/^_ f 
 
 LIBRA.RY 
 
 Theological Seminary, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 I 
 
:. ■' y ^- 
 
 
% 
 
 I- 
 

 
 f'>. 
 
PRIMITIVE 
 
 TRUTH AND ORDER 
 
 VINDICATED FROM 
 
 MODERN MISREPRESENTATION: 
 
 WITH 
 
 A DEFENCE OF EPISCOPACY, 
 
 PARTICULARLY THAT OF 
 
 SCOTLAND, 
 
 AGAINST AN ATTACK MADE ON IT 
 
 BY THE LATE DR. CAMPBELL, OF ABERDEEN, 
 
 IN HIS 
 
 LECTURES ON ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORT. 
 
 BY THE RIGHT REV. JOHN SKINNER, 
 
 IN ABERDEEN, SENIOR BISHOP OF THE SCOTCH EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 
 
 THE FIRST AMERICAN EDITION. 
 
 To which is annexed, 
 
 A REVIEW OF DR. HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY. 
 
 
 PSjyTED AND SOLD BY T. ^ J. sfV^^DcH HBUi^^^'*'^ ^ 
 
 1808. ^'^^f^nmK'^-^'' 
 
 No. 160 Psarl-Strect. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT 
 TO THIS EDITION, 
 
 1 HE original edition of this work contained 
 a short " Address to the Episcopalians of Scot- 
 land." As this address derives its principal 
 interest from the local circumstances of the 
 Church in that country, the publishers have 
 omitted it; and they have subjoined a very 
 able Review of Dr. Haxveis' Church History, 
 extracted from the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, 
 which, they think, will enhance the value of 
 the volume. 
 
THE FOLLOWING WORK, IN VINDICATION 
 
 OF 
 
 PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER, 
 
 IS MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED 
 TO THE HONOURABLE 
 
 SIR WILLIAM FORBES, BARONET, 
 
 OF PITSLIGO; 
 
 BOTH AS A GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT 
 
 OF HIS EXERTIONS IN THE SAME CAUSE, 
 
 AND 
 
 AS A HUMBLE TESTIMONY 
 
 OF THAT SINCERE REGARD FOR HIS PUBLIC VIRTUES, 
 
 AND NO LESS AMIABLE CHARACTER 
 
 IN PRIVATE LIFE, 
 
 WHICH HAS BEEN LONG AND DEEPLY IMPRESSED 
 
 ON THE MIND OF 
 
 HIS MUCH OBLIGED, OBEDIENT, 
 
 AND VERY FAITHFUL SERVANT, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 Introduction^ Page 9 — -25 
 
 Chapter I. 
 
 The Christian Religion^ beings like its Divine Author^ 
 " the same yesterday ^ to-day, and for ever^'' ought 
 to be received and embraced^ just as it is represented 
 and held out in the Scriptures of Truth, *' without 
 adding thereto, or diminishing from it^^ 2r— 88 
 
 Chapter II. 
 
 The Church of Christ, in which his Religion is received 
 and embraced, is that spiritual Society, in xvhich the 
 Ministration of holy Things is committed to the three 
 distinct Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, 
 deriving their Authority from the Apostles, as those 
 
 Apostles received their Commission from Christ, 89 ^258 
 
 Chapter III. 
 
 A Part of this Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, 
 though deprived of the Support of Civil Establish- 
 ment, does still exist in this Country, under the Name 
 of the Scotch Episcopal Churchy whose Doctrine, 
 Discipline, and Worship, as happily agreeing with 
 that of the first and purest Ages of Christianity, 
 ought to be steadily adhered to, by all xvho profess to 
 be of the Episcopal Communion in this Part of the 
 Kingdom, 259 — 340. 
 
 Appendix, containing List and Letters of Consecra- 
 tions, and Articles of Union, 341—350 
 
 Extract from the Review of Primitive Truth and Or- 
 der, contained in the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, exhi- 
 biting a Reply to Dr, CampbelVs Commentary on the 
 Words of Ignatius — '^ There is but one Altar as 
 there is but one Bishop," 351— 35^ 
 
 A Review of Haw e is* Church History, in which the 
 Errors and Misrepresentations of that Work are de- 
 tected and exposed, c^55 — ^\ 4 
 
IN^rRODUCTION. 
 
 J.F there be any one truth, in embracing which it might 
 be supposed that the intelligent part of mankind would uni- 
 rersaily agree, it is surely the importance of religion, and 
 the necessity of attending to what it recommends, for pro- 
 moting the interests of society on earth, as well as prepar- 
 ing men for the happiness of heaven. Viewing the matter 
 in this light, it is impossible but that every serious think- 
 ing person, who wishes well to his country, must sincerely 
 lament the unhappy divisions, which have so long a^-itated 
 the public mind, on a subject so interesting as the nature 
 and tendency of true religion. However justifiable sepa- 
 ration may be in some cases ; and however necessary at all 
 times, for the friends of truth and righteousness to with- 
 draw themselves from the tents of error and ungodliness; 
 still it cannot be denied that the numerous sects and parties 
 into which the Christian world has been divided, and their 
 almost endless diversity of religious opinions, must be con- 
 sidered as one of the heaviest calamities with which man- 
 kind have ever been visited. Nor need we be at much 
 pains to point out this wild variety of sentiment respecting 
 the doctrines of the gospel, as the most common source of 
 infidelity, and most powerful support of irrellgion; since 
 we find it daily appealed to as such, and therefore industri- 
 ously encouraged by those ** perverse disputers," who, ra- 
 ther than embrace the '' pure undefiled religion" of Christ, 
 allow themselves to be completely *' spoiled through philo- 
 sophy and vain deceit." 
 
 Nothing seems to be better known, nor more carefully 
 improved, by the adversaries of our common faith, thaa 
 
no JtNTRODUCTIONi 
 
 the advantage they derive from those unhappy disscntiuns, 
 by which the family of Christians, which an Apostle calls 
 the " Household of faith," is divided against itself. In la- 
 menting the effects of such shameful division, the church o^ 
 Christ may justly say, in the words of the Psalmist, — " It 
 is not an open enem)^ that hath done me this dishonour ; 
 but even those who were once my companions, who took 
 flweet counsel together with me, and walked in the house 
 of God as friends." Such " offences," however, we are 
 assured, " must needs come ;" even although a '' woe be de- 
 nounced against those by whom they come." We are also 
 forewarned, that there must, and will be heresies, factions 
 and parties distinguished by their false and destructive 
 principles j " that they who are approved" by their steady 
 adherence to truth, unit}^ and order, " may be made mani- 
 fest." — Such then being the divided state of what is called 
 the Christian World, those who have promoted the pre- 
 sent w^ork do not hope to produce any thing like general 
 unanimity in a country such as this, where so many jarring 
 opinions are entertained on the subject of religion. — The 
 object which they have in view is of less extent, and there- 
 fore more likely to be accomplished. The design of this 
 publication is to offer some arguments in defence of Episco* 
 pacy in general, and particularly that of Scotland ; and to 
 persuade such of the inhabitants of this country as profess 
 to be of the Episcopal Communion, to walk worthy of that 
 profession, by acting in a manner consistent with it, and 
 endeavouring to support the constitution, and preserve the 
 unity of that small remnant of the old established church, 
 which still happily exists in this part of the united kingdom. 
 There is no article of the Christian faith, as laid down in 
 our public creeds, that seems to be so strangely misunder- 
 stood, and so little attended to, as that in which we are; 
 taught to profess our belief of the " holy catholic church." 
 And the mistakes and inattention so prevalent with regard 
 to this important article are the more to be regretted, as the 
 
INTRODUCTION. U 
 
 baneful consequences arising from this unhappy cause do 
 daily exhibit an increasing tendency to disorder, confu- 
 sion, and every evil work. It is no doubt by preserving 
 the bonds of ecclesiastical unity, that Christians are to be- 
 kept in the way of obedience to the one God, and depen- 
 dence on the one Mediator. It has, therefore, been justly 
 observed by an eminent writer, that, " if ever this subject 
 of the church of Christ, now so much neglected, and al- 
 most forgotten by those who are most concerfted to under- 
 stand it, should come to be better considered, there would 
 be more ti'ue piety, and more peace, more of those virtues 
 which will be required in heaven, and which must there* 
 fore be first learned upon earth. Some amongst us err, 
 because they know not the Scriptures ; and others, be- 
 cause they never considered the nature of the church. 
 Some think they can make their own religion, and so they^ 
 despise the word of God, and fall into infidelity. Others 
 think they can make their o^vn church, or even be a church 
 unto themselves ; and so they fall into the delusions of en- 
 thusiasm, or the uncharitableness of schism." 
 
 These are the pertinent remarks of a learned divine of 
 of the church of England, and they are enforced by an ob- 
 servation so justly expressed, and so well adapted to my 
 present purpose, that I must take the liberty of presenting 
 it to the notice of those for whom this publication is more 
 particularly intended. " But, as there is nothing to en- 
 lighten the minds of men in the doctrines of salvation, but 
 the word of God ; so there is nothing that can unite their 
 hearts and affections, but the church of God, Ye are one 
 bread, and one body, saith the Aposde ; one body by par- 
 taking of one bread; and that can only be in the sajne com- 
 mumoiiy'^ Impressed therefore with the truth and import- 
 ance of what is here so justly asserted, and eamestly de- 
 
 * See the preface to an Essay en. ibe C^nrcb, hj the late Rijv WillJam, 
 Jonesj of Navl^^nd, \xi SuffolK- 
 
12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 sirous of its producing the same effect in the minds of 
 those for whose benefit I am now writing, I shall beg leave 
 to request their serious and impartial consideration of the 
 subject before us; while, taking a view of the general state 
 of religion in this countr}', and the danger to which it is 
 exposed, from professed infidels on the one hand, and from 
 the fanatical abettors of enthusiasm on the other, we look 
 back through all this mist of modern confusion, to the pri- 
 mitive order and uniformity of the church, and see what 
 necessity there is for our continuing still in the " Apostles' 
 doctrine and fellowship^'' as the only source of order and 
 guard of uniformity. — We shall then close our view with 
 such a brief, but, I trust, satisfactory account of the ecclesi- 
 astical orders and administrations of the Episcopal Church 
 in Scotland, as, notwidistanding the violent attack which 
 was lately made upon it by a learned Professor of the 
 establishment, may tend, by the blessing of God, to con- 
 firm the regard and attachment of its present members; to 
 promote a becoming union among all those who profess 
 to be of the Episcopal persuasion in this part of the king- 
 dom ; and to fumish them with proper arguments for the 
 vindication of those sound and salutary principles, by 
 which they have the happiness to be distinguished. 
 
 It is an observation of undeniable certaint}^, that the 
 same Divine Being, the Almighty Lord of heaven and 
 earth, who has given to man the good things of creation 
 for the use and benefit of his body, and the precious truths 
 of revelation for the instruction and comfort of his soul, 
 has in both instances met with the most ungrateful and 
 unworthy returns. The good things of creation have been 
 abused to the basest purposes of riot and intemperance, 
 consumed in sin and sensuality, and often made a pretence 
 for indulging covetousness and ambition, a sordid parsi- 
 mony and griping avarice; while the precious truths of 
 revelation have been treated with the most insolent scorn 
 and contempt, exposed to all the wantonnoes of raillery and 
 
INTRODUCTION. IS 
 
 ridicule, and often so strangely perverted, as to produce no- 
 thing but blind superstition and enthusiastic presumption. 
 
 It is not enough, however, that we acknowledge in ge- 
 neral the truth of this melancholy observation : let us ex- 
 amine whether such a charge be strictly just, when applied 
 to the inhabitants of this land, the country with which we 
 are most immediately connected. Perhaps, when compar- 
 ing our moral character with that of other states and king- 
 doms, we may feel an inclination at once to resist the 
 charge, because our country cannot in justice be accused of 
 such flagrant abuses of the divine goodness as are too often 
 exhibited in other parts of the world. But before we allow 
 ourselves to be carried away by any such superficial and 
 flattering comparison, we shall do well to consider, whether 
 this moral superiority, which at present we undoubtedly 
 possess, may not be more justly ascribed to a want o£ 
 means and opportunity of carrying the pursuit of sensual 
 and worldly pleasure to the same height with our richer 
 neighbours, than to any want of inclination, from principle, 
 to the abuses which I have been mentioning. It seems 
 therefore a doubtful point, whether our virtue in this re- 
 spect is to be traced to the proper source and principle of 
 all that deser\'es to be called virtue, or whether our being 
 " delivered from much of the evil" that prevails in other 
 places, may not be ascribed to the favourable circumstance 
 of our not being so much " led into t mptation." But 
 whatever may be said, either for or against our national 
 character, on this score, it can only be applied to the first 
 branch of the charge to which I have alluded, as pointing 
 to that presumptuous abuse of the good things of creation, 
 the criminality of which will no doubt be in proportion to 
 the share that is enjoyed of these temporal blessings ; and 
 those, to whom little is given, will surely have the less to 
 account for. But as to the other part of the charge, in 
 which our country is implicated, as professing to be Chris- 
 tian, and enjoying the full benefit of divine revelation, I ant 
 
14 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 afraid, that in the contempt, or abuse of Its precious truths, 
 as much guilt and depravity will be found here, in propor- 
 tion to our numbers, as in the other parts of the united 
 kingdom. 
 
 From the advantages which Scotland has long enjoyed 
 in the way of literature, and the easy access thus afforded 
 to the general acquisition of knowledge, has arisen the 
 powerful temptation, which many have been unable to 
 withstand, of carrying their speculations beyond the proper 
 limits, and affecting to be wise even in matters of religion, 
 above what God has caused to be written for man's instruc- 
 tion. While such speculations, however, were confined to 
 the student in his closet, their influence was narrow and 
 circumscribed; and the general state of society was but lit- 
 tle affected by the writings of such infidels as David Hume^ 
 till they were better suited to vulgar capacity, and their 
 deadly venom more widely circulated, by the poisonousf 
 arts of Thomas Pame^ and his numerous disciples. These- 
 could not fail at last to attract the notice of government ; 
 and by its firm and steady exertions, a stop has been put to 
 the open and avowed propagation of principles so hostile to 
 the morals, the peace, and good order of society. Yet it is 
 much to be feared, that in many parts of the kingdom, the 
 seeds of irreligion and licentiousness have been so plenti- 
 fully disseminated, that unless their growth be checked by 
 a returning sense of duty, or some powerful interposition 
 of Providence, before they come to full maturity, inevita- 
 ble ruin must be the consequence. Already do the presa- 
 ges of such a fatal issue begin to exhibit themselves. In 
 some of the most populous districts of Scotland, where the 
 middling and lower ranks of the people were, some years 
 ago, exemplary in the discharge of their religious duties, 
 not occasional neglect only, but a constant derision, and an 
 avowed contempt of these duties, have now taken place. 
 The rites and ordinances of the gospel are exposed to 
 every species of scorn and ridicule. Children are wilfullr 
 
INTRODUCTION. t5 
 
 withlield from the " laver of regeneration ;" and men and 
 women " count the blood of the covenant, wherewith they 
 are sanctified, an unholy thing, in pure despite of the spirit 
 of gi'ace." 
 
 The attainment of superior wisdom has been the boast of 
 the free-thinking tribe in every age, and in every nation i 
 and much mischief has been done to the cause of Chris- 
 tianity by the sophisms of schoolmen, and the introduction 
 of that false philosophy and vain deceit, the offspring of 
 metaphysical subtilty, through v/hich so many in the higher 
 ranks of life have been completely " spoiled and led 
 away after the rudiments of the world, and not after 
 Christ." Yet comparatively small was the injury, so long 
 as the poor had the gospel preached unto them ; so long as 
 the mass of society was uncontaminated, and the great 
 body of the people esteemed themselves happy in enjoying 
 the comforts of religion, and " counted all things but loss, 
 for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus their 
 Lord." The partition- wall, however, between learned and 
 unlearned, is now in this respect broken down. The adepts 
 of the new philosophy have availed themselves of the faci- 
 lity, with which the lower classes of the people may be 
 tempted to get rid of this distinction ; and, if we may bor- 
 row the figurative language of the Psalmist, " the boar out 
 of the wood doth now waste it, and the wild beast of the 
 field doth devour" and tear in pieces, the gospel of that 
 •' God of hosts," who proclaimed himself " the true vine ;" 
 even the " Shepherd of Israel," of whom the same Psalm- 
 ist declares, that " he is our God, and we are the people of 
 his pasture, and the sheep of his hand." — What a pity it is 
 that the grievous wolves of atheism and apostacy should be 
 allowed to enter in among us, clothed as they are in the 
 lambskin dress of fraternal benevolence, and universal phi- 
 lanthropy ; under which guise, " speaking perverse things 
 to draw away disciples after them," they spare not the 
 flock of Christ, but are daily carrying off unstable souls to 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the destruction that awaits them! To whom, but to thait 
 same mighty Shepherd of Israel, who neither slumbereth 
 nor sleepeth, can we look for such aid and protection as are 
 necessary to defend us from these enemies of our peace ? 
 
 But, while we fly to him for shelter, earnestly praying 
 that he would take us under " the shadow of his wings, 
 until these calamities be overpast," we must be equally 
 careful to beware of the modern " false prophets," and not 
 listen to the pretensions of such as are ever seeking to 
 exalt themselves, by going about and saying, " Lo, here is 
 Christ, or lo there ;" for Christ himself hath left this warn- 
 ing with us — " Not every one that saith unto ine, Lord, 
 Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven ; but he that 
 doth the will of my Father which is in heaven."-^' Now 
 this heavenly Father being the God of order, not of confu- 
 sion, his will must in every thing accord with his work ; 
 and we are to discover what his Vv'ill is, from v/hat he has 
 done for the purpose of revealing it to us. His doings^ no 
 doubt, mav be often " marvellous in our eyes ;" but no 
 man, who is not actuated by the most palpable presumption 
 and self-confidence, will dare to infringe, or pretend to 
 alter, the order of God's works, whether they refer to his 
 operations in the economy of nature, or of grace. Bold 
 and assuming as the naturalist too often is, he never has 
 attempted to invert the seasons ; to make the sun rule by- 
 night, and the moon by day; to oppose the stars in their 
 courses ; to bring the winds out of their treasures, or to 
 allay the fury of the tempest by his unavailing " peace, be 
 still." How then should any one pretend to alter the 
 system of things spiritual ; — to change the economy of 
 grace ; — to disjoint the whole frame of religion, by oppos- 
 ing the revealed will of God, and setting aside the laws 
 and institutions of his divine appointment ? Yet all this 
 may be justly laid to the charge of those wild entliusiasts^ 
 
 * St. Manhevr vli. 21 
 
INTRODUCTION. t> 
 
 who, full of the assurance of faith, and the inward expe* 
 rience of a self-confident mind, enroll themselves among 
 the elect of God ; and, certain, as they suppose, of being 
 saved themselves, look down with contemptuous disdain on 
 those humble Christians who are yet content to "■ work out 
 their own salvation," in the way that God has prescribed^ 
 " with fear and trembling."— A doctrine^ which thus tears 
 away from the human heart every solid motive to a holy 
 and religious life j which tells us^ in language as plain as 
 these people can possibly make use of, that if we are in the 
 number of the elect, there is no fear, and if we are not^ 
 there is no hope : Such a doctrine, the abettors of it, no 
 doubt, justly suppose, would require to be supported, not 
 by human authority, but by an immediate testimony from 
 heaven; and therefore the modern preachers of this new- 
 gospel, despising the commission which our Lord gave his 
 Apostles, to be handed down by regular succession, have 
 all at once assumed to themselves a title, by which they 
 would make the world believe that they have now the 
 only mission from heaven that exists upon this earth, th6 
 peculiar privilege of preaching what they are pleased to call 
 the Gospel^ in opposition to all that the church of God has 
 hitherto received under that venerable name. 
 
 How long this delusion, which is now spreading so wide 
 through every part of the kingdom, may prevail, it is not 
 easy to say ; as the power of delusion is strong, both when 
 it would appear to be on the side of religion, and when it 
 operates in a contrary direction. Attempts have been 
 made, by something like ecclesiastical authority, to stop the 
 progress of this growing evil, and to administer a remedy 
 to those who are infectecj by this missionary phrensy ; a 
 sort of possession more worthy of one who has his " dwel- 
 ling among the tombs," than of those who reside in the 
 habitations of men ! But they who prescribe the remedy, 
 ought to understand well the nature of the disease, and be 
 able to trace the malady to its proper source. People who 
 
 3 
 
18 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 admonish others to beware of falling into any dangerous 
 error in matters of religion, ought themselves to be exempt 
 from the mischief, against v/hich their admonition is direct- 
 ed. Such warnings come with an ill grace, and therefore 
 with no great probability of doing much good, from those, 
 who, perhaps it will be said, derive their own ministry 
 from the same contempt of a regular apostolic mission, of 
 which they now see such alarming consequences, as have 
 at last produced a wish to prevent their farther increase. 
 
 In the midst of all this confusion, this melancholy depar- 
 ture from PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER, wc of the Epis- 
 copal Communion have the credit and comfort of reflecting, 
 that nothing has been said or done on our part to promote 
 or encourage such wild deviation from the paths of true re- 
 ligion, the ways of unity, peace and love, which our blessed 
 Redeemer marked out for all his faithful followers. — It ig 
 true, we are separated, and must continue to be separate 
 from the establishment of this country; not as influenced 
 by a spirit of opposition to whatever is established either in 
 church or state (which seems to be a prominent feature in 
 the doctrine of these new Apostles), but because we act on 
 principles which require and justify such separation ; and 
 which, if well understood, and duly adhered to, would en- 
 sure stability to every sound establishment, and prevent 
 those unhappy divisions, which serve only to multiply 
 error, and drive men farther and farther from the truth as 
 it is in Christ. 
 
 Such as I have now described it, is evidently the situa- 
 tion of the land in which we live, with respect to the reli- 
 ^ous character of a great majority of its inhabitants, very 
 much resembling the state of things in the Jewish churchy 
 at the time of our Saviour's first coming into the flesh, 
 when the true religion was either totally set aside by the 
 infidelity of the Sadducees, or sadly corrupted by the 
 vile hypocrisy of self-con'beited Pharisees. The former, 
 led away, like our modem Illuminati^ with a vain affecta- 
 
INTRODUCTION. ig^ 
 
 lion of superior discernment, could not bear the thoughts 
 of submitting their enlightened understandings to the fa- 
 miliar tenets of a vulgar faith. They must have a creed of 
 a different form, perfectly suited to what tliey are pleased 
 to call Reason^ and the Fitness of things. This has been 
 the idol of the unbelieving race, in all ages and places of 
 the world. And though the vanity of their scheme has been 
 often exposed in the clearest manner, and to the full satis- 
 faction of ever>^ serious, sober-thinking person; yet it would 
 seem to require the same divine eloquence now as it did 
 formerly, to " put the Sadducees to silence." 
 
 But though it were possible (and with God it cannot be 
 impossible) to check the licentious railings of these " bold 
 disputers, who even deny the Lord that bought them -, 
 denying, either that they are bought, or that he who bought 
 them is the Lord — the eternal. Almighty Jehovah; the 
 true faith has yet another sort of enemies to combat with, 
 in the imitators of those pharisaical pretenders to religion, 
 of whom St. Paul gives a most just and striking descrip- 
 tion in these words — " For I bear them record, that they 
 have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For 
 they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going 
 about, to establish their own righteousness, have not sub- 
 mitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."^ — Sub- 
 mission to the righteous will and appointment of God was 
 no part of the religion adopted by that zealous ignorance^ 
 the effects of which are here so minutely described ; and 
 similar effects are still flowing from the same unhappy 
 cause. The pride of infidelity, we may well suppose, is 
 not a litde cherished and supported by the gross absurdi- 
 ties which prevail among many of those who profess to 
 believe the great truths of the gospel ; and who, in flying 
 from the ruinous paths of the impious sceptic, are often 
 sadly bewildered in ways of their own devising, and plunge 
 
 * Rom. X. 2, 3. 
 
eo INTRODUCTION*. 
 
 themselves into all the follies of the wild enthusiast. There 
 seems to be a strange propensity in many of our country- 
 men to be misguided by such as thus go about to deceive ; 
 and who, to carry on their d^^ceit the more effectually, lay 
 it down as an undoubted maxim, very flattering to the va- 
 nity of the human heart, that any man who can read, may, 
 with the scriptures in his hands, be able to know and do 
 every thing necessaiT to salvation. But this, though partly 
 true, is not the whole truth ; and well-meaning people 
 ought to be put on their guard against such an artful mis- 
 representation. Had the scriptures contained only a few 
 moral precepts, tending to presence the peace of society, 
 and to regulate man's conduct towards his neighbour, with- 
 out prescribing any sacred rites and institutions, as a testi- 
 mony of his submission to the will of his God, the maxim 
 I have mentioned might have been assumed with more 
 propriet}^ But is this really the case ? Has a man, in 
 order to be made a Christian, nothing more to do than to 
 go to a bookseller's shop and purchase a bible, that he may 
 peruse it at his leisure an A interpret it as he thinks fit? 
 With all the liberality which this age possesses, no one has 
 yet ventured to assert so much in plain terms, although the 
 loose opinions, which so generally prevail, clearly show, 
 that too many are guided by no other principle. 
 
 In tracing these and many other growing evils to their 
 proper source, we may easily find their original in that 
 lamentable ignorance of the true nature and constitution of 
 the Christian Church ; and of consequence, that total want 
 of regird for the order and succession of its ministers 
 which have, of late years, so wofuUy prevailed among us -j 
 encouraged and countenanced by a numerous set both of 
 preachers and authors, whose interest it is to flatter men 
 in this fashionable error, and take advantage of it. Hence 
 it is, that the Christian world has been bewildered and led 
 astray by so many unfaithful histories of the church, and 
 such ill-digested lectures on that subject, as could onlv 
 
INTRODUCTION. 21 
 
 come from persons who found it necessary to touch these 
 things ver*/ tenderly, because the ground on which they 
 stood in their official character, was not so firm as to bear 
 them up in any other language than that of the false pro- 
 phets of old, " who spoke smooth things, and prophesied 
 deceits, because the people loved to have it so." A writer 
 of another stamp, the late pious and learned Bishop of 
 Norwich, in laving before his clergy a brief account of the 
 great fundamental doctrines which they were to inculcate, 
 as essential to Christianity, and without which, it cannot 
 be considered as a religion true in itself or beneficial to us, 
 takes care to include in the number of these important doc- 
 trines, the Constitution and Use of the Church ; " a subject 
 on which," he says, men's principles for some years past 
 " have been very unsettled, and their knowledge preca- 
 rious and superficial."* — We need not wonder that this 
 should be the case, when men are at so little pains to ac- 
 quire that sound substantial knowledge, which is absolutely 
 necessar)^ to settle their principles, and give them just and 
 suitable ideas on a subject of such serious and striking im- 
 portance, as was ascribed by the blessed Author of our 
 religion, to the way and manner, the purpose and design of 
 his building or raising that society, which he was pleased 
 to call his church, and which he no sooner entered on his 
 public ministr\^, than he began to establish.')* 
 
 Now that this church of Christ, thus established by 
 himself in person, and afterwards enlarged b}^ his Apostles, 
 on the plan which he had laid down for their direction, 
 ought to be considered as a regular, well formed society, 
 is evident from the names and allusions by which it is 
 described in the sacred writings. It is there represented 
 as a bodi/^ a household or family, a city, a kingdom; and 
 must certainly bear some kind of relation to what these 
 terms are generally knoA^m to imply. Indeed, no one who 
 
 * See Bishop Home's Charge, p. 21. f See St. Matthew xvi. 18, 19. 
 
22 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 reflects ibr a moment on the nature of these figurative 
 expressions, can be ignorant wherein it is that this relation 
 or connection takes place. The church is a body having 
 many members, of which Christ is the head. The church 
 is a '^ household'''' ox family^ of which Christ is the master,— 
 " of whom the whole family is named;" and into which 
 being admitted by baptism, we receive the spirit of adop- 
 tion, whereby we are allowed and enabled to call the great 
 Lord of heaven and earth our Father. The church is also 
 called the " city of the living God ;" and Christians are 
 said to be " fellow-citizens w^ith the saints :" and it is of- 
 ten mentioned as a kingdom^ of which Christ — ^the King of 
 saints — is the Almighty Sovereign, " to whom all power 
 is given, in heaven and in earth." In all these respects, 
 the church must be considered as an outward and visible 
 society, possessing all the powers and privileges, and im- 
 posing on its members all the relative duties implied in 
 the allusions which I have now quoted. As a body^ all 
 the members must be joined to the head, and to one an- 
 other, that they may receive life and motion for the dis- 
 charge of their several functions. As a family^ its Al- 
 mighty Father must in every thing be the guide and di- 
 rector of his children, appointing for them the proper teach- 
 ers and masters, and training them up in the way of life, 
 from which they must never depart. As a household^ the 
 church must not be divided against itself: that it may 
 stand, it must be upheld in unity and order, and by sub- 
 mission to such wholesome discipline, as in the charitable 
 institutions of this world is found necessary to be imposed 
 on all who are admitted to share in the liberality of the 
 founders. As a city and kingdom^ the church must be 
 watched over, and governed by its proper officers, deriv- 
 ing their spiritual power and authority from that heavenly- 
 Sovereign, who is King of kings and Lord of lords. 
 
 Such then being the light in which we are taught to view 
 the nature and design of that holy and heavenly society^ 
 
INTRODUCTION. SS- 
 
 which in scripture is called the church; let us now cast a 
 veil over the confusions of these latter days, and set our- 
 selves to inquire after the order and uniformity of the 
 primitive ages of Christianity; when the doctrine and 
 fellowship of the Apostles were strictly and steadfastly 
 adhered to, and Christians continued most faitiifuUy and 
 conscientiously " in the things which they had learned, 
 and been assured of, knowing of whom they had learned 
 them." And as in the course of this inquiry, it may be 
 necessary, for the truth's sake, to speak of things as they 
 really are, and not " call evil good, and good evil, or put 
 darkness for light, and light for darkness ;" it is hoped 
 that such candid and honest dealing will not be misinter- 
 preted as the indication of an uncharitable, or illiberal 
 mind; but justly considered as proceeding from an earnest 
 desire to promote the salvation of men, and to join fer- 
 vently in the pious wish and petition of the church, as ex- 
 pressed in one of her daily prayers, " that all who profess 
 and call themselves Christians may be led into the way of 
 truth, and hold the faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of 
 peace, and in righteousness of life." 
 
 How then can any want of true charity, or what de- 
 serves to be called liberality, be with justice imputed to 
 him, who, in his professional character, is doing all he can 
 for the benefit of his fellow Christians, and is not willing 
 that any of them should be lost, if he can help it ? Will 
 nothing serve to constitute a liberal-minded Christian, but 
 that lukewarm indifference, which is totally unconcerned 
 about every thing connected with religion ; which looks 
 on all professions as alike safe, provided men be sincere, 
 and sees no reason why every one may not hope to " get 
 to heaven" in his own way I Do we judge thus in matters 
 of less consequence, and where the interests of die present 
 life only are concerned? Is he applauded as a liberal- 
 minded physician, who, seeing his patient indulge himself 
 in every thing that tends to nourish disease and impair the 
 
5J4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 constitution, flatters him that all shall yet be well; and that 
 he does right to go on in his own way ? Is he applauded 
 as a liberal-minded lawyer, who tells his client^ that he 
 need give himself no trouble about the laws and govern- 
 ment of this country ; since, in order to preserve the rights 
 and liberties of a British subject, he may be as well di- 
 rected in every thing by the municipal code of France, or 
 Russia, or any other country ? Is the commander of ar- 
 mies applauded as a liberal-minded soldier, who, in the 
 day of battle, leaves his troops without orders or instruc- 
 tions of any kind, and lets them fight the enemy in the way 
 that seems best to their own judgment ? Why then should 
 the teacher of religion be applauded as a liberal-minded 
 divine, whose only merit lies in " speaking peace, where 
 there is no peace," and leaving the people to grope for the 
 ivall of salvation, the pillar and ground of truth ; when by 
 pointing it out, through the mist of modern error and 
 delusion, as " a city set on a hill," which is at unity in itself, 
 he might direct their eyes to that which is the only sure 
 refuge from sin and misery, the only pjace of safety to a 
 guilty world, and, therefore, ought to be " the joy of the 
 whole earth." Conscious, therefore, of possessing no other 
 spirit than the spirit of Christian charity, and actuated by 
 no other motive than the desire of promoting the glory of 
 God, and the good of my Christian brethren, I shall pro- 
 ceed to establish the following plain and important facts, 
 as matters of undoubted certainty, and woithy of the most 
 serious consideration. 
 
 I. That the Christian religion, being, like its divine 
 Author, " the same yesterday, to-day and for ever," ought 
 to be received and embraced, just as it is represented and 
 held out in the scriptures of truth, without " adding there- 
 to, or diminishing from it." 
 
 II. That the church of Christ, in which his religion is 
 received and embraced, is that spiritual society in which 
 the ministration of holy things is committed to the three 
 
INTRODUCTION. 25 
 
 distinct orders of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, deriving 
 their authority from the Apostles, as those Apostles re- 
 ceived their commission from Christ. And, 
 
 III. That a part of this holy, catholic and apostolic 
 church, though deprived of the support of civil establish- 
 ment, does still exist in this countiy, under the name of 
 the Scotch Episcopal Church; whose doctrine, discipline 
 and worship, as happily agreeing with that of the first and 
 purest ages of Christianity, ought to be steadily adhered 
 to, by all who profess to be of the Episcopal Communion, 
 in this part of the kingdom. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Christian Religion^ beings like its Divine Author, " the 
 same yesterday, to-day and Jor ever,'' ought to be re^ 
 ceivedand embraced just as it is represented and held out 
 in the Scriptures of Truth, " without adding thereto or 
 diminishing from it.'* 
 
 JL he truth of this proposition is so evident, as to admit 
 of no sort of doubt in the minds of those who are rightly 
 instructed in the knowledge of divine things: and there 
 cannot be a more agreeable subject of Christian medita- 
 tion, than to survey the various means and instruments by 
 which God has been pleased to convey this comfortable in- 
 struction to man. For this purpose we are assured, that 
 the same " God, who at sundry times, and in divers man- 
 ners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets^ 
 hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son."^ The 
 only difference, which is here pointed out to our notice, 
 refers to the ti?nes and to the maimers in which God hath 
 spoken; for under all this variety with respect to the mode 
 of revelation, the subject was the same, and the speaker 
 the same, the voice of the one true God proclaiming the 
 " one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
 Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all."t It was ia 
 consequence of his giving this all-sufficient ransom, that he 
 became that powerful Mediator, who alone could make 
 peace between heaven and earth; and who, according to 
 the terms of the everlasting covenant of grace and mercy, 
 did of his own free love, and unmerited goodness to man, 
 graciously undertake to make reconciliation for iniquity, 
 and to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself; which sacri- 
 
 » Heb. i. 1, 2. t 1 Tim. ii. 5, 6. 
 
2d Pmiithe Truth and Order vindicated^ 
 
 iice, an Apostle tells us, " was verily fore-ordained before 
 the foundation of the world."^ Hence it is that the plan of 
 this glorious design is so often mentioned in scripture as 
 God's purpose, which he had purposed from the begin- 
 ning—his " etemal purpose, which he purposed in Christ 
 Jesus our Lord j^t his " pui-pose and grace, which was 
 given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began ;"."!: which 
 had been fore-ordained, or predestined in the counsel and 
 decree of the blessed and glorious Trinity, who had been 
 pleased to bind themselves by an everlasting covenant to 
 the accomplishment of it. This, we have ground to be- 
 lieve, is the true scriptural notion of predestination ; not 
 any absolute, unconditional decree for the salvation of 
 particular persons ; but only God's general purpose and 
 resolution of sending his Son into the world, " that xvho- 
 soever believeth in him, should not perish, but have ever- 
 lasting life."§ With a view to this merciful purpose, tha 
 scripture describes, in terms sufficiendy adequate to the 
 human capacity, the several parts, which the three per- 
 sons in the Godhead, and man too by their appointment, 
 have to act in this blessed scheme^ according to the brief 
 iiccount given of it, by a venerable writer of the primitive 
 church, in these words — " the Father well pleased, the 
 Son administering and forming, the Spirit nourishing and 
 increasing, man himself gTadually profiting and attaining 
 towards perfection."|| Such ia the beautiful representation, 
 which may be drawn from scripture, of the mysterious 
 scheme of salvation provided for fallen man ; and of the 
 several parts, which the adorable Three in Jehovah have 
 been graciously pleased to assign to themselves in carrying 
 on this mighty work of love and mercy to the human race. 
 " Known unto God are all his works from the beginning 
 of the world," particularly that which is the crown and 
 
 * 1 Peter i. 20. f Ephes. iii. 11. % 2 Tim. i. 9. 
 
 ^ St. John iii. 16. || Irenacus, book iv. chap, Ixxv. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicatedi 29 
 
 glory of all the rest, the redemption of mankind by the 
 sacrifice and death of his beloved Son. But had not this 
 act of mercy been also revealed and " made known" to 
 men, as soon as their situation required such a comforta- 
 ble discovery, they could have had no hope of being re- 
 conciled to God ; no encouragement to serve the Lord 
 with gladness, or to declare with grateful joy, " that his 
 mercy is everlasting, and his truth endureth to all genera- 
 tions." It was justly observed by a writer of distinguished 
 rank in this country, " that if it was the intention of God 
 to pardon man ; to reclaim him from his sinful state j to 
 encourage him to love, fear, and serve his Creator, and to 
 i"estore him to a capacity of performing such acceptable 
 service, it was absolutely necessary, for promoting that 
 design, to acquaint man with his intentions ; to give such 
 proof of those intentions as should convince and thoroughly 
 persuade those to whom the revelation was made, and to 
 preserve such evidence of that revelation to mankind, as 
 should be sufficient to support their faith and hope, and give 
 them ground to rejoice in the God of their salvation."^ 
 Now all this has been done in the most cortiplete and satis- 
 factory manner, by that same wise and gracious God, ia 
 the unity of whose essence we are taught to believe, that 
 " there are three who bear record in heaven" to the eternal 
 purpose of man's salvation; and who have not left them- 
 selves without witness on earth to that covenanted scheme 
 of grace, mercy and peace, which was in much compassion 
 exhibited to fallen man, as soon as his deplorable condition 
 called for the comfort which was thence to be derived* 
 The words, in which the inspired historian relates the pro- 
 mise of mercy, are, " that the seed of the woman should 
 bruise the head of the serpent ;" that there should, in the 
 fulness of time, be born of the posterity of Eve a Re- 
 
 * See Svme Thoughts cmcerning Religion, ijfc. by the late Honourable 
 Duncan Forbes, Lord President of the Court cf Sessions. 
 
30 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 deemer or Deliverer; who, by making satisfaction for the 
 sins of men, and restoring them to the love and favour of 
 their offended Maker, should thereby bruise the head, 
 and destroy the power and dominion of that old serpent 
 the devil, who had beguiled our first parents into sin, and 
 gained, as he thought, a signal triumph over them. 
 
 Thus early was the gospel preached, and the glad 
 tidings of salvation published to the human race.— The ac- 
 count given of it by Moses is short and concise; but the 
 revelation itself, as coming from God, was no doubt full 
 and explicit. One thing is obvious, that the change which 
 took place in Adam's condition, as the consequence of his 
 fall, would necessarily lead to a correspondent change in 
 his religious service : and we may reasonably conclude, 
 that such a form of worship would be instituted, as might 
 exhibit his dependence on the covenant of grace entered 
 into by the three great ones in deity, one of whom was 
 to unite the human nature with his own, and as God mani- 
 fested in the flesh, to do and suffer whatever was neces- 
 sary for man's salvation.^ Accordingly we find, that when 
 Adam's transgression required his expulsion from the 
 earthly paradise, and his entrance on a state of salutary 
 discipline, and a new system of faith and trust in his God, 
 a certain emblematic representation was placed at the east 
 of the garden of Eden, exhibiting the ever-blessed Trinity 
 as joined in covenant to redeem man, and the union of the 
 divine and human natures in the person of the Redeemer. 
 The Cherubim^ and the glory around them, with the divine 
 presence in them, were to keep or preserve the way of the 
 tree of life, to show man the way to life eternal, and keep 
 him from losing, or departing from it.^ Before this emble- 
 
 * See some very pertinent remarks on this subject, in a volume of ex- 
 cellent discourses oh the great doctrine of atoiie7nent, lately published — by 
 the Rev. Charles Daubeny, LL. B. author of a Guide to the Church. 
 
 t I know it has been thought, that this venerable figuie called the 
 Cherubim \\:\z set up to the eastward of Eden; merely sis ^ guard to keep 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. Si 
 
 made representation, which was afterwards, by divine 
 command, set up in the tabernacle of Moses, and temple ol" 
 Solomon, the church or people of God were taught to per- 
 form that typical serv^ice, which pointed to Christ, as the 
 wai/y the truths and the life^ and kept up among them a 
 constant remembrance, that " without shedding of blood, 
 there was no remission of sin." 
 
 It was to preserve a due regard to this fundamental arti- 
 cle of religion, that God was pleased to appoint sacrifices 
 of expiation and atonement for sin, and required such ser- 
 vices to be observed through all succeeding generations, till 
 the Redeemer himself should come, who was to do away 
 all these shadows and emblems, and to make the true satis- 
 faction, the only proper atonement. In proof of the earli- 
 ness of this institution, it has been very justly remarked, 
 
 unhappy Adam from coming at the tree of life, and so the mysterious 
 account here given of it has been much exposed to the scoffs and ridi- 
 cule of unbelievers. On this subject we find the learned Lord President 
 Forbes, in his Thoughts concerning Religion, thus delivering his sentiments 
 with great plainness. — " The Jews, who have misconstrued the angel 
 Jehovah into a created angel, have thought fit here to understand by the 
 Cherubim two of the same sort of angels, v/ho had got a flaming sword, 
 to frighten Adam from re-entering Eden, and meddling with the fruit 
 of the tree of life : and this monstrous story they have made out of a 
 text, that necessarily means no such thing, and may fairly be construed to 
 a sense big with the most important information to mankind. What is 
 translated, to keep the laay ef the tree of life, with intent to prevent the 
 coming at it, may as properly be rendered, to observe, or for observing, 
 and so discovering and finding out, the ivay to the tree of life. And the 
 word we translate placed, is almost always in every text translated inha- 
 iited" (as in a tent or tabernacle) ; " and whether you translate n placed 
 or inhabited, the next word ought to be translated the Cherubim, as things, 
 or emblems, well known to those for whom Moses wrote. So that Jeho- 
 vah's placing or inhabiting these Cherubim, was the method chosen by 
 him, to make the "way to the tree of life kept or observed.'^ See more to 
 the same purpose, tending to show that the Cherubim of the scriptures 
 were mystical figures of high antiquity and great signification, being, as 
 Irenatus calls them, " Resemblances of tke dispensation of the Son of 
 God/' that is, the Christian economy. 
 
32 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 that the skins, with which God is said to have clothed the 
 nakedness of our first parents, must have been the skins of 
 beasts, that had been offered by them in sacrifice, since at 
 that time they were not allowed to kill them for any other 
 purpose : And this typical clothing was a most comfort- 
 able emblem of that covering and protection from divine 
 wrath, that garment of salvation provided for man, by the 
 sacrifice of the Lamb of God, who was to take away the 
 sin of the world. 
 
 The rite of sacrifice being thus established by divine 
 authority, as the instituted emblem of redeeming love, it 
 may well be supposed, that Adam and his family would be 
 ready to testify their grateful acceptance of that love, and 
 dependence on it, by a regular application to die means ap- 
 pointed for directing the eye of the faithful offerer to that 
 great atonement, which the blood of the slain animal was 
 designed to shadow forth. Indeed, we are expressly in- 
 formed, that the two sons of Adam, Cain and Abel, 
 brought each of them an offering unto the Lord,* but with 
 this remarkable difference, that God is said to have '' had 
 respect unto Abel, and to his offering, while unto Cain, and 
 •to his offering, he had not respect :" The reason of which 
 IS given in these words of the Epistle to the Hebrews ; " By 
 faith, Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than 
 Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, 
 God testifying of his gifts."f This it was that made the 
 difference between his sacrifice and Cain's, that the one 
 offered by faith, the other did not ; by faith in the promised 
 Redeemer, and from a humble hope of being accepted 
 through his merits. And indeed this difference appeal's in 
 
 * Gen. iv. 3, 4. Where this ofTering is said to have been brought to the 
 Lord " in process of tivic,^* or, as it is translated on the margin of our 
 Bible, at '• t/je end of days" or on the periodical return of that day, whidv 
 had been sanctified from the beginning, and thereby ijiore iJl■»^^,ediate^^ 
 set apart for the celebration of religious worship- 
 t Hcb. xi. 4 
 
Primitive Tnith and Order vindicated, SS 
 
 the very nature of their gifts or offerings. For Cain 
 brought only of the fruit of the ground, as an acknowiedge- 
 ment of the divine bounty, in providing for his temporal 
 support, and giving him a right to what the ground pro- 
 duced. But he showed no desire to act in conformity ^^ith 
 that divine plan of salvation which the fall had rendered 
 necessary for his spiritual comfort. He offered no living 
 creature as an atonement for sin, and whose blood was to be 
 *hed as an acknowledgement of the forfeiture of life, and 
 as a type or emblem of the all-atoning sacrifice of the great 
 Redeemer. In short, he conducted himself as if he had 
 "wished to make it appear, that he had no sin to be atoned 
 for, no belief in the one Mediator, and no thought of ap- 
 plying to God, through faith in his meritorious ransom. 
 Whereas Abel, conscious of his fallen state, and the now 
 sinful condition of man, offered a living creature to God, 
 '' the Jirstlings of his flock, and of the fiU thereof," as the 
 instituted type or memorial of the great Firat-horn^ through 
 whose sacred blood the life that had been forfeited was to 
 be restored. For which reason Abel is said to have offered 
 hy fa'ith^ and the Lord had respect to his offering, on ac- 
 count of the excellence which was thereby stamped upon it, 
 and the topical relation which it bore to the sacrifice of that 
 beloved Son, in whom God has been ever well-pleased. 
 But the offering brought by Cain had no such qualities : It 
 meant no expiation for sin, nor any acknowledgement of it : 
 It was not made in faith ; nay, it was so far from having 
 respect to the Divine Intercessor, that it might rather be 
 considered as a formal rejection of his intercession; and 
 therefore it was rejected, and God had no respect to it, or 
 to the offerer. In this early and remarkable instance we 
 may see a lively representation, on the one hand, of the 
 humble and devout Christian, who, after all his most sincere 
 and diligent endeavours in the way of his duty, yet, con- 
 scious of his own infirmities, relies upon the merits of his 
 Saviour j and on the other hand, a representation of those. 
 
M Frhnitwe Truth and Order vindicated* 
 
 who either ascribe too much to their own merits, or, by a> 
 fatal misapprehension, neglect and undervalue that only- 
 method of atonement and acceptance, through which God 
 hath declared, he will be reconciled to sinners. 
 
 We have no reason to think that God was any " respecter 
 of persons," in the case of Cain and Abel, as recorded in 
 the sacred history ; for it was the different quality of their 
 offerings, and the different dispositions with which they 
 were offered, that occasioned the difference of respect 
 which was shown to them : and I have insisted the longer 
 on this instance, because it gives us so plain, and so early 
 an account of the origin of sacrifices, and the true meaning 
 and design of them. It shows us that sacrifice had an evi-» 
 dent reference to the promised Redeemer, and being insti- 
 tuted on the first declaration of mercy through him, and 
 carefully observed by the first family of the human race, 
 tvas by them transmitted to all mankind. Hence we may 
 easily perceive, how the notion of expiating sin, and ap* 
 peasing the offended Deity by sacrifices, became so univer- 
 sal, and spread itself into the most distant ages and coun- 
 tries. When the sons of men began to multiply, and to 
 disperse themselves in colonies upon the face of the whole 
 earth, they never failed to carry these sacred rites along 
 with them, as well knowing how precious a treasure they 
 contained ; and that in the religious and due use of them, 
 they might humbly expect the forgiveness of their sins, and 
 the favour of God, through the efficacy of that all-sufficient 
 sacrifice, which they typically represented, and which was 
 in the fulness of time to be offered for the sins of the whole 
 world. We need not wonder then, that in these primitive 
 ages, men were so tenacious of such important rites, and 
 took all due care to evince the high opinion they entertained 
 of them, as the appointed emblems of that stupendous 
 transaction, on which rested all their hopes of pardon, and 
 peace with God. 
 
 After the account, which the inspired historian gives us, 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 35 
 
 of the acceptance of Abel's offering, and the rejection of 
 Cain's, who, in consequence of " the voice of his brother's 
 blood crying from the ground, went out from the presence 
 of the Lord, a fugitive and vagabond in the earth," we meet 
 with little, except Enoch's translation, that is particularly 
 descriptive of the character of God's faithful people, till the 
 day arrived, when, " by faith, Noah being warned of God, 
 of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark 
 to the saving of his house, by the which he condemned the 
 world, and became heir of the righteousness, which is by 
 faith."* Such was the effect ascribed by an apostle to the 
 faith of Noah, who, notwithstanding every appearance to 
 the contrary, being firmly convinced that the flood would 
 come, according to the Divine warning, went on with his 
 awful preparation, and found that safety and protection in 
 his righteous course, which were denied to the world of 
 the ungodly. " His friends and neighbours, who had 
 either neglected, or presumptuously derided his pious ad- 
 monitions, looked in vain to him for help ! There was no 
 hiding place ^ no refuge from the storm, but within the ark 
 - — and God had shut the door. The waters, which soon 
 rose above the highest hills, bore all away with irresitible 
 force ; - the day of acceptance was over, and the night of 
 judgment closed in for ever, on a corrupt and perverse 
 generation."! But even then, though the pillars of the 
 earth were shaken from their foundation, and its apostate 
 and rebellious inhabitants were swept away by the over- 
 whelming deluge, the building of God, the work of re- 
 demption was not overthrown. The church of the Re- 
 deemer, now confined to eight persons, remained safe and 
 secure :J And as soon as Noah had gone forth out of the 
 
 * Heb. xi. 7. 
 
 f See this subject treated with uncominon strength and elegance of 
 expression, in Sermons preached at Laura Chapely Bath, during the season 
 of Advent, 1799, by the Rev. Francis' Randolph, D. D. 
 
 I There is a beautiful allusion to this circumstance in one of the 
 
f&S Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 ark, and he and all that it contained were placed agaiil 
 upon a new world, we find him entering on the renewed 
 duties of life, with an act of worship to his merciful Pre- 
 server. " Noah builded an altar unto the Lord, and took 
 of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered 
 burat offerings on the altar."* From the distinction of 
 clemi beasts and fowls, which is here so particularly men- 
 tioned, it is evident, that these offerings, as well as this 
 distinction, must have been made by divine appointment ; 
 and the life of these creatures was taken away, and their 
 blood shed, as a merrjonal of that everlasting covenant, 
 through the blood of wh) :h, life was to be restored to man. 
 It v/as this divine lifv-giving covenant, the establishment 
 of ivhich was promised to Noah before the flood, and the 
 promise repeated after it to him and his sons, in the same 
 strong expressive terms — ^*' And I," says God, " behold I 
 establish tny covenant with you ;"t thus challenging an ex- 
 clusive property in it, and pointing it out as his own act 
 and deed; not as a thing, which had then only begun to 
 take place, but had been of long standing, and was now by 
 this solemn promise so ratified and established, as to give 
 the strongest ground of assurance that it could not fail, but 
 would stand fast for ever. 
 
 We have seen how the terms of this covenant were 
 proposed to Adam after his fall, and means appointed for 
 preserving the remembrance of them, and confirming a 
 dutiful dependence on them. With the same view they 
 were renewed to Noah, both before and after the flood ; 
 ^nd God, we are told, was pleased to set his bow in the 
 
 prayers of the Office of Baptism, wherein we beg of that " Almighty 
 God, who of his great mercy did save Noah and his family in the ark 
 from perishing by water, that the child — or infant voyager, being deli- 
 vered from his wrath, may be rece.ved into the arJt of Christ's churck, 
 and so pass ihc waves of this troublesome ^vorld, that finally he may come- 
 to the land of everlasting life." 
 
 * Gen. viii. 30. f Gen. ix. 9. 
 
Prhmtive Truth and Order vindicated, Sr 
 
 liloud, as a token of his covenant, a pledge of his mercy 
 to man, through the merits and mediation of that mighty- 
 One, whom St. John saw sitting " on the throne in heaven, 
 and there was a rainbow round about the throne."^ Yet 
 with this emblem of God's power and goodness staring 
 them in the face, the descendants of Noah soon began to 
 forsake the ways of the Lord, and at last filled up the 
 measure of their iniquity, by that idolatrous confederacy, 
 which occasioned their dispersion at Babel. Thus " scat- 
 tered abroad upon the face of all the earth," they departed 
 also from the worship and service of the true God ; and all 
 would again have been lost in idolatry and coiTuption, had 
 not the divine mercy interposed for the preservation of 
 truth and righteousness. For this purpose, the wisdom of 
 heaven judged it necessary to separate some one individual 
 from the degenerate mass of tnankind ; and the person se- 
 lected was the patriarch Abraham, called by God to be the 
 father of the church of the Hebrews, and of the promised 
 seed, which was to bruise the head of the serpent. The 
 history of this distinguished character exhibits, as might 
 well be expected, many wonderful interpositions of divine 
 providence, tending to confirm the " precious promises," 
 which had been made to Adam and Noah, and still afford- 
 ing a clearer intimation of the council of God, and a 
 stronger pledge of the immutability of his gracious purpose 
 towards all the families of the eaith.t We are assured by 
 St. Paul, that " the gospel was preached unto Abraham,"J 
 when it was not only revealed to him, but that revelation 
 was also confirmed by an oath, that " in his seed all the 
 nations of the earth should be blessed." And the same 
 apostle, reasoning on this important subject, in his Epistle to 
 the Hebrews, tells us, that *^ when God made promise to 
 
 * Rev. iv. 3. 
 
 t See Dr. Randolph's excellent Sermon on the character of Abraham, 
 I Gal. lii. 8, 
 
S8 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware 
 by himself. For men verily swear by the greater ; and an 
 oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife: 
 wherein God willing more abundantly to show to the heirs 
 of promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed him- 
 self by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it 
 was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong con* 
 solation."^ Now, what can these two immutable things be, 
 but first, God's interposing himself^ and then the oath^ both 
 showing the immutability of his counsel ? And how could 
 we Christians derive consolation from this solemn ti*ansac- 
 tion, unless it referred to a covenant of mercy, in which 
 the whole race of mankind were concerned, and of which 
 that partial exliibition made to Abraliam, was only designed 
 to preserve the memory, and secure the benefits of it to 
 him and his posterity, till the seed should come, to whom 
 the first promise was made ; even tliat promise which was 
 also ratified with an oath, and of which it is said — " Jeho- 
 vah hath sworn, and will not repent, thou art a priest for 
 ever, after the order of Melchizedek."'f St. Paul has 
 clearlv pointed out the person here referred to, and the na- 
 ture of that unchangeable priesthood, which, according to 
 the terms of the everlasting covenant, confirmed and even 
 sworn to by the adorable Three in Jehovah, was to remove 
 the curse from, and procure a blessing to, all the nations 
 of the earth. Even Abraham himself was blessed by this 
 Melchizedek, priest of the most High God; and beholding 
 his promised Redeemer under that mysterious character, 
 he rejoiced to see the day of his incarnation, and our Sa- 
 viour himself assured the Jews, that " he saw it and was 
 glad,''''X It was with a view of enforcing conviction on his 
 unbelieving countrymen, and showing how strangely they 
 had departed from the faith of their ancestors, that our 
 Lord gave them this assurance ; thus proving himself to 
 
 *" Heb. vi. 13, 16, 17, 18. f I'salm ex. 4, \ St. John viii. 56. 
 
Frimitii^ Truth ami Order vindicated, 39 
 
 have been the object of hope and dependence to their 
 venerable progenitor, and that all the predictions and pro- 
 mises made to the faithful Abraham, were now fulfilled 
 in him, whom yet they would not believe, because he told 
 them the truth. Very different were the opinion and be- 
 haviour of one of their own priests, the father of John the 
 Baptist, who, on the birth of his son, as the appointed 
 forerunner of the Messiah, gave thanks to the " Lord God 
 of Israel, because in visiting and redeeming his people, he 
 had remembered his holy covenant, and the oath which he 
 sware to their father Abraham."^^ From the subject of 
 this oath, as described in what follows, it is evident, that 
 Zacharias, on this remarkable occasion, was taught and 
 directed by the holy Spirit, to celebrate the redemption of 
 the world by the promised Saviour, as the great object of 
 God's holy covenant, ratified by the oath of Jehovah, and 
 shadowed out in all the types and figures which exhibited 
 to the eye of faith that " tender mercy of our God, whereby 
 the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light 
 to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, 
 and to guide our feet into the way of peace."t 
 
 This was the mercy which, Zacharias could say, was 
 " promi&ed to our fathers," and spoken of by all the holy 
 prophets, from the beginning of the world. On these pro- 
 mises and predictions was built that strong and vigorous 
 faith, which supported the patriarchs in all their trials ; and 
 in which they lived and died, looking forward, by the light 
 which they enjoyed, to that salvation, which they knew 
 was prepared, and would in due time be manifested, " be- 
 fore the face of all people." It was this light, which con- 
 ducted the faithful Abraham to one of the mountains of 
 Moriah ; whither he was ordered by God to " take his son, 
 his only son Isaac, whom he loved, and offer him there 
 for a burnt-offering :"J And " by faith," says the Apos- 
 
 ' St. Luke i, 73; 73. t 3t. Luke i. 78, 79- ^ Gen. xxli. 2: 
 
40 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 tie, " Abraham, when he ^yas tried^ offered up Isaac ; and 
 he that had received the promises, offered up his onhj 
 begotten son^ of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy 
 seed be called ; accounting, that God was able to raise him 
 up even from the dead; from whence also he received him 
 in a figure :"* or more literally, in a parable^ where some- 
 thing more is meant than that which is expressed. The 
 impending death, and unexpected deliverance of Isaac, 
 the only begotten son of Abraham, are the things here re- 
 lated : but the actual sacrifice, and resurrection of Christ, 
 the only begotten Son of God, are the things which are 
 also meant to be pointed out, with all the circumstances in 
 which these will be found to agree with what is recorded 
 of Isaac ; of whom " God said unto Abraham — In Isaac 
 shall thy seed be called," and St. Paul affirms, that this 
 seed " is Christ."t 
 
 As it is particularly mentioned in the histoiy of these 
 patriarchs, that " after the death of Abraham, God blessed 
 his son Isaac,"J as the type or representative of the pro- 
 mised seed ; so when Isaac was old, and had blessed his 
 son Jacob, as chosen of God for the same purpose, we are 
 informed of a very striking vision, in which " Jacob be- 
 held a ladder set upon the earth, and the top of it reached 
 to heaven, and behold, the angels of God ascending and 
 descending upon it ; and behold, the Lord stood above it, 
 and said — I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and 
 the God of Isaac :"§ after which follows a renewal of the 
 promise made to both these fathers — " In thee, and in thy 
 seed, shall all the families of the eartli be blessed." So 
 this vision, with the blessing which accompanied it, was 
 intended to confirm the patriarch's hope and trust in the 
 one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
 Jesus; who himself alluded to this symbolical appearance, 
 
 * Hcb. xi. \7, 18, 19. \ Gen. XXV. 11, 
 
 t Gen. x.\i. 12, and Gal. iii. 16, § Gcn. xxviii. 12. 15. 
 
jPnmttive Truth and Order vindicated. 41 
 
 when he said to Nathanael— «an Israelite indeed — " Here- 
 after you shall see," what Jacob's vision prefigured, ^^ Hea- 
 ■fen open, and the angels of God ascending and descend* 
 ing," not on a ladder, but on him that was represented by 
 it — "• upon the Son of man."^ But this was not the only 
 encouraging assurance, which the patriarch Jacob received, 
 that the " God of Bet)iel" was to be " in Christ, reconciling 
 all things both in heaven and earth to himself." This same 
 God was pleased soon after to exhibit a most wonderful 
 support to the hope of his future incarnation, by appearing 
 as a man to this distinguished patriarch, and xurestling ivith 
 him, for the sake of changing his name from Jacob to 
 Israel, and showing what power he had both with God and 
 with men, as a Prince: alluding thereby to the name which 
 he had just received ; for Israel properly signifies — '*" a 
 prince of God."f Though this appears to have been a very 
 mysterious transaction, we can plainly discern, that the 
 person who wrestled with Jacob was a divine person, 
 even " Jehovah God of Hosts." For so we read in the 
 book of the prophet Hosea, that " Jacob had power with 
 God; yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed: 
 he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in 
 Bethel, and there he spake with us, even Jehovah God of 
 Hosts: Jehovah is his memorial :"J Agreeably to what the 
 same God said to Moses — " Thus shalt thou say unto the 
 children of Israel; — Jehovah — the God of your fathers, 
 the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of 
 Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name for ever, 
 and this is my memorial unto all generations."]] From 
 which it is evident, that this name Jehovah is his memo^ 
 rial, his appropriate, perpetual, incommunicable name ; 
 and what follows is " a most gracious declaration of this 
 Jehovah's peculiar connections with the fathers of the Isra- 
 
 * St. John i. 51. I Hosea xii. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 t Gen. Kxxii. 24—29. I Exod. iii. 15. 
 
4St Prlfnitiife Truth and Order vindicate. 
 
 elites."* Depending as he well might on this po'tverful 
 connection with Jehovah, as his Gody we find " Jacoh^ 
 when he was a dying, by faith blessing both the sons of 
 
 • So says one of the ablest biblical scholars of the age, the profoundly 
 learned Dr. Horsley, lately Lord Bishop cf Rochester, now of St. 
 Asaph; who, in an advertisement at the end of his admirable translatioa 
 of Hosea, adds the following Remark to his note on the word " memo- 
 rial" (F. p. 143.) which most beautifully illustrates cur present subject : 
 namely — That the person, of whom it is said, that the name Jehovah 
 is his memorial, is no other than he whom the patriarch found at 
 Bethel, who there spake with the Israelites in the loins of their pro- 
 genitor. He, whom the patriarch found at Bethel, who there, in that 
 manner, spake with the Israel tes, was by the tenor of the context, 
 the antagonist, with whom Jacob was afterwards matched at Pcniel. 
 The antagonist, with whom he was matched at Peniei, wrestled with 
 the patriarch, as we read it the book of Genesis, in the human form* 
 The conflict was no sooner ended, than the patriarch acknowledged his 
 antagonist as God. The holy prophet first calls him angel, f and after 
 mention of the colluctation, and of the meeting and conference at Be- 
 thel, says4 that he. Whom he had called angel, was " Jehovah God oC 
 Hosts." And to make the assertion of this person's godhead, if possi- 
 ble, still more unequivocal, he adds — that to him belonged, as his ap- 
 propriate memorial, that name, which is declarative of the very essence 
 of -the Godhead! This MAN, therefore, of the book of Genesis, this 
 ANGEL of Hosea, who wrestled with Jacob, could be no other than the 
 Jehcvah- Angel, of whom we so often read in the English bible, under the 
 name of the " angel of the Lord." A phrase of an unfortunate structure, 
 and so ill conformed to the original, that it is to be feared, it has led 
 many into the error of conceiving of the Lord as one person, and of the 
 angel as another. The word of the Hebrews, ill rendered ** the Lord," 
 is not, like the English word, an appellative expressing rank or condi- 
 tion ; but it is the proper name yebovah. And this proper name Jebova/i 
 is not, in the Hebrew, a genitive after the noun substantive " Angel," as 
 the English represents it ; — but tlie words in the Hebrew translated Je- 
 hovab and Angel, are two nouns substantive in apposition, both speaking 
 of the same person ; the one, by the appropriate name of the essence, tlie 
 other by a tide of oflice. •' yehovah-Angsl'* would be a better rendering. 
 The Jehovah- Angel of the Old Testament is no other than He, who in 
 the fulness of time, " was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgirr 
 Mary," 
 
 •f Hosea xji. 4 | Hosea xii, 5. 
 
Primitive Tfuth and Order vindicated. 43 
 
 Joseph ;"* and in so doing, addressing himself to that 
 ** God, before whom his fathers Abraham and Isaac did 
 walk ; the God, which fed him all his life long, the Angel 
 which redeefned him from all evil;"t which plainly showed 
 that the hope of a Redeemer^ under the character of the 
 Shepherd of Israel feeding his flock with all good things, 
 was to be handed down in the family of Joseph ; whose 
 typical history sensed to confirm that " hope of the promise 
 made of God unto the fathers ; unto which promise," says 
 St. Paul, " our twelve tribes, instantiy serving God day 
 and night, hope to come."J 
 
 The history of these twelve tribes of Israel, as recorded 
 in the sacred writings, opens to us a wonderful source oi 
 evidence in support of the proposition now before us : And 
 by considering what these people were; how they were 
 supported by the power, directed by the wisdom, and in- 
 etructed in the knowledge of Jehovah the true God, we 
 shall readily perceive their t^^Dical relation to his Christ, 
 the Saviour of the world, and the proof, which their whole 
 economy clearly exhibits, that the religion of this Saviour 
 was the same yesterday under the law, as it is to-day under 
 the gospel, and will continue for ever^ even unto the end 
 of the world. 
 
 The rise and progress of the Jewish nation is cue of the 
 most surjDrising things to be met with in the page of history. 
 Descended from these distinguished patriarchs, whose faith 
 and piet}^ we have been now contemplating, they were 
 taught to look upon themselves as the peculiar objects of 
 his providential care, who had so often declared himself to 
 be " the God of Abrahani, Isaac and Jacob." — Conducted 
 by his merciful providence into the land of Eg\^t, they 
 were there reduced to the most humiliating state of bon- 
 (iage^ from which they could find no relief, till the four 
 hundred years were expired, which, in the wise and mys- 
 
 * Heb. xi. 21. t Gen. xlviii. 15, 16. I Acts xxvi. 6, 7, 
 
44 Prhnitive Truth and Order vwScated, 
 
 terious designs of heaven, had been fixed as the period of* 
 their affliction. Emerging at last from this grievous depth 
 of servitude, and delivered from their cruel oppressors by 
 a most miraculous displav of Aimighty vengeance, they be- 
 came a great and powerful people ; possessed their promised 
 land for many years, with the full exercise of their religion, 
 and in the firm i^elief, derived from their sacred writings, 
 that an extraordinary person, of their blood and kindred, 
 was to arise, who should deliver them from all their ene* 
 mits, and set upon a kingdom above all the kingdoms of 
 the earth. Encouraged by this opinion, and totally mis- 
 apprehending the character of their expected Deliverer, 
 they rejected him, when he came; and quarrelling with the 
 power which had them in subjection, after the most obsti- 
 nate defence that ever people made, they were utterly over- 
 thrown, their city and temple destroyed, and those that 
 escaped the sword, were scattered among all nations ; 
 %vhere their posterity continue to this day, cut off from all 
 the powers and privileges possessed by those among whom 
 they reside ; distinguished only by their pecuhar obser- 
 vances, and a firm conviction, that their religion is from 
 God, and their great Deliverer is still to come. 
 
 These are wonderful circumstances, and call for extraor- 
 dinary attention. They afford the strongest arguments in 
 favour of the Christian religion ; since all that has hap- 
 pened to these scattered tribes of Israel was distinctly and 
 repeatedly foretold in those scriptures of the Old and New 
 Testement, on whose combined evidence, the truth of our 
 glorious gospel rests with unshaken firmness. Often do 
 we find it predicted in these sacred records, that the Jews 
 should not oiily despise and reject, and even put to death 
 the promised Messiah, and on this account be dispersed 
 into all coimtries, and exposed to the gi*eatest hardships ; 
 but also, that they should not be swallowed up, and lost 
 among their conquerors, as has gne rally been the case 
 with all vanquished nations, but should still subsist to latest 
 
Primithe Truth and Order vindicatedf. 45 
 
 times, nrd under all their distresses and difficulties, be a 
 distinct people. And how amazingly has this prophecy 
 been fulfilled! Yet the pen, which divine inspiration 
 guides, could hardly have pointed to a more singular or 
 improbable occurrence. Nothing has happened like it in 
 the course of human affairs. All the mighty monarchies, 
 both of the east and west, are vanished like the shadows 
 of the evening, with the setting sun ; their places know 
 them no more ; while this contemptible race of fugitives 
 sre strangely secure without a friend or protector amidst 
 the wreck of empires. There are some people now, as in 
 our Saviour's time, who " will not believe, except they see 
 signs and wonders." Let them look at this prodigy, which 
 is daily in their view, and try if they can possibly account 
 for it in any other way than by allowing it to be " the 
 Lord's doing, and, therefore, so mar\^ellous in our eyes." 
 
 Marvellous indeed must it appear, that a people so highly 
 favoured of God ; selected from all others to be his pecu- 
 liar charge, and by his mighty hand rescued from bond- 
 age ; conducted through numberless dangers and difficul- 
 ties, and at length settled in a country destined for their 
 habitation, and there constituted the guardians, as we may 
 say, of the divine oracles and institutions, should yet 
 abandon the great object, which all these marks of distinc- 
 tion had in view ; be totally expelled from the land, which 
 the Lord their God had given them, and rendered wholly 
 incapable of peifonning the peculiar rites of their religious 
 service ; having neither altar, priest, nor temple, nor any 
 vestige left of v/hat the law required for making their so- 
 lemn sacrifice. Does not all this plainly show that the law 
 of Moses, in this respect, being already fulfilled, has no more 
 its original end to answer ; and that the whole Jewish eco- 
 nomy, being but the shadow of good things to come, has 
 very properly given place to the substance — to " the body 
 which is of Christ f ^ He was the real, permanent object 
 * Cd. ii. m 
 
46 Primitive Truth mid Order vindict^ed. 
 
 shadowed out by all these figurative, temporary represen- 
 tations of the Mosaic ritual ; and the whole order of the 
 sacrifices, the whole disposition of the tahemacle, the 
 whole ministry of the priesthood, pointed to him as the 
 *' one true propitiatory sacrifice, the true tabernacle, whidi 
 the Lord pitched, and not man — the eternal High Priest, 
 who is passed into the heavens, there to make continual in-^ 
 tsercession for them that come to God by him." To him 
 give all the types of the law, as well as *^ all the prophets 
 witness ;" and it was solely on his account, that the people 
 of Israel were kept together, and supported by a train of 
 miracles ; for on his leaving the world, when his work 
 here below was finished, this chosen nation was dispersed 
 over all the earth, and its policy completely dissolved. 
 
 Such then being the true nature of the leg-al dispensation, 
 and such the design of the whole Israelitish economy, the 
 question needs no longer be asked—" Wherefore then 
 Berveth the law V The same Apostle, who states the ques- 
 tion, gives also the proper answer ; when speaking of the 
 promise of mercy made to Abraliam, he tells us, that the 
 law was " added because of transgressions, till the seed 
 should come," that is, Christ, " to whom the promise was 
 made."* By saying that the law zvas added^ he plainly in^^ 
 timates, that there was something known and practised be- 
 fore, to which this addition was made ; and what could 
 ^at be, but the evangelical promise renewed to Abraham, 
 and the worship and obedience required, in consequence 
 of that promise, to which the law was added by way of 
 preservation, and in order to lessen transgression for the 
 time to come ? Through the con-uption of the patriarc hal 
 teligion, many sorts of transgression prevailed among .he 
 heathen nations, who took their rise from the confusion at 
 Babel, and grew up into the wildest idolaters, worshipping 
 their imaginary deities with such abominable practices as 
 
 * Gal. iii. 19. 
 
Prhmtive Truth and Order vindicated, 4f . 
 
 made them hateful to the true God, and of course very 
 dangerous neighbours to those who still believed in him, 
 and adhered to his service. For this reason God was 
 pleased to raise a wall of division between the Hebrews 
 and the heathens, and laid his people under every possible 
 obligation that might preserve them from mingling with 
 those that served other gods, and learning their w lys. 
 As a wise and good parent would keep his children fiom 
 the seducing company of profligates and blasphemers, so 
 did the Almighty Father of heaven and earth guard his 
 holy family from all the abominations of that bewitching 
 idolatry, by which they were smrounded. " Ye shall be 
 holy unto me," said God to the children of Israel, " for I 
 the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, 
 that ye should be mine."* 
 
 Thus claiming them as his children, he had also conde- 
 scended to provide a schoolmaster for them, to teach them 
 the rudiments of heavenly knowledge, and so train them 
 up in the true faith and fear of their God. " The law," 
 says St. Paul, " was our schoolmaster unto Church ;"f 
 was designed to instruct those who lived under it in the 
 character and office of the expected IMessiah ; for which 
 purpose, as scholars are confined in a school, so were they 
 separated from the world, to learn and practise continually 
 those signs and figures, by which this wonderful person 
 was described to them. Nothing can be more plain and 
 distinct, than the precepts and institutions of the law, if the 
 mere outward act and observance of them had been all that 
 was required. Yet we find, it was the fervent desire and 
 earnest prayer of those who had a just sense of this matter, 
 that God would teach them, and make them to understand 
 the precepts of his law, in which they were commanded to 
 " meditate day and night." And that this constant medita- 
 tion was necessary to unravel the true meaning and design 
 
 * Levit. XX. 2^. t Gal. iii. 24. 
 
48 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 of it, will sufficiently appear, if we only consider one of 
 its most striking and solemn institutions, the rite of sacri- 
 fice, or shedding the blood of living creatures as an offer- 
 ing to God ; which surely required a considerable degree 
 of attention in discovering the end and object of it, as well 
 as the disposition with which it ought to be performed. 
 It is not only contrary to the common sense and reason of 
 mankind, but declared by an inspired Apostle to be abso- 
 lutely " impossible, that the blood of bulls, and of goats, 
 should take away sins."^— There was no such inherent 
 value in the blood of these victims ; nor could any neces- 
 sary connection be supposed between the slaying of these 
 or any such creatures, and the saving of a sinner. But 
 then what was wanting in their general nature, was made 
 up by special institution; and these animals, being once 
 devoted and set apart for this service, acquired a new rela- 
 tion, and of consequence a value from the substance, of 
 which they were only types and shadov/s. The offering of 
 these was then only acceptable to the Deity, when it was 
 considered as his own appointment ; and in consequence of 
 a due attention to the hidden things of the law, was per- 
 formed with faith and humility, as a memorial of that 
 Lamb of God, who was in due time to be manifested^ that 
 he might take away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 
 
 In contradiction, however, to this train of reasoning, so 
 clearly confirmed by the authority of scripture, it has been 
 supposed, that the practice of worshipping the deity by 
 sacrifice was merely a human invention, and kindly ac- 
 cepted by God, only in compliance with the weakness of 
 his creatures.—- Nay, it has been assigned as one consider- 
 able reason for God's sending his Son into the world to 
 take away sin by the sacrifice of himself, that this was a 
 wise and gracious condescension to that strong apprehen- 
 sion, and persuasion, which had so early and universally 
 
 * Heb. X. 4. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order 'uindicated; 49 
 
 prevailed among mankind, concerning the expiation of sin, 
 and appeasing the offended Deity by sacrifices of living 
 creatures. But can it really be imagined, with any son of 
 reason or propriety, that the all-wise purposes of heaven, 
 and the unsearchable counsels of God, should be directed 
 or influenced by the vain conceits and inventions of men ; 
 or that the customs of a blinded and corrupted world should 
 furnish a proper pattern for the divine proceedings ! No, 
 certainly: The mysterious dispensation, which produced 
 the sacrifice of the Son of God, had a much nobler, and a 
 more appropriate original. It was the result of the greatest 
 mercy conducted by infinite v/isdom, and rests on no other 
 foundation than the immutability of that divine counsel 
 which was confirmed by an oath ; that everlasting cove- 
 nant for man's redemption entered into by the adoraI)le 
 Three in Deity, before the world began. This was the 
 source of that gracious undertaking, which prepared a 
 bodv for the promised Redeemer, in which he might do 
 and suffer the will of God, b\- giving himself a ransom for 
 man ; and from this all-sufficient and meritorious sacrifice, 
 which in the purpose of God was offered from the founda- 
 tion of the world, proceeded not only the institution and 
 acceptance of those offerings which we read of, as brought 
 to the Lord by his own people, but also the corruption and 
 abuse of this institution, which prevailed among the hea- 
 thens, and gave rise to all their abominable superstitions. 
 For, as has been jusdy observed in a late excellent publica- 
 tion, " had there been no true religion, there could not 
 have been any that is false. Had there been no divine in- 
 stitutions, superstition would have had no foundation on 
 which to have raised its imaginary superstructure. The 
 very abuse of sacrifice, therefore, proves the divinity of its 
 origin. For to the perversion of sacred .radition, are the 
 corrupdons of heathenism to be traced up :^ Awd as the 
 
 * ::,ee p oOo of the Rev. Charles Daubeny's v Juine of Discourses on 
 Vlie great Doctrine of Atonemeut, where we meet with the following very 
 
 7 
 
50 "' Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 Deity repeatedly and formally disclaimed all virtue, consi- 
 dered as inherent in the sacrifices themselves, the Divine 
 appointment of them could have no other object in view, than 
 to direct the eye of the offerer to that great atonement, which 
 the blood of the slain animal was designed to shadow forth ; 
 being the appointed emblem of that precious blood, which, 
 according to the eternal purpose, was to redeem the life of 
 man. In like manner," says the same learned author,^ 
 " the offering up that commemorative sacrifice, which cha- 
 racterizes the Christian altar, is an acknowledgment on our 
 parts, that our lives were forfeited, and have been re- 
 deemed by the body and blood of Christ, actually offered 
 up on the cross. Bread and wine are but the instituted 
 emblems, deriving all their spiritual efficacy from the rela- 
 tion they bear to that important transaction, which they 
 were appointed to represent. Thus the typical sacrifice of 
 the Jewish temple, and the commemorative one of the 
 Christian church, direct our thoughts to the same divine 
 object of contemplation ; each in its peculiar way furnish- 
 ing a figurative exhibition of the recovery of man from the 
 effects of the fall, through the mediation of that divine 
 
 apposite note.—" The more this subject, the most fruitful in the whole 
 compass of literature, is investigated, the more satisfied shall we be, 
 that the images of heathen idolatry were but the corruptions, according 
 to the imaginations of men at different times, of that primitive symbo- 
 lical representation, originally set up at the fall, for the purpose of pre- 
 serving the faith, and characterizing the worship of the true religion. 
 The reader has only to go far enough back, and he will arrive at the same 
 divine fountain, to which the pure stream of patriarchal religion, and the 
 corrupt one of heathenish superstition are to be traced up. Mr. Maurice, 
 in his Dissertation on the Oriental Trinities (which by bringing the coun- 
 terfeits, the Fagan Triads, to prove the realities, thereby makes the cor- 
 ruption of revelation bear testimony to the truth of it) has done much in 
 assisting the reader in this interesting research. If the reader would be 
 further assisted, he will find more useful, because more correct, informa- 
 tion upon it in the 7'rinitarian Analogy, by that most excellent divine, the 
 late William Jones;" to be found in vol. i. of liis Theological, Philoso- 
 phical and Miscellaneous Works, published in 1801. 
 * P. 360, 361. 
 
Primitive Tnith and Order vindicated. Si 
 
 person, who by the all-sufficient sacrifice of himself, be- 
 came the Redeemer of a lost world." 
 
 We have now taken a short view of the Jewish economy, 
 or law of Moses, in the light wherein St. Paul represents 
 it ; not only as a necessary addition to the patriarchal reli- 
 gion, for preserving God's people from the idolatry and 
 wickedness of the heathen nations, but also as " a school- 
 master unto Christ," leading men by the discipline of its 
 types and shadows to the knowledge of real and substantial 
 truths ; in which capacity, our Lord himself tells us — that 
 " the law prophesied until John the Baptist ;" till he suc- 
 ceeded it in that office,— who seeing Jesus coming to him, 
 spoke the very language of its institutions, when he said 
 — " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin 
 of the world."* 
 
 This too has been the language of prophecy from the 
 very beginning of the world ; and as soon as we look into 
 the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, we find them 
 unfolding the design of the Redeemer's coming, and the 
 process of the redemption wrought by him, in the fullest 
 and most particular manner. We are told, that a gi-eat 
 Person was to come, bringing peace and salvation to all 
 nations; who should be Immanuel ov God xvit/i us; — born 
 of a virgin, poor and obscure, yet one whom David calls 
 his Lord; — the Lord to whom the temple belonged, — the 
 mighty God,— -a great King, — an everlasting Priest— a 
 Prophet like unto Moses, but much greater; who should 
 be anointed by the spirit of the Lord God, to preach the 
 gospel to the poor, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and 
 comfort to the mourners, and to heal the broken-hearted ; 
 —who shoidd work miracles of the most merciful and bene- 
 ficent kind; and yet, notwithstanding all his power and 
 goodness, should be rejected by the greater part of his 
 nation j be despised and afflicted ; a man of soitows, and 
 
 * St.Johni. 29. 
 
S^ Primitive Truth and Orcler vmcRcated. 
 
 acquainted with grief ; accused bv false witnesses ; betrayed 
 by an intimate friend; sold for thirty pieces of silver; 
 treated by his enemies in the most barbarous manner, and 
 at last put to a shameful and tormenting death ; while all 
 the time, he should be led like a lamb to the slaughter, 
 not opening his mouth, but to pray for his enemies, and 
 make intercession for the transgressors. All these and 
 many more circumstances of the same kind pointed so 
 clearly to what really happened in the land of Judah, and 
 were so punctually fulfilled in the person of Jesus of Naza- 
 reth^ that it is astonishing how the Jews could overlook the 
 striking evidence afforded by so many plain and literal pre- 
 dictions. Perhaps at the time when these things were pas- 
 sing before them, and they themselves were promoting the 
 accomplishment of this awful mystery, they might have 
 been so blinded by pride and prejudice, as not to see or 
 consider what had lieen done, or what they themselves 
 were doing. But after they had got time to reflect on all 
 that had happened, and to compare it with what had been 
 prophesied ; we may indeed wonder how they failed to 
 perceive where the truth lay, and honestly to confess, in 
 the words of one of our Lord's first disciples — " we have 
 found him, of whom Moses in the law and \k\^ prophets^vS. 
 write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."^ 
 
 It was to Moses and the prophets that Abraham is repre- 
 sented in the parable, as referring the rich man's unbeliev- 
 ing brethren for the evidence of a future state ;t ^i^^ 
 when Jesus gave this direction to his incredulous countr}^- 
 nien — '' Search the scriptures, for in them, ye think ye 
 have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me ;'*J 
 they were the writings of Moses and the prophets^ the only 
 scriptures then known, which thus bore testimony to him, 
 as the author of eternal life to all them that believe. With 
 the same view, we find him kindly rebuking two of his 
 
 • St. John i. 45. t St. Luke xvi. 29—31. \ St.. John v. 39. 
 
Pnmithe Truth and Order vhidkated, 53 
 
 followers, as foolishly backward to believe what the pro- 
 phets had spoken ; and then we are told, that " beginning 
 at Moses^ and all the prophets^ he expounded unto them in 
 all the s-^riptures, the things concerning himself."^ In imi- 
 tation of his blessed Master, we find St. Paul employed in 
 '' expounding and testifying the kingdom of God," to the 
 Jews at Rome, and " persuading them concerning Jesus, 
 both out of the law of Moses ^ and out of the prophets r\ 
 and that this had been his constant, and most effectual me- 
 thod of persuasion, appears evidently from part of his ad- 
 mirable defence before king Agrippa ; wherein he declares, 
 that " having obtained help of God, he had continued unto 
 that day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none 
 other things than those, which the prophets and Moses did 
 sav should come : that Christ should suffer, and that he 
 should be the first that should rise from the dead, and 
 should show light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."^ 
 
 If then this eminent preacher of the gospel, in the testi- 
 mony which he bore to the truth of it, said none other things, 
 than what Moses and the prophets had said should come, 
 with regard to the sufferings, and exaltation of the expected 
 Messiah, — the light of the Gentiles, and the glorv of his 
 people Israel ; the obvious and necessary inference to be 
 drawn from these premises is, that there is no other differ- 
 ence between the preaching of Moses and the prophets, 
 and that of an Apostle of Christ, but this — that the 
 former points to the promised Saviour, as yet to come ; 
 the latter exhibits him as already come. — But he is in fact 
 the sum and substance of both parts of divine revelation ; 
 and what is called the New Testament, containing the 
 writings of Apostles and Evangelists, speaks no other lan- 
 guage than what the Old Testament had spoken before by 
 Moses and the prophets, respecting the scheme of man's 
 salvation^ except in so far as relates to the way and maimer 
 
 * St. Luke xxiv. 27. \ Acts xxviii. 23. \ Acts xxvi. 22, 23. 
 
54 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 
 
 in which that gracious scheme was exhibited to the world. 
 The Old Testament went before, to announce what was 
 to be delivered in the New : and the New Testament came 
 after, to interpret the Old: but both, like the Cherubim 
 over the mercy seat, bear a constant and friendly aspect 
 towards each other, united in, and intent upon carrying 
 on, one and the same gracious design of promoting the 
 glory of God in the salvation of men. 
 
 This is the view in which we are taught to behold these 
 two dispensations of divine mercy, as distinguished by the 
 characters of Old and Nexv ; not as though they were two 
 distinct schemes of religion unconnected with each other, 
 but as what they really are, two parts of the same beauti- 
 ful whole, mutually confirming and illustrating each other ; 
 and to be considered as Old and Nexv^ only with respect to 
 the time and manner of their being manifested to the 
 world. It is therefore well and wisely declared in the 
 seventh article of the Church of England, that " the Old 
 Testament is not contrary to the New ; for both in the Old 
 and New Testament, everlasting life is offered to mankind 
 by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and 
 man, being both God and man. Wherefore they are not 
 to be heard, which feign that the old fathers did look only 
 for transitory promises." How can it possibly be feigned, 
 or imagined, that they looked only for transitory pro- 
 mises, when an inspired Apostle expressly assures us, that 
 those whom he enumerates " all died in faith, not having 
 received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and 
 were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and con- 
 fessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth, 
 desiring a better country, and looking forward to the city, 
 which God hath prepared for them ; ' even as we Chris- 
 tians,' having here no continuing city, seek one to come."* 
 So it is evident, that they and we, having the same object 
 
 » Heb. XX. 13—16. and xiii. 14, . 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 55 
 
 in view, and travelling to the same country, must be di- 
 rected to it by the same means; that is, by a firm and steady 
 faith in him, who is " the way, the truth and the life ;"* 
 the way in which we are to walk, the truth, by which we are 
 to be guided, and the life in which our journey is to end. 
 
 Although the dispensation, under which we live, be 
 called the New Testament, we are not to suppose, that it 
 differs in substance from the 0/d^ or points to any new way 
 of salvation which was not known before. For since the 
 fall of man, there has been but one way discovered for 
 his recovery; one scheme of mercy, at first revealed in the 
 promise of deliverance by the " seed of the woman ;" — 
 represented by the emblematic appearance at the east of 
 the sacred garden, — and aftersvards more fully exhibited 
 in the religious services, and mystical offerings of the 
 *' old fathers," both before imd under the law. These were 
 appointed to prefigure^ what our eucharistic service is 
 designed to commemorate as actually accomplished by the 
 sacrifice of Christ — " the one oblation once offered for the 
 sins of the whole world." Thus the Pati'iarchal, die Jew- 
 ish, and the Christian economy, will all be found to unite in 
 directing the eye of the faithful to the same object of evan- 
 gelical hope, from the revelation of the promised seed to 
 Adam in paradise, through the shadows of the law, to its 
 designed completion in the person of Jesus Christ, — " the 
 Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." And when, 
 at the consummation of all things, the Patriarch, the Jew, 
 and the Christian, shall be assembled before the throne 
 that is set in heaven; as they will all have had but one 
 source of hope here below, so will they then join in one song 
 of praise, with the mystic powers on high — saying — " Bles- 
 «ing, honour, glory and power be unto him that sitteth oa 
 the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever."t 
 From the account that has now been given of the primi- 
 
 * St. John xlv. 6. t Rev. v. 13. 
 
^6 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 tive institution of religion, as founded in the immutable 
 counsel of that " Father of lights, with whom is no varia- 
 bleness, neither shadow of turning ;" I think it must evi- 
 dently appear, that the way of salvation, which divine, 
 wisdom has marked out for the human race, is no new 
 discovery, peculiar to this or that age of the world. It is 
 as old as the " way of the tree of life," of which a very 
 early symbol was appointed to keep fallen man in remem- 
 brance ; and with respect to which the last book of the in- 
 spired volume delivers this encouraging promise — " To 
 him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, 
 which is in the midst of the paradise of God."* The 
 same emblem is made use of in both cases, to show that 
 the means of procuring life to man have been the sam.e 
 from the beginning, and will continue to the end of the 
 world. Nothing is more likely to hurt the cause of Chris- 
 tianity, and obstruct its salutary influence on the minds of 
 men, than the false notions, which prevail respecting its 
 original, and the mean, degrading ideas, which some are 
 disposed to entertain with regard to its Author, and the 
 plan on which it was preached and propagated in the world 
 about eighteen centuries ago. Those who view it as a sys- 
 tem, which was then entirely new, and had never been 
 heard of before, sit down very coolly to weigh its merits as 
 placed in the balance with the schemes of heathen philoso- 
 phy, and natural divinity, which then were or since have 
 been set in opposition to it. They do not see, or are not 
 willing to see that light of evidence, which shows the truth 
 and purpose of the everlasting covenant, entered into by 
 the adorable Three in Jehovah for man's redemption, be- 
 fore the foundations of the world were laid. The}' overlook 
 the unity of this grand and merciful design, and will not 
 observe that beautiful chain of connection, by which the 
 *' promise was united with the performance, the prophecy 
 
 * Rev. ii. 7. 
 
Frimitive Truth and Order vindicated. 5.7 
 
 iv'ith the completion, the anticipation with the event ;"*^ 
 jdl tending to illustrate the character, and display the glo- 
 ries of that Almighty Deliverer, who from the very fall of 
 man, stood forth his Redeemer and Intercessor. They 
 do not consider, that for the manifestation of this wonder- 
 fiil person, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be 
 blessed, there was a fulness of time appointed, to which all 
 the preceding dispensations looked forward ; just as thera 
 is now a fulness of time determined, to which our views 
 ought to be continually directed, when all the nations of the 
 earth will be summoned to appear before the tribunal of 
 that " just and righteous One," who came first to save, 
 and will at last come to judge the world. 
 
 These are the great and interesting objects, which our 
 Christian principles lead us to contemplate : And when vfo 
 survey the imminent danger to which such principles are 
 exposed, from the careless indifference which appears on 
 the one hand, and the wild enthusiasm which breaks out 
 on the other, both equally tending to sap the foundation-^ 
 and destroy the purity of tlie Christian faith ; surely we 
 cannot but see the necessity of exerting our utmost endea- 
 vours to hold fast our profession, and to fix the certainty 
 und security of our belief on its only solid basis — ^*' the truth 
 as it is in Jesus." If his religion be true, it must be so in 
 every part that is now exhibited to our view ; it must have^ 
 been always so in every period of time ; and those several 
 objects, about which our faith is exercised, the creation, 
 the redemption, and the sanctification of man, were all 
 presented at once to the eye of Almighty love ; they all 
 began together in the unchangeable purpose of Jehovah, and 
 will move on in merciful procession, as the covenanted, 
 confederate work of the glorious Three in one undivided 
 Kssence, till time shall be no more. 
 
 Little then are we obliged to those teachers of natural 
 theology, those advocates for what is called Ratiojial Reli' 
 
 * Set Dr. Ijlandolph's Sermons on thi?^ subject. 
 8 
 
J 8 Primitive Truth and Order 'vindicated* 
 
 p-'ion. who would take us out of the hands of out first, our 
 best, our only safe instructor, to prove to us, that there is 
 a God who made us, and a future state of retribution re- 
 served for us ; and after carrv ing us to the borders of that 
 awful state, there to leave us without a Saviour, or a Sanc- 
 tifier, who only can enable us to pass the bounds, the great 
 gulph fixed between our fallen nature and a happy immor- 
 tality. Is it thus, that the light of the gospel, the meridian 
 brightness of the sun of righteousness, is to receive addi- 
 tional splendour from the feeble taper of human reason, the 
 pitiful glimmering of what is called the Light of Nature ? 
 Is it thus, that philosophy is to be brought in, to the aid of 
 religion ; and the emptiness of man's fluctuating judgment 
 and understanding to be opposed to that fulness of wisdom 
 and knowledge, which dwells for ever in the most High ? 
 No : it is not by such expedients as these, that the cause of 
 Christianity is to be supported, and its influence promoted 
 in the world. We have seen them tried in the balance, and 
 found wanting. God has permitted the experiment to be 
 made, and under a pretence of refining and improving the 
 religion of Christ, by explaining its doctrines in such a 
 rational manner, as may recommend it to more general 
 acceptance, a plan has been carried on with wonderful suc- 
 cess, for stripping it of all its primary importance, and hold- 
 ing it up, as but a secondary object in the scale of Divine 
 Providence.* 
 
 * This plan seems to be recommended by Archdeacon Paley, who 
 maintains that " he, who by a diligent and faithful examination of the 
 original records, dismisses from the system one article, which contradicts 
 the apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind, does 
 more towards recommending the belief, and with the belief, the in- 
 lluence of Christianity, to the understandings and consciences of seri- 
 ous inquirers, and through them to universal reception and authority, 
 than can be elTected by a thousand contenders for creeds and ordinances 
 of human establishment." This no doubt is partly true, as far as " the 
 apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind" may be 
 opposed to '• creeds uad ordinances of human establishment." But are 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 59 
 
 With this view, it has been laid down as an incontro- 
 \^ertible position, that what is called Natural Religion con- 
 stitutes the basis of revelation, and having therefore prior 
 authority, must be considered as of superior obligation. 
 Accordingly, its laws are represented as eternal and un- 
 changeable, antecedent to the will of God, and indepen- 
 dent on it ; so perfectly agreeable to reason, and the fitness 
 of things, that God as well as man, the Creator as well as 
 the creature, is obliged to conform to them. The light of 
 nature is thought to be sufficient for the discovery of all 
 that is necessary to be known respecting the will and perfec- 
 tions of the Deity ; and as this boasted light can only dis- 
 cover what are called moral duties, they are said to carry 
 with them a natural or eternal obligation ; while positive 
 duties are but mere arbitrar}- commands, void of all inter- 
 nal excellency. These and such like metaphysical distinc- 
 tions have been eagerly laid hold of, to establish the neces- 
 sity of a constant appeal to the tribunal of human reason ; 
 and no precept of scripture must be received as a rule of 
 duty, till it be proved to agree with the dictates of philo- 
 sophy, and its utility be tried by the standard of human 
 wisdom. By thus throwing so much weight into the scale 
 of reason, and so little into that of revelation, as if every 
 one had a right to frame a religion for himself ; the autho- 
 rity of scripture is daily more and more weakened and 
 despised, the value of Christianity is proportionably depre* 
 
 there no creeds and ordinances of divvie establishment, every article of 
 which must be retained as part of the Christian system, however contra- 
 dictory it may appear to the judgment or apprehension of " the natural 
 man — the disputer of this world ?" Is there not a " faith — once delivered 
 to the saints," which must he " early contended for " by all who hope to 
 share in " the common salvation ?" and which faith, he who maintains 
 in its purity, as founded on the authority of God, does more towards 
 recommending the belief and influence of true Christianity, than " a 
 thousand such contenders" as Dr. Paley, for " the apprehension, the 
 experience, or the reasoning of mankind." See the dedication of his 
 " Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy ^** to the Bishop of Carlisle. 
 
itSf Pfhnltlve Truth and Order mridtcdt^d, 
 
 ciated ; infidelity raises its proud aspiring head, and taking 
 advantage of the high gi'ound on which its favourite religion 
 of nature has been (even by some men of distinguished 
 abilities) imprudently placed, exalts itself against that true 
 knowledge of God, and divine things, which can only be 
 derived from divine revelation.* 
 
 Thus we niay plainly see, that nothing has done greater 
 mischief to our holy religion, than the vain attempts of some 
 of its teachers to bring down its exalted truths to the stand- 
 ard of human reason; these attempts having in some 
 measure invited its enemies to join issue with those that 
 appear to be friendly to it, that the former may strengthen 
 their hands by the unguarded concessions of the latter. — ■ 
 So in fact it has been found, that some of the strongest, 
 •and most pointed attacks that have been made on Christia- 
 nity, have derived their chief strength from the acknow- 
 ledgment of this principle, that natural religion is the foun- 
 dation of all that is instituted and revealed : a principle, 
 tvhich, as some have been pleased to consider as the ground 
 of their faith, others have been bold to hold forth, at least 
 with less inconsistency, as the support of their infidelity. 
 And if it be true, as some Christian divines have thought 
 proper to allow, that " unless all the great things contained 
 in the law of nature are first known and believed, the reve- 
 lation of God himself can signify nothing," it may no 
 doubt be afiirmed with equal confidence, that where all these 
 things are already known and believed, revelation can sig- 
 nify but little 3 For if nature and reason can so easily dis- 
 
 * If the reader be desirous of obtakking farther information on this 
 interesting subject, I would beg leave to recommend him to a work, in 
 the perusal of which he will be cure to receive both the benefit and 
 pleasure that must arise from complete satisfaction, and which is very 
 properly entitled, 7'be Kncnaledge of Divine Tbnigs from Heveiation, not 
 from Reason or Nature. By the late John Ellis, D. D. Vicar of St. 
 -Catherine's, Dublin, and fovmerly of Brazien Nose College, Oxford.. 
 l.ondon, 1771. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 6^ 
 
 cover the most important truths, and be sufficient to direct 
 man in the way of his duty, and lead him to the happiness 
 designed for him, there does not appear to be much neces- 
 sity for any other guide ; nay, there is hardly room lef"t for 
 any other, where the mind is already preoccupied with the 
 sufficiency of its own powers, and feels itself in possession 
 of every religious truth that is worth the inquiring after. 
 The consequence of all this must be, that in proportion as 
 reason is exalted, and the comprehension of the human 
 mind enlarged beyond its proper limits, the importance 
 and value of revelation will be just so far depressed and 
 under-rated, till at last reason becomes absolutely indepen- 
 dent and self-sufficient, and will either have a religion en- 
 tirely of its own devising, or none at all. 
 
 Thus does the pride of human nature tempt men to em- 
 ploy the reason which God has given them, in direct oppo- 
 sition to the will and intention of the Giver, without consi- 
 dering the folly and baseness of such unworthy conduct, 
 and into what gross absurdities it must infallibly lead them. 
 If these men would know what reason is without revelation, 
 and to what it would lead them in matters of religion, if 
 unassisted, and left to itself, let them consult the histories 
 of those heathen nations, who knew nothing of the Old Tes- 
 tament, while it was the only scripture, or who since then 
 have never heard of Christ and his gospel. There they 
 will soon discover what strange work their idol reason has 
 made in the world ; how it has multiplied Deities like die 
 sand of the sea, and " changed the glory of the incorrup- 
 tible God, into an image made like to corruptible man, and 
 to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things j"*" 
 how it has led men to offer sacrifice unto devils, in a va- 
 riety of forms, and in the most inhuman and bai-baj'ous 
 manner ; and, in a word, that there is scarce any thing so 
 absurd and ridiculous, or so monstrous and abominable, 
 
 Rom. 
 
62 I^rbnithe Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 but what the vahi, self-sufficient reason of man has made 
 an object of religious worship. 
 
 To use the words, therefoi'e, of a late admirable address to 
 the patrons and professors of the new philosophy: " Let 
 the modern reasoner, who would make as good a religion 
 by the help of nature, and his own faculties, as we have 
 received from the lights of revelation, and the doctrines of 
 the gospel, take his ground where he will, provided he does 
 not go without the heathen pale; and let him keep it. — Let 
 liim borrow no assistance from Moses, and let him assume 
 to himself all the lights that he can find, all the rational 
 religion he can collect, not only in the world then known, 
 but in the world since discovered, in all the nations of the 
 east, where reason surely, as far as arts and sciences were 
 concerned, was in no contemptible state ; in America, to the 
 north and to the south, in all the continents and islands^ 
 ■\\rhich modern navigation has added to the map of the 
 world, as the Romans knew in the Augustan age ; let him 
 pursue his researches, and when he has made his tour 
 through all their temples and pagodas, let him erect his 
 trophies to reason, and publish his discoveries with what 
 confidence he may. Alas ! for mankind, and the boasted 
 dignity of human reason, he will bring back nothing but a 
 raree-show of idols, a museum of monsters, Egyptian, 
 Indian and Chinese deformities, and non-descripts, the 
 creatures of earth, air and sea, snakes, reptiles, even stocks 
 and stones promoted to be gods, and man degenerating, 
 and debasing himself to kneel down before these dumb 
 divinities, and pay them worship. — And now, if this is all 
 that he, who opposes the religion of revelation, can disco- 
 ver, and make prize of in the religion of reason, I give 
 him joy of his discoveries, and wish him candidly to de- 
 clare, if upon result of those discoveries, he can believe 
 so well of himself as to suppose, that had he lived in those 
 days, he would have found out any thing more than was 
 found out by those who lived in them : whether, if he had 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 63 
 
 singly engrossed the collected wisdom of the seven wise 
 men of Greece, he would have revealed a better system of 
 religion to the world than Christ has revealed ; and whe- 
 ther he would have known the will of God better than God 
 knew it himself, and more clearly have communicated it to 
 mankind."^ 
 
 Whoever duly considers the scope and force of this rea- 
 soning, can be at no loss to discover the obvious conclusion 
 in favour of divine revelation ; to which it is evident, that 
 men are indebted for all that pretended religion of nature 
 which they so fondly boast of, and which is no other than 
 what they derived from the use of the sacred writings, and 
 the instiTiction received from those who had the care of 
 their education. Thus the revealed truths, which took 
 early possession of their souls, which they were taught 
 with the first rudiments of learning, and of which no per- 
 son living in a Christian country can be supposed wholly 
 ignorant ; these they mistake for the pure natural conceptions 
 of their own minds, and ascribe to reason, and the light of 
 nature, that very knowledge of divine things which they 
 have derived from the gospel of Christ, and which they yet 
 set up in opposition to it. But is it right and reasonable 
 to treat in such a disingenuous manner the religion of him, 
 who came to be, and actually proved himself to be the 
 light, and life of the world? " Ought the withered hand, 
 which Christ has restored and made whole, to be lifted up 
 against him? — Or should the dumb man's tongue, just 
 loosened from the bonds of silence, blaspheme the power 
 that set it free ?"t Yet thus basely do these men act, who 
 employ the knowledge which they have from scripture, 
 against scripture itself, and make use of their religion of 
 nature, as an engine to batter down the religion of Christ. 
 
 * See this subject farther pursued and ilKistrated in an excellent little 
 tract, called, Afevi plain Reasons viby voe should believe in Christ, and 
 adhere to his Religion. By Richard Cumberland, Esq. London, 19dh 
 
 t See Bishop Sherlock's Discourses on this subject. 
 
64 Primiiivb Truth and Order vindicated^ 
 
 But little do these men consider what it really is, which ^ 
 under the name of Natural Religioriy they thus fondly ad- 
 mire, as such a powerful weapon in the hands of infidelity: 
 Little indeed do they seem to know of the true state of 
 that nature from which they would derive this imaginary 
 religion. For how can that system of religion be called 
 natural^ which was never yet discovered by any of the 
 sons of men, while left to themselves in a state of nature^ 
 without a guide or instructor ? Or if it could have been 
 discovered by men thus uninstructed and untutored, yet 
 how could such a religion be suited to man in his present 
 state, which takes no notice of any change that has hap- 
 pened to him, but supposes him to be still in that pure^ 
 holy and happy condition, in which he came originally 
 from the hands of a pure and holy God, and, therefore, 
 capable of performing such a worship and service as that 
 God requires, and will accept from an innocent, unoffend- 
 ing creature ? No proposition, I think, can be more clear 
 and evident than this ; that Natural Religion^ if it has any 
 meaning at all, must mean that religion which is fitted for, 
 and peculiar to the present state of man's nature, as some- 
 thing very different from that, in which he first received 
 his being. But how can that be deemed a religion at all 
 calculated for man in his present state, which leaves out of 
 the account the doctrines of his Jail and his restoration ; 
 which never tells, nor can tell him, how he died in Adam, 
 and was and will be made alive again in Christ ? That " in 
 Adam all died," and in consequence of the mortal nature 
 received from their first parent, all his posterity are liable 
 to death, is a truth no less confirmed by experience, than 
 plainly declared in holy writ. But the cause, as well as the 
 sting, of death is sin ; and how sin can be pardoned, and 
 its effects removed from the sinner, no light of nature has 
 ever been able to show, nor give any glimpse of hope, but 
 what may arise from the dark, uncertain prospect afforded 
 by repentance ;; of which it can only be said, " who can tell 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 65 
 
 if God will accept it?" God alone could tell the terms 
 on which " repentance and remission of sins were to be 
 preached among all nations ; and it behoved Christ to 
 suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day,"* that in 
 his name^ the promise of this universal blessing might be 
 authoritatively declared by those commissioned for that 
 purpose : " For in him," says one of these authorized 
 preachers, " all the promises of God are yea, and in him 
 amen ;"t in him they are all made sure to us, and by him 
 are truly and effectually accomplished. 
 
 But " remission of sins" is not of itself sufficient to fill 
 up the measure of divine mercy promised to man in his 
 blessed Redeemer, and which the light of nature could 
 never have exhibited to the eye of faith : " there is still," 
 as an eminent writer beautifully expresses it, " something 
 farther that nature craves, something which with unuttera- 
 ble groans she pants after, even life and happiness for ever- 
 more. She sees all her children go down to the grave; 
 and all beyond the grave is to her one wide waste, a land 
 of doubt and uncertainty : when she looks into it, she has 
 her hopes, and she has her fears ; and agitated by the vicis- 
 situde of these passions, she finds no ground whereon to rest 
 her foot. How different is the scene which the gospel 
 opens! there we see the heavenly Canaan, the new Jerusa- 
 lem; in which city of the great God, there are mansions, 
 many mansions for receiving them, who through faith, and 
 patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glorv and im- 
 mortality."J How properh', then, may we join in the 
 words which an apostle addressed to his Saviour, " Lord, 
 to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal 
 life."|| Thou hast exhibited in thine own person a clear 
 Tandeniable proof, that " life and immortality are now 
 
 * St. Luke xxiv. 46, 47. 
 
 t 2 Cor. i. 20. 
 
 I See Bishop Sherlock's Discourse on St. Johniii. Ifi, 
 
 y St. John vi. 68. 
 
 9 
 
6i& Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 
 
 brought to light," and therefore need not be sought in the 
 dark uncertain guesses of human reason, which may serve 
 well enough in the affairs of this life, and in pointing out 
 some of the common duties between man and man ; but 
 when it exceeds its bounds, and presumes to meddle with 
 the deep things of God, and to dictate in the great points 
 of religion, its weakness and insufficiency do then mani- 
 festly appear. It is but " the bUnd leading the blind," and 
 will sooner betray us into error and danger, than deliver us 
 out of them. Shall we then quit the glorious light dis- 
 played in the gospel of Christ, to follow the faint and feeble 
 gUmmering of natural reason I Shall we seek for clearness 
 in the midst of obscurity, or hope to meet with truth in 
 the labyrinths of error and uncertainty? Thou blessed 
 Saviour of the world! If we leave thee, to whom shall we 
 go? Where shall we find a guide like thee, a conductor so 
 kind, so compassionate, so infinitely wise, so divinely mer- 
 eiful ? " Thou light of the Gentiles and glory of Israel 1" 
 How great must be the blindness and infatuation of those 
 who, refusing to be guided by the radiant beams of thy 
 heavenly doctrine, walk on in the false and treacherous 
 ways of their own devising, and neither discern, nor desire 
 to know the truth ? What egregious folly, as well as base 
 ingratitude is it, thus to spurn at all the gracious designs of 
 heaven, and seek to fall back into the miserable gulfs of 
 heathen ignorance and idolatry; there to lie lost and bewil- 
 dered by the light of that reason which we have now been 
 viewing, as set up through all its weakness and wanderings, 
 in opposition to divine revelation ! 
 
 Reason, we acknowledge, is the gift of God to man;^ 
 and had it always been employed, as it ought to have been, 
 in the service, and for the honour of the Giver, it would 
 have proved what it was designed to be, an able advocate 
 
 • See Mr. Daubeny's excellent reasoning on this subject, in the first 
 discourse of his work above mentioned, ' 
 
Frimitlve Truth and Order vindicated, 67 
 
 for the truth of revealed religion ; which, it is evident from 
 that common mark of distinction, could not have been 
 known, till it was revealed or discovered by its gracious 
 Author.^ — Yet human reason would be muttering against 
 this divine truth, and holding up some semblance of reli- 
 gion as natural to man, which, therefore, it was not requi- 
 site for God to reveal ; the discovery of which we shall 
 allow to be a natural enough consequence of the pride and 
 vanity of the human heart. — But the misfortune is, that 
 this specious theory happens to be directly contrary to mat- 
 ter of fact : For if there be any truth in revelation, which 
 those who talk so much of the connection between natural 
 and revealed religion seem to acknowledge ; nothing is 
 more certain than that God spake, or revealed his will to 
 Adam in Paradise, and that too, as soon as he was created; 
 a circumstance which cuts off all right of precedence in any 
 other mode of discovery, and leaves no room for that ima- 
 ginary system of human invention— -the religion of nature. 
 Yet no sooner had revelation thus commenced in Paradise, 
 than we are immediately informed of that ambitious desire 
 of obtaining knowledge by other means, which proved so 
 fatal to our first parents. " Ye shall be as Gods, knowing 
 good and evil," was the temptation which took hold of 
 the human understanding upon its first perversion ; and the 
 success which the tempter gained on that occasion, has en- 
 couraged him to go on with a continued repetition of that 
 same confident assurance ; which, by setting up the reason 
 of man in opposition to the word of his Maker, laid the 
 foundation for infidelity, in all that variety of forms in 
 which it has since appeared, through the several ages and 
 nations of the world. 
 
 The whole train of opinions that attend what is com- 
 
 * It has been well observed, that right reason, as expressed in Latin 
 by Ratio recta, must mean reason ruled, or directed by a law, that is, 
 by the law or will of God. 
 
ea Primiitve Truth and Or defvindiccite^* 
 
 monly called Freethinkihg^ will be found to flow from 
 some unworthy notion, or settled contempt of divine 
 revelation, grounded on this false principle, that man's own 
 understanding must be a sufficient guide to him in all 
 matters of religious concern.-— According to this assump- 
 tion of the Freethinkers, as the human mind is capable of 
 advancing by progressive information, to higher degrees of 
 knowledge, there is nothing to prevent our carrying on the 
 improvement of religion by the same means, till it be 
 brought to its utmost degree of perfection. This is placing 
 religion on the same footing with those arts and sciences, 
 the study of which opens a wide field for speculation, and 
 is daily leading to new discoveries, calculated to improve 
 the condition of man in this world, and produced by the 
 exertion of those natural faculties with which God was 
 pleased to furnish him. But religion has a different object 
 in view, and points the attention of man to matters of in- 
 finitely greater importance. It invites him to look forward 
 to a future state of existence, and provides the means by 
 which he may be prepared for the enjoyment of ever- 
 lasting happiness. The knowledge and application of these 
 means, accompanied with a firm belief of the end to which 
 they lead, make up the great business of religion ; which, 
 it is evident, man was wholly unable to carry on by him- 
 self, without immediate instruction and assistance from his 
 Maker. — This necessary aid was afforded, as soon as he 
 was created ; and has been continued in various ways, as 
 circumstances required, but with a constant attention to 
 the accomplishment of that gracious object which the Deity 
 had in view, by communicating the knowledge of his will 
 to man. Every such communication tended more and 
 more to comfirm his dependance on God's everlasting pur- 
 pose; and that scheme of mercy, which had been projected 
 in the councils of heaven, and partially revealed from time 
 to time, was thus seen advancing through all its successive 
 stages, till it arrived at that fulness of tim^, which had 
 
Frimitlve Truth and Order vindicated. 69 
 
 been appointed for its complete manifestation in the per- 
 sonal ministry of God's incarnate Son. 
 
 Such has been the uniform purpose, and continued 
 progress of divine revelation, from its commencement in 
 Paradise, to its final termination in the gospel of Christ. 
 Nothing then can be more certain than this obvious conse- 
 quence, that religion thus coming from God, and founded 
 on the clear revelation of his will to man, must be consi- 
 dered in itself as a perfect institution, and incapable of 
 receiving any improvement from the utmost efforts of 
 human intellect. Men may talk as they please, of the pro- 
 gress of arts and sciences ; these, as human inventions, 
 will always be susceptible of some degree of improvement, 
 in proportion to the weakness, and want of skill displayed 
 by their several authors : But nothing can be more absurd, 
 than to speak of a progressive religion ; which, as the work 
 of God, can never receive any additional excellence from 
 the wit or contrivance of men. If it has been abused and 
 perverted by human folly, a just regard to its original insti- 
 tution requires that it should be rescued from these abuses, 
 and brought back to its primitive standard. But every 
 attempt at such necessary reformation ought to have its 
 object distinctly ascertained, and be directed to the proper 
 measures for obtaining the removal of those corruptions, 
 which have given rise to it. Without some such direction 
 to a specific point, and a well regulated adherence to fun- 
 damental truths, a boundless field of speculation will be 
 laid open, and one theorv will follow another in such end- 
 less succession, as to leave those who are thus seduced 
 from the right way, in the perilous condition described by 
 the apostle, *' ever learning, and never able to come to the 
 knowledge of the truth."* 
 
 '' The conceit of superior learning," says a venerable 
 author, " has always had an ill effect upon Christianity, 
 
 * 2 Tim. iii. 7. 
 
70 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 and is frequently found in those who have no great matters 
 to value themselves upon. We may be as learned as we 
 can make ourselves, and yet continue good Christians ; be- 
 cause true learning, and true religion, were never yet at 
 variance ; but the moment we are vain of our learning, we 
 begin to be in danger, and some folly or other is not far 
 off."* So careful was the author of this pious observation 
 to guard us against that vain pretension to learning, which 
 makes some men affect to be wise in matters of religion, 
 " above what is written ;" while, at the same time, he was 
 equally careful to withhold every encouragement from that 
 enthusiastic notion, so fondly cherished by others of a dif- 
 ferent description, who imagine themselves sure of salvation, 
 for no other reason, but because they are ignorant and 
 unlearned. Both these extremes must be equally avoided ; 
 and there cannot be much difficulty in drawing the line 
 between that proud display of learning, which looks down 
 with contempt on the simplicity of the gospel, and the no 
 less presumptuous ignorance, which foolishly regards all 
 its inward feelings and imaginaiy assurance, as certain 
 proofs of a saving faith, though unaccompanied with any 
 true knowledge of the ground on which that faith is built.^ 
 
 * And none more near at hand, than what the same author had been 
 just before describing. For " how often," sa} s he, " has it been urged, 
 that we ought not to receive the faith, which the first fathers of the 
 church, and the succeeding fathers of the reformation, have delivered 
 to us, because we are of late years so far advanced above them in know- 
 ledge ? But I have never seen the connection pointed out between any- 
 modern improvement in science, and the new doctrines of reformers in 
 theology. We are certainly much improved, for instance, in the art of 
 making time-keepers, above those who lived an hundred years ago ; but 
 no man will say, that we thence derive any advantage for numbering 
 our days more wisely, or that we have any clearer ideas of eternity, than 
 we had before. An eminent artist in this way may doubt of the Apos- 
 tles' Creed ; but then, there is no visible relation betv/een his art, and 
 his unbelief." See Bishop Hume's Charge to the Clergy of the Diocese 
 of Norwich, ir92. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 71 
 
 Being thus convinced, that there is no necessary connec- 
 tion between the doctrines of Christianity, and the disco^ 
 veries which from time to time have been made in various 
 branches of science, and therefore no wisdom or safety in 
 attempting to place subjects under the same point of view, 
 which are as widely separated from each other, as earth 
 from heaven ; we cannot but readily embrace this unavoid- 
 able consequence, and cherish it as a most valuable and im- 
 portant truth, that the religion of Christ is not a thing to be 
 new-modelled and improved, in hopes of bringing it to a 
 greater degree of perfection. It cannot put on those va- 
 rious modes and shapes, which are suited to the fashions 
 and fancies of the times, but must always be expected to 
 appear in an uniform dress, and to wear the character of 
 its divine Author, that of being " the same yesterday, to- 
 day, and for ever." Because his aposdes, and their suc- 
 cessors, have been called ministers of the Nerv Testament, 
 we are not to suppose that their ministry consists in alwa5^s 
 delivering something that is nenv^ or different from what 
 has been said before; since the faith for which we are 
 exhorted " earnestly to contend, was but once delivered to 
 the saints," and therefore what was the whole faith then, 
 must continue to be so still ; nothing must be added to it, 
 or taken from it. Perhaps there never was a time which 
 required so much steady attention to this matter as the 
 present ; when an itch for noyelty seems to prevail, beyond 
 any thing of the kind that has been hitherto observed. 
 Every age, no doubt, has had that common failing of ima- 
 gining itself to be wiser than any that preceded it. But 
 the wisdom of this age pretends to carry the point much 
 farther than ever was attempted before ; and nothing more 
 is necessary now to set aside the most venerable truths, and 
 institutions of religion, than merly to say, that they are old 
 and obsolete, and founded on such antiquated notions, as 
 are totally inconsistent with that more just and liberal view 
 ef things, which is the pride of this enlightened age. Thus 
 
72 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 are mankind led away by the mere force of fashion, and 
 bullied out of their religion, out of every thing that is va- 
 luable and good, by a few bold unmeaning words, which 
 serve only to show the folly and confidence of those that 
 use them. Such persons, we may observe, are ever on 
 the wing of speculation, devising new theories both of sa-r 
 cred and civil government; and when any disagreeable 
 truth stands in their way, they have only to hold it up, as 
 an exploded doctrine, — a remnant of that hateful thing cal- 
 led Priestcraft ; which immediately does the business, and 
 saves the trouble of any farther reasoning on the subject. 
 
 These are the errors and delusions with which all sound 
 and sincere Christians have to contend, and to carry on the 
 contest in that earnest manner, which an Apostle so warmly 
 recommends ;^ a contest, which it was never more neces- 
 sary than at present, to urge with fervour, and prosecute 
 with zeal and firmness — a zeal proportionate to the danger 
 to which the true faith of Christ is now exposed, both from 
 the bold attempts of avowed enemies, and the insidious aid 
 of pretended friends, appearing outwardly to support, but 
 secretly undermining the foundation of that authority, on 
 which rests our belief of the Christian doctrine. In defence 
 of that doctrine, the credibility of which is so openly at- 
 tacked by infidelity on the one hand, and its purity no less 
 endangered by enthusiasm on the other, we must there- 
 fore strive to arm ourselves with such weapons as are best 
 calculated for repelling the assault made on it, and the in- 
 jury done to it, by each of these powerful, but, we trust, 
 not invincible adversaries. From the manner in which the 
 aposde exhorts us to pursue this arduous contest, it is evi- 
 dent, that by the faith once for all delivered to the saints, we 
 are to understand, not an inward conviction of the truth of 
 the Christian doctrine, or that assurance of faith, which 
 some modem preachers boast of, as the peculiar privilego 
 
 * Sr Jude. P.. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order 'vindicated, 73 
 
 of their saints, but something that could be delivered in an 
 outward and public manner, could be read, or heard like 
 the ^'•form of sound words'^ mentioned by St. Paul, which 
 Timothy was directed to " hold fast ^^ that so he might 
 hand it down to the Christian church, as a model of what 
 was to be professed and believed in that church, to the end 
 of the world. Accordingly it is by such a summary of the 
 Christian faith that the church to which we belong con- 
 tinues, and, I trust, will continue, to profess her belief in 
 the adorable Three who subsist, with equal power, ma- 
 jesty and etemit^^, in the unity of the Godhead, and bear 
 record in heaven to the merciful scheme of man's salva- 
 tion. By such a concise and well-composedy£?rw of sound 
 words, we are taught to ascribe our creation to " the Father 
 Almighty^" our redemption to " his only Son Jesus Christ 
 our Lord," and our sanctification to " the Holy Ghost ;" 
 adding also our faith in '' one holy, catholic church," that 
 mystical body, of which Christ is the glorious Head, and 
 in which is enjoyed " the communion of saints," blessed 
 with the promise of " forgiveness of sins" in this world, 
 and of the " resurrection from the dead, and everlasting 
 life" in the world to come. This is undoubtedly the faith 
 which Christ established in his church, and which he 
 authorized his apostles to deliver from him, as a sacred 
 privilege or blessing to his people, to be received and pre- 
 served as such, whole and entire, till he should come again 
 to give a " crown of righteousness," to all them who shall 
 thus " have kept the faith, and love his appearing." 
 
 For the preservation, therefore, of such a blessing, the 
 sum and substance of all the good things which Christ has 
 made over to his church, and in the hope of that glorious 
 reward which he has promised to such fidelity, it is surely 
 the interest, as much as the duty of all Christians, to con- 
 tend in the most earnest manner ; and they cannot do so 
 
 * 2Tim. i. lo. 
 10 
 
['!t4f Primiitve Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 more effectually, than by holding out the end and object of 
 their faith in t)ie same uniform light, in which it has ever 
 been. represented, as the effect of that divine immutable 
 counsel, which admits of no change or variation, and so 
 makes the volume of revelation speak a clear, consistent 
 language from beginning to end. It begins with the crea- 
 tion of the world, and the formation of man ; and it ends 
 with the last judgment, and consummation of all things ; 
 and through the whole period described in the Old Testa- 
 ment, we see a regular chain and series of well-connected 
 events, all leading on to tlie incarnation of the promised 
 Redeemer, and directing the attention of God's faithful 
 people to that great m} stery of godliness, God manifested 
 in the flesh. It was to this mysterious accomplishment of 
 the Divine counsel, that the law and the prophets looked 
 forward ; and what was so long shadowed out in their 
 t}T)ical rites, and figurative language, was at last most hap- 
 pily exhibited in all its substance, under the dispensation of 
 the gospel ; which is, therefore, to be considered as fulfil- 
 ling the law, just as the law was predicting the gospel, and 
 both are to be viewed as constituting one beautiful and con- 
 • sistent scheme of salvation. 
 
 It is by adhering to this unity of design, and placing 
 things in their proper form and order, that the faith of a 
 Christian is built on such a firm and solid foundation, as 
 man cannot lay ; but which was graciously laid for him in 
 the will and counsel of his God before the world began, and 
 gradually manifested in all the outlines of the marvellous 
 plan, according to the wisdom of its Almighty contriver. 
 When things are thus traced back to their proper source, 
 we can easily perceive the instructive design of those sa- 
 cred emblems, under which the knowledge of God's mer- 
 ciful purpose, and good will towards men, is so beautifully 
 conveyed to us : And it is in this view that we are taught 
 to behold the ancient patriarchs, prophets, priests and kings, 
 as typiciil characters, and their several offices, and the more 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 7if 
 
 retnarkable passages of their lives, as fore-showing him, 
 who was to arise, as the Head of the holv family, the great 
 Prophet, the true Priest, the everlasting King.* Thus the 
 events which happened to the ancient people of God, were 
 designed to point out, as in a figure, parallel occurrences, 
 which should afterwards take place in the accomplishment 
 of man's redemption, and the rise and progress of the 
 Christian church : and as we are to view in the same light 
 the various provocations and punishments, captivities and 
 restorations of the tribes of Israel, which we are assured 
 " happened unto them for ensamples," " types or figures," 
 and were written for our admonition ; so we are to under- 
 stand in the sam.e figurative sense, what is said of the law, 
 and its ceremonies ; of the tabernacle and temple, with the 
 services therein performed, and of the whole economy of 
 the priesthood of Aaron. All this the well-instructed 
 Christian will easily transfer to the new law of the gospel, 
 to the oblation of Christ, to the true tabernacle or temple 
 not made with hands, and to what was done therein for the 
 salvation of the world, by him, who was in one respect a 
 sacrifice, in another a temple, and in a third a " High Priest 
 for ever after the order of Melchizedek ;" after a certain 
 order, form, or regulation, which was to be the rule and 
 model of the Christian priesthood for ever. 
 
 That the Christian church was to have a priesthood, duly 
 and regularly ordered, according to a form appointed for 
 
 * See this subject admirably illustrated In the preface to Bishop Horne's 
 excellent Commentary on the Book of Psalms, which his biographer justly 
 calls the greatest work of his life, and of which the author himself gave 
 this account, soon after it was begun : " The work delights me greatly, 
 and seems, so far as I can judge of my own turn and talents, to suit me 
 the best of any I can think of. May he who hath the Key of Bavid, 
 prosper it in my hand, granting me the knowledge and utterance neces- 
 liary to make it serviceable to the church !" Let any person of judgment 
 peruse the work, and he will see how well the author has succeeded, and 
 kept lip the spirit of it to the end, 
 
^W Primitive Truth and Order vindicated^ 
 
 that purpose, is abundantly evident from the whole of St. 
 PauFs reasoning on this subject, in his Epistle to the He* 
 brews ; in which the figurative economy of the law is repre- 
 •ented as brought to perfection under the gospel, and the 
 service of the temple as furnishing a t}^pical resemblance of 
 that of the Christian church. If the faithful Jews were 
 allowed to draw near to God, through the appointed minis- 
 trations of the tabernacle j " we have any altar," says the 
 apostle, " from which they had no right to eat, while they 
 still adhered to that unavailing service:" And if as Chris- 
 tians, we have an altar ^ we must also have a priesthood to 
 minister at the altar ; for these are correlative terms ; and 
 St. Paul certainly considered them as such, when he was at 
 so much pains to point out the analogy in this respect 
 between the law and the gospel, and laid it dov/n as a set- 
 tled rule, that " no man ever taketh this honour" (of the 
 priesthood) " unto himself," or can ever receive it, but 
 from the hands of those who have power to give it, " those 
 that are called of God as was Aaron." I'he apostle, it is 
 evident, meant to show, that the Christian and Jewish 
 churches were not two different dispensations, as to their 
 original plan and purpose, but a continuation of the one 
 church of God, and one Divine economy for the salvation 
 of man: And things were thus regularly ordained and uni- 
 formly carried on, because it is of infinite importance to 
 man, that he should always be able to know, if he will but 
 diligently inquire, where, and with whom he is to find the 
 commission, which has been faithfully handed down to those 
 who are appointed to minister in holy things.^ If ever 
 
 * See this matter, and others of similar importance, recommended tc» 
 i)ie attention which they justly deserve, in a small traet, lately pub- 
 lished, called a " Layman's Account of bis Faith and Practice^ as a Mem- 
 ber of the Episcopal Church in Scotland" and of which the British Critic, 
 for December, 1801, says — " The principles which the author labours 
 to establish, are certainly sound, his reasoning is cogent without pubtiet)', 
 liud his piery serious %v;!hoa'; moroscncss." 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 77 
 
 such an appointment took place, and we are well assured 
 it did take place by Divine authority, it must certainly be 
 continued, and carried on, to answer the end designed by 
 it: And how can it possibly be continued in a right and 
 regular manner, but by keeping it within the lines marked 
 out for its preservation, and in the proper channel, through 
 which it may pass on to future ages ; just " as a river, 
 whilst confined within its banks, flows on full and far in its 
 destined course j but if its mounds are broken down, and 
 its waters scattered and diffused beyond their natural limits, 
 it ceases to be a river, it loses its force, its beauty and use- 
 fulness, and becomes unable to reach the distant ocean, to 
 which its course was directed."* Such must have been 
 the case with the Christian ministry, had no limitation been 
 prescribed, no exclusive rights assigned to it, and no pro- 
 vision made for transmitting these from the fountain-head, 
 through streams of regular succession, to the end of the 
 world. But as all this has been happily attended to, by the 
 wisdom of our blessed Redeemer, it follows of course, that 
 this part of the gracious scheme of redemption must be 
 strictly adhered to by us ; no attempt must be made to 
 *' add to, or diminish from it." The means of grace, the 
 channels of communication, through which the benefits of 
 the gospel are conveyed to those who are called to partake 
 of them, must be preserved whole and entire, without any 
 breach or interruption, as the current of revelation itself; 
 Otherwise, the people of God may be accused now, as they 
 were formerly, of " committing two evils — forsaking the 
 fountain of living waters, and hewing out to themselves 
 cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water.^f In our 
 Lord's conversation with the woman of Samaria at Jacob's 
 well, the same figurative language is made use of, to show 
 
 * See a Sermon , entitled, " A due Ordination as necessary as a due 
 Call to the Gospel Priesthood." By the Rev. C. C. Church, rector of 
 Gosforth, and minister of Trinity, Whitehaven. 
 
 i Jer. ii. 13. 
 
Y8 Primitive Truth and Order hindkated. 
 
 that Christ being the only fountain of " living waters,"* 
 there is no other way of partaking of this life-giving spring, 
 but by the means which he has appointed for imparting to 
 us its salutary virtue : and for preserving it pure and entire, 
 having hewn us out a cistern, even his church upon earth, 
 he is said to have given " this treasure in earthen vessels^ 
 that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not 
 of us."t I^ conformity to which, he tells Ananias con- 
 cerning the appointment of St. Paul to the ministry—" Go 
 thy way, for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name 
 before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel ;"f 
 just as the same Lord had shown the necessity of his mak- 
 ing a similar choice for the same purpose, when he thus 
 addressed his apostles : " Ye have not chosen me, but I 
 have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should gOy 
 and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remainJ'''^ 
 But the fruit or effect of their apostolic commission could 
 not have long remained^ far less could that commission 
 have extended " even unto the end of the world," if it had 
 not been understood and exercised by them to this effect, 
 that as they themselves were chosen and sent^ so were they 
 .appointed to choose and send oihtrs^ with the same ordinary 
 powers which they had received, for carrying on the work 
 of the ministry, and the continued edifying of the body of 
 Christ. 
 
 It would be deemed a ver}^ bold and desperate attempt 
 to think of altering the circulation of the blood through the 
 human body, and turning it into new channels: Yet even 
 this hopeless undertaking could not exceed that height of 
 folly and presumption, which would propose to divert the- 
 progress of divine grace from the channels appointed for 
 conveying it through the mystical body of Christ ; or give 
 it a course different from that, which the God of all grace 
 
 * St. John iv. 10—14. \ Acts ix. 15. 
 
 t 2 Cor. iv. 7. % St. John xv. 16. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 79 
 
 has ordained for it. In all societies, even in those which 
 have only the affairs of this world for their object, we find 
 that certain regulations must be adopted for preserving 
 peace and order, and securing to the several members the 
 enjoyment of their peculiar rights and privileges, with all 
 the benefits and advantages that are connected with the 
 purpose for which the society has been formed, and which 
 are expected to arise from it. Such is the case in all those 
 bodies politic, or temporal societies, which, for the conve- 
 nience of those concerned in them, are established on just 
 principles, and supported by the lawful eflfoits of human 
 industry. And such, we find, has ahvays been the case, 
 with respect to that ecclesiastical body, or spiritual society, 
 instituted by divine wisdom, for the merciful purpose of 
 communicating to those who are received into it, the means 
 of grace here, and the hopes of glory hereafter. From 
 the manner in which it embraces these two grand and im- 
 portant objects, it is evident that the economy of this spi^ 
 ritual society must have a two-fold applicati n, and be 
 considered as partly concenied with the outward, partly 
 with the inward man. 
 
 The human frame, we knov/, consists of two parts, a 
 body and a soul; and hence it is, that an inspired apostle 
 draws a most beautiful allusion, representing the unity of 
 the church of Christ, as being one body, animated and in- 
 fluenced by one spirit. But if the church be designed to 
 comprehend the whole man, and to hold out the means of 
 sanctifying and saving both soul and body, and preserving 
 both unto everlasting life; to answer this gracious purpose, 
 it must be so constituted as to exhibit outward and visible 
 signs suited to the sensations of the body, and convey an 
 inward and spiritual grace adapted to the necessities of the 
 soul. — The institutions appointed for that purpose, are, 
 therefore, very properly called Mysteries^ as exhibiting 
 one thing to the outward senses, and by that sacramental 
 emblem, disclosing another thing spiritually to the mind. 
 
to Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 
 
 They are the mysterious means, which God has ordained, 
 under the economy of the gospel, for communicating sal- 
 vation and life to man : And for that reason, when St. Paul 
 wished to point out the natin-e of his ministry, as " serving 
 God in that gospel," and the regard which was due to his 
 sacred office, he did it in these terms,-—'' Let a man so 
 account of us, as ministers of Christ, and stewards of the 
 mysteries of God ;"* thereby plainly showing, that none 
 but the " ministers of Christ," persons set apart for the 
 service of the church in the way of his appointment, have 
 a right to be considered as " stewards of the mysteries of 
 God," duly authorized to dispense that spiritual food and 
 nourishment, which the heavenly Householder has so gra- 
 ciously provided for the support and comfort of his happy 
 family. 
 
 It was, no doubt, in allusion to this merciful provision, 
 that we find our Lord asking — " Who then is that faithful 
 and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler over his 
 household, to give them their portion of meat in due sea- 
 son ?"t By the household here, we are certainly to un- 
 derstand the church of Christ, which is often distinguished 
 as *' the household of faith — the house, or household of 
 God :" And as Christ is by office, and in a peculiar man- 
 ner, the Lord of this household, so the rulers of it are those 
 officers who act under him, as the governors and pastors of 
 his church, and who, it seems, must be made such by him, 
 that is, made " ministers of Christ," — as he has directed, 
 before the)'^ can become " stewards of the mysteries of 
 God." This, we know, is the case in all well-regulated 
 households. Those who act as stewards are appointed, 
 not by the family, but by the Lord or Master of the famil}', 
 and are accountable, not to them, but to him, for giving 
 them their meat in due season. The meat Vvliich the 
 church is to receive from its rulers and stewards, is the 
 
 " ICor. iv. 1. t St. Luke xii. 42. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* H% 
 
 word of life, or the means of grace and salvation, which 
 are called " God's mysteries;" being that mystical provi* 
 slon which he has laid up in store, to be regularly dealt 
 out, for the spiritual health and strength of his faithful peo* 
 pie. Who then can have any power to distribute his provi- 
 sion but those to whom he has given authority for that pur- 
 pose ? Who can pretend to meddle with the " mysteries of 
 God," or to administer the blessings of his holy and vener- 
 able sacraments, without a sufficient warrant for so doing I 
 Nothing can be more evident, from the nature of the thing, 
 than that they who are called God's stewards, must have 
 .his commission and authority for what they do, in their 
 jseveral serv'ices to his people. And St. Paul puts the 
 j-natter beyond all doubt, when he tells us, that " God has 
 actually *e?," or constituted officers, and these too of dif- 
 ferent orders, in the church ;^ which we may know to be 
 done by him, when we see it done in the manner prescribed 
 by that Almighty King and Head of the church, who has 
 all power in heaven and in earth, and from whom all eccle- 
 .siastical authority must be derived. Every ministry, there- 
 fore, that does not lead up to him, through his apostles and 
 their successors, is but a bold intrusion into the sacred of- 
 fice ; an unwarrantable usurpation of those rights, which he 
 made over to his appointed messengers, when " he sent 
 them, even as the Father had sent him," with power to do 
 .as he had done, and perpetuate the ministerial order, ac- 
 cording to the dispensation of the gospel, in the same man- 
 ner as he had begun it. This is the only way in which it 
 can be regularly carried forward, on the plan laid down by- 
 its gracious Founder ; and with respect to which plan, we 
 may truly say, as of all the other parts of his holy religion, 
 that what it was " yesterday," and is " to-day," the same 
 it must continue " for ever;" — ^nothing must be " added to 
 it, or taken from it." 
 
 * 1 Cor. xii. 23 
 11 
 
S2 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 There are some, however, even of the Christian profes- 
 sion, who do not admit the truth of this position ; and we 
 are not ignorant of the arguments, such as they are, on 
 which their rejection of it is founded.-^—" It cannot be 
 proved," they say, " that any plan 6r form of ecclesiastical 
 government was laid down in the Christian church, or that 
 any command was gi^en by Christ for that purpose. And 
 even admitting, that something like Episcopacy was ap- 
 poirited by the apostles," still they insist, that " such an, 
 appointment could only take place, in consequence of the 
 particular circumstances of the church at that time, and 
 without any view to its being a permanent establishment ; 
 because no precise constitution could be framed, which 
 would suit the church in its necessary accommodation to 
 the different arrangements of civil policy, or be equally 
 agreeable to the various nations, which might embrace the 
 Christian faith." Such reasoning as this, if supported by 
 any thing like proof, might, no doubt, be acknowledged to 
 have some weight, were it not also certain, that the consti- 
 tution of the church, the authority of her ministers, and 
 the validity of her sacraments, are all inseparably connected, 
 as nriatters of the greatest importance in the Christian 
 scheme of salvation, and must be esteemed as such bv all 
 who have a just sense of the high origin, and inestimable 
 value of the gospel of Christ. To those who consider the 
 religion of our adorable Redeemer, as nothing more than 
 a republication of what they call the Religion of Nature, 
 it must, to be sure, appear very absurd and ridiculous, to 
 be inquiring into, or disputing about, the external polity or 
 government of the church ; since in their opinion the only 
 thing necessary, is to find out how far the precepts of the 
 gospel agree with the moral fitness of things, and are sup- 
 ported by the law or feelings of nature, and the deductions 
 of human reason. But surely they who regard Christianity 
 as a religion of divine institution ; who believe, that its 
 gracious Author came into the world to save sinners, and 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, ZZ 
 
 Aat " his name is the only name under heaven whereby 
 they can be saved ;" that his sacraments of baptism, and 
 the eucharist, are the appointed means of uniting us to him, 
 and preserving us in that union, and derive all their eiEcacy 
 and importance from his blessing and sanctification of them : 
 Such persons cannot possibly think it a matter of indiffer- 
 ence, whether the hand from which they receive these 
 sacraments, be the hand of an administrator, whp derives 
 his authority from Christ, and is empowered to bless in his 
 name, or the hand of one who has nothing of that kind but 
 what he has taken to himself, or received from those, who 
 had as little power as he, to grant any such call or com- 
 mission. 
 
 But to consider the validity of the Christian sacraments, 
 and the authority of those who administer them, as mat- 
 ters of such high importance, we have been told by a late 
 popular writer,^ " is placing the essence of religion, not in 
 any thing interior and spiritual, not in what Christ and his 
 apostles placed it, something personal in regard to the 
 disciple, and what is emphatically styled in scripture, the 
 hidden man of the heart ; but in an exterior circumstance, 
 a circumstance which, in regard to him, is merely accident 
 tal, a circumstance of which it may be inipossible for him 
 to be apprized." And so, we may say, may ^' his belief 
 and obedience of the gospel," be merely accidental, and 
 depending on the circumstance of his being bom and edu- 
 cated in a Christian country, yet not the less acceptable to 
 God, or beneficial to himself, on that account. But the 
 author of the work to which I am now alluding, calls it 
 " an absurdity to make the truth of God's promises de^ 
 pend on circumstantials ;" and to him " nothing is more 
 evident, than that the essence of Christianity, abstractedly 
 considered, consists in the system of doctrines and duties 
 
 • See Lectures on Ecclesiastical History^ by George Campbell, D. D 
 Principal of Marischal College, Aberdeen. Vol, i. p. 86, &c. 
 
84. Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 
 
 revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the essence 
 of the Christian character consists in the belief of the one, 
 and the obedience of the other." Although we acknow- 
 ledge, in general, the truth of this observation, we cannot see 
 much propriety, or any advantage arising to religion, in thus 
 splitting it into essentials and circumstantials^ for the sake 
 of weighing the one against the other ; because there is 
 imich danger of not making a proper division : and so by 
 mistaking the nature of what is essential^ and what circum- 
 stantial, we may throw into the one scale what should be 
 placed in the other, and thereby make a separation of what 
 God has been pleased to join together for our comfort and 
 instruction. It was, therefore, well observed by a learned 
 and ingenious author,* that " as it is one of the peculiar 
 weaknesses of human nature, when, upon a comparison of 
 two things, one is found to be of greater importance than 
 the other, to consider this other as of scarce any importance 
 at all ; it is highly necessary, that we remind ourselves, 
 how great presumption it is, to make light of any institu- 
 tions of divine appointment j that our obligations to obey 
 all God's commands whatever are absolute and indispen- 
 sable ; and that commands merely positive, admitted to be 
 from him, lay us under a moral obligation to obey him — . 
 an obligation moral in the strictest and most proper sense." 
 Hence it would appear, that there is not so much ground 
 as is generally imagined for the common distinction of 
 moral 2knd positive dutits; which, being both alike foimded 
 in die v/ill and revelation of God, must be equally binding 
 on man, and can admit of no other variety of obligation on 
 our part, than what is determined by our Lord's own deci- 
 sion of tliis matter—" These ought ye to have done, and 
 
 * Bishop Eutlev, in his Analogy, ccc. p. 19S, of the fifth edition — a 
 work which contains much elaborate reasoning in favour of reveUiticn, 
 yet surely ascribes by far too much consequence to it.r. pretended rival, the 
 light or religion of nature. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 85 
 
 not to leave the other undone."^ If we see sufficient rea- 
 son to embrace the religion of Christ, as the only ground 
 on which we can hope for salvation and happiness, we 
 must also be convinced, that, in order to promote that im- 
 portant end, it must be received whole and entire ; as a 
 combined " system of doctrines and duties," requiring 
 our " belief of the one, and obedience of the other," with- 
 out any other reference to our judgment and discretion, 
 than what is necessary for our discovering, that these 
 *' doctrines and duties were revealed by our Lord Jesus 
 Christ," either immediately while he sojourned on earth, 
 or after his ascension into heaven, by means of the Holy 
 Spirit, who was " to guide his apostles into all truth." 
 
 So far then we are agreed with the learned Lecturer on 
 Ecclesiastical History^ whose words I have now quoted^ 
 though we shall afterwards have frequent occasion to differ 
 from him. In his subsequent description of what he deemed 
 to be the " essence of Christianity," we think, he ought to 
 have mentioned, what he could not but know, that a part of 
 the " system of duties," revealed by the Holy Spirit to our 
 I^ord's apostles, and expressly enjoined by one of them, 
 was obedience and submission to those who have a right to 
 *' guide or rule over us, and to watch for our souls i"! And 
 as it is impossible that such a right as this can be possessed 
 by any man, or order of men, who have not derived it from 
 the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, in the way that he 
 appointed for the transmission of it, we cannot but consider 
 it as a matter of the highest importance to ascertain, as far 
 as we are able, in what form of church go\'eniment this 
 right was originally invested, because to that government 
 alone can such obedience and submission be due. 
 
 On this point, our Ecclesiastical Lecturer is obliged to 
 allow — " that a certain external model of government must 
 have been originally adopted for the more effectual preser- 
 
 * St. Mat. xxiii. 25. t Heb. xili. 1/. 
 
86' Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 
 
 vatlon of the evangelical institution in its native purity, and 
 for the careful transmission of it to after ages."* And 
 when there were such strong reasons for the original adop- 
 tion of a " certain external model of government," it may 
 well be presumed, that the apostles, supposing them to 
 have been only possessed of common judgment, without 
 the benefit of inspiration, could not fail, as governors of the 
 church, to take the most effectual steps for the future esta- 
 blishment of what was so necessary to be adopted. Nay, 
 so much was even Dr. Campbell convinced of the necessity 
 of such an apostolic institution of government, that he pro- 
 nounces " any presumptuous encroachment on what is 
 evidently so instituted, to be justly reprehensible in those 
 who are properly chargeable with such encroachment, as 
 is indeed any violation of order, and more especially wheii 
 the violation tends to wound charity, and to promote divi- 
 sion and strife." Happy had it been for the church in this 
 kingdom, if what is here observed had been duly attended 
 to by those from whom the author of this just remark 
 derived his ministry, — ^^Yet, as if afraid that he had gone 
 too far in censuring such presumptuous encroachment as 
 justly reprehensible, he immediately adds — '■'• But the re- 
 prehensic«i can affect those only who are conscious of the 
 guilt ; for the fault of another will never frustrate to me 
 the divine promise given by the Messiah, the great Inter- 
 preter of the Father, the faithful and true Witness to all 
 indiscriminately, without any limitation, that he who re- 
 ceiveth his testimony hath everlasting life." 
 
 There is a sense, in which part of this reasoning may 
 be received as well-founded ; but we cannot so easily per- 
 ceive the connection, by which the following conclusion is 
 drawn from it. " I may be deceived," says the author, 
 " in regard to the pretensions of a minister, who may be 
 the usurper of a character to which he has no right. I am 
 
 ♦ Vol. i. p. 8r. 
 
Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 87 
 
 no antiquary, and may not have either the knowledge, or 
 the capacity necessary for tracing the faint outlines of an- 
 cient establishments, and forms of government, for enter- 
 ing into dark and critical questions about the import of 
 names and titles, or for examining the authenticity of end- 
 less genealogies ; but I may have all the evidence that con- 
 sciousness can give, that I thankfully receive the testimony 
 of Christ, whom I believe, and love, and serve."* 
 
 But surely this all-sufficient coJiscioiisness must arise 
 from some source or other : and where there is a want of 
 the " knowledge or capacity necessary" for such inquiries 
 as are here alluded to, there must be an implicit reliance 
 on the skill and fidelity of those teachers or spiritual guides, 
 who ought to serve as " eyes to the blind, and feet to the 
 lame," who seem to be particularly pointed out for that 
 purpose in the authoritative direction delivered to God's 
 people in these words — " Thus saith the Lord, stand ye 
 in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is 
 the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for 
 your souls."'!' There were many, no doubt, in the days of 
 Jeremiah, who might have availed themselves of this plea, 
 that " they were no antiquaries, and had neither the know- 
 ledge nor capacity that was necessary" for such laborious 
 and useless investigation. Yet the command is general, 
 and sufficient instruction given how to proceed in discharg- 
 ing the duty enjoined. There is a " good way" pointed 
 out for walking in, among the " old paths," which are to be 
 found out by " asking," with eaniestness and circumspec- 
 tion. — ^" Stand ye in the ways, and see^ and ask for the old 
 paths."-—" Asking" implies some person or thing, of whom 
 inquiry may be made ; as where the children of Israel were 
 commanded to " ask their fathers," and to " ask of the days 
 that were past," for such information as was necessaiy for 
 directing their conduct. The same instructive information 
 
 • Vol. i. p. 88. t Jer. vi. 16. 
 
88 Primitive Truth and Order vindicatett* 
 
 may still be obtained, if we are at due pains to apply for it, 
 and do not trust too much to that inward " consciousness," 
 which often promises rest to the soul, without the trouble 
 of any outward inquiry about " coming" to that Saviour, 
 in the way and manner which he has prescribed, who alone 
 can bestow this inestimable blessing, and " give rest to the 
 soul that is weary and heavy laden."^ 
 
 Having, therefore, already considered his holy religion, 
 the only way in which we can " come to him" for spiritual 
 rest and comfort, as, like himself — " the same yesterday, 
 torday, and for ever ;" and being, I hope, well convinced, 
 that it ought to be received and embraced, just as it is re- 
 presented and held out in the scriptures of truth, without 
 *' adding thereto, or diminishing from it," we shall now 
 proceed, in consequence of what has been said, to establish 
 another no less evident and important fact, which shall be 
 the subject of the following chapter. 
 
 * St. Matt. xi. 9.9. 
 
 f 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Church of Christy in which his Religion is received and 
 embraced^ is that spiritual Society^ in which the Ministra* 
 tion of holy Things is committed to the three distinct Orders 
 of Bishops^ Priests and Deacons^ deriving their Authority 
 from the Apostles^ as those Apostles received their Commis- 
 sion from Christ, 
 
 W HEN the converted Hebrews received this command 
 from an inspired apostle — " Obey them that have the rule 
 over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for your 
 souls ;"* they were thereby put in mind, not only that they 
 had souls to be " watched for," but also that the power or 
 authority, which these watching rulers had over them, was 
 of a spiritual nature, and such as had relation to that spiri- 
 ,tual life, which, after being begun on earth, was intended to 
 last for ever in heaven. — This single obsen'ation presents 
 us with a just view of the difference between these two 
 sorts of government, which have the things of earth, and 
 the things of heaven for their several objects : A distinc- 
 tion which St. Paul, in another place, seems to point out as 
 worthy of our notice, when he tells us, " the first man is of 
 the earth, earthy ; the second man is the Lord from hea^ 
 ven."'!' Our earthy man must, therefore, be ruled and 
 directed by such means and instruments, that is, by such 
 forms or modes of government, as are suited to the various 
 situations of things on this earth ; where we are placed for 
 a while, as in a school of instruction, to fit and prepare us 
 for a more pure and permanent state in that heaven, from 
 which came the second man, the Lord, — the Almight}' 
 
 • H€b. xiii. 17, t 1 Cor. XV. 47. 
 
 12 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 Restorer of our nature, to establish a government suited to 
 the gracious design of his coming, and most admirably cal- 
 culated to qualify and dispose his happy subjects for the 
 possession of that utifading inheritance reserved for them 
 in " his everlasting kingdom." 
 
 ; Looking forward, with prophetic eye, to the estabhsh- 
 ment of this spiritual kingdom, and to the solemn inaugu- 
 ration of its heavenly King, the inspired Psalmist might 
 justly say of it ; " This is the Lord's doing, and it is mar- 
 vellous in our eyes."* The setting up a pure and spiritual 
 kingdom in the midst of a carnal and wicked world, and in 
 spite of all the opposition which the prince of this world 
 could make to it ; the founding this spiritual building on a 
 rock^ " agaiiist which the gates of hell should not prevail," 
 was surely an astonishing exertion of divine power, and 
 such as evidently showed the hand of that Almighty Lord, 
 who can do what he pleaseth both in heaven and in earth* 
 
 The " doings" of men are sometimes a little " marv^el- 
 lous in our eyes," when we see them not only pulling do%vn 
 and destroying those venerable fabrics of civil government, 
 iwhich have stood for ages, — the pride of human policy,' — 
 but even attempting to subvert the foundation of that eccle- 
 siastical system, which, resting on the solid ground of 
 divine institution, is not to be altered or new-modelled, as 
 the work of human device, or in conformity to the manners, 
 the prejudices, or civil constitutions of the different nations, 
 in which the Christian church has obtained a settlement. 
 Here we cannot but observe a remarkable difference be- 
 tween the ''' doing of the Lord," and that of man, with 
 regard to the nature of their respective works. — What the 
 former does, is done at once, and produced in full per- 
 fection, according to the nature of the work, and the design 
 .which God has in view by producing it. It has therefore 
 been justly observed, that " God never made his works for 
 
 * Psalm cxviii. 23. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. dl 
 
 man to mend ;" nor does it become a poor, dependent, fal* 
 lible rreature, to interfere with, or pretend to alter, the 
 appointments of the supreme, all-wise and good Creator, 
 It is enough for man to reform and improve himself, to 
 amend what is amiss in his own conduct, and correct those 
 errors and mistakes, which experience will discover in the 
 best and wisest plans of government that have ever been 
 devised by human ingenuity. These, it seems, can only 
 be brought to their admired perfection by slow and leisurely 
 degrees. Even the boasted constitution of this country, 
 which has been so often proposed as a pattern to the neigh- 
 bouring nations, is well known to have been the gradual 
 work of ages, the happy consequence of that progressive 
 spirit of improvement, which can never be so properly 
 (exercised, as in contriving means to supply the defects of 
 human foresight, and to secure to society the benefits 
 arising from the accumulated experience of successive 
 generations. 
 
 All this is very proper and necessary to be attended to, 
 as far as we are concerned with the works and inventions 
 of men, and obliged to show a due regard to the various 
 schemes of human policy, which have been contrived, and 
 established, for thus securing, as far as may be, the peace 
 and good government of this world. But the temporal 
 peace and prosperity of such a vain and transitory world, 
 cannot surely be the only, nor the principal object, which 
 man has to regard and attend to, considered as a candidate 
 for eternal happiness in the kingdom of heaven. Viewing 
 himself in this light, he cannot but see the necessity of cul- 
 tivating a proper acquaintance with the laws and government 
 of that kingdom, and of submitting to that course of pro- 
 bation and discipline which has been appointed for the 
 church of Christ, while militant here on earth, to prepare 
 it for that triumphant state, which it is at last to enjoy with 
 its glorious Head in heaven.— When the pious well-dis- 
 posed Christian sets himself to acquire a proper knowledge 
 
^ General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 of his duty in this respect ; what a happy circumstance is it 
 for him, that the nature and constitution of Christ's king-^ 
 dom, as settled by himself, were fully declared, and made 
 known to his apostles ; those select officers, to whom the 
 original commission was given, " to convert the nations^ 
 and teach them to observe all things whatsoever he had 
 commanded them ?" On this subject every necessary infor* 
 mation may be derived from the doctrine and practice of 
 these aposties, as handed do^vn in the inspired writings of 
 the New Testament, and explained and illustrated by the 
 concurring testimony of the first and purest ages of the 
 gospel; all which exhibit in the clearest light the foundation 
 of the Christian church, the form of government esta- 
 blished in it, and the manner in which it is to be supported 
 by its Divine Founder, to the end of the world. 
 
 Our knowledge of all these circumstances points out the 
 peculiar nature of that spiritual kingdom erected by Christ, 
 and shows how widely it differs, even in its first erection^ 
 from the kingdoms of this world. Their constitutions and 
 forms of government are perpetually changing. What one 
 aation adopts, another rejects: What is admired in thia 
 age, perhaps will be reprobated in the next ; because the 
 mind of man is not capable of fixing to itself any certain 
 standard for adjusting the merits of diose numberless po* 
 Utical theories, which are daily getting abroad into the 
 world. But what was beyond the compass of human ability, 
 has been accomplished by divine power and authority. 
 The church or kingdom of God, as we have already ob* 
 served, with respect to his holy religion in general, came 
 good and perfect from his hands, and might well suffer^ 
 but could never be improved by the inventions of men. 
 In tracing it to its purest source, the fountains of antiquity 
 must be resorted to, otherwise we shall see but darkly into 
 the troubled waters of latter times, which faction and party 
 have been continually stirring, and thereby producing end^ 
 less disorder and confusion. Such must alwavs be the 
 
Qeneyal Defence of Episcopacy, 93 
 
 case, when men attempt to form a religion, and a church 
 fdr themselves, and are not satisfied with what God has 
 provided for them. 
 
 We must, therefore, endeavour to make ourselves suf- 
 ficiendy acquainted with what the goodness of God in this 
 respect has done for the children of men j and with the book 
 of revelation in our hands, v/e shall be at no loss to disco- 
 ver how well the one part of the sacred volume agrees with 
 the other, and both point to the same object under every 
 dispensation ; still representing the church or people of 
 God as one body, actuated by one spirit, and established 
 in one and the same faith and hope. Thus looking back, 
 with a well-directed eye, to the state of the church, through 
 its several progressive stages, from its first establishment 
 in Paradise, and its confinement afterwards to one smgle 
 family in the ark, we can trace its enlargement in the pos- 
 terity of the chosen fiuher of the faithful race, its wander- 
 ing state in the wilderness, its settlement in the promised 
 land, and all that happened to it, till the fulness of time 
 came for the manifestation of its God and Redeemer^ 
 who was to put his finishing hand to the constitution of this 
 spiritual society, and place it on a sure and immoveable 
 foundation. Through the whole of this extended view, 
 one striking circumstance must constantly arrest our atten- 
 tion ; that under everj^ dispensation of divine grace, some 
 particular persons were set apart for performing the sacred 
 rites of religion, and clothed with suitable authority for that 
 purpose. The inspired history says but little of what is called 
 the patriarchal economy. But even in the concise account 
 which is given of that period, we see evident marks of the 
 divine institution of sacrifice, as the most essential part of 
 religious worship, and may thence justly infer that a priest- 
 hood also was instituted to minister in holy things ; since 
 there was the same reason for setting apart certain persons 
 to represent Christ the Priest^ as there was for constituting 
 certain offerings to represent Christ the Sacrifice, For 
 
94 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 maintaining this consistencv, we have every reason to be*., 
 lieve, that the right to minister was given to the first-bon^: 
 as types of Him, who was to be " the First-born andong 
 many brethren ;" and it was on account of Esau's despising 
 and seUing this right, that he was denominated " a profdne 
 person ;"* one who had no just sense of God's appointment^ 
 or the regard which was due to sacred things j for which 
 reason he was set aside from the office, and the honour of 
 the priesthood was transferred to his brother Jacob. 
 
 When we come down to the establishment of the church 
 under the Mosaic dispensation, we perceive its form and 
 ministry, its authority and indepejidence, displayed in the 
 clearest manner: and these things are frequently referred 
 to in the writings of the New Testament, which point td 
 the ancient constitution as still to be maintained in all things 
 essential to the being of a church. Thus viewing the di- 
 vine conduct in the light which revelation throws upon it, 
 we ai-e taught to consider the Jewish dispensation as the 
 infancy of the Christian, and the Christian, as the full 
 growth, and mature perfection of the Jewish. But in both, 
 the body is formed after the same model ; and we can trace 
 a similarity of features and lineaments, such as is observed 
 in the progressive advancement of our o\vn bodies from 4 
 infancy to manhood. To be sure, " as the economy of 
 man's salvation forms one complete whole, it may well be 
 supposed, that there will be an uniformity in its several-. 
 parts ;"t And when we find the God of Abraham, Isaac^i^; 
 and Jacob, regulating the service of the Israelitish church^q 
 by the express appointment of those who were to ministdr;e> 
 in it, we may justly infer, that the same God, when mani*- 
 Tested in the flesh for its salvation, would adopt a similar 
 plan in the Christian church ; thereby showing, that the 
 
 * Heb. xii. 16. 
 
 t See this urga merit well handled in Mr. Daubeny's excellent Guide to 
 the Church, p. 25, &c. 
 
Oeneral Defence of Episcopacy, 95 
 
 ^ law being a shadow of good things to come," bore a re- 
 semblance in all respects to the substance, which the gospel 
 exhibited. The law was adorned with a priesthood of 
 God's own institution — a high priest, and priests of his 
 own calling— a whole tribe of Levites of his own select- 
 ing, separated from the rest of the people, and peculiarly 
 set apart for the service of the tabernacle ; which, with all 
 its holy things, was a type or figure of the body, and con- 
 sequently of the church of Christ. In this church, there- 
 fore, " which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all 
 in all," we may expect to find the full completion of all 
 that was prefigured under the Mosaic economy ; and as the 
 Hebrew ministry was " an ordinance for ever," that is, for 
 the continuance of the temple and nation of the Hebrews, 
 so are the divine institution, and pei'petuity of the Christian 
 ministry, expressed in that commission, which our Lord 
 gave his apostles; — ^' As my Father sent me, even so send 
 I you : and — ^lo, I am with you always, even unto the end 
 of the world." 
 
 If we inquire into the history of these apostles, before 
 they received this final and most ample commission from 
 their Lord and Master, we shall find, that when the num- 
 ber of his followers had considerably increased, and he was 
 " moved With compassion at seeing the multitudes scattered 
 abroad, as sheep having no shepherd," he thought proper 
 to " ordain twelve," as the evangelist tells us, " that they 
 should be with him, and that he might send them forth to*- 
 preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast° 
 out devils ;" and these he named apostles^ as being persons 
 peculiarly sent with power to act in his name, and to carry 
 on the blessed work, which he had so happily begun. Af- 
 terwards, when the harvest became too great for so few 
 labourers as these twelve, our Lord was pleased to " ap- 
 point other seventy also," who, though of an order inferior 
 to the apostles^ as appears from their never being distin- 
 guished by that title, were yet empowered to preach the 
 
96' General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 gospel, and to work miracles for the confinnation of their' 
 doctrine. Thus early do we observe a subordination 
 among the ministers of Christ, and a striking similitude 
 between the Jewish church and the Christian, with respect 
 to their foundation and establishment. The former was 
 delivered from the Egyptian slavery by Moses the servant 
 of God ; and the latter is delivered from its bondage to sin 
 and satan, a slavers^ infinitely more deplorable, by Jesus 
 Christ the Son of God. In the former, the twelve tribes were 
 conducted by twelve officers, the heads of their several tribes, 
 who were all subject to Moses: and in the latter, twelve 
 apostles were appointed to guide and instruct the people, 
 and themselves to be obedient in every thing unto Christ. 
 And, to complete the allusion, our Lord's seventy disciples 
 answered to the same number of the heads of families, who 
 were appointed according to the number of Jacob's family 
 that went down with him into Egypt,^ and also according 
 to the number of the " seventy men of the elders of Israel,''' 
 who were solemnly set apart for assisting Moses in " bear* 
 ing the burden of the people.''^ Thus, as some of the old 
 fathers observed, our Lord first chose twelve apostles, and 
 afterwards he added other seventy select disciples, that by 
 this means, the people discovering the resemblance between 
 him and Moses, might the more readily believe him to be 
 that Prophet, who, Moses foretold, should come. 
 
 Thus far did our Saviour collect and gather his church in 
 his own person, and while his ministry was confined to 
 *' the lost sheep of the house of Israel ;" on which account 
 St. Paul calls him a " minister of the circumcision," and 
 he was frequently styled-—" the King of the Jews." But 
 as his death was to take away the distinction between Jew 
 and Gentile, so after his resurrection he declared, that 
 " all power was given to him in heaven and in earth j" as a 
 
 * See Dr. Potter on Church Government, p. 49—50. 
 t Num. xi. 16, 17, 
 
General befenCe of episcopacy, 95^ 
 
 proof of which, he enlarged the power of his apostles, and 
 gave them a full and absolute commission, to convert, bap- 
 tize and teach, not the Jews only, but " all nations." The 
 nature of their commission is sufficiently expressed by our 
 Lord's telling them — " As my Father hath sent me, even 
 so send I you ;" which plainly showed, that as the Father 
 had sent and empowered him to collect, constitute and 
 govern his church, and ordain ministers in it, so he devolved 
 this mission and power upon them ; and as before they had 
 been only his personal attendants, waiting his orders from, 
 his own mouth, they were now to stand in his stead, to be 
 officers in trust for the regular administration of the affairs 
 of his kingdom, and to have authority to send others, for 
 the purpose of carrying on and perpetuating the same plan 
 which he had set on foot, even unto the end of the world. 
 Though they were thus sent by him, even as he had been 
 sent by the Father, yet it is certain, they could not be sent 
 as mediators and redeemers, as he was ; for there is but 
 " one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
 Jesus." This new commission, therefore, must be under- 
 wood only of the authority of government and discipline 
 in the church, which Christ himself had received of the 
 Father, and of ordaining others to the same office, to which 
 the apostles themselves had been called by virtue of their 
 ordination* While our Lord himself continued personally 
 present with them, they had a commission to baptize, and 
 preach the gospel, and to do such things as were most likely 
 to gain credit to their doctiine. But now being sent in a 
 more ample and solemn manner, to supply the place of 
 their absent Master, and carry on the work which he had 
 begun, they were empowered to convey to others that 
 Episcopal Authority, which they themselves had received 
 from the chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls ; that so 
 there might be a continual, uninterrupted succession of 
 ecclesiastical governors and pastors, who, in consequence of 
 his gracious promise, were to hope for the blessing of his 
 
 13 
 
98 General Defence of Episcopacyi 
 
 spiritual presence, protection and assistance in the exectf"^ 
 tion of their sacred office, even unto the end of the world. 
 Thus were the apostles exalted to the highest station in 
 the church, according to the account which St. Paul gives 
 of this matter, when he tells us-^that " God hath set some 
 in the church, first apostles."* He set them ftrst^ not 
 only in order of time, but in dignity of office, and distin- 
 guished them as the governors of the church, under Christ 
 its supreme Head : Which enlargement of their power we 
 find them soon after exercising, by electing one to fill up 
 the place of Judas, which had fallen vacant by his miserable 
 end, and prescribing several rites to be observe^ by the 
 members of their spiritual society. But though the apostles 
 were thus constituted the principal labourers in God's vine- 
 yard, it cannot be supposed, from the daily increase of the 
 work which it required, that they could long be able to at- 
 tend to all the minuter parts and branches of it. They 
 therefore found it necessary, according to the model esta- 
 blished by their blessed Master, to continue that other in- 
 ferior order of church officers, in which capacity themselves 
 had served under him, while he was upon earth. These 
 are often mentioned under the title of presbyters or elder s^ 
 though the express time and manner of ordaining them be 
 not particularly recorded. Thus we are told of the apos- 
 tles Paul and Barnabas, that in the course of their travels 
 *' for confirming the souls of the disciples, they ordained 
 them elders or presbyters in every church."f St. James 
 directs the sick to " call for the elders or presbyters of the 
 church to pray for them."J St. Peter warns those to 
 whom he wrote, to be " obedient to their elders^ and he ex- 
 horts these elders or presbyters to feed the flock of God 
 which was among them."§ St. Paul puts Titus in mind, 
 that he " had left him," as bishop, " in Crete, that he 
 
 * 1 Cor. xii. 28. % St. James v. 14. 
 
 t Acts xiv. 23. § 1 St. Peter v. 1—5. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 99 
 
 should set in order the things that were want'mg, and or- 
 dain elders in every city."* The elders^ in all these passages, 
 are the same with presbyters or priests^ the second order of 
 ministers in the church, whom we may suppose St. Paul to 
 have had in his eye, when, after mentioning — that " God 
 had set some in the church, first apostles" — he added, 
 " secondarily ;&r(7/>Ae^*;" the word prophet being often ap- 
 plied to signify a person acting by a divine commission, and 
 employed in God's immediate service, but without convey- 
 ing the idea of his foretelling future events, which is now 
 commonly affixed to the word prophet. 
 
 But we have farther to observe, from the information 
 given us in the history of the apostles, that soon after they 
 had received their Episcopal power, they ordained another 
 order of church mmisters, who, from the nature of their 
 office, were peculiarly distinguished as deacons or servants. 
 There were seven of these ordained at first, because the 
 apostles judged such a number sufficient to supply the ne- 
 cessities of the church at that time. They had the charge 
 of the poor people, and took care of the charitable collec- 
 tions that were made for their relief. But they had also 
 authorit}^, as they now have with their bishop's license, to 
 preach the gospel, and to baptize where a higher minister 
 cannot be had. Thus we find Philip, who was one of them, 
 baptizing the eunuch ;t while Stephen, another of them, suf- 
 fered death, for preaching the gospel to his own country- 
 men.J Accordingly this office was regularly continued in 
 the church ; and in every council or synod, mention is 
 made of the deacons, their powers are confirmed, and their 
 duties explained, as being the persons alluded to, whom 
 the apostle says, God has set in the church, as "thirdly 
 /eac/zer6'."|| 
 
 These seem to be all the standing orders established ia 
 
 * Thus i. 5. \ Acts vi. and vik 
 
 t Acts viii, 38, 11 1 Cor. xii. 2a 
 
100 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 the church f which therefore St. Paul, we see, distinguishes 
 in a particular manner, by mentioning them in their regular 
 order — " first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teach- 
 ers :" Which three gradations of office, thus distinguishing 
 the Christian, as they had before distinguished the Jewish 
 dispensation, were carefoUy and constantly preserved in the 
 primitive church, and spread, with the spreading of the 
 gospel, to the very ends of the earth. In every kingdom 
 and corner of the converted world, we find the bishops, as 
 the successors of the apostles in all their ordinary powers^ 
 presiding over their several portions of the flock of Christ; 
 administering the sacred rite of confirmation, as the seal or 
 sanction of admission into that flock ; ordaining presbyters, 
 as the pastors of its several congregations, and deacons for 
 the particular services allotted to their order ; and exerci- 
 sing their Episcopal authority, in governing and inspect- 
 ing, each his own particular diocese, as well as in promot- 
 ing and preserving the peace, unity and order of the whole 
 body of Christians. According to this plan of church 
 government, so exactly similar to that which was esta- 
 blished on a smaller scale, under the Levitical priesthood, 
 we find St. Paul, in that solemn charge which he gave to 
 Timothy, when appointed bishop of the church in Ephe- 
 sus, putting him in mind, among many other things, that 
 *' he should lay hands suddenly on no man ; that he shcaild 
 receive no accusation against ^ presbyter^ but before two or 
 three witnesses ; and that the deacons in his church should 
 be men of sober and orderly conversation." Here we have 
 a plain intimation of what was then, and afterwards to be, 
 the form of ecclesiastical administration. We see the offi- 
 cers of the church distinguished by their respective sta- 
 tions ; the bishops as governor and inspector of a particular 
 portion of it, answering to the high-priest under the law ; 
 and the presbyters and deacons^ subordinate ministers in 
 it, like the priests and Levites: And where we find these 
 orders of ministers duly appointed, the word of God 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 101 
 
 preached, and his sacraments regularly administered, there 
 we find the church of Christ, with its form, its authority, 
 and every thing that is essential to its nature and constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 " The wisdom of God," says an admirable writer on this 
 Subject, " is here very evident, in appointing the orders 
 of the Christian ministry after the pattern of the Jewish 
 church, which was of his own appointment so long before. 
 That there might be no uncertainty in a case of such conse- 
 quence to the souls of men, there was no novelty, but a 
 continuation of the like administration with that which had 
 all along been known and acknowledged in the church. 
 Aaron was an high-priest^ with a ministry peculiar to him- 
 self ; under him there was an order of priests^ twenty-four 
 in number, who served by course in the daily sacrifices and 
 devotions of the tabernacle and temple ; and these were as^ 
 fiisted by the whole tribe of the Levites, As the law had 
 its passover, its baptisms, its incense, its sacrifices, its con- 
 secrations, its benedictions, all to be realized under the 
 sacraments and offerings of the gospel, so its ministry was 
 but a pattern of the ministiy which is now among us ; and 
 %ve cannot mistake the one, if we have an eye to the 
 other; such is the goodness of God in directing us, through 
 all the confusions of the latter days, by a rule of such great 
 antiquity, to the way of truth, and keeping us in it."^ 
 
 * See Mr. Jones' Essay on the Church, a tract most warmly recom- 
 mended by two very competent judges of its merit, the late Dr. Home, 
 bishop of Norwich, and Dr. Horsley, now bishop of St. Asaph, who, 
 in the charge which he delivered at his second general visitation of the 
 diocese of Rochester, in the year 1800, thus addresses his clergy—" When, 
 by assiduity in your public and private ministry, by the purity of your 
 lives, and the soundness of your doctrine, you have gained the good will 
 and esteem of your parishioners, they will be ready to give you their 
 attention upon a subject, upon which the people of this country, in gene- 
 ral, much want good teaching : I mean the nature of the church, the 
 necessity of church communion, and the danger of schism. Upon these 
 points I know nothing so well calculated for general edification, as a tract, 
 
1G@ General Defence of Episcopacif. 
 
 God has many ways of directing us to what is right, but 
 none more instructive, than the beautiful order and striking 
 uniformity to be observed through all his dispensations of 
 grace and mercy, and particularly in those which are con- 
 nected with the care and government of his church. There 
 it is that men are to look for the " old paths," the good and 
 approved way of God's appointment, that they may walk 
 therein, and find rest to their souls. But this can never be 
 the case, if they take delight in following the endless inno- 
 vations of latter times, and instead of seeking rest in God's 
 way, and according to his direction, are content ta wander 
 about in ways of their own devising, and will never allow 
 their souls to rest on the basis of true religion. New 
 schemes of faith, and false systems of duty are daily re- 
 commended to men's deluded fancies ; and notwithstanding 
 all that has been said (and much has been written with 
 great clearness of reasoning) to show, that the constitution 
 of God's church must be ever considered as the instituted 
 means of preserving and conveying the precious doctrines 
 of salvation, from the beginning to the end of time, it is 
 still pretended, that the scriptures of truth give us no infor- 
 mation on this interesting subject, and prescribe no parti- 
 cular form of ecclesiastical polity " as necessary, or even 
 more acceptable to God than another." 
 
 In the lectures on ecclesiastical history^ of which we have 
 
 cntituled, An Essay on the Church, by the late Rev. William Jones, 
 some time of Pluckley, in this county, but last of Nayland, in Suffolk, 
 It has lately been reprinted in a small size, and at a cheap rate, by the 
 Society for proinoting Christian Knowledge, of which the author had been 
 many years a most useful member. Of that faithful servant of God, I 
 can speak, both from personal knowledge, and from his writings. He 
 was a man of quick penetration, of extensive learning, and the soundest 
 piety. And he had, beyond any other man I ever knew, the talent of 
 writing upon the deepest subjects to the plainest understandings. He is 
 gone to his rest, and his works, we trust, follow him. His Catholic 
 
 Doctrine of the Trinity, and this Essay on the Church, cannot have toa 
 
 wide a circulation." 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, tOS 
 
 already taken some notice, it is affirmed, and " will be 
 owned," says the author, " by those who, on this subject, 
 are capable of examining with coolness, and pronouncing 
 with impartiality, that we have not that sort of informa- 
 tion in holy writ, from which we can with certainty form 
 a judgment, concerning the entire model of the apostolic 
 church. What we can learn thence on this subject, we 
 must collect from scattered hints given, as it were, inci- 
 dentally, when nothing seemed less the intention of the 
 writers, than to convey to us a particular account of the 
 plan of the society they had formed."^ Whether there be 
 any truth in this observation, or how much regard is due 
 to it, may be easily inferred from what has been, in the 
 foregoing pages, very briefly stated respecting the " infor- 
 mation," which may certainly be obtained from the writ- 
 ings of the New Testament, " by those who are capable 
 of examining with coolness." — And were there even less 
 to be found than is really contained in the sacred records, 
 on the subject of church government, the conclusion to be 
 drawn from this seeming silence on a matter of such im- 
 portance, would be very different from that which this 
 theological teacher has attempted to draw from it. If such 
 of the aposdes as were employed in writing the gospels 
 and epistles that go by their respective names, did not 
 think it necessar\'^ to mention in express and positive terms, 
 the plan of the society which they had formed on the mo- 
 del laid down by their blessed Master, it is to be remem- 
 bered, that the government of the church was then in the 
 hands of the apostolic college, and the form and manner in 
 which it was administered, being visible to all who had 
 any concern with it, there was no more occasion for telling 
 them what that form of government was, than there would 
 be now, in enforcing a proper behaviour on the subjects of 
 this united kingdom, to tell them, that they were governed 
 
 f Dr. Campbell's Lectures, lect. iv. 
 
104 General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 by a King, assisted in his legislative capacity by the Lords 
 and Commons in parliament assembled. 
 
 Of that which is daily exhibited in practice, there seems 
 to be no necessity for a minute description in theory ; and 
 ^s the practice of the apostles, under the immediate direc- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit, was perfectly sufficient to show 
 how the church was then governed, and in what way a 
 succession of governors was to be continued, as their Lord 
 had promised, " even unto the end of the world ;" this 
 was a matter, which, however important in itself, did not 
 require to be particularly insisted on, in the writings of the 
 New Testament, because it must have been easily known, 
 and well understood, by those persons for whose imme- 
 diate use these writings were originally intended. A gi-eat 
 number of these were either Jews by descent, or proselytes 
 to the Jewish religion before they embraced the faith of 
 Christ ; and to people of this description, the form and 
 order of the priesthood had long been as familiar as the 
 daily service performed in the temple j all which, they knew, 
 were to be considered as " types and shadows of the good 
 things' to come," under the dispensation of the gospel. 
 Viewing the religion of their fathers in this light, as nothing 
 else in fact but Christianity under a veil, these converted 
 Jews, or Jewish proselytes, would naturally infer, from 
 the little that was said on this subject, that the same orders 
 of priesthood w^ere to be retained under the gospel that 
 had been established under the law ; especially when they 
 saxv three orders actually employed in the work of the 
 miinistry, and heard of certain Christians " perishing in the 
 gainsaying of Corah;" a thing which to them must have 
 appeared impossible, if there was not to be still a superior 
 order of priesthood in the church, the " honour of which, 
 no man was to take to himself, but he that was called of 
 God, as was Aaron." Even the converts from heathenism 
 had been so long accustomed to higher and lower degrees, 
 among those who were appointed to direct its idolatrous 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy^ 105 
 
 services, that when they saw the worship and discipline of 
 the church conducted by the three orders of apostles^ pres' 
 byters^ and deacons^ they could not fail to believe, that this 
 plan of ecclesiastical polity was to be permanent under the 
 gospel, as a similar establishment had been under the law 
 while it remained in force, and that both were acceptable 
 to that God of order from whom they proceeded.^ 
 
 It is true. Dr. Campbell is at great pains to expose what 
 he thinks the absurdity of establishing any analog}^ between 
 the priesthood of the Old and that of the New Testament; 
 the former of which being intended to serve for a time» 
 he considers as " instrumental in ushering a more divine 
 and rational dispensation ;"f more divine than that, which 
 God himself had instituted-— 7?zore rational than that, by 
 which the reason of his own chosen people had been so 
 long directed ! On this point he labours, with uncommon 
 ardour, through a whole lecture, inveighing against the 
 distinction between clergy and laity^ and with parti- 
 cular severity against, what he is pleased to call, " the 
 priestly pride of some prelatical preachers i*^^ where the 
 force of the censure, no doubt, lies in the beautiful allite- 
 ration or jingle of the sentence. Were we disposed to re- 
 tort in something like his own st}4e, it would not, we pre- 
 sume, be difficult to show, that the pride of presbytery is 
 much more predofninant in these prelections, than could 
 have been expected from a professor, whose general cha- 
 racter was supposed to place him far above the use of any 
 such mean, unbecoming language, as that which we have 
 now quoted. We must take him, however, as he is repre* 
 aented to us in this posthumous publication, which, we 
 are assured, " was left fully written out by himself, and in 
 a proper state of preparation for the press ;" and of which 
 
 * See this point very properly handled in the Anti-yacobln Rcvifiv of 
 Dr. Campbell's Lectures — for June, 1801. 
 
 f See his Lectures, Itct. x. | Lecture x, 
 
 14 
 
t05 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 it is said, in an advertisement prefixed to the work, that 
 " such as are acquainted with the subject, will admire the 
 author's well-digested learning, and will readily perceive 
 the importance of an accurate historical deduction of the 
 progress of church power, and the establishment of a hi- 
 erarchy, and how clear and decisive it is, in all that ftiay 
 be termed the hinge of the controversy between high 
 church and others." 
 
 From this prefatory account of these boasted lectures^ 
 and from what we have heard reported of their extraor- 
 dinary merit, by those who are prepared to admire and 
 extol whatever has come from the pen of their author, it 
 may fairly be presumed, that they are considered as con- 
 taining the whole strength of the arguments against dio- 
 cesan Episcopacy, and that every thing which could be 
 said on the subject, has now been brought forward, " with 
 that perspicuity, candour and moderation," which are said 
 to distinguish the writings of Dr. Campbell. It may, there- 
 fore, be deemed not a little presumptuous in any one, who 
 has not arrived at the same height of literary fame, to at- 
 tempt a refutation of such strong and powerful reasoning 
 as might be expected from a writer whose reputation has 
 been long established " in the republic of letters*" The 
 only apology I have to offer for such seeming presumption, 
 shall be furnished by Dr. Campbell himself; who, in the 
 introduction to his ingenious Dissertation on Miracles, al- 
 luding to Mr* Humey as a " subtle and powerful adversary," 
 makes this modest acknowledgment, which I shall beg 
 leave to apply to my own caise : — " With such an adver- 
 sary," as Dr. Campbell, " I should on very unequal terms 
 enter the lists, had I not the advantage of being on the side 
 of truth. And an eminent advantage this doubtless is. It 
 requires but moderate abihties to speak in defence of a good 
 cause. A good cause demands but a distinct exposition, 
 and a fair hearing ; and we may say with great propriety^ 
 it will speak for itself." 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, \07 
 
 To strengthen this confidence in the goodness of the 
 cause, which now claims our support, I have the satisfaction 
 to observe, that nothing has been said against it, in these 
 modem, and by some so much admired lectures^ but what 
 had been often said before, by writers on the same side, and 
 as often answered by others of a different persuasion. Even 
 Dr. Campbell, with all his boasted penetration, and ^' won- 
 derful acuteness," has not been able to produce any one 
 objection to the apostolic, and therefore divine institution 
 of Episcopacy, which had not been started by others, who 
 preceded him in the same field of controversy.^ Some of 
 their arguments he has indeed clothed with a new dress, 
 and by that means has made them assume somewhat of a 
 different form and appearance ; but in substance and reality, 
 we shall find them the same as those to which we have been 
 always accustomed, with the exception perhaps of one pro- 
 minent and distinguishing feature, their being accompanied 
 with a peculiar boldness of assertion, and peremptory mode 
 of decision, which certainly give no addition to their in- 
 trinsic value, or to their effect in proving the truth of what 
 is thus asserted. 
 
 Such then being the nature of the work we have to ex- 
 amine, the materials of which have been furnished by other 
 hands, and only put together by this eminent artist, we 
 need only look back to the accounts of those, who have al- 
 ready inspected them, and see what opinion was given of 
 them at the time when they were first produced. Since 
 even this learned and strenuous opposer of Episcopacy has 
 
 * In proof of this, it might easily be shown, how much he has bor- 
 rowed, not only from Blondel, Salmasius, and other foreigners, but also 
 from writers in the English language, such as Cartroright, Clarhon, 
 Baxter, Lord King, author of an Enquiry into the Constitution, ij'c. of the 
 primitive Church ; and from his own countryman Mr. Anderson, of Dun- 
 barton against Rhind, to whom he seems to have been particularly in- 
 debted for some of his most violent invectives against the *' High-church 
 party," as may be seen in the dedication, preface, and many other parts 
 of ^r. Anderson's work. 
 
Idi General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 been able to say nothing that is new against it, there is no 
 reason to expect, that any thing new should be said in its 
 defence. As the mode of attack is still the same, the 
 means of repelling it must be the same likewise : And 
 since our acute and ingenious adversarj^ has not conde-* 
 scended to strike out any other way of assailing our eccle-, 
 siastical constitution, than what has been discovered by 
 those that went before him with the same hostile view, we 
 must be content to follow him in the beaten path, which so 
 many of his predecessors have trod, though perhaps not so 
 capable as he, of giving it all the turnings and windings 
 which are so curiously displayed in the lectures now before 
 us. 
 
 It is proper to begin the observations, which we have 
 proposed to make on these theological lectures^ by giving 
 the author's o^vn account of them. " I intend," says he, 
 in the beginning of his first lecture, " that the subject of 
 the present and some succeeding lectures, shall be the sa- 
 cred history, the first branch of the theoretic part of the 
 theological course which claims the attention of the student* 
 This is subdivided into two parts : the first comprehends 
 the events which preceded the Christian aera ; the second, 
 those which followed. The first, in a looser way of speak- 
 ing, is included under the title of Jewish history ; the se- 
 cond is what is commonly denominated church history, or 
 ecclesiastic history." It is this second part of his plan, 
 with which we are more immediately concerned, and which 
 he introduces, by telling us, towards the conclusion of his 
 second lecture : " Now indeed was formed a community 
 of the disciples of Jesus, which was called his church ; a 
 word that denotes no more than society or assembly, and is 
 sometimes used in the New Testament, with evident ana- 
 logy to the common use, to signify the whole community 
 of Christians considered as one body, of which Christ is 
 denominated the Head; and sometimes only a particular 
 congregation of Christians. In this general society, founded 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 109 
 
 in the unity of their faith, their hope, their love, cemented^ 
 as it were, by a communion or joint participation, as occa- 
 sion offered, in religious offices, in adoration, in baptism^ 
 and in the commemoration of the sufferings of their Lord, 
 preserved by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent 
 instructions, admonitions, reproofs when necessarv-^^ and 
 even by the exclusion of those who had violated such 
 powerful and solemn engagements j in all this, I say, there 
 was nothing that interfered with the temporal powers." 
 And we are ready to say the same, because Christ himself 
 assures us, that " his kingdom^'* which Dr. Campbell chooses 
 to call " the Christian commonwealth^ is not of this world," 
 and, therefore, " in no respect calculated to interfere with 
 the rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jea- 
 lousy to the secular powers." But when we are told, that 
 *' this general society is cemented by a communion or joint 
 participation in baptism^"* we are at a loss to know what 
 is meant by this expression, as connected with what fol- 
 lows ; since there is surely no command in scripture, en- 
 joining the disciples of Jesus to partake jointly^ as occasion 
 offers^ in baptism^ although they are expressly commanded 
 to partake jointly in what is here called, " the commemor 
 ration of the sufferings of their Lord." We are certain, 
 that baptism is the only means whereby members can be 
 admitted into this society ; but we have never learned, that 
 a set of unbaptized persons, even though united in the be- 
 lief of the gospel, have any authority to constitute them- 
 selves members of it, by baptizing one another, which 
 would seem to be the Lecturer's meaning, in the passage 
 which we are now considering. 
 
 We are also obliged to differ from him very widely, with 
 respect to what is called the Church; which word, if it 
 denotes, as he acknowledges, a society^ must also signify, 
 not a casual assembly^ or even a meeting of persons by 
 "joltmtary agreement among themselves ; but, as the deri- 
 vation of the original word implies, a select society, or 
 
101 General Defeme of Episcopacy] 
 
 number of people, called or selected, by some person or 
 persons having authority for that purpose : And as the 
 kingdom of Christ is declared to be " not of this world," 
 the subjects of that kingdom, or the members of his church, 
 must be considered as called out of or froin the world; 
 called by God from " the world that lieth in wickedness," 
 that " having delivered them from the power of darkness, 
 he may translate them into the kingdom of his dear Son."* 
 All this shows the nature and jurisdiction of the church of 
 Christ to be very different from that of " any private com- 
 pany, like a knot of artists or philosophers," to which Dn 
 Campbell is pleased to compare the society founded by the 
 Son of God for the salvation of mankind : a comparison 
 so unworthy of being brought forward on such an occasion, 
 and so unlikely to answer any good end, by the terms in 
 which it is stated, that we should not have thought it de- 
 serving the smallest notice, if it were not evidently intended 
 to introduce an inquiry into the causes of that woful cor- 
 ruption, which soon prevailed among Christians, and which, 
 by a long and fanciful chain of connection, is traced to the 
 primitive practice of referring their civil differences to the 
 arbitration of their ministers. 
 
 This practice is considered as a natural consequence of 
 St. Paul's " expostulation with the Corinthians on the 
 nature and dignity of their Christian vocation, to which it 
 would be much more suitable, patiently to suffer injuries, 
 than to endeavour to obtain redress," by going to law in the 
 heathen courts. But lest there should be any mistake on 
 this point, by confounding matters of civil controversy with 
 injuries of a more criminal nature, our Lecturer takes care 
 to inform us, that not only " such private offences, but also 
 those scandals which affected the whole Christian fraternity, 
 were," in the apostolic age, " judged by the churchy that is, 
 the congregationJ''' '■'• Accordingly," he says,t " the judg- 
 
 * Col. j. 13. f Lecture iii. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » 111 
 
 itient, which Paul, by the Spirit of God, had formed, con- 
 cerning the incestuous person, he enjoins the church, to 
 whom his epistle is directed, that is (to use his own words 
 for an explanation), them who at Corinth are sanctified in 
 Christ Jesus, called to be saints, to pronounce and execute. 
 And in his second epistle to the same church,* he says, in 
 reference to the same delinquent—" Sufficient to such a man 
 is the censure, which was inflicted by many;" virolu}-/ vXHovaf 
 —by the community — and (v, 10) " To whom ye forgive 
 any thing, addressing himself always to the congregation^ 
 I forgive also. We admit, with the learned Dodwell,']' 
 that in the censure inflicted on the incestuous person, the 
 Christians at Corinth were but the executors of the doom 
 awarded by the apostle. Nor does any one question the 
 apostolic authority in such matters over both the flock and 
 the pastors. But from the words last quoted, it is evident, 
 that he acknowledges^ at the same time, the ordinary power 
 in regard to discipline lodged in the congregation; and from 
 the confidence he had in the discretion and integrity of the 
 Corinthians, he promises his concurrence in what they shall 
 think proper to do. ' To whom ye forgive any thing, I 
 forgive also.' Now, though in after times the charge of 
 this matter also came to be devolved, first on the bishop 
 and presbyters, and afterwards solely on the bishop, yet 
 that the people as well as the presbyters, as far down, at 
 least, as to the middle of the third century, retained some 
 share in the decision of questions, wherein morals were im- 
 mediately concerned, is manifest from Cyprian! s letters still 
 extant. In his time, when congregations were become 
 very numerous, the inquiry and deliberation were holden 
 (perhaps then more commodiously) in the ecclesiastical col- 
 lege, called the presbytery^ consisting of the bishop, the 
 presbyters, and the deacons. When this was over, the 
 result of their inquiry and consultations was reported t«^> 
 
 * 2 Ccr. ii. 6. | De jure bicorum sacerdotali. c. iii. sec. in. 
 
112 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 the whole congregatmi belonging to that churchy who were 
 called together on purpose, in order to obtain their appro- 
 bation of what had been done, and their consent to the re- 
 solution that had been taken ; for without their conseiit^ no 
 judgment could regularly be put in execution." 
 
 Such is the surprising account given of this matter in 
 Dr. Campbell's Lectures i and such the light in which his 
 theological students were taught to view the original consti- 
 tution and discipline of the Christian cjiurch !— Had such 
 an account been given by one of our modem independents^ 
 who boast of their congregational churches, as the only 
 form of primitive institution ; or had such a lecture been 
 read in the society for propagating the gospel at home, we 
 should have considered it, however ill founded and erro- 
 neous, as perfectly natural, and consistent with the object 
 and end of these independent and missionary schemes.* 
 But how shall we discover or allow the merit of any such 
 consistency of character, where we see a man of acknow- 
 ledged abilities, and holding some of the most distin- 
 guished offices which the religious establishment of this 
 country has to boast of, yet supporting and recommending 
 a system of ecclesiastical order and discipline, almost as 
 different from that which is established in Scotland, as it is 
 opposite to every thing of the kind to be met with in the 
 primitive church ? Have not the friends of this establish- 
 ment too much reason to suspect that their learned Lecturer 
 would have been one of its warmest opponents, had not his 
 opposition been prevented by the liberal provision which 
 it held out to him, and the preferments ^vhich he so long 
 enjoyed ? 
 
 But in the preceding extract from his third lecture, no 
 
 * We have heard, that Greville JSwing, and the Haldenites, hold Dr. 
 Campbell's Lectures in high estimation. They have also been much ad- 
 mired and recommended by the Monthly and Critical Revi^^ers, who, in 
 general, are not considered aa very friendly either to primitive truth cz 
 order. 
 
general Defence of Episcopatyi j 13 
 
 singularity of opinion strikes us more forcibly than his 
 strange insinuation, that Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, was 
 uo more but the pastor of a single congregation ; when the 
 keenest adversaries of the Episcopal cause have been oblig- 
 ed to acknowledge that he was undoubtedly the fixed and 
 permanent moderator of a presbytery^ which contained at 
 kast eight congregations : And though Dr. Campbell has 
 jasserted it, as a thing " manifest from Cyprian's Letters," 
 that in his time, " the people^ as well as the presbyters, re* 
 tdned some share in the decision of questions, wherein 
 morals were immediately concerned," yet he has not fa- 
 voured us with the quotation of a single passage to prove 
 the truth of his assertion ; and we are certain, that many 
 passages could be produced to evince the direct contrary^ 
 and which would completely overthrow this pretended 
 jurisdiction of the people. 
 
 Such, indeed, was the remarkable humility and conde- 
 scension of this primitive martyr, the venerable bishop of 
 Carthage, that from the time of his entering on his Epis- 
 copal office, as he says in one of his letters — " he had resolv- 
 ed to do nothing in the public affairs of the church, with- 
 out the advice of his presbyters and deacons, and the con- 
 sent or approbation of the people at large."^ But, that tl'^ 
 was the effect of his own free and voluntary condescer^^"» 
 and what he was not bound to adhere to, if he s?^ gooa 
 reason for acting otherwise, is evident from va?^J "^stan- 
 ces of his future conduct, and particularly fro'^ ^"^ letters 
 written by him, on the subject of reconciling those who, 
 by sacrificing to idols, during the Deciar persecution, had 
 lapsed or fallen from the communion c^'the church. In one 
 of these letters, he threatens his vresbyters and deacons 
 with a heavy sentence, if they should dare to transgress die 
 rule, or order, which he had sent them, respecting the treat- 
 
 • Quando priniordio Episcopatus mei statuerim, nihil sine consilio ves- 
 tro, et sine consensu plebis, mea privatim sententia gerere. Ep. xiv. p. o3. 
 
 15 
 
114 Getter al Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 ment of these unhappy persons in his absence.* Let any 
 person read the letters, and try if it be possible to reconcile 
 thera to the character of one, who was nothing more than 
 the pastor of a single congregation, or to discover any 
 thing in them that looks like an acknowledgment on the 
 writer's part, of that democratic influence in the adminis- 
 tration of church discipline, which Dr. Campbell seems so 
 eager to support. 
 
 But we need not wonder at his making Cyprian no more 
 than the pastor of an independent congregation, who could 
 do nothing " without their consent," when we find him 
 endeavouring to press St. Paul himself into the same ser- 
 vice. For though he admits, as he could not well do other- 
 wise, that the Christians at Corinth were but the executors 
 of the doom " awarded by the apostle ;" yet he thinks it 
 evident, that St. Paul " acknowledged the ordinary power 
 in regard to discipline lodged in the congregation," because^ 
 he told them-—' To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive 
 also ;' thus " promising his concurrence in what they should 
 judge proper to do ;" which surely implies, that without his 
 concurrence in this affair, they could do nothing ; and that 
 ^11 their power of judging arose from the authority, which, 
 ^ this instance, and for particular reasons, he was pleased 
 *° uve them. And so he tells them — " To this end also 
 did 1 .rj-ite, that I might know the proof of you, whether 
 ye be oot^j^^f [^ ^11 things."t Indeed, the language which 
 
 interea, sj^js immoderatus et prseceps, sive de nostrh presbyterii; 
 \ei (liaconis, sive dt pgi-gg^jj^jg^ ausus fuerit, ante sententiain 7iostra7n, 
 communicare cum laps., a cmmnunicatione nostra resecetur." See this 
 subject discussed in a mo:, satisfactory manner, by Bishop Sage, In his 
 Principles of the Cyprianlc A^^ London, 1695. 
 
 t 2 Cor. ii. 9. It is well observed by the Anti-Jacobin Reviewer of 
 this article, that " to whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also," is cer- 
 tamly the language of a superior to inferiors, who have no power either 
 to punish, or to forgive, but what they derive from him : It is, as if the 
 king had said to the viceroy of Ireland, during the late rebellion—" I en- 
 trust you with the amplest powers for the public good: such of the rebels 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 lo 
 
 the apostle uses, through the whole of his discussion o 
 this awful subject, plainly shows, that the power of excom- 
 municating the obstinately guilty, or re-admitting the peni- 
 tent, rested solely in himself. For " I told you before," 
 says he, " and foretel you as if I were present the second 
 time, and being absent, now I write to them, which here- 
 tofore have sinned, and to all other, that if I come again, I 
 will not spare.'''' And again — " I write these things, being 
 absent, lest being present, I should use sharpiiess^ accord- 
 ing to the power which the Lord hath given me to edif cation^ 
 and not to destruction.^''^ Though Dr. Campbell could not 
 but perceive, that these expressions gave little countenance 
 to his congregational^ or independent scheme, yet by trans- 
 lating the words — V fTnliixio. uvlm n Wo 1«v xXnowv — " the cen- 
 sure which was inflicted by the community^'' instead of — 
 '' this punishment which was inflicted of many," he would 
 seem to insinuate, that the incestuous person was excom- 
 municated by a vote of the congregation ; when the fact was, 
 that, without referring the matter at all to them, St. Paul 
 himself had passed the sentence, as he tells us in these 
 words — " I verily as absent in body, but present in spirit, 
 have judged already, as though I were present, concerning 
 him, that hath so done this deed ; in the name of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, 
 with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such 
 a one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that the 
 spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."t The 
 apostle then proceeds to show, what should be the effect of 
 this sentence, by enjoining those to whom he wrote, to 
 '' put away from among them the excommunicated person, 
 not to keep company with him, and with such an one, no 
 not to eat j" which abhorrence of his company and conver- 
 
 as you shall forgive, I will forgive also." But will any man say, that in 
 ordinary cases, the viceroy's power, in consequence of such a speech,, 
 ■ would have been considered as the same with the sovereign's? 
 * 2 Cor. xiii. 2, 10. t 1 Cor. v. 3, 4. 5, 
 
116 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 sation, would of course bring him into public disgrace^ and 
 that disgrace was the punishment which the Christian peo- 
 ple had to inflict, in consequence of their apostle's sen- 
 tence. 
 
 But the strain of declamation, in which Dr. Campbell 
 indulges on this subject, seems all intended to afford hirti 
 an opportunity, not only of giving a favourable view of the 
 discipline of his own church ; which, unless with regard to 
 '' churches and manses, and some other things of little mo- 
 ment," he considers as perhaps the most unexceptionable 
 now to be met with ; but also of representing in a very dif- 
 ferent light, " the polity and discipline" of the church of 
 England, which, he seems to think, have been. " devised^ 
 for the express purpose of rendering the clerical character 
 odious, and the discipline contemptible." As a proof of this, 
 he tells his audience, that " ecclesiastical censures, in Eng- 
 land, have now no regard, agreeably to their original 
 destination, to purity and manners ;" supposing, no doubt, 
 that his presbyterian students would never look into the 
 Book of Common Prayer of the Chureh of England^ wh^re, 
 in the rubric prefixed to the communion service, and which 
 Was made a part of, and confirmed by, an act of parlia- 
 ment, the minister is expressly ordered to admit, or not to 
 admit to the Lord's table, according to what he knows of 
 the life and conversation of the person applying for admis- 
 sion ; and in case of " repelling any," he is " obliged to give 
 an account of the same to his ordinary, who shall proceed 
 against the offending person according to the canon." 
 How then can it be said, that such " ecclesiastical censures 
 have no regard to purity and manners V Yes — says Dr. 
 Campbell — -" the participation of one of the sacraments 
 having been with them, by a very short-sighted policy, 
 perv^erted into a test for civil offices, a minister may be 
 compelled by the magistrate, to admit a man who is well 
 known to be a most improper person, an atheist, bias- 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy; \\t 
 
 phemer, or profligate."^ The history of this test^ and the 
 causes which gave rise to it, and still operate in the opinion 
 of the legislature, as a sufficient ground for its continuance, 
 must have been well known to our learned professor ; who 
 must also have known, had he but taken the trouble to in-- 
 quire, that no such compulsion as that which he supposes^ 
 35 ever experienced by any minister of the church of Eng* 
 land ;t 3ttd therefore the coarse expression might have 
 been spared, which alludes to the test^ as " a coarse im^ 
 plement of human authorit}^, to compel a thing of so deli* 
 cate a nature as true religion." The coarseness complained 
 of lies not in the implement, but in the disposition of those 
 who are tempted to abuse, or apply it to a wrong purpose • 
 and such temptations will always occur, \vhere the profess 
 sion of religion is accompanied with those worldly advant- 
 ages, which, in some shape or other, are often connected 
 with it, even when embraced in its greatest purity. 
 
 Having observed our Lecturer taking so much pains td 
 convince his pupils, that the discipline of his own thurch^ 
 though infinitely preferable to that of the church of Eng* 
 land, was yet far short of the pure apostolic model, by 
 which the congregational or independent churches are dis*- 
 tinguishedj we might have supposed^ that any farther 
 
 • Lecture Ui. 
 
 t See this matter very fully discussed by the learned Bishop Sherlock, 
 in his * Arguments against the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts/ 
 *' The test act," says that able prelate, " forces no clergyman to give the 
 sacrament to atheists and debauchees, or any other offenders, if they be 
 openly and notoriously such : and if they are such only in secret, they 
 are out of the question ; for no clergyman's conscience can be burdened 
 for admitting an unknown offender to the sacrament. If a clergyman 
 proceed virith discretion and charity, and according to the rules prescribed 
 him by authority, he has as little to fear from a man with a place, as from 
 a man without one; and if he be unjustly and vexatiously sued for doing 
 his duty, the law will give him costs." — Such was the opinion of an 
 English prelate, who, in regard to this matter, must surely have known 
 what was " the law of the land," and the power of the magistrate, as 
 well as any Scotch professor. 
 
118 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 inquiry into the original form of church government, was 
 either quite unnecessary, or at least a matter of so little 
 moment as not to require any long or serious discussion. — 
 For if it be true, that all ecclesiastical authority is derived 
 from the people, and that the very distinction between 
 clergy and laity, has its only foundation in the will and 
 choice of the Christian community, appointing what is 
 proper for the preservation of order and decency in their 
 religious assemblies ; in that case, the question, whether 
 the persons set apart in the apostolic age for that pur- 
 pose, were of one, or two, or three orders ; or what were 
 the powers with which they were supposed to be invested, 
 is so frivolous in itself, and of so little weight in the scale 
 of our duty as Christians, as hardly to require or merit 
 the slightest examination. Yet trifling as it must have 
 appeared in the eyes of Dr. Campbell, and of such of his 
 students as viewed it in the same light with him, he obliged 
 them to attend to it, through seven of his lectures ; " the 
 subject of which," he told them, " was the internal polity 
 of the church, and the form she has insensibly assumed ; 
 with the rules of subordination which have obtained, and 
 in many places do still obtain in the different orders." 
 
 In following him through the course of this inquiry, we 
 are presented with a regular chain of " steps, advancing 
 from presbytery to parochial Episcopacy, thence to prelacy 
 or diocesan Episcopacy, from that to metropolitical prir 
 macy, thence again to patriarchal superintendency," and 
 landing at last in the papal supremacy. The first three of 
 these steps are all with which, properly speaking, we are 
 concerned, in defending our own ecclesiastical polity ; and 
 through these we shall endeavour to trace his progress, 
 with as much order as his frequent excursions will permit. 
 Before we are regularly introduced to the first step of his 
 course, we find several things premised^ and laid down for 
 our direction, which, as I observed already, would seem 
 to render quite unnecessary all that follows, respecting the 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 119 
 
 different forms of ecclesiastical administration. For in the 
 most unqualified language, we are plainly told, that " the 
 terms of the gospel covenant are no where, in the sa- 
 cred pages, connected with, or made to depend on, either 
 the minister, or the form of the ministry ;"* although he 
 had just before quoted our Lord's own declaration of the 
 terms of the gospel covenant in these words — " He that 
 believeth, and is baptized^ shall be saved ;" which surely 
 implies his being baptized after the form and manner 
 pointed out in the commission which Christ gave his 
 aposdes, at the very time when he made this declaration. 
 If baptism then must be considered as one of the terms, 
 or conditions of salvation, how can it be said to have no 
 dependence on the minister, or no connection with the 
 form of his ministry ? Are we to understand our Lec- 
 turer's words, as intended to teach his pupils, that our 
 Lord's apostles acquired no particular authority from the 
 commission which he gave them, for making all nations 
 his disciples, by baptizing them; and that the form of bap- 
 tism laid down in that commission, was not more valid, 
 or more necessary to be observed, than any other form, 
 which might be adopted for the same purpose ? Then, to 
 be sure, the original form of government in the church is 
 a matter of no consequence ; and it is perfectly ridiculous 
 to give ourselves any trouble in inquiring, or reasoning 
 about it. Every one that pleases, may take on himself the 
 office of a minister; and every form of ministry is equally 
 consistent with the terms, and productive of the benefits, 
 of the gospel covenant. 
 
 The same inference must undoubtedly be drawn from 
 the account which is afterwards given of the apostolic 
 commission, where we are told by this learned explainer of 
 the " sacred pages," that — " the first order given to the 
 ^^'leven to make converts^ to baptize^ and to teach^ can*ies 
 
 * Lectwre iv. 
 
1^0 General Defence qf Episcopacy^ 
 
 in it nothing from which we can discover, that it was a 
 commission entrusted to them exclusively as aposdes or 
 ministers, and not given them also as Christians ; and that 
 the apostles were particularized, because best qualified^ 
 froni their long attendance on Christ's ministr}'^, for pro- 
 moting his religion in the world ; but not with a view to 
 exclude any Christians, who were capable, from co-operat- 
 ing with them in the same good cause."* We had just 
 before been told of a " similitude taken from temporal 
 things," for the better illustration of this dark and difficult 
 subject; and by the help of a little freedom of the same 
 kind, in which, we hope, there is no harm, we now dis- 
 cover, that Dr. Campbell's so long possessing the theolo'- 
 gical chair in Marischal College, and instructing his pupils 
 in the knowledge of sound divinity, was not in consequence 
 of his having received any commission or authority for that 
 purpose, but merely because he was " best qualified" for 
 discharging the duties of the office, and none else were 
 '^ capable of co-operating with him in the same good 
 cause."t 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 
 t This point is well illustrated by another " similitude," which the 
 Anti-Jacobin Reviewer of Dr. Campbell's work thus happily makes use. 
 of, • It is not probable, that his Majesty's commission to the president 
 of the supreme court of law in Scotland, expressly prohibits all other law- 
 yers from executing that office, to which it appoints him; and it is cer- 
 tainly not improbable, that there are many lawyers at the Scotch bar 
 perfectly well qualified to preside over any court of law in thai part of 
 the united kingdom. Yet what would Dr. Campbell have thought of 
 the man, who, having formed opinions of the constitution of courts of 
 Jaw, similar to those which he had himself formed of the constitution of 
 the Christian church, should have said—" There is nothing in the com- 
 mission given to the president of the court of session, from which we can 
 discover that it is a commission entrusted to him exclusively, as a 
 Judge, and not given to him also as a lawyer ; and that he is particu- 
 larized in it, only because he is best qualified for discharging the duties 
 of the office, but not with a view to exclude any lawyer who is capable, 
 from occasionally taking possession of his chair, and presiding with 
 autlioritv over the court ?" 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 121 
 
 But that the opinion which led to this similitude was 
 the " construction put upon the apostolic charge, in the 
 days of the apostles," we are told, " appears not impro- 
 bable, from the subsequent part of the scripture history ; 
 for Philip the deacon baptized the Ethiopian eunuch; Peter 
 trusted the charge of baptizing Cornelius and his family^ 
 to the Christian brethren who attended him ; Ananias, a 
 disciple, was employed to baptize Paul ; and Paul says of 
 himself, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach 
 the gospel." 
 
 With respect to the first of these instances, it is said, 
 that " Philip, though no apostle, and probably at that time 
 no more than a deacon, (that is, a trustee for the poor in 
 matters purely secular) did all to the Ethiopian eunuch, 
 which the apostles had in charge with regard to all nations. 
 He converted, baptized, and taught him." And so he well 
 inight, when the " angel of the Lord" had sent him on the 
 journey, which led to this conversion, and the " spirit" 
 directed him how to proceed in it. Our Lecturer takes no 
 notice of this circumstance, or of the account which is 
 given of the appointment of the seven deacons ; who, 
 though men " full of the Holy Ghost," were yet solemnly 
 «rdained by prayer, and the laying on of the apostles' 
 hands ; which evidently shows, that this same deacon, or 
 *' trustee for the poor," as he is here called for the sake 
 of lessening his sacred character, was something more, 
 evai in office, than those, who are thought to supply the 
 place of deacons under the Scotch establishment ; and being 
 also directed by an immediate vision, or inspiration from 
 heaven, was sufficiendy warranted in all that he did for the 
 benefit of his Ethiopian convert. 
 
 A second instance produced from scripture in support of 
 our author's opinion, respecting the nature of the apostolic 
 commission, is the relation of what happened, "when 
 Peter was sent to open the door of faith to the Gentiles, by 
 the conversion of Cornelius and his family." To prepare 
 
 16 
 
122 General Defence of Episcopacy, ^ 
 
 the way for that merciful event, an angel of God was 3€nt 
 to the devout centurion, not to instruct him directly in the 
 faith of Christ, but to inform him of one, who " should 
 tell him what he ought to do." This necessary knowledge 
 of his duty was to be obtained, not from the first well-in- 
 formed Christian, who could be found to impart it^ but 
 from an apostle of Christy who was to be brought from a 
 considerable distance for that purpose : which clearly 
 shows, that the commission, in virtue of which the apos- 
 tles acted, was so " exclusively entrusted to them as apos- 
 tles," that not even an angel from heaven was allowed to 
 intermeddle with any thing that belonged to it. An apos- 
 tle, therefore, having been sent for ; having come to Corne- 
 lius, and having found, that " on all those in his house, 
 who heard the word, the gift of the Holy Ghost had been 
 poured out" in a most wonderful and conspicuous manner, 
 he naturally puts this question to " the six brethren who 
 accompanied him," — '-'■ Can any man forbid water, that 
 these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy 
 Ghost as well as we ?" And then we read, that " he com- 
 manded them to be baptized in the name of the Lordj"^ 
 that is, he gave authority to those that were with him to 
 administer the sacrament of baptism ; and surely no person 
 can doubt his right to delegate such authority, in conse- 
 quence of the commission which he himself had received 
 from Christ for that very purpose. When all these cir- 
 cumstances are duly considered, — the previous falling of 
 the Holy Ghost upon these first fruits of the Gentiles,- — 
 the presence of an apostle, — the attendance of certain ' 
 brethren; an apostolic command empowering these brethren 
 to baptize the converted family; it is hardly possible to con- 
 ceive a train of facts more directly contrary to the popular 
 claim set up by Dr. Campbell, than what appears in the 
 history of the conversion of Cornehus, and the means by 
 
 ♦ Acts X. 47, 48. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 1 23 
 
 which he and his family were received into the church of 
 Christ. 
 
 What is said of " Ananias, a disciple, being employed 
 to baptize Paul," is as litde to the purpose for which it is 
 brought forward, since we know not of what rank in the 
 church this disciple was, and the apostles themselves are 
 frequently called disciples ; neither is it positively said, that 
 Ananias baptized Paul, any more than that Peter baptized 
 Cornelius. And if Ananias' saying to Paul, " Arise and 
 be baptized," proves that in consequence of this command 
 Paul received baptism from his hands, it may with equal 
 reason be inferred, that Peter's commanding Cornelius to 
 be baptized, proves the office to have been performed by 
 the apostle. In both cases, however, there was a direct 
 communication from heaven ; and when Ananias acted un- 
 der divine influence, and according to what " the Lord said 
 to him in a vision," we cannot doubt of his having sufficient 
 authority for what he did, whether he was ordained or not 
 by the hands of men ; and from all that the sacred historian 
 tells us of him, no man can say, that he was not so ordained. 
 Even from our Lecturer's own words — " Ananias, a dis- 
 ciple, was employed to baptize Paul," it may be justly con- 
 cluded, that the disciple was duly authorized by his blaster 
 and Employer: And a similar inference may be drawn 
 from what Dr. Campbell acknowledges of St. Paul's " say- 
 ing himself of his own mission, that Christ se7it him not 
 tc baptize, but to preach the gospel ;" which clearly shows, 
 that, since we are certain he did baptize, as well as preachy 
 it was the apostle's own opinion, that he could not regu- 
 larly do either the one or the other without being sent. 
 
 In all these instances,^ produced from the scripture 
 
 * The same instances, and the same arguments founded upon them, 
 were produced some years ago, for a similar purpose, by another mi- 
 nister of the Scotch establishment, in a work, entitled — Ari Inquiry into the 
 Powers of Ecclesiastics, isfc. and which was taken due notice of at the 
 vinae of its publication. 
 
J 24 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 history, we have now seen what ground there is for the 
 construction which our author wishes to show was put 
 tipon the apostoHc charge, in the days of the apostles, and 
 particularly what was then the opinion of Christians, with 
 respect to the power of baptizing^ '* which," he says, 
 *' compared with preaching, though a part, was but an in- 
 ferior and subordinate part of an apostle's charge." Yet 
 was it particularly specified in the apostolic commission, 
 and pointed out as the instituted means, whereby the con- 
 verted nations were to be brought to Christ, and entered 
 into his school, for the purpose of being " taught to ob- 
 serve ail things whatsoever he had commanded." — How 
 then can it be thought, that the administration of baptism 
 was not an essential part of the commission given to the 
 apostles, and given to them exclusively, not as Christians, 
 but as apostles, persons " sent by Christ, even as the Father 
 had sent him," with power to provide for the regular trans- 
 inis&ion of the same authority to ''^preach and baptizcy even 
 Unto the end of the world ?" 
 
 Indeed, our Lecturer seems to have been aware of his 
 having gone too far, in giving such a degrading account of 
 baptism, and in assigning such unlimited power to the 
 *•' community at large," for the administration of it ; and, 
 therefore, he adds a sort of caution against any improper 
 inference that might be drawn from what he had said on 
 the subject, by telling us, that " nothing here advanced can 
 justly be understood to combat the propriety of limiting, 
 for the sake of discipline, the power of baptizing to fewer 
 hands, than that of preaching, when once a fixed ministry 
 5 s settled in a church, and regulations are adopted for its 
 government." — But if it be true, as he had said before, 
 that " the first order given to the eleven to baptize^ was 
 with no view of excluding any Christians, who were capable, 
 from co-operating with them ;" who are they that could 
 afterwards pretend to alter that order, or make an exclusion^ 
 where none was intended ? If Christ himself allowed, and 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 125 
 
 gave his apostles authority to permit, the promiscuous 
 liberty of baptizing to 2X1 Christians, wIk) were capable of 
 using it; who but these apostles, as acting for Christ, could 
 with any " propriety limit" the general power, with which 
 he had thus indulged all his capable disciples? If Dr. 
 Campbell's presbytery^ as succeeding to the apostles, or 
 rather coming after them, (for stricdy speaking, he allows 
 tliem no successors) did for the sake of discipline, consider 
 such a limitation proper, and make it accordingly ; was not 
 this as flagrant an encroachment upon the " rights" of the 
 people made over to them by Christ, as what he so bitterly 
 complains of in the diocesan bishops, when they began to 
 limit the powers, and encroach upon the rights of their 
 brethren presbyters? It might also be asked, who they 
 Were, that could take upon them to " settle a fixed ministry 
 in a church," different from that which the apostles had 
 settled ; or were entitled to appoint " regulations to be 
 adopted for its government," if all " capable Christians" 
 had an equal right to share in that government^ and none 
 Were set apart for judging of their brethren's capacities ? 
 
 These are questions which our Professor well knew it 
 Would be difficult to answer ; and conscious, as it were, of 
 the necessity of sheltering, under something like primitive 
 authority, what he had advanced, respecting the right of 
 private Christians to exercise those offices, which have long 
 been considered as peculiar to a public ministry, he tells us 
 *— <*" The doctrine I have been illustrating, so far from 
 being, as some Romanists ignorantly pretend, one of the 
 many novelties sprimg from the protestant schism, was 
 openly maintained at Rome without censure, about the 
 middle of the fourth century, by Hilary, a deacon of that 
 church, a man of erudition and discernment ; whose opinion, 
 it seems, as here represented, was, that, " at first, for the 
 Increase of converts, it was aUowed to all without distinc- 
 
 * Lectiue iv. 
 
126 General Defence of Episcopacy <> 
 
 tion, to preacli, to baptize, and to explain the scriptures in 
 the church."* Such is the doctrine which this author is 
 made to teach by giving a few extracts from his exposition 
 of the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Ephesians ; in 
 which, finding a number of church officers mentioned by 
 St. Paul, as having been given by Christ for the work of 
 the ministry, he wished to make it appear, that even in his 
 time, they were all retained, though under different names: 
 and as the practice then was to administer baptism only on 
 certain days, and at stated seasons, we can easily discover 
 what this " man of erudition and discernment" means, 
 when he says — that " at first — all taught, and all baptized, 
 whenever occasion called, without any distinction of days 
 
 * The words quoted by Dr. Campbell from the commentary of Hilary, 
 who is usually called the Pseudo-Ambrose, and which had been quoted by 
 Mr. Anderson, of Dunbarton, for the same purpose, are these — " Post- 
 quam omnibus locis, ecclesiae sunt constitutae, et officia ordinata, aliter 
 composita res est quam coeperat ; primum enim omnes docebant, et omnes 
 baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus fuisset occasio." A 
 little after, " Neque Petrus diaconos habuit, quando Cornelium, cum omni 
 domo ejus baptizavit; nee ipse, sed jussit fratribus qui cum illo ierant ad 
 Cornelium ab Joppe." Again ; " Ut ergo cresceret plebs, et multiplicaretur,. 
 omnibus inter initia concessum est, et evangelizare, et baptizare, et scrip- 
 turas in ecclesia explanare." Such, we are told, " were the sentiments 
 of a respectable member of the Roman presbytery in those days ;" but 
 we are not told, what was more certain, that this same Hilary aittached 
 himself to one of the most violent men of those days, Lucifer of Cagliari, 
 and was so far from giving any countenance to the opinion, that all 
 Christians had a right to administer the sacraments, that he zealously 
 contended for the necessity of re-baptizing heretics, and all those whose 
 baptism had been in any respect irregular ; on which account, his con- 
 temporary Jerome sarcastically called him — the Deucalion of the ivorld. 
 All this, Dr. Campbell might have mentioned to his pupils, and should 
 also have added, what immediately follows his last quotation, in these 
 words—" Ubi autem omnia loca circumplexa est ecclesia, conventicula 
 constituta sunt, et rectores, et coetera officia in ecclesia ordinata sunt, ut 
 iiullus de clero auderet, qui ordinatus 7ion esset, prsesumere officium quod 
 sciret non sibi creditum vel concessum ; et coepit alio ordine et provi- 
 dentia gubernari ecclesia, quia si omnes eadem possent, irrationabile esset, 
 et vulgaris res et vilissima videretur." 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 127 
 
 ov seiisons." For by this observation, as connected with 
 what goes before, and follows it, we are not to understand, 
 that the sacrament of baptism was, at the beginning, admi- 
 nistered by all Christians indiscriminately, but only that the 
 writer of this account thought it was then administered, as 
 occasion required, by all those, to whom he had been allud- 
 ing, the apostles^ prophets^ evangelists^ paators and teachers^ 
 who St. Paul had said, '' were given by the Lord, for the 
 perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for 
 the edifying of the body of Christ." Whether Hilary was 
 right or wrong, in supposing that those who were thus 
 given for the service of the church, were called to it by 
 the immediate impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not or- 
 dained by men, we need not stop to inquire, since, if the 
 case really was so, there could be no doubt of their having 
 sufficient authority for what they did, and no danger that 
 what was done by them would not be deemed regular and 
 valid by those who knew them to be acting under such 
 divine influence. 
 
 Not satisfied, however, with resting the truth of his 
 opinion on the authority of his favourite Hilar}', which we 
 see affords it at best but a very weak and questionable sup- 
 port, our Lecturer appeals next to the testimony of a wri- 
 ter a littlemore ancient, and whom he treats in the same 
 way as he had treated his " respectable member of the 
 Roman presbytery," by detaching a sentence or two, with- 
 out giving the whole of the argument to which they refer. 
 This , writer is TertuUian, who, in his Exhortation to 
 Chastity^ inveighing against second marriages, and having 
 proved, as he thought, that they were prohibited to the 
 clergy, makes use of this argument for extending the pro- 
 hibition to the laity, that the distinction which prevailed in 
 his day between the priesthood and the people, must have 
 been only of the church's making ; for, says he, " where 
 there is no meeting of the ecclesiastical order, thou offerest 
 and bapdzest, and art single a priest to thyself. But three 
 
128 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 persons, though laymen,, make a church,"^ as Dr. Camp- 
 bell renders this last sentence, and then adds — " It matters 
 nothing to the present question, that his doctrine of the 
 unla\vfulness of second marriages is unreasonable; it mat- 
 ters nothing that his argument is inconclusive ; we are con- 
 cerned only with the fact, to which he refers as notorious;" 
 —whereas the truth is, that instead of being 2ifact at all, it 
 is merely an inference drawn from very absurd premises, to 
 serve a particular purpose, and by the same author, who in 
 his Book on Baptism^ in answer to the question— Who may 
 baptize ? says — " The chief priest, who is the bishop, has 
 the right of giving baptism, and after him the presbyters 
 and deacons, but not without the bishop's authority."t In 
 these words, it is plainly laid down, we might say, as " a 
 notorious fact," not only, that there were these three orders 
 in the church, of which the bishop was the chief, but also 
 that even deacons or presbyters could not baptize, or of con- 
 sequence perform any other ministerial acts, but by autho- 
 rity derived from him. The same author, in his Prescrip- 
 tions against Heretics^ says — " Among them a bishop to- 
 day is not so to-morrow; a deacon to-day is a reader to- 
 morrow ; to-day a presbyter, a layman to-morrow ; for 
 they enjoin priestly offices even upon laymen :"{ thus point- 
 ing out as one of the grossest irregulai'ities prevalent among 
 these heretics, what Dr. Campbell wishes to represent as a 
 duty, which every private Christian, if capable, is bound to 
 perform. 
 
 But of all the strange things advanced in this fourth 
 lecture now under our consideration, that which must excite 
 
 * TertuHian's words are — " Adco ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est con- 
 sessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos tibi solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia 
 est, licit laici." 
 
 t His words are — " Dandi quidem jus habet summus sacerdos, qui est 
 Episcopus, dehinc presbyteri et diaconi, non tamen sine Episcopi auctori- 
 ta'^e." 
 
 \. " Namet laicis saterdolalia munera injangunt." . 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » 129 
 
 the greatest degree of surprise, is his attempt to represent 
 the congregational scheme of ecclesiastical polity, which 
 he is so anxious to defend, as " conformable to the doc- 
 trine of the church of England."^ In proof of this agree- 
 ment, he brings forward the latter part of her twenty-third 
 article, entituled — Of ministering in the Congregation ; 
 where it is said — " those we ought to judge lawfully called 
 and sent, which be chosen, and called to this work, by 
 men, who have public authority given unto them in the 
 congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's 
 vineyard. This," he says, " if it mean anv thing, and be 
 not a mere identical proposition, of which, I own, it has 
 some appearance, refers us ultimately to that authority, 
 however modelled^ which satisfies the people^ and is settled 
 among them,'^'* It is but fair, however, notwithstanding this 
 ingenious and polite remark, to let the church of England 
 speak for herself, as most likely to be the best interpreter 
 of her own ineaning. And if we turn to her thirty-sixth 
 article, which our Lecturer has kept out of sight, because 
 there can be no doubt as to what it means^ we find her there 
 declaring, that — *' the book of consecration of archbishops 
 and bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons, lately 
 set forth in the time of Edward the VI. and confirmed at 
 the same time by authority of parliament, doth contain all 
 things necessary to such consecration and ordering; neither 
 has it any thing that of itself is superstitious and ungodly. 
 And, therefore, whosoever are, or shall be consecrated 
 or ordered according to the rites of that book, we decree 
 all such to be rightly, orderly and lawfully consecrated and 
 ordered." 
 
 Now, the preface to that book, thus confirmed and sanc- 
 tioned, (and wKich preface is as much a part of the doctrine 
 of the church of England as the thirty-nine articles])' runs 
 in these terms, so plain, that they cannot be mistaken. 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 17 
 
'130 General Defence of Episcopacy o 
 
 *' It is evident unto all men, diligently reading holy 
 scripture, and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time 
 there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's church, 
 bishops^ priests and deacons: Which offices were evermore 
 had in such reverend estimation, that no man might pre- 
 sume to execute any of them except he were first called, 
 tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as were 
 requisite for the same ; and also by public prayer, with 
 imposition of hands^ were approved, and admitted thereunto 
 by lawful authority* And, therefore, to the intent that 
 these orders may be continued, and reverently used and 
 esteemed in the church of England, no man shall be ac- 
 counted, or taken to be a lawful bishops priest or deacon in 
 the church of England, or suffered to execute any of the 
 said functions^ except he be called, tried, examined, and 
 admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter follow- 
 ing^ or hath had formerly Episcopal co7isecratio7i or oi'dina- 
 tion*^ Had Dr. Campbell introduced into his lecture this 
 preface^ as well as her twenty-third article^ he could not 
 have easily brought his pupils to believe, even on his word, 
 that the church of England " has not presumed to delineate 
 the essentials of a Christian ministiy, or to say any thing 
 which could be construed to exclude those who are go- 
 verned in a different manner from that in which she herself 
 is governed."* 
 
 It was equally unfair in the learned Professor, not to tell 
 his youthful audience, in explaining to them the doctrine of 
 the church of England, that at the time when her thirty- 
 nine articles were drawn up, the word congregation made 
 use of in the tzventy-third article had precisely the same sig- 
 nification as the word church, and was used with the same 
 
 * See Lecture iv. where Dr. Campbell has evidently borrowed from 
 Mr. Anderson, of Dunbarton, who affirms — "that the 19th and 23d articles 
 of the church of England are conceived in such general words, on pur- 
 pose that tbey might not be thought to exclude other churches that differ from 
 tfjem in point of government." Page 38 of the work ahead/ mentioned. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » 131 
 
 latitude. Indeed, the two terms were at that time considered 
 so perfectly synonymous, that in the translation of the bible 
 then used, Christ is called the " Head of the congregation^ 
 which is his body ;" and is mentioned as saying to Peter-— 
 " On this rock I will build my congregation,'*'' To the same 
 purpose we are told, that forty years after the drawing up of 
 the thirty-nine articles, the word congregation was used in 
 the canonical prayer before sermons, lectures and homilies, 
 in which they were directed " to pray for the whole congre- 
 gation of Christian people dispersed throughout the whole 
 world."^ Hence it is evident, that the meaning of the ar- 
 ticle in question is plainly this — '* It is not lawful," that is 
 - — by the law of God^ for " any man to take upon him the 
 office of public preaching or ministering the sacraments in 
 the congregation," or '-'• church of Christy before he be thus 
 lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we 
 ought to judge lawfully called and sent," according to the 
 laxv of God^ which be chosen " and called to this work, by 
 men who have thus public authority given unto them in the 
 congregation," or church of Christy "to call and send mi- 
 nisters into the Lord's vineyard." The lazofulness of such 
 public authority must mean its conformity to the laws of 
 God^ because the bishops and clergy assembled in convoca- 
 tion, who were the compilers of the articles, not being civil 
 judges, had no right to declare what was lawful, by the laws 
 of the land, or any temporal statutes, but only what they 
 deemed to be lawful, according to the laws of God, laid 
 down in scripture for the spiritual government of his church. 
 And as the twenty -third article is sufficient to show the ne- 
 cessity of such a lawful commission, so the thirty-sixth arti- 
 cle plainly declares that the persons invested with such com- 
 mission, are the bishops^ priests and deacons^ who are duly 
 consecrated and ordered, according to the rites of the book 
 referred to in that article ; and in which book the church of 
 
 * See Brett's Divine Right of Episcopacy, i^c. 
 
1 32 General Defence of Episcopaaj* 
 
 England, by her prayers to Almighty God, acknowledges 
 her belief that every one of these orders was appointed by 
 his Holy Spirit^ and therefore was certainly of divine insti- 
 tution. Surely then we may now leave it with our readers 
 to determine on what ground Dr. Campbell could be jus- 
 tified in saying, that the church of England has " avoided 
 limiting the Christian ministry to one particular model." 
 
 Whether he has done justice to his own church in as- 
 signing the same doctrine and conduct to her, is a point 
 which we are not called upon to decide ; although we can- 
 not help taking notice of the unnatural association which 
 he endeavours to establish between the doctrine of the 
 church of England, and that of the Westminster Confession 
 of Faith, the authors of which, at the very time of com- 
 piling it, entertained such a mortal enmity against that 
 church, that they had sworn in their soleynn league and co- 
 venant^ to " endeavour, without respect of persons, the ex- 
 tirpation of prelacy, with all ecclesiastical officers depend- 
 ing on that hierarchy." it cannot be difficult to perceive 
 how far this conduct in the authors is entitled to the praise 
 of " moderation," which our Lecturer bestows on the 
 doctrine of his Westminster confession, " which," he says, 
 " is of equal authority with us, as the thirty-nine articles 
 are of in England;" and then, after quoting the folio v/ing 
 words from the 25th chapter of it, " Unto the catholic 
 visible church, Christ has given the ministry", oracles and 
 ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the 
 saints in this life, to the end of the world ,•" he immediately 
 adds — " And this is all that is said on the subject." We 
 should suppose, however, that something more is said on 
 the subject, when, in the 27th chapter of the same con- 
 fession, we find these words — " There be only two sacra- 
 ments ordained by Christ our Lord, neither of which may 
 be dispensed by any but by a minister of the word law- 
 fully ordainedr And if we wish to know how, in their 
 judgment, a minister of the word is lawfully ordained^ v»^e 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 133 
 
 are referred, by a very sensible and spirited reviewer of 
 Dr. CampbeH's lectures, to the form of presbyterial church 
 government^ agreed upon by the assembly of divines at 
 Westminster, and of equal authority with the Confession 
 of Faiths where we shall find it decreed — that " every mi- 
 nister of the word be ordained by imposition of hands, and 
 prayer, with fasting, by those preaching presbyters to whom 
 it doth belong."^ 
 
 The church of England, however, is well able to defend 
 the doctrine of her own articles and liturgy,'— With the 
 Westminster Confession of Faith we have at present no 
 concern, farther than to take notice of Dr. Campbell's very 
 partial appeal to its decision. But there is another point, 
 which he brings forward, as particularly applicable to those 
 of the Episcopal persuasion in this country, and to which 
 it behoves us, therefore, to direct our attention, with a 
 view to defend ourselves from the imputation of inconsis- 
 tencv, in a matter of such importcince. It is stated in the 
 following words—" I shall add to these the doctrine of the 
 Episcopal reformed church of Scotland, contained in a 
 confession of faith ratified by law in this country in 156/; 
 which, though set aside in the time of the civil wars, to 
 make room for the Westminster confession, was re-enacted 
 after the restoration, and continued in force till the aboli- 
 tion of prelacy at the revolution." In the very beginning 
 of this statement we meet with an expression, which must 
 appear a little ambiguous, and not easy to be understood, 
 as made use of by a writer of Dr. Campbell's professional 
 character. — When we look back to the date which he fixes 
 for the legal ratification of this confession of faith, it is 
 natural for us to ask, what he means, by saying, that " it 
 contains the doctrine of the Episcopal reformed church of 
 Scodand ?" It was drawn up by those early reformers who 
 called themselves " the congi-egation," of which the famous 
 
 * See the Anti-Jaccbin Eevie^j for May, 18G1, p. 21. 
 
134 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 John Knox was the great leader and director : and We 
 know, that in the Parliament which, gave it a legal sanc- 
 tion, there were some bishops^ and men of Episcopal prin- 
 ciples. But could Dr. Campbell consistently acknowledge 
 that these persons were on the reforming side, or had any 
 leading hand in bringing forward this new confession, when 
 such an acknowledgment would directly fly in the face of 
 that fundamental article of the claim of rights which led to 
 ^' the abolition of prelacy at the revolution," and declared 
 *' this to be one cause of" such abolition, that the " nation 
 had reformed from popery by presbyters .^" 
 
 We must, therefore, suppose, that our Lecturer's vague 
 appellation of the " Episcopal reformed church of Scot- 
 land," can only be applicable to the state of that church at 
 the time when she was regularly formed and constituted, 
 according to the true Episcopal model. And on this sup- 
 position we need not wonder, that her Confession of Faith 
 was set aside to make room for that of the Westminster 
 reformers, who, no doubt, found their own Confession 
 more suitable to the purpose of that " solemn league and 
 covenant," by which they were bound to effect, if they 
 could, the extirpation of prelacy, and every thing connected 
 with it. But when our Professor thought proper to men- 
 tion the " re-enacting of the former confession after the 
 restoration," he should also have informed his students, 
 that the act which restored the former Episcopal govern- 
 ment, declared that government to be most " agreeable to 
 the word of God." And if he had likewise taken notice 
 that the re-enacting the confession alluded to, and " con- 
 tinuing it in force till the revolution," was a thing far from 
 pleasing to the bishops of that period ; it was no more than 
 what plainly appeared from the jealousy which they ex- 
 pressed, in regard to the test act, as it was called, in 1681, 
 which imposed this confession upon them, under a solemn 
 oath, enforced by severe penalties. So great indeed was 
 their alarm on that account, that some of them refused to 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » 135 
 
 take the oath in the sense which was then put upon it by 
 the enemies of the Episcopal estabhshment, till their scru- 
 ples were removed by an explanatory act of council^ de- 
 claring, that " though the confession of 1560, being framed 
 in the infancy of the reformation, deserves due praise ; yet 
 they were not required to swear to every proposition or 
 clause in it, but only to the true protestant religion con- 
 tained there ; and that in the test there is no encroachment 
 upon the intrinsic spiritual power of the church, as exer- 
 cised by the apostles, and the most pure and primitive 
 church of the three first centuries ; nor any danger from 
 it to the Episcopal government of this national church, 
 which is again declared to be most agreeable to the word 
 of God." 
 
 But there would have been no occasion for our taking 
 any notice of this old confession^ if Dr. Campbell had 
 not thought proper to make it the ground of a very 
 contemptuous and unjust reflection, conveyed in these 
 words — ^^ I recur to it the rather," says he, " in order to 
 show how much, on this article, the sentiments of our late 
 nonjurors (for we have none of that description at present) 
 differ from the sentiments of those whom they considered 
 as their ecclesiastical predecessors, and from whom they 
 derived their spiritual pedigree."^ Here are several 
 marks of distinction made use of, and all with a view to 
 throw some reproach on the persons thus distinguished. 
 They are said to have been lately nonjurors. But if they 
 are not so noxu^ was it fair to hold them up in such an of- 
 fensive light ? They considered themselves as having had 
 " ecclesiastical predecessors ;" and as that implies such a 
 thing as " ecclesiastical succession," nothing more was 
 necessary to expose them to ridicule, imless perhaps to 
 brand such " succession" with the odious name of " spiritual 
 pedigree." Yet, notwithstanding all this load of contempt 
 
 * liecture iv. 
 
136 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 laid on the late nonjurors; as they have still, it seems, suc- 
 cessors, whom our Lecturer afterwards distinguishes by 
 the title of the " Scotch Episcopal party," he should have 
 considered how far they acknowledged the relation to which 
 he alludes, before he involved them in the censure of 
 " differing so much in their sentiments" from those, whom 
 he, perhaps, not they, " considered as their ecclesiastical pre-ii 
 decessors." He could not but know, that for many years 
 after the reformation was begun in Scotland, various forms 
 of ecclesiastical polity were adopted, one after another, and 
 under as many different denominations. But did he ever 
 hear, from sufficient authority, that any of these was 
 acknowledged by the " late nonjurors," to have been the 
 *• Episcopal reformed church of Scotland ?" Did he ever 
 hear that the '^ Scotch Episcopal party," as he calls them, 
 would expect to find their " ecclesiastical predecessors," in 
 such times of tumult and confusion, as exhibited nothing- 
 like a regular, well-constituted national church? If we 
 come down as far as to the year 1610, when the church of 
 England gave her support in this country to the reforma- 
 tion, of which she has justly been called the bulwark, and 
 contributed, as she again did in 1661, to the introduc- 
 tion of a real Episcopacy among us, w^e readily and gi*ate- 
 fuUy look back to the bishops and clergy, who were thus 
 duly *' consecrated and ordered," as really and truly our 
 ecclesiastical predecessors." But vv^e go much higher up 
 for the fountain of our " spiritual pedigree," however 
 lightly and sarcastically that phrase may be used by some^ 
 deriving it, under Christ's authority, yrom his apostles, and 
 only through these " predecessors," as the intermediate 
 channels of conveyance, which have brought it regularly- 
 down to us. f ■ 
 From the sentiments of these our " ecclesiastical prede- 
 cessors," on the article of church government, we have 
 surely not departed. And though there were more ground 
 than can be shown, for bringing such a charge against us.- 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 sy 
 
 it would come but awkwardly from one, whose sentiments 
 on this same article, differ so much as Dr. Campbell's evi- 
 dently do differ from those of his " predecessors," if he 
 would have allowed them to be so called, who, on obtain- 
 ing their establishment in 1690, expressly declared — " that 
 the presbyterian government was not only agreeable to the 
 inclinations of the people, but likewise founded on the word 
 of God, and therefore of divine right."* Yet this divine 
 rights a minister and professor of that same establishment 
 has rejected with disdain; and after telling his students, 
 that what he had advanced on that subject " did not affect 
 the lawfulness, or even, in certain circumstances, the expe- 
 diency of the Episcopal model, it only exposed the arro- 
 gance of pretending to a jus divinurn''' — lest this should be 
 thought applicable only to the Episcopal pretension, he 
 immediately adds — " I am satisfied that no form of polity 
 can plead such an exclusive charter, as that phrase, in its 
 present acceptation, is understood to imply. The claim 
 is clearly the offspring of sectarian bigotry and ignorance." 
 Such is the language now used by those, who are enjoying 
 the benefits originally procured by, what, it seems, must 
 at last be called, the " sectarian bigotry and ignorance" oi" 
 their predecessors. 
 
 Our Professor indeed had told his hearers, that though it 
 was his purpose, in considering the question about the 
 apostolic form of church government, " to proceed with all 
 the candour and impartiality of which he was capable ; yet 
 he was to speak out boldly what appeared to him most pro- 
 bably to have been the case, without considering what sect 
 
 * Their great champion, Mr. Anderson, of Dunbarton, expressly de- 
 clared it to be their *^ firm belief, that there is but one government by 
 divine right, viz. the presbyterian y' and we find him drawing this con- 
 clusion at the end of his work — " Upon the whole, I conclude that the 
 presbyterian gcyverninent is of divine institution." See p. o7 and 341 of 
 his Defence of the Church Government, Faith, Worship and Spirit of tht 
 Presbyterians, iStt:. printed at Glasgow 1714. 
 
 18 
 
1.38 General Def erne of Episcopacy* 
 
 or party it might either offend or gratify."* With this 
 resolution, he proceeds to the examination of the fact, and 
 sets out with acknowledging, " that the apostles regularly 
 established churches, and settled therein proper officers or 
 ministers,t who were chiefly distinguished by the three 
 terms — ^bishops or overseers, presbyters or elders, and 
 deacons or attendants. Now, the doubts that have arisen 
 are chiefly concerning the two first of these names— ^wAo/»s 
 and presbyters ; and the question is, whether they are names 
 for the same office, or for different offices."f — And then 
 he immediately adds—" This at least is the first question ; 
 for it must be owned, that there have been some strenuous 
 advocates for the apostolical origin of Episcopacy, who 
 have entirely given up the argument founded on the 
 names." And when the argument is thus given up, there 
 needs no longer be any question, 7?r.s^ or last^ about that 
 on which it is founded. 
 
 The argument maintained by those who are advocates 
 for the apostolical origin of Episcopacy, is not founded on 
 names but things ; and therefore the question is not whe- 
 ther the church officers, called presbyters or elders in the 
 apostles' days, might not also be called bishops or over- 
 seers, as having the oversight or charge of a certain por- 
 tion of the flock of Christ? but, whether in that character 
 they had the apostolic power of ordaining others, and such 
 authority to govern and direct the inferior overseers, as 
 was evidently committed to the highest order of church 
 officers, who were afterwards peculiarly distinguished by 
 the title of bishops P In the passage quoted by Dr. Camp- 
 bell from the Acts of the ApostlesJ there can be no doubt 
 that those who are called elders, or presbyters of the 
 church, are also denominated overseers or bishops. But it 
 does not hence follow that they had the power of ordina- 
 tion, or any such authority as was committed to Timothy, 
 
 * Lecture iv. f Ibid. \ Ibid. !| Aets xx. 17, 28. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 139 
 
 when he was appointed to take charge of the church at 
 Ephesus, as its proper bishop and governor. If we only 
 observe the difference in the apostle's directions to him and 
 to them, we need no other proof that these presbyters were 
 not authorized to execute those offices, for discharging 
 which Timothy had been purposely set over them. In St. 
 Paul's admonitions to them, he puts them in mind of their 
 duty as pastors, and warns them to " take heed to them- 
 selves, and to all that part of God's flock," as distinguished 
 from the shepherds, which was entrusted to their care 
 and oversight : Whereas in the charge given to Timothy, 
 he is empowered to watch over, not the flock only, but the 
 shepherds also, the subordinate clergy as well as the laity, 
 in that part of the church committed to his inspection. — 
 There were some things, which he was not only to " com- 
 mand and teach," but to charge others, that they should 
 teach them also. Such as were proposed for the office of 
 deacons, he was to prove and examine, and if found blame- 
 less, to admit them to it ; that so, ' ■ by using the office of 
 a deacon well, they might purchase to themselves a good 
 degree," and in due time be found fit for a higher station 
 in the church ; even for discharging the duties of elders or 
 presbyters. Against these presbyters, Timothy was di- 
 rected' to " receive no accusation, but before two or three 
 witnesses : and them that sinned he was to rebuke before 
 aU, without preferring one before another," and, like an 
 equitable judge, " doing nothing by partiality." In a word, 
 he was charged to " lay hands suddenly on no man ;" that 
 so, by avoiding such rashness in exercising his power of 
 ordination, he might not be a " partaker of other men's 
 sins, but keep himself pure" from any such abuse of his 
 authority. In this apostolic charge, then, we see delineated, 
 in the most accurate manner, all the particulars, in which 
 bishops have been considered, since the days of the apos- 
 tles, as superior to presbyters ; and he, who will not 
 acknowledge Timothy to have been bishop at EphesuS; 
 
i.46 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 may as well deny, that there have ever been bishops in any 
 part of the world, or that there are at present twenty-six of 
 that order in England. 
 
 But in answer to all this, our Lecturer holds up a part 
 of St. Paul's account, and only one part of what the aposde 
 says of Timothy's ordination. For — " in regard to the 
 imposition of hands, which is considered," he says, " by 
 many''* (we would hope the Doctor himself was one of the 
 many) " as a necessary attendant on ordination, we find 
 this also attributed to the presbytery ;"^ as to which, we 
 are told, but without any proof, that " all Christian anti- 
 quity concurs in affixing this name to what may be called 
 the consistory of a particular church, or the college of its 
 pastors :" therefore as Timothy was ordained by the laying 
 on of the hands of this presbytery^ or college of pastors, it 
 could not have been to the office of a bishop, in the proper 
 ecclesiastical sense of the word, since, according to Dr. 
 Campbell, no such office was known m the church at that 
 time. Yet he acknowledges, that " this is the only passage 
 in the New Testament, in which the Greek word for pres- 
 bytery is applied to a Christian council ;" and if we may 
 , take the opinion of Calvin^ as of equal weight with that of 
 many of his followers, on the subject of presbyterian or- 
 dination, he expressly denies, that by the presbytery in this 
 text, was meant a college of presbyters, and reads it, as 
 if the apostle had said—" neglect not the gift of the office 
 of a presbyter which was given thee by prophecy, with the 
 laying on of hands." It has been thought by some, that as 
 the apostles themselves were sometimes called elders or 
 presbyters, therefore, a meeting of a certain number of 
 them, for the ordination of Timothy, might properly enough 
 be called the presbytery. But as St. Paul, in another 
 place,t speaks of himself as the sole ordainer of Timothy, 
 so there is a diflfereQce of expression in the two accounts 
 
 • 1 Tim. iv. 14. t 2 Tim. i. 6, 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 141 
 
 which he gives of this matter; and from the one it appears 
 that Timothy was ordained by the putting on of the apos- 
 tle's hands, to convey authority; and from the other, that 
 this was done with the laying on of the hands of the pres- 
 bytery, as a testimony of their approbation.* Having al- 
 ready admitted, that at the time when St. Paul wrote his 
 several epistles, the elders or presbj^ters of the church were 
 sometimes called bishops^ or overseers of what was com- 
 mitted to their charge, we need hardly take notice of our 
 Lecturer's " argument,t that there were but two orders of 
 ministers then established, because Paul, in addressing the 
 Philippians, expresses himself in this manner, — To all the 
 saints at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."f For if 
 we should say, that they also had an apostle of their own, 
 and, therefore, a bishop " in the proper and ecclesiastical 
 sense of the word," it would be no more than what St. 
 Paul said, when he told them, " I supposed it necessary to 
 send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and companion in 
 labour, and fellow soldier, but your apostle ;"§ on which 
 Jerome observes — *•'' By degress, in process of time, others 
 were ordained apostles^ by those whom our Lord had chosen, 
 as that passage to the Philippians shows, ' I supposed it 
 necessary to send unto you Epaphroditus your apostle ;" and 
 ITieodoret gives this reason why Epaphroditus is called 
 the apostle of the Philippians — ^" He was entrusted with the 
 Episcopal government, as being their bishop." The same 
 
 * The Greek preposition dia, signifies the means by which the au- 
 thority was conveyed: the other preposition ^{\a,^ signifies no more than 
 concurrence or approbation, such as is still given in the church of Eng- 
 land, where the rubric directs, that " the bishop, with the priests present, 
 shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth 
 ihe order of priesthood. 
 
 I Lecture iv. 
 
 \ It should rather be rendered, " with bishops and deacons" — as the 
 original has not the restrictive articles. 
 
 § Phil. ii. 25, where our translators have rendered it messenger. 
 
142 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 writer tells us,* " those now called bishops, were anciently 
 called apostles ; but in process of time the name of apos- 
 tle was left to them who were truly apostles, and the name 
 of bishop was restrained to those who were anciendy called 
 apostles : thus Epaphroditus was the apostle of the Philip- 
 pians, Titus of the Cretians, and Timothy of the Asiatics." 
 —Yet Dr. Campbell asserts, that " Theodoret was very 
 much puzzledf where to find the origin of the office of bi- 
 shop, as the word in his time implied, when he imagined 
 he discovered it in a phrase, which occurs but once in the 
 New Testament,"! where St. Paul mentions his brethren, 
 as the apostles of the churches. For we know that Barna- 
 bas, as well as Paul, was called an apostle, and we have 
 seen Epaphroditus expressly mentioned as the apostle of 
 the Philippians, to whom Theodoret made no scruple to 
 join Timothy and Titus, as the apostles of their respective 
 churches in Ephesus and Crete. 
 
 We have already taken notice of the Episcopal autho- 
 rity, which was certainly committed to Timothy as Bishop 
 of the church at Ephesus ; the evidence is equally clear 
 and irrefragable for that of Titus in Crete ; to the nature 
 and design of whose commission, St. Paul refers in the 
 plainest terms, when he tells him — " For this cause left I 
 thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things 
 that are wanting, and ordain elders or presbyters, in every 
 city, as I had appointed thee."§ As the gospel was al- 
 ready planted in Crete, it may be presumed, that some 
 presbyters had been ordained in it likewise ; in which case, 
 if they had power to ordain others, there was no occasion 
 to leave Titus there for the same purpose, as such an inva- 
 
 • On 1 Tim. chap. iii. 
 
 I Not more puzzled than the Doctov himself was, where to find the 
 origin of the power of his presbytery, when he was obliged to have re- 
 course for it, to what he acknowledges to be the only passage in the 
 New Testament, in which the word is applied to a Christian council. 
 
 I 2 Cor. viii. 23. ^ Titus i. 5. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 143 
 
 sion of their office would have tended to promote strife and 
 contention, rather than peace and good order. — But sup- 
 posing that there were no presbyters in Crete, till Titus 
 was left there for ordaining some ; yet when he had or- 
 dained a few, he might have gone away and left them to 
 " set in order every thing that was wanting ;" to carry on 
 all future ordinations, and govern the church by their own 
 authority. Yet, instead of this, in consequence of the 
 Episcopal power which had been committed to him, he is 
 directed by St. Paul, not only *' to ordain presbyters in 
 every city," but also to " rebuke with all authority, to ad- 
 monish heretics," and in case of their obstinacy, to " re- 
 ject" them from the communion of the church. In all 
 these respects, it is evident that the authority of Titus in 
 the church of Crete, was the same as that of Timothy in 
 the church of Ephesus. The same caution is enjoined to 
 both in the important affair of ordination, whether of pres- 
 byters or deacons, and the same reason assigned for their 
 being thus cautious, because " the^ bishop must be blame- 
 less, — as the steward of God ;" and we know, it is a pecu- 
 liar part of the steward's office to provide, inspect, and 
 watch over the inferior servants of the family. 
 
 When we now look back to the clear and distinct account, 
 which is given of the Episcopal authority in the Epistles 
 of St. Paul to Timothy and Titua, and see these distin- 
 guished ministers of Christ exercising the power committed 
 to them, for the edification and good government of the 
 churches, over which they were appointed to preside, we 
 cannot perceive any *' species of vanity," far less any '* evi- 
 dent falsehood" in those postscripts subjoined to the epis- 
 tles, which style Timothy and Titus " the first ordained 
 bishops, the one of the church of the Ephesians, and the 
 other of that of the Cretians." Neither are we at all stag- 
 
 * Not a bishop, as our traiulators have rendered it, leaving out the re- 
 strictive article. 
 
144 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 gered in our belief of the truth of these postscripts, biy 
 Dr. Campbell's asserting, that " Timothy and Titus were 
 not made bishops till about fve^ hundred years after their 
 death,"'!' when we find so much unexceptionable evidence 
 to the contrary. 
 
 But still our Lecturer insists, that they could " not be 
 properly bishops, in the modern acceptation," because the 
 powers with which they were invested, were conferred 
 upon them, not as bishops, or fixed governors, but in their 
 extraordinary and temporary character of evangelists, I 
 shall not say, that such a man as Dr. Campbell would bor- 
 row this idea from writers of very inferior talents ; but 
 nothing is more certain, than its being one of the most 
 hackneyed topics, even in the meanest publications, which 
 the two last centuries produced against the apostolic insti- 
 tution of Episcopacy.J It is still more surprising, that 
 such an idea should be adopted by the same author, who 
 tells us, in another of his works, that the word from which 
 the term evangelist is derived, " relates to the first infor- 
 mation that is given to a person or people, that is, when 
 the subject may be properly called news. Thus, in the 
 Acts," he says, " it is frequently used for expressing the 
 first publication of the gospel, in a city or a village, or 
 amongst a particular people."|| Nay, in the very lecture 
 now before us, he acknowledges, that the word " denotes 
 
 * This word/te, though not in the list of errata, has been said to be a 
 mistake of the printer, and (or Jive, it seems we should read tbree; which, 
 to be sure, would lessen the error of the author a little as to the date, 
 but could make no alteration, in our opinion, as to the Jact, when we 
 know so well that Timothy and Titus were certainly made bishops in 
 their own lifetime, as well as evangelists. 
 
 t Lecture v. 
 
 I See Mr. Anderson's (of Dunbarton) Defence, Sec. who affirms, as 
 Dr. Campbell does, without any proof, that " Timothy and Titus were 
 extraordinary officers, and, therefore, it caimot be thence inferred, thai 
 their superiority of power was designed to be perpetual." p. 104. 
 
 I) Sec the Preliminary Dissertation^- prefi.xetl to his " Translation of 
 the Gobpel:"-," p. 29:1 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » 145 
 
 properly, to preachy or declare the good news, that is, the 
 gOspel, to those who had before known nothing of the mat- 
 ter." — It is evident then, that in his opinion, the disciples 
 Whom " Christ gave as evangelists, for the work of the 
 ministry," must have been the persons emploved, whatever 
 was their character or station, in communicating the know- 
 ledge of the gospel to those to whom it was news^ and who 
 had never before heard of its glad tidings. — But how could 
 Timothy and Titus be considered as evangelists^ in this sense 
 of the word, to the churches of Ephesus and Crete, where 
 St. Paul himself had been preaching the gospel, before 
 they were empowered to take charge of these churches ; 
 and in that of Ephesus, there had been elders expressly 
 Ordained for taking heed to the flock committed to their 
 care, and feeding them with sound doctrine t It is true 
 that Timothy was directed by St. Paul to do the work of 
 an evangelist^ or preacher of the gospel ; but a preaching 
 apostle or bishop was no such extraordinary character as to 
 be invested, merely on that account, with a pre-eminence 
 over the other overseers of the church at Ephesus. If it 
 was not then as evangelists^ that Timothy and Titus were 
 entrusted with the inspection and government of the Ephe- 
 sian and Cretian churches, it must have been as persons, 
 in whom the apostolic commission was continued, with all 
 the ordinary powers which were necessary for answering 
 the purpose of that important commission. 
 
 But it has been pretended, by those who oppose the 
 continuance of such an apostolic commission in the way 
 of Episcopal succession, that the apostles themselves were 
 ministers of the same extraordinary character as these evan- 
 gelists, whose office was not to be continued any longer 
 than the first publication of the gospel required. Follow- 
 ing his predecessors in this beaten tract, Dr. Campbell has 
 affirmed, that " the apostolate itself was one of those extra- 
 ordinary offices which were in their nature temporary', 
 and did not admit succession :" in support of which very 
 
 19 
 
146 General Defence of Episicopacy, 
 
 bold, if not extraordinary assertion, he brings forward se- 
 veral arguments, to which the " attention of his hearers is 
 entreated."* First— he refers them for the character of 
 an aposde, to the brief description given of it by St. Peter, 
 as sufficient to show, that the office could be but temporary, 
 and could have no existence after the extinction of that 
 generation. The words which are supposed to show the 
 " absurdity, as well as aif ogance of modem pretenders,"t 
 are those made use of, on occasion of the election of 
 Matthias into the place of the traitor Judas, when Peter 
 said — " Wherefore, of these men, which have companied 
 with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out 
 among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the 
 same day that he was taken up from us, must one be 
 ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." J Is 
 it possible, that our learned Lecturer could infer from these 
 words, that the essence of the apostolic character consisted 
 in " having seen Jesus Christ in the flesh after his resurrec- 
 tion," — when we are assured, " that he was seen in the 
 flesh of above five hundred brethren at once, after he rose 
 from the dead," though at that time there were only eleven 
 apostles? — »And if he had requested the attention of his 
 pupils to the nature of that commission, which these eleven 
 received from their Lord and Master, with the promise 
 subjoined to it, that he was to be with them always, even 
 unto the end of the world, it must have been no easy mat- 
 ter, we should suppose, to convince those who firmly 
 believed the truth of this promise, that the eleven apostles 
 could have no successors, and their commission " no exist- 
 ence after the extinction of that generation." 
 
 His second argument, in support of this opinion, is laid 
 down in these words — " The apostles were distinguished 
 by prerogatives, which did not descend to any after them. 
 Of this kind were — their receiving their mission immedi- 
 
 * Lecture V. f Ibid. + Acts i. 21, 22. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 147 
 
 ately from the Lord Jesus Christ, — ^the power of confer- 
 ring, by imposition of hands, the miraculous gifts of the 
 spirit, on whomsoever they would — and the knowledge 
 they had, by inspiration, of the whole doctrine of Christ."^ 
 But if these " prerogatives did not descend to any after 
 them," it was not because they constituted any essential 
 part of the apostolic office, but only as they were qualifica- 
 tions peculiarly necessar\^ for the discharge of that office, 
 in laying the foundation of the Christian church, and pro- 
 pagating the Christian doctrine throughout the world. It 
 was, no doubt, absolutely necessary, that the frst apostles 
 of the Christian church should '^ receive their mission im- 
 mediately from Christ himself," because there was none 
 else from whom they could receive it. But the same 
 necessity could not be said to exist, when they, having once 
 been " sent by Christ, even ^s the Father had sent him," 
 had thereby received power to continue that mission in 
 such a way, as that it might be regularly handed down to 
 the end of the world. As to the miraculous powers, and 
 inspired knowledge of divine truth, with which the eleven 
 apostles were endued in such an eminent degree, it does 
 not appear, that these marks of distinction, except perhaps 
 in that eminence of degree, were peculiar to them ; since 
 we read of many others, who possessed the same power of 
 working miracles, and the same extraordinary gifts of the 
 spirit. The seven deacons were all " men full of the Holy 
 Ghost, and wisdom ;" and it is particularly mentioned of 
 one of them, that " he did great wonders and miracles 
 among the people," and that his adversaries " were not 
 able to resist the wisdom, and the spirit, by which he 
 spake."t It is evident then, that the apostolic office did 
 not consist in the possession of these extraordinary privi- 
 leges, which, at the first setting out of the gospel, for the 
 sake of giving power and progress to it, were bestowed on 
 
 • Lecture v. t Acts vi. 8—10. 
 
148 General Defence of Episcopacif* 
 
 many others of inferior stations in the church.— These 
 could not possibly preclude the apostles from having suc- 
 cessors in that superior office, which, for answering ail the 
 ordinary purposes intended by it, was to be continued as 
 long as the church itself should exist upon earth. 
 
 Yet our Lecturer gives it, as his third argument against 
 such an apostolic succession, that " the mission of the 
 ?ipostles was of quite a different kind from that of any ordi- 
 nary pastor. It was to propagate the gospel throughout 
 the world, both among Jews and pagans, and not to take 
 the charge of a particular flock. The terms of their com- 
 mission are, Go and teach all nations : Again, Go ye into 
 all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. No 
 doubt they may be styled bishops or overseers, but in a 
 sense very different from that in which it is applied to the 
 inspector over the inhabitants of a particular district.— -» 
 Thev were universal bishops ; the whole church, or rather 
 the whole earth, was their charge, and they were all col- 
 leagues one of another.""* All this perhaps is true with 
 respect to the general nature of their commission, although 
 they might find it convenient, if not necessary, to assign to 
 each a particular portion of the charge committed to them. 
 It was the current report of antiquity, that they divided 
 the earth among them ; and to some such division, St. Paul 
 seems to allude, where he says — " When James, Cephas, 
 and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace 
 that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the 
 right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the hea- 
 then, and they unto the circumcision."! The same St. 
 Paul, who though not of the eleven^ is yet acknowledged, 
 as well as Matthias, to have been an apostle, assures us^ 
 that "- he so strove to preach the gospel, not where Christ 
 was named, lest he should build upon another man's foun- 
 dation :"J And we have every reason to believe, that the 
 
 » Lecture V. t Gal. ii. 9- \ Rom. xv. 20. 
 
General Defence of Eptscopacij. 149 
 
 other apostles conducted themselves in the same regular 
 and orderly manner. No — says our Professor — " If they 
 had limited themselves to any thing less than the world, 
 it would have been disobedience to the express command 
 they had received from their Master, to go into all nations, 
 and to preach the gospel to every creature." But surely 
 the obedience which they owed to this command, did not 
 require that every individual among them should actually 
 go into all nations ; and that the gospel should be preached 
 to every creature, by each of the eleven aposdes, to whom 
 the command was given. It was enough, that no nation 
 was omitted, no creature neglected, by the apostles in 
 general, but that, as St. Paul says of them, " their sound 
 went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of 
 world."* But when this was accomplisTied by their com- 
 mon and united efforts, there was nothing to hinder them 
 from exercising their apostolic authority over the churches, 
 which they had respectively planted, till they should find 
 proper persons, or " faithful men,"-]" as St. Paul calls them, 
 on whom they might devolve the same authority, with 
 power to transmit it from age to age, or in the words of 
 their Lord's promise — " even unto the end of world." 
 
 As another objection, however, to this plan of apostolic 
 succession, our Lecturer brings forward his fourth and last 
 argument, which he states in these words — " As a full 
 proof that the matter was thus universally understood, both 
 in their own age and in the times immediately succeeding, 
 no one, on the death of an apostle, was ever substituted in 
 his room ; and when that original sacred college was extinct, 
 the title became extinct with it."J But what signifies the 
 extinction of the title ? Might not the same official powers 
 be continued under different titles ? To take another simili- 
 tude from temporal things ; are we not accustomed to hear 
 of the supreme civil power being enjoyed in one country 
 
 * Rom. X. lb. f 2 Tim. ii. 2. | Lecture v. 
 
150 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 by a King^ in another by an Emperor^ and in a third, very 
 lately, by a First Consul; while each of these titles denotes 
 a person possessed of supreme, and therefore very similar 
 authority ? Dr. Campbell could not but know the reason 
 why, as well as the time when, the title of apostle was laid 
 aside, and that of bishop substituted in its place. Though 
 he had quoted Theodoret, to expose the folly of his imagin- 
 ing those to be bishops whom St. Paul described as " the 
 apostles of the churches," he should yet have recollected, 
 that the same Theodoret mentions their successors, as 
 humbly abstaining from the name of apostles, and con- 
 tenting themseh es with that of bishops ; a title expressive 
 of the care, attention and vigilance, which their office re- 
 quired. — To what purpose then was our author's remark, 
 that " on the death of an apostle, no one was ever substi- 
 tuted in his room," if by no one he means no aposde? 
 And that this was his meaning, is evident from the pains he 
 has taken to show, that neither " the election of Matthias 
 by the apostles, nor the subsequent admission of Paul and 
 Barnabas to the apostleship, formed any exception to what 
 had been advanced ; for they came not as successors to any 
 one, but were specially called by the Holy Spirit as apostles, 
 particularly to the Gentiles."^ And if they came with 
 apostolical powers, we are ready to admit, that it is of no 
 consequence whether " they came as successors to any 
 one" or not ; since the point in question is not, whether 
 there should be now just twelve bishops in the whole Chris- 
 tian church, and each of them able to trace his succession 
 from some individual apostle j but whether in that portion 
 of every regularly constituted church called a diocese, there 
 always has been, from the days of the apostles to the pre- 
 sent time, some ecclesiastical person, so far possessed of 
 the apostolic commission and character, as to have autho- 
 rity to ordain and superintend the presbyters and deacons 
 
 * Lecture v. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 151 
 
 under his spiritual jurisdiction, and to assist in preserving 
 and continuing his own Episcopal order, as also in what- 
 ever else is necessary to the care and good government of 
 the particular national church to which he belongs ? Now, 
 the admission of Paul and Barnabas to the office of apostles, 
 after the number txvelve was completed, settles this point, 
 so far as it proves, that the apostolic office was not limited 
 to those " who companied with the eleven all the time that 
 the Lord Jesus went in and out among them," and, there- 
 fore, was not such as necessarily " became extinct," when, 
 as our Lecturer expresses himself — " that original sacred 
 college was extinct." — On the contrary, we see an addition 
 made to it in the case now before us; and though he tells 
 us that " Paul and Barnabas were specially called by the 
 Holy Spirit as apostles," thereby making a distinction, and 
 marking a difference, as it were, between their apostleship, 
 and that which, he had said, was " received immediately 
 from the Lord Jesus Christ^"* yet St. Paul himself, who 
 best knew how this matter stood, assures us, that " he was 
 an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, 
 and God the Father;"'^ which not only points to the man- 
 ner in which he himself was called to the apostleship by 
 the Lord Jesus Christy but at the same time clearly shows, 
 that when he wrote his Epistle to the Galatians, there were 
 in the church, apostles, who had been ordained to their 
 office by the ministry of man. Such, we have seen, was 
 Epaphroditus, whom St. Paul calls the apostle of the Phi- 
 lippians.t Such, undoubtedly, were Timothy and Titus, 
 and those brethren who are distinguished as " apostles of 
 the churches, the glory of Christ."J 
 
 * Gal. i. 1. 
 
 t Dr. Campbell's man of discernment— Hilary the deacon, in his 
 Commentary on the second chapter of the Epistle to the Philippians, 
 says expressly, that Epaphroditus was constituted their apostle by St. 
 Paul himself: His words are, ** Erat enim eorum apostolus, ab apostolo 
 factus." 
 
 \ 2 Cor. viii. 23. 
 
1 52 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 Where then could our Lecturer have learned, or how 
 could he pretend to teach his pupils, that the apostolical 
 office, founded on the commission given by our Lord to 
 the eleven apostles, " was one of those extraordinary of- 
 fices, which were in their nature temporar}^, and did not 
 admit succession?'^ There was a school, in which this 
 lesson was taught, but from which we can hardly suppose 
 that such a man as Dr. Campbell would have imbibed the 
 sentiments he has avowed on this subject. Yet, when we 
 observe one of the most strenuous advocates for the papal 
 supremacy positively asserting, that " bishops are- not pro- 
 perly the successors of the apostles, because the apostles 
 Were not ordinary, but extraordinar\' pastors, such as, from 
 the nature of their delegation, could have no successors,"* 
 we cannot easilv refrain from expressing our surprise at 
 guch a striking coincidence in opinion, between the popish 
 cardinal, and the presbyterian professor ; and from this, 
 and other instances of a similar nature, we might be in- 
 clined to suspect, that between popery and presbytery, the 
 difference^ in many things, is not so great as is generally^ 
 imagined. 
 
 From considering the nature of the apostolic office, as 
 admitting no succession, and the peculiar business of the 
 Other extraordinary ministers called evangelists, as exem- 
 plified in Timothy and Titus, our author passes, bv a na- 
 tural transition, to what he terms, the " only one other plea 
 of any consequence in favour of the apostolical antiquity of 
 
 * See Cardinal Bellarmine — De Rom. Pont. lib. iv. cap. 24 — whose 
 >vords are these — " Episcopi non succedunt proprie apostolis, quoniam 
 apostoli non fuerunt ordinarii, sed extraordinarii, ei quasi delegati pas- 
 tores quibiis non succeditur." To this authority Mr. Anderson, of Dun- 
 barton, seems to have referred, when, combating the argument in favour 
 of Episcopacy, drawn from a succession in the apostoiate, he observed 
 — " The church of Rome, a society of a very large extent, of a long 
 standing, and such as has produced not a few wise and great men, ex- 
 pressly contradict it, denying that any of the apostles had successor?, 
 save Peter, in the papal chair." See his Dcferxe, &.c. p. 90. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 153 
 
 Episcopacy ; and which he reserved for the last, because 
 it affords an excellent handle for inquiring into the real 
 origin of subordination among the Christian pastors. The 
 plea he means is taken from the Epistles to the seven 
 Asian churches in the apocalypse, addressed to the angels 
 of these churches severally, and in the singular number ; 
 to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and so of the rest."*" 
 At his first setting out on this inquiry, he seems at a loss 
 what account to give of the peculiar mode of address 
 made use of in these Epistles, but is extremely unwilling 
 to acknowledge that any inference can be drawn from it 
 in favour of Diocesan Episcopacy, This, he thinks, would 
 be contrary to every just rule of interpretation ; and yet 
 he appears to be equally dissatisfied with what he says is 
 <^ maintained by some zealous patrons of the Presbyterian 
 model," that by the angel is meant, according to the allego- 
 rical style, that consistory of elders, called the Presbytery^ 
 which, the better to show the union that ought to subsist 
 among the members, is here emphatically considered and 
 addressed as one person. Between these two interpreta- 
 tions, which have respectively distinguished the Episcopa- 
 lian and the Presbyterian party, he chooses to steer a mid- 
 dle course, and to adopt, what he calls an intermediate opi- 
 nion, as appearing to him much more probable than either 
 of the other tw^o. " His sentiment, therefore, is, that, as in 
 their consistories and congregations, it would be necessary, 
 for the sake of order, that one should preside, both in the 
 offices of religion, and in their consultations for the com- 
 mon good, it is their president or chairman, that is here ad- 
 dressed under the name of angel." — This opinion he af- 
 terwards illustrates, by comparing his chairman to the 
 " speaker of the House of Commons, and to the prolocutor 
 of either house of convocation in England, or the modera- 
 tor of an ecclesiastical judicatory in Scotland." The first 
 
 * Lecture v. 
 20 
 
154 General Defence of Episcopacy 4 
 
 of these comparisons is rather unlucky, as the appointment 
 of the speaker depends on the will of the Sovereign, and, 
 therefore, implies the acknowledgment of a superior : And 
 the other two offices, being of a temporary nature, were not 
 properly adapted to the design of his comparison, unless 
 he had, or could have shown, that these apocalyptic bishops 
 ever descended from their station, and became common 
 members of the presbytery, as he knew to be always the 
 case with his moderators. 
 
 It is indeed true, that the epistles addressed to the angels 
 mentioned in the first three chapters of the book of the 
 Revelation of St. John, were intended for the use of those 
 churches, of which these angels are represented as the 
 directors and governors. There can be no ground to sup- 
 pose that the churches themselves were meant by the an- 
 gels, when the distinction between them is so plainly laid 
 down in these words, as descriptive of the mystery:-—" The 
 seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the 
 seven candlesticks, which thou sawest, are the seven 
 churches."^ Both being thus distinguished by their proper 
 emblems, the angels could not be the churches, nor any 
 select number, or collective body of men, because they are 
 constantly mentioned as single persons, and by a title, 
 which was well known to bear the same meaning as that of 
 aposde. Both are applied to signify a messenger of God : 
 an apostle as one sent or commissioned to carry his mes- 
 sage, an angel as employed in telling or declaring that mes- 
 sage. The name of angel, therefore, was very properly 
 applied to those who immediately succeeded the apostles, 
 in their office of preaching or publishing God's will to the 
 church ; and when St. Paul was employed in preaching the 
 gospel to the Galatians, he says, " they received him as an 
 angel of God.^f This plainly shows that these angels were 
 not only single persons, but entrusted also with the care 
 
 * Rev. i. 20. t Oal. iv. 14. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 155 
 
 and government of the several churches, of which they 
 were called the angels: which will still appear more clearly, 
 if we consider the subject of the Epistles addressed to them, 
 and the characters, which are there given of them. On 
 account of the authority committed to them, we find them 
 praised for all the good, and blamed for all the evil, which 
 happened in their churches.— The angel of the church of 
 Ephesus is commended, because " he could not bear them 
 that were evil, and had tried those who said they were 
 apostles, and were not so." Having called them to ac- 
 count, and examined their pretentions, he found them to 
 be no other than " liars," and impostors, and therefore 
 executed the discipline of the church against them ; in doing 
 which, he receives approbation for discharging his duty. 
 The angel of the church in Pergamos is reproved for not 
 severely censuring, as they deserved, those who were 
 guilty of wicked and idolatrous practices ; from which it is 
 evident, that he had authority to correct such disorders. 
 And the same may be said of the angel of Thyatira, who 
 is blamed for " suffering Jezebel, who called herself a pro- 
 phetess, to teach and seduce the servants of Christ," and 
 so lead them into the basest idolatry. The angel of Sardis 
 is commanded to be " watchful, and to strengthen those 
 who were ready to die ;" otherwise our Lord threatens to 
 " come on him as a thief, and at an hour which he should 
 not know ;" plainly alluding to what he had formerly said 
 to those " stewards, whom he had made rulers over his 
 household, to give them their meat in due season." 
 . All this is abundantly sufficient to show the office, station 
 and authority of the angels of the seven churches, and that 
 we need not scruple to call them, with St. Augustine, and 
 other ancient fathers, " the bishops and presidents of these 
 churches."-^ If they had not been clothed with that cha- 
 
 * See this matter fully handled in An History of the Go=icrnment of the 
 Primitive Church, Ijfc. by Francis Brokesby, B. D. of Cambridge, and 
 
iiHQ General Defence of Epistopacy* 
 
 l-acter, it would be difficult to reconcile the charges give»i 
 to them bv St. John in the name of Christ, with that princi- 
 ple of equity, bv which we are sure all the divine proceed- 
 ings ever have been and always will be guided. If the an- 
 gels of the Asiatic churches had been invested with no more 
 permanent power than what is committed to the moderator 
 of a presbytery under the Scotch establishment, it \vould 
 have been hard indeed to require more of them than their 
 office allowed them to perform, or to condemn them for not 
 doing what they had no right or authority to do. This 
 wouid be considered as such flagrant severity and injustice 
 IR any human judicatory, that we cannot possibly suppose 
 the most distant tendency towards it, in his divine admi-^ 
 niseration, who is King of kings, and Lord of lords, and 
 as "' Judge of ail the earth, will certainly do right." But 
 if the angels addressed by St. John had really the same 
 authorit}^ over the seven churi^hes of Asia that was com- 
 mitted to Timothy and Titus, in those of Ephesus and 
 Crete : if these angels, apostles, or bishops, had each of 
 them a right, in virtue of his apostolic commission, to take 
 cognizance of false and heretical doctrine, to admonish the 
 heretic, and in case of his obstinate contempt of such ad- 
 monition, to reject him from the communion of the church: 
 if to these angels only pertained the power of ordaining 
 presbvters and deacons in the several churches committed 
 to their care, and when ordained, of appointing their ser- 
 vices, inspecting their conduct, and seeing that every thing 
 was done decently, and so as to promote order and edifi- 
 cation : If such were the Episcopal powers committed to 
 these angels of the Asiatic churches, which, we have already- 
 seen, had been committed to Timothy in Ephesus, and 
 
 in A Discourse of Church Gmerntnent^ ijfc. by- Dr. Potter, who has shown* 
 fi-om the most early accounts of the primitive church, that bishops were 
 settled in all the seven churches of the Proconsular Asia, of which Ephe- 
 sus was the metropolis, at or near the time when these Epistles were 
 written by St. John, and sent to the angels, or bishops^, of these churches. 
 
Omerai Defence of Episcopacy » 157 
 
 Titus in Crete, the careful performance of the duties aris- 
 ing from such an important trust would, no doubt, procure 
 the praise of their heavenly Master ; while inattention and 
 negligence, neither reproving what was wrong, nor rebuk- 
 ing the wicked, nor expelling the incorrigible, would as 
 certainly expose them to the just reprehension of that 
 divine Lord, who had employed his servant John thus to 
 point out their duty, and do the same good office to the 
 bishops of the seven churches in Asia, that St. Paul had 
 done before to those of Ephesus and Crete* 
 
 Our Lecturer, indeed, after all he had said to show the 
 resemblance between St. John's bishops in Asia, and his 
 own moderators in Scotland, acknowledges, that his opi- 
 nion " is only the most likely conjecture of all he has seen 
 on this article, w^hich, he owns, does not admit so positive 
 a proof as might be wished." And yet, from proof so im- 
 perfect, and evidence merely conjectural, he infers, without 
 the least hesitation, that " it was doubtless the distinction of 
 one pastor in every church, marked by this apostle, though 
 not made by any who had written before him, which has led 
 TertuUian, whose publications first appeared but about a 
 century after the apostles, to consider him as the institutor 
 of Episcopacy."^" To prove that this was Tertullian's opi- 
 nion, his words are quoted in Latin, with the translation 
 given of them by Bingham, in his Antiquities of the Chris- 
 tian Church^\ which is called " a palpable misinterpretation 
 of our antiquary," as by this version, according to our au- 
 thor, " Bingham avoids showing, what is extremely plain 
 from the words, that TertuUian did not think there was 
 any subordination in the pastors of the churches instituted 
 by the other apostles."J But this, perhaps, would not 
 
 * Lecture v. t Book II. chap. i. § 3. 
 
 \ Tertuilian's words are, as taken by themselves in Dr. Campbell's 
 quotation, " Ordo tamen Episcop'irum ad originem recensus in Joannem 
 stabit auctorem:" (lib. iv. adv. Marcionem) which Bingham translates 
 thus : " The oixler of bi&hops, \vhen it is traced up to its originulj will 
 
1 58 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 have appeared so " extremely plain" as Dr. Campbell 
 thought it, had he not omitted the first clause of the sen- 
 tence, with which the words he has quoted have a neces- 
 sary and evident connection. In his controversy with 
 Marcion, who rejected part of the New Testament canon, 
 Tertullian had been proving the novelty of this heretic's 
 opinions, from his being unable to show any church that 
 embraced them, which could deduce its original by a de- 
 scent of bishops from the apostles ; which was evidently 
 the case with those churches, in which the sound apostolic 
 doctrine was still retained. For " let us see," says he, 
 *' what milk the Corinthians drew from Paul, by what rule 
 the Galatians were reclaimed, what the Philippians, Thes- 
 salonians and Ephesians read, what, likewise, our neigh- 
 bour Romans say, to whom both Peter and Paul left the 
 gospel sealed with their blood.— We have also churches 
 founded by John,^ for though Marcion rejects his apoca- 
 
 be found to have St. John for one of its authors." This Dr. Campbell 
 proves to be a ** palpable misinterpretation," by the following argument. 
 Had Tertullian said — " Mundus ad originem recensus, in Deum stabit 
 creatorem," would Bingham have rendered it — " The world, when it 
 is traced up to its original, will be found to have God for one of its crea- 
 tors ? I cannot allow myself to think it. Yet the interpolation, in ren- 
 dering creatorem one of its creators, is not more flagrant than in render- 
 ing auctoreni one of its authors." This reflection we cannot help think- 
 ing too severe, if not Jiagrantly unjust. For Bingham knew well, that 
 Tertullian did not allow colleagues to God, as creator of the world ; but 
 that he very well might assign, and had actually assigned colleagues to 
 John, as author of Episcopacy. And as the Latin language has no re- 
 strictive article, we must be regulated by the context, in rendering aucto- 
 rern either an author, thereby with Bingham admitting other authors, 
 or the zwthoY, with Dr. Campbell, thereby restricting the sense to one, 
 ■which certainly was not Tertuliian's meaning, as is evident from the 
 connection of this quotation with the preceding part of the passage 
 from which it is taken. 
 
 * Habemus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias : Nam etsi apocalypsim ejus 
 Marcion respuit, ordo tatnen Episcoporum ad originem recensus, in Joan- 
 nem stabit auctoiem ; where the word tanten evidently shows that the 
 passage must have a connection with what goes immediately before. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy » i^9 
 
 lypse, yet the order or succession of bishops in these 
 churches, when traced up to its original, will be found to 
 have John for its author," as being the ordainer of the first 
 bishops in the churches which he had planted. 
 
 This, though a kind of paraphrase of his words, is 
 evidently Tertullian's meaning, and agrees exactly with 
 what he says on the same subject in another of his works, 
 which we have already had occasion to mention, his " Pre- 
 scriptions against Heretics," where he challenges them to 
 '' produce the originals of their churches, and show the 
 order of their bishops so running down successively from 
 the beginning, as that every first bishop among them, shall 
 have had for his author and predecessor, some one of the 
 apostles, or apostolic men, who continued with the apostles. 
 For in this manner the apostolic churches bring down 
 their registers ; as the church of Smyrna from Polycarp 
 placed there by John, the church of Rome from Clement 
 ordained by Peter ; and so do the rest prove their apostolic 
 original, by exhibiting those who were constituted their 
 bishops by the apostles."* Here we see not only Tertul- 
 lian mentioning the circumstance of Peter ordaining Cle- 
 ment at Rome, as well as John placing Polycarp at Smyrna, 
 both of whom have been always called bishops ; but that 
 the rest of the churches also had bishops constituted by the 
 apostles ; and he expressly gives the very appellation of 
 "author" to every apostle, or apostolic man, who had founded 
 churches any where. Had Dr. Campbell acted fairly with 
 his " young friends, whom he had just before been wam- 
 
 * Tertullian's words are these : " Edant ergo origenes ecclesiarum 
 suarum ; evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab 
 initio decurrentem, ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex apostolis, vel 
 apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum apostolis perseveraverint, habuerit auc- 
 torein, et antecessorem ; hoc enim modo ecclesise apostolicse census suos 
 deferunt, sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Joanne con- 
 locacv.m refert ; sicut Romanorum Cleimentem a Petro ordinatum edit ; 
 proinde utique et ceterse exhibent, quos ab apostolis in Episcopatum con- 
 stitutes, apostolici seminis traduces habeant." Dc prescript. C. 32. 
 
160 General Defence of Episcopacy , 
 
 ing to revere truth above all things, wherever they found 
 it, and be always open to conviction," he would have laid 
 before them this passage, which I have now quoted, as 
 well as the other, and left them to determine for them- 
 selves, without " prejudice or prepossession, whether there 
 was any good ground to conclude, that TertuUian " consi- 
 dered tlie apostle John as the institutor of Episcopacy." 
 And yet, had the case been really so, the cause of Episco- 
 pac)'' could have received no harm from it, when we find 
 even this learned adversary acknowledging it to be " more 
 likely, that John, in the direction of the Episdes to the 
 seven churches, availed himself of a distinction, which 
 had subsisted from the beginning, than that either the 
 church was new-modelled by this apostle, or that the dif- 
 ferent apostles adopted different plans."* This last suppo- 
 sition, indeed, appears to us so very unlikely, we might even 
 say incredible, that we have no scruple to rest the institu- 
 tion of Episcopacy on the ground which is here assigned 
 to it ; because we are certain that all the apostles modelled 
 the church on one and the same plan, even on the plan of 
 that distinction^ which had subsisted from the beginnings 
 and always " implied" that very " diiference in order and 
 power," which our Professor was so unwilling to acknow- 
 ledge, and laboured so earnesdy to make his pupils disbe* 
 lieve. 
 
 In the course of these labours, we have now followed 
 him through such of his lectures as seem to have more 
 immediate reference to the authority of scripture, in ascer- 
 taining the original constitution and government of the 
 Christian church: a subject on which the inspired writers 
 give us as much clear information as is perfectly sufficient 
 to guide us aright, if we will be directed by it in this in- 
 quiry; and " from which," it is our opinion, " that we can 
 with certainty form a judgment concerning the entire 
 
 * Lecture v: 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 161 
 
 model of the apostolic church." Dr. Campbell, however, 
 thinks otherwise, and represents those passages of scrip- 
 ture which have a reference to this important subject, in a 
 light very different from that in which the friends of Epis- 
 copacy have been taught to view them. To whom then 
 shall we have recourse, as most likely to point out where 
 the truth lies between such jarring opinions ? To whom 
 indeed can we apply for direction in judging of a matter 
 of fact, such as the apostolic constitution of the church, 
 hut to those contemporary or early writers, who, " as to 
 what depends on testimony^'' in explaining any part of 
 ficripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every 
 c^se, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to have' 
 swayed them, to be preferred before modem interpreters or 
 annotators ?" This is the account which, in a work pub- 
 lished by himself,* Dr. Campbell gives of the credit that 
 is due to those who are called the fathers of the church ; 
 and then he adds — " I say not this, to insinuate that we 
 can relv more on their integrity, but to signify, that with 
 them many points were a subject of testimo7iy, which, with 
 modem critics, are matter merely of conjecture^ or, at most, 
 of abstruse and critical discussion. And every body must 
 he sensible, that the direct testimony of a plain man, in a 
 matter which comes within the sphere of his knowledge, is 
 more to be regarded than the subtile conjectures of an able 
 scholar, who does not speak from knowledge, but gives the 
 conclusions he has drawn from his own precarious reason- 
 ings, or from those of others." 
 
 After such a concession in favour of the fathers, limited 
 as it is in some points, we shall most readily listen to their 
 evidence in the case before us, being well assured, that 
 the government of the church under which they lived, was 
 a matter that " came within the sphere of their knowledge," 
 and that we cannot possibly suspect all the Christian wri- 
 
 * See his Preliminary Dissertations, Sec. p. 106, XQ7. 
 21 
 
162 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 ters of that character, to have been " swayed by any parti- 
 cular passion," to give a false account of whait must have 
 been generally well known, and in a case where the false- 
 hood could have been so easily detected. 
 
 The first of these " ancient testimonies," which our Lec- 
 turer brings forward, is taken, he says, " from the most re- 
 spectable remains we have of Christian antiquity, next to the 
 inspired writings;" and then adds,^ " The piece I allude to 
 is the first Epistle of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians, 
 as it is commonly styled, but as it st}^les itself, the Epistle 
 of the church of God at Rome, to the church of God at 
 Corinth :"■— From which inscription of the epistle. Dr. 
 Campbell would no doubt infer, aS Blondel had done before 
 him,'!' that at the time when it was written, both the church 
 of Rome and that of Corinth v/ere governed by a college 
 of presbyters, or rather by the people at large j since the 
 whole church at Rome wrote to the whole church at 
 Corinth, without making any distinction between clergy 
 and laity. — Yet Blondel could not but know, that such a 
 distinction is expressly mentioned in the epistle itself ; and 
 his follower, Dr. Campbell, is at no small pains to show, that 
 the passage in which it is so mentioned, being " introduced 
 by Clemens, when speaking of the Jewish priesthood, and 
 not of the Christian ministry, aifords no foundation for the 
 distinction that was long after his time introduced." How 
 far this reasoning is just, will appear from considering the 
 purpose, for which the Jewish priesthood is spoken of on 
 this occasion, and the situation of those on whom St. Cle- 
 ment thus presses the necessity of ecclesiastical subordina- 
 tion. 
 
 * Lecture Iv. 
 
 t Yet Blondel acknowledges that this very Cltment was generally be- 
 lieved to have been the second bishop after St. Peier in the church of 
 Rome. — His words are, " Plerique Latinorum (Hieronymo teste) secun- 
 dum posL Petrum fuisse putaverunt, ut ante annum domini dS ad Homanjp 
 eccksijc clavum sedisse neccsse sit." Apologia p.o Sent. Hieron. p. 9. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 163 
 
 A fresh spirit of schism and division had broke out in the 
 church at Corinth, similar to that which St. Paul was 
 obliged to repress, when he wrote his first Epistle to the 
 Corinthians : And now his fellow labourer, St. Clement, 
 making use of some of the powerful arguments which the 
 apostle had formerly urged, brings the matter home to the 
 point in question, by showing how the members of the 
 church at Corinth ought all to conduct themselves in a 
 quiet and peaceable manner, each within his proper station ; 
 thus humbly imitating the order and harmony which pre- 
 vailed in the Jewish church, the instituted type or figure of 
 the church of Christ. " Seeing then," says St. Clement, 
 that " these things are manifest unto us, it will behove 
 us to take care, that looking into the depths of the divine 
 knowledge, we do all things in order, whatsoever our Lord 
 has commanded us"to do : and particularly, that we perform 
 our offerings and service to God, at their appointed seasons 
 —and by the persons that minister unto him. For the 
 chief priest has his proper services, and to the priests 
 their proper place is appointed, and to the Levites belong 
 their proper ministrations (or deaconships), and the layman 
 is confined within the bounds of what is commanded to 
 laymen. Let every one of you, brethren, bless God in his 
 proper station, not exceeding the rule that is appointed to 
 him." When we consider the scope and design of this 
 passage, we must be convinced, that though the venerable 
 writer is speaking of the economy of the Jewish church, it 
 is only in the way of allusion, and for drawing the neces- 
 sary inference, with regard to the Christian ministry. But 
 neither the allusion would have been proper, nor the infer- 
 ence just, if the distinctions of ecclesiastical order in the 
 Christian church had not corresponded to those in the 
 Jewish, as they are here described by St. Clement, for the 
 sake of pointing out the resemblance, and showing the 
 proper conclusion which was to be drawn from it. 
 
 Yet our Professor endeavours to make this ancient author 
 
|:64 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 contradict himself, by quoting a passage from hirii, in 
 which, as he thinks, the orders of the Christian ministry 
 ar*:- represented as but two, and so not the same in number 
 with those of the Jewish. It was for the same purpose 
 that Blondel made use of this passage, in which St. Cle- 
 ment says — that " the apostles having preached the gospel 
 through countries and cities, constituted the first fruits 
 of their conversions, whom they approved by the spirit, 
 bishops and deacons of those who should believe :" From 
 which words it is inferred, that the apostles, in planting 
 churches through countries and cities, ordained but two 
 orders to take care of them.* And may it not then be 
 asked, what were the ordamers themsehes ^ Were they 
 of no order in the church ? Or were they of the same 
 order with either of these whom they ordained ? From 
 the answer that must be given to these question, it is evi- 
 dent that there were three orders in the church, at the time 
 when the apostles ordained the two inferior orders, whom 
 St. Clement, in the current language of the apostolic age, 
 calls bishops and deacons, and thereby alludes to a text, 
 which he quotes frorn Isaiah,| as rendered in the Greek 
 translation — -" I will constitute their bishops in righteous- 
 ness, and their deacons in faith." Whether this be a just 
 translation, or a proper application of the prediction. Dr. 
 Campbell acknowledges is not the question. — " It is 
 enough," he says, " that it evinces what Clement's notion 
 was of the established ministers then in the church." And 
 his notion, we have no doubt, was the same with what we 
 have seen prevailed at the time when he wrote this Epistle 
 ^o the Corinthians; that under the apostles, the care or 
 
 * See the same inference drawn, and the very sanie reasoning made 
 use of to support it, in An Enquiry into the Constitutioii, iSfc. of the Primi- 
 tive Churc/j, which was so completely anrAvered in An Original Drau^bt 
 of the Primiti'ue Church, by a presbyter of the church of Enpjand, that 
 it is said to have brouglit over the Enquirer to this author's opini'^". 
 
 t Isaiah Ix. 17. 
 
Gmeral DefeiKe vf Episcopacy, 165 
 
 oversight of certain portions of the flock of Christ was 
 eommitted to inferior overseers and ministers, whom we 
 l*ave called bishops and deacons, till it was thought proper 
 to put them under the government of persons invested 
 with apostolical power, such as Clemens himself possessed 
 and exercised in the church of Rome, of which he is al- 
 ways distinguished as bishops and by another writer of the 
 same name, Clemens of Alexandria, is expressly called 
 the " apostle Clemens."^ This is all that can be justly in- 
 ferred from the passage of his epistle, quoted by Dr. Camp- 
 bell ; which was not at all intended to point out particularly 
 the number of orders in the church ; and could no more 
 be considered as setting aside the superior rank and autho- 
 rity of bishops, than the common language of both Jewish 
 and Christian writers could be understood as excluding the 
 high priest, when they mentioned the Jewish ministry 
 under the general appellation of priests and Levites.f 
 
 The next testimony \^•hich our author produces, to show 
 that, in the primitive times, there were only two orders of 
 ministers in the church, is that of Polycarp, bishop of 
 Smvrna, who is said by Irenseus to have been taught by the 
 apostles, and to have convei-sed with many, who had seen 
 our Saviour; to which account it is added, that Irenasus 
 himself had seen him, in his younger days, and knew him 
 to have been constituted bishop of Smyrna by the apostles. 
 One might suppose, that when the adversaries of Episco- 
 pacy bring forward such a witness as this in support of 
 their cause, they had certainly discovered in his writings, 
 some clear, undoubted evidence, on which might be justly 
 founded the irrejection of the Episcopal order. But, in- 
 
 * Strom. lib. iv. 
 
 t In some parts of the English liturgy the clergy are prayed for under 
 the twofold distinction of " bishops and curates." But no person will 
 hence infer, that the church of England has but Hvo orders of clergy, 
 when she has so carefully provided for the " making, ordaining and 
 consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons." 
 
166 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 stead of this, all that we meet with in his Epistle to the 
 Philippians, is a very brief intimation of " their being sub- 
 ject to the presbyters and deacons, as unto God and Christ ; 
 while, at the same time, the very introduction to the epistle 
 marks the superior character of the writer, in these words 
 — " Polycarp, and the presbyters that are with him, to the 
 church of God which is at Philippi."^ And if only the 
 presbyters and deacons of that church are mentioned in the 
 words quoted by Dr. Campbell,! it might be owing to the 
 Episcopal charge being vacant at the time when this epistle 
 was written, as was the case at Rome, when Cyprian, bishop 
 of Carthage, wrote his letters to the presbyters of that place. 
 But what shall we say of our Lecturer's asserting it, as 
 " evident from the above quotation, that Polycarp knew of 
 no Christian minister superior to the presbyters," when, 
 together with his own, he earnestly recommended, and actur 
 ally sent to the Philippians, at their desire, those very 
 epistles of Ignatius, in which the office and the duties of 
 a bishop, as distinguished from those of the presbyters, are 
 so fully and frequently insisted on, that Polycarp might 
 well think it unnecessary for him to say any thing farther on 
 that subject? Being himself a bishop, and writing in that 
 character to the Philippians, he might justly consider the 
 epistles of Ignatius, which they were so desirous to see, as 
 perfectly sufficient to establish the regard which was dUe to 
 the Episcopal office, especially as one of these episdes was 
 
 * If the author of this epistle had not been distinguished by a supe- 
 rior dignity of office, we could hardly suppose it consistent with his mo- 
 desty and self-denial, to have named himself only, and made no mention 
 of his brethren, but by the general name of presbyters : A circumstance, 
 ■which obliged even Blondel to make the following remark — " Id tamen 
 in S. Mavtyris epistola peculiare apparet, quod eam privatim suo et presbyte- 
 rorum nomine ad Philippensium fraternitatem dedit, ac sibi quandam supra 
 pi-esbyteros — vtvi^oxav reservasse videtur, ut jam mm in Episcopali apice 
 constitutum reliquos Smyrnensium presbyteros gradu swperasse conjicere 
 liceat." Apol. p. 14. 
 
 t Lecture iv. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy^ 167 
 
 addressed to himself as bishop of Smyrna, and another of 
 them to the church of that place, exhorting them to be obe- 
 dient to their bishop, and to do nothing of what belongs to 
 the church without his consent. 
 
 Indeed, the epistles of Ignatius bear such strong undeni- 
 able evidence to the existence of three distinct orders in the 
 Christian ministry, known by the name of bishops, pres- 
 byters and deacons, that there is no possibility of evading 
 the force of this positive testimony, but by boldly affirming, 
 diat the epistles themselves are spurious, or have been so 
 interpolated by various transcribers, as to leave but a very 
 small, if any degree of credit due to them. This has been 
 the pretence, in one shape or other, of all the advocates for 
 presbyterian parity, from the days of Calvin do^vn to Dr. 
 Campbell ; and we have only to take notice of the same 
 arguments, dressed out perhaps in different forms, according 
 to the taste and abihty of the several writers, who have pre- 
 sumed to attack those venerable remains of ecclesiastical 
 antiquity contained in the epistles of St. Ignatius. — It is 
 very suitable, however, to our present design, to show all 
 proper attention to what has been said on this subject ; and 
 we shall begin with observing, that Ignatius, bishop of 
 Antioch,. having presided over that church with admirable 
 prudence and constancy, for almost forty years, was at last 
 condemned to suffer death, about the tenth year of the 
 reign of the Emperor Trajan, and on the way to his mar- 
 tyrdom at Rome, wrote his epistles to the several churches 
 to which they are addressed. That some such epistles were 
 written by Ignatius, is evident from the account, to which 
 we have just now referred, as given by Polycarp in his 
 Epistle to the Philippians, in which he tells them — ^* The 
 epistles of Ignatius, which he wrote unto us," (that is, to 
 himself, and to the church at Smyrna) " together with what 
 others of his have come to our hands, we have sent to 
 you, according to your order, which are subjomed to this 
 epistle ; by which ye may be greatly profited \ for they treat 
 
168 General Defence of Episcopacy » 
 
 of faith, and patience, and of all things that pertain to edi- 
 fication in the Lord Jesus."* To this account from Poly- 
 earp, we may add that which is given by his disciple Ire- 
 naeus, bishop of Lyons, who, as Eusebius assures us, " was 
 not ignorant of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius, and men- 
 tions his epistles in these words — Thus one of our brethren 
 being condemned for maintaining the faith, to be exposed 
 to the wild beasts, said— -I am the wheat of God, and shall 
 be ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I may be found 
 the pure bread of Christ."t Which words, thus quoted by 
 Irenaeus, are found in the epistle of St. Ignatius to the Ro- 
 mans. To this undoubted testimony, may be added that of 
 Origen, who was bom before Irenseus died, and has left us 
 two quotations from the episdes of Ignatius, which are 
 both to be found in our present copies. And Eusebius, in 
 his ecclesiastical history ,J gives us a full account of these 
 epistles, and tells us where the holy martyr wrote them. 
 
 Such are the testimonies, which, together with those of 
 Athanasius, Jerome, and many others, serve to prove, that 
 the epistles of Ignatius, as published by archbishop Usher, 
 in an ancient Latin version, and soon after by Isaac Vossius 
 in the original Greek, from a manuscript in the Florentine 
 librar}^, are undoubtedly the genuine epistles of that primi- 
 tive martyr : a point, which has been so clearly established 
 by the learned Dr. Pearson, late bishop of Chester, in his 
 admirable work on this subject, as to leave room for no 
 objection or argument of any weight to appear, against the 
 genuineness of these epistles, which has not been already 
 refuted in his unanswerable vindication of them.|| If, 
 therefore, it shall still be urged by such writers as Dr. 
 Campbell, against the authority of Ignatius, that " we 
 cannot with safety found a decision on an author, with 
 
 * See Archbishop Wake's Translation of the Genuine Epistles of tht 
 Apostolical Fathers, p. 59. 
 
 f Irenaeus Contra Her. lib. v. cap. 28. \ Lib. Hi. c. 36. 
 
 II See Viiulici.s Ignatiana, by Dr. Pearson. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacip d6^ 
 
 whose works transcribers have made so free," we think it 
 sufficient to reply in the words of archbishop Wake, " that 
 )S. it be meant, that the same has happened to the epistles of 
 Ignatius, as has done to all other ancient writings, that let- 
 ters or words have been mistaken, either by the careless- 
 ness or ignorance of the transcribers, we see no reason 
 why we should deny that to have befallen these epistles, 
 which has been the misfortune of all other pieces of the like 
 antiquity. This, therefore, it has been often declared,^ 
 that neither do we contend about ; nor can any one, who 
 i^eads the best copies we have of them with any care or 
 judgment, make any doubt about it. But as for any large 
 interpolations, such as were those of the copies before ex- 
 tant ;'[■ for any changes or mistakes that may call in question 
 either the credit or authority of these epistles, as we now 
 have them, we utterly deny that there are any such in these 
 last editions of them :"J nor, we may add, has even the 
 Ipamed Dr. Campbell offered any thing to induce us to 
 believe that there are. He has indeed acknowledged, that 
 " the epistles in question ought not to be rejected in the 
 lump," but still insists " that undue freedoms have been 
 used, even with the purest of them, by some over-zealous 
 partizan of the priesthood." And if we should maintain, 
 that this" is an undue freedom used by " ail over-zealous 
 partizan" of presbytery, we could bring forward as much 
 proof in support of our assertion, as he has produced for 
 the purpose of stamping the mark of forgery, or interpo- 
 lation, on the epistles of Ignatius. All that he has offered 
 like argument on the subject,|| amounts at most, even by 
 h|^ own account, to " raising suspicions of their authenti- 
 city. Or at least of their integrity ;" but he surely knew, 
 that it requires more than suspidon^ however strong, to fix 
 forgery, or prove interpolation in any writing. 
 
 * Vossii annot. passim. Pearson Vind. Ignat. Proleg. p. 20. 
 " f That is, before those of Usher and Vossius. 
 t See Archbishop Wake's Translation, &c. p. 39. II Le«t«re vi 
 32 
 
1 70 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 What seems to be the greatest ground of offence, as well 
 as of suspicion, is the " nauseous repetition," as he calls it, 
 " of obedience and subjection to the bishop, presbyters, 
 and deacons, to be found in the letters of Ignatius." But 
 has he shown, of even attempted to show, that there are 
 any manuscripts, or editions of letters, in which this offen- 
 sive " nauseous repetition" is not to be met with ? No : 
 but the sentiment itself, and the manner in which it is ex- 
 pressed, are so different from the spirit and style of the 
 apostolic age, as to afford " strong presumptive evidence 
 against the entire genuineness of the letters in question." 
 Such is the judgment which Professor Campbell wished 
 his pupils to form on this controverted point j* very differ- 
 ent indeed from the opinion delivered by one, who must 
 be acknowledged a no less competent judge of their merit, 
 even the learned translator of the epistles of Ignatius into 
 English, who assures us, that " there is nothing in these 
 epistles, as we now have them, either unworthy of the 
 spirit of Ignatius, or the character that antiquity has given 
 us of them ; nothing disagreeing to the time in which he 
 wrote, or that should seem to speak them to have been the 
 work of any later author. Now this, as it hardly ever 
 fails to discover such pieces as are falsely imposed upon 
 ancient authors; so there not appearing any thing of this 
 kind in these epistles, inclines us the more readily to con- 
 clude, that they were undoubtedly written by him, whose 
 they are said to be."t And when we are thus well assured 
 that they are so, and have every reason to believe that this 
 
 * It is worthy of notice, how differently Dr. Campbell himself ex- 
 presses his opinion of the Ignatian epistles, in the preface to his transla- 
 tion cf St. John's gospel, where he says — " There are evident refer- 
 rences to this gospel, though without naming the author, in some epis- 
 tles of Ignatius, the authenticity of which is strenuously maintained by 
 bishop Pearson, and other critics of name — It was in the beginning of 
 the second (century) when the above mentioned Ignatius wrote his epis- 
 tles."— Dr. Campbell's Translation of the Gospels is dedicated to a liiskop. 
 
 t See Archbishop Wake's Translation, p. 34. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, i.7i 
 
 is a true and just account of their character, we need not 
 be much moved by any of those objections, which the anti- 
 Episcopal writers have made to their authenticit}^ ; one of 
 ^hich Dr. Campbell states to be, that " their style, in many 
 places, is not suited," as he expresses it, " to the simplicity' 
 of the times immediately succeeding the times of the apos- 
 tles ;" and then, after enlarging a litde on this topic, in a way 
 that only seems like reasoning, and has but the appearance 
 of argument, he adds, " but it is not the style only which 
 has raised suspicion, it is chiefly the sentiments." And 
 the chief sentiment, which he has selected to justify this 
 suspicion, is expressed in the following words of Ignatius 
 to Polycarp — " Attend to the bishop, that God may attend 
 to you. I pledge my soul for theirs, who are subject to 
 the 'bishop, presbyters, and deacons. Let my part in God 
 be with them." 
 
 After quoting these words, our Lecturer asks — " Was 
 It the doctrine of Ignatius, that all that is necessary to sal- 
 vation in a Christian, is an implicit subjection to the bi- 
 shop, presbyters, and deacons t Be it, that he means only 
 in spiritual matters. Is this the style of the apostles to 
 their Christian brethren ?" Yes ; we answer, it is the very 
 style even of that great apostle, to whom he immediately 
 refers, and who, after giving this command to the believing 
 Hebrews — " Obey them that have the rule over you, and 
 submit yourselves," gives also the reason and object of his 
 command-—" for they watch for your souls, as they that 
 must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not 
 with grief ;"^ that is, may give a joyful account of your 
 obedience and submission to them, when they are speaking 
 to you in the name of Christ, and teaching you to observe 
 all things whatsoever he has commanded. For it was only 
 When the bishop, with his presbyters and deacons, .were 
 thus employed in the careful discharge of their duty as 
 
 * Heb. xiii. ir. 
 
1 7'2 General Defence of Episcopacy ^ 
 
 ambassadors for Christ, that Ignatius required the Christ 
 tians at Smyrna to hearken and attend to them ; and if they 
 did so, he might very safely assure them of salvation ; just 
 as we find two of our Lord's apostles quoting that passage 
 of scripture which saith-r— " Whosoever shall call upon the 
 name of the Lord, shall be saved ;"^ where " calling on 
 the name of the Lord," must necessarily imply faith in that 
 name, which is the " only one given under heaven, whereby 
 we must be saved," and obedience to that Lord, " who 
 became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that 
 obey him." Yet the same St. Paul, who said of himself 
 and his fellow apostles-—" We preach not ourselves, but 
 Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants for 
 Jesus' sake," could also represent himself as a humble in- 
 strument of that salvation, which this Jesus had purchased, 
 when, speaking as the apostle of the Gentiles, he said, on 
 that account, " I magnify mine office, if by any means I 
 may provoke to emulation, them which are my flesh, and 
 might save some of t/ion,^^^ 
 
 In the same light we find him representing his fellow 
 labourer Timothy, when having pointed out what things he 
 was to " command and teach," he exhorts him to " continue 
 in them, and to take heed unto himself, and unto the 
 doctrine ; for in doing this," says he, " thou shalt both save 
 thyself, and them that hear theeJ'''X Where then was the 
 presumption or impropriety in Ignatius " thus exhibiting 
 the pattern, which had been given by that great apostle," 
 and in the name of his blessed Master, promising salvation 
 to those who should hearken to the doctrine, and follow 
 the directions delivered by his commissioned servants, and 
 agreeably to his holy will ? If this was the " predominant 
 scope" of Ignatius, in the letters ascribed to him, does he 
 deserve the imputation of " preaching himself and other 
 
 * Acts ii. 21, and Rom. x, IS. f Rom. xi. 13, U. 
 
 \ 1 Tim. iv. 16. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 /o 
 
 ecclesiastics ?" And was it fair to say, as Dr. Campbell has 
 said, that " the only consistent declaration which would 
 have suited the author of these epistles, must have been 
 die reverse of Paul's. We preach not Christ Jesus the 
 Lord, but so far only as may conduce to the increase of our 
 influence, and the exaltation of our power ; nay, for an 
 object so important, we are not ashamed to preach up 
 ourselves your masters, with unbounded dominion over 
 your faith, and consequently over both soul and body." 
 
 Where are the words of Ignatius to be found that can 
 bear such a harsh interpretation? We have read all his 
 epistles from beginning to end, but have not met with a 
 single expression in them that can justly be said to lead 
 to such an unworthy conclusion. On the contrary, we see 
 his humility no less conspicuous than his zeal, when we 
 find him declaring to the Magnesians — ^" As one of the 
 least among you, I am desirous to forewarn you, that ye 
 fall not into the snares of vain doctrine ;" and to the Ro- 
 mans — " I do not^ as Peter and Paul command you. They 
 were apostles, I a condemned man ; they were free, but I 
 am even to this day a servant-''* thereby alluding to his ap- 
 proaching sufferings as the conclusion of his service^ and 
 acting not at all consistently with that affectation of power, 
 that desire of worldly exaltation, which, on the supposition 
 of his epistles being genuine, as we have very good ground 
 to believe they are, our Professor thinks it necessary, for 
 the sake of " propriety, as well as consistency," to ascribe 
 to this truly pious and venerable prelate ; of whom it may 
 indeed be said, in the words of Dr. Campbell, that he has 
 thus " suffered a second martyrdom" in his character, for 
 no other reason but because he is considered as " the first 
 ecclesiastical author who mentions bishop, presbyter, and 
 deacon, as three distinct orders of church officers." And 
 what wonder is it, if he were really so, when in the re- 
 stricted sense of " ecclesiastical authors," as excluding the 
 inspired writings, we know of none whose writings are 
 
1 74f General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 received as authentic, pi*ior to Ignatius, unless Clemens of 
 Rome : and does Ignatius contradict or differ misterially 
 from Clemens ? Or does Pol^xarp, of Smyrna, whom Dr. 
 Campbell has quoted with so much triumph, differ so 
 widely from Ignatius, as to show not merely a " diversity 
 in style, but a repugnancy in sentiment ?" What though 
 both these old bishops of Rome and of Smyrna speak in 
 very honourable terms, not only of presbyters, but of dea- 
 cons, and seem to direct the attention of those whom they 
 addressed chiefly to these two orders of ministers ? Do 
 any such hints and directions, with all that can be drawn 
 from them in the way of doubtful inference, speak so de- 
 cisively in favour of Presbytery, as the precise words of 
 Ignatius, without any comment, do in support of Episco- 
 pacy ? Are the specious arguments of philosophy held 
 forth to prove the formation of all things by a first cause, 
 so clear and satisfying a demonstration to the mind of a 
 Christian, as this single and express assertion of the inn 
 spired historian, " In the beginning God created the hea- 
 ven and the earth ?" 
 
 But it is needless to insist any longer on this part of eu¥ 
 subject, since our Lecturer himself thinks proper to close 
 it in these words — " But should we admit after all, in op- 
 position to strong presumptive evidence, the entire genu- 
 ineness of the letters in question, all that could be fairly 
 inferred from the concession is, that the distinction of 
 orders, and subordination of the presbyters, obtained about 
 twenty or thirty years earlier than I have supposed, and 
 that it was a received distinction at Antioch, and in Asia 
 Minor, before it was known in Macedonia, and other parts 
 of the Christian church. That its prevalence has been 
 gradual, and that its introduction has arisen from the 
 example and influence of some of the principal cities, is 
 highly probable." It is thus that our learned Professor is 
 pleastd to make concessions, for the sake of drawing such 
 inferences from them, as may best suit his own purpose^ 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. Vt% 
 
 and at last to decide the very point in question, and a mat- 
 ter of the utmost importance, by no other argument, than 
 that his account of it '^ is highly probable ;" an argument, 
 which, whatever may be allowed to it in speculative debate, 
 can have but little weight in determining matters of fact. 
 Yet if we were to make the most of our adversary's con- 
 cession, that when Ignatius wrote, the " distinction of 
 orders, and subordination of presbyters, which we plead 
 for, was received at Antioch, and in Asia Minor," and to 
 admit his " probability, that the example of some of the 
 principal cities" would have considerable influence in favour 
 of such distinction, we should not be ashamed to own, that 
 the example of such a " principal" place, as the scripture 
 describes Antioch to have been, has great weight with us ; 
 and that we think it a point of no small consequence gained, 
 to find our scheme of church government so early received 
 " in a city," where the disciples were first called Chris- 
 tians.^ 
 
 - But the epistles of Ignatius not only show what was the 
 form of government in the church at the time when he 
 >vrote them, (which was a very few years after the death 
 of the apostle St. John) and what it was in the city of An- 
 tioch, of which he had been bishop near forty years ; they 
 also exhibit the clearest evidence of his belief, that the 
 three distinct orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons 
 were of divine institution, and essential to the regular con- 
 stitution of the Christian church. In these epistles he men- 
 tions several of his contemporary bishops by name, Onesi- 
 mus, bishop of the Ephesians; Damas, of the Magnesians ; 
 Polybius, of theTrallians; and Polycarp, of the Smymians; 
 and still as he mentions them, he highly commends the 
 presbyters and deacons for their obedience to them, as to 
 the command of God, and according to the will of Jesus 
 Christ. Having saluted the Trallians in the fulness of his 
 
 * Acts xi. 26. 
 
1 r6 General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 apostolic character, he earnestly exhorts them to be subject 
 to their bishop, presbyters and deacons ; for without these, 
 there is no church : And then, entreating them to beware 
 of the poisonous doctrine of certain dangerous heretics, he 
 adds—" And this you will do, while you are not puffed up, 
 nor separated from God, even Jesus Christ ; nor from the 
 bishop, and the commands of the apostles. He that is 
 within the altar is pure ; but he that does any thing" (be- 
 longing to the altar) " without the bishop, presbyters and 
 deacons, is defiled in his conscience." So likewise in th& 
 inscription of his epistle to the Philadelphians, he " salutes 
 them in the blood of Jesus Christ, our everlasting and per- 
 manent joy, especially if they were at unity with the bishop, 
 and the presbyters that were with him, and the deacons, 
 who were appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ, 
 whom he had, according to his ov/n will, established wirix 
 firmness by his holy spirit." And in the epistle to the 
 church at Smyrna, after mentioning the reverence which is 
 due to the sacred orders of the ministry, " as the com- 
 mandment of God," he adds—" Let no man do any thing 
 of what belongs to the church, separately from the bishop. 
 Let that be esteemed a valid eucharist, which is celebrated 
 by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Without the 
 bishop, it is not lawful either to baptize, or to celebrate the 
 feast of charity ; but that which he approves, is also pleas- 
 ing unto God, that so whatever is done, may be sure and 
 well done." 
 
 These are some of the many passages which might be 
 produced from the epistles of Ignatius, to evince his belief 
 of a truth, v/hich even these few are sufficient to show he 
 certainly did believe, that the principal care, and govern- 
 ment of the church of Christ had been committed by his 
 apostles to those, who, immediately after the apostolic age, 
 were peculiarly distinguished by the title of bishops^ having 
 under them the two inferior orders of presbyters and dea- 
 cons^ discharging their several offices always in conjunctioi>. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 77 
 
 with, and subordination to, their respective bishops, with- 
 out whose authority, in the opinion of Ignatius, no bap- 
 tism was to be administered, no eucharist celebrated ; no- 
 thing, in short, to be done, which more immediately be- 
 longed to the service of the church, or was included in the 
 commission which our Lord gave his apostles, to be con- 
 tinued to the end of the world, for making the nations 
 Christian, and teaching them to observe all things neces- 
 sary to salvation and happiness. Such was the doctrine 
 delivered by this holy and venerable bishop of Antioch, 
 who could not but be perfecdy acquainted with the form of 
 government, which the apostles, by their Lord's command, 
 had settled in the church, since he lived so near to their 
 times, and had not only been instructed by them, but, as 
 St. Chrysostom tells us, actually received his ordination 
 from their sacred hands. It is likewise to be considered, 
 that these epistles were written by him, in the immediate 
 prospect of that violent death, to which he was condemned 
 for his bold and steady adherence to the faith of Christ, 
 and when, having but a short time to live, he was desirous 
 to leave behind him this last and dying testimony of his 
 zeal for the honour of his blessed Master, and the advance- 
 ment of. that glorious cause, for which he was about to 
 suffer. All these are considerations which must add great 
 weight to the evidence of Ignatius, and may well convince 
 every impartial reader of his epistles, how unreasonable it 
 is to expect or desire any stronger, or more ample testi- 
 mony than that which they bear to the Episcopal govern- 
 ment of what even Dr. Campbell is obliged to acknowledge 
 to be the " truly primitive church." 
 
 In the middle of his remarks on Ignatius, the Doctor 
 thought proper to introduce, without much appearance of 
 connection, another writer of the second age, " in whose 
 writings," he says, the " names bishop and presbyter, 
 and others of the like import, are sometimes used indis- 
 criminately." This writer is no other than Ireneeus, who 
 
 23 
 
1 7& General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 was first a presbyter, and afterwards bishop of the church 
 of Lyons, and having successively discharged these two 
 offices, can hardly be supposed lo confound, or be ignorant 
 of, the distinction between them. Indeed, our Lecturer 
 acknowledges, " that the distinction of these, as of differ- 
 ent orders, began about this time generally to prevail; 
 although the difference was not near so considerable as it 
 became afterwards. Accordingly Irenseus," he says, " talks 
 in much the same style of both. What at one time he as- 
 cribes to bishops, at another he ascribes to presbyters : he 
 speaks of each in the same terms, as entitled to obedience 
 from the people, as succeeding the apostles in the ministry 
 of the word, as those by whom the apostolic doctrine and 
 traditions had been handed down." — Now, the proof of all 
 this similarity of order, and sameness of office in bishop 
 and presbyters, is taken from one single passage of the 
 work of Irenseus against the heretics of his time, wherein, 
 speaking of apostolic tradition, he defines it to be that, 
 *' which, from the apostles, is preserved through successions 
 of presbyters in the churches."* On which passage Dr« 
 Campbell makes this observation — Here not only " are the 
 presbyters mentioned as the successors of the apostles, but 
 in ranging the ministries, no notice is taken of any inter- 
 vening order, such as that of bishops." And for that very 
 reason, as such an intei-vening order certainly existed in 
 the days of Irenseus, we may justly conclude, that the 
 presbyters were not mentioned by him, " as the successors 
 of the apostles ;" nor do his words imply any such thing ; 
 being solely intended to point out a continued succession 
 and course of presbyters, or, as we would now say, clergy 
 in general, as (custodes) guardians of apostolic tradition. 
 
 • The words quoted by Dr. Campbell are these : " Cum autem ad earn 
 iterum traditionem qu3e est ab apostolis, quae per successiones presbytc- 
 rorum in ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus eos, qui adversantur traditioni, 
 dicent se non solum presbyter is sed etiam apostolis existentes sapien- 
 tiores, synceram invenisse veritatem." Lib. iii. cap. 2. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 1 79 
 
 It is well known, that the word presbyter may refer to 
 age, as well as to office; and though the writers of the 
 second century never apply the title of presbyter to a bi- 
 shop of their own time, but always appropriate it to sub- 
 ordinate presbyters, to express the distinction between bi- 
 shops and them ; yet when they speak of bishops of former 
 times, they make no scruple of giving them sometimes the 
 appellation of presbyters, as being a term equivalent to that 
 of ancients^ signifying not their office, but their antiquity 
 in the church, and in that sense, it might be applied not to 
 ©ne only, but to all the orders of the sacred ministry. 
 That this was the sense in which Irenseus applied it, in the 
 passage quoted by Dr. Campbell, is sufficiently evident 
 from other parts of his writings, where it is expressly 
 mentioned, that in the chief care and government of the 
 church, the bishops only were the successors of the apos- 
 tles. Thus, when arguing against the heretics who infested 
 the church in his time, to show that their doctrine was not 
 that of the apostles, nor handed down from them, he 
 makes the following appeal — " We can reckon up those 
 who were by the apostles ordained bishops in the churches, 
 and those who were their successors even to our own time. 
 They never taught nor knew any of the wild opinions of 
 these men : And had the apostles known any hidden mys- 
 teries, which they imparted to none but the perfect (as the 
 heretics pretend), they would have committed them with 
 particular care to those persons, to whom they committed 
 the churches themselves. For they would be extremely 
 desirous, that those should be perfect, and unreprovable in 
 all things, whom they left to be their successors, and to 
 whom they consigned their own authority." — He then adds 
 — " Because it would be tedious to enumerate the succes- 
 sion of bishops in all the churches, he would instance in 
 that of Rome ; which succession he brings down to Eleu- 
 therius, who was the twelfth from the apostles, and was 
 
180 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 bishop there, when Irenseus MTOte this treatise ;"* in ano- 
 ther part of which he tells us, that the true knowledge Is 
 " the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient state of the 
 church throughout the world, and the character of the 
 body of Christ, according to the successions of bishops, 
 to whom they committed that church, which is in every 
 place, and has descended even unto us."t In these pas- 
 sages of Irenaeus, where the succession from the apostles 
 is plainly and purposely held up to view, we see ^' no no- 
 tice taken of any intervening order," such as that of Dr. 
 Campbell's presbyters, as in any way necessary to the car- 
 ryinj^ on that succession, which, together with their doc- 
 trine, was delivered by the apostles to the several churches 
 founded by them, and is therefore very properly made use 
 of, to show that the doctrine was most likely to be found 
 where the succession was regular. 
 
 . The same argument, we have seen, was employed by 
 another ecclesiastical writer of this period, the much ad- 
 mired, yet deeply regretted TertuUian, who speaks of it as 
 a thing universally admitted in his time, that the apostles 
 
 * His words are, " Habemns annumerare eos, qui ab apostolis instituti 
 sunt Episcopi in ecclesiis, et successores eorum usque ad nos, qui nil tale 
 docuerint, neque cognoverunt, quale ab his deliratur. Etenim si recon- 
 dita mysteria scissent apostoli, quae seorsim ec latenter ab reliquis perfectos 
 docebant, his vel maxime traderent ea, quibus etiam ipsas ecclesias com- 
 mittebant. Valde enim perfectos, et irreprehensibiles in omnibus eos vo- 
 lebant esse, quos et successores relinquebant, suum ipsorum locum magis- 
 terii tradentes. — Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine, oni- 
 r.ium ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maxima et antiquissimse, et om- 
 nibus cognitae, a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis Petro et Paulo Romse fun- 
 datae et constitutse ecclesiae, earn quam habet ab apostolis traditionem, et 
 annunciatam horoinibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientem 
 usque ad nos, indicantes confundimus onines cos," See. Iren. lib. iii. cap. 3. 
 f Agnitio vera est apostolorum doctrina, et antiquus ecclesix status in 
 \miverso mundo, et character corporis Christi secundum successiones 
 Episcoporum quibus illi earn, quae in unoquoque loco est, ecclesiam tra- 
 f1:derunt, quae pervenit usque ad nos, S;c. Lib. iv. cap. 6S. 
 
Gefieral Defence of Episcopacy, 181 
 
 placed bishops in all the churches which they planted ; of 
 which he gives a particular instance in that of Smyrna and 
 of Rome, and argues against the heretics in the same 
 manner as Irenaeus had done ; proving, as has been already 
 shown, that by this succession, from the apostles, of regu- 
 lar and lawful bishops, the true faith was preserved in all 
 the churches, which had their foundation in some one or 
 other of the apostles, and thereby retained the apostolic 
 doctrine. And however Tertullian may have erred in 
 matters of opinion, by mistaking the meaning of some 
 texts of scripture, and building too much on his own fan- 
 ciful interpretation of them, there can be no doubt as to the 
 regard which is due to his testimony, when asserting such 
 a well known fact as that of the succession of bishops from 
 the apostles ; a thing so fully attested by the ecclesiastical 
 registers to which he refers. 
 
 Passing over what our Lecturer says of two short, and, 
 we suspect, spurious, letters from Pius, bishop of Rome, to 
 Justus, bishop of Vienna, as not worthy of notice, we t ome 
 to consider a passage quoted by him from Clement of 
 Alexandria, who wrote at the close of the second century, 
 and which l>e thus translates — " Just so in the church, the 
 presbyters are entrusted with the dignified ministry, the 
 deacons with the subordinate. Both kinds of service the 
 angels perform to God in the administration of this lower 
 world."* Dr. Campbell then adds — " Here the distinction 
 is strongly marked between presbyter and deacon : But is 
 it not plain from his words, that Clement considered the 
 distinction between bishop and presbyter, as, even in his 
 days, comparatively not worthy of his notice ?"'|' We 
 must, however, beg leave to say, that this inference does 
 
 * The words in Greek, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, are — O^oi^^- ^s koci 
 KO^oc rriv iKK\ri(na,v, luv j-csv ^BX%uflix.m en Tcpao-jSulEpoi (Tuj^ecnv EiJtova rviv 
 vxYifiliKviv ot ^iajcovo*, ra^vloig ocfj-i^cJlixq hoe,KOH(X,(; ocyyeXoi t£ U7r£p»il«v]»i rw 
 ©eoi, KOilix, TYiv Twv -crfpiystwy oiKovo/xiav. Strom, 1. I. 
 
 t Lecture vi. 
 
182 Qeneral Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 not appear so plain as the Doctor thinks ; not only because 
 Clement's words evidently refer to the allusion he had been 
 drawing from philosophy and physic, as administering to 
 soul and body, the twofold distinction in man ; but chiefly 
 because in another passage of this very work, he illustrates 
 what he had said of the services of angels, by observing, 
 that the faithful presbyter, though not honoured with the 
 frst seat on earthy shall yet sit on one of the four and twenty 
 thrones mentioned in St. John's revelation ; from which 
 he takes occasion to show, that the gradual promotion of 
 bishops^ presbyters^ and deacons^ bears resemblance to the 
 orders of angels,^ and so gives ground for comparing the 
 hierarchy in the church on earth to that which takes place 
 in heaven. And that this same Clement was very far from 
 *' considering the distinction between bishop and presbyter, 
 as not worthy of his notice," is still farther evinced by 
 what he says in another of his works, where, having pointed 
 out some texts of scripture, as containing a summary of 
 the duties which concern all Christians in general, he adds 
 ' — " that there are other precepts without number, which 
 concern men in particular capacities ; some which relate to 
 presbyters, others which belong to bishops, and others 
 respecting deacons :"'|' — from which it must plainly appear, 
 not only that Clement regarded the distinction between 
 bishop, presbyter, and deacon, as a matter that ought to 
 be duly attended to, but also that he considered the re- 
 spective duties of these several orders, as distinctly stated 
 in the holy scriptures. 
 
 ■^ Ette* xat ai ev1au9« KoCioi. tyiV £x.)iX»3<3"iav OTpoHOTr^i, tTC^TKorr-jovy wpeo'^y- 
 
 'ivyXv/iHCTi'i, Strom. 1, VI. 
 
 TOLiq /5;CAoi$ rat? aytatg at /xev wpEcrCylEpotjjai ds ETtcrxoTTOi?, at oi oiocKOVOi^* 
 Poedag. lib. iii. c. 12, as quoted by archbishop Potter — On Church Govern- 
 ment'—]). 165, which may be very usefully consulted by those who wish 
 to be properly informed en this subject. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 183 
 
 We have now brought down the evidence in support of 
 apostolic Episcopacy, as the government of the primitive 
 church, to that period which our learned Professor has 
 thought proper to fix for ascertaining what he calls the 
 first step of the hierarchy. We must, however, consider 
 it as the second step of his course, whereby he aflvances 
 from presbytery to what he calls parochial Episcopacy, 
 and which he pretends to found on the unanimous consent 
 of antiquity, " in assigning to one bishop no more than one 
 ExxA*)?i« or congregation, and one Ila^oixia or parish." We 
 have already taken notice of his opinion respecting the first 
 of these words, which, though usually translated churchy 
 " when it is not applied to the whole Christian community, 
 can only," he says, " denote a single congregation of 
 Christians ; the plural number, churches^ being invariably 
 used, when more congregations than one are spoken of, 
 unless the subject be of the whole commomvealth of 
 Christ."^ Hence he fondly draws, what he thinks an 
 unavoidable conclusion, that " as one bishop is invariably 
 considered, in the most ancient usage, as having only one 
 church or congregation, it is manifest that his inspection at 
 first was only over one parish."'!' 
 
 Laying this do\vn as the fundamental position, on which 
 rises under his masterly hands that specious fabric which he 
 has dignified with the name of " parochial Episcopacy," 
 he seems to feel himself standing on sure ground; and his 
 pupils no doubt would be encouraged to view it as such, 
 having had no intimation given them that it was the very 
 same ground from which so many of his predecessors had 
 been successively beaten, and which was assumed, with 
 the same confidence, about a century ago, by the author of 
 a work already referred to, called an " Enquiry into the 
 constitution^ discipline^ unity and worship of the Primitive 
 Churchy Of the striking similarity between this work, 
 
 * Lecture vi. t Lecture vi. 
 
1 84 General Defence of Episcopacy » 
 
 and that part of Dr. CampbelFs Lectures which is now 
 before us, I cannot express my opinion more justly, or to 
 better purpose, than in the words of a learned divine of the 
 church of England, who, in some remarks lately published 
 on this subject, says — " Having attended to the progress 
 of this controversy, and particularly marked the ground on 
 which, from time to time, it has been placed, I have no 
 difficulty in tracing the road which the Professor has tra- 
 velled; and there is little doubt on my mind, that the pub- 
 lication last mentioned was the one which the Professor 
 had before him when he put together that part of his Lec- 
 tures which is now more immediately under consideration ; 
 because the same arrangement of argument and proof, the 
 same mutilation of extract, the same want of appeal to that 
 evidence which the scriptures are competent to furnish, 
 together with the same turn of expression, are to be met 
 with in the publications of both writers; a circumstance 
 not to be accounted for but on the supposition of one hav- 
 ing copied from the other."^ 
 
 Now, the foundation, which the Enquirer first, and our 
 Lecturer after him, have both considered as firmly laid in the 
 constitution of the primitive church, is plainly this, that the 
 charge of one bishop was originally confined to one congre- 
 gation, or parish, which they both define, almost in the same 
 terms, to be " a competent number of Christians dwelling 
 near together, having one bishop, pastor or minister set 
 over them, with whom they all met at one time to worship 
 and serve God." This Dr. Campbell further explains, by 
 " observing once and again, that ever}^ church had its own 
 pastors, and its own presbyter}^ independendy of every 
 other church : And when one of the presbyters came to be 
 considered as the pastor ^ byway of eminence, the rest were 
 regarded only as his assistants, vicars or curates, who acted 
 
 * See Mr. Daubeny's Preliminary Discourse to those lately publishetl 
 on the Great J)octrine nf Atonement, p. 90. 
 
Generdl Defence of Episcopacy. Ig5 
 
 under his direction ;" just as the Enquirer had before illus- 
 trated his definition of a presbyter, by observing, '* that as 
 a curate hath the same mission and power with the minis- 
 ter whose place he supplies, yet not being the minister of 
 that place, he cannot perform there any acts of his minis- 
 terial function, without leave from the minister thereof ; so 
 a presb\ter had the same order and power with a bishop, 
 whom he assisted in his cure, yet being not the bishop or 
 minister of that cure, he could not there perform any parts 
 of his pastoral office without the permission of the bishop 
 thereof; so that what we generally render bishops, priests 
 and deacons, would be more intelligible in our tongue, if 
 we did express it by rectors, vicars and deacons; by rec- 
 fors understanding the bishops, and by vicars the presby- 
 ters; the former being the actual incumbents of a place, 
 and the latter curates or assistants, and so different in de- 
 gree, but yet equal in order." 
 
 Thus it is, that these tvvo authors go hand in hand in 
 their definition and explanation of the point in question, 
 the latter boiTowing from the former, and both founding 
 their application of the term parish^ on the et^molog}^ of 
 the original word, to which they tell us, " that there is 
 commonly a strict regard paid, in the first application of a 
 name to any particular purpose." We know wtry well that 
 in the primitive times, to which we are now looking back, 
 a bishop's charge was called his ila^otxia or parish ; and 
 we are told in some Lexicons, that the verb iTa^oiKEo;, from 
 which the English word parish is derived, signifies " habi- 
 tare juxta," to dwell or inhabit near. Yet some of the 
 writers of the New Testament use the word in a different 
 sense, of which several instances could be produced ; and a 
 very " learned and accurate" Lexicographer shows from 
 these instances, that the word refers to " a sojourning, or 
 temporary dwelling in a strange or foreign country," and 
 was therefore very descriptive of the character and situation 
 of those heavenly-minded Christians, who, as strangers 
 
 24 
 
1S6 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 and pilgrims, passed the time of their sojourning here in 
 fear, looking forward in hope to a more settled habita- 
 tion.* 
 
 Our Lecturer indeed sa) s — ^" It must not be imagined, 
 that he lays too great stress on the import of words, whose 
 significations in time come insensibly to alter:" And yet, 
 without taking any notice of the alteration, which time has 
 introduced into the use of the original word in question, 
 he immediately after asserts, " that the word iTa^oiKia, in 
 lu^tm parochia^ can be applied no otherwise, when it re- 
 lates to place, than the term parish is with us at this day ;" 
 whereas the fact is, as clearly exhibited by a learned and 
 inquisitive searcher into these matters,t that though this 
 term was applied in the primitive times to signifv an Epis- 
 copal diocese, yet it was so far from being confined to a 
 single congregation, or to one place of worship, and the 
 inhabitants near it, that it comprehended all that were in- 
 cluded in the civil government of every city, and the re- 
 gion round about it, and, therefore, was of greater or 
 smaller extent, according as the government of such city 
 happened to have a larger or lesser jurisdiction. 
 
 In opposition, however, to this well established fact, our 
 Professor still insists on his being able to evince, beyond 
 all possible doubt, as he affii-ms in the beginning of his 
 seventh Lecture, that " the bishop's cure was originally 
 confined to a single church or congregation ; which he in- 
 
 * See in Mr. Parkhurst's Greek and English Lexicon to the JVeiu Tes- 
 lament, the words — TTa^ot^csw, occurring Luke xxiv. 18 Heb. xi. 9.— 
 ria^oixio., occurring Acts xiii. 17. Applied spiritually, 1 Peter i. 17.— 
 ITa^oiv.oc, occurring Acts vii. 6 — 29. Applied spiritually, Eph. ii. 19, 1 
 Pet. ii 11. In conformity with the meaning annexed to it by the in- 
 spired writers, Suicer renders the word Ila^'Oixsw by the Latin — Advena 
 or Peregrinus sum, and cites as authority for so doing, Philo Judseus, 
 Basil and Theodoret. — See an Original Draught of the Primitive Church, 
 ejTc. p. 34. 35. 
 
 f See VIr. Bingham's Origines Ecclesiastics, or the Antiquities of the 
 Christian Church, vol. iii. p. 344, &c. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 1 87 
 
 tends to show from the particulars recorded in ancient 
 authors, in relation both to him and to it, and which," he 
 says, " can be verified from the clearest and most explicit 
 declarations of these primitive writers, particularly of Ig- 
 natius, of Justin Martyr, of Irenseus, of TertuUian, of Cy- 
 prian, and several others." It is somewhat strange, that 
 he should have omitted an author more ancient than any 
 of these, the writer of the Acts of the Apostles, who gives 
 us a particular account of the very first church formed by 
 them, the church of Jerusalem, and formed, no doubt, as 
 a pattern to all succeeding churches. Of this church, it 
 is universally agreed, as Dr. Campbell himself acknow- 
 ledges, that the first bishop was James, sumamed the 
 yust^ a brother or near kinsman of our Lord ; and whether 
 he was of the number of the twelve or not, is of no conse- 
 quence, since he is expressly called an apostle, was evi- 
 dently vested with the authority of an apostolic bishop, 
 and in that character placed at the head of the church in 
 Jerusalem. The marks of distinction, by which he is 
 plainly pointed out in that station, are too conspicuous not 
 to strike every attentive reader. When St. Peter had de- 
 clared the manner of his miraculous deliverance from 
 prison, to such of the disciples as he found gathered to- 
 gether, he desired them to " go and show these things to 
 James, and to the brethren:"^ but why to James in particu- 
 lar, if he was not the principal person to be informed of that 
 event, and who would most probably have the brethren, 
 that is, the elders or presbyters with him, as we find they 
 were on another occasion, when St. Paul having returned 
 to Jerusalem, from preaching the gospel among the Gen- 
 tiles, was desirous to give an account of his success, and 
 for that purpose " went in, the day following, unto James, 
 and all the elders, or presbyters, were present ?"t In his 
 epistle to the Galatians, the same St. Paul not only places 
 
 * Acts xii. 17. t Acts xxi. 18. 
 
i^B General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 James before Cephas and John, but speaks of those who 
 came down from Judea to Antioch, as " coming frora 
 James,"^ and not from the other apostles and elders, of 
 whom there appears to have been a considerable number 
 then residing at Jerusalem: And if we turn to the fifteenth 
 chapter of the Acts, where the cause of those persons 
 coming down from Judea to Antioch is particularly nar- 
 rated, we find, that in the council of the aposdes and el- 
 ders, who " came together to consider of the matter" in 
 question, after Peter, Barnabas and Paul had severally 
 delivered their opinions on the subject before them, James 
 spoke last, introducing his discourse with this address-??^ 
 ** Men and brethren, hearken unto me," and closing it 
 with a decisive sentence, which, delivered by hin> as pre- 
 siding in the council, put an end to the controversy.-}* 
 
 All these circumstances put together, afford the most 
 satisfactory evidence, that the person thus distinguished by 
 title pa^ which he acted, and the respect which was paid to 
 his authority, was really, what he has been constantly re- 
 presented by the concurring testimony of all antiquity, the 
 fixed bjshop of the whole church of Jerusalem, having a 
 number of presbyters and deacons under him, and a great 
 body of Christians belonging to his Episcopal charge. No, 
 says Dr. Campbell, he was nothing more than " the pastor 
 of '^. single parish, whose whole flock assembled in the same 
 placv;, for the purposes of public worship, and that they might 
 ^11 join in one prayer aijd one supplication ;" the nqieaning of 
 which is plainly this, that let the sacred writers, and the 
 fathers of the church after them, say what they will of the 
 numerous conversions wrought by the blessed j^postl^s 
 themselsves, or by their inspired fellow-labourers, and 
 successors in the ministry of the gospel, yet the utmost 
 result of all their labours, during the first three hundred 
 years after Christ, could never amount to more, even in 
 
 » Gal. ii. 12. t Acts XV. 13—19. 
 
general Defence of Episcopacy. % 89 
 
 tile largest cities upon earth, including their adjacent terri- 
 tories, than just such a competent number of beUevers as 
 could be contained within the walls of a single oratory^, or 
 place of worship, where they might assemble with their 
 bishop and presbyters, that is, according to our professor, 
 with the parsOi> and his elders, "to hear the scriptures 
 read, and receive spiritual exhortations."* 
 
 Of this his favourite scheme of " parochial Episcopacy,'' 
 it flight have been expected, that our learned Lecturer 
 would have began his proof from the place where the church 
 itself began, and so have taken the Jerusalem-parish, which 
 has long been esteemed the mother^ as the model likewise 
 of all the other cjburches in these eatly and perilous times, 
 >yhen, as an ancient writer tells us, this ver}^ parish or 
 church " was so y;astly enlarged by the accession of mul- 
 titudes qf believers, yea, even of the rulers or principal 
 men of the city^ that it produced an uproar of the Jews, 
 of the Scribes and Pharisees, they being afraid that the 
 whole city would own Jesus for the Christ."t Let us try, 
 then, if we cap discover, even from scripture itself, how 
 far this was the case, since our Professor has given us no 
 information concerning it, supposing, no doubt, that his 
 pupils would read, and judge for themselves. 
 
 Nothing can be more clearly expressed than the account, 
 which the sacred historian gives us, of the progressive 
 enlargement of the parish or diocese of Jerusalem, both 
 before and after St. James was appointed its bishop by the 
 Other aposdes. In the frst chapter of the Acts, we are 
 told, that the number of the disciples assembled, when 
 Matthias was added to the eleven apostles, was about an 
 hundred and twenty ; but these could be only a part of 
 the church, as we are assured, that our Lord appeared, 
 after his resurrection, to " above fve hundred brethren at 
 
 * Lecture vii. 
 
 f Hegesippus in Euseb. lib. ii. cap. 23. 
 
190 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 once, the greater part of whom remained"* when St. Paul 
 wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians. In the second 
 chapter of the Acts, we read that there were added unto 
 them about three thousand souls, and that " the Lord was 
 dally adding to the church such as should be saved." If it 
 shall be objected, that of these three thousand, who were 
 converted on the day of Pentecost, there might be a consi- 
 derable number, who had come up from other countries 
 to celebrate that holy feast at Jerusalem, it should be 
 remembered, that they are said to have " continued in the 
 apostles' fellowship, and breaking of bread, and prayers ;" 
 which, as the church was then situated, implies that they 
 continued with them in Jerusalem, and so became inhabit- 
 ants of that city, if they were not so before.^ But should 
 any deduction be made from their number, nothing of that 
 kind can be pretended in the next instance ; for in the 
 fourth chapter of the Acts, we are told, that on the preaching 
 of Peter and John, " many of them which heard the word, 
 believed, and the number of the men was about fve thou- 
 sand,'''' — Again, we read in the ffth chapter, that " believers 
 were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men 
 and women ;" and in the sixth^ that " the word of God still 
 increased, and the number of the disciples multiplied in 
 Jerusalem greatly, and a great company of the priests were 
 obedient to the faith." In addition to all these successive 
 accounts of the vast increase of believers, we are informed 
 in the tzventy-first chapter of the Acts, that when Paul came 
 up to Jerusalem, and went in to James and his presbyters, 
 " they said unto him. Thou seest, brother, how 77ia7iy thou- 
 sandsX there are of Jews which believe." And when we 
 
 * 1 Cor. XV. 6. 
 
 t See this matter clearly stated, and a full and distinct account of the 
 yising church ai Jerusalem, in a most elaborate Defence of Diocesaii Epis- 
 iopacy, by Henry Maurice, D D 
 
 \ 1 he original word isMv^ty.^Efj myriads, which is generally rendered 
 ■t.cn thousands. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 191 
 
 consider, that the inspired historian who relates all this had 
 but little reason to exaggerate, or boast of, the prodigious 
 increase of the disciples of Jesus, which at that time could 
 only serve to increase the rage and violence of their ene- 
 mies ; as we cannot withhold our belief of such a well-at- 
 tested fact, we must be equally at a loss how to reconcile to 
 reason and common sense, the contracting such numbers 
 into a single congregation, or pretending that so many thou- 
 sands could possibly assemble in one place, for the exercise 
 of religious worship, at a time when their peculiar form of 
 worship was severely prohibited, and could not be cele- 
 brated or attended, but in the most private and retired 
 manner. 
 
 Dr. Campbell acknowledges, what indeed is well known, 
 that " there were yet no magnificent edifices built for the 
 reception of Christian assemblies, such as were afterwards 
 reared at a great expense, and called churches. Their 
 best accommodation, for more than a century," he says, 
 " was the private houses of the wealthiest disciples, which 
 were but ill adapted to receive very numerous congrega- 
 tions." — How then, we may ask, could such a " numerous 
 congregation," as that which was composed of the " many 
 thousands''' of converted Jews, whom St. Luke speaks of, 
 be received, for " the purpose of public worship," into any 
 private house, even of the wealthiest disciple in Jerusalem ? 
 Our Lecturer very justly observes, that " it is not so much 
 by the measure of the ground, as by the number of the 
 people, that the extent of a pastoral charge is to be rec- 
 koned ;" and he supposes, " at the time the churches were 
 first planted by the apostles, that the Christians at a me- 
 dium, were one thirtieth part of the people." — This calcu- 
 lation he carries into the country called Asia Minor, and 
 " supposes further, that country to have been equal then in 
 point of populousness to what Great-Britain is at present ; 
 so that one of their bishoprics," which we know, were then 
 only seven in number, " in order to afford a congregation 
 
1 92 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 equal to that of a middling parish, ought to have been eqiT^ 
 jn extent to thirty parishes in this island :"* And on that 
 supposition, how is it possible that the Christian inhabit- 
 ants of such an extensive tract of country, and so numer- 
 ous as they are here calculated to be,f could be considered 
 as but a single congregation, or *' assemble every Lord's 
 day, for the purposes of public worship, in the saine place?"" 
 For so Dr. Campbell translates the Greek words sr* to aoTo, 
 which, it seems, he had found in the " writings of those 
 fathers," whose names he had just before mentioned. '^ 
 We acknowledge, that there is such an expression to be 
 met with in Justin Martyr's apology to the heathen Em- 
 peror for the persecuted Christians ; and though our learned 
 Professor tells us, that " it is for bfeviti/s sake he does 
 not produce the passage at length,"^ we are yet led to sus- 
 pect, that this has happened for the sake of something else, 
 and because the whole passage, short as it is, and standing 
 in no need of abbreviation, contained more than he was 
 willing to produce, or found convenient for his purpose* 
 The apologist, in offering a vindication of the persecuted 
 Christians throughout the Roman Empire, takes notice of 
 the general method, which they adopted in performing 
 their religious ser\^ice, and for that purpose mentions — that 
 *' they all throughout cities and countries^ aissemble in the 
 same place^ as Dr. Campbell renders et* to oLuioJ"^ But this 
 surely could not mean, that the whole body of Christians 
 
 * Lecture vii. 
 
 t This calculation is well illustrated by the Anti-Jacobin Me<oi&wer of 
 Dr. Campbell's work, who estimates the present population of Britain 
 at only 7,000,000, the thirtieth part of which is about 233,333, and that, 
 divided by seven, the number of angels, or bishops then in Asia Minor;, 
 leaves about 33,333 members for each congregation — a number by far too 
 great for assembling under one roof, to " hear the scriptures read, and 
 receive spiritual exhortation." 
 
 :j: Lecture vii. 
 
 J I Justin Martyr's words are, Tlv.vim y,oC[% TroXs;^ w cy^aq fj-evovluiv s'rr, 
 TO avio cvvz'Avj(7i' yiv^cA, 
 
Gmerai Defence of Episcopaty» 193 
 
 throughout the wide extended empire of Rome, assembled 
 together in one place^ and made but one congregation ; and, 
 therefore, to prevent the appearance of such a glaring ab- 
 surdity, the first part of the sentence, mentioning " all 
 throughout cities and countries^'' is prudently omitted, "for 
 the sake of brevity" no doubt, both by our Lecturer and by 
 the author, from whom he has almost literally copied the 
 reasoning which he makes use of, on this part of his sub- 
 ject.* But he should also have reflected, that the pro- 
 priety of the translation on which this reasoning is founded, 
 has in general no great authority to support it, and in some 
 cases cannot possibly be admitted. There was no difficulty, 
 however, in admitting it, in the beginning of the second 
 chapter of the Acts, where the twelve apostles are said to 
 have been " all with one accord in one place:'*'' But towards 
 the conclusion of that chapter, after " the three thousand 
 souls were added to them," where, it is said — " all that 
 believe were srt to ai/V — our translators have rendered it-— 
 " they were all together^'' that is, consorted, or companied 
 with one another, but not so as to be all crowded into one 
 place ; which, had it been possible, would at that time have 
 been very imprudent. Beza's opinion of this passage is, 
 that — " the common assemblies of the church, with their 
 mutual agreement in the same doctrine, and the great una- 
 nimity of their hearts, were signified by it." — The same 
 may be said of that passage in the beginning of the third 
 chapter of the Acts, where it is mentioned — that " Peter 
 and John went up together^ ett* to a.\jV — that is — for the 
 same purpose, into " the temple, at the hour of ,'rayer." 
 And in the fourth chapter, where it is said — " that the 
 kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered 
 
 * In proof of this, see the whole second chapter of the Enquiry into the 
 Constitution, ijfc. of the Primiti've Church, in the last section of which 
 chapter the author indeed quotes the words of Justin Martyr, which he 
 had before omitted, and translates them thus — " On Sunday all the in- 
 habitants, both of city and country, met together," &c. 
 
 25 
 
is* General Defence of Ephcopacij, 
 
 together^ bt* to aulo, against the Lord, and against his Christ," 
 it would be absurd to suppose that they all actualh^ assem-* 
 bled in one place^ when the passage only means, that they 
 conspired together for the same purpose, the words plainly 
 pointing to the object^ and not to the place^ of their combi- 
 nation ; just as that passage of Ignatius, part of which is 
 quoted by Dr. Campbell, refers not to the place^ but to the 
 object or purpose for which the Magnesians were to assem- 
 ble together. " Do nothing, therefore," says Ignatius, 
 *' without the bishop and presbyters, neither strive to make 
 any thing appear a reasonable service, which is done in 
 your own separate or private way; but in coming together, 
 let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one 
 hope ;"* — all tending to show, that nothing was to. be done 
 in the way of public prayer and supplication, but as ap- 
 pointed and performed by their bishop and presbyters, and 
 so as to manifest a becoming love of unity and order. That 
 such is the meaning of this passage of Ignatius, is evident 
 from what immediately follows on the same subject, in 
 which he still recommends the same unity of mind and 
 spirit, in the public offices of religion ; " wherefore come 
 ye all together as unto one temple of God, as to one altar, 
 as to one Jesus Christ." For as he told the Christians at 
 Smyrna, when exhorting them to " flee all divisions, as the 
 beginning of evils — that eucharist is to be looked upon as 
 valid," or well established, " which is either offered by the 
 bishop, or by him to "whom the bishop has given his con- 
 sent,^'-\ 
 
 But to " evince," as our Lecturer says, " beyond all 
 possible doubt, that the bishop's cure was originally con- 
 
 * The words of Ignatius are — Mnos ^/^ft; (Jiy^y Ty iirnxoira k&a ruv 
 
 aXk iTi TO kvlo^ jjiix 'rr^o^ivx'^: /^-** dc»5crii, nq vac^ /xia eATTiifc Fpist. ac-. 
 Magnes. p. 33. 
 
 t See A rchbi'ohop Wake's Translation. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* >95 
 
 lined to a single church or congregation," he still appeals 
 to the language of Ignatius, and insists, that as there was 
 but " one place of meeting, so there was but one commu- 
 nion table or altar, as they sometimes metaphorically called 
 it. There is but one altar, said Ignatius,* as there is but 
 one bishop." This saying, we know, has been justly re- 
 ceived, and understood in its full force, by every candid 
 Enquirer'^ into ecclesiastical antiquity, and our Professor 
 might have spared the unhandsome reflection cast on those 
 who differ from him in opinion, with respect to the mean- 
 ing of it, where he savs — " Nothing can be more con- 
 temptible than the quibbles which some keen controvertists 
 have employed to elude the force of this expression. They 
 will have it to import one sort of unity in the first clause, 
 tmd quite a different sort in the second, though the second 
 is introduced merely in an explanation of the first. In the 
 first, say they, it denotes, not a numerical, but a mystical 
 unit}^, not one thing, but one kind of thing ; in the second, 
 one identical thing. "J 
 
 In this manner does our learned Lecturer run on, ex- 
 posing, as he thinks, the " chicane''^ of those who pretend 
 to discover any distinction in the unity referred to in the 
 words of Ignatius. Yet he might have remembered, that 
 there are words recorded by an inspired writer, describing 
 a " sort" of unity which surely requires some distinction 
 in the application. *' That they all may be one," says our 
 Lord, " as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they 
 also may be one in us— that they may be one, even as we 
 are one."|| Here we are obliged to consider the unit)'' re- 
 ferred to, as of a twofold nature ; a " mystical unity" de- 
 scribed in the words — " that they may be one," and an 
 
 ^ 'Ev Si/ctar/?^iov i',- V ETTto-Koro-:. Epist. ad Philadelph. 
 t Dr. Campbell has borrowed from the Enquirer above mentioned, a 
 ^reat part of his reasoning on this quotation from Ignatius, 
 \ Lecture vii. i] St. John xvii. 21, 23. 
 
196 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 essential unity in the words that follow — '* even as we are 
 one." — The Socinian controvertists will, no doubt, call 
 this distinction a " contemptible quibble ;" and insisting 
 that the same " sort" of unity ought to be understood in 
 both the clauses of our Saviour's expression, they will 
 argue as fluently in support of their opinion, as Dr. Campbell 
 has done from what Ignatius says of there being " one altar, 
 as there is one bishop ;" an expression, which no more 
 proves the necessity of there being but one congregation in 
 the diocese of a primitive bishop, than St. Paul's exhor- 
 tation to " glorify God with one mind and one mouth,"* 
 would prove that all the congregations of Christians ought 
 to have, as hut one mind or sentiment, so literally, but one 
 mouth to express it. 
 
 Our Lecturer, however, is not satisfied with the support 
 which, on this point, he thinks he has obtained from Igna- 
 tius ; he even calls in to his aid the authority of one, to 
 whom, he afterwards says, " he recurs the more willingly, 
 because he is held the great apostle of high church." Hav- 
 ing mentioned that "when the eucharist was celebrated, 
 the whole people of the parish or bishopric, if we please 
 to call it so, communicated in the same congregation, and 
 all received the sacrament, if not from the hands of the 
 bishop, at least under his eye j"f he immediately adds— 
 
 * Rom. XV. 6. 
 
 t Nay, and partook also, according to Dr. Campbell, of one and the 
 same loaf; for so we are told in his Translation of the Gospels, vol. ii. 
 p. 450, where we meet with the following note on St. Mat. xxvi. 26. 
 " The loaf—zov oc{]qv E. T. bread. Had it been afiov without the article, 
 it might have been rendered either bread or a loaf. But as it has the ar- 
 ticle, we must, if we would fully express the sense, say the loaf. Pro- 
 bably on such occasions one loaf, larger or smaller, according to the com- 
 pany, was part of the accustomed preparation. This practice, at least 
 in the apostolic age, seems to have been adopted in the church, in 
 commemorating Christ's death. To this it is very probable the apostle 
 alludes, 1 Cor. x. 17. — 'Olt «? a^lo,, h a-^i^a hi taoXKoi ectju-ev hi ya,^ irccvrs.-: 
 Vila Evof a^l&f /xe1e;)^oju.ej'; that is — JBecause there is one loaf, ive, though 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy^ 197 
 
 ^ Hence it was that the setting up another altar within the 
 limits of his parish, beside the one altar of the bishop, was 
 considered as the great criterion of schism;"^ a crite- 
 rion evidently drawn from those passages of the works of 
 Cyprian, in which he describes a schismatic as one, " who, 
 despising the bishops, and leaving the priests of God, dares 
 to set up another altar, and to offer up different, and un- 
 authorized prayers ;"t and again declares — that " no other 
 altar can be erected, no new priesthood constituted, besides 
 the one altar, and the one priesthood."} These, and such 
 like passages from the works of Cyprian, if brought forward 
 in support of Dr. Cambpell's opinion with respect to what 
 he calls " parochial Episcopacy," must be treated with 
 great violence, before they can be wrested to a purpose so 
 different from that for which they were originally designed, 
 and which is uniformly displayed in the writings of the 
 primitive fathers, every where exhibiting this plain and ob-. 
 vious truth, that the unity of the bishop, of the altar, and 
 of prayer, is all founded on the common principle of the 
 
 "tnany, are one body, for ire all partahe of the one loaf. It is in the common 
 Iranslatlon — For we, being many, are one bread arui one body ; for u-e arc 
 nil partakers of that one bread. Passing at present some other excep- 
 tions, which might be made to this version, there is no propriety in say- 
 ing one bread, more than in saying one water or ojie -wine.'* And we 
 may add — there is as little propriety in building so much on the article 
 in this passage of St. Matthew, when, in the parallel places of St. Mark, 
 St. Luke, and St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians, the word oc^lov 
 is used luitbout the article : Nor do we see much probability, that one loaf 
 could have been found suffic ently large, even for the three thoiisand souU, 
 •who are said (Acts ii 41, 42.) to have •' continued steadfastly in the 
 apostolic breauing of bread," much less for the many thousands, who 
 were soon after " added unto them." 
 
 * Lecture vi. 
 
 t " Contemptis Episcopis, et Dei sacerdotibus derelictis, constituere 
 audet aliud altare, precem alteram illicitis vocibus sacere." — De Unitate 
 JEcclesine. 
 
 \ Aliud altare constitui aut sacerdotium novum fieri, praeter ununi 
 altare, et unum sacerdotium, non potest. — ^Cypr. epist. 43. 
 
198 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 unity of the Christian priesthood. And it has been justly 
 observed, that no uninspired writer " ever so unlocked the 
 evangelical secret of this catholic and Christian unity, as 
 the inimitable Cyprian has done."^ Of this we have a 
 very striking proof in that admirable passage, which has 
 been so often quoted by the writers on this subject:-— 
 " The Episcopate is one^ of which every bishop holds a 
 part, so as to have a concern in, or be interested for, the 
 whole. The church also is one^ which by a fruitful increase 
 grows up into a multitude of members ; as the sun has many 
 rays, yet but one fountain of light ; or as a tree may have 
 many branches, yet but one root fixed deep in the earth ; or as 
 when man}^ streams descend from one fountain, they appear 
 indeed divided in their number, yet all preserve the unity 
 of their original."f So is it, with respect to the unity of 
 the Christian church, which, though distinguished in its 
 principle by the several primitive expressions of one churchy 
 isne altar ^ and one bishops will always be found to consist 
 with as many churches, altars and bishops, as can be proved 
 to derive their order, institution and authority from the 
 same sacred source, the Bishop of souls, and Founder of 
 the church ; the unity of whose divine power and spirit, 
 diffused at first among the chosen twelve, is still preserved 
 
 * See the Original Draught of the Primitive Church, which contains a 
 full and satisfactory answer to the JStiquirer, is^c. above mentioned. 
 
 t " Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. 
 Ecclesia quoque una est, quae in multitudinem latius incremento fxcundi- 
 tatis extenditur; quo modo soils multi radii, sed lumen unum ; et rami 
 arboris multi, sed robur ununi tenaci radice fundatum ; et cum de fonte 
 imo rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet diffusa videatur, exundantis 
 copix largitate, unitas tamen servatur in origine." Cypi*. De Unitate 
 Ecdesice. In a note on this passage, Mr. Marshall, the translator, observes, 
 " that the words in solidum are forensic, and allude to the case of divers 
 contractors, each of whom was bound not only for his proportionable 
 part, but if the rest failed, was to make gocd the whole." — By this ac- 
 count, the bishops will be found to hold their part of the Episcopate, as 
 we say, conjunctly and severally. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 199 
 
 among those who have regularly succeeded to them, in the 
 commission, which they received from Christ. Hence it 
 necessarily follows, that the unity of every regular congre- 
 gation of Christians, consist in their having the ministerial 
 offices, with which they are supplied, performed by a per- 
 son duly authorized for that purpose, and acting under the 
 appointment and direction of those who, as rightful 
 bishops, have " authority given unto them in the church, to 
 call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard." 
 
 We have now taken notice of the principal arguments, 
 to which Dr. Campbell has recurred; for they have all been 
 made use of before, to show, that the primitive bishop, in 
 the period which he has fixed for his " parochial Episco- 
 pacy," was no other than the pastor of a single congrega- 
 tion or parish, with the presbyters assisting as his curates. 
 And after all the pains he has taken to adjust his plan of 
 the primitive bishopric to the modem presbyterian parish, 
 we find him still obliged to own, that " the resemblance 
 does not hold in every particular ; though," he says, ^* it 
 plainly does in most ;" and then adds — " perhaps in some 
 things, the case may bear a greater analogy to some highland 
 parishes in this northern part of the island, wherein, by 
 reason of their ten-itorial extent, the pastor is under the 
 necessity of having ordained itinerant assistants, whom he 
 can send as occasion requires, to supply his place in the 
 remote parts of his charge."* — The fitness of this analogy 
 we shall in part admit, as it corresponds pretty nearly with 
 the ideas which we have been taught to form of primitive 
 Episcopacy; conceiving it to be almost in the Doctor's 
 own words — " One ordained pastor having power to send 
 out ordained assistants to supply his place, as occasion re- 
 quires." But as Christianity began in cities, and popu- 
 lous countries, and it was a long time before it reached 
 such uncultivated tracts as are to be found in the northern 
 
 * Lecture vH. 
 
200 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 parts of this island, it is chiefly with these populous settle- 
 ments that we are at present concerned, such as the church, 
 parish, or diocese of Jerusalem, where the bishop must 
 have had many congregations of Christians to superintend, 
 and therefore many presbyters acting under him in the 
 discharge of their ministerial duties. 
 
 Indeed, our Professor seems to admit as much, in that 
 passage of his Lecture now before us, where he observes, 
 that " as the whole of the bishop's parish generally received 
 the symbols of Christ's body and blood, mediately or im- 
 mediately from his hand, so they were, for the most part, 
 baptized either bv him, or in his presence." Here the 
 words " generallif and "/£>r the most part''' plainly imply, 
 that sometimes the case was otherwise, and a kind of similar 
 acknowledgment is made by what is said of their " receiving 
 the symbols mediately from the hand of the bishop." By 
 this expression we cannot properly understand any thing 
 else but the mediation or intervention of the presbyters, as 
 his " ordained assistants." And if receiving from their 
 hands at the other end of such a capacious room as could 
 contain thausands of communicants, according to the plan 
 of our Professor, could be held the same as receiving from 
 the hand of the bishop, why not at the other end of the 
 street, and so on to any distance to which his Episcopal 
 charge might extend ? It must be remembered, that we are 
 presently alluding to the " parochial Episcopacy" of Jeru- 
 salem, in which parish, however, from the account given 
 of it in scripture, we must think it next to impossible, even 
 had it been expedient, which at that time it certainly was 
 not, that the three thousand, ihtfve thousand, yea the many 
 thousands of believers, or parishioners^ should meet in one 
 place, for the purposes of public worship, or form but one 
 congregation. 
 
 It may well be supposed, that in these variable times of 
 the gospel, when the churches had now and then a little 
 rest, and were multiplied, but much, oftener were scattered 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, ^1 
 
 by distress and persecution, there would be some Episcopal 
 charges, whether we call them by the name of pansh or 
 diocese, where the bishop could easily meet with his whole 
 flock in one place, and perform every part of his official 
 duty to them in person. Dr. Campbell has taken care to 
 furnish us with an instance of this kind,*^ in what he calls 
 the " extensive diocese of Neocesaria," where Tillemont, 
 he says, " hath shown from Basil and Gregor\' of Nyssa, 
 both natives of Cappadocia, that in the middle of the third 
 century, there were no more than seventeen believers, who 
 probably all resided in the city ;" and then asks — '•'' Could 
 fewer be properly associated into one congregation ?"t ^^^ 
 he has forgot to mention, what the same Basil and Gregory 
 relate, whether Tillemont hath shown it or not, that the 
 bishop assigned to the charge of Neocesaria, the famous 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus, who had himself been converted 
 by Origen, left at his death onlv seventeen pagans in all 
 that " extensive diocese :" And the consequence, we are 
 told, was, that the " zealous citizens pulled down their 
 altars, temples and idols, and in every place built houses 
 of prayer in the name of Christ."J 
 
 * The historian Gibbon had mentioned the same instance, and almost 
 in the same, words. — See vol. ii. of the 8vo. edition of his History of the 
 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, p. 360 ; where, after acknowledg- 
 ing what, he says, " we may learn from the writings of Lucian, a philo- 
 sopher who had studied mankind, and who describes their manners in 
 the most lively colours, that under the reign of Commodus, his native 
 country of Pontus was filled with Epicureans and Christians,''^ he adds in 
 a note, " Christianity, however, must have been very unequally ditiused 
 over Pontus, since, in the middle of the third century, there were no 
 more than seventeen believers in the extensive diocese of Neo-Caesarea. 
 See M. de Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiast torn iv. p. 675, from Basil 
 and Gregory of Nyssa, who were themselves natives of Cappadocia." 
 This is one of many proofs that might be adduced of a peculiar " coin- 
 cidence in sentiment" between our theological Professor, and that cele- 
 brated historian, whose sceptical opinions are not likely to procure him 
 any admiration among the real friends of Christianity. 
 
 t Lecture vii. 
 
 \ Gregor. N) ssen. in Vit. Thaumat. torn. iii. p. 567. Paris ^dit. 1638. 
 26 
 
^02 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 ' An earlier writer too than Gregory Nyssen, the same 
 Tertullian, to whom Dr. Campbell has frequently referred, 
 as favouring some of his sentiments, mentions the Chris- 
 tians, even in his early age, as *' so numerous, as almost 
 to constitute the greater part of every city j"* and in his 
 apology to the Roman magistrates, he does not hesitate to 
 speak of the great multitudes of his profession, in these 
 confident terms. " We are of yesterday j yet every place 
 is filled with us ; your cities, your islands, your forts, your 
 corporations and councils, even the armies, tribes and 
 companies, yea the palace, senate, and courts of justice ; 
 the temples only have we left to you.— Should we go off, 
 and separate from you, you would stand amazed at your 
 own desolation, be affrighted at your solitary state, the 
 stagnation of your affairs, and the stupor of death, which 
 had in a manner seized your city."t What a strange ac- 
 count must this have appeared to the magistrates of Rome, 
 if their great city was found to contain, instead of such 
 prodigious numbers, no more than a single congregation of 
 Christians ? The same observation may be made on what 
 Eusebius says, in general, of the Christian churches in 
 every city and country, about the close of the apostolic 
 age, when he uses such singular terms to express their 
 amazing numbers, and compares " their thronged and 
 crowded societies to grain heaped upon a barn floor."J It 
 will be no easy matter to reconcile this report of a very well 
 
 * Tanta hominum multitudo, pars pcene onajor cujtisque civitatis. Ter- 
 tul. ad Scap. c. 2. 
 
 •}• ** Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus; urbes, insulas, cas- 
 tella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, se- 
 natum, forum; sola vobis reliquimus templa. St tanta vis hominum in 
 
 aliquem crbis remoti sinum abrupissemus a vobis proculdubio expa- 
 
 vissetis ad solitudinem vestram, ad silentium rerum, et stuporem quen- 
 dam quasi mortui uvbis " Tertul. Apol. p. 33. cap. of. 
 
 :j: This gives but imperfectly the sense of the original, Kat orila. mcc 
 
 7rX?i9?tj aS^oa;,- viKXri^iVA <Tvn{lnKi^uv, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c ?• 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy', 203 
 
 informed and accurate author, with our Professor's imagi- 
 nary calculation, by which he attempts to show that " one . 
 of the primitive bishoprics, in order to afford a congrega- 
 tion equal to that of a middling parish, must have been 
 equal in extent to thirty parishes in this island." 
 
 Having already discovered the extreme weakness of the 
 materials, and want of solidity in the foundation, on which 
 this strange position is built ; and being thereby sufficiently 
 guarded against any conclusion that may be drawn from 
 such doubtful and dangerous premises, we may be excused 
 from following our learned Lecturer through all the minute 
 descriptions of his parochial plan of Episcopacy ; especi- 
 ally as, by his own confession, there is no complete resem- 
 blance or conformity to it, in that established system, under 
 the protection of which he made such a distinguished 
 figure. The difference indeed, we could easily show in a 
 number of instances, if it were not more our concern to 
 defend the soundness of our own, than to expose the de- 
 fects of other systems ; or if we may be allowed to adopt 
 the language of him who has attacked us, and say — " It is 
 neither our province, nor humour, to trace nonsense through 
 all its dark and devious windings."^ There is still, how- 
 ever, one part of our Professor's specious theory, of which 
 we cannot well omit to take some notice, as it seems to 
 touch the main hinge of the controversy, and may serve as 
 a farther specimen of the skill and address with which the 
 other parts are constructed. 
 
 The point to which I am alluding, occupies, in one way 
 or other, all that remains of the seventh Lecture, part of 
 which we have already considered, and is introduced by 
 the Lecturer's " returning to the administration of religious 
 ordinances in those primitive parishes," which he had been 
 describing. After having told us, that " the presbyters 
 
 * See Dr. Campbeirs application of this remark to thfe pious and 
 eminently learned Mr. Henry Dodwell, Lecture iv. 
 
26ft Genera! Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 executed certain ministerial offices, in those parts of the 
 parish to which the bishop found it reasonable to send 
 them, and also assisted him in the public offices of religion; 
 ^lat when he was sick, or otherwise necessarily absent, 
 they supplied his place, and as the charge of the parish 
 was eminently devolved upon him, they acted in all the mi- 
 nisterial duties by his direction, or at least with his permis- 
 sion ;" he immediately adds — ^'' The only question of mo- 
 ment that has been raised on this head is, whether by his 
 order or allowance, they could exercise every part of the 
 pastoral office as well as the bishop, or whether there were 
 some things, such as ordaining others to the ministry, 
 which even his commands could not empower them to dof ' 
 On this veiy important question, the learned Professor 
 gives his own opinion directly in these words — " As the 
 power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk 
 gradually, I am disposed to think, that in the course of 
 two centuries, or even a century and a half, there was a 
 considerable difference in this itspect, in the state of things, 
 at the beginning, and at the end. Towards the conclusion 
 of that period, I imagine, it became very unusual for a 
 bishop to delegate this, which was ever looked upon as 
 the most sacred, and most momentous trust, to his pres- 
 byters. The transition is very natural from seldom to 
 never, and in our ways of judging, the transition is as na- 
 tural from what never is done, to what cannot lawfully be 
 done."^ 
 
 Now, what is all this, but mere declamation, or a fan- 
 ciful train of reasoning, founded upon gratuitous assump- 
 tions, and confirmed by the author's own " imaginings^ 
 and dispositions to think^"* so and so, without any thing of- 
 fered in the way of proof, or even of illustration? The 
 period which he has assigned for the operation of his " na- 
 tural transition," we cannot help thinking, is very ambi- 
 
 * Lecture vii. 
 
I General Defence of Episcopacy. 205 
 
 guously defined. He is willing to reduce it to " a century 
 and a half," and yet finds a considerable difference in the 
 state " of things at the begijiningy and at the end." That 
 period undoubtedly began with the birth of Christ ; so that 
 the thirty-three years of his life must be struck out of the 
 calculation, as must also be the subsequent years to the 
 death of St. John, the apostle ; and then the " course of a 
 century and a half," will be reduced to little more than half 
 a centur}% which is rather a short period for effecting such 
 a considerable change as our author alludes to, in the go- 
 vernment of the church. When he tells us — ** that the 
 power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk 
 gradually;" should he not have mentioned more particu- 
 larly, for the information of his pupils, what it was that 
 thus raised the bishops and sunk the presbyters, even in 
 a gradual manner? There were then no flattering Con- 
 stantines, — none of those imperial edicts, which he in- 
 veighs so bitterly against, to create or support such a dan- 
 gerous ascendancy in the first of these ecclesiastical orders 
 above the second. If it was entirely owing to " seniority, 
 or superior merit, or distinguished talents," as our Lec- 
 turer seems to think '^ probable," what an insignificant race 
 must those presbjters have been, none of whom could ever 
 be found to possess " merit or talents" sufficient to pre- 
 serve their power from sinking, or rather being totally 
 swallowed up in that gulph of Episcopal dominion, from 
 which it was never to rise again I 
 
 Our author indeed " imagines," (but without assigning 
 any ground for such an imagination) that towards the con- 
 clusion of his " century and a half," it became very unusual 
 for a bishop " to delegate the trust of ordination to his 
 presbyters ;" and yet we shall soon find him endeavouring 
 to fix this unusual practice, even upon " the great apostle 
 of High-church himself," a whole century after the period 
 to which he is here referring. But the strangest inconsist- 
 ency^ and most illogical piece of reasoning in all that portion 
 
206 General Defence of Eptscopaeyl 
 
 of Dr. Campbell's Lectures now under our consideration, 
 is that which follows in these words — " We know, that 
 some time after the period to which I have here confined 
 myself, ordination by presbyters was prohibited, and de- 
 clared null by ecclesiastical canons. But the very prohibi- 
 tions themselves, the very assertions of those whom they 
 condemned as heretics, prove the practice, then probably 
 wearing, but not quite worn out."^ And it is well, we 
 say, for those who maintain the necessity of Episcopal 
 ordination, that its modern rival, ordination by presbyters, 
 was prohibited so early, as even our Lecturer's vague 
 expression must mean, " if it mean any thing." — ^^But we 
 know not well what opinion to give of the manner in which 
 he accounts for these prohibitions, and which appears liable 
 to some objection in the terms made use of to define it, 
 and much more in the consequences that may be deduced 
 from lU 
 
 If by the . terms, in which it is expressed, we are to 
 understand that " the prohibitions themselves prove the 
 practice to be then probably wearing, but not quite worn 
 owf," we must object to that sort of evidence, which esta- 
 blishes no sort of connection between the proof and the' 
 thing to be proved : and we might say, on much better 
 ground, if probability be all the point in question, that the 
 prohibitions rather prove the practice to be ^tn probably 
 wearing m, and beginning to require correction. — But if it 
 be the practice itself which is meant to be proved, not only 
 by the prohibitions themselves, but " by the very assertions 
 of those whom they condemned as heretics," might it not 
 be expected, that our Professor would have let his pupils 
 know, whether the authors of these " assertions," some of 
 whom he ought to have named, were really heretics, or 
 only condemned as such, by those who had prohibited the 
 practice, to which he was here referring ? His statement 
 
 * Lecture vii. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy^ 207 
 
 of the case, on the contrary, is dark and dubious, where 
 the nature of the subject required that his sentiments should 
 have been delivered in clear and explicit terms. He was 
 sensible, no doubt, of the ticklish ground on which he 
 was treading, and, therefore, contrived to make use of lan- 
 guage, not so plain, and unequivocal, as might have been 
 looked for. Yet even to insinuate that the assertions of 
 condemned heretics serve to prove their innocence, or the 
 lawfulness of that, which they were condemned for main- 
 taining, is a tenet rather of dangerous consequence, and 
 not such as might be expected from an established theo- 
 logical chair. Did the assertions of the Arian heretics, 
 when condemned by the council of Nice, prove their doc- 
 trine to be then only " wearing, but not quite worn out?" 
 Were there no novelties in these old times, which, on 
 their very first appearance, were stigmatized 3s heresies I 
 And might not this fancy of admitting *' ordination by 
 presbyters," have been but a novelty, when it was first pro- 
 hibited, at least for any thing that Dr. Campbell has pro- 
 duced to show the antiquity of its origin, or the continu- 
 ance of its practice ? Or did the church, so early as the 
 period " to which he has here confined himself," make 
 canons against apostolic institution, and primitive usage, 
 when " wearing, but not quite worn out ?" I'hese are 
 questions, which, connected as they evidently are with 
 " the most sacred and momentous trust," it was the busi- 
 ness of our learned Lecturer to have discussed with a de- 
 gree of seriousness and attention, suitable to the dignity 
 and importance of the subject, and not to have left his 
 hearers without any other impression on their minds, than 
 what arises from the authority of a great name^ which, he 
 himself has repeatedly told us, " has greater influence on 
 the opinions of the generality of men, than most people 
 are aware of." 
 
 In the course of our inquiries into the ecclesiastical his- 
 tory of the first three or four centuries, we meet with an 
 
908 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 instance of one CoUuthus, a presbyter of Alexandria, who^ 
 pretending to have been promoted to the office of a bishop, 
 began to encroach on the Episcopal power of ordination, 
 but was soon brought to see his error, and having renoimced 
 his schism, was again admitted to communion as a presby- 
 ter. This happened about the beginning of the fourth cen- 
 tury, and so far from being considered as a " practice then 
 wearing out," it is expressly mentioned as th^frst attempt 
 of that kind. Some time after we read of another presby- 
 ter, Aerius, who, as a judicious writer observes, " seek- 
 ing to be made a bishop, could not brook that another was 
 preferred before him ; and, therefore, when he saw himself 
 unable to rise to that greatness, which his ambitious pride 
 did affect, his way of revenge was to try, what wit, being 
 sharpened with envy and malice, could do, in raising a new 
 and seditious opinion, that the superiority which bishops 
 had, was a thing which they should not have, there being 
 no necessary distinction between them and presbyters."* 
 For holding and striving to propagate this new opinion, 
 which Epiphanius imputes to his ignorance of the scrip- 
 tures, Aerius was not only branded as a heretic^ but con- 
 sidered as no other than a madman ; for " how was it possi- 
 ble," said those who argued against him, " that he should 
 constitute or ordain a presbyter, who had no authority to 
 impose hands in ordination ?"f 
 
 In opposition, however, to these facts (though facts are 
 usually reckoned stubborn things) our Lecturer produces 
 some extracts from the works of contemporary writers, 
 sufficient, as he thinks, to establish his own opinion ; and 
 " that about the middle of the third century, the presbyters 
 were still considered as vested with the power of conferring 
 
 • See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Politic, book vii. p. 25. 
 
 T lift/,- otovjs ti'y Tov Tr^Ecr/Si/lff ov Ka9i?av ^»j Ixpvloi, x,'^foQs;KX.v ra p^si^olomv* 
 Epiphanius Hseres. Ixw p 908— as quoted by Archbishop Potter in hir, 
 Ciiscowse on Church CoTcrnmenty p. 293. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 209 
 
 orders," he says, " has been plausibly argued from an ex- 
 pression of Firmilian, in his letter to C3 prian ;" which ex- 
 pression is thus translated by the " plausible arguer," whom 
 he, no doubt, had in his eye.* — " All power and grace is 
 constituted in the church, where seniors preside, who have 
 the power of baptizing, confirming and ordaining."'|' Now, 
 says Dr. Campbell, " that by majores natu^ in Latin" (here 
 rendered seniors), " is meant the same with '7t^z<j^v\i^oi in 
 Greek" (or presb3rters), " of which it is indeed a literal ver- 
 sion, can scarcely be thought questionable. Besides, the 
 phrase so exactly coincides with that of Tertullian, who 
 says — Probati prsesident seniores — approved elders preside, 
 — as to make the application, if possible, still clearer." J 
 Yet we cannot help thinking, that more illustration is still 
 wanting ; and that no person, who reads with attention the 
 whole of this epistle of Firmilian's to Cyprian, and pro- 
 perly considers the nature of the subject on which he wrote, 
 can have any doubt, that by the " seniors, who i)reside in 
 the church," he certainly meant the bishops^ as being the 
 only presidents, who were acknowledged to " have the 
 power of confirming and ordaining," as well as of bap- 
 tizing, and to whom he plainly refers a little after, when 
 mentioning St. Paul as surely " not inferior to the bishops 
 of whom he had been speaking."|| It is equally certain, 
 that by Tertullian's " approved presidents," could only be 
 meant the bishops or heads of the several churches within 
 the Roman empire ; since he was clearly of opinion, that 
 the apostles had placed bishops in all the churches which 
 they had planted, and adduced those of Smyrna and Rome 
 
 * See t\\e Enquiry into the Constitution, ISfc. of the Primitive Churchy so 
 frequently copied by Dr. Campbell. 
 
 t " Quando omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constltuta sit, ubi prae- 
 sident majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordi- 
 nandi possident potestatem." Cyprian. Epist. 75. 
 
 I Lecture vii. 
 
 !j " Nisi si his Episcopis de qiiibus nunc, minor fuit Paulus." 
 
 2r 
 
MO General Deferice of Episcopacy, 
 
 as instances, although he saw no occasion for calling them 
 by that name, in the apology which he was now offering 
 to the Roman governors. 
 
 But what we think most surprising in all that part of Dr. 
 Campbell's Lectures, now more immediately before us, is 
 the readiness with which he recurs to the authority of Cy- 
 prian. — -This cannot so well be accounted for, as by ob- 
 scrv^ing, that the only passage which he quotes from that 
 venerable writer, as favouring the validity of ordination by 
 presbyters, was made use of, for the same purpose, by his 
 great friend and oracle, the author of the " Enquiry into 
 the Constitution^ ^c, of the Primitive Church^^^ — We find 
 him arguing just as Dr. Campbell has done, from part of 
 a letter addressed by Cyprian to his presbyters and dea- 
 cons at Carthage, in which " he, in the most earnest and 
 pressing terms, intreats them, during his absence, to dis- 
 charge what was incumbent both on themselves, and on 
 him, in such a manner, as that nothing might be wanting, 
 either as to discipline or diligence."')' Now, says our 
 Professor, — ^^ is it to be supposed, that he would have so 
 expressly enjoined them, without exception or limitation, to 
 discharge the duties of his function, as well as their own, if 
 neither presbyters nor deacons could do any thing in ordi- 
 nation, that part, which was the chief of all ?"J And we 
 may ask in return, if ordination was included in those du- 
 ties, which they were to discharge, is it to be supposed, 
 that he would not have made an exception with respect to 
 his deacons; as they could have no pretensions to the power 
 of ordaining, even on Dr. Campbell's principles, who had 
 just before been observing, " that there was no occasion 
 for making canons against ordination by deacons, or by 
 
 * See the Enquiry, ISc. p. 62. 
 
 t " Quoniam niihi interesse nunc non permittit loci conditio, peto vos 
 pro fide et religione vestra, fungajnini illic et vestris partibus et meis, ut 
 nihil vel ad disciplinam, vd ad djligentiam desit." Cypr. Epist. 5. 
 
 % Lecture vii. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 211 
 
 laymen, who did not pretend to such a right ?" Yet here 
 he adds — " Might it not be justly thought, that if Cyprian 
 meant to except ordination, he would have given them 
 some hint in this letter, what method, in case of any va^ 
 eancy in their presbytery, (which during his absence, would 
 be doubly incommodious) they should take, to get it 
 quickly and properly supphed ?" And we may easily dis- 
 cover the reason, why no such hint was given, by a careful 
 perusal of the letter itself, which was evidently written for 
 the sake of recommending to his clergy a quiet and prudent 
 behaviour under their present distress, as well as a charitable 
 attention to the necessities of those who are suffering for 
 their faith in Christ, but without any view to the case of a 
 vacancy in their presbytery, or the most proper method of 
 getting it supplied. 
 
 This very case, however, or any thing similar to it, we 
 find sufficiently provided for in another of Cj-prian's Let- 
 ters, addressed to two of his colleagues, Caldonius and 
 Herculanus, neighbouring bishops, and to two of his own 
 presb)^ers, Rogatianus and Numidicus, appointing these 
 four " his vicegerents or deputies, to inquire into the ages, 
 conditions and merits of the brethren ; that he whose 
 proper charge or business it was, to promote men to ec- 
 clesiastical offices, might be well informed about them, and 
 so promote none but such as were worthy, and humble and 
 meek."^ By such an ample deputation as this, those en- 
 trusted with it, including in their number two of the Epis- 
 copal order, were sufficiently authorized to supply what- 
 ever vacancy might happen in any of the ecclesiastical of- 
 fices, within the diocese of Carthage, during the unavoid- 
 able absence of its proper bishop and governor, who, we 
 
 * " Cumque ego vos pro me mcarios mlserim — ut xtates eornm, et 
 conditioiies, et merita discerneretis, ut jam, ego, cui cura incwmbity om- 
 nes optime nossern, et dignos, atque humiles et mites, ad eccle:iiastic<e 
 administrationis officia promoverem." Cypr. Epist. 41. 
 
Sl^ General Defe7ice of Mplscopacy* 
 
 see, speaks of himself iii the singular number, as the pef-* 
 Son who had the power of appointing his subordinate offi- 
 cers, and founds that power on his having the care of the 
 church of Carthage committed to him. 
 
 The same sentiment we find expressed in another of his 
 letters to his presbyters and deacons, and to all his people, 
 which he begins by telling them, that " though in all cleri-* 
 cal ordinations he had been accustomed to consult them 
 beforehand, and to examine the manners and merits of 
 every one with common advice,"* yet in the instance 
 which he was then going to mention, he had thought pro- 
 per to depart from his usual practice, by ordaining a per- 
 son without any such previous consultation, and now inti- 
 mated what he had done, in the common style used by 
 superiors on such occasions. This he repeats in his next 
 letter concerning another oi'dination of the same kind, by 
 desiring his presbyters and deacons, and all his people, to 
 take notice^ that though on account of their youth, he had 
 appointed these persons only to an inferior office for the 
 time, he " yet designed them for the honour of the pres- 
 byterate, and to sit with him as his counsellors, as soon as 
 their years would admit of that promotion."t All which 
 plainly shows, that Cyprian considered himself, in his 
 Episcopal character, as vested with the sole power of or- 
 dination within his district ; and it will not be easy to dis- 
 cover, in any part of his works, the least intimation of his 
 sharing that power with his presbyters, far less of his ad- 
 mitting, that they had sufficient right to exercise it, as 
 having equal authority with himself. On the contrary , w& 
 find him on all occasions vindicating and strenuously as- 
 serting the supreme power of the bishops in this, as w^ell 
 
 * " In ordinationibiis clericis solenius vos ante consulere, et mores, ac 
 meriia singulorum communi consilio ponderare." See the whole of Cy- 
 prian's 38th epistle to his presbyters and deacons, and to atl his people. 
 
 ■\ C?eternm presbyterii honorem, designasse nos iUis jam sciatis-^SQS- 
 suris nobisctim, provectis ct covroboratis annis suis, E-pist. 39. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 213 
 
 as in every other matter, connected with the care and gc* 
 Vernment of the church. 
 
 This is particularly observable in one of his letters writ- 
 ten to those unhappy persons, who, by sacrificing to idols, 
 had fallen oif from the communion of the church, and after- 
 wards became indecently importunate, even with insolent 
 clamour, to be restored to it. After stating to them the 
 manner in which the frame of the church, and the autho- 
 rity of its bishops, were constituted by our blessed Lord, 
 whose precepts we ought to revere and obey, he adds — 
 " Thence, in the course of time, and by regular succession 
 downwards, the ordination of bishops, and the constitution 
 of the church, are transmitted in such a manner, as that the 
 church being built upon the bishops, all her public acts or 
 affairs may be ordered by them as the chief rulers. — Where- 
 fore, since this is God's appointment, I cannot but wonder 
 at the boldness and insolence of certain persons, who, in 
 writing to me, have called themselves a church, when a 
 church is only to be found in the bishop, the clergy, and 
 the faithful, or steady Christians."^ Such is the reason- 
 ing made use of by this admirable writer, to show the ne- 
 cessity of maintaining communion with the bishop, as the 
 jmeans of preserving that principle of unity in the church, 
 which is essential to its very existence. And this we find 
 him again recommending very strongly, in a letter ad- 
 dressed to all his people on the breaking out of a lamenta- 
 ble schism in his diocese. Having first put them in mind, 
 that " God is one, and Christ is one, and the church is one, 
 and the Episcopal chair is one," he then points to the appli- 
 cation, and shows what ought to be the consequence of all 
 
 * " Inde per temporum, et successionum vices, Episcoporiim ordina- 
 tio, et ecclesise ratio decurrit, ut ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur, et 
 omnis actus ecclesise per eosdem praepositos gubernetur. Cum hoc itaque 
 divina lege fundatum sit, miror quosdam audaci temeritate, sic miiii scri- 
 bere voluisse, ut ecclesiae nomine literas facerer.t ; quanda ecclesia in Epis- 
 copo, et clero, et in omnibus stantibus sit constituta." Cypr. Epist. 33. 
 
S14 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 this unity, in the most earnest and affectionate terms. — 
 " Ye are brethren," says he, " let no man make you wander 
 from the ways of the Lord : Ye are Christians, let no man 
 rend you from the gospel of Christ : Let no man take off 
 from the church, the sons of the church : Let them who 
 have a mind to perish, perish by themselves: Let them 
 alone continue out of the church, who have departed from 
 the church ; Let them alone not be with the bishops, who 
 have rebelled against the bishops."^ 
 
 But it was not to " his people," or laity only, that Cyprian 
 directed these, and such like admonitions, warning them of 
 the danger of despising the due exercise of ecclesiastical 
 authority ; he spake the same language to his clergy, and 
 showed himself equally desirous of enforcing on the inferior 
 orders of the ministry, a becoming regard to that sacred au- 
 thority, when thus exercised in the way of Christ's appoint- 
 ment. Having been informed of the ill usage, which one of 
 his contemporary bishops had received from a turbulent and 
 disorderly deacon, he recommended a proper exertion of 
 the Episcopal authority, as the most likely way of bringing 
 the delinquent to a just sense of his duty; observing at the 
 same time, in the letter which he wrote on the occasion, that 
 *' the deacons ought to remember, that our Lord himself 
 chose apostles, that is, bishops and governors ; whereas the 
 apostles, after their Lord's ascension, appointed for them- 
 selves deacons, to be ministers of the church, and of their 
 Episcopal office; so that, if we durst do any thing against 
 God, who hath made us bishops, they might in like manner 
 oppose us, by whose authority they have been made dea- 
 cons."'!' 
 
 * " Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et cathedra una 
 — Nemo, vos fratres, errare a Domini viis faciat: Nemo vos Christia- 
 nos ab evangelic Christ i rapiat: Nemo filios ecclesiae de ecclesia tollat : 
 Pereant sibi soli, qui per Ire voluerunt. Extra ecclesiam soli remaneant, 
 qui de ecclesia recesserunt. Soli cum Episcopis non sint, qui contra Epis- 
 copos rebellarunt." Cypr. Epist. 43. 
 
 f " Memmisse autum Diaconi debent, quoniam apostolos, id est Epis- 
 copos et prgepositos, Dominus elegit ; diaconos autem post ascensuni 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 21 S 
 
 The deacons, however, were not the only order of church 
 officers, whom Cyprian has described as placed in a sub- 
 ordinate capacity, and acting under the authority of the 
 bishops. Even the presbyters also, though always men- 
 tioned by this venerable prelate in terms of the most affec- 
 tionate regard, and whom he so often calls his fellow-pres- 
 byters^ and points out their duty, as partners with him in 
 the great work of the ministry, are yet as constantly put in 
 remembrance, that nothing was to be done by them, as 
 part of that work, but with the allowance and consent of 
 their ecclesiastical superior; much less was any thing to 
 be attempted in despite of his just authority, and from an 
 avowed spirit of opposition to it. That any such attempt 
 was considered in the days of Cyprian as highly blameable, 
 and worthy of censure, is evident from the manner in 
 which he expressed himself, when obliged to restrain the 
 arrogance of some of his own presbyters, who, during his 
 absence, occasioned by the violence of persecution, had 
 evinced a desire to take the whole Episcopal power into 
 their own hands, and to manage the affairs of the church, 
 as if they had been independent on any superior. Deeply 
 sensible of the necessity of repressing such a daring spirit 
 of disobedience, he tells them very plainly, that he had for 
 a long time taken no notice of their unruly conduct, hoping 
 by his forbearance to have obliged them to be quiet ; but 
 their excessive presumption would not suffer him to be 
 silent any longer, lest the people committed to his care 
 should suffer through his inattention. " For what," says 
 he, " have we not to fear from the displeasure of our Lord, 
 when some of our presbyters, neither mindful of the rules 
 of the gospel, nor of their own station in the church, and 
 making no account of the authority of the bishop, who is 
 
 Domini in caelo, apostoli sibi constituerunt Episcopatus sui, et ecclesiae 
 ministros. Quod si nos aliquid audere contra Deum possumus, qui Epis- 
 copos facit ; possint et contra nos audere diaconi, a quibus fiunt." Cypr. 
 Epist. 3. 
 
«it 
 
 216 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 at present set over them, or even of that future day, which 
 shall bring every work into judgment, have done what was 
 never attempted before, and, in defiance of their superior, 
 have usurped the whole power, which he has a right to ex- 
 ercise ?"* He therefore concludes his letter with assuring 
 them, that if they still persist in such factious and disor- 
 derly practices, he will use the authority which the Lord 
 had entrusted to him, and prohibit their future discharge of 
 any ministerial duties. 
 
 In all this, we cannot but discover abundant evidence of 
 the subordination both of deacons and presbyters to their 
 bishop ; and must be convinced by so many undoubted tes- 
 timonies, that this was a principle firmly believed in the 
 Cyprianic age, and received as a part of that apostolic doc- 
 trine, which was to be handed down in the Christian 
 church, to the end of the world. Were we to cite but the 
 most striking passages from the works of St. Cyprian, which 
 serv^e to e&tablish the belief of this principle, it would be 
 only repeating what was done in a most distinct and judi- 
 cious manner, about a century ago, by a learned writer of 
 this country ,t who, soon after the publication of this work, 
 was promoted to the Episcopate, on the same primitive 
 footing as that on which was placed the authority of the 
 bishop of C.'.rthage. In maintaining that authority, we 
 have seen this venerable martyr standing forth as its zea- 
 lous advocate, under the most trying and difficult circum- 
 
 * " Quid enim non periculum rnetuere debemus de offensa Domini, 
 quando aliqui de presbyteris, nee evangelii, nee loci sui memores, sed ne- 
 que futurum Domini judicium, neque nunc sibi prspositum Episcopum 
 cogitantes, quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est, cum 
 contumelia et contempiu propositi, totum sibi vindicent." Cypr. Epist. 
 16. 
 
 I See the Principles of the Cvprianic Age ivith regard to Episcopal Paiver 
 cr.d yurisdiction, cjfc. — and a Vindicalion of ihat Discourse, &c. both by 
 the Rev. John Sage, who, before the revolution, was one of the minis- 
 ters of Glasgow, and in ITOJ, v.as consecrated a bishop of the Scotch 
 tlunrh, 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy ». 217 
 
 stances, and when his zeal in supporting the character 
 with which he had been invested, was the certain means of 
 increasing the dangers to which he was exposed, and plac- 
 ing him in the ver}^ front of the battle, to be more direcdy 
 aimed at, by the fary of his enemies. Yet, with all this 
 malice and opposition staring him in the face, he never 
 shrunk from the arduous task, which the dignity of his 
 office imposed upon him. Through evil report and good 
 report, he persevered in a steady resolution to discharge, 
 with vigour and firmness, the sacred trust committed to him ; 
 and, in every part of his writings, we find his theory and 
 practice uniformly consistent, with respect to the subordi- 
 nation which had always distinguished the Christian mi- 
 nistr}^ On this very point, therefore, it is the more sur- 
 prising that such a man as Dr. Campbell should endeavour 
 to represent him as at variance with himself! a misrepre^ 
 sentation, for which we cannot otherwise account, than by 
 adopting the Doctor's own opinion, that " when once unhap- 
 pily the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man, 
 his object is no longer truth, but victory." We are not 
 ashamed, however, to stand up for Cyprian's self-consis- 
 tency, or to rank ourselves on his side of the question now 
 under our consideration, even although it should be held 
 up to ridicule, under the contemptuous, but mistaken epi- 
 thet, of High-church ; which, when our Professor thought 
 proper to apply as a mark of scorn, in the case before us, 
 he might have reflected that those whom he wished to make 
 the objects of this vulgar sneer, look higher up for their 
 apostleship than even to Cyprian, great and venerable as 
 they know him to have been, and much as they esteem the 
 support which he has afforded to the cause of ecclesiastical 
 unity and order.* 
 
 * It was no doubt very pleasing to Dr. Campbell to find his sarcastic 
 account of the venerable Cyprian, as the " apostle of High-church " so 
 happily coinciding yff\t\\ the opinion of a w^riter, whose work he admired 
 as " a most masterly performance." In the Hiatory of rhe Decline and 
 
 1^. 
 
'its General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 Our I^ecturer, indeed^ looks not so high for support td 
 his cause ; but, passing quickly over the authority of Cy- 
 prian, " eminent" as he calls it, he hastens to produce again 
 that of Hilary, the Roman deacon, with more hope, no 
 doubt, of finding a friend in him, whom he had quoted be- 
 fore with approbation, as " a man of erudition and discern- 
 ment." — In giving our opinion of the sentiments ascribed to 
 this writer, we could not but take notice of the partial man- 
 ner in which his words were extracted from his writings,^© 
 give some ground for the forced construction that was to be 
 put upon them : And the same observation may be applied 
 to the quotation now before us, wherein this commentator is 
 represented as inferring from a passage in the third chapter 
 of the first Epistle to Timothy, that there is no difference 
 between the ordination of a bishop and of a presbj^er, and 
 that " Timothy himself was ordained a presbyter, but 
 because he had not another before him, was, therefore, a 
 
 I'all of the Roman Empire, after being told, that the ambitious " Cyprian 
 ruled with the most absolute sway the church of Carthage, and the pro- 
 vincial synods," we find his conduct ascribed to a motive as unworthy 
 of his character as of the author who could thus argue — " Cyprian had 
 renounced those temporal honours, which, it is probable, he would never 
 have obtained ; but the acquisition of such absolute command over the 
 consciences and understanding of a congregation, however obscure or 
 despised by the world, is more truly grateful to the pnde of the human 
 heart, than the possession of the most despotic power, nnposed by arms 
 and conquest on a reluctant people." After such an account of his con- 
 duct in life, we need not be surprised at the following base insinuation 
 •with respect to his feelings under the prospect of a violent death—" It 
 was in the choice of Cyprian either to die a martyr, or to live an apos- 
 tate : but on that choice depended the alternative of honour or infamy. 
 Could we suppose that the bishop of Carthage had employed the profes- 
 sion of the Christian faith only as the instrument of his avarice or ambi- 
 tion, it was still incumbent on him to support the character which he 
 had assumed; and if he possessed the smallest degree of manly fortitude, 
 rather to expose himself to the most cruel tortures, than by a singiC act 
 to exchange the reputation of a whole life, for the abliorrence of his 
 Christian brethren, and the contempt of the Gentile world." See Gib- 
 bon's History ^ {jJ'c. 8vo. edit. vol. ii. p. 352, 435. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 2t^ 
 
 bishop." On this our Professor observes—" Nothing can 
 be more evident, than that the whole distinction of the 
 Episcopate is here ascribed to seniority in the ministry, 
 without either election, or special ordination. When the 
 bishop died, the senior colleague succeeded of course ; as 
 to ordination, it was the same in both, and bishop meant 
 no more, than first among the presbyters, or the senior 
 presbyter."^ But if this be really the meaning of Hilary's 
 words, we must be allowed to say, that he expressed him- 
 self very improperly, when in the same passage he assigned 
 this as the reason, why there was " one ordination of a bi- 
 shop and a presbyter ; because they were both priests"— 
 and there could be no necessity for a double appointment 
 to the same office, as it was undoubtedly by the same ordi- 
 nation, that both bishop and presbyter were promoted to 
 the order of priesthood.-"-" But," as he immediately adds 
 — *' the bishop is the first or chief priest ;" the first, not 
 merely in point of seniority, but in order and authority, 
 such as the chief priest was in the Jewish church. For 
 though he was a priest, yet all of that order were not high- 
 priests, nor did they succeed to that office in the way of 
 seniority ; just so-»»-says Hilary, " though every bishop be 
 ' a presbyter, yet eveiy presbyter is not a bishop ;"t O^S ^s 
 our Professor might have said to his pupils, — " though 
 every moderator be a minister, yet every minister is not a 
 moderator," nor does he " succeed to the office of course, 
 as senior colleague ;" for if we are not mistaken, the choice 
 generally falls on the junior colleagues ; a very wide depar- 
 ture indeed from what Dr. Campbell makes Hilary describe 
 
 * Lecture vii. 
 
 t The whole passage from Hilary, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, is u\ 
 these words : " Post Episcopum tamen diaconi ordinationem subjecit. 
 Quare ? Nisi quia Episcopi et presbyteri una ordinatio est ? uternue enim 
 sacerdos est. Sed Episcopus primus est, ut omnis Episcopus presbyter 
 sit, non omnis presbyter Episcopus. Hie enim Episcopus est qui inter 
 presbyleros primus est. Denique Timotheum presbyterum ordinatum 
 significat, sed quia ante se alteram non habebat, Episcopus erat." 
 
g20' General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 to have been the primitive practice, and to give weight to 
 his authority, points him out as " a respectable member of 
 the Roman presbytery in those days." How far he was 
 thought to deserve that character, and what respect was 
 paid to his authority by some of the other writers of " those 
 days," may be easily discovered from the ridiculous and con- 
 temptible light in which he is represented by the very next 
 " witness whom our Lecturer adduces, a man," he says, 
 ^' who had more erudition than any person then in the 
 church, the greatest linguist, the greatest critic, the greatest 
 antiquary of them all." 
 
 This is no other than the presbyter Jerome, who wrote 
 about the end of the fourth, and beginning of the fifth cen- 
 tury, and whose " eminent authority" re^ uires particular 
 consideration, " because," according to Dr. Campbell's 
 distinction, " he is held the great apostle of low-church.''* 
 So much indeed is his authority built upon, in support of 
 ecclesiastical parity, that the most powerful champion who 
 has ever yet stood forth in its defence, after composing a 
 voluminous work against the Episcopal government of the 
 church, sent it abroad into the world under the title of— 
 " An Apology for the opinion of Jerome."* As it is from 
 this armory that all the subsequent adversaries of Episco- 
 pacy have borrowed the principal weapons, with which they 
 have appeared in the field, and fitted themselves for the 
 combatj we may well suppose, that our learned opponent 
 
 * See D, Blondel's " Apologia pro sentcntia Ifieronymi." Amstel. 
 1646, as to which Dr. Monro, in his Enquiry into the Nev: Opinions, kSfc. 
 very justly observes, that — " when the government and revenues of the 
 church were sacrilegiously invaded by atheists and enthusiasts under 
 Oliver Cromwell, the learned Blondel employed all his skill to make the 
 ancients contradict themselves, and all contemporary records,- and though 
 every line that he had written, with the least colour of argument, had 
 been frequently answered and exposed, it was still thought enough for 
 the enemies of Episcopacy to say that Blondel had written a book of 
 549 pages, to show that Jerome was of their opinion, and had sufficiently 
 proved that this ancient Monk was a PresbyteriarJ' 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 221 
 
 in this place, would not fail to wield these weapons with 
 his wonted dexterity ; and so as to make them \'ield every 
 possible aid to the cause which he had undertaken to de- 
 fend, while thus employed in fighting his way through 
 what he calls " the progress of the hierarchy." With this 
 view, we now find him bringing forward, in what he, no 
 doubt, thought the most hostile form, " the testimony" of 
 Jerome, as attacking Episcopacy from one particular point, 
 " the practice, which," he says, " had long^ subsisted at 
 Alexandria ;" and then gives us the passage in Jerome's own 
 words, from his epistle to Evagrius, mentioning that " from 
 the days of St. Mark, the evangelist, down to those of the 
 bishops Heracla and Dionysius, the presbyters of Alexan- 
 dria always chose one from among themselves, and placing 
 him in a higher seat, named him bishop, as an army would 
 make an emperor, or deacons choose an arch-deacon."* 
 
 This is the famous story, respecting the supposed custom 
 of the church of Alexandria, which, from the davs of 
 'Blondel, has been eagerly laid hold of, to show, what Dr. 
 Campbell calls — " the sense and strength of the argument" 
 arising from it, that there can be no essential diiference" 
 between the order of bishop and that of presbyter ; since, 
 to make a bishop, nothing more was necessary at first (and 
 of this practice the church of Alexandria remained long an 
 example,) than the nomination of his fellow presbyters ; and 
 no ceremony of consecration was required, but what was 
 performed by them, and consisted chiefly in placing him in 
 a higher seat, and saluting him bishop."! We know well 
 where it is, that every thing which looks like ceremony in 
 the holy offices of religion, has been long exploded j but we 
 
 * " Alexandria a Marco evangelista usque ad Heraclam et Dionysiuni 
 Episcopos, presbyteri semper unum ex so electum, in excelsiori gradu 
 coUocatum, Episcopum nominabant, quomodo si exercitus imperatorem 
 faciat, aut diaconi eligant de se quern industrium noverint, et archidiaco- 
 hurh vocent." Hieron. Ep. ad Evagrium. 
 
 t Lecture vii. 
 
222 General Defeftce of Episcopacy* 
 
 cannot so readily discover, by what means the sacred rite of 
 ordination can be excluded from the account given by Je- 
 rome of the practice at Alexandria, when the words imme- 
 diately following the passage just now quoted, so directly 
 refer to that very rite, and are introduced with the same 
 connecting particle, on which our Professor appears to lay 
 some stress — ^'' For*'* even at Alexandria, — "what does a 
 bishop, which a presbyter may not do, excepting ordina' 
 tion .^"^ — " True," says he, " Jerome admits this as a dis- 
 tinction that then actually obtained ; but the whole preced- 
 ing part of his letter was written to evince, that from the 
 beginning it was not so," And we may say, it is equally 
 true, that between " writing to evince," and " actual evinc- 
 ing," there is a very material difference, as frequently ap- 
 pears from the latter being by no means the consequence of 
 the former. 
 
 As a proof of this, let us only try how Dr. Campbell's 
 paraphrase of the words he had quoted from Jerome, will 
 bear its necessary connection with the perplexing question 
 which immediately follows them. — *' There was nothing," 
 says the Doctor, " at first requisite to make a bishop, but 
 what was performed by his fellow presbyters, no other ordi- 
 nation, than their election ;yor," adds Jerome,-—" what does 
 ^ bishop which a presbyter may not do, excepting ordina- 
 tion P" But why except ordination, or deny the power of 
 it to the presbyters, if no such thing was necessary, or ever 
 required in the making of a bishop? It is evident, therefore, 
 that Jerome not only " admits the superiority of bishops in 
 the exclusive privilege of ordaining," which Dr. Campbell 
 acknowledges to be " true," but that he also admits it to 
 have been so from the beginning, at least from the time 
 when those divisions broke out in the church of Corinth^ 
 to which St. Paul refers in his first Epistle to the Corin*. 
 
 • Quid enim facit, excepta ordinationCf EpiscopuSi quod presbyter non 
 
 faciat I 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 223 
 
 Ihians. For it was immediately after these divisions took 
 place, and in the very time of the apostles, that provision 
 was made for what Jerome calls the " remedy of schism," 
 and to which he alludes more particularly in his commentary 
 on the Episde to Titus, in which we find this account given 
 of the same matter, that when it began to be said, I am of 
 Paul, and I of ApoUos, and I of Cephas, and '' every one 
 thought that those whom he baptized belonged to himself, 
 and not to Christ, it was decreed through the whole world, 
 that one, chosen from among the presbyters, should be set 
 over the rest, to whom should belong the whole care of the 
 church, that so the seeds of schism might be taken away."'^ 
 Allowing now, that such a decree did really take place, on 
 the occasion which is here said to have given rise to it, we 
 must still find it necessary to inquire, by whom it was 
 made, and what authority there was for making it. It 
 could not be the consequence of any voluntary agreement 
 among the presbyters themselves, who were the persons 
 whose power, it seems, had been abused, and was, there- 
 fore, to be now restrained : For such an agreement could 
 only have produced a disposition to submit to this restraint, 
 but could not imply that they had any competent authority 
 to impose it. No general council had yet been called, no 
 'assembly of the church held, which could pretend to give 
 laws to all its members, or to issue any other decrees than 
 what had come from those who had received power from 
 on high — to " go and teach all nations." It was to the 
 apostles^ therefore, and to them only, that we can ascribe 
 the decree to which Jerome refers, if any such was made 
 for binding the whole Christian world ; so that even on the 
 principle which he lays down. Episcopacy can be traced to 
 no other source than apostolic institution. 
 
 * '* Postquam vero unusquisque, eos quos baptizaverat suosputavitesse, 
 non Christ), in toto orbe decretmn est, ut unus de presbyreris electis supex- 
 poneretur caeteris, ad quern omnis ecclesiae cura pcrtinerer, et schisma- 
 tiim semina toUerentar." 
 
224 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 If after what has now been said of Jerome's testimony^ 
 It should still be pretended, that his Alexandrian custom 
 militates against any such original distinction been bishop 
 and presbyter, as we have all along asserted, we shall find 
 a sufficient reply to this objection in Jerome's own words, 
 used against one of his antagonists on a similar occasion, 
 " Quid mihi profers unius urbis consuetudinem ?" Why 
 do you twit me with the custom of one city ? Or, as he 
 expresses the same sentiment in another place by an antithe- 
 sis, which suffers from being translated into English—- 
 " Major est (auctoritas) or bis quam urbis.^'^ The example 
 of a world is of more authority than that of a city. But 
 indeed there are many arguments which might be adduced 
 to show, that even the practice of the church in the city of 
 Alexandria was not such as Jerome appears, or rather as 
 his commentators would make him appear to represent it. 
 There were two writers considerably earlier than he, and 
 both of them members of this same presbytery of Alex- 
 andria, which is pretended to have had such extraordi- 
 nary powers in the nomination or appointment of their 
 bishop ; and yet no notice is taken by them, not the least 
 hint given either by Clemens or Origen, of any such pecu- 
 ' liar practice or privilege in the church to which the}' be- 
 longed. This is the more remarkable in the case of Ori- 
 gen, who frequently complained of the severity with which 
 he had been treated by his bishop Demetrius, but never 
 thought of reminding him of the equality of footing on 
 which they stood, or of claiming the rights of a fellow 
 presbyter ; which surely he might have done, had Deme- 
 trius been no more than a temporary moderator, placed in 
 the chair with no other ceremony than that of salutation, 
 and for no other purpose, than collecting the votes of his 
 brethren, and preserving order in their several meetings. 
 
 We are not disposed to call in question the testimony of 
 Jerome, whose character and abilities we hold in just vene- 
 ration ; and had he personally witnessed, or been contem- 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 225 
 
 porary with those who witnessed, the singular custom 
 which he assigns to the church in Alexandria, we should 
 have paid all due respect to '* his testimony, as a testimony 
 in relation to a matter of fact, both recent and notorious */' 
 But we are surprised that a writer, so much applauded for 
 accuracy as Dr. Campbell, should have distinguished Je^ 
 rome's testimony in this manner , or held it out as " regard' 
 ing the then late uniform practice of the church of Alex* 
 andria;" as it appears, even by his own calculation, that 
 from the time when the practice ceased, to the time when 
 Jerome gave this account of it, there must have elapsed 
 near an hundred and forty years ; a much longer period 
 ■than seems to be intimated by the manner in which our 
 Professor speaks of it : and it may well be questioned 
 whether a transaction at such a distance of time, however 
 notorious, could properly be termed recent^ or whether, in 
 referring to the happy event of 1660, an accurate writer 
 would, in 1800, call it the late restoration. 
 
 But we are told, that in support of Jerome's testimony, 
 " that of the Alexandrian patriarch Eutychius has been 
 pleaded, who, in his annals of that church, takes notice of 
 the same practice, but with greater particularity of circum- 
 stances than had been done by Jerome." And our Le,Cr 
 turer might also have told his pupils, that this same annalist 
 lived as far down as the tenth century, and though a 
 patriarch, such as the church produced at that day, was 
 remarkable for nothing so much as his credulity, and the 
 inconsistency of his narratives, not only with those of more 
 authentic historians, but often with themselves. Neither 
 Jerome nor he produces any authorities for what they 
 report of the practice at Alexandria ; and as to the former, 
 it is well known, that being a man of warm temper, hot in 
 disputation, and possessed of extensive learning, and won- 
 derful powers of mind, he would readily take hold of any 
 appearance of argument, and push it in every direction, by 
 his peculiar strength of language, to carry the point which 
 
 39 
 
226 General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 he had in view, and was eager to accomplish. That this 
 was the case when he wrote his epistle to Evagrius, is in 
 some measure acknowledged by our Professor himself, who 
 says — that what Jerome had been maintaining in the pre- 
 ceding part of this letter, was " in opposition to some dea- 
 con, who had foolishly boasted of the order of deacons, as 
 being superior to the order of presbyters." Feeling, there- 
 fore, for the dignity of his own office, thus in danger of 
 being trampled on by such presumptuous folly^ Jerome's 
 object was, by every possible means, to exalt the presbytery 
 in order to repress the aspiring pretensions of the deacon. 
 With this view, a man of such keen resentment, and 
 warmth of disposition, would naturally push his argument 
 beyond its proper bearing, and in his haste to keep down 
 the presumption of an inferior order, would easily run on, 
 till he encroached on that which was superior to his own ; 
 that so by adding to the height on which he stood, he might 
 increase his distance from those that were below him* 
 Those who coolly attend to his train of reasoning on the 
 subject before us, can hardly fail to discover that this is 
 often the case ; and, on many occasions, will find it more 
 difficult to reconcile Jerome to himself, than to draw any 
 advantage from him, in favour of that cause, which the 
 followers of his apologist, Blondel, have so anxiously 
 brought him forward to support* 
 
 It has been justly observed, that " in spite of the appa- 
 rent contradictions to be found in the writings of Jerome, 
 some of the strongest proofs may be produced from them, 
 that the original establishment of the Christian church was 
 Episcopal^'* in the true and proper sense of that term.* 
 In this same epistle to Evagrius, he says expressly— 
 '^ That we may know that the apostolic traditions were 
 taken from the Old Testament, that which Aaron and his 
 sons, and the Levites were in the temple, let the bishops, 
 
 * See an Appendix to Mr. Daubeny's Guide to the Church, vol. i. p. 66. 
 
 i"^.. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy • 227 
 
 presbyters and deacons clainj to themselves in the church."* 
 Here it is plainly asserted, not only that the hierarchy of 
 the church is founded on apostolic tradition, but also that 
 the apostles had the model of the temple in their view, and 
 raised their plan of church government according to the 
 Jewish economy, by placing the same difference between 
 bishop, presbyter and deacon, under the gospel, as there 
 had been between the high-priest, priest and Levite under 
 the law ; a position, which overturns every argument that 
 can be brought from any other part of his writings, to 
 prove the identity of bishop and presbyter, or that the 
 latter is of the same order with the former ; of whom he 
 says also in this epistle—^" that the power of riches, or the 
 humility of pov'erty, does not make a bishop higher or 
 lower ; but they are all successors of the apostles."f On 
 the same principle he argues against the Luciferians in the 
 following manner — " that the safety of the church depends 
 on the dignity of the chief priest, (or bishop) to whom, if 
 a peculiar power be not given, superior to that of others, 
 there will be as many schisms as priests in the churches."J 
 To the same purpose we find him admonishing Nepotian 
 *' to be subject to his chief priest, and to receive him as 
 the father of his soul; for what Aaron and his sons were, 
 that we know the bishop and presbyters to be."|| It may 
 also be observed, that in his Catalogue of ecclesiastical wri- 
 
 * " Et ut sciamus traditioncs apostolicas sumptas de veteri testamento; 
 quod Aaron, et filii ejus, et LevitDe, in templo fuerint, hoc sibi Episcopi, 
 presbyteri atque diaconi vendicent in ecclesia." Epist. ad Evag. 
 
 f " Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis humilitas, val sublimiorem vel 
 inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Ceterum omnes apostolorurn succes- 
 sores sunt." Epis. ad Evag. 
 
 \ * Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet, cui sj non 
 €Xors quaedam, et ab omnibus eminens detur potestas, tot in ecclesiis 
 efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes." Dialog, advers. Luciferian. 
 
 II '♦ Esto subjectus pontitici tuo, et quast animze parentem suscipe: 
 Quod Aaron et rilios ejus, hos Episcopum et presbyteros esse noveri- 
 mas." Epist. ad Nepot. 
 
22S Generat Defence of Mpmopdciji 
 
 ters^ he mentions " St. James the Just, called the brother 
 of our Lord, as ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusa* 
 lem, Timothy as ordained bishop of Ephesus by St. Paul^ 
 and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, by St. John :" And in the 
 same work he cites the genuine epistles of Ignatius, as the 
 third bishop of Antioch after the apostle Peter, in which 
 epistles we know how clearly the distinction between bishop 
 and presbyter is marked, and the authority of the superior 
 Order as firmly maintained. To all this may be added what 
 he says, in his epistle against the Montanists, that whereas 
 *' among them the bishop was considered as but in the 
 third degree, among us the bishops hold the place of the 
 apostles."* 
 
 We have now taken a concise, but we believe correct 
 enough view, both of the " testimony and opinion" of Je- 
 rome, in regard to the point in question between the advo- 
 cates for and against Episcopacy. We have seen him ad- 
 mitting, in his own way, that the church of Alexandria 
 had this form of ecclesiastical polity in it, from the days of 
 St. Mark the Evangelist, and that it was adopted as a 
 remedy for those schisms and confusions, which broke out 
 in the days of the apostles, and was no longer delayed than 
 the disease appeared. We have seen him also acknowledg- 
 ing, that the hierarchy of the Christian church was founded 
 on apostolic tradition, and that in establishing the evangeli- 
 cal polity, the apostles had an eye to the legal economy, and 
 considered the peace and unity of the church as depending 
 on the authority of the bishops, whom he therefore repre- 
 sents as standing in the place of the apostles, and succeed- 
 ing to all their ordinary powers* If these are the senti- 
 ments, which Jerome delivers in plain unequivocal lan- 
 guage, when allowed to speak for himself, and without suf- 
 fering any " violence to his expressions," the friends of 
 Episcopacy need not be afraid of meeting with any opposi- 
 
 * " Apud eosEpiscopus tertius est, apudnos apostolorum locum Epis- 
 copi tenent." Ep. 54. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* ^2^ 
 
 lion either from his " opinion or his testimony ;" since both 
 are equally favourable to their cause, when not wrested to 
 a sense, which would make him as inconsistent with him- 
 self as hostile to them. 
 
 If after all it should be thought, that Jerome's language, 
 in some parts of his works, is of a doubtful nature, and 
 seems to give an account of the origin of Episcopal 
 government, somewhat different from that which has the 
 concurring testimony of antiquity in its favour, we may 
 still be allowed to ask, whether such writers as Clemens of 
 Rome, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Polycarp, Clemens of 
 Alexandria, Irenaeus, TertuUian, Origen, Cyprian, and 
 many more, long prior to Jerome, were not as capable, 
 and had not as good opportunities, as he, with all his know- 
 ledge of antiquity, could pretend to, of " investigating the 
 origin of any ecclesiastical order or custom," and, therefore, 
 of discovering what change, or whether any change had 
 happened in the constitution of the church, from its first 
 foundation to their own times ? If such a question must 
 be answered in the affirmative, we are equally certain, that 
 they will all be found to agree in this, as a well known truth, 
 that the ecclesiastical constitution, under which they lived, 
 consisting of three distinct orders of church officers, with 
 '' discriminating powers, had been framed by the apostles, 
 after the pattern set them by their blessed Master, and from 
 them handed down, without change or interruption, by a 
 regular and duly authorized succession. 
 
 We have observed, from the works of some of these early 
 writers, how they were accustomed to argue against the he- 
 retics of those times, from the impossibility of their showing 
 that regular succession of bishops from the apostles, which 
 distinguished all the sound and orthodox parts of the Chris- 
 tian church. But how weak and silly had this argument 
 been, if the heretics could at any time have proved a breach 
 in that succession ; much more could they have shown, by 
 undoubted evidence, that it had no relation to the apostles, 
 
m 
 
 239 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 and did not at all commence till about thirty or forty yeais 
 after the last of them was removed from this world ? Had 
 this been a fact, known, or even but surmised at that time, 
 we may well suppose, how eagerly it would have been laid 
 hold of, by the enemies of the true faith, to cut down at 
 once the whole force of that reasoning, which, founded 
 on the apostolic succession of bishops, had been so repeat- 
 edly and powerfully employed against them. 
 
 The strength of this argument did not depend on any in- 
 genious subtilty in the manner of stating it. — There was 
 nothing connected with it, which could be considered as 
 matter of abstruse speculation, that might be differently un- 
 derstood by the opposite parties. The whole point in ques- 
 tion was to be decided by an appeal to those ecclesiastical 
 records, from which the succession of bishops in the several 
 churches might be easily ascertained ; and no mistake was 
 likely to happen, none indeed could generally prevail, when 
 the public registers were so numerous, and so many monu- 
 ments remained to bear witness to every important transac- 
 tion, from the days of the apostles down to that very period, 
 which some authors in these latter times have thought 
 ' proper to fix, as the sera of a wonderful change in the con- 
 stitution and government of the Christian church.— They 
 have not indeed agreed as to the precise time when this 
 supposed alteration took place ; but in general their opi- 
 nions seem to coincide pretty much with that of Dr. Camp- 
 bell, who acknowledges, that " before the middle of the 
 second century, a subordination in the ecclesiastic polity, 
 which he calls primitive Episcopacy, began to obtain veiy 
 generally throughout the Christian world, every single 
 church or congregation having a plurality of presbyters, who, 
 as well as the deacons, were all under the super intendency of 
 one pastor or bishop."^ Now, here is an acknowledgment 
 
 * " V was under these circumstances," says Mr. Gibbon, the historian, 
 that tiU Ic'tv title of bishop began to raise itself above the humble 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 25 1 
 
 that this extraordinary change in the ecclesiastic polity, 
 which consisted in the subordination of many, and the su- 
 perintendency of one, had its beginning' before the middle 
 of the second century, that is, about forty or fifty years af- 
 ter the death of St. John. At this period, being the close 
 of the apostolic age, it is supposed that the ecclesiastic 
 polity was a state of perfect parity, every church or congre- 
 gation being under the direction of a college of bishops or 
 presbyters, the same name being applied to all, with some 
 little distinction in the senior colleague, which though not 
 easily defined, and, by our Professor's account, " very dif- 
 ferent from that which in process of time obtained," yet, 
 he says, " served for a foundation to the edifice, that is, to 
 the rise of Episcopal superiority." 
 
 But even with the advantage of this foundation, we shall 
 find it very difficult to account for the edifice which was so 
 quickly reared, and at a time when so few materials could 
 be furnished for that purpose, either by avarice or ambi- 
 tion. Our Lecturer indeed thinks it " no reflection on the 
 church in general, or even on the pastors in particular, to 
 suppose, that however sincere their zeal for the cause of 
 
 appellation of presbyter ; and while the latter remained the most natural 
 distinction for the members of every Christian senate, the former was 
 appropriated to the dignity of its new president. — The primitive bishops 
 were considered only as the first of their equals, and the honourable ser- 
 vants of a free people. Whenever the Episcopal chair became vacant by 
 death, a new president was cliosen among the presbyters by the surlrage 
 of the whole congregation, every member of which supposed himself in- 
 vested with a sacred and sacerdotal character. Such w as the mild and 
 equal constitution by which the Christians were governed more than an 
 hundred years after the death of the apostles Every society formed 
 within itself a separate and independent republic " — See a great deal 
 more to the same jjurpose, from p. 328 to p 341 of the 2d. vol. 8vo. of 
 the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; from which 
 an attentive reader cannot fail to observe how closely our Christian Pro- 
 fessor has imitated the sceptical historian. An injidel might have had 
 reasons for slandermg and abubi ng Episcopacy, of which a believer should 
 have been ashamed to avail hintselt 
 
232 General Defence of Episcopacy > 
 
 Christ might be, as it undoubtedly was with a very great ma- 
 jority, they would not be entirely superior to considerations 
 either of interest or of ambition, when such considerations 
 were not opposed by motives of a higher nature."^" And 
 we mav ask, what higher motives could have been set in 
 opposition to these worldly considerations, than those which 
 must have daily presented themselves to the minds of the 
 primitive pastors in the age to which we are now looking 
 back, when many of them must have been ordained by the 
 apostles themselves, or bj' their immediate successors, and 
 all of them may be supposed to have possessed a consider- 
 able share of the apostolic spirit and disposition, and were at 
 any rate exposed to the same hardships and sufferings, the 
 same deprivation of all worldly comforts and conveniences, 
 which the aposdes had to encounter? Is it then to be ima- 
 gined, that they would pretend to alter that form of mi- 
 nistr}^ which the apostles had established in the church, or 
 depart so soon from the rule, which, by the direction of 
 the Holy Spirit, had been given them to walk by ? Can it 
 be credited, that men so humble, and heavenly minded, 
 so meek and unassuming as these primitive pastors unde- 
 " niably were, could dare to bring forward a system of ec- 
 clesiastic polity in direct opposition to that, which, by 
 Christ's command, his apostles had delivered to the con- 
 verted nations, and thus prefer a little temporary pre-emi- 
 nence among their fellow servants on earth, to the eternal 
 approbation of their great Lord and Master in heaven? 
 Could such folly and presumption be expected from men 
 v/ho, in every other respect, had acted a wise, sober and con- 
 sistent part, and rather than renounce their Redeemer, and a 
 due regard to his institutions, had shown themselves ready 
 and willing to endure, and many of them actually did en- 
 dure, the most cruel and barbarous sufferings, which the 
 malice of their heathen persecutors could possibly contrive 
 
 * Lecture viii. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 23o 
 
 as Instruments of a spiteful rage against the faith of Jesus, 
 and the order and unity which then adorned his church ? — ■ 
 Could, for instance, the zealous and venerable Ignatius, 
 who was such an ornament to that very period, in which 
 the pretended innovation is supposed to have taken place ; 
 ' — iCould he have concurred in the base presumptuous 
 scheme of new-modelling the frame and constitution of the 
 church, when his whole desire was to contribute to its 
 peace and preser^^ation, and to bear all that his enemies 
 could inflict, if so he might attain to be with its glorious 
 Head, even Jesus Christ ? Or could his illustrious contem- 
 porary, Polycarp, the great light of the Asiatic churches, 
 have given his sanction to so bold and impious an undertak- 
 ing ; the man who, when urged to repent of his error and 
 blaspheme Christ, replied — " Fourscore and six years have 
 I served him, and he never did me any harm ; how, then, 
 can I blaspheme my "King and my Saviour?" 
 
 Perhaps it will be said, that in the days of these holy 
 martyrs, the change or innovation alluded to, was only 
 beginning to make its appearance, and by advancing slowly 
 in its progress, would be less apt to excite apprehension in 
 that numerous body of church officers, whose station and 
 powers in the church were at last so materially aifected by 
 it. Our Professor's plan of parochial Episcopacy, as deli- 
 neated by his fanciful description, would seem a deviation, 
 so small and inconsiderable, from his apostolic presbytery, 
 as to create no alarm in the minds of those who did not, 
 and perhaps could not, perceive how gradually it was ap- 
 proaching to a still greater change, leading insensibly to 
 what he calls the next step of the hierarchy, " when pre- 
 lacy, or diocesan Episcopacy succeeded the parochial, and 
 began generally to prevail." Here again we are presented 
 with another beginnings and what our Lecturer thinks a 
 new system of ecclesiastic polity, which, not satisfied with 
 calling diocesan Episcopacy^ he chooses also to distinguish 
 hy the name of prelacy; a term which, in the vulgar Ian- 
 
234 General Defence of episcopacy, 
 
 guage of this country, being often connected with popery^ 
 has, with many, an invidious meaning attached to it. Yet 
 we can see no good reason why this title should be consi* 
 dered as more descriptive of diocesan than of parochial 
 Episcopacy, since the bishop had been surely as much a 
 prelate (prselatus), or person preferred in his parish^ as he 
 afterwards was in his diocese^ and Dr. Campbell acknow* 
 ledges, not only that " it was a proper Episcopacy in re- 
 spect of the disparity of the ministers," which is the very- 
 thing we contend for, but also " that it seems to have as- 
 sumed the model of a proper Episcopate^ as the word is 
 now understood, before the middle of the second century." 
 And if the case be really so, we should be glad to learn 
 what occasion there was for our Professor taking so much 
 pains to establish an imaginary distinction between his pa- 
 rochial and diocesan Episcopacy ; which may truly be called 
 a " distinction v/ithout a difference," as is evidently shown 
 by his own c][uotations from BurrHs Ecclesiastical Law, 
 where that writer justly observes — -" The cathedral church 
 is the parish church of thie whole diocese ; which diocese 
 was therefore commonly called parochia in ancient times, 
 till the application of this name to the lesser branches into 
 which it was divided, made it, for distinction's sake, to be 
 called only by the name of diocese." Bingham also, a very 
 industrious inquirer into the antiquities of the Christian 
 church, whose authority we have already quoted on this 
 subject,* informs us, " that the ancient name of an Episco- 
 pal diocese for three hundred years was commonly wa^owia^ 
 which some mistake for a parish church, or single congre- 
 gation ; whereas, as learned men have rightly observed, it 
 signified then, not the places or habitations near a church, 
 but the towns or villages near a city, which, together with 
 the city, was the bishop's Tra^oiHia, or, as we now call it, his 
 diocese, the bounds of his ordinary care and jurisdiction. 
 
 * See page 186. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 235 
 
 That thus it was, appears evidently from this, that the 
 largest dioceses, such as those of Rome, Antioch, and 
 Alexandria, which had many particular churches in them, 
 were called by the same name ; as the reader may find an 
 hundred passages in Eusebius, where he uses the word 
 Ta^otxi*, when he speaks of these large and populous cities, 
 which had many particular churches in them." — He then 
 adds the testimony of other writers to the same purpose, 
 and infers from the whole, " that nothing can be plainer, 
 than the use of the word Tra^oimoc for a diocese, to the fourth 
 century ; and now about this time the word diocese began 
 to be used likewise."* 
 
 Such being the language and practice of the primitive 
 times with regard to this matter, it was very difficult for 
 our Professor to fix a precise date for the beginning of his 
 prelacy^ or diocesan Episcopacy^ as distinguished from that 
 which was parochial^ and yet was a proper Episcopate, 
 even *^ as the word is now understood." All that we find 
 him attempting with this view, is in a passage of his eighth 
 X-ecture, where, speaking of " the first subdivision of the 
 pastoral charge into smaller precincts, since called parishes, 
 the name which had formerly belonged to the whole," he 
 says, " there can be no doubt, that there had been instances 
 of it in great cities, long before the expiration of the third 
 century, in some, perhaps in Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, 
 even before the expiration of the second, though it was far 
 from being general till a considerable time after the third."'!' 
 But as we agree with the Professor in this, that " a pastor's 
 charge is properly the people, not the place," we can see 
 no difference in the nature of prelacy, or Episcopacy, whe- 
 ther the place in wich the people reside, who are under the 
 bishop's charge, be called a parish or a diocese ; or whether 
 his charge be of larger or smaller extent. It is the pre- 
 
 * See Bm^bam'i Antiquities, vol, iii. p. 345, 346, 
 t Lecture viii. 
 
tS(y General Defence of Episcopacy, 
 
 eminence of office, or the superior authority annexed to the 
 Episcopal character, that gives the true criterion of prelacy; 
 and at whatever period that mark of distinction first ap- 
 peared in the Christian church, if it did not originate from 
 the apostles, and show itself in their immediate successors, 
 it must have been considered as a very striking encroach- 
 ment on the powers possessed by the parochial college of 
 presbyters. They must thus have been reduced to a state 
 of subordination and dependence, which it was strange that 
 they did not perceive to be the effect of unwarranted usur- 
 pation on the part of the bishops, and, therefore, to be re- 
 sisted by the presbyters with a degree of firmness and re- 
 solution worthy of the sacred and equal trust which had 
 been committed to them. 
 
 Our Lecturer was aware, how unaccountable this must 
 appear to every person acquainted with the common feel- 
 ings of human nature, and, therefore, has endeavoured td 
 obviate the difficulty in the best manner he could. " Some," 
 he says, " have represented it, as an insuperable objection 
 to the presbyterian hypothesis, concerning the rise of Epis- 
 copal superiority, that it seems to imply so great ambition 
 in one part, and so great supineness (not to give it a worse 
 name) in the rest of the primitive pastors ordained by the 
 apostles, and by the apostolic men that came after them, 
 as is perfectly incredible. This they seem to think a de- 
 monstration a priori^ that the thing is impossible."* And 
 we certainly do think it, if not impossible, yet at least 
 highly improbable, and a thing which has never yet oc- 
 curred in any similar case, either recorded in history, or 
 handed down by tradition. Dr. Campbell, however, is 
 very ingenious in pointing out the causes and motives, 
 which, in his opinion, might lead to it ; ••' and so far," says 
 he, " am I from thinking that the ambition or the vices of 
 ^he first ministers gave rise to their authority, that I am 
 
 * Lecture vi. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 237 
 
 certain that this effect is much more justly ascribed to their 
 virtues. An aspiring disposition rouses jealousy — ^jealousy 
 puts people on their guard. There needs no more to check 
 ambition, whilst it remains unarmed with either wealth or 
 power. But there is nothing which men are not ready to 
 yield to distinguished merit, especially when matters are 
 in that state, wherein every kind of pre-eminence, instead 
 of procuring wealth and secular advantages, exposes but to 
 greater danger, and to greater suffering." 
 
 Such is the train of reasoning, with a good deal more to 
 the same purpose, made use of by our Professor, to over- 
 throw the *' demonstration," to which he had alluded, and 
 to make it appear, that the rise of Episcopal superiority is 
 to be accounted for, by ascribing it to distinguished merit, 
 and distinguished danger, on the part of those who -were 
 promoted to that superior dignity. That the first of these 
 causes could not operate in giving rise to the " Episcopal 
 superiority," is evident from what has been already said 
 on the nature of it. And if this superiority be considered 
 as a bold deviation from the plan of ecclesiastic polity laid 
 down by our Lord's apostles, and a presumptuous depar- 
 ture from the parity which they had established, it could 
 not possibly receive any countenance or support from men 
 of " distinguished merit" in the service of the church. 
 With such a character, they could never think of introduc- 
 ing, much less of accepting, any superiority or pre-eminence 
 above their equal brethren, whereby they might make them- 
 selves lords over God's heritage, in the manner which he 
 had forbidden. This was a species of merit as unknown 
 to these primitive times, as it was unworthy of the Chris- 
 tian pastors who lived in them. The pious Irenseus of 
 Lyons, the zealous Cyprian of Carthage, with his contem- 
 poraries, Fabian and Cornelius of Rome, and many more 
 whom we could name of the " noble army of martyrs," 
 were as much prelates^ or diocesan bishops^ as any that ever 
 came after them under that denomination, and some of 
 
238 General Befence of Episcopacy, 
 
 them lived at the times, when even Dr. Campbell admits 
 the introduction of diocesan Episcopacy in a variety of in- 
 stances. Is it then to be supposed, that all these holy and 
 venerable prelates would encounter the severest trials, and 
 yield themselves to a violent death, in the humble hope 
 of receiving a crown of life, for assuming a superiority 
 which did not belong to them, and transgressing the limits 
 assigned to their ministerial order by that Lord, from whom 
 the whole power of it was derived, and the whole reward 
 of a faithful discharge of duty to be expected t If such a 
 conduct was far from giving them any merit in the sight of 
 God, it ought as little to have procured for them any ho- 
 nourable mark of distinction among men ; especially among 
 their fellow pastors, who were thus held out as placed in 
 an inferior station, on account of their inferior merit, or 
 rather because they had no merit at all, not even that of 
 resisting such a daring innovation, and striving to preserve 
 the rights of their own order from being swallowed up by 
 this usurped superiority of rank, which, though but newly 
 introduced, was rapidly spreading, under the name of diQ- 
 cesan Episcopacy, 
 
 . It is strange indeed, that through all the churches of 
 Asia, Africa, and Europe, the " senior brother" in every 
 college of pastors, should thus at once have trampled on 
 the rights and privileges of his colleagues, as if a general 
 consj.iracy had been entered into for that purpose : and yet 
 it is still more strange and unaccountable, that not one oi 
 these innumerable pastors should have made a single re-* ^ 
 monstrance against so flagrant an usurpation, as if they too 
 had all combined, at one and the same time, to betray their 
 trust, and allow themselves to be thus shamefully degraded* 
 It is as impossible to conceive that any such thing should 
 have happened then, as to believe now, that all the mode-^ 
 rators of the several synods under the Scotch establishment, 
 would be allowed to assume at once not only the title, but 
 the superior rank and authority, of diocesan bishops, with; 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 239 
 
 ®ut the smallest opposition from any one member of these 
 synods, or the least notice taken of such a wondei-ful 
 change of system.-— Nay, the difficulty must be much 
 greater, if we wish to make the cases similar: For then we 
 must suppose the whole of Christendom to be under the 
 same form of church government as that which is esta- 
 blished in this northern part of Britain ; to be convinced too 
 that this form of government is of apostolic institution, 
 and yet permit a few aspiring ecclesiastics to overturn it, 
 and introduce in all the Christian churches a new, unknown 
 scheme of " Episcopal superiority^" favourable only to the 
 views of those who were its first contrivers. 
 
 It is further to be considered, that these few ambitious 
 prelates, who were thus so astonishingly successful in get- 
 ting themselves acknowledged to be true diocesan bishops, 
 were widely scattered over the face of the earth, and for the 
 most part knew very little of one another, and could hold 
 no general meeting for the purpose of concerting their plan, 
 or of obtaining the sanction of civil power to recommend it. 
 And yet so it happened, that under all these disadvantages, 
 they could contrive to learn each other's sentiments, to think 
 and act alike in every stage of this refined system of policy, 
 and at length were able to exhibit an entire new form of 
 ecclesiastic government, under the name of diocesan Epis-' 
 'copacy ; nay, had the amazing address to persuade the 
 whole Christian world, that so far from any change having 
 taken place, the church of Christ had all along, from the 
 days of the apostles, been Episcopal. Nothing can add to 
 the degree of surprise, which must be excited by all this 
 inexplicable procedure, unless it be the consideration of 
 what Dr. Campbell mentions as another cause of the rise 
 of Episcopal pre-eminence, that " instead of procuring 
 wealth and secular advantages, it only exposed to gixater 
 danger, and to greater suffering." This, we believe, was 
 really the case, in the severe and tr) ing times to which we 
 are now looking back. As soon as an edict passed for per- 
 
240 General Defence of Episcopacip* 
 
 secuting the Christians in any part of the church, the bi»- 
 shops were immediately aimed at, as the most guilty per- 
 sons, and the first that were exposed to the fury of their 
 persecutors. As their danger was thus imminent, their 
 labour too was often no less severe ; for upon them was 
 laid the principal care of the flock, which frequently re- 
 quired the greatest vigilance and attention in the shepherd. 
 To the undergoing all this toil and trouble, they were 
 impelled by a sense of duty ; and were supported under it, 
 by the hope of having their services accepted by their bles- 
 sed Master. But could they have felt the force of this 
 motive, or indulged this hope, had they been conscious 
 at the same time, that they were violating his commands, 
 and arrogating to themselv^es a power and pre-eminence, 
 which he had expressly forbidden ? And of this they must 
 have been conscious, had their Episcopal superiority been 
 an infringement of the apostolic institution, and an entire 
 subversion of that system of ecclesiastic parity, which, 
 by their Lord's command, the teachers of the nations had 
 formed and left with his church, that it might be there re- 
 tained to the end of the world. 
 
 In accounting for so early and so universal a departure 
 from this supposed system of equality among the first Chris- 
 tian pastors, our Lecturer alludes to the origin of civil 
 government, and thinks it " easy to evince, that the parallel 
 case of monarchy will, in the nature of things, be found 
 equally impossible."* The friends of that form of govern- 
 ment will, no doubt, think it equally easy to remove this 
 impossibility, by bringing what they take to be clear, un- 
 questionable evidence, that monarchy, as well as Episco- 
 pacy, is founded on divine appointment. But supposing 
 the case to be otherwise, and that monarchy, or, as our 
 Professor calls it, " the dominion of one man over innu- 
 merable multitudes of men," was really a breach of their 
 
 * Lecture vi. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 241 
 
 original equality, and an encroachment on those " natural 
 rights of man," the maintaining of which has ofte^n made 
 a noise in the world, and, of late years, has been attended 
 with the most shocking barbarities ; is it then possible to 
 believe, that such revolutions work their way in a calm 
 and quiet manner, and are allowed to pass without notice, 
 as the effects of natural causes, " in the ordinary progres- 
 sion of human things ?"— Yet of a similar nature, though* 
 perhaps not so difficult to be accomplished, was the change, 
 which is supposed to have taken place in the church, by the 
 introduction of prelacy, or the setting up in every diocese, 
 one pastor above the rest, vested with all the powers, which 
 have ever since been assigned to the Episcopal office. 
 Such a change as this from that pastoral equality, which, 
 it is said, had previously subsisted from the days of the 
 apostles, we should think, must have excited some alarm, 
 or produced some disturbance in the church, or at least 
 have been taken some notice of, by the many writers, who 
 record the transactions of that very period in which this 
 remarkable change is pretended to have happened. 
 
 Let us but consider the high regard always expressed 
 among the primitive Christians for every thing which they 
 believed to be of apostolic institution ; what a controversy, 
 for instance, was raised on that account, and carried on for 
 many years, with the greatest zeal on both sides, about the 
 proper time of observing Easter, the annual festival which 
 they all celebrated in memory of our Lord's resurrection. 
 And when such a question as this was deemed to be of so 
 much importance, although it regarded merely the day that 
 was supposed to be fixed on by the apostles, can it be ima- 
 gined that the constitution and form of government which 
 they had established in the church, would not be held in 
 the highest veneration, or that every care would not be 
 taken to preserve it pure and entire in the very state in 
 which the apostles had left it? When any schism or heresy 
 broke out in those days, we find the abettors of it assigning 
 
 31 
 
242 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 various causes, and often at a loss what to assign for their' 
 breaking away from the communion of the church, andy 
 as it was then called, " setting up altar against altar." But 
 had they known, or suspected, that any change or inno- 
 vation had been introduced into the government of the 
 church, such as our modern opposers of prelacy, or Epis- 
 copacy, represent it to be, they would have eagerly brought 
 it forward, as a sufficient reason for their abandoning a so- 
 ciety which had submitted to such irregular and usurped 
 authority. The authors of this ambitious project would 
 have been held up to popular indignation, as " lording it 
 over God's heritage," and it would not have been left to 
 the declaimers " in our more enhghtened times," to ex- 
 hibit in its proper colours " the priestly pride of such pre- 
 latical preachers." Yet nothing of this kind was ever 
 heard of, in the times to which we are now referring. No 
 ecclesiastical historian of that or the succeeding ages takes 
 the least notice of any such departure from apostolic insti- 
 tution : No adversary of the church in those days ever ob- 
 jected to it : And from all this silence both in friends and 
 enemies ; from nothing being said either to justify or con- 
 demn the change that is supposed to have happened, we 
 may certainly conclude that no such change had taken 
 place ; but that the government of the church had still con- 
 tinued, without any interruption, what the apostles had 
 left it, a proper and regular Episcopacy, whether we call 
 it parochial or diocesan, which makes no difference as to 
 the nature of the institution, or the authority on which it 
 was founded. 
 
 We may, therefore, sum up ^hat has- been said on this 
 point, in the words of a most learned and distinguished 
 divine, whose works have been long admired for their 
 genuine piety, and who, in asserting Episcopacy to be of 
 divine institution, appeals thus to the faith and practice of 
 Christendom — " Be ye followers of me, as I am of Christ, 
 is an apostolical precept. We have seen how the apostles 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 243 
 
 have followed Christ, how their tradition is consequent of 
 divine institution. Next let us see how the church has 
 followed the apostles, as the apostles have followed Christ. 
 Catholic practice is the next basis of the power and order 
 of Episcopacy. For — let us consider — Is it imaginable 
 that all the world should, immediately after the death of 
 the apostles, conspire together, to seek themselves, and 
 not the things that are of Jesus Christ, to erect a go- 
 vernment of their own devising, not ordained by Christ, 
 not delivered by his apostles, and to relinquish a divine 
 foundation, and the apostolical superstructure, which, if it 
 was at all, was a part of our Master's will, which whoso- 
 ever knew and observed not, was to be beaten with many 
 stripes ? Is it imaginable, that those gallant men, who 
 could not be brought off from the prescriptions of gen- 
 tilism, to the seeming impossibilities of Christianity, with- 
 out evidence of miracle, and clearness of demonstration 
 upon agreed principles, should all, upon their first adhesion 
 to Christianity, make an universal dereliction of so consi- 
 derable a part of their Master's will, and leave gentilism 
 to destroy Christianity; for he that erects another economy 
 than what the Master of the family hath ordained, destroys 
 all those relations of mutual dependence which Christ hath 
 made for the conjunction of all the parts of it, and so de- 
 stroys it in the formality of a Christian congregation or 
 family ? — Is it then imaginable, that all those glorious mar- 
 tyrs, that were so strict observers of divine sanctions and 
 canons apostolical, would be also so assiduous in contemn- 
 ing the government that Christ left for his family, and 
 erect another ? To what purpose were all their watchings, 
 their banishments, their fears, their fastings, and formida- 
 ble austerities, and, finally, their so frequent martyrdoms ? 
 Of what excellency or avail, if, after all, they should be 
 hurried out of the world, and all their fortunes and posses- 
 sions, by untimely, by disgraceful, by dolorous deaths, to 
 be set before a tribunal, to give account of their universal 
 
g44 General Defence of EptscQpactf» 
 
 neglect, and contemning of Christ's last testament, in 5^ 
 great an affair as the whole government of his church ; If 
 all Christendom should be guilty of so open, so united 9. 
 defiance against their Master, by what argument or confi- 
 lience can any misbeliever be persuaded to Christianity, 
 which, in all its members, for so many ages together, is so 
 unlike its first institution as in its most public affair, and 
 for matter of order of the most general concernment, is so 
 contrary to the first birth? Where are the promises of 
 Christ's perpetual assistance, of the impregnable perma- 
 nence of the church against the gates of hell, of the spirit 
 of truth to lead it into all truth, if she be guilty of so 
 grand an error as to erect a throne, where Christ hath 
 made all level, or appointed others to sit in it, than whom 
 he suffers ? Either Christ hath left no government, or most 
 certainly the church hath retained that government, what- 
 isoever it is."* And he concludes the whole of his reason- 
 ing on this subject with the application of that golden rule 
 of Vincentius Lirinensis— •" We must take care above all 
 things to adhere to that which has been believed, in all 
 places, at all times, and by all persons ; for this is truly 
 and properly catholic :" And nothing was ever more so 
 than the government of the church by bishops. Therefore, 
 as the same ancient author observes-^" It never was, is, 
 nor ever shall be lawful to teach Christian people any other 
 thing, than that which has been received"t from a primi- 
 tive fountain, and has descended in the stream of catholic, 
 uninterrupted succession. 
 
 * See section xxii. of an excellent tract, entitled — " Of the sacred Or- 
 der and Offices of Episcopacy " &c. bound up with the other polemical 
 ■works of Dr Jeremy Taylor, chaplkin to Charles the First, and bishop 
 of Down and Connor. 
 
 f •* Magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod sem- 
 per, quod ab omn<bus creditum est. Hoc est enim vere proprieque ca- 
 tholicum. — Annunciare ergo Christlanis catholicis. praeter id quod acce- 
 perunt, nunquam licuit, nunquam licet, nunquam licebit." Vincent. Li- 
 y'm. adv. Hseres. cap. 3—14. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 245 
 
 In opposition, however, to all these testimonies of an- 
 cient times, which have been brought forward in support 
 of the apostolic or Episcopal succession, there is an argu- 
 ment still used by some writers, to lessen the force of so 
 much accumulated evidence, by impressing on the mind 
 as much doubt and uncertaint}^ as possible, with regard to 
 the manner in which this succession has been preserved^ 
 or carried on, from one age of the church to another. The 
 danger of its failing, and the difficulty of knowing whether 
 it has not so failed, or suffered interruption, were, there* 
 fore, topics, cf which our learned Professor would not fail 
 to lay hold, when striving to maintain his opinion, that 
 *' the validity of God's covenant," as he expresses himself, 
 *' cannot depend on the ministry, or his promises be ren- 
 dered ineffectual to the humble believer on account of any 
 defect in the priesthood." To this he had been alluding 
 in the beginning of his fourth Lecture, and after pointing 
 ©ut the difficulty of " examining the import of names and 
 titles, and the authenticity of endless genealogies," he re- 
 curs to the subject, as an inference from the case of the 
 thankful Samaritan, whose faith was accepted, although he 
 did not go and show himself to the priests: And yet— 
 1* no order of men," says our Lecturer, " existing at pre- 
 sent in the Christian church, can give any evidence of a 
 divine right, compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and 
 of the posterity of Aaron in the Jewish."* Now, if we 
 should say, that the very reverse of this is the case, the 
 position might be safely maintained on this ground, that it 
 could not be so easily proved, that no spurious child had 
 ever been introduced into the family of the high priest, as 
 that no unordained person had ever been admitted to the 
 Episcopal office. But, indeed, we have good reason to 
 beheve, that in either case, nothing of this kind has ever 
 happened. It was sufficient for the Israelite to know, that 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 
246 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 
 
 the priesthood under the law having been established in the 
 family of Aaron, no doubt had ever been entertained of 
 that family being preserved pure from any illegitimate 
 mixture. And the Christian has at least equal ground to 
 be satisfied, that the government of the church under the 
 gospel having been established by the apostles, in the way 
 of Episcopal succession, that succession has never yet failed 
 in the Christian world, however it may have been in some 
 places despised, for two or three centuries past, and 
 thrown aside as unnecessary. 
 
 It is a circumstance, that must be well known to those 
 who are acquainted with the history of the Christian 
 church, that for the preservation of the Episcopal succes- 
 sion, nothing more was requisite than a proper observance 
 of the canons made by the church for that purpose, and a 
 due regard to the doctrine, on which these canons were 
 founded. It was always a received doctrine in every part 
 of the church, that no ordination was valid, but that of 
 bishops ; and the earliest canons required, that every 
 bishop should be ordained or consecrated by two or three 
 bishops. By this means, the Episcopal succession has been 
 carefully preserved in every age, from the days of the 
 apostles to the present time ; and since it was universally 
 believed, that none but bishops could ordain, it was mo- 
 rally impossible, that any person could be received as 
 bishops, who had not been so ordained. This was the 
 reason, which Mr. Law assigned for the security of the 
 Episcopal succession, in one of his admirable letters to 
 Bishop Hoadly^ and then applied it in this manner — " Now, 
 is it not morally impossible, that in our church any one 
 should be made a bishop without Episcopal ordination? 
 Is there any possibility of forging orders, or steahng a 
 bishopric by any other stratagem ? No ; it is morally im- 
 possible, because it is an acknowledged doctrine amongst 
 us, that a bishop can only be ordained by bishops. Now, 
 as this doctrine must necessarily prevent any one being a 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, 247 
 
 bishop without Episcopal ordination in our age, so it must 
 have the same effect in every other age, as well as ours ; 
 and, consequently, it is as reasonable to believe, that the 
 Succession of bishops was not broke in any age since the 
 aposdes, as that it was not broke in our own kingdom 
 within these forty years. For the same doctrine, which 
 preserves it forty years, may as well preserve it forty hun- 
 dred years, if it was equally believed in all that space of 
 time. And that this has been the constant doctrine of the 
 church, we have the most undoubted evidence. We be- 
 lieve the scriptures are not corrupted, because it was 
 always a received doctrine in the church, that they were 
 the standing rule of faith, and because the providence of 
 God may well be supposed to preserve such books, as were 
 to convey to every age the means of salvation. The same 
 reasons prove the great improbability that this succession 
 should ever be broke, both because it was always against a 
 received doctrine to break it, and because we may justly 
 hope the providence of God would keep up his own insti- 
 tution."* 
 
 Such is the clear, satisfactory train of reasoning, by 
 which a decisive answer is at once afforded to all the " dark 
 and critical questions," that can possibly arise, even in such 
 a fertile mind, as that of our late learned Lecturer, " about 
 the import of names and titles, and the authenticity of end- 
 less genealogies," the examination of which did not appear 
 in such a formidable view, in the dawn of the reformation, 
 and when, after a lapse of near a thousand years, men be- 
 gan again to look into these questions, and to inquire into 
 
 * See the second of the Three Letters written by the Rev. William 
 Law to Bishop Hoadly, and lately reprinted in a collection of tracts, 
 called " The Scholar armed against the Errors of the Tir)ie," l^c. la 
 the preface to which, this reason is assigned for republishing Mr. Law's 
 Letters, that — •' though incomparable for truth of argument, brightness 
 of wit, and purity of English, and honoured with the highest admira- 
 tion at their first appearance, they are now in a manner forgotten." 
 
248 General Defence of Episcopacif, 
 
 the foundation of that ecclesiastical authority, which they 
 still saw to be necessary for the preservation of the faith, 
 the unity and order of the church. Even those who are 
 considered as the l"ounders of the presbyterian form of 
 church government, did not object to Episcopacy, on ac- 
 count of an}' doubt or uncertainty as to the regular succes- 
 sion of bishops. So far from entertaining any suspicion or 
 prejudice of that kind, they reckoned it a most unjust 
 aspersion to say, that they condemned or threw off Epis- 
 copacy, because they were obliged to do without it in 
 Geneva, where they thought it impossible to have bishops, 
 without submitting to that papal supremacy, which they 
 had lately renounced. But as this was not the case in 
 England, they highly applauded the Episcopal hierarchy 
 of the English church, and congratulated the nation on 
 their happiness in retaining it. This appears from their 
 several letters to Queen Elizabeth, to the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, and others of the English bishops, in which 
 they earnestly prayed to God for the continuance of so 
 great a blessing, bemoaned their own unhappy circumstances 
 in being deprived of it, because they had no magistrate to 
 protect them, and owned that the want of Episcopacy Was 
 a great defect, but called it their misfortune rather than their 
 fault. — '^ As for their excuse," we shall only say, in the 
 words of a masterly writer on this subject, " we do not 
 now meddle with it, for, we think, it was not a good one ; 
 they might have had bishops from other places, though 
 there were none among themselves but those who were 
 popish, and they might as well have had bishops as pres- 
 byters, without the countenance of the civil magistrate. 
 It might have raised a great persecution against them, but 
 that is nothing as to the truth of the thing ; and if they 
 thought it a truth, they ought to have suffered for it."^ 
 
 • See a " Discourse on the ^ialificatio7is requisite to administer the Sa- 
 craments,'" by the celebrated Charles Leslie, and republished, with n:ai)/ 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. JS49 
 
 But whatever weight may be allowed to their plea of 
 necessity, it is evident, from their having recourse to it as 
 an excuse for their conduct, that they considered the refor- 
 mation, in which they were engaged, as a renouncing and 
 withdrawing from, not pure and genuine Episcopacy, but 
 the corruptions, which papal usurpation had grafted upon 
 it. This is plainly and openly avowed by their great leader 
 Calvin, who, in opposing the claims of the Romish church, 
 says — " If they would give us an hierarchy, in which the 
 bishops did so rise above others, as that they would not 
 refuse to be subject to Christ, and to depend on him as 
 their only Head^ and be referred to him ; in which they 
 would so preserve brotherly communion among themselves, 
 as to be united by nothing so much as his truth, then, in- 
 deed, I should confess, that there is no anathema, of which 
 those persons are not worthy^ if any such there be, who 
 would not reverence such an hierarchy, and submit to it 
 with the utmost obedience."^ And such an hierarchy he 
 acknowledges that the church of England possessed, to 
 which he therefore professes to give both inward rever- 
 ence, and outward respect, assuring the bishops, that he 
 would gladly have served them, in settling the affairs of 
 their church. 
 
 of his otlher tracts, m the Scholar Armed, &c. And in confirmation of 
 the truth of Mr. Leslie's remark, ♦* that the Genevan reformers might 
 have had bishops from other places," see an Ecclesiastical History of 
 Scotland, &c. by the Rev. John Skinner, vol. ii. p, 130, &c. where an 
 account is given of no fe^yer than ten bishops, who, in the beginning of 
 the reformation, renounced the errors of popery, and could have been 
 the means of preserving the Episcopal order in any society that chose to 
 accept of it. 
 
 * " Talem si nobis hierarchiam exhibeant, in qua sic emineant Epis- 
 copi, ut Christo subesse non recusent, et ab illo tanquam unico capite 
 pendeant, et ad ipsum referantur; in qua sic inter se fraternam societa- 
 tem colant, ut non alio modo quam ejus veritate sint coUigati, tum vero 
 nullo non anathemate dignos fatear, si qui erunt, qui non earn reverean- 
 tur, sunimaque obsdientia observent." — De Kcce^s. £cc/es. Eeform. 
 
 32 
 
SiSO General Defence of Episcopacy 
 
 To the same purpose we find Beza expressing his senti- 
 ments, in language as strong as it was possible to use on 
 such an occasion—" If, however, there be any," says he, 
 " which you can hardly make me believe, who reject the 
 whole order of bishops, God forbid that any man of a 
 sound mind should assent to the madness of such persons."^ 
 And speaking of the government of the church of Eng- 
 land by bishops, he says—" Let her enjoy that singulai^ 
 blessing of God, which I wish may be ever continued to 
 her.^'t Many more testimonies of a similar nature might 
 be produced, to show how little countenance was given by 
 these leading reformers abroad to their pretended fol- 
 lowers in this coumry, who would be satisfied with nothing 
 less than the entire abolition of Episcopacy, as " being a 
 great and insupportable grievance, and contrary to the in- 
 clinations of the generality of the pttople."} It were easy 
 to show how widely they diifered in this respect from those 
 whom thev considered as promoting the same cause ia 
 other countries. One remarkable instance of such differ- 
 ence of sentiment appears from what is recorded of the 
 learned Blondel, who is said to have concluded his " apo* 
 logy for the opinion of Jerome," with words to this pur- 
 pose — " By all that we have said to assert the rights of the 
 presbytery, we do not intend to invalidate the ancient and 
 apostolical constitution of Episcopal pre-eminence. But 
 we believe, that wheresoever it is established conformably 
 to the ancient canons, it must be carefully preserved ; and 
 wheresoever by some heat of contention, or otherwise, it 
 has been put down or violated, it ought to be reverently 
 restored-" We are farther informed, that " as the book 
 
 * " Si qui sunt autem, (quod sane mihi baud facile persuaseris) qui 
 omnem Episcoporum ordinem rejiciunt, absit, ut quisquam satis sanac 
 jpentis furoribus illorum assentiatur." 
 
 t " Fruatur sane ista singulari Dei beneficentia, quae utinam sit illi 
 pevpetua." Tract, vie Minist. Eccl. Grad. cap. i. et xviii. - 
 
 \ See Claim of Risht, after the Revolution ^n 1688. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy. 25 1 
 
 Jtiad been written at the earnest request of the assemblv at 
 Westminster, and especially of the Scots ; when thenr 
 jigents in Paris saw this conclusion of Mr. Blondel's mar 
 nuscript, they expostulated with him very loudly, for mar- 
 ting all the good he had done in his book, disappointing 
 the expectation of the assembly, and showing himself au 
 enemy, instead of a friend, to their holy covenant ; this 
 they urged upon liim with such vehemency, and unwearied 
 importunity, that they prevailed with him to put out that 
 conclusion.""^ His intention however of admitting it, suf* 
 ficiently shows what his sentiments were on this subject^ 
 smd how far he was from abetting or approving those vie-* 
 knt measures, which were then in agitation for overturning 
 that ancient and apostolic constitution of the church, which 
 he wished to see carefully preserv^ed, wherever it had been 
 regularly established. 
 
 We shall only take notice of another testimony, given by 
 a divine of the presbyterian establishment in Holland, who 
 could not be suspected of any prejudice in favour of Epis* 
 copacy. This is the celebrated Mr. LeClerc, whose words, 
 as quoted by the present bishop of Lincoln, are these — " I 
 have always professed to believe, that Episcopacy is of 
 •apostolical institution, and consequently very good, and 
 veiy lawful ; that man had no manner of right to change it 
 in any place, unless it was impossible otherwise to reform 
 the abuses that crept into Christianity ; that it was justly 
 preserved in England, where the reformation was practi- 
 cable without altering it ; that, therefore, the protestants in 
 England, and other places, where there are bishops, do very 
 ill to separate from that discipline ; that they would still do 
 much worse in attempting to destroy it, in order to set up 
 presbytery, fanaticism and anarchy. Things ought not to 
 
 * This important piece of information is given at full length in a let- 
 ter from Dr. P. du Moulin to Dr. Durell, and published in the Appendix 
 to his Vievi of the Government and Public Worship (^ God in the reformed 
 Churches beyond the Seas, p. 339, 340. 
 
052 General Defence of Episcopacy. 
 
 be turned into a chaos, nor people seen every where with- 
 out a call, and without learning pretending to inspiration. 
 Nothing is more proper to prevent them than the Episcopal 
 discipline, as by law established in England, especially when 
 those that preside in church government, are persons of 
 penetration, sobriety and discretion."* — ^^Yet this same Mr. 
 L.e Clerc exhibits a strong proof of the inconsistency of those 
 winters on this subject who, if they do not halt between two 
 opinions, seem desirous however to keep weU with both 
 sides ; for, arguing in another part of his works, against 
 the necessity of Episcopal government, he tells us—" It is 
 nothing to the purpose to show, that Christ and his apostles 
 instituted this form of church government, and that the 
 church never had any other kind of government in it for 
 above fifteen hundred years from our Saviour's days down- 
 wards, which, though it be so clearly evidenced, that the 
 truth of it cannot be denied, yet it is of no weight, nor de- 
 serves to be regarded. For those, who would make the 
 hierarchy necessary to the constitution of the Christian 
 church, ought to prove, that God instituted Christianity 
 for the sake of the Episcopal order, and that the Episcopal 
 order was not instituted for the sake of Christianity. — For 
 if this order was appointed for the sake of the church 
 (which they cannot deny) they must also acknowledge,' 
 that if it be more advantageous to the church in some 
 places, to have this order abolished, it is not amiss to lay 
 it aside in such places."t 
 
 Now, this is an argument for abolishing the Episcopal 
 order, which, if carried to its full extent, will equally serve 
 to prove the lawfulness or even expediency of laying aside 
 every '^ outward and visible sign" in religion, nay, even the 
 scriptures themselves ; since it may justly enough be said« 
 
 • See Bishop Pretyman's Elements of Christian Theology, vol. ii. p. 
 400, 401. 
 
 t Bibliotheque, torn. ix. p. 159, as quoted by Dr. Brett in bis Accoim 
 pf Church Government, ijfc p. Ill, 1X2. 
 
General Defence of Episcopacyb 253 
 
 that Christianity was not instituted for the sake of the scrip*^^^ 
 tures, but the scriptures were written for the sake of Chris- 
 tianity, that the church might have a certain rule to walk 
 by; and therefore, when any church judges it more advan- 
 tageous to be without the use of the scriptures, there is no- 
 thing amiss in laying it aside, as the church of Rome has 
 done, for what she is pleased to think the greater benefit 
 of Christianity. By the same reasoning, the two sacra- 
 ments of baptism and the Lord's supper, being instituted 
 for the sake of Christianity, and as outward means of con-^ 
 veying an inward grace, they too may safely enough be 
 laid aside, when any body of pretended Christians shall feel 
 themselves so inwardly moved by the spirit, as to stand in 
 no need of such outward means of obtaining its grace and 
 influence ; and the church of Rome is the less to be blamed 
 for taking away the cup from the laity, since, according to 
 Le Clerc's argument, she might have deprived them of the 
 whole sacrament, had she thought it more for the advantage 
 of the church so to do. 
 
 These are modes of reasoning, to which, as advocates for 
 the truth as it is in Christ, we can never be obliged to have 
 recourse. We know, that the holy scriptures, and the sacred 
 institutions of Christianity, were designed by its blessed 
 Founder to be continued in his church, even unto the end 
 of the world ; and, therefore, neither the church of Rome, 
 nor any other church, cian ever set aside the use of the 
 scriptures, or the ministration of the sacraments, whole 
 and entire, as they were instituted by Christ himself: And 
 we see no reason why the same may not be said of the 
 Episcopal government of the church, which, being ap- 
 pointed by Christ himself, who had all power given him in 
 heaven and earth for that purpose, cannot be set aside by 
 any human authority, or on any pretence whatever. We 
 do not say that Christianity was instituted for the sake of 
 the outward polity of the church, or the church for the 
 s^ke of the Episcopal order ; btit we may justly say, what 
 
2^4 General Defence of Episcopacy* 
 
 is plainly said in scripture, and was constantly professed m 
 the purest ages of the gospel, that the helief of the " holy 
 catholic church," being a part of the faith which Chris* 
 tianity requires, and the Episcopal order a part of what 
 we are taught to believe, concerning the constitution and 
 government of the church, no separation must be attempted 
 of what our God and Saviour has thus joined together. 
 We must receive his scheme of salvation according to the 
 plan and the terms on which he has offered it to us ; and 
 notwithstanding all that Mr. Le Clerc and other writers of 
 the same stamp have affirmed to the contrar}^, we must 
 conclude, that the necessity of Episcopal government is 
 most undeniably proved, when we show that it was insti- 
 tuted by Christ and his apostles, and continued to be the 
 only form of church government for fifteen hundred years 
 and upwards. 
 
 The strength of the arguments which we have now beei* 
 handling in defence of the apostolic Episcopacy, lies in this 
 undoubted truth, that the Christian priesthood is a divine 
 positive institution, which, as it could have no beginning 
 but by means of God's appointment, so neither could it 
 be continued but in the way which he had been pleased to 
 appoint for its continuance. The apostolic practice plainly 
 showed what the method was which God had chosen for 
 that purpose : For Christ was in all that the apostles did, 
 and God was " in Christ reconciling the world to himself." 
 The ministr)^ of this reconciliation was con^mitted to the 
 apostles ; and we have seen how that ministry was branched 
 out into three distinct orders, and that the persons severally 
 invested with them, towards the end of the apostolic age, 
 were distinguished from each other by the appropriate titles 
 of bishop, presbyter and deacoji : A distinction which evi- 
 dently took place in conformity with that which had been 
 establish :d in the Jewish church, of high priest, priest and 
 Levite. That such a resemblance would appear between 
 the Israebtish and Christian economy^ may be justly in- 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy, ^5S 
 
 ferred from this consideration, that the former was de- 
 signed to be the figure and forerunner of the latter, and 
 that the author of both was the same all-wise and merciful 
 God, who would certainly contrive and order whatever was 
 best for answering his own gracious purposes. This was a 
 matter which could only be settled by divine wisdom and 
 goodness, and, therefore, would not be left to the deter- 
 mination of human prudence. For if it be true, as Dr. 
 Campbell has affirmed it to be " certain, that one model 
 of church government may be much better calculated for 
 promoting the belief and obedience of the gospel than 
 another," we may as certainly conclude that such a model 
 would be prescribed by the divine Founder of the church, 
 as he knew to be best calculated for promoting the ends of 
 infinite mercy and goodness. This was the object which 
 he had in view, by appointing the orders of the ministry, 
 and regulating the whole sacred service under the dispen- 
 sation of the law ; and we cannot suppose that he would 
 leave that of the gospel in an irregular or unsettled condi- 
 tion, and not make sufficient provision for the permanent 
 order and polity of that church which he came in person to 
 establish and to build on such a rock, as that the gates of 
 hell should not prevail against it. To say then " xvithfree^ 
 dom^'' as our Professor does, " that if a particular form of 
 polity had been essential to the church, it had been laid 
 down in another manner in the sacred books,"^ is, in our 
 opinion, to speak with more freedom than is becoming on 
 such a subject, especially when any person may see, who 
 is not blinded by prejudice, that there is " a particular form 
 of polit)' laid down in the sacred books," both in what our 
 Lord said to his apostles, and in what they did in conse- 
 quence of his directions ; and all this laid down, if not in 
 such a manner as Dr. Campbell would have dictated, yet so 
 as to enable the primitive church perfectly to understand 
 
 *= Lecture iv. 
 
256 General Defence of Episcopacy 4 ■ 
 
 the plan, and continue the form of polity which the apostles- 
 had begun, and which form, we have seen, was properly, 
 and in the true sense of the word, Episcopal. 
 
 If Dr. Campbell did not see this in the same light with 
 us, and was disposed to put a different construction on 
 what is laid down in the sacred books, we can only regret 
 this circumstance, as an additional evidence in support of 
 his own observation, " that even good and learned men al- 
 low their judgments to be warped by the sentiments and 
 custom of the sect which they prefer ; and the true partizan 
 of whatever denomination, always inclines to correct the 
 diction of the spirit by that of the party."* Foreseeing, 
 no doubt, that this would be more particularly the case, 
 in the article of church government, our Lecturer proposed 
 an appeal to those early writers, who, by his own account, 
 as to what depends on testimony^ in explaining any part of 
 scripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every 
 case, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to 
 have swayed them, to be preferred before modem inter- 
 preters or annotators." Agreeing very cordially with him 
 in this opinion, respecting the testimony of the fathers, we 
 have listened to the evidence of these unexceptionable wit- 
 nesses, and have found it, from the general and uniform 
 tenor of their writings, to be full and direct, in favour of 
 apostolic Episcopacy, as the invariable form of govern- 
 ment, which had obtained in the Christian church. — This 
 was a matter of fact, in relation to which their testimony 
 could not be doubted ; and if we consider the nature of the 
 thing, it was surely " a case, wherein no particular passion 
 could be suspected to have swayed them." The apostolic 
 institution of Episcopacy was a truth believed, and openly 
 avowed, at a time when no worldly temptation could have 
 operated in producing that belief, or supporting that " par- 
 ticular form of ecclesiastic polity." There was no room 
 
 * See his note on Mat. iii. 11.— in bis Translation of the Gospch, 
 
General Defence of Episcopacy* 2S7 
 
 £<5r a spirit of pride or ambition to exert its influence on the 
 minds of Christian pastors, when the highest office in the 
 church, so far from securing to those invested with it any 
 portion of worldly honour, or legal revenue, served only to 
 Expose them to a greater degree of reproach and poverty. 
 Hie station of a bishop was that of the most imminent dan- 
 ger; and whoever possessed that degree of zeal and firm- 
 ness which induced him to accept it, was almost certain, 
 as soon as persecution commenced, to fall the first victim 
 to the fury of his enemies. 
 
 While the Episcopal character was thus held up, as the 
 principal mark to be aimed at by the rage of heathen op- 
 pression, we can hardly suppose that any other motive 
 would have been sufficient to the undertaking an office so 
 peculiarly encompassed by danger and difficulty, but the 
 firm conviction of its being absolutely necessary to the 
 maintenance of order and unity in the church, and to the 
 preservation of that apostolic commission, from which must 
 be derived, by regular succession, all the right that any 
 man can have to minister in holy things. The form of this 
 ministry, and the several degrees of office by which it has 
 been always distinguished, we have now fully considered ; 
 and by every argument adapted to the subject, we have seen 
 it clearly evinced, that the constitution of the church, as 
 established by its divine Founder, and given in charge to 
 his chosen apostles, was by them transmitted to their 
 several successors, and so handed down through the pri- 
 mitive ages as a regular diocesan Episcopacy. This is the 
 plain and important fact, which we have been endeavouring 
 to establish as the second part of our plan, with all the ori- 
 ginal evidence in its favour, which could be required from 
 scripture, and all the additional testimony which has since 
 been affiDrded to its support, by " ANTIQUITY, UNI- 
 VERSALITY and CONSENT." We may therefore be 
 allowed to recommend, as a matter of undoubted certainty, 
 and worthy of the most serious consideration, what was 
 
 33 
 
258 Genera! Defince of Episcopacy i 
 
 proposed as the title of this chapter — " That the church of 
 Christ, in which his religion is received and embraced, is 
 that spiritual society in which the ministration of holy things 
 is committed to the three distinct orders of bishops, pres- 
 byters, and deacons, deriving their authority from the 
 aposdes, as those apostles received their commission from 
 Christ*" 
 
( 259 ) 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 '^'Part of this Holy^ Catholic^ and Apostolic Churchy though 
 deprived of the Support of Civil Establishment^ does still 
 exist in this Country^ under the Name of the Scotch Epis- 
 copal Church, whose Doctrine^ Discipline^ and Worships 
 as happily agreeing with that of the first and purest Ages 
 of Christianity^ ought to he steadily adhered to by all who 
 profess to be of the Episcopal Communion^ in this Part 
 of the Kingdom. 
 
 It is a well known fact, that in all the nations of the 
 world, where any sense of a God or religion has been pre- 
 served, certain persons have always been set apart, as the 
 more immediate servants of that God, and for performing 
 the more solemn oJSices of his religion. The sacred function 
 appropriated to these persons has, for the same reason, been 
 ever considered as a divine and most salutary institution. 
 This much may be gathered even from the dark records 
 . of heathen antiquity. But, if, wishing for clearer informa- 
 tion than these can afford, we consult the sacred history. 
 We shall find this matter set in a just and true light. The 
 nature of the priesthood is there laid down in the plainest 
 manner, the design of it fully explained, and its authority- 
 placed on the onl}' proper foundation. The mediation of a 
 Redeemer, as absolutely necessary to the salvation of 
 mankind, is there held forth as the source of that typical 
 priesthood, and those figurative sacrifices, which the law of 
 God appointed and required, in all that period which pre- 
 ceded the incarnation of the promised Saviour. — It was 
 from their relation to him, and dependence on him, that both 
 priests and sacrifices derived all their honour and efficacy ; 
 And when at last this ^glorious Intercessor " appeared upon 
 
260 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 earth, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself," we are 
 assured, that " he did not glorify himself to be made an 
 High Priest, but received this honour from his Father that 
 sent him, and was called of God, as was Aaron."* In 
 conse [uence of this high and heavenly commission, he 
 Stood forth as the great High Priest of our profession, 
 and having purchased his church with his own blood, he 
 not only " died, but rose again, that he might be Lord both 
 of the dead and of the living." It was, therefore, after his 
 resurrection that he was heard to declare, that " all power 
 was given unto him in heaven and in earth ;" and with this 
 declaration he introduced the commission which he then 
 gave his apostles, delegating to them such a portion of his 
 power as was necessary for authorizing them to convert the 
 nations to his faith, and teach them to observe whatever he 
 had commanded, even unto the end of the world. From 
 the extent of time allotted to the execution of this commis- 
 sion, we may see, it was impossible for the apostles to ex- 
 ecute it fully, and to that extent^ in their own persons, or 
 in any other way, than by doing what they could them- 
 selves, and transmitting to others the same charge, which 
 they had received, that so a succession of such commis- 
 sioned officers might be continued in the church, to the 
 end of time. 
 
 The manner in which this succession has been carried 
 on, and the certainty of its having met with no breach or 
 interruption, from the days of the apostles to the present 
 time, have both, we presume, been sufficiently established 
 in the preceding chapter, which has also exhibited the most 
 ample and satisfactory evidence, to prove the apostolic in- 
 stitution of the three distinct orders of bishops, presby- 
 ters, and deacons, to whom the Christian ministry was 
 originally committed, and by whom, according to their 
 several degrees of office, it has always been exercised in 
 
 * Hcb. V. 4, 5. 
 
jPtirticular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 261 
 
 every sound and regular part of the Christian church. 
 Those who have opposed this form of ecclesiastical polity, 
 have often been challenged to produce evidence of any na- 
 tional or provincial church, existing without it, for fifteen 
 hundred years after the first publication of the Christian 
 faith. The corruptions, which, for a great part of that 
 period, unhappily prevailed in the Western nations, did 
 not, and could not affect the validity of the apostolic com- 
 mission, or put an end to the ministerial power, which it 
 was designed to convey. The church of Rome, with all 
 the errors and abuses cleaving to it, which made the re- 
 formation necessary, did not cease to be a church, any more 
 than a man, whose soul is corrupted by vice, and his body 
 marred by disease, ceases to be a man, while his soul and 
 body continue united. It often happened that the Jew- 
 ish church was sadly infected with idolatr)', and addicted 
 to many enormities, which provoked to anger the Lord 
 their God ; yet they still continued a visible church upon 
 earth, till he at last thought proper to remove their candle- 
 stick, and allowed " the Romans to come and take away 
 their place and nation." Though he frequently raised up 
 prophets to warn them of their danger, and call them to 
 repentance, yet he never instituted a new order of priests, 
 nor authorized any but the sons of Aaron, to appear in 
 his holy place, and offer the sacrifices prescribed by the 
 law. Their corruptions did not divest them of the priest- 
 hood, nor make any breach in the order of succession, till 
 k was completely taken away, and their whole economy 
 dissolved. And so the church of Rome, while permitted 
 to retain a succession of the Christian priesthood, by its 
 preservation of the Episcopal order, must also have the 
 power of conferring that order, although it could have no 
 power to prevent those who had thus received their Epis-^ 
 copal succession, from doing all they could to reform the 
 abuses, which had gradually crept into that degenerate part 
 of the Christian church. 
 
262 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 This is all that can properly be meant by the term re- 
 fortnation^ which does not lead to the idea of making a 
 new church, a thing we can no more do than make a new 
 bible, but only to that of correcting and amending the old 
 one, and so replacing it in a state of conformity to the ori- 
 ginal standard. But the succession of pastors in the three 
 sacred orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons, was none 
 of the inventions of popery. It was the continuance of an 
 apostolic institution, which had spread itself over the w^hole 
 Christian world, even to this remote island of Britain, long 
 before the corrupting influence of the church of Rome had 
 obtained any footing in it. — When Augustin the Monk was 
 sent over by Pope Gregory to convert the Saxon invaders; 
 he found an Episcopal church in Britain, regularly consti- 
 tuted according to the primitive model. And when, many 
 centuries after, the church of England came at last to en-, 
 gage in the happy work of reformation, which she did most 
 seriously and successfully, she only returned to the exercise 
 of her original rights, as an independent national church. 
 It was on this footing that she threw off the yoke, under 
 which she had so long bowed to the papal tyranny. But 
 when she thus separated from the corruptions of Rome, she 
 did not also throw off a just regard to the doctrines and in^ 
 stitutions of the church of Christ. — Her reformed bishops 
 saw^ the necessity of continuing that Episcopal ordination 
 which they themselves had duly received : And Archbi- 
 shop Parker having been regularly consecrated by four of 
 these bishops, on the 17th of December, 1559, and placed 
 by Queen Elizabeth in the see of Canterbury, the public re- 
 gisters will show not only the year, month and day when, 
 but also the persons by whom, every particular bishop has 
 been consecrated, from that period to the present time. 
 
 Such is the regular manner in which the Episcopal suc- 
 cession has been canonically carried on, and can be clearly 
 traced, in the church of England: And it is also well 
 known, that on two remarkable occasions, has that church 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 263 
 
 contributed her friendly aid to preserv^e the same succession 
 in her sister-church of Scodand. After the reforming party 
 in this country had gone on for a course of years, with 
 much noise and tumult, establishing and altering their va- 
 rious plans of church government, King James, at last, hav- 
 ing succeeded to the crown of England, was enabled to put 
 matters on a more decent and regular footing. For that 
 purpose, having desired three of those persons who had 
 been nominated to bishopricks in Scotland, to repair to 
 London, he told them at their first audience, " that he had 
 with great charge recovered the temporalities of the church 
 out of lay hands, and bestowed them, as he hoped, upon 
 worthy persons ; but as he could not make them bishops, 
 nor could they assume that honour to themseleves, he had 
 therefore called them to England, to receive regular conse- 
 cration from the bishops there, that on their return home, 
 they might communicate the same to the rest, and thereby 
 stop the mouths of adversaries of all denominations."^ 
 These three persons were accordingly consecrated on the 
 31st of October, 1610, by the bishops of London, Ely and 
 Bath ; and on their return to Scotland, communicated the 
 Episcopal powers which they had now received in a right 
 and canonical manner, to their former titular brethren ; by 
 which means a regular Episcopacy was introduced into the 
 reformed church of Scotland, and continued to enjoy the 
 sanction of legal establishment, till the troubles broke out 
 in the reign of Charles the First, when the church was 
 again thrown into the utmost confusion, atid a " solemn 
 league and covenanf was entered into for effecting the en- 
 tire extirpation of " prelacy, or the government of the 
 church by archbishops and bishops, and all the ecclesiasti- 
 cal officers depending on that hierarchy." 
 
 Things continued in this disordered and ruinous state, 
 till the restoration of Charles the Second ; on which happy 
 
 * See Skinner's Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 251. 
 
264 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScoiiand. 
 
 event, the Church of England immediately revived, and 
 showed herself worthy of the distinguished place she had 
 always held among the reformed churches. Her esta- 
 blished rank and splendour were restored to her. Nine of 
 her bishops had survived the late calamities, of whom the 
 worthy bishop of London, Dr. Juxon, who had attended 
 his dying sovereign on the scaffold, was promoted to the 
 see of Canterbury. The other eight took possession of 
 their former bishopricks, and the rest of the sees that had 
 been vacant, were soon filled with learned and able pre- 
 lates. A similar resolution was adopted by government, 
 with regard to Scotland ; but before Episcopacy could be 
 restored in this country, the necessity of the case required 
 that application should again be made to the English 
 church for assistance. The Scottish bishops, who had been 
 driven into exile by the violence of the times, had all died, 
 except one, without being able to provide for the Episcopal 
 succession. It was therefore determined, by those who 
 had the object at heart, that this necessary provision should 
 be made, by having recourse to the same expedient which 
 had been adopted about fifty years before ; and, accordingly 
 four of the persons who had been nominated for the Scot- 
 tish Episcopate, were consecrated at London, on the 15th 
 of December, 1661, by four of the English bishops.* 
 
 * In the year 1789, Bishop Abernethy Drummond, Bishop Strachan, 
 and I, being at London, soliciting relief to our church from certain 
 penal statutes ; at the desire of Bishop Seabury, of Connecticut, who 
 some years before had been consecrated by the bishops in Scotland, we 
 applied to the archbishop of Canterbury for an attested extract of the 
 consecration of the Scotch bishops in 1661, and through his Grace's con- 
 descending attention, received what follows — 
 
 " Extract from the Register-book of Archbishop Juxon, in the library 
 
 of his Grace, the archbishop of Canterbury, at Lambeth palace" — 
 
 Fol. 237. 
 
 ** It appears — that James Sharpe was consecrated archbishop of St, 
 
 Andrews, Andrew FairfuU archbishop of Glasgow, Robert Leighton 
 
 bishop of Dunblenen, and James Hamilton bishop of Galloway, on the 
 
 15ih day of December, 1661, in St. Peter's church, Westminster, by 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 265 
 
 But neither on this, nor on the former occasion, did anv of 
 the two archbishops officiate ; lest their presiding at the 
 consecration should have been considered as claiming from 
 the church of Scotland, the acknowledgment of any sub- 
 jection to the metropolitical sees of Canterbury or York. 
 On returning to Scotland the four newly consecrated pre- 
 lates took possession of the several sees to which they had 
 been appointed, and the other ten bishopricks were after- 
 wards conferred on the persons, who for that purpose had 
 received consecration from their hands. 
 
 Thus was Episcopacy once more restored in Scotland, 
 and continued to be the established form of church govern- 
 ment, till the revolution took place in 1688, when the bi- 
 shops unanimously refusing to comply with that change, 
 and to renounce the allegiance which they had sworn to 
 King James, were obliged to suffer the consequences of 
 such refusal ; and however imprudent their conduct may 
 appear in a worldly view, it is evident, from the sacrifices 
 which they made, that they acted with integrity, and from 
 the most disinterested and conscientious motives. But whe- 
 ther it was owing to the offensive principles maintained by 
 the bishops and their followers, or rather to that article in 
 ,the Claim of Right set up by the convention of the estates of 
 Scotland, which declared " prelacy^ or any sort of Episco- 
 pal superiority^ to be a great and insupportable grievance 
 and trouble to this nation ;" — whichever of these causes 
 operated most powerfully in producing the designed effect, 
 so it was, that the same convention, having been turned 
 into a parliament, passed an act on the 22d of July, 1689, 
 for " abolishing prelacy, and all superiority of any office in 
 the church of this kingdom above presbyters." — In conse- 
 
 Gilbert, bishop of London, commissary to the archbishop of Canterbury, 
 and that the Right Rev. George, bishop of Worcester, John, bishop of 
 Carlisle, and Hugh, bishop of Landaff, were present and assisting. 
 
 " Extracted this 3d day of June, 1789, by me, William Dickes, Se- 
 cretary." 
 
 34 
 
266 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 
 
 quence of this abolition, which was followed, the year after, 
 by the establishment of the presbyterian form of church 
 government, the bishops were deprived of every thing 
 connected with their office, which the civil power could 
 take from them. They lost their revenues, and temporal 
 jurisdiction ; but their spiritual authority still remained, 
 and that " gift of God," which they had received by the 
 imposition of Episcopal hands, they considered themselves 
 bound to exercise for promoting that Episcopal " work in 
 the church of God, which had been committed to them.'' 
 By virtue of this commission, they continued, in a quiet 
 and peaceable manner, to discharge the duties of their 
 spiritual function. They ordained ministers for such 
 vacant congregations as adhered to their communion ; and 
 when they saw it necessary to attend to the preservation of 
 their own order, they proceeded to the consecration of such 
 persons as were thought most proper for being invested 
 with that sacred and important trust.— -We have also to 
 observe, that all the ordinations and consecrations which 
 have taken place in the Scotch Episcopal church, since the 
 sera of the revolution, have been and still are invariably 
 performed, as we have reason to believe they were from 
 the Restoration to that period, according to the '' form and 
 manner of ordaining and consecrating" prescribed by the 
 church of England. All this having been duly attended 
 to, by the prelates who were ejected from their sees at the 
 revolution, and by those whom they and their successors 
 promoted to the order of bishops, it is evident that eveiy 
 thing has been done, which could be deemed necessary for 
 preserving a regular Episcopal succession in Scotland ; as 
 may be seen from a list of the consecrations of Scotch bi- 
 shops from the revolution to the present time, which is 
 subjoined in an appendix to this work.^ 
 It was, no doubt, from his knowledge of these matters, 
 
 * See Appendix, No. I 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 267 
 
 and of the care which has been taken to sup ort an Episco- 
 pal church in this part of the kingdom, though deprived of 
 the aid of civil establishment, that Dr. Campbell was led td 
 introduce one of his Lectures^ on Ecclesiastical History^ by 
 observing, that he should not have thought it necessary " to 
 be so particular as he had been, in ascertaining the nature 
 of that polity which obtained in the primitive church, were 
 not this a matter that is made a principal foundation of dis- 
 sent by a pretty numerous sect in this country :" by which 
 sect^ it is plain that he means the Scotch Episcopal church, 
 from what immediately follows. — " I do not," he says, 
 *' here allude to those amongst us, who barely prefer the 
 Episcopal form of government, whom, in general, as far as 
 I have had occasion to know them, I have found moderate 
 and reasonable in their sentiments on this subject. Such do 
 not pretend that the external model of the church (what- 
 ever they may think of the antiquity of theirs) is of the 
 essence of religion." 
 
 If by thus making a distinction between the two Episco- 
 pal " sects*'' in this country, our Professor meant to pay a 
 compliment to the one at the expense of the other, it does 
 not appear that the peculiarity of sentiment, which he has 
 •held forth as the mark of distinction, was the most proper 
 for answering his purpose. It is generally thought, that the 
 " foundation of dissent" from that which, in any country, 
 is by law established, ought to be laid in something that " is 
 of the essence of religion," or at least supposed to be so by 
 the dissenting party. And such is our opinion of the neces- 
 sity of maintaining unity and concord among all " who pro- 
 fess and call themselves Christians," that we should hold 
 ourselves highly culpable in keeping up a separate commu- 
 nion from that which has the law of our country on its 
 side, were it not for the sake of things which we believe to 
 be essential to our religion, and a part of that apostolic doc- 
 
 * See Lecture viii. 
 
268 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 trine, to which, as Christians, we must steadfastly adhere* 
 If there be any amongst us, as it seems Dr. Campbell had 
 *' occasion to know, who barely prefer the Episcopal form 
 of government," on account perhaps of its antiquity, but 
 without considering it as at all necessary to the being of a 
 church ; whatever may be said of such people's moderation^ 
 we see no ground for distinguishing them as " reasonable 
 in their sentiments," if they had no better reason to justify 
 their separation from the establishment of their country, 
 and no other benefit from the Episcopal form of govern- 
 ment^ but what arises from the ministrations of clergy, who 
 have been Episcopally ordained, but otherwise acknowledge 
 no such government. The reflection, therefore, which, it 
 would seem. Dr. Campbell was desirous to cast on one of 
 the Episcopal " sects" in this country, will be found more 
 applicable to the sentiments which he has ascribed to the 
 other, and by marking which as " moderate and reasonable," 
 he, no doubt, intended to keep up that unnecessary distinc- 
 tion between the Scotch and English Episcopacy, which 
 has already subsisted too long, but ought to afford no more 
 room for such disagreeable and unworthy comparisons. 
 
 All this, however, and more of the same kind, of which 
 we have been obliged to take some notice, appears but as 
 slight skirmishing, when compared to the grand battery, 
 which was at last to be opened against the shattered but 
 venerable remains of the old Episcopal church of Scotland. 
 We had seen preparations making for this hostile attack, 
 in the beginning .of our Professor'* Eleventh Lecture^ where, 
 after some general remarks to show, in his way, that the 
 terms ordination and appointment to a particular pastoral 
 charge^ were at first perfectly synonymous, he adds, " If 
 one, however, in those truly primitive times, (which but 
 rarely happened), found it necessary to retire from the 
 work, he never thought of retaining either the title or the 
 emoluments. — To be made a bishop, and in being so, to 
 receive no charge whatever, to have no work to execute, 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 269 
 
 could have been regarded no otherwise, than as a contra- 
 diction in terms. Indeed, the name of the office implied 
 the service, without which it could not subsist, that is, 
 without which there was no office. The name bishop 
 means overseer, and this is a term manifestly correlative 
 to that which expresses the thing to be overseen. The 
 connection is equally necessary and essential as between 
 father and child, sovereign and subject, husband and wife. 
 The one is inconceivable without the other. Ye cannot 
 make a man an overseer, to whom ye give no oversight, 
 no more than ye can make a man a shepherd, to whom ye 
 give the charge of no sheep, or a husband, to whom ye 
 give no wife. Nay, in fact, as a man ceases to be a hus- 
 band the moment he ceases to have a wife, and is no 
 longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so in the 
 only proper and original import of the words, a bishop 
 continues a bishop only whilst he continues to have people 
 uiider his spiritual care."* 
 
 These are the general principles which our Lecturer laid 
 down, as the ground of a long satyrical strain of declama- 
 tion, for it can hardly be called reasoning, against the 
 Episcopal succession in Scotland; that regular and orderly 
 succession, for the validity of which we have appealed to 
 undoubted vouchers, those ecclesiastical registers, which 
 can at any time be shown for the satisfaction of all con- 
 cerned. But before we come to consider the particular 
 application, which our Professor has made of these his 
 " self-evident propositions," to the case of what he calls-^ 
 '' the Scotch Episcopal party," let us inquire a little into 
 the foundation of his supposed analogies, and see what 
 would be the consequence of those ieferences, which he 
 intended should be drawn from them. The most likely 
 one of any to be admitted as a parallel case to the connec- 
 tion between a bishop and his spiritual charge, is that which 
 
 * Lecture xi. 
 
270 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 subsists between " sovereign and subject," the connection 
 in both cases arising from appointment to an office, although 
 it must be owned, that the mode of appointment is very- 
 different, as well as the object about which each of these 
 offices is exercised. Our Lecturer, however, was fond of 
 this allusion — -and asked—" For example, what would one 
 think of the pretext of making a man a king, without giv- 
 ing him either subjects or a kingdom ?"^ We should cer- 
 tainly think the pretext very foolish, and the thing itself as 
 unlikely to happen : Since these king-makers, a privilege 
 which some people are always glad to keep in view, might 
 themselves become the subjects, and their lands would of 
 course be the kingdom. — But the Doctor adds — " Ye will 
 say, may not the right to a kingdom be confen^ed on a man, 
 whom we cannot put in possession V This he readily 
 admits, but insists that it " is not parallel to the case in 
 hand." Yet why not parallel, when those who have a right 
 to make a bishop, surely give him a right, when so made, 
 to exercise his office in any part of the world, where he can 
 do so, without encroaching on the charge or right of ano- 
 ther bishop; and it will not be said that the right to a king- 
 dom can be conferred but on similar terms. Possession 
 may be obtained by force, but right is of a more delicate 
 nature. During all the time of Cromwell's usurpation, 
 Charles the Second was acknowledged as their rightful 
 king, by all the loyal part of his subjects ; and the length 
 of his reign has been always computed from the day of his 
 father's death, although it was eleven years before his res- 
 toration gave him the actual exercise of his kingly power. 
 ' — So might a bishop be invested with Episcopal authority, 
 altho.igb placed in a situation which would neither require 
 nor admit the exercise of it. 
 
 The allusion which our Lecturer makes use of, to the 
 connection between father and child, and between husband 
 
 * Lecture xi. 
 
Partioilar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 271 
 
 and wife, is by no means suited to the case in hand, as these 
 are mere states or conditions of hfe, the nature of which is 
 very different from that of an office, the former depending 
 altogether on a particular relation, whereas the permanency 
 of the latter will be often found to rest on a more general 
 footing. Such is evidently the case with regard to the office 
 of a shepherd, which, as applied to the Episcopal character, 
 does not necessarily infer an immediate charge of a flock, 
 since there may be other subjects of inspection that come 
 not properly within the idea, which that term conveys. 
 When, therefore, our Professor, wishing to ridicule the 
 notion of a bishop in partibus infdelium^ observed that " a 
 bishop's charge being a church, and a church consisting 
 only of believers, infidels are properly no part of his charge, 
 no more than wolves or foxes are part of the flock of a 
 shepherd," we are surprised that so complete an analogist 
 did not recollect, that infidels may become believers, but 
 wolves and foxes can never become sheep. Will any one 
 say, that to make believers of infidels is no part of the of- 
 fice of a bishop, or that his office immediately ceases, when 
 his labours in that way are no longer successful I If such 
 were the precarious nature of the shepherd's office, it would 
 hardly have been applied to point out the highest possible 
 instance of pastoral care, and we should not have read of 
 " sheep going astray, and afterwards returning to the Shep- 
 herd and bishop of their souls." 
 
 The only analogy, therefore, which seems at all applica- 
 ble to the design in view, is that v/hich our Professor 
 makes use of, when he says — ^' Ye cannot make a man an 
 overseer, to whom ye give no oversight ;" and this is sup- 
 posed to arise from the name bishop or overseer^ as con- 
 nected with, and requiring, things or persons to be over- 
 seen. He might, however, have remembered his own ob- 
 servation, that " the import of words gradually changes 
 with the manners of the times ;" as a proof of which, the 
 word presbyter has certainly lost the import which he him- 
 
272 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 
 
 self assigned to it, as a " title of respect," denoting a sena- 
 tor or elderly person, since it would now be thought ridicu- 
 lous, instead of " ordaining or making a presbyter," to 
 speak of " ordaining or making a respectable old man;" 
 and may not the same change have happened in the applica- 
 tion of the name bishop or overseer^ even supposing its ori- 
 ginal import to have been " inspector of a particular 
 flock ?" Of this, however, the Professor brings no sort of 
 proof, but runs on, in his usual declamatory style, expatiat- 
 ing on his favourite topic, that " a bishop continued a 
 bishop only whilst he continued to have people under his 
 pastoral charge, and where no such charge was given, ordi- 
 nation appeared but a mere illusion, the name without the 
 thing. For nothing can be plainer," says he, " than that 
 as yet," that is, in the fifth century, " they had no concep- 
 tion of the mystic character impressed by the bishop's hand 
 in ordaining, which no power on earth can cancel."^ A 
 little after he tells us, that " the doctrine of the character 
 had not yet been discovered ;" and prosecuting still far- 
 ther his strained analogy between marriage and ordination, 
 he boldly asks — " What then is there in the one ceremony 
 more nugatory than in the other? For if unmeaning words 
 will satisfy, why may not the mystical, invisible, indelible 
 character of husband be imprinted by the first, as that of 
 priest or bishop is by the second ? Holy writ gives just as 
 much countenance to the one, as to the other. "t 
 
 This, we think, is rather rashly affirmed ; and the lan- 
 guage made use of in delivering such a strange opinion, 
 appears to us as void of delicacy, as inconsistent with the 
 character, which ought to be maintained by every professor 
 of Christian divinity. Is it really suitable to such a profes- 
 sion, even to suppose, much more to assert, that there is 
 nothing given in and by apostolical, primitive, regular ordi- 
 nation, but such a bare " assignment to some particular 
 
 * Lecture xi. f Lecture. xi. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 273 
 
 congregation," as is perfectly similar to the connection be- 
 tween husband and wife ? What then are we to understand 
 by the gift (^x^i^'l"^^^ which St. Paul twice mentions as in 
 Timothy, and in both places ascribes it — to " the laying on 
 of hands ?" Does this point to any thing like his " assign- 
 ment to a particular congregation," or to any sort of connec- 
 tion with a pastoral charge ? Have we not more reason to 
 believe, that this charisma or gift meant something, which, 
 notwithstanding Dr. Campbell's sarcastic way of treating it, 
 might be called a " character impressed" by imposition of 
 hands, and which Timothy was " not to neglect, but to stir 
 up" and put into exercise, so as to answer the good purpose 
 for which he had received it ? We know, that the charis- 
 mata^ or gifts so often mentioned as peculiar to the early 
 ages of the gospel, have been generally thought to denote 
 the miraculous powers with which many of the primitive 
 Christians were endowed, even down to that period, when 
 our adversaries are obliged to acknowledge that a true and 
 proper Episcopacy universally prevailed. Yet as we are 
 not told of any miraculous works performed by Timothy in 
 consequence of the gift which was in him ; and as it is ex- 
 pressly said to have been placed there by the imposition of 
 ' hands, and that it might be stirred up in the work of the 
 ministry, to which he had been appointed, we have eveiy 
 reason to conclude, that it referred entirely to his ordina- 
 tion, not as an " assignment to some particular congrega- 
 tion," but as giving him authority to execute his office ia 
 any congregation, or any part of the flock of Christ, which 
 might be committed to his charge. 
 
 Such, we have ground to believe, was the apostolic prac- 
 tice, founded on the nature of the .commission which the 
 apostles themselves received from Christ, as extending to 
 all nations, and all ages of the world. It was, therefore, a 
 maxim universally received in the primitive church, that 
 every bishop, as one of the successors of these apostles, 
 had a pastoral relation to the vvhole catholic church, and 
 
274 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 that the Episcopal body was thus widely diffused, for the 
 mutual benefit of all its members, that if any one fell inta 
 heresy, others might be at hand to redress, the mischief. 
 Writing to the bishop of Rome on this very subject, Cy- 
 prian tells him — " Therefore is our bcxiy of bishops so 
 large, and yet so joined together in the bond of unity, and 
 cemented by mutual agreement, that if any one of our college 
 should attempt to introduce heresy, and so tear in pieces 
 and lay waste the flock of Christ, others should step in to 
 its assistance, and like tender and useful shepherds, gather 
 our Lord's sheep into his fold. — For though we are many 
 shepherds, yet we have but one flock to feed, and all the 
 sheep which Christ has purchased with his blood and passion^ 
 we ought to gather together and cherish."^' From these 
 words of Cyprian, and many other passages of his writings^ 
 it would appear, that he considered the college or corporation 
 of bishops, as founded for the purpose of propagating the 
 Christian faith throughout the world, and preserving it in 
 its original purity. And though the division of the church 
 into dioceses, and the placing local bishops over them, be- 
 came necessary for the sake of order, and for preventing 
 any improper interference with each others conduct ; yet 
 when the faith of the church was in danger of being lost, 
 or corrupted by the prevalence of any pestilent heresy, 
 every bishop was to consider himself as an universal pas- 
 tor, and to do every thing in his power for preserving the 
 soundness, and promoting the welfare of the whole body. 
 Such being evidently the opinion entertained by Cyprian, of 
 what he calls the " one Episcopate, of which every bishop 
 
 * " Idcirco copiosum est corpus sacerdotum, concordiae mutux glutino 
 atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut si quis ex collegio nostro hseresin fa- 
 cere, et gregem Cnristi lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subveniant cjeteri, 
 et quasi pastures utiles et misericordes oves Dominicas in gregem coUigant. 
 Nam e'si pastores multi sumus, unum tamen gregem pascimus, et ovc: 
 universas, quas Christus sanguine suo et passione quaesivit, colligere t". 
 fovere debemus." Cypr. epist. 67. ad Steph. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 275 
 
 holds a share for the benefit of the whole," we are indeed 
 surprised to find Dr. Campbell quoting this very pas- 
 sage, in support of the opposite notion, which he so warmly- 
 espoused, that a bishop is to be considered as nothing more 
 than the " pastor of a particular church or congregation," 
 his " assignment" to which is all that is meant by ordina- 
 tion, and without which, it seems, he could have no share 
 in the " one Episcopate," which yet St. Cyprian so zea- 
 lously maintained to be held in common by the whole body 
 of bishops, and therefore held by them, in virtue of their 
 ordination or appointment to the Episcopal office, and not 
 of their " assignment" to any particular charge. 
 
 It was proper that we should take notice of all this pre- 
 paration which our Professor had made for effecting what 
 seems to have been the principal purpose of the Lecture 
 now before us, the bringing forward his heavy charge 
 against the orders of the Scotch Episcopal church, which, 
 after all that he had said by way of introduction to it, he 
 still thought might probably excite some surprise, as well 
 from the novelty of it, as by the confident and peremptory 
 manner, in which he meant to support it. In both these 
 respects, we do think it was sufficiently calculated to pro- 
 duce surprise in the minds of all who might esteem it wor- 
 thy of their consideration, on account of the station and 
 character of its author. Had the Principal of Marischal 
 College boldly asserted, that a civil establishment being es- 
 sential to the very being of Episcopal government, it is im- 
 possible that the order of bishops can be continued in a 
 church which is not supported by the state : It would have 
 been saying no more, than what had been said before by 
 men equally high in office, and well versed in all sorts of 
 knowledge, except that of the nature and constitution of 
 the Christian church. Or had Dr. Campbell, who was 
 early bred to the study of the la\y, given it as his opinion, 
 that the act of parliament which abolished Episcopacy in 
 Scotland, or some restricting statute afterward enacted, had 
 
276 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 actually deprived the ejected bishops of their whole spi- 
 ritual power, and left them no authority even to ordain 
 priests and deacons, far less to consecrate bishops as their 
 successors in these powers ; this would have been only re- 
 peating the absurdities of those Erastian writers, who 
 would make the civil power superior to apostolic institution, 
 and allow an authority merely human, to annihilate the di^ 
 vine commission granted by him who has all power in 
 heaven and in earth. In all this there would have been no- 
 thing new or surprising, however inconsistent with the cha- 
 racter of a Christian divine ; because such inconsistencies 
 have often appeared, and been suifered to pass as liberal 
 sentiments, flowing from a mind unfettered by any profes- 
 sional prejudice. 
 
 What method then has our Professor taken to support 
 his strange attack on the depressed but pure and primitive 
 Episcopacy, which still subsists in this part of the united 
 kingdom ? Does he pretend to say, that the bishops of Scot- 
 land, who were deprived of their legal power and privi- 
 leges, in consequence of the Revolution in 1688, considered 
 themselves as equally divested of all spiritual authority, 
 and therefore took no measures for continuing a needless 
 succession of bishops in a church so suddenly and com- 
 pletely cut off, as that of Scodand then was, from all its 
 former connection with the state l No : even Dr. Camp- 
 bell admits, that the ejected bishops, dispersed and perse- 
 cuted as they were, continued their care of the Episcopal 
 succession, and ordained several bishops, in order to pre- 
 serve it.— 'But the misfortune, or rather the folly, as he 
 thinks it, was— these new bishops *^ were ordained at 
 large;" and because they had not httn previously appointed 
 each to a certain diocese, or had not received what he 
 ■would call " assignment to a particular charge," he main- 
 tains^ with dictatorial authority, that their ordinations were 
 null and void, yea, no other Xh^n farcical ceremonies, in 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 277 
 
 which the actors played the fool, for the purpose of impos- 
 ing on others. 
 
 When those, from whom the present clergy of the Scotch 
 Episcopal church derive their orders, were known to be 
 men of such unblemished integrity, and disinterested zeal, 
 as to induce them to suffer the loss of all their worldly dig- 
 nities and emoluments, for the sake of what they esteemed 
 to be infinitely more valuable, truth and a good conscience, 
 it is hard to hear them reviled as no better than formal 
 hypocrites, striving to deceive others, and acting a most ri- 
 diculous farce in pretending to discharge one of the most 
 solemn functions of their sacred office. It is no less 
 surprising, that such a severe accusation should be pub- 
 lished, as coming from a man, who, among his own friends, 
 was much admired for his meekness and moderation, and 
 what the world calls liberality of mind. Lest, therefore, we 
 should be suspected of doing injustice to his character, a 
 tiling which it particularly becomes us to avoid, when he is 
 no longer able to stand up in its defence, we shall give the 
 indictment brought against those whom he calls " our 
 Scotch Episcopal party," in their accuser's own words. 
 After quoting some authorities, to show the abuse of those 
 loose ordinations, chiefly of presbyters, which were begin- 
 ning to take place in the fifth century, he proceeds thus^ — 
 
 " One will perhaps be surprised to hear, that our Scotch 
 Episcopal party, who have long affected to value themselves 
 on the regular transmission of their orders, have none but 
 what they derive from bishops merely nominal. I do not 
 mention this with a view to derogate from their powers, but 
 only as an argumentum ad hominem^ to show how much 
 their principles militate against themselves. It does not 
 suit my notion of Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or 
 to forbid any to cast out devils in the name of Christ, be- 
 cause they follow not us. If the lust of power had not 
 
 * Lecture xi. 
 
2TB Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 with churchmen more influence than the spirit of the gospel, 
 greater attention would have been given to the decision of 
 their Master in a like case. Even their own writers ac- 
 knowledge, that immediately after the death of Dr Ross, 
 bishop of Edinburgh, the last of those ordained before the 
 Revolution, there were no local bishops in Scodand, not 
 one appointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of 
 any people, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district. But 
 there were bishops who had been ordained at large, some 
 by bishop Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, 
 after the Revolution, had retired to England. The warm- 
 est partizans of that sect have not scrupled to own, that at 
 that gentleman's decease, all the dioceses of Scotland were 
 become vacant, and even to denominate those who had 
 been ordained in the manner above mentioned, Utopian 
 bishops, a title not differing materiall}^ from that I have 
 given them, merely nominal bishops^ for as far as I can 
 learn, they were not titular even in the lowest sense. No 
 axiom in philosophy is more indisputable than that quod 
 nidlibi est non est, — The ordination, therefore, of our pre- 
 sent Scotch Episcopal clergy, is solely from presbyters ; 
 for it is allowed, that those men, who came under the 
 hands of bishop Ross, had been regularly admitted minis- 
 ters or presbyters, in particular congregations, before the 
 Revolution. And to that first ordination, I maintain, that 
 their farcical consecration by Doctor Ross and others, when 
 they were solemnly made the depositaries of no deposit, 
 commanded to be dihgent in doing no work, vigilant in the 
 oversight of no flock, assiduous in teaching and governing 
 no people, and presiding in no church, added nothing at 
 all." 
 
 Such is the ludicrous manner in which our Lecturer 
 thought proper to represent a sacred and solemn office, 
 performed by men of piety and worth, whatever may be 
 thought of their worldly wisdom, and whose conduct in 
 this affair ought not, we humbly think, to have been thus 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 2^9 
 
 held up as an object of ridicule, and so wantonly exposed 
 to scorn and contempt. To add to the mockery too, he 
 would not have it thought, that " it suited his notion of 
 Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or to forbid any to cast 
 out devils in the name of Christ, because they followed 
 not his party." He had before been quoting the passage of 
 scripture, which mentioned the occurrence that occasioned 
 this remark, and had made the following observation upon 
 it. " The apostles still retained too much of the Jewish 
 spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause. ' He 
 foUoweth not us;' a reason which to this day, alas ! would 
 be thought the best reason in the world by most Christian 
 sects, and by every individual who possesses the spirit of 
 the sectary."^ And is all this particularly levelled at the 
 " Scotch Episcopal party," as if they were peculiarly pos- 
 sessed of this sectarian spirit t Let a miracle, such as 
 casting out devils in the name of Christ, be wrought as 
 really and visibly as in the instance referred to, (for the apos- 
 tles acknowledged that they saw it) and we can safely affirm 
 that not an individual of our sect would dare to forbid such 
 a thing, any more than Dr. Campbell himself would have 
 done. But he certainly knew that there might be pre- 
 tenders to this miraculous power, who might use the name 
 of Christ, without any " pious intention to promote his 
 cause," of which we have a striking instance in the case of 
 those " vagabond Jews, exorcists, who took upon them to 
 call over them which had evil spirits, the name of the 
 Lord Jesus," and were justly punished for their impious 
 presumption.f 
 
 With an appearance, however, of candour and modera- 
 tion, our Professor told his pupils, that what he had men- 
 tioned, or was going to mention, respecting the " Scotch 
 Episcopal party," was " with no view to derogate from their 
 powers :" to which we shall only beg leave to apply his own 
 
 * Lecture iv. f Acts xix. 13—17. 
 
280 Particular Defence of the Eptscopaty of Scotland 
 
 remark on the conduct oif David Hume in a similar case-— 
 " Was ever so rough an assault preceded by so smooth a 
 preamble ?"^ For in what way could he have more effec- 
 tually " derogated from their powers," than by representing 
 what he thought the source of these powers, as no better 
 than 2i farcical ceremony, which " added nothing to the first 
 ordination" of those on whom it was performed, and " from 
 whom was particularly withheld the right of transmitting 
 orders to others ?" If this be the " argumentum ad homi' 
 nen^'* made use of " to show, how much the principles of 
 the Scotch Episcopalians militate against themselves," the 
 application of the argument ought to have been properly 
 pointed out, and these hostile principles particularly speci- 
 fied : And as this has not been done, it may be presumed, 
 that the learned Professor knew as little of the principles of 
 these Episcopalians, as they perhaps know of his " notion 
 of Christianity," and the propriety of the method which he 
 has here taken to support it. 
 
 In this state of uncertainty, with regard to the applica- 
 tion and strength of his reasoning, we are led by some cir- 
 cumstances to conjecture, that the argument alluded to, as 
 so happily brought home to the " Scotch Episcopal party," 
 may probably be drawn from the canon of an ancient coun- 
 cil, which he has quoted and commented on, as particu- 
 larly applicable to the case in hand, and to the sentiments 
 of a " party," who are supposed to hold in peculiar rever- 
 ence every thing that is truly primitive in ecclesiastical ad- 
 ministration. The canon referred to, is the 6th of the 
 general council of Chalcedon, in which he says, " all such 
 loose ordinations, of bishops at large without a diocese, 
 are declared, I say not irregular or uncanonical, but abso* 
 lutel)^ null :" And to give the more weight to this canon, 
 he adds the decision of Leo, a contemporary pope, or bishop 
 rjf Rome, who, he says, " on account of his writhigs, is 
 
 * Dissevtatlcn on Mlracle<;, p. 243. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 281 
 
 considered as a doctor of the church, and affirms posi* 
 tively in one of his letters, that the ordination is to be 
 counted vain, or of no effect, which is neither founded in 
 place, nor fortified by authority'." The first of these clauses 
 our Doctor explains so as to make it suit his own purpose, 
 but takes no farther notice of the second, which requires 
 authority in the ordainer, to give validity to the ordination, 
 }fi whatever place the person ordained may be called to ex- 
 ercise his ministry. 
 
 In his next lecture we find our Professor endeavouring 
 to procure still farther sanction to the authority of the 
 council of Chalcedon, by putting us in mind of the opinion 
 of Pope Gregory the Great, who is said to have held the 
 four first general councils in equal veneration with the four 
 gospels. And how comes all this to afford any peculiar force 
 of argument against the Scotch Episcopal church, which, if 
 it esteems these two bishops of Rome, the first and best of 
 their names, as doctors of the, church, and holds in all due 
 veneration the four first general councils, is yet entirely of 
 the opinion of the church of England, as expressed in her 
 21st article, that " general councils may err, and sometimes 
 have erred, even in things pertaining unto God ?" With re^ 
 spect, however, to the present point in question, we do not 
 see that it is at all concerned with the regard which is due to 
 the authority of general councils, and which must always be 
 regulated by the consideration of the particular objects 
 which their several canons had in view, according to the 
 circumstances of the church at the different periods when 
 these ecclesiastical synods were held. The council of 
 Chalcedon was called for the express purpose of repressing 
 the Eutychian heresy; and its sixth canon has been gene^ 
 rally thought to point at the danger of increasing that he- 
 resy, by su'feh irregular ordinations as might tend to give 
 k additional support, and Vv^ere therefore prohibited ; whichi 
 prohibition was enforced by an imperial edict, evidendy 
 fgynded on the same reason, and published for the §apri^ 
 
 36 
 
282 Pnrticular Defence cfthe Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 purpose. Dr. Campbell has omitted to quote the intro- 
 ductory part of the canon, in which the prohibition is par- 
 ticularly levelled at " the loose ordination of presbyters 
 and deacons^^ as most likely to continue the mischief which 
 Jiad arisen from the heresy that was now condemned : and 
 he has also kept out of sight the conclusion of the canoti 
 which seems to prohibit the persons so ordained from 
 performing the functions of their ministry, lest they should 
 do it to the reproach or injury of the person who had or- 
 dained them.^ 
 
 We could produce many respectable authorities in con- 
 tfirmation of the opinion which has now been given of the 
 meaning and design of this Chalcedonian canon. The au- 
 thor of that celebrated work called " Ecclesiastical Polity ^^ 
 and who is generally distinguished by the title of the "judi- 
 cious Hooker," argues very strongly against the error of 
 those, who, " because the names of all church-officers are 
 words of relation ; because a shepherd must have his flock, 
 a teacher his scholars, a minister his company which he 
 
 * The whole canon runs thus in the original. Islt^vict. ^e a'jroMXviJLBmg 
 ,X^i^oTovH;^a,t^ [myite nPESBTTEPON, //,*)T£ AIAKONON, fxnrs oAwj 
 Ttva Tuv Ev E)cx.X»5a-tari>tw Tay/>t,aTi, h jj^n loiKuii tv ix.KXvsa'ia. 'croXtuq to JcwjiAWfj 
 tj' jLtapTyptw, n* [xovaTnfto^ o ;^£ipoTov«jU£v^ siriKvifvlloilo* T^i" ^a a.TToXvTxng 
 ^EtpoToy^^jUEVSj upicrtv 'ri aytcc cruvoJ''^ a,KVfov Ep^flv rrjv rokxvlm ;^£*po9£criav, 
 Kcw i^nlo^^s ^uv«o-9ai mfx^i-^ E^ 'TBPEI TOY XEIP0T0NHSANT02. 
 It is thus translated by a German writer, of Lutheran principles. — 
 " Neminem absolute ordinari presbyterum vel diaconum, vel quemlibet 
 in ecclesiastica ordinatione constitutum, nisi manifeste in ecclesia civi- 
 tatis, sive possessionis, aut in martyrio, aut in monasterio, qui ordinatur^ 
 mereatur ordinationis publicatce vocabulum. Eorum vero qui absolute oi- 
 dinantur, decrevit sancta synodus vacuam haberi manus impositionem, 
 et nullum ejus tale factum valere, ad injuriam ipsius qui eum ordinavit." 
 To which he adds this remark, " Recte prohibet hie canon, ne quis, nisi 
 ■in publico loco (qualia erant templa, oratoria, et cedificia martyribus con- 
 secrata) ad ministerium ecclesiasticum ordinetur. Et apud nos hodie 
 in ducatu Wurtenbergico, ordinationes fiunt in csetu ecclesisc." Vide 
 Epitome Historic Ecclesiasiicx. A Lucas Osiander, D. D. 4to. Tu.> 
 bingec, 1597, p. 356. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 283 
 
 ininistereth iinto ; therefore suppose that no man should b© 
 ordained a minister but for some particular congregationy 
 and unless he be tied to some certain parish. Perceive they 
 i|ot," says he, *' how by this means they make it unlawful 
 for the church to employ men at all in converting nations ? 
 For if so be the church may not lawfully admit to an eccle- 
 siastical function, unless it tie the party admitted unto some 
 particular parish, then surely a thankless labour it is, 
 whereby men seek the conversion of infidels, who know not 
 Christ, and therefore cannot be as yet divided into their 
 special congregations and flocks." For the avoiding, there-* 
 fore, of all confusion in treating of this matter, he thinks 
 there is nothing more material, than first — to separate- 
 " exactly the nature of the ministry from the use and ex-^ 
 ercise thereof. Secondly, to know that the only true and 
 proper act of ordination is to invest men with that power^ 
 which doth make them ministers, by consecrating their per-» 
 sons to God and his service, in holy things, during the terni 
 of life, whether they exercise that power or no. Thirdly, 
 that to give them a title or charge where to use their minis- 
 try, concerneth not the making, but the placing of God's 
 ministers ; therefore the laws, which concern only their 
 election or admission to that place or charge, are not appli-i 
 cable to infringe, in any way, their ordination. And, fourth- 
 ly, that as oft as any ancient constitution, law, or canon is 
 alleged concerning either ordinations or elections, we forget 
 not to examine, whether the present case be the same which 
 the ancient was, or else do contain some just reason, for 
 which it cannot a'dmit altogether the same rules, which for- 
 mer affairs of the church, now altered, did then require." 
 
 Having laid down these premises, and shown the neces- 
 sity of attending properly to them, in all questions relating 
 to the ordination and appointment of the Christian minis- 
 try, this learned writer draws such a conclusion from them, 
 as affords a sufficient defence of the Scotch Episcopal ordi- 
 nations against any misapplication of that canon of the 
 
^84 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 Council of Chalcedon, which is now under our considera« 
 tion : " Absolutely therefore," says he, " it is not true, that 
 any ancient canoii of the church, which is, or ought to be 
 with us in force, doth make ordinations at large unlawful ; 
 and as the state of the church doth stand, they are most 
 necessary. If there be any conscience in men, touching 
 that which they write or speak, let them consider as well 
 what the present condition of all things doth now suffer, 
 as what the ordinances of former ages did appoint ; as well 
 the weight of those causes, for which our affairs have 
 altered, as the reasons, in regard whereof, our fathers and 
 predecessors did sometime strictly and severely keep that 
 which for us to observe now, is neither meet, nor always 
 possible."^ 
 
 To the same purpose, we find another lio less venerable 
 author, the pious Bishop Jeremy Taylor, when mentioning 
 this very decree of the council of Chalcedon, making a dis- 
 tinction between those ordinations which, for particular rea-* 
 sons of prudence or expediency, were declared to be un- 
 canonical and irregular, and those which were always held 
 to be null and void in their own nature.^ Of the latter kind 
 was every ordination, which was not sanctioned by proper 
 Episcopal authority in the ordainer ; whereas the former 
 were prohibited merely for the sake of order and regularity, 
 after it was found expedient to allot a certain portion of the 
 church to the inspection of every particular bishop^ assisted 
 in certain parts of his pastoral office by the subordinate 
 tlergy of his own district. But this restriction to a pecu- 
 liar charge was not founded in any thing essential to the 
 nature of the Christian priesthood : It arose entirely from 
 local circumstances, and was marked by such limits of con- 
 venience as were produced by a variety of causes operating 
 differently in different countries, but all uniting in the pre- 
 
 * See Ilnoker^s Ecclesiastical Polity, book v. p. 330, 53 
 t Sec Bishop Taylor's Episcopacy Asserted, sect, xxxii. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 2gj 
 
 sfervation of what St. Cyprian called the " one Episcopate" 
 of divine appointment, parcelled out by ecclesiastical autho- 
 rity and consent, into such parts and portions as might be 
 severally held bv their respective bishops, for conjunctly 
 promoting the common cause of their great Lord and Mas- 
 ter, the Shepherd and Bishop of souls. 
 
 " Here, then," as Dr. Potter,^ another eminent divine, 
 expresses himself on this subject, " we must carefully dis- 
 tinguish between the ordination of ministers, and their de- 
 signation to particular districts. For these are things wholly 
 different, though they often went together ; it being mani- 
 fest, that one may be a bishop, or priest, where he has no 
 aut|iority to exercise his office ; which is the case not only 
 of those who are ordained to convert heathens, without any 
 title to a particular church; but all others who travel be- 
 yond the limits of their own district: For a priest who 
 comes into a foreign country, where other lawful ministers 
 are settled, still retains his sacerdotal character, and yet 
 has no authority to take upon him the ordinary exercise of 
 his office there." 
 
 All this, indeed, is in perfect conformity to that part of 
 the established doctrine of the church of England which is 
 laid down in her ordination offices, as fully expressive of 
 her sentiments on the point now before us. Thus in the 
 *' ordering of priests," the candidate " receives the Holy 
 Ghost, for the office and work of a priest in the church of 
 God, committed unto him by the imposition of hands ;" 
 and on receiving the bible from the bishop, he gets " au- 
 thority to preach the word of God, and to minister the 
 holy sacraments in the congregation, where he shall be 
 lawfully appointed thereunto." So likewise in the " conse- 
 cration of bishops," when the presiding bishop has said — 
 " Receive the Holy Ghost, for the office and work of a 
 bishop in the church of God, now committed unto thee, 
 
 •^ See his Dhcour.nc on Church Government, p. 452. 
 
2S6 Particular Defence of the EpiscGpacy nf Scotland 
 
 by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen ;" — He 
 immediately adds — " And remember that thou stir up the 
 grace of God, which is given thee, by this imposition of 
 our hands ;" where the admonition plainly alludes to the 
 ;^a^to-.x« (charisma) the gift or grace, which was given to 
 Timothy by the same means, and points out both the na- 
 ture and design of it. But not a word is said in all this 
 solemn act of immediate " ordination, by laying on of 
 hands," that has the least appearance of connecting it with, 
 or making it depend upon, what Dr. Campbell insists, is 
 absolutely essential, "the solemn assignment of the per- 
 sons ordained, to a particular charge." Yet this " form of 
 consecrating bishops, which is according to the order of 
 the church of England," is the very form by which those 
 bishops were consecrated, from whom the present Scotch 
 Episcopal clergy derive their orders, and who, in Dr. Camp- 
 bell's estimation, " surprising" as the discovery may seem, 
 were no other than " bishops merely nomtnal^'^ that is, as- 
 suming the name, but possessing none of the power or au- 
 thority peculiar to bishops. 
 
 Let us, then, examine a little more particularly how this 
 matter stands, and consider the peculiar situation of the 
 bishops who were ejected at the revolution, and of those 
 who were their immediate successors in the Episcopal of- 
 fice, together with the motives which influenced their con- 
 duct in providing for that succession : From all this it will 
 appear what a strange misrepresentation Dr. Campbell has 
 given of the whole affair, as unworthy of his character, as 
 it is unjust to those whom he has thus endeavoured, but, 
 we hope, vainly endeavoured, to expose in the most ridi- 
 culous and contemptible hght. That the prelates of Scot- 
 land, before their legal ejection took place in consequence 
 of the revolution, were true and lawful bishops^ in every 
 sense which these terms can bear, he has not attempted 
 to deny ; nor indeed has he deigned to take the least notic<" 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 28f 
 
 of the cause or manner of their ejection, whence it pro* 
 ceeded, or how it was conducted. The fact, however, is 
 certain ; and the only point in question is, what these bi- 
 shops became, after they were thus legally deprived of 
 their sees, their revenues, and all kind of temporal juris- 
 diction. We have already seen our Lecturer laying it 
 down, as " a thing so plain, that one is almost ashamed to 
 attempt to illustrate it, that as in fact a man ceases to be a 
 husband the moment that he ceases to have a wife, and is 
 •no longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so, in 
 the only proper and original import of the words, a bishop 
 continues a bishop only whilst he continues to have people 
 under his spiritual care." Plain, however, as all this appears, 
 we are at some loss to know what is here meant by a " bi- 
 shop's having people under his spiritual care .•" Not that 
 there is any ambiguity in the words themselves, but be- 
 cause we often find Dr. Campbell putting a very different 
 «ense on the powers and cares of bishops, from that, in 
 which we think the church has always understood them. 
 Yet we may surely take it for granted, from his own con- 
 cession, that the ejected Scotch bishops once had people 
 under their spiritual care ; and this being acknowledged, 
 ^ve may also take the liberty of asking two simple questions, 
 on which may be said to turn the main hinge of the argu- 
 ment between Dr. Campbell and us. One of these questions 
 is — By what means were those bishops invested with this 
 spiritual care ; or from what source did they derive their 
 right to it? Our Professor could not say, what no true 
 presbyterian, indeed no true Christian, will say, that they 
 deriyed it from the state, which never pretended either to 
 exercise or claim any power of " ministering either of 
 God's word or sacraments," or of conveying any thing 
 whatever, which may truly be called spiritual And if the 
 ease be really so, the next question is — Did the ejection of 
 these bishops by the civil power deprive them of any 
 fwc^ly ^spiritual right, which they had possessed before. 
 
288 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 and had been put in possession of, by ecclesiastical power 
 only ? This question, we hope, will also be answered in 
 the negative : or had there been any doubt about it in the 
 minds of Dr. Campbell's pupils, they might have been re- 
 ferred for a solution of it to a divine of the church of Eng- 
 land, the learned Dr. Prideaux, author of the " Connec- 
 tion of the Old and New Testament^'' which their Professor, 
 in his first lecture, had called an " excellent work, and ear*- 
 nestly recommended to their perusal ;" and in which they 
 would have found the following account of the Christian 
 priesthood, as, in this respect, similar to the Jewish : 
 
 " For to instance in Episcopacy, the first order of it, be- 
 sides the ecclesiastical office, which is derived from Christ 
 alone, it hath in Christian states annexed to ic (as with us) 
 the temporal benefice (that is, the revenues of the bishop- 
 rick) and some branches of the temporal authority, as the 
 probate of wills, causes of tithes, causes of defamation, 8s:c» 
 All which latter most certainly is held under the temporal 
 state, but not the former. — Were this distinction duly con- 
 sidered, it would put an end to those Erastian notions which 
 now so much prevail among us. For the want of this is the 
 true cause, that many observing some branches of the Epis* 
 copal authority to be from the state, wrongfully from hence 
 infer, that the rest is so too ; whereas, would they duly ex^ 
 amine the matter, they would find, that besides the tempo- 
 ral power and temporal revenues, with which bishops are 
 invested, there is also an ecclesiastical or spiritual power, 
 which is derived from none other than Christ alone. And 
 the same distinction may also serve to quash another con- 
 troversy, which was much agitated among us, in the reign 
 of his late Majesty, King William the third, about the act 
 which deprived the bishops, who would not take the oaths 
 to that king. For the contest then was, that an act of Par- 
 liament could not deprive a bishop. This we acknowledgi^ 
 to be true in respect of the spiritual office, but not in re- 
 spect of the benefice, and other temporal advantages an(i 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 289 
 
 powers annexed thereto. For these every bishop receiveth 
 from the state, and the state can again deprive anv bishop 
 of them on a just cause. And this was all that was done 
 by the said act. For the bishops that were then deprived 
 by it, had still their Episcopal office left entire to them ; 
 they being as much bishops of the church universal after 
 their deprivation, as they were before."^ 
 • Such is the clear and distinct account which Dr. Pri- 
 deaux gives of this matter ; and it should be remembered, 
 that the case to which he alludes, of the deprived bishops 
 in England, was of a much more perplexed and intricate 
 mature, than that of their brethren in Scotland ; the former 
 leading to an unhappy separation of one part of an Episco- 
 pal church from another, whilst the latter was an overturn- 
 ing of the whole established Episcopacy at once, and 
 obliged the Scotch Episcopalians of that day to defend their 
 cause, as it has been defended ever since, on those general 
 principles, by which their ecclesiastic polity was supported 
 in the first and purest ages of Christianity. This was the 
 apology made for us in the year 1792, when that distin- 
 guished prelate, Dr. Horsely, then bishop of St. David's, 
 now of St. Asaph, stood up to plead our cause in the great 
 council of the nation, with a strength of argument, and 
 dignity of mind, which did him equal honour as a bishop 
 of the church, and a peer of the realm. " These Episco- 
 palians," said his Lordship, " take a distinction, and it is 
 a just distinction, between a purely spiritual, and a political 
 Episcopacy. A political Episcopacy belongs to an esta- 
 blished church, and has no existence out of an establish- 
 ment. This sort of Episcopacy was necessarily unknown 
 in the world before the time of Constantine. But in all 
 die preceding ages, there was a pure spiritual Episcopacy, 
 an order of men set apart to inspect and manage the spi- 
 ritual affairs of the church, as a society in itself totally un- 
 
 * Connection of the Old and Nexv Testmnent^ part ii. book 3, p. 161. 
 37 
 
290 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 
 
 connected with civil government. Now, these Scotch 
 Episcopalians think, that when their church was cast off 
 by the state at the revolution, their church, in this dis- 
 carded, divided state, reverted to that which had been the 
 condition of every church in Christendom, before the esta- 
 blishment of Christianity in the Roman empire by Con- 
 stantine the Great ; that losing all their pohtical capacity, 
 the)' retained, however, the authority of the pure spiritual 
 Episcopacy within the church itself. — That is the sort of 
 Episcopacy to which they now pretend, and I, as a church- 
 man, have some respect for that pretension."^ 
 
 On these principles, therefore, founded in the very nature 
 and constitution of the Christian church, we may safely say, 
 that the bishops of Scotland, ejected at the revolution, con- 
 tinued to be as much bishops, in the pure ecclesiastical sense 
 of the w^ord, after, as they had been before their ejection ; 
 and were so, even on Dr. Campbell's restricting plan, when 
 supported by all his allusions to father and husband, sove- 
 reign and shepherd ; since it is a certain fact, that j notwith- 
 standing the parliamentary abolition of prelacy, great num-» 
 bers, both of clergy and laity, or, as the Doctor would rather 
 have called them, presbyters and people, adhered to the 
 deprived bishops, and acknowledged themselves to be still 
 " under their spiritual care." And was this " spiritual care" 
 of the Scotch church to cease entirely at the death of these 
 bishops ? Or, because our Professor will not allow that the 
 apostles could have successors, on account of the extraordi- 
 nary powers with which these apostles were invested, was 
 there any thing so peculiar in the character of bishops, 
 precisely such as we have shown the bishops of the three 
 first centuries to have been, that they could not have others 
 to succeed them in their spiritual charge, or use the same 
 
 * See a Narrative of the Proceedings relating to an act which was 
 passed in 1/92, for granting relief to pas'cors, nvinisters, and lav persons 
 of the Ejiiscopal communion in Scotland. Printed at Aberdeen, 1792. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 291 
 
 means for preserving that succession, as had been used for 
 the same purpose in every age and under every state or 
 condition of the Christian church ? 
 
 But, says our Lecturer, " even their own writers acknow- 
 ledge, that immediately after the death of Dr. Ross, bishop 
 of Edinburgh, the last of these ordained before the revolu- 
 tion, there were no local bishops in Scotland, not one ap- 
 pointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of any peo- 
 ple, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district." And sup- 
 posing this to have been the case, we shall be able to show 
 how easily it may be accounted for, and what regular steps 
 were taken for having again local bishops, appointed to their 
 several dioceses or districts, as soon as circumstances 
 would permit. — Even our adversary acknowledges, that 
 at the period he mentions, " there were bishops in Scot- 
 land, who had been ordained at large, some by Bishop 
 Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, after 
 the revolution, had retired to England*"* And from 
 what has been already said on the nature of ordination and 
 Episcopal consecration, it is evident, that these were real, 
 duly consecrated bishops, possessed of the power of con- 
 secrating others, and of taking the charge of any diocese 
 .or district that might be committed to their inspection. 
 
 It is allowed, even by Dr. Campbell, '* that those men 
 who came under the hands of bishop Ross, had been regu- 
 larly admitted ministers or presbyters in particular congre- 
 gations before the revolution ;" and it is equally certain, 
 diat they had flocks, perhaps but " little flocks," yet not 
 
 * This seems to bo very inaccurately stated, as none of the ejected 
 bishops performed any consecration in England, and only one Scotch 
 bishop was consecrated there, as may be seen in the Appendix No. I. 
 from which it will also appear, that though Dr. Campbell speaks only 
 of the bishop of Edinburgh as the ordainer, yet the first consecration in 
 Scotland after the revolution, was performed by the archbishop of Glas- 
 gow, and bishop of Dunblane, in conjunction with the bishop of Edin- 
 burgh ; and every consecration since has been performed by the canoni- 
 «jil numljer of bishops. 
 
292 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 despicable on that account, which still continued under 
 their spiritual care, and according to our Professor's de- 
 scription of the primitive practice, " could assemble with 
 their several pastors in one house, for the purpose of pub- 
 lic worship :" And if it were true, as he says, that for 
 many years after the introduction of Episcopacy into the 
 church, a bishop's pastoral charge did not extend beyond a 
 single congregation, then would it necessarily follow on his 
 principles, that these Scotch pastors, when promoted to the 
 Episcopal order by a solemn and regular consecration, be- 
 came not only primitive bishops, but, in his opinion, perhaps 
 the only primitive bishops, who were then to be found in 
 Britain, or any other country. They were certainly '' paro- 
 chial bishops," even in Dr. Campbell's view of their charac- 
 ter ; and we know not what good reason he could have as- 
 signed, why their parochial charge, however small, might not 
 have been called their diocese, or might not have swelled to 
 such an extent, by the addition of neighbouring congrega- 
 tions, as to become a diocese, even in the modem sense of 
 the word. It is of no consequence, that an unprecedented 
 scheme was afterwards set on foot, for committing the 
 whole government of the Scotch Episcopal church to a col- 
 lege of bishops, who were to act in common, without any 
 of them being appointed to the charge of a particular dis- 
 trict: And it is now as little worthy of notice, that in op- 
 position to such a fanciful system of ecclesiastic polity, the 
 defenders of diocesan Episcopacy thought proper to distin- 
 guish the members of this college by the title of " Utopian 
 bishops." All that we have occasion to observe respecting 
 a controversy, which was soon brought to an end, is merely 
 this, and it must have been well known to Dr. Campbell, 
 that none of the writers from whom he borrowed the de- 
 nomination, which he has so derisively applied, ever ex- 
 pressed the least doubt of the college bishops, as they were 
 called, having been duly and regularly consecrated, and 
 thereby invested with full powers for conveying to otherR 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 293 
 
 the same gift or grace which themselves had received by 
 imposition of hands, for the purpose of preserving, through 
 that dangerous and distressful period, a regular Episcopal 
 succession in the church to which they belonged. 
 
 This indeed appears to have been the principal design of 
 all the consecrations which took place in Scotland from the 
 revolution, in 1688, to the death of the last survivor of the 
 ejected bishops, which happened in 1720. It was not till 
 the number of these prelates was reduced to five, and some 
 of these also advanced in years, that they saw the necessity 
 of making some provision for continuing the Episcopal 
 su'- ession, and thereby preserving their national church 
 from being again obliged, as she had been within their 
 own memory, to have recourse to another quarter for a 
 regular and valid Episcopacy. — Something of this kind is 
 always alluded to, in the deeds or instruments of their 
 consecration, signed and sealed in the usual manner :* 
 And after the first consecration was performed by the arch- 
 bishop of Glasgow, and other two of the deprived prelates, 
 we find on every subsequent solemnity of the same kind, 
 some of the new bishops assisting the old, as long as any 
 of them remained, and afterwards acting in their own 
 names, and by their own powers, as prudence or necessity 
 dictated. At the same time, many considerations might 
 present themselves to show the propriety of what was pro- 
 posed, and cordially agreed to on both sides ; that during 
 the life of any of the old bishops, the government of the 
 church should remain entirely in their hands, whilst those 
 whom they had consecrated should, all that time, be vested 
 with no diocesan power, nor have the inspection of any 
 particular district, but merely assist the others in keeping 
 up the Episcopal order, and managing matters for the ge- 
 neral good of the church. 
 
 Such was the plan of procedure suggested by the ne- 
 
 * See copies of them in the Appendix^ No. II. 
 
294- Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 cessity of the times, and recommended, no doubt, by va- 
 rious circumstances, as most likely to answer the purpose 
 for which it was adopted. — And however unsuitable and 
 improper it may now appear to us, before we can form any 
 just or candid judgment of the motives which gave rise to 
 it, we shall find it necessary to look back a little to the state 
 of things at that period, and consider what might be tbe 
 sentiments and feelings of the bishops and clergy of the 
 lately established church, whom the revolution had de- 
 prived of their livings and many valuable privileges, had 
 reduced to the most abject poverty and pitiable distress, 
 and thereby thrown into a state of dependence on the hopes 
 of that family, for the support of whose interests they had 
 suffered this deprivation, and all these accumulated hard- 
 ships. It is painful, even at this distance of time, to reflect 
 on the violent and barbarous manner, in which these un- 
 happy sufferers were driven from their former possessions. 
 The remembrance of such strange and unexpected severity 
 was not likely to be soon effaced, and some of the political 
 measures of those times were but ill adapted to conciliate 
 the minds of persons, who had so much cause, as they 
 thought, for being disaffected to the established govern- 
 ment. Hence it was that the shattered remains of the old 
 national church came to be considered as a society kept 
 together for no other purpose than to serve the interests, 
 and support the pretensions of the exiled family. On some 
 of the principal friends of that family, many of the perse- 
 cuted clergy had been obliged to depend for protection and 
 support, and, in consequence of that dependence, had been 
 much influenced by the wishes and opinions of their pa- 
 trons. It may also be supposed, that some of them would 
 retain as much of the prevailing opinion, respecting the ne- 
 cessary connection between the mitre and the crown, as 
 might lead them to suppose, that the church could not pos- 
 sibly subsist, without admitting the same interposition of 
 regal authority in the nomination of its bishops, to which 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 295 
 
 they had been accustomed in the times of constitutional 
 and legal Episcopacy. 
 
 Viewing things in this light, and encourged, perhaps 
 obliged to take such measures as were most agreeable to 
 those persons of rank and influence on whom they de- 
 pended, a part, though but an inconsiderable part of the 
 Scotch Episcopal clergy, contrived a new scheme for ma- 
 naging the government of their church, till it should be 
 seen whether there was any probability, as they, perhaps, 
 might be led to hope, from their remembrance of what 
 had formerly happened, of recovering her ancient privi- 
 leges. The plan proposed, of which we have already taken 
 some notice, was shortly this ; — that after the death of the 
 bishop of Edinburgh (who, as we have seen, survived the 
 other ejected prelates till the year 1720) all the bishops who 
 had been consecrated since the revolution, and were then 
 alive, should be formed into an Episcopal college, for the 
 general puipose of preserving a succession of bishops, and 
 ordaining inferior clerg)', but without pretending to local 
 jurisdiction, or the charge of any particular district, which, 
 as they could not obtain with the formal sanction of govern- 
 ment, they thought it better to decline, out of respect to 
 the. suffering situation of the person, whom they acknow- 
 ledged as their kmg. The scheme accordingly was no 
 sooner proposed, than it received his approbation, and on 
 this plan a few promotions soon after took place, in conse- 
 quence of recommendations from the exiled prince. But 
 notwithstanding this shadow of support to the collegiate 
 scheme of church government, and however proper or re- 
 spectful to the unfortunate house of Stuart, it might have 
 appeared in the eyes of a few individuals, it was far from 
 being acceptable to the clergy in general, or giving any satis- 
 faction to the great body of the laity who adhered to the 
 communion of the Scotch Episcopal church. They longed 
 for the revival of diocesan Episcopacy, as that form of 
 church government, to which they had always been accus- 
 
296 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 tomed, and which they knew to be most conformable to 
 the primitive model. They saw no necessity for con- 
 founding the things of God with the things of Caesar ; and 
 since it was an undoubted fact, that the adventitious privi- 
 leges granted by the state, had laid the foundation of the 
 grateful concessions made by the Christian church, they 
 considered that part of it, to which they belonged, being 
 now destitute of all secular support or encouragement from 
 the state, as at full liberty to betake itself to its own intrin- 
 sic powers, and make what provision was necessary for the 
 succession and continuance of its sacred orders. There 
 could be no occasion for asking a licence from the crown 
 for the election of bishops, who were not to be distin- 
 guished by any mark of the royal favour, nor to enjoy any 
 peculiar benefit for the support of their profession. They 
 might surely be promoted now, as they had been of old, 
 before Christianity became a religion established by law : 
 And where no interposition of royal authority, no inter- 
 ference of the state was to be expected, as the church was 
 left at liberty to exercise those powers communicated by 
 her divine founder for preserving her in existence ; so, whilst 
 this was done in a quiet and becoming manner, there was 
 no reason to fear that government would be offended. 
 
 These were the principles on which the constitution of 
 our church was settled, as soon as it recovered from the 
 shock, which was necessarily occasioned by the violent and 
 abrupt termination of its connection with the state. And 
 if some of our writers, whom Dr. Campbell calls the 
 " warmest partizans of our sect, have not scrupled to own, 
 that at the death of the bishop of Edinburgh in 1720, all 
 the dioceses in Scotland were become vacant," — ytt it can 
 never be supposed, that these writers believed the whole 
 Episcopal church in Scotland to have become so far vacant 
 likewise, as to have no bishops in it capable of being elected 
 to take the charge of its several districts, or of consecrat- 
 ing others, that might be elected for that purpose. — This 
 
Particular Defence of the Epise&pacy of Scotland. f^X 
 
 was a sort of vacancy, which none of our writers ever did^ 
 or could acknowledge ; because they all knew well, that 
 when that event happened, which occasioned this " dioce- 
 san vacancy," there were no fewer than six of those bi- 
 shops alive, who had been consecrated since the revolu- 
 tion, and whom they always owned to be real bishops^ in 
 the true and primitive sense of the word. And they knew 
 likewise, that in less than two months after the death of the 
 bishop of Edinburgh, the presbyters of that diocese, which 
 had once been legally and constitutionally under his inspect 
 lion, unanimously elected one of the above-mentioned six 
 bishops to be their diocesan ; and not long after, the pres- 
 byters of Angus elected another of them, and those of 
 Aberdeen a third,* for the same Episcopal charge of these 
 several districts. It can hardly ht supposed, diat all these 
 presbyters, who had been bred for the ministiy, and regu- 
 Harly ordained in an Episcopal church, would be so unac» 
 quainted with ecclesiastical history, and the canons of an- 
 cient councils, as to make choice of persons for their bi- 
 shops, who by being ordained at large, might have assumed 
 the name, but had no just right to die character of bishops, 
 and to whose first ordination as presbyters, " their farcical 
 consecration," as Dr. Campbell thought proper to call it, 
 " by Doctor Ross and others, added nothing at all." Is k 
 to be imagined, that so many respectable and experienced 
 clergymen would have joined in countenancing and abet- 
 ting such a ridiculous, we may say even impious farce ; or 
 have suffered the government of their church, and the 
 management of its affairs, to fall into the hands of persons 
 who had obtained their promotion by such irregular and 
 unjustifiable means ? Yet no remonstrance appeared against 
 it ; nothing indeed was seen but a general approbation of the 
 measure which had thus restored the true diocesan Epis*- 
 
 * See Skinner's Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p, 625, 629, 
 
 530. 
 
 38 
 
298 'Particular Defence of the episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 €opacy ; and a few years after, the whole Episcopal church 
 in Scotland was settled on the same right and orderh' plan, 
 and certain regulations adopted, which have continued to 
 be the standard of its discipline to this day.^ 
 
 We have been obliged to be thus particular in our detail 
 of facts, as the best way of repelling that strange, unex- 
 pected attack, which has lately been made on the validity 
 of our Episcopal orders, and which, v/e have seen, has 
 nothing to support it, but the novelty of the arguments by 
 which it is maintained, and the peremptory manner in 
 which they are brought forward. If the refutation of them 
 required any addition to that clear, satisfactory evidence, 
 which has been already produced, we might easily find it 
 in the writings of some of the most learned and distin- 
 guished divines of the Church of England, who have af- 
 forded most abundant testimony in favour of such a sound 
 and primitive Episcopacy, as that which still subsists in 
 Scotland. And when this point came to be debated in the 
 upper house of Parliament, and a discussion took place on 
 the nature of our Episcopal succession as far back as the 
 year 1748, the whole English bench unanimously opposed 
 the passing of an act, which seemed to infringe the validity 
 of our orders ; and some of them argued against it in the 
 strongest terms, particularly the learned and pious Dr. 
 Seeker, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop 
 of Canterbur}', who, in his speech on that occasion, ob- 
 served, that " to preserve the Episcopal church of Scotland, 
 the bishops, who were outed of their temporalities at the 
 
 * Agreeably to these regulations, every bishop is elected by the whole 
 body of clergy, within the diocese or district over which he is to preside, 
 and they meet for such election, in virtue of a inandate signed by at least 
 a majority of the bishops. When the election is over, the issue of it 
 is reported by the dean of the diocese to the primus, or senior bishop, 
 who communicates it to his colleagues, and they jointly appoint a day 
 and place for the consecration of the person elected, which is always 
 performed by three bishops at least, in a public chapel, and according 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 299 
 
 revolution, not only conferred orders, but consecrated bi- 
 shops in the room of those that died ; for surely," said he, 
 " the Episcopal party in Scotland have as much a right and 
 a power to both the one and the other, as the primitive 
 Christians had, before their religion came to be the esta- 
 blished religion in any countr}^, and if they would profess 
 and practise the same submission to the civil gbvemmdnt, 
 I should think them equally entitled to protection and indul- 
 gence."* 
 
 Another more recent occurrence was the means of pro- 
 curing a similar acknowledgment in favour of our Episco- 
 pacy from that branch of the church of England ^vhich 
 was long cherished in the British plantations of North- 
 America, but could never obtain, till it was torn from the 
 parent flock, that which would have given it additional life 
 and vigour, a regular and resident Episcopate. In an excel- 
 lent discour&e on this subject, preached in Virginia, in the 
 year 1771, the author makes this introductory remark,— 
 *' It was (I believe) about the middle of the last century, 
 that our want of bishops was sensibly felt and lamented, 
 jand that applications for remedying the evil were made 
 to the throne. These applications were thought so reason- 
 able, that under Charles the second, a patent was actually 
 made out for appointing a bishop of Virginia, By some 
 fatality or other (such as seems for ever to have pursued all 
 the good measures of the monarchs of that unfortunate 
 family) the patent was not signed when the king died ; and 
 from that time to this, all exertions for the attainment of 
 this desirable object, though they have never wholly ceased, 
 have been as languid, as the opposition to them has been 
 vehement. Never before in any period of our history, or 
 in any part of the empire, was a measure so harmless, so 
 necessary, and so salutary, resisted and defeated on grounds 
 $0 frivolous, so unwise, and so unjust." Our author then 
 
 * See the Scots Magazine for 1748, p. 589, 590. 
 
SOO Partiaulaf' Defence Gftke Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 proceeds to mention, and answer very fully all the objec- 
 tions, which had been made to this wise and salutary mea^ 
 Sliire ; and in an appendix which he subjoined to this dis- 
 course, when it was published with some others in the year 
 1797^ he concludes with these very just and pertinent ob- 
 servations—- 
 
 *' That the American opposition to Episcopacy was at aQ 
 connected with that still more serious one, so soon after* 
 wards set up against civil government, was not indeed 
 generally apparent at the time, but it is now indisputable, 
 as it also is, that the former contributed not a little to render 
 the latter successful. The Anti-Episcopalians carried theit 
 point with an high hand, which is no otherwise to be ac- 
 counted for, than that the party, in perfect union with their 
 fellow labourers in the British parliament, were in the 
 habit of opposing every measure that seemed likely to 
 strengthen the hands of government. That the object, 
 which in this instance was opposed, was either in itself 
 really dangerous, or intended to be so, will not now ht 
 pretended by any one : For hardly was the independence 
 6f the colonies gained, before an Episcopate was applied 
 for and obtained j"* an Episcopate, in every respect simi- 
 lar to that which had often and earnestly been requested 
 by the English clergy in America ; that is, bishops duly 
 authorized to perform the original duties of their office, to 
 ordain and govern the clergy, and administer the sacred 
 rite of confirmation, but without any temporal power or 
 preferment, and possessed of no other authority than that 
 
 • See " A View <)f the Causes and Concequcnces of the American Revolu- 
 iiotty m thirteen Discourses, preached in Nortli-America, between the 
 years 1763 and 1775 — with an historical preface, by Jonathan Boucher, 
 A. M. and F. A. S. — Vicar of Epsom in the county of Surry, London. 
 1797" A work which does equal credit to its author, by the soundness 
 of the principles which it inculcates, both in religion and politics, and by 
 the manner in which they are enforced, from the authority of divine 
 revelation. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 301 
 
 which is derived from the church and not from the state, 
 being of a purely spiritual and ecclesiastical nature. 
 
 This was the Episcopacy which was first communicated 
 to the American church in the state of Connecticut, in the 
 person of Dr. Samuel Seabury, one of the missionaries 
 from the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts y 
 and a suffering loyalist during the American war, who 
 having brought with him the most ample attestations of his 
 character and qualifications, both from the clergy of Con- 
 necticut, and those of the neighbouring state of New-York^ 
 was consecrated by the bishops in Scotland in the year 
 1784, and some years after joined with, and assisted the 
 bishops who received consecration at Lambeth, in giving a 
 bishop to the protestant Episcopal church in the state of 
 Maryland, and in other business that came before what is 
 called the House of Bishops in Anierica."^ This happy co- 
 alition, in forming and establishing the constitution of the 
 church in the United American States, was justly consi- 
 dered by those who had a hand in promoting it, as the best 
 means of uniting them also in doctrine, discipline and wor-» 
 ship ; whilst it exhibits that becoming desire, and resolution 
 to maintain a Christian fellowship and communion with 
 the Episcopal church in this country, which must ever be 
 regarded as a public acknowledgment on their part, of the 
 validity of our orders, and the regularity of that Episcopal 
 succession, from which they are derived. 
 
 * This appears from a " 'Journal of the Proceedings of the Bishops, 
 Clergy, and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States 
 cf Atnerica, in a contiention held in the city of Kevj-Tork, in September, 
 1792" In which journal it is mentioned, that Bishop Seabury preached 
 by appointment, at the opening of the convention, and afterwards as- 
 sisted Bishops Provoost, White, and Madison, in the consecration of Dr. 
 Clagget, as bishop of the church in Maryland. " In 1793, Bishop 
 Seabury published at New-York, two volumes of discourses, which are 
 such as might have brought credit to any prelate, in any age, and in any 
 country." He died in February, 1796, and for a character of him, see 
 Mr. Boucher's work, mentioned in the preceding note, p. 5S&, and also 
 the obituary of ibe Genikman's Magazine for May, 1797, p. 442. 
 
302 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 
 
 On this point, therefore, we presume, it would be super- 
 fluous to add any thing more to that abundant evidence, 
 which has been already produced, and which, we would 
 hope, must be considered as perfectly sufficient to show, 
 how little ground Dr. Campbell had for making use of such 
 a contemptuous and vilifying comparison, as that which he 
 laid before his pupils, in the following passage of his 
 eleventh lecture. " Let no true son of our church be 
 offended, that I acknowledge our nonjurors to have a sort 
 of Presbyterian ordination;" (alluding to what he had 
 said just before, of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy 
 having their ordination solely from presbyters) " for I 
 would by no means be understood as equalizing theirs 
 to that which obtains with us. Whoever is ordained 
 amongst us, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops. 
 It is true, we neither assume the titles, nor enjoy the re- 
 venues, of the dignified clergy, so denominated in other 
 countries ; but we are not the less bishops in every thing 
 essential, for being more conformable to the apostolic and 
 primitive model, when every bishop had but one parish, 
 one congregation, one church or place of common wor- 
 ship, one altar or communion table, and was perhaps as 
 poor as any of us. Whereas the ordination of our non- 
 jurors proceeds from presbyters in their own (that is, in 
 the worst) sense of the word, men to whom a part only of 
 the ministerial powers was committed, and from whom 
 particularly was withheld the right of transmitting orders 
 to others. When we say that our orders are from presby- 
 ters, we do not use the term in their acceptation, but in 
 that, wherein we find it used by Luke, in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, by Paul in his epistles, and (if the name of 
 fathers be thought to add any weight) by the purest and 
 earliest fathers, Clemens Romanus, Polycarp, and others, 
 presbyters, in short, whom the Holy Ghost had made bi- 
 shops of the flock. But when we say, their orders arc 
 from presbyters, we use the word not in the apostolicjilj 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 30J 
 
 but in the more recent sense, for a sort of subordinate mi- 
 nisters, who are not authorized to ordain, and who, on 
 Dr. Hammond's hypothesis, as well as ours, were not ori- ^ 
 ginalh' in the church." 
 
 On a calm, candid, and attentive perusal of the forego- 
 ing passage, we can hardly refrain from asking even after 
 the manner, which some perhaps will not think over-polite, 
 of one of the reviewers of these lectures — " Is this the 
 language and reasoning of Dr. Campbell, the justly cele- 
 brated author of the Dissertatio7i on Miracles^ and of the 
 valuable work, entitled. The Philosophy of Rhetoric ? So 
 says the editor, and we dare not contradict him ; but it 
 is such reasoning as would disgrace a school-boy who had 
 ever looked into a treatise of logic."* Let us examine it 
 a little, with all the impartiality which can be expected 
 from persons, whose right to the true clerical character is 
 held forth by it in, what must appear to them, the most 
 pitiful and degrading light. Had it even been acknowledged, 
 that they had real genuine presbyterian ordination, per- 
 haps they v/ould not have thought themselves very highly 
 complimented ; but to bring them down to something, di- 
 minutively represented as only a sort of presbyterian or- 
 dination, is truly humiliating, and would require much 
 more strength of argument than Dr. Campbell has thought 
 fit to produce for effecting such a bold depression of our 
 Episcopal orders. Endeavouring to show the superior au- 
 thority of the orders of presbyterians, he indeed affirms, 
 but affirmation is not proof, " that whoever is ordained 
 amongst them, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops." 
 If then there be any regard due to succession at all, may it 
 not be asked, what class of bishops ordained bishop Calvin 
 at Geneva, or bishop Knox in Scotland? The former, as far 
 as appears from his history, never had ordination of any kind, 
 tliough few bishops ever assumed more of the Episcopal 
 
 * See Anti-yacobirr Revh-v for July, 1801, p. 246 
 
304- Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 power than he did ; and the latter, if he received any or- 
 ders at all, which seems to be very uncertain, yet could only 
 have been ordained a presbyter, or one of those to whom, 
 even by our Professor's own account " a part only of the 
 ministerial powers was committed, and from whom was 
 particularly v/ithheld the right of transmitting orders to 
 Others." How then could he or any of the class of pres- 
 byters at the reformation, take upon them to transmit to 
 others what themselves had not received ; or pretend to ex- 
 ercise a right, which had been always, by divine institu- 
 tion, withheld from the office to which they had been ap- 
 pointed ? 
 
 Were it however to be granted, in contradiction to the 
 clearest evidence of scripture and antiquity, that bishops 
 and presbyters being originally of the same order, no dis- 
 tinction ought ever to have been made between them, nor 
 any exclusive powers assigned to the one, more than to the 
 other ; yet, as Dr. Campbell allows, that " those men, who 
 came under the hands of Bishop Ross, had been regularly 
 admitted ministers or presbyters^ before the revolution, 
 and that the orders of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy 
 are derived from these presbyters," we may submit to the 
 judgment of any unprejudiced person, whether the ordi- 
 nation of those clergy be not in every respect as valid as 
 that of any other body of men who derive their orders only 
 from presbyters, and much more so than that which can be 
 traced to no source of ecclesiastical power at all, but owes 
 its origin solely to the appointment of the people, or the au- 
 thority of the civil magistrate. In a case so plain, and 
 where the premises are so clear, it might have been 
 thought, that the conclusion would be equally obvious, and 
 that no " true son" of a presbyterian church, would ever 
 have objected to amj sort of, what is really, presbyterian 
 ordination, or made any difference between the powers of 
 those presbyters, who were surely all alike subordinate 
 ministers as well before, as at the time of the reformation; 
 
Particular Defence of the Eplscopaey of Scotland, 3Q5 
 
 and who could not since have acquired a right to change 
 the inherent nature of their powers, or to make themselves 
 a different order from what they were originally intended 
 to be. Yet Dr. Campbelljias found out a distinction be* 
 tween our acceptation of the word *' presbyters," which he 
 calls not only a " more recent," but the '* worst sense" of 
 it, and the " apostolical," which is no doubt the best sense 
 in which he uses it ; as if the difference between his sense 
 of the word and ours could make any difference in the 
 nature of the office, or render it better to him and worse 
 to us, according to the sense in which it is taken. This 
 seems to be just the same as adopting the popular argu- 
 ment of the Romish doctors in recommending their tran«* 
 substantiation, " crede quod habes, et habes," believe that 
 you hav^e, and you have it. Let a man but believe, that 
 he possesses any office, or that the office which he possesses 
 has particular powers assigned to it, and nothing more is 
 necessary to put him in possession either of the one or the 
 other. The absurdity here is the same, as if a subaltern in 
 the army should take the command of a regiment, because 
 he believes himself to be as much an officer as his colonel, 
 or a justice of the peace assume the powers of the Lord 
 High Chancellor, because they are both judges. 
 
 When Dr. Campbell presumed that his orders were better 
 than those of the Scotch Episcopal clergy, because theirs 
 were only from presbyters, as " a sort of subordinate mi- 
 nisters who are not authorized to ordain," whereas his 
 were from " presbyters in the acceptation used by Luke, 
 by Paul, by Clemens Romanus, Polycarp, and others of 
 the purest and earliest fathers ; presbyters, in short, whom 
 the Holy Ghost had made bishops of the flock ;"*^ all this 
 amounts to nothing more than bare, bold presumption, 
 without the least appearance of proof. He could not but 
 Jcnow, that we never pretended to deny the power of the 
 
 * Lecture xi. 
 39 
 
30& Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 
 
 Holy Ghost to make bishops of the flock, not only of pres- 
 byters, but even of deacons and laymen too, if he was 
 pleased so to do. This, however, we are sure, was never 
 done in the ordinary way, but by a more certain and evi- 
 dent mode of appointment than any inward " conscious- 
 ness," or mere effect of fancy, which yet appears to be all 
 that our Professor had to support him, when he thus at- 
 tacked the pious and learned Dodwell.^ — " I have stronger 
 evidence that you have no mission, than all your traditions, 
 and antiquities, and catalogues will ever be able to sur- 
 mount." And what is this evidence, which must be strong 
 indeed, to set aside all these means of ascertaining a divine 
 mission, which have been so long and generally received J 
 We have all that is brought forward against them in what 
 immediately follows — ^' For if he, whom God sendeth, 
 speaketh the words of God, (and this is a test which Christ 
 himself hath given us) he who contradicteth God's words 
 is not sent by him." And by this rule it is, that all the 
 pretenders to " mission," even the wildest of our modern 
 missionaries, endeavour to justify their pretensions on the 
 ground of their " speaking the words of God," of which 
 they, no doubt, think themselves the best judges. On this 
 ground, too, our learned Professor might have saved him- 
 self a great deal of the trouble he took in seeking for other 
 arguments to run down the orders of the Scotch Episcopal 
 clergy, since all he had to do was barely to affirm, that they 
 " contradict God's words," — ^therefore, they have no mis- 
 sion. It was likewise quite unnecessary, in arguing against 
 the pretensions of these clerg}^, that he should take any pe- 
 culiar merit to himself and his brethren, on account of their 
 " not assuming the titles nor enjoying the revenues of the 
 dignified clergy, so denominated in other countries, al- 
 though they are not the less bishops in every thing essen- 
 tial, for being more conformable to the apostolical and pri- 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, Z07 
 
 mltive model ;" since he knew very well that the Scotch 
 Episcopal clergy were as destitute of tides or revenues as 
 he could pretend to be ; and however he might have wished 
 to sneer at the " dignified clergy in other countries," yet 
 when he condescended to compare his own church with 
 *' our sect," the only question was, which of these two was 
 most " conformable to the apostolical and primitive mo- 
 del." It is by this conformity that we think ourselves at 
 present peculiarly distinguished, in all the instances of unity 
 which he has mentioned, as they were understood in the 
 language, and explained by the practice of the truly apos- 
 tolical church. And if his comparative '^ poverty" be any 
 just mark of ^' conformity to the primitive model," it will 
 not be easy to deny the preference in this respect to the pre- 
 sent Scotch Episcopal church, of whose ministers it may 
 not improperly be said, in the language of an apostie, that 
 they are " as poor, yet making many rich, as having no- 
 thing" that can be called temporal, and settled revenue, 
 " yet possessing all things" that pertain to spiritual or 
 Christian edification.^ 
 
 But there is still something farther to be said in sup- 
 port of the validity of the Scotch Episcopal orders, when 
 thus drawn into a comparison with that sort of presbyterian 
 ordination, which obtains under the establishment of this 
 
 * It cannot be thought impertinent to mention here an anecdote recorded 
 in the life of that truly " dignified clergyman," the late Dr. Home, bishop 
 of Norwich, who, his biographer says — " from the present circumstances 
 of its primitive orthodoxy, piety, poverty, and depressed state, had 
 such an opinion of the Scotch Episcopal Church, as to think, that if the 
 great apostle of the Gentiles were upon earth, and it were put to his 
 choice with what denomination of Christians he would communicate, the 
 preference would probably be given to the Episcopalians of Scotland, as 
 r.iost like to the people he had been used to." See life of Dr. Home, in 
 Mr. Jones' Works, vol. x'n. p. 176. It can give no offence, we hope, 
 tluis to state a President of Magdalen College in Oxford, over against 
 a Principal of Marischal College in Aberdeen, as at least equally com- 
 petent to Judge in matters of apostolical conformity. 
 
;>08 Particular Defmce of the Episcopacy ofScottmist* 
 
 countn^ where every one that is oruained by the esta- 
 bhshed rules, Dr. Campbell says, " is ordained a bishop 
 by a class of bishops." He had also before laid it down 
 as an invariable maxim, that the name hhhop^ which 
 means overseer^ cannot with any propriety be applied to 
 any person, who has nothing to oversee, and, therefore, 
 ^' a bishop continues a bishop only whilst he continues 
 to have people under his spiritual care." Dr. Campbell, 
 then, having been ordained a bishop, or what was the 
 same with him, a minister, could only continue to be so, 
 whilst he had people under his ministry or spiritual care. 
 Yet we are told by his biographer, that in June, 1795y 
 finding himself, no doubt, as his letter expresses it- — *^ pro- 
 videntially in a situation of living independently of the 
 emoluments of office," he resigned his chiirge of minister 
 of Grey-friars' church, as well as that of Professor of Di- 
 vinity in Pflarischal College, into the hands of the presby- 
 tery of Aberdeen, " entreating them to declare him re- 
 leased in future from these functions, and the pastoral re* 
 lation implied in them loosed ;" with a caution, however, 
 against any misconstruction of his meaning expressed in 
 these words — .'-* I hope I shall not be misunderstood by 
 any to mean, by this deed, a resignation of the character 
 of a minister of the gospel, and servant of Christ. In 
 this character I glory, so far am I from intending to re- 
 sign it but with my breath; nor do I mean to retain it only 
 as a title. For if, by the blessing of God, I should yet be 
 able to do any real service, either in defence, or in illus- 
 tration of the Christian cause, I shall think it my honour, 
 as well as my dut}^, and the highest gratification of which 
 I am capable, to be so employed. It is only from the par- 
 ticular relation to the people of Aberdeen as pastor^ and the 
 theological students of Marischal College, as teacher, that 
 it is my desire to be loosed,""^ 
 
 * See the Account of his Life and Writings prefixed to his Lectures. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 309 
 
 The reader perhaps will be a little surprized to find in 
 ^is letter, some regard expressed for that very thing called 
 *' character^"* in a minister of the gospel, which the same 
 person, in his Lectui'es, has treated with so much pointed 
 scorn and disrespect. But what we are chiefly concerned 
 to lay hold of, is the very appropriate weapon, w^hich is 
 here put into our hands, for defending the validity of our 
 orders, against the only blow which Dr. Campbell could 
 find the means of aiming at them. His peculiar attack on 
 the Scotch Episcopal clergy, we have seen, is wholly sup- 
 ported by his pretending, that they derive their orders from 
 '' bishops merely nominal;", and that these bishops were 
 thus " merely nominal," because they received no particu- 
 lar assignment to any Episcopal charge, for want of which 
 he does not scruple to call their consecration farcical^ or 
 of no signification. Had he been now alive, we should 
 certainly have wished to ask him, what material difference 
 there is, between a man's retaining the title after resigning 
 the charge, and accepting of the title at first without the 
 charge t We see him announcing himself to be a bishop 
 or pastor, ordained by a class of the same kind, and by 
 that very ordination, assigned and bound to a particular 
 pastoral charge, without which, by his own account, he can 
 no longer continue to be a bishop, pastor, or minister ; yet 
 from that charge he desires to be released, and to have his 
 pastoral relation to it loosed, but still means to retain his 
 character as a minister of the gospel, and is willing " to be 
 employed either in defending or illustrating the Christian 
 cause, as far as he is able," v/hich can only mean his doing 
 it, as a minister, bishop or pastor. And what is all this 
 but intending to act as a bishop ordained at large ; to be a 
 pastor without a flock, a minister without having any peo- 
 ple under his ministerial or spiritual care, and to continue 
 a bishop, even when he had no charge to oversee or in- 
 spect ? If then in this assumed character, he had pre- 
 tended to baptize a child, or administer the sacrament of 
 
310 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 the Lord's supper, or assist a class of bishops in ordaining 
 a bishop, must not every thing of this kind, on his own prin- 
 ciples, have been no better than a farcical ceremony, per- 
 formed by one who had no power or right to perform any 
 such office, being in fact, no other than a bishop, pastor or 
 minister " merely nominal ?" But as Dr» Campbell, no 
 doubt, would have spurned at the idea of acting in such a 
 fictitious character, why was he so ready, without just 
 ground, to apply the same censure to others, and to hold up 
 to contempt, as bishops " merely nominal," those who had 
 surely as good a right to be esteemed real and true bishops, 
 as he had, even by his own way of arguing, to be consi- 
 dered as a minister of the gospel, after he had resigned his 
 pastoral charge, and so renounced the only title he could 
 have, by his own principles, to that official character? — If 
 he wished to retain such a character only on the supposi- 
 tion of his still " being able to do some service either in 
 defence, or in illustration of the Christian cause," the same 
 privilege might have been allowed to those whom he thought 
 proper to call " nominal bishops," many of whom well could, 
 and some of them actually did defend and illustrate what 
 they believed to be the Christian cause, and on that foot- 
 ing, might certainly claim, as well as Dr. Campbell, to be 
 considered as, what they really were, bishops of the Chris- 
 tian church. We offer this reasoning merely in return to 
 the Doctor's " argumentum ad hominem," and to show 
 how much his practice, in the affair of his resignation, 
 " militated against his principles." If he was at so much 
 pains to condemn us, as he thought, on our own principles, 
 it is but fair that we should be allowed to make use of his 
 principles, as far as we can, in our own vindication. 
 
 It is entirely for the purpose of vindicating ovirselves, 
 that we have been so long detained, and obliged to make 
 so many remarks, on the lecture no^v before us, which 
 appears to have been wholly levelled at, what the Lecturer 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 311 
 
 calls* " a pretty numerous class, and these not all Roman- 
 ists :" By which description we may easily perceive, that 
 he means the class whom he had, twice in this lecture, dis- 
 tinguished by the obnoxious title of " our nonjurors^"* al- 
 though in a former lecture he had candidly owned, " that 
 we have none of that description at present." That some 
 kind of reflection was intended by this appellation, may at 
 least be suspected, from his always applying it as a mark 
 of distinction, without any reference to the political senti- 
 ments which gave rise to it, and particularly from the abuse 
 which he pours out, with an unusual flow of acrimony, on 
 a most learned and distinguished writer, whom he after- 
 wards introduces to our notice, as " a zealous defender of 
 prelacy," and what is worse, by the opprobrious designa- 
 tion of" the Irish nonjuror ^ Dodwell,"t distinguishing those 
 who maintain that Episcopal ordination is necessary to the 
 valid administration of the sacraments of our religion, by 
 the title of " Dodxvellians ;"J as if this were a doctrine 
 peculiar to nonjurors^ and therefore so zealously maintained 
 by Dodwell. 
 
 A similar intention is too obvious to escape notice in the 
 treatment which our Lecturer bestows on another no less 
 
 * Lecture xi. 
 
 f Page 96 — 122. This great and good man had, no doubt, many sin- 
 gularities of opinion, but none that could justify such abusive epithets as 
 these — " Arrogant and vain man ! What are you, who so boldly and 
 avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant, articles of your own de- 
 vising, neither expressed nor implied in his words? Yio you venture — a 
 worm of the earth ? Can you think yourself warranted — for your own 
 malignant purpose — to exhibit Christ, as the head of a faction — your 
 party forsooth ? — Your language is neither the language of scripture, nor 
 of common sense." P. 90. It was the severity of this language of Dr. 
 Campbell's, which provoked the Anti-yucobin lievieiver to make that bold 
 and animated retort, which we meet with in his number for June, 1801, 
 p. 112, and for which he makes a suitable apology, wishing rather to 
 plead the cause of truth in the words of soberness. 
 
 ^ An epithet not peculiar to Dr. Campbell, as Mr. Anderson, of Dun 
 barton, had ,Tiiade use of it long before. See his Defence^ ^c. p. 98. 
 
312 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 distinguished nonjuror^ the piou^ and learned Dr. Hickes, 
 who had been dean of Worcester, and was deprived of 
 that dignity, as the bishops of Scotland were ejected from 
 their sees, in consequence of the revolution. The character 
 of this celebrated divine had been severely handled by our 
 Professor in his tenth letter, on the subject of the resem- 
 blance between the Jewish and Christian priesthood ; and 
 here again, in the conclusion of the eleventh lecture, a 
 heavy charge is brought forward against him in the follow* 
 ing terms : — **' An author of whose sentiments I took some 
 notice in my last lecture, has observed,^ that as the civilians 
 have their fictions in law, our theologists also have their 
 fictions in divinity. It is but too true, that some of our 
 theological systems are so stuffed with these, that litde of 
 plain truth is to be learned from them. And I think it will 
 be doing no injury to this dogma of the character, to rank 
 it among those fictions in divinity. God forbid I should 
 add, in the not very decent words of that author, (though I 
 really beheve he meant no harm by them) xvhich infinite 
 wisdom and goodness have devised for our benefit and adr 
 vantage* The God of truth needs not the assistance of 
 falsehood, nor is the cause of truth to be promoted by such 
 means. The use of metaphorical expressions, or figurative 
 representations, in scripture, give no propriety to such an 
 application of a term so liable to abuse." — And we may too 
 justly add, that there is hardly a term in scripture which is 
 not liable to abuse, nay, which has not actually been abused 
 by the depravity and perverseness of the human imagina- 
 tion. The word fction properly signifies something feigned 
 or invented, for the purpose of conveying information, 
 whether true or false. In leading to the discovery of truth, 
 it is much the same as figure, or representation, and nothing, 
 we know, is more common, than, in speaking of that mys- 
 terious institution, to call the consecrated bread and cup in 
 
 * M'w^kci' Christian Priesthood, lib. i. cap. ii. § 8. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotlami. 3tS 
 
 die eucharist, the representative symbols of the body and 
 blood of Christ. Dr. Hickes was treating of the propriety 
 ©f calling them so, because they are substituted and deputed 
 for that body and blood, which they thus mystically repre^ 
 9ent. " This power," says he, " in legislators, of making 
 and supposing things to be to all intents and purposes, and 
 effects in law, what in reality they are not, is called by the 
 civil law— ^c^Z(9W." After which, he produces various in?- 
 Stances of such fiction in the Roman law, and in the com- 
 mon law of England, and then adds—*'' In like manner, 
 there are fictions in divinity, which infinite wisdom and 
 goodness have devised for our benefit and advantage* 
 Thus man and wife are supposed to be, and therefore are 
 ftiade one fleshy as the law makes them one person. Thus 
 Christ is supposed to be the Lamb slain from the foiinda-^ 
 Hon of the xvorld: Thus also the doctrine of adoption is ft 
 divine fiction in the gospel, as it was an human fiction in the 
 Roman law, and in both cases hath all the effects of real 
 and legitimate sonship. And, therefore, I hope, it is no 
 great or dangerous paradox to sa}^, that by divine fiction or 
 substitution^ the bread is made the body, and the wine the 
 blood of Christ," &c. And nothing surely can be more 
 harmless than these observations, which need not to have 
 occasioned so much horror and indignation, as seem to have 
 been raised by them in the breast of our Lecturer. We 
 may, therefore, justly enough observe, that " to have spoken 
 with proper respect of men of such profound erudition, and 
 distinguished excellence, as Dodwell and Hickes^ however 
 mistaken they might be, would certainly not have dimi- 
 nished in the least Dr. Campbell's own reputation ii> the 
 the world."* 
 
 As this is the opinion of a clergyman of the church of 
 England, as by law established under the present govem- 
 ?nent, it cannot be supposed to proceed from any prejudice 
 
 ** S?e Mr. Paybeny's el^ht Discourses on the Dottrim ofAtomment, p.f^^ 
 
 49 
 
314 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotland. 
 
 or partiality in favour of the political sentiments peculiar 
 to nonjurors : And since Dr. Campbell's account of those 
 whom he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party," and still re- 
 presents as continuing in their nonjuring principles, seems 
 to imply a suspicion that their original or transmitted disaf- 
 fection to government may have been the cause of some 
 defect or irregularity in the transmission of their clerical 
 orders, we cannot do better than sum up what has been al- 
 ready said on this subject, in the words of the same author 
 whose opinion we have just now quoted, and who could 
 not be influenced by any personal or interested motives to 
 speak of the nonjuring clergy either of England, Ireland 
 or Scotland, but as they really were, and showed them- 
 selves to be both in their principles, and their conduct. 
 Having occasion to mention some of these clergy, as zea- 
 lous defenders of apostolic Episcopacy, such as Dodcuell 
 and Hickes^ Leslie^ and Law^ he argues in the following 
 manner on the validity of their ministerial commission, 
 
 * In a note subjoined to Bishop Horne's excellent Sermon on the 
 Duty of contending for the Faith, preached at the primary visitation of the 
 present archbishop of Canterbury, in 1786 — we find the following cha- 
 racter of Mr. Leslie and his writings—" The polemical skill of a Leslie 
 is an expression of Bolinbroke. A clergyman's library should not be 
 without this author's theological works, in two volumes, folio, containing 
 his pieces against Deists, Jews, Romanists, Socinians, and Quakers. 
 He is said to have brought more persons, from other persuasions, into the 
 church of England, than any man ever did; his skill in conversation 
 •being equal to that in writing. Allowance must be made for a style, 
 which, though sufHciently perspicuous and nervous, is not according to 
 the modern ideas of correctness and elegance. Bayle styles him a man 
 of great merit and learning. Mr. T. Salmon observes, that his works must 
 transmit him to posterity, as a man thoroughly learned and truly pious. 
 But a better and more disinterested judge, Mr. Harris, informs us, that 
 he made several converts from popery, and says that notwithstanding his 
 mistaken opinions about government, and a few other matters, he de- 
 serves the highest praise for defending the Christian religion against De- 
 ists, Jews, and Quakers, and for admirably well supporting the doctrines 
 of the church of England against those of Rome. See Biographical 
 Dictionary." Bishop Home then adds — " Mr. Leslie's writings hav« 
 
Particular Befenee of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 3 1 5 
 
 ^* When I consider, that among the nonjuring clergy, 
 are to be found some of the most pious, most learned and 
 most conscientious divines that ever adorned the church 
 of England, I cannot help thinking, that the government 
 would have gained more in honour, than it would have 
 lost in security, had such men been permitted to have re- 
 mained in possession of their preferments. But admit- 
 ting, that policy demanded that the nonjuring clergy 
 should be deprived, it is to be observed, that they v^^ere 
 deprived only of those seculiar possessions, which the 
 church had derived from her connection with the state- 
 Their oifence, if it may be called by so harsh a name, was 
 of a political nature ; their punishment corresponded to it. 
 They offended against the ruling powers ; they, in conse- 
 quence lost their patronage. But all the rights, dignities 
 and emoluments, which the priesthood derives from the 
 piety and patronage of civil rulers, are quite distinct from 
 that spiritual commission, by which the clergy administer 
 the affairs of Christ's kingdom. Of this commission they 
 could not be deprived by civil rulers, because it had been 
 received from an higher authority. The office, therefore, 
 which the nonjuring clergy held in the Christian church, 
 was precisely the same, and every act of it as valid, ab- 
 sti*actedly considered, after their deprivation, as it was be- 
 fore ; what they had been deprived of, being only those 
 contingent circumstances of emolument and honour, which 
 have no necessary connection with the ministerial com- 
 mission. The spiritual character of a bishop, and his par- 
 ticular local jurisdiction, have been, at different times, and 
 under different circumstances, separated from each other : 
 But a man may still be a true bishop, whether he has or has 
 not any particular district, over which he is authorized to 
 
 been neglected, because he had the misfortune to be a Jionjuror. But 
 since the age is disposed to drop prejudices, it is a pity that this alone 
 should be suffered to remain, especially as the subject of it is now^ — 
 ' waxed old and ready to vanish away." 
 
$1 6 Particular Defence of the Episcdpa^if ofScoilaneL 
 
 preside. Slk h, in a theological sense, I conceive the non- 
 juring bishops were ; and 1 do not see how the testimony 
 of such divines^ upon the subject of church government. 
 Can be affected by an offence committed against the civil 
 power; on the contrary, I should think such testimony 
 ought to weigh heavy in the scale, from the considerations, 
 that the parties who furnished it, (whatever judgment may 
 be formed of their political opinions) had given the most 
 unequivocal proof of their being honest men, by sacrificingf 
 every temporal advantage to the preservation of their con-< 
 sciences."* 
 
 Such is the opinion given of the nonjuring clergy in ge* 
 neral, by a writer who, as we before observed, cannot be 
 supposed to feel any particular bias in favour of the cause, 
 for which they were first distinguished by the title of nort* 
 jurors^ but seems to have a very just idea of their principles 
 and conduct as ecclesiastics ; and that is now the only light 
 in which we have any occasion to view their character or 
 sentiments, all other objects of discussion being at last taken 
 out of the way, and every question respecting their political 
 attachments entirely laid to rest. Those, however, who have 
 . succeeded them in their ecclesiastical character, and have 
 been the means of preserving a regular Episcopal succession 
 in this country, are still, it seems, suspected of inheriting 
 also some share of their disaffection to the established go* 
 Vemment ; which must have been the only reason that could 
 have induced Dr. Campbell to keep up against them the 
 odious title of nonjurors^ as a mark of their supposed dis- 
 affection. As we have, therefore, sufficiently vindicated 
 the conduct of our predecessors in handing down those 
 spiritual powers, with which the present Scotch Episcopal 
 clergy, according to the nature of their several orders, 
 have been duly invested i it is but fair that we be now al- 
 
 • S^e an Appendtsi to the Guide to the Church, in answer to Sir Richard 
 Hill, Bart. By the Rev. Charles Daubeny, L.L. B. London, 1799. 
 
^ariicuhr Definee dfthe Episcopacy of Scotland. 81 f 
 
 lowed to speak for ourselves, and humbly to request, that 
 the following plain and honest representation of our case 
 may be properly attended to, by all who have a right to be 
 satisfied with respect to our loyalty as subjects, and espe» 
 Gially by those who, professing to hold the same religious 
 principles as we do, are yet, it is said, kept back from join* 
 ing our communion, by entertaining groundless suspicions 
 against us, in regard to this very article. 
 
 It has been already observed, that in consequence of the 
 legal abolition of Episcopacy, which took place soon after 
 the revolution in 1688, those who professed an adherence tQ 
 the old ecclesiastical system were on that account suspected 
 of still maintaining a spirit of disaifection to the new go«» 
 vemment. This is a fact which cannot be denied, and 
 perhaps may be easily accounted for, from the natural ope* 
 ration of those heavy penalties by which their worship was 
 prohibited, or at least the public celebration of it severely 
 restricted. Under these discouraging circumstances, which 
 continued in full force for many years, it was hardly pos- 
 sible for the Scotch Episcopalians to throw off the reproach 
 of disloyalty which, in the opinion of the public at large, 
 had been almost inseparably annexed to their religious pro* 
 fession. All they could do, was to conduct themselves in 
 such a quiet and inoffensive manner, as might convince go- 
 vemment, that there was no danger to be apprehended from 
 their principles, and therefore no necessity for with-holding 
 from them any longer that lenity and indulgence which they 
 have so liberally experienced ever since our present most 
 gracious Sovereign came to the throne. The wisdom and 
 clemency of his Majesty's government, so happily mani- 
 fested from the commencement of his reign, encouraged 
 them to hope, that an offer of their allegiance would not be 
 rejected: and as soon as they could make that offer in a 
 conscientious manner, and consistently with the principles 
 by which, it was known, their conduct had been uniformly 
 mfluenced, they had the satisfaction to find, from the King's 
 
31 a Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 answer to their address, that it was graciously accepted; 
 in consequence of which, they could not but hope, that the 
 British legislature would take their case into consideration, 
 and see the expediency of relieving both clergy and laity 
 of the Episcopal communion in Scotland from the restraints 
 and penalties to which they had been long exposed in the 
 exercise of their religion. With this hope, an application, 
 was made to Parliament in their behalf; and in the act that 
 was passed for their relief in the year 1792, one of the 
 clauses of the preamble ran in these terms — " Whereas 
 there is sufficient reason to believe that the pastors, minis- 
 ters and laity of the Episcopal communion in Scotland, are 
 now well attached to his Majesty's person, family and go- 
 vernment." And if at that time the King and Parliament 
 of Great-Britain had sufficient reason to believe, that we 
 were such dutiful and loyal subjects, the subsequent period 
 has affiarded the most ample proof of our earnest desire to 
 embrace every means in our power that might tend to con- 
 firm that belief, and show us to be worthy of the good cha- 
 racter which was then so honourably conferred upon us. 
 The period we allude to has been disgracefully distin- 
 guished by every possible art that could be devised for se- 
 ducing subjects from their allegiance. None has ever sur- 
 passed it in plots and associations, not for promoting the 
 interests of this or the other candidate for the crown, and 
 setting up one in preference to another, but for the express 
 purpose of cutting off at once the pretensions of every 
 claimant, extirpating the whole race of kings, subverting the 
 foundation of all government, and bursting asunder not 
 only the bonds of civilized society, but every religious tie 
 that connects man with his God, and tends to secure his 
 peace and happiness both here and hereafter. 
 
 During all these wild and lawless attempts, which could 
 have nothing for their object but the dissemination of anar- 
 chy and confusion, and every evil work, no such base ima- 
 gination could be laid to the charge of our society. Attach- 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy cf Scotland. 319 
 
 ment to kingly power has been always the characteristic of 
 the church to which we belong, and no one has ever beea 
 found connected with any seditious club, or democratic 
 party, who dared to call himself a regular Scotch Episcopa- 
 lian. Through the whole of that awful and arduous con- 
 test, in which our country was lately* engaged, whatever 
 aid government could derive from the pubhc solemnities of 
 religion, was regularly afforded in our sacred assemblies : 
 And on the days appointed by royal authority, either for 
 national humiliation, or general thanksgiving, our people 
 were always seen devoutly assembled in their several places 
 of worship, using the various forms of prayer and praise^ 
 which were composed for these solemnities, and may still 
 be referred to as proofs of that appropriate mode of devO' 
 tion with which they were celebrated. On all these occa- 
 sions, the clergy of our communion did not fail to manifest 
 an exemplary zeal in impressing on the minds of those un- 
 der their charge, a just sense of their duty as good Chris- 
 tians and as loyal subjects, exhorting them eamesdy, in the 
 words of inspired wisdom, to " fear the Lord and the 
 king, and not to meddle with them that are given to change." 
 To the king, as our rightful sovereign, and to his royal 
 family, as pledges of a happy succession to his crown and 
 dignity, we feel ourselves attached by all the ties of con- 
 science, as well as gratitude, and have, therefore, uniformly 
 promoted, to the utmost of our power, those salutary mea- 
 sures of his government, which have, from time to time, 
 been adopted for preserving the internal peace of the king- 
 dom, as well as its security from every hostile invasion. 
 
 For the truth of all this, we may appeal, and have ap- 
 pealed to the testimony of those who frequent our places 
 of public worship j many of whom being placed in offices of 
 trust under government, would give no countenance to our 
 religious assemblies, if they did not find them such as are 
 
 * This W9fs written during the short continuance of the Izkq peace . 
 
320 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotkt^ 
 
 not only consistent with the laws, but worthy of protection; 
 aad were not perfectly sensible, that his Majesty has no 
 better subjects, nor persons more attached to his govern* 
 ment, on principles of permanent loyalty, than the bishops 
 and clergy of the Scotch Episcopal church. May we not 
 then be allowed to ask on what gi^ound it is, that we are still 
 to be branded with the title of nonjurors^ as a mark of our 
 supposed disaffection in refusing to swear allegiance to the 
 sovereign upon the throne ; a supposition as unfounded, as 
 it is meant to be unfavourable, and which can only proceed 
 from a desire to keep up odious and unnecessary distinc* 
 tions among his Majesty's subjects I Oaths may no doubt 
 be contrived, and, in some instances have been required, 
 both of a civil and religious nature, which we should think 
 ourselves obliged to decline, as neither consistent with our 
 principles, nor suited to our situation. But it is impossible 
 that we could with any propriety, even on our present foot- 
 ing of enjoying toleration only, refuse to swear allegiance 
 to a sovereign, for whom we solemnly and sincerely pray, 
 as often as we assemble in the house of prayer, that " God 
 would be his defender and keeper, and give him the victory 
 over all his enemies." With these, and such like petitions, 
 put into our mouths by that excellent liturgy, which we ad- 
 mire, and venerate, and daily use in our public service, it 
 is wonderful that the Scotch Episcopal church should yet 
 be suspected of any thing that looks like disaffection, or any 
 jealousy be entertained of such an ecclesiastical body, eveii 
 though dissenting from the establishment of Scotland, when 
 by that very dissent, it is more closely united to the esta* 
 blished church of England. Yet this bond of union, arising 
 from a similarity of constitution, as far as regards the spi- 
 ritual authority of the church, has been held Up to derisiotty 
 as a mere imaginary privilege, and the " Scotch Episcopal 
 party^'' as Dr. Campbell has called it, is exposed to ridi- 
 cule, for adhering to that form of ecclesiastical polity, which 
 has the sanction of legal and constitutional swppQrt in the fcu' 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 321. 
 
 greater, and most distinguished part of the British Empiref, 
 We need not then be ashamed of its being said, however 
 we may object to the terms in which it is mentioned, that 
 this adherence to the polity of the primitive church *' is 
 made a principal foundation of dissent by a pretty numer- 
 ous sect in this country." For though we have no right to 
 value ourselves on our numbers, in proportion to the popu- 
 lation of Scotland, and it is no part of our belief, that the 
 truth must necessarily be on the side of the majority, yet 
 we see no reason why the terms, sect and partij^ should be 
 applied, as marks of reproach, to those whose religious de- 
 nomination as Epiocopaly is countenanced by that of the so- 
 vereign on the throne, of the " Lords spiritual in parlia- 
 ment assembled," and of much the largest proportion of 
 the inhabitants of the united kingdom, when compared to 
 those of any other religious persuasion. 
 
 These considerations might be thought sufficient to se- 
 cure the Episcopacy of Scotland from the disgraceful im- 
 putation of being allied to that sectarian spirit which de- 
 lights in opposition to whatever is established, and is never 
 satisfied, till every institution of superior dignity and merit 
 be brought down to its own mean, debasing standard* 
 This is not the doctrine by which we wish to be distin- 
 guished ; nor ought we to be ranked among those modem 
 authors of division, the founders of new sects, of whom 
 Dr. Campbell observes—^'' it is hard to conceive to what 
 the disciples of some recent sectarians can be made prose- 
 lytes, unless to uncharitableness, hatred and calumny against 
 their fellow Christians, and that on the most frivolous or 
 unintelligible pretexts." As we do not deal in " hatred or 
 calumny" against any human beings, so neither are the rea- 
 sons " frivolous or unintelligible," for which we have con- 
 tinued in a state of separation from the religious establish- 
 ment of this part of our island : a separation founded on 
 the most substantial and important grounds ; such as have 
 been lon^ topics of serious discussion, and may be easily 
 
 41 
 
322 Particutar Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotland< 
 
 understood by all who are desirous to inquire into them^ 
 We do not, therefore, consider ourselves as having any re-* 
 lation, or even resemblance to those " modern authors of 
 division, who are daily introducing new sects in countries, 
 where Christianity is universally professed, and where 
 there is free access by the scriptures, both to its doctrine 
 and to its precepts." Yet Dr. Campbell, who gives this 
 account of them and their proceedings, might have known, 
 that these " recent sectaries," as he calls them, and who 
 are still abounding more and more in number and influence, 
 are not slow to vindicate themselves on such pretences as 
 these—." that the scripture, though in all hands, is either 
 abused or neglected j that Christianity, though universally 
 professed among us, is no more than a bare profession; 
 that its doctrines are not properly understood, nor its 
 precepts rightly applied ; and, therefore, they come with 
 a charitable zeal, to rectify every abuse, to preach the true 
 gospel in this unenlightened land, and open the eyes of a 
 Wind, deluded people." 
 
 This has been the sectarian cry in all ages ; and how far 
 it may be either checked or encouraged by some of the ar- 
 guments made use of in these Lectures^ we shall not pre- 
 tend to determine. That they have no particular tendency 
 to repress the sectarian spirit, may indeed be justly inferred 
 from the character given of them by one sufficiently ac- 
 quainted with their whole end and object, and who tells us, 
 plainly, that the study recommended by them, " can give 
 no oifence to any, but to those who maintain the jw^ divinum 
 (divine right) of bishops, and their hereditary succession 
 from the apostles."^ — Indeed, the Lecturer himself makes 
 a kind of apology even for those " contentious teachers," 
 to whom he had been alluding, and " of whom he would 
 not presume to say, that they may not occasionally do good, 
 
 * See the view of Dr. Campbell's Prelect ions hi Theology, prefixed to 
 his Lecturer. 
 
J^artlcuhr Defence of the Episcopacy ofScothrtS. 325 
 
 though there be but too great reason to dread that the evil 
 preponderates. And even here," says he, " I am to be un- 
 derstood as speaking of the first authors of such unchristian 
 separations. I know too well the power of education and 
 of early prejudice, to impute equal malignity to those who 
 may succeed them, whether teachers or disciples."^ 
 
 All this, to be sure, is perfectly agreeable to Dr. Camp- 
 bell's well known sentiments on the subject of heresy and 
 schism, the last of which particularly he seemed to consider 
 as a breach of charity^ and not a breach of communioru For 
 so he had expressly said in a work published by himself — 
 *-' How much soever of a schismatical or heretical spirit, in 
 the apostolic sense of these terms, may have contributed to 
 the formation of the different sects into which the Christian 
 world is at present divided ; no person who, in the spirit of 
 candour and charity, adheres to that which, to the best of 
 his judgment is right, though in this opinion he should be 
 lilistakea, is in the scriptural sense either schismatic or he- 
 retic. And he, on the contrary, whatever sect he belongs 
 to, is more entitled to these odious appellations, who is 
 most apt to throw the imputation upon others."'}' This 
 description we find particularly applied in the work before 
 us, to that poor persecuted nonjuror Mr. Dodwell, against 
 whom, after a great deal more of such bitter declamation, our 
 Lecturer thus goes on — " His unceasing cry was schism ;f 
 yet in the scriptural sense a greater schismatic than himself 
 the age did not produce. Whose doctrine was ever found 
 more hostile to that fundamental principle declared by our 
 Lord to be the criterion of our Christianity, mutual love ? 
 Whose doctrine was ever more successful in planting, by 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 
 t See his Dissertation on Heresy, prefixed to the Translation of the 
 Gospels, p. 453, 434. 4to. edit. 
 
 :j: This is evidendy borrowed from the coarser language of Mr. Ander^ 
 son of Dunbartun, who had sad of Dodwell, " Schism^ scbistn was iiis 
 vverlasting clack." ^tt\i\s Defence, ksfc. p, 31. 
 
324 Particular Defence of the episcopacy Of Scotland* 
 
 means of uncharitable iand self-opinioned judgments, the 
 principle of hatred in its stead ? The test, to which scripture 
 points is — -Does the teaching in question alienate the hearts 
 of Christians, or unite them ? Does it conciliate the affec- 
 tions, where differences have unhappily arisen ? or, does it 
 widen the breach ? If the former, the spirit is Christian ; 
 if the latter, schismatical. The former is not more produc- 
 tive of charity^ the end of the commandment, or gospel co* 
 venant, and the bond of perfectncss, than the latter is of its 
 opposite, malignity, the source of discord, the parent of in- 
 tolerance and persecution."^ 
 
 We acknowledge that all this sounds well, and shows the 
 %vriter to have possessed a sufficient command of words for 
 any purpose he might have in view. But does it afford any 
 clear, distinct idea of the point in question, or serve to il- 
 lustrate the scripture sense of schism, of which discord, 
 hatred and malignity may be the effects^ but certainly are 
 not the essence ? It is true, an apostle speaks of schisms 
 among the Corinthians, even when they seemed to be of the 
 same communion, and were assembled for the same pur- 
 pose. " When ye come together in the church," says he, " I 
 hear that there be schisms or divisions among you i"'!' And 
 
 * Lecture v i. 
 
 ■j- 1 Cor. xi. 18. From this text it has often been inferred, that schism 
 ian only mean a breach of charity, not of cominuntGn ; and with that 
 view it was frequently referred to by the English dissenters, at the time 
 when the question about occasional conformity was agitated, and many 
 pamphlets were published to show, that even the apostles formed differ- 
 ent communions apart from each other, though they were not scrupulous 
 about mutually communicating now and then, as occasion required. It 
 may, therefore, abate, in some measure, the confidence of Dr. Campbell's 
 admirers, to find that he has only borrowed from others his strange un- 
 scriptural notion of schism, the fallacy of which was sufficiently exposed 
 by the learned Mr. Wail, author of ihe masterly work on Infant- Baptism y 
 ■who, in another publication called—" A Vindication of the Apostles from 
 a, very falsa iinputation laid en thein, in several English pamphlets, viz. 
 that they refused co?istant, and held only occasional cotntnunion vcitb one 
 mother^ andv:ith one another's churches;'' adverting to the above men- 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 325 
 
 it is likewise evident from the context, that by the sdusms 
 of which the Corinthians were guilty, the apostle meant 
 their breaking off into separate parties, that the rich, despis* 
 ing the poor, might partake of the Lord's supper by them- 
 selves ; which was such an uncharitable and unbecoming 
 division, as, if not timeously checked, would soon have led 
 to that, which even Dr. Campbell acknowledges, " was con- 
 sidered as the great criterion of schism, the setting up ano- 
 ther altar, beside the one altar of the bishop." But when he 
 flies off from this fair and just standard, by which every 
 thing relating to schism ought to be measured, and endea* 
 vours to entangle the subject with a number of questions, 
 plausible indeed, but far from being pertinent, all we have 
 to do, is to balance these v/ith a few other questions, much 
 more apposite and equally important, by asking in return — • 
 Is there no other criterion of Christianity, but mutual love I 
 Is there not th faith to be contended for, as well as a charity 
 to be inculcated ? And is not a perversion of the former as 
 much to be guarded agamst, as a wounding of the latter l 
 Was the beloved disciple of a schismatical or sectarian spi- 
 rit, when he gave this warning to those whom he loved in 
 the truth — ^'^ If there come any unto you, and bring not this 
 doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him 
 God speed ?""^" Would Dr. Campbell himself have been 
 guilty of " w^oLinding charity," if his preaching disagree- 
 
 tioned notion of schism, as supported by the text we have quoted, argues 
 jn the following manner. — " This is just as if any one should prove, that 
 actual killing of a man is not in the scripture notion murder, by this 
 argument, that the scripture does sometimes call hatred — murder. He 
 that hateth his brother is a murderer. (St. John iii. 15.] Or that actual 
 defiling a woman is not, in our Soviour's sense, adultery, because he 
 sometimes calls lusting after her by that name. If St. Paul do call those 
 animosities, and the taking of sides, which had not yet broken out into 
 actual separation, and renouncing of communion, but was in a fair way 
 to it, by the name of schism, how much more would he have called it 
 so, if they had proceeded to an absolute division, two altars set up in 
 opposition to one another?" 
 * 2 St. John V. 10. 
 
326 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotland» 
 
 able, though necessary truths, should at any time have of- 
 fended his hearers, and made them prefer more accommo- 
 dating teachers ? Yet wounding of charity^ like what he lays 
 to the charge of Dodwell, we may justly say, is his " un- 
 ceasing cry ;" and when he meets with sentiments conge- 
 nial to his own on this subject, he does not fail to recom- 
 mend them in the strongest terms, as " conveying an idea 
 of the church truly rational, enlarged and sublime !"^ 
 
 This, no doubt, may be all very fine, as intended to dis- 
 play, what our learned Theologist calls — the " liberal spirit 
 of the gospel :" But we must confess, whatever shall be 
 thought of our " ideas" of the matter, that " we have not 
 so learned Christ," nor been taught to consider any thing 
 connected with what is now termed " liberality of spirit," 
 as at all favourable to the pure and genuine truths of the 
 gospel. These truths, we are told, are to be spoken in love ; 
 but still they must be spoken and maintained, as God has 
 delivered them to us ; and no separation should ever be at-* 
 tempted between the love which Christianity requires, and 
 the truth which it reveals. That love which has not this 
 truth for its foundation, is but a false appearance of charity, 
 as every thing must be, which encourages men in those er- 
 rors that are destructive to their souls. Yet nothing is more 
 evident, than that men are too much disposed to seek this 
 encouragement to themselves, and too v/illing to believe, 
 that while they are sincere in their profession, v^^hatever 
 that profession may be, no danger is to be apprehended ei- 
 ther from ignorance or error. St. Paul, it may be presumed, 
 xvas as sincere in his profession as any man could be, when 
 *' he lived in all good conscience after the manner of the 
 law of his fathers, and was zealous towards God, verily be- 
 lieving, that he ought to do many things contrary to the 
 name of Jesus :" And yet, after he became a Christian, he 
 acknowledged, that in all this he had been no better than 
 
 * Lecture iv. 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 327 
 
 *^ a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious." It was a con- 
 fident dependence on his own sincerity, as well as a high 
 opinion of his superior knowledge, that made him so stre- 
 nuously resist, before his conversion, all the evidence that 
 could be offered for the truth of the gospel. And to the 
 same, or similar causes, it may still be owing, that so many 
 who profess to receive this faith as delivered to the church 
 by duly commissioned teachers, are yet unwilling to be- 
 lieve, that any such commission is necessary either for pre- 
 serving the faith, or supporting the unity of the church, or 
 that there is any thing wrong in heresy and schism, if they 
 be only embraced, and adhered to, " in the spirit of can- 
 dour and charity." 
 
 Indeed, if by the word Church we are to understand 
 every sect or party which professes to be Christian, what- 
 ever be the form of its ministry, or the authority of those 
 employed in its service, there can be no such thing as 
 schism^ considered as a separation from the church of Christ# 
 Hatred, or malignity, or something else may be found out, 
 whereon to fix the imputation of schism, as something sin- 
 ful in the sight of God ; but this is evidently to clothe one 
 sin in the dress of another, that by giving the same appel- 
 lation to both, we may seem to lessen the number of trans- 
 gressions, though without diminishing the proportion of 
 their guilt. This is a species of self-deceit, which every 
 wise man would wish to avoid j and, therefore, in order to 
 deal honestly with ourselves, we must take care to view the 
 things of religion, not according to the passions or preju- 
 dices of men, but in that light only wherein the scriptures of 
 truth represent them ; which is particularly necessary with 
 regard to the nature of the church, and the nature of schism, 
 as the latter cannot be rightly understood, without a proper 
 knowledge of the former. 
 
 For discovering the nature of any society, we generally 
 have recourse to the names or titles by which it is distin- 
 guished, and particularly to the descriptions given of it, by 
 
328 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 those who had been employed in forming or executing the 
 plan of its constitution, and drawing up the rules that were 
 to be adopted for the management of its concerns. It is 
 by the same means that we have come to the knowledge 
 of the true nature and constitution of that spiritual society 
 called the church of Christ, and which, among other ap- 
 pellations and allusions, expressive of its original purpose, 
 is frequently compared to a body ; — and " as we have 
 many members in one body," says St. Paul, " and all 
 members have not the same office, so we being many, are 
 one body in Christ, and every one members one of ano- 
 ther."^ And to show us more particularly what this body 
 is, we are told by the same apostle, that " God hath put all 
 things under the feet of Christ, and gave him to be the 
 head over all things to the churchy which is his body, the 
 fulness of him that fiUeth all in all."t It vv^as for the edify- 
 ing of this body, that the work of the ministry was ap* 
 pointed, that so Christians " may grow up into him in all 
 things, who is the Head, even Christ ; from whom the 
 whole body, fitly joined together, and compacted by that 
 which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual 
 AA^orking in the measure of every part, maketh increase of 
 the body, unto the edifying of itself in love."J 
 
 It is this heavenly principle of love, which maintains 
 unity in the church on earth, and prevents that unhappy 
 separation, which would otherwise put an effectual stop to 
 the increase of the body. For this reason, " the members 
 must have the same care, one for another, that there may 
 be no schism in the body ;"|| and when the body is thus pre- 
 served from division, it is very properly said to be edified, 
 to be kept together by the cement of faith and love, so as 
 to resemble a compact and commodious building, fitly 
 framed for answering eveiy purpose intended by it. Thi"^; 
 
 * Rom.xii. 4, 5. f Eph. i. 22, 21. 
 
 t Epiies. iv. 15, 35. !l I Cor. xii. 2,?. 
 
Partkukt' Defence dfthe Episcopacy of Scotland. 339 
 
 is that " bond of perfectness," as St. Paul calls it, which 
 Would secure the firmness of that spiritual building raised 
 ^* on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus 
 Christ himself being the chief corner stone." And with- 
 out this sound, cementing principle of unity, the firmest 
 foundations, the stateliest walls, the best disposed apart- 
 ments, would soon become no better than naked and de- 
 formed ruins, open to every storm, and exposed to all the 
 desolation of wasting elements. It is under these, and 
 such like bold and striking metaphors, that the apostles of 
 Christ, and St. Paul in particular, describe the design and 
 construction of that solid and durable edifice, reared by 
 them after the model left them by their blessed Master, and 
 so different from the air)^, fantastic structures which latter 
 ages have exhibited, according to the humours of the times, 
 and the ever- varying fancies of popular phrensy. But 
 from the view which we have already taken of the first es* 
 tablishment of the Christian church, it must have suffi- 
 ciently appeared, in what a happy manner the spirit of 
 unity knit all the members together, and how careful every 
 one was to know himself, his station, and his duty, and to 
 think and act soberly, according to the situation which pro* 
 vidence had allotted to him. — As the great Head of the 
 church had appointed divers orders and officers in it, they 
 could not but see the necessity of preserving the subordi- 
 nation which he had established ; and they all conspired, 
 " as workers together" for the same blessed purpose, to be 
 faithful in their several departments, each contributing hi^ 
 best endeavours " to the perfecting of the saints, to the 
 work of the ministiy, to the edifying of the body of 
 Christ." 
 
 Such, then, being the nature and design of the Christian 
 church, considered as a visible society, formed by Christ 
 himself, for the gracious purpose of uniting men to him, 
 in faith, love and obedience here, and by that means, in 
 everlasting gloiy hereafter, we may well suppose, that such 
 
 49 
 
USO PaHkUlar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 a holy and heavenly society, so evidently designed for the 
 happiness of mankind, would not fail to awaken the spite 
 and envy of that spiritual enemy, who having, from the 
 beginning of the world, acted in opposition to the Saviour^ 
 has been emphatically called the Destroyer^ as perpetually 
 bent on the destruction and misery of the human race* 
 No sooner was the church founded on earth, than the 
 malice of hell was directed against it ; and as the power of 
 its adversary could not prevail, for its total overthrow, his 
 great object was, to render it as ineffectual as possible to 
 the merciful purpose for which it was intended, by under- 
 mining it secretly in the way of discord and division, when 
 he could not beat it down directly by an open and bold 
 attack. 
 
 Hence, then, we may discover the nature and origin of 
 that sin against the church, and, consequently, against its 
 divine Founder, which Christians have been long and 
 earnestly warned to avoid, as most dangerous and deadly^ 
 under the name of schism^ a word which, from the scrip- 
 tural application of its original meaning, must signify a 
 cutting off, or separating from that ecclesiastical body, of 
 which Christ is the Head, and, therefore, a deprivation of 
 that nourishment and strength which he affords to all his 
 faithful members. This was undoubtedly the primitive, 
 nay, the apostolical sense of the word schism, whatever at- 
 tempts may have been made to pervert its natural meanings 
 and give a softer turn to the application of it. Custom, 
 which reconciles us almost to every thing, has brought us at 
 last to look upon the divisions which now take place among 
 those who profess to be Christians, in a very different light 
 from that in which they would have been viewed in the 
 primitive days of the church : And something which we 
 have substituted for true Christian charity, requires us, it 
 seems, to believe, that the church of Christ is to be found, 
 and, therefore, salvation to be obtained, in any society, or 
 with any denomination of persons professing to be Chris- 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 331 
 
 tians. Hence it must necessarily be inferred, that as some" 
 thing called a church may be found every where^ that which 
 we caU schism can be found no where. This matter, how- 
 ever, is vQYy differently represented in the inspired writ- 
 ings of the New Testament ; and if the constitution of the 
 Christian church be the same now that it was in the days 
 of the apostles, the sin of schism must be the *same like- 
 wise ; consisting still, as it did then, in a cutting off, or 
 being cut off, from the body of Christ, a separation from 
 the communion, an encroachment on the government, and 
 a breach in the unity of his church. But the nature and 
 consequences of schism have been so well described by a 
 late eminent divine of the church of England, and in such 
 a concise and energetic manner, that we hope to be excused 
 for giving the following extract from one of his popular 
 and most useful tracts, as fully expressive of our own sen- 
 timents on this subject. Having pointed out some prevail- 
 ing errors with respect to government, and the setting up 
 the power of the people as supreme, whereas the scripture 
 assures us, that " there is no power but of God ;" he then 
 proceeds to give an account of that, which has the same 
 effect in the church, that rebellion or sedition has in the 
 state, and his words are these : 
 
 " The same principle which disturbs the order of civil 
 government, breaks the peace of the church. When it 
 operates against the state, it is called the pozver of the peo- 
 ple ; but in religion it is called private judg-ment, and some- 
 times conscience ; but it always acts against the judgment 
 of authority. It has been a great misfortune of late times, 
 that we have been partakers in other men's sins, by making 
 too light of the offence and danger of schism. What self- 
 interest denominates liberality and charity, is really nothing 
 but indifference or ignorance. The church being the church 
 of God, it cannot be in the power of man to put ministers 
 into it, and give them authority to act. The rule of the 
 scriptures is therefore absolute, that no man taketh this 
 
■^52 Partkutar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 honour unto himself but he that is called of God, which 
 calling must be visible, because that of Aaron was so, who 
 is the pattern in the scriptures. — Ministers in the Christian 
 church act, for God, to the people ; which they cannot do 
 without God's commission. — The rule, and its reason, are 
 both plain to common sense, and want no explanation. It 
 is to be considered farther, that if the promises of God are 
 jnade to his church, no man can expect to obtain them, by 
 joining himself to any other company of men, after his own 
 fancy. The ark of Noah was a pattern and pledge of the 
 church of Christ ; and the persons saved in it, were saved 
 by water, as we are by baptism j so the church of England 
 understands it. Now, let us only ask ourselves, what be-^ 
 came of those who were out of the ark ? The parallel will 
 suggest what great danger there must be to those who were 
 ©ut of the church. Thus did primitive Christians argue^ 
 and unless they had privileges which we have lost, we must 
 argue in the same manner now. If not, we do dishonour 
 to the grace of God, who hath mercifully taken us into the 
 ark of his church, and our indifference will do no good $ 
 nobody will be gained by it ; offences among men will be 
 multiplied, and the authority of God's religion will be 
 %veakened ; for if the church may be any thing, men will 
 soon conclude it may be nothing ; and who will not own, 
 if his eyes are open, that much of the relaxation and con- 
 fusion of latter times hath arisen from the poor, low ideas 
 which some good men have entertained and propagated 
 upon this great subject ? Others who have dared to argue 
 of late years as Christians did of old, have been branded 
 %vith the name of ht^h church?nen, and very deservedly ; 
 for we know of no other true churchmen; but faction, 
 seeking rest for itself, can find none, but by Inventing 
 names and distinctions which have no sense in the mouth 
 of a Christian ; they are all of this world, and calculated to 
 serve some carnal purpose. Wise people should consider, 
 that whatever examples there may have been of piety, 
 
fiartlcukf Defenee t>fthe Episcopacy of Scotland. 333 
 
 learning, wit or wisdom, joined with schism, they can 
 never prove that schism is no sin ; no man can be taken aa 
 authority against the laws of God ; and the great law of 
 charity is supreme over all* It is not kindness, but mean-? 
 ness, which shows respect to sin in any man ; for no man's 
 person can render sin respectable* What is convenient to 
 him, if pernicious in itself, and its consequences, ought td 
 be detestable to us ; and if offence must be given, it is 
 better to offend man than God. Tenderness to schism may 
 be a fine thing, and pass for true piety, so long as men 
 shall judge one another : But when God shall judge us all, 
 it must give an account of itself to him, who is no respecter 
 of persons."^" 
 
 From this most just and accurate account of schism^ 
 where a borrowed ray from the true light of the gospel 
 shines in every period, we may clearly see what it isj which 
 *' the great law of charity" requires of us. It is not ta 
 £nd excuses for those who prefer any communion of their 
 own invention to that of the Christian church, and would 
 convert into a Babel of confusion, what was designed to 
 be " as a city that is at unity in itself." This is but a poor 
 sort of charity, which has nothing to bestow but indulgence 
 for error, and would rather allow the misguided traveller 
 to lose his way and perish, than be at any pains to show 
 him the path of life, or that light from above, which 
 " would guide his feet into the way of peace." When we 
 are taught to pray, in one of the collects of our church, 
 that God would " pour into our hearts that most excellent 
 gift of charit}^, the very bond of peace, and of all virtues," 
 we are thereby put in mind, that the gift, which we thus 
 implore from heaven, is given for the sole purpose of bind^ 
 ing us together in peace and unity on earth ; and when it 
 ceases to operate in this manner, it is no longer that true 
 
 * See '* A Letter to the Church of England^ pointing out some popular 
 errors of bad consequence,- by an old friend and servant to the church ;'* 
 publishect with the ether works of th« Rev. William Jones- 
 
534 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 
 
 Christian charity which is founded in faith, and supported 
 by hope, and can no more exist without these two, than 
 the end can be obtained without using the means. While, 
 therefore, we pray for the gift oi charity^ as persons united 
 in one hope of our calling, we must also contend for the 
 one faith^ which was once delivered to the saints ; and of 
 this faith, we are taught to receive the belief of " the holy 
 catholic church," as a most essential and important article. 
 
 In this light we have now considered it very fully, and 
 in such a manner as appears to us to be most consistent 
 with the design for which it is revealed to us in scripture, 
 and has always made a part of the Christian creed. If the 
 view we have taken of it, shall be considered as exhibiting 
 a strong attachment on our part to that side of the contro- 
 versy, which the opposers of our principles have thought 
 proper to distinguish by, what they suppose to be, the' 
 odious appellation of Hi^^h-Church^ we have only to answer, 
 in the words of a distinguished prelate of the church of 
 England, that " we are not to be scared from our duty by 
 the idle terror of a nick-name, artfully applied in violation 
 of the true meaning of the %¥ord," to bring discredit on the 
 principles of those who, disclaiming any sort of divine 
 right to those powers, honours and emoluments, with 
 which the priesthood may be adorned by the wisdom or 
 piety of the civil power, are yet anxious to maintain the 
 importance of its spiritual commission, and not ashamed to 
 acknowledge, that there is in the sacred character somewhat 
 more divine than may belong to the mere hired servants of 
 the state, even that spiritual authority which is necessary 
 for the administration of Christ's spiritual kingdom. Ac- 
 cording to this sense of the word, adds the learned and 
 venerable Bishop Horsley, " we must be content to be 
 High-Churchmen^ or we cannot be churchmen at all. For 
 he who thinks of God's ministers, as the mere servants of 
 the state, is out of the church — severed from it by a kind, 
 of self-excommunication. — But for those who have been 
 
particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 335 
 
 S5urtufed in its bosom, and have gained admission to its 
 ministry, if from a mean compliance with the humour of 
 the age, or ambitious of the fame of liberality of senti- 
 ment (for under that specious name, a profane indifference 
 is made to pass for an accomplishment) they affect to join in 
 the disavowal of the authority which they share, or are si- 
 lent, when the validity of their divine commission is called 
 in question ; for any, I hope, they are few, who hide this 
 weakness of faith, this poverty of religious principle, un- 
 der the attire of a gown and cassock, they are in my estima** 
 tion little better than infidels in masquerade."* 
 
 This, we trust, will serve as an apology for the attempt 
 that has now been made to vindicate the principles, and 
 support the sacred character, of the bishops and clergy of 
 the Scotch Episcopal church. That " the validity of our 
 divine commission has been called in question," in a man- 
 ner which we surely did not provoke, and from a quarter 
 where we could hardly have expected to meet with such 
 severe, unhandsome treatment, is a fact which cannot be 
 doubted by any one, who reads with attention those parts 
 of Dr. Campbell's Lectures on Ecclesiastical History^ which 
 are particularly levelled against the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 and who at the same time is acquainted with the history of 
 that Episcopacy for at least a century past, and knows how 
 little foundation there was for such a violent and unexpected 
 attack. From this consideration, perhaps it may be in- 
 ferred, that the weapons of an adversary so incautiously 
 aimed, might have been allowed to spend their force, and 
 fall harmless to the ground. It may no doubt be thought 
 a needless waste both of time and labour, to employ them 
 in the refutation of arguments which, like all those that 
 have ever been produced against Episcopacy in general, 
 have been already so often refuted; or even to take so 
 
 * See the truly excellent charge delivered by Dr. Horsley, when Bi- 
 shop of St. David's, to the clergy of his diocese, at his primary visita- 
 tion in the year 1790, 
 
336 Particular- Defence of the Episcopaey of Scotland, 
 
 much pains in defending our own Episcopacy in particular, 
 from an attack, which has nothing but its novelty, and 
 perhaps the character of its author to support it. With 
 jespect to the former, we have already said all that is 
 necessary to show, how little strength there is in it. la 
 regard to the latter, we could wish to say nothing; be- 
 cause we are well awafe how much weight will be thought 
 due to it. 
 
 Far be it from us to say any thing that could be supposed 
 to detract from the personal worth, and purity of morals, 
 which distinguished the character of Dr. Campbell. We 
 know him to have been, in general, as his biographer 
 justly describes him — " a man of a mild disposition, and 
 even temper, and who was not much subject to passion." 
 We recollect with pleasure the opinion delivered by him in 
 favour of a repeal of the penal laws, which, in times of civil 
 commotion, had been passed against the Scotch Episcopa~ 
 lians, as well as against those of the Roman catholic persua* 
 sion. And as far as we were concerned in the relief which 
 was obtained from the severity of these statutes, all due 
 acknowledgment was made, for the friendly part which 
 Dr. Campbell had acted in recommending the measure, as 
 reasonable in itself, and what, he thought, would be gene- 
 rally agreeable to the established church of Scotland. To 
 express our gratitude on that occasion to him, and to every 
 one else who had any hand in procuring for us the tolera- 
 tion which we nov/ happily enjoy, was both our bounden 
 duty, and our earnest desire; and we cannot charge our- 
 selves with any neglect of what was so justly incumbent on 
 us. Yet our spiritual character we must regard as of infi- 
 nitely greater consequence, than any temporal indulgence 
 ivhich we can possibly meet with: And as it was Dr. 
 Campbell's avowed opinion, that " true religion never flou- 
 rished so much, nor spread so rapidly as when, instead of 
 persecuting, it was persecuted, and instead of obtaining sup- 
 port from human sanctions, it had all the terrors of the ma- 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 337 
 
 gistrate, and the laws armed against it,"* we have some 
 reason to suspect, that the removal of these terrors was 
 considered as no great support to our cause, while room 
 was left to beat it down from another quarter, and a proof 
 of the invalidity of our clerical orders was thought to be a 
 severer blow than any effect of fines and imprisonments. 
 Relieved as we have been from the latter by the clemency 
 of government, we must still feel the weight of the former, 
 if not repelled by the force of those arguments, which 
 the cause we have to maintain so plentifully affords : And 
 should these be found to fail in producing the designed ef- 
 fect on every unprejudiced mind, it must be owing to the 
 weakness with which they are urged, and not to any want 
 of strength in the arguments themselves. One thing we 
 wish to be constantly remembered, that this dormant con- 
 troversy has not been revived on our part from any other 
 motive than what has arisen from absolute necessity : And 
 whatever has been said in the course of our reasoning 
 against some of the positions laid down by Dr. Calhpbell, 
 has been brought forward entirely in our own defence, and 
 to assert our right to that firm ground, on which the belief 
 of Episcopacy as a divine institution ha? hitherto rested 
 with inviolable security. 
 
 Had our Professor's Theological Lectures been confined 
 to the chair from which they were delivered, and reached 
 no farther than the circle of his pupils, we should not have 
 been obliged to take any notice even of that part of them 
 which was directly intended to oppose the principles and 
 pretensions of what he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party ;" 
 because, as an established Lecturer, he had a right to in- 
 struct his students as he thought proper, in the peculiar 
 tenets of his own and their profession. But when these 
 instructions were committed to the press, and published to 
 
 • See his " Address to the people of Scotland, on the alarms which had - 
 been raised by the bill in favour of the Roman Catholics." 
 
 43 
 
338 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
 
 the world, for the evident purpose of impressing on the 
 public mind, not only a mean and unfavourable idea of the 
 established form of church government in the other part 
 of the kingdom, but a thorough contempt of what still re- 
 mains of the ancient establishment of this country, we 
 could not allow ourselves to be wholly silent on a subject, 
 with which our best and dearest interests are so intimately 
 connected, nor suffer the Episcopal church of Scotland to 
 appear as without a friend in the day of her humiliation, 
 complaining as it were, in the words of the prophet, " that 
 there was none to take her by the hand, of all the sons 
 that she had brought up." — If it shall be said, that the ap- 
 pearance we have now made in her defence would not have 
 been attempted, had the person himself been alive, out of 
 whose hands we have endeavoured to rescue her credit and 
 character, it may be sufficient to answer, that if he had in- 
 tended the attack to be make in such an open and public 
 manner, he would have conducted it after a different form, 
 and so as to have exhibited a more satisfying evidence of 
 the truth of what has been said in his favour, " that he 
 was uncommonly liberal to those who differed from him in 
 religious opinions." If, indeed, he was so liberal to the 
 infidel Hume, as " to expunge or soften every expression 
 that either was severe, or was only supposed to be offen- 
 sive,"^ in his controversy with that sceptical philosopher, 
 we might hope, that he would have been no less so to a 
 society, or even " party," as he calls them, professing to be 
 Christians, and avowing a sincere and uniform belief in 
 all the great truths of divine revelation.f But if we must 
 
 • See the Account of his Life mid Writings, prefixed to his Lectures, 
 p. 16. 
 
 f We have already taken some distant notice of the favourable opi- 
 nion Mrhich Dr. Campbell entertained of the sentiments professed by one 
 of the most insidious and inveterate enemies of Christianity, and shall 
 now produce a more direct proof of it, in the following letter written 
 by our Professor to Mr. Strahan, the printer, and dated — June 25, 1776 
 
Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 839 
 
 not presume to call in question the assurance given to the 
 public, that these Lectures on Ecclesiastical History were 
 transcribed, and revised, and prepared for the press by the 
 author himself, we can only regret that we are obliged to 
 rely on the truth of this information ; and in that case may 
 justly apply an observation which was made on a similar 
 occasion, that " when an author charges his blunderbuss 
 to be fired off by his executors, it looks as if he himself 
 was afraid of the recoil." 
 
 We shall now take our leave of Dr. Campbell, with 
 much concern for having been compelled to accompany him 
 so long through that thorny field of controversy into which 
 
 " I have lately read ovef one of youf last winter's publications with 
 very great pleasure, and, I hope, some instruction. My expectationa 
 were indeed high when I began it; but I assure you, the enterta.nment 
 I rece ved, greatly exceeded them. What made me fall to it with the 
 greater avidity was, that it had in part a pretty close connection with a 
 subject I had occasion to treat sometimes in my theological lectures, to 
 wit, the rise and progress of the hierarchy : And you will believe, that 
 1 was not the less pleased to discover, in an historian of so much learn- 
 ing and penetration, so great a coincidence with my own sentiments, in 
 relation to some obscure points in the Christian antiquities. I suppose, I 
 need not now inform you, that the book I mean is Gibbon's History of 
 the Fall of the Roman Empire, which, in respect of the style and man- 
 ner, as well as the matter, is a most masterly performance." — See Mis-' 
 cellaneous Works of Ediuard Gibbon, Esq. &c, published in 2 vols, quarto, 
 by John Lord Sheffield, 1796. In this letter we cannot but observe the 
 most unqualified approbation given to a work, which, even from what 
 was then published of it, justified too well the remark that was after- 
 wards made on the whole, that — *' the author often makes, where he 
 cannot readily ^/2^, an occasion to insult our religion; which he hates so 
 cordially, that he might seem to revenge some personal injury." Yet a 
 coincidence in sentiment, with respect to " some obscure points in the 
 Christian antiquities," was sufficient to make our theological Lecturer 
 applaud, in the most flattering terms, this avowed hater of Christianity. 
 It was enough to secure every encomium which Dr. Campbell could be- 
 stow, that this impious scoiFer at the worship and worshippers of Christ 
 held the same opinions as those which the Doctor himself maintained, in 
 relation to the " rise and progress" of, what they both join in making 
 the constant butt of their raillery— ths hierarchy. 
 
340 Partkulair Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 
 
 we have been reluctantly dragged. Nothing could have 
 induced us to enter on it but an imperious sense of duty, 
 demanding every effort in our power to protect our ecclesi- 
 astical polity from the effects of that sharp and severe treat- 
 ment which it has unfortunately experienced at the hands 
 of one of the most distinguished of our countr^^men. It is 
 with pain that we reflect on a great part of the publication 
 now before us^ and hence unhappily feel a diminution of 
 that respect which we would gladly have entertained for 
 the memory of Dr. Campbell. He has, however, afforded 
 us an opportunity of reviewing the grounds on which our 
 principles have so long stood firm and unshaken, resisting 
 all the force of irony and declamation, even when aided by 
 the still more powerful influence of worldly interest. And 
 having thus, as we think, fully established what was pro- 
 posed as the subject of this chapter, — that a part of the 
 holy, catholic and apostolic church of Christ, though de- 
 prived of the support of civil establishment, does still exist 
 in this country under the name of the Scotch Episcopal 
 Churchy whose doctrine, discipline and worship have been 
 happily found to agree with that of the first and purest ages 
 of Christianity; it will now, we trust, be an easy matter 
 to show that these ought to be steadily adhered to by all 
 who profess to be of the Episcopal communion in this part 
 of the kingdom; the showing which, in as plain, inoffen- 
 sive, and concise terms as possible, will, in our humble 
 opinion, form a very suitable conclusion to the design for 
 which these persons have been addressed on the present 
 occasion. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 No. I. 
 
 The following List of Consecrations, with their dates, 
 and the names of the consecrators, as extracted from their 
 ecclesiastical register, will give a clear and distinct view of 
 the Episcopal succession in Scotland since the Revolution, 
 as far as the present bishops are concerned. 
 
 Januarif 25, 1705. Mr. John Sage, formerly one of 
 the ministers of Glasgow, and Mr. John Fullarton, 
 formerly minister of Paisley, were consecrated at Edin- 
 burgh by John Paterson, Archbishop of Glasgow, Alex- 
 ander Rose, Bishop of Edinburgh, and Robert Douglas, 
 Bishop of Dunblane.^ Bishop Sage died in June^ 1711.^ 
 Bishop Fullarton succeeded Bishop Rose, as Bishop of 
 Edinburgh, in 1720, and died in May^ 1727. 
 
 April 28, 1709. Mr. John Falcon ar, minister at 
 Cairnbee, and Mr. Henry Christie, minister at Kinross, 
 were consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop Rose, of Edin- 
 burgh, Bishop Douglas, of Dunblane, and Bishop Sage. 
 Bishop Christie died in 1718, and Bishop Fakonar i?i 1723. 
 
 August 25 y 1711. The honourable Archibald Camp- 
 bell, who had been long in priest's orders, and resided 
 mostly in London, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop 
 
 • Archbishop Paterson, Bishop Rose, and Bishop Douglas, with the 
 other bishops of Scotland, were deprived at the Revolution by the civi! 
 power, because JEpiscopacy had been voted an insupportable grievance by 
 thi Scotch convention. 
 
342 AppendiiC. 
 
 Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Douglas of Dunblane, and 
 Bishop Falconar. He was elected Bishop of Aberdeen in 
 1721, which charge he resigned in 1724 — and died yune 
 16, 1744. 
 
 February 24, 1712. Mr. James Gadderar, formerly 
 minister at Kilmaurs, was consecrated at London by Bishop 
 Hickes,^ Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Campbell. He 
 was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen in 1724, and died in 
 February^ 1733. 
 
 October 22, 1718. Mr. Arthur Millar, formerly 
 minister at Inveresk, and Mr. William Irvine, formerly 
 minister at Kirkmichael, in Carrick, were consecrated at 
 Edinburgh, by Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Ful- 
 larton, and Bishop Falconar. Bishop Irvine died Novetri' 
 ber 9, 1725. Bishop Millar succeeded Bishop Fullarton, 
 as Bishop of Edinburgh, and Primus,'\ and died October 9, 
 1727. 
 
 After the death of Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, which 
 happened March 20, 1720, 
 
 October 17, 1722. Mr. Andrew Cant, formerly one of 
 the ministers of Edinburgh, and Mr. David Freebairn, 
 formerly minister of Dunning, were consecrated at Edin- 
 burgh, by Bishop Fullarton, Pri?nus^ Bishop Millar, and 
 
 '* Dr. George Hickes, formerly dean of Worcester, was consecrated 
 in the Bishop of Peterborough's chapel, in the parish of Enfield, Fe- 
 bruary 23d, 1693, by Dr. William Lloyd, Bishop of Norwich, Dr. 
 Francis Turner, Bishop of Ely, and Dr. Thomas White, Bishop of 
 Peterborough. Dr. Lloyd, Dr. Turner, and Dr. White, were three of 
 the English bishops who weie deprived, at the Revolution, by the civil 
 power, for not swearing allegiance to William IIL They were also three 
 of the seven bishops who had been sent to the Tower by James IL for 
 refusing to order an illegal proclamation to be read in tlieir dioceses. 
 
 t Anciently no bishop in Scotland had the title of Archbishop, but one 
 of them had a precedency, under the title of Primus Scatice Episcopus. 
 In consequence of the revolution, after the death of Bishop Rose of Edin- 
 burgh, the Scotch bishops reassumed the old form, one of them being 
 elected Primus, with power of convocating and presiding, according tc 
 their canons made in 1743. 
 
Appendix, 343 
 
 Bishop Irvine. Bishop Cant died in 1721. Bishop Free- 
 bairn was elected Primus in 1731, afterwards Bishop of 
 Edinburgh, and died in 1 739. 
 
 June 4, 1727. Dr. Thomas Rattray, of Craighall, 
 was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Gadderar, Bishop 
 Millar, and Bishop Cant. He was appointed Bishop of 
 Dunkeld, succeeded Bishop Freebairn as Primus^ and died 
 May 12, 1743. 
 
 June 18, 1727. Mr. William Dunbar, formerly mi- 
 nister^ at Cruden, and Mr. Robert Keith, presbyter in 
 Edinburgh, were consecrated at Edinburgh, by Bishop 
 Gadderar, Bishop Millar, and Bishop Rattray. Bishop 
 Dunbar was first appointed Bishop of Moray, and after- 
 wards of Aberdeen, on the death of Bishop Gadderar in 
 1733. He died in 1746. Bishop Keith was first appointed 
 Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Fife. He was elected 
 Primus after the death of Bishop Rattray, and died in 
 January^ 1756. 
 
 June 24, 1735. Mr. Robert White, presbyter at 
 Cupar in Fife, was consecrated at Carsebank, near Forfar, 
 by Bishop Rattray, Bishop Dunbar, and Bishop Keith. — 
 He was appointed Bishop of Dunblane, succeeded Bishop 
 Keith as Primus^ and died in August^ 1761. 
 
 September 10, 1741. Mr. William Falconar, pres- 
 byter at Forres, was consecrated at Alloa, by Bishop Rat- 
 tray, Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was 
 first appointed Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Moray; 
 succeeded Bishop White as Primus^ and died in 1 784. 
 
 October 4, 1742. Mr. James Rait, presbyter at Dun- 
 dee, was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Rattray, 
 Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was ap- 
 pointed Bishop of Brechin, and died in 1 777. 
 
 * Those clergymen, who, in consequence of the Revolution, were 
 deprived of their parishes, are in this list called ministers: And those 
 who had not been parish-ministers, under the civil establishment, are 
 czViQdi presbyters. 
 
344 Appendix. 
 
 August 19, 1743. Mr. John Alexander, presbyter at 
 Alloa, was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Keith, 
 Primus^ Bishop White, Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Rait. 
 He was appointed Bishop of Dunkeld, and died iii 1776, 
 
 July 17, 1747. Mr. Andrew Gerard, presbyter in 
 Aberdeen, was consecrated at Cupar, in Fife, by Bishop 
 White (having commission from Bishop Keith, the Primus^ 
 for that effect), Bishop Falconar, Bishop Rait, and Bishop 
 Alexander. He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, and 
 died in October, 1767. 
 
 June 24, 1762. Mr. Robert Forbes, presbyter in 
 Leith, was consecrated at Forfar by Bishop Falconar, 
 Primus, Bishop Alexander, and Bishop Gerard. He was 
 appointed Bishop of Ross and Caithness, and died in 1776. 
 
 September 21, 1768. Mr. Robert Kilgour, presbyter 
 in Peterhead, was consecrated at Cupar, in Fife, by Bishop 
 Falconar, Primus, Bishop Rait, and Bishop Alexander. 
 He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, succeeded Bishop 
 Falconar as Primus, in 1 784, and died March 22, 1 790. 
 
 August 24, 1774. Mr. Charles Rose, presbyter at 
 Down, was consecrated at Forfar, by Bishop Falconar, 
 Primus^ Bishop Rait, and Bishop Forbes. He was first 
 appointed Bishop of Dunblane, afterwards of Dunkeld, and 
 died in April, 1791. 
 
 June 27, 1776. Mr. Arthur Petrie, presbyter at 
 MicklefoUa, in Fyvie, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bi- 
 shop Falconar, Primus, Bishop Rait, Bishop Kilgour, and 
 Bishop Rose. He was first appointed co-adjutor to Bishop 
 Falconar, whom he afterwards succeeded as Bishop of 
 Moray, and died April 19, 1787. 
 
 September 25, 1782. Mr. John Skinner, presbyter in 
 Aberdeen, was consecrated in the chapel at Luthermuir, 
 by Bishop Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Rose and Bishop Petrie. 
 He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Kilgour, on whose 
 resignation he succeeded to the charge of the diocese of 
 
Appendix. JH^ 
 
 Aberdeen, In October, 1786, and was elected Primus itk 
 
 December, 1788. 
 
 Mirch 7, 1787. Mr. Andhew Macfarlane, presby* 
 ler in Inverness, was consecrated at Peterhead, by Bishop 
 Kilg^oar, Primus^ Bishop Petrie, and Bishop Skinner. He 
 was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Petrie, whom he suo 
 needed soon after, as Bishop of Ross and Moray. 
 
 September 26, 1787. Dr. William Abernethy Drum* 
 MOtiD, one of the presbyters of Edinburgh, and Mr. JoHi^ 
 Strachan, presbyter in Dundee, were consecrated at 
 Peterhead, by Bishop Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Skinner, 
 and Bishop Macfarlane. Bishop Aberaethy Drummond 
 was first appointed Bishop of Brechin, and afterwards of 
 Edinburgh, which having also resigned, he is now Bishop 
 of Glasgow. Bishop Strachan succeeded him as Bishop of 
 Brechin. 
 
 September 20, 1792. Mr. Jonathan Watson, pres- 
 byter at Laurence-kirk, was consecrated at Stonehaven, 
 by Bishop Skinner, Primus^ Bishop Macfarlane, Bishop 
 Abernethy Drummond, and Bishop Strachan. He was 
 appointed Bishop of D unkeld, that diocese being vacant 
 by the death of Bishop Rose. 
 
 June 24, 1796. Mr. Alexander Jolly, presb^^ter at 
 Fraserburgh, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop i\.ber* 
 nethy Drummond, Bishop Macfarlane, and Bishop Stra-* 
 chan. He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Macfarlane, 
 on whose resignation he succeeded soon after to the charge 
 of the diocese of Moray.* 
 
 Though the districts into which the Scotch bishops have 
 <!ivided their church are not exactly according to the limits 
 of the dioceses under the legal establishment of Episco- 
 pacy, yet they still retain the names, by which they were 
 
 * A few more presbyters have been coiisecrated bishops in Scotland 
 since the revolution ; but as they had no hand in carrying on the Episco- 
 pal succession, it was thought unnecessary, in making out this list, ta 
 mention their consecrations. 
 
 44 
 
546 Appendix. 
 
 of old distinguished, with the exception of Fife, instead 
 of St. Andrews. Every diocesan bishop has his distinct 
 charge, and without assuming any other local jurisdiction 
 than what was acknowledged in the primitive church for 
 the first three centuries, may as properly be denominated 
 -bishop of the place or charge assigned to him, as St. James 
 has always been called Bishop of Jerusalem, Ignatius, Bi- 
 shop of Antioch, or Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage. On this 
 footing the Episcopal college in Scotland consists at prc^ 
 sent of the following members. 
 
 Mr. John Skinner, Bishop of Aberdeen^ and Primus* 
 Mr. Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of i?05^. 
 Dr. Abernethy Drummond, Bishop of Glasgow, 
 Mr. John Stachan, Bishop of Brechin, 
 Mr. Jonathan Watson, Bishop of Dunkeld. 
 Mr. Alexander Jolly, Bishop of Moray* 
 
 No. II. 
 
 X HE Letters of Consecration granted to Bishop Sage in 
 ir05, and referred to in page 292 of this work, are thus 
 expressed : 
 
 " Apud Edinburgum, die vicesimo quinto mensis Janu- 
 arii, anno ab incarnato Domino, et Servatore nostro, mil- 
 lesimo, septingentesimo quinto. 
 
 NOS — ^Joannes, providentia divina, Archiepiscopus 
 Glascuensis, Alexander, miseratione divina, Episcopus 
 Edinburgensis, et Robertus, miseratione divina, Episcopus 
 Dunblanensis, in timore Domini ponderantes pierosque fra- 
 trum nostrorum carissimorum, et in coUegio Episcopali 
 collegarum (hoc nupere elapso, et ecclesise nostrse luctuOso 
 curriculo) in Domino obdormiisse, nosquc perpaucos qui 
 divina misericordia superstites sumus, multipiicibus curis, 
 
Appendix. 347 
 
 morbis, atque ingravescente senio tantum non confectos 
 esse: Quapropter ex eo quod Deo supremo, Servatori 
 nostro, sacrosanctse ejus ecclesise, et posteris debemus, in 
 animum induximus, officium, caracterem, et facultatem 
 Episcopalem, aliis probis, fidelibus, ad docendum et regen- 
 dum idoneis hominibus committere ; inter quos quum nobis 
 ex propria scientia constet, reverendum nostrum fratrem 
 Joannem Sage, artium magistrum, et presbvterum Glas- 
 cuensum tanto muneri, aptum et idoneum esse ; nos igitur 
 divini numinis praesidio freti, secundum gratiam nobis con- 
 cessam, die, mense, anno suprascriptis, in sacrario Domus 
 archiepiscopi Glascuensis, supradictum Joannem Sage, or- 
 dinavimus, consecravimus, et in nostrum Episcopale colle- 
 gium co-optavimus. In cujus rei testimonium, Sigilla 
 Joannis Archiepiscopi Glascuensis, et Alexandri Episcopi 
 Edinburgensis, (sedis Sancti Andreae nunc vacantis vicarii) 
 huic instrumento (chirographis nostris prius munito) ap- 
 pend! mandavimus. 
 
 Jo. Glascuen. 
 Sic subscrib. Alexr. Edinburgen. 
 
 Ro. DUNBLANEN. 
 
 (Log. Sigil. Episcop. Edinb.) (Loc. Sigil. Archiepis. Glas.) 
 
 In some of the subsequent deeds or instruments of con- 
 secration, we find a still more direct reference to the pre- • 
 servation of the Episcopal succession. They are expres- 
 •sed in the following terms : 
 
 NOS — &c. -Afflictissimse hujus, cui nos Deus prse- 
 
 posuit, ecclesiae Scoticanse concordise, paci, unitati atque 
 ordini qua licet et quantum in tantis et talibus angustiis 
 possumus consulentes, dilectissimo in Christo fratri — 
 presbytero, et pastore de , quern hodie in colle- 
 gium nostrum Episcopale consecrando co-optavimus, ejus- 
 dem ecrlcsire Scoticanae portionemj quse in provincia ceu 
 
$4t Appendix. 
 
 ditione j. i w Dco militat, specialem commendamus, ejtrs- 
 que curae Episcopali, usque quo clementior Deus ecclesisB 
 suae, sui Christi sponsae in hoc terrarum angulo- — heu 
 quantum laboranti! benignius prospexerit: Hoc etiam 
 imum ardentissimis adjicientes votis, ut in Domino confi- 
 tus, nuUisque persecutionum procellis territus, praedictus 
 frater, ne quando summus simul at sacerrimus orthodoxot 
 rum Episcoporum ordo per legitimam ordinationum suc- 
 cessionem continuatus deficiat, ceu disperdatur, solicitus 
 advigilet. Datum, &c. •^^-^ 
 
 No. III. 
 
 ARTICLES OF UNION 
 
 Proposed btj the Right Reverend the Bishops of the Scotch 
 Episcopal Church, to those Clergymen who officiate 
 in Scotland by virtue of Ordination from an English or 
 an Irish Bishop, 
 
 As an union of all those who profess to be of the Episco- 
 pal persuasion in Scotland, appears to be a measure ex* 
 tremely desirable, and calculated to promote the interests 
 of true religion ;— .The Right Reverend the Bishops of the 
 Scotch Episcopal Church do invite and exhort all those 
 clergymen in Scotland who have received ordination from 
 English or Irish bishops, and the people attending their 
 ministrations, to become pastors and members of that4)ure 
 and primitive part of the Christian church, of which the 
 bishops in Scotland are the regular governors : — With a 
 view to the attainment of which desirable end, the said 
 bishops propose the following Articles of Union, as the 
 conditions on which they are ready to receive the above- 
 mentioned clergy into a holy and Christian fellowship, and 
 to acknowledge them as pastors, and the people who shaH 
 
Appendix. .. 349 
 
 lie committed to their charge, and duly and regularly ad^ 
 here to their ministrations, as members of the Scotch Epis.- 
 copal Church. 
 
 L Every such clergyman shall exhibit to the bishop of the 
 diocese, or district in which he is settled, or, in case of a 
 vacancy, to the primus of the Episcopal college, his letters 
 of orders, or a duly attested copy thereof, that so, their auf 
 thenticity and validity being ascertained, they may be en- 
 tered in the diocesan book, or register kept for that purpose* 
 
 II. Every such clergj^man shall declare his hearty and 
 unfeigned assent to the whole doctrine of the gospel, as re- 
 vealed and set forth in the holy scriptures ; — and shall far- 
 ther acknov/kdge, that the Scotch Episcopal Church, of 
 which the bishops in Scodand are the regular governors, is 
 a pure and orthodox part of the universal Christian Church. 
 
 III. Every such clergyman shall be at liberty to use, in 
 his own congregation, the liturgy of the Church of Eng* 
 land, as well in the administration of the sacrament of the 
 Lord's supper, as in all the other offices of the church. 
 
 IV. Every such clergyman, when collated to any pasto- 
 ral charge, shall promise, with God's assistance, faithfully 
 and conscientiously to perform the duties thereof, promot- 
 ing and maintaining, according to his power, peace, quiet- 
 ness, and Christian charity, and studying in a particular 
 manner to advance, by his example and doctrine, the spi- 
 ritual welfare and comfort of that portion of the flock of 
 Christ, among which he is called to exercise his ministry. 
 
 V. Every such clergyman shall own and acknowledge, as 
 his spiritual governor under Christ, the bishop of the dio- 
 cese or district in which he is settled, and shall pay and 
 perform to the said bishop, all such canonical obedience 
 as is usually paid by the clergy of the Scotch Episcopal 
 Church, or by the clergy of the United Church of England 
 and Ireland, to their respective diocesans ; saving and ex- 
 cepting only such obedience as those clergymen, who do or 
 may hold spiritual preferment in England or Ireland, owe 
 
•350 Appendix* 
 
 to jthe bishops, in whose dioceses, in those parts of the 
 united kingdom, they do or may hold such prefennent. 
 
 VI. Every such clergyman, who shall approve and ac- 
 cept of the foregoing articles, as terms of agreement and 
 union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, shall testify his 
 approbation and acceptance of the same in manner follow- 
 ing, viz. 
 
 " At , the day of , I , ordained dea- 
 con by the lord bishop of , and priest by the lord bishop 
 
 of — , do hereby testify and declare my entire approba- 
 tion and acceptance of the foregoing articles, as terms of 
 union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, and oblige myself 
 to comply with, and fulfil the same with all sincerity and 
 diligence. In testimony whereof, I have written and sub- 
 scribed this my acceptance and obligation, to be delivered 
 
 into the hands of the Right Rev. , bishop of , as 
 
 my diocesan and ecclesiastical superior, before these wit- 
 nesses, the Rev. , and the Rev. , both clergymen 
 
 •f the said diocese, specially called for that puipose." 
 
,(351 ) 
 
 {The readers of this work will doubtless be gratijied xvith 
 • the following extract from the review of it^ contained in 
 ' the Anti-Jacobin Magazine. This extract exhibits a re- 
 ply to Dr, Campbell's commentary on the zvords of Igna- 
 tius — " There is but one altar, as there is but one bi- 
 shop,"^ — more satisfactory than that advanced by Bishop 
 SkinnerJ] 
 
 Dr. Campbell takes it for granted, that his Episcopal 
 antagonists consider the unity in the secohd clause of Ig- 
 natius's words as the numerical or physical unity of the 
 bishop's person ; and, consequently, that they represent 
 the venerable martyr as arguing thus : " All the altars of 
 a diocese must be one, because the bishop is but one per- 
 son." Ignatius, however, neither argues, nor is supposed 
 by the advocates of Episcopacy to argue, in this foolish 
 and senseless manner. His reasoning is perfectly sound, 
 although Dr. Campbell has either happened, or chosen, to 
 misunderstand it. The unity intended in both clauses of 
 the sentence is of the same kind ; and in neither of them is 
 it numerical. In both it is an unity, not in respect of indi' 
 'Didual existence^ but in respect of authority^ power^ and 
 effect. All the altars of a diocese, however numerous in 
 respect of place, are one ; because the same (not numeri- 
 cally) eucharistical service is, with the same spiritual benefit 
 to the partakers, performed at all of them by the one autho- 
 rity of Christy derived to them through the bishop ; and 
 the bishop is one^ because, with respect to his own diocese, 
 he is the original depositary of this one authority. Nor is 
 this mode of phraseology confined to ecclesiastical subjects ; 
 but, on the contrary, perfectly common. We say that 
 tliere is but one executive power in the kingdom ; because, 
 
352 Extract from ^he ^Anti-jfacobin Revhw* 
 
 although the individuals employed in the execution of the 
 laws are almost innumerable, yet they all derive their 
 authority from the one authority of the king^ who, in this 
 country, is the sole fountain of power. We say that the 
 act or deed of any one justice of the peace is the same as 
 that of any other ; not because it is numerically the same,, 
 but because it is of the same validity. We say that their 
 authority is the same, because^ in all of them it is the king's 
 authority. In like manner We say, that every altar in the 
 diocese is the same with every other ; not because they are 
 numerically the same, but because they are all erected by 
 the one authority of the bishop ; and because, of conse- 
 quence, the eucharist received at one has the same effect 
 as when received at another. 
 
 It is true, indeed, that, in the case of both the king and 
 of the bishop, this one authority happens to be lodged in 
 one numerical individual person. But this is a circum- 
 stance on Avhich the propriety of the above-mentioned 
 modes of speech in no degree depends ; and which, there- 
 fore, as far as our argument is concerned, is merely acci- 
 dental. If we find it difficult to abstract the idea of the 
 one authority of the king or of die bishop, from the indi- 
 viduality of the persons invested with it, the difficulty is 
 wholly owing to the power of early and habitually con- 
 firmed association ; for the things themselves may, cer- 
 tainly, be separated, not in idea only, but in fact. The 
 Roman consuls, though numerically two, were possessed 
 but of one supreme authority ; and when that authority 
 was, occasionally, lodged, whether in one dictator, or in 
 ten military tribunes, it was but one authority still. So if it 
 had pleased our blessed Saviour, or his apostles actings 
 under his direction, to constitute bishops, in all districts, 
 by pairs, such a constitution of the church would have 
 made no alteration in the force of St. Ignatius's argument. 
 For then, the bishops, who, in respect of personality, were 
 
Extract from the Anti-Jacohzn JReview* 353 
 
 two, would, in respect of spiritual authority and power^ 
 have been but one. 
 
 We repeat, therefore, that the quibble which Dr. Camp- 
 bell finds in the words of Ignatius, as explained by that 
 Father's Episcopal commentators, is all his own ; and we 
 strongly suspect that, by a dialectician of his eminent 
 acuteness, it would never have been found, if the weakness 
 of his argument had not stood in need of even this very 
 feeble support. For no man knew better than Dr. Camp- 
 bell, that, in all nations and languages, things are viewed 
 and spoken of as, in some respects, one^ which, in other 
 respects, are exceedingly different ; and that physical, or 
 numerical unity is, in fact, but one of innumerable kinds, 
 which are hourly conceived by the human mind, and hourly 
 expressed in human speech. But Dr. Campbell's conclusion 
 that " the bishop's cure was originally confined to a single 
 church or congregation," required that the words h fiuo-ia- 
 s-»/^ov should signify one individual " communion table or 
 altar;" and this signification of them, he thinks, is suffi- 
 ciently secured by supposing hj I'Ttio-Koxo; to mean the indivi- 
 duality of the bishop's person: for otherwise Ignatius 
 would be guilty of a quibble. We wonder, indeed, that 
 the very words which he quotes from Dr. Bum's Eccle- 
 siastical Law did not show Dr. Campbell the danger of 
 building on such unfirm ground. " The cathedral church,'^ 
 says that accurate writer, " is the parish church of the 
 whole diocese." The bishop, of course, and strictly speak- 
 ing, is the pastor of the whole diocese. Every altar in it 
 is, therefore, his altar. If we wished to speak with parti- 
 cular correctness, we might say that it is a representative 
 of his altar, meaning the altar of the cathedral church. 
 Or if we choose to adopt a figurative phraseology^ we may 
 employ a language exactly analagous to that of the cus- 
 toms, (which calls such a sea-port a branch of the port of 
 London) and say that every altar in the diocese is a branch 
 of the bishop's altar. 
 
 45 
 
A REVIEW 
 
 OS* 
 
 HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY, 
 
 IN WHICH 
 
 THE ERRORS AND MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THAT WORK 
 ARE DETECTED A^TD EXPOSED. 
 
 EXTRACTED FROM THE AUTl-JACOBIH REVIEir. 
 
REVIEW 
 
 OF 
 
 HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY. 
 
 IT was reserved, for our author to publish a history of 
 the church, for the express purpose of proving that the 
 Church of England, in which he enjoys a rich rectory, 
 has deviated essentially from the original church of Christ 
 in doctrine, in government, and in worship ; th^t prelacy is 
 an usurpation, and patronage contrary to the principles of 
 the gospel ; that it is the duty of the people, when the regu- 
 lar clergy preach unsound doctrine, of which the most il« 
 literate clown is a competent judge, to withdraw themselves 
 from the church, which, in consequence, becomes schisma- 
 tical; that all establishments of one church in preference to 
 another, are the offspring of a corrupt policy j that the alli^ 
 ance between church and state has ever been meretricious ; 
 and that to contend for the unity of the church in any thing 
 more than a few articles of faith, of difficult comprehension, 
 is to be guilty of a sin enormous as that of blasphemy. 
 
 Should any of our readers be disposed to waste his time 
 in attempting to conceive by what means an ecclesiastical 
 historian reconciles such opinions to the concurring testi- 
 mony of the fathers of the church, we beg leave to assure 
 him, that Dr. Haweis employs no means for so vain a pur- 
 pose. He is perfectly aware that his book and the writings 
 of the fathers can never be reconciled ; but he must consi- 
 der this as a matter of no importance, since he represents al- 
 most all the Catholic writers for the first four centuries as 
 either so very weak or so very wicked as to be unworthy of 
 the smallest credit. 
 
358 Review of Hawels* Church History* 
 
 He admits, indeed, that there was something respectable 
 in the character of Augustin, bishop of Hippo, and more in 
 that of Athanasius ; but he characterizes Clemens of Rome, 
 Ignatius of Antioch, and Poly carp of Smyrna, as very mean 
 writers. 
 
 " Justin the martyr, Origeny Tertullian^ Pantcenus, and 
 many others, zealous indeed in apologies for the Christian 
 cause, and ready to die rather than renounce their profes- 
 sion, yet held a Christianity of so equivocal a nature, as to 
 render it ver}^ dubious whether they had any real part of lot 
 in the matter." What extravagant enthusiasts they must 
 have been ! Ireneus, though he combated all the heresies 
 then subsisting in the church, yet suffered " his philosophic 
 opinions to mingle with, and debase the Christian purity P 
 and, of course, was a heretic himself! 
 
 " TertuUian is a striking instance, how much wisdom and 
 weakness, learning and ignorance, faith and folly, truth and 
 error, goodness and delusion, may be mixed up in the com- 
 position of the same person ! Though Tertullian himself af- 
 fords but a very wretched specimen of Christianity ^ his apo- 
 logy demonstrates^ that in all the great and glorious features 
 of this divine religion, there was a people in that day emi- 
 nently to the praise of the glory of God* s grace /" We really 
 should have thought that the author of an apology which de- 
 monst rates this^ must afford a ^o/erai/e specimen of Christi- 
 anity ! 
 
 Of Gregory Thaumaturgus^ so highly praised by Cave, 
 and others, our impartial and charitable historian says :— ^ 
 " I must be exceedingly hard drove for a Christian, before 
 I can put such men as Gregory Thaumaturgus into the 
 number !" What though St» Basil^ compares Gregory to 
 the prophets and apostles, affirming that he was actuated by 
 the same spirit with them, trod in their footsteps, and his 
 conversation in the gospel during the whole course of his 
 
 * De Spiritu Sancto. c, 29. 
 
Review of Haweis^ Church History. 3B9 
 
 life, from the day of his conversion to the day of his death? 
 Basil was denominated the Great ; and " the tide greaty^ 
 says our author, when speaking of Constantine, " as far as 
 my observation reaches, usually marks the most destructive, 
 the most tyrannical, and the most murderous of mankind." 
 
 The learning and genius of Origen furnish great cause of 
 offence to Dr. Haweis, who professes indeed no respect for 
 learning in any Christian divine antient or modern. Origen, 
 it is true, maintained many errors ; but our author is the 
 first ecclesiastical historian, whom we have met with, that 
 did not acknowledge his obligations to the learned labours 
 of the presbyter of Alexandria. In this he is, however, con- 
 sistent ; for such an acknowledgment in behalf of Origen 
 could not reasonably be expected from that man, who boldly 
 pronounces the labour of Connybearey and Warburton^ and 
 Watson in defence of revelation, useless ; and who, notice- 
 ing " their elaborate defences of Christianity, and apologies 
 for the Bible," adds, " did these ever convince one infidel, 
 or make him a real convert to gospel truth ? I trow not !" 
 
 In many things our author admits Cyprian to have been 
 worthy, and to have merited all the praise he receives ; but 
 in his office he manifested the pride of a too unhumbled 
 heart (Is the heart of his censurer humbled r) ; his episcopal 
 ideas appear too elevated ; he was a visionary ; his asser- 
 tion that there is only one episcopacy (Episcopatus unus 
 est, cujus e singulis in solidum pars tenetur) " is unscrip- 
 tural ;" though the martyr builds it on a text by St. Paul,^' 
 which obviously admits of no other meaning. No matter ; 
 St. Cyprian is pleading for " the unity of an outivard churchy 
 which, in the eyes of a spiritually minded man, must be 
 contemptible ;" and, therefore, our spiritually minded his- 
 torian thinks himself authorized to quote the tract, De uni- 
 tate Ecclesice^ partially and unfairly ! Nay, he thinks him- 
 self authorized to affirm, that " the strong lines of poper}-, 
 
 '* Fph. iv. 4, 5; 6, g;c. 
 
36<> Review of Haweis* Church History', 
 
 tod a visible head of the Catholic church, whose anathemas' 
 Were to hurl into the dust every opposer to prelatical pride^ 
 had now begun to make considerable strides, and that no 
 man hitherto had more contributed to this than Cyprian !" 
 Yet he must know, if he knows any thing of antiquity, that 
 Cyprian, in his letters to Stephen, bishop of Rome, chas- 
 tises the insolence of that prelate, and contends with ear- 
 nestness and great strength of reasoning for an absolute 
 equality among bishops ! To belie the records of antiquity, 
 is a very singular proof of the impartiality of an historian ; 
 but what could be expected from the man who, while he af- 
 firms that, in the age of Cyprian, " strong lines of popery, 
 and a visible head of the church had begun to make consi- 
 derable strides," suspects that in the very same age, *' the 
 name of bishop and presbyter was still synonimous !" and 
 confounds Cyprian with certain bishops sent by him and the 
 African synod, to converse with Stephen on heretical bap- 
 tism ! To be impartial, a man must be accurate as well as 
 honest* 
 
 Of Constantine the Great, our author thus writes : '' The 
 bounties he bestowed ; the zeal he displayed ; his liberal 
 patronage of episcopal men ,*" (Are there any episcopal wo- 
 men in the conventicles of Lady Huntingdon ?) " the pomp 
 he introduced into worship ; and the power invested with 
 general councils," (What kind of power was this ?) " made 
 the church appear great and splendid ; but I discover not a 
 trace in Constantine of the religion of the Son of God. 
 (You are a discerner of spirits !) As an outward professor, 
 and for an outxvard churchy no man more open, more zeal- 
 ous : as a partaker of the gi*ace of God in truth, either in 
 gejiuine repentance for his crimes, or real nezvtiess of life^^ 
 (Pray, what is the distinction between these ?) " I want 
 abundantly better evidence than I can see in Eusebius, who, 
 like many a courtly bishops is very cordially disposed to 
 exalt on a pedestal, the king that patronizes and increases 
 their power, wealth, and dignity !" 
 
Mevietv of Haweis^ Church History* ^&l 
 
 To Eusebius, the celebrated historian, our spiritually-^ 
 minded man allows no merit. " He was a great favourite 
 ^t court. No good sign for a bishops under two such mo- 
 narchs as Constantine and Constantius* Whether he thought 
 in all things as Arius, or not, it is certain he supported hin% 
 and his adherents. He, with his nanxesake of Nicomedia, 
 were the pillars of the Avian heresy! Eusebius is a miser- 
 able voucher; and under all the prejudices and credulity 
 that are so visibly marked in him, Jam cordially thankful 
 for the more credible testimony of heathen men." (Why 
 not of heathen women ?) " I fear he knew as little of real 
 Christianity as his royal (iniperial) disciple Constantine, 
 whom he so egregiously flatters. The more I read,, the 
 more I doubt the authenticity of his testimony, and dare 
 not receive his history as oracular !" 
 
 St. Ambrose of Milan is no greater a favourite of our au- 
 thor than Eusebius. He was pious, but superstitious ; and 
 ^ the piety of superstition is awfully e<^uivocal. How high 
 jhe spirit of true godliness was in the church of Milan, I 
 must learn from something besides their church music and 
 the Ambrosian chaunt. His discipline respecting Theodo- 
 sius, is a glaring i^rooi oi prelatical insolence over abject su- 
 perstition, and all done for the honour of the church." (Eu- 
 sebius is censured for being court ly^ and Ambrose for not 
 being courtly !) *' The divinity of Ambrose is wretched, 
 and often unscriptural ; and his moral treatises insignificant** 
 Of the doctrines of predestination 2iXiAgrace^ he appears to 
 have very false conceptions :" i. e. he was no Augustinian, 
 ©r what in modern language is called a Calvinist ! 
 
 Not one of the fathers before Augustin taught the pecu- 
 liar doctrines of Calvin ; and hence our historian repeat- 
 edly says of them «//, that " they are but miserable guides 
 to evangelical truth!" Even of the far-famed bishop of 
 Hippo himself, he says, that there is more deep reasoning, 
 solid argument, precision of language, and scriptural evi- 
 dence^ in one page of Edwards on Free WiJl, than in a^l 
 
362 ■ Remew of Hazveis^ Church History. 
 
 the voluminous works of" Augustin put together ;" though 
 it is obvious to every man acquainted with the subject, that 
 Edwards reasons as a philosophical necessarian^ of the same 
 school with Hobbes and Priestley, and not as a predesti- 
 narian of the school of Calvin ! 
 
 It cannot, however, excite great surprize, that Augustin, 
 and the rest of the fathers, should be considered as insuffi- 
 cient guides to evangelical truth by him who considers St. 
 Paul himself as hardly evangelical. " In compliance with 
 James's recommendation, he was fulfilling a part of the 
 Mosaic ritual, respecting vows, in order to shov/ that he 
 continued to observe the law. Whether he owed it such a 
 compliance, I have ever doubted ; this and his circumcising 
 Timothy have appeared to me temporising. But Paul pro- 
 bably is right, and I am wrong." Yes, Sir, we think this 
 probable ! 
 
 As the testimony of the fathers is necessary to establish 
 the authenticity of the books of scripture, it may possibly 
 occur to some of our readers, to ask whether Dr. Haweis^ 
 who has poured upon them greater abuse than Gibbon, be a 
 Christian. The question is not unreasonable, and deserves 
 an answer, which it is proper that the author himself be 
 permitted to give. 
 
 " Having through divine mercy (says he) obtained grace 
 to be faithful— in providence received my education — and 
 been called to minister in the Church of England, I have 
 embraced and subscribed her articles, ex animo^ and have 
 continued to prefer an episcopal mode of government ; and 
 I am content herein to abide with God^ till I can find one 
 more purely apostolic." 
 
 We are not certain that we understand the author where 
 he says that he received his education in providence. All 
 men of every religion, and every nation, have been educated 
 under the superintending providence of the Governor of 
 the universe ; and therefore on that account Dr. Haweis 
 can claim nothing peculiar to himself. But if it be his 
 
Review of Haweis* Church History. ' 363 
 
 meaning that he received his education in the town of Pro- 
 vidence^ in Rhode-Island, we cannot be much surprized at 
 the contempt which he professes for the writings of the 
 fathers, for in North- America those writings are very little 
 studied. This circumstance may likewise account for the 
 following strange language of " the faithful man who is 
 content to abide with God in a church under episcopal go- 
 vernment." 
 
 *' When I speak of episcopacy, as most correspondent in 
 my poor ideas, to the apostolic practice, and the general 
 usage of the church in the first, and generally esteemed 
 purer ages, let no man imagine I plead for that episcopacy, 
 which, rising on the stilts of prelatical pride^ and worldly- 
 mindedness, has since overspread the earth with its bane- 
 ful shadow ; or suppose those to be the true successors of 
 the apostles, who, grasping nt power and pre-eminence over 
 churches, which their labours never planted nor watered, 
 claim dominion over districts, provinces, kingdoms beyond 
 all power of individual superintendance. These ally every 
 where, and in every age, have manifested the same spirit 
 of antichrist ; and that just in proportion as their usurpa- 
 tion of authority over the churches, and the consciences of 
 men, hath been most extensive, most exclusive, and most 
 intolerant." 
 
 That the church of England is intolerant will not surely 
 "fee supposed, since she permits one of her sons to publish 
 such libels as this ; but that her bishops claim dominion over 
 districts, and her archbishops pre-eminence over provinees^ 
 are facts which cannot be controverted. In the opinion of 
 Dr. Haweis, therefore, she manifests the spirit of antichrist ; 
 and it is not wonderful that " a man who has obtained grace 
 to be faithful, should consider it as condescension to abide, 
 in such a society, even with God !" 
 
 But still it may be asked, upon whose testimony our au- 
 thor builds this impartial history, after thus rejecting in a 
 lump the testimony of the early writers of the Catholic 
 
364 Reoiew of Baweis^ Church History* 
 
 church? Why, to the testimony oi heathen men^ for which 
 we have seen him so piously grateful, he adds that of schis^' 
 matics^ heretics^ and apostates / Though Ignatius, as a wri«' 
 ter, appears to him, " low in the scale of excellence, because 
 he advances many degrees above Clemens in episcopal au- 
 thor itif /" though Cyprian is a blasphemer, because " hig 
 episcopal ideas appear too elevated, and he says that there 
 ought to be but one bishop in a Catholic church ;* and 
 though Eusebius is accused of " partiality, credulity, and 
 unfair representations," yet the Novetians, Donatists, Me- 
 letians^ and Lucifer lans, are entitled to the fullest credit | 
 whilst Julian the apostate is styled almost " as good a Chris- 
 tian as bishop Warburton, and a much better man."f 
 
 The Catholic writers consider the ordination of the 
 clerg\^ as a matter of much importance, in which indeed 
 they are joined by the Novetians, Donatists, Luciferians^ 
 and all the sectaries of those early periods ; but they con- 
 tend likewise for the unity of the church, not only in doc- 
 trine, but also in government and discipline ; and this oul^ 
 impartial historian condemns as ah intolerable error. He 
 seems indeed to look upon ordination as far from essential,, 
 " though he admits it to be a harmless ceremony when not 
 employed to exalt the dignity of the prelatical tribe ; but 
 *' the preservation of the unity of an outward church, in 
 the eyes of a spiritually-minded man, must be contemptible^ 
 compared with the holding the unity of the spirit in the bond 
 of peace, and loving one another out of a pure heart fer- 
 vently ;*' Nay, '* the unhappy idea of the unity of the 
 
 * Our author chooses to quote him (p. 244) as saying that there ought 
 to be but one bishop in the Catholic church ; but the quotation is false. 
 
 •)• We are far from approving of all the paradoxes advanced in tie di- 
 i-ifW legation of Moses ; but we believe that Dr. Haweis is the only author 
 calling himself a Christian, who has censured either the object or the exe- 
 cution of the " discourse concerning the earthquake and fiery eruption 
 which defeated Julian's attempt to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem." He 
 prefers, however, Basnage's account of the matter, because Basnage waB 
 a Walloon pastor, and Warburton an English bishop. 
 
Reotero) of T^aweis* Church History. 36J 
 
 church under a particular mode ofgovernment^ produced the 
 plenteous tares of controversy, and the abhorred mutual 
 excommunications of men, whose duty it was to love one 
 atiother out of a pure heart fervently ;" and it seems to be 
 because the Novetians and Donatists rent the church, that 
 they are such favourites of this worthy priest of the church 
 of England ! 
 
 Though he admits that in " the dispute about the lapsed, 
 Cyprian's plan is more scriptural than Novetian's," he yet 
 says expressly — " When I hear Cyprian anathematizing 
 such a man, I would rather be under the curses with No- 
 vetian, than utter them with Cyprian* I forbear to quote 
 the high expressions, to me bordering on impiety,* with- 
 which he honours the episcopal order, and from whence he 
 deriv^es the claims of obedience. This seems the great blot 
 in his escutcheon, and the cause of all the indefensible se- 
 verity with which he treated those who presumed to differ 
 from him." 
 
 It is not merely from the pleasure which our author takes 
 in reprobating a learned clergy, and in reviling the fathers 
 of the church, that he expresses himself in this manner : it 
 is to serve a purpose still nearer his heart. Mr. Milner 
 having, in his church history, compared the sectaries of the 
 present day to the disorderly Corinthians in the days of 
 the apostles, Dr. Haweis says — " I am astonished, that a 
 man of his Christian knowledge and experience can see any 
 similitude between a multitude of gracious souls withdraw- 
 ing from false teachers^ and pastors who walk disorderly, 
 working not at all, and forming real churches under faith- 
 ful labourers of their ow7i choice^ and proud and wicked 
 Corinthians ! Do men withdraw from godly pastors P For 
 
 • To forbear quoting the expressions on which a charge of impiety is 
 founded against a Christian bishop, who laid down his life for the truth, 
 was extremely unjust ; but it was certainly prudent, because there is not 
 in the whole writings of Cyprian a single expression which will admit of 
 an impious coustruction. 
 
366 Review of Hcvweis* Church Historyl 
 
 one of their description in the present day, who can be 
 blamed for so doing ; ten thousand withdraw from their 
 parochial or heretical teachers, on the surest grounds of 
 Christian oWigation. The crime and the schism is [are] 
 with those who cause it [them] by their unscriptural teach- 
 ing and conduct, not with those who come out from among 
 them, and separate !" 
 
 Such is the substance of the first volume of this impartial 
 history, comprehending the first four centuries of the Chris^ 
 tian church. Of the author's " inquiries after God's secret 
 ones, the remnant whom the world knoweth not, the chosen, 
 and called, and faithful," we have taken no notice ; because 
 such inquiries, by whomsoever made, must, of necessity, 
 prove fruitless. 
 
 Though that part of the volume, of which men can judge, 
 appears to us one tissue of errors flowing from the com- 
 bined sources of prejudice, pride, and ignorance ; we shall 
 yet attempt no formal confutation of it, because what is not 
 supported by argument, cannot by argument be overturned. 
 Our author rests his cause on " his own poor opinion," as 
 he very properly calls it ; and we trust that our opinion, 
 though poor likewise, is yet sufficient to balance his. We 
 beg leave, however, to conclude this article with a few ob- 
 servations on ordination^ the character of St, Cyprian^ the 
 veracity of Eusebius^ and the utility of the writings of the 
 Fathers in general ; because we think it of great importance 
 to the peace of the church, that the people at large, but more 
 especially the younger clergy, be on these subjects furnished 
 with correct notions, which they certainly will not receive 
 from the volume under review. 
 
 Among the errors established by the Council of Trent, 
 our reformers considered the Romish doctrine concerning 
 the Christian sacrament. A sacrament was, by that council, 
 declared to be " an outward sensible action, or sacred sign, 
 ordained by Jesus Christy as a sure and certain means to 
 bring grace to our souls. To make a true sacrament, three 
 
Heview of Haxveis* Church History, a67 
 
 things were decreed to be requisite : 1. That there be some 
 GUtrvard sensible action performed ; 2. That this be a certain 
 means to bring grace to the soul; and, 3. That Jesus Christ 
 be the author of it. The outward action was likewise said 
 to consist in something spoken and sometliing done ; the 
 thing done being called the matter of the sacrament, and the 
 words spoken, xh^form of it."^ 
 
 These definitions were adopted by the generality of pro- 
 testant churches ; but the English reformers holding it essen- 
 tial to a sacrament, that the outward sensible action or sa- 
 cred sign was ordained by Christ himselfwhWt he sojourned 
 on earth, rejected, of course, five of the seven sacraments 
 of the church of Rome ; because it is obvious to every reader 
 of the gospels, that baptism and the LorcTs supper are the 
 only sacraments, of which the sacred sign, including what 
 is here called the matter and the form^ was instituted by 
 Christ in person. Whether it would not have been better, 
 with the Greek Church, to denominate baptism and the 
 Lord's supper the mysteries of Christy which seems to be 
 scripture language, and to have allowed the name of sacra' 
 ments to be extended to other Christian institutions, which 
 certainly involve in them the obligation of an oath, we shaU 
 not now inquire. It is sufficient to observe, that the refor- 
 mers of our church unquestionably considered the ordina- 
 tion of ministers, and the right of confirmation, as institu- 
 tions of Christ, though the sensible action or sacred sign 
 employed in each was not instituted till after his ascent into 
 heaven. 
 
 The consequence is, that these rites have, by every true 
 son of the Church of England, been at all times considered 
 as of the highest importance, as ordinances indeed of Christ 
 
 * We have transcribed this account of the Romish doctrine concerning 
 the sacraments, from the work of a Romish bishop, in two small octavo 
 volumes, entitled, " The sincere Christian instructed in the Faith, from 
 the written Word ;" but we have compared it with Father Paul's history 
 ef the Council of Trenr, and found the account cow ct. 
 
368 Review of ITaweis* Church History ^ 
 
 through the medium of the Holy Ghost, and as laying men 
 under the most sacred obligations. Some of the clergy, who, 
 during the persecution under Queen Mary, had fled to Ge- 
 neva and other protestant countries beyond sea, returned, it 
 is true, with doubts in their minds, whether bishops and 
 presbyters were not originally of the same order, and whe- 
 ther presbyterian ordination and confirmation be not of 
 equal validity with ordination and confirmation by bishops. 
 From aflfected moderation or culpable negligence of inquiry, 
 the same doubts are professed by two many of the clergy at 
 this day ; but, except among the independents who sprung 
 up under the usurpation of Cromwell, it never entered into 
 the head of any man calling himself a Christian, to suppose 
 that the ordination of the clerg,/ is a useless ceremony, till 
 it became fashionable to confound the religion of Christ 
 with what philosophers call the religion of nature. 
 , Were Christianity nothing but a system of ethics founded 
 on the relation which subsists between God as the Creator 
 and Governor of the world, and man, as a rational crea- 
 ture, it would indeed be ridiculous to inquire by what form 
 or what authority the clergy are ordained ; because, in that 
 " case, the ablest moralist, whether ordained or not, would, 
 of course, be the ablest and most useful minister. But if 
 Christianity be, as it certainly is, an instituted religion^ 
 founded on the means employed by God to restore to man- 
 kind that immortality which all had forfeited by the sin of 
 Adam ; and if immortality be not now, nor ever was the 
 right of man, either as inherent in his nature^ or as the re^ 
 ward of moral virtue^ (and this is the dictate of sober phi= 
 losophy as well as of the gospel) it follows that immortality, 
 if conferred upon man, must be conferred as a '''free gift*^ 
 upon such conditions as seemed best to the all-wise Given 
 But the rites of a religion founded on a free gift must de- 
 rive all the value, and the ministers of that religion all their 
 authority, not from the relations of nature^ but f*-^ ^* ..iie 
 positive appointment of the author ofthe^iji^i and l>e whq 
 
JReview of Haweis* Church History » 369 
 
 maintains that any man, who is qualified by knowledge, 
 5iay act as a minister of the gospel, though he be not or- 
 diained, must, to be consistent, claim to himself immor- 
 tality, not as " the gift of God through Jesus Christ our 
 Lord," but either as the inherent right of his nature, of 
 which he cannot be deprived, or as a debt due by God to hi^ 
 merit. 
 
 Such arrogant claims are in direct opposition as well to 
 the letter as to the spirit of the Gospel ; and, therefore, he 
 who has read the New Testament with any degree of 
 intelligence, and believes it to be a revelation from heaven, 
 must be convinced that from it only he can learn who they 
 Sffe who have authority from Christ to preach the word, 
 and to administer the ordinances of his religion* Into this 
 question we enter not now, having discussed it at some 
 length in our ninth volume, and in our notes on Mr. Keith's 
 letter published in our twelfth volume ; and if our reason- 
 ings on these occasions be conclusive, it is obvious that 
 something more than agreement in faith is necessary to con- 
 stitute that union which our blessed Lord requires among 
 his disciples, 
 
 . It may not, however, be altogether useless to offer some- 
 ' thing in vindication of the mode, or, to use the language of 
 the Council of Trent, " the sensible action or sacred sign," 
 by which holy orders are conferred in the Church of Eng- 
 land. This, it is well known, is the imposition of the hands 
 of the bishop, accompanied with the words which the 
 reader will find in the offices for the Ordination of Deacons 
 and Priests^ and the Consecration of Bishops* That impo- 
 sition of hands was not the sensible action by which our Sa- 
 viour conferred the last and highest order on the eleven, 
 investing them with the authority which is now callecj 
 episcopal, is, indeed, certain ; because St. John assures us, 
 that " he breathed on them, saying. Receive ye the Holy 
 Ghost," &c. This sacred sign was properly employed by 
 him, " to whoin God gave not the spirit by measure," and 
 
 4^7 
 
270 Review of Haweis' Church History. 
 
 who himself conferred the spirit by his own authority ; but 
 it would ill become any mere man, who, whatever station 
 he may fill in the church, can communicate the graces of the 
 spirit only ministerially. 
 
 The apostles, therefore, instead of imitating in this in- 
 stance the example of their divine Master, adopted the sign 
 which, from time immemorial, had been employed among 
 their countrymen in the ordination of men to offices sacred, 
 or of high importance, and which Christ himself had em- 
 ployed on other occasions. Thus, Moses, by the direction 
 of God, ordained Joshua to be his successor, by laying his 
 hands upon him, and giving him a charge in the sight of the 
 high priest and all the congregation.* After his example, 
 the Jews employed the same ceremony in the ordination of 
 their judges and rabbins down at least to the year of our 
 Lord 1170;t and it appears from the Talmud,} that in 
 the ordination of elders, three elders laid their hands on the 
 head of the candidate for that dignity. 
 
 The ceremony of imposition of hands, therefore, in the 
 ordination of ministers, was transplanted from the Jewish 
 into the Christian church. It was employed by the college 
 of apostles in the ordination of the seven deacons ; by the 
 prophets and teachers at Antioch, in " the separation of 
 Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto the Holy 
 Ghost had called them ;§ by St. Paul and Barnabas, when 
 they ordained (x^i^orovncravlig^ elders in every church j|| and 
 by St. Paul when he ordained Timothy. That imposition 
 of hands was meant to be employed for the same purpose in 
 the church of Christ, always even unto the end of the world, 
 IS apparent from the injunction given by the same aposUe 
 to the same Timothy, to " lay hands suddenly on no man, 
 lest he should be partaker of other men's sins ;"* and as the 
 
 • Numbers xxvii. 18, Sec f Vide Benjamin, itiner. p 73. 
 I Sanhedr. cap. i. § AciS xiii. 1 — 4. || Acts xiv. 23. 
 
 * This mode of a])point)iig men to important offices has not been pecu- 
 liar to the Jewish and Christian character. We learn from Demosthenes 
 
Mevino of HaweW Church History, 371 
 
 Apostles were unquestionably directed by the spirit of 
 Christ, this sensible action or sacred sign may be considered 
 as ordained by Christ himself, though not ordained by him 
 in person. 
 
 On the subject of ordination, the Catholic writers of the 
 primitive church all thought as we do ; and as St, Cyprian 
 treats of it more fully than most of them, he is peculiarly 
 obnoxious to the modern advocates for lay-preaching. He 
 knew nothing of that Christian obligation on the grounds of 
 which the people withdrew themselves, and, according to 
 our author, are bound to withdraw themselves from their 
 parochial teachers, and form separate churches under la- 
 bourers of their own choice. On the contrary, he attributed 
 all the heresies which then infested the church to such cause- 
 less divisions ; and embraced every opportunity of exhort- 
 ing the presbyters and deacons, as well as the people, to 
 obey their respective bishops ; while he entreated the bi- 
 shops to preserve unity among themselves. His tract, De 
 imitate Ecclesice is one of the most valuable works of anti- 
 quity, breathing throughout a spirit of peace and love, and 
 written with great perspicuity of language and force of 
 argument. Yet our author accuses him of prelatical pride, 
 because he concurred with Cornelius in excommunicating 
 Novetian as an incorrigible schismatic. 
 
 " That Novetian was a dissenter from the church I cannot 
 perceive ; for he was a bishop as truly chosen and ordained, 
 from any thing which appears, as Cornelius, He was a man 
 avowedly sound in all the principles of the gospel doctrine, 
 and concurring in all the discipline of the church ; nay, dis- 
 posed to carry it to excess ; and besides this, there rests not 
 a shadow of accusation against him." 
 
 With your leave, good Doctor, this shadow was suffici- 
 
 (Oratione 1. in Phiiip.) that there were magistrates among the Athenians 
 constituted x^^iolovia,, and thence styled ;)^E4^(37ov>9']a4 ; and the same thing 
 appears from the writings both of Plutarch and Cicero. 
 
QT2 Review of Haweis' Church History* 
 
 ent to condemn him. The manner in which he prevailed 
 
 upon three obscure bishops to consecrate him is well known ; 
 
 and there is not perhaps in the annals of the church anochet 
 
 consecration so completely scandalous. But granting, for 
 
 the sake of argument, that it had been otherwise, the Ro* 
 
 man see was already filled by Cornelius, whom you acknow^ 
 
 ledge to have been sound in the faith, and unexceptionable 
 
 in his administration of the discipline of the church. In 
 
 that state of things, could Novetian claim to be bishop 
 
 of Rome, and refuse to hold communion with Cornelius 
 
 and his clergy, without becoming a schismatic^ or, as you 
 
 properly enough express it, a dissenter from the church ? 
 
 Were you to go over to America, get yourself consecrated 
 
 by three bishops of the church of the United States, return 
 
 to Canterbury, and claim to be rightful metropolitan of all 
 
 England, refusing to communicate with any clergyman who 
 
 preaches not the doctrines of unconditional election and 
 
 reprobation, would you or would you not be a schismatic 
 
 or dissenter from the church of England I 
 
 To this question it is possible that you and we may be 
 disposed to give different answers ; but were a clergyman, 
 calling himself the Rector of All Saints, Aldwinckle,* to 
 ©pen a conventicle in the parish, and seduce the people 
 from the church, under pretence that j^ou had climbed over 
 the wall of the sheepfold, by accepting of an unscriptural 
 presentation ; and were he to refuse holding any communion 
 with you, calling you liar and traitor on account of the 
 tendency of this impartial history, we are persuaded that 
 you would agree with us in deeming such a man a schisma^ 
 tky who deserved to be degraded and eKcommunicated by 
 the bishop of the diocese. Yet his crime would be less than 
 that of Novetian in the same proportion as a modern parish 
 is less than the ancient diocese of Rome, and as the bar* 
 mony of a single congregation is of less consequence than 
 
 * Dr. Haweis is Rector of All Saints, Aldwincklo. 
 
Itevi^ of Haweis* Church History • 373 
 
 the peace of the church universal. But it is for passing the 
 usual censures on Novetian and his adherents that Cyprian 
 lis here charged with prelatical pride and insolence^ though 
 it will not be easy to find in all the records of the church 
 more striking instances of humility, combined with dignity, 
 than was displayed by the bishop of Carthage on this and 
 various other occasions. 
 
 To his deacon Pontius, who lived in his house, accom» 
 panied him in his exile, and was present at his martyrdom, 
 his character was surely better known than to Dr. Haweis, 
 who, from circumstances to be noticed hereafter, appears 
 to us never to have read a page of his original works. Had 
 Cyprian been an*ogant and insolent, such a domestic must 
 sometimes have felt his insolence. Yet, speaking of the 
 reluctance with which he yielded to the clergy and people 
 demanding him for their bishop, Pontius goes on— Quidam 
 Hli restiterunt, etiam ut vinceret. Quibus tamen quanta 
 lenitate, quam patienter, quam benevolenter indulsit quam 
 clementer ignovit, amicissimos eos postmodum et inter ne- 
 nessarios computans mirantibus multis ? Cui enim posset 
 non esse miraculo, tarn memoriosae mentis oblivio ? 
 
 Could this have been published in Carthage of a bishop 
 of an icnhumbled lieart^ at a time when thousands were alive 
 to contradict the eulogium ? Or, would the same deacon 
 have said of an insolent bishop, whose death he had just re- 
 corded — Dolebo quod non comes fuerim ? sed illius victoria 
 triumphanda est. Devictoria triumphabo ? sed doleo quod 
 comes non sim. Verum vobis tamen et simpliciter confi- 
 tendum est quod et vos scitis, in hac me fuisse sententia. 
 Multum, ac nimis multum de gloria ejus exulto; plus 
 tamen doleo quod remensi. 
 
 Our author calumniates Eusebius still more grossly than 
 he had calumniated Cyprian. He admits, indeed, that " this 
 famed prelate, remarkable for his knowledge, readmg, and 
 ecclesiastical investigations, stands eminent among the first 
 authorities for church history j" yet, as we have seen, as a 
 
$74 Rfoiew of HmJOeifP Church Histdry* 
 
 divine he was an hceresiarch^ and as an historian, credulous 
 and unfaithful! 
 
 : That Eusebius, who was a great admirer of Origen, and 
 deeply skilled in the Platonic philosophy of the Alexandrian 
 school, sometimes expresses himself un cautiously on the 
 divinity of Christ, must indeed be granted ; but it is impos- 
 sible to consider as a pillar of the Arian heresy, the man, 
 
 who calls Christ aulo^sov Ijery God^ and rov ity.yJ^oua-ikKX. xai 7rav»)y 
 
 juova, TiOLi a,vlov Geov-^sovereig"?! and leader of all thing's^ and God 
 by himself^ Dr. Haweis, however, from his reply to Dr. 
 Maclane's vindication of Eusebius, seems to consider even 
 bishop Bull himself a pillar of Arianism ; for that illustri- 
 ous prelate, in his Defensio fidei Nicenae, has a whole chap- 
 ter de subordinatione filii. 
 
 But granting that Eusebius was a semi- Arian, which the 
 expressions quoted above will not permit us to grant, he 
 may, notwithstanding, be a faithful historian. His morals 
 were never impeached ; pietate adeo venerabilis (says 
 Cave,t) ut apud plurimas occidentis ecclesias in sanctorum 
 numero habebatur j and he was so little ambitious of worldly 
 greatness, that he refused to exchange the comparatively 
 poor see of Caesarea for the rich one of Antioch, because 
 he deemed the translation of bishops from see to see disre- 
 putable. What could tempt such a man to falsify the re- 
 cords of the church ? He was no schismatic, nor patron of 
 schismatics, that he should have written a history for the 
 express purpose of proving that the church of the fourth 
 century had deviated esseatially from the original church of 
 Christ in doctrine, in government, and in worship ! Had 
 Dr. Clarke, whom our author calls a blasphemer, written a 
 history of the church of England, does any man in his sen- 
 ses couclude, that because he was an Arian, or semi-Arian, 
 he would have given a false detail of the succession of the 
 Archbishops of Canterbury and York ? Yet, for no other 
 
 * Hist. Eccles. lib. x. cap, 4. f Hist. Liter. 
 
Review of Haweis* Church Histonj» ZfS 
 
 reason than the supposed arianism of Eusebius, does our^'f^- 
 dicious and impartial historian question the authenticity of 
 the Hst which he gives of the bishops of Jerusalem, and ac- 
 cuse the learned author of glaring prejudice and credulity ! 
 
 But does not Eusebius publish letters which were said to 
 have passed between our blessed Lord and Abgarus, king 
 of Edessa ? and are not those letters apocryphal, though he 
 professes to have translated them from the Syriac originals 
 preserved in the archives of Edessa ? That Eusebius has 
 published such letters is certain ; and to us it appears 
 equally certain, that the letters are forgeries; but we do not 
 think that Eusebius was the forger, or that it is any proof 
 of his extreme credulity, that what imposed upon Baronius^ 
 Spondanus^ Valesiiis and Vossius^ among the modems, and 
 to which even Cassaubon and Cave seem inclined to give 
 credit, imposed upon him. The Syriac originals were 
 doubtless given to him as authentic ; and he inserted trans- 
 lations of them in his history of the church, just as Livy 
 inserted some incredible tales in his history of Rome. He 
 inserted them as letters preserved in the archives of Edessa^ 
 which, with other archives, had been laid open to him by 
 the command of the Emperor Constantine ; and as he had 
 si character to lose, and was obnoxious to a large party in 
 the church, it is not conceivable that he would have appealed 
 to public archives as containing letters which he was con- 
 scious that he himself had forged. All that Eusebius at- 
 tested as consisting with his own knowledge was undoubt- 
 edly true ; and we beg our learned author, before he makes 
 another attack on his character as an historian, to read with 
 as much attention as he is able to bestow, the eighth chapter 
 of the first part of Bishop Pearson's Vindicice Ignatiance, 
 In the mean time he may meditate on the following extract 
 from that masterly performance, and prove himself, if he 
 can, an abler judge of such matters than the author! 
 
 Si autorem uUum veterem nominare posset, quam Euse- 
 bius agnovit, et cujus autoritatem testimoniis aliorum con- 
 
5^6 Review of Haweis* Church History, 
 
 firmatum ivet, qui postea fictor detectus est, aut val in du- 
 bium vocatus: aliquid quidam diceret, quod eum a tetJieri-' 
 tatis et inverecundice crimine^ ut ipse loquitur, liber areU 
 Ego vero Eusebium tanta diligentia tantoque judicio in 
 examinandis Christianorum primaevae antiquitatis scriptis, 
 in quibus traditionem apostolicam contineri arbitratus est, 
 usum fuisse contend©, ut nemo unquam de ejus fide aut 
 descriptis, quae ille pro indubitatis habuit, postea dubitaverit. 
 Libri qui nunc in dubium vocantur, aut olim vocati sunt, 
 testimonium ejus non habent. 
 
 Of Dr. Haweis's diligence and judgment in examining 
 the writings of Christian antiquity, some estimate may be 
 formed from his calling Abgarus Agbarus ; from his sup- 
 posing that " most of the Apostles lived and died 2Xi\OTi^ 
 their brethren in Palestine ;" from his affirming that " al! 
 ecclesiastical officers for the first three hundred years were 
 elected by the people — nay, that Matthias was thus chosen 
 to fill up what he calls the tribular number of the Apostles ;'* 
 from his affirming that " no claims of pre-eminence among 
 the clergy make their appearance in the epistle of Clement 
 to the Ciorinthians ;" and that it " was not till the reign of 
 Adrian that the bishop was supposed to stand in the place 
 of the Jewish high-priest, the presbyters in the place of 
 priests, and the deacons in the place of Levites."^ In far- 
 ther proof of his accuracy and diligence, he speaks of " the 
 Constitutions of Ignatius^'' meaning, we suppose, the apos^ 
 tolical constitutions^ which were pretended to have been 
 written by Clement ; he calls Polycarp, whom all antiquity 
 represents as the disciple of St, John^ the disciple of Jgna-^ 
 iitcs ; mistaking the name of an office for the name of a 
 man, he calls Pontius, the deacon of St. Cyprian, Pontius 
 Diaconus ; and, as we have seen, he makes Cyprian him^ 
 
 • To be convinced of the rashness of this assertion, the reader needs 
 only to consult St. Clement's first epistle to the Corinthians, or vol. ix, 
 •p. 125, of our Reviev/-. 
 
Review of Hawets* Church History, 37f 
 
 self an advocate for popery^ at the very time that he was 
 contending for the equal rights of diocesan episcopacy^ and 
 reproving Stephen^ bishop of Rome ^ for acting as if he thought 
 himself superior to odier bishops! Has Dr. Havveis read 
 one page of the writings of Clemens Romanus, of Pontius, 
 or of Cyprian ? 
 
 He has certamly laboured to prove, if confident assertions 
 can be called proof, that there are none of the Fathers 
 whose writings are worth the reading ; but mere asser- 
 tions will have little weight in a cause where more learned 
 men had employed, without success, much erudition and 
 plausible reasoning. The heaviest charge which has been 
 urged against the Fathers is their credulity; but " upon an 
 impartial examination oS. the passages, upon which this 
 charge principally depends for support, it will appear, (says 
 a learned writer*,) that many of the supposed errors arise 
 from misrepresentation ; that many relate to trifling circum- 
 stances, many are dispersed among the sentiments of indi- 
 viduals, and not among the tenets of the church, and have 
 no relation whatsoever to public principles of belief, or pub- 
 lic terms of communion. How, therefore, these peculiar- 
 ities conspire to make them generally unserviceable in the 
 cause of religion, it is diffijult to comprehend. If any at- 
 tempts to elevate the Fathers to the high rank of the apos- 
 tles, were made by their advocates ; if they were affirmed 
 to have been assisted by inspiration ;t or to have been en^ 
 dowed above the common lot of mankind, with infallibility ; 
 the objection would doubtless carry great force against such 
 ambitious pretensions. But we contend only that thev de- 
 serve our regard as xvitnesses of the opinions of their rey.pec- 
 live ages ; as historians of the facts xvhich were accessible to 
 
 * Mr. Keith, in his Sermons at Bampton's Lecture. 
 
 t Dr. Haweis admits the apostolical Fathers to have been assisted by 
 &lSpira^ion, for he says expressly, that •* miraculous gifts generally ceased 
 with the first generation of the Apostles' converts and successors. There- 
 fore Clement and Ignatius were inspired. 
 
 48 
 
Sta Review of Haxveis* Church History, 
 
 their inquiries ; and as teachers, whose pietv and learning 
 eminently distinguished them from all their contemporaries. 
 Sharing the imperfections of other writers, they fairly claim 
 the same indulgence. The faults imputed to them ought 
 frequently to be imputed to the times in which they lived j 
 when accuracy of research was often precluded by nume- 
 rous obstacles, and when ardent zeal induced them to press 
 every circumstance into their service, which carried with it 
 even the appearance of truth. If the plea of credulity de- 
 serves to be admitted as a ground of rejection, widi equal 
 or perhaps superior force does it operate against some of 
 the most celebrated authors of Greece and Rome." 
 
 This is placing the utility of the writings of the Fathers in 
 a proper light. It is as witnesses only that we plead for 
 them ; and as witnesses they are entitled to the fullest cre- 
 dit. Their reasonings are often weak, and their criticisms 
 puerile ; but it is impossible to question the integrity of 
 men who laid down their lives for the truth : What they 
 affirm that they witnessed, they undoubtedly witnessed. 
 Even the opinions^ in which they were unanimous— ^-wo^/ 
 semper^ quod uhique^ quod ab omnibus — are not to be hastily 
 rejected, merely because they tally not with the dogmas of 
 this or that modern school ; and the man must have a very 
 high opinion of his own understanding, who, like our au- 
 thor, presumes to say that he holds the gospel truth in greater 
 purity than the bishops and presbyters of the first three 
 centuries. 
 
 " Pride, surely, was not made for man ;" and men truly 
 religious are always humble. The most virtuous man on 
 earth must be sensible that his good deeds cannot benefit 
 his Maker ; and the most zealous and orthodox Christian, 
 if he forget not that he possesses nothing which he did not 
 receive, will not boast of the services which he may have 
 rendered to the cause of piety and truth. It was not, there- 
 fore, without surprize, that we found our most orthodox au- 
 thor, in the preface to the second volume of this history, 
 expressing himself in the following terms : 
 
Review of Hccweis' Church History. 379 
 
 '^ The great design of the adorable Redeemer when he 
 came down from heaven, was to procure peace upon earth, 
 and good will towards men. To correspond with this de- 
 sirable and blessed purpose, is the great end and object of 
 this history !" 
 
 A comparison such as this we had imagined that no man, 
 whose mind is not swollen with spiritual pride, would have 
 dared to make ; and we will venture to say, that the blas- 
 phemer Clarke, though justly reprehensible for the notions 
 which he entertained of the Son of God, never in idea com- 
 pared the designs of that adorable person with his own ! He 
 left such comparisons to fanatics, and to a species of mis- 
 sionaries, with which, in his day, the Christian Church was 
 not acquainted. 
 
 Clarke, indeed, as well as more orthodox men, held 
 hardly any principle in common with Dr. Haweis ; for he 
 thought that our belief of Christianity rests on the evidence 
 of miracles and prophecj^ ; and our impartial historian 
 affirms, with a confidence, which, were the assertion true, 
 could become only the searcher of hearts, that " no n^n 
 €ver was convinced of divine truth savingly by miracle !" 
 What though St. Luke assures us (Acts ix. ^5,) that " all 
 who dwelt at Lydda, when they saw Eneas miraculously 
 cured by St. Peter, turned to the Lord !" our author, who 
 thinks it doubtful whether St. Paul or himself had imbibed 
 most of the spirit of Christianity, may consider the testi- 
 mony of St. Luke as originating in mistake; for the Apos- 
 tle certainly understood the doctrine of saving faith better 
 than the Evangelist. 
 
 From the end of the fourth century, to the commence- 
 ment of the Reformation, our author traces, with a bold 
 pencil, the rise and progress of the corruptions of Christi- 
 anity ; but we shall content ourselves, and, we trust, our 
 readers, with a very cursory view of his detail of the trans- 
 actions of that gloomy period, because his facts are authen- 
 ticated only by his own assertions, and are such as furnish 
 
380 I^eviezO of HdWeis' Chtlr&h llistot't/. 
 
 few lessons of iristniction to Christians of the present day* 
 His account of the Nestorians and Eutvchians, in the fifth 
 century, is well told ; but his nan-ative of the rise, progr* ss^ 
 and present prevalence of Pelagianism is in many respects 
 objectionable. 
 
 When he talks of " Cassian^ a Monk, of Marseilles, dif- 
 fusing abundantly the pleasing poison of this heresy," we 
 will not give ourselves the trouble to inquire whether he 
 may not mean Cassiodorus^ who, from being Minister to 
 Theodoric the Ostrogath, retired^ in his old age, into a mo- 
 nastery of his own building in Galabria^ and published the 
 tripartite history of Socrates, Sozomen^ and Theodorite, 
 with various learned w^orks of his own and other writers. 
 Cassiodorus, we know, has been accused, most unjustly in- 
 deed, of Pelagianism, because he pubhshed some of the 
 works of Pelagius, after purging them of their errors ; but 
 Cassian, as Dr. Cave observes, was " Pelagianorum hostis 
 acerrimus." Even the view which Dr. Haweis gives of the 
 opinions of Cassian^ though not quite accurate, differs widely 
 from the heresies of Pelagius, He was indeed styled by 
 the followers of Augustin, a ^'^wzi-pelagian, but with what 
 justice the reader will perceive when he is informed that 
 Cassian adm.tted the doctrine of original sin^ and the ne- 
 cessity of preventing as well as co-operating grace. He 
 contended, indeed, as St. Paul had done before him, that 
 " the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against 
 the flesh ; and that without some such internal struggle as 
 this, there could be no such thing as human virtue, nor any 
 receptacle in man for divine grace ; but so far from teach- 
 ing, that virtue merits heaven, as quoted by the accurate 
 author of the Historia Liter aria^ " ex nimio fere pelagia- 
 nos oppugnandi studio errores, asserit omnes justorum^w^- 
 titias esse peccanta /" 
 
 We readily admit, however, that in the writings of Cas- 
 sian errors may be found, and that Pelagius was a heretic, 
 whom our author has treated with perhaps greater lenitv^ 
 
Review of Harweis^ Church History. 381 
 
 than, from the nature of his heresy, he could have claimed 
 at his hands ; but we protest against the uncharitable insinu- 
 ation, that Pelagianism pervades the Chiirch of England at 
 present ; and we shall not hesitate to pronounce Dn Haweis 
 a false accuser of the brethren, if he charge with Pelagian- 
 ism, all who dissent from the dogmas of Augustin, Lu- 
 ther, Calvin, and Edwards. Of the work of Edwards on 
 Free-will, he perceives not, as we have already observed, 
 the tendencv ; and we doubt much if he fully comprehends 
 the metaphysics even of his masters Augustin and Calvin. 
 The following exclamation is the offspring of arrogance and 
 ignorance : 
 
 " I confess my astonishment at Mr. Milner's assertion, 
 that the doctrine of particular redemption was unknown to 
 the ancients ; and he wishes it had remained equallv un- 
 known to the moderns ; (we heartily wish the same thing). 
 I am shocked that the scriptures of truth should be treated 
 thus slightly, or the greatest and best of men be laid under 
 so unbecoming a censure." 
 
 Whether Mr. Milner's assertion be censure or praise, it 
 is an undoubted truth, that in the writings of the Fathers, 
 anterior to St. Augustin, there is nothing which gives the 
 smallest countenance to particular redemption. But pray, 
 Sir, when. did you discover that the Fathers of the first four 
 centuries were the greatest and best of men ? In your first 
 volume you represent them as a crew of turbulent, credu- 
 lous, contemptible liars^ a $ort of character to which we 
 would not be hasty to apply either of the epithets great and 
 good* With respect to the scriptures of truth, what right 
 have you to suppose that either yourself, Calvin, Luther, 
 or Augustin, understood them better than Bishop Bull or 
 Jeremy Taylor ? We know your answer to this question ; 
 for, after representing the Church as so totally coiTupted 
 in the end of the fifth century, that no genuine Christianity 
 was to be found in it but among a few unknown persons, 
 Ood^s secret ones^ you thus express yourself; 
 
3S2 Review of Haweis* Church History* 
 
 " The state of things at that time nearly resembled the 
 present. The greater dignitaries of the Church too much 
 men of this world; the inferior clergy UJider their infiuence^ 
 and choosing the ministry for its advantages, or an idle life; 
 and the people^ like their priests^ easily engaged in the page- 
 antry of rites, ceremonies, and superstitions observances : 
 though a generation was preserved, who cleaved to the Lord 
 in one faith, and served him out of a pure heart fervenriy :" 
 A very pretty character this of the Church of England and 
 all her great dignitaries, of whom we know none greater 
 than the two prelates to whom we have referred you. 
 
 The view of the church during the sixth century grows 
 darker and darker, and presents very little that is worthy 
 of the reader's attention. To our author's narrative, how* 
 ever, implicit credit must not be given; for he inadver- 
 tently acknowledges (p. 49), that he has only " looked at 
 some of the "writers of that age, and their works." By 
 what means he obtained a sight of the writers of that age, 
 he has not told us ; but we cannot help thinking that a man 
 ambitious of the character of an impartial \\\sX.oYidXi^ was in 
 duty bound, not only to look at^ but to read with care many 
 of the works of every age, of which he proposed to record 
 the events and doctrines. 
 
 In the seventh century arose the impostor Mohammed, 
 for whose success our author well accounts, by allowing to 
 him great abilities, which he undoubtedly possessed, and 
 by showing what advantages he derived from the igno- 
 rance, corruption, and condition of the clergy. We doubt, 
 however, if Dr. Hawcis has done more than look at the 
 original waitings of that period. To prove the extreme su- . 
 perstition of the age, he quotes St. Eloi of Noyon's charac- 
 ter of a good Christian, which he tnay have found in Lord 
 Kames's Sketches^ of the History of Man, We do not say 
 that he has actually taken it fn^m that work ; but it is some- 
 what singular that an English historian of the Church 
 should have quoted, without addition or diminution, the 
 
Review of Haweis' Church History, 383 
 
 very passage which had before been quoted for the same 
 purpose by the Scotch Judge.* 
 
 Our author, who, upon every occasion, betrays a fellow- 
 feeling for schismatics^ is very willing to find the pure doc- 
 trines of the gospel among the Pauliniam of this century ; 
 though, by his own account of them, they had as little claim 
 to the appellation of Christians as the modem Quakers. — 
 " They regarded the sacraments, he says, as merely allego- 
 rical, and not literally to be observed ; they treated the Vir- 
 gin Mary contemptuously'*'* (which he seems to consider as 
 meretorious conduct) ; " and in their church assemblies 
 they abolished their names, [and offices] of Bishops and 
 Presbyters, instituting a set of pastors, with perfect equality ^ 
 without any peculiar rights^ privileges^ or garb to distin- 
 guish them from the people !" 
 
 His account of the struggles of the Bishop of Rome for 
 universal supremacy in this age, and of the opposition 
 which was made to his claims, not only by the Eastern 
 Church, but by the British, Scotch, and Galilean Churches, 
 and even by the Bishop of Ravenna, in Italy, would be 
 valuable, had he referred us to the authors from whom the 
 account is taken. The man, however, who only looks at ori- 
 ginal writings might not have found this an easy task ; and, 
 therefore. Dr. Haweis never attempts it. 
 
 His history of the eighth century is a well told tale ; but 
 it can be considered as nothing more ; for though in gene- 
 ral true, it rests on no other authority than his own asser- 
 tions. Not one quotation is given— not one contemporary 
 writer referred to. The means by which the Pope obtained 
 what he has long claimed as the patrimony of St. Peter ; 
 the origin of the temporal dignities of the prelates, as Dukes, 
 Marquisesy Counts and Barons ; the final rupture between 
 the Eastern and Western Churches on account of image 
 
 * See Sketches of the History of Man, vol. iv. p. 876, 377, and our 
 author's Impartial History ^ vol. ii. p. 63, 8tc. 
 
384 Review of Haioeis* Church History, 
 
 worship ; the conquests of the Saracens, and the first for- 
 midable appearance of the Turks, are all perspicuoush' de- 
 tailed. We have likewise a concise account of the rise of 
 the new Empire of the West, under Charles the son of Pe- 
 pin, surnamed (says our author) Charlemagne, This, we 
 suppose, was said to show his skill in the French language, 
 as it is probably to display his knowledge of Greeks that a 
 sect, by all other historians styled monothdites,^ is by him 
 uniformly called monotholites. 
 
 In the detail of ecclesiastical affairs during the ninth cen- 
 tury, we expected some account of the rise and constitution 
 of the Moravian Church, which has been, from its founda- 
 tion, independent both of the Roman Pontiff, and of the 
 Patriarch of Constantinople ; but we were disappointed. 
 Our author tells us only that it was founded in 850, by two 
 Greek Monks ; and that it is sufficiently superstitious. He 
 dwells, however, at some length, on the sufferings of Go^ 
 teschalcus^^ whom he calls a martyr for divine truth ; and 
 expresses himself in language extremely reprehensible. 
 
 We abhor, as much as he does, all kinds of religious per- 
 secution; and the peculiar dogmas of Goteschalcus — at least 
 those dogmas for which he suffered, appear to us harmless, 
 though certainly not essential articles of the faith ; and, in 
 one sense of the words, perhaps not true. As our author 
 mentions them only in general terms, as " the doctrines of 
 predestination and grace," we shall lay them before our 
 readers in the words of Goteschalcus himself, that a judge- 
 ment may be formed of the propriety of Dr. Haweis's 
 writings. 
 
 * From i^ovo; and SsAw. 
 
 t Goteschalcus, called likewise Fiilgentius, on account of his eloquence 
 and science, was a Benedictine Monk of Orbais in France, and flourished 
 y,bout the middle of the ninth century. Our author uniformly calls him 
 Godeschalcus, thus confounding him with a deacon of the Church of 
 Liege, who flourished about the year 7&T, and is known in che literary 
 annals of tl.e Church, as the author of the life of St. Lambert the martyr, 
 a book filled with legends and lying wonders. 
 
Rsmev) of Haxveis^ Church History, 385 
 
 ^* Ego Goteschalcus credo et conflteor quod gemina est 
 praedestinatio, sive Electorum ad requiem, sive Reprobo- 
 rum ad mortem : quia sicut Deus incommutabilis, ante 
 mundi constitutionem omnes electos suos incommutabiliter, 
 per gratuitam gratiam suam prsedestinavit ad vitam seter- 
 nam : Similiter omnino omnes Reprobos, qui in die judicii 
 damnabuutur propter ipsorum mala merita, idem ipse in- 
 commutabilis Deus, per justum judicium suum incommu- 
 tabiliter prsedestinavit ad mortem merito sempiternam."^ 
 Tiiis is, indeed, Calvinisni sufficiently harsh ; but he else- 
 where softens it in the following manner : 
 
 " lUos omnes impios et peccatores, quos proprio fuso 
 sanguine filius Dei redimere yenit, hos omnipotens Dei bo- 
 nitas ad vitam praedestinatqs, irretractabiliter salvari tantum- 
 jnodo velit : illos omnes impios et peccatores, pro quibus 
 idem Dei filius nee corpus assuujpsit, nee orationem, nee 
 dico, sanguinem fudit, neque pro eis ullo modo crucifixus 
 fuit, quippe quos pessimos futuros esse prcescivit^ quosque 
 justissime in aeterna prsecipitandos torrejenta praefinivit, ipsos 
 omnino perpetim salvari penitus nolit."t 
 
 In this last extract, the reader perceives that the predesti- 
 nation and reprobation of Goteschalcus are conditional ; and 
 though he errs, not knowing the scripture, when he says that 
 Christ was not, in any respect^ crucified for the impious and 
 the wicked, whom he has certainly redeemed fron> the ever- 
 iasting power of the grave^ yet the error carries in it no- 
 thing of blasphemy. Indeed, we strongly suspect, that had 
 Dr. Haweis weighed well the import of this passage, he 
 would not have lamented so loudly and so long over the 
 fate of " poor Goteschalcus and his doctrine ;" for modi- 
 fied Calvinism like this, seems not to be what he calls " the 
 truths of vital godliness." At any rate, it ill became him to 
 stigmatize the opposers of Calvinism in a body, with the 
 ppithets of " unhumbled, unawakencd, pharisaical and 
 
 * Apud Hincmar. de prsedest. cap. v. j Ibicl. cap. xxvii. & xxix. 
 
 49 
 
385 Reoiew of Haweis' Church HhtoYy. 
 
 proud ;" for a greater proof of the pride of his own heait 
 cannot be conceived than he furnishes by thus seating him- 
 self in the chair of infallibility, and pouring forth railing ac- 
 cusations against such men as the Bishops Taylor and 
 Home. 
 
 But he is still more inexcusable, if an excuse be not found 
 in his ignorance, when, after using such language as this, he 
 goes on to say, that " the doctrine of the Trinity hath a 
 near connection with that oi predestination and grace." Was 
 the late Mr. Jones of Nayland's faith in the Trinity not 
 sound ? We hardly think that even our author will dare to 
 say so ; and yet it is not possible for two Christians to think 
 more differently than Mr. Jones and he on the subjects of 
 predestination and grace. To be convinced of this, let the 
 reader only compare the two admirable letters by Mr. Jones, 
 on the modem doctrine of predestination, published in the 
 fifth volume of our journal, with the following modest ac- 
 count which Dr. Haweis gives of himself and his brother 
 Calvinists in this imperfect history : 
 
 " The natural man receiveth not the things which be of 
 the spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they 
 are spiritually discerned. Happily, the Lord, in every age, 
 though they were but few comparatively — (what were few ? 
 the ages !) — taught some the grace of God, which bringeth 
 salvation ; and to this day a generation, according to the 
 election of grace, can say wherein we stand, and rejoice in 
 hope of the glory of God !!!" 
 
 We have an account of the conversion of the northern 
 nations, in the tenth century, to the Christianity which was 
 then professed in the churches of Rome and Constantinople; 
 and the author gives a rapid sketch, certainly not softened, 
 of the shocking immoralities which prevailed among the 
 clergy. No dissenter or deist could give stronger colouring 
 to such descriptions ; though here, as every where else, we 
 feel the want of references to the original authors. 
 
 The eleventh century o^iens, in this work, with a brief 
 
Review of Haweis* Church Historij. 387 
 
 ^ccouilt of the crusades in Palestine ; whence the author 
 proceeds to the contests between the Emperor Otho and 
 Pope Gregory the seventh ; and concludes, as usual, with a 
 detail of the almost universal corruption of faith and morals. 
 The period was a busy one, and the narrative of its transac- 
 tions is animated and interesting. A just tribute is paid to 
 the memory of Berenger, for opposing the doctrine of tran- 
 substantiation, not yet universally received in the western 
 church; but the author betrays his ignorance of the Aristote- 
 lian philosophy, when he says it was ridiculous to attempt, 
 by means of it, to defend so monstrous an absurdity. The 
 Aristotelian division of body into matter and form^ which 
 maif exist separately^ is admirably fitted for the support of 
 transubstantiation ; and we have often been tempted to be- 
 lieve, that, on this account, and on this only, the philoso- 
 phy of the Lyceum was in the middle ages so generally pre- 
 ferred to that of the Academy, The consequences here 
 attributed to the prevalence of monkery certainly sprung 
 from that system ; but, for the credit of the Albigenses, 
 we hope that they were not a spawn of the Faulinians. 
 
 The history of the twelfth century exhibits nothing very 
 different from that which prevailed in the preceding. The 
 crusades were carried on with disgrace to the arms of 
 Christian Europe ; new contests arose between the Empe- 
 ror and the Pope ; the northern powers continued to con- 
 vert their Pagan subjects and neighbours by the sword; 
 and the most ridiculous questions were debated among the 
 monks with the utmost keenness. This, however, kept 
 inquiry alive, and sent the lover of truth to the sacred scrip- 
 tures and the earliest uninspired writers of the church. 
 
 Hence much gospel truth was brought to light ; and the 
 Waldenses, of whom our author gives a just account, got a 
 firm footing in various countries of Europe. In this century 
 were founded several universities, though the Christians 
 were still indebted, for what knowledge they obtained of 
 the most useful sciences, to the Saracens i and a copy of the 
 
38$ Review of Haweis^. Chui'ch History. 
 
 pandects being discovered, suggested to the Pope the ex* 
 pedieftt of digesting under similar heads the various canons 
 and decrees pubhshed at different periods by councils and 
 pontiffs. Hence the origin of the canon law^ which being 
 conjoined with the civile was taught as a science in the uni- 
 versities, and gave i-ise to the degrees of L. L, B. and L, 
 L. D. at that period, or soon afterwards, the most highly- 
 valued of all academical honours, because the reward of 
 the science employed with most success in support of papal 
 usurpation,'^ 
 
 The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries present to liS 
 scenes in all respects similar to those which we have viewed 
 in the preceding. Crusades in Palestine and Egypt against 
 the followers of Mohammed, and in Europe against the 
 Albigenses ; contests between the Pope and the Emperor, 
 and between his holiness and the French King ; schisms in 
 the papacy producing anathemas from Pope against Pope $ 
 the rise of dominician and franciscan orders of monks ; the 
 ridiculous disputes among the frahciscans themselves; andl 
 the devotion of the monks of all orders to the court of 
 Home, are here placed before us in glowing colours. This 
 part of the work is extremely well written, and not dis» 
 graced by oui* author's usual illiberality to those who think 
 differently from himself respecting the distinguishing dog- 
 mas of Calvin. He shows that the disputes among the 
 nionks contributed much to the rise of the Lollards on the 
 continent, while they stimulated our countryman WicklifT 
 to search in the scriptures for that truth which he could 
 not find in the schools. We have likewise some account 
 of the missions to Tartary and China, and of the stop put 
 to the progress of Christianity in the east, by the victorious 
 arms of the bigotted Tamerlane. 
 
 • It was, perhaps, the discovery of this fact that induced our Pro- 
 Instant historian, after he had inadvertently taken the degree of L. L. 
 B. to proceed to Doctor in Physic; a process certainly uncommon ampins; 
 clergymen, or men of general literature. 
 
jRmew of ffaweis^ Chunk Bistofy. 5§9 
 
 But ^e hasten to the fifteenth century, of which the his- 
 ton% in the work before us, opens with the fall of the East- 
 ern Empire, the discovery of the new world, and the ef-f 
 facts of those great events on the progress of letters and 
 Christianity. At the beginning of this sera, there were nd 
 fewer than three Popes, each claiming the sovereignty of 
 the visible church, and denouncing anathemas against the 
 anti-popes and their various adherents, as well nations as 
 individuals. To put an end to this confusion, the council of 
 Constance was called, which deposed two of the Popes; 
 and, the third giving in his resignation, a new Pope was 
 chosen, who, by the name of Martin the fifth, assumed 
 the ecclesiastical supremacy over the western world. The 
 Greek church, though prostrate in the dust, still maintained^ 
 as at this day she maintains, her independence of the sed 
 of Rome, acknowledging no visible superior tb her owrt 
 patriarchs. The principal transactions of the council of 
 Constance weire the condeirination of John Huss and Je- 
 rome of Prague to the flames, in direct violation of the 
 promise given to the former of these tnart)a's by the Empe- 
 ror Sigismund ; the ordering of the bones of WicklifF to be 
 dug up and burnt ; and the decree for withholding the sa- 
 cramental cup from the laity. Another council was called, 
 during this century, at Pavia, which deposed Pope Euge- 
 nius ; and the schisms and dissentions which this occa- 
 sioned, paved the way for the reformation. 
 
 We have accompanied this impartial historian through 
 1500 years of the Christian church, and have now arrived 
 with him at the sera of the reformation. Being as little 
 attached to popery and its corruptions, as any chaplain of 
 the late Countess of Huntingdon can be, we agree with 
 Dr. Haweis that it is an important aera— ^even the sera of 
 the revival of genuine Christianity^ Our zeal, however, 
 does not prompt us, as his zeal has prompted him, to plead 
 for the immaculate purity of the motives by which the 
 earliest reformers were influenced in every stage of their 
 
&90 Review of Haweis' Chunk History, 
 
 controversy with the church and court of Rome. We cer- 
 tainly believe that " Luther, in his faint opposition to the 
 corruptions of the age, was animated not by zeal for truth, 
 but either by avarice or by mean envy for the glory of his 
 order neglected by a preference of the Dominicans ;" and 
 yet, if our author include us among those " popish adver- 
 saries or infidel historians, to whom^ he says, malignity 
 and hatred of gospel-truth suggested this opinion," we 
 hesitate not to say to him'— ^Mentiris itnpudentissime. We 
 are so far from being ashamed of receiving benefit from 
 such men as Martin Luther and Henry the eighth, that we 
 bless the hand which turned the avarice of the one, and 
 the luxury of the other, from their natural mischiefs, to 
 become instruments of the choicest blessings— even the re- 
 covery of LETTERS, and the restoration of religion. But 
 we are not surprised that Erasmus, though he saw the 
 errors of the church more clearly than Luther himself, 
 *' trembled at the rude hand of hasty reform j" nor does 
 our charity, notwithstanding his modest expression, permit 
 us to say that it was only the cowardice of his ov/n spirit 
 which made him fear " to be involved in the dangers that 
 he apprehended." Such sentences can proceed only from 
 the mouths and pens of Calvinists, who affect to be 
 searchers of hearts and discovers of spirits. 
 
 Dr. Haweis draws an amiable, and, in general, a just 
 character of Melancthon ; though he says, that " the yield- 
 ing temper of that reformer, his love of peace, and some 
 educational prejudices respecting church unity and schism^ 
 led him sometimes into concessions injurious to the cause 
 which he defended." 
 
 We have seen that, in our author's opinion, schism is no 
 sin, and church unity unworthy of the regard of a spiritu- 
 ally-minded man; but Melancthon thought otherwise-— 
 '' Would to heaven, (says he) that I could not only not 
 enfeeble the power of bishops, but establish their dominion ; 
 for I see but too well, what sort of church we are likely ts 
 
Review of Haweis* Church History, 391 
 
 bave, if we demolish ecclesiastical government; I am, 
 sure that the tyranny we have escaped (viz. that of Rome) 
 will then be nothing to that which we shall see established."^ 
 
 This, however, is not the only educational prejudice 
 which our impartial historian undoubtedly finds in the 
 writings of Melancthon. That great and good man was 
 no Calvinist^ as appears as well from his Letter to Arch- 
 bishop Cranmer, as from what he teaches, in the Augsburg 
 Confession, concerning the promise of grace, and justifica- 
 tion. In the Letter he says, " Nimis horridae fuerunt 
 initio stoicce disputationes apud nostras defato^ et disciplinse 
 Xiocuerunt. Quare te rogo, ut de tali aliqua formula doctrinse 
 cogitas." In the Confession he thus expresses himself: 
 " Non est hie opus disputationibus de prsedestinatione aut 
 similibus. ^-exa promusw est universalis ; et nihil detrahit 
 Gperibus, imo exsuscitat ad fidem, et vere bona opera." 
 
 Such offences as these are not to be forgiven by our 
 orthodox historian, who yet, strange to tell, speaks of Zu- 
 inglius in terms of the highest respect. " Though not 
 alike famed with Luther, he may justly (says our author) 
 rank his equal in piety, in learning his superior." Would 
 the reader, after this, suppose that on free-will^ grace^ ekc' 
 tion^ and reprobation^ Zuinglius held opinions little different 
 from those of Pelagius on the same subjects ? We men- 
 tion not his mean notions of the sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper, or his making the church the creature of the state. 
 In the foiTfner of these opinions, Dr. Haweis probably agrees 
 with him ; and though he himself makes the church the 
 creature of the mob, we are not surprised at his preferring 
 Erastionisjn to Apostolical authority. But, in the name of 
 consistency, how comes he to praise the reformer, who 
 maintained that heaven is open to all who live according 
 to the light vouchsafed to them ; and who seem not to have 
 believed in original sin ? To talk of the " moderate tem- 
 
 * Seward's Anegdoteg, vol. iii, p. 129. 
 
$^2 .-fievzffw of Haxveis^ Church History. 
 
 per and selfrcomniand" of Zuinglius, would be ridiculous in 
 ^ny man who knows that he put off the character of a cler- 
 gyman to assume that of a soldier, and died fighting for his 
 ppinions against the Cantons, whom he had not been able, 
 hy reasoning, to convert to the protestant faith ; but of the 
 particulars of this fact our diligent and impartial historian 
 imist be supposed ignorant. He is not ignorant, however, 
 ^hat Zuinglius and Luther differed widely in their opinions 
 respecting the Lord^s Supper ^ which, he says, " is a subject 
 unworthy of contest;" and, apologizing for them, he 
 Requests us to " remember that the best of men are but mm 
 m the best!'" 
 
 Hi^ praises ctf Calvin are not much higher than we^ 
 expected from him ; yet an historian truly impartial, after 
 observing that this far-famed reformer " embraced the 
 doctrines of truth, and adorned them by a conversation 
 the most exemplary^'* would have related, with due horror, 
 the burning of Servetus at a stake, instead of slurring 
 Calvin's guilt with--^" ff this were a just charge, let the 
 jreproach rest upon him!" When he passed this feeble 
 censure on the apostle of Geneva, he had surely forgotten 
 his own maxim, that " no mian ought to vindicate, or, as 
 he might have added, extenuate, abuses in the cause of 
 protestantism, whilst he pleads against them in the hand of 
 popery." 
 
 Notwithstanding these effusions of prejudice and partialis 
 t)% he gives a rapid and well written sketch of the progress 
 of the reformation in Germany, France, Switzerland, Swe- 
 den, Denmark, and Norway ; and then proceeds to state the 
 doctrines of the reformation, and to contend, in direct op- 
 position to what he had before related of the contests of 
 Luther, Carlestadt, and Zuinglius, for a union of sentiment 
 among the reformers J 
 
 What he calls the doctrines of the reformation are iht 
 peculiar opinions of Calvin and his more rigid adherents, 
 which, of course, we must suppose are all that he deems 
 
Reoiertv of Haweis^ Church History. 393 
 
 necessary to be received by the Romish Church to restore 
 her to primitive purity. The condemnation of image- 
 worship, of transubstantiation, of the invocation of saints ; 
 the denial of purgatory and of the supremacy of the Pope ; 
 and the restoration of the cup to the laity in communion, 
 as well as of the privilege of marriage to the clergy, are 
 not deemed worthy of notice among the doctrines which 
 the first reformers unanimously maintained ! The funda- 
 mental truths, in which all the eminent men among them 
 
 concurred, were only 
 
 : " 1. Of God's eternal purpose and predestination of an 
 elect people^ and those, comparatively yt'w, ordained to life 
 and glory eternal. 2. That man had lost all ability to da 
 good^ and freedom of xvill to choose it ; and was in his 
 nature, as fallen, inclined onlv to evil. 3. That nothing 
 ever did or can alter this propensity of the human hearty 
 but the Holy Ghost by his own immediate agency on the 
 souls of men. 4. That a sinner is, and can be justified by 
 faith only; and this not of himself, being unable either to 
 comprehend or receive the things that be of the Spirit of 
 God ; and therefore, the faith itself must be the gift of 
 God, 5. That merit in creatures there is none nor ever can 
 * be. From first to last a sinner must be saved by grace. 
 6. That the vicarious atonement by the one oblation of 
 Christ upon the Cross is effectual, not for the many called^ 
 but for they^ry chosen,^'' 
 
 Were we less aci{uainted than we are with the principles 
 and views of Dr. Haweis, we should indeed be surprised 
 by his hardy assertion, that " these are the things which the 
 reformers uniformly held ;" whilst he passes, without 
 notice, so many other things, about which all Europe 
 knows that there was no controversy among them. But, 
 how does he prove the unanimity of the reformers in hold- 
 ing these abstruse dogmas of Calvinism ? Why, as usual, 
 by his own confident assertions, and by partial extracts 
 from the correspondence of Luther with Erasmus ! 
 
 50 
 
394 Meww of Hawezs^ Church History, 
 
 ^ Melanethon's sentiments respecting predestination and 
 election we have already exhibited in his own words, to 
 which it is hoped that all our readers, who have not been 
 ^hapl^ns to the late Countess of Huntingdon, will give as 
 much credit as to the unsupported assertion of our hnpartial 
 historian. The sentiments of Zuinglius respecting these 
 subjects may be safely inferred from the following address 
 of the minister to the godfathers and godmothers of chil* 
 dren brought to be baptized, which the reader will find in 
 the Liturgy of the Church of Zurich, of which ZuingUus 
 was the founder : — " Consider, therefore, that it is the 
 will of God our Saviour, that all men should attain unto 
 the knowledge of his will, through our only Mediator 
 Jesus Christ, who gave himself up for the redemption of. 
 ALL MANKiND."*^ Is this Calviuism, or what our author 
 calls gospel truth ? 
 
 The quotation from Luther proves, indeed, that he held 
 the most shocking of the tenets which have usually beew 
 attributed to Calvin as their author ; but it proves, at the. 
 same time, that, in controversy, he substituted petulance for 
 argument, and scrupled not to pervert the meaning of scrip- 
 ture to. support his cause. Erasmus had said — " What can 
 be more useless, than to publish this paradox to the world ? 
 namely, that whatever we do, is done, not by virtue of our 
 qwnfree willy but in a way of necessity y"* &c. To this very 
 pertinent question, Luther, after a number of sarcasms, 
 which the respect due to learning, genius, and virtue, should 
 bave suppressed, replies ; " You urge, where is either the 
 necessity or utility of preaching predestination? God him- 
 self teaches it, and commands us to teach it, and that is 
 answer sufficient.*' 
 
 , True ! if God command us to teach it, no other answer- 
 could be required by Erasmus, or will be required by any 
 one of those Churches, in which Dr. Haweis says, that " the 
 
 * Littirgia Figurina, London, 169S. 
 
Mevkw of Ilaxveis} Church History, 895 
 
 ddctrines of the reformation have gone out of vogue :" But 
 
 where is this command to be found ? 
 
 Predestination, we shall suppose to be an undoubted 
 truth ; but we find no mention of it in the Gospels nor in 
 the Acts of the Apostles ; and we hardly think that even 
 the zeal of our author will contend, that in these five in* 
 spired tracts, all the ti'uths are not to be found, which our 
 blessed Lord commanded his followers to teach, when he 
 said to the eleven, " Go ye into all the world, and preach 
 the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is bap*- 
 ■tized, shall be saved ; and he that believeth not, shall be 
 damned." The controversies of St. Paul with the Jews and 
 Greek philosophers, led him into disquisitions on many to- 
 pics, to which Christians might for ever have safely re- 
 mained strangers ; and which illiterate Christians can ne- 
 ver comprehend. Let not the reader be startled at this ast- 
 Tsertion. For the character and labours of St. Paul we have 
 the highest veneration, and believe the world to be more 
 indebted to him, than to any other individual minister of 
 Christ ; but even St. Peter, though he did not presume, like 
 our author, to charge the Apostle of the Gentiles with 
 temporizing-, yet acknowledged, that, " in his epistles are 
 some things hard to be understood, which they who are 
 unlearned and unstable, wrest to their own destruction." 
 
 The case, indeed, could not be otherwise. St. Paul's 
 epistles are, every one of them, addressed to particular 
 'churches, or particular men, for the obvious purpose of 
 ^guarding them against some prevailing errors^ and unra- 
 velling the sophistry of the Jews, the Gnostics, the Stoics, 
 and the Epicureans. This being the case, no man can feel 
 the full force of his reasonings, or apprehend the precise 
 meaning of the terms which he uses, who has not some 
 knowledge of the questions that were agitated among those 
 to whom his epistles were immediately addressed. Sudh 
 knowledge can never be the portion of illiterate Chris- 
 tians, who shall therefore be saved, if they believe the plain 
 truths, and fulfil the duties inculcated in the four gor,pels ; 
 
S9^ Review of Haweis" Church History, 
 
 though they perplex not themselves with the things iii St^ 
 Paul's epistles, which St. Peter himself thought hard to be 
 imderstoodi 
 
 In the gospels, thfen, must we look for the command 
 which Luther says, God has given us to teach ignorant 
 men, that " whatever they do, is done, not by virtue of their 
 own free will, but in a way of necessity^" Instead of such a 
 command, however, he produces only two passages, which, 
 as they contain no command of any kind, are nothing to the 
 purpose. The former, in which our blessed Lord says,* 
 *' Many are called, but few are chosen," refers obviously to 
 the calling of the Jews by the first preaching of the gospel ; 
 and the latter"]' is only a declaration that Christ knew the 
 temper and disposition of those whom he had called to the 
 apostleship. After telling the twelve that they " were not 
 all clean," and setting them an example of condescension 
 and humility, he adds, " If ye know these things, happy 
 are ye^ if ye do them. I speak not of you all, I know whom 
 1 have chosen : but that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he 
 that eateth bread with me, hath lift up his heel against me." 
 If these words could be supposed to have any relation what- 
 ever to the doctrine of election and reprobation, (which they 
 plainly have not), they would operate with the force of de- 
 monstration against that doctrine ; for they declare that 
 Judas was chosen as well as St. Peter. 
 
 Aware that his illustrious correspondent would not re- 
 ceive these two texts of scripture, as the command of God to 
 teach that what we do, is done, not by virtue of our own free 
 will, hxitmaxvaij of necessity^ Luther at last condescends 
 to point out to him the utility of the doctrine : " It tends, 
 he says, to humble our pride !" 
 
 Does it indeed ? Are the Calvinists, in general, the hum- 
 blest of mortals ? Or does this impartial histoiy indicate the 
 extreme humility of its author ? Surely the man who pro* 
 nounces that all the Catholic writers of the first four centu- 
 
 * Malt. XX. 16. t St. Johji xiii. 18. 
 
kev'iew of Haweis* Church History* 397 
 
 ries arc either weak or wicked, and that all the modems 
 who think not on these subjects as he does, are " destitute 
 of learning, not to say common sense," has no pretensions 
 whatever to humility. Indeed, it is not easy to conceive how 
 the belief of unconditional election and reprobation can pos- 
 sibly humble the human heart ; for, as it is natural for him 
 who is convinced that he is one of the chosen few, to look 
 down with contempt on the less favoured multitude ; so he 
 who believes, that whatever he does, is done by necessity, 
 may indeed, as our Church teaches,* " be thrust either into 
 •desperation, or into wretchedness of unclean living;" but 
 he cannot be humbled by the consciousness of guilty be- 
 cause, though a murderer, he was as passive an instrument 
 as the sword by which he perpetrated the deed. By the 
 inward operation of divine grace, the elected Calvinist may 
 indeed be kept humble ; but, by the same operation, the 
 virtuous remonstrant may likewise be kept humble ; espe- 
 cially as he is conscious that a// his sins are chargeable on 
 himself. 
 
 But the reformer adds another reason to prove the utility 
 of this doctrine. 
 
 " It is one of the highest degrees of faith, he says, sted- 
 fastly to believe that God is infinitely merciful, though he 
 saves, comparatively, but few, and condemns so many ; and 
 that he is strictly just, though of his own will he makes 
 such numbers of mankind necessarily liable to damnation. 
 These are some of the unseen things, whereof faith is the 
 evidence. Whereas, were it in my power to comprehend 
 them, or clearly to make out hoiv God is both inviolably 
 just, and infinitely merciful, notwithstanding the display of 
 wrath, and seeming inequality in his dispensations, respec- 
 ing the reprobate, faith would have little or nothing to do." 
 
 And this jargon Dr. Haweis calls a " triumphant reply !" 
 forgetting, it is to be hoped, that God himself appeals to 
 
 * irth Article. 
 
f|0 ReviexD of Haiveis^ Church Hhtdi^y, 
 
 human judgment for the iqidty of his ways, which he surely 
 would not have done, if divine justice had been altogether 
 incomprehensible by man. In the first chapter of Isaiah's 
 prophecies, he calls upon the Jews to reason with him on the 
 subject, and, by the mouth of Ezekiel, thus addresses them: 
 " Yet ye say, the way of the Lord is not equal. Hear 
 now, O house of Israel! Is not my way equal? are not your 
 ways unequal?" A question, which the house of Israel 
 could not have answered, were there any truth in this rea- 
 soning of Luther's. 
 
 Let not the reader be scandalized at the freedom with 
 which we treat the dogmas and reasonings of this great 
 reformer. To use the language of a celebrated historian,^ 
 " The knowledge of truth was not poured into his mind all 
 at once, by any special revelation : he acquired it by in- 
 dustry and meditation, and his progress, of consequence, 
 was gradual." He was liable, therefore, to all the mistakes 
 of other students ; and was destitute of many aids, which 
 we now possess, for the discovery of religious truth. Whilst 
 the irascibility of his own temper, resenting the ill treat- 
 ment which he received from the church of Rome, drove 
 him, perhaps, too far from the creed of that church in some 
 points of doctrine, the inveterate prejudices of education 
 made him symbolize too much with her in others ; and be 
 it remembered, that, if he thought " the truths respecting 
 predestination in all its branches, should be taught and pub^ 
 lished^'' the reformers of our own church were of a very- 
 different opinion ;'j' and that if deference be due to human 
 authority, it is to them^ and not to Luther, that ive are to 
 pay it. 
 
 From this digression respecting the union of sentiments 
 among the most eminent reformers, the author returns to 
 the history of the church. His detail of ecclesiastical affairs, 
 
 * jRobert son's History of Charles V. 
 
 T See the conclusion of the 17th Article. 
 
Review of Haweis' Church History* 377 
 
 fixntt the diet of Augsburg, ta the religious peace in the 
 same city, is not sufficiently minute ; and he has produced no 
 good authority for his belief, that the Emperor Charles the 
 fifth died in the protestant faith. The superstitious mumme- 
 ries of that monarch, at the end of his life, are indeed alto- 
 gether inconsistent with the supposition ; and Dr. Haweis 
 might have found, in the spirit and temper of Philip, a suf- 
 ficient reason for the cruel treatment of Charles's friends 
 and confessor, without supposing that a Romish priest and 
 Romish bishop countenanced the apostacy of the Emperor 
 from the Romish faith ! With Robertson, however, we 
 think it is not improbable, that Charles, " having found, af- 
 ter repeated trials, that he could not bring any two clocks 
 or watches to go exactly alike, might reflect, with a mixture 
 of surprize as well as regret, on his own folly, in having 
 bestowed so much time and labour on the mere vain at- 
 tempt of bringing mankind to a precise uniformity of senti- 
 ment concerning the profound and mysterious doctrines of 
 religion." This was a reflection worthy of the most saga* 
 cious monarch of his age, when, freed from the cares of go- 
 vernment, he was at leisure to meditate coolly on the powers, 
 passions, and prejudices of the human mind. 
 
 In the fourth chapter of the book which contains the his- 
 toiy of the sixteenth century, we have a rapid detail of the 
 progress of the reformation in England, Scotland, Ireland, 
 Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Brandenburg, Prussia and 
 Germany. There is, however, nothing in it to which our 
 readers can be supposed strangers, except a ludicrous story, 
 not worthy of repetition, respecting Dr. Cole and the kna%>e 
 of clubs ; an erroneous account of the constitution of the first 
 reformed church in Scotland ; and an acknowledgment, we 
 suppose inadvertendy made, that the Augsburg confession 
 is not Calvinistic, and, of course, that what was formerly 
 said of the Calvinism of Melancthon, is a falsehood ! 
 
 We have more than once, in reviewing this work, had 
 occasion to remark, that to the impartiality of an historian. 
 
wo Keview of Haweis^ Church History, 
 
 diligence and accuracy are as essential as the love of truth; 
 and, if our learned ^nd candid author had given himself the 
 trouble to read Skmner^s Ecclefiiastical History; Bishop 
 Sage's Fundamental Charter of Presbyter if ; or even the Zi- 
 turgy compiled for the use of the church of Scotland, by 
 the reformer Knox, he would hardly have dared to express 
 himself in the following terms : 
 
 " The intrepid Knox having formed with Calvin, at Ge- 
 neva, the strictest friendship, and adopted all his opinions 
 respecting church government, be returned to his native 
 land ; and with his rough eloquence, and hardihood that 
 knew no fear, he bore down all opposition, overturned the 
 whole Popish hierarchy, and established the Presbyterian 
 government in its stead, to which the church of Scotland 
 still adheres, ^^ 
 
 ^ We pass over the obvious intention to deceive, in the stu- 
 died ambiguity of the last clause of this sentence ; and only 
 beg leave to refer our spiritually-minded man, to the works 
 which we have mentioned, for a complete proof that the 
 Presbyterian form of church government was introduced 
 into Scotland, not by John Knox, but by Andrew Melville ; 
 and, that for the first fifteen year^, the reformed church was 
 governed by super intendants^ for the ordination of whom 
 John Knox drew up 2i form, Superintendants, however, 
 resemble bishops ; and such is our pious priest's unreniit- 
 ting zeal to excite the rancour of the multitude against that 
 order of men, that, speaking of those, who, in the reign of 
 our Henry the eighth embraced the '^ evangelical doctrines," 
 he says, 
 
 " Some of them, as the excellent Bilney, by whom Lati- 
 mer was converted, with Frith, and other worthies, fell 
 victims to episcopal persecution, and died in flames !" 
 
 When you wrote this very extraordinary sentence, (give 
 us leave. Sir, to ask you solemnly) what impression did 
 you mean to make on the minds of your readers I You 
 knov/ perfecdy well, that the persecutions under the reigu 
 
Heview of Hcnveis^ Church History. 401 
 
 of Henry, can no more be called episcopal^ than presbifterial 
 persecutions ; but do you not likewise know, that your ad- 
 mirers — the infatuated frequenters of Lady Huntingdon's 
 chapels — will understand you as here charging bishops of 
 -every co7nmunion with cherishing, in the churches which 
 they govern, a spirit of persecution? That the charge, is 
 Jalse^ a stronger proof cannot be wished for, than that the 
 rector of All-Saints^ Aldwinckle^ has never been censured, 
 either for his schismatical practices at Bath, or for the num- 
 berless insinuations of a maUcious tendency with which this 
 history teems against the regular clergy of the church of 
 England. . . 
 
 • We pass over the two next chapters, on the learning and 
 heresies of the times, and on the accessions made to the Chris- 
 tian Church ; because from them the reader can learn no- 
 thing, except that the author, differing widely from Bacon, 
 is of opinion, that " the more advanced in science proceeded 
 to the summit of wisdom, to know that there is no GodJ^^ 
 ■ The seventh chapter, on the Progress of the true Churchy 
 exhibits a melancholy picture of the religion of those who, 
 in the western world, acknowledged the supremacy of the 
 Pope, and, in the east, that of the Patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople. The author, however, had surely forgotten his own 
 definition of gospel doctrines, when, speaking of the Greek 
 Christians, he chose to affirm, that " they are tenacious onlys 
 of their miserable forms and ceremonies, in which all their 
 Christianity consists, and strangers alike to the gospel doc- 
 trines, and the purity of godliness." According to him, pre- 
 destination is the most important of all gospel doctrines; 
 and we learn from Dr. King,'^ not only that it is a dogma 
 of the Greek church, but also that it is treated by some of 
 the Russian clergy, " with a much better kind of logic than 
 that with which such points are generally discussed," When 
 Dr. Haweis shall have read this, or rather the work t© 
 
 * Rif^s and Cereinof:ies of the Greek Church, &c. 
 5X 
 
402 Review of Haweis* Church Nistory*^ 
 
 which we have referred him, we trust, that his candour wilL 
 impel him to make, through the medium of the Russian 
 Ambassador, a proper apolog\' to the Archbishop of No^ 
 vogorod, for having thus inadvertently calumniated tke^ 
 brethren ! 
 
 The ac<:ount of the Lutheran churches is given with less 
 partiality than our author usually betrays. It proves with 
 the force of demonstration, that the earliest reformers werei 
 not agreed in holding the doctrine of unconditional election 
 and reprobation ; that the followers of Melancthon were, at' 
 least, as numerous as those of Luther j and that they were; 
 prevented from explicitly avowing themselves to be what 
 Dr. Haweis calls Semi-pelagians, only during Luther's life, 
 lest his irascible temper and overbearing spirit should excite?, 
 such dissentions among them, as might give advantages tot 
 their common enemies. 
 
 Among the Calvinistic churches enumerated in the same 
 chapter, is placed the church of England. As our authot^ 
 produces no other proof than his own assertion^ that she 
 holds the doctrine of absohite decreeSy we shall content our- 
 selves at present with opposing to it our denial; but whea 
 he quotes Bishop Burnet, in support of another positioix 
 equally false, the reader may perhaps think him entided to, 
 more attentiois Speaking of the Puritans in the reign of 
 Elizabeth, he says-— 
 
 "■ Nor were they as averse to the name of bishop or his 
 superintendance, as to the pomp, and wealth, and political 
 engagements of the prelacy : for as yet the English bishops, 
 claimed not their office by divine rights but under the con-. 
 stiiutioJi of their country ; nor pleaded for more than twa 
 orders of apostolical appointment, bishops and deacons." 
 
 Has Dr. Haweis never read the Preface to the For7n of 
 ordaining Bishops^ Priests^ and Deacons^ published, by au- 
 thority , in the reign of Edward the sixth ? If not, it is time 
 that he should read it ; that he may not again oppose the 
 testimony of aa individual respecting tlie doctrinea of the 
 
Review of Haweis' Church History. '40S 
 
 ^ASrch, to the authoritative declaration of the church her- 
 self. But the declarations of the church are by him gene- 
 ^^y understood in a sense diametrically opposite to the 
 literal meaning of the words in which they are made* 
 
 Thus, in the exhortation at the celebration of the commu- 
 niouy the church, by the mouth of the priest, instructs the 
 fseople, that " as the benefit is great, if, with a true penitent 
 heart, and lively faith, we receive that holy sacrament (for 
 then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his 
 blood ; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us ; we are 
 one with Christ, and Christ with us ;) so is the danger 
 gi'eat, if we receive the same unworthily : for then are we 
 guilty of the body and blood of Christ our Saviour ; we eat 
 and drink our own damnation^ not considering the Lord's 
 body," &c. But our author, wishing to make the church 
 in every thing symbolize with the oracle of Geneva, says— ^ 
 *' Calvin supposed the sign or symbol to convey a sacra- 
 mental pledge of blessing, and that a spiritual presence of 
 Christ attended it to the regenerate and beheving only; 
 whilst toothers the elements remained as common food: and 
 this the Church of England adopted.''^ Whence it follows, 
 that, in his opinion, the Church of England means by the 
 Word damnation^ bodily nourishment ; for we can hardly 
 suppose that he really intends, every time that he sits down 
 to dinner, literally to " eat and drink his ozvn damnation^ or 
 to be guilty of the body and blood of Christ his Saviour !" 
 
 His account of the rise and progress of the Socinians, In- 
 dependents, and Anabaptists, contains little that is new or 
 exceptionable. Mention is, indeed, made of a city^ of 
 which we never heard before, called Racoxv ; and geogra* 
 phical information we certainly did not expect from a his- 
 tory of the church. We are afraid, however, that, by all 
 Other historians, civil or ecclesiastical, our author's Racow 
 IS called Cracow^ or Cracovia; and had he studied with 
 care the works of Charles Leslie, he might have learned, 
 with other things of more importance, tliat the Socinian ca- 
 
404f Revietu Of Hciweis' Church Histofy, 
 
 techism was published m Cracozv^ though to avoid a cacb- 
 phonic, it is usually called the Racovian catechism. This is 
 a trifling blunder, but it shows a defect of that accuracy, 
 without which an historian can never be trusted. 
 
 His introduction to the history of the church, in the se- 
 venteenth century^ raised in our minds expectations which 
 the continued narrative did not gratify. The candour with 
 which he judges of the conduct of the Jesuits, when acting 
 as Missionaries in the four quarters of the globe ; the cen- 
 sures which he deservedly passes upon the other orders 
 which thwarted their measures ; and the disinterested zeal 
 by which he allows many of that learned and active. order 
 to have been influenced, led us to hope for the same impar- 
 tiality in his account of the reformed churches, more espe- 
 cially of the church of England. We were, however, woe- 
 fully disappointed. James the first he finds popishiy inclined, 
 and his most respectable bishops impious Jiatt ever s ; yet the 
 church of Rome knew so little of this inclination, that, we 
 are told, she meant to blow up the monarch and his bishops 
 by gunpowder ! Charles the first leaned still more towards 
 Rome, and Archbishop Laud was half a Papist ; though the 
 Princess Elizabeth has declared to the world, that the last 
 injunction laid upon her by her royal father, was to study 
 the Archbishop's book against Fisher the Jesuit, which 
 would ground her against popery ! 
 
 It is indeed known to all who are acquainted with the 
 history of that period, that no man recovered so many per- 
 sons from the corruptions of popery as Dr. Laud ; that the 
 famous Chillingworth was one of his proselytes ; and that, 
 of course, it is to that much calumniated prelate, that the 
 world is indebted for the ablest defence of the reformation 
 that ever "svas written — we mean Chillingworth's Religion ' 
 of Protestants^ a safe Way to Salvation, The Archbishop 
 'was indeed a hjgh-churchman, and discountenanced the 
 docti'ine oi absolute decrees ; and the divine right of episco- 
 pacy, Avith the universality of redemption, are, in our au- 
 
Review of Haweis* Church History, 40S 
 
 thor's opinion, the two greatest heresies that can be main- 
 tained by a Protestant, whether clergyman or layman. They 
 are much greater offences against God than impiety and hy- 
 pocrisy ; for, " he hopes that Whitgift and Bancroft were 
 good men ^ and good bishops," though, in the page immedi- 
 ately preceding that in which this hope is expressed, he had 
 called the former an impious flatterer^ and the latter, a hy* 
 pocrite! (vol. iii. pp.80, 81.) 
 
 What he says, (p. 62) of Calixtus, the divinity professor 
 of Helmstadt, is much niore applicable to Laud : — " No 
 man appears a more determined Protestant than Laud, or 
 has written with greater force against the errors of the 
 church of Rome ; though he was abused as half a Catholic, 
 because he maintained, that in the church of Rome the fun- 
 damental articles were still held ; and that salvation might 
 there be obtained, even though men were under many mis- 
 takes and prejudices of education. He admitted that the 
 union of churches was impracticable, under the decisions of 
 the council of Trent ;" but earnestly wished that those de- 
 cisions might be altered, and Rome become such as that he 
 could unite with her. This surely was no unpardonable of- 
 fence in the disciple of him, who, in one of his best prayers 
 on earth, said, '* Holy Father, keep through thine own name 
 those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we 
 are:' 
 
 Dr. H. does not think Cromwell just equal to Charles the 
 first in moral worth ; but " the true religion," i. e. Calvin- 
 ism, " was infinitely more indebted to him !" Nay, we are 
 as much indebtecl to him ior presei'ving true religion among 
 us, as to Henry the eighth for introducing it ! Was true re- 
 ligion then preserved among us by the Brownists^ Muggle- 
 tonians^ ^lakers^ Fifth-moiiarchy-men^ and all the other 
 sects without name and number, which sprang up under the 
 protectorate, and are now mostly forgotten t A spiritually- 
 minded man, who, preferring the schism-shop to the cathe- 
 dral, wishes, by all possible means, to lessen episcopal au- 
 
406 J^imeto of Haweis'* Church History^ 
 
 thortty, may be of this opinion ; but we trust that the ma* 
 jority of "die nation think differently of true religion. 
 
 With respect to the character of Charles the second, we are 
 not inclined to dispute with him ; but we cannot enough ad* 
 mire the effrontery of the man, who affirms that the Bishops 
 and other dignitaries of the church were in that reign igno- 
 rant, worldly-mmded, and negligent of their duty ! Wer6 
 the Archbishops Juxon, Shelden, and Sancroft ignorant, or 
 worldly-minded men ? He admits some merit in Kenn^ even 
 though an Arminian ; and be it recorded to the honour 
 of Charles, that Dr. Kenn recommended himself to his fa- 
 vour, not by flattering his vices, but by reproving his mis- 
 tress — ^the fimious Nell Gwyn. Warburton, though, in out 
 author's opinion, no better a Christian than Julian the apos- 
 tate, was probably as learned as Dr. Haweis ; and, as he 
 was no high-churchman, he may be entitled to credit, when 
 he affirms of the reign of Charles the second, not only that 
 ^ it was^ but is, likely ever to be esteemed our golden age of 
 theological literature." 
 
 Our author, who finds not one unsullied virtue in the so- 
 vereigns of the house of Stuart, discovers great generosity 
 in William, Prince of Orange, when he condescended to aC' 
 cept of three kingdoms ! Magnanimous hero ! He was not 
 actuated by low ambition, or a desire to humble the French 
 king. His only motive for deigning to snatch the sceptre 
 from the hands of his uncle and father-in-law, Vv^as a desire 
 to preserve the profession of the true religion in Great- Bri* 
 tain and Ireland ! How opportunely was he seized with that 
 Christian desire immediately after the birth of the Prince 
 of Wales ; — an event which opened his eyes likewise to 
 another fact, which he could not previously be made to per* 
 eeive ! James, and his brother Charles, had been often ac- 
 cused of extending the prerogative, and encroaching on the 
 rights of the people, and the parliament ; but William, as 
 lorg as he was heir-apparent to the throne, saw no necessity- 
 for restraining the prerogative. He even said to Charles^ 
 
Meoiew of Haweis' Church HisUrtf, 405' 
 
 fchat it ought not to be restrained ; but he now discovered his 
 mistake, and came over to England, not merely to prevent 
 the establishment of popery, but to redress all the grievan-* 
 ces of the nation ! Yet William was not a faultless sove- 
 reign. He filled the vacant sees with latitudinarian divines^ 
 favouring Arminianism^ and some of them even high,- 
 churchmen ! 
 
 Our learned historian, however, is mistaken, when h^ 
 says that the prelates, who could not transfer their allegiance 
 Xq him from the abdicated Sovereign, were deposed. No 
 attempt was made to depose them, if by deposition he meant 
 degradation. They were, indeed, deprived of their ^^^^ by 
 9^ act of Parliament; but deprivation of a see, and deposit 
 tion or degradation^ are words of very different import^ 
 tliough Sir Richard Hall and he have chosen to confound 
 them. A schism, it is true, was, by this rash measure, 
 introduced even among hi^h-churchmen ; but Sancroft and 
 Tillotson were both bishops, and the adherents of neitheie 
 looked upon the ordination of the other as invalid: the]^ 
 followed the example of the council of Nice, which ac- 
 knowledged the validity of the Novetian ordinations, though 
 unquestionably schismatical ; and when a clergyman went 
 over from the one party to the other, he was not re-ordained, 
 but only required to renounce the principles upon which the 
 schism was founded. Our reverend physician's insinua- 
 tions, therefore, that the authority of the regular clergy is 
 not more apostolical than that of the self-commissioned 
 methodists, proceeding, hke those of his precursor the 
 Baronet, on a confusion of ideas, serve only to evince how 
 little he is acquainted with the constitution of the Catholic 
 «hurch, and how desirous he is to promote fanaticism and 
 endless divisions. 
 
 The history of the eighteenth century opens with a high 
 penegyric by the author on himself; and the object of the 
 detail is to prove that there is no true Christianity in the 
 world, but among the 3fgr avians^ the MethodzstSj the Ger- 
 
Review of Haxveis* Church History* 
 
 inan Pietists^ and the various sects of Scottish Seceders^ who 
 are, indeed, such genuine gospellers^ that they have pub- 
 liclv renounced some of the first principles of moral recti- 
 tude.* The Lutheran churches have all deviated from the 
 opinions of their founder respecting particular redemption 
 5ind absolute decrees ; and Dr. Haweis, who holds these opi- 
 nions, has too good reason to value his own understanding 
 and progress in godliness, to look upon their universal apos- 
 tacy as a ground oi probability^ if not ^ proof ^ that Luther, 
 on these points, had not discovered the truth as it is in 
 Jesus ! 
 
 Much undeserved abuse, we believe, has been poured 
 upon the Moravians ; but we cannot pay great regard to 
 our author's account of their church and doctrines, because 
 it omits several things of importance to be known, and con- 
 tains some assertions, which we have good reason to consi- 
 der as false. An episcopal succession is indeed a matter of 
 too little importance to be noticed by our spiritually -minded 
 man ; but there are readers of our journal, who will receive 
 pleasure from the information that Archbishop Potter, after 
 the most diligent research into the histor37^ of the church of 
 the united brethren, admitted the succession of their bishops 
 to have been uninterrupted, and considered them as aso- 
 ciety of Christians deserving of the right hand of fellowship. 
 Our author affirms, that Count Zinzendorff, " though he 
 consented, with Baron Watteville, to be appointed to the 
 presidence of the brethren's affairs, both spiritual and tem- 
 poral, in conjunction with the elders of the congregation, 
 yet continued in communion with the Luthern church to 
 his dying day !" 
 
 This is a tale, in itself, exceedingly improbable. The 
 united brethren, at that period, if not now, considered epis- 
 copal ordination as necessary to qualify the servants of the 
 church for their respective functions ; and it is little likely 
 
 * See cur eighth volume, p. 134 
 
Review of Haweis* Church History, 409 
 
 that they would appoint a layman of a different communion 
 to preside over their bishops and presbyters. But we need 
 not reason in this manner. We have the authority of one 
 of their own clergv to affirm, that Count Zinzendorff, 
 after endeavouring in vain to bring over the brethren at 
 Hemheet to the Lutheran faith and discipline, became 
 himself a convert to their faith and discipline, and, in 1735, 
 was consecrated one of their bishops ; having, the year be- 
 fore, been examined, and admitted into the inferior orders 
 by the theological faculty at Tubingen. Archbishop Potter, 
 we are assured, congratulated him on the event, and pro- 
 mised what assistance he could give to a church of confes- 
 sors, of whom he wrote in terms of the highest respect, for 
 their having maintained the pure and primitive faith and 
 discipline, in the midst of the most tedious and cruel per* 
 aecutions. 
 
 We have reason to believe, from the detail given us by 
 the same candid Moravian, that the charge of impurity 
 brought against the count by the ti*anslator of Mosheim's 
 history, and the Bishops Warburton and Lavington, is not 
 so totally groundless as our author wishes to persuade his 
 readers. The count, indeed, was innocent ; but it is ad- 
 mitted by our correspondent, that some of the converts to 
 the faith and discipline of the unitas fratrum^ having pre- 
 viously imbibed extravagant notions, propagated them with 
 zeal among their new friends, in a phraseology extremely 
 reprehensible; and that the count himself sometimes adopted 
 the very improper language of those fanatics, when labour- 
 ing to bring them from the extravagance of error to the 
 soberness of truth. It is added, that much of the extra- 
 vagance and error, which have been attributed to the count, 
 is to be charged, not to him^ but to those persons who, 
 writing his extempore sermons in short-hand, printed and 
 published them without his knowledge or consent. 
 
 This account of the matter is extremely probable ; and 
 while, it may ser\^e to vindicate these respectable characters 
 
410 Review of Haweis* Church History^ 
 
 from one of the blackest calumnies that were ever circu- 
 lated against men,^ it shows that Count Zinzendorff and 
 the brethren gave no countenance to those impurities, 
 which, on plausible evidence, were said to disgrace their 
 society. They have departed, however, far from the ori- 
 ginal purity of their principles, if they be amalgamated 
 ivith that mass of mushrooms sprung from the hot-bed o£ 
 fanaticism, and ycleped the Missionary Society* 
 
 The three apostles of methodism were Mr. John Wes- 
 ley, Mr. George Whitfield, and " the noble and elect 
 Lady Huntingdon." We have a full account of the birtli, 
 life, and transactions of each of these servants of the Lord, 
 and revivers of true godliness ; and it may seem rather sin- 
 gular, that, though Wesley was as zealous an opponent of 
 Calvinism as any of those dignitaries of the church, whom 
 our author calls Semi-pelagians, he is yet admitttid to have 
 been •"' an eminently favoured saint of God." But he had 
 the merit of exciting a schism in the established church, 
 which, like charity, covereth a multitude of sins. 
 
 Whitfield had all Wesley's zeal, with the additional me- 
 rit of Calvinistic orthoxy, and little learning' / Hence it 
 is, that " no man^ since the days of St. Paul, not even Lu- 
 ther himself, was ever personally blest to the call and con- 
 version of so many souls from darkness to light, and from 
 the power of Satan unto God, as George Whitfield. He 
 
 * " I am informed," says our candid author, «« that the impure and 
 malignant note inserted by the translator of Mosheim, against tbc 
 brethren, in his ecclesiastical history, he would, from conviction of' its in- 
 justice, have expunged: but the copy being shown to the author of tJb& 
 divine Legation of Moses, the bishop engaged him to let it stand, and 
 there it remains a monument of the bitterness, bigotry, and falsehood of 
 these accusers of the brethren" It would have been singularly obliging 
 in our impartial historian, to have saidyrow vihom he received this curi- 
 ous piece of informarion ! The bishop of Gloucester and Dr. Maclaine 
 •were no fools. They could not but be sensible that, if real, this was a 
 most nefarious transaction ; and it is not probable that they would first 
 coinmit a crijne, and then publish that crime to defeat its olyect, and fi'w.- 
 grace themselves/ 
 
Jfeview of Haweis* Church History » 411 
 
 crossed the Atlantic thirteen times, to preach the everlast- 
 ing gospel, xuith the power of the Holy Ghost sent doxvn front 
 Heaven /" 
 
 But though no man^ since the days of St» Paul, has been 
 so personally blest as St. George Whitfeld^ yet the elect lady 
 seems to have been still more blest ; for she founded col- 
 leges, endowed innumerable chapels, and patronized Dr, 
 Hazveis ! There are several curious particulars in our au- 
 thor's account of this lady, which we regret that our limits 
 permit us not to transcribe ; but we cannot omit the follow- 
 ing, as it shows the real object of some of the Methodists 
 in " creeping into houses, and leading captive silly women, 
 led away by divers lusts," whilst it verifies an observation 
 of the pious Nelson, that " love between the sexes, though 
 it may begin in the spirit, generally ends in the flesh." 
 
 Lady Huntingdon, though exemplary in her conduct 
 from a child, wished, till some time after her marriage, to 
 establish her own righteousness, and " hy prayer, fasting, 
 and alms-deeds, to commend herself to the favour of the 
 Most High and Most Holy ! The zealous preachers, who 
 had been branded with the name of Methodists, had now 
 awakened great attention in the land. Lady Margaret Hast- 
 ings happening to hear them, received the truth as it is in 
 Jesus from their ministry; and was, some years after, 
 united in marriage with the excellent Mr, Ingham, one of 
 the first labourers in this plenteous harvest ! Conversing 
 with Lady Margaret one day on this subject, Lady Hun- 
 tingdon was exceedingly struck with a sentiment she ut- 
 tered, that since she had known and believed in the Lord 
 Jesus Christ for life and salvation, she had been as happy 
 as an angel !\ To any such sensation of happiness, Lady 
 Huntingdon felt that she was yet a stranger !" She obtained 
 that happiness, however, from her connection with Mr<x 
 Whitfield, and prophesied to Bishop Benson, that, on his 
 death-bed, " the ordination of George Whitfield would be 
 one of the few ordinations on which he would reflect with 
 
41^ i^eview df llaweti Church HiHoYy^. 
 
 complacence."—" It is worthy of remark," adds the author,. 
 " that Bishop Benson, on his dying bed, sent ten guineas 
 to Mr. Whitfield, as a token of his favour and approbation^ 
 and begged to be remembered by him in his prayers !" 
 
 Yet this prophetess, this genuine Calvinist, this elect ladtf^ 
 is represented by her panegyrist, as having her heart swollen 
 ivith spiritual pride, as " thinking of herself much more 
 highly than she ought to have thought, and not soberly, 
 according as God had dealt to her and her friends the mea- 
 sure of faith."^ " The success attending her efforts seemed 
 to impress her mind with a persuasion, that a particular 
 benediction would rest upon whomsoever she should send 
 forth ;f and rendered her choice not always judicious ! She 
 had so long directed the procedures of her connection^ that 
 she too seldom asked the advice of the judicious ministei"s 
 who laboured with her ; and bore not passively contradic- 
 tion,^ This, we suppose, is related to prove the truth of 
 Luther's opinion, that Calviniam tends to humble the 
 
 human heart ; and many such proofs the reader will find 
 in our author's account of himself, and his brethren of the 
 connection ! 
 
 Thus, " Whitfield too frequently indulged in censures of 
 the clergy, which, however just they might be, seemed the 
 effect of resentment !" — " He, and Wesley, and all of them^ 
 were always at their work, preaching wherever they could 
 procure admittance into the churches ; and not a little Jiat" 
 teredbij the popularity attending their ministrations ! They 
 must have been more than men (they were the elec£) if they 
 had not been so." " The Methodists" (remember, reader, 
 he is a Methodist who is speaking) " live in a state of 
 greater piety and separation from the zvo rid than the gene- 
 rality of their brethren. They join in noiae of the fashion - 
 
 * Rom. xli. S. 
 
 f We now see the propriety of our author's phrase, " Episcopal mer.," 
 which appeared to us so strange when we first met with it. 
 
K^iew of Hawets* Church History, 313 
 
 ad^le amusements of the age, frequent not the theatres, or < 
 scenes of dissipation, court no favour of the great, or human 
 respects ; their tiine and services are better employed in the 
 more important labours of the ministry, preaching the word 
 in season, out of season, and counting their work their best 
 rvagesP'' 
 
 We have some reason to believe that all Calvinistic Me- 
 thodists liave not been so disinterested. One of them, said 
 to be of the elect ladj^'s connection^ agreed to hold a rich 
 rectory for a minor, but refused to resign it when the minor, 
 became of age, because he had discovered that the transac- 
 tion was simoniacal and illegal. Simoniacal and illegal it 
 certainly was ; but had the rector possessed the spirit of our 
 author, he would have contrived to fulfil his engagement, 
 ivhile he prevented the simony. He would have paid the 
 tithes to the man in whose favour he had promised to re- 
 sign the living ; but, " counting his work his best wages," 
 he would have continued his pastoral relntlnn to the parish 
 for the sake of the souls entrusted to his care. Such, we 
 cannot doubt, would have been the conduct of Dr. Haweis, 
 if he had been so unfortunate as to enter into a simoniacal 
 contract for the living of All-Samts, Aldwinckle ! 
 
 Through the last volume of this work, the author em- 
 braces every opportunity of expatiating on the Christian 
 zeal oithe London Missionary Society^ and pronounces that 
 society to be " certainly of God." We cannot help being 
 <ef a different opinion. The Doctor and his associates may 
 each be actuated by a disinterested desire to carry the light 
 of the glorious gospel into the regions of the shadow of 
 death ; but it would not be easy to persuade us that God is 
 the author of confusion^ or. that the doctrines of Christianity 
 will be successfully preacaed among the heathen by men, 
 not only running unsent, but differing so widely in opinion 
 as Calvinists and Arminians, Episcopalians and Presbyte- 
 rians, Paedo-baptists and Anti-paedo-baptists ! 
 
 In vain may the society direct its Missionaries to abstain 
 
414 Review of Hawets* Church History* 
 
 from controversy, and preach nothing to the heathen but the 
 essential doctrines and duties of the gospel. The Mission- 
 aries are not agreed among themselves what doctrines an,d 
 duties are essential. One thinks the distinguishing tenets o)F 
 Calvinism the most essential parts of gospel truth ; another 
 discovers in those tenets, a series of the most shocking blas- 
 phemies ; whilst a third, admitting their truth, sees no pro- 
 priety of inculcating them on the minds of the people. One 
 Missionary discovers in the New-Testament, that the in- 
 fant children of believing parents should be admitted into 
 the church by the sacrament of baptism ; whilst another is 
 persuaded, that no person is a subject of Christian baptism, 
 who does not actually believe the gospel. The indepen- 
 dent, considering the rights of Christians as common, feels 
 himself bound to " stand fast in the liberty with which 
 Christ hath made him free ;" but the Episcopalian and Pres- 
 byterian believe that a ministry, with xhQ power of the keys^ 
 or the exclusive right of itdiiiinistciliig the sacraments, is 
 the ordinance of Christ, to which the multitude of believers 
 are bound to pay obedience ; whilst they differ exceedingly as 
 to the constitution of the church, and the channel through 
 which the power of the keys must be derived. Among such 
 heterogeneous missionaries, preaching the gospel to the 
 same people, controversies seem to be inevitable ; and their 
 labours, instead of enlightening the heathen, will only in- 
 crease their prejudices against the faith, whenever it shall be 
 carried to them in a more regular manner. 
 
 In a word, the Missionary Society, like this history of 
 the church, can do no good, and may be productive of much 
 evil. With this conviction on our minds, we dare not re- 
 commend either the one or the other to the public favour ; 
 but we readily admit, that to preach the gospel among the 
 heathen is the duty of the church, and that an ecclesiastical 
 history, really impartial and authenticated by proper refer- . 
 ences to original authorities, is a desideratum in English 
 literature. 
 
INDEX 
 
 A Page. 
 
 BEL's saci-lfice — why accepted 32 
 
 Abraham — called to be the father of the church of the Hebrews 37 
 
 — ■ — trial of his faith, 39 
 
 Acts of the Apostles quoted — for the sense of sTi to au1o 193 
 
 Aerius — the heretic — the first opposer of Episcopacy 208 
 
 Ananias — a disciple — how employed to baptize Paul 123 
 
 Anderson of Dunbarton — followed by Dr. Campbell 107, 130 
 
 -— — ^ again quoted, 137, 144 
 
 ■■ agrees with the church of Rome 152 
 
 Angels of the seven churches of Asia 153 
 
 — supposed by Dr. Campbell to be moderators 153, 157 
 
 .. proved to be bishops I54 
 
 Anti-Jacobin Review quoted 114, 120, 133, 192 
 
 Apostles of Christ— when and how commissioned 9, 95, 97 
 
 ^tt first in the church 98 
 
 ■ ■ in what their extraordinary character consisted 146 
 
 " — — reasons for their not having successors consi- 
 
 dered 145, 152 
 
 when the title was laid aside I49 
 
 how their Episcopal office has been continued 150 
 
 all modelled the church on the same plan 160 
 
 Articles XXIII. and XXXVI. of the church of England considered . 129 
 
 Baptism, one of the terms or conditions of salvation 119 
 
 administration of it — an essential part of the apostolic com- 
 mission 145 
 
 Bellarmine — Cardinal — denied that the apostles had successors 152 
 
 Beza — quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 250 
 
 Bingham — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 157 
 
 his authority for voc^oi-Kia, being used for a diocese 234 
 
 Bishops— how successors of the Apostles 100 
 
 college of— in Scotland were duly consecrated, 291 
 
 • — soon became diocesan 297 
 
 Bishops ill ScQtJand— how elected 298 
 
416 INDEX. 
 
 Bishops, priests and deacons, expressly distingiiished by the church 
 
 of England PagelSl 
 
 Blondel quoted 162 
 
 acknowledges Polycarp's Episcopal character 166 
 
 his Apology for the Opinion of Jerome 220 
 
 -- ' how the conclusion of that apology was suppressed 251 
 
 Book of consecration, &c. of the church of England quoted 130 
 
 Boucher, Rev. Jonathan, quoted on the American episcopate 299, 300 
 Bow, in the cloud, a token of God's covenant 37 
 
 Brett, Dr. his Divine Right of Episcopacy quoted 131 
 
 Burn's Ecclesiastical Laiv quoted 234 
 
 Butler's Analogy, &c. quoted 84 
 
 Cain's sacrifice — why rejected 33 
 
 Calvin, quoted on Timothy's ordination 140 
 
 ' ■ quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 249 
 
 Campbell, Dr. — his lectures on ecclesiastical history 83, 335 
 
 — — for what purpose these lectures were published 338 
 
 ■ ■ his opinion of church government 85 
 
 ■' . ... and of the difficulty of ascertaining the form of it 86 
 
 " his severity against priestly pride 105 
 
 I his lectures said to he prepared by himself for the 
 
 press 106 
 
 < ■ his Dissertation on Miracles quoted ibid 
 
 his account of the plan and purpose of his lectures 108 
 
 — — ■ his misrepresentation of the church of England 116, 129 
 
 his reference to the test as a coarse implement 117 
 
 his opinion respecting the terms of the gospel cove- 
 nant 119 
 
 - ' his account of Philip the deacon 121 
 
 ' ■ his popular claim receives no countenance from the 
 
 conversion of Cornelius 123 
 
 — — . his account of the office of evangelists 144 
 
 his description of the apostolic character 145, 146, 148, 
 
 149, 150 
 
 ■ • ■• his account of the angels of the seven churches 153 
 
 his opinion of the testimony of the fathers 161 
 
 ■ his misrepresentation of Clemens Romanus 162, 165 
 
 _— his objections to the epistles of Ignatius 160, 173 
 
 his description of parochial Episcopacy 183, 184, 188 
 
 his account of church unity 195, 196 
 
 ■ — ^ — — his Translation of the Gospels quoted 196 
 
 his parochial Episcopacy incompatible with that of 
 
 Jerusalem 200 
 
 -— — — his opinion vrith respect to the nov/cr of ordination 204 
 
INDEX. 41? 
 
 Gampbell, Dr. — his misrepi-esentation of Hilavy the deacon page 219 
 ■ " his account of Jerome's Alexandrian custom 221, 222 
 
 — — his opinion respecting the rise of Episcopal superi- 
 ority 231 
 
 ■ ■ ■ his distinction between parochial and diocesan Epis- 
 
 copacy 23G 
 
 — — his reflection on the Scotch Episcopalians 267, 268 
 
 — — his opinion of ordination, as an appointment to a 
 
 particular charge 268, 269, 271 
 
 _— his attack on the orders of the Scotch Episcopal 
 
 church 275, 278 
 
 - — — — . he allows the nonjurors to have a sort of presbyte- 
 
 rian ordination 302 
 
 - " ■ — — his absurd reasoning on that subject 303, 305 
 
 his arginnenttim ad bo')ninuni retoned on himself 407, 410 
 
 — ■ his character and disposition 336 
 
 — — - his account of Gibbon's History ^ &c. 339 
 
 Chalcedon — general council — referred to by Dr. Campbell 280 
 
 •' the purpose for which it was held 281 
 
 Charisma — or gift — in Timothy — what? 273 
 
 Charity — truly Christian, described 334 
 
 Cherubim — mystical figures 30 
 
 Christianity — to be ennbraced as represented in scripture 27 
 
 ' ■ the accomplishment of God's etefnal putpose 28 
 
 Church — Essay on it by Jones, quoted 11, 101 
 
 — — mistakes with regard to it 10, 20, 109 
 
 ■ how represented in scripture 21, 22, 328 — o30 
 
 — — particular persons set apart for its service 93 
 
 — — — — its form of government sufficiently ascertained 104 
 
 Claim of right — set up at the revolution 134, 265 
 
 Clemens Romanus — his first episde to the Corinthians quoted 162 
 
 ■ his allusion to the Jev/ish, in describing the Chris- 
 tian ministry 162 
 Clement of Alexandria misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 181 
 
 ■• ' — quoted in favour of Episcopacy 182 
 
 Clerc, Mr. Le^ — quoted for and against Episcopacy 251, 252 
 
 • his argument against it — dangerous to Christianity 252,254- 
 
 Clergy and laity — the distinction opposed by Dr. Campbell 105 
 
 College of bishops in Scotland — duly consecrated 291, 292 
 
 CoUuthus, a presbyter, censured for pretending to ordain 208 
 
 Congregation used instead of church 130 
 
 Congregational authority supported by Dr. Campbell 111 
 
 ■ • ' — -^ — not supported by St. Pjiul 114 
 
 Cornelius — his conversion 121 
 
 Cumberland, Richard — quoted .62 
 
 Cyprian-^misrepresented by Dr. Campbell pZ^ 197, 210, 211 
 
 53 
 
428 INDEX. 
 
 Cypvian— describes admirably the unity of the Episcopate page 15^ 
 supports the authority of bishops 211 — 216 
 
 his account of the Episcopal college 274 
 
 Daubeny, Rev. Charles — his just account of sacrifice 49 
 
 - ■ — ^ ■- — ■' his Guide to the Church quoted 94 
 
 — — his Preliminary Discourse quoted 184 
 
 — the Appendiyi of his Guide to the C/jMrc-6 quoted 226 
 
 r. his Eight Discourses quoted 313 
 
 — —— his opinion of such nonjurors as Dodwell 
 
 and Hieks, Leslie and Law 314 
 
 Deacons — set thirdly in the church 99 
 
 r)ioc€san Episcopacy of Scotland 297 
 
 'Disciples — seventy — how employed 95 
 
 Divine right — claimed by Presbyterians as well as Episcopalians 137 
 
 Divisions among Christians hurtful to Christianity 10 
 
 Dodwell unfairly attacked by Dr. Campbell 306, 311, 323 
 
 Dbdwellians — an epithet tised by Anderson and Dr. Campbell 311 
 
 Economy of grace — not to be altered 16 
 
 Ellis, Dr. — his Knoivledge of Divine Things, Sec. recommended 60 
 
 England, church of — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 116, 129 
 
 - her ordination offices quoted 285 
 
 Inquiry info the Constitution, iJJfc of the Primitive Church 183 
 
 -_ followed by Dr. Campbell 184, 193 
 
 Enthusiasm— the folly and danger of it 20 
 
 Enthusiasts boast of the assurance of faith 17 
 
 Episcopacy — origin of it not founded on names, but things 158 
 
 — * primitive — how described by Dr. Campbell 230 
 
 was never a new thing in the church 241 r 242 
 
 -^ — the only form of church government for fifteen hundred 
 
 years 261 
 
 — —abolished by the parliament of Scotland in' 11689 265 
 
 Episcopal reformed church of Scotland misrepresented hy Dr. Camp- 
 bell 13- 
 
 --' government of the church of Scotland agreeable to the 
 
 word of God 135 
 
 Episcopal superiority — how accounted for by Dr. Campbell 236, 239 
 
 Episcopal character — how exposed to persecution 257 
 
 Episcopal succession — regularity of it easily proved 245 
 
 ■■ ■ ■■• ■■ no reason to believe tliat it has failed 245, 247 
 
 -— ' — — how carried on in England 262 
 
 ' — - — — how transmitted to Scotland 263 
 
 —I .' » how continued in Scotland 266 
 
 Episcopalians of Scotland — not separatists from the church 18 
 
 loyal subjects 317, 321 
 
 why separated from the establishment 321 
 
 Episcopate— one— described by Cyprian 275 
 
INDEX. 419 
 
 Evangelists — Timothy and Titus considered as such page 144 
 
 Eusebius quoted 202 
 
 Eutychius— Patriarch of Alexandria, referred to by Dr. Campbell 225 . 
 Faith— once del vered to the saints, to be contended for 71 
 
 delivered :n ^forin of sound ivords 73 
 
 I built on a firm and solid foundation 74 
 
 Fathers — their testimony appealed to 161, 256 
 
 Firmilian — his letter to Cyprian considered 209 
 
 First born — how types of Christ, under the patriarchial economy 94 
 
 Forbes — Lord President, quoted 29, 31 
 
 Free-thinkers — boast of superior wisdom 15 
 
 their wild and foolish opinions 68 
 
 Gibbon — the historian — coincidence between him and Dr. Campbell 201 
 
 his strange account of Cyprian 218 
 
 — — — his opinion of primitive bishops 230 
 
 highly applauded by Dr. Campbell 338 
 
 Gregory Nyssen quoted by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon 201 
 
 Heretics— ancient — could show no regular succession of bishops 230 
 
 Hicks, Dr. — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 313 
 
 Hierarchy opposed by Gibbon and Dr. Campbell 33d 
 
 High-church applied by Dr. Campbell to Cyprian 196 
 
 . designed as a contemptuous epithet 217 
 
 properly described by bishop Horsely 334i 
 
 Hillary tlie deacon, quoted by Dr. Campbell 126, 218 
 
 Jerome's opinion of him 126 
 
 says expressly that Epaphroditus was an apostle 151 
 
 Hooker — his Ecclesiastical Polity quoted 282, 284 
 
 Home, Bishop — his opinion of the Scotch Episcopalians 307 
 
 Horsely, Bishop — his opinion of the Scotch Episcopacy 289 
 
 his charge to the clergy of St. David's quoted 235 
 
 Hosea — Bishop Horsely 's translation quoted 42 
 
 Jacob's ladder 41 
 
 ■ his name changed to Israel ibid 
 
 James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem 187, 188 
 
 Jerome — quoted on the succession of apostles 141 
 
 — — quoted by Dr. Campbell 221 
 
 .: — , not hostile to Episcopacy 222, 226, 228 
 
 — quotations from him in favour of Episcopacy 226 — 228 
 
 •= his testimony not to be opposed to that of the earlier fathers 229 
 
 Jerusalem — church of— contained many thousands of believers 189 — 191 
 Jev^ish dispensation typical of the Christian 94 
 
 Ignatius — account of him as bishop of Antioch 167 
 
 his genuine epistles published by Usher and Vossius 168 
 
 — — vindication of these epistles 170 — 174 
 
 — his epistles clearly iiiovY the threQ distinct orders of bishops, 
 
 •presbyters and deacoiiS 175—177 
 
425 INDEK. 
 
 Ignatiua'f^what he means by " one altar as but one bishop" page 19S 
 
 Itlumiiiati — modern— like the sadducees of old 1$ 
 
 Jones, Rev. William— his £ssqy on the Church quoted 11, 101 
 
 -mmm ■.. . his account of schism 331 — 333 
 
 Irenaeus quoted 28 
 
 ■'■'^ misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 178 
 
 '^i— =^ quoted in favour of Episcopacy 179, 180 
 
 Isaac — the type or representative of the promised seed 40 
 
 Israel — twelve tribes of— their wonderful history 43 
 
 Justin Martyr's use of the phrase s'T; to avlo 192 
 
 Kingdom of Christ — how established 90 
 
 -^ , ■ . , its government not to be altered 90 — 92 
 
 ■ .. -,.. . jx how it diifers from the kingdoms of this world 92 
 
 Law, Rev. Mr. his arguments in support of the Episcopal succession 24Q 
 
 .4-., his letters to Bishop Hoadly 227 
 
 Layman's account of his faith and practice 7^ 
 
 Leslie, Rev. Charles, quoted 248 
 
 -~— -—- — ). . ■ account of him by Bishop Horns 314 
 
 Liberality of mind — how it ought to be shown 23, 24 
 
 Melchizedeck — blessed Abraham 38 
 
 Ministry — Christian must have a valid commission 77—79 
 
 Missionaries — their contempt of a regular tnission 18 
 
 Monro, Dr. — his account of Blondel's apology 220 
 
 Moses — law cf — fulfilled 45 
 
 •-. — a schoolmaster unto Christ 4,7 
 
 — , predicted the coming of the Messiah 52, 5^ 
 
 Natural rehgion — what ? 58, 59 
 
 folly of opposing it to revelation 60 
 
 — — mistakes with respect to it 64, 65 
 
 Neocesaraea — diocese of— mentioned by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon 201 
 
 New philosophy — effects of it 15 
 
 Noah — warned of God, prepared the ark 35 
 
 ■■■■ God's covenant established with him 36 
 
 Nonjurors — Scotch— misrepresented 135 
 
 "- - — their disaffection accounted for 317 
 
 ■ ■ ^ - ■■■■ Scotch Episcopalians ought not to be branded 
 
 as such 317 
 
 Norwich — late bishop of, quoted 21, 70, 75 
 
 Old paths — how to be asked for 87, 102 
 
 Old Testament not contrary to the New 53 — S5 
 
 Ordination by Presbyters prohibited 205, 207 
 
 : not an appointment to a particular charge 272 
 
 '. offices of the church of England 285 
 
 adopted by the Scotch Episcopal church 286 
 
 Original Draught of the Frimiti'je Chitrc/^ quoted 198 
 
 Paley, Archdeacon, quoted 58 
 
INDEX. 431 
 
 PjU"ish— how ap])lled in the primitive church page 18S 
 
 Parochial Episcopacy described by Dr. Campbell 183 — 135 
 
 — its supposed resembilq.nce to some highland 
 
 parishes in Scotland 199 
 
 Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon quoted 186 
 
 Philip, ihe deacon — his baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch 121 
 
 Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna — misinterpreted by Dr. Campbell 166 
 
 Popery and presbyter) — not unlike in many things 152 
 
 Potter, Archbishop — distinguishes becween the ordination of minis- 
 ters, and their appointment to a charge 285 
 Pi-edecessors — ecclesiastical — how considered by the Scotch Episco- 
 palians 136 
 Prelacy applied by Dr. Campbell to diocesan Episcopacy 235 
 Presbyters or elders set secondarily .n the church 9^ 
 Presbytery — how employed in ordaining Timothy 140 
 ■ . ' change of it into diocesan Episcopacy impossible 238 
 
 this proved by Dr Jeremy Taylor S42— 244 
 
 Prideaux, Dr. — quoted on the spiritual power of bishops 288 
 
 Priesthood — Cliristian 76, 254 
 
 ■ ■■ - orders of it under the gospel 104 
 
 Prophecy, language of — from the bcgaining of the world 51 
 
 Reason — not to be opposed to revelation 60 — 62, 66 
 
 Reformation of religion — what — and how to be carried on 69 
 
 - ■ »■ ■ ' did not make a nev) church 262 
 
 Reformers— foreign — not hostile to Episcopacy 248 
 
 Religion — importance of it 9 
 
 ■«— — patriarchal, Jewish and Christian, all point to the same object 55 
 
 Restoration of Charles II. and of Episcopacy 263 
 
 'Revelation the only source of religious knowledge 63 — 67 
 
 Revolutions not effected without some noise 241 
 
 Rome, church of — retained the Episcopal succession 261 
 
 Sacrifice — a divine institution o2, 48 
 
 — — of Cain and Abel'^ 32 
 
 -— — carefully observed by the primitive worshippers 34 
 
 Sage, Bishop — his Principles of the Cyprianic Age 216 
 
 Schism — Dr. Campbell's opinion of it 323 
 
 true account of it 330 
 
 — — — accurately described by Mr. Jones 331 — 333 
 
 Scotch Episcopal church vindicated 259, 317, 321 
 
 believes agreeably to the 21st article of the 
 
 church of England 281 
 -^ — — its bishops ejected at the revolution, conti- 
 nued real bishops 266 
 
 and had people under their spiritual care 287, 290 
 
 uses the ordination offices of the church of 
 
 EnglamJ 286 
 
4iJ2 INDEX. 
 
 Scotch Episcopalians — loyal subjects page 317, SaO 
 
 why they separate from the establishment 321 
 
 Scotland— moral and religious state of it 13 — 15 
 
 Seabury, Bishop — consecrated in Scotland 301 
 
 . assisted at the consecration of Dr. Clagget of Ma- 
 ryland ibid 
 Seeker, Archbishop— his opinion of the Episcopal succession in Scot- 
 land 298 
 Sectaries— described by Dr. Campbell 3^2 
 Separation — in some cases necessary 9 
 Sharp, Archbishop, and others consecrated at London in 1661 264 
 Sherlock, Bishop, quoted 63, 65, 117 
 Sincerity — how far to be depended on 326 
 Skinner, Rev. John — his ecclesiastical history quoted 249, 263, 297 
 Solemn league and covenant — for the abolition of Episcopacy 263 
 Stewards of the mysteries of God— how appointed 79 — 81 
 ■■ — — . — . mistakes with regard to their ap- 
 pointment 82 
 Taylor, Bishop — on the antiquity of Episcopacy 242, 244 
 
 —J — — on ordination 284 
 
 TertuUian quoted and misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 128, 157, 180 
 
 — — translated by Bingham, whom Dr. Campbell quotes unfairly 157 
 
 his sentiments fairly stated 158, 160, 202, 209 
 
 Test — referred to by Dr. Campbell, as a coarse implement 117 
 
 Testimony of the fathers — how far to be depended on 161 
 
 -., fairly appealed to 256 
 
 Theodoret quoted 142 
 Timothy — charge given to him as bishop of the church in Ephesus 139 
 
 ■ — — his ordinatioii misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 140 
 
 Timothy and Titus — how considered as evangelists 144 
 
 Titus left in Crete with Episcopal authority 142 
 
 Vincentius Lirinensis quoted 244 
 
 Wake, Archbishop — his translation of Ignatius' epistles quoted 168 
 
 ■ ' ■ his vindication of these epistles 177- 
 
 Wall, Mr. — 'dUthoY of Iftfant Baptism, quoted . 324 
 
 Way of salvation — no new discovery - 56 
 
 Westminster — Confession of Faith, quoted by Dr. Campbell 132 
 
 Zacharias— how inspired at the birth of JoImi the baptist 39 
 
 THE END. 
 
BOOKS 
 
 Printed and sold by T. ^ J, SWORDS, No, 160 Pearl-Street, 
 
 NetV'Tork. 
 
 1. Dissertations on the Prophecies which have 
 
 remarkably been fulfilled, and at this Time are fulfilling in the 
 World. By Thomas Newton, D. D. late Lord Bishop of 
 Bristol. 
 
 !2. A Companion for the Festivals and Fasts of the 
 
 Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. 
 Principally selected and altered from NehorCs Companion for 
 the Festivals and Fasts of the Church of England. By John 
 Henry Hobart,A,M, an Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, 
 New- York. To which are added, Pastoral Advice to Young 
 Persons before and after Confirmation, by a Minister of the 
 Church of England ; and an Exhortation to Family Prayer, 
 by Bishop Gibson ; with Forms of Devotion. 
 
 3. A Guide to the Church, in several Discourses: 
 
 To which are added, two Postscripts : the first to those 
 Members of the Church who occasionally frequent other 
 Places of Public Worship ; the second to the Clergy. Ad- 
 dressed to William WUberforce^ Esq. M. P. By the Rev. 
 Charles Daubeny, L. L. B. a Presbyter of the Church of 
 England. 
 
 4. The Catechism of the Protestant Episcopal 
 
 Church in the United States of America. To which is an- 
 nexed, a Catechism, designed as an Explanation and En- 
 largement of the Church Catechism : Recommended by the 
 Bishop and Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
 State of New-York. The third Edition. 
 
 5. An Exposition of the Book of Common Prayer, 
 
 and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and 
 Ceremonies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
 States of America. By the Rev. Andreiv Fozvler, A. M. 
 Rector of St. Bartholomew's Parish, South-Carolina. The 
 second Edition, with Additions and Improvements. 
 
 6. A Collection of the Essays on the Subject of 
 
 Episcopacy, which originally appeared in the Albany Centi- 
 nel, and which are ascribed principally to the Rev. Dr. Limiy 
 the Rev. Mr. Beasleij, and Thomas T, Hoxv, Esq. With ad- 
 ditional Notes and Remarks. 
 
 7. An Apology for Apostolic Order and its Ad- 
 vocates, occasioned by the Strictures and Denunciations of 
 the Christian's Magazine. In a Series of Letters, addressed 
 to the Rev. John M, Mason, D. D. the Editor of that Work. 
 
 . By the Rev. John Henry Hohart, an Assistant Minister of 
 Trinity Church. Judge righteous judgment. John vii. 24. 
 
Books pi*inted and sold by T» ^ y. Swords* 
 
 8. Two Letters to the Editor of the Christianas 
 
 Magazine. By a Churchman* Be calm in arguing^ for 
 fierceness makes error a faulty and truth discourtesy, Herbert. 
 — Refellere sine pertinacia^ et refelli sine iracundia^ pariti 
 sumus. Cicero. 
 
 9. An Attempt to familiarize the Church Cate- 
 chism. For the Use of Schools and Families. By Mr3* 
 Trimmer. First American, from the third London Edition. 
 
 10. An Abridgement of Scripture History; con- 
 sisting of Lessons selected from the Old Testament. For 
 the Use of Schools and Families. By Mrs* Trimmer, 
 
 IL The Christian Institutes; or, the sincere Word 
 of God. Being a plain and impartial Account of the whole 
 Faith and Duty of a Christian. Collected out of the Writ- 
 ings of the Old and New Testament : digested under proper 
 Heads, and delivered in the Words of Scripture. By the 
 Right Reverend Father in God Francis^ late Lord Bishop of 
 Chester. The frst American^ from the twelfth London Edi- 
 tion, 
 
 12. An Apology for the Bible, in a Series of Let- 
 ters, addressed to Thomas Paine^ Author of a Book entitled. 
 The Age of Reason, Part the Second, being an Investigation 
 of True and of Fabulous Theolog}^ By R, Watson^ D. D. 
 F. R. S. Lord Bishop of Landaff, and Regius Professor of 
 Divinity in the University of Cambridge. 
 
 13. Discourses on several important Subjects. By 
 
 the late Right Rev. Samuel Seabury^ D. D. Bishop of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of Connecticut and 
 Rhode-Island. Published from Manuscripts prepared by the 
 Author for the Press. 
 
 14. The Lite of Samuel Johnson, D. D. the first 
 
 President of King's College, in New- York. Containing 
 many interesting Anecdotes ; a general View of the State of 
 Religion and Learning in Connecticut during the former Part 
 of the last Centur\'; and an Account of the Institution and 
 Rise of Yale College, Connecticut ; and of King's (now Co- 
 lumbia) College, New- York. By Thomas Bradbury Chand- 
 ler^ D. D. formerly Rector of St. John's Church, Elizabeth- 
 Town, New- Jersey. To which is added, an Appendix, con- 
 taining many original Letters, never before published, from 
 Bishop Berkeley, Archbishop Seeker, Bishop Lowth, and 
 others, to Dr. Johnson. 
 
 15. The Life and Posthumous Writings of Wil- 
 liam Cowper, Esq. with an Introductory Letter to the Right 
 Honourable Earl Cowper. By William Hayley^ Esq.