The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1882-04-14
The EpiscODal Church.
BY REV. ItODT. l.. STEVENS.

we have nov 10 deal a ILh the wit
ness TO the truth of the three fold
ministry born by the early writers in
the Christian Church. We must
notice again, however, the assertion
that the burdsn 0f prof lios upon the
Episcopal Church 10 tss2bizb its sys-
Iem. There arc 20 many differeut
sects that it. "Duid bs - lui,,,ssibls -
frniLlSha - enhnisrafs tbe different
theories upon which they Justify the
existehca. Oar strongest opponents 20
FAR Us learning j. osueer ned, are un-
donbtedly the Presbs terians, who CLAIM.
that their action, IA leaving the Epis-
coPAl ChHrch or Church If Eagland.
had sound scriPtufal and historis
grounds. They have &C. sJscted The Esis-
coPal form Of Church Governments bs-
cause they claim tba. tho Presby t. ran
scheme was estaslishsd by the Apos-
ties, and thnir liss NJ reasoning
u followed by all ths other
sects. VS. quote th. wSrd1 Of Pre-,
tyterian Diviee referred 70 as Ae
standard authority on the Christian
Ministry ia the United Ssatss: DR..
,Niller's work on "tho Primitive and
Apostolic Order ofthe Church Of Christ
VIndicated." lie wrote this book %
controvert the claims which ths Fps
copal Church has always made To those
who left her ranks. He asserts in his
preface that by controversy alone can
the truth be maintained, be says: SAC
cordingly tho whole history Of the
Church has been one continued sxssn-
pliication Of the principle, that the
truth ever has been, and, IS long ss
this militant state continues, ever
must be maintained by CONTROVERSY"
Thus from the commencement Of the
existence IF any scot, it has had con
troVersy with the Christian body il
ont or (dissectsd) itself from.
II a centroVersy be Of any impor-
tAnee il concerns facts or truths. Con
troversy is defined by Webster AZ, "iks
expression or msintAinance of feelings,
opinion Or courss Of action, contrary 70
or discordAnt with those Of others,
contention, dispute, debate Where
trus ChrisIian love and charity prevail
there 10 but little controversy and az =
rule nothing is mere Improbable or
evil in its effects on Christian oharac-
ter than debates on matters Of religion
When a debate arises as 20 "A con-
monly accepted fact, tho burden o!
proof lies with the party ss>rting tbs
question. Should man assenI that
no sach person as Napoleon Bonaparte
existed, IL could 90 replied, 1T il q
watter of common belief that he died
less than a hundred years ego, 4ad
while | cannot bring living witness
70 swear to this fact, il is net my part
but yours to prove your denial" While
every one would allow tho reasonable
ness of this answer, let us apply tbs
same reasoning to the central truths o.
Christianity and how do We find it met
It Is n common matter OF belief that
Christ lived, worked miracles, aad
est, biishsd a Church. Bat ini1ei'
denv this and maintain that the scrip
tures are uutrne Does the huTseR .
|, rroct lie with those whs accept or den,
the truth 7 Most assuredly 1t ID con
trsry TO every principle OF right Judge
, ment and COMMON sense to make tn
burden Of proof lie upon him who &C
eepts what is commonly believed an
practiced, but he whs denies the fac
must make good his assertion. Th
Q truth if attacked muat bear aefSneS
Christianity must defend It's truth
4 though il can also furnish satisfactcr
OF evidence of positive kind and cor
: vincing 10 any miRd open to convi'
tiOp.
: In the question as 20 what foru, ,
Church government do the Scripture
:, show ~ existing, on whom docs th
. burden of proof lie . The sectarians ga.
il lies upon us, while We say it res
with them. Thus there is controve
: sy as to who raised the contrOver,
and many becomes SO disgusted wi,
y the dispute that the wkele question
laid bye as unworthy Of attention
8 Bot difficult as the question seems
: many persons, it is made So by a 10
n ge,fulness Of how we act in all 9th,
!, questions involving great issues, OF
this is great iSsue if the Episeop
d Church has any claiHIs at al 10 a hes
!, ing.
e We have simple rule which v
a will apply. Before the Church vi
divided into the present denomination
n was it Episcopal in government or no
l. Every one can trace the existing 1
If nominations back to the reform3tio
r and before the reformation, the Ghart
n was Episcopal in form. In Englar
whore u national reformation toe
;. place this Episcopal form was retaiae
"a Here and theie vsice WAS raise
! calling Episcopscy Popish. IN mskir
/ this charge against tho Church Of En-
i, land did not she burden cf proof
With the opponents of the national sy
. tenn | oiaim that this is the Il
: : question of all that am writing abo,
:. An honest answer will prove tho trut
fulnesa of intention and willingness
receive testimony for what is worth A
: without prejudice. To say .hat {,
burden Of preof lay with the Episccp
l. Church would reveal a Preiudi
= against her system which shows th
. no fair representation of the questi
- is possible In all other matters VIII
y question arises the party diasenti
from established usage must prove
n point aid until .his proof is general
I'd accepted it remains with them n
in simply to defend their assertions but
p prove them. This we claim to ht
m rule, law of reason. When then !
id look at the facts they stand thus, I
IA great majority of the Christian wor
is Episcopal in form, and it is also I