"The

ing a uniformity in the belief of the simple and fundamental doctrines of grace, as has been found among the several denominations who receive the Bible alone as the sole and sufficient standard of faith and duty. With all their conflicts on minor points, there has been in fundamentals, more than anywhere else, One Faith, and one Lord. Freedom of thought, and free discussion, have caused at times sharp controversy; error deserves it; truth is worth it: but in all, the truth has gained. Some have apostatised: but the Bible is before them, and no superior authority binds their consciences to retain the error. Let the vast corruptions of a thousand years; let the corruptions now rising and spreading within the communion paled in and fenced by Church interpretations and Church authority, decide, whether, within such fences, these apostates would have done any better. "There must be heresies," says the Word of God, "that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." The great mass have remained firm: the more firm from the discussions to which these heresies have given rise. sword of the Spirit" is not the interpretations of the Church, but "The Word of God." If you would repress heresy, leave that sword unsheathed. A pious prayerful soul may be trusted with that; a wilful heretic will not be put down with a human decree or canon. Bind not up the thoughtful inquirer to believe on the authority of human interpretations and canons, lest his faith rest on the wisdom of man, rather than on the Word of God. Rear up fences of forms, interpretations, and decrees; and you may perpetuate your own folly; you may thrust your wisdom between the soul and the authority of God; you may arrogate to yourself the authority of conservator over the understanding of future generations, as well as of God's Holy Truth; but you may at the same time perpetuate heresy and darkness, and lay the foundations of a spiritual bondage under which your children's children may groan in hopeless misery. But let a continent sink in error; let ten thousand times ten thousand blinded priests conspire to hold them in bondage; yet throw these fences down, and send forth one living man with "the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God;"-and darkness and superstition will flee before him. That sword of the Spirit which is the most powerful to conquer, is most powerful to defend. Give us this, and let error take the field; let Satan come in subtlety or in wrath; and we have wherewithal to quench his fiery darts. But remove the faith of the people one step from the Word of God, and try to fence it round by human decrees and forms, and the incipient apostasy has begun its march; the mystery of iniquity is at work; nothing but the special providence of God can prevent Anti-christ from being, in time, fully developed and revealed.

17

XIX.

ON THE ALLEGED RIGHT TO IMPOSE LITURGIES AND CEREMONIES.

Illustrated by the Doctrines of Holy Alliance. Enormities in practice. Necessarily a system of usurpation and persecution. Natural rights of Christian congregations. Plea of uniformity. The question not of the expediency of a Liturgy, but of the right to impose one. Canons of American Episcopacy. Limits of Church power.

ANOTHER fundamental principle which demands discussion, separate from all consideration of Church organization, or modes of discipline and worship, is the alleged right to frame Liturgies and devise ceremonies for the worship of God;. to forbid Christians to celebrate public worship in any other mode; and to enforce these Liturgies and ceremonies by penalties, either civil or ecclesiastical.

The importance of this topic will be better appreciated by a reference to some instances of parallel usurpations in civil affairs. Such a reference will show what fundamental principles are worth; and how many seeds of despotism, mischief, and wo, may be wrapped up in a seemingly innocent line.

Those who are old enough to remember the campaign of Bonaparte in Russia, will call to mind the famous HOLY ALLIANCE formed by several of the crowned heads of Europe. Its object was, professedly, the peace and stability of the European nations. "The world," says Daniel Webster, "seems to have received this treaty upon its first promulgation, with general charity. It was commonly understood, as little or nothing more than an expression of thanks for the successful termination of the momentous contest in which these sovereigns had been engaged."*"In the name of the Most Holy Trinity," said their manifesto, " their Majesties solemnly declare, that the present act has no other object than to publish in the face of the whole world, their fixed resolution, both in the administration of their respective states, and in their political relations with every other government, to take for

* Speech on the Greek Revolution.

their sole guide the precepts of that Holy Religion—namely, the precepts of justice, Christian charity, and peace-which, far from being applicable only to private concerns, must have an immediate influence on the councils of princes, and guide all their steps, as being the only means of consolidating human institutions, and remedying their imperfections."

All this appeared vastly well. It is probable that they were sincere; and that Alexander, at least, the great soul of the Alliance, was actuated by the most beneficent motives.

This Alliance, then, was made to keep the peace of Europe; and to enforce that peace and the observance of the principles of justice and Christianity among nations (in the language of Webster)," by a million and a half of bayonets."

But now there arose a momentous question: What do these princes deem to be "the principles of Christianity and justice," with regard to human governments? Oh! the Divine Right of Kings and the absolute destitution of all political rights on the part of the people! It was not long before they revealed the principles on which their conduct was to be governed. The first principle they put forth was in these words: "All popular or constitutional rights are holden no otherwise than as grants from the crown." "Society," says Webster, "upon this principle, has no rights of its own: it takes good government when it can get it, as a boon and a concession; but can demand nothing. It is to live in that favor which emanates from regal authority; and if it have the misfortune to lose that favor, there is nothing to protect it against any degree of injustice and oppression. It can rightfully make no endeavor for a change by itself. All its duty is described in the single word SUBMISSION."

The Holy Alliance was not slow to draw the same conclusion. In the Laybach Circular, of May, 1821, they declared, "That useful and necessary changes in legislation ought to emanate from the free will and intelligent conviction of those whom God has rendered responsible for power; and that all that deviate from this line, necessarily tend to disorder, commotions, and evils, far more insupportable than those which they pretended to remedy."

On this principle, the English Barons who, six hundred years ago, after suffering from the intolerable tyranny of King John, sword in hand, wrested the Great Charter from that infamous king at Runnimede,-were entirely to blame! If the Holy Alliance had existed then, it would have put the Barons down. The king had a divine right to rule the English; responsible only to God: and they must submissively wait till the tyrant should grow kind.

Our notions of freedom are such as to make the very name of charter and liberties, in the English sense, a reproach. Our

franchises we hold by no kingly charter: nor do we hold these as liberties, but as RIGHTS which we will VINDICATE,—not ask as a favor from any power below that of God. "I need not stop," says Webster, "to observe how totally hostile are these doctrines of Laybach, to the fundamental principles of our governinent. They are in direct contradiction; the principles of good and evil are hardly more opposite. If these principles of the sovereigns be true, we are but in a state of rebellion, or of anarchy, and are only tolerated among civilized states, because it has not yet been convenient to conform us to the true standard."

The Holy Alliance pursued the principle to its legitimate issue. They declared that "The Powers" [the Alliance] “have an undoubted right to take a hostile attitude in regard to those states in which the overthrow of the government may operate as an example."

"There cannot," says Webster, "be conceived a more flagrant violation of public law, or national independence, than is contained in this short declaration." "No matter what be

the character of the government resisted; no matter with what weight the foot of the oppressor bears on the neck of the oppressed; if he struggle, or if he complain, he sets a dangerous example of resistance; and from that moment he becomes an object of hostility to the most powerful potentates of the earth. I want words to express my abhorrence of this abominable principle. I trust every enlightened man throughout the world will oppose it ; 'and that especially those who, like ourselves, are fortunately out of the reach of the bayonets that enforce it, will proclaim their detestation of it both loud and decisive.”

But why this outcry at a mere abstract principle? On that principle depends the movement of a million and a half of bayonets; and the question of despotism or freedom throughout the globe. That principle soon awoke to vigorous life. The people of Spain, worn out with inquisitorial cruelties and grinding oppression, rose in their might, and established a Constitution. The bayonets of France, as the instruments of the Alliance, advanced across the Pyrenees and put that Constitution down. Greece rose against the bloody rule of the Turks. When the revolution broke out, the sovereigns were in Congress at Laybach, and declared "their abhorrence of those criminal combinations which had been formed in the eastern part of Europe." "The practical commentary," says Webster, "corresponded with the plain language of the text. Look at Spain. Look at Greece. If men may not resist the Spanish Inquisition, and the Turkish Cimetar, what is there to which humanity must not submit? Stronger cases can never arise."

The butchery of the Turks was too horrid: nature cried out

against the doctrine of the Holy Alliance. The genius of England prevailed. The Turkish authority was broken: but mark; -The Greeks must not be free! The republics of Greece restored in the midst of despotic Europe! O no: they must have a king. A weak, wrong-headed boy, a scion of some legitimate succession, must be set to reign over the high-spirited republican Greeks!

The Holy Alliance turned their thoughts to the insurrectionary provinces of South America, and their bayonets would have re-established there the authority of Spain: but Great Britain would not be a partner in the crime; the fleets of Britain were to be encountered on the sea; and beyond, lay that Young Republic, whose chief magistrate had in his message intimated the determination of the people, that on this continent such things must not be done.

The principle of the Holy Alliance reached even to the evil example of our Revolution, and of our Republican Institutions: nor is there room to question, that not their good will, nor their forbearance, but the good hand of God, and the difficulty of the undertaking, kept the Holy Alliance from sending their bayonets to set up a monarchy in this American land. They did not believe that any government established and wielded by the people could be VALID. They did not believe that there could lawfully be "A STATE WITHOUT A KING."

So much for a principle. The illustration has been long; but not too long for its importance.

The

How does the illustration apply to the case in hand? Church, alias the Hierarchy, set up a claim, not only to be the judge of faith with authority paramount to all rights of private judgment; but they claim also a right to frame liturgies, and ceremonies, for the worship of God, and to impose the same upon all Christians. I say-UPON ALL CHRISTIANS. Whoever, being within the pale of that Church, presumes to worship God in public in any other way, is ecclesiastically punished, or cast out. Whatever bodies of Christians presume to worship God, without submitting to this Hierarchy, and to its liturgies and ceremonies, they are regarded as wicked schismatics; and with their ministers are held up to abhorrence as followers of Korah. In this principle, and in this line of conduct, Episcopalians both Popish and Protestant, with some honorable exceptions fully agree.

This principle has been tried on a vast scale, and for a period of more than a thousand years. A despotism a thousand times than that of the Holy Alliance. doctrines; what idolatrous rites;

And what has been the result? more iron-handed and bloody What mummeries; what false what prayers to the saints and