Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-10-30
THE RUTLAND HERALD
evangelical Alliance.
SERMON BY DIR. HARRIS.

7al1TDTEI
eminent Bishop upon the subject, and
5o would upon this occasion speak to
II. audience in reference to his own
Cows on the same subject. A fair audi
,ncc greeted the speakers utterances.
The text selected was the following
i.on Ephesians VT:
There is one boAy and one spirit even
ave are called In one hope of your call
~; One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
09c God and Father of all, who is above
ii and through all, and in you all.
The speaker said, that since these
acre the words of Scripture, all true
CHRISTIANS deplored the divisions in the
,u-ch. Animated with the hope of
rriry, all Protestant Christians cast
.ant them for the means of remedying
III. breaches. The result had been the
pypgclical Alliance which had just
.s.alitssession in New York. Although
M, was notable assemblage, it was a
r,,ale fact that the Protestant EpiscO-
M. Church had taken no part in its pro-
.,alircs. The question had been asked
W,vdid they not cooperate He grant
al In discussing the character of this as
..nblsgr. that the people there gathered
,cra animated with a sincere longing for
unity. that they We're able and earnest,
,.l that much good must result from
their mhors, yet there were reasons why
n. Episcopal Church could not cooper
,te with them. In the first place they
Objected to the name of the organization.
An alliance was not strongly enough
hound together to execute the work this
toly had in hand. Or. Hodge, often
called the greatest theologian of the age,
had stated in his speech that no one had
,h-ht to exclude any person coming in
hp name Of Christ, and who had Christ
visible in him. Another person, in dis
a,s,ing the nature Of the meeting, had
.sncd the different seCts to nations
B.wccn the members of each there was
communion, and between the bodies in
hrcommuuion, just as there was in each
nation law and between nations interna-
,iDt law. From this the speaker dis
.uted alliance was not union, and he
l.ieycd the Lord meant there should be
,a, union between his follOwers-not
merely national alliances. Alliance was
amcre rope of sand but real union was
aestrong band.
The body was sailing under false coll
@. its delegates represented no one
Nt themselves no body of Christians
lli authorized any person or delegation
Dact for them. 1t was therefore not
an alliance of Christians, but only
conference Of able aud earnest men to
consult as to what could be done to resist
uc cncroachmcnis Of Romanism. DR..
Adams, in his address Of welcome, de-
srous of showing the broad ground on
which they stood, spoke of the Holy
Catholic church and the communion of
ANTS rs their platform. The question
hen was, why could we not join with
hem? The meeting was called to ena-
BE the delegates to manifest their
Christian union. How did they do
ibis -? Not by the adoption of anything
Ike a common creed, for their only at
tempt was the platitude In essentials,
liberty in non-essentials, unity in all
&ngs, charity. This was not defnitive
ri anything it meant nothing at all.
The want Of unity in the conference
was manifest. DR.. Hodge said in his
speech, which he had read, that there
yasno external mark or criterion neces-
ay to man in the church. And yet
very Christian in the assembly believed
that baptism was necessary, and that
was an external ordinance. The speaker
held that no Christian would adj
nit to the Lords supper any
person who had not been baptized. Then
again there were the differing beliefs
among the denominations on this sub
pct. The largest body represented at
the conference was the Baptist; and
very many of their number believed that
no one was baptized who had not been
immersed. In what way could they
pin in unity with the Congregationalists
BOD other denominations who had just
Hpeculiar tenets of their own. There
was one method open to the conference
and that was the Lords communion Of
'lnts-the Holy Supper-which had
been from all time the real and only
communion. This they avoided and it
vas beforehand tacitly understood that
here was to have been no general cele-
5ration Of this event. This was carried
out, but one eminent Baptist clergyman
incurred something of reproach for Gel
Grating this event, though not before
The alliance as a body. From these and
other things it was easy to be seen that
there was no real unity in the confer
eace, even in those things which DR..
Adams proposed as like to be common
10und. u.......
1t was, therefore, clear that the Epis-
opal church could not cooperate in any
1dertaking which ignored those things
eemed essential by the church. In the
natter of baptism the church had never
INSISTED upon any particular quantity of
water; but it had always differed in
matters of church government from 9th
f denominations.
Again, the Episcopal church did not
agree with the conference as to its
method of PROSECUTING. This had al
ways been a favorite idea with the alli-
'nce, and, unlike them, the church be-
.eyed that the only and true way was
" reform in the church itself. His
'aurch had not attempted to win over
members from other churches, but had
received them when they had come, and
"Aa always been ready to explain the
ruth to those who doubted. The rev
"end gentleman referred at some
snsth to the Old Catholic movement in
DeFmany as proof of the proper method
-" work. He did not claim the results
G their o,yn lint accortad for - tbot tba