BX

5950

D18

THE DANGERS OF CHURCH CENTRALIZATION.

SOME REMARKS

ON THE

Proposed Changes in the Constitution

OF THE

PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES.

BY A LAYMAN.

Kolamus leges Angliæ mutare."

DETROIT, MICH.:

PRINTED BY PALMER, FISHER & FLEMING.

No. 52 SHELBY STREET.

1856.

3-13-33

The Dangers of Church Centralization.

ANOTHER Session of the General Convention is at hand, and the matters likely to be brought before it should direct the attention of all Churchmen to the tendency of our legislation, and the objects and nature of our ecclesiastical union. For, not only have theories been advanced which, to some minds at least, appear highly dangerous, but those theories are being carried into practice in such manner as to endanger the independence of every diocese.

It has been distinctly laid down by an eminent writer, that the General Convention (except where expressly restricted) possesses the absolute and unqualified power of legislating upon all ecclesiastical matters; and that, while the dioceses may legislate on subjects touching which the Convention is silent, nevertheless, "when an act of the General Convention upon such a matter is passed, it becomes the supreme law; superseding what has been done in a diocese, or any power of a diocese at variance with it, and superseding the right to make any similar provision in a diocese ad idem; but abridging the power of the dioceses only so far as the law by just intendment extends." [HOFFMAN'S Law of the Church, p. 117.]

In plain English, the General Convention has the power to legislate upon all subjects, and may, if it see fit, leave no matter whatever upon which the dioceses shall have any right to act. This theory has certainly the merit of being as plain and comprehensive as the old doctrine of Sic volo, sic jubeo.

There are, however, one or two restrictions in the Constitution upon the powers of the General Convention, which would seem to ordinary and vulgar minds to operate as a slight check, at least, upon them. But here, again, we have a construction put upon it which leaves the Convention at full liberty to amend even the Constitution at its own good pleasure, whether the dioceses acquiesce or protest. The whole theory, taken together, is certainly one which, if untrue, should be put down, and, if true, should be fully understood, that we may know upon what terms we hold our liberties. And we propose to show some of the results which may be expected, as well as those which have resulted, from the workings of this plan.

It is a political axiom, that unchecked power is not only liable to abuse, but, sooner or later, will be abused inevitably. It is a dangerous weapon to handle. Like children, its possessors can not avoid trying it, in order to realize that they have it. Of course, it is to be hoped, and perhaps presumed, that the members of an Ecclesiastical Convention, having no temporalities to quarrel over, would not be likely to act improperly when assembled for purely religious objects; but the debates in our General Convention show that this hope is sometimes misplaced, and that passion and rancor have made their appearance even in that august assembly.

But, are the matters over which the General Convention, under the broad claim referred to, or even under the most moderate claim that can be set up, has cognizance, such as to prevent the probability of abuse under all circumstances? A very superficial acquaintance with history must show the reverse to be true. In what manner did heresies and corruptions enter the early Church, except through the action of men who were; not only members of the Church, but ministers at its altars? How was it that the gigantic system of lies, the Papacy, came into being? The ordained ministers, the consecrated bishops, are answerable. Is it not, therefore, a little presumptuous to assume that a spirit of sanctity, and, to speak plainly, an infallibility in judgment, and in temper also, will prevail in our council, and that here, only, will power never be abused? Where is the famous odium theologicum to be banished? The disputes of theology are more bitter, and more unscrupulous too, than any others. And, surely, Catholic Unity has not so far prevailed as to harmonize entirely all our views. The words-far from