OMISH OR AMISH CHURCH.

BY SHEM ZOOK,

MIFFLIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.

OMISH Or Amish, is a name which was, in the United States, given to a society of Mennonites, but who are not known by that name in Europe, the place from which they originally came. In many parts of Germany and Switzerland, where they are still considerably numerous, they are there sometimes, for the purpose of distinction, called Hooker Mennonites, on account of their wearing hooks on their clothes; another party of Mennonites being, for similar reasons, termed Button Mennonites. The principal difference between these societies consists in the former being more simple in their dress, and more strict in their discipline. In their religious forms of worship, the different denominations of Mennonites vary but little from other Protestants. They consider the scriptures as the only rule of faith, and maintain that the surest mark of the true church is the sanctity of its members. They have regular ministers and deacons, who are not allowed to receive fixed salaries; in their religious assemblies, however, every one has the privilege to exhort and to expound the scriptures. Baptism is administered to adults only, infants not being considered proper subjects, and is administered by pouring water upon the head of the subject. The Lord's Supper is administered in commemoration of the death of our Saviour. It is considered unlawful to take an oath on any occasion, as well as to repel force by force; and they consider war, in all its shapes, as unchristian and unjust. Charity is with them a religious duty, and none of their members are permitted to become a public charge.

Great injustice has been done the Mennonites by Protestant as well as by Catholic writers, by imputing to them doctrines which they never held with regard to the incarnation of Christ and the Millennium, or personal reign of Christ upon earth. That Menno Simon was charged with entertaining peculiar and unwarranted

opinions respecting these matters is true, (doctrines which we deem improper to mention, but an account of which may be found by referring to article Anabaptists, in the Encyclopædia Americana;) but it is well known to all who are acquainted with the writings or works of Menno Simon, that if his written declarations are to be received as an evidence of his opinions, then the said charges are entirely gratuitous and without foundation in fact. The Mennonites have also been charged with having originated with the Anabaptists of Munster; and have frequently been confounded with the followers of Bockhold, John of Leyden, and David Joris. This charge is equally and totally incorrect. It is not denied that many of those who had been misled by these fanatics, ultimately joined the Mennonites; but they were not admitted into their society until they had wholly repudiated the wild and fanatical notions of the Munsterites. The many, and often bitter, controversies which took place during the time of the Reformation, not only between Catholic and Protestant writers, but often between the Protestants themselves, added to the fact that the history of the Mennonites has hitherto been written by writers of other sects, readily account for the misstatements and incorrect accounts respecting the origin, history, and religious opinions of the Mennonites.

The name Amish or Omish was derived from Jacob Amen, a native of Amenthal, in Switzerland, and a rigid Mennonite preacher of the seventeenth century; but that he was not the founder of a sect will be evident from the fact, that the society who are in the United States wrongfully called Amish or Omish, still rigidly adhere to the Confession of Faith which was adopted at Dortrecht, in Holland, A. D. 1632, (before the time of Jacob Amen,) by a General Assembly of ministers of the religious denomination who were at that time and in that place called Mennonites, (after Menno Simon, an eminent preacher and native of Friesland, in Holland,) but who were (as has been well established by writers of the seventeenth century), prior to that time, at different periods, known by the names of Henricians, Petrobrusians, and Waldenses. The number of the milder Mennonites in the United States is computed at 120,000, while that of the rigid Mennonites is not supposed to exceed 5000.

PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.

BY JOHN M. KREBS, D.D.,

PASTOR OF THE RUTGERS STREET CHURCH, NEW YORK, AND PERMANENT CLERK OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

I. DOCTRINE, WORSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT.

THE published "Constitution of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America," sets forth at large the system of doctrine, mode of worship, and form of government, adopted by this church.

The Doctrines are contained in the "Confession of Faith," and in the "Larger and Shorter Catechisms," and are those which are popularly denominated "Calvinistic." This distinctive title is appropriated to this system, not because Calvin invented it, but because, among all the modern advocates of it, he was undoubtedly the most profound and able, and because it has suited the policy of some to endeavour to convey the idea that this system was unknown until Calvin began to propagate and defend it.

In the Confession of Faith there are many doctrines in which the Presbyterians agree with their brethren of other denominations. In regard to all that is embraced in that formula concerning the being and perfections of God, the Trinity of persons in the Godhead, the divinity, incarnation and atoning sacrifice of the Son of God, &c., they may be said to hold substantially in common with all sects who deserve the Christian name. But with respect to the true state of human nature before God, the doctrine of sovereign, unconditional election to eternal life, the doctrine that Christ died in a special sense for his elect people, the doctrine of justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ alone, of sanctification by the special and invincible power of the Holy Spirit, and of the perseverance of the saints in holiness, they differ very materially from many who bear the Christian name. In short, with regard to what are commonly called the "five points" discussed and decided in the Synod of Dort, the Confession is opposed to Arminianism, and coincides with the Calvinistic system maintained by that body.

These evangelical doctrines, as they are taught in the Word of

God, were revived and held with singular unanimity by all the churches which arose out of the Reformation, as appears very evidently from a comparison of the various creeds and confessions which were framed and published by them. Those who on the Continent adhered to Martin Luther in his ritual views and observances, and the Anglican prelatists as well as the Reformed Churches of France, Germany, Switzerland, Holland and Scotland, equally adopted the tenets since denominated Calvinistic, their differences having relation mainly to the administration of ecclesiastical affairs, the parity of the Christian ministry, and their subordinate topics: And the history of the church and of the world, (as a constant developement of this great principle, that truth is in order to goodness, its great touchstone, in its tendency to produce holiness, and that there is an inseparable connexion between faith and practice, truth and duty,) together with the admissions of some of the most eminent scholars and divines, and eloquent writers of later days, even of those who by no means favoured Calvinism, are an irrefragable testimony to the benign influence exerted by this much-abused system, on the illumination and salvation of those who cordially embrace it, and on the moral character and deportment, the knowledge and freedom, and the general prosperity and happiness of every community where it has prevailed.*

* “By many ignorant and prejudiced persons a very foul, but a very false, allegation, both before the time of the Synod of Dort, and also down to the present day, has occagionally been advanced against the Calvinistic system. That system has been set forth as offering a premium for gross immorality, as inculcating in the case of the vainly presumptuous, an unhallowed security, and as advocating, to the certain ruin of the constitutionally despondent, all the wild recklessness of utter and uncontrolled desperation. Hence, in the way of summary, we have been gravely assured that, according to the Calvinistic scheme of interpretation, the elect, no matter what may be the obstinate ungodliness of their lives, must be finally saved even in their impenitence, while the reprobate, no matter what may be the devoted holiness of their conversation, even in their godly penitence must be finally damned. Nothing can be more unfounded than this vulgar allegation.

"Calvinism really teaches, that the elect, even though they may be humbly doubtful of their own individual election, after their effectual calling, however speckled with the remains of human corruption, will always lead holy and devoted and godly lives; while the reprobate, even though they may madly and contemptuously presume upon their own imagined security, will always show their true character, either by an indulgence in habitually unhallowed practice, or by an utter deadness to every sentiment of vitally influential religion.”—Judic. Synod. Dordrech. Conclus. Cap. V.

"This invariable association of holiness with election, and of unholiness with reproba- ! tion, is assuredly the special badge of Calvinism; and for the abuse of the system by the profanely licentious, that scheme is no more responsible, than any other scheme can justly be made responsible for its own particular and disallowed perversion.

"The dogma, if such a dogma be held even by the wildest Antinomian, that an indi. vidual fearlessly and securely may sin, because without evidence, or rather against evi

The forms of worship are simple and scriptural, consisting in praise, prayer, and the reading and preaching of the word of God. They are regulated according to a prescribed "Directory," but are

dence, he has fondly persuaded himself that he is one of the elect-that dogma is a mere perversion of the Genevan system. A pious Calvinist-and among doctrinal Calvinists have been numbered some of the best and the wisest and the most holy men who have ever adorned the Catholic Church-a pious Calvinist would shrink from it with horror and disgust. So far from sanctioning the blasphemous absurdity, on the real principles of his own scheme, he would be the first and the foremost to consider its maintainance, by any pretended Calvinist, as a black mark indicative of the wretched perverter's own reprobation. He would say—Whatever may be the secret purpose of God in regard to effectual calling, no man can claim to be of the number of the elect to glory, unless as a clear evidence of his election, he can show a life devoted to his Saviour and instinct with fruit. producing holiness. As honest men, we are bound, in the measure of our opportunity, faithfully to investigate doctrinal truth; but then, we are equally bound to abstain from the offensive shamelessness of unmerited calumny.”—Faber's Primitive Doctrine of Election, B. I., chap. vi. sec. 2.

As the most powerful body of European refugees from prelatical cruelty, who originally settled in the United States, were inflexible Calvinists; and as they have impressed their character upon all the national attributes of our republic: it is indispensable accurately to comprehend the cardinal principles of Calvinism in its operation and results, among the entire body of its genuine disciples in this country-the original Anglican Puritans, the Scottish and Irish Presbyterians, the Baptists, and the Reformed Dutch and Germans. In addition, therefore, to the previous testimony of Mr. Faber, three separate witnesses are adduced; and as neither of them are Calvinists, the four combined historiographers must be admitted as proof equivalent to moral demonstration.

Calvin. The author of the biographical notice of "Calvin," in the Encyclopedia Britannica, among other expressions laudatory of the exalted virtues, noble talents, and trans. cendant erudition of the French Reformer, thus characterizes him and his most illustrious compeer. Luther and Calvin are "twin stars, the brightest of that constellation of lights by whose effulgence were dispelled the long night of darkness, under the cloud of which the energies of mankind suffered eclipse; and having emerged, they shone forth with a brilliance and glory unparalleled in the history of the world."

The same writer also mentions, among the chief points which distinguish the system of Calvin from that of the other Reformed Churches,--the independence of the church of the civil power, and the spiritual presence of Christ in the sacrament "of the Lord's Supper."-Encyclopædia Britannica, article CALVIN.

The Puritans.-Mr. Bancroft, in his History of the United States, exactly coincides with Mr. Macaulay and other critics, who have illumined the world by their splendid lucubrations in the Edinburgh Review. The American narrator's evidence being so unexceptionable, a few sentences are extracted. It must be premised, however, that he uses the terms Calvinism and Puritanism, in the doctrinal view, as identical.

Puritanism was religion struggling for the people; the shelter, said its enemy, for the noble principle of liberty. It was its office to engraft the new institutions of popular energy upon the old European system of a feudal aristocracy and popular servitude. The good was permanent. The outward emblems were of transient duration. The effects of Puritanism display its true character. Ecclesiastical tyranny is of all kinds the worst. Its fruits are cowardice, idleness, and poverty. Puritanism was a life-giving spirit. Activity, thrift, and intelligence followed in its train."

"The political character of Calvinism, which with one consent, and with instinctive judgment, the monarchs of that day feared as republicanism, and which Charles II.