New-York daily tribune., 1844-02-10
= 4 F, T R RIBUN E
From the Commercial .7drer:iser.
can be no Church without Pre-
unefS

can be no Church without Pre-
Thefs late.
nc ,ow perfectly obvious that my opponent
II - mean 70 ccme to the point, and therefore,
ooe: asa Of dignifying this correspondence with
.le ~ ,;,le Of discussion is worthy of ridcule
3ns va - r;dicule in which am not at all inclined
ony should on these accounts feel myself
10 ~ hs nerectly justified in altogether dropping
10 70 49, who. however valiant at the dinner
W. ;s ike the knight who comes into the lists
S:,h a,, fine flourish of trumpets and laundering
s.s ssauce as if he would cat up his adversary at
a',hc,l uel but who is always missing when the
.a. arrives But although confess to strong
GaST c.o,;ng Of disgust, am unwilling TO abandon my
- .l,ooetber, or even seem TO shrink from
49, believe to be public service; more espe-
VII, as am sure that should thereby exceed
a ., rratify those who do not desire that the un-
ah;,rcS;no dogma should be exposed to class Of
readers who have not heretofore been aware OF Its
.Sarscter and tendencies. This, however, am
resolved upon, viz: that Twill pay no attention to
snv w shifts or lodgings for the future, but pursue
,he H., line of argument which | have commenced
With vii nv reader and not my opponent in my eye,
shall therefore say nothing to the prodigious dis
.r of looic in his last productions but after reca-
pptnlating what I have already advanced, and
ssborngits point and bearing, will proceed to other
considerations.
Our starting point is the assertion at the din
ner table, that there can be no Church eoithout
prelete. have several times alluded to my
reasons for otinsisting upon my right to demand
oftbe loud voiced champion of eXclusiveness that
he should begin this discussion, by furnishing
proof of this allegation. Every one can see that
the pretext that, having advanced Negative
proposition, ne cannot, by the laws Of dialectics
be iarlv called to prove it, is no more than pre-
tect under the cover of which he desired to es-
cape from the predcament in which his untimcly
dinner. speech had placed him. 1t is mere pre-
text say, for it requires but moments atten-
ton from any school-boy, TO decide that his as
ssrtion contains t1co negatives, which, Qhe judi
cjous Lindley Murray being judge,) make the
strongest kind of affirmative. "Therc can be
no Church without Prelatc;;" acitdout being
negative particle, the assertion amounts to this,
prelacv is indispensable TO the existence OF the
Church of Christ. Rather than let him escape,
| consented to commence the discussion. still
holding him to the position which he thrust SO
yauntingly in the face of the whole community,
and believing that | should soon subject him to
the necessity of letting the public see upon what
Scriptural grounds he meant to justify doc
trine involving such astounding consequences;
so contrary to the common sense OF mankind,
and so contradcted by everyday facts. Hence
nv first Scrptural argument, cow called an asser-
ton, and begging Of the question. That
is unanswerable, and no wonder 1t has
been unanswered. 1t is to this effect, that ncl-
ther the doctrine of Prelacy, nor that of Presby-
terv, (the one implying superior and inferior
grades in the ministerial Office the other the per-
feet Official equality Of ministers of the Gospel,)
was made, by the word of God, absolutely essen
tiaI to the existence of the Church. There might
be Church with Prelates, there might be one
without them By this argument / renounced
all exclusive claims for Presbytery while de-
MED such claims to Prelacy.
This kind of argument, have no doubt, took
my opponent by surprise, for would have pleased
hm better to see the subject presented IN the
share of contest between Il member o; one sect
cltming exclusive authority. and the member OF
another sect claiming similar authority; IN 9TH
er words, a debate between Presbyterian so
called and Prclatst upon the ptitul question,
which of The two was the true Church. But
1epeat here what have often sid, [becauSe
wish the reader to near it in mnd,) that set out
with the purpose of exposing exclusive claims.
b"leve shat all the substantial elements OF fres.
bytenan government are traceabe IN the Woro OF
G0d, and farther, that 1t is best 10 adhere TO them
! have no doubt whatever upon that point but
would no, therefore, make adherence to fresoy-
ferian'Sm essential to the existence OF the Church
ol Christ. This is my POSITION and believe the
position universally held i'll my own communion
But 1t is not the position which my opponent de-
sired me TO take, if one may Judge from his SUD-
sequent efforts to deprive me of my catholic char
acter.
lproceeded at once to tortify the above argu-
ment by an appeal to the spirituality OF the Cos
pei as moral institute, in contrast with the
Journalism of insisting upon the fundamental nc
cesSlty of particular mode of constituting the
ministry. | edduced also the true principles OF
Christian anity, showing that 1t was unity OF
ialst, love and other moral affections, which con-
shtuc the Christian character-whlch affections
We're not made dependent upon an individuals 5
external relations to one particular Church poilty.
still farther corroborSted this view by an appeal
to garlng facts, proving that the blessings OF
Gods spiri. have not been confined to any one
OF the Christian denominations. From this fact
1 argued that my opponent must find himself IN
the following dilemma obliged, on the one hand,
TO deny the substantial Christianity OF all COM
munons but his own-or, by admitting them to
be Christian, on the other hand, obliged to admit
that the best blessings of the Gospel It's prom'Seo
Spiritual blessings, had been bestowed upon oooles
which did not belong to the Church OF God at all
ANIL which therefore were not in covenant Win
Him in other words, that 1t made very little dif-
ference whether men are in or out of the Church.
Now, without any great pretensions to logic, /
take upon me to say that here was something to
answer, which has not been answered. We are
told that without Prelates there is no Church, and
Scripture is referred to as the test. search the
Scripture and reply, can find no such dogma
there, but find much that looks the other way.