Images de page
PDF
ePub

ly in the face of all authentic testimony, than several which I have been called to refute in the foregoing pages. It is plain, however, that the more deeply and extensively we pursue our inquiries, the stronger and brighter appears the evidence in favour of the Presbyterian doctrine. It is more and more manifest, that, in pleading the cause of this doctrine, we are pleading the cause of every Protestant Church on earth, excepting that of England, and those who claim descent from her as their Parent.

LETTER IX.

Rise and Progress of Prelacy.

CHRISTIAN BRETHREN,

DR. Bowden represents Presbyterians as believ

ing that Prelacy was suddenly and violently established; that "a wonderful revolution took place, "calculated to influence the passions of thousands, "producing violent convulsions, and virulent ani"mosities." And expresses great astonishment that such a revolution, introduced at once, should not have been more distinctly recorded by the early writers.

This is a total misrepresentation. Presbyterians believe and affirm, with Jerome, that Prelacy arose "by little and little." They attribute its introduction to causes quite sufficient to account for the fact, without producing the convulsions and noise which fill the imagination of Dr. Bowden. These causes were, the facility, the indolence, and the inconsideration of some; the ambition of others; the precedency of standing moderators; the veneration paid to senior ministers, and such as were of superior talents and influence; the respect attached to those who resided in large cities, and other considerations of a similar kind. With such

causes as these incessantly at work, who can fail to consider as the most probable of all events, that which Dr. B. represents as altogether impossible?

But Dr. Bowden thinks it utterly incredible that the clergy in the second or third centuries should have been guilty of usurping power, or of struggling for pre-eminence. If we may believe him they were too pious, disinterested and humble, to admit the suspicion of selfishness or ambition having any place among them. "Surely," says he, "men of such distinguished virtue and piety as the "Bishops of that period are universally acknow

66

ledged to have been, could not have entertained "a thought so inconsistent with a pure conscience, "with peace of mind, and with the hope of future "happiness. Could men who displayed all the "meekness and humility of Christians, have at"tempted a plan of domination so completely at "variance with these virtues? Could men who en"dured every thing for the sake of Christ, violate "his sacred institution? Could men, who, to save "themselves from the most excruciating torments, "would not offer incense at the idol altars, delibe"rately associate for the purpose of acquiring a

66

trifling authority over their brethren? What! "conscientious in every thing relating to Christian "purity, to Christian manners, and yet profligate

86

as to the constitution of the Christian church! "Gross inconsistency! Palpable contradiction!" Again" What was the motive that influenced a "few of the Presbyters to attempt an assumption

"of superiority over their brethren? Was it a de"sire of temporal power? That was entirely out "of the question, without the aid of civil authoriAnd every one knows that kind of authority 66 was exerted for the destruction of the church. "Was it the love of wealth? None resulted from "the acquisition, or could result from it. The

[ocr errors]

people were generally poor, and the Bishops, as "well as the Presbyters and Deacons, were main"tained out of the offerings at the altar; and scanty was the fare that proceeded from that source. Was it the love of ease and security? "That could not be; for Episcopal superiority 66 greatly increased the labours of the Bishops, and "exposed them to almost certain destruction. If, "then, neither dominion, nor wealth, nor ease, nor

security, could possibly be the motives for so "daring an attempt, as to deprive the Presbyters "of their most sacred rights, those ambitious spi"rits, as you deem them, must have acted without 66 any motive, which is evidently inconsistent with "the very nature and constitution of the human "mind."

It is really putting one's patience to a very severe test to find an opponent so frequently alluding to his own superior "scholarship" and reading, and at the same time permitting himself to write in this manner. What! no clerical ambition? No strife about pre-eminence? No ecclesiastical usurpation in those early ages? It would have been just as reasonable, and just as true, if he

had said that the gospel was preached in those days by none but angels.But let us attend to a few facts.

Passing by several cases in point which occurred during the lives, and under the immediate eye of the Apostles, when, as St. Paul himself assures us, the mystery of iniquity had already begun to work, let me ask, Was there no spirit of domination manifested in the fierce dispute between Victor, Bishop of Rome, and Polycrates, of Ephesus, which took place in the second century, as related by Eusebius? Was no love of pre-eminence displayed by Cerinthus and Basilides, whose burning desire was "to be "accounted great apostles?" Did Montanus, in the same century, exhibit no ambition in broaching his celebrated heresy? Was Samosatenus, in the third, wholly free from the same charge? Did Demetrius of Alexandria, discover nothing of an aspiring temper, when he sickened with envy at the fame and the success of Origen? Are there no accounts of Novatus having sought, ambitiously and fraudently, to obtain the Bishopric of Rome? Did not his contemporary, Felicissimus, make a vigorous attempt to supplant Cyprian, as Bishop of Carthage? Was not Cyprian brought in to be Bishop in that city, by the influence of the people, in opposition to the majority of the Presbyters, some of whom were anxious to obtain the place for themselves? And did there not hence arise frequent collisions between him and them, and at length an open rupture? I ask, are any of these

« PrécédentContinuer »