Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

terrupted succession from any or der of men whatever. That the friends of episcopacy should, for a moment,imagine themselves serving the interests of their sect by any exclusive pretensions to a clerical character, is indeed astonishing; for it is well understood, that the highest dignitary of the American church proposed, before the revolution, to dispense with the regular succession of bishops, in order to preserve the existence of the church; and the principal prelate in New-England was consecrated only by the extra-regular and non-juring bishops of Scotland. Episcopacy,if it should ever become the prevailing form of church government in the United States, can only be esteemed the most eligible of the various constitutions of the christian ministry. Never can it be considered as essential to the existence or authority of a church; nor as a form, without which ecclesiastical ordinances and acts are sacrilegious and nugatory.

The last time this subject employed the pens and passions of the American clergy, was, we be lieve, in the controversy between the Doctors Chauncy and Chandler. The View of Episcopacy,' by the former, is one of our few indigenous theological works, which erudition enriches, and which posterity will not easily suffer to be forgotten. Since that time the subject has been wisely suffered to sleep in the quietness of mutual charity or mutual indifference. In the year 1805,however, there were some appearances of an inclination to revive the controversy in NewYork. Two works were published by Mr. Hobart, an episcopal clergyman in that city, one entitled A Companion for the festivals and fasts,' the other A Com

panion for the Altar,' which,though designed, it is said, exclusively for episcopalians, contained some pretensions, which were construed by the presbyterian clergy into a wanton provocation and insult to other denominations. The author of some occasional papers in the Albany Centinel took up, in conse quence, the subject of church gor. ernment, passing the severest strictures on Mr. Hobart's episcopal Companions.' This instantly roused an army of clerical antago nists. Dr. Linn, the author of these papers, which he styled Miscellanies,' had to contend successively with the prowess of Mr. Hobart, Thomas Yeardley How, Esq. Rev. Frederick Beasley, and if we do not mistake, of bishop White himself; and after much expense of time, charity, learning, and industry in the writers, and of patience in their readers, the dis pute seems to have terminated in ill-will on one side, and fatigue on the other. Mr. Hobart, that he might erect a trophy to the honour of the cause in which he had engaged, collected all the essays on the subject of episcopacy, which originally appeared in the Albany Centinel, and published them last year in an octavo volume, with adtional notes and remarks. He considered this publication peculiarly proper, because there had been some time announced a periodical work, called the Christian's Magazine, to be conducted, as he says, by the united talents of the respectable body of anti-episcopal clergy in the city of New-York.' To what new controversies this dreadful note of preparation was preliminary we have not inquired.

The work, which we are now called to examine, appears to have originated in the laudable desire of furnishing the Presbyterians of

New-York with a species of vade mecum against the pretensions of the Episcopalians. It is written with sufficient moderation, remarkable purity, and much unostentatious learning. We shall content ourselves with enumerating the subjects of the nine letters, which Dr. Miller has here addressed to the united Presbyterian churches of the city of New-York.' The first, though introductory, gives no account of the previous skirmishes, which we have related, but simply states the claims of three different classes of Episcopalians, and the presumptions against them. The second letter gives an abstract of the evidence from scripture of the original parity of the clergy. The four following positions are maintained, viz.

examined. It is remarkable, that the most able advocates for episcopacy have at different times given up every argument from scripture. The authority of Dodwell in this controversy is nearly oracular; and he honestly confesses, that Bishops, as a superiour order to Presbyters, are not to be found in the New Testament.

The fourth letter is employed in examining the testimony of the Fathers of the two first centuries. On this subject, the work of Chauncy, which we mentioned above, might, if it had been the plan of the author to acknowledge all his authorities, have been quoted instar omnium. omnium. It is a complete collection from the genuine writings of these fathers, of all the passages, which can be supposed to relate to the subject of ecclesiastical establishment. It is only to be regret

That Christ gave but one commission for the office of the Gospel ministry, and that this office, of course, isted, that the want of Greek types did not allow Dr. Chauncy to print the originals at the bottom of the page.

one.

That the words Bishop, and Elder, or Presbyter, are uniformly used in the New Testament as convertible titles for the same office.

"That the same character and powers which are ascribed, in the sacred writings, to Bishops, are also ascribed to Presbyters; thus plainly establishing the identity of order, as well as of name. And finally,

"That the Christian Church was organized by the apostles after the model of the Jewish Sinagogue, which was unquestionably Presbyterian in its form*.

P. 28.

[blocks in formation]

The strength of the episcopal cause in this early age rests upon the smaller epistles of Ignatius. Till it can be clearly shewn what portions of these are authentick,the anti-episcopalians may fairly refuse their authority. In truth, they do not deserve the immense learning which has been wasted to prove them genuine, and to prove them interpolated.

In the fifth letter is examined the testimony of some of the later Fathers.

In citing the Fathers, it was necessary to draw a distinct line between those who are to be admitted as credible witnesses, and those whose testimony is to be suspected. I have accordingly drawn this line at the close of the second century. About this time, as will be afterwards shown, among many other corruptions, that of clerical imparity appeared in the church; and

even the Papacy, as we have before seen, had begun to urge its anti-christian claims. From the commencement of the third century, therefore, every witness on the subject of Episcopacy is to be received with caution.' P.168.

There are however, two passages in Jerome, one in his commentary, on Titus, and the other in his epistle to Evagrius, which are so unequivocal, that all the ingenuity of the mitre has never yet been able to evade or to invalidate them. Gibbon felt their importance; and he has referred to them in note 109 of his famous fifteenth chapter. They indeed deserve the serious attention of every man, who engages in the episcopal controversy. The fact also mentioned by Eutychius, whose testimony Gibbon admits, is hardly less important, and deserved something more than bare quotation in a note. In the latter part of this chapter Dr. Miller accumulates evidence to prove, that an order of ruling elders in the primitive church was not discontinued till after the third century. The following passage shows that the writer is not disposed to relinquish the claims of his own church to the honour of being the only existing model of primitive

order.

No church can long proceed in a reg. ular and orderly manner, without appointing some of its more grave and distinguished lay-members to assist the minister in performing ecclesiastical duties. Episcopalians have their Vestry, and Independents their Committee; both of whom, among other things, discharge many of the duties which properly belong to ruling Elders. And vet both Independents and Episcopalians concur in rejecting this class of officers; and thus virtually fix on themselves the charge of having offices for which no scriptural warrant can be produced. How numerous are the difficulties and absurdities to which men reduce themselves, when they depart from primitive order! And how

strongly does the aspect of every other religious communion testify, that Presbyterian church government is the only convenient and adequate form; inasmuch as none of them can proceed a step without adopting, in practice, her radical principles !' P.208. Note.

The next chapter contains the testimony of the Reformers and other witnesses for the truth, in favour of the doctrine of ministerial parity. It is here maintained,

that the church of England stands alone in the whole Protestant world, in making diocesan Bishops an order of clergy, superiour to Presbyters; and that even those venerable men, who finally settled her government and wor ship, did not consider this superi. ority as resting on the ground of Divine appointment, but of ecclesiastical usage and human expediency.' This chapter and the next on the concessions of eminent Episcopalians' are extremely curious and interesting. The Cranmers, and Wakes, and Ushers, and Stillingfleets of the church of England must look down with ineffable indignation on the folly of their pretended successors, who would alarm the unwary, the timid, or the ignorant in a country like this, with the jus divinum of Diocesan Episcopacy.

The eighth chapter professes to trace the rise and progress of prelacy; and the ninth is rather invidiously employed in displaying the

practical influence' of the episcopal form of government; a species of argument, which, if produced at all, might perhaps have been urged with less zeal and less exultation.

Upon the whole, we consider Dr. Miller in this work, as having deserved well of the church to which he belongs, well of every ecclesiastical inquirer, and well of

the literary world in general, which is already permanently indebted to him for his admirable "Retrospect of the Eighteenth Century." We could wish, indeed, that this episcopal controversy, so totally uninteresting except to a few encroaching spirits, had never again been revived; because, from the animosity, which has invariably appeared in it, we are satisfied that the spirit of the gospel suffers more in the dispute, than any order of ministers can gain. But we also remember, that, in the wisdom of Providence, a slight occasion is permitted to excite violent pas sions, because, by this means, great talents are often set in motion, which would otherwise have remained dormant ; a spirit of inquiry is awakened, which extends itself to other topicks; and laborious and extensive researches become necessary to the honour and even to the existence of certain classes and professions. Hence we are suspicious, that our clergy will never attain to the learning, which distinguished the early nonconformists, till persecution, or insult, or opposition, or mutual controversy compels them to mutual defence. A peaceful church will invariably rest satisfied with an ignorant ministry.

We have avoided making copious extracts from the present work, because they would probably be less interesting in NewEngland, than in any other part of our country. Indeed, in a dispute between Presbyterianism and Episcopacy we are sensible of an inconvenient excess of impartiality, amounting almost to indifferThe substance of the arguments in favour of Episcopacy may be found, by those who wish

ence.

to study the subject, in Potter on church government, and Slater's original draught of the primitive church, in answer to the celebrated and standard anti-episcopal "Inquiry" of Sir Peter King. Dr. Campbell, in his Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, is the latest and perhaps the most powerful of the modern opponents of high church; and to him Bishop Skinner of Aberdeen has replied. No tract, however, with which we are acquainted, throws so much light on the subject of the apostolick arrangement of the early churches, as Dr. Benson's Dissertations, annexed to his paraphrase of the epistles to Timothy.

As to the dispute between Presbyterians and Congregationalists, we trust there will be no need of its revival. If however the spirit of the times should generate a controversy, the ministers of congregational churches would do well to know the grounds and reasons of our present constitution of church government. These may be found largely detailed in Cotton's Power of the Keys, Hooker's Survey, and Norton's Responsio ad Apollonium. The contest between Independency and Scotch Presbyterianism distracted for ten days the Westminster assembly of divines, and the arguments on both sides were afterwards published, by consent of the parties, in a book entitled The Grand Debate between Presbytery and Independency. This it is now difficult to procure; but the subject is not badly treated in Davenport's reply to Paget, and in many other works of the early settlers of New-England.

ART. 63.

EПEA ПTEPOENTA; or the Diversions of Purley: By John Horne Tooke, A. M. late of St. John's College, Cambridge. First American edition, from the second London edition. 2 vols. 8vo. Philadelphia, W. Duane. 1806.

WE think it honourable to our country, that it contains a sufficient number of scientifick readers, to justify the republication of a philosophical treatise on the Englisa language. The first part of the Diversions of Purley, a few copies of which reached the United States soon after its publication, was admired for its ingenuity, and the probability of the author's the ory concerning the particles of our language, and excited no small desire in its readers to see the result of his continued researches. Another edition of the first, together with the second part of this work, has since been published, from which the American edition is printed. The necessity of a review of this production in our numbers is superseded by the learned strictures of some of the author's own countrymen. This article, therefore, is designed, rather to call into notice a publication of merit, than to vindicate or combat any of the theories, which it contains.

Mr. T. has been censured for the singular intrusion of his political violence into a work where it had no concern, and for the unnecessary licentiousness of his quotations from English writers of former times, illustrative of his etymologies. For his political invective we are disposed neither to of fer, nor to admit an apology: concerning the indelicacy of the quoted passages, the censure is more

fastidious than just. The work is intended for scholars, not for vulgar readers: the former are in little danger from the levities of Gower, the grossness of Chaucer, or the crudities of Sir Thomas More; and the latter are secure, on account of their inability to understand them.

There is another charge against Mr. T. in the justice of which we fully acquiesce. It is founded on his indiscriminate abuse of Lis predecessors, whose learning is unquestionable, and who, though they were not faultless, have made great advances toward giving stability to our language, directing us to the sources whence it was drawn, and explaining its principles.-Dunces in poetry have the right of prescription to bestow their ungentle epithets upon those, with whom they would be proud to claim kindred; and pretenders in literature have lavished their a buse upon men of genius, whose excellence they could not reach: but it should be the prerogative of those only, whose knowledge is above competition, and whose wisdom precludes a rival, to ridicule the labours of acknowledged scholars, and to ascribe their errors to invincible stupidity. As long as our language shall exist, we shall cherish feelings of gratitude towards Harris, Lowth, and Johnson and if they have not done every thing, which the combined wisdom of English jacobinical sçavans, with Horne Tooke for their president, could now effect, we are not rashly to admit, that they deserve reproach rather than praise.

To those, who have not seen the Diversions of Purley, nor any account of the work, the following view of its contents may not be unacceptable. The first volume contains remarks on the division

« PředchozíPokračovat »