Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-07-06
OUR NAIL POUCH.
Presbyterianism More Ancient Than Epis-
copacy or tho Reformation.


copacy or tho Reformation.
To the Editor Of The Dispatch.
In THE DISPATCH recently pleasant,
written article upon the Episcopal Churcl
appeared. If the writer had confined his re
marks to the principle expressed in his owl
words, that 'ff the Episcopal Church wal
doing good work the question Of It's origin
was OF no great Importance" we shoulc
nave enjoyed his disquisition. 1t is only
when he assumes to express the theories o.
other churches and state their claims thai
we take exception. Then we feel inclined tC
say: Speak for yourself, Johnr' He has
certainly misunderstood and misstated the
position Of the Presbyterian Church when
he announces that it only claims to have
originated at the Reformation.
| 1t may surprise him-though it should not
II he has read hisrory-to learn that the
Presbyterian Church claims for its princi-
pies of polity and government priority of
origin. and that the original church was es-
sent1ally Presbyterian. 1t also claims that
this original government, which was repub-
ican and elevattng, was swept away by che
ambitions and passions OF men who formed
sne Aomish hierarcy, whose principle is
tion came large portion OF the Church put
on these errors and returned to the princi-
pies Of the primitive church. Of which the
this p POSITION nAe Of fns the ro's Presbyterian
Church is well founded could be easily es-
taDl1shed by an appeal to the great mass of
church historians. But it will suffice to
quote only from those writer's and historians
VINO are connected with the Episcopal
Church, and whose opinions will surely not
be regarded as biased in favor of Presbyte-
as the original system it viii be hard to con-
vince us that this modern claim requires
serious consideration. Thus, says Dean
ear STANLEY friend Thoss w hss9rios no9 danv
as sure that nothing like modern Epis-
copacy existed before the close of the first
century as it is that nothing like modern
ming of the second. 1t is certain that
throughout the first century, and for the
hrst years of the second, bishop and pres
that as the necessities Of % the time Semanded led
nrst at Jerusalem, then in Asia Minor, the
elevation Of one presbyter above the rest
by the almost universal law, which even
In republics engenders monarchical ele,
ment, the word bishop gradually changed
Its meaning, and by the middle Of the Sec
ond century became restricted to the chief
In no instance were the apostles called
bishops in any other sense than they were
equally called 'presbyters' and 'deacons.'"
Again he says: "The Christian clergy ex-
listed before the institution of Christian
bishops. In the first age there was no such
marked distinction as we now find between
the different orders of the clergy. 1t was
only by slow degrees that the name OF
bishop became appropriated to one chief
pastor raised high in rank and station above
the mass OF the clergy All this is stated
with great force by Bishop Lightfoot, Of
England, in his essay on the Christian min
istry, and also by the Rev. Edwin Hatch in
his hampton Lectures. Their position in
the Esta blished Church of England makes
these concessions very significant. Bishop
Tomline says: II readily acknowledge that
there is no precept in the New Testament
which commands that every church shall
be governed by bishops"
Bishop Beveridge also says: sNothing can
be determined, frcm what the apostles did
did In their early proceedings in preaching
the gospel, as to the establishment of any
certain form Of church government for per-
petual duration" There is no more strtk-
ing proof of later origin of the Episcopal
idea of bishop than that even such prel-
we find in the New Testament the name
"blshop we must regard it as meaning the
bishop OF parish or presbyter; but the
bishop OF diocese. we must there seek not
under that name, and independently of any
name at all" Truly this comedies every
thing asserted by non-Episcopal advocates,
For optics sharp he needs. ween.
Who sees what is not to be seen.
It is thus clear that Presby terianism has
the strongest reason for its claim of an
founded on Presbytery, and especially in
asserting the parity of the clergy in all
CIlu9S ccCleS1AStlC1l; anu GDdC Cuc assertion
of Episcopal writers for their own as the
mother church, is like what Dean Milman
styled the theory OF the Apostolic succession,
"a fiction of ecclesiastical vanity"
1t may appear strange to some that the
Presbyterian Church does not emphasize
more her historical superiority. But this
church believes its great work Is to preach
the gospel, not to stimulate ecclesiastical
pride. Without invidious comparison, it
feels it has special work to do as the con-
of the great truths Of Scripture, as
a church in which the highest learning and
deepest culture unite with hearty faith in
the world; and that with kindly
sympathy toward other branches of the
church, it has its own mission, nobler than
prosely yttzfng, more important than posing
as the most marked channel of divine grace,
worthter than boasts Of dead past, the
teaching of principles which society needs,
and creed which it believes is founded on
Gods word. With the confidence which a
good origin and high descent create, it
does not point to itself but to Christ, nor
spend its energies in magnifying its forms
at the expense of others. s. J. F.
SwIssvALE, July 2.