Year: 1874




Churches of the Reformation are COM
mittipg in our day, as many OF the sd-
vocates OF Episcopscy do not hesitate
to allege. the sin OF Korsh, Datban and
Abiram 10 the days of Moses. But i
90, where 10 the evidence Of it? Is II
in the devoxt, blsmeless, consistent
Christian lives they lead ? Is it IN the
blessing Of God upon their labors, and
the power and success Of their minis
try9 Is it in the souls who, BY God
grace, through their ipstrLmentalltyr
are turned from the power Of Satan un
10 God and find pardon and peace and
life and salvation at the loot OF the
Cross OF Christi Are these the marks
and tokens OF Gods displeasure-oI
God Q judgments-sgaius bold. dar-
ing, presump ptuous sin .. In other words
and to put the question in the very
form in which our Saviour put it to the
Pharisees, who were denying the Bsp-
tism of John because be had not asked
them for authority to baptize :-"the
ministry Of these servants OF Christ, is
it from Heaven or OF men p Dare
any Christian man say, 1t is not from
Heaven 2 and dare we set up stand
ard of our own, by which we disown
those whom God hath owned, and con-
demu those whom God hath accepted,
and separate ourselves from sll fellow
ship on earth withthose with whom we
shall be glad enough to take our places
10 Heaven? .,


And yet the Episcopal Church in this
country and in our daY has practical y
planted herself on this high ground and
assumed this imperious attitude
towards the great bulk OF
Protestant Christians. 1t is true
that her standards OF doctrine remain
unchanged, and the XIX and XIII
Articles OF the Prsyer-book still testify
to her original Protestant stand on
this question. But the other has be-
come the prevailing sentiment in the
Church and is fast becoming embodied
in the Common Law OF the Church. So
far has positive legislation gone in this
direction, if we accept the current in
terpretation of certain cauons, that no
minister OF the Episcopal Church can
now, by any one official act, recognize
any other Protestant Church, as
true Church, or the minis
ter OF any other church as law
full ministers OF ChristG As the Church
Journal OF a recent date boastipgly
states it: "Itmay be an opinion, tole-
rated in the church, that the
Apostolical succession is not
necessary to a valid ministry.
1t ia an opinion, however,
which the Church absolutely forbids
every parish, every Convention, every
Deacon. Priest or Bishop, from acting
on" Or as the Hartford Chwehman
OF the same date puts 1t, yet more point
edly and arrogantly: ANY man has
a right to believe Free-trade is better
than protection, even though be is liv-
ing under q protectionist government
but if he carry his free-trsde opinions
into practice, he is smuggle aud so
the editor believes, and glories in be-
lieving, that the Episcopal Church has
outlawed all non-episcopal ministers,
and views any minister Of her own
VINO would officially recognize them 8
an ecclesiastical smuggler. This may
be the law OF the church. | cannot
positively deny it. This certainly is
the spirit OF the recent legislation in
the Church. But / thank God, it is
not the spirit Of many Of her ministers
and multitudss Of her people. l thank
God that there are Thousands in her
communion who have never yet bowed
the knee to this Baal. Yea, l thank
God that there are to-day thousands in
her bosom whose hearts beat in full
sympathy with the spirit OF late holy
man OF God and honored minister OF
the gospel in the Episcopal Church,
in the city OF Baltimore, who tor the
last twenty years OF his life made It a
rule never to pass in his daily walks
about the city, the church building OF
spy Christian denomination without 81
lently lifting up his heart in prayer to
the Great Head Of the Church Tor HIS
blessing upon that church, its minis'
ter, its people, and its work


Agsin. This question Of the at
,itude OF the Episcopal Church
towards the other churches
Of Protestant Christendom wac,
after all, the real question involved in
Bishop Cunmins Communion AcI q,
the recent meeting ot the Evangelical
Alliance. The right or the wrong, the


awiuluess or the unlawiulness OF bic
conduct, turned solely on this point
That meeting was q noble gathering oi
the great Protestant household Of faith.
It rss q goodly and pleasant sight to
see Christian brethren from almost
every land and nation and people sod
tongue, meeting together and dwelling
together in euch blessed unity And
it was surely most appropriate that, q,
the close OF their meeting and before
parting never TO behold one another q
faces again in this world, they should
gather as the members OF one great
aud blest family around the
table of their Common Lord
And yet for taking his place at that
table and uniting with Christian breth-
rem of other churches in that sacred
service, Bishop Cummirs was deuounc.
ed in the most unmeasured terms, was
accused OF having violated the Consti-
tuition and Canons OF the Church, and
was charged with having been unfaith :
fol to the most solemn vows a human
being can assume.


Now were these charges false, or
were they true2 do not discuss the
question as far a. Bishop Cummins Is
concerned. he needs no defence st my
hands. His character as Christian
man and q Christian minister, stapdi
unimpeacbed before the Christian world.
To the freshnes and strength OF his
early manhood be took upon him