New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-02-03

Even admitting (what I am by 70 means dis
posed to admit except for arguments sake,) that
frelacy IS distinctly recognized in Scripture as
the existing form OF the Christian Church at that
day, 1t is not surely more distinctly recognized
| than monarchy IS, as the then existing form Of
civil government. Render unto Cesar the
things that are CGSar's:" ':Honor the King ):
The po1cerS that be are ordained Of God" says
INSPIRED authority. | may remark, in passing
teat when you can show as good proof text for
e1ctuSire assumptions IN the Church, as these
and some others which the advocates Of the ex-
elusive Divine right Of kings can show, | shall
he disposed to think much better of the modesty
OF those assumptions. Surprising, however, that
an equally pointed recognition of Prelacy can be
shown, as that which the believers in monarchy
appeal to-would it Justify you in making 1t, as
you do make it, absolutely and without any ex-
cepton, essential to the very being of the Church?
Is there no room to be allowed for Enistake-no
ground for the possible suppositon that Prelacy,
like monarchy, might be dropped to suit crcum-
stances, and vet not actually destroy the Church,
and leave it without Gods blessing If some
should affirm that there is so strong an affinity
between Prelacy and monarchy that they should
60 together, (and this seemed to be the belief OF
i<ng James Whose hatred for Presbytcrianlsm
often found vent in his iavorite maxim, " No
Bishop, no kng") and if others should affirm
that republic in the state requires republic IN
the Church; and if upon these principles they
should severally agree to arrange the order OF
Church government-the question occurs wheth
either of these classes of persons could by Justly
charged by the other with the guilt Of absolutely
subverting the Church.
Now in respect to both the Church and the
state both Of them Institutes distinctly recog-
nized in the Bible, boldly affirm (and [ pray you
observe that this Is the substance OF my first ar
gument, which you have not SO much as touched
that the Bible does not make particular form
Of either indispensable to the existence Of either
The passage 81 have referred to, upon which
staunch high Churchman in England would build
the exclusive divine right of Queen Victoria, 90
not, as you will admit, Justify such conse-
quencc. If they did, then was our revolution re-
helon, and our present existence is continued
rebellion against constitution which God has
appointed VIII you take this consequence If
not, why? The word Of God no where rccog-
mes popular government in the state. There
is no mention there of President, chosen by the
popular voice. On the contrary the authority
looks altogether the other way.
What then What reply will you make to the
>;crptural argument the exclusive divine right
of Kings Precisely this, which | make to your
claim OF the exclusive Divine right of Prcates
that the occ-bearers of the State are not the eS-
scnce of the Statc-that God has dlvlnely APP
pointed Government, but has not prescribed any
precise details of Government or the mode OF con-
stituting Gorern0rS-that lie has cniolned civil
law and obedience TO civil law, but has not en-
loned that the lawmakers shall be hereditary
monarchs, whose authority is derived from their
predecessors. and theirs again from other prcde-
cessors in an unbroken mOnarchical succession,
akin to your dpostOtical succeSSi0n-ln one word,
that there may be state, divinely authorized by
His provncc--a state meeting all the substantial
requirements Of civil Government state with
competent otficers-and yet state ,rithout n
hiRg.
The analogy might be indefinitely pursued
were this the time-it is perfect. God has APP
pointed government in his Church-he has es-
tablshed ministry-hc has warranted the ap-
pointment of agents to carry out the necessary
purposes of a Church relation Up to this point
we agrcc--but at this point, as have SAID, we
divcrge. You are not willing TO allow Of a diver
sitv of Judgment as to the appointment and Undue
ton of these agents, but actually make it essen
tial that they should, in erery case, become pos
sessed of their rights by sort OF hereditary and
unbroken descent. This is your theory of exclu-
sIvc legitimacy, and, as have shown, 1t flnds It's
counterpart in the monarchical legitimacy of the
old world, Judged by which the government OF the
United States is meta government at all; and has
none of the rights, and none of the duties of
government Upon this principle, we are bound
TO renounceo our constitution, and at once fall back
upon the principle of a succession, by submitting
ourselves to the Queen OF America.
But as it will be some time before the people
of this land can be brought to this conclusion as
TO the state, SO | am sure 1t will be some time
before they can admit the conclusion as to your
Church, or any other individual Church. Just
as in the state, there were abundant reasons for
the rejection of the empire of Great Britain, and
for a reorganization of a Rew government growing
out Of the great charter OF human rights which
lies aback Of all governments, so in the church,
when necessity exists, Christians may fall
back upon the great charter OF religious truth,
the Bible, abandon an old and lntolerable tyran-
ny, and re0rganize themselves as Church OF
Christ.
And farther, as in the State, when reorganized,
the necessity of officers, and the necessity OF APP
pointing and Inducing them according to some
established rule viii be apparent in the Church,
when reorganized, the same necessity Will origin
ate rules more or less accordant with truth and
Justice. And this is the sense in which you are
to understand all the rules in regard to the ap
pointment and induction OF ministry which you
ind in the several formularies OF the reformed
churches.
You came out of the Roman hierarchy, some
what later than the Churches on the Continent;
so far as that hierarchy could, 1t deprived all the
reformed bodies of their ecclesiastical rights
They did not heed this, but quietly proceeded to
exercise the rights inherent in Christian believers,
and of which no communication can deprive
them, and to organize themselves into Christian
Churches.