gy enough to shame the six bishops who have undertaken to bear him through, and to make them feel that they and their party are down. Is there moral energy enough—is there enough of the Christian spirit—is there enough of American manliness—to throw off the secularizing, Romanizing, demoralizing influence of the Trinity church corporation ? If that shall be the result of the present conflict, then will the honor of the Episcopal church be vindicated. There remains another topic which we regard as a proper subject of discussion. It is the light which this whole matter throws upon the constitution and working of the Episcopal church, both in respect to its merits, and in respect to its defects and disadvantages. 1. The records of this trial show, that in one most important and radical point, the Episcopal church in this country is Protestant and not Catholic. If there is any test of Protestantism—nay, of ultra Protestantism, as opposed to organic Catholicity, the utter rejection of the whole body of the Catholic canon law is such a test. Luther's declaration of independence—the salient point, as it may be called, of the separation between the Protestant and Catholic organizations—consisted in his solemnly committing to the flames at Wittemberg, Dec. 10, 1520, both the Pope's decree of excommunication against him, and the volumes of the canon law. And though to this day the canon law is the basis of the ecclesiastical jurisprudence of Lutheran Germany, the Protestantism of Germany is maintained by the provision that the canon law is of no force, when it conflicts with Protestant principles. In the church of England, the canon law, excepting such parts of it as are repugnant to the prerogative of the crown and the laws of the realm, is still in force, by act of Parliament, (25 Hen. VIII.) The canon law

then, even in England, has force, not as enacted by the councils, or established by the usages of the ancient church, but as enacted by King Henry VIII, and his obsequious Parliament; and this it is, that saves the Protestantism of the church of England. The ultra Protestant communities—the Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists and Methodists—in a word the Puritan churches, have nothing to do with the old canon law, except as they “renounce it and pray to be delivered from the snare thereof.” And how is it with the Episcopal church in the United States ? Does that body recognize the legislation and jurisprudence of the ancient church, down to the age of the Reformation, as of authority in the administration of discipline by American bishops, except so far as the old canons have been repealed or modified by some express enactment of its own 2 Not at all. The Episcopal church renounces not only the papal decretals, but the entire body of the canon law, no matter by what councils it was enacted. It renounces, not only the canons of the so called universal councils which have been held since the great schism which separated the patriarch of Constantinople from the patriarch of Rome; but also, the canons of the Catholic church as it was before that so much lamented schism. Not Jack himself in the Tale of a Tub, stripped away every rag of Lord Peter's livery more completely than the American Episcopal church has denuded itself of every tatter of the Catholic canon law. The theory of Catholicity, as we understand it, is that the Catholic church is an organic body with a corporate power of legislation, and that this power of legislation, whether exercised directly, under the formalities of a universal council, or indirectly, in the form of universal usage or tradition, binds the whole Catholic church to the duty of conformity. But neither the canons of the first six general councils, nor the canons of the first three—no, nor the yet older body of traditionary rules, known as the canons of the Apostles, have any force whatever, before the ecclesiastical tribunals of the American Episcopal church. It is in this respect an ultra Protestant church. Its only canons are those enacted by its own legislature, under a constitution framed by mutual compact. This is a serious obstacle in the way of the enterprise of those in that church, who would expel the Protestant element, and efface from its escutcheon the Protestant name. 2. The records of this trial show that, under the system of the Episcopal church in its present stage of development, it is a very difficult matter to bring an offending bishop to account. The ecclesiastical system of American Episcopalianism bears in many respects, a very close analogy to Congregationalism, and particularly to the Congregationalism of Connecticut, -the greatest differences being such as are involved in the fact that the original and independent church of the one system is a diocese with a bishop over it, while the complete and independent church of the other system, is a congregation with its bishops and deacons. The relations of the several diocesan churches, in the one system, are like the relations of the several parochial churches of a district, in the other system. The house of bishops is like the association of pastors. The general convention of bishops and diocesan deputies, is like the consociation or council of the confederated churches. The diocesan convention is like a church meeting regularly convened for business. The Episcopal bishop, like the Congregational pastor, is immediately responsible to his brethren of his own order within the limits of the confederation. He may be complained of, and regularly presented, either by his own dioce

san convention, or by any three of his brother bishops; just as the pastor of a Congregational church in Connecticut may be arraigned before a council, either by the action of his own church, or on a complaint to the association by two or three of his brethren in the ministry. The Episcopal prelate can not be regularly condemned but by the voices of his brother bishops; and just so the parochial bishop under the Saybrook Platform, can not be tried till the association, upon inquiry, have found sufficient cause for trial; nor can he be censured in the consociation without the votes of a majority of his brethren in office. The Congregational system works well as it respects the responsibility of pastors. Why then should not the Episcopal system work equally well in respect to the responsibility of bishops ? A moment's reflection is enough to show that there must be a difference. Think of the greatness of the dioceses and the consequent distance of the bishops from each other. One resides at Boston, another at Hartford, another at New York, another at Geneva, the next at Detroit; how can these men exercise any such fraternal inspection over each other as is exercised by the pastors of a Congregational association ? Think of the unnatural loftiness of the position which a bishop occupies in relation to the clergy and laity of his own diocese, by virtue of that august dignity and those mysterious powers which are supposed to have descended to him from the Apostles. He has no brethren around him to watch him as a brother, or to speak to him in the freedom of fraternal counsel and admonition. Who is there in the diocese that shall dare to move against him to bring him to account, unless his delinquency is such that the very stones are ready to cry out against him 2 All this is most abundantly and painfully illustrated in the history of the trial now under consideration. It was asked again and again, by the friends of Bishop Onderdonk, in reference to clergymen who had been cognizant of his misconduct in some particulars, Why did they not go to their brother, and tell him his fault alone The proper answer is, He was not their brother in any such sense, as would make that measure reasonable on their part. There was no relation of parity between him and them, such as must be presupposed in taking a step of that kind. What kind of a figure would a young clergyman, the rector of a little country congregation, make, going to administer a private admonition to his own bishop, and that bishop the diocesan of New York 2 The only remedy for this lies in the division of dioceses till the episcopacy shall approximate to the character of a parochial episcopacy. If a bishop were to have the superintendency of a few contiguous congregations, two, three, or half a dozen, devoting his time and strength to the advancement of their religious interests, this difficulty of bringing him to account would disappear. Let the system be thus developed; and the bishop instead of being, either in his own estimation or in that of any body else, a great spiritual potentate, of the same sort with the bishop of Exeter, or of London, or of Rome, would be simply a minister of Christ, charged with the oversight of several congregations. Instead of being isolated by his rank, with no brother—no peer, nearer than fifty or a hundred miles in one direction, and two or three hundred in another, he would be surrounded by brethren, his equals in office, under whose constant oversight he would perform his work, whose watchfulness would guard him from temptation, and whose brotherly faithfulness would rebuke him promptly when he went astray. 3. In connection with this consideration of the difficulty with which

the discipline of the church is put in exercise against an offending bishop, we can not but notice, as illustrated by the present trial, the operation of the Episcopalian system upon the minds of those who have been trained in it. We know not how to define what we mean, better than by referring to instances. First, then, here is a young minister of the Gospel; we can not doubt that he is a conscientious and truly pious man. All that appears on the record, and all that we have heard of him from any other quarter, constrains us to regard him with a sympathy which we have no disposition to disguise. Born and nurtured in the Episcopal church, in which his father was an honored minister, he looks upon the ministry of that church as an employment in which all his hopes and wishes in regard to this life can be filled, and in which, serving his Savior in the holiest labors, he can best train himself while training others, for the life to come. Having performed the usual probation in the lowest order of the ministry, and having obtained a settlement over a respectable congregation in a flourishing village of Western New York, he is now to be ordained to the office of the priesthood. That ordination can be obtained, of course, only from the apostolic hands of the bishop of the diocese. The bishop is performing an official journey through that part of his jurisdiction. The candidate for orders has come therefore in person some fifty miles, for the sake of conveying the bishop to the place where the ordination is to be performed to-morrow, in the presence of his own parishioners. His young wife, two months married, is with him. She too has been trained in the Episcopal church, in which her own father, as well as her husband's, is a minister. To both of them, the lesson of veneration for the functions and the person of the bishop, was among the earliest lessons of their childhood; and it remains in their minds, blended with all their most sacred and devout associations. As they have been delayed by various causes, the return journey must be performed, a great part of it, in the night. At their setting out, the sun is already near its going down. In a few moments, the shocking but irresistible conviction comes over them, that this authentic successor of the Apostles, whom they are conveying to the performance of the most mysterious and peculiar of all his awful functions, is more than half intoxicated. The husband is compelled to witness one annoying familiarity after another practiced upon his wife. An attempt is made to recall the Bishop to his senses, by a respectful and gentle rebuke, but in vain. What shall they do The twilight is fading; and as the night deepens, the annoyances grow more offensive, till the frighted and agitated wife springs over the back of the seat on which her husband is sitting, puts herself into his arms, and, in a whisper, tells him that she can endure it no longer. What shall that husband do 2 What does a just indignation prompt him to do? What would he do, if the offender were any body else than his bishop o Does he bid the carriage stop 2 Does he open the door, and seize this hoary insulter of modesty by the collar * Does he say to him, suiting the action to the word, ‘Come out of my carriage ; I have done with you;now go about your own affairs and take care of yourself as you can o' No ; he is absolutely in a maze; he knows not what to do. He waits till the carriage arrives at a stopping-place. There he consults with his wife, and learns from her lips the grossness of the insult. What shall be done In his indignation, he declares that he will not be ordained by such hands as those —that he will return to his home, and not carry such a bishop for such

a service. His wife, with an instinctive discernment of the position in which such a course on the part of her husband would place both of them, does all she can to soothe him; and after a little resting of the horses, their journey is continued. So they travel from one stoppingplace to another, the prelate meanwhile—that apostolic man, the “center of unity’ for the State of New York, and the one appointed medium in all that empire State for the communication of the grace of God in confirmation and in ordination— sinking down into the heavy sleep in which nature seeks to regain its balance, after disturbance by improper alcoholic excitement. At last the distressing journey is ended; and, at the appointed time, the ordination follows, the lady very properly absenting herself from a ceremony so shocking to all her religious sensibilities. But her unhappy husband—who does not pity him * He can not escape. The man of whose character he has become cognizant, is none other than his bishop; and he can find no other way of entrance into the ministry of Christ, but by submitting to the laying on of those lecherous hands. Who that has not been educated an Episcopalian can imagine the conflict of that hour in his mind 2 Who can imagine the stunned and helpless feeling with which that candidate must have kneeled before that bishop—a feeling as if all the foundations of faith and faith's affections had been destroyed—a feeling as if he had suddenly discovered that “The pillared firmament is rottenness, And earth's base built on stubble.' Proceed we to another illustration. We have now before us two young ladies, evidently educated under thoroughly Episcopalian influences, confirmed at a suitable age, diligent Sunday school teachers, active in promoting the interests of the church. It is a Sabbath in the month of June ; and in the church where these young ladies are accustomed to worship, far towards the upper end of New York island, the Bishop, with whom they had heretofore had some acquaintance, is to officiate ; and after the morning service he is to dine at their brother's house, which is their home. The younger sister is obliged to leave church and go home before the service of the morning is ended, on account of a nervous headache. Th elder, at the close of the service, rides home with the bishop in a carriage, of which the rector of the church is the owner and the driver. On the way, while the parson is chiefly occupied with his functions as charioteer, “the law of kindness in the Bishop, as described by his brother of New Jersey, “overflows' its banks; and, in his ‘familiar and paternal' way, not having the fear of ‘blue laws’ before his eyes, he insists on putting his arm around the lady's neck, and taking some other liberties. The lady is tempted to leap from the carriage; but she does not. It would be natural for her to utter some exclamation, but she is silent. Why? The reason is plain enough. This is the Bishop; and the thought that if she cries out the Bishop will be disgraced, and the church dishonored, awes her to silence. But as soon as she arrives at her brother's house, she rushes to her chamber, and there tells the story to her sister, between whom and herself there are no secrets. What then * Do these young ladies determine to remain in their chamber, till the man who has insulted one of them has left the house 2 No; the Bishop—the Bishop must be treated with respect. The idea of treating the apostolical succession as embodied in their bishop, with any appearance of disrespect, shocks their devout sensibilities. The younger sister, therefore, though afraid, goes down immediately to “entertain’ him, as the family were not yet prepared to do so; the elder having promised to

follow, as soon as she can sufficiently compose herself. No sooner does she enter the parlor, in the performance of this pious intention, than the Bishop begins to “entertain' himself by taking the same liberties which he had just been taking with her sister. She is “afraid to scream, or even to reprove him, for her two brothers are in the hall,” and the door is open. She is “fearful for his personal safety, and does not expose him for the sake of the church.” The coming in of other members of the family affords her a momentary relief, but she does not embrace the opportunity of making her escape. Her religious sentiment of reverence for the Bishop is so strong, that even after all this, she dares not treat him with diminished respect; she dares not show him that she thinks him a villain; it does not appear that she dares to admit such a thought into her own mind. Instead of avoiding him with a womanly dignity, she almost seems, if we may judge from her own story, to put herself in the way of additional insults, which he loses no opportunity of practicing, till the sisters go out to their afternoon classes in the Sunday school. Such is the veneration in which a bishop, as such, is held by a devout churchWoman. We have yet another illustration, bearing on a different point. A young clergyman in one of the little parishes on Long Island, has the honor of entertaining the Bishop under his own roof. His young wife, a few weeks married, is so unfortunate as to sit by the Bishop during a short ride from church, after the morning service. On her arrival at home, she tells her husband, who had come home some other way, that the Bishop's manners are too familiar; that he has put his arm around her in the carriage, pressing his hand upon her bosom; and that she desires not to ride with him again. The husband, whose vener

« 上一頁繼續 »