As you were so kind as to favour me with the loan of a publication,
entitled "_Letters to a Dissenting Minister, by L. S. E., containing
Remarks on the Principles of the Sect_," &c., and to request my opinion
of its merits and tendency, I have put down what occurred to me on the
perusal of some parts of its contents: to have toiled through the whole
of it, was a task to which my patience was by no means equal.
The first impression produced on my mind was, the total absence of that
charity and forbearance so often enjoined in the holy Scriptures.
"_Judge not, that ye_ BE NOT JUDGED," was one of the precepts
delivered, in his first sermon, by our divine Lord and Master; and in
accordance with this direction, when his disciples, instigated by a
mistaken regard for his cause, came to him complaining that they had met
with some who followed not with them, and inquiring whether they should
forbid them, his reply was, "Forbid them not, for he that is not against
us is with us." The apostle Paul recommended the same line of conduct
towards weak and mistaken brethren, and in the First Epistle to the
Corinthians, which abounds with directions as to the conduct of
professing Christians one towards another, he sums up the whole by a
glowing description of _charity_, as superior to all other graces:
"Charity suffereth long, and is kind; thinketh no evil; hopeth all
things; endureth all things." To me it appears utterly impossible to
reconcile these expressions with the arrogant pretensions and sweeping
censures of this writer, not only with respect to the overt conduct, but
the _motives_, of those who differ from him, charging them with a
sin more heinous than drunkenness, and with being under the influence
of the devil, because they cannot see alike with him respecting some
of the circumstantials of Christianity, though they may agree as to
the essentials.
But the censorious language of the writer is not exhausted in the use of
the most opprobrious epithets, and such as have hitherto been only
appropriate to the vilest of characters; but it is diffused through the
pages of his publication, by raking together and detailing anecdotes,
with a view to degrade and vilify individuals, and the body of
dissenters at large. That there are imperfections and inconsistencies to
be found among the professors of religion, must be acknowledged; and has
in every age been a source of lamentation to truly pious and devoted
Christians; but how different their feelings from those of this
clergyman, who endeavours to expose to ridicule the failings of others;
who dwells upon them with a kind of malignant pleasure, and thus affords
a handle to the common enemies of Christianity!
As to many of the anecdotes contained in this publication, many are
garbled and distorted, and some of them are, in many of their
particulars, palpable falsehoods. The very quotations from the writings
of his opponents--though it must be conceded that at this period of
great excitement many unguarded expressions have been used by some
individuals--are, some of them, so garbled and mangled as scarcely to
bear any resemblance to the original, and calculated to convey a meaning
very different from what was intended by the writer.
Not to dwell any longer on these statements, which occupy a considerable
portion of the book, in the chapters on _the Authority of the Church_,
and _the Ordination of Christian Ministers_, much will be found so
extravagant in its assumptions, as to throw the pretensions of the
church of Rome into the shades (within whose pale, if he had any regard
for consistency, he ought certainly to have been), and calculated to
undermine and overthrow the grounds of the Protestant succession. They
are indeed so full of absurdity as to amuse rather than offend, and
exhibit in the clearest light the inability of L. S. E. to form a
correct judgment, either as to matters of faith or practice. With all
the consequence and arrogance which assumed infallibility can induce, he
maintains that none ought to be teachers of religion but those who are
_authorized_, or otherwise _specially inspired_ of God. According to his
definition, an _authorized_ minister is one who has passed through the
ordeal of episcopal ordination, and what constitutes that authority is,
the _regular succession_ from the times of the apostles to the present
period. In order to make this most important discovery of a regular
succession, on which, in his estimation, so much depends, I have been
employing myself for some time, in rummaging the different volumes of
ecclesiastical history within my reach, and endeavouring to trace the
succession, from the time of Peter downwards; and upwards from the time
of the Reformation. In the former case, there is great confusion in the
catalogue of bishops. Few of these are alike; some names of persons are
given, who, there is reason to believe, never existed; there are many
periods entirely without names; and it is well known, that for some time
there were rival popes, each claiming exclusive authority. In tracing
these tainted and impure currents, where shall we discover, either
before or after the Saxon invasion, the perennial stream which will
alone confer sanctity on the priestly office?
In attempting to make discoveries in a retrograde movement, from the
time of the Reformation, we find the names of Bonner, Gardiner, &c.;
those immaculate characters, who, of course, transmitted this divine
authority, and afterwards committed those to whom they had given it to
the flames. In this lack of information on so momentous a subject, L. S.
E.--_alias_ the Rev. Augustus Gathercole--will confer an invaluable
benefit on the church to which he belongs, if he can produce, from his
hidden stores, in the musty parchments which have been concealed for
ages, the direct and unbroken line of succession, and append it to the
next edition of his popular production. Of course the dissenters can
have no pretensions to be _authorized_ teachers on these grounds; and
not more so, as having _a special inspiration from God_ to become
teachers, which is represented by this writer as the only other ground
of a call to this office. It is true that some enthusiasts, with whom,
as a body, they have no connexion, have laid claim to this high
prerogative; but the avowed sentiment of the nonconformist body is, that
the supernatural powers connected with a _special inspiration_ from God
ceased with the first ages of Christianity. The Holy Spirit, in his
ordinary and gracious operations, is promised to all good men, and
especially to the ministers of the gospel, who, whether professing to be
authorized teachers in the way before described or not, are insufficient
in themselves for any good work, their sufficiency being of God, who
alone can make them able ministers of the New Testament. Destitute of
this, the hands of the bishop cannot confer any of the necessary
qualifications.
If none have any claim to the sacred office but those who have had
episcopal ordination, or are specially inspired, not only the present
race of teachers among different denominations, both Methodists and
regular Dissenters, must be degraded to the rank of intruders, whatever
success may have attended their labours; but the same will apply to the
2,000 ministers of whom the world was not worthy, the brightest
ornaments of the church to which the reverend gentleman belongs, who
were expelled from their situations by the act of uniformity. Also the
ministers of the Presbyterian church in Scotland, of which, as well as
of the church of England, the king, by his representative, is the head,
with many of the most eminent men who have flourished in these and
foreign lands. Whatever excellences the universal suffrage of the wisest
and best of men, both Churchmen and Dissenters, have attributed to the
writings and public labours of an Owen, a Howe, a Charnock, a Watts, a
Doddridge (the intimate friend of Archbishop Secker), a Henry, with a
long train of others that might be enumerated, they must now retire into
the shades, and pass into oblivion, because this infallible judge has
made it out that they were not _authorized teachers_. Like their
successors, they were incompetent to administer the ordinances aright;
like them, to use his own language, they could not lay _claim to be
considered as Christians. They were without the pale of the visible
church of God. As schismatics, who forsook the church, they ought to
have been the very first persons to whom the church should have refused
her burial service; the principles of independency, which they in
general maintained, being those of depraved human nature instilled into
man, and fostered in him by his great enemy the devil, who was the first
dissenter._
Whatever inconveniences or evils may attend the choice of their own
teachers by each respective congregation, the imposition of teachers is
far from being free from the most serious objections, and especially
when the patronage is in the hands of persons, as it often is,
regardless of the spiritual welfare of the flock, who are left in a
starving condition, and too often feel no interest either in the
preacher or his doctrine.
But I forbear, and shall leave it to a discerning public to determine
whether the contents of this unique publication--a specimen of which is
now given, can do any service to the church of which the Rev. A.
Gathercole prides himself as being a member, or do any credit to the
judgment of the reverend clergymen and the lordly bishop, who have
condescended to give it their sanction.
For myself (and I can without hesitation say the same of those with whom
I am connected), I have no wish to see the downfal of the venerable
fabric of the church, though in its patronage, often improperly used,
and in some of its formularies, particularly the baptismal service and
others connected with it, I think I see much that calls for alteration.
Many of its ministers and members I respect, and wish to consider them
as fellow-Christians. To this however, in the estimation of the Rev. A.
Gathercole, I have no right to lay a claim, and must not therefore
presume to subscribe myself by any other name than that with which he
designates every Dissenter,--