| 460 Saturday of October next at 10 o'clock A. M.
During the sittings of the conference, the greatest harmony prevailed. About 25 baptisms took place, the most of which were for the dead.
Almon Babbit, Chairman.
W. W. Phelps, Clerk.
From Hague's Historical Discourse.
Appendix.
Apostolical [Apostolic] Succession.
The doctrine that a series of ordinations transmitted in a visible succession from the apostles, is necessary to constitute a valid ministry of the church, if strictly followed out to its legitimate conclusion, would lead any one of us, either to become a seeker and wait for a new aspostleship, or else, to unit with the Church of Rome. While Roger Williams, acting on this principle, came to the one conclusion, we have known those who were led by it to the other. The sentiment we have here stated, was in effect most strongly asserted by the Archbishop of York, in the British Parliament, during the debates of the year 1558. The bill before the House, was for attaching the supremacy of the Church to the Queen of England. The Archbishop said, that if the Church of England withdraw from the Church of Rome, she would, by that act, directly forsake and fly from all general councils; and he proceeded to prove that the first four councils of Nice, Constantinople Ephesus, and Chalcedon, had acknowledged the supremacy of Rome. He, then presented to their view this alternative for consideration. Either the Church of Rome is a true or false one. If she be a true Church then we will be guilty of schism in leaving her, will be excommunicated by her, and the Church of England will be, of course, a false Church. If the Church of Rome be a false Church, then she can not be a pure source of apostolical [apostolic] succession; and the Church of England must be false, because she derived her ordination and sacraments from that of Rome.
The question we know was decided in favor of separation from Rome, but the speech of the Archbishop presents to the successionist, the horns o a dilemma, between which it would seem difficult to choose.
We have said that the principle of lineal descent from the apostles would lead one directly to the Church of Rome, because we suppose that if the line of succession can be traced to any one of the apostles, it can be traced to Peter. Yet, who can bring forth the register to show an unbroken chain of ordinations from him? In the days of Ezra, those who would be acknowledged as priests, were required to prove their right by the genalogical [genealogical] register. On the principle of apostolical [apostolic] succession, we make the same requisition now. And in answering such a demand for historical proof, we hear Bishop Stillingfleet saying "we find bishops discontinued for along time in the greatest Churches. Where was the Church of Rome, when, from the martyrdom of Flabia and the banishment of Lucius, the Church was governed by the clergy?"
The Learned Cardinal Bellarmine says "For above eighty years, the Church for want of a lawful Pope, had no other head, than what was in heaven."
That celebrated cardinal and historian Baronius who had well nigh filled the papal chair himself, says, "How deformed the Roman Church, when harlots, no less powerful than vile, ruled away at Rome., and at their pleasure changed sees, appointed bishops, and what is horrible to mention, did thrust into Peter's chair, their own gallants, false Popes! What kind of cardinals can we think were chosen by these monsters?" 'Come here,' says Stillingfleet, 'to Rome, and here the succession is as muddy as the Tiber itself." The Church of England, in the Homily for Whit-sunday, declares that "the popes and prelates of Rome, for the most part, are worthily accounted among the number of false prophets and false Christs, which deceived the world for a long while," and prays that the gospel may be spread abroad, to "the beating down of sin, death, the pope, the devil, and all the kingdoms of anti-Christs.'
Various historical chasms might be pointed out, but we have only room to quote these admissions of successionists themselves, which are weighty on account of the source from which they come.
Godwin in his history of the bishops, has shewn [shown] that among the English bishops, many kirks are wanting which can not be supplied. He has shown, too, at what enormous prices the English bishops bought their ordinations in the eleventh century, when simony prevailed in Italy and England. They committed crime
(page 460) |
