V

DO "CATHOLICS" REPRESENT THE

WR

CHURCH?

E have now shown, as we believe, conclusively, that the present wide-spread opinion that the Episcopate is necessary to the being of the Church, with its inevitable corollary that the non-episcopal bodies form no part of the Holy Catholic Church, and that their individual members are cut off from the hope of Salvation, because, as Bishop Hobart expressed it, "cut off from Communion with Christ," is a theory wholly repugnant to the official doctrine of the Church of England and our own Protestant Episcopal Church. Our people should not be misled by it. We wish to emphasize this the more inasmuch as there are many moderate Churchmen, far removed from the extreme position of the "Catholic" party, who have nevertheless been prevailed upon to accept this exclusive theory of the Episcopate. They accept it without understanding its true significance, or appreciating the dangerous consequences which flow from it. We wish to say, therefore, as clearly and emphatically as we know how, that the theory which holds the Episcopate to be

absolutely essential to the Church, so that without it no Church can exist, the theory which excludes all the non-episcopal bodies from the Church Catholic, and so justifies the title The American Catholic Church as the logical title for this Communion, because the only Episcopal organization native to America since its first settlement by Europeans, is a theory which by its very nature necessarily implies the unchurching of all other Protestants as individuals. It denounces them as "cut off from communion with Christ," hence cut off from the one and only source of Eternal Life, and so denied the hope of Life Eternal, denied the hope of Salvation. It means this, and nothing less than this, for the plain reason that if the Episcopate be not necessary or essential to the Church on this ground, there is no other ground that can be discovered for asserting its necessity. You may, indeed, speak much of its importance in the Church, you may even conceive it to be necessary or essential to the well-being of the Church, but when you go further than this, and assert its necessity to the very being of the Church because that without a Bishop there can be no valid Ministry and no valid Sacraments, you mean and can mean but one thing, viz.: that it is necessary to individual incorporation into the Church of Christ, to personal union and communion with Christ, to personal reception of the Life by the Soul, hence necessary to personal Salvation. Moreover, the best proof that we are not misrepresenting the logical consequences of the theory is the fact that its own greatest expounders have

given precisely this interpretation of it. The Episcopate is necessary, they tell us, because "the participation of the Body and Blood of Christ is essential to the maintenance of Christian life and hope IN EACH INDIVIDUAL," and "it [the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ] is conveyed to INDIVIDUAL Christians ONLY BY THE HANDS OF THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES AND THEIR DELEGATES" (Schmucker's Hist. All Religions, p. 291). "We hold the necessity of a Bishop to be as great in the Church as the breath of life is in man, or as the sun is in the system of creation"—" the Episcopal dignity is so necessary in the Church, that without a Bishop there cannot exist any Church, NOR ANY CHRISTIAN MAN; NO, NOT SO MUCH AS IN NAME" (British Critic). Says Bishop Hobart, “Where the Gospel is proclaimed, communion with the Church by the participation of its ordinances, at the hands of the duly authorized Priesthood, is the INDISPENSABLE CONDITION OF SALVATION" (Companion to the Altar, p. 202). And again, "Whoever is in communion with the Bishop, the supreme governor of the Church upon earth, is in communion with the Head of it; and WHOEVER IS NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE BISHOP, IS THEREBY CUT OFF FROM COMMUNION WITH CHRIST" (A Companion to the Festivals and Fasts, p. 59). If this be not a clear, unequivocal assertion that the Episcopate is necessary to the Salvation of each individual Soul, we should like to know what is? And if this does not mean that the members of non-episcopal bodies are not as individuals cut off from the Catholic Church (the

significance of their Baptism to the contrary notwithstanding'), “cut off from communion with Christ,” and so cut off from hope of Personal Salvation, we should like to know what it does or can mean? In short, according to their own statements, it is as plain as any fact can be that the Episcopate is regarded as necessary to the Church, because necessary to the validity of those Sacraments which alone can give Salvation to each individual Soul. Hence it is necessary to the being of the Church because necessary to the being of every Christian man. To deny

This is only another instance of the illogical and wholly inconsistent position of "Catholics.' They are forced to admit that Lay Baptism (to say nothing of Baptism at the hands of Ministers of Non-Episcopal Churches) is valid, and yet in spite of this admission they normally speak of the Episcopate as necessary to the validity of the "Sacraments"—(plural)—thus including Baptism. We are not responsible, though, for the inconsistency of the statement that "Catholics" assert that Episcopacy is necessary to the validity of the "Sacraments" which we have frequently made in these pages. It remains a fact that they do make just this statement, despite their admissions to the contrary. The same writer who has given us so much valuable testimony as to the validity of Lay Baptism, nevertheless asserts elsewhere: "The Catholic Church has ever held this doctrine, that true ministrations of Grace depend on Episcopal Ministries, and has always regarded all other ministries, whether assumed to be conferred by Presbyters, undertaken at will, or bestowed by a call from the Congregation, to be wholly invalid. . . . Every Mission of their hands is, therefore, absolutely null and void, according to Scripture, Authority, Apostolic prac tice, and the unbroken tradition of Eighteen Centuries" (Blunt, Annot. Bk. Com. Pr.).

Note.-"Every Mission of their hands" is "null and void." Does not this necessarily include Baptism? If not, why not? "The Apostolical Succession of the Ministry is Essential to the right administration of the Sacraments" (plural). Ch. Handy Dict.