Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-11-27
rHE RUTLAND HERALD,
MONDAY, NOVEMBER "a, 1878.
:. some essentials I'm Religion. >,

The Rev. w. j. Harris, of Trinity
Church. in accordance with previous an
nauncement, delivered last evening, a
sermon on the above subject, to an at
,entiye audience. His text was taken
as follows
Hob xIII:l7. Obey them that have the rule
oter YOU, and submit yourselves: for they
watch for your souls, as they that must
give account.
After brief introduction, in which he
alluded to what he had said in former
discourse concerning the essentials" of
ssal salvation in heaven, and of member
ship in Christs church on earth, he an
pounced as the question for the evening,
"What is essential to the due order of
the church as an organized body of pro-
fessed christians ?" This is in some re-
epects question quite different from
either of the others. All so-called
Evangelical christian bodies recog-
pize the Lords design that the divine
society which He established should ex-
tst under some organized form, and that
certain persons, called ministers, pastors
or teachers, should exercise certain Off
cal functions in this organized body.
All agree, practically at least, that it is
not lawful for any man to, take upon
him the office of public preaching or of
ministering the saCraments, before he is
lawfully called to do it. All practically
agree too in giving to ministers, already
ordained, the authority to ordain other
ministers and send them forth to their
work. Difference of opinion comes,
when it is asked, where do these already
ordained ministers get their authority to
do these official acts There are two
theories upon which the question is an
swered. The first is the independent
theory, according to which all authority
resides in the local society of believers,
voluntarily associated together for mu-
tual improvement and common instruc-
ton in the things of religion. Whoever
is elected by this society to be its leader
or chief officer, is by virtue of his cleo
ton qualified to perform all official func-
tons for that society. Congregationalism
/; only modification of this theory, re-
cognzng the advantage and propriety
of a communion of churches-a volun-
tary association of societies having a
general resemblance the one to the
other, each having a ministry which can
be recognized by the other Therefore,
Cougregationalists, Baptists, and all
others, who hold TO this theory, have
their candidates for the ministry exam
fusd in the presence of clerical and lay
delegates from several local churches,
and then set apart to their sacred Office
hy various ministers acting as represen-
atiycs Of their respective churches. The
other theory asserts that a fundamental
and divinely-ordained distinction exists
between the two orders of clergy and
laitv, and that authority to administer
the Sacraments and to ordain other min
isters is not derived from the local
church, but was given by the Lord Him.
self to what was designed to be a self
aerpetuating body of men, who should
he assisted in the government of the
church and in the selection of suitable
candidates for the ministry by the coun-
sci of the laity. This is the theory Of
Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopal
aus, and some others; not that every
member Of these bodies holds this
theory, but it characterizes them as
bodies. In spite, however, of the two
theories, all practically agree in assign
ing to the ministry the exclusive func-
tons already spoken of, not allowing
these functions to be exercised by the
laity except under pressure Of stern ne
cessity. With respect to the proper
form of the ministry there is great
difference both of theory and OF prac-
tice. Congregationalists, Baptists, and
presbyterians recognize but one order,
that Of presbyters. Most Presbyterians
claim that this one order is among them
fashioned after the New Testament
model, and has been perpetuated in an
uubroken succession from Apostolic
times. Congregationalists and Baptists,
for the most part hold, that no form of
church government and order is SO dis
tinctly laid down on Divine authority
IS to claim our conscientious adhesion
10 it, but that each local society is at
liberty TO select that which best pleases
itself Methodists and Episcopalians
apparently agree in recognizing three
Bishops, Priests and Deacons,
assigning to each its own peculiar func-
tons. But Methodist Bishops do not
claim to be an order distinct from Pres
byters-they claim to be nothing more
than Prcsbyters, to whom the Church
has assigned the duty of special over
sight and the right to ordain, and from
whom the Church may take away these
special functions. Methodists, there
fore. have really but two orders, Pres
byters and Deacons. Episcopalians, as
body, hold that the three orders,
which are now called Bishops, Priests,
and Deacons, did, as matter of fact,
exist in the Apostolic and Primitive
Church, each order having its peculiar
functions assigned to it under the direc,
ton of our Lords inspired Apostles.
They also claim, that these three orders
have, as a matter of fact, been perpe-
tuated in the Church in unbroken sue.
cession, especially through the continued
exercise of the functions of the highest
ofthese orders, that Of Bishops. From
the simple fact, that this form of the
ministry was, as they believe, developed
under the Apostles themselves, they fol-
the most part infer, that it is of the
same Divine authority with the recorded
teachings of those Apostles-not to be
departed from until the great Head OF
the Church shall through equally &C
credited agents authorize such depar-
ture. There is, then, radical difference
among us as to what is essential to