The Exclusive Claims of Episcopal Ordination Examined and Rejected, and the Methodist Ministry Vindicated; In a Ser. of Letters to C.W. Ethelson Being a Reply to His Sermon on 'The Unity of the Church'.

The Exclusive Claims of Episcopal Ordination Examined and Rejected, and the Methodist Ministry Vindicated; In a Ser. of Letters to C.W. Ethelson Being a Reply to His Sermon on 'The Unity of the Church'.

By (author) 

List price: US$14.14

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1815 edition. Excerpt: ...The scriptures never mention this bishoprick of Timothy. 2. We have already found that there were elders, in the plural, and that these were the bishops of the Ephesian Church. If, therefore, Timothy was one of these, he was not a diocesan, but a presbyterian bishop. Yet even this cannot be proved. For though when Paul went into Macedonia, he left Timothy at Ephesus, the latter did not remain there even one year: as is distinctly proved from Acts xx. 1--4. Nor does it appear that Timothy, from that time, had any more connection with the church at Ephesus, than with the other churches which he had in like manner visited. J Actj xir. 23. f 1 Tim. ir. 14. fl 2 Tim. i. 6. 8 Tim. ir. fc (7.) But if Timothy was not a bishop, was not Titos, who ordained elders in Crete? I answer, There is no notice in scripture of his being a bishop; but, as we have just seen, that the elders whom he ordained there were themselvesi bishops. It is most probable that, like Timothy, he too was an evangelist. His being the bishop of Crete is a mere fiction, for the support of a tottering cause, which, unless you may be permitted to make Timothy and Titus into bishops, has not one leg to stand upon. Yet Titus, like Timothy, travelled too much to be a diocesan bishop. (See 2 Cor. ii. 13. vii. 6. 14. viii. 6. Gal. ii. 1. 2 Tim. iv. 10. Tit. hi. 12.) But you grant that the apostles laid hands on others: and were not the apostles, bishops? "Indeed, (Acts i. 20.) the apostolic office is expressly termed a bishoprick."t This precious morsel, Sir, is the only argument which you have urged, or which you can urge, to prove that there is one episcopal ordination mentioned jn the scriptures. And to what does it amount? The apostolic office is a bishoprick, and therefore an...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 38 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 2mm | 86g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236564022
  • 9781236564023