The trial of episcopacy

NYPL RESEARCH LIBRARIES

3 3433 06826465 8

IsYsVOX Library

- THE

OF

EPISCOPACY

REPORTED BY

R. C. C. A. M.

POUGHKEEPSIE I
PUBLISHED BY P. POTTER,

P. & S, roitr, Printers.

1817.

SOUTHERN DICTRJCT OF NEW- YORK, ss.

Be it remembered, That on the eleventh day of April, in the
jc>~<:..^^-a- forty-first year of the Independence of the United
I L. S. t States of America, Paraclete Potter, of the sai4
L>,«zl<3lJ district, has deposited in this office the title of a
"^"'^'''^'^^book, the right whereof he claims as proprietor in,"
the words following to wit :

"The Trial of Episcopacy, Reported by R. C. C a.m."

In coniormity to the act ofthe Congress of the United States
entitled " An Act for the encouragement of Learning, by secu-
ring the Copies of Maps, Charts aud Books to the authors and
proprietors of such copies, during the time therein mentioned/'
And also to an act, entitled, * an Act, supplementary to an Act,
entitled an Act for the encouragement of Learning, by securing
the copies of Maps, Charts and Books to the authors and pro-
prietors of such cf»pies during the times therein mentioned,
and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, en-
graving and etching historical and other prints."

THERON RUDD.
Clerk ofthe Southern District of New- York.

TO THE READER.

This book owes its existence to the
following circumstance :— In a recent
pompa ny, composed of gentlemen of high
respectability, but of different religious
denominations, the tenets of the various
sects into which the great family of
Christians is divided, became the topic
of conversation. The company, altho^
agreed on some of the most important
doctrines of the Gospel (viz.) of
salvation by the Son of God ; of the
power and influence of the Holy Ghost
to sanctify the soul, and of the ever
blessed Trinity of the Godhead, en»
tertained a contrariety of oplniou, on a

iv TO THE READER.

variety of other subjects, which drew
them into controversies, as learned as
they were spirited.

The controversies which were thus
commenced, were continued from time
to time with so much zeal and ability,
as at length to excite the attention of
the public, and they finally drew togeth-
er some hundreds of the most pious, and
learned of the American nation, who
formed themselves into a council to set-
tle the important matters in dispute.—
The following is a record of the pro-
ceedings of that council, for the accura-
cy of which, the Reporter feels himself
solely accountable.

THE

TRIAL

OP

EPISCOPACY.

As soon as a sufficient number of the gentlemen
had convened, they proceeded, as is usual in such
cases, to appoint a Chairman : when President
James was elected by an unanimous vote, and
by a similar vote, Daniel was chosen Secretary.

The assembly being thus organized, the chair-
man enquired the business to be done.

Doc. Presbyter Primus answered, that it w as to
ascertain,

1. What the visible Church of Christ is.

2. What constitutes membership in that Church,

3. What is the precise nature of its constitution.
On which the Chairman remarked — Gentlemen,

business of so great importance to mankind,
of such solemn moment to the souls of meia, should
not be proceeded upon rashly. Every thing re-
lating to it should be done with great deliberatioR
A.

as well as with decency and order. This assem-
bly should recollect that they are, in this case,
acting for the present not only, but for future
ages ; that the decisions of so extensive and
respectable a council may be expected to be quo-
ted as authority by future generations. Every
party concerned, should therefore be present ; and
when present, should disdain to be influenced by
sectarean views, and be willing to submit to the
only true standards of divine truth — to the script-
ures, to facts, and to the monuments of antiquity.
I therefore presume to enquire, if the diflerent de-
nominations are properly represented by some of
the most {)ious and learned of (heir communion. If
this be not the case, some measures should be a-
dopted to effect so desirable an object.

On enquiry it was found that they were, except
the Methodist and Protestant Episcopal christians.

On motion, it was therefore resolved, that this as-
sembly adjourn, for the spaceof four days ; and that
the secretary immediately invite the Protestant
Episcopal and the Methodist Churches to send
delegates to this convention, at the same time
stating to Ibem the nature and importance of the
business to be transactrd.

ADJOURNED.

7

Oft the fifth day following, the session was resum-
ed according to adjournment. The interesting na-
ture of the subjects to be discussed, brought to-
gether, besides the original members, an immense
concourse of Christians of every denomination,
constituting the most respectable Christian assem-
bly ever convened in the United States.

Doc. Bishop appeared on the part of the Prot-
estant Episcopal Church, and Presiding Elder on
the part of the Methodist christians. Being thus
organized, the Chairman addressed the assembly
in the following words —

Gentlemen, it is with a degree of diffidence
that I at this time 611 this chair — a diffidence
which arises from a conviction of the momentous
nature of the subjects about to come before this
assembly, and the part I am to bear in the decis-
ion of the questions which may arise. I hence
feel this situation more important than any 1 have
before been called to fill, and my accountability
perhaps greater than in any station in which I
have before been placed. But I trust, Gentlemen,
you are sensible, and especially those of you who
are entrusted wiih the " mysteries" of Almighty
God, that 1 am not alone accountable in this mat-
ter. I trust you are sensible, that you, with me,

must render to the Judge of all, a scrupulous ac-
count of the trust, which in his providence, is now
committed to us.

With the subjects about to be discussed, many of
you may be expected to be much better acquaint-
ed than myself. I shall therefore place great de-
pendance upon your wisdom, your learning, and
your piety, for my guide and support, while 1 have
the unexpected honor of holding this seat. I
shall hear you with patient attention ; and I pray
that all that decorum and order may be observed,
which the place and the business demand.

The first subject before you, is, to ascertain
<« what the visible Church of Christ is ?"

The gentlemen will speak singly, without in*'
terruption, and will now begin.

Doc, Presbyter Primus, Sir, as I had the hon-
or of proposing this question, it will be expected
that I first should make some remarks upon it.

You have with much propriety noticed the im-
portance of the subjects now before us. I am in-
deed deeply impressed with the force of your ob-
servations. I am aware that what is now done
by this numerous and learned body of christians,
mai^ greatly affect distant posterity. The delib-
erate decisions of such a body of men as now aur

9

round me, selected as tliey are, from one of
the most enlightened nations on the globe, will
necessarily have a salutary or baneful efifect on
posterity, as they shall or shall not be controuied
by the maxims of divine truth It is therefore my
earnest desire, that every thing should be done, not
only " decently and in order," but done also with
deliberation and intelligence. The question now
before us is a preliminary one to others equally
important, and should therefore be settled with
accuracy. To me sir, nothing is of more import-
ance than to know what Christ's Church is, gnd
where it may be found. For I do assure you, ny
brethren, that unworthy as I am, I would not for
the whole world, and all the kingdoms ofit,bein
doubt whether I was in the Church of Christ or
not— whether I was translated or not, into the
kingdom of" God's dear Son." I would not be
in doubt w hether I have the sacraments, or wheth-
er I have them not. But how can I be sure in
this case, unless I know what the kingdom of
Christ is, where it may be found, and what are
the marks by which it may be known ? I know
that doubts have arisen in the minds of many on
this subject ; of many of enlightned minds and pi-
ous hearts j doubts which have placed them *' in
A2

10

a strait betwixt two." We therefore rightly judge
this to be a subject of vital importance to Godli-
ness. We have fallen on times when some say,
*' lo, here is Christ," or " lo, there is the desert" or
*' in the next chambers,*' and are bid to take heed
that none deceive us. Some speak of a Church
within, which can be knefwn only by feeling-^ some
there are who contend that the temporal commu-
nity of Christ is not visible ; others preach that
the same Church is visible^ but self-formed and
constituted by man. But my brethren, what a
terrible case should we be in, if we had no suf5-
cient warning given us, and no rule to go by !
Thanks be to God, this is not the case. But as
the lightning that cometh from the east shinethinto
the west, so plain and notorious was the establish-
ment of Christ's kingdom in the world, together
with the form of its constitution, and the order of
its ministry in all the countries where it was plant-
ed. It would be unreasonable ; indeed it would
be lamentable ; it would seem as if God had
mocked us contrary to the nature of his mercy,
that he should publish a way of salvation and leave
it uncertain where that way may be found. From
what is said of it in the gospel, it is impossible
that the Church should be a society, obscure and

11

liard to be distinguished. ' Ye are the light of
the world" said Christ to his disciples ; " a city
that is set on a hill cannot be hid." Now light is
sure to show itself, and it comes in a straight line
which directs us to its source. A City placed up-
on a hill is so elevated above other objects, that
it cannot be difficult to find it ; rather it is impos-
sible to miss it— it" cannot be hid." And Chris-
tians in all ages seem to have agreed that it shall
not be hid. For when we approach a city in any
pare of Christendom, the Churches are generally
first seen towering over all other buildings.

Furthermore Sir, Christ hath given us a pre-
cept, that under certain circumstances we should
tell our case to the Church; but unless it be known
where and what the Church is, this cannot be
done. The precept therefore supposes that the
Church must be known to us. The same must
follow from the injunction of St. Paul in his
Epistle to the Hebrews—" obey them that have
the rule over you, and submit yourselves, for they
watch for your souls, as they that must give
account." The rulers of this Church must there-
fore be known to us; for it is impossible we
should do our duty, and submit ourselves to them^
unless we are sure who they are. The Church

12

must therefore, in its nature be a society manifest
to all men. Some may slight it, and dispute it,
and refuse to hear it, but they cannot do even
this^ unless they know where it is to be found.
The Church of Christ then is a visible institu-
tion, capable of being seen and known by all.

In the next place, this Church is in no sense
derived from this world. It is not the work of
man ; nor can it possibly be so. The distinctive
nature of it is, through the whole scriptures, laid
in its opposition to the world. Of the world Christ
said to his disciples, " Ye know it hated me be-
fore it hated you." The apostle St. Paul, speak-
ing of mankind, before translated into the king-
dom of Christ, describes them as " aliens and
strangers from the covenant of promise, having
no hope, and without God in the world ;" but af-
ter translated, as " children of the kingdom of
Christ." Indeed the Church* is so named because
it is called or chosen out of the world. Until it is
so called out of the world, it hath no being. But
it cannot call itself, any more than a man can
bring himseli into existence. Our christian call-
ing is therefore as truly the work of God, and at

* Ecclesia, called or chosen.

13

much independent of ourselves, as our natural
birth. In other words, Christ founded his own
Church and perpetuates it by his own power and
authority. Further, the Church must have orders
in it for the work of the ministry ; but no man can
ordain himself, neither can he (of himself) ordain
another, because no man can give what he hath
not. " How shall they preach," saith the scrip-
ture, unless they be sent ? And again, " no man
taketh this honor to himself, but he that is called
of God, as was Aaron," Nay, even " Christ glo-
rified not himself to be made an high priest, but
he that said unto him, thou art my son, this day
have I begotten thee," So that in no sense can
Christians be made by wifln'5 authority. They
must be made by that power which Christ gave
to his Church, that power with which the Re-
deemer of the world clothed his apostles, and
which has descended in the line of their succes-
sors. As his Church is t725i6?e, so is his authority
conveyed by visible instruments ; and unless thus
conveyed, it cannot be had. And again. Sir,
tliis Church is not of the world, because it must
have power, without which it can do nothing to
any effect : — but in it, there is no power but of
God. In other words,no man can act in the name

iii

of God, but by God's appointment. No ambas-
sador ever sent himseU", or took upon him to sign
and seal treaties and covenants without being
sent — that is, without receiving autliority from
an higher power so to do. The act, so far from
being lawful, would be treasonable. Nothing
therefore can be phuner, than that the Church
neither is, nor can be, from man. It is no human
inititution ; and as it acts under God, if it act at
all, it must act by his autliority and appointment.
It is thus properly called the Church cf God, and
mankind might as reasonably presume to make
God's world, as to make Go-l's Church.

Layman Primus, Before the Rev. gentleman
proceeds Sir, 1 wish to ask lam a single question
for information, as some of his arguments go di-
rectly to condemn the practice of many of our
congregations. The question I ask is this — If a
community of people form themselves into a so-
ciety, choose a man who feds himself to be call-
ed of God. appoint him to i\\e priesthood them-
selves, and he administer the sacraments of the
Gospel to them, will not they be a Church of
Christ, and /le a regular priest of the living
Jod ?

P. Primus, I shall answer this gentleman Sir,

15

in tlie fear of God, and according to the tenor of
his word. My answer then is, that they would
be no more a regular Church, nor he any more
God's minister, than a band of soldiers who should
without authority, embody and organize them-
selves, and appoint a general to command them,
would be an army of the United States. For
if Christ the Redeemer of the world, the Son of
God, took not upon himself the priesthood until
commissioned by the Almighty Father — if his
apostles acted not until they were empowered^ if
their successors stirred not their hand in the Holy
work, until clothed with apostolic authority, (and
that this was the case, the scriptures expressly
declare) how can we, how dare we, call him a
minister of Christ who derives his authority from
his equals, who have no authority to give ; and
how call that community of people a Church,
who have never submitted to that authority, viz.
the authority of Christ, which alone can call them
out of the world ?

Some among us, my friends, (I wish to say it
with all deference, but I must clear my con-
science from the crime of temporizing) — some a-*
mong us my triends, have erred in this respect.
Some think they can make their own religion,

16

and others think they can make their own
church, or can be a church unto themselves, and
so unhappily fall into the delusions of enthusiasm,
or the uncharitableness of seism — Churches and a
ministry have been thus self-formed, and laymen
have ordained laymen, and those thus ordained,
have ordained successors : and thus the delusion
has been perpetuated, so that in some instances
it is difficult to know by what power the Clergy
act. But let me assure my brother, " it was not
so from the beginning." No: the Scriptures de-
clare that it was not. And all the monuments
of antiquity, from the days of Christ for 1500
years, declare that " it was not so from the be-
ginning." We may safely challenge the whole
world and all the kingdoms of it, to show us a sin-
gle Church self-formed in the first fifteen centu-
ries. They were all organized by apostolic au-
thority— which is the authority of Christ, perpe-
tuated by him in that priesthood which he ordain-
ed. And I challenge any to show a person cloth-
ed with the ministerial powers, by any but the
successors of Christ and his Apostles. Congrega-
tions did then choose men, who themselves trtcst-
ed^ and whom their brethren believed, " were wiov-
ed by the Holy Ghost^ to take upon them the mi-

17

nistiation of the word and sacraments. But these
congregations thus choosing, never presumed to
follow the sin of Korah and his company — never
assumed the priesthood. And the persons thus
chosen, although they believed themselves moved
by the Holy Ghost to the work of the ministry^
never presumed, never dared to act, until they
were not only called as was Aaron, but also like
him, visibly authorized and sent. No. In the
pure and primitive ages of Christianity, such an
assumption of the priesthood would have been
accounted sacrilege : and never until a late peri-
od, when the Church of Christ was divided by the
sin of seism; when enthusiasm and fanaticism did
much towards overturning the institutions of
Christ, was it ever pretended, that an inward
call was a warrant for administering in Holy
things. The plenitude of the spirit was ever ac-
counted an indispensable qualification^ but it was
never accounted authority to administer the word
and sacraments.

Sir, I wish my learned brethren not to take my
sayings alone on this subject — I appeal to the
scriptures ; I appeal to the records of antiquity,
and if a solitary fact sanctioning the modern no-
tion of inward calls, constituting authority to ad-
B.

18

minister in holy things be produced, I give up
the argument. I believe I have already proved
beyond a dispute that Christ's Church is a visible
body, capable of being known by all men, and
that this Church was planted and supported by
Jesus Christ, that it is not the work of man but of
God, This the scriptures declare, and this the
early writers, those Fathers in the faith, who
were as distinguished for their learning, and their
piety, as for their sufferings for Christ, with one
voice declare, and shall we in contradiction to
these high authorities, these highest of authori-
ties, the undisputed history of facts recorded
in scripture, set up the feelings of men, or their
trust to an inward call ? All agree in the defecta-
bility and depravity of man in his best estate.
How wild then to set up the impressions and pro-
fessions of the depraved creature, in opposition to
the testimony of facts which transpired under
the immediate influence of God ? This is de-
throning the Almighty, and placing the crea-
ture above the Creator. It is, in one word de-
molishing the whole fabric of the Christian sys-
tem, and sending man afloat on an ocean of
doubts, to find the church in the whims, the feel-
ings and fancies of mankind. It is breaking down

19

the standards of divine truth, the acts of Christ
and his apostles, and laying waste the whole vine-
yard of our divine Lord, to the ravages of corrupt
man. I wish however my learned brethren may
take a part in this investigation, and that all may
speak freely and candidly, so that the question
being examined in all its bearings, may be set-
tled on its true and permanent footing. With this
view and with the prayer that God may guide and
bless us, I stop to hear.

The chairman then observed, that if any other
gentleman had any thing to offer on the question,
he hoped he would proceed.

Dr. Bishop. Sir, after what has been said by
the Rev. gentleman, it would seem needless to
enter into a further discussion of this question.
His scripture authority and his appeal to the an-
tients, cannot fail to carry conviction to every
mind. Whatever the Church of Christ is found
to be in one age, it will continue to be to the end
of time, unless the Divine Head and Founder of
it see fit to change it. Of any change we possess
no knowledge. That the church was at first a
visible conimunit}^ separate from the world, is
evident from that authority which Christ gave to
his apostles to govern it : for surely he would not

so

give them authority to govern an invisible com-
munity. That it was visible, is also to be infer-
ed from the visible sacraments which he autho-
rized the apostles to administer in it ; for surely
he would not command them to baptize with wa-
ter, and administer the elements of bread and
wine, in the holy supper, to a church not to be
distinguished from the world.

And that this Church is of the immediate ap-
pointment and institution of Christ, the scrip-
tures teach, as well by their whole tenor, as by
particular passages. He appointed its doctrines,
its priesthood, its sacraments, and its worship.
While on earth he was its visible as well as spir-
itual head. It is therefore, in every sense the
Church of Christ. It, in no sense, belongs to the
world.

When Christ was about to ascend, he estab-
lished a visible head in the line of his apostles ;
but they were its head only by a delegated power.
They acted under him and by his authority and
when he appointed them as a visible head, he
clothed them with authority to appoint others to
succeed them. He then said " lo, 1 am with you
always even unto the end of the world" ; that is—
he would accompany that power, that authority of

2i

presiding in the church, and of ordaining others,
to the end of time. And Sir, his promises never
fail. He is then still in the world, and accom-
panies that apostolic power. It is as much his
authority now, as it was eighteen hundred years
ago. Unless his promise is broken, the succes-
sion, the visible succession is not l)roken. And
he has promised that " the gates of Hell shall nev-
er prevail against it.'* They have not prevailed.
This succession is capable of being traced from t he
apostles to the present day. So plain is it in the
Scripture history, that " he who readeth may run
and understand.'* And if we can place confidence
in the early writers^ — men who shone as stars in
the firmament by their wisdom, by their godli-
ness, and by their sufferings in the Christian
cause — men vvho wore out their lives and become
willing victims to death, in the triumphant hope
of rendering a joyful account of their ste warship—
equally evident is it, that this Church and the
regular successions of its apostolic priesthood, con-
tinued without a solitary interruption. And al-
though men have set up churches and priesthoods
of their ow n, and have railed at this apostolic au-
thority, still it remains the Sjame. As no man

gave it, so can no man takfe it away. Saith
B 2

22

Ireneus, an early Father, Lib. III. Chap. 3.
" the apostolic tradition is present in every
church. We can enumerate those who were
constituted bishops in the church and their succes-
sors even unto us. And this is the language not
only of Ireneus, but also, of all the writers down
to the reformation — a period from which it is
not difficult to trace our origin as Christians.

Now Sir, wherever the succession of this author-
ity has been continued in the priesthood; and under
it, men celebrate the worship and the sacraments
of the Gospel by faith, there we find the visible
Church of Christ. The visible Church of Christ
then is " a congregation of faithful men, in the
which the word of God is preached, and
the sacraments be duly administered according to
ChrisVs ordinance^ in all those things that of neces-
sity, are requisite to the same."* This Sir, being
the case — Christ's Church being a visible institu-
tion, as has been fully proved ; he having or-
dained a priesthood, and given his delegated pow-
er to that priesthood, to govern and perpetuate his
Church to the end of the world, wherever we find
the succession of thai power dispensing the word and

*Art. 19.P.E. Church.

sacraments to faithful men, we find the Church of
Christy and no where else. I know Sir, in later
times men teach a different doctrine — I know men
come forward disputing every visible authority ;
in the warmth of their zeal, claiming to be em-
powered of God to pull down others and build up
themselves; — but I must be plain on this subject.
Sir, I must beg leave to question their authority,
until they show me tlieir commission and trace
their descent from Christ. I am sensible that new
things in religion are captivating and popular; that
in these days many new inventions are sought
out — that the mysteries of an inward call, accom-
panied with high denunciations, and flaming pro-
fessions, are calculated, as a torrent, to lay waste
the vineyard, of our Lord. But they can never
prevail but to a certain extent. For he who has
pledged himself to support his kingdom — he who
says to the ocean, hitherto shalt thou come but no
further, he who said the gates of hell shall not pre-
vail against it, will protect his Church to the stu-
pendous day of his second advent.

The saying of men Sir, shakes not my faith. I
know that men ordained by man's authority, speak
with boastful contempt of what we have this day,
heard proved to be the authority of Christ. I

24

know tliey have answered those who have remon-
strated with them, telling them, " thus saith anti-
quity, and thus did the apostles say and do," we
regard not the apostles — we are taught of God ; we
have a commission from Heaven. But to me. Sir,
these things are suspicious. They should not
move us ; on the other hand we should be con-
tented to stop, to " look out the good old way, and
w alk therein," for in so doing we are assured we
shall find rest to our souls.

Laijman Sccundus. Sir, if the Rev. gentleman
be done speaking, I have a remark to make. Not-
withstanding all that has been said about this vis-
ible church and authority, I am impressed with a
belief, that an apostolic ordination is not indis-
pensable to a valid ministry; I believe if the man
possess the inward call^ the outward is not so ma-
terial ; and I think the scriptures seem to favour
my belief, especially the declaration of the Apos-
tle St. Paul to the Corinthians, where he says " ye
may all prophecy one by one, that all may learn
and be comforted."

What the gentlemen contend for, does seem ii>
be true ; still we must not my brethren, establish
any system which shall limit the spirit of God.
The plan which the gentlemen are advocating,

S5

seems to depend too much on dry scripture reason-
ing. It seems to limit the holy fervor, which ig
often stirred up by the Spirit of God in laymen.
Besides, it would unchurch much of the christian
%vorld. I hope therefore this question may be well
considered before a decision is had.

Presbyter Primus. Sir, until I heard this gen-
tleman's observations, it was not my intention to
have again spoken on this subject. The authori-
ties are so full and so plain that I was in hopes,
the bewitching love of mystery, and blind venera-
tion for supposed inspiration, would give way to
sound and sober conviction. I would ask the
gentleman who last spoke, what evidence he has,
that those persons have a spiritual commission,
who profess to be appointed by God to preach and
to dispense the visible authority which Christ es-
tablished ? Do they evidence it as did the Apos-
tles, by miraculous works, the only evidence which
can in the nature of the case, be admitted ? None
pretend to this. It is only because they are good
and zealous men. But is goodness and zeal a
proper criterion in this case ? It is always right
to venerate zeal and piety ; but we must not let
that veneration overihrow theexriress institutions
of God,and controvert fact and scripture. I think

S6

I see tills veneration working on the mind of the
geaileman wlio has just spoken; and it does not
lessen my love and esteem for him. I know him
to be an honest and good man — and I know it is
tlie una^ected simplicity of his heart, which makes
him lean towards what is, in his sober conviction,
an error. In the sincerity of friendship, I would
ask him, if he could be influenced by similar con-
siderations in reference to temporal things ? Sup-
pose an eminently pious man should come to him,
saying that God had revealed to him, that he
must give one fourth of his estate to the Church-
suppose he should in the language of pious fervor,
exhort him to go and deposit his monej^ in the fund
' — would he not be apt to think, that this good
man had got some whim in his head — that he was
mistaken — that he had taken some delusive dream
for a revelation from God ? I really believe he
would. His veneration for his [)iety, his admira-
tion of his devoted aess to the cause of Christ,
would never convince him that that man had a
divine commission which would authorise him to
require the surrender of a fourth of his property.

Will he then let his veneration of the same
man's piety subvert the laws of a positive institu-
tion of Christ — subvert the testimony of facts

plainly staled in the word of God. and recorded by
the blood of martyrs ? Are convictions firm and
invincible in the one case, but light and superfi-
cial in the other ? Are we willing to give up our
reason and understanding in religion, but in noth-
ing else ? Surely it is not of so little importance
whether we are or are not in the fold of Christ, as
that we can be justified in permitting ourselves to
be " blown about by every wind of doctrine.'"
Can it be possible that all civil compacts, formed
by inan, are so regular and snug as we see them,
that they should be universally governed by
known laws, and that Jesus Christ has left his
Church so loose and irregular as that it can be eas-
ily mistaken, or that the knowledge of it should
at all depend on the virtues of even the best of
men ? If this be the case,surely the children of this
world have become wiser in their generation than
even the Son of God !

No my brethren, Christ has so organized his
visible kingdom, that it may be certainly discov-
ered and known, if we are disposed to seek it ;
and he hath established certain infallible marks
by which his officers may be distinguished ; for
they are to be called and sent as was Aaron.
This is the scripture account of the matter. Tim-

28

othy who was ordained by the apostle, is com-
manded to commit the same office which he had
received, to faithful men, who should be able to
teach others. But how^ shall Timothy know who
are those able and faithful men ? Shall he ordain
every man who says the Spirit moves him to
preach ? Or, will the spirit immediately point out
to Timothy, the man who is to be ordained ? No.
He must enquire into the qualifications of those
who offer themselves lo the work — They must be
sober, blameless, of good behaviour, apt to teach,
St. Paul says to Titus, ** for this cause left I thee
in Crete, that thou mayest ordain elders in every
city ;" and he enumerates to him the necessary
qualifications in those to be ordained ; admonish-
ing him to " lay hands suddenly on no man." In-
deed my Brethren, since the Holy-Ghost has giv-
en in the Gospel, sufficient directions concerning
this matter, we should attend to them and look
for no other.

But since the Gentleman who last spoke, ad-
duced an authority from St. Paul's writings, which
he says seems to favour his belief, we are bound to
notice it. The whole sentence is this. " Let
the prophets speak two or three, and let the others
judge. " If any thing be revealed to another that

S9

sitteth by, let the first hold his peace ; for ye all
may prophecy one by one.'*

In the Corinthian Church there were many,
endowed with spiritual gifts, who were ambitious
to display their gifts, and to speak, several at
once, to the confusion of one another, and of the
whole assembly. To correct this disorder the
apostle says, if any man speak, let it be by two, or
at the most by three, (i. e.) let not more than two or
three speak in the same meeting, and let not those
speak all at once, but in course^ one after another.
Let the prophets speak two or three in succession,
and let the other judge — and if while one (prophet)
is prophecy ing, any thing be revealed to another,
(i. e.) anotherj»rop/t€f,letthe first prophet hold his
peace." Let the first finish his discourse, and
cease from speaking, before the other begins —
** for ye may all (all the prophets) prophecy one
by one. If ye will observe order in your assem-
blies, all the prophets may have opportunity to
speak, and ye need not interrupt one another.

Prophets were an order of public teachers in
the primitive church. Th^y only are the persons
who the apostle says, may all prophecy. The
words therefore, so far from allowing, plainly for-
bid private Christians to start up and teach m re-
C.

30

Hgious assemblies. They forbid those who pre*
tend they are so overpowered by divine influence
that they cannot refrain ; for " the spirits of the
prophets are subject to the prophets" — and " God
is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as
in all the churches of his saints."

I am not Sir, impatient to hasten the decision
of this question ; but 1 cannot see that the detini-
tion of the Church of Christ given in the course
of tliis debate, can be questioned.

Layman Terlius, Although the Rev. gentle-
man cannot, I think I can. He has not attempt-
ed to answer the argument just novv offered, that
" the mode of defining the Church of Christ, now-
contended for, unchurches much of the Christian
world." I think it is an argument of great weight
— one which it will be found difficult to remove.
For myself I am an advocate for Christian Cha-
rity. Charity " is the bond of peace," it is the
distinguishing virtue of the Gospel, and I think
with the apostle, that '* it should abound."

Preshjter Qimrtus, Sir, I think the observa-
tions of this gentleman of great interest, not only
in reference to his appeal to the principles of
Charity, but also in reference to the effects which

81

a tlecision, " that there is no true Church of
Christ, unless established after the apostolic prac-
tice and by a succession of authority from Christ,
would have, at least in some parts of our own
country/ — and I doubt not Sir, but that the effects
would be more serious in reference to ma?»y chris-
tians in Europe as well as America, than these
my brother presbyters, who so warmly advo-
cate it, are aware of. As to our own country ;
president Stiles, used all his learning and genius
to disprove the accusation brought against liis
connection, that they were practising on lay or-
dination ; and after all his exertions, he had can-
didly to confess, that there were some instances
ill which that was the case. Now what would
be the consequence of the present ex|>ected de-
cision ? Why a part at least of that extensive
community (and no one can certainly tell what
part) must be unchurched ; and all must be lc;ft
Seating on the ocean of uncertainty, under the
dreadful doubt wiiether they do or do not, belong
to Christ's visible Kingdom.

I hope the gentlemen will be very scrupulous
in. the examination of this subject, and very pru-
dent in their decision.

Chairman. Gentlemen, it would certainly be

3S

proper that the assembly in general, and the s
gentlemen in particular, should be satisfied as to the
points they insist upon. You hear that the
charge of uncharitableness and evil consequences,
have been brought against your observations.
For my own satisfaction, and for the benefit of the
whole community of Christians, I am very desi-
rous of hearing what your wisdom and learning
may suggest in answer to this charge.

Presbyter Primus. Sir, I did not neglect to
answer the first gentleman upon these points, be-
cause I had no remarks to make, or because I
wished any part of the argument should be pass-
ed unnoticed ; but because I was almost sure the
gentlemen themselves, would on reflection, per-
ceive that no such charge can with propriety be
brought against the positions which we have ta-
ken. Now Sir, I deny the charge of unchurch-
ing all, and consequently of uncharitableness. In
examining this question we are in search of truth —
we are seeking into matters of fact — facts stated
in the scriptures and in other authentic history.
If in the examination of these authorities, it
should evidently turn out, that I am not a lawful
minister of Christ — that I have not my authority
from him through his apostles — I say, if it should

33

no turn out, I should not be unchurched ; for in (hat
case, it will appear that I never have heen church-
ed. 1 should be sorry that it shoidd so turn out —
but I had rather it should be so, than not know
the truth at all. For when I know it, if I have
been wrong, I can become right. And truth will
be truth Sir, be the professors never so few. BIul-
titudo errantium non parit errori pairocinium,
(it is not great numbers of misled persons that
can make falsehood truth or right to be wrong) is
a latin saying, and will ever hold true. If 1 am
out of the Church of Christ, thousands of brethren,
in the same condition will not help me ; and it
would be the highest charity in one of these
brethren, if he knew the fact, to acquaint me with
my error. And would it not be equally charita-
ble in one who knew he was in the church to un-
deceive me ? Surely it would. The apostle says
" we can do nothing against the truth, but for the
truth." So should we say. If this learned, this
numerous council should a thousand times decide,
that certain congregations are Churches of Christ,
and certain ministers are duly authorized, if they
are not so, our decision can never make them so.
Christ's Church was founded by Christ, is support-
ed by Christ, and all the decisions of all the men
C 2

34

upon earth can no more make a church than they
can make a world.

AVould it be uncharitable in any man who
knew I was so unfortunate as not to be a member
of Christ when I thought I was — would it be un-
charitable to undeceive me ? Every man says, no.
My having been for years, or my ancestors hav-
ing been for centuries in the error, alters not the
case. Error is error still, though ever so venera-
ble by age, or amiable by virtue. Should a gen-
tleman making a journey to a particular place,
be met by either of us proceeding on a road lead-
ing in a diflferent direction, and to a different
place ; on what principle could it be accounted
uncharitable to apprize him of his mistake — nay
suppose this whole assembly were present, and
should assure him he was in the right road ; would
that alter the case ? Would it be turning the tra-
veller out of his journey to put him in the right
way ? It certainly would not. No, nor would it
be unchurching a community of people, to point
out their error, to shew them they were in the
world, by shewing them the Church of Christ.
So far from leading them from it, it would be in-
troducing them into the fold, in which they
ihmight they were, and into which they should a-

35

bove all things desire to be. No Sir, this cry of
unchurching and uncharitableness is a mistake-
is entirely unfounded, and I think I can see
where the difficulty lies. It consists in associat-*
ing ideas with the subject which do not belong
to it.

The impression of many is, that in proving
that such and such sects have not a valid scrip-
ture ministry, and consequently are not a regular
scripture church, we exclude them from eve-
ry opportunity of salvation. Now this is as for-
eign from the fact, as can be conceived of. We
consider these churches as not regularly organiz-
ed, and that it is only in a regular organized
church, only in the real Church of Christ, as our
confession of faith expresses it, that there is any
ordinary possibility of salvation. In other words,
it is to the members of this church alone, that GocJ
has vouchsafed his promises. But we by no means
deny, that God does continually grant extraordi*
nary " possibility" of salvation. On the contra-
ry we declare most readily, and delight in the
thought, that the piety of thousands, in irregular
communions, will be accepted. God is not con-
fined to his promises, although we are.

We are sensible that many cbttrcheg, which

36

we esteem irregular, embrace " in their bosom a
large portion of piety," and we do not entertain
the most distant thought, that the want of regular-
ity in their constitution and ministry, will preclude
them from salvation, when that irregularity pro-
ceetlsfrom necessity, or honest error. On the
contrary we believe that such error will be forgiv-
en ; and sincere piety accepted, in all who pro-
fess the faith of Christ. No charity can be more
extensive than this.

We think, that if our ministry and church, be of
divine institution, (and that they are, I think we
have offered abundant proof,) the inevitable
consequence is, that this regularly received au-
thority of Christ, is essential to the visible Church.
Therefore, if our position be true, w^e unchurch no
one, and are uncharitable to none ; but on the
contrary, we are exercising the most extensive
charity in reference to all.

In reasoning upon the question which now oc-
cupies the attention of this assembly, we must
remember we are discussing a matter of fact, for
the benefit of all ; we are endeavouring to deter-
mine " what the Church of Christ is" — We should
therefore in no sense, associate the idea of un-
churching any denomination of Christians, and

87

especially, of excluding them from final salvation.
We should put the discussion upon this principle,
that since the pretensions of all sects are publicly
made, that one of us is as liable to be proved wrong
as another, and let the event of the trial deter-
mine, who does stand and is supported by the
truth. This is the fair ground on which to place
the subject. If in such case, we give it a full and
impartial trial, the fact will appear. For it is im-
possible that the Son of God has left this momen-
tous subject— his church^-^hh own body-— his own
kingdom, in such obscurity that there are no marks,
no evidence, by which it may be certainly known.
On the contrary 1 think these marks have been
discovered, this evidence adduced — But still I
wish the investigation not to stop here — I wish if
the Gentlemen have any thing further to adduce,
they may present it with that freedom and can-
dour which 1 know they possess.

Layman Teriius. Sir, I confess myself satisfied
with the answer which the Rev. gentleman has
given me. I am convinced by his remarks that
we are wrong in associating with the subject,
ideas foreign to it, and can now see no cause for a
charge of uncharitableness.

Chairman. Gentlemen, I am pleased to see

38

such a display of order and decorum as prevails
in this assembly. It convinces me that all
are duly impressed with the imj.ortance of the
matters before us. And I have the happiness to
be pleased with your candour, with the coolness
and dispassionate manner in which you conduct
your arguments, and with that strict reference to
charity and impartiality which I discover among
you. It will be recollected by all, that a defini-
tion of the visible Church of Christ, has heen giv-
en, (viz.) " the Church of Christ is a congregation
of faithful men i in the which, the pure word ojGod
is preachtd, andthe sacraments be duly ministered
according to ChrisVs ordinance in all those things
that of necessity are requisite to the same.^^

You have heard how this definition has been
explained, and with what arguments it has been
inforced. The weight of proof is yet, certainly in
favor of the said definition. If any other gentle-
man has a different definition, he will offer it ; or
if any one have any further observations to make,
on the one already offered, he will now proceed.

Presbyter Tertiiis. I presume Sir, that the as-
sembly is satisfied with the cle tr view which has
already been given of the subject, and that a d
cision will now be proper.

39

Chairman, I am unwilling to close this subject
until every gentleman shall be satisfied. And I
now pause to give place to any observations or
arguments.

Since it is by the silence of all, confessed that
the important question before us is sufficiently in-
vestigated, I now proclaim that any one is at li-
berty to enter his protest against the definition of
a visible church which I have just recited : and
if no such protest be offered, I shall consider it as
established by this council to be the standard.

Gentlemen — It seems unnecessary, since there
is such an apparent unanimity of opinion among
you, to be particular in a summary of the argu-
ments which have been offered upon this question.
It is sufficient to recapitulate, that our blessed Re-
deemer did establish while on earth a visible
church — that in it he did establish a ministry,
clothed with power to perpetuate his kingdom —
that he promised to accompany his delegated
power to the end of time, that it appears from
scripture and authentic history, that he has ful-
filled his promise, and that his church may be
^ound wherever the succession has been preserv-
ed in the priesthood, and the power thereof exer

40

cised in administering the word and sacraments
to faithful men.— ADJOURNED.

THIRD DAY.

MET ACCORDING TO ADJOURNMENT.

Chairman. Gentlemen — Your attention will
be this morning called to the examination of the
second question, originally proposed to this assem-
bly, (viz.)

" JVhat constitutes membership in the visible
Church of Christ ?

The previous one being settled, I apprehend it
will be less difficult to determine this — I am now
prepared to hear what your wisdom and learning
may sugge&.t upon it.

Presbyter Primus. Sir, it is with a degree of
pleasure, I am unable to express, that I observe so
much punctuality and such undivided attention in
this numerous assembly ; and it affords me equal
pleasure to hope, that these momentous questions
on which some contrariety of opinion has hither-
to been entertained, are about to be considered in
all their bearings, under the influence of the piety
and learning which now surround me.

On the question before us, I have to observe,
that eiuce it has been proved, and to me proved

41

beyond a doubt, that Christ's Church is a visible
institution^ and organized under a visible regimen,
the first enquiry should now be, whether he insti-
tuted and ordained visible ordinances in it. That
this was the case, taking the sacred word for au»
thority, there cannot be a question. When Christ
clothed his apostles with power, he said unto
them, "go teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
CJhost."

When he instituted and celebrated the Holy-
Supper with his disciples, he said, " do this in re-
membrance of me." And we find that these
Christian officers acted under the authority they
received, and im[)licity obeyed the above injunc-
tions. They continually taught the great doc-
trines and precepts of Christ. They were occu-
pied in prayer and in breaking of bread, and as
they found men listen to Gospel truth, as soon as
they found them willing to become disciples oi
Christ, they admitted them into the visible school
by baptism. On the day of Penticost, thousands
were instructed, and thousands were bayitised.
To the importunate enquiry of those who were
" pricked in their hearts," and exclaimed, *' what

shall we do V the Apostle answered, " repent and-
D

4a

be baptised every one of you, in the name of the
Lord Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and
ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

We find in the practice of those holy messen-
gers of God, the apostles, a continued attention to
this ordinance, and that they invariably adminis-
tered it to all converts. We find in the course of
their history, fifteen or sixteen instances in which
baptism was administered, and we find it particu-
larly recorded, who were the subjects, what was
the manner, and what the matter, with which it
was [)erfofraed. So that it must be extreme preju-
dice or ignorance, which can leave any man to
doubt, that there were visible ordinances establish-
ed id the Church of Christ, and that these sacra-
ments were constantly celebrated in the practice
of the first Christians.

This matter is not left Sir, to our understanding
and explanation of the scripture account. We
have the opinions and the practice of the early
Christians, successors to the apostles, who lived in
their age and the age immedijitely succeeding.
These men,renow ned for their piety,as well as their
■wisdom, mnsthave known the mind of Christ and his
apor^lles upon this matter. It wusa matter of fact in
\vhich the Christian Church could not be deceiv-

43

ed — and it was not until more than fifteen hun-
dred years after they lived and died, before any
christians ever questioned the necessity of the vi-
sible ordinances, or the visible authority which
Christ ordained in the church.

This voice of universal consent, this voice of
antiquity, this voice of the church in her pure,
her primitive days, when she was uncorrupted and
undivided, should be heard with veneration ; and
this voice so exactly according with the scrip-
tare institutions, and apostolic practice, must car-
ry conviction to every thinking mind.

These facts being thus established Sir, it will
be easy to see what constitutes membership in
the visible church. Baptism was always admi-
nistered, and its necessity enforced on every con-
vert to Gospel truth. The converts on the
day of pentecost, on the day of their first conver-
sion—-the jailor, in the very hour in which he
appealed to the apostle — Lydia, as soon as she
heard the word of God preached— were all baptis*
ed. None were received as disciples by the apes'
ties except those who were subjects of this ordi-
nance. In this wa5'^ ba{)tism evidently becomes
the seal of adoption into Christ's visible Church—-
the visible door by which we enter his household

44

and kingdom. This we are expressly taught by
Christ himself in the 3d chap, of St. John's Gos-
pel— ^" Except ye be baptised with wat€i\ and the
Holy Ghost, ye cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." This is plain language. " The kingdom
of God" here, must mean in its lowest sense, the
visible church. This we cannot enter, without
water baptism, as well as the baptism of the spi-
rit. To baptise with the spirit, is the work of
God ; but to baptize with water is the business of
his visible officers. God ever does all on his part.
To those who are faithfully and clevoutly obedient
to his laws and institutions, he will grant every
spiritual aid and qualification. This puts upon
every one the necessity of complyipg with this in-
stitution, in order to be one of the fold of Christ,
and it at the same time shows us, that this ordi-
nance is the only seal of admission into his fami-
ly. For if without baptism, " we cannot enter'''
the kingdom, and with it we caw, nothing can be
plainer than that this is the only way of admis-
sion.

These Sir, are the views which I have collect-
ed upon this question, from the scriptures, from
the practice of antiquity, and indeed from the
standards of almost cverj'^ denomination in Chris-

45

tentlom. These views I shall continue to enter-
tain, unless some gentleman can afford me new
light on the subject.

Presbyter Tertius. Sir, although I heartily ac-
cord with my Rev. Brother, in his views of tlie
visible Church of Christ, I must beg leave to dif-
fer iii opinion from him, in reference to member-
ship. In my mind, it is a question whether water
baptism constitutes membership therein or not,
and I confess I am inclined to believe the contra-
ry is the fact. I rather accord with some of our
best writers, who teach us that baptism is to be
administered only '' to regularly received mem-
bers of the Church.""' That " baptism does not
constitute membership," but that it consists in that
faith and sanclilication which are wrought by the
word and spirit of God. Surely the gentleman
will not go so far as to say, that the want of bap-
tism will exclude from final salvation ; and if it
exclude not from the kingdom triumphant, it is a
mystery to me why it should from the kingdom
militant. It appears to me that the baptism of the
spirit, should be placed above that of water, and
that the latter should be considered as a sign, ra-
ther than a seal of admission into the chnrch. It

*Ecclesiastical Catechism, p 9.
D2

45

is certainly undervaluing the grace of God, and
his work in the soul, to place the visible ordinan-
ces in one sense above them or at least upon an
equality with them. I wish to magnify the love
of God, and to see it raised above every thing
earthly. I am willing however to hear what can
be advanced on the subject.

P. Primus. Sir I am as desirous " of magni-
fying the grace of God,'* as this Rev. Geutleman
or any other man can be; but 1 am desirous of
doing this in God's way, and not in mail's. It is
surprising to me that any man can think or talk of
giving honor to his Redeemer, by mangling, dis-
torting and rendering insignificant his positive in-
stitittions. Were this sacrament the ordinance of
man — did it rest on a matter of opinion — we might
then treat it with comparitive lightness. But
ivhen it is supported by facts-^by indisputable
scripture facts, when it is ordained by Chrisfs
own words, when he expressly declares we cannot
be members of his kingdom without it — is it not,
instead of magnifying his grace, seriously detract-
ing from that glory and honour due to him, to make
his ordinance a bare ceremony ?

Christ declares in positive terms, ye cannot
er^ter rqy kingdom without baptism. Some ap-

47

proaching him, say iiot so my blessed Lord ; —
this is not what you mean — j^ou undervalue the
influence of your blessed word and spirit, by ma-
king your insiituiiGns of such importance; your
commands and institutions, and what your apostles
said and did, must give way, that your grace may
be magnified, and that you may give glory to
yourself in another way, by sanctifying the soul-—
This baptism is too insignificant a thing — Our
?.eal for your honor and glory would have it to
take a lower place in the Gospel system; we would
liave it instead of the seal to be the ceremony —
the sign of membership, and not the instrument
by which men are made members."

This if I understand it, is the reasoning of the
gentleman, when reduced to plain language. But
what is this but remonstrating with Christ ; saying
we know better about the business than you ; —
We have found out a better way to organize the
system of Grace, than the one communicated to
us in your word — One which will more directly re-
'dound to your glory, and will better promote your
cause among men !

Still Sir, although my Rev. Brother has fallen
into this mode of reasoning, I am not about to im-
peach his motives — 1 am satisfied they aie good.

48

'This mistake arises from the goodness of his heart.
His faith directs him to spiritual things — to the
Church triumphant. This he views with such
5^eal as to make him too indifferent, in reference
to the institution of the Church militant.

The Rev. gentleman fully accords with us ia
the definition of the visible Church of Christ.
He fully agrees, that it was organized by God
himself; and if he would carry his ideas a step
further, he would see that he should as sacredly re-
gard the commands and institutions of his Saviour,
in i>!ie respect as another — that a requisition in
regard to a visible practicable duty, is as obli-
gatory as to a spiritual exercise of soul.

God hath erected a visible kingdom in the
■world, which he styles his Church. This Church
is a part of that sj'^stem of Grace, in which he has
provided for man's salvation. As we are social
beings, he hath accommodated this part of his bles-
sed system to our natures. This church is his
visible school ; to the mem!>ers of w hich he grants
his word and spirit, to enlighten their benighted
minds ; to the members of which he affords his
heavenly impulse, to controul their wills, to warm
and exalt their affections, and to sanctify their
corrupt natures, that when he has done with them

*9

here below, they may be capable of being receive^
by him above. — The Church is in this way, termed
the school of Christ — a school in which immortal
beings, defective in their nature, may be renewed,
and educated for eternity. This school is Christ's.
He founded and supports it. Being visible, he has
seen fit to appoint a visible way of admission unto
it ; and declares, as we have seen, that there h
not nor shall be any other way. Now let this
way be ever so plain, ever so simple, it is Ckrisfs
way, it is the apostolic v/ay,it is the way by which
all the primitive Christians entered. — And shall
we presume to be wiser in this matter than apos-
tles and martyrs ? — wiser than Christ himself? —
Surely this would be an ungodly way of magnify-
ing the grace of God !

No Sir, let us give proper reverence and honour
to the visible institutions of Christ, and be con-
tented to do what he commands. The great mis-
take on this subject appears to be this. Some
men take the internal qualification of a good mem-
ber of Christ's Church, to constitute membership
in the visible community ; when this is in no sense
true, a»iy more than that the good disposition of
the heart of man, constitutes the man.

In order to be a Christian, a man must enter the

00

school of Christ by baptism ; and in order to be
a »oodf Christian, he must obey not only this one
command, o^enterim^ the school, but he must obey
all the commands, and be regulated by all the
maxims of the Gospel — He must live by faith, be
moved by the spirit, and live a life of piety.

My Brother Presbyter says, " surely the gen-
tleman will not go so far as to say, the want of
baptism will exclude from final salvation." " And
if it exclude not from the Ivingdom triumphant, it
is a mystery to me why it should from the kingdom
militant." To which I answer that we say no
such thing. On this subject 1 say what I said in
reference to the visible Church ; — that I think,
and I delight in the thought, that thousands of pi-
ous persons never baptised, will on account of
their piety, be received into a happy Inifiiortal-
ity :— that honest error will be forgiven : that al-
though they can in no senre be said to belong to
the visible Church of Christ, because they have not
been subjects of that only ordinance which Christ
hath instituted to admit them ; and although they
have no con venant promise of salvation^ — still, that
God is not bound by his promise?, although we
are, if acquainted with them ; and that he may, aa

5i

we find he constantly does, dispense his fevouT«
to those without his covenant.

I have Sir, farther to remark upon what my Rev.
Brother said respecting the opinion of some of our
best writers onthis3ubject,(viz.)thattheysupported
the position, that baptism did not constitute mem-
bership. I must confess I was sorry to hear the
remark, inasmuch as, although a few men have
supported this position, still the standards of al-
most every Church in Christendom testify to the
contrary. Even the standards of his own church use
a language in express contradiction to the doctrine
he contends for. Our Confession of Faith, p. 25,
speaking of the sacraments, says they " put a vis-
ible difference between those who belong unto the
church, and the rest of the world." And p. 128,
it says Baptism is a sacrament of the New-Testa-
ment, ordained by Christ, not only for the solemn
admission of the party baptised into the visible
Church, but also to be unto him a sign and seal of
the " covenant of Grace, of his ingrafting into
Christ," &c.

The catechism of the Protestant Episcopal
Church speaks in equally strong terms. The an-
swer to the second question is, " my sponsors in
baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ"'-

§2

jthat is, a member of his visible body. " The
Child of God'* — that is, adopted into G od's visible
family—" and an inheritor of the kingdom of Heav-
en,'* that is, by covenant relation made an inheri-
tor of the promises. The same language we find in
the Heidleburgh Catechism 27th Lord's day — In
Hellenbrook's Catechism p. 55, and in the Dutch
Church Confession of Faith, article 34.

In short, there can be no question, but that all
the standards of the Presbyterian, as well as other
Churches — that all our best and most learned au-
thors support the position, that baptism is the onli/
door of admission into the visible Church of Christ.
I have dwelt the longer upon this point Sir, be-
cause I wished to give my Rev. Brother, dis-
tinct ideas of the views I entertain on the sub-
ject, and because I wished the question to be set-
tled on the permanent grounds upon which the
gospel has placed it.

Chairman, Are there any other gentlemen
who have any remarks to make ?

Doc. Bishop.— I have only to say Sir, that I
have followed the Rev. Gentleman in his speech
with equal pleasure and interest. Truly sad has
been the havoc which has been made of the visi-
ble institutions of Christ by some modern writen?,-

5B

and I do think the evil required an antidote,
^one certainly can be more effectual, than jm ap-
peal to Christ, his apostles, and the Christiaa
Church. This, I am happy to observe, has been
done in a very plain and logical manner by the
gentleman who last spoke.

The question being now called for was put,
when it was unanimously determined, that Water
haptism constitutes the only membership in the visi'
hie Church of Christ.

ADJOURNED.

FOURTH DAY,

MET ACCORDING TO ADJOURNMENT^:

Chairman, Gentlemen, we have progressed in
the business before us to the final question, viz.

" What is the precise nature of the constitution of
the visible Church of Christ. ?"

The assembly are now prepared to hear this
interesting question discussed, and 1 do hope it
may be settled with that clearness and precision,
which have marked the decision of those al-
ready disposed of.

Presbyter Primus. Sir, my present impressions
are, that this question is so decidedly settled in

5i<

the scriptures, that the business of this conven-
tion, may now soon be brought to a close. It is
pretty generally granted, and has already been
decided by this assembly, that the constitution of
the Church of Christ is of divine authority and
appointment. This constitution recognizes a
priesthood, possessing po^vers to perpetuate the
Church by ordination, and to govern the Chris-
tian community. It is the precise nature of this
priesthood, ordained by Christ and perpetuated
by succession, from him to thp present day, that
Vfe are to enquire into. The question is not,
whether there is such a priesthood, or whether it
has been continued by succession. These ques-
tions are already settled. The question is, what
is the regimen of this priesthood 1 Are there
grades of power in it, or does it consist of one or'
tier ? The latter,! presume, we shall find to be the
true and apostolic constitution of the Christian
ministry.

It is well known, that the Church of Rome,
together with some others, sets up for an imparity
in the ministry ; but it must be recollected, 4hat
that church has sought out many new inventions.
The question under consideration should be fried
not by her example, nor by the exfimple of any

55

other community of people, but by the only true
standards, the scriptures, and antiquily. And
what can be plainer sir, than parity in the minis-
try— than the presbyterian government of the
Church, as held forth in the bible "^ There was in-
dis[)utal)ly an equality, as it respects authority,
among the apostles. They ever acted in union,
and never in any one instance claimed a superi-
ority, one over the other. Those whom they
ordained were brethren — were their equals. Ti-
mothy was in nothing below the apostle St. Paul,
and he was ordained, not by a bishop, but'' with
the laying on of the bands of the presbytery,"
1 Tim. iv. 14. His ordination was presbyterian
in every sense of the word. If none but bishops
might ordain, how came it to pass that the holy
apostle St. Paul, encouraged this prominent in-
stance of ordination by presbyters Preshytera
are sometimes called bishops in the New Testa-
ment ; and from this community of names it has
been plead, that there was an higher order of
church officers. But as bishops are sometimes
called presbyters, as well as presbyters bishops,
we may as well infer presbyterian government, as
others episcopal — so that this community of names
amounts to nothing. But the scriptures are not

56

alone upon this subject. The voice of antiqnily
supports the position which we have taken, and
teaches us that there was no imparity in the mi-
nistry for at least 300 years from the days of our
blessed Saviour. It is needless for me at present
to adduce authorities — but they are at hand if ne-
cessity requires them.

To me Sir, this question appears so plain, that
I deem it needless to enlarge upon it at present — •
I will only state what seems very evidently, to me,
to be the true ministry and government of the
Chrisrian Church. It is this — In the apostolic
age, every regularly organized congregation of
christians were furnished with three classes of
church officers ; only one of these classes howev-
er, purely priestly, or empowered to administer
the word and sacraments. The first of these class-
es consists of the bishops, or presbyters, or pastors ;
the second, of the ruling elders ; and the third, of
the deacons.

The bench of elders, with the pastor or bishop,
as their standing moderator or president, consti-
tutes the spiritual court, for directing all affairs
purely ecclesiastical, in the congregation. These
bishofis of the several congregations, with a dele-
gation from the eldership of each church, are to

57

convene in larger or smaller councils or synods,
for the purpose of discussing and deciding great
questions, and making general and particular ar-
rangements, for the good and effectual governing
of the Church. i

This Sir, we conceive to be the precise consti-
tution and order of the visible Church of Christ,
as settled and practised on by the apostles. Hence
saith St. Paul, " God hath set some in the church
— — first apostles, secondarily prophets, thiillly
teachers ; after that miracles, then aifls of healing,
belps governments, diversities of tongues." Here
Sir, are set forth a variety of orders, the three first,
forming its whole economy and government, and
precisely answering to the familiar statement I
have already given; so that in the ministry, con-
sidered as such, there is a perfect equality of power
and office ; and these subordinate officers, ruling
elders and deacons, are no more than a spiritual
court for the advice and direction of the bishop, oc
pastor of the congregation.

I rest the question here Sir, not because I have
exhausted the arguments it suggests, but because
those I have stated are to my mind conclusive.

Doct. Bishop, It is with regret Sir, that 1 feel

constrained, after concurring with the learned'
B2

58

gentleman wlio has just set down, in the sentiments
he expressed on the two preceding questions, to
differ with him on the present occasion. I am
sorry to say 1 cannot conscientiously subscribe to
the doctrines which he has just now advanced ;
not merely because they are opposed to those held
by the venerable church to which I have the hap-
piness to belong, but because I am under the full
conviction, that they are not supported by scrip-
ture or antiquity. It appears to me Sir, (I wish
to say it with all deference, and in the fulness of
charity and decorum) it appears to me Sir, that
the gentleman, however clear upon other subjects,
labours under an honest error in this. But I
am happy to hear him state the question to be
discussed, so fully and fairly. I am pleased to
hear him say, that the question is not " wheth-
er there be a priesthood ; or whether it has been
continued by succession ;'* but " what is the
precise regimen of the Christian priesthood ? Are
Hhere grades of power in it, or does it consist of
one order .^" This Sir, is the precise question.

The gentleman seems to be very positive that
the apostolic regimen of the Church was a parity
in the ministry — He intimates th^t the Chtirch of

59

Rome introduced an imparity, and that others
have followed her example ; but as he does not in-
sist upon this, it will not be necessary at present,
to go into an investigation of the subject.

The Rev. gentleman thinks " there was indis-
putably an equality as it respects authority among
the apostles, and that Timothy was in nothing
below the apostle St. Paul'* — All this Sir, is read-
ily granted — Nay, it has never been questioned by
any man. But that Timothy was 7iot oniained
by a bishop, is a point which I shall not so read-
ily grant. The gentleman could not have quoted
a text from the Bible, more unfortunate for his
cause than the one he has chosen. The case of
Timothy, fairly understood, is a palpable tact,
proving the imparity of the ministry in the apos-
tolic age. But before we proceed to examine it
as such, let us notice the specious argument which
the Rev. gentleman has used, to prove that Timo-
thy was a Presbyterian. He was ordained, not
by a bishop, says he, " but with the laying on of
the hands of the Presbytery." Very true, he was.
In this case I request my learned friend to re-
member what he said respecting the " community
ef names," 1 readily grant, that it proves notli-

60

ing for his cause, nor for mine. Episcopalians lay
no stress upon the term Bishop, as used in the
Scriptures. They freely confess, that Bishops
are there sometimes called Presbyters, and Pres-
byters Bishops. It is altr ether a uiistake, that
we coatend for Episcopal regimen upon that
ground. It is ihepowers which we find exclusive-
ly lodged in the highest order of the ministry, on
which all our arguments are founded. We say
that there was in the aj)Ostolic age, and has been
ever since, a grade in the ministr}', superior to two
others, possessing the power of ordaining and of
governing the Church — that this grade of officers
were sometimes called Bishops, at others Presby-
ters ; and so they may be Sir, in the present day.
Every Bishop is necessarily a Presbyter, and per-
forms all the functions of Presbyters ; but every
Presbyter is not a Bishop.

Let us now apply the argument of the gentle-
man.

Bishops were called Presbyters : St. Paul says
to Timothy, " neglect not the gift that is in thee,
which was given thee by prophecy, with the lay-
ing on of the hands of the Presbytery, ^^ What is
the inference ? Why, that St. Paul, with several
other Bishops or Presbyters, had consecrated

6i

Timothy to the c lice of bishop or Presbyter, and
made him an oflcer like themselves. Still the
gentleman says he was not ordained by a Bishop,
but by Presbytery. Here he condemns us, by ac-
cusing us of using thir vi'mmunity of names, to sup-
port our position ; an immediately takes the same
refuge himself, as the only support of his own
cause. The gentleman says, Timothy was not
ordained by a Bishop — surely he will not deny but
that St. Paul was a Bishop ; and this same St.
Paul expressly enjoins Timothy, " stir up the gift
of God which Is in thee, by the putting on of my
liatids." From which the inference is undeniable,
that St. Paul was himself the chief agent ; the
actual ordainer of Timothy. The Presbytery,
wh(»ever they were, whether Bishops in the pecul-
iar iease, or mere Presbyters, only associated with
the apostle, as concurring in the work.

But Sir, I have other evidence to offer, that
Timothy was a Bishop, in the peculiar sense of
the word, and superior to other Presbyters, who
were at Ephesus. There qertainly were Presby-
ters at Ephesus, before Timothy was sent there.
At least five years before Paul wrote his epistle to
Timothy, he sent from Miletus to Ephesus, for
the « Elders of the Church." Let this fact be re '

membpred, while we notice the power and duties
of Timothy.

Timothy and Titus were sent expressly to " or-
dain elders in every city." We have seen (hat
there were eUlers, or presbyters in Ephesus. Had
these possessed the power of ordination, is it not
extraordinary that others shoukl be sent for that
purpose, and that there shouhl be no intimation
given, that those already there could do it ?

Further — It certainly appears that the church
at Ephesus, was subjected to T'ifnoihy''s aidhority
— " Lay hands suddenly on no man," was an in-
junction to him.— That is, do not admit into the
sacred ministry, any without due examination. Is
therp any one associated with Timothy in this in-
junction— any of those elders or presbyters who
were there before him ? None. They are not
Eo much as named — and the evident reason is,
that Timothy was an officer superior to them.

Again — The very maintenance of the elders,
or presbyters, St. Paul entirely commits to Timo-
thy. " Let the elders that rule well, be accounted
worthy of double honour; especially they who la*
l)our in word and doctrine." All writers agree
fljat this is a charge to take care that the elders

63

be maiatained. But there is no intimation that
the elders are to be associated with him.

Again — St. Paul gave to Timothy authority to
order Divine service — to see that all things were
done decently and in order, in the Church — to
give rules concerning Christian discipline — to take
care that none be ordained who were novices—
that women should go modestly appareled, should
keep silence in the Church, and not teach — antl
that none should be admitted to the otfice of dea-
con without trial — nor any be raised to an higher
oiTice, who had not acquitted himself well in the
deacon ship.

Now to shew that all this was addressed to
Timothy, as the head oi the Church at Ephesus,
the apostle thus selemnly concludes — " I give thee
charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all
things, and before Jesus Christ, who before Pon-
tius Pilate witnessed a good confession, that thou
keep this commandment without spot, unrebuka-
ble, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Here the apostle plainly tells us, that the command
relating to the above points, was given to Timo-
thy for his direction and conduct in the Church of
Christ ; and that he of course would be responsi-
ble for the breach of it

64

Now, Sir, if there are words in the whole com*
pass of language, which can express episcopal
powers — powers particularly appropriate to bish-
ops in this day, we have them in the epistle to
Timothy. His superiority over the Church at
Ephesus, is as clear as the sun in the firmament.
And that Timothy was the head of the extensive
community of Christians at Ephesus— that he had
the supreme controul of both ministers and people
— that he possessed and exercised episcopal func-
tions— is the point for which we contend. It is
this which constitutes his epispocal character, and
not any name or title which he bore. It matters
not whether he was styled bishop, presbyter, apos-
tle, or evangelist.

I have been more explicit Sir, u n this point,
because of the great stress which the Rev. gentle-
man puts upon it. '■■'

I am astonished Sir, that the gentleman should
appeal to antiquity for the support of parity in the
ministry. Did Hooker, Bull, Pearson, Beveridge,
Wakfe, Potter, Chillingworth and Leslie, as learn-
ed and pious men, as ever adorned the Christian
Church, know nothing of antiquity ; and after
their intense labours, their deep research, after
they have explored all the annals of Church histo--

65

Tj ami reported that imparity is the apostolical
regimen of Church government, is it left for us of
the year 1817, to announce to the world that these
writers are all mistaken, and that the records of an-
tiquity speak no such thing as they tell of? Is the
authority which has so long been allowed to these
luminaries of the Church, to be destroyed before
this council by the fiat of a single presbyter, how-
ever respectable ? I trust not Sir. Many of the
records which these learned men explored are
now extant. Ignatus Turtullean, Origen, Irene-
us, Cyprian, and others of the first centuries, al-
though dead, speak : and their united voice is,
that there were no presbyterians in their day—
that a parity in the ministry was then not known.
Before I c ticlude my observations, I have to
remark Sir, upon the other quotation which the
gentleman maue, in support of Presbyterian pa-
rity.

It is the declaration of St. Paul, that " God hath
set some in the ChUrch — first apostles, second-
arily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that mira-
cles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments,
diversities of tongues." These, says the gentle-
man, are institutions of God. This no one de-

«i«a. Bat how the gentleman became §o bewil-
F.

66

dered as to quote it to maintain his plan of*
Church government, I am utterly at a loss.
The first three, are, apostles, })rophets and teach"
ers. These no doubt are offices held by men—
but the others, miracles, gifts of healing, &c. were
qualifications which God, the great head of his
Church, bestowed upon the stewards of his myste-
ries, for the effectual conviction of the world, and
promulgation of his blessed gospel among men-
Let us observe these three officers.

First apostles— We know what they were. They
were the Governors of the Church. They were
the first in rank — the first in power and office —
they ordained, they ruled the Church. These
were their peculiar powers — and hence were they
called Bishops — They were in their age, in refe-
rence to office, what our Bishops now are. This
the most superficial cannot but observe.

The second class of officers were prophets.
What is the business of prophets as held forth in
the New Testament ? Their peculiar business
•was to proclaim the Gospel of salvation to men,
and to enforce upon them divine truth. They
are represented as a grade below the apostles,
acting under them, but of a high priestly charac-
ter. How does such character comport with th%

67

of the rulins; elders, T\'ho compose a part of this
gentleman's system, and who are stationed, not
upon the walls of Zion, proclaiming salvation,
but in a kind of court, to assist and advise the
presbyter, in his parochial business, and to ac-
company him as a kind of lay delegate to synods
and assemblies ? How precisely do tliese prophets;
answer the description of our presbyters, who are
a second order in the ministry, and whose pecu-
liar business always hos been, to explain and en-
force the Gospel of Christ, and to administer the
holy sacraments when authorized by their Episco-
pal Head? I must confess I cannot perceive for
what the gentleman quoted this passage — -a pas-
sage in such direct hostility to his system.

The third office is teachers — a grade still below
the former, whose business, as appears from their
employment in the scriptures, and as explained
b}^ early writers, was to instruct converts, and to
perform the lower duties of the ministry, answer-
ing in every respect to the deacons hi the Protes-
tant Episco{)a! Church. But are the gentleman's
deacons after the pattern of these scripture teach-
ers ? I do not find that he has assigned them any
p^.rlicular driles ; but whatever duties he may be
pleased to as?ign them, I presume he will not

68

constitute them teachers, in as much as hetleclarea
them not a grade of the priesthood. This passage
therefore, so far from supporting parity in the mi-
nistry, is a conclusive exemplification of the Chris-
tian regimen.

I shall not now Sir, detain the attention of this
learned assembly longer. I rose, barely to de-
fend that venerable Church to wliich I belong,
against what 1 deem to be erroneous doctrines. I
shall therefore forbear at this time, to state my
ideas at large, on the constitution of the Christian
Church, in as much as I wish not to appear illi-
beral or forward. I wish the subject to be can-
didly and gradually unfolded, thai a fair and per-
m-djeut conviction, may at last rest on the
mia 's of all, let the final decision be what it
may.

Presbyter Secundus. Sir, I h^.d flattered myself
•with she hope that the argument on this question
wov-ld not be diverted from its course, and this as-
seiiirily insulted by the pretensions of Prelacy
and high-toned Church principles. I was in hopes
that the gentleman would be modest, and not in an
uncharitable and outrageous manner, unchurch
all denominations except those who have humbly
bowed themselves to the sceptre of Prelacy. The

69

RiKlit B.ev, genilemhn has yet, to be sure, only
atiempted to answer the arguments oiTered by my
brother presbyter — But I can see he has not yet
got to the end of his story — Vv'e shall presently see
him stepping forward with bolder strides, and
claiming the whole christian vineyard, endeavor-
ing to shove out as intruders, every presbyterian.
Indeed what he has already offered upon tliis sub-
ject, goes directly to do this. It goes to set him-
self safely in the Episcopal chair, and to dislodge
every presbyterian from the christian ministrj^ — -
to turn them out into the wide world of error, and
to pronounce them pretenders and usurpers. Be-
fore the gentleman can be justified in uttering a
syllable, which only looks towards such a conclu-
sion, he should be perfectly certain of his premi-
ses. To unchurch with a lash of his tongue, all
non-episcopalian denominations under heaven ;
and cast their members indiscriminately, into a
condition vyorse than that of the very heathen, is,
to say the least of it, a most dreadful excommuni-
cation ; and if not clearly enjoined by the law of
God, as criminal as it is dreadful. That all those
venerable Churches which have flourished in Ge-
neva, Holland, France, Scotland, England, Ire-
land, &c. since the reformation j and which have
F2

70

Spread, and are spreading through this vast conti-
nent— that those heroes of the truth, who, tliough
they bowed not to the Mitre, rescued millions from
the Man of Sin, lighted up the lamp of genuine
religion, and left it burning with a pure and steady
flame to the generation following — 'that all those
faithful ministers, and all those private christians,
who though not of the hierarchy, adorned the doc-
trine of God their Saviour, living in faith, dying
in faith ; hundreds, thousands of them going away
to their Father's house under the strong consola-
tion of the Holy-Ghost, with anticipated Heaven
in their hearts, and its hallelujahs on their lips —
that all, all were w ithout the pale of the visible
Church, were destitute of covenant grace, and
left the world without any chance for eternal life,
but that of unplf't^:ed. unpromised mercy, are
facts of such deejj-toned horror, as m«y well
make our hair stand up '' like quiils upon the fret-
ful porcupine," and freeze the narm hIr>od at th«i
fountain. We say this awful, this dreadiui SLn-
tence, is the necessary conclusion to be drawn
from the position which the Right Rev. Gentle-
man has taken.

Episcopacy Sir, is a bold inovation upon the
original constitution of the Church— is an unpal-

7i

lallelled usurpation of {)ower by some presbyters,
above their equals. It has been the scourge of
the Christian world for several hundred years, and
I am happy indeed, that the question is now sub-
jected to the examination of this numerous, pious
and learned body of men. I am determined to
meet it with promptitude and decision — 'and since
this Right Rev. gentleman has come forward
with his high pretensions, and authoritative de-
nunciations, I shall take the liberty, in order to
bring the subject fairly before this assembly, that
it may be fully investigated and settled, to state
the accusations, which I think may be justly
brought against Episcopacy — this child of Popery,
and image of royalty.

I hold in my hand Sir, a paper containing those
accusations, which I shall now read and endea-
vour to support.

Accusations brought against the assumed power
in the Christian ministry termed Episcopal.

First. That the peculiar powers of Episcopacy
should be discountenanced, in that they are a vio-
lation of the laws of Christian charity in un-
churching all non-episcopalians.

Second. In that they were violently usurped ip
the third century.

Third. In that there is no express warrant fop
them ia the scriptures — they no where say " thus
said the Lord."

FGurlli. In that they deny the scripture insti-*
tution of ruling elders.

Fifth. In that they grew out of, and are an er-
ror of Popery.

Sixth. In that dioceasan episcopacy is not to
be supported by scripture or history, but puts it in
the power of man to lord it over the heritage of
God.

These Sir, T confess, are serious cliarges to l>e
brought against a christian community, hut
charges to me so evidently true, that I should
feel myseli guilty of violating the sacred relation,
which binds me to my God and Saviour, if I did
not distinctly state and boldly enforce them.

The Right Rev. Gentleman and otiiers, will
be at liberty, if they see tit, to follow me in ray
arguments; so that in this way I conceive the
subject will be more distinctly understood and sa-
tisfactorily settled.

Chairman. Sir, I must be permitted to interrupt
you. You have set out very zealously, and I
jnust take the liberty to say somewhat intempe-
rately upon this subject. You have struck out

73

an entire new plan of investigation ; a plan, to
say the least, bearing with severity upon a res-
pectable and numerous body oF Christians, and
fitly calculated to excite more warmth than should
be fe!t in the discussion of such a subject. Before
therefore, you are permitted to proceed, the sense
of tiie assembly, and especially of those against
whom your charges are levelled, should be had.
It should be known whether they agree to
your proposed manner of investigating the im-
portant question now under cowsideration.

Doct. Bishop. Sir, the gentleman has my most
cordial assent, to the manner in which he has
proposed to investigate the subject. He is at
perfect liberty to choose his own mode of assail-
ing the church to which I have the happiness to
belong — I know not that it matters how the at-
tack is brought, whether with the finer graces of
decorum, or the coarseness of intemperate denun-
ciation. His manner and measures were to be
sure unexpected, but against them 1 shall offer no
objection. As he has promised me the favor of
following him, I shall most likely improve il, and
risk the cause of EpiscQi>acy on that foundation,
upon which I am confident it has ever stood— Up-
on scnphtn and antiquity.

7ii

I wish therefore the gentleman may be permit-
ted to proceed.

Chairman. I have no special objection to the
consi«leration of the accusations which the Rev,
gentleman has read, other than that the proposed
manner entirely alters the nature of the proceed-
ings, from a popular investigation, to a kind of
special trial ; thereby rendering my situation
more delicate and accountable, by constituting
me a kind of Judge, on special charges brought a-
gainst a particular class of the Christian commu-
nity. If therefore these accusations be tried,!
shall insist that twelve gentlemen be chosen, from
the various denominations of christians present,
and associated with me as a kind of Jury.

Presbyter Primus. It is presumed there can
be no possible objection to such a measure.

Doct. Bishop. None.

The gentlemen were immediately selected from
among the most learned and pious of the asst ra-
bly, and the court new formed, consisting of the
Chairman, or Judge, and twelve Jurors.

Chairman. Gentlemen, we are now prepared
to go into an investigation of the several charges
which have been read. In calling your attention
to this, 1 deem it my duty to remind you of that

75

^e corum aud fairness of enquiry, which has hith-
erto marked most of our proceedings, upon these
momentous and interesting topics. We hope that
while gentlemen ardently contend for the truth,
they will strive to temper their zeal with all that
love and affection which belongs to religious en-
quiry.

The first charge is, " that the peculiar powers of
Episcopacy should be discountenanced^ in that they are
a violation of the laws of christian charity, inun-
churching all non episcopalians*'*

Presbyter Secundus. Sir, it is scarcely neces-
sary for me to utter a syllable in support of the
Justness of this charge. The well known fact,
that Episcopalians set up Episcopal regimen as the
only true and divine authority— that they teach,
that there can be no true Church without it, and {hat
all uon-episcopalians are running in the wide road
of error — are denounced as aliens from the com-
monwealth of the visible Israel, and are without
hope of salvation, except upon the ground of un-
covenanted mercy, is sufficient of itself to rouse
every feeling of sensibility, to awaken the deepest
sense of detestation, if not against the persons, at
least against the cold, unfeeling principles which
influence them. Shall non-episcopalians, in the

76

full enjoyment of their holy religion— christians
who " have tasted the good word of God, and the
powers of the world to come" — christians who
shine as lights in the world — shall such christians
feel it no hardship to be insulted with a declara-
tion, that they have left the true fold of Christ by
deserting the Hierarchy — that their priesthood is
710 priesthood, any more than Korah, Dathan, and
Abiram's was — that their ministry acts by human
authority only ; that the divinity of the priest-
hood is all lodged in the bishop, and that without
him there can be no church, no ordination, and
finally no persons actually belonging to the visi-
ble Church of God. What a sweeping system is
this ? a system which demolishes at one stroke
all the glories of the presbyterian cause, and lev-
els all her noble churches with the dust ! If this
is not entering the most holy sanctuary of charity,
and violating her most sacred maxims, I know not
what is. — Uncharitableness exercised against indi-
vidual persons bears no comparison to this ; for
it denounces and unchurches without a single
salvo, whole communities of people, and outrage-
ously robs them of their dearest privileges and en-
joyments, without any hope or refuge, except that
of rushing into the arms of Episcopacy. I can

f7

read in the countenances of these brethren around
me, that manly detesidtion they feel, at the bare
mention of this unrivalled assumption of power,
and this hard hearted denunciation of brethren in
Christ.

I feel that I can safely risk this charge, upon
the support which it receives from every man, in
the least influenced by the principles of Christian
love. I shall therefore cheerfully submit it to the
decision of the gentlemen, whom I have the hap*
piness to address.

Doc. Bishop. Gentlemen, I am surprised that
the Rev. gentleman who has but now addressed
you — a gentleman of his superior powers of mind^
and of his great acquirements, should take the po-
sition he has upon this charge, against which I
have the honor of defending my Church.

When this charge was announced, and an-t
nounced with the assurance of support from a
quarter so formidable, I confess I trembled at the
consequences — not however under a sense that
the charge itself was just, or that it could for a
moment be sanctioned by this judicious and learned
assembly. My fears originated from another
quarter. It is well known to you gentlemen, that
the sympathies of the multitude are instantly eir-

7S

cited on the cry of uncbaritableness and persecw-
tivr. ; that an accusation of this nature runs - like
wil.' Ore," among the great mass who think irttle
an<! reason less, and who are powerfully con-
trouled b}' positive assurance and popular ha-
rai.'g «e, especially when thus addressed by persons
of bigh standing and commanding j)owers. This
was the source of my fears. These fears however
dissij.ated as the Rev. Gentleman proceeded in
his remarks. Suppose the " well known fact,'*
on which the gentleman founds his attack were
undisputed by Episcopalians. It would be evi-
dent Jo the most superficial understanding, that
the high accusation brought by the gentleman,
COi!-;: noi be sustained by such fact, unless Epis-
copalians were first convinced that they were in
an error themselves. Let it be taken for granted
Sir. <hal Episcopalians think and declare that
there can be no true Christian ministry, without
Episcopal authority' — that it is the only and true
Aj'ostolic regimen of church government, and
still it will be impossible to sustain the charge of
illiberality or unchurching against them.

1 cannot iHuridate this subject more satisfacto-
rily iMMu by repeating the arguments used b}; the
Rev. P. Primus (which were cordially approbated

79

by the Rev. gentleman w ho now makes this charge)
when vindicating luoiseira!7(l his Ohurch ugxliist
the same accusation. He says " I deny the charge
of unchurcliing all, and consequefitly of unchari-
tableness. In examining this question we are in
search of truth — we are set-king into matters of
fact." This gentlemen, I atlirm of the princtpal
question now in dispute. We are endeavorifig to
ascertain the precise nature of tlie constitution of
the Christian ministry. One party atlirnit to be
I^piscopal another Presbyterian. The question is
to be tried, and the matter of fact fairly settled.
How childish then in either of the parties, to rise
up and cry, "denunciation — persecution — unchar-
itableness ?" Said the Rev. Gentleman already
quoted, when pleading against the like accusa-
tion, " we are seeking into matters of fact— facts
stated in the scriptures and other authentic his-
tory. If in the examination of these authorities,
it should evidently turn out, that I am not a law-
ful minister of Christ — that i have not my autho-
rity from him through his Apostles — I say, if it
should so turn out, I shall not be unchurched, for
in that case, it will appear that I never have been
churched. I should be sorry that it should so luni
»ut— but 1 had rather it ghoiild be ffo than not

80

know the truth at all. For when I know it, if I
have been wrong, I can become right. Truth
will be truth Sir, be the professors never so few.'*
Continues he, " If 1 am out of the Church, thou-
sands of brethren in the same condition, will not
help me; and it would be the greatest charity in
any one of these brethren, if he knew the fact, to
acquaint me with my error. And would it not be
equally charitable, in one who knew he was in the
Church, to undeceive me ? The Apostle says "we
can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.'*
So should me say. If this numerous and learned
council, should a thousand time? decide, that cer-
tain congregations are Churches of Christ, and
thai certain ministers, are duly authorized, if they
are not so, our decisions can never make them so.
Christ's Church was founded by Christ— is sup-
ported by Christ — and all the decisions of all the
men upon earth, can never make a Church any
more than they can make a world.

Would it be uncharitable in any man, who
knew 1 was so unfortunate as not to be a mem-
ber of Christ, when I thought I was — would it be
uncharitable to undeceive me ? , Every man says,
no. My having been for years, or my ancestors
having been for centuries in the error, alters not

Si

tbe case-Error is error still, though evet so vener-
al>!e by age or amiable by virtue. Should a gen-
tleman making a Journey, to a particulcir place,
be met by either of us proceeding on a road lead-
ing in a ditTerent direclion, and to a different
place, on vvha! principle could it be accounted
uncharital)le, to apprize him of his mistake ?
Nay, suppose this whole assembly were present,
and should assure him he was in the right road ;
would that make it so ? Would it be turning the
traveller o?^f of his journey to put him in the right
way 1 It certainly would not. No, nor would it
be unchurching a community ef people, to point
out their error — to show Ihem that they were in
the world, by showing them the Churcit of Christ.
So far from leading them from it, it would be intro-
ducing them into the fold in which they thought
they were, and into which they should above ail
things desire to be. No Sir, this cry of unchurch-
ing and uncharitablenes8,is a mistake— is entirely
unfounded." This reasoning gentlemen is to me
conclusive. And unless using it in behalf of an
Episco[)alian, renders it of less force than when it
is imjdoyed in favour of a Presbyterian, it must b€
coticJusive ^ith the Rev. Gentleman, who has ac-
cused Episcopacy of this sin of dennnciation an#
02

lincharitablcncss. Everyone perceives that this
reasoning applies precisely to the case before us.
And although the gentleman saw, or thought he
saw, in the countenances of the gentlemen around
him, " a manly detestation," still 1 am prepared to
submit the decision of this high accusation, not
only to you Sir, and to this honorable Jury, but to
the voice of this whole assembly ; and should it
finally prove, that Episcopacy cannot support its
claims against Presbytery, and Episcopalians
should still continue to assert them, then will
any gentleman be entirely at liberty to renew the
accusation.

Presbyter Primus. I am convinced Sir, that
this subject has been sufficiently investigated and
for myself, wish the Chairman and Jury may de-
cide it.

P. SecuTidus. The question is submitted.

The Chairman having ascertained the senti-
ments of the Jury, proclaimed to the assembly,
that he and the jurors were unanimous in their
judgment, that Episcopacy was not chargeable
with the offence alledged, and that it ought to be
exonerated therefrom.

Chairman. Gentlemen, the second charge
brought against EpiscopaUans is, " that they as-

83

mmcd the Epi<!CopaI power in the third ceniury^
We are now ready for its examination.

P . Tcrtius. However ill-timed and im[>roper
in itself the first charge, I trust this is founded
upon such evidence, that it will not be difficult to
substantiate it. It is well known that Popery
was not an Apostolic institution, but a corru{)tioa
of power, assumed some centuries after the Aposto-
lic ige. I conceive Episcopacy to be a grade of
the same power, and that it crept gradually into
the Church in the third century. The causes
which then operated to do away the true regi-
men of Church government — the divinely insti-
tuted Presbytery — were the indolence and the '
inconsideration of some, the ambition of others ;
the custom of standing moderators ; and the vene-
ration paid to senior ministers, and such as were
of superior talents and influence ; the respect at-
tached to such as resided in large cities, and other
considerations of a similar kind. It is not to be
denied that in the third century, that zeal which
characterized the Apostles and first ministers; that
wakeful diligence which we in every case find in
the first stewardf? of the sanctuary, began to abate
ifl some who were called to the spiritual work.
In other words, the Church began to be corrnpt 5

84)

and the love of the world and the pride of life, in
many instances took the place of the love of God.
Am >ition with her unbridled desires, rode forth
intt) the vineyard of our God and Saviour. When
tiiese corruptions had crept into the Church, we
are to remember that the synods and .issetnhlies
were coaducled with presidents at their heads ;
and that there were standing moderators in the
larger synods; that these {)residents and modera-
tors were of the senior Presbyters, venerated for
their age and standing ; tliese too would be natu-
rally chosen from among those of the greatest ta-
lents and influence, and the most ambitious in the
larger cities, by whom the greatest respect is de-
manded, and to whom it is invariably pai I. —
These men, inflated with their promotion and
success ; their ambition warmed by power
and station ; standing: at the head of the Chris-
tian community, they »vouid have a commanding
influence over the Chur*ch ; they would pretty
naturally desire to make their station immove-
able ; and by the joint exertions of several of these
ambitious heads, each controuling the Presbyters
under him, might gradually with little effort, as
they actu'nlly did, establish a P'relacy, and hand it
jilowa to their iBUCcessors. In this way, through

8^

ambition and corruption, did Episcopacy creep in-
to the Church, and tinally in this way did the
Po[)e ascend his throne, in his plentitude of ; ow-
er, and spread darkness, dismay and death tln-ough
all the kingdoms of Christendom. This Sir, is
the language of ancient history. Take tlie au-
thority of Jerome. He says, that Bishops and
PresbytersVere the same under the Apostles — that
before there were by the devil's influence, parlies
in religion, the churches were governed by the
common council of Presbyters, but afterwards the
practice was introduced, of placing one of the
Presbyters above the rest, as a remedy against
seism. He further says, that this practice was
brought in by litUe and little. He asserts that
Presbyters were above Presbyters, more by the
custom of the church, than by the appointment of
Christ ; and that this change owed its origin to
the decay of religion, when every one began to
think that those whom ]he baptized were rather
Ms own than Christ's."

I appeal to your candor, my brethren, w hether
there can be any plainer and more satisfactory
proof than this, that Episcopacy was an innovation
of man. Again, Gregory says, " would to God
there vi as no Prelacyjno pre-eminence of place— -no

86

Ijrannical privileges.*' Would Greojory, an erai^
jiently ()ious and learned Bishop wish this, my
brethren, if he believed Prelacy to be of divine
appointment ?

Origi^n says, " I think that which ia written con-
eerning the sellers of doves, to agree to (hose who
commit the Churches to greedy, tyrannical, un-
learned, and irreligious Bishops, Presbyters, and
Deacons."

These, gentlemen, are quotations from author*
who cannot be disputed. Many others of the like
nature might be adduced from almost every age,
subsequent to the third century. This being the
fact, it renders the statement which 1 have given
of the rise of Episcofiacy, incontrovertable. The
power then having been thus usurped, the act is
an outrage upon that ministry which Christ estab-
lished in the time of his Aijostles and their succes-
sors. And should therefore be diseountenauced.

Presbyter Secundus. Gentlemen, I have been
gratiiied with the ex|)lanation w hich has been giv-
en of the charge under consideration, and the rea-
sons which have been urged in support of it. Our
Brother has very dispassiouHtely and calmly exajjii-
ined the subject, ant! Jac;dit ins?' ch a light as tUat
neae can be in doubt respecting the true state ct

87

Ibe question. I am aware however, that the gei?-
tleman may urge on the other side that there is no
liisiory in support of this charge — that no writer
of ihat age in s^omany words, asserts that such a
change in the constitution of ; he Church did take
place, and none in the next century except Jerome.
Anticipating this plea, I rose for the pur[)ose of
clearing this point of what may he supposed its
difficulties. It must be remembered that the
principal writers of that day, were those dis-
tinguished men,vvho were at the head of the Church,
whose corruptions and whose ambition lead thera
to change the divinely constituted Presbytery for
Prelacy. And they, being the authors of the tleed,
and the historians of the age, would he careful not
to record the fact, because by so doing they would
record their own shame. What few other writers
there were in that age, being of minor influence
when compared with these usurpers, they would
by fear or by favours be pressed into silence, so
that the^ might not be expected to record their
master's shame. The silence therefore of writers
respecting the fact itself, is easily accounted for.
The error continually mounted upwards, until it
seated itself on the Popish throne— and as it ascend-
ed, it obscured the truth and buried the record of the

88

fact in its ^loom. But wherever or however retain-
ed,whetherin the Pope, or in its more comely form»
in Episcopacy, it is still the error of the third cen-
tury and must give way to the divine institution
of Presbytery

Doc. Bishop. Gentlemen, I confess the Rev.
Gentlemen who have stepped forward in the sup-
port of this high accusation, are by no means want-
ing in ingenuity, in the formation of systems to
suit their purposes. They have certainly given
a very pretty and plausible account of the rise and
progress of Episcopacy ; and have so artfully con-
nected it with Popery, that it is not a wonder that
they are so confident of success ; and were all
knowledge of Scripture and antiquity treasured
up in the minds of these Rev. Gentlemen, they
would no doubt come ofif with triumph, and bury
the Episcopal community in the disgrace of their
reproaches. 1 am indeed sorry that gentlemen
will condescend to use reproach instead of argu-
ment in support of their ause. Little did I ex-
pect that the hackneyed slang, so much used about
the period of the American revolution, would ever
be revived. At that time it was in the mouth of
ev<ry enemy to her welfare, that the Episcopal
(3httich was a child of Popery ; that her rites and

89

ordinances, her worship, and her government, were
but a step removed from, the corruptions of the
Church of Rome. Then it was, that she was cri-
ed down as a child of royalty ; as craving a
throne, and of dangerous influence ; that she
possessed neither piety or virtue, and that her wou-
ship was a dry formality." Many in my presence
can testify with what diligence and what clamor
Episcopacy was assailed, and it is well known
that these things had a surprizing and almost over-
whelming effect. She was for years in a state
militant. But God, who has promised to save his
Church, helped her in her distress. He blessed the
labours of her faithful servants — The fallacy of
the accusations brought against her being exposed,
hundreds who had been deluded by the cry rushed
into her bosom.

I repeat it, therefore, that it is with pain I hear
gentlemen renewing the cry which has more than
once terminated in the shame of those who raised
it. The manner however in which the Rev. Gen-
tlemen have wove Episcopacy and Popery togeth-
er in their system, and the plausibility which by
a kind of historical legerdemain, they have given
their statement, deserves attention. I shall there

fore improve this opportunity of examining it,
H

90

Let us first notice the singularly shrewd mau-
iier in which the gentlemen get over the silence of
history, in reference to their pretended change of
Presbyterian to Episcopal regimen. " The usurp-
ers," they say, " were the historians of the age, and
they would not record the fact, for thereby they
would record <heir own shame" Surprizing shift
to save a bad cause ! And were these violent
usurpers of the priesthood — these corrupt modera-
tors, who had transformed themselves into Bish-
ops—were they the only historians of that day 1
What gentleman of learning will venture his repu-
tation on such a declaration ? Was the eloquent
TurtuUian one of the usurpers ? Was he one of
those greedy, ambitious, corrupt Bishops, who
thirsted for Papal dominion ? No. He was a mere
Presbyter. He was in no danger of recording his
own shame. Nor was he one of a little mind, a
tame spirit, or minor influence, who was to be sub-
dued by fear or favour. In his various writings,
has he left no hint of this anti-Christian usurpa-
tion ? No. Would he have recorded his own
shame ? Nay, gentlemen, has not this Presbyter,
who had every motive to brand with infamy these
usurpers, declared in the most explicit terms, that
all spiritual power is derived from Episcopal or^

91

dination ? That neither Presbyter nor Deacon
has any right to baptize witliout the Bishop's au-
thority ? Does he not challenge the heretics to
produce a list of their Bishops ? What could have
induced Turtullian to be silent with respect to
this usurpation if it had ever existed ? Or rather,
what could have induced him to assert such a
shameless falsehood, as that Episcopacy was of
Apostolical institution, if it were not a notorious
fact ? We hear no remonstrance from him ; but
we hear him on the contrary, declare, that the A-
postles left three orders in the Church, Bishops,
Priests and Deacons.

We have the same testimony from the profound-
ly learned Origen. He also was a Presbyter, and
therefore one of the sufferers under this unchristian
domination. He too had a peculiar motive for
unmasking the imposition. He conceived him-
self to be ill treated by his Bishop : yet irritated
as he was, he declares Episcopacy to be of divine
appointment. Did he not know how the matter
was ? Was he an idiot, or a knave ? Was he a-
fraid to tell the truth, or had he any motive for
telling a falsehood ? Gentlemen, we have got to
a sUynge , ass if we attempt to impose such ftc^
tions upon mankind.

But why are christian Bishops to be excluded
from bearing their testimony in tavor of Episcopa-
cy ? Oh ! say the gentlemen, " they were the
usurpers, and of course could not record their own
shame. Was Ignatius an usurper ? Does the man
who had been forty years Bishop of Antioeh, who
had been ordained to that olfice by Apostolic im-
position of hands, and who encountered, for the
sake of Christ, death in one of its most horrid
forms, deserve that character '' Did he, virtuous
and pious as he was, go out of the world with a lie
in his mouth ? Did this martyr, who declares over
and over again, that the office which he bore was
of divine institution, record his own shame ?

Was Polycarp, the venerable and pious Bishop
of Smyrna, one of those usurping Prelates ? He
must have had a principal hand in the business, if
Blondell guesses right ; for Polycarp lived at the
very time, when Blondell says this flagitious revo-
lution was effected. He, by recommending in the
strongest terms, the epistles of Ignatius, asserts
the divine right of Episcopacy. Did he go out
of the world triumphing in the flames, and exult-
ing in the hope of happiness, when he had upon
his soul the guilt of destroying that sacred regimen

93

which Christ left in his Church ? Such supposi-
tions, gentlemen, are revolting to common sense,

The Rev. gentleman therefore, instead of clear-
ing away the difficulties, has but barely glossed
them over with a superficial, a supposed ' shame.'
It is im{)0ssible that a fact of such moment should
have transpired, and still not a trace of history be
left, which records it ; and at the same time, the,
most pious, the most learned of every age, testify ^
ing a contrary truth. Jerome, the writer whom
the gentleman quotes with so much trium[)h, says
no such thing, as we shall directly show. And
even if he did, when the voice of all antiquity is
expressly against him, his authority should be ta-
ken with great caution. The Rev. gentleman
has presented us with some quotations, which, as
they have the appearance of a history of the fact
alledged, deserve to be noticed.

Let us calmly examine the quotation which he
has so triumphantly imtroduced from Jerome. In
the first place this passage must be considered at
best obscure and doubtful.

Jerome says that Bishop and Presbyter were

the same under the Apostles. This I grant. But

does it follow that there was no office superior to

this order. As a logician, the gentleman will eer-
H2.

94

tainly not say it does. Who then were the supe-
rior officers ? I answer the Apostles. What does
Jerome next say ? That before there were, by
the devil's influence, parties in religion,the Church-
es were governed by the common council of Pres-
byters." Here Jerome must be understood, in or-
der not to contradict the Scriptures, to mean, that
the Presbyters governed the Churches, insubordi-
nation to the Apostles. All this says every Episco^
palian. Afterwards, says Jerome; after this dis-
traction at Corinth, when one said I am of Paul, I
of Appollos — to prevent the seeds of seism, one of
the Presbyters was set over the rest. Now aa
Jerome says, one of the Presbyters was placed
over the rest, to prevent the seism, which took
place at Corinth, if we allow him common sense,
it cannot be supposed he meant to assert, that the
remedy was not applied till two or three hundred
years after the evil begun. According to him then,
Bishops were introduced in the Apostles' day,
which is all Episcopalians claim. Jerome further
says, that this superior order among the clergy
was introduced by little and little." This too is
perfectly consistent with the notions of the most
high-toned Episcopalian. As the labors of thff
Apostles increased, and it became irapracticabte

09

for them to superintend the numerous Churehes
which they had planted — they gradually placed
men over these Churches with the same majority
of power which they themselves had exercised.
So that I do not see, but that I may as triumphant-
ly quote this passage, as the Rev. Gentleman, who
thought it so pointedly supported his cause.

Let us now examine his second quotation,
Gregory says, "would to God there were no Pre-
lacy— no pre-eminence of place— no tyrannical
privileges." To this quotation the gentleman sub-
joins this question — Would an eminently learn-
ed and pious Bishop, have spoken thus, if he had
considered Prelacy of divine appointment ? To
this question I answer without hesitation, Yes.
He might have thus spoken in perfect consisten-
cy with the belief, that Episcopacy was of divine
origin.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's whole reason-
ing on the subject is entirely fallacious. Bishops
have abused their authority, therefore the office is
not of divine appointment. Whither will not this
sophistry lead us ?

I would seriously ask the gentleman, what are
his views in giving us this quotation from Greg-
ory ? Surely not to make him a Presbyterian.

96

Gregory does not wish that there were no Bish-
ops, but that there was no pre-emiaency amongst
Bishops. Such is ray apprehension of his lan-
guage. It is extremely unfair and uncandid,to quote
from writers expressions like these, to prove the
rise of Episcopacy ; when the least at ention to
the same writers, would make it evident, beyond
contradiction, that they believed in the divine
right and succession of E[)iscopal regimen, and
were only in those expressions, alluding to a
pre-eminence which early began to obtain among
Bishops, as such. From Bingham's history, we
have abundant evidence of the rise of Metropoli-
tans. They were presidents of the house of
Bishops — were heads of the Bishops and of an
whole province ; and frequently presided as such,
in the councils of the Church. Continues Bing-
ham, these Metropolitans were in after ages cal-
led Arch Bishops and Patriarchs. Now the early
writers frequently s[)eak of this pre-eminence
among Bishops ; and while they constantly affirm,
that there were three orders in the ministry — that
Bishops, Priests and Deacons were appointed to
the Church by Christ and his Apostles, and of
course of divine authority, they at the same time
inform us, that this pre-eminence in the highent

97

order (viz.) the distinguishing character of the
Metropolitan, of the Archbishop or Patriarch, had its
rise in the necessities and customs of the Church,
and not from divine appointment. And this Sir,
is what every Episcopalian declares.

Unhappily perhaps for the Church, after the
Roman empire became Christian, some undue
privileges were conferred on some Bishops, by the
civil power in large Cities, and these privileges,
have in many instances, been a scourge to the
Church. I believe it to be such on the Island of
Great Britain now. It was this pre-eminence of
place — of privilege, which the civil power con-
ferred ; this was the pre-eminence against which
Gregory exclaims | and against which every man
may exclaim, and still be a confirmed and zealous
Episcopalian,

In the English Church, there are particular ti-
tles, privileges and powers, conferred on certain
Bishops by the civil power, and in this way the
church and kingdom are united. This was former-
ly the case in Rome,and of this Gregory complains.
But these titles, powers, and privileges form no
part of Episcopacy, as such. It is only a mix-
ing of the government of the church with the civ-
il government of the particular country where

98

it happens to be stationetl — But this is an addi-
tion of civil powers to the divine priesthood,
which in no sense belongjs to it. Against this
mmy Episcopalians have exclaimed in every
age, since tlie priesthood has condescended to be
thus tramelled. But non-Episcoj>alians, in quot-
ing these remonstrances, against civil poiver and
iiilcs, to disprove ihe daine imlituiion of Episcopa-
cy ; make not only Origen, but almost every oth-
er writer of eminence in the past centuries, con-
tradict themselves in tlie most explicit terms. §

§ The ipiritual Church of England, if 1 may so speak, and
the civil Church of England, we entiiely distinct ; and I can-
ti<'t inorejriilely or more perspicuously exprt-ss this distinction,
than iii the 1 'ngu;ige of one of tht most eminent prelates who hag
afi< ined that Church. " To the Prince or to the law, (sayg
Bishop Horslej-,) we are indebted for all our secular posisessiuns ;
for the rank and dignity annexed to the superior order of the
Clergy; fo" our secular authority; for ihe jurisdiction of our
iourtsj and lor every civil effect which follows the exercise of
our s,iritUAl authority. All these rights and honours vvith
which the priestli'od is 'domed by the piety of the civil m <gi8-
trate, are quite distinct from the spiritual commission which we
bear, for the adniimstration of Chrisfs Kingdom They iiave
no necessary connexion with it ; they stand merely on the
ground of human law."*

The spiritual Church of England we are proud to resemble.
Falsiedbemyheartandmy tongue, when the one cease? to beat
withgiatitude to her, ind the other to speak her praisrs. The
spiritual Church of England we resemble in all essential points
of doctrine, discipline, and worship But with the civil Church
of England wetotally differ j and the difference consists in nou-
essentjal points of discipline.

* fforsley^s charge to his Clergy -when Bishop of Slt^

^avicPs.

99

I shall now adduce a few authoriries (Vom th^
■Writers {ireceding the age in which the alledged
usurrmtion took place. If we find Episcopacy
then extant and universally received, the question
must of necessity be settled, because the evil com-
plained of could not be prevalent befcre it had an
existence. Ignatius who was the disciule of St.
Peter, and according to the ancients, wasordained
by him, Bishop of Antioch, in the Epistle which
he wrote on his way to martyrdom, saith, what is
the Bishop but he that hath all authority and

Her spiritual Episcopacy and ministry ; her orders of Bish-
ops, Prif sts and Deacons, we possess ; we are proud to possess
them These constitute our claim to the characler of an Apos-
tolic Church. But we differ from her in our Clergy enjoying
notempoial powers; in our Church being no farther related to
the State, than as amenable to its I'-ws, and protected by them J
and in her being destitute of those inferior offices of Arch-
Deacons, Deans, Prebends and others, which are only of human
institution " 1 may securely (s-itys Hooker) therefore, conclude,
Ihvit there are, at this day, in the Church of England, no other
than the same rie^rees of ecclesiastical orders, namely. Bishops,
Presbyters, and Deacons, which had their beginning from Christ
and his blessed Apostles themselves. As for Deacons, Prebenda-
ries, Parsons, Vicars, Curates, Arch-Deacons, Chancellors, Offi-
ciils, Commissaries, and such other like names, which being not
found in Holy Scripture, we have been thereby, through some
nies's error, thought to aUow of ecclesiastical degrees not known,
iirr ever heard ot, in the better ages of former times ; all these
are in truth but titles of office, whereunto partly ecclesiastical
persons, and partly others, are in sundry forms and conditions
admitted, asthe state of the Church doth need, degrees of order
Etill continuing the same they were from the first bf ginning." -Jj^
Bishop Hobart^schargi,

• Ecclesiastical PoUfv, Book Y. Sect. 7S.

100

power ? What is the Presbytery but a sacred
constitution of counsellors and assessors to the
Bishops ? This gentlemen, is testimony as ex-
plicit as words can make it, and is derived from the
Apostolic age. About seventy years from that
age flourished Ireneus, who thus speaks — ^" We,
says he, can reckon up those whom the apostles
ordained Bishops in the several Churches, and
who they were that succeeded them, down to
our times. Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, who
lived about the same time, certifies the same
thing. See also Arch-Bishop Potter. Other
authorities of the like nature might be produced
from these ages, but surely candour will be satis-
fied with these.

To suppose that events could there be spoken of
as notorious in the Church, for centuries before
they took place, would be contrary to every prin-
ciple of common sense. The fact is so notorious,
and is so fully recorded by every early writer,
that Episcopacy was the regimen of the Church
in the first and second centuries, that it will be in
vain for any man to pretend that it took its rise
after that period.

Against the supposition that the powers which
Bishops exercise by long and immemorial usage.

101

were originally an usurpation, there is an argu-
ment which even wiih any candid Presbyterian
must be conclusive. If Episcopacy were an
usurpation — if the power of the Bishops, like that
of the Pope, was anti-Christian and unscriptural,
would not the illustrious Reformers have denoonc-
ed Episcopacy with as much zeal as they did Po-
pery ? To suppose that they would not, is to im-
peach at once their talents and their sincerity.
The hierarchy in its various modifications, was an
object of jealousy, of close, bold, and unrestrained
investigation ; and the primitive writers were
faithfully explored, in order to test its pretensions.
If under these circumstances, the Reformers, while
they denounced the Pope as " anti-Christ," " the
man of sin, the son of perdition, not only refrain-
ed from censuring Episcopacy, but spoke of such
an Episcopacy as the Church of England posses-
sed, in the most respectful terms, I think the con-
clusion is irresistible, that Popery and Episcopa-
cy are not equally untenable. The fact is as
remarkable as it is undeniable, that the great
Reformers, Calvin and Reza; and other divines of
the reformed Churches on the continent of Eu-
rope, in opposing the hierarchy, opposed only

the corrupt hierarchy of the Church of Rome ; ap-
h

provedin the strongest language of a printilivH
Episccfacy, such as the Church of England pos-
sessed, and lamented the imperious circumstances
which de|)rived them of it.*

The Rev. Gentleman seems to rest much of his
fine theory, on the desire of pre-eminence which
he intimates is natural to man. A wish of pre-
eminence is natural^ when it brings with it, its
usual gratifications ; but where is the man who
w ishes it, when it brings in its train every thing
appallingto human nature — a brief spiritual author-
ity, such as the early Bishops possessed, general-
ly accompanied with bonds, imprisonment, and
death in the most horrible forms, has very few
charms, even to those in whose breasts the love of
power operates strongly — It would be the height of
folly to suppose, that any Presbyters, however in^
ordinate their ambition, or corrupt their motives^
would wish such distinction on the rack and at
the stake, or that they would usurp stations, where
relentless persecution would inevitably assail
them. No, human nature loves itself too well, for
that kind of distinction. Yet this was the situ-
ation of the Christian Bishops in the first centu*
ries. They were not supported, but in most ca-

* Calvin^ a book concerning the ntceuitjf o/reformiilg
the Church.

103

ses depressed by the civil j)ovver. They had n©
Demosthene;! or Cicero to plead their cause.
They had to fight the battles of Christ, frequesitiy
against principalities aod powers — and not uufre-
quently died in the conflict. And still these
Bishops are charged with profligacy, and ambitious
usurpation.

It is universally acknowledged that the Church,
until the middle of the second century, jjreserved
her piely. This was but a short time previous
to the alledged usurpation by her Presbyters.
The Bishops of this very age, are recorded as dis*
playing all the meekness and humility of Chris-
tians. And C'ln it be supposed that these men,
who would not offer incense at the idol altars, to
save thcraselves from the most excruciating tor-
ments, deliberately associated for the purpose of
acquiring a trilling authority o^er their brethren,
at the expense of an institution of their Lord and
Master ? What ! conscientious in eAery thing
relating to Christian purity^ — to Christian man-
ners ; and yet profligate as to the constitution of
the Christian Church! Gross iuconaistency I

But gentlemen, suppose this chimerical plan.,
ofdeprivhig the Presbyters of those powers to
which they were entitled by the appointment oi'

10*

their Lord and Master, should have entered into
the minds of a few amhitious Presbyters, how in
the name of common sense, was it to be effected ?
They possessed not the civil power to drive, nor
the eloquence of Cicero to persuade, men out of
their senses. How then did they effect so im[)or-
tant, so outrageous a change ? How did they cov-
er the fatal deed, that it produced no remonstrance,
no 'jpposition ? Nay, how did they blot the re-
membrance of it from the mind, that it should lie
buried for centuries, and be finally permitted to
pass until after the Reformation before thought of
or discovered ?

The truth is that the ancients had much great-
er advantages for determining the question under
consideration, and every other important matter
relating to the Church, than we can possibly
have. They had not only all the writings that
we have, but a great many more. They had a
great number of epistles, written by Synod to
Synod — by Bishops to Bishops — by Churches to
Churche:', about all things that happened, in
which either the government or the discipline of
the Church was interested. From all which manu-
scripts and records, they mi^bt as fully have le arned
^hat was the government instituted by the Apos-

105

ties, and whether substantial innovations had
been made in it, as we can learn by the records
of the fifth and sixth centuries, what the form of
government was in those centuries. Indeed gen-
tlemen, it is impossible that this usurpation, oven
if effected in one province, should have extend-
ed itself throughout the world, at a period, when
the secular power would not have enforced it —
and when there was no general council to effect
it. I repeat it — had this usurpation happened
there would have been explicit, irrefragible facts
recorded in cotemporary writers of a change,
which if effect€*d by general consent, must have
given new features to the visible Church, and
constituted one of its most memorable eras. And
w here, we ask, is the record of a change, which if
effected by usurpation, must have rallied clergy
and people around their just rights, consecrated
by Apostolic auithority, and called forth at least
from some one degraded Presbyter, a solemn jiro-
test, which would have been heard through dis-
tant climes to distant ages. Where the " voice
of warning," which, even in this degenerate day,
poured forth the alarm in Zion, when danger only
remotely threatened her sacred cause. Alas ! the
inhabitants of Zion, lay locked in deadly slumber.

106

The centinels on her sacred ramparts, were
6leei)!ng at their posts. The enemy came. No
blast from the gospel trumpet swept over Zion
to rouse her members in defence of her Apostolic
order. Presbytery, her revered pride and glory,
vanished. A corrupt Prelacy raised its hideous
form — Christians throiighmd the world, who but a
eentury or two before, had receivetl Presbytery as
a sacred deposit from Christ and his Apostles, as
if touched by the wand of enchantment, fell down
and worshipped the image, which the pride and
ambition of usurping Prelates had set up \ And
more astonishing still, the pen of history neglect*
ing its office, left to future ages no traces of this
wonderful event ! The man who can believe
that this astonishing change in Apostolic order,
could have been universally effected within a
short period of the Apostolic age, without being
fully, explicitly, and lastingly recorded in the wri-
tings of that period, which are still extant, must
be prepared to believe that all the Presbyteries
now in the world, may lie down to sleep, and
wake up under the government of Bishops, and
yet that no record would be left to inform posteri-
ty of the astonishing event.
Chairman, It appears to me gentlemen that

107

this charge is, in its nature, incapable of being
sustained. 1 cannot believe that a fact, which,
if true, would go to show that the regular succes-
sion of the true regimen of the priesthood was
interrupted for several centuries, nay which in-
deed would prove that Christ suffered the econo-
my of the ministry to be altered, and which at
the same time involves all the inconsistencies and
difficulties which the Right Rev. Gentleman ha«
stated, could ever have had an existence. The
belief of this usurpation must have originated at
some period, in the prejudice or mistake of men,
and cannot be founded in fact — I wish however
to leave the gentlemen to support their position
in their own way, begging them at the same time,
not unnecessarily to detain the council.

Presbyter Primus. We submit the question.

Chairman, We proceed then to the third ac-
cusation viz. that there is no express warrant for
Episcopacy in the Scriptures^^they no where say,
« Thus saith the Lord:'

Presbyter Qiiarius, It appears to me gentle-
men that the fact, that God has no where laid
down the plan of church government in his re-
vealed will, and has no where said that this or
that particular regimen should be observed, is a

108

good and sufficient argument why we should lay
no great stress on any form whatever, and espe-
cially why we should not claim to ourselves to be
exclusively ridit. There is something to me
very forbidding, in hearing men positively de-
cli.re, that this is God's institution — God's regimen
"—when it must be granted that they have no ex-
press authority for saying so.

Presbyter Secundus. Gentlemen, I am sorry to
hear the Rev. Genlleman speak thus loosely on
this subject. He seems to intimate that no regi-
men of the Church is of divine institution. This,
I hope, he is very far from believing. The Pres-
byterian form of church government is held forth
in the New Testament as clear as the sun in the
firmament of heaven, and the acts of the Apostles
uniting with the commission given to them by
Christ, amounts in my estimation, to an express
warrant for the practice of our churches.

Doctor Bishop. Gentlemen, it appears to me
there is some looseness in the observations of both
the gentlemen. The charge preferred against
that Church to which I belong is, " that there is
no express warrant in the scriptures fo;* her pecu-
liar government." This we readily gfant, atlirm-
iug at the same time that this is no less true with

109

respect to Presbyterian regimen than Episcopal.
What we contend for is, that although we have not
an express warrant in so many words, still we
have Apostolic practice and institution, and that
these are conclusive evidence of divine right. If
the broad principle be admitted, that express
precept o?i/?/ and not Apostolic practice, is conclu-
sive evidence of divine right, by what proof shall
we establish the divine institution of the Sabbath,
or indeed, the genuineness of the writings Df the
New Testament.

The A|)ostles acted under divine inspiration.
Those institutions, therefore, which they settled,
and which are not obviously of a local an(» tem-
porary nature, are authorised by that divine spirit
under which they acted, and are to be reverenced
and obeyed as from God. The contrary princi-
ple cuts up by the roots evangelical doctrine, and
shakes to its foundation, the Christian Church.

There is then only one thing to be considered
in reference to the charge under consideration—-
And that is, whether all Apostolic practices are
equally obligatory ? If not, is Episcopacy one
which is binding in all ages ? That all are e-
qudly obligatory is not to he pretended — There
is an evident distinction between them, therefore,

lid

which is this— The practices of the Apostles which
were intended to last, and be unchangeable, are
binding on all Chrislians, while those which were
intended to be temporary and mutable, are not. — '■
And we can determine instantly, from the nature
of those practices, w hether they were to be local
and transitory, or of general and permanent ob-
servance. The love feasts, the kiss of charity^
the deaconesses, who were to attend on women in
baptism, were Apostolic /?rac/i'c^5 evidently of in-
ferior moment, proper and nectssary only under
peculiar circumstances of the Church, and laid
aside when these circumstances changed. But
the practice oi the Apostles insettling the Christian
ministry is of the tirst importance, aiid of perma-
nent obligation.

The Christian ministry lies at the foundation of
the Christian Church. The Apostles were to in-
stitute a ministry which was to continue, by suc-
cession, « to the end of the world." We have the
same right to change the sacraments, and to pre-
tend that they are temporary and mutable, as we
have the constitution of the Christian m'nistry, as
settled by Apostolic practice. Here the institutions
©fthe Apostles; must be gathered from their /^rac/icej
from their authoritative acts. The ministrrf is of

Hi

divine authority, and rests solely on a divine com-
inission given by Christ to his Apostles. This
commission must be derived from Christ ; the
source of all power in the Church, by a succession
of persons authorised to transmit it. In no other
way can it be derived. Once admit that this
succession has been interrupted — admit that the
mode of transmitting the ministerial commission
may be changed— may be placed in other hands
than those in which the Apostles placed it, and
you render null the promise of Christ — "Lo, I am
with you alway, even unto the end of the World.'^
You suffer the gates of hell to prevail against the
Church, for you wrest from it its divine character.
You make its ministers and its sacraments, human
officers and human ordinances. You sever it
from its divine head, from which it derives spirit-
ual growth and nourishment.

The connection between the visible Church
and the " Lord of all," can only be kept up by
a visible ministry, administering visible sacra-
ments ; and this ministry, can derive its author-
ity from Christ only, in that mode and order orig-
inally constituted. We contend not then, that
Episcopacy is unchangeable, merely because it is
the original form of government settled by Apos-

112

tolic practice : but we contend that it is unchange-
able, because it is the originally constituted
mode of conveying that commission, without \\ hich
there can be no visible ministry, no visible sac-
raments, DO visible Church. The power of ordi-
nation must remain with the first grade of the min-
istry, now called Bishops, because with them it
was placed by the Apostles, divinely commission-'
ed to found the Church, to constitute its ministrj^
and to provide for the continuance of this minis-
try " to the end of the world." Change the min-
istry—place the power of ordination in other
hands, and the Church is no longer founded " on
the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself
being the chief corner stone." Its constitution
and ministry have no power but what man gives
them. It rests on the sandy foundation of human
mthoriiy. When '* the floods come, when the
rain descends, when the winds blow and beat upon
it, it will fall, for it is not founded on the ROCK
OF AGES.

Hence, although we pretend not that Episcopa-
cy is founded on express warrant, still we contend
that it is supported by divine authority, equal ta
such a warrant. And we think that gentlemen
should be extremely cautious how they bring

lis

charges against the Church. They should be
able to prove that Episcopacy is not the true regi-
men of the priesthood of Christ's Church, before
they bring such accusations, as the one under
consideration. Had the gentlemen first proved
that Episcopacy was not that regimen, then their
charge might have been predicated upon that proof.
But by bringing their charges forward first, they
necessarily have to beg the principal queslion,
which I conceive can have no good effect, otlier
than to perplex and prolong the controversy.

Chairman, We are now waiting such further
remarks as gentlemen may be desirous of offering.
After the lapse of a short time, no one rising to
speak, the chairman, having consulted with the
Jurors, announced to the assembly, that it was
the unanimous opinion of the court, that the
charge under consideration would not lie, and
that it was therefore dismissed.

Chairman. The fourth accusation gentlemen, i?

^' tliaf Episcopac)/ should be discountenanced, because

it denies the Scripture institution of Ruling Elders.'''*

Presbyter Tertius. Gentlemen, in discussing
K

114

the other charges which have been tried, I hairc
not taken an active part, because 1 consid<^red
them of minor importance towards prostrating
this enemy of the Ohristian cause. Episcopacy.
The one now brought before us, I view as a pri-
mary means of exposing the imposture. 1 there-
fore proceed to the argument.

There is, gentlemen, independent of all histori-
cal testimony, a necessity, little short of absolute,
that one or more persons, under some name, to
perlorm the duties of ruling Elders, should be ap-
pointed in every well ordered congregation. The
minister, whether he be called Pastor, Bishop,
Rector, or by whatever title, cannot individually
perform all the duties necessary to maintain gov-
ernment and discipline in the Church. He can-
not be every where or know every thing. He
must have a number of grave, judicious and
pious persons who shall assist him with informa-
tion and counsel, whose official duly it shall be to
aid him in overseeing, regulating and edifying the
Church. We can hardly have a better comment
on these ideas, than the practice of those Church-
es who reject RulingElders — Our Episcopal breth-
ren reject them; but they are obliged to have
their Vestrymen and Church Wardens^ who per-

115

form the duties belonging to such Elders. Our
Independent brethren, also reject this class of
Church officers ; but they too, are forced to re-
sort to a committee, who attend to the numberless
details of parochial duty, which the minister
cannot perform. They can scarcely take a sin-
gle step without having, in fact, though not in
name, precisely such officers as are comjjrised
under the scriptural a[»peIlation of Ruling Elders.
Now is it probable, is it credible, that the Apostles
acting under the inspiration of Christ, should en-
tirely overlook this necessity and make no pro-
vision for it? It is incredible. But we have
better evidence than this. The New Testament
makes express mention of such Elders. There is
undoubieilly a reference to this in 1 Timothy, v.
17," Let the Elders that ride well J) e counted morthy
of double honor, especially they who labor in word
and doctrine '^ Every man of plain good sense,
Avho had never heard of any controversy on the
subject, would conclude, on reading this passage,
that, when it was written, there were two kinds of
Elders ; one whose duty it was to labour in word
and doctrine, and another, who did not thus labour,
t)ut ruled'm the Church— The Apostle says, Elders

116

that rule well are worthy of dauhle honour^ hut espe*
dally those who labour in the word and doctrine.

For this construction of the passage, Dr.
Whitaker, a zealous and learned Episcopal di vine
contends — " by these words/' says he, " the Apos-
tle evidently distinguishes between the Bishops^
and the inspectors of the church. If all who rule
Kell be worthy of double honor, especially they
>vho labour in the word and doctrine, it is plain
there were some who did not so labour ; for if all
had been of this discription, the meaning would
have been absurd ; but the word specially^ pointa
out a difference. If I should say all who study
well at the university, are worthy of double ho-
nour ; especially they who labor in the study of
theology ; I must either mean that all do not
apply themselves to the study of theology, or I
should speak nonsense. Wherefore, I confess that
to be the most genuine sense, by which pastors
and teachers are distinguished from those who on-
ly governed.

I shall in addition to these arguments, recite
you but one authority, from among many of the
ancients. It shall be from Hilary. It begins
thus : " for indeed among all nations, old age is
honorable. Thence it is that the synagogue, and;

117

after that , the church had Elders, without whos«
counsel nothing was done in the church ; which,
by what negligence it grew into disuse, I know
not, unless perhaps by the sloth, or rather by the
pride of the teachers, while they alone wished to
appear something."

Upon these authorities gentlemen— authorities
drawn from sources which cannot be disputed, the
scriptures and the best Episcopal writers, 1 risk
the argument. If this charge be sustained, one
grade of Episcopal regimen, of course, falls to the
ground, and Episcopacy itself is lost.

Doct. Bishop. I have been waiting a moment
in order to hear what further may be said by the
gentlemen upon the charge, but as none of them
rise, I proceed to examine the Rev. Gentleman's
authorities, in which he so proudly triumphs. Be-
fore I proceed to consider the arguments them-
selves, however, I must observe, that were E{)isco-
palians to admit such an order in the church as Rul-
ing Elders, it could in no sense be the cause ofEpis-
copacy " failing to the ground." As Bishops
have not the sole power in ecclesiastical affairs — as
Presbyters are their counsellors and assistants in
the administration of church discipline — so Ruling

JPZrfcr^, supposing them to have an equal share in
K2.

118

the government vfiih preachmg Presbyters, would
by no means invade the negative power of Bish-
ops. E|)iscopacy then, is safe, whatever may be
the decision of the question.

The Rev. Gentleman draws his first argument
from the necessity of the case ; and I must confess,
if not drawn, it never would have appeared. He
thinks he " can hardly have a better comment on
this necessity," than the practice of those church-
es which reject Ruling Elders." Here he brings
in his Episcopal brethren with their Vestry and
Church-Wardens, and the Independents with their
committee. Is the Gentleman ignorant, how wide
a difference (here is, between his Ruling Elders,
and our Vestry and Wardens ? Let us examine
and compare them.

His *' Church Session consists of tlie minister,
or ministers and elders of a particular congrega-
tion." " The Church Session is competent to the
spiritual government of the congregation." Sec.
1 and 2, chap. 8. Is this the business of our Ves-
tries, and oi Independent Committees ? No such
thing. They have nothing at all to do with spir-
itual matters. Their business relates soldi) to tern-
poraUlics. They cannot admonish, " rebuke, sus-
pend, or exclude from the sacraments, those who

119

are found to deserve the censures of the Church/^
as the Ruling Elders can, for whom the gentleman
plenils. Their business is totally different ; and
therefore, lUieccssity requires Ruling Elders, it re-
quires spiritual ones in the Presbyterian, and tem-
poral ones among Episcopalians and Independ-
ents. The necessity of having Laymen, to take
care of the temporalities of the church, is evident
to every man. But until it can be proved, that
Jesus Christ did not establish a competent priest-
hood, there can be no necessity of having Laymen
to administer in spiritual things.

The next argument which the Rev. Gentleman
produces is from the Holy Scriptures. " Let the
Eiders that rule well, be counted worthy of double
honour, especially they who labour in word and
doctrine." On these words the Gentleman re-
marks, that every man of plain good sense, who
had never heard of a controversy on the subject,
would conclude, on reading this passage, that
when it was written, there were two kinds of El-
ders, (this happens to be the very point to be de-
termined) one whose duty it was to labour in the
word and doctrine, and another, who did not thus
labour, but only ruled in the Church." I hope
the Rev. Gentleman will confess that there i? a

ISO

great deal of plain good sense in the Christiaa
world, and yet by far the greater part of it is against
him. I hope the Gentleman will allow that Ig-
natius, Ireneus, Tertullian, Clemens of Alexan-
dria, Origen, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Jerome, and
many other eminent writers, have enumerated the
orders of the Church repeatedly, and yet have not
a sentence to support his favourite system of
Ruling Elders — I hope he will also allow, that
these men had plain good sense. I should also
hope he will allow, that Baxter, Vines, and the
greater part of the English Prefcbyterian Divines
in their day, besides numbers of foreign Presbyte-
rians, who have distinguished themselves by their
writings, and yet were professed enemies to Rul-
ing Elders, were men of plain good sense. Sure-
ly, Chamius, Salmasius, Blondell, Ludovicus, Ca-
pellus, Moyses, Amiraldus, all Presbyterians, were
not novices — still they all testified against Ruling
Elders. The Rev. Gentleman proceeds upon this
text and rests the whole explanation of it, upon
Dr. Whitaker, whom he calls a " zealous and
learned Episcopal divine." But for what, I ask,
was Dr. Whitaker zealous ? Certainly not for
Episcopacy. He was zealous for the {)ecu!iar doc-
trines of Presbyterians. Learned he was j but an

Kpiscopalian he never was, although a minister el
the Church of Fngland; for it is not everyone
who wears her garb, that adopts her principles.
But it mailers not what he was. We have noth-
ing to do with him, but with his reasoning. Let
us try it, and I presume we shall find it insufficient
to answer the purpose for which the Rev. Gentle-
man quoted it.

The fact which the gentleman would rvish to
have proved, by the text quoted from Timothy is,
that those wko ruled welU aud those who laboured
in the word and doctrine^ held distinct offices. Now
this fact is contended for bj Dr. W hitaker, and of
course by the Rev. Gentleman who last addres-
sed you. Those who ruled well, might for aught
any man knows, have been ordained to preach
also, and might, in consequence, have frequently
preached ; but they were not laborious in prehchr
ing. This is the distinction marked by the word
especially ; a distinction not of office but of indus-
try in the same office. Some elders were more
concerned in ruling : others in preaching : but it is
miserable logic to infer from this, that those who
ruled, had not also a right to preach : as misera-
ble logic as it woiilvl fie to infer, that those who
preachedj had not a right to rule. The word rs-

pteially will not warrant either conclusion. It
undoubtedly implies a difference, not in the
powers conferred, but solely in their application.
When Doct. Whitaker infers from this word, a
distinction of office, he merely begs the question.
He ought to have proved that the word specially,
necessarily implies a distinction of office. This
he does not prove. His conclusion then is un-
warranted— and the text by no means supports the
notion of Ruling Elders.

I shall next proceed to examine the Rev. Gen-
tleman's quotation from Hilary, an early writer.
Had Hilary said that the seniors, in his day, were
Ruling Elders — that they formed a component part
of the Presbytery ; that they with the Pastors, had
the power of examining and licensing candidates
for the gospel ministry, of ordaining, settling,
removing or judging ministers : of resolving ques-
tions of doctrine or discipline, of condemning er-
roneous opinions" — in short, of ordering whatever
pertained to the spiritual concerns of the Church-
es under their charge,* he would to be sure make
out for us a sample of Ruling Elders in his day,
answerable to those contended for in the present.
But he has not a syllable in support of one of these

* Presbyterian form of gov.

133

particulars. He says no more than that seniorSj
or eUleriy men, were consulted, but that the cus-
tom was grown into disuse in his time. And can
we from such declaration, draw the conclusion,
that there were Ruling Elders at that time ; such
as J' re now contended for? To do so would be
strange logic. Elderly men were consulted:
therefore, there were Ruling Elders in the Church,
who shared her spiritual government.

Gentlemen, it is incontestibly true, that in the
different situations of the Church, which frequent-
ly occurred, in the first three centuries, while per-
secution lasted, it was customary to consult aged
men, not as officers however, but as laymen.
Surely from this custom we can upon no princi-
ple, infer a warrant for the establishment of a grade
of Church officers.

Presbyter Independent. The office of Ruling
Elders, gentlemen, is so unreasonable a thing —
is sup[)orted by such superficial inferences, from
texts of Scripture, and such vague expressions of
ancient writers, that it is really unaccountable
how any set of men can continue so tenacious upon
the subject. I could wish that the sense of the
whole Christian world could be consulted, for
almost all Christendom is against it. The Ro-

man, Greek, and Coptic Churches are against
it. The Churches of England, Sweden and Den-
mark, are against it. Our numerous sects of In-
dependents in this country and in Great Britain
are against it. Nay, even Presbyterians them-
selves, are divided upon this subject. Bishop
Sage informs us, that, " the whole tribe of the
Belgic remonstrants, are against it in their Confes-
sion of Faith.

Baxter in his preface to his Five Disputations of
Church Government, says expressly that, « as far
as he could understand, the greatest part, if not
three for one, of the English Presbyterian Minis-
ters, were as far against Lay Elders as any Pre-
lates of them all."

It is in vain for Gentlemen to set up their rea-
soning, against the understandings and the good
sense of almost all the Christian world upon this
subject The fact is, that amongst the hundreds of
ancient writers extant, there is not an individual of
them all, who in enumerating the grades in the
ministry and the officers in the Church, says any
thing of Ruling Elders. The most that can be
said from the Scriptures, are the illogical, inferen-
ces of Dr. Whitaker ; and all that can he drained
from the ancients, is, that old men were consul tef!

125

in cases of distress and emergency. And may
God grant us |)rudence, to appeal to the same
source for knowledge, and cool deliberation, in
every tribulation in the Church, and in the day of
persecution and affliction.

Chairman. Gentlemen we are prepared to hear
whatever may be further urged upon this question.

Vreshyter Tertius. We submit the question*

Chairman. We proceed to the fifth charge \h:
That Episcopacy grew out of, and is an error of
Fopery.

Presbyter Tertius. Gentlemen, I have taken
the trouble of investigating this charge laboriously
and conscientiously, and after the most mature de-
liberation, find it well founded. Popery, strictly
speaking, is the ecclesiastical supremacy assumed
by the Bishop of Rome, and involves in it that
system of corruption^ as well in doctrine and
government, as in practice, which characterizes
that Church. Hence Transiihstaniiation, Purga-
tory, Auricular Confession, the Worship of Ima-
ges, the Invocation of Saints, Adoration oft'ne

136

Cross, and Prelacy, are all spoken of as RomJsh er-
rors. And ii* the Roman Pontiff be not their im-
mediate author he is their immediate supporter.
In this sense Clerical imparity is a Popish error,
nearly coeval in its rise, with the commencement
of Papacy itself. It oris^inated from the same
source, and tends to the same mischief. All my
enquiries have more and more confirmed me in
the persuasion, that it is a real mischievous de-
parture from Apostolic simplicity. That this
charii;e is not unfounded, may be farther argued,
not only from the Popish and Episcopal Churches
sup[>orting the same views upon the subject, but
their adhering to each other with great tenacity,
almost acknowledging that they must stand or
fall together. It is needless to cite authorities
upon this point; for it is well known that all Ro-
man Catholics claim the Protestant Episcopal
Church as a daughter \\ho rebelled against her
mother, and having stole away from her, abused
her who begot her. Indeed Episcopalians hesi-
tate not to acknowledge, that the Church of
Rome is valid in her ministry, and Apostolic in
her priesthood. The Protestant Episcopal Church
to be surp is a Reformed Church — reformed from
many of the most awful errors of Popery: but

1S7

still, when she came out she not only brousjht with
her, her " Mass Books"* new moddletl, but also
one of the proudest marks of Papal domination,
Prelacy. This is a fact which on no ground can
be disputed. Her history can be regularly traced
back to her own mother, and the comparison be-
tween the two can be easily drawn, and when
drawn, the similarity is evident.

DocL Bishop. Gentlemen I have already men-
tioned in the course of the proceedings of this coun^
cil, that it was with pain I heard gentlemen at-
tempting to renew old prejudices and abuse, which
have since the Puritanic age, been, at times,
heaped upon the Protestant Episcopal Church, It
is certainly surprizing that gentlemen of candour
■will do this. Surely it is not their design to draw
an ideal similarity between the Churches, making
an unfavourable impression, and hoping thereby
to induce a belief that one partakes of the impurity
of the other. This is a design which I am unwil-
ling to ascribe to them. It must therefore be an
honest error, which is run into in consequence of
both Churches being Episcopal. Let us then try
the question, by first ascertaining, from authentic

• Christian Magazine.

128

history, when Popery took its rise, and then
whether Episcopacy did, or did not exist before
<hat period. If before^ it certainly is not a Papal
error, and our Protestant Episcopalians are not
the more Papists, because they enjoy an Episcopal
form of government.

We can fix within a certain period the commence-
ment of the reign of "Anti-Christ." The Pope of
Rome did not arrive to " full stature," according to
the generality of Protestant writers, until the th
century. And an accurate historian says, " the
earliest period^ which can be suggested^ [for the rise
of Popery] is the year 325."* Let us then fix the
period as far back as can be suggested ; let us fix
it in the year 325. Now gentlemen, we are able
io prove, by the most abundant and unequivocal
testimony, from primitive writers, that the Epis-
copal form of government did exist prior to that
period. Bishop Pearson, in his vindication of the
epistles of Ignatius, quotes several authors who
particularly mention, that the Bishop, of Alexan-
dria was always ordained, not by Presbyters but
by a Bishop. Simeon Metaphrastes says of St,
Blark, that he ordained as his successor, Anianus,

* DT' Livingston in his JMissionary Siermon.

129

Bishop of Alexandria, and gave to other Churches
Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons* >s-

itively asserts, that imparity existed in the ' hiirch
of Alexandria from its foundation. St, Cvjjrian,
one of the most celebrated men of his age, who
lived about the year 250, and was actually Bish-
op of Carthage, furnishes us in his writings with
abundant evidence that Episcopacy was univer-
sal in his day.

Again — -Poly carp was nnquestionably Bishop of
Smy rna,and according to the most authent ic records,
was ordained by St. Paul. Tertullian, who lived
in the third century, in his writings, gives us a
full account of the Bishops of his day.

About seventy years from the Apostolic age
flourished Ireneus, who was Bishop of Lyons. —
"We,'* says he, "can reckon up those, whom the
Apostles ordained Bishops in the several Church-
es, and who they were that succeeded them down
to our times."

I might Gentlemen, increase the catalogue of
Bishops, who lived prior to the time at which the
iirst rise of Popery has been fixe<! — I might show
you from their own writings, that they possessed

*Vin. Ep. Ignatius,

L2

the peculiar power of Bishops above Presbyters.
But this is certainly unnecessary. These, Gen-
tlemen, are not matters of opinion — they are facls^
and cannot be mistaken. They are facts which
we find again and again recorded by authentic
historians, with names and places and dates ac-
curately put down.

Thus the earliest period even stfsrgesfed for the
rise of Popery being the year 325, and there
having been at that time and for a succession of
years before, Bishopg^in the Churches, and Epis«
copal government in the peculiar sense, having

before that time existed Episcopacy can no.

more be said to be a Popish error, than the Bible
can be said to be a Popish book. The Papal
Church 2/5^ both ; but originated neither; and un-
less that use can change a divine institution, into
an invention of man, then we derive not our
Church government from the Church of Rome.

The fact is gentlemen, that the Church was
from the Apostolic age Episcopal. At a certain
period, the Church of Rome became corrupt, and
was inveloped in a clond of error. At the glo-
rious Reformation the Protestants, with great pru-
dence as well as zeal, reformed themselves, and
came out from these errors. But not one of these

131

Reformers at this time contended that Episcopal
regimen was an error of that Church frons i ich
they departed. They threfore did not re nor. ice
it. The Episcopal Church thus having thrown
ofif the errors of Rome, claims, and she can sup-
port her claim, to be a true Apostolic Church,
cleared from those errors which afflicted her,
when in communion with the Romans. If Epis-
copacy were an usurpation — if the power of the
Bishop, like that of the Pope, were antichristian
and unscriptural, would not the illustrious Re-
formers have denounced Episcopacy with as much
zeal as they did Popery ? To suppose that they
would not is at once to impeach their understandr
ings and their sincerity.

Upon the whole, gentlemen, to me it is as clear
as the sun in the firmament, that the accusation
is unfounded and cannot be supported with even
the semblance of argument.

Chairman. With the advice of the Jurors I
proceed to the examination of the next and last
charge, viz. " That Dioceasan Episcopacy is not
to be supported by Scripture or history, but puts it
in the power of 7nan to lord it over the heritage of
God:*

Presbyter Secimdus. In the consideration of

132

(his char2;e we enter upon fhe principal question
under consideration, and in supportino; it, I trust,
we shall be able to show what the precise nature
of the constitution of the Christian Church is. — «
If it be proved that Dioceasan Episcopacy is not
supported by the word of God, or by the voire of
Antiquity, the truth of the latter clause of this ac-
cusation will readily appear, viz. that " it puts it
in the power of man to lord it over the heritage
cf God."

I shall now proceed gentlemen to ofTer you di-
rect and positive proof in support of (his charge.
In doing this, I shall confine myself to the word
of God; for whatever is not found in the Bible,
cannot be considered in any sense, as cssenHcl,
either to the doctrine or the order of the Church.
As the Christian ministry is an office, deriving
its existence and its authority solely from Jfsns
Christ, the King and Head of the Church, it is
obvious that his word is the first and principal
rule, by which any claims to this oflice cr.n prop-
erly be tried, and the duties and powerr of those
who bear it, ascertained. The pradicc of the
Church is justly admitted as a help to ihc right
i^nderstanding of scripture authority, and as con-
firming our faith in (hose doctrines which Christ

133

and his Apostles teach. Let us then examine
what the Scriptures say on the subject before us.
We affirm, that although they present us with no
formal* or explicit decisions on the subject, still
we find in them a mode of expression, and a num-
ber o^facts^ from which we may accurately ascer-
tain the out-lines of the Apostolic plan of Csiurch
order. By an attention to these, if I mistake not,
it will be easy to shew that the Presbyterian form
of Church government, is the true regimen of the
Gospel.

The first authority which I shall offer, is taken
from our Lord's commission to his Apostles, vvh'ch
is in these words — "^o ye therefore and leacii all
nations, baptising them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy GhosV*—'-'- Teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I command
you : and to, I am with you alway, even unto the
end of the world.^^ These passages form the grand
commission under which all lawful ministers have
acted, from the moment in which it was deliver-
ed to the present time. You will observe gen-
tlemen, that this commission w as given to one or-
der of ministers only, viz. the eleven Apostles.
To them he committed the ministerial authority
in his kingdom. This commission therefore con-

134

ititutes no more than one order of Gospel minis-
ters. It embraces the highest and lowest eccle-
siastical power, in one office and in one person,
and it is impossible to divide it into three, as our
Episcopal Brethren would have it. Until then
the friends of three orders in the Christian min-
istry, produce from Scripture, some other commis-
sion than this ; or find s»me explicit warrant for a
threefold division of the power which this one com-
mission conveys, we are compelled to conclude,
that our Lord contemfdated but one standing or-
der of Gospel ministers in his Church.

The second authority which I shall give is
found in Acts xx. 1 7. 28. " And from Miletus lie
seiit to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church.
And wheii they were come unto him, he said unto
them, take heed unto yourselves, and to all thcjiock
ever which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,
to feed the church of God, which he has purchased
with his own blood.''* These overseers were in-
disputably Scripture Bishops. And from this
sentence it is observable that there were a num-
ber of these overseers or Bishops, who governed
the Church in the city of Ephesus, as co-ordinate
rulers, or in common council. This is wholly ir-
reconcilable with the principles of modern Epis-

135

copacy ; but perfectly coincides with the Presby-
terian doctrine that Scriptural Bishops are the
pastors of single congregations.

The next passage to our purpose is the ad<lress
of the Apostle Paul to the Philippians. " Paul
and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to
all the saints in Christ Je?us which are at Philippic
•with the Bishops and Deacons." Here, as in the
authority above cited, we find the inspired wri-
ter speaking of a mimher of Bishops in a single
city — -a fact totally inconsistent with Prelacy.

The third passage to be adduced is Titus 1, and
is as follows-—" For this ca*jse left I thee in Crete,
that (hou shouldst set in order the things that are
wanting, and ordain Elders [Presbyters] in every
city, as I had appointed thee."

This passage proves, beyond controversy, that,
in Apostolic times, it was customary to have a plu-
rality of these Bishops in a single city. We
have before seen that there were a number of
Bishops, in the city of Ephesus, and a numbep
more in the city of Philippi ; but in the passage
before us we find Titus directed to ordain a plural-
ity of them in c-ucry city. This perfectly agrees
wilh the Presbyterian doctrine, that scripturalt
Bishops were (he Pastors of single congregationg.

136

©r Presbyters, invested, either separately or joint-
ly, as the case might be, with pastoral charges ;
but it is impossible to reconcile it with the modern
notions of Dioceasan Et)iscopacy.

There is another passage equally conclusive in
support of this argument. It is that which \a
found in 1 Peter, v. 1 . 2. " The Elders which are
among you, 1 exhort, who am also an Elder, and a
witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a par-
taker of the glory that shall be revealed. Feed
thefiock of God which is among yon, taking the
cvemght ilureof, {\h^i is, exercising the office, or
performing the duties o[ Bishops over i\\eva)nct bi^
constraint but willingly, not for filthy here, ltd of a
ready mind.^*

The construction of this passage is obvious. It
expressly represents Presbyters as Bishops of the
flock, and solemnly exhorts them to exercise the
power, and perform the duties of this office.

Thus full and conclusive gentlemen, is the ev-
idence, drawn from divine authority, ihaiGcspel
Bishops Viete Pasters of single congregations; that
Presbyters and Bishops possessed the same com-
missions, were endowed with the same qualifica-
tions, and were assigned to the same sphere of duty.
The Presbyters in Apostolic tiirses, were empov;-

137

efed tc preach the 7Vord; they possessed the powei*
of government, OYO^rvJing the Church, and of or-
daining. The latter of these our Episcopal Breth-
ren expressly deny. I shall therefore adduce cer-*^
tain facts recorded in the Bible, which indisputa-
bly prove that Presbyters did ordain in the Apos-
tolic times, and shall with these close my argu-
ment.

The first instance that I shall mention, is that
of Timothy, which is spoken of by the Apostle St.
Paul, in the following terms. 1 Tim. iv. 14.
« Neglect not the gift that is in thee, ivhich was giv-
en thee hy prophecy ^nnth the laying on of the hands
of the Presbytery.** All agree that the Apostle
is here speaking of Timothy's ordination ; and
this ordination is expressly said to have been per-
formed with the laying on of the hands of the Pres-
bytery—-thaii is, of the Elders or a council of Pres-
byters. Than this more conclusive evidence can=
not be asked to prove the position, that Presbyters'
did ordain in the Apostolic age.

Take another instance of the like nature. It
is that of Paul and Barnabas, who, after having
been regularly set apart to the work of the minis-
try themselves, proceeded thro' the cities of Lystra^
Iconiitm. &ZC. And n^lien they had ordained them

138

Miters in every Church, and had prayed with fasting,
they commended them to the Lord, on whom they had
believed. Barnabas was a mere Presbyter — was
in no sense an Apostle, and had no pre-eminence
which belonged to the Apostolic character ; still
we here find him ordaining Elders in every
Church.

Unless, gentlemen, 1 deceive myself, I havfe
now established my position, that there is no
officer, superior to Presbyters, spoken of in the
Scriptures, and that the Christian Church was or-
ganized by the Apostles, under the Presbyterian
form. This position, thus established, decides the
question. Such a concurrence of Scripture facts,
as has been adduced, is at once remarkable and con-
clusive as to the simple fact, that the Presbyterian
regimen was adopted in the Apostolic age. I can-
not see how any one can peruse the New-Testa-
ment, with an impartial mind, without perceiving
that the Presbyterian form of Church government
is there distinctly portrayed.

With these observations, gentlemen, I submit
the subject.

Doct Bishop. Gentlemen, 1 hope we shall not
be so unfortunate as to exhaust the patience of
this assembly, before we consummate the business

before us. You have doubtless observed, that I
have made it my business, not so much to estab-
lish the claims of Episcopalians, as to vindicate
the Church against the charges brought against
her, by rebutting the arguments of her assail-
ants. It must be evident to every one that 1
entered this controversy, not of choice but of ne-
cessity. It imposes upon me an unexpected
tdsk, but a task which every sense of duty
impels me to perform. It is my present design to
examine the arguments which the Rev. Gentle-
man has offered you in support of Presbyterian
parity. This is the only thing I shall attempt
at present. But before the final decision is made
upon this subject I shall beg your indulgence,
while I state the authorities which in my estima-
tion, support the claims of Episcopacy, and which
I trust will finally clear the Protestant Episcopal
Church from the serious charges which the gentle-
men are endeavouring to support against her.

I have no possible objection to the mode which
the gentleman who has spoken in support of this
charge, has chosen for settling the matter in con-
troversy. Institutions of God, should be defend-
ed by the word ol God. The Bible is the first and
best rule, by which to settle thii important point.

140

i am highly pleased to hear him appeal to the
tribunal of Jesus Christ and his Apostles ; and I
am equally pleased to observe, the gentleman's
accurate acquaintance with his subject, and his
greatingenuity in bringing forward, in the most
advantageous manner, all the arguments to be
deduced from the Bible. The thorough knowl-
edge he has evinced of the institutions of Christ
and the acts of his Apostles — the skill he display-
ed in the arrangement of his arguments, and the
ability with which he enforced them, furnish stri-
king marks of a superior mind. I can only regret
that such talents are not emploj^ed in a bettercause.
His first argument is drawn from the commis-
sion of our Saviour to his eleven Apostles. On
this commission the gentleman observes, that there
is but one order of ministers recognized — that to
that order was committed the whole ministerial
authority in Christ's Kingdom — that it possessed
the highest and lowest ecclesiastical power — and
that until the friends of three orders in the
Christian ministry, produce from Scripture some
other commission, or find some exjdicit warrant
for a threefold division of the powers which this
commission conveys, the cause of Episcopacy i:3
desperate. I know not that any Episcopalian ob-

141

jects to the first part of this explanation — v?z,
that all ministerial power is derived from the com-
mission of Christ, and that the power which the
Apostles received, embraced everj^ possible grade
in the ministry ; but the consequence which th^
gentleman draws from this, no Episcopalian feels
himself under any obligation to subscribe to. It
appears to me that the learned gentleman, in this
case, has used a little sophistry.

The particular Apostolic regimen of the Chris-
tian priesthood, was not yet precisely settled in the
Church when our Saviour ascended; and the reason
is evident. It was because HE w as, while on earth,
the visible, as well as spiritual head of his Church,
and surrendered not its government to the Apos-
tles, until he departed. In this state of his king-
dom, being about to ascend, Christ clothed his.
Apostles with plenary power to act as his visible
head — to perfect the organization of his Church —
to establish what is now properly called the Jpos-
tolic regimen, to introduce such a regimen in the
ministry as, no doubt, their divine head had al-
ready marked out to them. This they were to
do, and tliis they did do, under divine influence,
and Almighty contrcul.

But says the gentleman, the whole power of the

M2.

14^

ministerial character was vested in the Apostles,
in one order. Hence he infers that these Apos-
tles could not, and did not establish a diversity of
grades in the Apostolic ministry. Strange logic
indeed.

The power of establishing Church order is vest-
ed in the Apostles equally ; therefore those Apos-
tles would establish no order in the Church but
Presbyterian parity.

Gentlemen, the Episcopalians contend, that the
Apostles possessed the only ministerial power —
that they alone transmitted it to their successors,
and that the peculiar regimen of the Christian
priesthood, is to be learned from their history.

I contend in the first place, that there has al-
ways existed an imparity in the priesthood, under
every dispensation — that this was the case amongst
the Jews — that it was also the case in the days
of our Saviour — that he then was the visible Head
and Bishop of the Church — that under him were
two orders, his Apostles, and seventy disciples —
and that Christ, when about to ascend, did consti-
stute his Apostles the first order^ — and did empow-
er them to transmit their Apostolic authority to
successors, and to constitute two other orders, an-
swering to the economy of the Church, as weH

143

under the Jewish dispensation, as while he him-
self was the visible Head and Bishop— And final-
ly, they contend that the history of the Apostles
indisputably proves, that they did appoint succes-
sors to themselves, with full power to ordain oth-
ers—and that they did also establish two other or-
ders, viz. Presbyters and Deacons, answering to
the two lower orders in the Jewish Priesthood,
and also to the grades of power, which the Apos-
tles and the seventy held previous to that special
commission, which the Apostles received from
Christ, constituting them, on his ascension, the
highest order in the ministry.

This is the position gentlemen, which I as an
Episcopalian take, and which does not subject
me to prove any new commission, or a threefold
division of that which Christ gave his Apostles.
I have only to prove that the Apostles did insti-
tute two other orders, and that they actually did,
under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, establish
an imparity in the ministry. This fact we pro-
fess to be able to establish, and before the final de-
cision of this question, I shall beg your indulgence
while I state the proof on which we rely to sup-
port it. So that I cannot percieve that the Epis-
copal cause is in the least embarrassed by the

144*

comments which the Rev. Gentleman has made
on the commission of our blessed Saviour to his
Apostles.

I now pass on to the other quotations which the
gentleman has introduced as proof of ministerial
parit3^ Of these he has produced four. The ob-
ject which he proposes to gain in citing these pas-
sages is, to prove from the community of names,
that there being at Ephesus, &c. a number of
Presbyters sometimes called Bishops, that hence
there was no imparity in the ministry in the Apos-
tolic age. It must rather be ascribed to the in-
genuity of man than to the substantial nature of
the cause he advocates, that he depends upon a
plausible use of the community of names for sup-
port. It is confessed on all hands, that Bishop,
Ekbr and Presbyter, are titles, sometimes applied
to the sanie officer. But this application of names
proves nothing in reference to the powers of the
office. It was the peculiar pcrvers with which
the Apostles and their successors were clothed,
which formed their distinctive character; and so
of the two other grades of officers in the Christian
Priesthood. The (irst text whicli (he Gentleman
quotes is from Acts xx. 1 7, 28. And from Miletus
lie sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the.

145

Church. And when they were come to him, he said
unto them, take heed unto yourselves, and to all tJw
fiooks over which the Holy Ghost hath inade yoit
overseers.

On this passage the gentleman remarks," it is
hence observable, that in the city of Ephesus
there were a number of Bishops who governed the
Church in that city, as co-ordinate rulers, or in
common council/' Grant that they were Bishops
—that they were Congregational Bishops— In oth-
er words, that they had the pastoral charge of
congregations. Before the gentleman gains his
point, he must prove that there was no Bishop
over these Bishops at Ephesus. This would be a
task more difficult than he will be disposed to at-
tempt. The fact is, there is not a text more un-
fortunate for his purpose in the Bible. Who sent
and called these Elders from Ephesus ? It was
the Apostle St. Paul, the founder, the head of this
Church— their Bishop in the peculiar sense of the
word. Else why has he the power to call these
Elders, or Bishops, if you please, from their own
city, and why do they implicitly obey his call and
meet him at Miletus ?

The fact is gentlemen as recorded in the Acts,
that Paul had already ordained Timothy to gov-

146

ern the Church at Ephesus. Paul took Timothj
with him on his way to Jerusalem, and stopping
at Miletus, he (Paul) sent for the Presbyters at
Ephesus as a ready way, no doubt of introducing
Timothy into his charge as Bishop of that city ;
from which time we find Timothy presiding over
the Church at Ephesus — governing it — and charg-
ed by the Apostle St. Paul, to use the power u
ordination, which he had conferred upon him, with
caution and prudence. Here then gentlemen, we
find a number of Bishops at Ephesus, but we find
they have a Bishop at their head, as the sole gov-
ernor and ordainer, among them — a Bishop, the
TRiniediate successor of the Apostle St. Paul, and
by him clothed with Apostolical authority. The
case of Ephesus is an incontestible fact, proving
Diocepsan Episcopacy. God knows, I should
have no objection to a parity in the ministry, if
it could be proved from the Scripture. So far from
setting up my will, or my prejudice, or party upon
this subject, I would willingly kneel at the feet of
the Rev. Gentleman, and be taught the principles
of Presbyterian order, provided such principles
could be drawn from the Bible. But when gen-
tlemen of celebrity of character, gentlemen of tal-
ents, of learning and piety, with all their labours,

147

<:an produce proof of parity no more solid than this,
I must beg to dissent from them. I wish to do it
with the utmost decorum and modesty, but I must
beg leave to dissent.

The second quotation of the Rev. Gentleman
is as follows — " Paul and Timotheus, servants of
J^us Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus,
wmch are at Phillippi, with the Bishops and Dea-
cons." As the reasoning of the gentleman upon
this passage is founded altogether upon the term
Bishops, I shall leave it to every one, to make his
own comments, and proceed to his third quota-
tion, which is as follows — Titus i. For this cause
left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order
the things that are wanting, and ordain Elders in
every city, as I appointed thee. The object of the
gentleman, in this quotation is to prove that there
was a plurality of Bishops, in every city in the
Apostolic day, and from thence to infer, that Con-
gregational and not Dioceasan Episcopacy was the
regimen of the Church. Here again the gentle-
man seizes the word Bishop, and from it infers a
parity in the ministry. Had he but for a moment
contemplated the character of Titus, to whom this
charge was given : who by the Apostle was
placed over ttle Church at Crete, and v/ho alone

148

is mentioned, as possessing the power of ordina-
tion in a district, which must have contained
many Presbyters, who alone was to set in order the
things that were ivanting, he would certainly have
chosen any other passage of Scripture, rather
than this to support his position ; he would have
seen that this text is a direct and explicit proof of
Dioceasan Episcopacy.

The other passage being of the same character
with those 1 have already examined, I shall not
trespass on your patience by adverting to it.

The gentleman closes his observations by a ref-
erence to two passages, as proof of his affirmation,
that Presbyters ordainedm theApostolic age. The
one of these being that of Timothy, which I have
already examined at some length, I shall not now
trespass on your time by a recapitulation of what
I then said ; and his other authorities for Presbyte-
rian ordination, being those performed by Paul
and Barnabus, who were both Apostles, heads, and
gov€rnm\s of the Church, neither shall I detain
you Willi any remarks on them. I rose gentlemen,
for the single object of examaining the arguL^^nts
of the Rev. Gentleman, designed to support Presby
terian regimen ; and having, asl conceive, expos-
ed their impotency, I now sit down, to hear what

14^9

further may be offered on this interestir.
ject.

Presbyter Terthis. Gentlemen, I hav
indeed highly gratified with the gent';
speech. It displays his usual genius, s
stubborn perseverance in the cause he advr
but while it convinces me of his superior talc;
at the same time the more confirms meinl.-
lief, that it requires more than the power < ■ •"
to prove the divine right of DioceasanEp;
cy. A cause which requnes so much •
to support it, must be a bad one. TI r
Rev. Gentleman, havii)g earnestly ende;.
to answer some of the arguments opposes"
is content to pass over others, in hope ' r.
silence would be received as refutation,
fact is gentlemen, that the scripture aai-v.r
which have been produced, are too concli'L
admit of an answer. My Brother Presbj ;
brought together, with much perspicuity .i
cision, most of the Bible evidence, whic'.'.
a parity in the Christian Priesthood. L
ment not only carries complete convicii
is also of such a nature as not to be desf; ;
even weakened, except by some express , .
m precept from tls Scrij/tures themselv?

150

such evidence, I am confident, the friends of
Prelacy will never be able to produce.

The charge under consideration being thus
already supported by the highest authority, I shall
detain you but for a few moments, while I cite to
you a few authorities from those writers, who are
stiled " Early Fathers." In doing this, I shall
confine myself exclusively to writers of the first
two centuries. Immediately after this period, so
many corruptions began to creep into the Church,
so many of the Christian writers are known to
have been heterodox in their opinions, and indeed
Papacy with all its darkness and error began to
rise so high, that the testimony of every subse-
quent writer is to be received with sus|)icioa.
And during this period, so little is to be found in
any writin<;;s extant, upon the peculiar regimen of
the Priesthood, that 1 should think it needless to
cite the few authorities to be deduced from an ex-
amination of these antient records, did not Epis-
copalians pride themselves on this source of
proof; did they not seem to risk their cause upon
it; and did they not proudly declare, that the unit-
ed voice of antiquity was in their favour. I am
pursuaded b}^ an examination of the fact, that the
voice of Antiquity is, on this point, at best weak.

151

and instead of proclaitning the validity of Episco-
pal doctrines, it speaks a language directly oppa-
site, and declares that in that day, there were
neither Popes nor Dioceasan Bishops. For the
correctness of this assertion, let us appeal to the
authorities themselves.

And first let us hear Clemens Romanus. He
lived towards the close of the first century ; and
doubtless conversed with several of the Apostles.
In consequence of a division in the Corinthian
Church, he thus addresses them.—'* It is a shame
my beloved, yea, a very great shame, and un-
worthy of your Christian profession, to hear, that
the most firm and ancient Church of the Corin^
thians, should, by one or two persons, be led into
a sedition against its Presbyters. Only let the
flock of Christ be at peace with the Presbyters
that are set over it. He that shall do this, shall
get to himself a very great honour in the Lord.
Do ye, therefore, who first laid the foundation of
this sedition, submit yourselves to your Presby-
ters, and be instructed into repentance, bending
the knee of your hearts."

Clemens, in this passage, evidently represents
the Church at Corinth as subject not ^o an individ'
mlf but to a company of persons, whom he calls

15^

; tersorE'ders; and expostulates with thei^

:e they had opposed and ill treated their^

(ers, and cast them out of their charge.

\ enerable Father, gives not the least hint of

-istinction, between the officers in the

;!, either in this passage or in any other he

it. Had such a distinction existed, it is not

.aii'je, but unaccountable, that he did not

;! it in this case, where the interrerence of

renie officer in the Church was so necessa-

riie tact is Gentlemen) no such distinction

; (' writer standing neiit on the roll of antiqui-

Polycarp. In his epistle to the Church at

;i, this venerable martyr, like Clemens,

• o oiily of two orders of Church officers ; viz.

■jlers and Deacons. He exhorts the Phi-

iaas to obey these officers in the Lord. " It be-v

is you," says he, " to abstain from these

; ;3, being subject to the Presbyters and Dea-

;' as to God and Christ. This writer no

. tj mentions ihe word Bishop in his whole epis-

:.i>r does he give the most distant hint to in-

t <^ that there were any individual or body of

1 vested with powers superior to Presbyters.

- uatiua takes the next place in the lisit of

153

Apostolic writers. This Father, who is frequent-
ly qaoied l)y Episcopaliaas with triumph, to be
sure speaks of Bishops ; but there is not a single
passage in his writings, which favours the idea of
Dioccasan Bishops, or that his Bishops were of a
distinct and superior order. There is not a
word mentioned of these Bishops possessing the
power o^ ordaining or confirming — nothing which
may lead us to suppose they were not Pastors ;
and indeed nothing which can afford the least tri-
umph to the friends of Prelacy.

We next appeal to the testimony of Ireneus.
This Father, who is said to have suffered martyr-
dom about the year 202 after Christ, is an impor-
tant and decisive witness, on the subject before
us. The following passages are found in his
writings. In his hook against Heresies, he says,
" when we challenge them (the Heretics) to that
Apostolical tradition, which is preserved in the
Churches, through the successions of the Presbyters,
they oppose the tradition, pretending that they
are wiser, not only than the Presbyters, but also
than the Apostles.''

Again — In his epistle to Florinus, in speak-
ing of Polycarp, he says, " I am able to testify

before God, that if that holy and Apostolical

N2.

1^4

Fresbvter had heard any such thing, he would ai
once have exclaimed, as his manner was, " Good
God ! into what times hast thou reserved me !'*
Several other like extracts might be made from
Ireneus. And I take it for granted, that no im-
partial reader can cast his eyes upon them, with-
out perceiving how strongly and unequivocally
they support the Presbyterian doctrine, of a parity
in the ministry. This Father not only applies
the names Bishop and Presbv ter to the same per-
sons, but he does it in a way which precludes all
doubt, that he considers them as only different
titles for the same office. He expressly declares,
that Presbyters received th^ succession of the
"Episcopate.

The testimony of Clemens Alexandrinus, who
flourished at the close of the second century, is
likewise in favor of our doctrine concerning he
Christian ministry. The following extracts from
his writings, will enable you to judge, in what
light he ought to be considered as a witness on
this subject. '* In the Church," he says, " the
Presbyters are intrusted with the dignified minis-
try ; the deacons with the subordinate."

Again — " This man is in reality a Presbyter,
'and a true Deacon of the purpose of God — not or^

155

dained of men, nor because a Presbyter, therefore
esteemed a righteous man ; but because a right-
eous man, therefore now reckoned in the Presbyte-
ry ; and though here upon earth, he hath not been
honoured with the chief seat, yet he shall sit down
among the four and twenty thrones, judging the
people, as John says in the Revelations." Cle-
ment was a Presbyter of the Church of Alexan-
dria. He speaks of himself as one of its jrover-
nors, and claims the title of " Shepherd or Pas-
tor," after the image of the good Shepherd— a ti-
tle which the greater part of Episcopal writers ac-
knowledge to have been given, in the premitive
Church, to the highest order of ministers. He
represents the Presbyters as intrusted with the
dignified ministry, and the Deacons with the sub-
ordinate, without suggesting any thing to indicate
a more dignifi£d order,

I have now Gentlemen, gone through the tes-
timony of those Fathers, who lived and wrote
within the first two centuries after Christ, the lim-
its which [ prescribed to myself at the beginning
of my address. I have not, to be sure, quoted every
passage from those writers which speaks of the
ministry and the then officers of Ihe Church, but
have endeavored to give an example or two from

156

each, as favourable to the Episcopal cause as any
other. And I now a|>])eal to your candour, gen-
tlemen, whether there is a single passage, which
proves that Christian Bishops, within the first
two centuries, were, in fact, an order of clergy
distinct from and superior to, those Preshyters,
"who were authorized to preach and administer
sacraments.

Such then Gentlemen, is the result of the ap-
peal to the early Fathers. They are so far from
giving even a semblance of support to the Epis-
copal claim, that like the Scriptures, they every
where speak a language wholy inconsistent with
it, and favourable only to the doctrine of ministe-
rial parity. What shall we say then, of those
"who triumphantly make contrary assertions ? I
only say, that those who find themselves able to
justify such assertions, must have been much more
successful in discovering early authorities in aid
of iheir cause, than the most diligent, learned and
keen sighted of their predecessors.

Upon the whole Gentlemen, I see not why^ this
important charge is not sufficiently supported, and
why a decision may not now be had.

Chairman. Gentlemen, the consideration of
these ch arges, having already occupied so much

157

time, and the one under our present examination,
being of supreme importance, it is proper tb:it the
council should now adjourn until to-morrow
morning.

On motion therefore, the assembly adjourned
till to-morrow 10 o'clock.

FIFTH DAY,

MET ACCORDING TO ADJOURNMENT.

Chairman. We have now met Gentlemen, for
the purpose of consummating the business before
us, and making a final decision upon the question,
whether Dwceasan Episcopacy he the true Apostoli-
cal regimen of Christ's Church ? Those gentlemen
who wish to continue the discussion will now
proceed.

Presbyter Quartus. Gentlemen, 1 rise not for
the purpose of multiplying arguments upon this
subject, l)ut barely to express to this assembly,
my full conviction of the propriety and truth of the
charge now before this council. I have admired
the temperate, and at the same time independent
manner, in which my Brother Presbyters have
conducted their arguments; and I cannot foriear
to express the satisfaction which I have received.

158

from the fair light in which the gentlemen have
placed the subject. This was a matter with which
I confess myself but little acquainted, until now,
and on which I must acknowledge, I had been
driven into some doubts, by the high claims and
lofty denunciations of some Episcopalians. But
the gentlemen have so simplified the subject, and
brought it within such a compass as to enable ev-
ery mind to comprehend it. I presume therefore,
that this council are prepared to decide as to the
propriety of the charge, and to pronounce with
one consent that Episcopacy is not only an inno-
vation of man, but that " it puts it in man's power
to lord it over the heritage of God."

Doctor Bishop. Gentlemen, I must beg the
honour of your indulgence, while I offer some re-
marks upon the high charge now urged, with such
stubborn perseverance, against Episcopalians. In
Joing this, I shall occupy as little time, as the
nature of the subject, and my accountability to
Him, who reigns in the Church triumphant, will
admit of. I shall not feel myself under any obli-
gations to take a formal view of the arguments
offered by the two last gentlemen; inasmuch as

15%

r11 their remarks are founded on names,* and ndt
on the peculiar character of the Priesthood ; and
as I shall have occasion, in the course of my ob-
servations to refer to the same venerable Fathers.
In this, it shall be my object to let them speak for
themselves, and you. gentlemen, shall judge wheth-
er their voice be strong or " weak,*' and for whose
cause they plead.

I now% gentlemen, pledge myself to prove by
Scripture, and by Fathers who were cotempora-
ries with those to whom the Rev. Gentleman has
referred, the Apostolic institution of Episcopacy ;— «
In other words, that the Apostolic ministry con-
sisted of three grades, Bishops, Priests and Dea-

^ * The true stale of the case in reference to names, is ungues*
tionably t' is — During the life of the Apostles , deference to them
forbid that their successors in office should be called Jpostles,
and hence they were called by the common title of Bishop, Elder.,
&c. After the death of the Apostles, their successors to their
rmloffict, as Timothy, Titus, &c. were called Apostles ; andin
process«ftime, this title was changed, and those who held the
Apostolic commission, assumed the title of Bisiiops, and the two
lower orders retained the titles of Presbyter and Deacon, Thus
saith an ancient Father, Theodoret — " The same persons," says
he, " were anciently called Presbyters and Bishops, and they
whom we now call Bishops, were then called Apostles; but in
process oftime, the name of Apostles was appropriated to thena
who were Apostlesinthestrictsense ; and their successors drop-
ped the name of Apostle, and took that of Bishop — In this sense
Epaphroditus is called the Apostle of the Philippians— Titus was
the Apostle of the Cretan?,ancl Timotiay of Asia." Reporter.

160

^ons — the first possessing the sole power of or^imt-
As a strong presumptive argument that this was
the case, Episcopalians bring into view the regi-
men of the Jewish Priesthood. The Jewish
Church was the visible Church of Go(i, was ac-
knowledged as such by our blessed Saviour him-
self-— Her Priesthood was appointed by Heav^
en. In it, through their whole history, we find
three orders, High Priest, Priest, and Levite, each
possessing different powers, the two latter sub"
ordinate to the former. This order of the priest-
hood, among the Jews, was protected by the arm
of God, and when invaded, the invaders were
punished.

This being the undisputed fact under one dis-
pensation of the Church of God, Episcopalians
think that until there is found an express warrant
for a change, (and they think they have a right to
demand of non-Episcopalians that warrant) the
known regimen of the ministry in Christ's Church
in this one age, is an argument by which to deter-
; ne her true order in this subsequent age, and
subsequent dis[>ensation.

The next presumptive argument they derive
fr©ra the visible order of the priestdood, during

161

the ministry of our Saviour. After his baptism
Christ acted as the visible, as well as spiritual
High Priest of his Church on earth — All visible
authority was derived from him — He was not only
the head of Christians as their Redeemer and Sav"
iour, but as their visible Bishop. Under himself, he
constituted his twelve Apostles and seventy disci-
ples,the Apostles holding a grade between himself
and the seventy. Here we contend is a sample of
imparity in the ministry, perfectly according with
that which God established among the Jews, and
proving indisputably that Christ did not change
the order of the Jewish Priesthood, but sanction-
ed it, thereby instructing us that the same regi-
men should continue in subsequent ages. This
fact Episcopalians offer as an insurmountable evi-
dence to prove the correctness of the Episcopal
form of Church government.

We now come to tlie commencement of the Apos-
tolic age. Let us examine the commission of our
Saviour to his Apostles. Being about to ascend,
and by his ascension to take away frohi his visible
kingdom, its visible head, Christ imparts to hi?
Apostles, his supreme visible authority — As his
Father had sent him^ so he sent them, to disciple

all nations. This commission of our Saviour*
O.

162

of course gave to his Apostles, full power t®
preside over and govern his Church, and per-
petuate the ministry by a transmition of their au-
thority to successors — Said he " Lo, I am with
you alway, even unto the end of the world."
When the Apostles were thus first empower-
ed, at Christ's ascension, we find but this one
grade of officers in the Apostolie Church ; but
this grade is the highest ; is clothed with power
competent to fill up the other grades as necessity
required, and to complete an Apostolic ministry
answering in all its parts to that appointed by
Heaven among the Jews, and that found in the
practice of Christ. I shall now proceed to prove
that the Apostles diddo this, and that in their his-
tory, the Episcopal form of government is plainly
set forth and taught.

In discussing any subject, it is essential to the
discovery of truth, and to bringing the discussion
to a s[)eedy issue, that the precise points to be
proved should be clearly ascertained, and the
proposition plainly and definitively stated. The
essential characteristic principles of Episcopacy
are — that there are three grades of ministers in-
stituted by Christ and his Apostles, that \he first
grade, in addition to the ministerial powers, pes-

163

see^ the sole power of ordination, with the right of
exercising supreme authority over the congregU'
iions and ministers who may be subject to them.

From this statement of the essentials of Epis-
copacy, tlie iollowing conclusions will result. 1.
That it is immaterial by what names these grades
of the ministry are distinguished — " mere names
are of little value.'* " It is for the thing not the
name, we contend."* Desperate indeed must be
the cause of the gentlemen, who have opposed
me on this subject, when they predicate their
whole argamenis on names which every one con-
cedes, were applied to the same orders. Who
would think of infering that our Saviour was no
more than an Apostle or Bishop, because these
names are applied to him ?t Or, who would think
that the Consuls of the present day, are the same
with those of the Roman Republic, because they
are distinguished by the same names ?

2. Nor do Episcopalians contend that in an
extensive and unqualified sense, there is any form
of Church government of divine risht. When
applied to the ordeis of the ministry, they contend

* W. McLoed'sEcpl. Catechism.
tHeb.lII.Pet.il. 25.

164

it is ; but when the term government, is applied
to the particular /nawner in which the powers of the
office are exercised they contend that it is not di-
vine. In other words, that the particular govern'
menl of the Church is not to be identified with the
ministry. This principle was contended for by
the celebrated Hooker and oners^ — o .- isco-
palians, seizing this circumstance, have endea-
voured to make much of it in support of their
cause. Bui the only point for which we contend,
dfs that Bishops^ Priests and Deacons, with their
appropriate powers, are of divine Apostolical insti-
tution .

I now proceed to establish this position by
Scripture authority. I have already observed that
under the Jew ish dispensation, we find three or-
ders in the ministry, under the titles of High Priest,
Priest and Levite ; that when Christ appeared to
establish the Gospel dispensation, there were
subordinate to Him, the High Priest of our pro-
fession, the Apostles* and the seventy^. It is my
intention now to prove, that after the ascension of
Christ, we find the ministry constituted un-
der the three grades of Apostles, Elders or Fresby-

* Luke vi. 12. l3. f Luke x. 1.

169

ters, sometimes called Bishops aud Deacons ; and
that these grades have been mtiintained in the
Christian Church to the present day. There can
be no question but that on the ascension of our
Saviour, the Apostles possessed the powers of the
ministry, and the sole power of transmitting the
ministerial authority. To deny this, would be to
deny that Christ left any visible authority in his
Church. To prove that the Apostles did exercise
this authority, and appoint successors of equal
authority with Uiemselves, as well as constitute two
other grades in the ministry, viz. Elders or Pres-
byters and Deacons, I shall invite your attention
to a view of the two churches, the one at Crete
and the one at Ephesus. In Titus 1. 5. it is said,
by the Apostle, " for this cause left I thee in
Crete, that thou shouldst ordain Elders in every
city." Let us notice the circumstances that attend-
ed this transaction, and see what inferences we
can draw from it.

St. Paul had planted the Gospel in the island
of Crete. He had made proselytes in every city,
who stood in need of the ministrations of Presby-
ters. He speaks not to Titus, as if he had left
him in Crete, to convert the cities to the, faith.
He speaks as if this work was already accomplish-

166

ed ; as if the way was paved for the establishmeut
of the Church. These being the circumstances
of the case, it appears to me that this transaction
carries on its face, a proof of superiority on the
part of Titus, to the Presbyters or Elders. Will
it be imagined, much less affirmed by any reason-
able man, that St. Paul had converted so many
cities on this island, without having ordained any
Elders amongst them ; when it was his uni-
form and invariable practice to ordain Elders ij^
every country in which he made proselytes ?-—
What ! would he neglect to ordain those amongst
them, who were absolutely necessary lo transact
the affairs of the Church during his absence ?
Would he have left the work he had begun, half
performed ? Influenced by the Holy Ghost, would
he have left those numerous proselytes he had
made, without an instructor and pasf07\ and ex-
posed them to the errors from which he had re-
deemed them ? It is incredible.

These considerations are sufficient to convince
every unprejudiced mind, that there were Elders
or Presbyters in the Church of Crete, at the time
St. Paul left Titus on that Island. And if there
were Presbyters, and those Presbj'ters had Uie pow-
er of ordination, Why was it necessary to leave Ti-

m

tus amongst them, in order to perform a task tiaat
might as well have been accomplished without
him ? If the Presbyters possessed au authority-
equal to that of Titus, would not St. Paul, by
leaving him amongst them, have taken the surest
way to interrupt the peace of the Church— to
engender jealousy, strifes and contentions ?

Again — Let us view this transaction in anoth-
er point of light. St. Paul had made converts, as
J have said, in every city of Crete. Titus had
attended him on his last visit to that Island.
If Presbyters were at this time considered as
competent to the task of ordaining others, why did
he not ordain one at any rate, during his stay
amongst them, and commission him, instead of
detaining Titus, to ordain Elders in every city ?
The efforts of Titus were as much wanted, as his
own to carry the light of the Gospel to other na-
tions, who had not received it. Why was it ne-
cessary that Titus should ordain Elders in cveri/
city ? After the ordination oiafew, would not his
exertionsbecomeuseless, ifffee?/ were able to com-
plete the work which he had begun ?

Gentlemen, the fact is, that Titus was placed
over the Presbyters, and over all the Churches in
all the cities of Crete. He was intrusted with all

168

the authority of a supreme ruler of the Church-
He was directed to ordain Presbyters — to rebuke
with all authority — to admonish Heretics, and in
ease of obstinacy to reject them from the com-
munion of the Church. And these, gentlemen,
are the peculiar prero<ii;atives of our Bishops —
These circumstances infallibly designate the pres-
ence of a Dioceasan Bishop. Accordingly we
find the united voice of antiquity, declares Titus
to have been the iirst Bishop of Crete. Eusebius
informs us " that he received Episcopal authority
over the Church of Crete." So also says Theo-
doret, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome and St. Am-
brose. If these considerations united, do not
show that Titus possessed powers superior to those
which were held by the Presbyters of those
Churches, I know not what considerations would.
Here then gentlemen, we present you with two
grades of the Christian ministry in the Apostolic
age.

But I have other evidence to offer you to the
same purpose. The case of Timothy alone, had
we no other evidence from Scripture, would when
taken in connection with ancient writers, be per-
fectly satisfactory to me. This alone demon-
strates all we can desire. He was placed by St.

160

Paul to superintend the C hurch at Ephesus. Tkis
case is even stronger than that of Titus at Crete.
It cannot be denied that there had long been
Presbyters in the Church of Enhesus. Listen
then to the language which St Paul speaks in his
epistle to him, and see if it is possible that he pos-
sessed no superiority over the Presbyters of that
Church. " I besought thee, says he to Timothy,
to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Mace-
donia, that thou mightest charge some that they
teach no other doctrine." Would Timothy have
been commissioned to charge the Presbyters to
teach no other doctrine, had he possessed no su-
periority over them? Would they not have had
a right to resist any attempts at a controul of this
kind, as an encroachment on their privileges.

Again — Timothy is directed to try and exam-
ine the Deacons, whether they be blaiheless or
not. If they prove themselves worthy, he is to
admit them into the office of a Deacon ; and upon
a faithful discharge of that office, they are to be
elevated to a higher station. " Likewise'* says
he, "must the Deacons be grave,not double tongued»
not given to much wine, not greedy of filth}' lucre,
holding the mystery of faith in a pure conscience."
^' Let these also befirst proved, and then let them

use the office of a Deacon being found blaraeless."
Here Gentlemen, we find the f/iin/ order in the
ministry, the order of Deacons ; but we here find no
mention made of the Presbyters of Ephesus, in the
ordination of these Deacons. They are not associ-
ated with Timothy at all in the work. Does not
this indicate, does it not demonstrate a su-
periority of power on the part of Timothy.
Timothy is also exhorted to lay " hands suddenly
on no man." There is no such thing as a recog-
nition even oiihe co-operation of Presbyters with
him. He seems to be the supreme and only agent
in the transaction of these affairs.

I ai)i)eal gentlemen, to the common sense of
mankind, whether if the Presbyiers of Ephesus had
possessed any authorUy equal to that of Tim-
othy ; whether if they had, like him, possessed Ihe
powerof ordination, St. Paul would not have recog-
nized their agency in connection with his ?
Would it not have been treating them with im-
proper neglect not to mention them ? But gen-
tlemen, what consummates our evidence on this
point, and places the subject beyond all doubt,
is the charge which St. Paul gives to Timotliy,
inre"HfJonto the penal discipline he was to ex-
ercise over his Presbyters, Timothy, ia required

to " receive an accusation against an Elder or
Presbyter, only before two or three witnesses."
"Then (that is, those among the Presbyters)
that sin, rebuke before all, that others also may
fear.*' Can any one imagine that Timothy would
have been commissioned to listen to accusations
made against Presbyters, and openly to rebuke
them, had not his authority transcended theirs ?
Does not this single circumstance establish the
point of his suj)eriority and present him to us in
every sense, a Dioceasan Bishop ? " The man
says," a learned and ingenious writer of our coun-
try, who shall not find a Bishop in Ephesus, will
be puzzled to find one in England."* I cannot
conceive of a case that would be more clear and
imequivocal, that would speak more loudly to the
common sense of mankind, than the case of Tim-
othy in Ephesus. He is obviously entrusted witli
Apostolic authority. Every thing which the
Apostle couid do in his own person, he com-
missions Timothy to perform in his absence. All
that we ever find the Apostles did do, except Mi-
raculous works, we find Tir^othy commanded to
do. He IS io adjust the affairs of the Church — he

*Dr. Bowden in answer to Dr. Stiles.

173

is to prove and examine Deacons — he alone is to
ordain them — he alone is recognized in the per-
formance of the task of ordaining Elders or Pres*
hylers — he possesses perfect controul over these
Presbyters. If they are guilty of any offence or
misdemeanors, he is to inflict pmmhnent upon
them. Indeed I cannot conceive of a case more
satisfactory in proof of the Apostolical original, of
the Episcopal form of Church government. Had
Timothy been of the same order with the Pres-
byters of Ephesus, can it be imagined that the
Apostle would, by elevating him to such high
privileges amongst them, have endangered the
peace of the Church, have taken a step so welf
calculated to excite discontent and dissatis-
faction amongst the remaining Presbyters or
Elders ? This cannot be imagined. Timothy
was undeniably then intrusted w ith Episcopal au-
thority in the Church of Ephesus ; he was the
Bishop of that place, which had congregations
and Presbyters in every city. He had the care
and controul of a district of the Church, a Dio-
cese. So F.usebius tells us. " He was the first
Bishop of the Province or Diocease of Ephesus,"
aays he.

Will it be said, that the office which Timothy

irs

held, expired with him ? That it did 7iot, is evi-
dent from the very nature of the office ; for there
is the same need of an officer now in the Church,
who can ordain, as there was in the days of Tim-
othy ; and accordingly we find, from the testi-
mony of antiquity, that he had his successors.
Will any one object and say, perhaps Timothy
and Titus were not settled officers but itinerant
Bishops — .that they sustained no fixed and perma-
nent relation to the Churches of Ephesus or
Crete ? I answer that were this even strictly true,
still it would not impair our argument. Whatever
time Timothy staid at Ephesus, he ordained El-
ders and regulated all the affairs of the Church.
This proves his superiority. Now if it was neces-
sary to send such an officer to Ephesus as Timothy^
to ordain Elders where there were Elders before,
it must have been equally necessary when he
left it, that an officer of his rank, should take his
place for the same purpose. Accordingly we find
from the ancients, that this was really the case.

I. Prom a fragment of a treatise by Polycrate*
Bishop of Ephesus, towards the close of the second
century. " Timothy," says he, " was ordained
Bishop of Ephesus by the great Paul,"
P,

2. It a])pears from Eusj bius* who says," it is
r^cor led in histor}^ that Timothif was the first
Bishop of Ephesus."

3. From the commentary under the name of
Ambrose ? He says, " being now ordained a
Bisho;), Timothy was instructed by the epistle of
Paul, how to dispose and order the Church of
God."

4. From Epiphaniiis,t who says, " the Apos
tie, speaking to Timothy, being then a Bishop,
advises him thus, " rebuke not an Elder," Sec.

5. By Leontius,! Bishop of Magnesia, one of
the Fathers in the great council otChalcedon, who
declared, that" from Timothy to their time, there
had been twenty six Bishops of the Church of
Ephesus." Here gentlemen, is a succession of
the office of Timothy kept up. The evidence
upon this point, from the early writers, is so full,
that Timothy was a permmient Bishop of the
Church at Ephesus, and that he had successors,
that there can be not the least doubt left upon
auy gentleman's mind. I might still quote other

* Eceles. Hist. lib. iii. cap. 4. 2 Prefat, in Epist. ad Tim.
■j- Haer. 7.5, n. 5.
± Com. Clial. act. i'u

175

authorities but it is certainly needless. I ^hali
therefore )»rojluce but one quoiation more which
shall be from Chrysostom. Saith he, " it is mani-
fest Timothy was intrusted with a whole nation,
viz. Asia."*

Unless, therefore, gentlemen, it is an immateri-
al circumstance, that Timothy ruled the whole
Church of Ej>hesus, both clergy and people, the
Elders or Presbyters being subject to his spir.tual
jurisdiction ; unless it be an immaterial circum-
stance that Timothy exercised the power of ov-
daining ministers, and thus of conveying the sa-
cerdotal authority, and unless it be an immaterial
circumstance also, that so niany veneraile an-
cient writers declare the same things, there can-
not be a question but that the Apostle St. Paul
did transmit his Apostolic authority, to Timoth^'^
and Titus, that they did transmit it to others ;
that there were Presbyters and Deacons at Ephe-
sus, in the church under the government of Timo-
thy. Indeed there cannot be a question but thp.t
there was a complete Episcopal government at
Ephesus in the Apostolic age, constituted by the
Apostles, and consisting of Bishops, Priest§ acxl
Deacons.

* Hqra. 15. in I Tim. chap. 4^

176

6iod knows gentlemen, I wish not to mislead
a single son of Adam. In the facts presented to
you, there is no equivocating, there is no sophis-
try. You are as capable as myself of drawing
inferences. I promised to prove the Episcoi)al
regimen of Church government to be Apostolic.
I might, I think safely rest my argument here ;
but I must still beg your indulgence for a few
moments longer.

Permit me then to introduce to your notice one
®ther fact, recorded in the Scriptures, which goes
directly to prove that the primitive government
of the Christian Church, was Ejiiscopal. It is to
be found in the Book of Revelations.

St. John introduces our Lord, addressing seven
epistles to the seven Angels of the seven Churches
of Asia. The Epistles coukl not have been ad-
dressed to the collective body of Christians in the
Churches ; for they are designated by the seven
Candle sticks, which are distinguished from the
seven stars, by which the Angels are denoted.

The Angels were evidently single persons.
They are uniformly addressed as such. And that
those seven Angels were Bishops of the seven Di-
oceasan Churches of Proconsular Asia, I think is
indisputable, from the concurring testimony of the

177

Fathers of that age, and the address which is made
tq the several Churches. At the time St. Joha
wrote the Revelations in the island ofPalmos, in
the year 95, Ignatius was Bishop of Antioch. He
again and again tells us, what the Bishops of his
day were, that they were indeed Dioceasan in
every sense of the word. " The acts of the
Church," says Blondel, " whether they were glo-
rious or infamous, were imputed to their exarchs
or chief governors^*

The Angel of the Church of Pergamos is cele-
brated for his personal virlues ; yet some neglect
Avas imputed to him as a governor I have a few
things against thee (saith the Lord). Thou hast
them ivho hold the doctrine of Balaam. So also
them who Jwld the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. And
he is severely threatened unless he repented ;
which proves that he had authority to correct
these disorders. The same may be said of the
Angel of Thyatira, who is blamed for suffering
" Jesebel, who called herself a prophetess, to teach
and seduce the people '* And the Angel of Sar-
dis is commanded to be watchful^ and to strengthen
those who are ready to die ; otherwise, our liOrd

* Blon. A]iol. Pref. p. 6. quoted by Uurscough.
P2.

threatens to come on him as a thief in the nighty
Since then these Angels had full power of reform-
ing abuses; since the neglect of reformation is
entirely imputed to them ; and since there are
none joined in commission with them, whose votes
were necessary to enable them to act ; it is evi-
dent that they had the supreme power in their
respective Churches. If these Angels had been
no more than Presbyters, when our Lord blamed
and threatened the Angel of the Church of bar-
dis, he might have said •' Lord, why blamest thou
me / I have no more authority in thy Church in
this city, than other Presbyters. We do every
thing as thou well know est, by a plurality of votes,
and those Presbyters, who wish a majority for
the purpose of beginning the work of reformation,
have not been yet able to obtain it. 1 need not
tell thee^ that I am no more ihan the Moderator
ef the Presbytery, appointed to count their votes
and keep order* Upon what dictate then of rea-
son, upon what princi[)le of justice, am I to be
blamed for the delects and corrriptions in the
Church? As a. Moderator, 1 have do re^ on
whatever to the Church ; my relation is entirely

• Miller's Letters.

179

to the Presbytery, and lliere I have but a casting
vote. What then can 1 do '^ Wh} am I address-
ed in particular, and threaltned with excision,
unkss I repesd ? For my personal faults I humbly
beg forgiveness, but I cannot possibly acknow-
lecige my guiii as a governor of this church, when
I bear no such character." No gentlemen, we
cannot 6U!)|)ose these Angels Presbyters, nor
even presidents of Presbyteries, without involving
ourselves in the most palpable difficulties. But
upon {he Episcopal system all is right. The^BC-
ven Angels are so many individuals; they are
blameti for certain corruptions in their respective
churches, and their Pr< si)yters and Deacons are
not blamed in the least. The Angels, therefore,
must have had power to correct these abuses, and
must have had jurisdiction over these Presbyters
and Deacons. They must have been in the
complete sense of the word, Dioccasan Bishops.

Here then, genth men, we have another Scrip-
ture fact, establishing our position, and proving
that the charge now before you, is as unjust as it
is cruel. Afier these luminous authorities— au-
thorities which [)rove beyond the power of con-
tra.r^'-non, iliatihe Apostles eslahlished three or-
ders in the Church, and that Dioceasan Ej^iscopacy

180

is a Scripture and primitive institution, I shall not
deem it nectssarj at present to present 3011 with any
further arguments from the Bible ; but shall only de-
tain you to hear a few authorities from the early Fa-
thers. This 1 do, gentlemen, not because my
subject stands in need of more light, but to show
you, and this whole assembly, that I have not
mistaken, or mistated the facts to which 1 have
referred. And 1 am not displeased with the re-
striction, which the Rev. Gentleman, who last
spoke, has made in reference to the Earl}^ Fathers.
I am willing to goto the two tirst centuries, and
if 1 proceed with my quotations to after ages, it
will be rather to shew that every century was uni-
form in 1 heir opinions and practice with respect
to the Priesthood, than to establish the fact
for which I contend. Now, gentlemen, those
early writers, who lived in the Apostolic age and
the age immediately succeeding, knew all about
the Christian Priesthood. It wasi a matter of
fact which thej saw with their eyes and
heard with their ears. They could no more
have been deceived respecting the Apostolic reg-
imen of the Priesthood, than we can be deceiv-
ed respecting the provisions of the American
Constitution. If tiiey then understood the fact as

181

we do; if they spoke of Bishops, Priests and
Deacons, in the same manner as we have seen
them set forth in the Churches of Crete, Ephesus
and the Proconsular Asia, their testimony will be
so strongly corroborative that it must produce
conviction doubly firm. Let us appeal to those
primitive, those venera ;le men.

In the year 70 of our Lord, lived Clement; a
glorious Martyr, whose praise is in the Gospel, and
of whom particular mention is made, Phill. iv. 3.
He speaks thus, in his first E|)istle to the Coria-
thians parag. 40. Oxf. Edition. " To the High-
Priest his proper office was appointed ; the
Priests had their proper order, and the LeviteS
their peculiar services, or Deaconships, and the
Laymen what was proper for Laymen,'' In this
instance, Clement is speaking of the distribution
of offices in the Christian Church, and plainly
sets torth Bishops, Priests and Deacons and to the
office of Levites he gives its proper Christian
title, " Deacon.""

In the beginning of the 2d century St. Igna-
tius, a Martyr of Christ, was constituted, by the
Apostles, Bishop of Antioch. In his Epistle to
the Magnesians, he tells them, that they ''ought
not to despise their Bishop, but to pay him afl

manner of reverence, according to the command-
ment of Goil, the Father" — " and as I know your
holy Presbyters do." Therefore, as Christ did
nothing without the Father, so neither do ye,
whether Preshyter, Deacon, or Laic, any thing
•wit! Oiit th" Bi hop " " I exhort you to do all things
in the &;imF mind of God, the Bishop presiding
in the place of God; and the Pres!\yters in the
room of tlie College of the Apostles ; and the
Deacons, most beloved in me, who are intrusted
M'ith the ministry of Jesus Christ." Does the gen-
tleman term this language weak? What then
would he account strong and explicit ? This
quotation plainly teaches us that this Father un-
derstood that Episcopacy was the regimen of his
day — that it was appointed by Go. I — that after
the ascension of Christ, the Apostles and their
successors, the Bishops, took the place of Christ
as to visible power and office, and that the Presbyters
took the place which the Apostles held in Christ's
day ; for saith he, " the Bishop presiding in the
place of God.^\ NovV Gentlemen, Ignatius knew
how this matter stood ; he knew the Apostolic
practice — he was perfectly acquainted with the
Apostolic institutions — he knew their history, and
was perfectly acquainted with the Priestboo(i.

183

He was no knave \\mi he should misrepresent, nor
iades^d had he any inducement lo misrepresent.

Again— In his Epistle to the Church at Phila-
delphia, he exhorts them " to give heed to the
Bishop, and to the Presbytery, and lo the Dea-
cons— Without the Bishop do nothing." In his
six Epistles, which he wrote on his way to martyr-
dom, he fullj'^ andex})licilly avows his belief of
the derivation of the Episcopal order from the
Apostles. In his Epistle to the Trallians, he says,
" what is the Bishop, but he who hath all author-
ity and power ? What is the Presbytery, but a
sacred conslitution of counsellors and assessors to
the Bishop ? What are the Deacons, but imita-
tors orChrist."'

He mentions several of his coteinporary Bish-
ops, " Onesinius, Bishop of the Ephesians Poly-
carp, of the Smyrnians, Polybius, of the Trallians,
and Damas, of the Magnesians ; nnd he at the
same time commends the Presbyters and Deacons,
for their ob'sdience to them. So in the beginning
of his Epistle to the Magnesians — "having been
so happy as to see you, by your worthy Bishop,
Damas, and your worthy Presbyters, Bassus and
Apolinus, and Zotion your Deacon, whom I can-
not but commend for his obedience to his Bishop

184

and the Presbytery." Here then is a Father of
the Gentleman's own choice — one of the second
century — and if he can make a Presbyterian of
him, I will give him full credit for his ingenuity.
Gentlemen, we have seen that this Father makes
express mention of a number of Bishops, in differ-
ent parts of the Christian world ; and since he
uniformly speaks of them as divinely ordained, I
infer, that about ten years after the death of St,
John, no Churches were without them.

Thus much then, we are assured of, by the tes-
timony of Ignatius — that in the Apostolic age and
that immediately succeeding, Bishops were uni-
versally at the head of the churches ; that they
derived their authority from the hands of the
Apostles, and by virtue of that authority, they arc
superior to all other ecclesiastical officers.

About seventy years from the Apostolic age,
flourished Ireneus, first Presb^er, afterwards
Bishop of Lyons, in France. " We," says he,
** can reckon up those, whom the Apostles or-
dained ^fs/io/js in the several churches, and who
they were that succeeded them down to our
times." He then adds, that as it would be endless
to enumerate the succession of Bishops in all the
p;f^urches, he would instance in that of Rome"-^

185

wliich succession lie brings down to Eleutherius,
who was the 1 2th from the Apostles, and filled the
Episcopal chair when Ireneus wrote this treatise.

I shall now, Gentlemen, present you with a few
extracts from the Apostolical Canons which are
of very e.irly date, and may with propriety be
brought in at the age of which I am now speak-
ing.

• Canon 1. Let a Bishop be consecrated by two
or three Bishops.

Canon 2. " Let a Presbyter and Deacon be
ordained by one Bishop." Here the power of or-
dination is lodged in one person, the Bishop, and
not in the Presbytery.

Canon 15. "If any Presbyter or Deacon shall
leave his own parish and go to another, without
the Bishop's leave, he shall officiate no longer;
especially, if he obey not the Bishop when he ex-
horts him to return, persisting in his insolence
and disorderly behaviour ; but he shall be reduc-
ed to communicate only as a layman."

Canon 32. " If any Presbyter despising his own
Bishop, shall gather congregations apart, and
erect another altar, his Bishop not being convict-
ed of wickedness, or irreligion ; let him be depos-
ed as an ambilious person : and likewise *such

Q

186

other clergy or laity, who shall join themsdves to
him, shall be excommuHicated."

Take next the authority of Turtullian. In
his treatise de Prescript C. 32. he challenges the
Hereticks, " to produce the original of their
Churches, to show the succession of their Bishops
from the beginning, so as to make it appear that
the first of their Bishops had an Apostle, or some
Apostolic person for his author, or ordainer, or
predecessor. For thus Apostolic Churches pro-
duce the registers or records of their extraction, as
the Church of the Smyrnians, their Polycarp set-
tled by St. John ; the Romans their Clemens,
ordained by St. Peter, answeiablj to what other
Churches do, who prove their Apostolic original,
or that they are the posterity of the Apostles, by
exhibiting them who were constituted their Bish-
ops by the Apostles."

The same author, in his book about Baptism
against Quintilla, in answer to the question, who
may baptise ? says, " The High-Priest, who is
the Bishop, hath the power of giving baptism ;
and after him, (or in subordination to him) Pres-
byters, and Deacons; but no! without the Bish-
op's authority." — I would appeal to 3 ou gentle-
men, whether there can be plainer or more expli-

187

Git autliorify than this. The testimony of this
Father is as unanswerable as that of Ignatius.
Here are the three officers designated, and their
powers and stations plainly and explicitly as-
signed ; all exactly comporting with the Scrip-
ture account, which we drew from the facts ad-
duced from the acts and declarations of the Apos-
tles.

The next authority to which I appeal, is Ori-
gen, the famous Catechist and Presbyter of the
Church of Alexandria, who flourished about the
year 330. He, in his explanation of the Lord's
Prayer, upon the words, " forgive us our debts,'*
mentions other debts — " There is a debt to the
widow, another to the Deacon, another to the
Presbyter, and then that to the Bishop, w^hich
our Saviour requires of the whole Church, and
that he will punish them who neglect to pay it.'*
And in his commentary on St. Matthew, he is
equally express — there is a necessity," says he,
•^'that we should depress the opinion of those who
highly esteem themselves, because brought up
under parents professing Christianity ; and espe-
cially if they are exalted on account of their pa-
rents or progenitors, who had attained to that dig-
nity in the Church, to sit on the Bishop's throne,

i88

or to have the honour of Presbyters, or Deacons,
to minister to God's people." These quotation*
gentlemen, need no comment. From them we
come down to the age of Cyprian, who was the
most celebrated man of the third century. He
flourished about the year 250, at which time he
was Bishop of Carthage.

It will appear from monuments of the third
century, that there were several considerable acts
of authority, relating to the government and dis-
cipline of the church, which belonged solely to
the Bishop ; for it will be abundantly evident,
that he could, in these cases, exercise this autho-
rity without the concurrence of any other church
governor — He had for instance, the sole power of
confirmation. For this we have St. Cyprian's
express testimony, in his Epistle to Jubianus,
where he says, " it was the custom to offer such
as were baptised, to the Bishops, that by their
prayers, and the laying on of their hands, they
might receive the Holy Ghost, and be consum-
mated by the sign of our Lord."

~ So likewise, the Bishop had the sole power of
ordination. In St. Cyprian's 38th Epistle, it
will be seen that having while absent, ordained
Aurelius, a Lector, he acquaints his Presbyters

189

and Deacons with it — '' In all clerical ordina-
tions, most dear Brethren, I used to consult you
before hand, and examine the manners and merits
of every one with common advice." But in this
instance, he proceeds to tell them, that he had
departed from his ordinary rule.

We have another remarkable instance in his
41st Epistle where he says, that because of his
absence from Carthage, he had given a deputation
to Caldonius and Herculaneus, tv;o Bishops, and
to Rogatianus and Numidicus two of his Presbyt-
ers, " to examine the ages, quilifications and
merits of some in Carthage, that he, whose prov-
ince it was, to promote men to ecclesiastical offi-
ces, might be well informed about them, and pro-
mote none but such as were meek, humble and
worthy." Indeed, gentlemen, Cyprian is very
explicit and very abundant in his testimony, that
the Church, in his day was purely Dioceasan. It
is impossible that he, or any of the earlier Fa-
thers, whom I have quoted, could be deceived
ui)on this subject, or could have misrepresented it.
In short, I cannot see but we shall be driven to the
dreadfnl necessity of denying the Scriptures, in
denying that Episcopacy was the regimen of the

Christian Jtnd Apostolic Church. Men in some
Q2

1§0

instances, in order to get rid of the testimony of
these Fathers, have assailed them with ridicule,
and boUlly denied their authority. But gentle-
men should be careful how they resort to such
means, inasmuch as it is by the testimony of these
same Fathers, that the divinity of the Scriptures
is established. Should an intidel deny their au-
thority, and laugh at their internal evidence, to
what shall we appeal to support the divinity of
that sacred volume ? Surely to the ancients, w ho
testify that they received it from Christ and his
Apostles.

I proceed Gentlemen, with rny testimony, and
come down to Athanasius, the celebrated Bishop
of Alexandria, who flourished in thtf early part of
the 4th century. In his first apology, he upbraids
the Arians with their persecutions and in recount-
ing what violences they were guilty of, he shows
how they had forced away many Bishops, as
Aramonius, Thamus and others, whom he there
names ; so also Hierax and Dioscorus, who w ere
only Presbyters, thus plainly distinguishing those
offices. And page 765, of the same apology, he
shows how his enemies, the Arians, not only re-
ceived Arians into their communion, but also
advanced them to higher offices in the Church ;

191

raising some from Deacons to be Presbyters, and
ot})ers from Presbyters to be Bishops ; — by which
he clearly distinguishes the gradations of these
officers also.*

Jerome, who likewise lived in the 4th century, is
also very explicit in his testimony respecting; the
validity of E[)iscopal regimen. In his Epistle to
Nepot, he says, " what Aaron and his sons were,
that, we know the Bishops and the Presbyters
are." If so, then, as Aaron, by divine right, was
superior to his sons, the Priests, so the Bishops
must be superior to the Presbyters.

Having gentlemen, exhausted myself and I fear
your patience also, I shall rest my arguments
upon these authorities, without proceeding down to
the later writers. Indeed this would be a task
entirely useless, because there is no dispute, but
that Episcopacy universally prevailed in the Chris-
tian Church, as early as the 4th century. And
even should any have the boldness todenythis^
every one the least acquainted with ecclesiasti-
cal History, would perceive the fallacy of such

denial.
Gentlemen, I shall trespass on your kind indul-

* Brokesby^s Hist, of the Gov. of the Prim. Ch. p. 143.

193

gence but a few moments longer. I will only
add, that if it were possible, after all the facts an4
testimony I have offered in the progress of this dis-
cussion, for any doubts to remain, as to the justice
of the claims of the Episcopal Church, to be Apos-
tolic and primitive in her doctrines and institutions,
there is one other fact, that must remove these
doubts from every imprejudiced mind. I allude
to the account given by Dr. Buchanan, of the con-
dition in which he found the Syrian Church. By
this account, assurance is made doubly sure, that
the reformers of that Church from which the Pro-
testant E;)iscopal Church in the United States is
descended, were not mistaken when they assert-
ed, in the preface to the office of ordination, that
from the Apostles' time there have bevn three or-
ders of ministers in Christ's Church, Bishops,
Priests and Deacons.

Speaking of Dr. Buchanan's narrative, that ce-
lebrated work, the Christian Observer says, "^ it is
impossible for one who is a member of the Pro-
testant Episcopal Church, not to feel a peculiar
degree of gratification, in perusing the account of
the Syrian Christians. The similarity of our faith
and mode of worship, of our ecclesiastical con-
stitution) and even of our minuter rites and cere-

inonies to those which prevail in' the Syriaa
Church, is very remarkable, and affords one ad-
ditional presumption, of the Apostolic origin
which we have been disposed to attribute to
them. We have in both Churches, the same
gradations of rank, Bishop, Priest and Deacon."*
Dr. Buchanan informs us, that the history of the
Syrian Church is traced back to the Church of
Antioch, where disciples were first called Chris-
tians— That they have never had the least inter-
course with Rome, and never heard of such a per-
son as a Pope, until the 1 6th centurj^ — Here then
Gentlemen, are two Churches, existing for six-
teen centuries, in quarters of the world far remov-
ed from each other — nay, even without the nations
in which they were respectively situated having
any commerce together ; and yet both tracing
their history back to Christ, and his Apostles'— *
both maintaining the same regimen of Church
order, and both claiming to receive it by trans-
mission from Christ. In short we here find the
same churchy existing for ages, in quarters of the
globe widely separated not only, but which have
had no intercourse with each other. This, Gen-

* Ch. Obs. 1811. p. 317—320.

19^

tlemen, is a fact to prove* the divine origin of
Ei)iscopacy, which no sophistry can evade and
which no one will have the hardihood to gainsay.*
And now gentlemen, I haye to refer it to your
learning and discriminating judgment, whether the
fact is not as clear as the sun in the heavens,
that the primitive regimen of the Christian Church
was Episcopal. Indeed is it not a remarkable
fact in the holy religion of our God and Saviour,
that such an identity of order in the Priesthood,
has been maintained in the Church, under every
dispensation of Heaven ? This is a striking sam-
ple of that beautiful, that divine harmony which
pervades the works and word of God. Christ stiles
his Church, his Body — hi» Kingdom — his Family
— B^e purchased it with his blood — He appointed it
as the school, in which immortal souls should be
prepared to perform the high range of duty in
Heaven. In it, he ordained a Priesthood, which
should be instrumental in (he salvation of his re-
deemed. However we may admire then, it is no

* It is not less singular tban true that this account of Dr. Bu-
chanan has- had such an efifect upon the minds of some gentle-
men, opposed to the Episcopal faith, that in a late edition of
Buchanan's work, the editor has taken the liberty^ to leave
out enti -ely the -ibove interesting account of the existence of
Epi^c ip fl Regimen among the Syrian Christi.in*. Let the rea-
der consult the several editions of Buchanan's work, and he will
be satisfied of the truth of this statement.

195

subject of wonder that he has maintained by his
own mighty arm, a similarity of regimen in that
Priesthood, in every age, and that in his provi-
dence, he has preserved even a record of the
names* of those men who have from time to time
succeeded in the highest order of his Church.

*It is one of the most curious monuments of antiquity, that in the
providence of God, a catalogue of the names of the Higli-Friests,
from Aaron to Christ, is preserved in tlie Scriptures, and that an-
other of the Apostles and the Bishop?, their successors, from
Christ to us. is easily traced in profane history. This cii cum«
stance alone, has such weight in proviogthe divine right ofE-
piscopal regimen, that the Reporter thinks proper to record the

CATALOGUE Aft FOLLOTN' S :

Jewish High-Priests, from

1 Aaron,

2 Eleazar,

3 Phineas,

4 Abishua,

5 Bukki,

6 Uzzi,

7 Zerahiah,

8 Meraioth,

9 Amariah,

10 Ahitub,

11 Zadok,

12 Ahimaaz,

13 Azariah,

14 Johanan,

15 Azaiiah,

16 Araiuiah,

17 Ahitub,

18 Zadoc,

19 ShHlium,

20 Kilkiali,

21 As.aiah,

22 Se'-aiah,

23 Jelioi-adak,
Dtiring the captivity they rvi

24 Josuc,
15 Joakim,

Aaron to the days of Christ'

26 Eliashil,

27 Jehoida the 2d,

28 Jonathan,

29 Jaddus,

30 Onias 1st,

31 Simon the just,

32 Elazer 2d,

33 Manasses,

34 Onias 2d,

35 Simoi. 2d,

36 Onias the 3d,

37 Jason,

38 Menelaus. a Simoniaclc,

39 Lysmachus,

40 Alcimus,

to 3886 of the world., and of
Rome 586.

41 Matatliias,

42 Judas Macabaeas,

43 Jonathas,

44 Simon 3d,

45 John, called Hircan,

46 Aristobulus,

re, 47 .Alexander Jannius,

48 Hyrcan,

49 Aristobulus,

196

For it is natural that he ^should protect that
Priesthood, which is the very life blood of his
visible body, which he instituted for the high, the
blessed purpose of admitting redeemed man to
himself, and of being instrumental in fitting im-
mortal souls for the high employ of worshipping

50 Hyrcan re-established,

51 Antigonus,

52 Ananel,

53 Aristobulus,

54 Ananel re-established,

55 Jesu, son of Phabes,

56 Simon,

57 Matthias,

58 Joazar,

59 EleazerSd,

60 Jesus, son of Sias,

61 Ismael,

62 Eleazar 4th,

63 Simon,

64 Caiaphas,

66 Simon, sir named Can-

thprns

67 Matthias 2d,

68 Elionee,

69 Simon Cantheras re-es-

established,

70 Joseph, called Caba.

71 Ananns,

72 Ismael,

73 Joseph,

74 Ananus,sonof Ananug,

75 Jesus, son of Damneus,

76 Jesus son of Gamaliel,

77 Matthias 3d,

78 Phanasus was High Priest

65 Jonathas and his' brother when Jerusalem was taken in the
Theophilus, year 61.

A list of Bishops who succeeded each other from the

Apostles down to the year 18lT.

A. D. 44 St. Peter and St. Paul, 221 Calistus,

70 Linus,

81 Cletus,

93 Clemens,
103 Anacietus,
112 Euarestiis,
121 Alexander,
132 Sextus,
142 Telesphorus,
154 Hygenus,
158 Pius,
167 Anicetus,

175 Soter,

179 Eleutherius,

194 Victor,

'^03 Zepheiinus,

227 Urbanus,
233 Pontianus,

238 Antherus,

239 Fabianus,

254 Cornelius,

255 Lucius,
257 Stephanus,

260 Sixtus, 2nd.

261 Dionvsius,
273 Filix" 1st.
275 En^ vchianug,
284 Cajus,

297 Marcellimj!*,
304 M-ucellus,
309 Eusebius,

l§7

liim in the realms of his glory. It has been my
happy lot to belong to his Church ; it is my great
honour to be admitted into his Priesthood — High
is the station, for a creature so humble, so unwor-
thy—-May the Great, the Glorious Head, grant, of
the fulness of his grace, to his whole Church, both

311 Miltiades,
314 Sylvester,

336 Marcus,

337 Julius,
352 Liberius,
385 Felix, 2nd.
367 Damasus,
375 Siricius,
398 Anastaciu?,
402 Inuocentius,
417 Zozimus,

419 Bonifacius, 1st.

424 Coelestinus,

432 Sextus, 3d.

440 Leo Magnus,

461 S. Hilariu?,

468 Simplicius,

4S3 Felix, 3d.

492 S.Gelasius,

497 Anastasius,

499 Symmachu?,

514 Hormisda,

524 Joannes, 1st.

526 Felix, 4tb.

530 Bonafaciu?, 2nd.

532 Joannes, 2nd,

.V35 Agapetus,

537 Sylverius,

540 Virgiliiis,

o.'>5 Palagias,

fSQ Joannes, 3d.

573 Benidictus,

578 PelagiuE,

590 GregoriusMagnu?,

596 AognstinusMooachus

R

614 Laurentiug,
619 Melitus,
624 Justus,
634 Honorius,
654 Adeodatus,
668 Theodorus,
693 Brithwaldus,
731 Fatwinus,
735 JVothelmus,
740 Cuthbertus,
759 Bregwinus,
762 Lambertus,
791 Athelardus,
804 Wolfredus,

829 Theogildup,

830 Ceolnothus,
871 Atheldredus,
889 Pleigmundus,
915 Athelmus,
924 Wolfelmus,
934 Odo,

959 Dunstan,

988 Ethelgaru?,

990 Siricius,

993 Alfricus,
1006 Elfegus,
1013 Livingus,
1020 Agelnothug,
1038 Eadlinus,
1050 Robertup,
1052 Stigandus,
1070 Lanfrancus,
1089 Anselm,
1114 Rodolphus,
1122 William Corboyl

198

ministry and people, to you, and to us all, for
Christ's sake.

Preshyler Tertius. The Right Rev. Gentle-
man has no doubt exhausted the powers of hiss
body as well as mind, in the support of his subject,
and to my mind, with very ill success. I hope it

1138 Theobaldus,

1162 Thomas Becket,

1171 RichardusMonachus,

1184 Baldwin

1191 Reginald Fitz-Jocelin

lins Hubert Walter,

1206 Stephen Langton,

1229 Richard Wethershed,

1234 Edmund,

1244 Boniface,

1272 Robert Kilwarby,

1278 John Peckara,

1294 Robert Wenchelsey,

1313 Walter Reynolds,

1327 ^-imon Mepham,

1333 John Stratford,

1348 Thomas Bradwarden

1349 Simon Jslippe,

1366 Simon L^ngham,

1367 William Whittlesey,
1375 Simon Sudbury,
1381 William Courtney,
1396 Thomas Aiuridel,
1414 Henry Chicheley,
1443 Johfl .-Stafford,
1452 John Hemp,

1454 Thomas Bou'-chier,

1486 John Morton,
1502 Henry Dean,
1504 VTilliam Warham,
1533 Thomas Cranmer, first

Prrtestant Bishop,
1555 Reginald Pool,
1559 Mathew Parker,
T575 Rdmund Grindal,
1583 John Whitgift,
1604 Richard Bancroft,
1610 Geo. Abbot.
1633 William Laud,
1660 William Juxton,
1662 James Sharp.
Those who succeeded* Bishop
Sharp, in the English Epis-
copate were

Gilbert Shelton,

W. Sancrofth,

J. Tillotson,

Thomas Tennisson,

Wm. Wake,

J. Potter,

Thomas Herring,

1 homas Seckar,

Cornwallis.

John Moore living 1802, who with William Markbam and
other Bishops consecrated Bishop White now living in Penn-
sylvania, and Bishop Provost, late of New-York, who together
with one other Bishop, consecrated, in the city of New-York,
Bish-'O Hobait and Bishop Griswold, both now living Thus
hath God, by his power preserved !iis church and his word
and with them his ministry.

* For the first part of this catalogue see Eusebiu's lustory.

ERRATA.

Page 10 line 2 for is read in.

12 2 for dispute — despise.

25 17 for dispense — despise.

43 17 for of — on.

86 18 for time — line.

101 23 for Reza — Beza.

123 11 for different— difficult.

163 note for W. Mc'Loed— Mr. Mc'Loed.

1-71 3 for then — them.

199

was not his expectation to render his cause suc-
cessful by the length of his speech. I presume
gentlemen the house is prepared for a decision.

Chairman. 1 am sorry to observe that there is
still a contrariety of opinion in the council upon
this important subject. I had thought, until the
last gentleman spoke, that there could not be a
dissenting voice. But since this contrariety of
opinion does exist, your Chairman and Jurors, in
consideration of the great importance of this sub-
ject, and of the peculiar delicacy and responsibility
of their situation, think proper to omit giving their
decision till a future day. This determination has
not arisen from any diversity of opinion, between
the Chairman and Jurors — we are all of one mind.
After mature deliberation; our decision shall be
niade public, with our reasons for it.

Presbyter Quintus, Gentlemen, since this
question is disposed of, I beg leave to present a
single charge against Episcopacy, which 1 pledge
myself to support, and which I request the council
may proceed to try, before they adjourn. It is,
that Episcopacy at the time she reformed her sdf
from the errors of Rome, was adorned with the pe-
culiar doctrines of Gra£e, or that Gospel system
termed Calvinism^ and that she has now thrown it

^00

off^ and adopted the dry and hopeless system of Ar-
menius.

Rtding Elder. Gentlemen, I hope the assem-
bly will gratify the gentleman by examining this
charge.

Presbyter Baptisticus. Gentlemen, I have also
a charge to prefer, which I hope will also be con-
sidered. It is that Episcopacy, at a certain period
adopted in theory and practice, and still maintains^
certain crude and umcriptural doctrines in rejefr-
ence to the ordinance of Baptism, whereby she ren-
ders void the commission of Christ to his Apostles.
Chairman. Gentlemen, it will be impossible
to attend to the examination of these charges at
this time, inasmuch as the day is at hand which
will call me and a number of the gentlemen who
compose this assembly, to the councils of the na-
tion. I shall with pleasure meet this council on
some future day ; at which time I shall pronounce
the decision on the question already discussed,
and will hear the examination of those now pr^
posed.

ADJOURNED.

The trial of the last charges, has been had, and
shall be reported in due time.

R. C. G. Reporter.
March, 1817.

. >J

^ t^<;/> <;X' P^' ^.4 ^^'^^

3 193t