“FOR, in the first place, the primitive rights of the people, in consequence of its new arrangement of things, experienced a considerable diminution inasmuch as, thenceforward, none but affairs are comparatively very trifling consequence were ever made the subject of secular deliberation and adjustment; the councils of the associated churches ascribing to themselves the right of discussing and regulating everything of ... ment or importance, as well as of determining all questions to which any sort of weight was attached. Whence arose all sorts of ecclesiastical laws, the one public or general, and thenceforward titled ‘canonical,’ from the canons; another private or peculiar, consisting mainly of such regulations as each individual church deemed it expedient, after ancient manner, to enact for itself.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.1

“In the next place, the dignity and authority of the bishops were very materially augmented and enlarged. In the infancy, indeed, of councils, the bishops did not scruple to acknowledge that they appeared there merely as the ministers legates of their respective churches, and that they were, in fact, nothing more than representatives acting from instruction; but it was not long before this humble language began by little and little to be exchanged for a loftier tone; and they at length took upon them to assert that they were the legitimate successors of the apostles themselves, and might consequently, of their own proper authority, dictate laws to the Christian flock. To what an extent the inconveniences and evils arising out of these preposterous pretensions reached in after time is too well known to require any particular notice in this place.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.2

“Another effect which these councils had, was to break in upon and gradually destroy that absolute and perfect equality which had reigned amongst the bishops in primitive times. For as it was necessary that some certain place should be fixed on for the seat of council and that the right of convening the assembling and presiding therein as moderator, as well as of collecting the suffrages and preserving the records of its acts, should be vested in some one or other of its members, it for the most part became customary to give a preference in these respects to the chief city of the province and its bishop, and hence in process of time, sprung up the dignity and authority of ‘metropolitans,’ a title conferred by way of distinction on the bishops of principal cities. These associations of churches. situated within one and the same province, soon gave rise to the practise of many different provinces associating together; and hence a still greater disparity, by degrees, introduced itself amongst the bishops.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.3

“In fine, this custom of holding councils becoming at length universally prevalent, the major part of the church assumed the form of a large civil commonwealth, made up of numerous inferior republics; to the preservation of which order of things it being found expedient that a chief or superintending prelate should be appointed for each of the three grand divisions of the earth; and that, in addition to this, a supreme power should he lodged in the hands of some one individual bishop; it was tacitly assented to that a certain degree of ecclesiastical preeminence should be recognized as belonging to the bishops of Antioch, Rome, and Alexandria, the principal cities in Asia, Europe, and Africa, and that the bishop of Rome, the noblest and most opulent city in the world, should, moreover, take the precedence amongst these principal bishops, or, as they were afterward styled, patriarchs, and also assume the primacy of the whole Christian Church throughout the world.”—Id. Cent. II., Sec. XXII., XXIII., with Mosheim’s “Eccl. Hist.” Book I, Cent. II, Part II, Chap. II., Par. 11.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.4

And of this thing in the third century the record is as follows:—MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.5

“It is to be observed, however, that, notwithstanding the primitive and venerable mode of church government, which had been established by the apostles, appeared for the most part still thus firmly to maintain its ground, it was yet in reality on the wane, and gradually giving way, more especially in the larger churches, to a form that inclined rather to the despotic or monarchial nature. For as is commonly the case in human affairs, the bishops who presided over congregations of any consequence, being elated by their situation, and not feeling satisfied with the limited degree of power that had been originally committed to their hands, began to arrogate to themselves an extent of authority and importance to which they had not before made pretensions, and artfully encroaching step by step, no less on the rights of the presbyters than on those of the people, they eventually succeeded in altogether dispossessing both of their ancient and undoubted privileges, and placing every thing at their own immediate judgment and disposal.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.6

“Innovations of this kind, however, could not, of course, be attempted without requiring some sort of justification, and we accordingly find, about this time, certain new maxims and dogmas propounded respecting the right government of the church and the functions and authority of bishops; the force and validity of which, however, so far from being easily perceptible, should seem to have been but very imperfectly comprehended even by those who may be considered as the first promulgators of them.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.7

“In furtherance of these episcopal encroachments we find Cyprian standing forth a distinguished example to his brethren, being of the episcopal order himself, and, as is too obvious to be deemed, of an ambitious, domineering spirit, he entered the lists as a most strenuous advocate for the dignity and authority of bishops, and in order to prevent any part of what he considered as their just rights, from being at a future time, under any pretense whatever, either wrested from them or even called in question, labored earnestly to establish the whole on all immovable, and eternal basis.”—Mosheim’s “Commentaries,” Cent. III., Sec. XXIV.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 141.8

Cyprian declared that “the church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the church is controlled by these same rulers.” And further, “Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the church, and the church is in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, then he is not in the church.”MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.1

Thus the system of federation and centralization for power that began in the second century and which in the third century had developed an episcopal despotism and monarchy in the church, culminated in the fourth century in the grand world-federation for power with and in the state, and thus developed the world despotism and world monarchy of the bishopric of Rome—the Papacy. And it cannot be denied that the final development of the actual working Papacy is but the steady, logical growth and development of the very first step away from the individuality, the integrity, and the liberty, of the Christian congregation. And the Papacy was in that first step just as truly, though not in such full and vigorous working, as it was in the later steps in the fourth century and onward.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.2

Note that the history says specifically that this scheme of “federation,” “Confederation,” etc., had its origin “among the Greeks, with whom such confederations of several cities, and the consequent conventions and their delegates, had long been in use.” It was therefore plainly in its very origin the application of the human, the worldly, the heathen, system of government to the divine, the heavenly, the Christian, living organization.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.3

The Church which Christ and his apostles left on earth was, and was ever to be, organized from God alone, through Christ the head, with the divine life sent straight down from heaven in the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 4:15-16; Colossians 2:17-19; 1 Corinthians 12:11-13, 25, 26. By the divine life alone, from God alone, through Christ alone, by the Holy Spirit alone, that Church was, and is ever to be organized; and so was, and is ever to be, a living “building,” built of living stones, fitly framed together in Christ by the Holy Spirit, and growing “unto an holy temple in the Lord,” “for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.4

1 Peter 2:4, 5: Ephesians 2:19-22.

Now to think of applying to this divine, heavenly, Christian, living church the form of a human, worldly, heathen State or government, was utterly to miss the true idea of the church and its organization. It was at once to put a human figmentary conception in the place of the divine thought. And in its workings it was nothing else than an attempt to repress, to confine, and to stereotype, in a dead, human, and heathen form of earthly government the divinely living, growing, and heavenly church.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.5

But the heathen idea and conception of things, passed off for the Christian idea and conception, is nothing but the Papacy. The heathen idea and conception of the Church of God, passed off for the Christian idea and conception of that Church, is the very essence of the Papacy. The heathen form of a federated State, passed off as Christian and as the divine order and organization of the Church of Christ and of God, is the Papacy full formed. And for professed Protestantism, in spirit and in letter, to reproduce this thing, is to present to the world an image of the Papacy full-formed.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.6

And that the Congregationalists, whose very name stands for the independence of the congregation, should be found in this church-federation is a sufficient evidence of apostasy. But that the Baptists, of all people, the Baptists, who have all these ages stood so nobly for the great truth of the individuality, the integrity, and the liberty, of the churches and of other people—that the Baptists should be found taking an active and leading part in this Federation of Churches, certainly indicates that the apostasy of the Protestant denominations is about complete.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.7

Federation in religion is only monarchy and imperialism in religion. And that all that the Papacy has ever been should spring from the original church-federation and “confederation,” is not at all surprising. Indeed, in view of the facts, it is the only thing that should be expected, or that could logically or intelligently be expected. And that now the living image of the Papacy will spring from church-federation again, is the only thing that should be expected or that can logically or intelligently be expected.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.8

To say, and to point out, that such can be the only outcome of church-federation, confederation, etc., now, is not in any sense to be considered extreme, it is in nowise to raise any prejudiced cry, nor yet is it to sound a mere scare-alarm. It is but the application of the calm faculties of sober sense, of intelligent discernment, and of logical deduction, to the unquestionable facts of history and truths of the Scripture; and is but the learning from these facts and truths the most obvious lessons—lessons that are plain everywhere on the very surface of the thing, and which grow only more forcible and more impressive the deeper the study is carried.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.9

The errors in church-federation and of church-federation are many. They are palpable, they are deceptive, they are destructive. But of all these errors, the fundamental error is church-federation itself.MEDM October 24, 1906, page 142.10

October 17, 1906

October 31, 1906