Page images
PDF
EPUB

"popish doctrine." He demands, in a tone to which I forbear to give a name, whether I "know what popery is ?" In the next page he calls upon me to "lay my hand upon my heart, and in "the fear of God to say, whether I do not think that I have most "grossly libelled the whole Episcopal church throughout the "world ;" and adds, that "something explicit upon this point will "be expected from me." This good gentleman shall have" something explicit." Let me assure him, then, that, after the most serious and conscientious review of all that I have written, I am so far from thinking that I have "libelled" the episcopal church in representing prelacy as a "popish doctrine," that all my inquiries convince me, more than ever, of the justness of my representation, and embolden me to repeat and urge it with new confidence. In answer to Dr. Bowden's question, what is popery? I answer, Popery, strictly speaking, as was remarked in a former letter, is the ecclesiastical supremacy usurped by the bishop of Rome. But, more generally speaking, it implies that system of corruption, both in doctrine, government, and practice, which characterizes, and has, for nearly fifteen hundred years, characterized the Romish, or Latin church. Hence transubstantiation, purgatory, auricular confession, the worship of images, the invocation of saints, and the adoration of the cross, are all spoken of by the most accurate writers, as popish errors; although most of them had crept into the church, long before the period which Dr. Bowden assigns for the rise of the papal usurpation; and although none of them, excepting perhaps the first, could ever be traced to the Roman pontiff himself as their immediate author.

I say then, again, that, in this sense, clerical imparity is a pish error," nearly coeval in its rise with the commencement of the papacy; originating from the same source; and tending, in a degree, to the same mischief. And though I would by no means place the former of these errors on a par with the latter; nor venture to pronounce the one, as I do the other, an antichristian abuse, being fully persuaded that many of the greatest and best men that ever lived have been friends of prelacy; yet all my inquiries have more and more confirmed me in the persuasion, that it is a real and a mischievous departure from apostolic simplicity, and that it first arose from the same principle of clerical ambition which gave rise to the papacy. I hope this is "explicit" enough

Nor is this all. When I look over the charges and reasonings urged by the popish writers, against the Waldenses and Albigenses, as they are preserved and exhibited in Perrin's history of those illustrious witnesses for the truth; when I read the language used by the popish persecutors of the English reformers, as it is recorded in different parts of Fox's Acts and Monuments; when I examine the cavils and objections made by Harding, Saunders, Stapleton, Campian, and other zealous Catholics, against the church of England; and when I look into the writings which Chillingworth, in his Safe Way of Salvation, examines and refutes, I could almost fancy myself listening to the pleas of some high-toned Episcopalians in the United States against their Presbyterian neighbours. Could you make it convenient to examine those writings for yourselves, you would find in them so large a portion of the same reasonings, and the same language, which are now found in certain episcopal writers; so much of the same cry, in exactly or nearly the same words, about the church! the true church! the apostolic church! so much of the same kind of charges, respecting schism, departure from the covenanted way of salvation, loss of the apostolic succession, and having no true priesthood, or valid ordinances, as would fill you with astonishment, if not with emotions of a more unfavourable nature. Nor would your astonishment be at all diminished by finding, as you would find, that the friends of the Church of England, in defending themselves and their cause against the writers in question, resorted, in a multitude of instances, to the very same scriptural authorities, and the very same arguments, which Presbyterians employ against the high-toned prelatists of the present day!-Reflect seriously on these facts, and then ask yourselves, whether Dr. Bowden, has any just reason to complain of me for speaking of an affinity between his claims and those of popery? I have, indeed, repeatedly suggested the idea of such an affinity, and distinctly meant to do so. I have done it, however, without passion, and without any wish to give unnecessary pain; but with a calm, deliberate, and firm conviction, that the suggestion was well-founded. And I can assure the gentlemen who have written so much and so resentfully for the purpose of removing it, that their publications are far, very far, from having diminished the force of this conviction.

I have now, my brethren, completed my examination of such parts of Dr. Bowden's and Mr. How's letters as I deem worthy of notice. It was my intention, after the example of the former of these gentlemen, to collect and present in one view, a catalogue of the "misrepresentations," "unfounded assertions," "mistakes," and" omissions," with which their pages abound. But finding these "misrepresentations," &c. to be so numerous, that a mere list of them, without comment, would fill another long letter; and many of them of so disreputable and offensive a character as not to be contemplated, even by opponents, without much commiseration for their authors; I have determined to spare myself the pain of writing, and you of reading such a letter; and here to take a final leave of the subject. I engaged in this controversy, without the least expectation of convincing Episcopalians, or of bringing over to my own opinion an individual of that communion; but solely for the purpose of satisfying and confirming Presbyterians. My object, I have the pleasure to know, is attained; and perceiving no further advantage in prolonging the controversy, I now lay down the pen; nor can I foresee any event that will ever tempt me to resume it on this subject.

I take for granted that all the gentlemen who have already appeared as my opponents, will again come before the public in reply to these letters; and will endeavour to persuade their readers that I have again misrepresented them and their cause, and again laid myself open to the heaviest charges and the severest reproach. All this and more I deliberately expect from gentlemen who have generally manifested a wish to have the last word. Should my expectation be realized, it will give me no uneasiness; nor shall I ever, (according to my present views,) take the least public notice of any thing that they may say. If, indeed, I should hereafter discover any important errors in the foregoing pages, (trivial ones, which do not affect the main question, will probably be discovered and pointed out,) I shall consider it as a duty which I owe to you to correct them. But with the controversy, as such, it is my firm resolution to have nothing more to do. This resolution is formed and expressed, not out of any disrespect to the gentlemen in question; but from a deliberate conviction that enough has been said on the Presbyterian side of the argument; and that my time

and pen may be hereafter devoted to objects more agreeable to myself, and more useful to others.

That the high-toned class of our episcopal brethren will, in any respect, alter their tone, either of speaking or writing, I have no expectation; nor have I the least anxiety that they should. Having provided the antidote, I am perfectly indifferent how often or how long the poison may be disseminated. Let them hereafter sing the praises of their "truly primitive and apostolic church," as loudly and as confidently as they please. Let them arrogate to themselves the honour of having the only true priesthood, and the only valid ordinances in the land. Let them embrace every occasion of pronouncing that we, as Presbyterians, are rebels and schismatics, and out of the covenanted way of salvation. I trust, my brethren, that not an individual among us has any feelings which are capable of being wounded by such language. It is, indeed, rather fitted to excite our pity, than our resentment; and is, certainly, much more disreputable to its authors, than to its objects.

That it is our earnest desire to live in peace and harmony with our brethren of the episcopal church, you can all bear witness. For them, I can truly say, that I entertain a high respect; and am happy to number individuals of that communion among my most valued friends. I know, also, that many of that denomination entirely disapprove, and deeply lament, the offensive writings of their own clergy, which have produced this controversy. Were I capable of applying to such persons many of the remarks which I have been compelled to apply, in the foregoing pages, to Dr. Bowden and Mr. How, I should deem myself one of the most uncandid and unjust of men. And, I will add, that it would give me much pain, if any thing in this, or my preceding volume, should be considered as pointing at Episcopalians of that liberal class. Differences of opinion there are, and will be, between us; but if these differences are maintained on both sides with that spirit which the Holy Ghost teacheth, they will neither foster the wrath of man, nor interfere with real Christian unity. Continue, then, I intreat you, to cherish on your part a spirit of amity and concili ation whatever reception it may meet with. Be always ready to exhibit your share, and more than your share, of this temper. And then, whatever may be the result, it will turn to you for a testimo ny. Remember that the haughty language, or the unscriptural

claims of the most uncharitable of our episcopal brethren, cannot possibly injure us; but that we shall always injure ourselves exactly in proportion as we lose sight of that holy spirit which adorned and united the disciples of Christ in the days of apostolic purity, and which compelled even their enemies to exclaim, " Behold how these Christians love one another."

Whether your pastors are lawful ministers, and the ordinances which they dispense legitimate ordinances, are questions which, happily, it is not for Dr. Bowden and Mr. How to decide. There is a day approaching when they will be decided before a higher tribunal, and with consequences more interesting than language. can express. Happy will it be for us, if in that day, we shall all be found members of that holy church, which the Divine Redeemer hath purchased with his blood, and adorned with his Spirit! Happy will it be for your ministers, if they shall be found, in that day, to have preached not themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and themselves your servants for Jesus' sake! And happy will it be for you, my brethren, if it shall then appear that you have not rested in rites and forms; but that you have received the truth in the love of it; that Christ has been formed in you the hope of glory; and that you belong to that chosen generation, that royal priesthood, that holy nation, that peculiar people, who shall for ever show forth the praises of Him who hath called them out of darkness into his marvellous light! That this blessedness may be shared by you, and equally by them also, whom, in this controversy, we have been called to oppose, is the unfeigned prayer of, My Christian Brethren,

Your affectionate Servant in the Gospel,
SAMUEL MILLER.

« EelmineJätka »