and eloquent men of his age, worthy to have been " a professor of eloquence," after having studied in Caesarea, in Alexandria, and in Athens, was bishop, in the last half of the fourth century, first of Zazime, "a dismal" place; and afterwards of Nazianzum, zóλɛws Evrɛhovs, vilis oppidi, an inferior place. 131 Even in the middle of the fifth century, diocesan Episcopacy was but partially established. In some countries, "there were bishops over many cities," but in others, they were still "consecrated in villages," xopais.132 But we need not enlarge. If any one wishes for further information on this point, he has only to refer to Clarkson on Primitive Episcopacy, an antiquated work, evincing a remarkable familiarity with the records of antiquity, in which facts, almost innumerable, have been brought together, all tending to show that the bishop of the primitive church had a charge no greater than a curate, or presbyter, or parish minister. Grant then to prelacy all her claims. Run back her 'unbroken succession' to these days of primitive simplicity, and it leads you up, not to an Episcopal palace, but to the cottage, the cell, it may be, of an obscure curate. The modern bishop has only deceived himself with a name. While he reads of ancient bishops, he idly dreams of Episcopal powers and prerogatives that were unknown in the church until the days of Constantine the Great. It is a sophism often used with effect, deceiving the simple and the wise, to surround an ancient and venerable name with modern associations. So delusive are our comparisons of that which is unknown with what is well known; so deceptive our judgment of the past by the present. Tityrus, the poet's simple swain, foolishly thought Rome herself just such another as his own Mantua, where the shepherds were wont to drive their tender lambs. So he had seen whelps, 131 Socrates, Eccl. Hist. Lib. 4. c. 26. p. 242. like dogs; so kids, like goats. 4 Thus he was wont to com pare great things with small. But what was his surprise to see the imperial city rearing her head as high above others as the cypress rises above the limber shrubs. 133 He had deceived himself by his false comparisons. A similar deception, though in its effects precisely the reverse of this, we practice upon ourselves when we bring a modern, into comparison with a primitive bishop. But on examination the delusion vanishes. The far-spreading domains of the diocesan, shrink into a little hamlet; the proud Episcopal palace becomes a poor parsonage; and the lofty prelate, a humble presbyter, the pastor of a little flock. The bearings of this view of the subject upon prelacy are obvious. 1. It denies the exclusive virtue of Episcopal ordination. The relations of the foregoing view to the exclusive validity of Episcopal ordination, are clearly set forth in the following passage from Clarkson, himself an Episcopalian : "Hereby, also, some mistakes about Episcopal ordinations, of ill consequence, may be rectified. A bishop, in the best ages of Christianity, was no other than the pastor of a single church. A pastor of a single congregation is now as truly a bishop. They were duly ordained in those ages, who were set apart for the work of the ministry by the pastor of a single church, with the concurrence of some assistants. Why they should not be esteemed to be duly ordained, who are accordingly set apart by a pastor of a single church now, I can discern no reason, after I have looked 133 Urbem quam dicunt Romam, Meliboee, putavi Stultus, ego huic nostrae similem, quò saepe solemus Sic canibus catulos similes, sic matribus haedos Nôram; sic parvis componere magna solebam. Verùm haec tantùm alias inter caput extulit urbes, Quantùm lenta solent inter viburna cupressi.—Virgil, Buc. 1. every way for it. Let something be assigned which will make an essential difference herein; otherwise they that judge such ordinations here, and in other reformed churches, to be nullities, will hereby declare all the ordinations in the ancient church for three or four hundred years, to be null and void, and must own the dismal consequences that ensue thereof. They that will have no ordinations but such as are performed by one who has many churches under him, maintain a novelty never known nor dreamt of in the ancient churches, while their state was tolerable. They may as well say the ancient church had never a bishop (if their interest did not hinder, all the reason they make use of in this case would lead them to it), as deny that a reformed pastor has no power to ordain, because he is not a bishop. He has Episcopal ordination, even such as the canons require, being set apart by two or three pastors at least, who are as truly diocesans as the ancient bishops, for some whole ages."134 2. It exposes also the futility of the doctrine of apostolical succession. "The theory is, that each bishop, from the apostolic times, has received in his consecration a mysterious' gift,' and also transmits to every priest in his ordination a mysterious' gift,' indicated in the respective offices by the awful words, Receive the Holy Ghost;' that on this the right of priests to assume their functions, and the preternatural grace of the sacraments administered by them, depends; that bishops, once consecrated, instantly become a sort of Leyden jar of spiritual electricity, and are invested with the remarkable property of transmitting the 'gift' to others; that this has been the case from the primitive age till now; that this high gift has been incorruptibly transmitted through the hands of impure, profligate, heretical ecclesiastics, as ignorant and flagitious as any of their lay cotemporaries; that, in fact, 134 Primitive Episcopacy, pp. 182, 183. London, 1688. these 'gifts' are perfectly irrespective of the moral character and qualifications both of bishop and priest, and reside in equal integrity in a Bonner or a Cranmer,—a parson Adams or a parson Trulliber."135 Now, we ask, were these countless multitudes of bishops all episcopally ordained, scattered through the earth, as they were, from Britain to the remotest Indies; in cities, towns, villages, forts, military stations, monasteries, and we know not where? Can these mysterious 'gifts' and graces be so diffused abroad over the earth, and bandied about from hand to hand, without the hazard that, amidst a thousand contingencies, they may have fallen away or lost their ethereal power? Has no graceless hypocrite crept in unawares among the Lord's anointed, and, with unholy hand, essayed these awful mysteries, vainly assuming to transmit by uncanonized rites, this heavenly grace? Has no link been broken in this mysterious chain, stretching onward from the distant age of the apostles down to the present? Has no irregularity disturbed the succession, no taint of heresy marred the purity of its descent? Believe it who can.136 135 Edinburgh Rev. April, 1843, pp. 269, 270. 136"We can imagine the perplexity of a presbyter thus cast in doubt as to whether or not he has ever had the invaluable 'gift' of apostolical succession conferred upon him. As that 'gift' is neither tangible nor visible, the subject neither of experience nor consciousness;-as it cannot be known by any effects' produced by it (for that mysterious efficacy which attends the administration of rites at its possessor's hands, is, like the gift which qualifies him to administer them, also invisible and intangible),—he may imagine, unhappy man! that he has been 'regenerating' infants by baptism, when he has been simply sprinkling them with water. What is the matter?' the spectator of his distractions might ask. 'What have you lost?' 'Lost!' would be the reply; '1 fear 1 have lost my apostolical succession, or rather my misery is, that I do not know and cannot tell whether I ever had it to lose!' It is of no use here to suggest the usual questions, When did you see it last? When were you last conscious of possessing it?' What a peculiar property is that, of which, though so invaluable,-nay, on which the whole efficacy of 3. It is fatal to the claims of high Episcopacy to be regarded as the one catholic and apostolic church.” This holy catholic church, one and invisible, deriving divine rights by regular succession from the apostles,-where or what is it? Who, this house of Aaron, that have kept all the while the sacred fire of the altar, borne up and defended the tabernacle of the Lord, and guarded thus from all profane intrusion the ark of the covenant? This royal priesthood, these that were at first created, and have always continued, wholly a right seed,-who, or what are they? What form of error, we seriously ask, what species of delusion, what kind of schism, what creature of sin, has not, at some time, found a place within this same immaculate church, as a component part of this strange Episcopal unity,—a unity only of chaos and infinite confusion? The whole system of high, exclusive Episcopacy is anything but a semblance of that apostolic church of which it so proudly boasts. In its doctrines, in its government, and in all the apparatus of its canons and its traditions, what has it now in common with the church, as she was in the days of the apostles? This "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church" of prelacy,-like the famous ship of ancient Grecian story, which by continued decay and repairs, came to be so changed at last that nothing of the Christian ministry depends,—a man has no positive evidence to show whether he ever had it or not! which, if ever conferred, was conferred without his knowledge; and which if it could be taken away, would still leave him ignorant, not only when, where and how the theft was committed, but whether it had ever been committed or not! The sympathizing friend might, probably, remind him, that as he was not sure he had ever had it, so, perhaps, he still had it without knowing it. Perhaps!' he would reply; but it is certainty I want.' 'Well,' it might be said, 'Mr. Gladstone assures you, that, on the most moderate computation, your chances are as 8000 to 1 that you have it!' 'Pish!' the distracted man would exclaim, 'what does Mr. Gladstone know about the matter?' And, truly, to that query we know not well what answer the friend could make.”—Edinburgh Rev., p. 271. 6 |