICAL PRAYER. 
 
 The practice of the Christian Church, universally, from 
 the 4th to the 16th century, and of a large proportion 
 even of the Protestant Churches since, has been, and is, to 
 conduct public prayer by means of prescribed forms. 
 Only the dissenters in England, the Presbyterians every- 
 where, and the Baptist, Methodist, and other non-prelati- 
 cal bodies in America, make use of free prayer. And 
 even the Methodists, the Reformed (Dutch), the German 
 Reformed and the Lutheran Churches make use, in part, 
 of a liturgy. It is especially characteristic of the Episco- 
 pal Church. In favor of this method is alleged : 
 
 1. The "propriety and dignity " with which praj'er is 
 performed by this mode. These are qualities not to be 
 undervalued, in the public worship of Cod. It is admit- 
 ted, that in free prayer, they may sometimes be lacking, 
 and that instead of them maybe found "mean, irregular 
 and extravagant effusions." Few ministers will care- 
 fully prepare themselves b}^ the methods recommended 
 for this part of the service. It is too often the case that 
 hesitation, repetitiousness, infelicities of expression, mea- 
 greness of thought, lack of Scriptural phraseology, a 
 rhetorical and declamatory style, the omission of appro- 
 priate topics, excessive length, etc., make non-liturgical 
 prayers unedifying.f 
 
 * See Appendix L. 
 
 t " The essentially intellectual character of an extemporaneous composition, 
 spoken to the Creator with the consciousness that many of His creatures are lis 
 tening, to criticise or to admire, is the great argument for set forms of prayer." 
 (The Guardian Angel, by O. W. Holmes, p. 119.) 
 
84: ADVANTAGES ANL> DISADVANTAGES 
 
 A Liturgy, on the other hand, is drawn from the whole 
 liturgical wealth of the church ; from the prayers of the 
 earl}^ fathers and later divines ; from the works of the 
 best devotional wa'iters, etc., in a dignified and Scrip- 
 tural stjde, and with the use of the best and most impor- 
 tant topics. 
 
 2. It is claimed there is an advantage in the worship- 
 er's being familiar w^ith the succession and routine of the 
 prayers. The Presbj^terian, in church, is entirely depend- 
 ent on the discretion of the officiating minister. He does 
 not know, from one sentence to another, what objects he 
 is to be called to pray for; and he can pray for no 
 object, however important, (as, e. ^., for rulers,) which 
 the minister does not introduce. On the other hand, the 
 worshiper with a liturgy knows in advance what are the 
 petitions in which he is to join, and can conform his sen- 
 timents to them. 
 
 8. There is an influence favorable to Christian unity 
 and sympathy in having all the parts of the church join 
 in the same prayer, at the same time. The whole church, 
 throughout a kingdom or a continent, is pouring forth 
 the voice of worship at once, in the same confessions, 
 petitions and thanksgivings. This nurses a feeling of 
 Christian fellowship, and makes the liturgy, which is the 
 means of it, very dear to the heart. 
 
 4. The use of a hook may be favorable to concentra- 
 tion of mind in prayer. 
 
 5. The spoken Amen ! is an impressive and Scri23tural 
 form of assent to the prayer, by the people." 
 
 Against these advantages may be set off, 
 
 * In answer to an overture in regard to responsive and ritualistic services, the 
 General Assembly, of 1874, replied, that " the practice of responsive service in the 
 public worship of the sanctuary is without warrant in the New Testament, and 
 is unwise and impolitic, in view of its inevitable tendency to destroy uniform- 
 ity in our mode of worship !" 
 
OF LITURGICAL PRAYER. bO 
 
 1. The want of adaptation, in a liturgj: to the vary- 
 ing wants and circumstances of a congregation. Events 
 often occur calling for joarticular notice in prayer. The 
 condition of the local church and of the church at large 
 varies. This objection might be obviated bj occasional 
 revisions of the prayer book, and especially by leaving 
 a part of the service for free prayer, as formerly prac- 
 ticed in the English Church. 
 
 2. The tendency to formalism, which is inseparable 
 from any rigid and unvarying liturgy. The forms come 
 to be regarded as of the essence of the worship, and are 
 held in superstitious veneration. Their use dries up the 
 facility of devotional expression, and becomes the sub- 
 stitute for social and even for personal prayer. Liturgi- 
 cal churches have no prayer meetings. 
 
 3. The use of a liturgy tends to ultra-conservatism, 
 and a looking to the past for the ideal condition of the 
 church. Liturgists are prone to consider their own forms 
 as absolutely perfect, and to discard the thought of any 
 improvement oi! the wisdom of their compilers. This 
 paralizes a church's energies, makes her narrow and 
 illiberal, and reduces her efficiency in every department 
 of active Christian work. 
 
 4. A rigid liturgy interferes with the communion of 
 saints, and forbids co-operation among Christian Churches. 
 
 A judicious liturgy, drawn from the best sources, lia- 
 ble to occasional amendment, and leaving part of the ser- 
 vice for free prayer, might be an imj^rovement on any 
 existing method of conducting public devotion. 
 
 SEC. XXXIIL — HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF COMMON 
 PRAYER. 
 
 Upon the accession of Edward YI, (1547) and under 
 the influence of Arch-bishop Cranmer, the Eeformation 
 
86 HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF 
 
 ill England came forth into recognized existence, and 
 measures were at once taken to divest public worship of 
 the more offensive features of Eomanism. The English 
 clergy had all, of course, received their ordination as 
 Komish priests, and most of them still clung to the old 
 superstitions. The Parliament, the young and pious 
 sovereign, his uncle the Earl of Hertford, (the regent) 
 and Cranmer, were zealous for reformation. Intimate 
 relations were maintained with continental reformers, 
 several of whom, as Peter Martyr, Bucer, and Calvin 
 himself, were invited to aid in Protestantizing the Eng- 
 lish Church. In 1548 all popish rites and shows were 
 forbidden, and images removed from the churches. The 
 first book of common prayer was drawn up by a com- 
 mittee of the leading divines of the kingdom. It w^as 
 founded on the Eomish missals, or prayer books, of 
 Sarum, York, Hereford and Bangor, leaving out the 
 most objectionable features, but retaining the vestments, 
 the altar, the cross in baptism, prayer for the dead, etc. 
 Zealous individual reformers, as Eidley and Latimer, 
 went further in their own dioceses, removing the altar, 
 discarding the vestments, etc. ; and, in 1552, shortly 
 before the king's death, a second book of prayer was 
 issued, by royal authority, embodying these and various 
 other improvements, and leaving the Church of England 
 reformed to a degree satisfactory to the best continental 
 Protestants. Calvin thought the service still contained 
 certain " tolerabiles ineptias." Cranmer, and Parker, 
 his successor in the See of Canterbury, though preferring 
 Episcopacy, fully recognized the validity of Presbyterian 
 ordinations, and corresponded with Calvin with a view 
 of uniting all the Keformed Churches in one commun- 
 ion. This was to be on the basis of a compromise which 
 
COMMON PRAYER. 87 
 
 retained Episcopac}', but discarded everjtliing in it that 
 was objectionable in the continental churches. This plan 
 failed from the death of Calviuj in 1561. (Hunt's Hist. : 
 I, 41.) 
 
 On the accession of Qaeen Elizabeth, the prayer book 
 was brought back again to the standard of Edward YIth's, 
 first book ; the images were replaced in the churches ; 
 the old Eomish ceremonies restored, and the prayer 
 against the " Bishop of Eome and his detestable enormi- 
 ties " struck out. The policy of the queen was to con- 
 ciliate her Romish subjects, who were a formidable party, 
 at the expense of the Paritans, whom she particularly 
 disliked, though the latter were quiet and loyal subjects, 
 while the former never ceased plotting against her throne 
 and life. So thinsjs remained throus^h her reisrn, and 
 those of James and Charles I. 
 
 On the restoration of monarchy (1661) a conference 
 (" Savoy Conference ") was held by royal authority, 
 between a body of Episcopal and Presbyterian divines, at 
 which the latter consented to accept the book of common 
 prayer, with certain amendments, as respects vestments, 
 signing with the cross, pronouncing the absolution, the 
 baptismal and burial service, &c. These being rejected. 
 Mr. Baxter proposed his '' Eeform^ed Liturgy," which was 
 also refused. The Episcopal hierarchy, triumphant and 
 vindictive, showed no disposition to accommodate the 
 Presbj^terians, who had aided so influentially in restoring 
 monarchy and prelacy. Instead of yielding to any de- 
 mands in the direction of liberality, they made the service 
 more rigid than before, introducing' some changes ex- 
 pressly to disown Presbyterian views. During the time 
 of the commonwealth, great numbers of the parish 
 priests had been displaced, as ignorant and scandalous, or 
 
88 BOOK OF COM.^LON PRAYEK. 
 
 seditions ; earnest and devout ministers, mostly Episco- 
 pal by ordination, though Presbyterian in sentiment, had 
 taken their places. These were now required to sub- 
 scribe to the act of uniformity ; submit, if they had been 
 ordained by presbyters, to re-ordination, and confess the 
 unlawfulness of their previous conduct. This led to the 
 ''Black Bartholomew" {24 of Aug., 1662), when 2,000 
 such ministers quitted their livings in a body. 
 
 Immediately after the English Kevolution of 1688, an 
 attempt was made, with the sanction of King William 
 and under the guidance of the liberal Arch-bishop Til- 
 lotson, at such modifications of the prayer book as would 
 result in reconciling all dissenters to the Established 
 Church. Through the bigotry of the high cliurch 
 clergy, this also failed, and no attempt has since been 
 made to amend the liturgy. After the establishment of 
 American Independence, some slight changes, adapted to 
 the changed political condition, were made. The Atha- 
 nasian creed, against the strenuous opposition of Bishop 
 Seaburj', but in accordance with the wish of the devout 
 and charitable Bishop White, was dropped. Other 
 changes have been urgently pressed by the low church - 
 party, but have only been obtained by the secession 
 under Bishop Cummins, 1878."^ 
 
 * It has been repeatedlj- said, and even by some recent Episcopal writers of high 
 standing, who cannot have taken the trouble to refer to Calvin's writings them- 
 8elves,'.that the Genevan reformer preferred the system of government by bish- 
 ops, and would gladly have secured the succession from the Anglican Episcopate 
 for his own church, if possible. The statement must appear essentially ludicrous 
 to all persons, even moderately versed in the history of the Reformation, and is 
 at once disproved by reading, in its full connection, the paseage relied on in 
 proof. It is found In the treatise, De nececsitate reformandce ecclesice, addressed 
 to the Emperor and the Catholic Princes, as an apology for the Reformation. It 
 is occupied exclusively with the argument against the Church of Rome, not even 
 making an allusion to the Episcopacy of the English Church. " Our adversaries 
 allege," he says, " that all heresy and schis-m result from neglecting to go back 
 to the source of truth, and seek instruction from the divinely ordained head* 
 
PEESBYTERIAN ORDINATIONS. bU 
 
 SEC. XXXIV. — DEDUCTION OF PRESBYTERIAN ORDI- 
 NATIONS IN AMERICA. 
 
 The existing body of Presbyterian ministers in Amer- 
 ica, derive -their ordinations from the Anglican Chnrch, 
 through three separate lines : 
 
 1. Through the Puritans of New England. — These 
 consisted of Non-conformist members of the English 
 Church, who fled to this country to escape the persecu- 
 tion of the bishops. The first colonists brought no min- 
 ister with them, the Kev. Mr. Eobinson having elected 
 to stay with that portion of the flock which remained in 
 Holland. But, in 1629, three English clergym.en arrived 
 in New England, viz. : Eev. Kalph Sm^ith, at Plymouth, 
 and Eev. Messrs. Higginson and Shelton, at Salem. In 
 the course of a few years, more than seventy other Non- 
 conformist English clergy came over. Ail these had 
 received their own ordination at the hands of .English 
 Bishops; but, agreeably to" the Presbyterian principles 
 
 Talem nobis exhibeant hierarchiam. &c. ; let them show us a hierarchy in which 
 the bishops shall so rule as to recognize, at the same time, their subjection to 
 Christ ; shall depend on Him as their only Head, and derive from Him all their 
 authority ; shall cherish between themselves fraternal concord, and be bound 
 together by no other tie than holding the truth in common ; then, indeed, I will 
 confess that those who would not reverently submit to it, would deserve any 
 anathema whatever. But this fraudulent sham of a hierarchy, rhey make so much 
 of, in what single feature does it resemble a genuine Episcopacy ? The Bishop of 
 Eome, governing without law, like a tyrant, yea, with a more reckless license 
 than any tyrant, holds the headship. The rest of the ecclesiastical body is fash- 
 ioned after his style, and not after the model of Christ," &c. The spirit of the 
 whole passage is, that if the Pope and the Eomish Bishops had been humble, 
 devout, Christian men, holding the truth, and watching over the flock in the 
 spirit of the Great Bishop and Shepherd of souls, the Reformation would have 
 been unjustifiable, and the Protestants inexcusable schismatics. On that absurd 
 supposition, we may easily aflirm the same thing. As Calvin here denies that the 
 existence of a true church depends on its union with the Church of Rome, so he 
 elsewhere, particularly in his Vera ecclesm reformandce ratio discards emphati- 
 cally the idea that it depends'on the ministry or on an apostolic succession. The 
 church is perpetuated all the same, he says, however the succession of bishops 
 may be broken. 
 
90 -DEDUCTION OF PRESBYTERIAN 
 
 they bad adopted, they felt no liesitation in perpetuating 
 the ministr}' ia America without the aid of bishops. 
 These English presbyters had, probably, been ordained 
 in the early part of the centurj^ ; and, therefore, any 
 American minister who could trace back through New 
 England the line of ordinations ending in himself, would 
 find it ran into the English Episcopate, somewhere from 
 1600 to 1680. 
 
 2. Through the Presbyterians of the commonwealth. — 
 Up to the year 1648, though many of the English clergy 
 were of Presbyterian sentiments, there had been no ordi- 
 nations in England except by the hands of bishops. On 
 the 5th of November of that year, (the civil war then 
 raging, and Long Parliament being in session,) Episco- 
 pacy was abolished, by concurrent action of the Lords 
 and Commons. The bishops all ranged themselves on 
 the side of the king. The universities were closed. 
 Manv of the clergy deserted their parishes, and joined 
 the royal army. No candidates for the ministry came 
 forward. The consequence was, that many of the par- 
 ishes were soon left without clergy ; and of the parish 
 ministers who remained, many were worse than none, 
 beino- io-norant and scandalous in life, and equally zeal- 
 ous for the king, and against the liberties of the people, 
 with the others. Under these circumstances, the parlia- 
 ment directed the Westminster Assembly to consider 
 and report on the validity of ordination without bishops. 
 After full discussion, they reported in ftxvor of Presbyte- 
 rian ordination. Thereupon, a committee was appointed 
 of twenty-three presbyters, to examine and ordain candi- 
 dates for the ministry. All persons ordained by them, 
 or a quorum of them, (7) were to be reputed ministers, in 
 full standi no- of the " Church of England." These twen- 
 
ORDIXATIOXS IN AMERICA. 91 
 
 tj-three ordaining presbyters had themselves been regu- 
 larly ordained by bishops. It is at this point, therefore, 
 that Presbyterian ordinations began in England. The 
 succession was preserved, was transmitted to this coun- 
 try, and has been perpetuated ever since. Any Presby- 
 terian minister who could trace his " ecclesiastical pedi- 
 gree " back through this line, would find it running into 
 the English Episcopate somewhere from 1620 to 1640 — 
 that is, in the persons of the bishops who ordained any 
 of these twenty three ordainers. 
 
 3. Through the Scotch-Irish presbyters. — Protest- 
 antism gained almost no footing in Ireland, until 
 near the end of the 16th century. To prevent its 
 introduction from Scotland, a law was passed in the 
 third year of Philip and Mary, (1556) forbidding the 
 Scotch to settle in Ireland, or to intermarry with the 
 natives. This law remained in force throughout the 
 reign of Elizabeth, and was only repealed in 1607. The 
 Scotch Presbyterians then began to settle in the north of 
 Ireland. At the same time the Xon-conformist ministers 
 of London (who were Presbyterian in principle) engaged 
 zealously in the work of missions among the Irish 
 Papists. Many of the English Puritans took refuge in 
 Ireland, and founded colonies, such as Londonderry and 
 Enniskillen. Episcopacy, though long before estab- 
 lished there, had but few adherents. The primate of 
 Ireland was Dr. James Usher, distinguished for his 
 learning and piety, and the highly liberal character of his 
 views on church government (Died, 1656.) The Scotch 
 ministers who came into the north of Ireland were zealous 
 Presbyterians, and unwilling, of course, to consent to 
 Episcopal ordination. Through the ^visdom of Arch- 
 bishop Usher a "plan of comprehension "' was adopted. 
 
92 DEDUCTION OF PRESBYTERIAN 
 
 by which the Presbyterian clergy became incorporated 
 into the Establishment, ordination being performed by 
 the bishop and the presbytery together. Presbyterian 
 ministers thus ordained, and refusing to use the liturgy, 
 held livings, notwithstanding, in the Church of Ireland, 
 and sat in convocation with the Episcopal clergy. A 
 confession of faith was adopted, (drawn by Dr. Usher) 
 embodying the rigid Calvinistic views of the English 
 Puritans, (the nine Lambeth Articles of 1595) both with 
 respect to doctrine and the church These articles 
 expressly recognized the ministry of every Christian 
 Church, and made no mention of bishops or an apostoli- 
 cal succession. (]N'eal, i, 262. Articles, p. 448.) 
 
 During the commonwealth. Episcopacy was abolished 
 in Ireland, as in England. The bishops ceased to exer- 
 cise their functions, and ordination passed wholly into 
 the hands of the presbyteries. On the restoration of 
 monarchy, (1661) Episcopacy was restored. Those min- 
 isters who had been ordained by presbyters were required 
 to be re-ordained by bishops, but without condemning 
 their previous ordination as invalid. (Neal, il, 285.) 
 The reason given was the requirements of the English 
 canonical law. With this understanding, many of the 
 Presbyterian clergy consented to re-ordination, and con- 
 tinued to hold livings in the Irish Church. 
 
 Others began to turn their eyes to America, and it 
 was at this time that the earliest Irish Presbyterian min- 
 isters came over. The first Presbyterian Church in 
 America was established at Kehoboth, in Maryland, in 
 1682, by Rev. Francis Mc Kemie, a member of the Lagan 
 Presbytery, in Ireland. The first presbytery in America 
 (Phil., 1705) was half composed of Scotch-Irish Presby- 
 terian ministers. 
 
ORDINATIONS IN AMERICA. 93 
 
 Now, any Presbyterian minister who could trace back 
 his line of ordination through these Scotch-Irish presby- 
 ters in this country, and their predecessors in Ireland 
 during the commonwealth, would probabl}^ come in con- 
 tact with an Episcopal bishop some time during the 
 reign of Charles I, or, say from 1625 to 1645. 
 
 This deduction of Presbj^terian ordinations is given, 
 not because any consequence whatever is attached to it 
 as affecting their validity, but simply as a matter of his- 
 torical interest. 
 
 SEC. XXXY. — ORGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 The Pomish hierarchy consists of the pope, claiming 
 to be the vicar of Christ on earth, and a body of bishops, 
 priests and deacons, who derive their authority to min- 
 ister in the church from the pope. 
 
 The claims of the pope to govern the whole church 
 rest on two assumptions : (1) That Peter was prince of 
 the apostles, and head of the church. (2) That Peter 
 was the first bishop of Pome, and bequeathed his power 
 to his successors. In support of the first assumption, it 
 is said : 
 
 a. That in all the enumerations of the apostles, Peter 
 is mentioned first, as, Mat. : x, 2 ; " ISTow, the names of 
 the twelve apostles are these : The first, Simon, who is 
 also called Peter." Mark : i, 36 ; " Simon, and they that 
 were with him." Acts : ii, 14; ''Peter standing up with 
 the eleven." 
 
 h. Christ declared that he would build His church on 
 Peter, and give him the keys of the kingdom of heaven. 
 (Mat. : XVI, 18.) 
 
 c. Christ taught out of Peter's ship. (Luke : V, 3.) 
 Ordered the same tribute to be paid for himself and for 
 
94: ORGANIZATION OF THE 
 
 Peter, (^fat. : xvii, 2.) Prayed particularly for Peter, 
 that bis faith should not fail. (Luke : xxii, 32.) 
 
 d. Christ committed the care of his whole church to 
 Peter, saying, " Feed my sheep. Feed my lambs." (John : 
 XXI, 15.) 
 
 To this (admitting that Peter was the most for- 
 ward and fluent of the twelve, and generally their spokes- 
 man) we reply : 
 
 e. That Christ expressly forbade any gradation of rank 
 among tlie twelve. " One is your master, even Christ, 
 and all ye are brethren." (Mat. : 23-8.) 
 
 / The twelve knew nothing of any primacy in Peter. 
 The dispute, who shoiild be greatest, arose after the 
 alleged appointment of Peter as their prince. (Mat. : 
 XVI, 18.) 
 
 g. Paul declared that he was fully equal to Peter — 
 " in nothing behind the very chiefest apostles," (2 Cor. : 
 XII, 11,) and rebuked him to the face. (Gral. : II, 11.) 
 
 h. Peter had no idea of his own supremacy, nor ever 
 claimed any. 
 
 i Christ's words to Peter, " Feed ray sheep," etc., instead 
 of being his commission to rule over the whole church, 
 were merely an assurance that he was not put out of the 
 ministry for his sin, but might continue, being penitent, 
 to exercise the office of a pastor. 
 
 k. Christ's Church was not to be built upon Peter, but 
 upon the truth, wdiich Peter had confessed, viz., the 
 divine mission of Jesus as Messiah {iizt rdbrrj rrj Tzirpa. 
 Mat. : XVI, 18.) There is a true sense, however, in 
 which the church was built upon Peter, viz., that he laid 
 th.e foundations of it as an organized society, by receiv- 
 ing the first Jewish and the first Gentile converts to 
 membership. (Acts: X[, 37, x, 41.) 
 
CHURCH OF ROME. 95 
 
 I. The power of the keys was assigned to all the apos- 
 tles, as much as to Peter. (Mat. : xviii, 18.) 
 
 In support of the second assumption, viz., that Peter 
 was bishop of Eome, it is said : 
 
 a. Peter wrote his 1st Epistle from Rome. 1 Peter : 
 V, 13 ; " The church that is at Babylon," etc. Where the 
 name of the metropolis of eastern Paganism is transferred 
 to the metropolis of western Paganism, Babylon being 
 the symbolic name for any great persecuting power. 
 (See Rev. xiv, 8.) 
 
 h. Reliable tradition testifies that Peter was first bishop 
 of Antioch, and then for twenty-five years bishop of 
 Rome, where he suffered martyrdom, A. D. 67. To this, 
 it is replied : 
 
 c. There is no evidence that Babylon, in 1 Peter : v, 
 13, is used symbolically for Rome. Peter's mission was 
 to the Jews, of whom a large body dwelt in Mesopota- 
 mia, the region of which Babylon had formerly been the 
 capital ; and though no city of that name then existed, 
 others occupied the same general site. It is unlikely 
 that, in sending a fraternal salutation, Peter should dis- 
 guise the name of the church he represents under a sym- 
 bolical alias. 
 
 d. The evidence that Peter was bishop of Rome is 
 wholly worthless. No allusion to Peter occurs in the 
 Epistle to the Romans, nor in the history of Paul's 
 imprisonment at Rome. Therefore, he could riot have 
 been in Rome previous to A. D. 63. No writer of the 
 first three centuries refers to any such thing. Irenieus 
 speaks of the Church of Rome having been founded by 
 Peter and Paul, which, as respects the latter, at least, we 
 know was false. Eusebius (A. D. 325) (deriving his 
 authoritv from the Pseudo-Clementine Recos^nitions — 
 
96 PROCESS OF ORGANIZING 
 
 a heretical romance of tlie latter part of the 2d century,) 
 relates that Peter visited Rome in the reign of Claudius, 
 (41-5-i) and founded the church there. Jerome (A. D. 
 400) is the first to speak of his having been bishop of 
 that city. A well-supported tradition, however, given 
 by Clemens Rom., Irenseus and Tertullian, testifies to his 
 having suffered martyrdom at Rome. 
 
 e. The idea of any one of the apostles being bishop of 
 a city is inconsistent with the character of their office, 
 which was that of traveling missionaries, staying in any 
 one place only long enough to plant the church, and 
 provide for its training by a suitable native ministry. 
 
 The conclusion is, that the pretensions of the bishop 
 of Rome are an imposture, without either Scriptural or 
 historical evidence. 
 
 SEC. XXXVI. — PROCESS OF ORGANIZING A PARTICULAR 
 CHURCH. 
 
 Ministers are often called, in our newer states and ter- 
 ritories, to organize Presbyterian Churches. The 
 method to be pursued is this : 
 
 1. In ordinary cases, application should be made to 
 the proper presbytery for the appointment of a commit- 
 tee for this purpose. But any evangelist or pastor may 
 organize a church, on his own responsibility. 
 
 2. At the time fixed, the minister or committee should 
 receive the letters of those prepared to join on certifi- 
 cate, and then receive on examination any others, bap- 
 tizing such as had not been baptized in infancy. 
 
 rJ. Those thus prepared to unite should then agree to 
 walk together in a church relation, by giving their assent 
 to the articles of the Christian faith, expressed in a com- 
 pendious manner, and agreeing to a form of covenant. 
 
A PARTICULAR CHURCH. 97 
 
 after which thev should join in celebrating the Lord's 
 Supper. 
 
 4. The next step is the election and ordination of 
 elders and deacons, according to the provisions in ch. 
 XIII. of Form' of Government. Members of the congre- 
 gation, as well as of the chnrch, may, if so agreed, vote 
 in such election. (Digest, p. 51.) The election should 
 be for a limited term. The office of ruling elder is per- 
 petual, but the period of service depends on the choice 
 of each congregation. (See Overture to Presbyteries, 
 Min. of Gen'l A^ssembly, 1874, p. 61.) 
 
 5. The proceedings should then be reported to the 
 presbytery, at its next meeting, with the request that the 
 Church be taken under its care. According to article 
 second of the platform for the reunion of the Presbyte- 
 lian Church, as well as according to the dictates of expe- 
 diency, no new^ church is to be organized on the accom- 
 modation-plan. (See New Digest, p. 53.) 
 
i^pi^E^Dix: 
 
^FF^ENDIX. 
 
 THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION — CONSECRATION OF PARKER. 
 
 At the accession of Queen Elizabeth, in November, 
 1558, there were only fourteen bishops left in England — 
 all Catholics ; thirteen of them refused to take the oath 
 of supremacy, and were ejected from their dioceses, or 
 " deprived.'' The fourteentli, Anthony Kitchin, Bishop 
 of Landaff, thoui^h still remain ino^ in the Romish com- 
 munion, took the oath of supremacy, and was allowed to 
 keep his bishoprick. There was no arch-bishop in 
 England, Cardinal Pole, Arch-bishop of Cantei-bury, 
 having died the same day v/ith Queen Mary — Novem- 
 ber 17th, 1558. Three of the old titulaj- bisho}^s of 
 Edward YIth's time, were still living, but out of office, 
 having been '■ deprived " by Queen Mary. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth was extremely anxious to restore a 
 regular Episcopate for the English Church ; she fixed on 
 Matthew Parker, who had been chaplain of her mother 
 (Anne Boleyn), for Arch-bishop of Canterbury. After 
 long resistance on his part, he consented to accept the 
 office, and was elected by the Dean and Chapter, August 
 1st, 1559. The queen then issued, September yth, her 
 mandate to six bishops, to confirm the election and con- 
 
102 THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION. 
 
 secrate the arch-bishop elect. Four of them were Roman 
 Catholics and refused to act; the other two, Barlow, 
 formerly Bishop of Bath, and Scorey, ex-Bishop of Chi- 
 chester (both deprived under Queen Mary), were insuffi- 
 cient to act alone, and the proposed consecration failed. 
 On the 6th of December, 1559, a second mandate was 
 addressed to Kitchin, Barlow, Scorey, Coverdale ex- 
 Bishop of Exeter, two suffragans, and an Irish Bishop, 
 (Bale) to proceed with the consecration. On the 17th of 
 December, four of them, viz., Barlow, Scorey and Cover- 
 dale (all " deprived " under Queen Mary, and not yet 
 restored), and one of the suffragans (John Hodgskins, 
 suffragan of Bedford), performed the consecration. From 
 Parker were derived all the subsequent consecrations of 
 bishops in the Church of England, and so of America. 
 The validity of this transaction is, therefore, in the Epis- 
 copal view of the matter, a question of supreme import- 
 ance. That Parker was, by a valid and canonical conse- 
 cration, made arch-bishop, may be easily admitted as 
 probable; but in a case on which such momentous con- 
 sequences are made to hang, not prohahility, but positive 
 demonstration is justly required, and demonstration, as 
 appears from the following particulars, is signally want- 
 ing : 
 
 . 1. The four consecrators were extremely doubtful of 
 their right to act, and only did so after having obtained 
 an opinion from several lawj-ers that they were compe- 
 tent. This would seem insufficient warrant for the per- 
 formance of an act which is essential, as is held, to the 
 perfection of the apostolic succession. 
 
 2. Almost from the time of tlie consecration of Parker, 
 its validity was publicly denied, and the evidence to 
 warrant it called for in vain. It was denied that any 
 
COKSECKATION OF PAKKER. 108 
 
 such consecration ever took place ; and, if it did, it was 
 affirmed that, tor several reasons, the act was latally 
 defective. 
 
 8. This was so generally the impression that, eight 
 years after, viz., in 1566, the parliament thought it nec- 
 essary to declare the act to have been valid, all errors 
 and informalities to the contrary, notwithstanding. But 
 if the act was ecclesiastically invalid, no retrospective act 
 of parliament could remedy the fatal defect. 
 
 4. The evidence alleged for the consecration of Parker, 
 on the 17th of December, 1559, was Parker's own " reg- 
 ister^ This was never produced till 1618, more than 
 fifty years later. It was then hastily shown to certain 
 Komish priests, to silence their objections ; when they 
 desired the opportunity for a second and more deliberate 
 examination, it was refused. 
 
 5. The record of Parker's consecration contained in 
 this register differed so strangely from the ordinary form 
 of such documents, as to throw great suspicion upon it. 
 Both Eomish and Presb}' terian writers charged that it 
 was -a palpable forgery. 
 
 6. Admitting, however, that a form of consecration 
 for Arch-bishop Parker was actually gone through with, 
 on the I7th of December, 1559, there is great reason to 
 doubt whether it supplied the necessary conditions for 
 the transmission of an "apostolic succession,'' in the 
 Episcopal sense. The only consecrator- was Barlow, 
 ex-Bishop of Bath and Wells, who had been '' deprived " 
 under Queen Mary. Scorey, Coverdale and Hodgskins 
 were only ^^ assistants.''^ Now there is great room for 
 doubt, whether Barlow himself had ever been conse- 
 crated. No record of it could ever be produced, though 
 repeatedly challenged. He was elected Bishop of St. 
 
104 THE ORDINATION 
 
 Asaph's, in 1535, bat resigned before consecration. He 
 was, in 1548, made Bishop of Bath and Wells ; and it 
 would seem very likely that his previous ^^consecration " 
 was taken for granted, and nothing said about it. His 
 own frequently expressed opinion was, that '■^consecra- 
 tion " was wholly unnecessary, so that it would have occa- 
 sioned him no trouble to accept the See of Bath and 
 Wells without any such formality. But, if Barlow had 
 never been consecrated, he was entirely incompetent to 
 impart Episcopal grace to Parker. 
 
 This brief and imperfect analysis of the argument in 
 the case shows, that however probable the consecration of 
 Parker, on the 17th of December, 1559, may be, the evi- 
 dence falls entirely short of that demonstration we have 
 a rio'ht to demand. 
 
 B 
 
 THE ORDINATION OF TIMOTHY. 
 
 The whole case of Timothy's ordination is as follows : 
 Timothy was set apart to his office, it is admitted, by 
 the joint action of Paul and a presbytery ; but, it is 
 claimed, that the whole authority to ordain resided in 
 Paul, and that the elders merely laid on hands to signify 
 their concurrence. In support of this, it has been usual 
 to laj^ great stress on the distinction between the two 
 prepositions dia and ii—a. 2 Tim. : I, 6 ; " Stir up the 
 gift of God which is in thee, by the putting on of my 
 hands " — dia rr^q e-cOrjffscb:; xrX. 1 Tim. : IV, 14 ; " which 
 was given thee by prophecy, WITH the laying on of the 
 hands of the presbytery " — //.era -r^? e-tO-qatio^ y-X ; '^ <5£a," 
 it is said, impl34ng efficient action, wlii*le "/Jtsra" merely 
 signifies concurrence. 
 To this we reply : 
 
OF TIMOTHY. 105 
 
 1. That this distinction is unsupported bj grammat- 
 ical usage — the two prepositions being often used inter- 
 changeably. Thus, Acts : XV, 4 ; " Tliey related ichat 
 things God had done ivitli them " (.asr ab-chv) ; compare with 
 Acts: XV, 12 ; " what signs and wonders Godliad wrought 
 among the Gentiles BY them " {dl adzaju) ; so, also, in the 
 vulgate, " cum " and "^;er" ; the same transaction being 
 referred to in both cases. This presents a precise parallel 
 to 1 Tim. : IV, 14, and 2 Tim. : i, 6. 
 
 2. The ordaining body was a presbytery or body of 
 elders, of whom Paul made one, and all took part in 
 conferring the ofiice. It is claimed that this was Timo- 
 thy's consecration as apostle or bishop. In that case, 
 according to Episcopal canons, mere elders had no right 
 to take any part in the transaction, even to express con- 
 currence. At the ordination of a presbyter by the bishop, 
 other presbyters do lay on hands for that purpose. 
 
 To evade this difficulty, it is claimed, that all this pres- 
 bytery consisted of apostles^ since the apostles were also 
 elders. This is a mere assumption, with no shadow of 
 evidence. " Presbj- tery " means'a body of presb3^ters or 
 elders. Where one apostle is expressly mentioned, and 
 those acting with him are distinguished as the presbytery^ 
 the inference is plain, that the}^ were not "apostles.'' If 
 it were related that a certain military operation was con- 
 ducted b}^ a " sergeant and ten soldiers,'' though it is a 
 fact that a sergeant is a soldier, the inference would be 
 clear that the ten others were not sergeants. 
 
 If this ground be taken, moreover, and it is the only 
 alternative to acknowledging an ordination by presbyters, 
 then the distinction so much insisted on between dia and 
 iiera must be given up, since the gift^ on that supposition, 
 
lOH THE OHDINATIOX 
 
 was conferred no more by the bands of Paul, than by 
 those of the other apostles. 
 
 It is sometimes said, this was Timothj-'s ordination, 
 NOT 1)1/ the preshytenj but to the preshyterate ("Neglect not 
 the oliice of the presb3'terate, which was given thee by 
 the laying on of hands." 1 Tim. : iv, 14), and for this 
 reading, Calvin's authority is quoted. (Inst. : IV, ill, 16.) 
 
 We reply, that on the ground of this ordination, Tim- 
 othy is directed to do all those acts which are claimed to 
 belong exclusively to the Episcopal office, viz., to ordain, 
 to govern and to discipline, as appears in the Epistles, 
 passim. This evasion, therefore, being obviously fatal to 
 the claims of the Prelacy, is seldom insisted on. In his 
 later and better considered Commentary on the Epistles 
 to Timothy, Calvin rejects this interpretation. 
 
 The whole difficulty, then, attending the Episcopal 
 theory of this transaction, may be summed up thus : 
 
 i. If it is said this was Timothy's. ordination as^res- 
 hyter, he is I'equired, on the ground of it (for no other 
 ordination or consecration is pretended), to perform 
 "Episcopal " acts. 
 
 2. That if it was his consecration as bishop, presbyters 
 took part in it, which would be wholly inadmissible. 
 According to church canons and the Episcopal prayer 
 book, three bishops are required to consecrate a bishop. 
 Presbyters can have no hand in the service. 
 
 3. That the only escape from these difficulties is the 
 gratuitous supposition that all the " presbytery," who 
 took part with Paul, may also have been apostles ; in 
 which case, the favorite distinction between dia^ as signi- 
 fying efficient mediura^ and //sra, as signifying only con- 
 currence, must be abandoned. 
 
 The conclusion is, that Timothy was ordained as a 
 
OF TOIOTKY. 107 
 
 presbyter or elder, by Paul and a number of presbyters, 
 with a special commission as an evangelist — a traveling 
 assistant to the apostles. He was sent from place to 
 place, as the needs of the churches required. By Paul's 
 direction, he remained some time at Ephesus, which 
 occasioned the fable that he was bishop of that city. 
 But the Epistle to the Ephesians (A. D. 61-68) makes 
 no mention of him or an}^ other person as bishop ; and 
 in Paul's address to the Elders of Ephesus (A. D. 6S\ 
 he commits to them, collectively, as hishoj^ts, the entire 
 spiritual oversight of the flock. (Acts : xx, 28.) 
 
 Prof Jacobs thinks the ^^gift'^ conferred on Timothy 
 was a supernatural yapiaim^ and that this could be con- 
 ferred only by an apostle : but there is no allusion in the 
 history of Timothy to his possessing any yapiG>jAxa ; 
 neither would elders have taken any part in conferrino* 
 such supernatural endowments upon him. " Grift " here 
 means simply office. (Jacobs, p. 118.) The yapioim-a^ 
 as has been already seen, were z^/iofficial gifts, conferred 
 miscellaneously on the disciples. This was a formal des- 
 ignation of Timothy to the work of an evangelist. 
 
 c 
 
 EISE OF NON-CONFORMITY IN ENGLAND. 
 
 The Eeformation in England, being conducted by the 
 government, and largely on political considerations, pro- 
 ceeded on the principle of changing existing usat^es as 
 little as possible. The authority of the pope was re- 
 nounced, the monasteries suppressed, and Cranmer's 
 Bible published with the royal sanction. The king 
 became head of the Church of England. This was the 
 only change during the reign of Henry VIII. Most 
 
108 RISE OF NON-CONFOKMITY IN ENGLAND. 
 
 Romish doctrines and ceremonies remained in force, 
 under the penalties of the "Six Bloody Articles." 
 
 On the accession of Edward YI. (1547), the Eeforma- 
 tion was further advanced by abolishing the mass, remov- 
 ing images from the churches, and requiring the com- 
 munion to be administered under both kinds. A book 
 of homilies, consisting of twelve discourses on points of 
 Christian faith and morals, was published for the use of 
 the clergy ; and the liturgy was compiled from four Rom- 
 ish mass books. In almost everything else, the former 
 rites and usages remained unchanged. An act of parlia- 
 ment, in 1549, required the clergy, under heavy penalties, 
 to conform to the prescribed ritual. 
 
 But while the hierarchy, and the governing classes 
 generally, were content with the changes effected, a large 
 body of the lower clergy, and of the people, who had 
 engaged in the reformation as a religious movement, were 
 offended that so much was left, savoring of the old super- 
 stition. They objected, in particular, to the priestly 
 vestments, to the cross in baptism, to the ring in mar- 
 ria<Te, the use of sponsors, and kneeling at the Lord's 
 Supper. They desired a shorter liturgy, with some 
 allowance for free prayer. They objected to putting the 
 apocrypha on a par with canonical scripture, and to the 
 obligation of certain fasts and festivals. They denied 
 that bishops were an order superior to presbyters, or had 
 any exclusive authority for ordaining. In most, if not 
 all these respects, further changes were contemplated by 
 the leading English reformers, and .would, no doubt, 
 have been effected, but for the premature death of the 
 young king. 
 
 On the accession of Queen Mary, in 1553, and the 
 counter-reformation that followed, large numbers of the 
 
RISE OF XOX-CONTORMITY IN" ENGLAND. 109 
 
 English Protestants, iiiclu<ling several bishops and many 
 eminent divines, took refuge in Germany, Switzerland, 
 and Holland. A portion of these exiles, who settled in 
 Frankfort, organized a congregation hy themselves, being 
 permitted to meet for worship in the French Church. 
 They conducted their service according to King Edward's 
 liturgy, amended and simplified, and leaving a part of the 
 service for free prayer. Of this church, John Knox was 
 one of the pastors, and John Calvin a friend and coun- 
 selor. Its harmony was soon broken up by the arrival 
 of other exiles, who were zealous for King Edward's 
 unchanged liturgy, especially Dr. Cox, who had been 
 tutor to that prince — the same from whom Elizabeth 
 afterwards wrested Ely Place, with the threat of 
 " unfrocking " him, if he resisted. The intrigues of this 
 churchman led to the division of the society, and the 
 banishment of John Knox from the city. The " Puri- 
 tans," as they now began to. be called, withdrew to 
 Greneva, and there established an English Church, with a 
 Presbyterian polity, and a service of prayer drawn up for 
 them by Calvin. 
 
 On the accession of Queen Elizabeth, in 1558, these Puri- 
 tan exiles returned home, strongly imbued with the leaven 
 of Presbyterian sentiments ; and the struggle between 
 the'Non-conformists and the hierarchy was transferred to 
 England itself. The queen was not merely opposed to 
 any further reformation, but desired to restore some part 
 of the abolished ceremonies of the Church of Rome. 
 She was opposed to the marriage of the clergy, to preach- 
 ing and " prophesyings," as the meetings of ministers 
 for mutual improvement were called. She desired to 
 retain images and crucifixes in the churches. The arti- 
 cles were reduced to thirty-nine, by cutting ofi" those relat- 
 
110 RISE OF XOX-CONFORMITY IN ENGLAND. 
 
 ing to eschatolog}''. The liturgy was reformed backwards, 
 and an " Act of Uniformity " forbade, under heavy penal- 
 ties, the least deviation from the prescribed service. 
 
 The main principle at issue, between the Puritans and 
 the " Court Reformers," concerned the authority of Scrip- 
 ture. The latter held that the Word of God was an 
 infallible rule of faith, but not of practice ; that many 
 things relating to discipline and worship are left unde- 
 termined in Scripture ; that in regard to these, the civil 
 magistrate has the right to decide, and that the practice 
 of the first Christian centuries was the standard to which 
 the church ought to conform. 
 
 These principles were maintained with great learning 
 and ability by Richard Hooker, in his Ecclesiastical Pol- 
 ity. On the other hand, the Puritans held that the Word 
 of Grod was a sufficient guide in respect to worship and 
 discipline, as well as faith ; that nothing was to be 
 required in divine service, but what was express^, or 
 b}^ necessary inference, contained in Scripture ; and that 
 as regards indifferent things,, the right of prescribing was 
 vested in the spiritual officers of the church, and not in 
 the civil magistrate. 
 
 In accordance with this principle, they rejected the 
 government of bishops, and all uncommanded rites and 
 ceremonies in worship, and desired to reduce the charch 
 to a Presbyterial simplicity in ritual and polity. The 
 energetic despotism of Elizabeth, which kept down the 
 Papists with one hand, suppressed the Puritans with the 
 other ; and no organized non-conformity dared show 
 itself in her reign. A considerable bod}^ of the best min- 
 isters in the kingdom (in London, thirty-seven out of one 
 hundred) refused to wear the vestments, and were deprived 
 of their livings. By some of these a presbytery was 
 
THE ORDEP.S OF WANDSWORTH. Ill 
 
 organized, in the year 1572, near London, but was unable 
 to maintain any open existence. Another portion of the 
 Non-conformists, headed by Robert Brown, an nnworthy 
 leader, wdio afterwards proved apostate both in fjiith and 
 life, pushed their opposition to tlie hierarchy to the 
 extreme of church democracy, and under the name of 
 " Brownists," or " Independents," organized a congrega- 
 tion, which was soon driven bv the bishops to take ref- 
 uge in Holland. But there remained within the Eng- 
 lish Church, conforming outwardly to the demands of 
 the act of uniformity, a large body of ministers and 
 Christians, Presbyterian in sentiment, waiting for the 
 dawn of the day of religious liberty. 
 
 THE ORDERS OF WANDSWORTH. 
 
 The strong sentiment among a considerable body of 
 the English clergy in favor of Presbytery, forbidden to 
 express itself openly by the rigor of the act of uniform- 
 ity, took shape in a secret attempt at Presbyterian orga- 
 nization. These ministers desired a simplified service 
 of prayer, greater liberty of preaching and " prophesy- 
 ing," and exemption from various usages characteristic 
 of the old Pomish worship. To all such demands the 
 queen was inflexibly opposed. She thought the Refor- 
 mation had already proceeded too far, and dreaded the 
 growth of Puritanism, as an element of disturbance in 
 the kingdom. Anj^ variation from the requirements of 
 the act of uniformity, even the slightest, was punished 
 with fine and imprisonment. For neglecting the sign of 
 the cross in baptism, or the ring in the marriage service, 
 devout and laborious pastors were torn from their fami- 
 
112 THE ORDERS OF WANDSWORTH. 
 
 lies and flocks, and left to pine for years in filthy dun- 
 geons. 
 
 The center of the Presbyterian sentiment was London 
 and the vicinity. On the 20th of November, 15'r2, a 
 number of the ministers met secretly in the village of 
 Wandsworth, in the suburbs, and organized themselves 
 into a presbytery. They agreed upon a confession of 
 faith, and rules of government and discipline, and elected 
 a body of ruling elders. The clerical members were the 
 following : 
 
 1. Eev. John Field, lecturer at Wandsworth. He 
 was fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford, and preacher at 
 St. Giles, London : an eloquent, learned and pious 
 divine. He was committed to a loathsome dungeon in 
 Newgate Prison, 7th of July, 1572, on the charge of non- 
 conformity. He was afterwards suspended from the 
 ministry by the Bishop of London, and ordered to 
 remove to ^ distant part of the country. 
 
 2. Eev. Thomas Wilcox, student of St. John's College, 
 Oxford, and much distinguished as a preacher and divine 
 in London. He was the author of numerous works, 
 practical, controversial and expository. For disapprov- 
 ing the government of bishops, and the service of the 
 book of prayer, he was repeatedly suspended from the 
 ministry, and shut up with the felons in Newgate Prison. 
 
 3. Eev. Nicholas Crane, student of Cambridge, and 
 minister of Eoehamton, near London, a learned and emi- 
 nent Non-conformist. He was silenced by Bishop Ayl- 
 mer, one of the bitterest persecutors of the Puritans, 
 several times thrown into prison, and finally died in 
 Newgate, in 1588. 
 
 4. Eev. William Bonham. 5. Eev. Nicholas Stan- 
 den. Thev were associated with Mr, Crane in their trial 
 
THE ORDERS OF WANDSWORTH. 113 
 
 before the Bishop of London ; both suffered repeated 
 imprisonments, and were kept in Newgate by Whitgift, 
 after the Lords of the Council had ordered their release. 
 
 6. Rev. Robert Johnson, fellow of the King's College, 
 and domestic chaplain to the Lord Keeper Bacon, father 
 of the Chancellor. In July, 1571, he was suspended for 
 non-conformity, by Arch-bishop Parker. Making some 
 concessions, he was restored. Not long after he was 
 again suspended by the Bishop of London, and thrown 
 into prison, for marrying Leojiard Morris and Agnes 
 Miles, without using the ring. He fell dangerously ill 
 in Newgate, as so many others did in those pestilential 
 dungeons. The Lords of the Council, on his petition, 
 ordered his release. But the bishop managed to evade 
 compliance, till, worn out by want and suffering, tliis 
 martyr, for the rights of conscience, died in the Gate 
 House Prison. 
 
 7. Rev. John Gardiner, rector of Maiden, in Sussex. 
 He was deprived of his living, and thrown into prison, 
 by Bishop Alymer, for preaching without a surplice. 
 He contracted the jail fever, from the effects of which he 
 languished for years. His pathetic petition to the Bishop 
 of London to take pity upon him, and upon his sufferino- 
 wife and children, might have touched the heart even of 
 an arch-bishop. 
 
 8. Rev. Thomas Barber, minister of Bow Church 
 London, and the beloved pastor of a very large cono-re- 
 gation, to whom he was accustomed to preach four times 
 a week. But, with Arch-bishop Whitgift, the souls of 
 the people were of very little consequence, compared 
 with white surplices. He shut up this faithful preacher 
 for several years, and left the flock to such ignorant, pro- 
 
114 THE ORDERS OF WANDSWORTH. 
 
 fane and scandalous priests as were usually intruded into 
 the place of suspended pastors. 
 
 9. Rev. Henry Smith, student of Lincoln College, 
 Oxford, and commonly called, for his eloquence, the 
 " silver-tongued Smith." Crowds were attracted to his 
 ministry, near Temple Bar, London. For some slight 
 deviation from the service book. Bishop Alymer put an 
 iron padlock on that silver tongue of his. But the favor 
 of the Lord Treasurer Burleigh, who was one of his 
 parishioners, seems to have screened him from further 
 molestation. 
 
 10. Rev. AVilliam Charke, fellow of Peter House, Cam- 
 bridge. For denying the divine right of bishops, he was 
 called before Whitgift, and required to recant. On his 
 refusal, he was expelled from the University. The favor 
 of Cecil, who was Chancellor of the University, shielded 
 him for a time ; but the arch-bishop stuck faithfully to 
 his skirts, and a short time after found a chance to shut 
 him up altogether. 
 
 11. Rev. Stephen Egerton, student of Oxford, and 
 minister of.Blackfriars, London, spoken of by Anglican 
 writers as "eminent for learning and godliness." He 
 zealously promoted the " prophesyings," and commonly 
 acted as moderator. For saying " you " in the baptismal 
 service, where he ought.to have said " thou'' he was first 
 suspended from the ministry, and then thrown into the 
 Fleet Prison, where he languished for many years. 
 
 12th and last, for this was an apostolic presbytery. 
 Rev. Thomas Edmunds, a man distinguished for his tal- 
 ents and virtues, but who occupied, perhaps, in the col- 
 leo-e a little the position of Thomas, the doubter. He 
 was a Puritan, without being a zealot -- a moderate Non- 
 conformist. But his moderation could not save liim 
 
THE ORDERS OF WANDSWORTH. 115 
 
 from the relentless clutches of Queen Elizabeth's " Little 
 Black Husband." Wbitgift pounced upon him for some 
 slight irregularity, and threw him into prison. After 
 some time he made his submission, and came out, and 
 died, at length, rector of All Hallows Church, London. 
 Here was a presb3^tery to be proud of! A convention 
 of felons ! A sjmod of jail birds I Thev came bj stealth 
 to the place of rendezvous, and trembled to hear the 
 sheriff's knock on the door. They were pallid from 
 loathsome dungeons. Thej had hardly combed the 
 straw of Kewgate out of their hair. The marks of iron 
 were on their wrists. But they were felons whose con- 
 sciences were prisoners to the Word of God, and w-ho 
 preached the everlasting Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 These jail birds were the sons of English universities. 
 They wrote classic Greek ; they held profound debates 
 in the Latin tongue ; they w^ere familiar with the fathers 
 and the school divines ; they were the friends and cor- 
 respondents of Calvin, and Beza, and Melancthon ; they 
 w^ere the uDconscious and unrecoo-nized saviors of Eno-- 
 lish liberty from the fatal grasp of the royal prerogative. 
 It was they and their fellow Presbyterians, who alone 
 saved the Protestanism of the realm from the swellino- 
 
 o 
 
 tide of the Catholic reaction. Torj' and Liberal, Mr. 
 Hume, Mr. Buckle, and Mr. Froude, alike make this 
 acknowledgment in their favor. Such were the men 
 who, three hundred years ago, attempted to lay the 
 foundations of Presbyterianism in England. Tlie 
 attempt proved, for the time, wholly abortive. The vioi- 
 lance of the bishops' officers was such, that, no sooner 
 was the fire of religious liberty kindled, than it was 
 trampled out. By the year 1571: the " prophesyings " 
 were everywhere suppressed, and it was not till the over- 
 
116 RISE AND FALL OF 
 
 throw of the monarch}^, seventy-five years later, that 
 Presbytery became an established fact in England. 
 
 E 
 
 RISE AND FALL OF PRESBYTERY IN ENGLAND. 
 
 Almost all the reformers, both in England and on the 
 continent, from Wiclif and Huss to Luther, Knox, Jew- 
 ell, Grindal, Coverdale, and all the early Protestant 
 divines, denied the divine right of bishops as an order 
 superior to presbyters. They found but two classes of 
 permanent church officers in the New Testament, viz., 
 bishops or presbyters, and deacons. Wheresoever men 
 aimed at a restoration of Christian doctrine and worship, 
 they also insisted on a return to Scriptural simplicity in 
 the government of the church. In Scotland and on the 
 continent, Presbyterianism established itself at once, and 
 the hierarchy was overthrown. In England, on politi- 
 cal grounds. Episcopacy was retained. Until the reign 
 of Charles I., therefore, Presbyterianism existed in 
 England only as a latent conviction ; and the struggle 
 between king and parliament was well advanced, (1610) 
 before it appeared in the field of controversy. The 
 Eomanizing and despotic measures of Arch-bishop Laud, 
 and the support given to the king's arbitrary proceedings 
 by the Episcopal clergy, had nursed among the more 
 serious part of the nation a profound disgust for that 
 form of government. The successful establishment of 
 Presbytery in Scotland was exerting a, silent influence, 
 and Scotch divines were in close correspondence with the 
 friends of popular rights in England. 
 
 The struggle of arras was preceded by a war of 
 pamphlets, between the friends 'of Episcopacy and Pres- 
 
PKESBYTEEY IX ENGLAND. 117 
 
 b}'ter^^ The most famous of these was the controversy 
 between Bishop Hall and others, on the one side, and five 
 Presb}- terian divines, under the name of " Smectjmnns," 
 on the other. "^ 
 
 This was followed by the " Eoot and Branch Peti- 
 tion," signed by fifteen thousand citizens of London, 
 praying the House of Commons to " do away with the 
 government of the church by arch -bishops, and bishops, 
 with all its dependences, roots and branches." A letter 
 was, at the same time, addressed to the Scotch General 
 Assembly, stating that " the desire of the most Godly 
 and considerable part among us is, that the Presbyte- 
 rian government, which hath just and evident founda- 
 tion both in the Word of God and the religious reason, 
 may be established throughout the entire kingdom." 
 This was designed as a step towards securing the aid of 
 the Scots in the coming struggle. 
 
 The civil war was opened by the king's setting up his 
 standard at Nottingham, on the 22d of August, 1642, 
 the Long Parliament being at the time in session. On 
 the oth of Kovember, 1643, the Episcopal hierarchy and 
 government was abolished by act of parliament, an act 
 having been previously passed for calling "an assembly 
 of learned and Godly divines, for settling the govern- 
 ment and liturgy of the Church of England." On the 
 abolition of Episcopacy, there rem.ained no provision for 
 the ordination of ministers of the Gospel. The bishops 
 all adhered to the royal side, and refused to ordain any 
 persons not Episcopal in sentiment. The universities 
 also were closed, and no candidates were forthcominof. 
 
 * The five were Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew 
 Newcomen, and William Spurstow. This trick of words was not very uncom- 
 mon at the time. 
 
118 RISE AND FALL OF 
 
 The Westminster Assembly, therefore, by order of par- 
 liament, Oct. 12, 16^3, appointed a committee of twenty- 
 three presbyters, to examine and ordain men for the min- 
 istry ; and all ordained by them, or a quorum of them, 
 (seven) were to be reputed ministers, in full standing, of 
 THE Church of England. It was universally taken 
 for granted that " the Church of England " remained, 
 and that the only change was in the form of govern- 
 ment. This w^as the commencement of Presbyterian 
 ordinations in England. 
 
 In the year 1616, parliament directed that all Eng- 
 land should be divided into presbyteries, rnling elders 
 everj^where ordained, and Presbyterial and synodical 
 government organized. The scheme was at first set up 
 for three years, and then indefinitely; but, in fact, it 
 never established itself, except in Lancashire and in the 
 City of London, where the Presb3/terian interest was 
 as it still continues to be, stronger than in all the rest of 
 England together. The reason why the new polity was 
 not organized throughout the realm was that the Pres- 
 byterian clergy were dissatisfied with the Erastian ele- 
 ment incorporated by parliament with it. The Com- 
 mons claimed the right of supervising and controlling 
 the discipline of the church. In each ecclesiastical 
 province there was to be a body of commissioners, whose 
 sanction should be necessary to every act of discipline, 
 and to w^hom every person excluded from the church 
 should have the right of appeal. This provision was so 
 objectionable to the clergy, that they i-efused to orga- 
 nize under it. They insisted on the divine right of 
 Presbytery, and that the Lord Jesus Christ is the only 
 head of the church. Failing to secure the repeal of this 
 measure, they ceased their efforts, and the work of build- 
 
PRESBYTERY IN ENGLAND. 
 
 119 
 
 ing the Church of England on the new basis came to an 
 end. 
 
 In 1613 the " Solemn League and Covenant, for 
 the extirpation of popery and prelac}^, and the establish- 
 ment of religion according to the Word of Grod and the 
 example of the best reformed churches," was subscribed 
 bv the parliaments of England and Scotland, the assem- 
 bl)^ of divines, and great numbers of the people. The 
 further object of the League and Covenant was declared 
 to be, '■ the maintenance of the rights and privileges of 
 parliament, and the defense of the king's person, family, 
 and authority." The object of the Presbyterians, in 
 short, both in England and Scotland, was the establish- 
 ment of Presbytery in the room of Episcopacy, with the 
 maintenance of monarchy, in the persons of the king 
 and his posterity. In the day of their triumph, they 
 used their power after the example of the hierarchy they 
 had superseded. It is not strictly true that " the new- 
 Presbyter was but old priest writ large. ""^ It was writ- 
 ten in the same heavy Eoman hand as the established 
 clergy before them, whether Papal or Anglican, had been 
 accustomed to use. But it was writ quite large enough. 
 In 1616, having the entire control of parliament, the 
 Presbyterians passed " an ordinance for the suppression 
 of blasphemies and heresies." " Any man " (so runs this 
 
 * Milton had personal reasons for dislikins; the Presbyterians, having been 
 summoned before parliament, on the indictment of the Westminster Assembly, 
 to answer for his book on ''The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce." The 
 '•'Scotch What D'ye CaU"- was, no doubt, Gillespie, who was a member of the 
 Assembly, and whose "■ rugged name," written in the eleventh sonnet " Galasp," 
 seeips to have been peculiarly offensive to Milton. For the '" mere A. S.,'''' who 
 is associated with Rutherford, another eminent Scotch member of the Assem- 
 bly, the critics have been driven to hunt out or invent "a polemical writer of 
 the times, named Adam Stewart." But it is much more likely "A. S." was an 
 understood symbol for some Presbyterian, or Presbyterians, in the Assembly, 
 than the initials of an obscure or supposititious writer in Scotland. Milton 
 would hardly have stooped to such game. 
 
r20 RISE AND FALL OF 
 
 terrible statute) " denying the doctrine of the Trinity, or 
 the divinity of Christ, or that the books of the Scripture 
 are the Word of God, or the resurrection of the body, or 
 a future day of judgment, and refusing, on trial, to 
 abjure his heresy, shall suffer the pain of death. Any 
 man declaring " (amid a long list of other errors) "that 
 man, by nature, hath free will to turn to God, that there is 
 apurgatorj^, that images are lawful, that infant baptism is 
 unlawful ; any one denying the obligation of observing 
 the Lord's day, or asserting that the church government 
 by Presl'jytery is anti-Christian, or unlawful, shall, on a 
 refusal to renounce his errors, be committed to prison."* 
 
 To carry out such legislation as this, and thoroughly 
 Presbyterianize the Church of England, it was only nec- 
 essary that Charles should subscribe the solemn League 
 and Covenant, and put himself into the hands of parlia- 
 ment. On these terms the Presbyterians 'were ready, at 
 any time, to end the war, and receive back the king. 
 They resisted to the utmost his execution, as well as the 
 abolition of the monarchy and the protectorate of Crom- 
 well. 
 
 But the power passed rapidly out of their hands. The 
 parliament was overawed by the army, then under con- 
 trol of Independents and Kepublicans ; and by "Pride's 
 Purge," December 5, 1648, one hundred and forty Pres- 
 byterian members were excluded from the House. The 
 remaining members, thenceforward called " the rump," 
 consisted of oflicers of the army. Independents, and 
 others of radical views. It was by them that the king 
 was brought to trial and the form of government changed. 
 
 From this time, the Presbyterians remained in a 
 depressed and imperfectly organized condition, until the 
 
 * Green's Short History of the English People, p. 553. 
 
PEESBYTERY IN ENGLA^'D. 121 
 
 death of Cromwell. The excluded members were then 
 restored by General Monk, February 24:th, 1659-60. 
 The parliament, now again become Presbyterian, imme- 
 diately resumed measures looking to the restoration of 
 monarchy, and the establishment of the Chnrch of 
 England, under the rule of Presbytery. Charles 11. had 
 already, on his part, subscribed the solemn League and 
 Covenant. He now returned in triumph to the throne of 
 his ancestors, to reign as a pious and Presbyterian sover- 
 eicrn. The result was the immediate re-establishment of 
 
 o 
 
 Episcopacy, and the passing of a new " act of uniform- 
 ity," by which, onthe2-lth of August, (" Black Barthol- 
 omew '') two thousand Presbyterian clergy were ejected 
 from their livings. Presbyterianism, which had abused 
 its clay of success, fell unpitied, and was mostly rooted 
 out of England. What remained became Congregation- 
 alized in 1689, and thence lapsed into heresy and insig- 
 nificance. 
 
 THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 
 
 On the 10th of September, 16-12, the Long Parliament, 
 in both Houses, passed an act for the utter abolishing of 
 Episcopacy after the 5th of November, 1648 ; and on the 
 12th of June, 16-13, it having then become plain that no 
 concessions in favor of civil or religious liberty were to 
 be expected of the king, they adopted " an ordinance for 
 calling 'an assembly of learned and Godly divines and 
 others, to be consulted with by the parliament, for set- 
 tling the government and liturgy of the Church of 
 England." 
 
 The parliament appointed one hundred and fifty-one 
 
122 THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 
 
 persons as members of tlie Assembly, of whom ten were 
 peers, twenty members of the House of Commons, and 
 the others distinguished divines of the Church of 
 England, Episcopally ordained, but Presbyterian or Inde- 
 pendent in sentiment. The Church of Scotland also 
 sent six commissioners. The Assembly met on the 1st 
 of July, 1618, with seventy-nine members present. Dr. 
 William Twisse was chosen prolocutor, and after his 
 death. Dr. Charles Herle. The quorum was fixed at 
 forty, and the average attendance did not equal one hun- 
 dred. The place of meeting was, at first, Henry Yllth's 
 chapel, in Westminster Abbey ; and, later in the year, 
 w^hen fires became necessary to comfort, in the Jerusalem 
 chamber of the deanery of Westminster. Sessions were 
 held daily, except on Saturday and Sundav, interrupted 
 by frequent sermons and days of fasting and prayer. 
 
 Every member, on taking his seat, subscribed the fol- 
 lowing declaration : "I do seriously promise 
 
 and vow, in the presence of Almighty God, that, in this 
 Assembly, I will maintain nothing, in doctrine, but what 
 I believe to be agreeable to the Word of Grod, nor, in 
 discipline, but what I conceive most to the glory of Grod, 
 and the good and peace of His church." This was pub- 
 licly read every Monday morning. 
 
 The Assembly began with a revision of the thirtj^-nine 
 articles, and proceeded as far as the sixteenth, somewhat 
 changing their form and appending copious Scripture 
 proofs. By the order of parliament, they then laid this 
 aside, and proceeded to the work of drawing up a form 
 of government, discipline and worship, in place of those 
 which had been abolished. In entering upon these sub- 
 jects, it immediately appeared that there were three par- 
 ties in the Assembly, viz. : 
 
THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 123 
 
 1. The PresbyteriaD, which was much the largest, 
 including the greater part of the English divines, all the 
 Scotch, and a number of the lay members. 
 
 2. The Independents, containing only about ten mem- 
 bers, but distinguished both for their ability and their 
 zeal in urging their views. 
 
 8. The Erastian, still sm^dler in numbers, but embrac- 
 ing several men eminent for learning and backed up by 
 a majority in parliament. They held that llie Supreme 
 Magistrate was the head of the cliurch, and that all dis- 
 cipline by the clergy was subject to His review and con- 
 trol. Both these latter parties denied, of course, the 
 divine right of presbytery, while the first maintained it. 
 
 The Assembl}^ first drew up the directory for worship, 
 the same, in substance, as that now in use, but consider- 
 ably more fall. This was agreed upon without dissent. 
 It did not include chapter ten — "on the mode of 
 inflicting church censures," which would have been 
 obnoxious to the Erastians. It was introduced by a 
 preface drawn up by some of the Independent divines, 
 recommending it instead of the service of the prayer 
 book. This was sanctioned by parliament, and divine 
 worship ordered to be conducted by it in all the churches 
 of the kingdom. All copies of the book of common 
 prayer were called in, and the use of it, either in public 
 or famih' worship, made punishable by fine and impris- 
 onment. 
 
 The Assembly then occupied itself with preparing the 
 form of government and rules of discipline. This led to 
 long and heated discussions between the Presbyterians 
 and the Independents. The latter agreed to a ruling 
 eldership, and the calling of synods for advice, but 
 
124 THE wp:stmtnster assembly. 
 
 resisted the idea of the unity of tlie church, the estab- 
 lishment of church coarts, and appellate jurisdiction. 
 
 The Erastians, also, zcdously denied the right of 
 church courts to subject offenders to trial and discipline, 
 as setting uj) an imperimn in iraperio^ of which they had 
 an exaggerated and mistaken terror. They held that 
 church and state ai'e identical, as they were under the 
 Jewish theocracy ; that all persons have_ a right to the 
 sacraments ; and that if excomm.unication is to be 
 inflicted on any, it can only be by the civil magistrate. 
 This view prevailed in parliament, and led to the Eras- 
 tian feature in the form of government, which discour- 
 aged the Presbyterians from organizing their polity 
 throughout the kingdom. 
 
 At the same time with these discussions, committees 
 of the Assembly were at work upon the confession of 
 faith, which was reported to parliament, with the Scrip- 
 ture proofs, the 29th of April, 1647. On the oth of 
 ISTovember, 1647, the shorter catechism was presented to 
 the House of Commons ; and on the 14th of April, 1648, 
 the larger.* The authorship of these admirable manuals 
 is unknown, except by conjecture. They are attrib- 
 uted chiefly to Dr. Arrowsmith, head of St. John's Col- 
 lege, Cambridge, and Dr. Tucknej^, Vice-Chancellor of 
 the University. The logically concise and demonstra- 
 tive character of the answers to the shorter catechism is 
 traced to the hand of Eev. John Wallis, afterwards so 
 distinguished as professor of geometry, at Oxford. 
 
 The Assembly broke up February 22d, -1649, three 
 weeks after the execution of Charles I, having lasted 
 
 * All}' difference in the dates assijrned to these events, is due to the fact of the 
 symbols having been reported to parliament, lirst in part, and then in their com- 
 pleted form. 
 
IXDEPEXUEXCY. 125 
 
 live yeaj'S , and six months, and held 1,163 sessions. 
 But a considerable committee continued to sit one day 
 in each week, for the trial and ordination of ministers, 
 till March 25th, 1652, when it silently disappeared. 
 
 The Westminster Assem^bly, though sharing with the 
 early councils, and with the Synod of Dort, in the disad- 
 vantage of being embarrassed by its intimate relations 
 with the civil power which called it into being, vv'as yet 
 never surpassed in freedom and boldness of discussion, 
 in the learning and piety of its members, in profound 
 study of the Scriptures, and in the logical and massive 
 character of its doctiinal results. 
 
 G 
 
 INDEPENDEXCY. 
 
 It is alleged, inbehalf of independency, that the power 
 of church government is most safely trusted in the hands 
 of the brotherhood of each church alone. We affirm, on 
 the other hand, that church power, or any other power, 
 is most unsafely trusted to the hands of a body whose 
 decisions are subject to no review, or control, bv any 
 higher body. The smaller the circle from within which 
 the members of a court are to be chosen, the greater the 
 liability to incompetency, to 2:)rejadices, to the controll- 
 ing influence of one or a few individuals. The male 
 membership of a church ofteis consists of a verv small 
 number. They may be ignorant, narrow-minded, and 
 ])rejudiced. The pastor may be arbitrary and passion- 
 ate. He may be able always to control a majority, and 
 become the petty despot of the church. The decisions 
 of the church may be simply the echo of his sentiments ; 
 but they must stand as absolute law, subject to no 
 reversal. AYhat citizen would consent to intrust his life, 
 
I'^H INDEPENDENCY. 
 
 or his property, beyond the most trifling amount, to any 
 sucli irresponsible court ? 
 
 Or, if the membership is large, the liability to error 
 and wrong is none the less. Popular assemblages are 
 eminently liable to be moved by passion, or personal 
 influence ; and the number taking part in any decision 
 diminishes each inilividual's sense of responsibility. 
 Mr. Burke, in his Eeflections on the French Revolution, 
 quotes Aristotle to the effect that " a democracy has 
 many striking points of resemblance to a tyranny ;" and 
 in another passage he illustrates it as follows : •' The 
 members of a democracy are, in a great measure, their 
 own instruments. They are nearer to their objects. 
 Besides, they are less under responsibility to one of the 
 greatest controlling powers on earth — the sense of fame 
 and estimation. The share of infamy that is likely to 
 fall to each individual, in public acts, is small, the opera- 
 tion of opinion being in the inverse ratio to the number 
 of those who abuse power. Their own approbation of 
 their own acts has to them the nppearance of a public 
 judgment in their favor. A ])erfect democi-acy is, there- 
 fore, the most shameless thing in the world ; and, as it 
 is the most shameless, it is also the most fearless. No 
 man apprehends in his own person, he can be made 
 subject to punishment." 
 
 A church session, on the other hand, proceeds with 
 comparative caution, for two reasons : In the first place, 
 their number is small, and a greater sense of responsi- 
 bility for his acts attaches to each individual. In the 
 next place, they know their proceedings are to be re- 
 viewed, and are liable to be reversed by a higher body, 
 and reversed with a degree of emphasis which may have 
 
IXDEPE^'UENCY. 12 < 
 
 the force of an impressive censure, proportioned to the 
 rashness or passion they may have disphiyed. 
 
 It may be fearlessly asserted that no system can be 
 devised more perfectly adapted to maintain truth, defend 
 character, and enforce discipline, than one in which a 
 case is first tried by a jury, on the spot where it orig- 
 inated, and where ever}^ fact bearing on the question is 
 most certain to be brought out ; which next goes, or 
 may go, by appeal, to a higher court, drawn from a 
 wider range, and embracing more elements of impartial- 
 ity and wisdom ; and then, by another remove, to a much 
 larger court still, embracing a range entirely without the 
 limit of local prejudices and passions ; which, even then, 
 is not necessarily arrested, but may, by possibility, go to 
 an ultimate court of appeals, representing the entire 
 church with which the local church where the difficulty 
 originated is in communion. 
 
 As a matter of fact, however, in the Presbyterian 
 Church, only a very few cases, involving important 
 principles, ever reach this highest court. Few appeals 
 go to a presbyter}^, fewer still to a synod. The two 
 causes mentioned above give a prudence and caution to 
 the acts of a church session, which usually lead all par- 
 ties to acquiesce in their decision. 
 
 The late venerable Dr. Josiah Hopkins, a man of emi- 
 nently calm and dispassionate mind, after having illus- 
 trated, by several examples, the working of the Congre- 
 gational polity in New England, gives the result of his 
 own experience as follows : 
 
 " But I have one more case to relate, and, without giv- 
 ing it, I cannot present the result of my experience for 
 the half century past. As I have already stated, the 
 first twenty years of my official life were spent in New 
 
12 b INDEPENDENCY. 
 
 England, as a pastor of a Congregational Charcli, and 
 the next sixteen in Western New. York, in connection 
 with a Presbyterian. The Congi^gational Church num- 
 bered, generally, from one hundred to one hundred and 
 seventj-iiv^e members, and the Presbyterian from four to 
 five hundred. Both were churches that, in point of dis- 
 cipline, stood as high as any in the vicinity. While I 
 was in the Cong^re2:ational Church, and attended to disci- 
 pline in the whole church, in several cases the excite- 
 ment became so high, that the house, though a large one 
 for the country, on a week day was literally filled, for 
 several days. La most, if not in every case, the subject 
 that produced this excitement was, at first, the merest 
 trifle, and it was finally settled by committees and ref- 
 erees. In some cases a spirit of permanent dissatisfac- 
 tion, even between such as were relatives, and had pre- 
 viously been on the best term^, was left fastened on 
 many minds. In the other church, though it contained 
 more than three times the number of members, there 
 never was a case in which the excitement became such 
 that a common room would not accommodate all that 
 desired to attend the trial. 
 
 " While I was in the Congregational Church, appeals 
 were frequently made from the decisions of the church, 
 sometimes to consociation, and sometimes to arbitrators. 
 But in the Presbj^erian, though we had meetings, as a 
 general rule, at least once in every week, to attend to 
 cases of discipline, yet there was not, in sixteen years, one 
 single case of appeal. Tnere was not a single case in 
 which the parties were so far dissatisfied with the deci- 
 sion of the session, that they were anxious for another 
 trial. 
 
 " Now, I am unable to see how evidence on the subject 
 
INDEPENDENCY. 12y 
 
 before us can be more convincing, tlian from the com- 
 parison of these ciuirches. They were both churches 
 that had the reputation of being comparatively well gov- 
 erned, as much so as any in the vicinit}'. They were 
 both prosperous. I cannot tell which was most so, as I 
 cannot have access to the records of the Congregational 
 Church. I recollect that it had a steady growth, and 
 from a small and divided state it became one of the most 
 numerous and most influential in that town, and almost 
 the only one, at the time I was called to leave it. The 
 Presbyterian Church, during the sixteen j-ears while I 
 was pastor, received, on an average, sixty a year, amount- 
 ing to the surprising number of nine hundred and sixty. 
 It cannot for a moment be supposed that the smaller 
 church, situated as it was in one of the better districts of 
 New England, was composed of worse materials, such as 
 are more difficult to keep within proper limits ; and vet, 
 within that smaller church, situated in New England, 
 there were excitements almost every year, that very 
 extensively affected the public mind. There were 
 numerous appeals to councils and arbitrators; and what 
 was still worse, there were left between" some families 
 some very unpleasant feelings and prejudices, which, it 
 is feared, can never be removed. But in the larger 
 church, containing more than three times the number of 
 members, not one single appeal was ever made from the 
 decisions of the session. Some very trjdng cases 
 occurred ; one member of the session even, being tried 
 and excommunicated, but not one excitement that ever 
 affected the public mind ; nor was the peace and happi- 
 ness of any one family ever destroyed.'' (Presbyterian- 
 ism and Congregationalism Compared, by Rev. Josiah 
 Hopkins, D. D., Auburn, i860.) 
 
180 PRESBYTERIAN ISM IN IRELAND. 
 
 PRESBYTERIAN ISM IN IRELAND. 
 
 Presbjterianism gained nlmost no footing in Ireland, 
 until near the end of the 16th century. To prevent its 
 introduction from Scotland, a law was passed, in the 
 third year of Philip and Mary, (1566) forbidding the 
 Scotch to colonize in Ireland, or to intermarry with the 
 Irish people. This law remained in force throughout 
 the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and was only repealed in 
 the year 1607. The Scotch Presbyterians then began to 
 settle in the north of Ireland, in considerable numbers. 
 The " Presbyterian " clergy of London undertook earn- 
 estly the work of missions among the native Catholics 
 in that part of the island. They sent over organized 
 bodies of colonists for that purpose, by whom London- 
 derr}^, Enniskillen, and some other Protestant strong- 
 holds, were either built, or enlarged and fortified. Epis- 
 copacy had, indeed, been established as the Church of 
 England, but the number of churchmen were small. 
 The primate of Ireland w^as Dr. James Usher, distin- 
 guished for his learning and piety, and the highly lib- 
 eral character of his sentiments on church government. 
 The Scotch ministers, who came into Ireland with their 
 people, were zealous against Episcopacy, and unwilling 
 to consent to Episcopal ordination. Through the wis- 
 dom and moderation of Arch-bishop Usher, and other 
 Irish bishops, a plan of comprehension was adopted, by 
 which the Presb^^terian clergy became incorporated into 
 the Establishment. Ordination was performed by the 
 bishop and the presbytery acting together. Under this 
 plan, many Presb3^terians, retaining both their own sen- 
 timents and usages, held livings in the Church of Ire- 
 
PRESBYTEllIANISM IX IRELAND. 131 
 
 land, and sat in convocationr with the Episcopal clergy. 
 A confession of faith, drawn by Dr. Usher, was adopted, 
 embodying the sentiments of the English Puritans, (the 
 nine Lambeth Articles of 1595) both in respect to doc- 
 trine and the church ; expressly recognizing the minis- 
 try of every Christian Church, and making no mention, 
 even, of bishops, or an apostolical succession. By this 
 liberal arrangement harmony was maintained between 
 the Episcopal and Presbyterian clergy of the Church of 
 Ireland, "until Arch-bishop Laud, in 1642, succeeded in 
 getting Usher's articles set aside, and a rigid subscrip- 
 tion to the thirty-nine articles substituted in their place. 
 This broke up the unity of the L'ish Churcli, and weak- 
 ened the cause of Protestantism, which had already 
 suffered greatly from the Irish massacre of the year 16-11. 
 During the commonwealth, Episcopacy was abolished in 
 Ireland, as in England. Cromwell reduced the Irish 
 people to submission, inflicting severe punishment for 
 the massacre of the Protestants. On the restoration of 
 Charles II, in 1661, Episcopacy w^as restored in Ireland. 
 All who had been ordained during the period of the com- 
 monwealth were required to be re-ordained, but without 
 condemning their previous ordinations as invalid. 
 Through this saving clause, the Presbyterian clergy con- 
 tinued to hold places in the Irish Church. On the revo- 
 lution of 1688, the Presbyterians of Ireland, as a bodv, 
 received express toleration, and an allowance from the 
 ^ state, the '• regium donum," was made to their ministry. 
 From the period of this corrupt relation, began the decay 
 of Irish Presbyterianisra, both in doctrine and life. 
 Early in the 18th century, Arianism began to prevail 
 among the Presbyterian, as it did among the Anglican 
 clergy, both of England and Ireland. In 1726 the Irish 
 
182 HISTORY OF FRESBYTERIANISM 
 
 Churcli was divided. The Belfast and Dublin ministers 
 insisted on a loose subscription to the confession of faith, 
 which would admit both Arminians and Arians. They 
 were thereupon excluded from the synod, and the line 
 was drawn between the unsound and the orthodox por- 
 tions of the Irish Presbyterian body. This was followed 
 by the "adopting act" of the Presbyterian Church, in 
 America, in 1729."^ 
 
 J 
 
 HISTORY OF FRESBYTERIANISM IN AMERICA. 
 
 The early IS'ew England colonists, through dread of 
 ecclesiastical tj^ranny, from which they had suffered so 
 much at home, were inclined to keep at the farthest 
 remove from prelac}^ They were, by no means, disin- 
 clined, however, to the essential features of Presbyteri- 
 
 * The low character of the Episcopal clergy of the time, both as respects faith 
 and life, is too well known. A few years after this, Dr. Rundle, who was sus- 
 pected of holding Arian views, being nominated Bishop of Derry, and objection 
 being made, on that ground, to his consecration, Dean Swift vented his scorn of 
 the scruple as follows : 
 
 Rundle, a bishop ! Fie, for shame I 
 
 An Arian to usurp the name ! 
 
 A bishop in the Isle of Saints ! 
 
 How will his brethren make complaints ? 
 
 Dare any of the mitred host 
 
 Confer on him the Holy Ghost, 
 
 In mother church to breed a variance, 
 
 By coupling orthodoxy with Arians ? 
 
 Yet, were he heathen, Turk, or Jew, 
 What is there in it strange or new ? 
 
 For let us hear the weak pretence ^ 
 
 His brethren find to take offense ; 
 Of whom there arc but four, at most, 
 Who know there is a Holy Ghost ; 
 The rest who boast they have conferred it, 
 Like Paul's Ephesians, never heard it, 
 And when they gave it, well 'tis known, 
 They gave what never was their own. 
 &c., &c , &c. 
 
IX. AMERICA 183 
 
 anism, as appears from the Cambridge and Saybrook 
 platforms, which recognize the visible unity of the 
 church, a ruling eldership, and synodical government. 
 
 The first express Presbyterian Church in America was 
 organized at Kehoboth, in Maryland, in 16S2, by Rev. 
 Francis Mc Kemie, a member of Lagan Presbyter}^, in 
 the north of Ireland. The Presbytery of Philadelphia 
 was organized in 1705, with a body of ministers of whom 
 one-half had been Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, and the 
 rest New England Congregationalists. In 1716 the 
 Synod of Philadelphia was constituted from four presby- 
 teries. The laxity and unsoundness in the Irish-Pres- 
 byterian Church rendered it necessary to lay an explicit 
 doctrinal basis for the union of the church in America. 
 In 1729, by what is known as the '' adopting act," the 
 Westminster Assembly's standards (excepting the '• Eras- 
 tian clauses," in chapters 21, 23 and 31,) were formally 
 acknowledged as the standards of the church. Among 
 the Scotch-Irish members, however, in the synod, jeal- 
 ousies soon grew up, occasioned by the varying interpre- 
 tations of that act, and the arrival of new ministers from 
 Ireland, whose orthodoxy was doubtful. These jeal- 
 ousies were increased by the breaking out of the " great 
 revival," and the frequently rash and injudicious meas- 
 ures used to promote it ; particularly, by William Ten- 
 nent, a Scotch-Irish minister, and his four sons. Great 
 alarm was also felt at the influence of "Log College," a 
 school established by Tennent, at Keshaminy, in Penn- 
 sylvania, for the education of young men for the minis- 
 try. To these causes is to be added the influence of 
 Whitfield, at that time prosecuting a preaching tour in 
 America. The conservative party, or "old side,'* dis- 
 approved of the rash and disorderly measures connected 
 
184 HISTORY OF PKESBYTERIANISM 
 
 with the revival ; desired a sound and well educated, as 
 well as zealous ministry, and required a strict subscrip- 
 tion to the standards. The new side, or " the New 
 Brunswick party," was composed of the Presbytery of 
 New Brunswick, which included three of the Tennents, 
 and such others as sympathized with them. In 1741 
 (the synod then sitting at Philadelphia) a protest was 
 introduced, recounting the divisive and disorderly prac- 
 tices of the " New Brunswick brethren," and requiring 
 their exclusion from the church. The latter, proving to 
 be in the rninorit}^, withdrew from the synod. This 
 made the schism of 1741. 
 
 The New England members generally adhered to the 
 majority. The New York Presbytery, which was not 
 present at the above mentioned acts, and was strongly in 
 sympathy with the revival, and, in so far, at least, with 
 the New Brunswick brethren, made early and repeated 
 efforts to heal the schism. This failing, they organized 
 the new Synod of New York, of which the New Bruns- 
 wick Presbytery became a part. Thus, the Synod of New 
 York, with three presbyteries, composed the "new 
 side," and the Synod of Philadelphia, with the same 
 mimber, the " old side." The new synod comprised 
 the most earnest and progressive elements in the church. 
 It grew rapidly in numbers and influence. Its member- 
 ship soon became three times that of the "old side." 
 Its ministers were in high repute and demand. The 
 relation between the two synods, however, was not acri- 
 monious. The feeling of irritation soon abated. New 
 overtures were made for peace, and in 1758, after lasting 
 seventeen years, the schism was healed, on principles 
 satisfixctory to both sides. The Synod of Philadelphia, 
 at the reunion, counted but twenty-two ministers, while 
 
IX AMERICA. 185 
 
 the Synod of New York had increased to seventy. 
 Between 1758 and 1775 the Presbyterian Church con- 
 tinued to grow steadily, notwithstanding the' decided 
 and persecuting opposition of the colonial established 
 church. In 1789 the organization was completed, b}^ 
 the meeting of the First General Assembly, which 
 convened at the same time and place, viz., Philadelphia, 
 May, 1789, as the First Congress under the constitu- 
 tion of the United States. 
 
 K 
 
 episcopacy IN" THE AMERICAN COLONIES. 
 
 At the beginning of the 18th century, when the feeble 
 elements of Presbyterianism, in this countrj^, were just 
 beginning to crystallize in their primary forms, the Epis- 
 copacy of the English Church had long had exclusive 
 possession of the middle and southern colonies. Exactly 
 one hundred years before the formation of the Presbv- 
 tery of Philadelphia, King James, hj orders under the 
 privy seal, established the English Church in the planta- 
 tions in America. Episcopacy was the state religion in 
 most of the colonies outside New England, as truly as it 
 was in the mother country, though not yet so com- 
 pletely organized. Its churches and parsonages were 
 built with public money, its clergy supported by gen- 
 eral tax, and inducted into their parishes by roj'al 
 authorit}^ Christians of every other denomination were 
 " dissenters," rigorously excluded, so far as possible, or 
 persecuted by severe penal laws, and, at length, only 
 tolerated by the act of the Eevolution government, of 
 1688. But the growth of Episcopacy in the colonies 
 was slow. When Francis McKemie, John Hampton, 
 John McNish, and their four associates, stood around 
 
136 EPISCOPACY IN THE 
 
 the cradle of infant Presbvteiy, in Philadelphia, in 1705, 
 the established clergy of all sorts in the colonies, par- 
 sons, teachers, and regimental chaplains, amounted to 
 less than fifty. Seventy years later, at the breaking 
 out of the Eevolution, they had grown to less than one 
 hundred. 
 
 The causes of this tardy increase, notwithstanding the 
 fostering care of government, and the efforts of the 
 " venerable society for the propagation of the Gospel in 
 the colonies," were found in the degraded character of 
 the clergy themselves, the lack of popular sj^mpathy, 
 and the want of an American Episcopate. The Angli- 
 can congregations in America occupied an equivocal 
 position, belonging to no diocese whatever. By an 
 unauthorized arrangement, tacitly acquiesced in, the 
 bishop of London had come to be regarded as the dio- 
 cesan of the church in the colonies. Resort w^as had to 
 him for all needed Episcopal acts. Confirmation and 
 government were wdiolly wanting, and every native born 
 candidate for orders must pass the seas, to receive the 
 gift of the Holy Spirit at the hands of the "successor of 
 the apostles." 
 
 During the century that preceded the Revolution, this 
 w^as no trifling hardship. In the imperfect navigation of 
 the period, the voyage, even if successful, was tedious. 
 But it was often attended with fatal results. The un- 
 happy candidates were wrecked on the coast ; they foun- 
 dered on the high seas, and were never heard of; they 
 were cut off by the small-pox in England, where the dis- 
 ease w^as thought to be peculiarly fatal to Americans; 
 they were taken by French privateers, and "died, pris- 
 oners in Bayonne." One-fifth, at least, of all who went 
 out for orders never came back. 
 
AMERICAN COLONIES. 137 
 
 Kepeated efforts were made, at various times during 
 the eighteenth century, to induce the English govern- 
 ment to provide a bishop for the colonies. All these 
 failed, partly through the indifference of the English 
 Church, and partly from the strenuous opposition of 
 American Episcopalians themselves, to the scheme. The 
 clergy and the legislature of Virginia protested almost 
 unanimously against it ; and the clergy of Georgia, at a 
 later period, gave a reluctant consent, on condition that 
 no bishop should reside within the limits of that state. 
 
 During the Kevolutionary war, the Episcopal clergy, 
 with only a very few exceptions, remained loyal to the 
 British crown. Bishop Wilberforce observes, that " amid 
 the general defection, one class of men alone remained 
 faithful. While hypocrisy found in Puritanism the 
 forms it needed, (days of fasting and prayer, &c.) not one 
 minister of the Episcopalian Church, north of Pennsyl- 
 vania, joined the side of the insurgents."* 
 
 Immediately on the establishment of American Inde- 
 pendence, efforts were renewed to secure from England 
 that apostolic succession for the states, which the mother 
 church had never been willing to provide for her chil- 
 dren in the colonies. Dr. Seabury was elected bishop of 
 Connecticut, and, even before the British troops had 
 evacuated New York, sailed for England in the hope of 
 obtaining consecration. Finding no encouragement in 
 England, Dr. Seabury kept on northwards, and sought 
 Episcopal grace from the non-juring bishops of Scotland. 
 
 Four obscure, private individuals, the successors of 
 those bishops who had refused to acknowledge the Eev- 
 olution government, and had, accordingly, been " de- 
 
 * History of the Prot. Episcopal Church in America, by Samuel, Lord Bishop of 
 Oxford, Am. Edition, p. 132. 
 
138 EPISCOPACY IN AMERICA. 
 
 prived," perpetuated their empty titles among the north- 
 ern Jacobites. It was a hundred years since the Stuarts 
 had forfeited the English throne; but the non-juring 
 bishops still looked to the exiled pretender of that fam- 
 il}^, a discreditable hanger-on about the Papal court, as 
 the Lord's anointed, and the rightful head of the English 
 Church. From him a conge delire was sought, as often 
 as it was thought proper to go through with the farce of 
 transmitting their apostolic authority. Three of these 
 bishops, destitute of any legal or moral right to act, laid 
 their hands on Dr. Seabury, and Dr. Seabury assuming 
 the act, however irregular, to be at least canonical, 
 claimed to have been the first to transport the " apostol- 
 ical succession " to America. 
 
 So much suspicion, however, attached to this proceed- 
 ing, that eminent Episcopalians thought it necessary to 
 procure a more reliable consecration. The Congress of 
 the United States, rather singularly, interested itself in 
 the matter. Four persons w^ere dulj'- elected bishops of 
 New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia, of 
 w^hom the three first sailed to England, and received con- 
 secration at the hands of the Arch-bishop of Canter- 
 bury ; Prevost, of New York, a narrow minded, violent 
 tempered, low Arminian churchman, who subsequently 
 resio-ned an office for which he had no taste or fitness ; 
 Madison, of Virginia, an accomplished gentleman, but 
 far more fond of philosophy, science, and social pleas- 
 ures, than of the duties of the Episcopate in a dilapi- 
 dated diocese ; and William White, of Pennsylvania, 
 whose devout, humble and charitable spirit reflect honor 
 on his office and on the church of which he was a chief 
 pastor. 
 
OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITUKGY. 139 
 
 OBJECTIONS TO THE EPISCOPAL LITURGY. 
 
 The iiD scriptural teaching of the Episcopal prayer 
 book, in the baptismal and burial services, constitutes, 
 perhaps, the most serious objection to it. In the service 
 for baptism and confirmation, the hearer is taught to 
 believe that the external rites of the church have a sac- 
 ramental efficacy of themselves ; that they accomplish 
 an opus operatinn upon the subject, by which, wholly 
 apart from any active and voluntary exercise of religious 
 affections, he becomes a child of God, an heir of Heaven, 
 and the reasonable expectant of a glorious immortality. 
 
 It is sometimes said, indeed, that by a child's being 
 " regenerated in baptism " is not to be understood its 
 being born again in a spiritual sense. It is a " condi- 
 tional regeneration," or an outward change of relations ; 
 a change of state and not a change of character ; but 
 the prevailing sentiment, and the decision of the highest 
 authorities, is otherwise, viz. : That the regeneration of 
 the child in baptism is his renewal by the power of the 
 Holy Spirit, and that if he persevere in baptismal grace, 
 he needs no other regeneration. And this view appears, 
 most conformed to the language of the service. After 
 the baptism has been performed, the rubric directs that 
 the priest shall say, " Seeing now, dearly beloved, that 
 this child is regenera,te and grafted into the body of 
 Christ's Church, let us give thanks to Almighty God for 
 these benefits. We yield Thee most hearty thanks, most 
 merciful Father, that it hath pleased Thee to regenerate 
 this child by Thy holy Spirit, and receive him for Thine 
 own child by adoption, and to incorporate him with Thy 
 holy church." 
 
140 OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITURGY. 
 
 The same thing is declared in the baptismal service 
 for adults. This whole question of the teaching of the 
 prayer book, in regard to baj)tismal regeneration, 
 received striking illustration in the course of what was 
 known as the " Gorham Controvers}^," in England. The 
 notorious Bishop of Exeter, Dr. Philpotts, refused to 
 institute Mr. Gorham to a benefice, on the ground of his 
 heresy, in holding that Episcopal baptism is not infalli- 
 bly the spiritual regeneration of the subject of it. After 
 a long, vexatious, and expensive suit, to which Mr. Gor- 
 ham was put, in asserting his rights, the case was finally 
 decided in his favor, by the judicial committee of the 
 privy council, on this ground, viz. : Not that the lan- 
 guage of the service does not seem to imply baptismal 
 regeneration, in the high church sense, but that such 
 liberty of opinion has always been allowed in the Church 
 of England on the subject, as to show that her intent is 
 to leave this an open question. The judicial committee 
 affirmed that the rubrics and formularies touching the 
 efficacy of baptism admit of being honestly understood 
 in different senses, particularly when the baptismal 
 service is interpreted by the article on baptism. (The 
 24th.) 
 
 This decision produced a violent ferment among the high 
 churchmen, both in England and America. A solemn 
 protest was presented to the government, by the bishop 
 of Exeter's party, in which the decision was stigmatized 
 as "giving public legal santion to false doctrine, as doing 
 injury and dishonor to Christ and His church, and 
 involving all who should countenance it in the guilt of 
 heresy." 
 
 The same violent sentiments were uttered by the high 
 church party in this country, through their leading 
 
OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITURGY. 141 
 
 orgaDS ; eno-ugli to show that, by the leading represen- 
 tatives of that chnrch, the doctrine of spiritual regenera- 
 tion, infallibly accompanying baptism, is held vital to 
 the Episcopal system, the denial of it a "heresv," 
 requiring open resistance, and even, according to Bishop 
 Philpotts, withholding communion with those impli- 
 cated in it. 
 
 The teaching of the burial service v;e must also regard 
 as dangerously erroneous. Over the grave of the drunk- 
 ard, the perjurer, the profane swearer, the priest is 
 required to declare that " it hath pleased Almighty God, 
 in His great mercy, to take unto Himself the soul of our 
 dear brother here, departed." Thanks are given as for a 
 fj^ithful soul departed in the Lord, '' that he hath deliv- 
 ered this our brother out of the miseries of this sinful 
 world ;" and the prayer is uttered, " that we, also, when we 
 depart this life, may rest in Christ, as our hope is that 
 this our brother doth." In fine, a more nakedl}^ Uni- 
 versalist service it would scarcely be possible to frame. 
 
 In the decision of the judicial committee on Mr. Gor- 
 ham's case, it is attempted to sustain their view of inter- 
 preting the language of the prayers in a qualified and 
 charitable sense, by a reference to this language of the 
 burial service. They say, " so far as our knowledge or 
 powers of conception extend, there are, and must be, 
 some persons, not excommunicated, who, having lived 
 lives of sin, die impenitent, nay, some who perish in 
 the actual commission of flagrant crimes ; yet, in every 
 case, the priest is directed to say, ' forasmuch as it hath 
 pleased Almighty God,' etc., ' we commit his body to 
 the grave, in the sure and certain hope of the resurrec- 
 tion to eternal life,' etc. In this service, therefore, there 
 are absolute expressions implying positive assertions. 
 
142 OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITURGY. 
 
 Yet, it is admitted they cannot be literally trae in all 
 cases, but must be construed in a charitable sense, justi- 
 fied, we may believe, by a confident hope that the 
 expression is literally true, in many cases, and may be 
 true even in. the particular case in which it seems to us 
 improperly applied." 
 
 This must be regarded as a miserable apology. A 
 minister of Christ is justified, it appears, in declaring, in 
 absolute terms, and under the most solemn circum- 
 stances, that the soul of a grossly irreligious member of 
 the Episcopal Church has been "taken by Grod, in great 
 mercy, to Himself," because this is true of some others, 
 and may he true, as the committee think, even in that 
 case. It is quite remarkable that the whole burial ser- 
 vice does not contain a word referring to the future con- 
 dition of the wicked. The whole implication, in every 
 case, is the present salvation, and future glorious resur- 
 rection of the departed. 
 
 Bishop Sherlock, as quoted in Southey's common- 
 place book, sets up a defense on this point, as follows : 
 "But, it is said, this encourages his wicked companions, 
 who attend his funeral, to hope they, too, may be saved, 
 though they persist in their wickedness to the last, as he 
 did. Now, indeed, what little matters may encourage 
 sucli men in sin, I cannot say, but there is no reason 
 that a faint and charitable wish should do this. If they 
 know the Gospel of Christ, they know He has threatened 
 eternal damnation against all impenitent sinners. If 
 they know the doctrine of the church, they know she 
 teaches the very same thing. If they saw their wicked 
 companion die, they saw his dying horrors and agonies, 
 which few of them die without ; and when they know 
 and see all this, is there an}^ hope they shall be saved in. 
 
OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITURGY. 143 
 
 their wickedness, only because the church will not damn 
 them, but reserves them to the judgment of Grod, and 
 sends her charitable judgment after them?' 
 
 N'ow, this is by no means a candid or honest defense. 
 What Bishop Sherlock passes off for a " charitable wish," 
 the committee of the privy council, in Mr. G-orham's 
 case, admit to be " positive assertions," and no one, cer- 
 tainly, can read the burial service and make anything 
 less of it. In the very service appropriated to the con- 
 sideration of death, and the state of men after death, the 
 liturgy teaches, that (setting aside suicides and excom- 
 municated persons) all who die in the Episcopal Church, 
 " rest from their labors, enter into joy and felicity, and 
 shall have their perfect consummation and bliss, both in 
 body and soul, in God's eternal and everlasting glory." 
 
 Now, what is it to the point to say, " It is the doctrine 
 of the church that damnation is threatened to all impen- 
 itent sinners ? " Is not the liturgy a part of the doctrine 
 of the church? It is always appealed to as such, and it 
 is that part of her teachings, which, as being continually 
 in the minds and mouths of her members, must necessa- 
 rily be the most influential in forming their views of doc- 
 trine. As to the "articles," they contain, in their pres- 
 ent form, no express assertion of future retributions ; the 
 forty-second of King Edward's articles, directed against 
 the heresy which afi&rms the ultimate salvation of all 
 men, having been dropped in the Elizabethan revision. 
 
 But even if there were any such assertion, the articles 
 are seldom read, and comparatively little valued. Their 
 ineradicable Calvinism causes them to be looked upon 
 with a degree of coldness. The liturg}^ is the great 
 Episcopal exponent of doctrine. Neither is it any more 
 to the point to say that the sinner knows the declarations 
 
144: OBJECTIONS TO EPISCOPAL LITUKGY. 
 
 of Scripture in regard to the finally impenitent. So 
 does the avowed Universalist; but his clmrch teaches 
 him to put a construction on those passages, which dis- 
 arms them of their terrors, and permits him to believe, 
 no matter what his character, he is sure of Heaven at 
 last. And as for the dying agonies of wicked men, sug- 
 gestive, as these must certainly be, of some future hor- 
 ror, '• the church " does her best to counteract the impres- 
 sion, by assuring the spectators that these agonies are 
 but the eccentric presage of a glorious immortal it3^ 
 
 The explicit teaching of a man's church constantly 
 dinned in his ears is not "a little matter,"' as Bishop 
 Sherlock disparagingly calls it. Among '"churchmen " 
 generally, the church is regarded as the authorized ex- 
 p)0under of Scripture. The individual is expressly 
 warned against trusting to his own private judgment. 
 With that willingness, therefore, so natural to man, to 
 escape responsibility, he says, my church teaches that if 
 I only die in her communion, I am safe. She will sol- 
 emnly declare over my grave that I have died in the 
 Lord, and am blessed from henceforth, and shall have my 
 "perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, 
 in God's eternal and everlasting glory." If I am de- 
 ceived, it is she has deceived me, and she, not I, must 
 answer it. 
 
 The Kev. Mason Gallagher of the Keformed Episcopal 
 Church, having referred to the above cited words of the 
 baptismal service, adds : '' In view of these words, how 
 utterly worthless and indefensible was the declaration of 
 fifty American bishops, in 1871, that the word regenerate 
 in the ofiice for baptism does not determine a moral change 
 in the recipient. It was a statement etymologically, his- 
 torically and doctrinally erroneous. It was another ami- 
 
SCHEME AND REUNION OF 1837-70. 145 
 
 able, but desperate and vins-uccessful attempt to reconcile 
 the Eomanism and Protestantism of the book of common 
 praver ; to harmonize truth and error ; to keep the image 
 of cla}^ and brass upon its feet. Thank God, this unholy 
 alliance has been at last broken, and a jDrayer book has 
 been at length framed in the iVnglo-Saxon tongue, which 
 makes the Word of God supreme, which rejects the tra- 
 ditions of men, and by which those who hold to Komish 
 error and Protestant truth cannot worship in sincerity 
 together." ("Prayer Book Eevision a Duty and Neces- 
 sity," by Eev. Mason Gallagher, p, 42. Eeformed Epis- 
 copal Church publications.) 
 
 m: 
 
 THE SCHISM AND REUNION OF 1837-70. 
 
 Notwithstanding the cordial reunion of the old and 
 new sides, and the unification of the entire Presbyterian 
 body, by means of the General Assembly, in 1789, the 
 seeds of difiiculty still remained, and, by the close of the 
 first quarter of the present century, developed themselves 
 in strong mutual suspicions and jealousies. The "new 
 side " reappeared under the name of " new school," sym- 
 pathizing warmly with New England, choosing to con- 
 duct missionary and educational enterprises by voluntary 
 societies, enthusiastic for the revival, and carrying it on 
 by means of evangelists and protracted meetings, and 
 moderate in its type of Calvinism. In addition to these, 
 and eventually swallowing up everything else, was the 
 difference between the Northern and the Southern part 
 of the church on the question of slavery. The old 
 school side, v/hile also earnest for the revival, was op- 
 posed to the doubtful machinery often used to promote 
 it, watched jealously against doctrinal errors, and pre- 
 
146 SCHE^EE AXD REUNION OF 1837-'70.. 
 
 ferred to carry on the evangelical enterprises of the 
 church by boards created by the General Assembly, and 
 responsible to the church herself. These causes, exas- 
 perated by the passions of violent and domineering men 
 on both sides, ripened matters, before the year 1837, for 
 another schism. The " old school " party found them- 
 selves a majority in the Assembly of that yeai". They 
 proceeded to abrogate (as they were entirely competent 
 to do the PLAN OF UNION between the Presbyterians and 
 Congregationalists as unconstitutional. Tiiey proceeded 
 further, and declared it void ah mitlo. Then, assuming 
 (under the influence of an unhappy error as to the facts) 
 that the Synods of Utica, Geneva and Genesee had been 
 formed and attached to the General Assembly by the 
 operation of tliat plan, the General Assembly declared 
 that they never had made, and did not make, a part of 
 the Presbj^terian Church. By means of this revolution- 
 ary coup d'eglise, the schism of 1837 was consummated. 
 Protracted law suits followed, resu'lting in decisions, first- 
 for the old and then for the new school. For several 
 j^ears, there was a strong sentiment of suspicion on the 
 one side, and of injury on the other, between the two 
 bodies. 
 
 But there soon developed itself, on the part of what 
 was at first called " Young Presbytery," a feeling of 
 regret and shame at the separation, and a desire for 
 reunion. The new school side became more zealous for 
 church doctrine and order. Irresponsible evangelists 
 began to be disoountenanced. The conviction grew 
 that the close relations maintained with New England 
 Congregationalism had proved detrimental to the proper 
 spirit and development of the church. V^oluntary socie- 
 ties lost their hold on the confidence of the presbyteries, 
 
PLAN OF UNION OF 1801 147 
 
 and a preference for chureli boards increased. The par- 
 ties wiio had beeti most active in effecting the schism 
 died, or ontlived their intiaence. A generation grew np 
 who had talcen no pai't in the unhappy straggle, and felt 
 no interest in perpetuating the schism. Finally, the 
 great convulsion of the civil war occurred, and the insti- 
 tution of slavery, which had proved so fatal an element 
 of discord in charch and state, was providentially 
 removed. There seemed, then, no further reason why 
 the two parts of the Presbyterian Church, which were 
 one in faith, order, and sympathies, should be longer 
 separated ; so, in the course of three or four years, by 
 wise and fraternal methods, the difficulties in the way of 
 reunion were overcome. The two " branches " met, by 
 delegates, in conventions, in the year 1869. in Pittsburg, 
 dissolved their separate organizations, and blended 
 together as one bod}^ The year following, the hrst 
 reunited General Assembly met in Philadelpliia. 
 
 PLAN OF UNION OF ISOl. 
 
 At the opening of the present century. Central and 
 Western New York, then just made accessible to settlers 
 by the construction of roads, and the partial extinguish- 
 ment of Indian titles, was being rapidly pieopled by 
 immigrants from Eastern and Middle States. The popu- 
 lation in 1800 was not far from 50,000. The colonists 
 from ISTew England were Congregationalists. Those 
 from New Jersey and Pennsylvania mostly Presbyte- 
 rians, Faithful and laborious missionaries and pastors 
 came with them, and churches were multiplied. The 
 Congregationalists, from Connecticut, and the Presbyte- 
 rians, from New Jersey, felt no mutual antipathy or 
 
148 PLAX OF UNION OF 1801. 
 
 jealousy. The ministers nl] united, nt first, in associa- 
 tions, of wliich, in 1804, tiiere weie three, viz., Oneida, 
 on the east, Ontario, on the west, and, between them, on 
 the military tract, (bounty lands, granted by the state to 
 Revolutionaiy soldiers, and embracing the counties of 
 Onondaga, Cayuga. Seneca, Cortland, Tompkins, Oswego, 
 and Yates,) the middle association. The first presby- 
 tery west of Albany, the Presbytery of Oneida, was set 
 off by the General Assembly in 1802. 
 
 In the year 1801, the General Assembly of the Pres- 
 byterian Church, acting on an overture from the Gen- 
 eral Association of Connecticut, adopted a "plan of 
 union for the government of the churches in the new 
 settlements." Its provisions were, substantially, as fol- 
 lows : First The missionaries, both of the General 
 Assembly and of the General Association of Connecti- 
 cut, were to encourage harmony and co-operation among 
 the members, on both sides. Second. A Congregational 
 Church, having a Presbyterian minister, may conduct 
 their own government Congregation all_y. Any diffi- 
 culty between the minister and the church, to be 
 referred to his presbytery, if both parties agree to it ; if 
 not, to a mutual council of Presbyterians and Congrega- 
 tionalists, in equal numbers. 71iird. A Presbyterian 
 Church, having a Congregational minister, to conduct 
 their own discipline Presbyterially. Any difficulty 
 between the minister and the church, to be referred to 
 his association, if both parties agree to it ; if not, to a 
 mutual council of Congregationalists and Presbyterians. 
 Fourth. When a congregation consisted part of Presby- 
 terians and part of Congregationalists, they were advised 
 to unite in forming a church, and settling a minister, 
 under these conditions; viz. : To choose a standing 
 
PLAN OF UNION OF 18()1. 1^9 
 
 committee of the brethren, to conduct discipline; a dis- 
 ciplined member, if a Presbyterian, to have a right of 
 appeal to presbytery ; if a Congregationalist, to the body 
 of the brotherhood ; and a delegate from the standing 
 committee, to have the same rights in presbytery as a 
 ruling elder. 
 
 This plan was eminently wise and liberal, and opera- 
 ted most favorably for the peace and prosperity of the 
 " churches in the new settlements." Strictly speaking, 
 however, it was, of course, unconstitutional, since it 
 admitted persons to act in Presbyterian courts who were 
 not presbyters, and were wholly unknown to the constitu- 
 tion. The General Assemblv, therefore, having some 
 time before requested the General Association of Con- 
 necticut, to unite in am.icably dissolving this plan of 
 union, of which the Association took no notice, was 
 entirely competent to discard the plan, as was regularly 
 done in the year 1837. The mistake and wrong of the 
 exscinding assemblj^ was in assuming that the Synods of 
 Utica, Geneva, and Genesee, were made up of Congre- 
 gational Churches, which had been formed and attached 
 to the Presbyterian Church by the operation of the plan 
 of union ; and as that plan was declared unconstitu- 
 tional and void, ah initio^ these synods '* were not, in 
 form or in fact, an integral part of said church ;'' whereas, 
 in truth, no Congregational Church, with a single tem- 
 porary exception, (Geneseo) was ever attached to a pres- 
 byter}^ by that plan. The Assembly, therefore, in 
 assuming that they had struck away the basis on which 
 those synods were built, and that, in consequence, they 
 fell out of the Presbyterian Church ex-necessitate rei^ 
 were guilty not only of a wrong, but of a historical blun- 
 der. Up to the year 1808, there was not a church con- 
 
150 ACCOMMODATION PLAN OF 1808. 
 
 nected with any presbytery in Western New York, that 
 was not itself strictly Presbyterian; and no case such as 
 is contemplated in article third, of a Congregational min- 
 ister being settled over a Presbyterian Church, ever 
 occurred. The minister, in such a case, always became 
 connected with a presbytery, before his installation. 
 
 o 
 
 ACCOMMODATION PLAN OF 1808. 
 
 How, then, did Congregational Churches come to be 
 connected with presbyteries in Western New York ? In 
 this way : By the year 1807, there were two presbyte 
 ries in Western New York — that of Oneida, already 
 mentioned, and that of Geneva, organized in 1805, both 
 connected with the Synod of Albany. The ministers 
 composing the Congregational associations, on the same 
 ground, were, also, in many cases, by a somewhat pecu- 
 liar arrangement, members of Presbytery. The two 
 instances in which this was first permitted, and which 
 established the precedent, were those of Eev. Mr. Hig- 
 gins, of the Church of Aurelius, and Eev. Mr. Woodruff, 
 pastor of the Church in Scipio, in Cayuga County, both 
 of them admitted to the Presbytery of Geneva, while 
 still retaining their membership in the middle associa- 
 tion. This simple, though irregular, proceeding opened 
 the way for the entire dissolution of the Congregational 
 Associaticins in Western New York, which soon fol- 
 lowed. In the year 1807, the middle association sent a 
 memorial to the Synod of Albany, then sitting at Coop- 
 erstown, requesting to be incorporated into the synod, 
 reserving, at the same time, to their churches the right 
 of Congregational government. The synod assented to 
 this proposition, agreeing to leave the churches of the 
 
ACCOMMODATION' PLAN OF ISOS. 151 
 
 association undisturbed in the administration of Congre- 
 gational government, and to receive delegates from them 
 on the same footing as ruling elders. This did not, of 
 itself, operate to dissolve the middle association, which, 
 however, was effected in 1810, in the following w^ay : 
 The Synod of Albany, in that year, organized all the 
 churches belonging to the middle association, and the 
 Presbytery of Geneva, into the three presbyteries of 
 Geneva, Cayuga, and Onondaga. The middle associa- 
 tion quietly expired, bequeathing its assets to the Presby- 
 terian Church. And thus organized Congregationalism 
 disappeared from the "military tract." The General 
 Assembl}^ of 1808, approved the act of the Synod of 
 Albany, and the principle thus established — that a Con- 
 gregational Church might be connected with presbytery, 
 on the " accommodation plan," as it was termed, retain- 
 ing its own internal discipline, and being represented in 
 Presbyterian Church courts by a lay delegate, became 
 fruitful, in the rapid absorption of. all the Congrega- 
 tional Churches in Western JSTew York into the Presby- 
 terian body. The Ontario Association was dissolved in 
 1812 ; the Union Association, of Oneida, in 1822 ; and, 
 with this, the last remnant of distinctive Congregation- 
 alism disappeared from all the central and western part 
 of the state. Many Congregational Churches were, sub- 
 sequently, organized, but all connected themselves, at 
 their origin, with some presbyter}^, on the accommoda- 
 tion plan. 
 
 It was not at all, therefore, by the plan of union of 
 1801, as the General Assembly assumed, but wholly by 
 the "accommodation plan," of 1807, sanctioned by the 
 General Assembly itself, in 1808, that the Congrega- 
 tional Churches within the bounds of the Synods of 
 
152 ENGLISH PLAN' OF UNION OF 1690. 
 
 Utica, Greneva, and Genesee, came to be incorporated 
 into the Presbyterian Church. The exscinding Assem- 
 bly, however, apparently acted on Yoltaire's principle, 
 that it is more important to strike hard, than to hit in 
 the right place. The plan of 1803 did the mischief, and 
 they punished the innocent plan of 1801. 
 
 ENGLISH PLAN OF UNION, OF 1690. 
 
 The Church in England, formerly called Presbyterian, 
 became, to a great extent, Congregationalized, before its 
 defection to Socinianism. A lax plan of union was 
 entered into between it and the Independent Churches, 
 soon after the revolution of 1688, by which the former 
 parted with the essential conservative features of Pres- 
 byterianism. The "heads of agreement" are given in 
 Mather's Magnalia, vol. ii, p. 228. Whoever compares 
 this plan with the Cambridge Platform, will see that 
 the latter contains far more elements of Presbyterianism 
 than the former. The plan of union merely allows, 
 without requiring, a ruling eldership, which the Cam- 
 bridge and Saybrook platforms insist upon ; and this 
 mere permission is the only vestige of Presbyterian gov- 
 ernment incorporated in the English plan. It contains 
 no recognition of any ecclesiastical authority, beyond the 
 local church ; no provision for appeals or complaints, 
 and nothing requiring ministers to assent to any form of 
 doctrine at their ordination. The churches were left free 
 to choose as their creed, either the Westminster confes- 
 sion, the Savoy, or the thirty-nine articles. The result 
 of the whole was, that the Presbyterian Churches became 
 Congregational Churches of a very loose t^^pe ; and from 
 this they slid, impercepti^bly, but rapidly, into gross doc- 
 
INVITATION TO THE LORDS SUPPER. 153 
 
 trinal errors. They merely retained, in part, the Pres- 
 byterian name, for the sake of retaining their hold on 
 certain vested funds ; acting in this with the same dis- 
 honesty as the Massachusetts Churches, which continued 
 to grasp and use, as Unitarians, the funds which had 
 been given them for the support of evangelical doctrine. 
 Only in England, less fortunate than in this country, 
 the law stripped them of their dishonest plunder. It is 
 important to remember, that it was Congregational, and 
 not Presbyterian Churches, in England, that were swept 
 away into Arian errors. 
 
 Q 
 
 THE DIRECTORY FOR WORSHIP, ON THE FORM OF INVITA- 
 TION TO THE lord's SUPPER. 
 
 In answer to an overture, inquiring " whether it 
 accords with the standards, and the spirit of the church, 
 to admit persons to the Lord's Supper, who are not 
 members of the visible church," the Greneral Assembly, 
 of 1876, replied, that "it is not in accordance with the 
 spirit of the Presbyterian Church, to invite any persons 
 to the Lord's Sapper, who are not members of the visi- 
 ble church.-'^ The language of the book, relied on by 
 some to authorize indiscriminate communion, (Directory, 
 VIII, 4,) is not correctly interpreted by them. Although, 
 in describing the persons there invited to the Lord's 
 table, church membership is not mentioned, it is clearly 
 implied." (Minutes, 1876, p. 79.) 
 
 In reviewing this judgment, it is proper to inquire : 
 
 * The overture of 1872 conti.iecl itself to the inctuiry, ''Whether it accords with 
 the S2)irit and usage of the Presbyterian Church, to invite persons — believers — 
 not members of any evangelical church, to partake of the Lord's Sapper." To 
 that precise question, no reference whatever bein^ made to the teaching of the 
 '' standard?," the General Assejably replied, no doubt correctly, in the negative. 
 Minutes, 1872, p, 89.) 
 
15i JJIKECTORY FOR WORSHIP ON THE FORM 
 
 1. What is the actual doctrine of the standards on the 
 subject ? " The universal church (Form of Government : 
 II, 1,) consists of all those persons, in every nation, 
 together with their children, who make profession of the 
 holy leligion of Christ, and of submission to His laws." 
 A particular church (chap, ii, 4,) is merely a section, or 
 smaller part, of this universal church, organized local 1}', 
 for the reason that " this immense multitude cannot 
 meet together" in one place, to' hold communion, or to 
 worship God." The character of the members of the 
 •universal and the particular church is, of course, and by 
 express definition, the same They are " professing 
 Christians, and their children." The ground of their 
 union is the same ; they are to live by the same rule. 
 But, as no limits are prescribed to the size of the particu- 
 lar church, it consists of so many of the members of the 
 universal church as, on account of local convenience, or 
 other reasons, are " voluntarily associated together." 
 Their voluntary association consists in this — that they 
 are, by their own choice, members of the congregation. 
 
 It is the members of the particular church or congre- 
 gation (for the terms are used interchangeably, Directory, 
 X, 7,) that are regularly to commune together in the 
 Lord's Supper — that is, a small portion of that uni- 
 versal church scattered throughout the world, which con- 
 sists of " all those who make profession of the holy relig- 
 ion of Christ, and of obedience to His laws." Every 
 such person having been duly baptized is a member of 
 the church ; and, if free from certain disqualifications 
 which remain to be mentioned, " it is his duty and priv- 
 ilege to come to the Lord's table." 
 
 This is the doctrine of the " standards : " " Children 
 born within the pale of the visible church, and dedicated 
 
OF INVITATIOX TO THE LORDS SUPPER. 155 
 
 to God, are under the inspection and government of the 
 church, and are to be taught to read and repeat the cate- 
 chism, the apostles' creed, and the Lords prayer. Thev 
 are to be taught to pray, to abhor sin, to fear God and 
 to obey the Lord Jesus Christ ; and when the}^ come to 
 years of discretion, if they are free from scandal, appear 
 sober and steadj^, and have sufficient knowledge to dis- 
 cern tlie Lord's body, they ought to be informed it is 
 their duty and privilege to come to the Lord's Supper." 
 Now, applying these definitions to chapter Yiii, " of the 
 administraiion of ilie Lords Saiyper^^^ we are left in no 
 doubt what persons it is that are to be invited to com- 
 mune, viz. : 
 
 1. It is, in general, members of the church or congre- 
 gation, that is to say, all baptized persons who are other- 
 wise unexceptionable. 
 
 2. Of this church or congregation, the profane, io-no- 
 rant and scandalous, and those that secretlv indulo-P 
 then:fseives in any known sin, are to be warned not to 
 approach the holy table. (Chap, viii, 8.) 
 
 3. The minister is to invite all the congregation (see 
 chap. VIII, 3 ; that all may come, &c.), under the three 
 following specifications, viz. : 
 
 a. Such as being sensible of their lost and helpless 
 condition by sin, depend upon the atonement of Christ 
 for pardon and acceptance with God. 
 
 h. Such as, being instructed in the Gospel doctrine 
 have a competent knowledge to discern the Lord's body. 
 
 c. And such as desire to renounce their sins, and^are 
 determined to lead a holj' and Godly life. 
 
 That this is not a mere cumulative description of the 
 same class of persons, that is, trulj^ regenerated persons 
 but a specification of three different descriptions or 
 
156 DIRECTORY FOR WORSHll' OX THE FORM 
 
 classes, appears from the style ilself ; the discriminating 
 words " such as " being thrice repeated. The three 
 classes, therefore, are, 
 
 First. Traly converted persons ; ^^ sack as depend upon 
 the atonement of Christ for pardon^ being sensible of their 
 lost and helpless state by sin^ This is the description ot 
 true Christians. 
 
 Second. Birth-right members of the church, who, with- 
 out making any special profession of having experienced 
 the renewing power of the Holy Spirit, are " instructed 
 in the Gospel doctrine and have a competent knowledge 
 to discern the Lord's hoUj. (See chap, ix, 1.) These 
 persons are, in the language of the standards, "young 
 Christians ; " and being sober and steady, free from scan- 
 dal, and having sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's 
 body, it is their duty and privilege to come to the Lord's 
 Supper. 
 
 The third class consists of those who may be called 
 seekers ov penitents ; such as have lived estranged from 
 the church and her ordinances, but now " desire to 
 renounce their sins, and to lead a holy and a Godly life." 
 
 It appears then, from the standards, that as concerns 
 the question of an invitation to the Lord's Supper, the 
 church and congregation are one ; all being regarded as 
 suitable communicants who are not profane, ignorant or 
 scandalous. Those who are so, are to be warned not to 
 come, they themselves being the judges of their own fit- 
 ness for communion. The examination in respect to the 
 knowledge and piety of " young Ciiristians," has respect 
 only to those who are to be regularly admitted to sealing 
 ordinances at their first communion. (Directory, ix, 2, 
 3.) Every baptized member of a congregation, there- 
 fore, is a member of the church, and, if not ignorant or 
 
OF INVITATION TO THE LORD's SUPPEE. 157 
 
 scandalous, it is his duty and privilege to come to tlie 
 Lord's Slipper. Of course, ii is the duty of the minis- 
 ter to invite him. 
 
 If we now turn from the standards themselves to the 
 debates in the Westminster Assembly, on the subject of 
 admission to the Lord's Supper, we find the actual views 
 of the framers of our symbols clearly exhibited. The 
 question before their minds, in every discussion of this 
 point, was not, what persons might be included as of suf- 
 ficiently credible piety to qualify them for communion, 
 but only what persons it was necessarj^ to exclude for 
 their ignorance and vices. All the members of the con- 
 gregation (being baptized Christians) were presumptively 
 proper communicants ; and a clear case must be made 
 out against any man in order to exclude him. Whether 
 this exclusion necessarily implied excommunication, or 
 only an official warning to such 'persons not to come to 
 the Lord's table while impenitent, was the great point on 
 which the discussion turned. Leading Presbyterian 
 divines, such as Gillespie, Reynolds, Herle, Marshall and 
 Calamy, maintained the latter, and their view was finally 
 incorporated in the standards. "The minister is to ream 
 the profane, the ignorant and the scandalous, &c." The 
 implication is that such persons, being members of the 
 church, might be disposed to attend the communion, as 
 was always the case in England so long as test acts 
 remained in force. The minister is not to excommuni- 
 cate such persons, but simply to warn them not to 
 approach, until penitent, the holy table. After elaborate 
 diwscussion on question 173 of the larger catechism, ^^ May 
 any ivho j^rofess the faith and desire to come unto the Lord's 
 Supper he kept from itf " the answer finally adopted was, 
 as it now stands, " such as are found to be ignorant or 
 
158 DIRECTORY FOR WORSHIP ON THE FORM 
 
 scandalous, notwithstanding their profession of the faith 
 and desire to come to the Lord's Supper, may and ought 
 to be kept from the sacrament, until they receive instruc- 
 tion and manifest their reformation." ^'' 
 
 The whole question before the Assembly was, simply, 
 whether pastors had the right to keep anybody from the 
 Lord's table, who was disposed to attend. The Erastian 
 members maintained the negative. Their principle was, 
 that the church, as such, had no power of discipline 
 whatever. In that matter she was merely the servant 
 and organ of the state ; and, even evangelical members, 
 like Groodwin, Gillespie, and Lightfoot himself, held that 
 none could be debarred from communion, except such 
 as were actually exconmiunicated ; but that ever}^ mem- 
 ber of the congregation who was neither ignorant or 
 scandalous, might and ought to commune, was univers- 
 ally agreed. 
 
 This unanimous agreement infallibly interprets the 
 language of the Confession, though that language itself 
 is so plain, that it might be supposed to need no inter- 
 pretation. It shows that, in the intendment of the 
 " standards," all baptized members of the congregation 
 are members of the church, and are presumptively 
 entitled to communion ; that among these, such as are 
 profane, ignorant, or scandalous, are to be debarred from 
 
 * Note. — To the same effect is the rubric introductorj' to the communion ser- 
 vice, in the Episcopal book of common prayer. '' If, among those who come to 
 be partakers of the holy communion, the minister shall know any to be an open 
 and notorious evil liver, or to have done any wrong to his neighbors by word or 
 deed, so that the congregation be thereby offended, he shall advertise him, that 
 he presume not to come to the Lord's table, until be have openly declared him- 
 self to have truly repented and amended his former evil life, that the congrega- 
 tion may thereliy be satisfied, and that he hath recompensed the parties lo whom 
 he hath done wrong, or at least declare himself to be in full purpose to do so as 
 soon as he conveniently may." 
 
OF INVITATIO^T TO THE LORD's SUPPER 159 
 
 coming, and tliat all others are expressly to be invited, 
 under the three specifications already stated. 
 
 According to the standards, therefore, the invitation 
 to commune at the Lord's table is to be addressed to 
 persons, not as " members of evangelical churches, in 
 good and regular standing," but as coming under one or 
 the other of these descriptions; that is, they are invited, 
 not with reference to their ecclesiastical standing, but 
 with reference to their own sense of their sins, their 
 wants, and their desires for pardoning and strengthening 
 grace. .The superior fitness of an invitation in this form 
 would seem to be obvious. 
 
 2. But the question as to the "spirit" of the Presby- 
 terian Church on this point, meaning, thereby, its pre- 
 vailing sentiment and practice, is a different one, and 
 requires a different answer. The abuses connected with 
 indiscriminate communion in the -Established Church of 
 England led the more earnest and faithful pastors, like 
 Baxter, to insist on the distinction between worthy and 
 unworthy communicants. It seemed intolerable to them, 
 that grossly ignorant, profane and scandalous 4)ersons 
 should make ihe solemn ordinance of the Lord's Supper 
 a mere convenience for procuring worldly benefits, as a 
 fellowship in a university, or a commission in the army. 
 They began, therefore, to draw the line between the 
 " church " and the " congregation," regarding the ignor- 
 ant and profane, even though baptized, and, therefore, 
 in the general sense, members of the church, as not, in 
 such a special sense, members as to entitle them to com- 
 munion. This gradually developed into that distinctive- 
 ly Independent and Presbyterian view, which makes 
 nothing at all of birth-right membership in the church, 
 and, consequentl3^ disparages infant baptism, as effect- 
 
160 DIRECTOKY FOR WORSHIP ON THE FORM 
 
 ing no change in even the outward relations of the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 That this is the actual view of the Presbyterian 
 Church, it is impossible to deny. Baptized children are 
 not regarded, among us, as, in any sense whatever, 
 church members. "When adults, who had been baptized 
 in infancy, present themselves before the session, and 
 are received, on giving credible evidence of piety, they 
 are regarded, and spoken of, as "joining the church," 
 whereas, the standards declare that they are already 
 members of the church, both general and particular. It 
 is only unbaptized persons who are spoken of in the 
 directory, as being "admitted to the church."' (ix, 4.) 
 Having thus thrown contempt on infant baptism, it is 
 highly inconsequent to complain that the ordinance 
 falls into disuse in our churches. 
 
 There is here, therefore, as not infrequently happens 
 with any constitution of some antiquity, a direct antago- 
 nism between the text and the comment, or the require- 
 ments of the statute and the actual practice under it. A 
 constitution remains stationary, but society advances. 
 The creed is stereotyped, while men's opinions are set up 
 in movable forms. In actual practice, errata are silently 
 and insensibly corrected, defects supplied, or superfluities 
 dropped out, while the " standards " retain their fixed 
 and solid shape. Inevitablj^, therefore, there comes, 
 sooner or later, in all churches, and in all constitutional 
 governments, a collision between the statute and the 
 interpretation. 
 
 Which is to give away? The constitution requires 
 one thing, the received usage demands another, and the 
 usage, by prescription, comes to be a kind of unwritten 
 constitution, which claims precedence of the other, and 
 
OF INVITATION TO THE LOED's SUPPEE. 161 
 
 has an independent life and authority of its own. I 
 observe, in my garden, that the canes of the ^' black- 
 cap " raspberries root themselves at their extremity in the 
 earth, and set up an independent life of their own. 
 They had previously been nourished wholly from the 
 parent root, the sap flowing out to the very tip, and giv- 
 ing an organic unity to the whole. But in the newly 
 rooted plant the sap soon begins to flow the other way. 
 The young cane sets up an opposition life against the 
 old. The result is, that, somewhere, the opposing cur- 
 rents meet. There is a disintegration and rupture, and 
 the schism becomes complete. 
 
 So the practice of a church becomes, at length, by 
 being rooted for some time in the soil of opinion, dis- 
 tinct and separate from the life it was originallj^ derived 
 from. 
 
 It becomes, then, or may become, a grave question, 
 when the practice of the church contradicts (as in this 
 case) its written constitution, to which of the two alle- 
 giance is owed. That the .practice, or the ''spirit" of a 
 church cannot always claim the right to overrule its 
 fundamental law, will be easih^ acknowledged. The 
 Jewish Church was, for long periods, sunk in idolatry, 
 even to the utter loss, or neglect, of the Mosaic statutes ; 
 and yet, it was the duty of a reforming prince to disre- 
 gard the established custom, and bring the people back 
 to the law of the "standards." The church, after the 
 middle of the fourth century, subscribed, almost unani- 
 iTiously, a semi-Arian confession ; but the fliith remained 
 as laid down by the first general council, and to that 
 every Christian owed his allegiance, and not to the pre- 
 vailing "spirit of the church." If the prevailing inter- 
 pretation and the spirit of the church contains the abso- 
 
162 ON THE DEMISSION 
 
 lute law, as against the standards, then the reformers and 
 the Puritans were precluded, and had no w^arrant in at- 
 tempting to bring back the church to her original platform. 
 On the other hand, it may be admitted, in regard to 
 adiaphora^ that a long established interpretation must 
 often have the force of an unwritten amendment. Jesus 
 partook of the Passover, not according to the mode 
 expressly required in the original statute, with staff in 
 hand and shoes on feet, but in the method which had 
 gradually come to prevail in its stead. The moral law 
 he cleared of all traditionary glosses and interpretations, 
 and enforced it in its original strictness ; but a positive 
 statute he allowed to be modified by the " change of 
 times, circumstances, and men's manners." It might be 
 a sacred duty, therefore, to resist the " spirit of the 
 church," when it required heresj^ in doctrine, or idola- 
 try in worship, and, at the same time, rash and unjustifi- 
 able, to assail it, when it merely requires a change in the 
 mode of administering an ordinance. In indifferent 
 things, prescription must often have the force of law ; 
 but then, it is always to be remembered that the begin- 
 ning of corruption in worship, like the beginning of 
 strife, is as wlten one letteth out water. " Nettle roots 
 (observes Lord Bacon) do not sting;" and an enlight- 
 ened Christian conscience must arbitrate the question, 
 whether we are bound by an extra constitutional cus- 
 tom, or whether we are entitled, or even bound, to fall 
 back on the constitution itself. 
 
 R 
 
 ON THE DEMISSION OF THE MINISTRY. 
 
 The necessity for some provision for the demission of 
 the ministry has become so urgent, that repeated appli- 
 
OF THE MIN'ISTRY. 163 
 
 cations have been made to the Greneral Assembly, to 
 provide a form, under which it might receive the sanc- 
 tion of the church. In the year 1872, the Presbytery of 
 ISTew York overtured the Assembly, requesting answers 
 to the following questions, viz. : 
 
 1. " Whether, when a minister, in good standing, is 
 deliberately convinced that he is providentially released 
 from the duties of his ofhce, he may not, with the con- 
 sent of the presbytery, demit that ofl&ce ? " 
 
 2. "And, in case a presbytery is convinced that any 
 one of its ministers, for any reason, not calling for disci- 
 pline, is permanently disqualified for the work of the 
 ministry, may not that presbytery, with the consent of 
 the synod, cancel the ordination of that minister ? '' 
 
 The committee, to whom this overture was referred, 
 argued, in reph^ : First. " That the sentiment of the 
 Christian Church, generally, has affirmed the indelible 
 character of ordination." This is easily admitted to be 
 true. The Grreek, Romish and Episcopal Churches have 
 always maintained that doctrine. Second. That wdiile 
 our standards " make no well defined statement upon the 
 subject," it may be inferred, from the perpetual charac- 
 ter of the offices of deacon and elder, of neither of which 
 can anj^ man be divested, except by deposition, that the 
 higher office — that of the ministry — cannot be less per- 
 manent. 
 
 The committee, however, acknowledge that the sec- 
 ond hook of discipline of the Scottish Kirk, " upon 
 which our own form of government is based, makes an 
 apparent exception to this." It directs (chap, vii, 25, 
 26,) that " those ministers ivho are found wholly insufficient 
 to execute their charge^ shall he derposed!'^ This insuffi- 
 ciency, the committee think, ''appears to be of such a 
 
164 ON THE DEMISSION 
 
 nature as to call for discipline, for the penalty is deposi- 
 tion." But this view is contradicted b}^ the context. 
 In the previous paragraph the book directs that minis- 
 ters heretical in doctrine, and immoral in life, (under 
 numerous specifications) shall be deposed It then adds 
 the separate clause above quoted, making the "alto- 
 gether insufficient " a distinct class from those guilty of 
 any moral offense. In their case the word " deposed " 
 only means divested of the ministerial office, with no other 
 stigma than is implied in the fact, that they were found 
 insufficient for it. Third. The committee think there 
 can be little need for any such measure, since so extreme 
 a care is exercised in admitting candidates to the minis- 
 try, that very few incompetent persons will be found on 
 the roll. 
 
 Unfortunately, this is too favorable a judgment 
 The injudicious encouragement sometimes given to 
 young men to enter the ministry, the rivalry betweer 
 theological schools, each holding out inducements to stu 
 dents to enter its doors, the too often superficial charac 
 ter of the examination for licensure, and the fact that, to 
 a man once licensed, ordination is almost never refused, 
 these causes will, from time to time, introduce into 
 the ministry some whose duty it was to " glorify God by 
 making besoms," or in some other respectable handi- 
 craft. Add to these the causes which make many 
 ordained ministers "altogether insufficient" for their 
 work, such as the loss of voice, the failure of health, the 
 impossibility of finding a pulpit, inadequacy of support, 
 discouragement, lack of all interest in the ministry, yet 
 not such as to call for discipline, and we have an array 
 of causes which have notoriously introduced into the 
 Presbyterian ministry a considerable number of persons. 
 
OF THE MINISTRY. 165 
 
 stamped with the indelible mark of office, to whom, as 
 well as to the church herself, it would be of immense 
 advantage, if a back door could be opened, through 
 which they could cjuietly step out into secular life. 
 Many persons who are, and for years have been, wholly 
 secularized, are still burdened with the title of "Eever- 
 end,"' their names borne on the roll of presbytery, and 
 regularly reported in the minutes of the General Assem- 
 bly. One effect of this is, considerabl}^ to swell the 
 apparent strength of the ministry, while, in fact, the 
 "altogether insufficient," or secular, character of the 
 parties tends far more to reduce that strength, than 
 wc-dd their entire subtraction fi*om the roll. Numbers 
 of tnem would welcome a provision, by which, without 
 stigma or reproach, they could be divested of the office. 
 At present, however obviously a Presbyterian minister 
 may have mistaken his calling, and however insufficient 
 he may be for the discharge of its duties, there are only 
 two grim figures whose hands can efface the marks of 
 ordination from his person ; the one is infamy, the other, 
 death. 
 
 In view of the whole case, the committee recommended 
 the following overture, which was ordered to be sent 
 down to the presbyteries, viz. : " Shall the following 
 section be added to chapter twenty-five of the Form of 
 Government, to wit : The office of a minister of the Gos- 
 pel is perpetual. No one can lay it aside, at his own 
 pleasure, or be deprived of it, but by deposition. Yet, 
 for reasons not calling for discipline, Firsts A minister 
 may, on his own request, and with the permission of the 
 presbytery, cease to be an acting minister ; or, Second, 
 If a presbytery is convinced that a minister is perma- 
 nently disqualified for the ministerial work, (except by 
 
iOG ON THE 1>EM1SSI0N 
 
 age, sickness, or other accidents,) it may, with tlie con- 
 sent of synod, after three months notice to such minis- 
 ter, require him to demit the functions of his office, it 
 being understood that he will still be a member of the 
 church, and eligible to the office of ruling elder, or dea- 
 con. Third. Provided, that if any one, in either of these 
 ways, cease to be an acting minister, he shall not be per- 
 mitted to sit, as a minister, in any of our church courts ; 
 and, if he is not connected as a member with some par- 
 ticular church, he shall still be responsible to his pres- 
 bytery, and he may, by it, be restored to the exercise 
 of the functions of his office, and to all the rights inci- 
 dent thereto." 
 
 This half-way, self-contradictory and indeterminate 
 measure naturalh^ failed to secure the assent of the pres- 
 byteries. Had the committee, on the other hand, dis- 
 missing the purely superstitious idea of an " indelible 
 character of office," boldly proposed a measure, pro- 
 viding, under suitable safe-guards, for the full demission 
 of the ministry, there is every reason to believe it would 
 have received the sanction of tlie church. 
 
 Under the delay of providing any such measure of 
 relief, individual presbyteries are naturallj^ led to act 
 independently of a general permission, and introduce 
 for themselves the needed reform. In a recent case, 
 (Sept., 1877,) a minister of the Presbyterian Church, of 
 unexceptionable Christian character, whose mind had 
 become unhappily disturbed, in regard to certain doc- 
 trines, applied to his presbytery to be released from the 
 clerical office. If they could not otherwise do this, he 
 requested them to bring charges against him, and depose 
 him from the ministry. The presbytery, in view of all 
 the circumstances, after expressing their high sense of 
 
.OF THE MINISTRY. 167 
 
 the applicant's Christian character, and their regret that 
 he should feel called upon to take any such step, 
 resolved that his request should be granted, and his 
 name dropped from the roll, and that he should no 
 longer be reputed a minister of the Presbyterian Church. 
 The synod, on review of the presbyterial records, 
 approved them, without exception. 
 
 Other presbyteries may have taken, others certainly jvi 11 
 take, the same course, which will be eventually accepted by 
 the General Assembly, and b}^ the church, at its instance. 
 This is the safe and natural method of church legislation. 
 The General Assembly should not originate, but merely 
 accept all necessary reforms. No permission could be 
 gained- for a limited tenure of the eldership, until a large / 
 bod}^ of churches had adopted it without permission, as 
 a necessary measure of relief The early councils did 
 not dictate the faith of the church. They only formu- 
 lated into creeds the faith which the church had already 
 developed. The General Assembly is a parliament, 
 which, acting nnder constitutional restrictions and prece- 
 dents, neither loves nor volunteers change, but always 
 concedes it when the demand, becomes sufficiently press- 
 ing;."" 
 
 THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 
 
 The Methodist Episcopal discipline includes the essen- 
 tials of Presbyterianism, viz., the government of the 
 church by presbyters, or elders, in courts of review and 
 control. The bishops are only elders entrusted with the 
 
 * For previous action of the Assem"'oly on this subject, see Xew Digest, pp. 
 6.5-70. 
 
168 THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 
 
 superintendency of the church, and are resjoonsible to 
 the General Conference. 
 
 The Methodist Episcopal organization includes the 
 following particulars : 
 
 1. The station, or local church, with its minister in 
 charge, steward, class leaders, exhorters, local preachers, 
 and committees to aid in discipline. 
 
 2. The Quarterly Conference, including the ministers 
 and official members of the churches within a circuit, 
 receiving appeals, licensing preachers, elc. This is pre- 
 sided over by the presiding elder of the district. 
 
 S. The Annual Conference, composed of the presiding 
 elders, and all the pastors and lay delegates within its 
 bounds, and receiving appeals from the Quarterly Con- 
 ferences. It elects traveling elders, or pastors, and dea- 
 cons, and transacts its business by means of a series of 
 twenty-three formal interrogatories as to the number, 
 standing, etc., of the clergy. There are, in the whole 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, between seventy and eighty 
 such conferences. Each Annual Conference is presided 
 over by a bishop. 
 
 4. The Greneral Conference, made up of the bishops 
 and a representation from the Annual Conferences of 
 one from forty-five elders and traveling deacons, and 
 two laymen from each conference. It meets once in four 
 years, and corresponds, generally, in its functions to the 
 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church. It also 
 elects the bishops. The bishops choose the presiding 
 elders, who are the chief pastors of particular districts. 
 Candidates for deacons' and elders' orders must pass a 
 satisfactory examination, before committees, on a four 
 years course of study, after they are taken on trial in 
 the Conference. 
 
THE SCOTTISH KIEK. 169 
 
 T 
 
 THE SCOTTISH KiEK. 
 
 The first book of discipline adopted bj the first Scot- 
 tish General Assembly, an Assembly out of whose forty 
 members only six were ministers, contained all the fea- 
 tures of our existing Presbyterianism. It set out with 
 the declaration against the claims of tradition, councils, 
 or church authority of any sort ; that " the Word of God 
 onl}" is sufficient for our salvation. It shall be read in 
 private houses, therefore, and taught in every kirk 
 within this realm ; and all contrary doctrine to the same 
 shall be impugned and suppressed." From this sole 
 and infallible guide, they deduced, as the ordinary offi- 
 cers for each congregation, bishops or ministers, presby- 
 ters or elders, and deacons, each class being appointed 
 to its specific work, precisely as now. 
 
 They provided carefully for raising up and educating 
 a ministry-, beginning with elementary schools, as fol- 
 lows : " Because schools are the seed of the ministry, dil- 
 igent care shall be taken over them, that they be 
 ordered, in religion and conversation, according to the. 
 Word. Every town should have a schoolmaster ; and 
 in landwart the minister, or reader, should teach the 
 children that come to them. Men should be compelled, 
 by the kirk and the magistrates, to send their bairns to 
 the schools. Poor men's children should be helped ;" 
 EDUCATION COMPULSORY, that is, and schools, where nec- 
 essary.' FREE. 
 
 In the suddenness of the religious revolution that had 
 taken place, and the discarding of the old incompetent 
 clergy, there w^ould, of course, be felt an urgent want of 
 religious teachers, in sympathy with the movement. 
 
liO THE SCOTTISH KiKK. 
 
 No exigency of circumstances, however, was to warrant 
 the intrusion of* unfit ministers. "Neither for rarity of 
 men (said the statute), for necessity of teaching, nor for 
 any corruption of the time, should unable men be admit 
 ted to the ministry. We should consider, first, whether 
 God hath given the gifts to him whom we would choose, 
 for God calleth no man to the ministry whom he arms 
 not with necessar}^ c^^^^- Better it is to have the room 
 vacant, than to have unqualified persons, to the scandal 
 of the ministry, and the hurt of the kirk. In the rarity 
 of qualified men, we should call unto the Lord, that He, 
 of His goodness, would send forth true laborers to His 
 harvest. The kirk and faithful magistrates should com- 
 pel such as have the gifts, to take the office of teaching 
 upon them." 
 
 Certain accidental and temporar}^ provisions were also 
 adopted by the first Scottish Assembly, which are well 
 deserving of attention, as illustrating the practical wis- 
 dom that presided over this great restoration of the prim- 
 itive church polity. 
 
 1. In the paucity of competent preachers of the Gos- 
 pel, a class of youthful "readers" was provided for, 
 thus restoring, at the reformation of the church, an order 
 found necessary during the period of its first formation. 
 These " lectors " were to read through, in course, as a 
 part of public worship, selected books of the Old and 
 New Testament. After a certain period of service, they 
 might attempt mingling exposition and practical remark 
 with their reading ; and thus, if found acceptable, were, 
 just as in the third and fourth centuries, to be advanced to 
 the ministry. 
 
 2. The system included a class of lay doctors, who 
 were set apart for the work of education, from teaching 
 
THE SCOTTISH KIRK. 171 
 
 the catechism up to the chair of a university. "The 
 office of the doctor (says the book of discipline) is to 
 open up the mind of the Spirit of God in the Scriptures 
 simply, without such application as ministers use, to 
 the end that the faithful may be instructed, and sound 
 doctrine taught. Under the name and office of " doc- 
 tor," we comprehend, also, the order of schools, colleges, 
 and universities, which hath been, from time to time, 
 carefully maintained as well among the Jews and Chris- 
 tians, as among the profane nations." 
 
 The understanding of the Scottish Presbyterian^ in 
 other words, was that ministers of the Gospel were to 
 devote themselves expressly to the cure of souls, and 
 that the work of Christian education, in all its branches, 
 was to be attended to by a class of lay elders, set apart 
 for the purpose. 
 
 8. Another feature of the first book of discipline was 
 what is called " the exercise," and what was subse- 
 quently known among the English Puritans as "the 
 prophesying." It was a meeting composed of the min- 
 isters, elders, doctors, readers, and men of learning, of 
 each town, and a circuit of some six miles around. 
 They were required to assemble weekly, "for the expla- 
 nation of texts of Scripture, discussion of points of doc- 
 trine or practice, and whatever else might tend to the 
 edifying of the kirk." At these exercises entire free- 
 dom of question and remark was indulged to all per- 
 sons, with this judicious proviso, "that no man should 
 move a question the which himself is not able to solve." 
 
 4. The system of " superintendents," incorporated 
 in the first book of discipline, was an eminent instance 
 of the wisdom of the Scottish Presbyterians. Eesolutely 
 opposed as they were to Prelatical rule, they adopted, in 
 
172 THE SCOTTISH KIRK. 
 
 view of their peculiar circumstances, a modified system 
 of Episcopacy. The uew polity was still too crude, and 
 the reformed ministers too ill trained, to be left to their 
 own unaided working. All the country parishes in the 
 kingdom were, accordingly, distributed into live dio- 
 ceses, over each of which was appointed a superinten- 
 dent. He was only a presbyter of the same grade as his 
 brethren, and he was to have his own church to serve, like 
 them ; but, in addition to this, he was to go the rounds 
 of his diocese, preaching, at least, three times a week, 
 anS inspecting the condition of the several flocks dili- 
 gently, as follows : 
 
 " In this visitation superintendents shall not only 
 preach, but also examine the doctrine, life, diligence and 
 behavior of the ministers, readers, elders, and deacons. 
 They shall consider the order of the kirk, the manners 
 of the people, how the poor are provided, how the youth 
 are instructed, how the discipline and policy of the kirk 
 are kept, how heinous and horrible crimes are corrected, 
 and shall admonish and dress out all things, the best 
 they may."' For this purpose they were to remain in 
 each congregation from two weeks to twenty days. 
 
 It was further carefully provided, that superintendents 
 should be subject to the same responsibility and disci- 
 pline as other ministers. To guard against any suspi- 
 cion of a Prelacy, the old title of "bishop" was refused 
 them, and no one of the old bishops was permitted to 
 fill the superintendency, until, by subscribing the book 
 of discipline, he had expressly renounced his Episcopal 
 pretensions. In short, it was almost identical with ihe 
 presiding eldership of our Methodist brethren, an 
 admirable arrangement for a pioneer church, or a church 
 in a new and reforming condition. The virus of Prelacy 
 
OHUKCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 173 
 
 does not consist at all in tlie mere fact of the oversight 
 bj one minister of a certain number of other ministers 
 and their congregations. It consists in the assumption 
 that this oversight is exercised bj a special divine war- 
 rant ; that the bishop owes no responsibility to the peo- 
 ple, and that he constitutes the indispensable channel on 
 which the}' depend for all communication of divine 
 grace. This makes a true hierarchy — a system which, 
 however modified and limited by circumstances, 
 embraces the essential elements of ecclesiastical despot- 
 ism. 
 
 TJ 
 
 CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 
 
 The method of procedure in Presbyterian Church 
 courts is generall}^ conformed to that of ordinary delib- 
 erative assemblies, and presents no difficulty that is not 
 overcome by a short experience. But as the Greneral 
 Assembly has directed that attention should be given to 
 this subject in the course of instruction in our Theologi- 
 cal Seminaries, the following brief commentary on " the 
 general rules for judicatories" is added. These rules 
 are given in the appendix to the form of government. 
 A foot note observes, that •' having never been submitted 
 to the presbyteries, they make no part of the constitu- 
 tion of the Presbyterian Church, but were only recom- 
 mended by the Assembly of. 1821, for the use of our 
 church courts." This is still their only authority, except 
 as they belong to the body of parliamentary common 
 law. They are usually adopted afresh by each General 
 Assembly for its own government. 
 
 So far as appears from the minutes, neither the orig- 
 inal Synod of PhiL^delphia, nor the united Synod of 
 
174 OHUKCn PARLIAMENTARY LAW, 
 
 New York and Philadelphia, after 1758, had any written 
 rules of procedure. On the 29th of ^[a}^, 1788, the 
 synod " having revised and corrected the confession of 
 faith and catechisms, the form of government and disci- 
 pUne, and the directory for worship, adopted and ratified 
 them as the constitution of the Presbyterian Church in 
 the United-States of. America." But nothing is said of 
 any rules for judicatories. They had previously acted 
 under the generally received though variable and unset- 
 tled rules of parliamentar}^ procedure. 
 • On the meeting of the first Greneral Assembly, the 
 year following (1789), the first act, after voting an address 
 of congratulation to General Washington, was the ap- 
 pointment of a committee to draw^ up rules for the gov- 
 ernment of the General Assembly in its proceedings. 
 The committee reported a series of fifteen rules which 
 were adopted, and which, so far as they go, are nearly 
 the same as the corresponding rules now given in the 
 appendix. They were probably drawn from the rules of 
 procedure of the Legislatures of New York and Penn- 
 sylvania, as those were from the rules of the British Par- 
 liament. This code was improved, by the Assembly of 
 1821, into the present body of rules, forty-three in num- 
 ber, which, since that time, with the exception of one or 
 two rules to be hereafter mentioned, have remained 
 unchanged. 
 
 The government of tha Presbyterian Church is vested 
 in the Church Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods and General 
 Assembly, each of which has the right of review and 
 control over the proceedings of the next lower judica- 
 tory. The rules apply to the conduct of all these, except 
 the church sessions, to which they have little application. 
 Sec. I. Of the Quorum. — On the meeting of any 
 
CHURCH PAKLIA.\[ENTAliY LAW. 1<5 
 
 legislature or deliberative assembly, the first question 
 that may fall to be considered is that of a quorum. The 
 term is derived from the former usage of reciting the 
 names of the members of a court with the prefix, ^^ quo- 
 rum sederunt qui infra^^ indicating that the records were, 
 or had formerl}^ been, kept in Latin. 
 
 The quorums of Presbyterian Church courts are the fol- 
 lowing : Of a session, the pastor and two elders, if there be 
 as many ; but one is sufficient. (See new Digest, p. 56.) 
 Of a presbytery, three ministers. Tberuleadds, 'Uuidas 
 many elders as may he preseid^'' but does not stipulate for 
 the presence of any. The quorum of a synod is "seven 
 ministers, and as many elders as may be present, pro- 
 vided that out of the seven, not more than three belong: 
 to one presbytery ; '' that is, in order to constitute a synod, 
 three presbyteries at least must be represented. The 
 quorum of the General Assembl}^ is " fourteen commis- 
 sioners, of whom one-half at least must be ministers.'' 
 
 Ko court can transact business without the presence 
 of a quorum ; but, by rule third, any two membei's are 
 competent to adjourn from time to timiC, until a quorum 
 shall assemble. This rule was occasioned b}^ the circum- 
 stance that the Synod of Philadelphia being adjourned, 
 to meet at York, Pa., the 28th of Octobci', 1795, there 
 assembled on that day seventeen ministers, of whom thir- 
 teen belonged to one presbj^tery, and the remaining four 
 to two otliers. Under the impression that they did not 
 constitute a quorum, the members thought they were 
 incompetent either to adjourn from day today or, finally ; 
 and at length simply dispersed and went home." The 
 quorums of Presbyterian Church courts were fixed in 
 
 * See note at end. 
 
17(5 CUURCII PAHLIAMEXTARV LAW. 
 
 the early history of the church, and are now dispropor- 
 tionately small. 
 
 Sec. ir. Members of Presbyterian Chukch Courts. 
 — The Form of Government, chap. XI, 1, says: " Asa 
 presbytery is a convention of the bishops and elders 
 within a certain district, so a svnod is a convention of 
 the BISHOPS and elders within a larger district ; " and 
 chap. XII, 2, says: '"The General Assembly -shall con- 
 sist of an equal delegation of bishops and elders." 
 ]N"ow, a "bishop" is one who has a pastoral care. The 
 question arises whether ministers without charge, have a 
 right to seats. In fixing the quorums of a presbytery 
 and a synod, it is said : " Any seven ministers^ &c. ; " 
 and a presbytery is said to consist of "all the ministers 
 within a certain district." So far as these rules go, it 
 might be left in doubt whether "bishops" or "minis- 
 ters" were the governing title. In Scotland, it is the 
 former. Xone but pastors have the right to sit in their 
 church courts, except that professoi's in the universities 
 sit in rotation, as pastors in common of the seminary 
 students. The General Assembly of 1816 decided that 
 " all ministers " are qualified for membership. (See Min- 
 utes, p. 615.) But this is a qi!iestion which cannot be 
 regarded as yet finally settled in the policy of the church. 
 
 As respects the other class of members in Presbyte- 
 rian Church courts, the description of them is that they 
 are " ruling elders." Only ordained ministers and elders 
 are spiritual officers ; and such only can exercise rule in 
 the church. By the "accommodation act" of 1808, 
 between the Presbyterians and Congregationalists, lay 
 delegates from standing committees of Congregational 
 Churches in union with presb^'teries, were entitled to 
 
CHURCH parlia:\[entary law. 177 
 
 seats as r tiling elders. Tliis anomaly was extinguished 
 by the repeal of the accommodation plan in 1873. 
 
 Sec. III. ORGAXiZATio>r of the Judicatory. — 
 Rule l — " The moderator shall take the chair pre- 
 cisely at the hour to which the judicatory stands 
 adjourned ; shall immediately call the members to order, 
 ani, on the appearance of a quorum, sirall open the ses- 
 sion with prayer." 
 
 Rule il — '-If a quorum be assembled. at the hour 
 appointed, and the moderator be absent, the last mode- 
 rator present shall be requested to take his place, with- 
 out delay." In the General Assembly, the last mode- 
 .rator present, even though not a commissioner, takes 
 the chair. (Digest, p. 172.) After calling the roll, and 
 reading^ the minutes of the last meetino^. a new modera- 
 tor is elected. Nominations are made viva voce. Where 
 there is more than one candidate, the voting is by bal- 
 lot, except in the Greneral, Assembly, where it is by call- 
 ins^ the roll. Where there are more than two candi- 
 
 CD 
 
 dates, the election is by plurality. The moderator is, 
 by usage, alwaj^s a minister, but there is nothing in the 
 constitution to forbid a ruling elder's occupying the 
 office; and, in a few recent instances this has actually 
 been done. (See Form of Grov. : x, 2 ; xix, 3.) 
 
 Each judicatory has a stated clerk, holding office dur- 
 iiig the will of the body, and a temporary clerk, chosen 
 at each session. The stated clerk receives a salary, in 
 the Greneral Assembly, of $100. In synods and presby- 
 teries, of $10 and upwards. The stated clerk is the cus- 
 todian of the minutes, and of all records and papers of 
 the j udicatory. 
 
 Besides these officers, the General Assembly has a 
 " permanent clerlv," whose business it is to draught the 
 
176 CHL'KCli FAKLiAMENTAKV LAW. 
 
 minutes of the body while in session, and see to trans- 
 scribing, printing, etc. Pay $8 a day, while engaged in 
 the business of the Assembly. The clerks of the Assem- 
 bly need not be commissioners to that body. (Digest, 
 p. 176.) 
 
 Sec. IV, Duties of the Modeeator. — ''It is the 
 duty of the moderator to keep order, in accordance wdtli 
 the rules, to hold the attention of the judicatory closely 
 to the matter in hand, to decide pipmptly all questions 
 of order, and to promote the most rapid and safe prose- 
 cution of the business. He may speak to points of 
 order, in preference to other members in his place, and 
 may join in debate, by calling some other member to 
 the chair. He appoints all committees, except the judi- 
 catory order otherwise." 
 
 " When the vote is by ballot, the moderator may vote, 
 but in no other case, except when there is a tie. If he 
 then vote aye, the question is carried. If he refuse to 
 vote, it is lost." In the Assembly of 1798, the modera- 
 tor, Dr. John Blair Smith, claimed the right to vote, as 
 commissioner from the Presbytery of Albany, and, also, 
 to give the casting vote as moderator. This the Assem- 
 bly°denied him. (Digest, p. 172.) 
 
 In order to command the respect and obedience of the 
 judicatory, it is necessary that the moderator should be 
 prompt and resolute in his decisions. His sentence is, 
 indeed, always subject to an appeal; but, in all ordinary 
 cases, even when a vote may be somewhat doubtful, a 
 prompt decision will carry the assent of the judicatory 
 with it. In the dissenting church judicatories, or con- 
 ventions, of England, the moderator usually gathers the 
 sense of the house during the course of the debate, and 
 gives the decision without putting the question to vote. 
 
CHURCH PARLTA^klEXTARY LAW. 179 
 
 A feeble and hesitating moderator throws the body into 
 confusion, and greatlj^ retards the progress of business. 
 
 Sec. v. Introduction of Business.— Business 
 niaj be brought before a judicatory in the following 
 wa3^s : 
 
 1. It is the duty of the stated clerk. to make out, in 
 advance, a docket containing the business of routine, 
 and any other matter that should regularly come before 
 the body. This docket is to be gone through with, till 
 it is exhausted. 2. Appeals, references, or complaints, 
 may come up from lower courts. 3. Reports of commit- 
 tees. 4. Review of records of lower courts, o. Orio-i- 
 nal motions. All matters of importance or difficulty, 
 are best referred to some appropriate committee, by 
 which they may be brought in order^ before the judica- 
 tory, as, matters of discipline, to the judicial committee ; 
 questions relating to any proposed action, to the com- 
 mittee of bills and overtures : interpretation of the con- 
 stitution, to the committee on the politj^ of the church, 
 etc. 
 
 Any member may bring an item of business before 
 the judicatory on his own responsibility. All motions 
 must be seconded, before they can be entertained, and 
 the mover may be required to reduce anj^ motion to 
 writing. But this applies only to principal motions, and 
 not to such subsidiar}^ motions as are merely designed to 
 aid in disposing of the former, as, to lay on the table, to 
 commit, etc., which are always in one form. All judi- 
 cial business must be introduced before the close of the 
 second day of the sessions ; and any appeal not intro- 
 duced at the first succeeding meeting of the judicatory 
 appealed to, and before the close of the second dav, is 
 
180 CHURCH PARLIAMEKTARY LAW. 
 
 regarded as abandoned, and the original decision is 
 affirmed. (Discipline : in, 11.) 
 
 Sec. vi. Order of Business. — Business may be 
 taken up either in tLe order of the docket, or by being 
 made the order of the day for a set time, or on casual 
 motions, reports, etc. All business is brought before a 
 judicatory, with a view to action upon it, and no busi- 
 ness can be acted on, except under the form of a motion. 
 All appeals, references, overtures, reports of committees, 
 etc., terminate in a motion looking to some action dis- 
 posing of the same ; and no person is entitled to address 
 a judicatory, except under, or in contemplation of, a 
 motion. In familiar proceedings this rule is often dis- 
 regarded, but always may be, and usually should be, 
 strictly enforced. 
 
 Sec. VII. All Eeports of Committees should be 
 IN Writing. — If in full, the regular motion is to accept 
 the report. The effect of this, if passed, is to discharge 
 the committee, and bring the report into the hands of 
 the judicatory. If rejected, it may be in favor of a 
 motion to re-commit the business to the same commit- 
 tee, with or without instructions ; or the committee may 
 report in part, and ask to be continued. On the accept- 
 ance of the report, if it be one calling for any action, the 
 next motion is for its adoption. The motion to adopt 
 is always debatable, and it is on this, and not on the 
 motion to accept, that the discussion of the matter 
 involved takes place. 
 
 Sec. viii. Progress of a Motion beforl a Judic- 
 atory. — When any motion is before a judicatory, its 
 progress may be promoted, retarded, or finally arrested, 
 by the following methods, viz. : 1. The motion being 
 ])ut to the vote, may be at (nee rejected, without debate. 
 
CHUKCH PAELIAMENTARY LAW. 181 
 
 2. Before any debate has taken place, the mover may 
 withdraw it, with the consent of the seconder ; or, after- 
 wards, by the consent of the judicatory. 8. It may be 
 moved to amend the motion ; and, 4. To amend that 
 amendment, but no farther. 5. It may be moved to 
 postpone to a set time ; and, 6. To postpone indefinitely. 
 7. To lay on the table, (a) for the present, (h) uncondi- 
 tionally. 8. To commit. 9. The previous question. 
 10. To adjourn. 
 
 . To these might be added a motion to proceed to the 
 order of the day, but this should be done simply by the 
 decision of the moderator, on the arrival of the hour 
 appointed, without any motion. 
 
 Sec. IX. Privileged Questions: — " When a ques- 
 tion is under debate, no motion shall be received, unless 
 to amend, to commit, to postpone, to lay upon the table, 
 for the previous question, or to adjourn. (Digest, Eule 
 14.) These are called "privileged questions," because 
 they have the precedence over any others. 
 
 1. The m,otwn to adjourn is always in order. Each 
 member of the court may speak upon it once. In the 
 British parliament, also, the motion is debatable, but 
 not in the Houj^e of Representatives of the United 
 States. 
 
 2. To lay on the table. The object of this motion is 
 either to suspend the consideration of a subject, for the 
 time, in order to attend to something else, at the conclu- 
 sion of which it may again be taken from the table, or, 
 to get rid of it altogether. But this latter use of it is 
 illegitimate, as the end desired is regularly attainable by 
 a different motion, as, for example, by a direct vote to 
 reject, or to postpone indefinitely. The motion to lay 
 on the table was discarded by the General Assembly 
 
182 CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 
 
 (N. S.) of 1851 ; but was restored by the United Gen- 
 eral Assembly, in 1871, with the following additional 
 rale: (No. 21.) "A distinction shall be observed 
 between a motion to lay on the table for the present, and 
 a motion to lay on the table unconditionally, viz. : A 
 motion to lay on the table for the present, shall be taken 
 without debate, and, if carried, the effect shall be to place 
 the subject on the docket, and it may be taken up and 
 considered at any subsequent time. A motion to lay on 
 the table unconditionally, shal] also be taken without 
 debate, and, if carried in the af&rmative, it shall not be in 
 order to take up the subject during the same meeting 
 of the judicatory, without a vote of reconsideration." 
 
 3. To amend. An amendment may be moved on any 
 motion, and shall be decided before the original motion. 
 An amendment may be amended, but not the second 
 amendment. 
 
 •1. To commit. It is often of great advantage to the 
 prosecution of business, to refer a motion to a committee, 
 who shall bring in some report, or minute, expressive of 
 the sense of the judicatory. It may be accompanied 
 with instructions, or otherwise. 
 
 5. To postpone^ either indefinitely, or to a set day. 
 An indefinite postponement excludes the question for 
 the rest of the sessions. (Rule 20.) " A subject which 
 has been indefinitely postponed shall not be again called 
 up, during the same sessions, unless by consent of three- 
 fourths of the members who were present at the deci- 
 sion." 
 
 6. The previous question. The object of the previous 
 question in the British parliament, from which we have 
 taken it, is to suppress, a bill which, for any reason, is 
 objectionable. It is said to have been first introduced 
 
CHURCH parlta:mextary law. I'^o 
 
 hy Sir Heiiiw Yane, the eider, in 1604. It is called 
 "previous," because the motion before the house being 
 for the adoption of a certain bill, a member moves a 
 resolution ^?-ey/o/^:9 to thai, A'iz., that the main question be 
 put — i. e., that it shall he put at some time, his object 
 being to obtain a negative decision, and thus turn the 
 question at once and forever out of the house ; for, obvi- 
 ously, if the house decide that the question shall not be 
 put at all, there could be no debate upon it. If, con- 
 trary to the mover's intention, his motion be carried, 
 then the debate may proceed ; that is, the house decides 
 that it luill consider and vote upon the resolution. 
 
 In this country, on the other hand, the object of the 
 previous question is not to suppress any bill or motion 
 but to suppress debate upon it, and bring the house 
 immediatel}^ to a vote on the C[uestion before it; but 
 what that question is, is differently interpreted in differ- 
 ent deliberative assemblies. In the legislature, and in 
 political conventions of the State of New York, the pre- 
 vious question, if sustained, arrests debate, sweeps aw^ay 
 all pending amendments, etc., and brings the house to 
 an immediate vote on the original motion. In the Uni- 
 ted States Senate the previous question is unknown • 
 but in the House of Representatives its effect is to arrest 
 debate, and bring the house to a direct vote upon pend- 
 ing amendments, and then upon the main question. 
 The f-rrm of the motion is, '" that the main question be 
 now put, and the object of the mover is to obtain an 
 affirmative decision. 
 
 In. Presbyterian Church judicatories, down to 1835, 
 the previous question was in tins form : " Shall the main 
 question he now put T'' If decided in the affirmative the 
 debate on the main question might proceed. If in the 
 
184 CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 
 
 negative, the effect was to arrest debate, and produce an 
 indefinite postponement. This rule was designed to be 
 the same in its effect as that in the British parliament, 
 but the inconsiderate introduction of the word "nor^" 
 gave it a character of contradiction and absurdit}^ viz. : 
 If the motion that the main question be now put pre- 
 vailed, then the main question was not to be put, but the 
 discussion was to sjo on. 
 
 By the Greneral Assembly of 1835, the rule was 
 altered, as follows : " The previous question shall be in 
 this form, 'Shall the main question be now put?' and 
 when demanded by a majority of the members present, 
 shall be put, without debate. If decided in the affirma- 
 tive, the main question, that is, the original motion, 
 shall be immediately put, without debate. If in the 
 negative, the debate may proceed." 
 
 This change removed the inconsistency in the rule, as 
 it before stood, and made the operation of the previous 
 question the same as in the State of New York ; that is, 
 it suppressed all subsidiary motions, and brought the 
 house to vote directly on the original question. 
 
 The General Assembly of 1851, altered the rule into 
 its present shape, in which it was approved and adopted 
 by the united Assembly of 1871, as follows: "The 
 previous question shall be put in this form, ' Shall the 
 main question he now putT It shall only be admitted 
 when demanded by a majority of the members present, 
 and its effect shall be to put a stop to all debate, and 
 bring the body to a direct vote, first, upon the motion 
 to commit the subject under consideration, if such a 
 motion shall have been made. Second, if the motion to 
 commit does not prevail, upon pending amendments ; 
 and, lastly, upon the main question." 
 
CHURCH PAELIAMENTAEY LAW. 185 
 
 The previous question is a measure of self protection, 
 by a judicatory, against the pertinacity of individual mem- 
 bers, when, in the opinion of a majority, a subject has 
 been sufficiently discussed. Eegarded as a "gag law," 
 it is seldom looked iipon with much favor among us. 
 The end designed may, usually, be attained by other 
 methods, as, by sufficiently energetic and persistent cries 
 of " question !" 
 
 Sec. X. In Filling Blanks, the vote is to be taken, 
 first, on the longest time, and the largest number. (Eule 
 38.) In the British parliament, the rule is the longest time 
 and the smallest number. In the Congress of the Uni- 
 ted States, a bill might be introduced, for example, to 
 empower the president to raise 20,000 volunteers, for 
 the protection of the frontier, for two years. The oppo- 
 sition might attempt to defeat this measure absolutely, 
 by some of the motions already mentioned. Failing in 
 this, they might attempt to limit the grant as much as 
 possible, moving, e. g., to reduce the number of men to 
 15,000, 10,000, or 5,000 ; and the time to 18, 12, or 6 
 months. The vote must be taken in succession on the 
 largest number and the longest time. 
 
 Sec. XL EuLES Eegulating Debate.— -' On c|ues- 
 tions of order, adjournment, postponement, or commit- 
 ment, no mem.ber shall speak more than once." (Eule 18.) 
 On all other Cjuestions each member may speak twice, but 
 not oftener, without the consent of the judicatorj^ In 
 ordinary conversational discussion this rule is disre- 
 garded : but in all formal or earnest debate should be 
 strictly enforced. Any church judicatory, however, may 
 go into "interlocutory session," corresponding to the par- 
 liamentary " committee of the whole," in which the 
 
186 CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 
 
 members may freely converse together, without the for- 
 malities which attend ordinary debate. (Rule 38.) 
 
 If more than one member i^ise to speak at the same 
 time, the member who is most distant from the modera- 
 tor's chair shall speak first. 
 
 If a motion under debate contains several parts, any 
 two members may have it divided, and the question 
 taken separately, on each part. 
 
 "It is indispensable that members of ecclesiastical 
 judicatories maintain great gravity and dignity, while 
 judicially convened, (i. e., when not in interlocutory 
 session) that they attend closely, in their speeches, to 
 the subject under consideration, and avoid prolix and 
 desultory harangues ; and when they deviate from the 
 subject, it is the privilege of any member, and the duty 
 of the moderator to call them to order." (Rule 24.) 
 
 Sec. xil Reading the Minutes. — The minutes of 
 the last meeting of the judicatory shall be presented at 
 the commencement of its sessions, and, if necessary, read 
 and corrected. (Rule 12.) 
 
 Sec. xiil Reconsideration. — "A question shall 
 not be again called up and reconsidered at the same ses- 
 sions of the judicatory at which it has been decided, 
 unless by the consent of two-thirds of the members who 
 were present at the decision, and unless the motion to 
 reconsider be made and seconded by persons who voted 
 with the majority." (Rule 22.) The words '' meeting '' 
 and " sessions " both mean the whole time during which the 
 judicatory sits. " Session " means the meeting of a sin- 
 gle day, which is interrupted only by a recess. At the 
 close of each day's ''session,'' the judicatory adjourns till 
 next da}^ At the close of its " sessions,'' it adjourns 
 finally, tiM the next regular or stated meeting. In the 
 
CHUECH PARLIAMEXTARY LAW. 187 
 
 records of the old Synod of ]^ew York and Philadel- 
 phia, the meeting was commonlj^ called a ^'' seder unV^ 
 The cabalistic letters U. P. P. S. Q.-S. are often found 
 after the place and date of meeting, i. e., ubi post i^reces 
 sederunt qui supra. 
 
 Sec. xiy. Ox Taking the Yote. — "Every motion 
 should be distinctly repeated by the moderator, before 
 being put. If there is any room for doubt, as to the 
 effect of the vote, he should explain what it will be." 
 The motion should be put in brief and simple terms, 
 thus : All those in flivor of the motion will say aye ; 
 contrary minded will say 7io. 
 
 " When the moderator has commenced taking the 
 vote, no further debate, or remark, shall be admitted, 
 unless there has evidently been a mistake, in which 
 case it shall be rectified, and the moderator shall re-com- 
 mence taking the vote. (Rule 34.) 
 
 " Members ought not, without weighty reasons, to 
 decline voting, as this practice might leave the decision 
 of very interesting questions to a small proportion of the 
 judicatory. Silent members, unless excused from 
 voting, must be regarded as acquiescing with the major- 
 ity." (Rule 30.) 
 
 Sec. XV. The Closing Acts of a Church Judica- 
 tory, above a church session, are reading and cor- 
 recting the minutes of the last session, prayer, and the 
 apostolic benediction, by the moderator, who then 
 declares the judicatory adjourned, to meet on a set day, 
 or, as the case may be, at the call of the moderator. 
 
 Note to Sec. il Ox the Quorum of a Syxod. — 
 " The quorum of a synod is seven ministers, provided 
 that not more than three belong to one presbytery." 
 
 The intent of this rule was to secure the presence of 
 
188 CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 
 
 ministers from, at lea?t, three presbyteries, in order to 
 constitute a synod. If it had simply fixed the quorum 
 at " seven ministers," without adding tlfe proviso, the 
 entire seven might, in some cases, belong to one presby- 
 tery. By the proviso, not more than three of the seven 
 must belong to one presbytery ; but the rule directs 
 nothing as to the distribution of the other four. They 
 may belong to four different presbyteries, one to each, 
 or, two to one, and one to each of two others, or three 
 to one, and one to a third. The whole seven might 
 even belong to seven different presbyteries. In the case 
 of the Synod of Philadelphia, referred to, there were 
 four presbyteries represented, of which two had one 
 each, one had two, and the other (Chestei*) had thirteen 
 ministers. 
 
 Now, inasmuch as the rule directs that, in the case of a 
 hare quorura^ not more than three of the seven shall 
 belong to one presbytery, it was inferred that, in this 
 instance, where ten more than a quorum were present, the 
 synod was in no condition to act, since thirteen out of 
 the seventeen members were from one presbytery. If 
 the Presbytery of Chester had had only three ministers 
 present, no one will deny that there would have been a 
 legitimate quorum. How should the excess of ten min- 
 isters from that presbytery vitiate this fact? The error 
 of the Synod of Philadelphia seems to have arisen from 
 their supposing that the object of the rule was to pre- 
 vent any one presbytery having a majority of the whole 
 number present ; whereas, its whole intent was to secure 
 the attendance of some minister, or ministers, from, at 
 least, three presbyteries. Suppose, at the hour of meet- 
 ing, the Synod of Chester had had only three ministers ; 
 of course, there would have been a working quorum. 
 
CHURCH PARLIAMENTARY LAW. 189 
 
 Would the arrival of ten other members from that pres- 
 bytery, an hour afterwards, have destroyed the quorum ? 
 On the other hand, the withdrawal of the single repre- 
 sentative of one of the other two presbyteries "would 
 have had that effect, and have obliged the synod to sus- 
 pend any further action, till the quorum was restored. 
 
 The Synod of Philadelphia, therefore, did have an 
 actual quorum at York, on the clay mentioned, and vras 
 competent, not merely to adjourn, but to attend to all 
 synodical business. 
 
Date Due 1 
 
 ...4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^