Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

would not argue excess of charity, but weak subserviency, were we to conceal our sentiments of the dangerous tendency of latitudinarian doctrines emanating from a dignitary of the Church on such an occasion. They derive an importance from his rank, and the sanctity of the place where they were delivered. We read in page 11 of the sermon, "When our Lord declared of the man who cast out devils in Christ's name, yet followed not with the Apostles, that he who was not against him was on his part; he told us clearly that there might be outward divisions of form which were compatible with the truest unity of Spirit." But Christ did not bid his disciples receive this man as a brother, or acknowledge him as a fellow-Apostle. "Forbid him not," is the utmost limit of favour which Christ's authorised ministers can be called upon to show to the unauthorised preacher of the gospel. Those who "cause division," should be "avoided," in order, firstly, to make that premier pas, which is the origin of division, an unlikely occurrence; and, secondly, to prevent the schism itself from spreading further. And, for the same reason, the people's moral right to expound the Scripture for themselves, and to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience, is qualified by that which is a matter of prior obligation that they do not thereby rashly incur the consequences of divisions (dixooraoia) by separating (Gal. v. 19, 21,) from that spiritual incorporation of believers, of which Jesus Christ is the corner-stone. He has appointed a perpetual ministerial succession in his church, with the view (inter alia) of instructing and guiding the laity into religious truth; and we do maintain, in the face of the Bishop of Norwich, that wherever any man, and body of men, have quitted the English national Episcopal branch of the church of Christ, (thereby causing division and subdivision, and setting afloat a sectarian spirit,) the abstract plea of its being done conscientiously furnishes no justification, and will not absolve them of the guilt of schism." He that gathereth not with us, scattereth." And we further hold, that if the dictates of their conscience had been all the apology that Luther or Melancthon had to offer for violating the scripturally-denounced unity of the church of Rome, they would just as much have fallen under the anathema of St. Paul as Joanna Southcote herself; or there is no meaning in words-no truth in the Epistles of the Apostles. No, my Lord, it is not because we feel it conscientiously; it is not simply because we read it in the English Testament; but that we have brought our mental faculties, sharpened and instructed, to the aid of conscience, and the elucidation of Scripture,-because our private judgment is approved by the universal consent of the Church, that we venture to inform you, that when St. Paul "verily thought with himself that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth," his conscience was a mere ignis fatuus; and

it is nothing else than this species of uninstructed conscience, which, at the bidding of a spurious private judgment, is the root of all the infidelity and dissent in England at the present day. Nothing, in our opinion, can justify a departure from the divine law of church communion. Separatists should be "marked" and "avoided," not petted, cheered, and encouraged, as if their breaking the discipline of the Church were not obnoxious to the charge of "schism," because, forsooth, they continue to hold the faith. At all events, they overturn the institution of a perpetual ministry of the word, (Heb. xiii. 17; 1 Thess. v. 12; 1 Cor. xvi. 16; Matt. xxviii. 20,) by opposing the dogmata of that clerisy, which they find regularly appointed with the object of evangelizing the nation. "It is not enough to boast of the Spirit," (says Luther indignantly,) "neither will God have us believe those who make pretensions, and say, Believe my Spirit; otherwise we should all stand on an equal footing, and no one would listen to another." They who make all exercise of discipline impossible, and whose avowed object is to overturn the church of Christ*--they who rest upon their own crude inter

"It is with me, I confess, a matter of deep, serious, and religious conviction, that the Established Church is a great national evil; that it is an obstacle to the progress of truth and godliness in the land; that it destroys more souls than it saves; and that therefore its end is most devoutly to be wished for by every lover of God and man. (Binney's Address on Laying the First Stone of the New King's Weigh House, 4th Edit. p. 53.) Again: "The dissolution of the existing antichristian alliance between Church and State, is the object at which dissenters will aim, and aim at on serious, sacred, religious grounds, identifying it with the honour of God, the peace of his church, and the universal advantage of mankind. This, however much it may include, is that one thing which, IN THE COMING CONFLICT, will be sought by them."— (Ib. p. 63.)

The Christian Advocate, a dissenting Journal, writes as follows:"We may rest assured, that until this, or something like this, has been effected, we shall stand no chance with the established parson-ocracy, We must fight and conquer them in detail, before we shall overthrow them in the mass. A guerilla warfare must precede the storming of

the citadel."

From a book, entitled The Tombs of the Prophets, by Mr. R. M. Beverley (Preface): "A shilling pamphlet against five millions sterling, (annually received by the clergy for not preaching the gospel,) are great odds."

"What is said of us, the believers?' Blessed are the poor in spirit; blessed are they that mourn; blessed are the meek; blessed are ye when men shall speak all manner of evil against you falsely,' &c. If, then, the Church consists of persons who are not meek, who are not poor in spirit, who do not mourn, whom no one persecutes, &c., it is clear that such a church cannot be the body of Christ; but as it in

[blocks in formation]

pretation, though "we" (the Apostles) "have no such custom, neither the church of God,"-they who rely on their spurious judgment at this day, in points irreconcileable with the practice

every respect, contradicts that which is predicated of the true Church, it follows, as an inevitable consequence, that it must be a body of Antichrist. And such a church is the Church of England, which rests entirely upon Acts of Parliament and brute force; which is supported by violence, and exists by violence; for every farthing of money that is paid into the Babylonian treasury, in the way of tithe, is by violence, and is only paid because men know very well that if it is not paid, there will soon be marshalled against them a posse of constables, with warrants and other tender mercies of the great whore, &c. The wife of Antichrist is both a hypocrite and a thief; talks of mercy and charity, but tithes, mint, anise, and cummin,-tithing she does to the uttermost farthing." "The church of England must soon fall, because the people's voice is against it."

[ocr errors]

"Should the church of England be termed, the crimson whore of Canterbury,'' the master work of the devil's contrivance,'' the Juggernaut of England,'' the corrupter of the whole frame of society,' 'a conspicuous apostasy,' 'the whore of Babylon,' 'Antichrist,' 'the Babylonian woman,' the mother of harlots,' and her clergy be designated her heathen and popish caste of priests,'' masquerading wolves,' ' belly gods,' black-footed locusts,' and 'murderers,' with scores of such charitable epithets, which I could really produce, I suppose it will be said that they have merely been blurted forth' at a dissenting meeting in some obscure town."-At an annual meeting of the Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society, held in London, the Chairman cried out against the Church, amidst a burst of applause, " Down! down! down with the old hag!!!"

At a meeting of dissenters, held at Cottenham, one of them delivered himself as follows:-" The church of England is the synagogue of Satan, and so far antiscriptural and antichristian, that it will one day or other be destroyed by the breath of God. The grossest corruption and bloodshed may be traced to the Establishment, which had been raised by the pride of man, and not by Scripture. I also object," continues he, "to the church of England, because of the means used to support it for in every ten years, the entire produce of the land for a year is eaten up by the black-footed locusts; and the parties who principally consume this revenue are the bloated archbishops and bishops, the lazy deans and subdeans, and the useless canons and prebendaries. Again, it must be remembered, that every doctrine and prayer of the Church is prescribed by the State, and if the whole clergy throughout the kingdom were to be directed, on a certain Sunday, to fall down and worship an ass, they would be compelled to do it." This is moderate; but hear another of these pious and worthy dissenting orators: "I wish to God that I had this evening to preach the funeral sermon of that hoary har lot Mother Church, which is a blast and nuisance upon the earth, both black, bloody, and useless; and I will say, Blessed be those hands that shall first hurl her to dark perdition among the fiends there, to be honouring, and to be honoured by the devil."

of the churches of Greece, Rome, Asia, and Africa, (whose veritable union is matter of scripture history,) during the lives of the Apostles, and ere the voice of revelation ceased-they who break the unity of divine worship, by separating, without limitation as to numbers of discordant sects, and thereby "divide Christ," these ARE liable to the charge of all the heterodoxy which may spring from their factious and ill-advised secessionthey are answerable for the consequences of their precedent and example; and what those consequences are, the Bishop of Norwich may learn by recalling to mind Matt. xii. 25; 1 Cor. i. 10, 12, 13; 1 Cor. iii. 1, 3, 4; and Gal. v. 19, 21. With the specified object of furnishing an indubitable proof to the world of his Divine mission, Christ prayed to his heavenly Father for the unity of his disciples. Now, whoever breaks the union in Catholic society, so far nullifies that proof, and gives grounds of scoff and triumph to the infidel. In the words of St. Clement, "It causes to doubt." We are perfectly ready to admit, that if the conscience of any dissenter be better informed than that of churchmen, his separation is not causeless; and whether it be so or not is a question to be remitted to an Omniscient tribunal. But, since we have ever abhorred the interference of opinion, fancy, inclination, and caprice, in a matter, where only sovereign evidence, paramount over all the vain delusion of fanaticism or superstition, should dictate; and since that instructs us, that uniformity of worship is the law of Christ, we hold that nothing can justify or excuse a separation, unless the terms of communion be sinful-unless, in fact, there is no living in communion with the national Church, without joining in practices manifestly corrupt, and offending palpably against the light and conviction of a "good conscience.'

If the Bishop of Norwich can imagine that such is predicable of the Church, of which he is the appointed guardian and teacher; if he can reconcile such a supposition with the admonition " duly to execute the office whereunto he is called to the honour and praise of God's holy name;" if he, notwithstanding his unwillingness to be made a bishop, has yet consented to govern in a church he deems corrupt-then is he justified in saying, "If the heart of a man be full of love and peace, whatsoever be his outward act of division, he is not guilty of schism." But, on the other hand, if, as we still hope, in the teeth of many extraordinary assertions, both in his sermon and tract, the Bishop of Norwich does consider the Established Anglican Church as essentially a branch of the Catholic Church, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, we cannot withhold the expression of our dismay at such a novel doctrine having been heedlessly promulgated from the pulpit by a Prelate of the church of England, on the occasion of his installation. If, indeed, the Bishop of Norwich conceives the church of England (according

66

to his apologetic citation from Bishop Taylor in limitation of schism) makes "unnecessary and inconvenient impositions;" if he opines that a man cannot entertain communion" with her "without sin," which is the hypothesis of his authority; and that the Church "makes it necessary for a Christian to separate,"-then unquestionably the language of our heresiarch Prelate is warranted but, in that case, we cannot understand how he can reconcile it to his conscience (having found out "a more excellent way,") to preside over a church which he must deem, according to the terms of our supposition, schismatic and corrupt?

For ourselves, holding the conviction that an episcopal form of government, an apostolic priesthood, and a scriptural rule of faith, are indispensable characteristics of every branch of the Holy Catholic Church, we cannot, as conscientious churchmen, believe that the score of sections into which Protestant dissent is split, have one and all left our communion only after the greatest caution-with trembling and hesitation, and in consequence of the most mature investigation. And as this is past all credibility, we necessarily are of opinion that, by their separation, they have needlessly occasioned feuds and divisions in an apostolic branch of the church of Christ-in short, are guilty of the sin of schism.

We esteem our prelates (for instance) as the successors of the Apostles. "Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt." We conceive they act in the plenitude of the apostolic character, 'Ev τ& πλnρώματι ἐν ̓Αποστολικῷ χαρακτῆρι. And, indeed, from the days of the Apostles to those of Calvin, there was not any one church in the whole christian world which was not Episcopal; but our modern dissenters dissolve the Church as a society, by pretending that there is no need of apostolic or Episcopal succession; that the doctrine taught is all that ought to be considered, and that the government should go for nothing; as if the dispute between Aaron and Korah was not solely about church government; as if the Fathers of the Church made any distinction between sin in doctrine and in discipline; knowing, as a matter of course, that, in the long run, they amounted to the same thing. We really think, that the great favour with which dissenters are treated in these conciliating days is most unkind and discouraging to the clergy, useless to the laity, injurious to the Establishment, and no way consistent with the word and government of God. Only let us contrast the conduct of our Protestant Established Church with the darkness and intolerance of the Roman Catholic before the Reformation on the one hand, and with the fierce bigotry and savage cruelty of the dissenters during the Usurpation on the other; and consider how little toleration could be expected in

* Jerome, Epis. ad Evagr.

+ St. Ignatius.

« ForrigeFortsett »