Letters concerning the constitution and order of the Christian ministry: addressed to the members of the Presbyterian churches in the city of New York. To which is prefixed, a letter on the present aspect and bearing of the Episcopal controversy

Front matter

1^ liETTERS ^^^

CONCERNING

THE CONSTITUTION AND ORDER

Letter I. Introductory, 1

II. Testimony of Scripture, - - - 14

III. Testimony of Scripture continued, - 45

IV. Testimony of the early Fathers, - 80

V. Testimony of Some of the Later Fathers, 110 VI. Testimony of the Reformers, - - 135

VII. Concessions of Eminent Episcopalians, 15*7

VIII. Rise and Progress of Prelacy, - 183 IX. Practical Influence of Prelacy, &c, - 214

Part II

Letter I. Introductory, - ^ - . ;^30 II. Presbyterian and Episcopal Claims compared, ----- 242

III. Testimony of Scripture reviewed, - 265

IV. The office of Ruling Elder considered, 292 V. Testimony of the Fathers reviewed, 311

VI. Testimony of the Reformers reviewed, 351 VII. Testimony of Calvin examined, - 389

VIII. Testimony of the Successors of the Re- .

formers, _ _ _ . 428 IX. Rise and Progress of Prelacy reconsidered, 453

X. Episcopal Concessions — Uninterupted

Succession, . - - - 474

TO

THE MEMBERS

OF THE

PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES.

I TAKE the liberty to inscribe this volume, in its present fornij to you. The original publication was addressed to those^united churches in the city of New York, of which I was, at the time of its date, one of the pastors. And although I still cherish the memory of that relation with grateful and affectionate respect, and still continue the address which ^was at first adopted; yet, as the circumstances which induce me to present the work a second time to the public, are of wider extent than the demands of a few single congregations ; I wish to bespeak the attention of the whole ecclesiastical body, with which I have the happiness to be connected, to the subject here discussed :-^ a subject which the unscriptural and exorbitant claims of a particular denomination among us have invested with an interest beyond that which intrinsically belongs to it. It is the duty of Christians in every age, not only to make themselves well acquainted with important religious truth, but also to arm themselves against surrounding errors; especially those which, from the plausibility and confidence with which they are advanced, are peculiarly fitted to *^ deceive the hearts of the simple.'^

The following " Letters'^ were originally published in two separate volumes; — the first in the year 1807; the 2

Vi PRELIMINARY LETTER.

second in 1809 ; the latter being an examination of the strictures of several friends of prelacy on the preceding volume. They have both been out of print for a number of years; and although frequent inquiry has been made for them, it was not supposed, until lately, that the demand was sufficient to warrant a second edition. Recent circumstances, however, have led to the belief that a new and corrected impression would be seasonable, and not unacceptable to the friends of primitive truth and order.

The original publication was made, with much reluctance, in consequence of repeated, long-continued, and violent attacks from some high-toned advocates of prelacy, chiefly of the state of New York, where I then resided. Of its reception by my episcopal neighbours, I will here say nothing. But I have the satisfaction to know that many others, whose good opinion I highly prize, considered the work as a service of some value to the cause of truth. It answered, in a good measure, the purpose which I intended. It satisfied and confirmed numbers, who had been either surprised or perplexed by the confidence of episcopal statements, and for whose instruction I was bound to provide Having accomplished this design, I was quite willing that the work should pass into oblivion, with the controversy which had called it forth. And I can truly say, that one reason why I felt so little disposed, several, years ago, to comply with urgent solicitations to reprint this manual, was, that I was unwilling to take any step which might prove the means of reviving or extending a dispute, which I cannot consider as either very honourable, or very profitable to the church of God.

And, as the original publication of the following Letters was prompted by unprovoked and violent attacks, and was made merely in self-defence ; so their appearance in this new form is occasioned by a similar cause. After reposing in quietness for more than twenty years, they have been, recently, again called up to public view, and subjected to

PRELIMINARY LETTER. yii

attacks marked by great vehemence and confidence. Of these attacks, it is not deemed necessary to take any further notice than to say, that their violence and their oflfensive imputations have created a new demand for the vs^ork, and thus afforded an opportunity of presenting it again to the public in a more convenient form. This is the only reply that I at present intend to give to any recent assailant. And I hope that every candid reader, after attentive consideration, will be of the opinion that more was not called for.

In preparing the work for a second edition, T have revised the whole with as much care as my circumstances allowed. And, although the further reading and reflection of twenty years, have enabled me to detect some mistakes, and to reconsider and modify the statements in a few places ; — yet I can truly say, that the amount of my modification has generally been, to urge my former reasonings with new confidence ; to array my old authorities with additional, instead of diminished force ; and, in general, to manifest what I have really felt,— a greatly augmented assurance of the soundness of my original conclusions.

With regard to my quotations from the fathers, and other writers, I think it proper to say, once for all, that I have endeavoured to make them with all the fidelity of which I am capable. Those who are familiar with such matters need not be reminded, that, frequently, out of a folio page, not more than half a dozen lines have any direct bearing on the purpose of the extract; and that if these are exhibited without any uncandid wresting from their connection, the real spirit of the author is set forth with sufiicient accuracy. If in any instance, in the following pages, an offence has been committed against this sound principle, it has not been done intentionally. It is, indeed, as common as it is easy, when an adversary is incommoded by a quotation in the way of authority, to complain of it as unfaithfully made, or as disingenuously separated from its viii PRELIMINARY LETTER.

proper connection. But of the truth of such complaints, every intelligent reader must judge for himself. I can sincerely declare, that after an attentive review of every page, I have permitted nothing to retain its place but what I verily believe may be firmly sustained ; and that if I had possessed time and health to make further alterations, they would have been employed in adding what I honestly deem new evidence of the relevancy and force of every thing that I have advanced.

Nothing, my Christian friends, is further from my intention, in any thing which you will find in the following pages, than to attack the episcopal church. I have no hostility to that denomination of Christians. Those who prefer Prelacy to Presbyterianism, are cordially welcome, for me, and, I am perfectly confident, for the whole Presbyterian church, to the enjoyment of all the advantages which they see or imagine in that form of ecclesiastical government. I have not the least doubt, indeed, that prelacy is an unscriptural error; an anwarranted innovation on apostolic simplicity: but such an innovation as a man may adopt with zeal, and yet be an excellent Christian, and an heir of eternal blessedness. To all such Episcopalians as Whitefield and Hervey in former times, and as Newton, Scott, and others of similar stamp in later periods, I can cordially " bid God speed," and sincerely rejoice in their success. Were the world filled with such men, I, for one, should be ready to say : Let their spirit reign from the rising to the setting sun ! With the utmost sincerity, then, can I declare, that no feeling of animosity toward Episcopalians, as such, has prompted me to speak in the language of the following pages. It is my unfeigned desire, and a desire which becomes stronger as I advance in life, that all who have '^ received like precious faith through the righteousness of God, and our Saviour, Jesus Christ,^' may live together " as one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." And I can further declare that it always gives me sensible

PRELIMINARY LETTER. ix

pain to engage in any controversy, even in self defence, which tends to produce even temporary alienation among those who ought to be united by the bonds of our common hope.

But when Episcopalians belong to that part of their denomination — a very small part, as I hope and trust — who not only believe that prelacy is a divine institution, but that every other form of ecclesiastical government must be rejected as rebellion against God : when they persuade themselves, not only that the human invention which they embrace, is truth, but that nothing else can be truth ; that where there is no ministry episcopally ordained, there is no church at all, no ministry, no valid ordinances, no people in covenant with God, and, of course, no warranted hope of divine mercy through our Lord Jesus Christ ; when, as a native and necessary consequence of these opinions, they consider it as unlawful to indulge in any religious intercourse with non-episcopalians ; and regard it as an act of fidelity to Christ to stand aloof from all who do not belong to their own body, however pious their spirit and exemplary their lives ; nay, however manifestly, in all other respects, they may bear his image, and do his will ; when they think it incumbent upon them to decline every act which would imply acknowledging as brethren in Christ the most devout and heavenly-minded Christians who do not stand in their particular line of fancied ecclesiastical genealogy ; and to refuse all communion and co-operation with them, even in the most hallowed work of Christian benevolence ; and, further, when they think it a duty to take every opportunity, in public and private, to denounce non-episcopalians as aliens from Christ, and call upon them to renounce their principles, and attach themselves to their sect, under the heaviest penalties ; I say, when Episcopalians take this ground, it is difficult to tell wherein their principle differs from the corresponding principle of the papists. They evidently take a stand hos-

X PRELIMINARY LETTER.

tile both to the letter and spirit of the Bible, They advance claims alike presumptuous, unreasonable, and mischievous. They teach doctrines which have an obvious tendency to place an outward ceremonial above the " weightier matters of the law 5" and to turn away the minds of men from the vital spirit of our holy religion, to ** fable and endless genealogies, which minister questions rather than godly edifying.'^ In short, they contend for principles, the tendency of which is to beget narrow views, sectarian pride, and blind superstition ; and to bring back the darkness and the thraldom of those ages when fallible mortals undertook to be the vicars of Christ upon earth, and to make their followers believe, that they held in their hands the spiritual rights, and the immortal hopes of their fellow men.*

I rejoice, my respected brethren, that Presbyterians have never been chargeable with attempting to maintain opinions so unscriptural and pernicious. I rejoice that our ecclesiastical formularies, as well as our private sentiments, are, universally, alien from such unfounded claims. It gives me pleasure to know, that we have never un-churched other denominations; never denied the validity of theirordinances; never consigned them to the uncovenanted mercies of God ; never stood aloof from any churches which we considered as holding the fundamental doctrines of our common salvation ; but have long been in the constant habit of recognizing as brethren in Christ, and holding communion with, all denominations who manifest any practical regard to the precious truth, and the holy living, which the Bible represents as essential to the Christian character. To this state-

* Those who desire to see the ground on which this exhibition of high church doctrine rests, are referred not only to the statements in the following letters ,- but also to the various episcopal publications circulating in every part of the United States, both practical and controversial, which, by either open avowal, or unavoidable inference, will fully sustain all that is here advanced.

PRELIMINARY LETTER. xi

ment, I am not aware, at present, of a single exception. I know, indeed, that we are often stigmatized as an austere and bigoted denomination. But this has never been owing ta our denying the church character of any of our neighbouring sisters ; but to our contending for what we deem the pecuh'ar and fundamental doctrines of the gospel, and endeavouring to enforce, in our communion, that purity of life, and that abstraction from the fashionable pleasures of the world, which some other denominations do not so carefully discountenance. The truth is, Presbyterians, as such, have so little of the spirit of sect; are so ready to join with all Christian churches in carrying on any enterprize of piety and benevolence ; so ready to take to their bosoms all, of every sect or name, who manifest the spirit of Christ; and so little disposed to question the standing of any ecclesiastical body, on account of its external organization, or to contend about church government at all, that they have scarcely enough of the sectarian spirit to defend themselves. It gives me unspeakable pleasure to contemplate this feature in our character as a church. It forms one among the numerous evidences that we walk in the footsteps of the primitive believers ; that we have imbibed something of the spirit of Him, who, when one of his disciples said, "Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and " we forbade him, because he followeth not with us ;'^ replied, " Forbid him not, for he that is not against us is for us ;" — the spirit of that holy Apostle, who could say, " Some, indeed, preach Christ even of envy and strife, ** and some also of good will. What then? notwithstand- " ing every way, whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is '* preached ; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.^' But, although Presbyterians will not yield to any other class of professing Christians whatever, in liberality to other denominations ; yet when their principles are assailed, there are limits beyond which they consider silence as inconsistent with duty. When they are denounced as " aliens xii PRELIMINARY LETTER,

from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenant of promise ;" when they are declared, as Presbyterians, to be no church of Christ, to have no ministry, no sacraments, no warranted hope in the mercy of God ; when every attempt either to dispense or receive ordinances by Presbyterian hands, is pronounced an act of rebellion against the Head of the Church ; when we are even represented as in a worse condition than the heathen, because equally out of God^s covenant, and resisting greater light than they j surely it cannot be wrong to say a word in defence of our principles ; surely it cannot be criminal to "give an answer to any one that asketh a reason of the *' hope that is in us, provided we do it with meekness and "fear.'^ Placing out of view all regard to our own reputation, as a Church, fidelity to our Master in heaven, as well as fidelity to those who look to us for instruction, undoubtedly requires, that we show, if it be in our power, that " we " have not followed cunningly devised fables," but can appeal " to the law and the testimony'^ for all that we teach the people.

Allow me, then, my christian friends, before you enter on the perusal of the following Letters, to state, with brevity, in this preliminary address, a few considerations, intended to show why those high and exclusive claims which our Episcopal neighbours are in the habit of urging with a zeal and confidence worthy of a better cause, ought to be, and must be rejected. And,

L We cannot find the least warrant for any such exclusive claims, in the word of God. If Prelacy had been a divine institution, and especially, if it had been regarded by the inspired writers as the fundamental and essential matter which modern high-churchmen represent it, — could they have been silent respecting it? Can it be imagined that they would have left the subject in obscurity or doubt ? When they had occasion to speak so frequently concerning the christian character and hope; concerning

PRELIMINARY LETTER. xiii

the church, its nature, foundation, Head, laws, ministers and interests ; it is truly marvellous that they should be explicit on every other point than precisely that whichjwre dlvino prelatists consider as the most vital and important of all I Yet is not this manifestly the case, the friends of •the claim in question themselves being judges? Have they not been constrained a thousand times to confess, that this claim is no where distinctly presented or maintained in the New Testament ? When the inspired writers undertake to tell us what those things are which professing Christians ought sacredly to regard, in order to make good their appropriate character, on what points do they dwell ? Do they insist on a particular line of ecclesiastical succession, or represent every thing, or, indeed, any thing, as depending on a certain form of official investiture ? Do they tell the humble inquirer after the way of holiness and salvation, that he must be careful, first of all, that he receives the sacraments from duly authorized hands; and that, whatever he does, he must be found in communion with some bishop, who holds his office by regular descent ? Is there a syllable which has the most distant resemblance to such counsel ? Assuredly there is not. No ; the points every where insisted on, as manifesting that the character and the hopes of men axe " such as becometh the gospel,'' are genuine faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance unto life, love to God and man, and habitually endeavouring to imbibe the spirit, to imitate the example, and to obey the commands of the Redeemer. The directions given are every where such as the following : " He that believeth on "the Son of God hath everlasting life, and shall not come " into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life ; " but he that believeth not on the Son of God shall not see " life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. There is, "therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in " Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the ** spirit. If ye love me, keep my commandments; for he 3

XIV PRELIMINARY LETTER.

" that saith he loveth me, and keepeth not my cbmmand- " ments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. Let the " wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his " thoughts, and let him return to the Lord, and he will have *' mercy upon him, and to our God, and he will abundantly ^'pardon him. Not by works of righteousness which we " have done, but according to his mercy doth he save us, ''by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the " Holy Spirit. As ye have received the Lord Jesus, so '' walk ye in him; rooted and built up in him, and estab- " lished in the faith, which is according to godliness, and "abounding in those works of righteousness which are by " Jesus Christ unto the glory and praise of God."

Now, I ask, is it conceivable that this could have been the tenor of the directions given by the Saviour and his inspired Apostles, to inquirers after the. way of christian obedience and hope, if they had coincided in opinion with modern high-churchmen ? I will venture to say, it cannot be, for a moment, supposed. Can we imagine that infinite wisdom, and infinite benevolence would undertake to instruct the members of that great community, denominated the Church, in their essential duties, and yet say nothing about that great point, without which, as some think, all her privileges would be a nullity, .and all her hopes vain ? Can we believe that the Bible was given for the express purpose of being ''a light to our feet, and a lamp to our path," in reference to the great interests of Christians, as individuals, and as a body ; and yet that it should not contain one word of explicit instruction in regard to that which is alleged to lie at the foundation of the visible church, and to be essential to its very existence, and, of course, to the validity of all its acts ? That be far from a Being who tadapts means to ends with infinite skill, and who does nothing in vain ! The simple and undeniable fact, then, that he particular organ ization of the visible church ; the persons invested with the ordaining power ; and the uninter-

PRELIMINARY LETTER. xv

nipted succession in a line of prelates^ are not so much as mentioned — or, to say the least, make no such figure, in the New Testament, as in many volumes of modern episcopal origin, — ought to be considered as decisive in this controversy. Had these principles been entertained at the time in which the New Testament was written, and regarded by the inspired writers in the same light in which they are regarded by some ecclesiastical men at the present day ; they could not have been silent respecting them, without forfeiting all claim to christian benevolence, nay, to common honesty. They would have dwelt upon them in every connection ; have repeated them at every turn ; and have made this subject clear, whatever else was left in the dark. Now, as they, by universal confession, have not done THIS ; as NO ONE of their number has done it ; it is as plain as any moral demonstration can be, that the principles and claims in question were then unknown, and, consequently, have no divine warrant.

II. Another strong presumptive argument against the claim of modern high-churchmen, may be drawn from the well known fact, that almost every part of the outward ceremonial of the visible church has actually been CHANGED, FROM TIME TO TIME, without affecting the existence or order of the spiritual community. During the first, or patriarchial dispensation, those who ministered in holy things, received, so far as we are informed, no formal ordination at all. Yet their services were considered as valid, and were accepted of God. When the Mosaic, or ceremonial economy was introduced, the first investiture of the high priest was, by divine direction, conducted by Moses, who was not a high priest, nor even a common priest, himself. On all subsequent accessions of the high priest, he was inducted into ofiice in a different manner; such an officer as Moses having never afterwards officiated on a similar occasion. Before the coming of Christ, the regular line of hereditary succession was repeatedly broken;

xvi PRELIMINARY LETTER.

yet this was not considered as affecting the validity of the high priest's ministrations; and even the Saviour and his apostles, notwithstanding this, repeatedly acknowledged, from time to time, the existing authority of that oiFicer. When the New Testament economy was introduced, a method of investing men with the sacred office was adopted, which had never been connected with the Aaronic priesthood. This was " the laying on of the hands of the presbytery ;" for we never find an instance, in apostolic times, of an ordination performed without the presence and co-operation of a plurality of ordainers. Yet still there was diversity even here. Sometimes we find ordinations performed by apostles ; sometimes, during their lifetime, by ecclesiastical men who were evidently not apostles. Similar changes and diversity of practice have taken place, from the earliest times, in reference to many other ordinances : and yet the visible church, from the family of Adam to the present day, has not ceased to be the same in substance. Nay, it is one of the principle&>of '^ecclesiastical polity," in which the friends of prelacy, and especially the highest toned among them, have always agreed with the "judicious Hooker," as he is commonly styled, that the Church has power to decree, alter, and modify rites and ceremonies at pleasure. I shall not now stay to inquire whether this opinion be correct or not. It is quite sufficient for my purpose that the most zealous advocates for high toned prelacy, fully believe and maintain it ; and insist that every part of the external organization of the church, may be added to, or dispensed with, at the discretion of the church herself, excepting the single feature of the transmission of ecclesiastical office and authority in the line of prelates. Now, I ask, what good reason can be given why this matter should form the only exception ? If various other things, confessedly found in the New Testament, may be altered or omitted, without destroying the being, or even the well-being of the church ; why should the point of prelacy be

PRELIMIMARY LETTER. xvii

alone unalterable ; especially when we find that the mode of investing with the sacred office, has been, in fact, again and again altered, and the integrity of the church still preserved ? Even supposing then, that we actually found prelacy pourtrayed in the Nevv Testament, as a historical verity in the apostolic age, which we are very sure is not the case ; still, according to the general principle of our Episcopal brethren, the church, if she thought proper, would have just as much right to alter this, as any other part of her external arrangements. Besides, let it be considered that ministers of the gospel who are not prelates, are empowered, in the Episcopal church, to preach, and administer the ordinance of baptism. Now, in this ordinance, according to the doctrine of high churchmen, the recipients of it are regenerated; that is, not only brought into a new relation to the church, but "born again, '^ by the power of the Holy Ghost. Does it require less power, then, to regenerate men, than to set an individual apart to the sacred office? Is that man who is qualified to proclaim the message of salvation, and to administer the sacraments of Christ's house, and thus to separate between the precious and the vile, destitute of power to participate in the work of inducting into office one who shall be equal to himself, and qualified to perform the same duties'? There is, surely, a wonderful inconsistency here! I am not ignorant that learned and eloquent Episcopal writers have attempted, and, as they supposed, with success, to demonstrate, that, while all the other parts of the external administration of the visible church are mutable, and may be altered at the pleasure of the church, the method of successive ordinations in the line of prelates, cannot be touched without destroj/ing the very, existence of the church. I am, however, so far from being satisfied with their reasoning, that I am more and more convinced that it leads to the grossest absurdity and error. That which God has commanded, is immutable, until he is pleased to change it; and nothing else is beyond the reach of modifixviii PRELIMINARY LETTER.

cation and change by the church, excepting what h thus enjoined. To take any other ground, may be very consistent for Papists ; but for Protestants, is a high-handed departure from their essential principles. Now, the highest toned prelates acknowledge, unanimously, that there is no express command in the New Testament, establishing or enjoining diocesan episcopacy. The utmost that they contend for is, that there are facts stated by the inspired writers which indicate that this form of church government then existed. Even this allegation is wholly unfounded. No such statement is made, as has been often demonstrated. But if it ivere, historic fact is not divine command. To maintain, then, that, even if prelacy could be proved to have been at that time in actual use, it must for ever remain in use, and can never be dispensed with, without destroying the very being of the church, is surel}^ a doctrine which comes with a very ill grace from those who assert that every thing else relating to the order of the visible church, however plainly represented in scripture as existing in the apostolic age, may be changed without incurring any such penalty.

III. Another consideration is worthy of notice here. The original reformers of the Church of England, were so far from maintaining the divine right of prelacy, that their avowed opinions, and their whole conduct evinced a diflferent belief. In the sixth letter of the first series, in the following volume, some evidence in- support of this position will be found ; and a greater amount of testimony might be arrayed, to almost any extent. The truth is, the first reformers of that church were substantially Presbyterians in principle, and earnestly wished to conduct the reformation of their church after the model of the reformed churches on the continent of Europe. And when they accepted a system of discipline and order much less remote from the popish system, and much less conformed to the Helvetic and other continental churches than they wished,