Images de page
PDF
ePub

Mr. How also lets us

p. 16. 68, and elsewhere. know that Dr. Bowden holds similar opinions; p. 68. and truly the Doctor himself repeatedly uses language which admits of no other construction. It is agreeable to find opponents thus candid and explicit. We now know the nature of the claim which these gentlemen advance, and of course, how to meet them. I am happy also to perceive, that in my former publication, I have neither misrepresented nor exaggerated their sentiments.They are precisely such as I ascribed to the third, or highest-toned class of Episcopalians. It is to the claims of this class only, and not to the moderate and liberal part of that denomination, that the reasonings in the following sheets are intended to apply.

But while these gentlemen are very undisguised and decided in advancing their claims, they write in a manner strangely vague and obscure on another point. Even admitting, (what we cannot admit, for we know the contrary,) that the question whether Episcopacy was in fact, the primitive constitution of the church, were decided in favour of our Episcopal brethren; still another question remains, viz. Is a compliance with that constitution so unalterably and indispensably binding on the church, that there can be no church, no ministry, no ordinances without it? These questions are totally distinct, and ought never to be confounded. Yet Dr. Bowden and Mr. How almost uniformly confound them ; and seem to think that if the former ques

tion be answered in the affirmative, the latter must of course be answered in a similar manner.-In a few instances, indeed, they admit the distinction to which I allude, and assert, that their only object is to establish the Apostolical institution of Episcopacy, without undertaking to pronounce on the consequences of rejecting it. But it is evident that, for

the most part, they entirely lose sight of this distinction, and write as if the establishment of the fact, that Prelacy existed in the primitive church, must effectually destroy the character of all churches not found in possession of that form of government. Whether these positions so totally distinct are so generally confounded by my opponents for want of clear and distinguishing views, or with design, I presume not to say.-But every discerning reader will be on his guard against imposition from either source.

These gentlemen, indeed, themselves assert, with the whole body of Episcopal writers, that the apostles never intended to lay down a model of church government, which should be, in all its parts, perpetually binding: and, of course, that the church is not bound to be, in all respects, conformed to the apostolic model. I am not now inquiring whether this doctrine be correct or not. But if it be, how can the want of prelacy destroy the character and even the existence of the church? In what part of Scripture is it said, that every other part of the Apostolic government of the church is mutable, and may be modified by

human wisdom; but that dispensing with the single point of Bishops, is fatal to the whole? My opponents, then, even on their own principles, are far from having accomplished the task which they prescribed to themselves. They have never shown, and are not able to show, that prelacy was instituted by the Apostles; but even if they could, many links would still be wanting in the chain of proof, that this form of government is so necessary, that there can be no church without it.

Mr. How, for reasons which he himself best understands, has thought proper to assert, that my Letters " are well known to be the result of several years of laborious attention to the subject which they discuss." Another writer in the Churchman's Magazine, has made a similar assertion; and boasts that the advocates of the Episcopal church will not require as much time to answer, as was employed in writing them. I cheerfully yield to these gentlemen the palm of celerity and copiousness in writing; and even if the statement respecting the time employed in preparing my publication were true, it is not easy to see how it bears on the argument. What would it avail a culprit to show that the collection of the testimony which seals his conviction was the work of a month instead of a day? But the statement is not true. My attention to the Episcopal controversy had been very small, perhaps culpably so, until within a few months previous to the publication of my Let

C

ters. When the printing was begun, not more thau one third of the volume was written; and the greater part of it was actually composed during the three months which were consumed in passing the sheets through the press. But though the work was chiefly written with that haste which eve ry one who has run a race with the press well understands; and amidst the feebleness of an habitual valetudinarian, as well as the distraction and fatigue of multiplied professional labours; it affords me some satisfaction to reflect, that, after the maturest deliberation, I see no cause to retract a single argument, or materially to alter a single statement. On the contrary, further reading and reflection have convinced me, that every argument, and every statement, notwithstanding all the contemptuous sneers, and confident assertions of my opponents, are capable of being irrefragably fortified.

Mr. How also endeavours to represent my work as an unprovoked attack on the Episcopal church, and to throw upon it all the odium of aggression. To those who are acquainted with the incontrovertible facts stated in the beginning of this letter, such a representation will appear something more than strange! If to state and defend the principles of my own church, after they had been frequently and violently attacked; if a calm and respectful plea against a sentence of excommunication from the church of Christ; if an attempt to show, that we, as Presbyterians, are not aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenant

of promise; if a work designed to prove that our ministry and ordinances have as fair a claim to divine warrant as those of our Episcopal brethren; and that they, in denying us the character of a church, and in consigning us over, with the heathen, to the uncovenanted mercies of God, act wholly without warrant-if these things constitute an unprovoked attack on the Episcopal churchthen, indeed, I have been guilty of such an attack. But I am not afraid that any one who is acquainted with facts, and who understands the import of terms, will either bring such a charge himself, or consider it with respect when brought by others.

Another charge which these gentlemen concur in urging, is no less unexpected and extraordinary. It is, that I have written with great bitterness, and that even my moderation is affected and insidious. This is a point concerning which no man can be an impartial judge in his own case. But, after receiving so many respectable suffrages in favour of the mildness and decorum of my style; after receiving the acknowledgments of so many moderate and candid Episcopalians in different parts of the United States, both clergymen and laymen, that I had avoided asperity and bitterness to a very unusual degree; it is impossible to avoid suspecting that these gentlemen, (who, so far as I know stand alone in making this charge,) have felt irritated by statements which they could not deny, and by arguments which they could not refute; and that they have mistaken both for bitterness and

« PrécédentContinuer »