benjamin f barrett episcopalianism versus swedenborgianism philadelphia 1872

7/28/2019 Benjamin F Barrett EPISCOPALIANISM Versus SWEDENBORGIANISM Philadelphia 1872

1/234

PRELATE AND pASTOR;- oa,EP.ISCOPALIANISM

YERSUS

SWEDENBORGIANISM.

BTBISHOP ~ R G E S S

B. F. BARRETT.

PHILADELPHIAJ. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.

187 2 .


2/234


3/234


4/234

'ANDOVER-HARVARDTH!::OL': - : 1 ~ Lit;r_,c . c . . ~ . ~ = : ---OTE.

In my little worR on "Episcopalianirtn," tliere occur ex-pressions wliic/, must needs sound linrsli lo tliose w/,o /,ave notum tlie Bishop's pamplilet. But wlim ii is RnowlS tlial tlieuexpressions were cofod verbatim fro111 Iii " Swedml>orl{ianism," and for reasons wliic/, t/,e reader wiJI readily tm-derstand and appreciate, tlie aspect of tlie case is so11uwlialchang-ed.

I /,ave 6un informed 6yfriends on wlioujudgmml I rely,that tlie effect of my little 6ooR is t1nifor111ly liappy wlim tlieBisliop's pamplilet is rend in onnulion witli ii; and liaw6un ur,i;-ed, tlierefon, lo /,ave tlie two worRs 6ound togetlier.One intelligent 6rollier writ1s:

" We liave lure several copies of your repl)' lo BisliopBurgess, wliicli are drculating a111onl{ Ept'scopalia1Ss, andan doing good. Some, liowroer, tliinR your 6ooR ratlierliars/,, except wlim read along- wit/, tlie Bt'sliop's allacR. Insue/," cases, tlie 1fect produad is excellent; 6ut wlim your6ooR is read 6y itself tlie 1fect is not so g-ood. By all meansliave tlie attacR added."

It is letters of tliis cliaracler wliicli linve induced me loorder tlie presmt edition, wit/, t/,e Bisliop' s pamp/,/et prefixed.In "Prelate and Pastor," tlierefore, tlie reader /,as 6otlisides, and is left lo form liis own conclusion.

B. F. B.WasT PHILADKLPHJA, April 9t 187a.


5/234


6/234

SWEDENBOR G TANISM.

BY TBlli UTB

BISHOP BURGESS.

PBOTESTAN'l' EPISCOPAL SOCIETY FOR THE PBOJllOTIONQF EVillGELIOAL KNOWLEDGE,

No. 2, BIBLB Ho'O'es, NBW You.


7/234


8/234

SWEDENBORGIANISM.

EVERY Priest or Presbyter of our Church,at his ordination, was asked, "Will you beready with all faithful diligence, to banishand drive away .from the Church all erro-neous and stro.nge doctrines, contrary toGod's Word?" and every one o.nswered, " Iwill, the Lord being my helper." This verynecessary task is to be discho.rged, not byforce or fraud, even i f that were possible,but by argument and persuasion, public andprivate, and, i f need be, by rebuke, denuncia-tion of the e r r o r ~ and exclusion from theLord's Table. Every Bishop has given athis consecration the same promise a second

(3)


9/234

4 Swedenborgianism.time, in almost the same words. Those whohave placed themselves under these mostsacred obligations cannot doubt their generalduty, to expose the falsehood of any doctrineby which any of their charge may be liable

to be at all endangered, and to warn themagainst the snare all the more, if they do

. not perceive it to be a snare.But it is at this very point where real dan-

ger begins, that some plausible maxims areencountered, which have not been withouttheir weight in the minds even of Christians,who loved both the truth and peace. I t isthus said that an opinion, true or false, onlygains strength and spreads the more whenit is openly opposed. Be silent, it is said,and it will either die away or cease to extenditself beyond its present limits. I t is per-fectly plain, however, that reasoning like


10/234

Swetlenborgianism. S'

this is exactly that which may be employedin the case of any disease which hRS in-creased till it beca.me alarmillg or fatal.Did you employ medical treatment? Youmay be told that the treatment en.used themischiet Did yon employ no medicaltreatment? Yon may certainly be told,with a much greater appearance of justice,that the mischief proceeded from your neglect. I suppose, however, that no father,solicitous for the threatened life of a sickchild, would be as much disturbed by thefear that, through timely attention to thecomplaint, he might have unintentionallypushed it on, as by the dread that he mighthave neglected it too long. In the samemanner when an error grows up and liveson, it is easy to say, either that it is becauseit was opposed, or because it was not op-


11/234

6 Swedenborgansm.posed, by the clergy. They who merelyreason from the result are always liable tomistake the.way of duty: There cannot bethe smallest doubt that it is right to guardthose whom we love, those for whom we arein any degree responsible, against everyserious danger which we can foresee; '8.ndthis duty is not at all affected by the result.The natural, obvious, and divinely appointedway of checking the progress of error, is, todetect, expose, and refute it by scripturalargument and warning. I f at any time itshould spread in defiance of such efforts, we mny be sure that without them i t wouldhave spread more rapidly and more disas-trously.

There is another objection which comeshome to our kindlier feelings. While theerror was at a distance, to contend earnestly


12/234

Sweden/Jorgianism. 7against it was inoft'ensive, but was also quiteuseles9. To argue against the Mormondoctrine wounds no one, bot is of no profit.But when the error approaches and sitsdown amongst us, it necessarily happensthat those on whom it lays its grasp are ourfriends and neighbors. We love them, werespect them ; we wish to live in union andconcord ; we are not blind to their variousmerits ; and ''l'e are all bound together bymutual kindnesses. I t is not possible seri-ously to assail the opinions of any withoutdanger of giving pain ; and certainly it isnot ~ x p e d i e n t to condemn them, except''l'hen it is to be done with great seriousneSB.Whatever mode may be adopted, reproofand censure can never be made pleasing.Are we then to forbear? Woe to us i l weprove faithless to our duty for such a cause ;


13/234

8 Swedenborgiamsm.i f we permit those whom we love to passunwarned into danger and delusion!

I am about, therefore, to speak of the de-lusion which derives its name and originfrom the writings of Swedenborg; and tospeak of it for the very reason that it ishere ; that it has a foothold in our commu-nity ; and that whatever powers of persua-sion it may possess are exercised to beguilethe uninstructed and the unstable. For thepersonal character of several of those bywhom this doctrine is professed I entertaina very high degree of respect; there is noneof them, so far as I know, from whom I everreceived any unkindness ; and I could wishnot to inflict the smallest pain by any wordswhich the truth may require to be uttered.At the same time, there is no room in sub-jects like these for any great influence of


14/234

Swedenbor.gianism. 9personal considerations. I f that which istermed, but never ought to be termed, "theNew Church," if the Church of Swedenborgbe right, the old Church, the Holy CatholicChurch, the Church of Christ, is gl'oeslywrong.

The whole Church of Christ, in all it.abranches and denominations, is constantlyassailed by those who believe in the doc-trines of Swedenborg, as i f it were wholly indarkness, blind to the troth, and engaged inteaching mighty and mischievous corrup-tions. We are not called to retaliate, exceptas, from the nature of things, that whichthus opposes the Church must be oppositeto the truth, and necessarily worthy of con-demnation. But it is not the province ofChristianity to defend its own cause so muchas to attack and overthrow, by the arms of


15/234

to Swedenborganz'sm.truth, all which is hostile to the declared willof God our Saviour. We must refuse tostand on the defensive ; we must push errorback upon its own ground; break down itsfastnesses, if it has any ; expose its hidingplaces ; disclose it as it is ; and i f it be possi-ble, leave it no disguise through which anhonest hea.rt can be deceived. We woulddestroy the error, that we may rescue theerring.

I offer no apology, then, for doing thatwhich is my duty ; for attempting to showwhat Swedenborgianism attempts to be;what delusions it embraces; and, beyondthese delusions, how it contradicts the wordof God. Let us only pray that all may bedone with that temper which the HolyGhost sheds abroad in the heart, and that


16/234

Swedenborgianism. I Iwe all may be enlightened by the truth as itis in Jesus!

Swedenborgianism is the name whichshould be carefully given to the doctrinaland ecclesiastical system of the followers ofSwedenborg. There is but one Ohurch ofChrist ; it embraces all who have receivedChristian baptism and hold the Christianfaith; there can be no "New Ohurch" in thesense in which that designation is claimed ;

_as i f the ancient and only Church of Obristhad been superseded. The title . of " theChurch of the New Jerusalem," it would beblasphemous to give, i f we did it deliberately,to a body which we believe to be of merehuman institution, and to be founded in thewildest perversions of the Scriptures. I f anyman can suppose the Swedenborgian sect tobe the New Jerusalem of the Revelation, he


17/234

I 2 Swedenborgz"anz"sm.of course can give them that name with agood conscience; but with the holiest, heavenliest words, the rest of mankind shouldnot dare to trifle.

Swedenborgianism is simply the system ofbelief and practice taught by EmanuelSwedenb?rg. He was a Swedish nobleman,a man of scientific knowledge, and voluminous writer, much engaged in speculationson the nature of the soul. When he wasfifty-seven years old, which was in the year .1745, he conceived that he had intercoitrsewith the world o! spirits ; and the variousthoughts on certain subjects which thenceforth arose in his mi.D.d, (and he w1,1s a prodigious dreamer,) he seems honestly to havetaken !or revelations. He lived till the ageof eighty-four, and continued, in his eccentric wo.y, to write on till his books were


18/234

Swedenborgiani'sm. I 3twenty-seven heavy and exceedingly tediousvolumes, in striking contrast with the

)variety, sublimity and beauty of the HolyScriptures. He did not attempt to founda. sect, or to make many proselytes ; he didnot pretend to work miracles, nor to prophesy, beyond a few slight instances of supposed disclosuies of things .which he couldnot know through the senses ; instances,which, if true, were similar to clairvoyance,and to which he attached little importance.

Such was the man, grave, moral, learned ;not eminently wise or gifted, or, so far aswe know, eminently devout and holy ; aspeculative enthusiast, a monomanil\c, aman whom his contemporaries regarded asof doubtful sanity. A few persons believedhis revelations while he lived; a few haveembraced them since; and although at first


19/234

I 4 Swedenborgansm.it seems to have been no pa.rt of their design,they have been compelled by consistency toseparate themselves from the ChristianChurch, and form a. new communion. I t isvery small; embracing at the end of a century from the time of Swedenborg, in theUnited States only thirty ministers andabout three thousand members; and inGreat Britain perhaps as many more.

Whatever parts of Christian truth may bemaintained by this communion just a.s by allChristians, cannot, of course, be considereda.s bee.ring the name o! Swedenborgianism.Whatever just thoughts or correct views ma.ybe entertained by them, which it needed noprophet to discover, are the common pro-perty of all men. They stand as a sect orcommunion, through their adherence toSwedenborg a.s the medium of divine revela-


20/234

Swed.en/Jorgianism. I 5tions. Here lies, my brethren, a peculiardanger of that system ; one which may makeus contemplate it with more pa.in and dreadthan some which contain leBH of truth, orwhich tea.eh doctrines more remote from thegospel. All sects which name themselvesChristian, and nothing more, appeal only tothe Scriptures, to human reason, and to thebelief of the Church from the beginning;none of them claim any new inspiration. Apersn may misinterpret the Scriptures, andmay be brought to a more correct interpre-tation. A person may reason wrong, andmay learn to reason right. A person maymistake the tradition of the Church, or hemay attribute to it less or more authoritythan it deserves ; he may even submit to1mch a control as that of the Papacy, andyet may shake this off, and come to the


21/234

16 Swedenborgianism.simple truth through the mere force of thattruth as drawn from the Scriptures, orfrom right reason, or from the Church ofprimitive times; for his very submission tothe Papacy was sustained by argumentsfrom those sources, however erroneouslyapplied. But the Swedenborgian errs, notbecause he reads the Scriptures otherwisethan rightly ; not because he reasons ill;not because he has any regard for the au-thority of the Church; but because he sets.Scripture, reason and t h ~ Church all aside,and y i e l d ~ up his whole soul submissivelyto the authority of one blind man.

I do not think that I go too far in sayingthat, as a teacher and an authority, Swe-denborg is placed above all the apostlesand prophets, and even above our blessedSaviour. He professes to reveal much more


22/234

Swerlen/Jorgianism. I 7than our Saviour revealed. He claims to~ e the words of our Saviour mean whatthey do not obviously mean, what they obviously do not mean, and who.t no man be-fore him ever dreamed to be their meaning.He says that our Saviour did not mean

what our Saviour knew every human being,from the very constitution of bis nature,must understand Him to mean. He substitutes a new Church for that which our Saviour established. I do 1:1ot at all design tosay that either Swedenborg or his followersever intended to lower the reverence of menfor the Redeemer, or to compare him withany mortal. But so far as our Lord is e.guide and e. law-giver, they do certainlyplace the word of Swedenborg in the placeof the word of Christ.

Thus, my dear brethren, you perceive2


23/234

i 8 Swedenborgiaitism.that Swedenborgianism attempts to be, nota form of Christianity, but an additio:r;i toChristianity, and a substitution for Christi-anity. The Bible, interpreteu by commonsense, by reason, by the Church, or byindividual conscience, is not its rule ; but acertain part of the Bible, interpreted bySwedenborg, and interpreted in a manne1so utterly his own, so wild, so destitute ofall support, that no person can for a momentcredit the interpretation, except because heJooks on the interpreter as far more en-lightened than any apostle. It ass-iimes tobe, to this extent, a new religion, having onew author.

Such being the work undertaken bySwedenborgianism, we will next allude tothe delusions, which on such authority, itholds and promulgates as truth divine.


24/234

Sweden/Jorgianism. 19Under this heacl I do not mention thatwhich is directly c o n t r a ~ c t o r y to the wordof God, but only that which the judgmentof all mankind, except those who believe it,;pronounces to be as little credible as thedreams of insanity, 01 this order are thefollowing statements, all taken from thewritings ol Swedenborg, where they aregiven as the account of the results of hisown visits to the invisible world, or of hisconferences with higher spirits.

That h,e was admitted into heaven andhell. That all the angels and devilswere originally men of the human race.That those who have deviated from theSwedenborgian view of the Tl'inity, to eitherside, ca.nnot be admitted into heaven. Thatthose in the Church who have denied theLord, and acknowledged only the Father,


25/234

20 Swedenborgianism.are in the other world " deprived of the fa-culty of thinking what is true," "becomedumb or speak foolishly," "miss their way,"and "their arms hang down and dangleabout as i f destitute of strength in thejoints." That Unitarians or Socinians arethere " carried forward a little towards theright," and sent down into the deep. Thatheaven corresponds in form and divisionswith one enormous man. That the Lordappears in heaven as a sun and as a moon.That "in heaven it is never permitted toany one to stand behind another and lookat the back of bis head."That different orders of angels wore gar-

ments more or less shining, " but the angelsof the inmost heaven o.re naked." Thatthere are in heaven houses, gardens, templesand pulpits; and " i f any one stand behind


26/234

S-t.0edenborgianism. 2 II

the pulpit, the preacher is confused." Thatthere being two classes of angels, the celes-tial and the spiritual, " the speech of theformer sounds much from the vowels o and11, that of the latter from e and i. That theinflux of the Lord himself into ml\Il is intohis forehead and face ; that of the celestialangels into one part of the brain, that of thespiritual angels into another. That anxietyand melancholy in man are caused by cer-tain spirits who take their place in the regionof the stomach, " and love things undigestedand malignant, such as unwholesome food."That the heathen " come into heaven moreeasily than Christians at this day." Thatinfants, as soon as they die, are delivered to"angels of the female sex/' and taught tospeak. .That from the world of spirits, intowhich immediately after death, men go, nnd


27/234

2 2 Swedenborgianism.which is between heaven and hell, there areholes or. c ~ v e m s leading down the abyss,and from these " are exhaled nanseoasstenches," which the wicked seek with de-Jight. That "some who die, when they lieupon the bier, think even in their coldbody."

That Swedenborg himself, while in thislife, had experienced the whole passage fromthis life into another, that he might fullyknow how it is when men die. That theprocess of revival in another life begins withthe a.et of angels, who " seem as it were toroll off the coat of the left eye" toward.B thenose, that the eye may see. That after deathmen who have loved falsehood, repair to suchplaces as clefts of rocks; conspirators to darkrooms and comers ; men proud of science tosandy places; men who studied doctrines,


28/234

Swetien!Jorgianism. 2 3but did not live by them, to heaps of stones;avaricious persons to cells where "swinishfilth " is found ; voluptuaries to places fullof uncleanness ; adulterers to brothels, andrevengeful persons to places fnll of deadcorpses. That all these choose such a.bodes,and have there their gratification. ThatSwedenborg saw the great Luther in theworld of spirits, not yet admitted to heaven;informed him of the end of the old church,and the substitution of the new ; and ledhim over by degrees to this belief, thoughat first " he became very indignant andstormed." That he saw the pious Melanc-thon in a cold, filthy stone chamber, wrappedup in a bear skin. That he attempted invain to convert the pious Calvin, who finallywent to a cavern under ground, with otherPredestinarians, "where they a.re forced to


29/234

24 Swedenborgianism.work for their food, and are all enemies toone another." That the pious and zealousMoravians could not abide in heaven, butcast themselves out headlong. That theplanet Saturn is the most distant from thesun. That men before the fall did notbreathe with their lungs. That various diseases with which Swedenborg was aftlicted, ,even such as the toothache, proceeded notfrom natural causes, but from the influx ofevil spirits. That in hell there are suchpunishments as bruising a sinner in a mortar, or grinding him in a mill, his fellow-sinners being the executioners. That m.heaven the plays of boys and little childrenare a part of the celestial festivities; andthat all things earthly are repeated there ;houses, chambers, gardens, librru.ies, books,papers, colleges, museums, all mechanic


30/234

Swedenborgt"anism. 2 Sarts, feasts, food, and wine. That in hellSwedenborg saw two of the Popes, one holding his feet in a basket foll of serpents, Andthe other sitting upon an ass which was onfire with red serpents creeping at its sides.That he saw David, the man after God'sown heart, amongst wicked spirits, himselfengaged in most horrid and shocking conduct. That the inhabitants of the planetMercury a.re intellectual, but haughty andexcessively loquRCious, and choose rather theform of crystalline globes than that of men ;that those of Jupiter live in low woodenhouses, sit cross-legged, a.re devoted to thedoctrines of the Swedenborgian Church,and have been sometimes vexed with popishemissaries ; that those of Mars have yellowforehea.ds and black chins, and wear clothesmade of bark; that those of Sa.turn do not


31/234

26 Swedenborgt'anism.bury their dearl, but cover them with boughsof trees. That some of the inhabitants ofVenus are giants, while those of the moona.re as small as children, and speak, notfrom the.lungs, but from the abdomen, witha. voice like thunder.

Why do we repeat these preposteroustales? Only that the true character of thedelusion may appear, which must be re-ceived by any who admit the revelations ofSwedenborg. You may possibly be told,however, that there is no obligation to re-ceive them; that he sometimes erred; thatthe system does not rest on his authority,but commends itself by its own harmonyand beauty. On that supposition it standson the same level with all speculations ; and

t l u ~ is a day in which many speculationsN'.fl sent forth more inviting than these; ancl


32/234

Swedenborgianistn. 27we must be free to say that neither the sys-tem nor its author displny any such superiorwisdom as should entitle it to a preferenceabove speculations which our own minds arequite competent to originate in our idlestmoments. But no; when the notion thatSwedenborg saw heaven and hell is removed,the whole fabric sinks into dust and confu-sion ; and whoever believes that he did seoheaven and hell, must receive his statementsof all which he saw there, down to the mostgrotesque and enormous of his reveries. I fthere be any who, taking the name of a" New Church," would o.nange its doctrinesand its practice, without even the guidanceof Swedenborg, simply by their own judg-ment and fancy, and in entire freedom fromthe authority of the old Church and the


33/234

?8 Swedenborgz'anism.Bible, wherein is that better than simpleDeism?

But now let us advance to a. higher chargethan that of delusion, however vast. Thedoctrines of Swedenborg a.re not only a.b-snrd, but directly contradictory to the wordof God. They a.re so, in the ~ a d e s t mode,by asserting that the language of the Scrip-tures has not its plain, natural, and obviousmeaning, but a hidden sense, which no onebut Swedenborg ever could interpret ; asense which may put upon them any mean-ing at his plea.sure, however foreign to theirimport ; a sense which often is directly inthe face of their very language. Our Lord,for example, has said that it is easier for acamel to go through the eye of a. needlethan for a. rich man to enter into the king-dom of God ; and rich men, from the time


34/234

Swedmborgianism. 29when our Lord spoke, have rememberedHis words with more or less profit ; butSwedenborg says that "by a camel is signi-fied the principJe of knowledge and of science in general, and by the eye of a needle,sphitual truth,"-thnt "by the rich aremeant those who are in the knowledges oftruth and good, and by riches the knowl-edges themselves ;" and after this, I hadalmost said lucid explanation, that "therich come into heaven as easily as thepoor." Our Saviour says that in heaventhey neither marry nor are given in mar-riage; but Swedenborg says that " there aremarriages in heaven as well as on earth,"and describes their whc;ile character and ar-rangements. With such a key as his, withthat pretended inward meaning, he mayoontradict any other words of Scripture as


35/234

30 .SwedenborgZ:anZ:sm.readily as these; for the supposition of sucha key is fatal to the supreme authority ofthe whole.He contradicts the word of God, by de

nying the divine authority of the books ofthe Old Testament, and of all the New except the four Gospels and the Revelation.We have to choose between Swedenborgand Paul ; for Swedenborg denies both thedoctrine of Paul and his inspiration. .Aiterthis, it becomes a question of comparatively little importance whether he maychance on any subject to agree with thatBible of which he gives so much to thewinds. The ground of agreement, where hedoes agree, is not submissive to the Bible.He contradicts it by denying the distinc-.

tion of the t ~ r e e Divine Persons, asserting aTrinity in one Person, and tho.t Person at


36/234

;iweden/Jorgianism. 31once Christ and the Father ; BO that all thewords of our Lord respecting the Fatherand the Son are rendered less than unmeaning; and all prayer is to be offered, notthrough Christ to the Father, but to Christas the Father; by declaring that the humannature of onr Lord was "full of impure andunhallowed principles," like ours; by denying entirely the atonement and propitiationthrough the blood of the Lamb of God ; bydenying entirely the intercession of ourLord as our great High-priest, and the dutyand propriety of offering our prayers in Hisname; by denying entirely the great buth,BO urged by Sl Paul, of justification throughfaith in the Son of God, which he calls nheresy ; by denying the resurrection of thebody, in direct opposition to the words ofour Saviour; and by denying, as directly, the


37/234

32 Swedenborgiant'sm.second coming of Christ to juage the world,the last judgment having, as they say, takenplace one hundred years a.go. I t is not mypresent duty to prove these doctrines of theScriptures. You all know perfectly thatthey a.re written there, as plainly as thenumbers of the chapters and verses. Youall, I trust, believe the Scriptures; and i fthe Scriptures, in these respects, are true,Swedenborgianism, in these respects, isfalse ; and such falsehood must be perilousto the soul which makes it its support.

The word of God is con tra.dicted, too, bythe morals which Swedenborg ancl Swedenborgianism have dared to inculcate. Theyhave represented, both in theory and inpractice, the road to heaven as broad andeasy, and requiring little of self-denial andof ta.king up the cross. They have depre-


38/234

Sweden6orgiansm. 33ciated the importance of prayer; limiting it,at least formerly, in public devotion, to theuse of the Lord's Prayer, and very littleurging it in private. They ho.ve recom-mended those amusements which mosttend to divert the mind from seriousthoughts and habits, and to create a gene-ral frivolity of character; such as go.mesat cards, billiards, dice, dances, and thea-trical entertainments. They have taught,not only that Polygamy is no sin for theMahometan, but that he has had his concu-bines as well as his wives in the lower heav-en. Swedenborg himself taught there werecauses legitimate, just, real, and sufficient forthe practice of concubinage, in certain cases,even amongst Christians ; and those causeswere such as are exceedingly numerous andexceedingly common. He teaches, o.lso,

3


39/234

34 Swedenborgz'anz'sm.and recommends, in certain cases, thepractice of that very sin, of which theApostle Paul says, "Let it not be oncenl\ID.ed among you, e.11 becometh saints."In truth, the writings of Swedenborg lingerand expatiate on subjects which we are com-pelled, not merely in the house of God, butin any respectable c ~ m p a n y , to pass withthe faintest allusion. I do not doubt thatthose who otherwise follow him, blush atthose pages ; and to many of them theyare probably unknown.

The painful task which I proposed is nowperformed. I have shown what Sweden-borgianism attempts to be ; then, what is theextent of the delusions which it invokes; andthen, how directly it contradicts and over-throws the word of God. That such a sys-tem should have any attractions for any


40/234

SwedenborgZ:anism. 3 5minds, may s e e ~ wonderfu1, but admits anexplanation. I t promises to disclose thesecrets of the life to come ; and that is aknowledge which to some is so welcome thatthey will accept any tale of such wonderswithout the color of real evidence.

I t softens and smooths down all the moremysterious and difficult doctrines of theScriptures, professing generally to receivethem in name, while it removes their sub-stance, and offering also a key through whichany doctrine may be explained away. Itpresents, in practice, the easiest of all religions ; counselling little more than to wishwell to others, and seek your own enjoyment,assured that at death you will pass to thestate which you have chosen. I t empracesbut a. small number of persons; the small-ness of their number and the peculiarity of


41/234

36 Swedenborgi"am"sm.their opinions bind them closely together.It is not a religion for the ignorant, thepoor, or the penitent ; but it offers suffi-ciently pleasant associations for those whoseek in their religion, rather to be pleasedthan to please God and to walk in thetruth.

Its one sole difficulty, my dear brethren,is, it is not true; it is one vast, utter de-lusion, resting on the speculations e.nddreams of one who would have been justlydeemed a blasphemer, i f he had not been amonomaniac. Hard as it is to speak plainlyof such subjects with tenderness to feelingswhich we would not willingly wound, yet, asa. C?ristia.n pastor and Bishop, who mustgive an account, I must speak plainly.Those numerous volumes which Sweden-borgianism would substitute for the Bible,


42/234

Sweaenborgianism. 37far from indicating genius, depth or wisdom,are superficial, absurd allll worthlt11i-;. Youmay be told that you do uot nrnlerstandwhat you read in them, nnd you may suppoi-;ethat there must be more there than you canumlerstand; bnt only a little patience is required to see all the meu.ning which theyhave, aud to see that it has no value. Letrue entreat you, then, to withdraw yourselves,a.ud to seek to withdraw all over whom youhave influence, from lending any snnction toe. system, which, i f it could widely prevail,would be most disastrous and fatal to theinterests of society, and to the souls of men.There can be no compromise. I f there isanJtbing which you love and revere in theGospel, or the Church of Christ, it is virtually renounced and trodden under footwhen that Chnrch is exchanged for a new


43/234

~ 8 Swedenborgianzsm.Church, and that Gospel for another Gos-pel. Remember the words of the ApostleSt. Paul in Col. ii. 18, 19, and which, fromfirst to last, are so strikingly applicable tothis subject. "Let no man beguile you ofyour reward in a voluntary humility andworshipping of angels, iutrndiug into thoMthings which he hath not :men, vainly puffedup by his fleshly mind, aud not holdingthe Head, from which all the body byjoints aurl bands having nourishment mm-istered, and knit together, increaseth withthe increase of God."

Should I address any who have giventheir confidence to the claims of this found-er of a new religion, I would embrace theopportunity of pleading with them, in thename of tlHir Redeemer. He


44/234

Swedenborgt"tlnzsm. 39heaven given among men, whereby ye mustbe saved." Forsake Him not fm the clrnu.msof a false Christ or false prophet. I 11ayit respectfully, but eamestl_y, 80iemnly, en-treatingly, for Jesus' sakP-. You know notwhat you do. Much of Christianity youliave carried with you into the Swedcn-borgian school; enough to make somebright eui.mples of benevolence and ofpatience. The Christian po.rt is excellent ;and for it those individuals . shall haveour respect, our honor, our esteem, ouraffection. The Swedenborgian part it> allerror, delusion and danger. Return to thecross of your Saviour, on which Sweden-borgianisrn refuses to rely. Return to theChurch of the living God, which Sweden-borgianism wonld fain supplant and over-throw. Return to tliP holy and blessed


45/234

40 Swedenborgt'ant'sm.word of divine truth which Swedenborgian-ism so daringly pervert.s and so largely re-jects. I know how much I venture in speak-ing as I have spoken; but there will belwurs when the Spirit will touch yourhearts, and tell you that dreams cannot dothe work of His truth and grace : then listen,an


46/234

EPISCOPALIAN ISM.

IN THREE PARTS.

BY B. F. BARRETT.

Audi Altn-am Parlem.

PHILADELPHIA]. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.

1871.


47/234

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 187a, byJ. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.,

In the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washinirton.

LtPPr! fco!T 'I Paz11,PBlL.1.D.ILPBl.I..


48/234

CONTENTS.

PART I.PAG8

El'ISCOPALIAJllSM JM ITS OwN Duss. ,............ S-7S

PART II.EPJSCOPAUANISM IN Bol.KOWED ROBES 75-129

PART III.EPISCOPALIANISK AT THE CONFESSIONAL 129--ISo

3


49/234

NOTE.

A little pamphlet enh"tled " SwEDENBORGIANISM,by Bishop Burgess," suggested the preparahon andpublicah"on of"Yhe folluwing pages. The writerhas 11imed not to copy the Bishop's strange disregard of truth and fairness,- but in his manner efhandling the subfect treated, parh"cularly in Part I . ,he has adhered as closely as circumstances wouldpermit to the example set him in the pamphlet re-:/erred to,- and in many instances he has used the.Bishop's own language, only varying its appli'catton.

'


50/234

EPISCOPALIANISM.

PART I .EPISCOPALIANISM IN ITS OWN DRESS.

Evnv true minister of the Gospel, whether hehas or has not bound himself by any formalpromise of fidelity at the time of his ordination,feels himself under a moral obligation to be ready,with all faithful diligence, tp banish and driveaway from the Church, and from the minds of hisfellow-men wherever they may be, all erroneous doctrines contrary to God's Word, whether theybe old or new, strange or familiar. Fealty to theMaster requires him to expose the character andtendency of any system which threatens the spiritual progress and welfare of mankind ; and to warnmen against the snare all the more, if they do notperceive it to be a snare, or are dazzled by the


51/234

6 Episcopalianismwealth, numbers, fashion or outward respectabilityof those who have imbibed the falsehood.

But it is at this very point where real dangerbegins, that some plausible maxims are en-countered, which have not been without theirweight in the minds even of Christians, who lovedboth the truth and peace. It is thus said that anopinion, true or false, only gains strength andspreads the more, when it is openly opposed. Besilent, it is said, and it will either die away orcease to extend itself beyond its present limits.It is perfectly plain, however, that reasoning likethis is exactly that which may be employed in thecase of any disease which has increased till itbecame alarming or fatal. Did you employmedical treatment? You may be told that thetreatment caused the mischief. Did you employno medical treatment? You may certainly betold, with a much greater appearance of justice,that the mischief proceeded from your neglect.I suppose, however, that no father, solicitous forthe threatened life of a sick child, would be asmuch disturbed by the fear that, through timely

a t ~ e n t i o n to the complaint, he might have unin-


52/234

In- its Oztm D r ~ s s . 7tentionally pushed it on, as by the dread that hemight have neglected it too long. In the samemanner when an error grows up and lives on, it iseasy to say, either that it is because it was opposed, or because it was not opposed, by theclergy. They who merely reason from the resultare always liable to mistake the way of duty.There cannot be the smallest doubt that it is rightto guard those whom we love, those for whom weare in any degree responsible-all, indeed, whomit may be in our power to influence-against everyserious danger which we can foresee ; and this dutyis not at all affected by the result. The natural,obvious, and divinely appointed way of checkingthe progress of error, is, to detect, expose andrefute it by rational and scriptural argument andwarning. I f at any time it should spread in defiance of such efforts, we may be sure that withoutthem it would have spread more rapidly and moredisastrously.

There is another objection which comes hometo our kindlier feelings. While the error was ata distance, to contend earnestly against it wasinoffensive, but was also quite useless. To argue


53/234

8 EpiScopaliani'smagainst the Mormon doctrine wounds no one, butis of no profit. But when the error approachesand sits down amongst us, it necessarily happens

~ h a t those on whom it lays its grasp are our friendsand neighbors. We love them, we respect them;we wish to live in union and concord; we are notblind to their various merits ; and we are all boundtogether by mutual kindnesses. It is not possibleseriously to assail the opinions of any withoutdanger of giving pain ; and certainly it is not ex-pedient to condemn them, except when it is to bedone with great seriousness. Whatever mode maybe adopted, reproof and censure can never bema.Qe pleasing. Are we then to forbear? Woeto us if we prove faithless to our duty for such acause ; if we permit those whom we love to passunwarned into danger, or to remain in the errorthey have embraced without .an effort 'to deliverthem from it.

I am about, therefore, to speak of the delusionknown as Episcopalianism,-its name and originbeing derived from that form of ecclesiasticalgovernment which was developed in an unen-lightened period of the church ; and to speak of


54/234

In i'/s Own Drtss. 9it for the very reason that it is here ; that it has afoothold in our community; and that whateverpowers of persuasion it may possess, are exercisedto beguile the careless and unthinking.

For the personal character of many of those bywhom this doctrine is professed, I entertain a veryhigh degree of respect ; there is not one of themso far as I know, from whom I ever received anyunkindness ; and I could wish not to inflict thesmallest pain by any words which the truth mayrequire to be uttered. At the same time, there isno room in subjects like these for any great in-fluence of personal considerations. I f that whichin our day is termed, but which certainly oughtnot to be termed "the Holy Catholic Church"if that doctrine and polity known as Episco-palianism, be right, the Gospel of our Lord JesusChrist, the uncorrupted Christianity, is grosslywrong.

All other Christian denominations-how re-peatedly and rudely have they been, and are still,assailed by those who have become wedded toEpiscopalianism ! -as if all outside the pale of thisism, were necessarily outside of the church of


55/234

'

IO Episcopaliani'smChrist. We are not called to retaliate, except as,from the nature of things, that which thus arro-gates to itself peculiar graces, and proudly flauntsits claim to supereminence, must be far from ifnot opposite to the truth, and justly worthy,therefore, of condemnation. But it is not theprovince of Christianity to defend its own cause,so much as to attack and overthrow, by the armsof truth, all which is hostile to the declared willof God our Saviour. We must refuse to stand onthe defensive; we must push error back upon itsown ground; break down its fastnesses, if it hasany; expose its hiding places; disclose it as it is;and if it be possible, leave it no disguise throughwhich an honest heart can be deceived. Wewould destroy the error, that we may rescue theerring.

I offer no apology, then, for doing that whichis my duty; for attempting to show what Episco-palianism is, or claims to be; what delusions itembraces; and, beyond these delusions, how itcontradicts the Word of God. Let us only praythat all may be done with that temper which theHoly Spirit' sheds abroad in the heart, and that


56/234

I11 its Oum Drtss. IIwe all may be enlightened by the truth as it is inJesus.

Episcopalianism is the name which should becarefully given to the doctrinal and ecclesiasticalsystem acknowledged by that body of people whocall themselves ' ' The Protestant Episcopal Church''- " t h e Holy Catholic Church"-" THE Church,"by way of eminence. There is but one Churchof Christ; it embraces all who believe in theLord Jesus as their only Redeemer and Saviour,who love Him supremely and their neighbor asthemselves, and who follow after Him by a faithful and religious observance of his precepts. Thereis no "holy catholic church" in the sense in whichthat designation is claimed; no one organizedand visible body of people that can with any propriety be called, or can call itself, "THE Church."The title of "the Holy Catholic Church" wouldbe a strange misnomer, indeed--something akinto blasphemy-if we gave it deliberately to a bodywhich we believe to be of mere human institution, and to be founded in multiplied and grossperversions of the Scripture. If any man cansuppose the Episcopalian sect to be the Holy


57/234

12 Epi'scopalianismCatholic Church, he of course can give if: thatname with a good conscience; but with suchsacred words it would be well for the rest of mankind not to trifle.

Whatever parts of Christian truth may be maintained by this communion, just as by all Christians, cannot, of course, be considered as properlyEpiscopalian. Whatever just thoughts or correctviews may be entertained by them, are the common property of all in Christian lands. Theystand as a sect or communion, through their adherence to the Prayer-Book, the Thirty-nineArticles, the dogma of Apostolic Succession, andthe traditions and authority of "the church."Here lies, my brethren, a peculiar danger of thatsystem-its tendency to encourage its adherents torest in, or to submit unquestionably to, the decreesof Councils, the conclusions of Bishops, merehuman authority in matters of faith, instead offreely exercising their own rational powers, andinquiring each one for himself what the Lordhath spoken, or what is really true. The sametendency is manifest in most of the sects; but(save in the Romish hierarchy, which "thti Erot-


58/234

In its Own Dress. 13estant Episcopal Church" so closely resembles)in a less degree. A person may misinterpret theScriptures, and may be brought, through the faithful exercise of his God-given powers, to a morecorrect interpretation. He may reason wrong;but if his thinking and reasoning faculty be developed and strengthened by exercise, he may learn atlast to reason right. He may misread or misunderstand the indications of Providence, and in theend learn wisdom from experience and even fromhis mistakes and failures. But the Episcopalianerrs, not merely because he does not understandthe Scriptures; nor because he reasons i l l-for herarely reasons at all on points that "the church"has settled; but chiefly because, like the Romanist,he accepts what his Priest or Bishop says, or what"the church" has decreed, without questioning;because he exalts the Thirty-nine Articles abovereason and Scripture, and yields up his whole soulblindly and submissively to the authority of "thechurch.''

I do not think that I go too far in saying that,as authorities, the Prayer Book and Thirty-nineArticles are.placed above the apostles and prophets,

2


59/234

14 Episcopalianismand really (though, perhaps, unconsciously) aboveour blessed Saviour. These in several places makethe words of the Saviour mean what they obviouslydo not mean, and what no enlightened andspiritually minded person would ever dream oftheir meaning. These merely human authoritiesunreliable and misleading as they are;-are lookedto for matters of belief and doctrine more thanthe words of the Lord himself; and their teaching held to be no less authoritative than that ofthe Bible. Yet I do not at all design to say thatthose who drew up the "Articles" or composedthe "Liturgy," intended to lower the reverenceof men for the Redeemer, or to compare him withany mortal. But said Articles and Liturgy arenone the less a hindrance to the progress of theRedeemer's kingdom, or to the diffusion of thetrue knowledge and life of heaven among thechildren of men.Look at some of the arrogant assumptions andastounding claims of this "Protestant EpiscopalChurch!" It claims to be "the one, holy, catholic, apostolic church;" to possess the exclusiveright to induct men into the office of the Chris-


60/234

Jn its Own Dress. 15tian ministry, and to bestow on them the authorityto administer the Christian ordinances. I t claimsthat its ministers are the only duly accreditedministers of Christ ; and the sacraments adminis-tered by them, the only authorized and valid ones.The ministers of this communion, therefore, holdthemselves aloof from other Christian ministers ;will not exchange pulpits with them; will notrecognize them as possessing a like authority withthemselves to go and preach the gospel, and bap-tize in the name of the Lord. It holds to theduty or desirableness of private confession topriests, and to the ability of its priests on suchoccasions to absolve the confessor from sin. Saysone of its learned and accepted authorities (Rev.Wm. Palmer, A. M., of Oxford): "The practiceof private confession to priests, and absolution,she [the Church ofEngland] never abolished. . . .That the church did not mean to abolish confes-sion and absolution (which she even regards as asort of sacrament) in general, appears from theoffice of the eucharist, and for the visitation ofthe sick, then drawn up (1547); and from thepower conferred on priests in the ordination


61/234

16 Episcopalianismservices.'' (Treatise on the Church of Chrisl-Appleton'sedition, vol. i., p. 477.) What is "thepower conferred on priests'' here alluded to? Letthe "Book of Common Prayer" used by theProtestant Episcopal Church in the United Statesof America, answer : "The Bishop with thePriests present, shall lay their hands severallyupon the head of every one that receiveth theorder of Priesthood; the receivers humbly kneel-ing and the Bishop saying: 'Receive the HolyGhost for the office and work of a Priest in theChurch of God, now committed unto thee by theimposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dostforgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thoudost retain, they are retained. . . . In the nameof the Father, and of the Son, and of the HolyGhost, Amen.' "

So blind and presumptuous is this Protc;stantEpiscopal Church! So unenlightened in regard tothings spiritual, as to believe and teach that theHoly Ghost can be committed unto a person bythe laying of ordaining hands upon that person'shead; and that thereafter, and in consequence ofsuch imposition of hands, that person has power


62/234

In its Own Dress. 17to forgive or retain whosesoever sins he will IDoes Christianity confer on frail and fallible mortals the power thus to bind men to or absolve themfrom their sins? Or will any body of people whorightly understand Christianity, presume to do it?

Equally unenlightened is this Church on thegreat doctrine of man's regeneration, or the newspiritual birth-the birth of the soul into the new,even the heavenly life. This is plain from whatis enjoined in the Book of Common Prayer concerning the baptism of children. After the crossshall have been made upon the child's forehead,says the Prayer-Book, "Then shall the ministersay: Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, thatthis child is regenerate, and grafted into th_e bodyof Christ's church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits," etc.-"Thenshall be said, all kneeling, We yield thee heartythanks, most merciful Father, that it bath pleasedthee to regenerate this infant," e tc . -As if he sublime and life-long work of regener

ation could thus be accomplished in a moment,and simply by a priest's making the sign of thecross on the infant's forehead! What utter igno-

B


63/234

18 Episcopalianismranee is here revealed of one of the great andcentral truths of the Christian religion! Manyof the ministers of the Episcopal Church seeclearly enough the falsity of what is here enjoined.But they have no discretion in the case. Theymust make their consciences bend to the rubric-must utter, in a solemn religious service, whatthey sincerely believe to be a falsehood, or sur-render their credentials and leave the Church.To show how tyrannous is the Prayer Book, andhow authoritative and binding its injunctions(even when they are seen to be contrary to theWord of God), a minister was lately suspendedfrom the exercise of his ministerial functions bythe Bishop of Illinois, because he omitted, andpersisted in omitting, this portion of the baptismalservice when christening little children.

We thus see what Episcopalianism assumes tobe and to do. We will not deny it the Christianname so long as it professes to be Christian. Butif it be a form of Christianity, it is certainly amuch marred and distorted form. The Bible,interpreted in the light of the nineteenth century,by the individual conscience, or by the reason


64/234

In ils Own Dress.and common sense of the people of our times, isnot its rule ; but the Bible as understood and interpreted in an age considerably darker than ours- t he Bible with the glosses put upon it by certain ecclesiastical dignitaries in the reign of Ed-ward the Sixth, more than three hundred yearsago. Where and what would have been the science of to-day, if the science of England_threecenturies ago had been embodied in thirty-nineArticles (more or less), and the students of sciencehad ever since sworn by them, or feared to takeone step beyond lest they should be stigmatisedas fools or quacks by the whole scientific fraternity? Precisely where and what the theology ofthe Protestant Episcopal Church is to-day. Thereis a science of spiritual as well as of natural things,and we should expect a progressive advance in theone as well as in the other. I f the Word of Godbears any resemblance to his works, why shouldthere not be a progressive e ~ o l u t i o n of deeper andstill deeper truth from the former as well as fromthe latter? There is no end to man's progress inknowledge of the works of God; and are we tosuppose that the last step in the understanding or


65/234

20 Episcopalianisminterpretation of his Word was taken more thanthree hundred years ago? No. I t is the orderof Heaven that there be continual progress in allkinds of knowledge, religious as well as scientific- in the knowledge of God's Word as well as ofhis works. The antiquity of any doctrine or pol-ity, therefore, is the poorest possible argument inits defence.

Such being some of the claims and assumptionsof Episcopalianism, we will next allude to someof the errors and delusions which it hugs and pro-mulgates as truth divine. Under this head Ishall mention things that are directly contradic-tory to the Word of God, and which all unbiasedand enlightened minds must declare to be as littlecredible as the dreams of insanity. And I shalltake them all from the Book of Common Prayer,duly ratified by the bishops, clergy and laity ofthe Protestant Episcopal Church in the UnitedStates of America, in convention assembled, Octo-ber 16, 1789. I begin with that which is orshould be the central doctrine in any system ofreligious belief-the. doctrine concerning the Di-vine Being or the true Object of worship.


66/234

In its Own Dress. 21

What is the teaching of Episcopalianism on thisall-important point? We have the answer in thevery first of the Thirty-nine Articles, the firstclause of which reads: '"There is but one livingand true God, everlasting, without body, parts, orpassions." Now the Bible assures us that eternallife consists in the true knowledge of God and ofJesus Christ the Sent of God. And Bishop Beverage says: " I t is impossible for any man to serveGod that doth not first know Him." But howcan we ever know a being that is "without body,parts or passions?" Can we form an}"'-Conception of such a being? Can we love or think ofhim? Can we love a mere abstraction ? Can wethink of that which has no form or body of anykind? What does the mental eye rest upon whenwe think of-nothing? for a thing or being thathas no form, is nothing. And such (accordingto the "Articles" ) is the Episcopalian' s God,"whom to know is life eternal ! "

But very different from this mere abstraction isthe God which the Bible tells us of. The God ofthe Bible has body, parts and passions. For doesnot the Scripture speak of God's face, eyes, ears,


67/234

2:Z Episcopalianismmouth, hand, arm, etc. ? And are not theseparts 1 And do they not clearly imply a whole?that is, a body? Can we conceive of such partsexisting without a body? And does not the Scrip-ture speak, too, of God's love and mercy and com-passion and forgiveness? And what are these butpassions, emotions or affections?The very first sentence, therefore, in the Epis-i::opali'an "Articles of Religion" is as contrary tothe express teachings of the Bible as it is to thedictate of reason and common sense.

This arst sentence in the "Articles" clearlydenies (by implication, at least) the personalityof God; for personality means that which consti-tutes or pertains to a person. And it is impossi-ble to even conceive of a person who is "withoutbody, parts or passions." Such a person neverhad and never can have existence-no, not evenin the airy regions of fancy. And to talk of anysuch bodiless, partless, passionless being as "living," or as possessing "power, wisdom and good-ness," is to talk more after the manner of thesilly jargo1! of the Middle Ages, than in the soberand intelligible way of modern times.


68/234

In its Own Drtss.Yet Episcopalianism, strange to say, p r o f e ~ e s

to teach the existence of a personal God. Andmore than that, it does teach the existence of tlirupersonal Gods ; for what else can we make of thethree Divine Persons of whom the Prayer Book sooften speaks, and to whom are assigned such dif-ferent characters and functions? The last sen-tence of its first Article, as if to make amends forits manifest denial of the personality of God inthe first sentence, says : "And in unity of thisGodhead there be three Persons of one substance,power and eternity, the Father, the Son and theHoly Ghost." And very often in the PrayerBook are these spoken of as three distinct Beingsor Gods-for whether we say three Divine Per-sons, three Divine Beings, or three Gods, to thepopular apprehension it is all the same. Thus inthe Catechism ' ' to be learned by every personbefore he be brought to be confirmed by theBishop,'' the candidate is asked : ' ' What dostthou chiefly learn in these Articles of thy belief?''To which he is required to answer : "First, Ilearn to believe in God the Father, who bathmade me and all the world. Secondly, in God


69/234

24 Episcopalianism

the Son, who bath redeemed me and all mankind.Thirdly, in God the Holy Ghost, who sanctifiethme and all the people of God." Thus every candidate for admission into the Protestant EpiscopalChurch is required to solemnly declare his beliefin three Divine Persons-God the Father, Godthe Son, and God the Holy Ghost-to each ofwhom a distinct and peculiar function is allotted.And if this be not a declaration of a belief inthree Gods, then the language here employedmust have been framed more with a view to con-ceal thought than to express it. Moreover, eachof these Persons is addressed separately in prayer;and a different petition is addressed to one fromthat addressed to another, as i f it were the officeof each to do something different from the othertwo. And one of them is said to have been be-gotten by another. That is, one Divine Personor God, begott!'!n by another Divine Person orGod !-yet each and all alike eternal I The second of these Persons is represented, too, as verydifferently disposed toward mankind from thefirst; as being seated at the right hand of the first,pleading the caase of us sinners, making interces-


70/234


71/234

Episcopaliani'smof them as three; and however you may compelyour lips to say they are one man, no arithmetichas ever yet been found out capable of provingyour assertion true. The utterance of your lipswill for ever contradict your thought.

And all this senseless jargon is gravely put forthby the Protestant Episcopal Church for the revealed truth of God ! And men and women andlittle children, every Sunday in the year, andoften on other days of the week, are expected toconfess their belief in these things in a solemnand reverential manner-thereby confirming themselves more and more in this fundamental falsity,the Tnpersona/ily of God.

For whether we consult reason or Scripture,the falsity of the dogma is equally apparent.Reason affirms that God is one-one in person aswell as in essence. And the Bible sustains theverdict of reason. Everywhere in the sacred Volume is God presented to us as one Being-oneMind--0ne Entity-one Divine Person, and neveras three Persons. And this God has come andrevealed himself unto men in the one Person ofthe Lord Jesus Christ. He is the manifested Je-


72/234

In its Own .Dress.hovah; " God with us." He is declared to be"theWord," which was made flesh. He said thatthe Father dwelt in Him; that He was the Fathershown or revealed unto men. "The Father thatdwelleth in me, He doeth the works;" "He thathath seen me hath seen the Father;" " I and theFather are one." These are among his own dec-larations. The Father dwelt in Him as the soulof man dwells in his body. Because a man has abody as well as a soul, he is not therefore two per-sons; and because there is a proceeding energy oractivity resulting from the union of soul and body,like the activity of light and heat which emanatefrom the sun, he is not, therefore, three persons.It is plain to be seen, then, what is the nature ofthe trinity in God; for man, the Scripture assuresus, was made " in the image of God." But manis not tripersonal; neither is God, according tothe teaching of the Bible. The apostle Paul, too,says, that "in Him [i. e. Jesus Christ] dwellethall the fullness of the Godhead bodily." Therecan be, then, no other personal God besides Him.Among the names, too, by which it was foretoldthat He should be called, are "the Mighty God,"


73/234

Episcopalia11is111"the Everlasting Father." And when to the be-loved disciple " a door was opened in heaven,"what does he see there? The three Divine Per-sons that Episcopalianism tells us of? By nomeans. But he beholds the heavenly host bend-ing in adoration before the one Divine Person-the Lord Jesus Christ; and he hears the song thatbursts from their lips. What was that song?"Worthy is the LAMB that was slain, to receivepower and riches and wisdom and strength andhonor and glory and blessing."

Plainly, then, does Episco,palianism contradictthe Bible in its first and fundamental Article ofreligion. And its teaching on this subject is ascontrary to reason as it is to Scripture. And con-tradicting the Bible on a doctrine so central andimportant as that concerning the Divine Beinghimself, we should expect to find its teachingsequally unenlightened and contrary to Scriptureon other subjects. And so indeed we do. Take,for example, its view of man's nature, as seen mits doctrine of the Resurrection.

The Episcopalian does not know that man isessentially a spirit. He does not know that the


74/234

In its Owll Dress.soul is the real man, and that this is a spiritualorganism, in the human form, immortal in itsnature--continuing to live, therefore, in its ownappropriate realm (the spiritual world) after thebody dies. He does not know that the resurrec-tion means the rising of the man, or the separa-tion of his spirit from the material body immedi-ately after death, and his conscious entrance intothe realm above matter; but he thinks it means theresuscitation of the material part-the very bodylaid off at death-at some future and (it may be)far distant period. It is the material body that heis taught to think of, when he says, " I believe inthe resurrection of the body." One of theablest expounders of the Episcopalian creed(Bishop Pearson) says: "W e can therefore nootherwise expound this article, teaching the resur-rection of lht body, than by asserting that the bodieswhich have lived and died shall live again afterdeath, and that the same flesh which is corruptedshall be restored" (p. 572). And again says thesame distinguished expositor: "The same fleshwhich was separated from the soul at the day ofdeath, shall be united to the soul at the last day."

:!ill


75/234

30 EpiScopalianism"The same body, not any other, sha.11 be raisedto life, which died" (p. 563).

So then, according to the Episcopalian creed,w.e are to believe that the identical particles composing men's material bodies-even after theirbodies have been eaten up by worms, fishes, beastsof prey or carrion birds, or borne upon the wingsof the wind the wide world over, or incorporatedinto other men's bodies (as is the case where cannibalism is practiced)-are to be all brought together again in the twinkling of an eye, and newbodies built up froin them (which after all arethe same old material carcasses)-yes, built up,potter fashion, not evolved by any law of growth;yet with their ten thousand delicate fibres andtissues more perfect than ever! And into thesenew bodies constructed of the same old materials,are to be introduced (in some way that Episcopalianism does not attempt to explain) the soulsthat have for ages been mourning the loss of theirfleshly habitations! We are to believe that thelittle infant, who died within twenty-four hoursafter birth, is to resume that same infantile body,and (I suppose) throughout the endless ages be


76/234

In its cr@n Dress. 31carried in the arms and dandled upon the knees ofits nurse! We are to believe that that consumptive mother,' o'r deformed child, or poor cripple,or the withered and emaciated saint of ninety, isto put on again, or be again thrust into, that samewasted, ghastly and repulsive tabernacle of flesh !And this, forsooth, is the glorious doctrine of theResurrection which Episcopalianism has to offerus, as we draw near the gate of death, or as theworn and wasted form of some loved one is laidbeneath the sod ! This the doctrine which soberand rational men and women are gravely asked toaccept as the revealed truth of God! Why, ifsuch a doctrine were presented to-day for the f i ~ ttime before any intelligent assembly, it would beflouted as the sheerest drivel and nonsense.

And here, as on other subjects, Episcopalianism contradicts the teaching of Jesus and theapostles, as plainly as it does the intuit.ions ofreason. "Now that the dead," says our Saviour,"are raised [not will be raised at some future andremote period], even Moses showed at the bush,when he called the Lord the God of Abrahamand the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob: for


77/234

32 EpiscopalianismHe is not a God of the dead but of the living ;for to Him all are living." Not only does theSaviour here teach that Abraham, Isaac and Jacobare still living, but that they have actually attainedunto the resurrection; for the resurrection was thevery question under discussion when he used thislanguage. What presumption, then, for any bodyof people p r o f ~ s i n g to be the disciples of Christ,to believe or teach any doctrine on this subjectdifferent from that taught by the Master himself!

Then Moses and Elias, centuries after theirdeath, were beheld in vision (in the spiritualworld, of course) on the Mount of Transfigura-tion, in the human form, and "talking withJesus;" showing that they also were not less alivethan when living in the flesh-that they also hadexperienced the resurrection.

And nowhere does the Bible teach any, suchdoctrine of the resurrection as is taught, or sol-emnly declared and confessed, by the ProtestantEpiscopal Church more than a hundred times ayear. How plainly, too, does this Church con-tradict the prince of the apostles on this subject !"But some," says Paul, "will say, How are the


78/234

In its Own Dras. 33dead raised up? and with what body do theycome? Fool! That which thou sowest is notquickened, except it die. And that which thousowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be,"etc. And he concludes his argument with thesewords: "A natural body is sown; a spiritualbody t"s raised. [This is the correct translation ofthe original.] There is a natural body and thereis a spiritual body." Could anything be plainer?Yet very different is this Apostolic doctrine fromthat absurd notion taught by the Protestant Epis-copal Church.

Equally unenlightened is this Church in regardto our Saviour's resurrection-holding and teach-ing that He rose and ascended into heaven withhis material flesh and bones ; and that He stillhas, and for ever will have, the same materialbody. "Christ," says Article iv., "did truly riseagain from death, and took again his body, withflesh, bones and all things appertaining to theperfection of man's nature [as if the dust of theearth could add anything to the perfection ofman's nature!] wherewith he ascended intoheaven and there sitteth, until he return to judge

c


79/234

34 Episcopa!ianismall men at the last day." Then our Lord, nowin heaven, has a material body. Then heavenmust be a material place. And so a spiritual worldis plainly denied-by implication, at least-and wehave nothing left us but gross materialism.

But see, again, the absurdity of Episcop.alian-ism ! the unutterable confusion in which the sys-tem is involved! For it professes to believe inthe Divinity of Christ. It calls him God; andGod, says Article 1st, is "without body, parts orpassions." Yet in Article iv. it not only teachesthat God (one of its Gods, at least) has a body,but a maten"a/ body-the very body that hungupon the cross. Whereas the Bible teaches that"God is a Spirit;" and that the Son-the Human-ity assumed in time-was glorified, made all Di-vine even to his flesh and bones.

Again ; Episcopalianism contradicts the Bibleon the great and momentous subject of humansalvation. "That we are justified by faith only,"says Article xi., "is a most wholesome doctrine,and very full of comfort." To be justified, ofcourse, is to be saved-to be made righteous,jnst, holy, free from evil and sinful proclivities.


80/234

In its Own Dress. 35And this, says the "Article," is done "by faithonly," that is by merely believing the gospel ofChrist. For faith is the assent of the understandingto the truth of what is taught. It is belief. Andto teach, as Episcopalianism does, that we arejustified and saved "by faith only," is to betrayan utter lack of the true Christian idea of boththe nature and way of salvation. And to lackthis.i is to lack knowledge on a fundamental doc-trine of Christianity. To teach that we are justi-fied and save.d by faith only, were the same as tosay that a person may be healed of a physicalmalady by simply believing in the _medical know-ledge and skill of his physician, and without fol-lowing his directions or taking his medicine.This is very far from the Scripture doctrine ofjustification. The heavenly life-the life of un-selfish love (and whosoever has this, is surelyjustified)-is developed or built up within thesoul, not by faith alone, or by merely believing inthe Lord and his Word, but by believing anddoing the truth. Hence we find charity and goodworks more frequently mentioned and morestrongly emphasized in the Bible, as conducive


81/234

Episcopalianismto salvation, than faith. "Not every one that saith- unto me, Lord, Lord," says our Saviour, "shallenter into the kingdom of heaven, but he thatdoetlt the will of my Father which is in heaven.""Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, anddoetlt them, I will liken him unto a wise man,"etc. "Whosoever shall do the will of my Fatherwhich is in heaven, the same is my brother andsister and mother." "Ye are my friends ii yedo whatsoever I command you." " My rewardis with me, to give every man according as hiswork shall be."

Moreover, love is presented clearly in the Bibleas paramount to faith. The sum of all that thelaw and the prophets teach, is declared to be loveto the Lord and the neighbor. And one of theapostles assures us that "love is the fulfilling ofthe law," and another says: "If we love oneanother, God dwelleth in us." "H e that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God and God in him.""And this is love, that we walk according to hiscommandments." And Paul says : " Though Ihave all faith, so that I could remove mountains,and have not charity [love], I am nothing"-no


82/234

In its Own Dress. 37Christian-not justified or saved. "And nowabideth faith, hope, charity-these three; but thegreatest of these is charity."

So clearly and unmistakably does Episcopalianism contradict the teachings of the Bible,when it declares that " we are justified by faithonly."

But why dwell upon or recite the preposterousdogmas of this church? Only that the truecharacter of the system may appear-a systemwhich every one professes to receive who acceptsthe Thirty-nine Articles. You may possibly betold, however, that there is no obligation to receive all of these Articles; that some of themmay not be exactly true; that Episcopalianismdoes not rest on their authority, but commendsitself by its own harmony and beauty. (Wedoubt if any sane person, not yet blinded by thedelusion, would say this.) On that suppositionit stands on the same level with all speculations;and this is a day in which many speculations aresent forth far more inviting than these; and weare free to say that the system does not displayany such superior wisdom as should entitle it to

'


83/234

Episcopaliamsma preference above speculations which any ordinary mind is quite competent to originate in itsidlest moments. But no; when the authority ofthe Prayer Book and the Thirty-nine Articles isset aside, the whole fabric sinks into dust and confusion. I f there be any who, taking the name ofProtestant Episcopalians, would shape their doctrines and practice simply by their own judgmentand fancy, and in entire freedom from the authority of the Prayer Book and the Articles, whereinis that better than simple Deism?

But now let us advance to a higher charge thanthat of false teaching. The system known asEpiscopalianism is not only absurd and contradictory to the Word of God, but its doctrines(some of them at least) are derogatory to the character of our Heavenly Father, and pernicious and

. degrading in their moral tendency. Take, for example, Article ii., in which it is said that the Son," begotten /rum everlasting (?) of the Father " -"truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried,to reconcile his Father to us;." or Article xxxi.,wherein we read : "The offering of Christ oncemade is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and


84/234

In i'/s Oum Dress. 39satisfu.ction for all the sins of the whole world,both original and actual ; and there is none othersatisfaction for sin but that alone." Is the Heavenly Father, then, such a Being as Episcopalianism would have us believe ?-full of anger towardsinners, and needing to be appeased, "propitiated," "satisfied," "reconciled lo us I" Is Heso unpitying and relentless that He will not forgive a sinning creature on the simple conditionof repentance, but will have fall satisfaction forhis violated law from somebody-if not from thesinner himself, then from some one else, whofreely offers to suffer in his stead 1 Is He so regardless of the rule of justice as to allow an innocent one to suffer in lieu of the guilty, and toremit on men condition the threatened punishment ? Episcopalianism answers, Yes. Hearhow one of its most learned expositors (BishopPearson) explains the creed touching the Articlesjust cited:

"The punishment which Christ who is oursurety, endured, was a full satisfaction to the willand justice of God . . . Christ, offering himselfa sacrifice for sin, giveth that unto God for and


85/234

40 Epi'scopaliani'sminstead of the eternal death of man, which is morevaluable and acceptable to God than that deathcould be, and so maketh a sufficient compensationand full satisfaction for the sins of man ; which

God accepting becometh reconciled unto us, andfor the punishment which Christ endured, takethoff our obligation to eternal punishment." (Ex- position of the Creed, p. 547.)

Episcopalianism has here introduced an oldPagan doctrine, making God a vengeful Being;yet willing to be placated by blood and suffering.It exhibits the Heavenly Father, not as compas-sionate and forgiving, but severe and exacting;as unwilling to forgive his erring children simplyon their repentance, but insisting that the fullpenalty of transgression shall be paid-if not bythe transgressors themselves, then by a substitutewho is himself perfectly innocent. It representsHim as capable of being bought off-placated-by a bloody offering; as willing to accept nothingless than the suffering and death of his own Son.It also represents Him as guilty of the doubleinjustice, first, of allowing an innocent being tosuffer the punishment due to transgressors; and


86/234

In its Own Dress. 41second, of exacting of these same transgressors astill further penalty unless tijey believe and repent.Surely the tendency of such a doctrine cannot beotherwise than demoralizing and pernicious. Allright ideas of justice are utterly confounded bythe view herein presented of the Divine justice.For where is the justice in requiring or permittinga perfectly innocent being to suffer in lieu of theguilty? Or where is the justice in becoming reconciled to the guilty, because an innocent beinghas paid the penalty which their transgressionsmerited?

Then it is a part of this same doctrine, that aperson may lead a most wicked life, and finallyend his days upon the gallows ; but if, an hourbefore he meets a felon's doom, he accepts thisdoctrine-believes with all his heart that the bloodof Christ has paid t ~ e p e ~ a l t y due to his transgressions, his sins will all be blotted out, he willbecome a partaker in the benefits of the greatatonement, receive a full pardon for all his transgressions, and pass straight from the gallows intothe society of the blessed. C:zn a doctrine whichencourages such a belief or justifies such a con-

4.


87/234

Episcupalianism.clusion, and at the same time confounds all ourideas of justice, exert any other than a most pernicious influence upon the minds and hearts ofthose who accept it?

What utter misconception, too, of the real nature of sin, and how it is to be removed and thesoul restored to a state of spiritual health andorder, does this doctrine disclose!

And here we dismiss the Prayer Book andThirty-nine Articles; having shown that Episcopalianism, in its teachings upon some of the mostvital questions of our religion, is alike repugnantto reason and revelation. And any system whosecentral ideas are wrong, must be utterly unworthyof respect and confidence when viewed as awhole. But not just yet do we dismiss the subjectin hand.

The huge heap of error which Episcopalianismcovers or embodies, has arisen largely from afundamentally wrong idea of the nature of thewritten Word, added to an excessive venerationfor antiquity and for the opinions of men wholived and wrote in a comparatively dark age. Itholds that "the plain, natural and obvious mean-


88/234

In i'ts Own Dress. 43ing" of the Bible, is its true and only meaning(Su Bislwp Burgess' Pamphlet on SwEDENBOR-GIANISM, p. :z8); or, as one of its learned commentators says: " In the Interpretation of Holy Scripture, that sense which is nearest the letter is commonly the safest." And the idea that the inspiredWord contains a deeper meaning than that ofthe letter-even a spiritual sense throughout-isflouted. (See the above-namedpamphlet.) From thisfundamental falsity, what else could be expectedto issue but dark and muddy waters? Episcopalianism seems not to recognize the fact that theLord's words "are spirit and life," and are, therefore, to be spiritually interpreted. It forgets, too,what the apostle says, " The letter killeth, butthe spirit giveth life." It seems not to know thatthe Bible is a book of divine symbols; and thatits richest nutriment-richest to souls hungeringafter truth and righteousness-its greatest wealthof meaning lies underneath the letter, or withinit as the soul is within the body. It forgets thatthe Lord spake all things in parables, " and without a parable spake He not." It forgets, also,that, in every instance in which He. himself ex-


89/234

44 Episcopalianismplains a parable, He departs entirely from theEpiscopalian canon of interpretation, and givesa spiritual meaning to every natural object men-tioned in the parable. Take, for example, his ex-planation of the parable of the sower. He heregives a spiritual meaning to every object mentioned-the seed, the way-side, the stony andthorny places, and the good ground also uponwhich the seed fell. He explains them all in aspiritual manner, showing them to mean the different moral or spiritual states of those to whomheavenly truths are communicated. And thefowls, the sun and the thorns He also uses in asymbolic sense, to denote the false persuasionsand evil loves of the natural man, which destroyin various ways (signified by devouring, parchingand choking) the principles of heaven before theyhave become thoroughly rooted in the affections,or haye attained a strong and healthy growth.So, again, in his explanation of the parable ofthe tares and the wheat. Nothing here is literallyinterpreted-not a thing. The field, the world,the good seed, the tares, the sowing, the harvest,the reapers, all have a spiritual meaning given


90/234

In its Own Dress. 45them by the Great Teacher. His words like hisworks are all symbolic. It is said that He spakeall things by parables, and without a parable spakeHe not. And if He always spoke in parableswhen He tabernacled in the flesh, or when Hespoke through the natural humanity that He as-sumed in time, can we suppose Him to havespoken in any other way when He spoke throughother mediums-through patriarchs, prophets andapostles?

Furthermore : after his resurrection, our Lordappeared to two of his disciples on their way toEmmaus; "and beginning at Moses and all theprophets, He expounded unto them in all theScriptures the things concerning himself." Andwhen He had vanished from their sight, they saidone to another, "Did not our hearts burn withinus while He talked with us by the way, and whileHe opened to us the Scriptures?" And again,after his second appearance to them, it is added :"Then opened He their understanding, that theymight understand the Scriptures." Strange lan-guage, indeed, is this-and utterly meaninglessif the theory of Episcopalianism in regard to the


91/234

'pi'scopa!i'animzScriptures be the true one. I f there be no othermeaning to the Scriptures than that which lies onthe surface, or if their plain, obvious, literal sensebe their true and only sense, what could the inspired penman have meant by the Lord's openingthe Scriptures to his disciples? or by his "openingtheir understanding that they might understandthe Scriptures?" But when it is known that thereis an inner or spiritual sense to the written Worda sense which the unillumined natural understanding does not discern-then this language becomesintelligible. The Scriptures can be opened becausethey contain, in addition to their outward andnatural sense, an inner and spiritual meaning. Acasket may be opened, and its contents be thendisclosed; but however beautiful the casket itselfmay be, it is as nothing in comparison with theprecious jewels deposited within. So, precisely,in regard to the written Word. There is muchof truth and beauty in the letter; but its richestgems, its exhaustless stores of wealth, lie deepwithin. Mercifully does the Lord conceal themost precious th

benjamin f barrett episcopalianism versus swedenborgianism philadelphia 1872

Documents