The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-03-04
For THE CENTRAL PRESBYTERIAN.
The Culdee Church.
AposroLIoAL SUCCESSION.


Before stating the facts that bear on
our connection with the Primitive Church,
through the Culdee Church, it may be
proper to premise the exact value which
we place on such connection, and the
only sense in which it can exist as his
torieal fact.
The phrase "apOstolieal succession" /" is
one that has been so much used in reh-
giOus controversy that it is WELT to define
its precise meaning. There are some
who contend for transmission of the
apostolic office to prelates of all later
ages. and who affirm that such prelates
now are the successors of the apostles in
their ap0stOlate. It is question we have
never seen answered, why these meR who
say they hold the apostolic office never
call themselves apostles If they have
the office, a tortiOri, they have the name.
Why then do they not take it When
Paul claimed the Office, he claimed the
name also. Why do they not do the
same? Have they any right to reject the
name that Christ himself attached to the
Office? May We not venture to suggest,
that this shrinking from the assumption
of the name may be connected with Sc
cret misgiving that after all they have no
more right TO the Office than the name,
and that there is a deep significance In
the fact that John saw on the foundation
of the New Jerusalem the names of only
twelve Apostles of the Lamb? The truth
is that so plainly does it appear that the
Office of apostle was an extraordinary and
temporary one, demanding that the occu-
pant of it should have seen Jesus after
his resurrection, that he might be a wit
ness of this fundamental fact, should have
the power of working miracles, AND
should exercise a jurisdiction over the
whole Church, and not a diocese or pro-
vince, that the instinct of the Christian
consciousness has always reeoiled from
any uninspired man assuming the name
apostle, very significant indication that
the thing expressed by that name was
never transmitted beyond the first pos
SCISSORS of the office, and hence, that, in
that sense, apostolic succession is an i'm
possibility.
But others, who may not claim this, do
claim that the only lawful ministry is that
which has come down in an unbroken
succession of regularly ordained men
from the time of the Apostles, and that
all other ministerial orders are invalid.
This is the Romish and Anglican High
Church position. Perhaps the best dis
position of it viii be to quote a few par
agraphs from the crushing demolition OF
il made by one of the most distinguished
members of the Church of England, who
will not be charged with sectarian bias.
Macaulay, in his celebrated review of
Gladstone's Church and State, repub-
hshed in his Miscellanies, has crushed
this fgment with the hands of giant
We can only quote part Of ms master
ly refutatiOn. After demanding the ev-
idence for the alleged fact of apOstohcal
succession in the Church of England, ne
says: "The transmission of orders
from the Apostles to an English clergy
man of the present day, must have been
through very great number of inter,
mediate persons. Now it probable that
no clergyman in the Church of England
can trace up his spiritual genealOgy, from
bishop to bishop, even so far back as the
time of the reformation. There remain
fifteen or sixteen hundred years during
which the history of the transmission Ot
orders is buried in utter darkness. AND
whether he be priest by succession from
the Apostles, depends on the question