Page:Zion's Watchtower 1887.pdf/93

(8) men, with Bishop Gregg broke off from the church (not however in the way of schism) and formed a Reformed Church of England, and in January of 1880 the St. John’s Episcopal Church, Dundee, Scotland, decided by the unanimous wish of the incumbent church-wardens, trustees, vestry, and congregation to place the church under the jurisdiction of the bishops of the Reformed Church of England, and this has had its effects upon other similarly circumstanced churches objecting to Sacerdotalism and Ritualism, thus forming the third Protestant Episcopal Scotch Church.—The Christian Family Annual.

We are Old-Fashioned, Evangelical and Protestant church people. We love the "old paths." We are not schismatics; but as the Church of England once rejected Romish error and separated therefrom, so now we reject those same errors which are destroying the spiritual fabric of the Church of England.

Even at the risk of the charge of not "sticking to the ship," we prefer to adhere to our principles—rather than be parried to Rome by a church which is rapidly losing her Protestant character.

We bear a relation to the Church of England similar to that which the Church of England bears to the Church of Rome. The reasons which the Church of England had for her separation from Rome three centuries ago, are our reasons for our separation from the Church of England today.

Our mission is to complete the work of the Reformation which was then so nobly begun.—''Ref. Church of Eng. Record.''

The biographer of Mr. Leigh Richmond one day submitted to him the following question: "What is the Scriptural and right way to preach to the Jews?" "I know of no scriptural way," he replied, "of preaching to men, otherwise than as sinners; and why the Jews, whose sins are of so aggravated a nature, should be dealt with in a different way, I do not see. I would address the Jew as I would address any other man, that is, as a sinner; and till he is convinced of his sin, he will never believe in a Saviour. 'Christ Crucified' is declared to be, 'To the Greeks foolishness, and to the Jews a stumbling block; but to them that believe, the power of God and the wisdom of God.' No man will ever feel the power of God, whether he be Jew or Gentile, till he learn it at the foot of the cross."

Pharisees rejected Jesus because He taught men that God's plans or grace were wider than they had believed them to be. The Gentiles, the outcasts, the whole world of humanity, was included in them. The Pharisees believed that the Jews, and especially their own sect, had a monopoly of the grace of God. It is strange how this old spirit of human nature comes out in our day. Many in the church seem to be just as averse to any view of the gospel which widens its scope beyond the narrow lines in which they have conceived it. The idea that there can be any blessing in it for the countless masses of the dead who passed out of life before Christ came, or who have since died with no knowledge of Him, is something they cannot admit. Nor have they an ear for any interpretations of Scripture which do not pass current in their sect, or which bring within the scope of God's love and blessing those whom they have always regarded as outside of His covenant. Men love to think that they belong to that favored class who have a monopoly of both the truth and the grace of God.—Words of Reconciliation.

"The convention of the St. Andrew's Brotherhood, which was held in this city last week, was its second annual session. The report of the council shows that the Brotherhood has grown in a year from 36 to 144 chapters, with an estimated membership of 2,361 young men. These figures demonstrate that the Church needs such a society, an order of laymen who will do Church work on Church lines. We wish to emphasize this remark—Church work on Church lines—because we believe it needs to be impressed upon the leaders of this movement. We were pained to note in the debates of the session a disposition to adopt the cant that young men must be brought to Christ, not the Church, that Christ, not the Church, must be preached, etc. In other words that there is a disposition to 'run' the Brotherhood on Y. M. C. A. lines. This is a mistake, and if it is persisted in, will be a fatal mistake. Christ and his church cannot be divorced. To bring men to Christ we must bring them into His Body. It is because the Y. M. C. A ignore this principle that the Church has not adopted it, and the Church will not adopt it even if it calls itself by the name of St. Andrew."—From The Living Church, Oct. 22, '87—Prot. Episcopal organ, Chicago.

The above is sent us by a brother who was once a staunch Episcopalian, but who is now rejoicing in a membership enrollment in the real Church—"The Church of the first born whose names are written in heaven." Our Brother's brief comment accompanying the above was: "A strong argument for our side."

Yes, it is a strong argument for our side. The claim made by the Episcopal organ that: "Christ and his church cannot be divorced; To bring men to Christ we must bring them into ," is true only of the true Church as we recognize it; the Church of whom it is written "The Lord knoweth them that are His." Truly it is impossible to divorce or separate the saints, the Bride, from their Lord, the Bridegroom. Truly to bring men to Christ is to bring them into this state of membership with Him as their head—into membership in the Church which is.

But this is not true of any of the nominal bodies of Christ which are mere earthly organizations composed for most part of tares; containing (as Bishop Foster, of the M. E. church, has declared) "all the ring-streaked and speckled [characters] of Christendom." No earthly organization whose membership is admitted by fallible men who cannot read the hearts of those they admit, can decently and candidly claim to be the Church, the Body of Christ.

Yet this absurd claim made by Episcopalians in the past, when all "dissenters" such as Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, etc., were regarded as heretics who had neither part nor lot in the Church of Christ—is still the measure of the heart and intellect of the editor of The Living Church, and we fear also of many who regard his writings with favor.

And yet all the various churches or sects are involved in the same confusion, for none will dispute that there is but one body of the one Lord, and hence but one "Church, which is his body." It is the height of absurdity then, to speak of the various human organizations as churches. There can be but one true church, one true body of Christ: all others must be spurious counterfeits.

The true Church which is his body must contain all "the sanctified in Christ Jesus," from the Head, down to the last member of his body. The true living Church, must contain all "the sanctified in Christ Jesus" who are alive. The true living Church in any city, state or town must contain all "the sanctified in Christ Jesus" in such city, state or town; as for instance, the true Church in London includes all "the sanctified in Christ Jesus," who are in London, and the true Church in Ohio, includes all "the sanctified in Christ Jesus" in Ohio.

Can it be claimed that any earthly organization contains