APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION,
AND
CHURCH POSITION
When Bossuet, in 1682, drew up the famous declaration of the French clergy, the Pope threatened him with the thunders of the Vatican; and when the Bishop of Meaux heard of the threat, he said of the Pope that “good intentions combined with slender enlightenment were a great misfortune in so exalted a position.”
Had Bossuet lived in these days, he might have had to repent of his temerity.
But, perhaps, amongst Protestants, also, parties may be found to whom this sentence might not be inapplicable.
We find extreme parties in all communities, and at this moment there are before us two extreme parties—one amongst Episcopalians, another amongst Dissenters, which assert themselves and make a noise altogether beyond their numerical value, or the value of their views and doctrines. Of whom the most charitable thing that can be said is, that “good intentions combined with slender enlightenment were a great misfortune in so exalted a position.”
The parties to which we allude are the High Church party, or Puseyite party amongst Episcopalians, and a section of the Plymouth brethren known as the Darbyite party; for this body is divided, like the Episcopalians, into two sections.
Now, the High Church position is this—it claims apostolic succession. Wherever the succession is, the true Church must be, and to be outside of it is to be outside the true Church. This is their position.
But those who go in for apostolic succession seem to be oblivious of the fact, that St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Jude, and St. John take the opposite view, or a view wholly irreconcileable with such a position. See the Epistles to Timothy, those of St. Peter, St. Jude, St. John, in which nothing can be more disastrous than the
