5:*, a 333 tSi ^ a3."S2- 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 SAMUEL AGNEW, 
 
 BX 5055 .L477 184A 
 Misopapisticus , 
 Letters on the writings of 
 the Fathers of the first 
 
LETTERS 
 WETTINGS OF THE FATHERS 
 
 OF THE FIKST TWO CENTUKIES, 
 
 WITH 
 
 REFLECTIONS ON 
 THE OXFORD TRACTS, 
 
 .IND SrRICTUnES ON 
 
 "THE RECORDS OF THE CHURCH." 
 
 noXXowf yap t-rXavriaiv r) vTzoKijipig avTiov, 
 " For their assumption has led many astray."— Son of Sirach. 
 ' Their own lionor is however secured the ancients ; but faith is i 
 nnhj to Ood'x word, and to experience."— Lord Bacon. 
 
 By MISOPAPISTICUS. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY R. B. SEELEY AND W. BUKNSIDE : 
 AND SOLD BY L. AND G. SEELEY, 
 FLEET STREET, LONDON. 
 1844. 
 
Digitized by 
 
 tlie Internet Arcliive 
 
 
 
 in 2014 
 
 
 
 https://archive.org/details/lettersonwritingOOmiso 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Ov yap KoXavevovres v^as Bia tuv Se tcov ypaixfiarojv, ouSe irpos 
 Xop"' ofXiX-riiTovTis, a\\' aTraiTijirofTft Kara rov aKpiji-q km (^sracTTiKOi' 
 Koyov ri]v KptiTiv iroiTtaaaeai, irpoaeAyiAvdeifid' , fin] vpoK-nii ei,nri5' av- 
 dputrap((JKeia rriSaiaiZaipLOVav KOTCX'o/iefous. — " For wc come not to you, 
 to flatter you by these letters, (writings,) or to address you for favour, 
 but to ask of you to form judgment according to accurate and scrutinizing 
 reason, being not restraincl hy prejudice, nor by a muii-pleasimi diiposi- 
 Uon towards the superstitious.^"— J vsTiy Martyr, Apol. i. Sect. 2. 
 
 The writer of these Letters has been encouraged to pub- 
 lish them, from having learnt, that when they appeared in 
 " The Record," they were much approved by many of his 
 brethren, the Clergy. They are now considerably en- 
 larged ; and there are added to them Strictures on " the 
 Records of the Church," — a Letter on Tradition,— and an 
 Appendix, containing copious Notes. The additional 
 Letter was written some time ago, and appeared in 
 tlie first two Numbers of the Christian Observer for 
 this year. Its object is to shew that Tradition is not 
 acknowledged as any authority in our Church. 
 
IV 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 The acquired, and not the real Title of the Tracts re- 
 flected upon, is here for the most part retained, as they 
 are better known by that, than by their ovra title, 
 " Tracts for the Times." 
 
 There is a sort of spell connected with antiquity, which 
 has ever been very injurious to the interest and progress 
 of truth. As it was in Philosophy before the time of 
 Bacon, so it has been, and is stiU in a measure, with 
 respect to religion. The voice of antiquity is by too many 
 deemed oracular ; whereas nothing should be so regarded 
 in religion, but the inspired word of truth. The senti- 
 ments of uninspired men, however excellent they may 
 have been, are no more divine than in the degree in which 
 they correspond with the Divine word ; and so far and 
 no farther are we bound to adopt and follow them. 
 
 Through undue and extreme respect for the opinions and 
 practices of the early Fathers and of the primitive Church, 
 religion in after times has been greatly impeded in its 
 progress, being much encumbered by mere human appen- 
 dages, which not only facilitated the introduction and 
 perpetuity of errors and corruption, but rendered it also 
 less capable of accommodating itself to the innovations of 
 time, and to the varied conditions of society-. What is 
 divine is fixed, and cannot be changed. What is human 
 is mutable, and may and ought to be changed, when cir- 
 cumstances require. But to render what is human stable 
 and fixed, is not only a profane attempt to equalize it to 
 what is divine, but proves also highly prejudicial to the 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 progress of truth. As the Gospel is intended for all man- 
 kind, there is nothing in its original institution that tends 
 to clog its march, or to prevent the freest communication of 
 its blessings. 
 
 The modern experiment, tried by the writers of the 
 Oxford Tracts, to revive the sentiments and customs of 
 the primitive Church, is justifiable only on the ground of 
 their being of a divine original. On every other ground, 
 the attempt is extremely absurd, and is calculated to do 
 nothing but evil. It is to give that importance to what 
 is human which is due only to what is divine, to transfer 
 the peculiarities of a rude and superstitious age to another 
 that is highly improved, and to introduce things in them- 
 selves for the most part immaterial, that are sure to create 
 disputes and discord. Tlie main design of these Letters 
 is to enable those, not much acquainted with the writings 
 of the primitive Church, to form a correct estimate of its 
 orthodoxy, and to know what importance is justly due to 
 its customs and practices. 
 
 " They that rcvcronco ton much uh! tiiiios, 
 Are hut a scorn to tlic )«'«■."— Loud Bacon. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I. PrelimiiiaiT : — Apostolical Succession — The sentiments of 
 Bishop Stii.li.ngi i.eet, Archbishop Cii.iNMER, Hookek, 
 and Archbishop W.utE— Tradition 
 
 11. Extracts from the writings of Clement, B.iuN.AB.is, and 
 Hermas 
 
 III. Extracts from the writings of Ign.atius and Polvcarp... 33 
 
 IV. Observations on the state of the primitive Church, and on 
 
 the claims made in l)ehalf of the opinions of the Fathers 48 
 
 V. A review of Justin Martyr's writings 63 
 
 Postscript : — Remarks on Bishop Kayb's Account of 
 Justin, and on Bickersteth's Edition of Justin's 
 
 Dialogxie with Tr_\^)hon 78 
 
 VI. A review of the Works of Iken.eus 85 
 
 Postscript: — Extracts on various interesting subjects... 108 
 
 VII. Baptism, according to the views of the Primitive Church. 117 
 
 VIII. The Lord's Supper, according to the views of the Primi- 
 tive Church 138 
 
 PosT.scRiPT : — Efficacy of Sacraments and of Orders ... 157 
 
'Ill CONTENTS. 
 
 LETTER. 
 
 PACE. 
 
 IX. The Character of the System of the Oxford Tracts 162 
 
 Addenda -.—Strictures on the translations in " the Records of the 
 
 Church" jgg 
 
 A Letter on Tradition 216 
 
 Appendi.x : — Notes 237 
 
LETTERS. 
 
 I. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY— APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 Sir. 
 
 I am extremely thankful to you, for the able, bold, 
 and uncompromising maimer, in which you have offered 
 your remarks on the British Magazine and the Tracts for 
 the Titnes ; —the two wooden props of superstition and 
 Popery in our Protestant Church. They have both 
 not only adopted some of the doctrines of the Romish 
 Church ; but they do also imitate the tone, spirit, and 
 what I may call the xlang of Popery : so that one thinks 
 while reading them, that he is reading the writings of 
 some monk or Jesuit, the tenor and substance being so 
 very like. There is a high-toned pretension, combined 
 with a vast show of humility — an apparent candour, 
 united with a narrow-minded exclusiveness — a puling dis- 
 play of zeal, accompanied by a supercilious apathy towards 
 all the grand essentials of truth — and a sanctimonious gra- 
 vity, evidently produced by superstition, rather than by any 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 vital principle of genuine godliness. That this is the cha- 
 racter of these publications, no one who possesses any 
 really spiritual discernment, can deny. There is much in 
 them to allure the unwary, and those naturally disposed to 
 superstition, and to impose on the young and inexperi- 
 enced. There is in them a sort of rehgious tone, which is 
 very captivating to those who are more led by their feelings 
 than by their understanding. Tliis, combmed with great 
 display of zeal, is calculated to be very winning. What- 
 ever the subject be, zeal has always a very attractive power, 
 and has often proved the means either of doing great good, 
 or of producing great evils. 
 
 There is scarcely any thing which has been so effective 
 as Zeal, having often produced amazing results. It is a 
 mighty instrument, a machine of vast power ; but whether 
 its working be for good or e\'il, will depend wholly on what 
 sets it in motion. If true religion be the mo^^ng power, 
 its working will be beneficial ; promotive of honour to God, 
 and of good to man. But if superstition, ambition, selfish- 
 ness, bigotry, or interest, sets it in motion, dishonour to 
 God, degradation to religion, and imtold injury to the well- 
 being of man, will be the inevitable consequences. When 
 we see it displayed, we should always try to ascertain its 
 character. The Jews were zealous ; but it was for tradi- 
 tions. Tlie papists are verj^ zealous ; but it is for foolish 
 rites, traditionary doctrines, and useless ceremonies. Tlie 
 professors of heathenism are often extremely zealous ; 
 but it is for things truly degrading to human nature. 
 The writers in these pubhcations are also very zealous ; but 
 for what For the spiritual truths of the Gospel — for the 
 grand essentials of religion ? By no means. They speak. 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 3 
 
 indeed, of some of these ; but evidently their zeal is for 
 otlier things, for outward rites and ceremonies ; for false 
 doctrines, such as Baptismal Regeneration, and Popish no- 
 tions about the Lord's Supper ; for foolish old customs of a 
 barbarous age ; for Tradition and Apostolical Succession. Vide 
 Such seem to be the things which mainly put their zeal in a' ' 
 motion, and continue to propel its movements. And woe 
 be to us, if we are captivated by its attractions. How ne- 
 cessary it is in the present day to say to all religious people, 
 " Beware of false prophets !" 
 
 What you said lately on Apostolical Succession, was much 
 to the purpose. To infer the character of the Christian 
 ministry from an abrogated priesthood, as the writer in the 
 British Magazine does, is surely an absurdity which might 
 have well been left to the mother of absurdities, the Church 
 of Rome. Apostolical succession ought to have been "proved 
 by the witer, instead of being assumed. The subject has 
 more difficulties tlian those who thus deal with it seem 
 to know. It has no direct proof from the Scriptures. If 
 they plead that it has, let them produce it. The text in 
 2 Tim. ii. 2, is sometimes quoted for this purpose : " The 
 things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, 
 the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to 
 teach others also." But this does not refer to " orders," 
 but to doctrines. He was to convey to them the same truths 
 which he had received from Paul, that they also might convey 
 them to others. This is a transmission of doctrines, and not 
 a conferring of orders. The fact is, and let them disprove it 
 if they can, that there is no command, no rule, no regula- 
 tion in the New Testament, on the subject of apostolical 
 succession, in the sense intended by them. And why so .'' 
 
 B 2 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 The answer is, because the God of wisdom did not tliink it 
 right or needful to appoint any thing specifically on the 
 subject ; and his wisdom has been abundantly proved by 
 the event. As it is, where there is no command, no rule 
 on the subject, the assumptions of men have produced 
 mischiefs that are incalculable. Thev have prided them- 
 selves on their supposed exclusive privilege, hedged 
 themselves in by an enclosure alleged to be Divine, and 
 anathematized all others. God has never raised such an in- 
 closure. We have, indeed, the example of the apostles 
 appointing ministers, and appointing others, such as 
 Timothy and Titus, to ordain ministers, without any com- 
 mand to perpetuate that example. That mode was suitable 
 to the state of things at that time ; and it may be suitable 
 Stilling- oi'der and regularity. Bishop Slillingfleel, in his 
 
 fleet. Irenicum, strongly maintains, that neither our Saviour nor 
 his apostles have appointed or settled any particular mode 
 in this respect. I shall make a few quotations from him: 
 Iremc. " Nothing is founded on divine right, nor can bind Chris- 
 ^ ' tians directly or consequently as a Divine law, but what may 
 be certainly known to have come from God, with an inten- 
 tion to obhge believers to the world's end." " Example 
 Ibid. doth not bind us as an example. There can be no duty 
 ^' " ' without a law making it to be a duty ; and, consequently, it 
 is the law, making it to be a duty to follow such examples, 
 which gives a Divine right to those examples, and not barely 
 the examples themselves." " Those who plead the obliga- 
 Ibid. toi'y nature of Scripture examples, must either produce 
 P- the moral nature of those examples ; or else a rule, bind- 
 ing us to foUow those examples." 
 
 Ibid. " That Christ hath appointed officers in his Church, and 
 p. 177. 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 5 
 
 invested them with authority to preach, and baptize, and ad- 
 minister the Gospel ordinances, is clearly made known to us 
 in the word of God. But whether any shall succeed the 
 a])ostles in superiority of power over presbyters, or all re- 
 main governing the Church in an equality of power, is 
 nowhere determined by the will of Christ in Scripture, 
 which contains his royal law." " The main duties and 
 ordinances are prescribed, but their circumstances and 
 manner of performance are left as matters of Christian 
 liberty, and only couched under some general rules : which 
 is a great difference between the legal and Gospel state. 
 Under the law, all ceremonies and circumstances are ex- 
 actly prescribed ; but in the Gospel we Kead of some general 
 rules of direction for Christians' carriage in all circumstantial 
 things." " Any particular form of government is neither ^^^'^ 
 expressed in any direct terms by Christ, nor can be ^' 
 deduced by just consequence ; therefore no such form of 
 government is instituted by Christ. If there be any such 
 law, it must be produced, whereby it is determined in Scrip- 
 ture, either that there must be superiority or equality among 
 cliurch officers, as such, after the apostles' decease." 
 
 " The essentials of Church government are such as are IW^^ 
 necessary to the preservation of such a society. Now, all ^' 
 these things have been proved to be contained in Scripture : 
 but whatsoever is not so necessary in itself, can only become 
 necessary by virtue of God's express command ; and what 
 is not so commanded is accidental and circumstantial, and 
 a matter of Christian liberty : and such we assert the form 
 of Church government to be." 
 
 The learned Bishop also adduces on the subject, " the 
 confession of two canonists, who," he says, " are the .yj'd 
 
highest among the Papists," and who must of course be 
 very high in the estimation of the writers in the British 
 Magazine and of the Oxford Tracts. These canonists are 
 Gratian and Johannes Seneca. The passages he quotes 
 are the following : — 
 Gratian. " ' Sacros ordines dicimus Deaconatum et Presbj-teratum; 
 hos quidem solos in Ecclesia primitiva habuisse dicitur. 
 — Gratian. We call deaconship and eldership holy orders ; 
 it is indeed said, that these alone existed in the primitive 
 Seneca. Church.'"—" • Dicunt quidem quod in Ecclesia prima 
 primitiva commune erat officia episcoporum et sacerdotum, 
 et nomina erant communia. Sed in secunda primitiva cce- 
 perunt distingui, et nomina et officia.— Joh. Seneca. We 
 say, indeed, that in the first primitive Church the office of 
 bishops and priests was common, and that the names were 
 common. But in the second primitive (Church) both the 
 names and the offices began to be distinguished.' " 
 Iremc. " Estius," says the Bishop, " a no mean school-man, 
 fairly quits the Scriptures, and betakes himself to other 
 weapons : ' Quod autem jure divino sint Episcopi pres- 
 byteris superiores, etsi non ita clarum est e sacris Uteris ; 
 Estius. aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest. — That bishops 
 are by Divine right superior to Presbj-ters, though it be 
 not so clear from the Holy Scriptures, can vet be suffi- 
 ciently proved from other quarters.' " Upon this the 
 Bishop shrewdly remarks, " The difficulty is, how a jus 
 divinum (a Divine right) should be proved, when men 
 leave the Scriptures." 
 Irenic. " that I have to say," observes the Bishop m another 
 p. 287. place, " concerning the course taken bv the apostles, lies 
 in these tliree propositions ; Tliat neither can we have 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 7 
 
 that certainty of apostolical practice, which is necessary to 
 constitute a Divine right : nor, secondly, is it probable that 
 the apostles did tie themselves up to any one fixed course 
 in modelling Churches : 7ior, thirdly, if they did, doth it 
 necessarily follow that we must observe the same." 
 
 The learned Bishop brings forward the testimonies of 
 several reformers, EngUsh and foreign; but the most 
 interesting to us is the opinion of Archbishop Cranmer, 
 which he gives as follows : 
 
 " ' The bishops and priests were (the same) at one time, Cranmer. 
 and were not two things, but both one office in the begin- 
 ning of Christ's religion. A bishop may make a priest by 
 the Scriptures ; and so may princes and governors also, 
 and that by the authority of God committed unto them ; 
 and the people also by their election. And the people, 
 before Christian princes were, commonly did elect their 
 bishops and priests. In the New Testament, he that is 
 appointed to be a bishop or priest, needeth no consecration 
 by the Scripture ; for election or appointing thereto is 
 sufficient.' " 
 
 " Thus we see," adds Stillingfleet, after giving a more 
 lengthened extract, " by the testimony chiefly of him who Irenic. 
 was instrumental in our Reformation, that he owned not ^' 
 Episcopacy as a distinct order from Presbytery, of Divine 
 right, but only as a prudent constitution of the civil magis- 
 trate for better governing in the Church." In the 
 same page he says : " After our Reformation had truly 
 undergone the fiery trial in Queen Mary's days, in the 
 Articles of Rehgion agreed upon, our English form of 
 Church government was only determined to be aijreeablc 
 to God's holy word ; which liad been a very low and 
 
8 
 
 APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 diminishing expression, had they looked on it as absolutely 
 prescribed and determined in Scripture, as the only form 
 to be observed in the Church." 
 
 I shall make a few extracts more from Bishop Stilling- 
 fleet's Irenicum: — " I handle now only the testimony 
 of antiquity ; and herein I shall endeavour to show 
 the incompetency of this testimony, as to the shewing 
 what certain form of Church government was practised by 
 the Apostles : for that I shall make one of that fourfold 
 argument, from the defectiveness of this testimony, from 
 the antiquity of it, from the partiality of it, and from the 
 repugnancy of it to itself." Then as to defectiveness, he 
 notices it as to places, times and persons ; and makes this 
 observation : — " If but one place varied, it were enough to 
 overthrow the necessity of any one form of government, 
 because hereby it would be evident, that they obser\-ed no 
 certain or constant course, nor did they look upon them- 
 selves as obliged so to do. We have already made it 
 appear that there is no law of Christ absolutely command- 
 ing one form and forbidding all other." Tlie Bishop goes 
 through all the above particulars, and shews clearly that 
 there is a great uncertainty on the subject from the testi- 
 mony of antiquity. And quoting a sentence from Eusebius, 
 in which he acknowledges it hard to find out who succeeded 
 the Apostles in the churches planted by them, except those 
 mentioned in St. Paul's writings, he proceeds thus:—" Is 
 it come to pass at last that we have nothing certain but 
 what we have in Scriptures and must the tradition of the 
 Church be our rule to interpret Scripture by } An ex- 
 cellent way to find out the truth doubtless, to bend the 
 rule to the crooked stick, to make the judge stand to the 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 9 
 
 opinion of his lacquey, what sentence he shall pass upon 
 the cause in question ; to make Scripture stand up in hand 
 to tradition, to know whether it may have leave to speak or 
 not ! Are all the great outcries of Apostohcal Tradition, of 
 personal succession, of unquestionable records, resolved at 
 last into the Scripture itself, by him from whom all these long 
 pedigrees are fetched ? Then let succession know its place, 
 and learn to vail bonnet to the Scriptures. And withal let 
 men take heed of over-reaching themselves, when they 
 would bring down so large a catalogue of single bishops, 
 from the first and purest time of the Church ; for it will be 
 hard for others to believe them, when Eusebius professeth 
 it is so hard to find them." 
 
 The testimony of the celebrated Hooker is not very differ- 
 ent from that of the Archbishop, and I shall add it here : — 
 
 " Another kind of extraordinary vocation is, where the Hooker 
 
 Ecc. Pol. 
 
 exigence of necessity doth constrain to leave the usual book viii. 
 ways of the Church, which otherwise we wovild willingly 
 keep, — where the Church must needs have some ordained, 
 and neither hath nor can have possibly a bishop to ordain. 
 In case of such necessity, the ordinary institution of God 
 hath given oftentimes, and may give, place. And there- 
 fore we are not, simply without exception, to urye a lineal 
 descent of power from the apostles by continual succession 
 of bishops in every effectual ordination." — 
 
 I am also tempted to give an extract from the wi itings 
 of another great and good man. Archbishop Wake. 
 The following is taken from the Christian Observer for 
 1820, pp. 379, 381. 
 
 " Far from me," says the benevolent and liberally-minded Wake. 
 Archbishop, " be the iron heart, that for such a defect 
 
10 
 
 APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 (Episcopacy) I should think any one of them (the reformed 
 Churches) to be cut oflF from our communion, or with 
 certain raving writers among us, think them to possess 
 no valid Sacraments, and so to pronounce them scarcely 
 Christian. Who am I, that I should dare to pronounce a 
 sentence of reprobation against any one in whom there 
 appear all the other characters of an humble, upright, sin- 
 cere Christian, only because he has not perhaps met -w-ith 
 the same instruction, or does not argue in the same way ; 
 or, in a word, because he is not so wise, or it may be, is 
 wiser than I am, and sees further than I do ; and therefore 
 
 Vide is not exactly of my opinion in every thing ? " 
 
 jpriuli.K, These are great names, and they bear directly against 
 the extravagant sentiments of the British Magazine and 
 the Oxford Tracts. And they have been adduced here 
 not merely because they are great names, but because they 
 seem to have Scripture, reason, and common sense on 
 their side. What would Archbishop Wake, were he now 
 living, think of the authors of these pubhcations ? Of 
 course the same as he thought of men of similar sentiments 
 in his day ; men of " iron hearts," and " raving wTiters." 
 For they clearly have such " iron hearts," however smooth 
 their tongues may be, as that they can unchurch " humble, 
 upright, and sincere Christians." And their ravings on 
 High-Church, or rather Romish principles, are quite equal 
 to those of any of the Romanists themselves, with whom 
 they seem anxious to fraternise, while they deny that any 
 except Episcopalians possess " any vahd Sacraments," 
 and declare, that " orders" are the only " external mark 
 of a Christian minister." 
 
 They have indeed very soft and tender hearts towards 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 11 
 
 ceremonies and traditions, and even towards the silly prac- 
 tices and gross errors of the Romish Church; but they 
 have no such hearts towards Protestants that are not Epis- 
 copal, however excellent they may be, and correct in the 
 essentials of religion. It is not with faith, and love, and 
 heavenly-mindedness, that they feel any sympathy, but 
 with sacramental rites, outward forms and matters of dis- 
 ciphne : these they seem to venerate with the same ardent 
 and extravagant devotion as the superstitious heathens their 
 wooden idols, and to regard with as much fondness as in- 
 fants their pretty dolls . It is amazing with what superstitious 
 feelings some people regard rites and outward forms, as- 
 cribing to them such virtues as are wholly unwarranted, 
 and paying them a sort of idolatrous adoration similar to 
 what the Israelites formerly did to the brazen serpent. 
 
 Two things seem to me to combine to form such charac- 
 ters—ambition and a superstitious spirit. Learning has 
 been ascribed to these men, and piety too ; and hence some 
 conclude, as the Bishop of Lincoln in his late charge, that 
 what they advance is entitled to much attention. But 
 leamuig is no guarantee for truth ; for the most learned 
 have often been the most erroneous ; and they have mostly 
 been the authors of heresies in all ages. Tei'tiillian, for 
 instance, was certainly one of the most learned of the 
 primitive fathers, and possessed a genius evidently superior 
 to them all ; and yet he became a prey to strange chimeras. 
 Piety, when genuine, is a far better guarantee ; but a ^^pj^^ 
 spurious piety, the offspring of superstition, is of all things C. 
 the most prolific of errors and folly. The piety of forms 
 and ceremonial rites, of fasting and sacramental ordinances, 
 was the parent of most of the extravagancies and fooleries 
 
12 
 
 APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 of Popery. Ambition is rather increased than lessened by 
 learning. Knowledge puffeth up. And ambitious men, in 
 order to raise themselves, if possible, above others, will 
 often do strange things ; and the more learned they are, 
 the more dangerous their schemes and their influence. If, 
 in solid attainments and real excellences, they cannot attain 
 superiority, they will have often recourse to some peculiar 
 and unimportant privileges, or to something out of the 
 common way, such as the customs and practices of anti- 
 quity, whether wise or foolish, useful or useless, suitable or 
 imsuitable to present circumstances. When men fail to excel 
 others in any of the great and important quaUfications for 
 the ministry, they pique themselves on their ordination, 
 and claim to themselves the exclusive right of preaching 
 and of ministering the sacraments : and to swell the mea- 
 sure of this kind of superiority, they attach, especially to 
 the sacraments, an importance which nothing but Romish 
 traditions can justify. Standing on this pinnacle, raised 
 for them by the Romish Church, they seem as self-compla- 
 cent as if they had fully gained their ambitious object, while 
 they become in reality objects of compassion or dread to all 
 enlightened Protestants — of compassion, as it respects them- 
 selves—of di-ead, in relation to the effect of their labours 
 on the unstable and ill-informed. 
 
 But, as a cloak for this ambition, superstition comes in, 
 which has never failed to win adherents by being extremely 
 devotional. The men of " mint, and anise, and cummin," 
 have ever been notorious for fasting, making long prayers, 
 and talking and writing most rehgiously, or rather supersti- 
 tiously, especially about the traditions of the elders, outward 
 rites, forms, and ceremonies. A truly religious devotion is 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 13 
 
 the progeny of faith, love, and hope : that which is supersti- 
 tious is the offspring of puerile and overweening reverence 
 for mere outward ordinances, old customs, and traditionary 
 rites. The latter is often more apparent, showing itself at Vide 
 the comers of the streets, or by crossings, and genuflexions, ^PP^^*^' 
 and is always obtrusive and plausible, as what is shallow 
 and fictitious makes invariably greater noise, show, and 
 display, than what is real and genuine. 
 
 But to return to apostolical succession. We have seen 
 that even Hooker gives up the point, as being not indispen- 
 sably necessary for a Christian ministry : and Archbishop 
 Cranmer breaks the chain completely, and makes very little 
 account of it. And the truth is, that orders are made very 
 little of in the New Testament, and the main stress is laid 
 on the necessary qualifications for the ministry. We find 
 men preaching, and baptizing too, without orders, as the 
 first deacons, whose appointment, by laying on of the hands 
 of the Apostles, was not to preach or baptize, but to minis- 
 ter the alms of the Church. And what are we to think of 
 Paul, who was never ordained by men } or if what is re- 
 corded in Acts xiii. was an ordination, it was not by 
 apostolical succession, for there was no Apostle present, but 
 " certain prophets and teachers." It is true, that he was 
 called and appointed, in an extraordinary manner, by our 
 Saviour ; but still, if apostolical succession was of such 
 importance, why was he not ordained by the first Apostles ? 
 And when he came to Jerusalem, as recorded in Gal. ii., 
 how was he acknowledged as an Apostle ? Did they exa- 
 mine into his ordination ? Had they done so, they would 
 have had no testimony as to his appointment from heaven, 
 but his own ; for the men who were with him, though they 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 heard the voice, did not, as it appears, understand what 
 was said ; and no man's testimony, in his ovm case, can be 
 received. What, then, were his credentials ? The effects 
 of his ministry, God owning him in his work. This satis- 
 fied them, and they acknowledged him as a true minister. 
 And though I wholly subscribe to the high propriety of 
 ordination by men, as an useful practice, and, in ordinary 
 circumstances, a necessary means of that good order in the 
 Church, so strongly enforced in the word of God, yet I am 
 fully persuaded that many not episcopally ordained, and not 
 ordained at all by men, are sent and ordained by a higher 
 power, for God owns and blesses them for the conversion 
 of souls, as he did St. Paul. And all that preach the truth, 
 and can produce credentials of this kind, ought to be owned 
 by all as time Christian ministers. To do otherwise, would 
 be to act directly contrary to the practice of our Lord's 
 own Apostles, which is with me a practice of far higher 
 authority than that of succeeding ages. But it may be 
 said, that extraordinary gifts attended St. Paul's ministrj'. 
 This is very true. But what were they ? They were 
 secondary things as to time and importance. They were 
 conferred on none but those who were first converted, or 
 professed to be so ; and they were only given for a time, to 
 answer a temporaiy purpose, and were in value nothing, 
 when compared with converting grace, which accompanied 
 his ministry. 
 
 To say, therefore, that "there is no other external mark 
 of a Christian minister," is to say what the best antiquity 
 does in no degi-ee countenance. It is exactly the same 
 thing, in my view, as to say that a man of straw is a real 
 man, because a coat is put on him ; or that a scarecrow is 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 15 
 
 a real man, because a hat is put on its head. Ordination is 
 well in its place ; but make too much of it, make it the only 
 " external mark," and you make it worse than no ordina- 
 tion at all. For my part, I would prefer a simple layman, 
 who "rightly divided the word of truth," who "held faith 
 and a good conscience," who was " apt to teach, a lover of 
 good men, sober, just, holy, temperate," and who " ruled 
 well his own house," which are the apostolic outward marks 
 of a Christian minister, — I would far prefer such an one to 
 all those who think that orders is the only external mark. 
 When people adopt and propagate such antiscriptural 
 notions, there is no wonder that others leave the Church, 
 and that some turn Quakers, and allow of no ministry at 
 all. And may we not expect that God, in his providence, 
 will degrade the office and do away with orders altogether.' 
 yea, were orders as much his appointment as some would 
 have them to be, when they are thus abused by extrava- 
 gance ? Did not God distinctly appoint the sacrifices under 
 the law ? and what did he do with them, when the Jews 
 placed most of their rehgioii in the mere acts of sacrificuig } 
 He caused them to be discontinued, by removing the 
 people into a distant countiy. And what did he say of 
 them, previous to his making them thus void.' "To what 
 purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to me.''— Bring 
 no more vain oblations ; incense is an abomination to me." 
 And was not the temple built with the express approbation of 
 God } And what did he do to the temple, when the people 
 thought that to be a sufficient external mark of their being 
 his people ? He destroyed it. And when mere " orders" 
 are made of such consequence, what are we to expect } and 
 what, indeed, has actually taken place already in this coun- 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 try ? God has evidently endowed men without " orders," 
 and has extensively blessed their ministry; and "orders," 
 not because they are not right in their place, but because 
 they have been too much considered eis the only external 
 mark, have been brought into disrepute ; and nothing will 
 bring them again into repute, and nothing ought to bring 
 them into repute, but the exhibition of such external marks 
 accompanying them as the word of God requires. 
 
 But when men fail to prove what they wish from the 
 Scriptures, they go to tradition ; and thus they imitate the 
 Jews in our Saviour's time. The Fathers are appealed to, 
 as if they were almost infallible. It has ever been the 
 disposition of man to leave God, and to seek out some 
 broken cisterns. This was the case with the Jews: they 
 had the Scriptures, but they paid more regard to the tra- 
 ditions of the elders. This is the case with the Papists : 
 they do, indeed, acknowledge the Scriptures, but they 
 acknowledge tradition as equal to them, and really and 
 practically far above them. The same spirit evidently pre- 
 vails in the writers of the British Magazine and the 
 Oxford Tracts. Tradition seems to be the idol. Unin- 
 spired writings of poor fallible men, like ourselves, must be 
 brought in to overrule and control the inspired book of 
 God, — to curtail or extend its meaning, as they think 
 proper. Let these be taken as helps and assistants, and 
 there can be no objection ; but if they be constituted 
 judges, the inevitable consequences will be, that God's 
 word will be dishonoured, reason and sanctified under- 
 standing will be outraged, and the way will be paved for 
 the introduction of the greatest delusions. Some of the 
 Fathers, especially the earliest, were the greatest bunglers 
 
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. 
 
 17 
 
 in interpreting Scripture of any that have ever lived ; which 
 
 I intend shewing in my next letter. It is not well, in- Vide 
 
 deed, to disclose and expose the weaknesses of good, well- ■'^PP™^'*' 
 
 meaning men ; but when they are converted into a sort of 
 
 demi-gods, it is a duty to shew what they were, that men 
 
 may be shamed, when they cannot be reasoned, out of their 
 
 foUy. 
 
 And here, sir, I am very much disposed to give a chal- 
 lenge to these wise men of the British Magazine and of 
 the Oxford Tracts ; and I will do so, especially, with the 
 view of undeceiving the public on this point ; and my chal- 
 lenge is this : — 
 
 / challenge all these men to produce from the modern 
 works of sectaries any thing so puerile, fanciful, foolish, 
 extravagant, and unscriptural, as I shall produce from 
 the luritings of the very earliest Fathers, even those called 
 apostolical. 
 
 This is my challenge ; and let them ransack the works of 
 all the sectaries in our day, except Socinians and Papists. 
 I could almost afford them the works of Joanna Southcote 
 and Jacob Behmen. I will not except those of Ranters ; 
 for I am sure I can match them, and even over-match 
 them. With this challenge I close this letter. 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
 c 
 
18 
 
 II. 
 
 Sir, Jan. 11, 1838. 
 
 Before I proceed to make extracts from the Fathers, it 
 is necessary that I should give some brief historical account 
 of the Scriptures and of the Fathers' writings. According 
 to the most approved opinions, all the books of the New 
 Testament, with the exception of St. John's Gospel and the 
 Revelation, were written before the year 70. The Gospel 
 and the Revelation of St. John are supposed to have been 
 written between 96 and 99. These are all the inspired 
 writings. The next records which we have are those called 
 the writings of the Apostolical Fathers, that is, of Clement, 
 Barnabas, Herrnas, Ignatius, and Pohjcarp. There are 
 two epistles of Clement, — one of Barnabas, — visions, com- 
 mands, and similitudes by Hermas, — seven epistles of 
 Ignatius, — and one of Polycarp ; these, together with the 
 relations of the martyrdoms of Ignatius and Polycarp, con- 
 tain all we have belonging to those called the Apostolical 
 Fathers, that is, such as lived with and had seen some of 
 the apostles ; and " these, together with the Holy Scriptures 
 of the New Testament," says Archbishop Wake, who has 
 
EPISTLES OF CLEMENT. 
 
 19 
 
 translated them all into English, " are a complete collec- 
 tion of the most primitive antiquity for about 150 years 
 after Christ." 
 
 To make up two centuries, we must take in the works of 
 
 Justin Martyr, Aihenagoras, Theophilus, of Antioch, 
 
 Tatian, Irenaus, and perhaps of Tertullian, though he 
 
 wrote, if not in the third, yet on the eve of that century. . Vide 
 . „ , . . . , . . , Appendi: 
 
 All other writmgs durmg the first two centuries are either F. 
 
 acknowledged spurious, or deemed doubtful or heretical. 
 
 The Apostles' Creed, as we have it, is no production of that 
 
 period, as may be clearly proved. The Canons of the 
 
 Apostles, as they are called, were not drawn up by any of 
 
 the Apostles, nor, probably, during the second century, 
 
 except in a few instances. They were " put together," 
 
 says Archbishop Wake, " at several times, and finished as 
 
 we now see them, within 300 years after Christ." As a 
 
 proof they did not exist in the first two centuries, they 
 
 are not mentioned, as far as I can find out, in any authentic 
 
 work belonging to that period. The beginning of the third 
 
 century is the earliest date that can, perhaps, be fixed for 
 
 any of them. To call them Apostolical is very wrong, as it 
 
 tends only to impose on those not acquainted with their Vide 
 
 . . . Appendij 
 
 origin. I shall now proceed to notice the contents of the g. 
 
 epistles and other works of those called the Apostohcal 
 
 Fathers. 
 
 I. THE TWO EPISTLES OF CLEMENT. 
 
 His first epistle, written in the name of the Church at 
 Rome to the Church at Corinth, is supposed to have been 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 EPISTLES OF CLEMENT. 
 
 sent between the years 68 and 70, clearly after the death 
 of Paul. It is rather a long epistle, occupying in Arch- 
 bishop Wake's translation, about forty-six octavo pages in a 
 type of moderate size. Its contents, for the most part, are 
 very excellent ; much calculated to cure the e^'ils of schism 
 and sedition, prevalent at the time in the Corinthian Church, 
 on account of which evUs it was sent. It contains large and 
 long quotations from the Old Testament, and some from the 
 New. It refers to Scripture only as authority, and never 
 mentions nor alludes to tradition at all. " Look," he says, 
 " into the Holy Scriptures, which are the true words of the 
 Holy Ghost. Ye know that there is nothing unjust or 
 
 Sect. 45. counterfeit (•irapair€Troiv)/*6K»', forged) written in them." 
 Though there be several minor points on which he seems 
 fanciful, I shall adduce now but one passage, in which a 
 Judaising spirit appears evident. That I may not trouble 
 your readers with the original, and yet afford them satis- 
 faction that the rendering is correct and faithful, I shall give 
 in this and in other instances the translation of Archbishop 
 Wake. The italics are mine : — 
 
 First Ep " It behoves us to take care that .... we do all things in 
 of order, whatever our Lord has commanded us to do : and 
 
 Sect. 40. particularly that we perform our offerings and service to 
 God at their appointed seasons : for these he has com- 
 manded to be done, not rashly, (by chance) and disorderly, 
 but at certain determinate times and hours. And, there- 
 fore, he hath ordained by his supreme will and authority, 
 both where and by what persons they are to be performed ; 
 that so all things being piously done to all weU-pleasing 
 they may be acceptable unto him. They, therefore, who 
 make their offerings at the appointed seasons, are happy 
 
EPISTLES OF CLEMENT. 
 
 and accepted, because that, obeying the commandments of 
 the Lord, they are free from sin. And the same care 
 must be had of 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 appertain 
 their proper ministries ; and the layman is confined within 
 the bounds of what is commanded to laymen." 
 
 The whole effect of this passage was to Judaise the Chris- 
 tian Church. The command of the Lord as to offerings at 
 appointed seasons, determinate times and hours, could have 
 no reference to any thing in the New Testament, but to the 
 Old, The tenor of the whole passage is ceremonial, legal, 
 and Jewish. 
 
 The second epistle of Clement is also to the Corinthians. 
 Its genuineness is doubted by many, but conceded by Arch- 
 bishop Wake and some others. Its date cannot well be 
 ascertained. It is short, and seems much inferior, in 
 many points, to the other. The spirit of it is not very 
 Evangelical, but tinged with legality ; and its conclusion is 
 worthy only of a Jewish Rabbi :— " For the Lord himself 
 being asked," he says, " by a certain person when his 
 kingdom should come, answered. When two shall be one, 
 and that which is without as that which is within ; and 
 the male with the female, neither male nor female." 
 
 Where he got this, it is not difficult to guess. That it is 
 wholly unlike anything said by our Saviour, needs no proof. 
 It bears the stamp and mark of a Rabbinical origin ; and 
 he no doubt heard it from some Jewish Christian, still 
 deeply tinged with the remains of his former sentiments. 
 The Oxford Tract men may consider this, if they choose, 
 as a precious traditionary rehc, handed down to Clement 
 
22 
 
 EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 
 
 from the Apostles ; but I feel quite satisfied that he got 
 it in the way I have explained. Of this tradition, Clement 
 himself gives us the explanation, which is quite consistent 
 with the train of the tale itself : — 
 
 " Now two are one, when we speak the truth to each 
 other ; and there is (without hypocrisy) one soul in two 
 bodies, ^nd that which is without as that which is within ; 
 he means this, he calls the soul that which is within, and 
 the body that which is without. As, therefore, thy body 
 appears, so let thy soul be seen by its good works. And 
 the male tvith the female, neither male nor female : he 
 means this, he calls our anger the male, our concupiscence 
 the female. When, therefore, a man is come to such a pass, 
 that he is subject neither to the one or the other of these, 
 both of which, through the prevalence of custom and an evil 
 education, cloud and darken the reason ; but rather having 
 dispelled the mist arising from them, and being full of 
 shame, shall, by repentance, have xmited both his soul and 
 spirit in the obedience of reason ; then, as Paul says, there 
 is in us neither male nor female." 
 
 II. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 
 
 This was the companion of St. Paul, and is called an 
 apostle ; and hence great weight is allowed by many to what 
 Vide he has written. That he was a good man appears from 
 Appmdi.x, Scriptures ; but that he was inspired to wite for the benefit 
 of the Church does not appear ; nor does the character of 
 his epistle justify such a supposition. Many may be good, 
 honest, and pious men, and yet be very wrong and foolish in 
 many of their notions. The date of this ^istle I cannot 
 
EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 
 
 ascertain. It is supposed to have been written more espe- 
 cially to Jewish Christians, and he himself was a Jew. It 
 takes up thirty-six pages in Wake's translation. 
 
 This epistle, with a few exceptions, is very fanciful and 
 extravagant, the production of a mind by no means free 
 from the influence of Jewish fictions. How the good 
 Archbishop Wake came to view it as half-inspired, seems 
 very strange, as there are many things in it which offend 
 even common sense ; mixed, indeed, with a few things 
 which are good and excellent. It is a strange mixture 
 of wisdom and folly, of truth Euid error, of sobriety and 
 extravagance. 
 
 How incongruous is the exposition he gives of Moses' 
 breaking the two tables : — 
 
 " And Moses cast the two tables out of his hands ; and 
 their covenant was broken, that the love of Christ might 
 be sealed in your hearts, unto the hope of his faith." 
 
 How strange an explanation of Scripture is the fol- 
 lowing : — 
 
 " Behold, thus saith the Lord God; enter ye into the 
 good land of which the Lord hath sworn to Abraham, and 
 Isaac, and Jacob, that he would give it you, and possess it ; 
 a land flowing with milk and honerj. Now, what the spi- 
 ritual meaning of this is, learn it ; it is as if it had been 
 said. Put your trust in Jesus, who shall be manifested to 
 you in the flesh : forasmuch as out of the substance of the 
 earth Adam was formed. — But what signifies the milk and 
 honey ? Because, as the child is nourished with milk and 
 then with honey, so we, being kept alive by the belief of 
 his promises and his word, shall live and have dominion 
 over the land. For he has foretold, saying, Increase and 
 
24 
 
 EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 
 
 multiply, and have dominion over the Jishes, 8fc. But 
 who is there that is now able to have this dominion over 
 the wild beasts, or fishes, or fowls of the air ? For you 
 know that to rule is to have power, that a man should be 
 set over what he rules. But forasmuch as this we have 
 not now, he tells us when we shall have it, namely, when 
 Wa^e. we shall become perfect, that we may be made inheritors 
 Pp.^169, of tijg covenant of the Lord." 
 
 I could easily midtiply instances of this kind of strange, 
 fanciful, unmeaning, and incoherent exposition ; and were 
 I to give all, it would be to transcribe the greatest part 
 of the epistle. I shall content myself with the following 
 passage, which is purely Cabalistical : — " Understand, there- 
 fore, children, these things more fully, that Abraham, who 
 was the first that brought in circumcision, circumcised, 
 having received the mystery of the three letters. For the 
 Scripture says, that Abraham circumcised three hundred 
 and eighteen men of his house, (' Many others,' says Wake, 
 in the margin, ' of the ancient Fathers have concurred with 
 him in this.' If so, they said what the Scripture does not 
 say.) But what, therefore, was the mystery that was 
 made known unto him ? Mark, first the eighteen and 
 next the three hundred. For the numeral letters of ten and 
 eight, are I H, and these denote Jesus. And because the 
 cross is that by which we are to find grace, therefore he 
 adds three hundred, the note of which is T (' the figure of 
 the cross). Wherefore, by two letters he signified Jesus, 
 and by the third his cross. He who has put the engrafted 
 gift of his doctrine within us, knows that I never taught 
 
 Ibid, to any one a more certain truth ; but I trust that ve are 
 Pp. 175, ^, , 
 176. worthy of it. 
 
HERMAS. 
 
 This I expect will exactly suit the taste of the admirers 
 of the British Magazine and the Oxford Tracts ; for the 
 material cross is magnified, and it is a " certain truth " 
 announced by an Apostolical Father. These two considera- 
 tions must of course strongly recommend to them this 
 Cabalistic fiction. How thankful ought we to be for the 
 inspired writings ! The more I read of the Fathers, the 
 more I admire the solidity, sobriety, and wisdom of the 
 Scriptures, and the more convinced I am that they are 
 inspired. The difference between them and the writings of 
 those who came nearest to them in time, is amazing — is, in 
 fact, such as to be sufficient of itself to convince us of their 
 inspiration. 
 
 III. — THE WRITINGS OF HERMAS, 
 
 It is thought probable that he was the Hernias mentioned 
 by St. Paul in Rom. xvi. 14, as one belonging to the 
 Church at Rome. He is called the Pastor or Shepherd 
 Hermas. He seems to have been at Rome when he wrote, 
 and the time appears to have been about the year 70. His 
 works occupy 147 pages in Wake's Translation, and are 
 divided into three books. The first contains 4 visions ; the 
 second, 12 commands ; and the third, 10 similitudes. They 
 might indeed have been all called visions ; for the whole is 
 said to have been communicated to him by some lady, or 
 some angel or another, whom he sees either in dreams, or 
 visions. 
 
 In reading Hermas, one is greatly at a loss what opinion 
 to form of him. That he was inspired, is a thought that 
 
HERMAS. 
 
 the mind cannot for a moment entertain ; his ideas and 
 notions are often so driveUing, and oftener so strange and 
 unmeaning, that it is not possible for any to harbour that 
 thought, except he were wholly blinded by veneration for 
 the Fathers, as many learned men have been, and are still. 
 The difficulty is, to determine whether he was an allegorizer, 
 like Bunyan, or an enthusiast, like Jacob Behmen. It 
 appears to me, after much consideration, that he was an 
 enthusiast. This is the correctest and the most charitable 
 opinion that can, I think, be formed of him. He sees 
 ladies, old women, as well as angels in his visions, and holds 
 converse with them ; and all his writings are made up of 
 these conversations. And this book, as we are told, was 
 read in the Churches in the earliest ages ; which certainly 
 is no great credit to the Primitive Church. 
 
 In his second vision, the heading of which is, " Of his 
 (Hermas) neglect in correcting his talkative wife," &c. 
 he represents himself as being carried away by " the 
 Spirit " into the place where he had seen a vision the year 
 before, and then proceeds thus : — " When I was come unto 
 the place, I fell down upon my knees, and began to pray 
 unto the Lord and to glorify his name, that he had esteemed 
 me worthy, and had manifested to me my former sins. And 
 when I arose from prayer, behold, I saw over against me 
 the old woman whom I had seen the last year, walking, and 
 reading in a certain book. And she said to me, ' Canst 
 thou tell these things to the elect of God ? ' I answered 
 and said to her, ' Lady, I cannot retain so many things in 
 my memory, but give me the book and I will write them 
 down.' ' Take it,' says she, ' and see that thou restore it 
 again to me.' As soon as I had received it, I went aside to 
 
HERMAS. 
 
 27 
 
 a certain place of the field, and transcribed every letter, for 
 I found no syllables. And as soon as I had finished what 
 was written in the book, the book was suddenly caught out 
 of my hands, but by whom, I saw not. After fifteen days, 
 when I had fasted, and entreated the Lord with all earnest- 
 ness, the knowledge of the writing was revealed unto me. 
 Now the writing was this : — ' Thy seed, O Hermas, hath 
 sinned against the Lord, and have betrayed their parents, 
 through their great wickedness. And they have been called 
 the betrayers of their parents, and have gone on in their 
 treachery. And now have they added lewdness to their 
 other sins and the pollution of naughtiness. Thus have 
 they filled up the measure of their iniquities. But do thou 
 upbraid thy sons with all these words, and thy wife, which 
 shall be thy sister ; and let her learn to refrain her tongue, 
 with which she calumniates. For when she shall hear these 
 things, she will refrain herself, and shall obtain mercy. And 
 they shall also be instructed, when thou shalt reproach 
 them with these words, which the Lord hath commanded 
 to be revealed unto thee. Then shall their sins be forgiven, 
 which they have hitherto committed, and the sins of all the 
 saints which have sinned, even unto this day ; if they shall 
 repent with all their hearts, and remove all doubts out of 
 their hearts. For the Lord hath sworn by his glory con- 
 cerning his elect, having determined this very time, that if 
 any even now sin, he shall not be saved. For the repent- 
 ance of the righteous has its end ; the days of repentance 
 are fulfilled to all the saints ; but to the heathen there is Wa^*e. 
 
 / ^ 1 *j Pp.205 
 
 repentance even imto the last day. 206. 
 
 How unmeaning and how rambling are many parts of 
 this vision ! Transcribing letters and not syllables ! Then, 
 
28 HERMAS. 
 
 after fasting and praying, there is a discovery of these 
 letters made to him : and the revelation is, among other 
 things, about his talkative wife ! Then she is sure to repent 
 and find mercy after hearing these words ! After this, he 
 rambles into another subject, and speaks of the repentance 
 of all the saints, and states, that there is a determinate time, 
 after which, if they sin, they shall not be saved. The 
 writers of the Oxford Tracts have picked out a leaf here, 
 and from other parts of Hermas's writings ; for they hardly 
 allow repentance after baptism. No more does Hermas, for 
 these are his words : — 
 
 " I have even now heard," he says to the angel, " from 
 certain teachers (like the Oxford Tracts men,) that there 
 is no other repentance besides that of baptism, when we go 
 down to the water and receive the forgiveness of our sins ; 
 and that after that we must sin no more, but live in purity. 
 And he (the angel) said unto me. Thou hast been rightly 
 informed." 
 
 The angel, however, qualifies this in some respect, and 
 
 tells him, that the Lord had appointed repentance under 
 
 certain circumstances, and "gave " him " the power of it." 
 
 And therefore, he adds, " I say unto thee. If any one after 
 
 that great and holy calling shall be tempted by the devil, 
 
 and sin, he has one repentance." I do not know whether 
 
 ,^bp. the men of Oxford go so far, or farther than this. It was 
 W ake. ° 
 
 p. 238. not without reason, as it appears evident from Hermas, 
 that St. John in his First Epistle, has spoken so pointedly 
 1 John on the subject of forgiveness. He doubtless observed this 
 'ii^ri^' error prevailing in his day. 
 
 There are many seeds and germs of future errors to be 
 found in Hermas, besides such as are evident and glaring. 
 
HERMAS. 
 
 Tliere are many errors that became prominent in after ages, 
 which may be traced to Hermas ; such as the adoration of 
 angels, baptismal regeneration, the merit of works, and 
 some others. 
 
 On the subject of baptism he is as extravagant as any one 
 can well be. He represents himself as seeing a great tower 
 built, which turns out to be the Church. He sees the build- 
 ing going on, and stones brought into it from various 
 places, from twelve adjoining mountains, from the plain, and 
 from the deep, or the water. He asks the angel to reveal 
 the meaning of all this, which he does at length. About 
 the stones of the deep, which were the saints under the Old 
 Testament, the angel speaks thus : — 
 
 " It was necessary for them to ascend by water, that 
 they might be at rest. For they could not otherwise enter 
 into the kingdom of God, but by laying aside the mortality 
 of their former life. They, therefore, being dead, were 
 nevertheless sealed with the seal of the Son of God, and so 
 entered into the kingdom of God. For before a man re- 
 ceives the name of the Son of God, he is ordained into 
 death ; but when he receives that seal, he is freed from 
 death, and assigned into life. Now that seal is the water 
 of baptism, into which men go down under the obligation 
 unto death, but come up appointed unto life. Wherefore 
 to these also was this seal preached, and they made use of 
 it, that they might enter into the kingdom of God. And I 
 said. Why then. Sir, did these forty stones also ascend with 
 them out of the deep, having already received that seal ? 
 He answered. Because these apostles and teachers, who 
 preached the name of the Son of God, dying after they had 
 received his faith and power, preached to them viho were 
 
30 
 
 HERMAN, 
 
 dead before ; and they gave this seal to them. They went 
 down, therefore, into the water with them, and again came 
 up. But these went down whilst they were alive, and came 
 up again alive ; whereas those, who were before dead, went 
 down dead, but came up alive. Through these, therefore, 
 they received life, and knew the Son of God ; for which 
 cause they came up with them, and were fit to come into 
 the building of the tower ; and were not cut, but put in 
 Abp. entire ; because they died in righteousness, and in great 
 
 Pp.%25 purity ; only this seal was wanting to them." 
 326. The men of the Oxford Tracts have evidently imbibed a 
 portion of what is said here ; but they do not seem to have 
 made up their system so complete as Hermas did. They 
 had better mend it, otherwise it will not be thoroughly apos- 
 tolical and primitive. Hermas makes the dead as well as the 
 living to be baptized ; and, giving them the seal of baptism, 
 he transfers them straight into heaven. But there is one good 
 thing in his system ; he gives the sign to none but godly 
 men. To transcribe all the strange things said by this wri- 
 ter, would be to transcribe the whole book ; I shall, there- 
 fore, give only one extract more, which clearly teaches the 
 merit of works ; the angel says to him : — 
 
 " Keep the commandments of the Lord, and thou shalt 
 be approved, and shalt be written in the number of those that 
 keep his commandments. But if, besides those things which 
 the Lord hath commanded, thou shalt add some good thing , 
 thou shalt purchase to thyself a greater dignity, and be in 
 more favour with the Lord than thou shovddest otherwise 
 
 . 27(5, have been." 
 
 The notice of Ignatius and Polycarp, I shall reserve for 
 another letter, and shall close this with a few brief remarks. 
 
THE EARLY CHURCH. 
 
 31 
 
 The idea generally entertained of the early Church, even 
 in the time of the apostles, is, I conceive, extremely erro- 
 neous. There is an extent of knowledge and a purity of 
 doctrine ascribed to it, which no right view of its circum- 
 stances can justify. We too often judge of what it believed 
 by the Gospels and Epistles, taking for granted that they 
 fully comprehended and imbibed all their heavenly and sub- 
 lime truths. So far were they from having any enlarged 
 knowledge, that it appears, judging by the writings of 
 those uninspired, that their views were veiy confined. And 
 what are we to think of them by the reproofs in many of the 
 Epistles, but that they were very deficient both in know- 
 ledge and moral conduct ? And no wonder, considering the 
 great disadvantages under which they laboured. Too much 
 has been also attributed to miraculous gifts ; these were 
 often abused, and the possession of them was no guaran- 
 tee against errors. Nothing but inspiration is infallible. 
 
 The most ignorant era of the primitive Church was in my 
 view the first ; including the latter part of the first and the 
 whole of the second century. Hence so many strange here- 
 sies sprung up, which began to rise even in the Apostles' 
 time. The light which the Apostles brought was clear and 
 bright, but the dark world received it but very partially. From 
 the death of the apostles until Justin Martyr, (about eighty 
 years after the death of Peter and Paul, and about fifty 
 after the death of John,) there was no writer of any note ; 
 and the Scriptures were comparatively in but few hands, 
 especially those of the New Testament : and the works of 
 Clement, and Barnabas, and Hermas, were read in many of 
 the Churches : which afterwards were discontinued. And 
 how came they to be discontinued ? Doubtless, through the 
 
THE EARLY CHURCH. 
 
 increasing knowledge the Christians acquired by having the 
 New Testament Scriptures collected together, and more 
 generally dispersed. It was, no doubt, found impracticable 
 to reconcile the Judaizing tendencies of Clement, the Ca- 
 balistic fancies of Barnabas, and the wild reveries of Her- 
 mas, with the Christian, sound, and sober truths of the 
 New Testament. 
 
 MiSOPAPlSTICUS. 
 
33 
 
 III. 
 
 Sir, Jan. 15, 1838. 
 
 It is very necessary, in older to form a right judgment 
 of characters, to keep in view the distinction between know- 
 ledge and piety, correct views and holy impressions, or a 
 clear head and an upright heart. The one may exist, and 
 does often exist, without the other. We may be quite or- 
 thodox in our sentiments, and yet be far from having true 
 religion in our hearts. And the converse of this is also 
 true. The heart may be right, while we may be wrong in 
 many of our opinions. A man may be a true and devoted 
 Christian, though he may entertain views on many points 
 by no means correct. The present day exhibits abundant 
 instances confirmatoiy of this truth. There are good and 
 pious men to be found among all denominations of Chris- 
 tians who hold the essentisds of the Gospel : and yet how 
 various and contradictory are many of their sentiments, on 
 points, too, deemed of considerable importance ! So that 
 a man's having a right heart is no proof that he has a clear 
 head. I make these remarks to prepare the reader for the 
 observations I am going to make on Ignatius and his 
 epistles : — 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 IV. THE EPISTLES OF IGSATIIS. 
 
 Ignatius. This evidently pious man was Bishop of Antioch from the 
 year 69 to the year 110, or as some say, to the year 116. 
 When Trajan the Emperor was on his way to subdue the 
 Parthians, and passing through Antioch, Ignatius, as we 
 are told, was " \ oluntarily brought " before him. The old 
 saint conducted himself ver\' courageously, and seemed to 
 court persecution rather than avoid it. We cannot but 
 admire him, and yet blame him : for as I shall presently 
 shew, there was a considerable sprinkllhg of superstition in 
 his reUgion. Though he shewed an apostoUc courage, he 
 did not manifest an apostolic spirit. Trajan, after examin- 
 ing him, condemned him to be thrown to wild beasts ; and 
 he was ordered to be sent to Rome for that purpose. On 
 his journey to Rome he was allowed to stop at several pla- 
 ces, especially at Smyrna, where Polycarp was ; and re- 
 ceived deputations from several of the Asiatic Churches, to 
 whom, in return for their kind attentions, he wrote epistles : 
 and it was during this journey that he wrote all his epis- 
 
 Epistles. ties. His seven epistles were written to the Ephesians, 
 Magnesians, Trallians, Ro7na)is, Philadelphians, Smyr- 
 neans and to Polycarp. They are all short, occupying al- 
 together sixty-five pages in Archbishop Wake's translation. 
 When he arrived at Rome the sentence was executed, and 
 he was devoured by wild beasts, while manifesting great 
 courage, and a desire for martyrdom incapable of being al- 
 together justified. 
 
 It would be wholly unjustifiable to expose the weaknesse;^ 
 of this good man, were it not that improper advantage ha* 
 
been taken of his sentiments, and thut he has been brought 
 forward as an authority in support of many things wholly 
 unscriptural. I shall arrange what I shall adduce from his 
 epistles under the heads of errors, fancies, and extravagan- 
 cies. 
 
 There are many germs of error in his epistles, and some En- 
 grown into considerable size. I cannot consider the fol- 
 lowing but in this light : — 
 
 "Let all reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ," and the 
 bishop as the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim Kpi 
 of God and college of the apostles. Without these there is '^!, '^J 
 no Church." 
 
 This was to claim for pooi- fallible creatures what did not 
 belong to them : and to assert that there is no Church 
 without them is wholly unscriptural ; for we read of Churches 
 in Paul's epistles in which there could not have been all 
 these officers. Then he speaks of the sacramental " bread" 
 as being " the medicine of immortaUty, our antidote that 
 we should not die, but live for ever in Christ Jesus." to'^the 
 And what but erroneous are passages like these : — sml'a) 
 "My soul be for yours; and I myself the expiatory 
 offering for your Church of Ephesus." " My soul Sect. 8 
 be your expiation, not only now, but when I shall have 
 attained unto God." "Let no man deceive himself; to^'the 
 both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious 
 angels, and princes, whether visible or invisible, if they 
 believe not in the blood of Christ, (he did not die for 
 D -2 
 
 Trail. 
 
 Epi. 
 
 Trail. 
 
 .ect. 13, 
 
36 IGNATIIS. 
 
 EpU^. angels) it shall be to them to condemnation." But 
 Smyr. not full grown error that we meet with, so much as 
 
 sect. 6- fancies or extravagancies which gave rise to them in after 
 ages. 
 
 n.— FANCIES. 
 
 There are many things which may be classed under this 
 term, the following are some specimens ; — 
 
 " The more any one sees his bishop silent, the more let 
 Epist. ^'n' reverence him. It is therefore evident that we ought 
 Ephe* ^° upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord 
 sect. 6. himself." 
 
 " Am I not able to write to you of heavenly things 
 But I fear lest I should harm you who are but babes in Christ ; 
 (excuse me this care) and lest perchance, being not able to 
 receive them, ye .should be choked with them. For even I 
 myself, although I am in bonds, yet am not therefore able 
 to understand heavenly things : as the places of the angels 
 and the several companies of them, under their respective 
 Epist. princes, things visible and invisible ; but in these I am yet 
 Ti^^ a learner. For many things are wanting to us, that we 
 sect. 5. come not short of God." How foohsh and strange 
 is all this, and betokens a mind not altogether free from 
 conceit. 
 
 " Now the wginity of Mary, and he who was bom of 
 her, was kept in secret from the prince of this world, as was 
 Epist. also the death of our Lord : three of the mvsteries the 
 
 to the 
 
 Ephes. most spoken of throughout the world, yet done in secret 
 sect. 19. Qq(J \Sliat a frivolous fancv or tale was this I 
 
IGNATIUS. 
 
 37 
 
 How much like a Jewish tale or a tradition of the elders ! 
 He tells us also, that the star which appeared to the wise 
 men, " shone in heaven beyond all other stars," and that 
 " all the rest of the stars, with the sun and the moon, 
 were the chorus to this star." This of course, according ibid, 
 to some, is an apostolic tradition, faithfully preserved by 
 Ignatius. I say, that it is a shoot from a Jewish stock, 
 which still retained its roots in many of the Jews who turned 
 Christians. 
 
 III. — EXTRAVAGANCIES. 
 
 1 do not know what else I can call the following passage, 
 in which he represents the saints, 
 
 " As being the stones of the temple of the Father, pre- 
 pared for his building, and drawn up on high by the cross of ^^^^^ 
 Christ, as by an engine, using the Holy Ghost as the rope." to the 
 
 What but extravagant are passages like these : — sect. 9. 
 
 " See that ye aU follow your bishops, as Jesus Christ the Epjgt. 
 Father ; and the presbytery as the apostles ; and reverence 
 the deacons as the command of God." sect. 8. 
 
 " It is a good thing to have a due regard both to God 
 and to the bishop : he that honours the bishop shall be 
 honoured of God. But he that does any thing without his 
 knowledge, ministers to the devil : " — sect. 9. 
 
 " Ye are therefore with all your companions in the same 
 journey, full of God ; his spiritual temples, full (carriers) g^j^j 
 of Christ, full (carriers) of holiness ; adorned in all to the 
 things with the commands of Christ." This language sect^'^g. 
 goes clearly far beyond the limits of sober truth ; and 
 
38 
 
 IGNATIUS. 
 
 and so does the following : — " Let it be vour care therefore 
 to come more fidly together to the praise and glory of God : 
 for when ye meet fully together in the same place, the powers 
 of the devil are destroyed, and his mischief is dissolved by 
 
 Sect. 13. the unity of your faith." The Devil no doubt exer- 
 cises his influence in the house of worship, as well as in 
 other places ; and there often in a way more ruinous than 
 any where else. The connecting of great things with mere 
 outward means, is one prominent mistake throughout these 
 epistles ; and this was one of the main sources of error in 
 the primitive Church ; and in the Church throughout all ages. 
 
 I shall add no more on these particular subjects. The 
 foregoing extracts sufficiently shew that Ignatius is no very 
 safe guide. He was evidently a man of great zeal and 
 ardour, but was deficient in sobriety of mind and sound 
 judgment. He was what all of us have seen some to be in 
 our day, humble and yet vain, honest but credulous, devoted 
 to his calling, and yet somewhat superstitious, confessing 
 himself unworthy and yet entertaining not only high but 
 extravagant ideas of his office, and indeed of all official 
 characters. There is indeed a strain of extravagance run- 
 Vide ning through all his epistles. His conduct was the same. 
 
 Appendix, gi^ews himself quite impatient for martyrdom, and wTote 
 an epistle to the Romans on purpose to dissuade them from 
 making any efforts to get him released. He earnestly prays 
 them not to interfere in his behalf. That this sort of spirit 
 was wholly inconsistent with what the Scriptures teach, 
 needs not to be proved. How different was the conduct of 
 Paul ! He requested his brethren to pray /or his release. 
 He was willing to undergo any evils, when it pleased God ; 
 but he did not court persecution and seek martyrdom as 
 
IGNATIUS. 
 
 39 
 
 Ignatius did. To account for the spirit of the latter is not 
 difficult to any one that will read his epistles with any at- 
 tention. He attaches very great merit to martyrdom : in 
 his epistle to the Romans we meet with such expressions 
 as these : — " It is easy for you to do what you please ; but 
 it wUl be hard for me to attain unto God, if you spare me," Sect. 1. 
 that is evidently, by procuring his release. " Ye cannot do 
 me a greater kindness than to suffer me to be sacrificed unto 
 God, now that the altar is already prepared." "I am ready Sect. 2. 
 to die for God, except you hinder me." " Suffer me to be Sect. 4. 
 food for the wild beasts, by whom I shall attain unto God: 
 for I am the wheat of God ; and I shall be ground by the 
 teeth of the wild beasts, that / may be found the pure 
 bread of Christ." " Pardon me in this matter ; I know 
 what is profitable to me. Now I begin to be a disciple." g^^.^ ^ 
 
 However we may admire this spirit, it was clearly gene- 
 rated in a great measure by views of martyrdom not 
 altogether scriptural. Marty dom came to be considered 
 in the Church not only as meritorious, but also as 
 means of expiating for sins, and of attaining eternal 
 life ; and the language of Ignatius goes very much 
 to coimtenance such an opinion ; and there is especially 
 a passage of this kind in the relation of Polycarp's mar- 
 tyrdom, which is this : " Being supported by the grace of 
 Christ, they (the martyrs) despised all the torments of the 
 world ; — by the sufferings of an hour, redeeming themselves 
 from everlasting punishments." Sect. 2. 
 
 The way in which the extravagant language of indi- 
 viduals has produced so many evils, has been this : — They 
 were extremely venerated, and every thing they said was 
 deemed almost Divine, there being not sufficient light and 
 
IGNATIUS. 
 
 knowledge to distinguish between what was human and 
 Divine, between what was weak, vain, and superstitious, 
 and what was truly dignified, disinterested, and consistent 
 with the spirit of the Gospel. And when persons were 
 once canonized, it was difficult to rid the public mind from 
 the undue veneration that was entertained. This has 
 continued in some degree even to the present dav. There 
 is in some an exorbitant notion of the merits and excellency 
 of the primitive Fathers. That many of them were xety 
 zealous and devoted to God, there can be no doubt ; but 
 in right views of religious truth, in enlarged knowledge, 
 and in enlightened piety, they are far inferior to the latter 
 Fathers, and especially to modern divines. When will 
 people be released from the enchantments of antiquity ! and 
 cease to adore the ancients, as the Heathens did their pri- 
 mitive heroes ! 
 
 But it would be wrong to leave lynutius, without ac- 
 knowledging the excellency of some parts of his epistles. 
 There is a more evangelical strain in them than in any of 
 the works of the other apostolical Fathers. The Saviour 
 and his atonement, and the work of the Spirit, are far more 
 fi-equently referred to than in their writings. Repentance is 
 mostly the theme of Clement, Barnabas and Hermas ; and 
 there is very little of the Saviour and his works in either of 
 them. Ignatius is in this respect far superior to them. 
 
 Here I may notice the disagreement that seems to exist 
 between Ignatius and Hermas on the subject of repentance. 
 The one repentance of Hermas is not to be found in Igna- 
 tius, but what evidently appears inconsistent with it. He 
 says :— " As many as shall with repentance return to the 
 unity of the Church, even thc.'^c shall be also the servants 
 
41 
 
 of God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ." Epist. 
 And again, in the same epistle, " The Lord forgives all p]|!jj 
 that repent, if they return to the unity of God." Not 
 a word is said about one repentance, even in the very sect. X 
 places where it ought to have been mentioned, if this 
 was the commonly received doctrine. Clement's Ian- sect. 8. 
 guage agrees with what Ignatius, and not with what Her- 
 mas says. In his first Epistle, he exhorts the Corinthians 
 to repent, without saying any thing about one repentance. 
 " Hence," he says, " we find how all the ministers of the 
 grace of God, (that is, Noah, Jonah, &c. to whom he had 
 jireviously referred) have spoken by the holy Spirit of 
 repentance. And even the Lord of all has himself de- 
 clared with an oath concerning it, "As I live, saith the ^, 
 Lord, I desire not the death of a sinner, but that he should Epist. 
 repent." Then he quotes Ezek. xviii. 30 — 32; Isaiah sect. 8. 
 i. 16, 18, &c. thus putting repentance under the Gospel on 
 the same footing with repentance under the old dispen- 
 sation. Then he concludes the eighth section thus : 
 " These things has God established by his Almighty will, 
 desiring that all his beloved should come to repentance." 
 And more express still is his testimony in the 7th Section : 
 " Let us look stedfastly," he says, " to the blood of Christ, 
 and see how precious his blood is in the sight of God : 
 which being shed for our salvation, has obtained the grace 
 of repentance for all the world. Let us search into all 
 the ages that have gone before us, and let us learn, that 
 our Lord has in every one of them still given place to 
 repentance to all such as would turn to him." All this he Sect. 1. 
 was j)ressing on the attention of the professing, but the 
 refractory members of the Corinthian Church. And it was 
 
42 
 
 POI.YCARP. 
 
 not " tears " and penance, according to the men of the 
 Oxford Tracts, which obtained the grace of repentance, 
 but the " blood of Christ, shed for our salvation." But I 
 proceed to notice : — 
 
 IV. THE EPISTLE OF POLYCARP. 
 
 He was the Bishop of Smyrna, a contemporary in part 
 with Ignatius, but outlived him about thirt\' years. The 
 only thing that remains of his WTitings is an epistle to the 
 Phihppians, written mo.st probably in the year 117. It 
 appears that he has written other epistles ; but they are not 
 extant. He seemed to be a sounder and more sober divine 
 than Ignatius, though his zeal was evidently of a colder 
 temperature. He was evidently a man of great worth and 
 influence in his day. and as it appears, deservedly so. His 
 epistle is short, occupying about ten pages, and contains 
 nothing, as far as I can see, but what is scriptural. 
 
 I quote the following passages, in which he appeals to 
 Scripture, and recommends it to the attention and perusal 
 of the Philippians : — referring them to the Epistle which 
 the "renowned Paul " wrote to them, he says, — "Into 
 which if you look, you wiU be able to edify yourselves 
 ^' in the faith, that has been delivered unto you." 
 Having referred to Antichrist and the spread of errors, he 
 exhorts them thus: — "Wherefore, leaving the vanity 
 of many, and their false doctrines, let us return to the 
 
 Sect. 7. word that was delivered to us from the beginning." 
 
 Sect. 9. Again, He exhorts them to " Obey the icvrd of righteous- 
 ness," which could be no other than the word of God. 
 
POLVrAKP. 
 
 43 
 
 And he expresses his hope of them tlius : — "I trust that 
 ye are well exercised in the Holy Scriptures, and that 
 nothhig is hid from you." Can a Romish Bishop or Sect. 12. 
 Priest express a hope of this kind ? How is it possible, 
 when he keeps the Scriptures from his people ? And the 
 men of the Oxford Tracts would have evidently their people 
 rather exercised in Catholic Tradition, than in the Holy 
 Scriptures. They would have the people first to hear their 
 teaching, which is the teaching of Tradition ; and after 
 having filled their minds with that which is no better 
 than Romish legends, they pretend then to send them to 
 the word of God for confirmation ! First prejudice the 
 mind and fill it with folly, and then let the word of God 
 be consulted ! This is the new wisdom of the Protestants of 
 Oxford ! Using the words of Polycarp, we would say to their 
 l)eople, " Leave the vanity of many and their false doctrines, 
 and return to the word that was delivered unto you from 
 the beginning," which is no other than the word of God. 
 
 Connected with Ignatius and Polycarp are the " Rela- 
 tions of their Martydoms," occupying about twenty- 
 four pages. I have already noticed the martyrdom of 
 Ignatius. The account, which is short, was drawn up, as 
 it is said, by his friends soon after the event. There is 
 one sentence in it which I shall transcribe, as it shews the 
 general character of Ignatius' preaching, and bears upon 
 some Romish notions in the present dav. 
 
 " Wherefore continuing a few years longer with the 
 Church (a previous persecution is referred to), and after 
 the manner of a Divine lamp illuminating the hearts of the 
 faithful by the exposition of the Holy Scriptures (mark, 
 not by tradition), he attained to what he desired." Sect. 2. 
 
44 
 
 POLYCARP. 
 
 The martyrdom of Polycarp took place about the year 
 147. He was burnt alive, like our reformers. The " Re- 
 lation," drawn up soon after, is contained in an epistle 
 from the Church at Smyrna to the Church at Philadelphia, 
 and to " all other assemblies of the holy CathoUc Church." 
 The conduct of Polycarp under his trial was much more 
 Christian and dignified than that of Ignatius, and equally 
 courageous. He avoided his enemies as long as it was 
 practicable ; and when he was taken, he stood his ground 
 nobly and manfully, and manifested a spirit truly apostolical. 
 
 The answer of Polycarp to the Proconsul, when required 
 to swear and reproach Christ, is worthv of being mentioned 
 always with his name ; it was this : — " Eighty and six 
 years have I now served Christ ; and he has never done me 
 the least wrong : How then can I blaspheme my King and 
 
 Sect. ."). my Saviour ? " The courtiny of persecution is expressly 
 disapproved of in this " Relation." The sentence is 
 this : — " We do not commend those who offer themselves 
 
 Sect. 4. to persecution, seeing the Gospel teaches no such thing." 
 It is evident that at that time, nothing was considered 
 right but what the Gospel sanctioned. If tradition sanctions 
 a thing now, and any Scripture can be so twisted as to give 
 it anv support, it is quite enough for the men of the Oxford 
 Tracts. The boast of being primitive, however, does not 
 in this respect avail them at all. There is one more ex- 
 tract which I shall make from this relation. The authorities 
 took care to prevent the Christians from ha\-ing anv part of 
 Polycarp's body, " lest," as it was said, " forsaking him 
 that was crucified, they should begin to worship this Poly- 
 carp." The " relation " then goes on thus : — " And this 
 he (the adversary) said at the suggestion and instigation 
 
POLYCAKl'. 
 
 •J5 
 
 of the Jews, who also watched us, that we slioidd not take 
 him out of the fire ; not considering, that neither is it 
 possible for us ever to forsake Christ, who sutleied for the 
 salvation of all such as should be saved throughout the 
 whole world, the righteous for the ungodly ; nor worship 
 any other besides him. For him indeed, as being the Son 
 of God, we do adore : but for the martyrs, we worthily love 
 them, as the disciples and followers of our Lord, and upon 
 the account of their exceeding great affection towards their 
 Master and their King. Of whom may we be also made 
 companions and fellow- disciples." Sect. 17. 
 
 This passage, I suspect, is not exactly to the taste of 
 the men of the Oxford Tracts. Their attempt to restore 
 Saints' days, and to canonize poor Bishop Ken, betokens yj^^ 
 a disposition very much akin to popery. It is a retrograde A))pendix, 
 motion towards Rome and its mummeries. Reverence for 
 the faithful, and especially for the martyred dead, was 
 beginning to grow even at this time in the primitive Church, 
 as is evident from the " relation" of Ignatius' martyrdom : 
 but it continued growing for some ages, before it attained 
 its maturity and became formally acknowledged. This 
 very disclaimer, though satisfactory in itself, yet seems to 
 imply that there was then an inclination to what was exces- 
 sive. But how strongly does it bear against saint worship ! 
 and how it exposes its extreme folly ! " But for martyrs, 
 we worthily love them," and in what capacity ? As " dis- 
 ciples and followers of our Lord," and as " fellow-disci- 
 ples." How strange then that we should worship and pray 
 to disciples and fellow -disciples ! But we shall have this folly 
 committed in this land, if the wise men of the Oxfoid 
 Tracts succeed in their schemes, and corrupt and stultify 
 
EAKLY FATHERS. 
 
 the country with their doctrines. But while the passage 
 demolishes saintworship, it establishes the worship of 
 Christ as the Son of God. It opposes both the Papist.s 
 and the Socinians, —the two extremes, which come far nearer 
 each other than many suppose. The Papist divides the 
 worship, and thereby etfectually makes it void, as to the 
 Saviour, who allows of no rival ; and the Socinian denies 
 it altogether : -and both can join freely in all the vain and 
 dissipating amusements of the world ;— the Papist even on 
 Sunday after his morning devotions ; and the other is not 
 over-scrupulous about the observance of any part of that dav. 
 And this clearly proves that the character of their religion i.* 
 not very dissimilar. No worship is genuine, but what i.^^ 
 sanctifying, and makes heavenly impressions on our minds 
 and affections, elevating om thoughts above, and alienating 
 our hearts from, such vain objects, as delight the ungodly 
 and worldly-minded. 
 
 I have now completed my review of the Apostolical 
 Fathers. If you will insert these letters, and your readei s 
 wish me to proceed, I may be inclined to carry on my work 
 to the end of the second century, at least so far as to notice 
 the principal works, that is, of Justin Martyr and Irenceus. 
 — I shall conclude at present with two remarks : — 
 
 1. There is nothing in the apostolical Fathers to counte- 
 nance the idea of tradition, that is, that the apostles de- 
 livered any thing to them that was peculiar, to be handed 
 down to posterity : nor do they say that they received any 
 particular explanation of Scripture on any point : nor do their 
 writings contain any thing but what is contained in Scrip- 
 ture, except some reveries and fancies, which may be much 
 more fairly traced to tlie Rabbinical Jews than to tlie 
 
KARLY FATHERS. 
 
 apostles. And if these writings contain no traditions 
 either as to doctrines or practices, ichere are they to be 
 found ? They form the chain of connexion between the 
 apostles and succeeding ages, and if they convey no tra- 
 ditions, it must follow that what their successors report is 
 nothing better than idle tales, the mere gossip of the most 
 talkative. 
 
 2. There is nothing in the writings of these men which 
 entitles them to any greM attention. They are evidently the 
 productions of men who were pious, honest, and zealous, 
 but destitute of learning, defective in solid judgment, and 
 withal somewhat superstitious. Were their writings the 
 productions of the present age, they would not be noticed ; 
 and many who now seem to admire them would despise 
 them. " That which I complain of," says Jeremy Taylor, 
 and very justly, "is, that we look upon wise men that 
 lived long ago, with so much veneration and ?nistake, that 
 we reverence them not for having been wise men, but 
 that they lived long since." Tlie truth is. Sir, and it 
 ought to be told and avowed, that modem divines, 
 especially since the Reformation, are giants in divinity, com- 
 pared with the dwarfs of the primitive Church. 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
48 
 
 IV. 
 
 Jan. 22. 1838. 
 Before I proceed further in my examination of the works 
 of the early Fathers, I shall interpose this letter ; in which 
 I intend making some remarks connected with the works 
 already noticed. I have said in a pre\-ious letter, that the 
 darkest or the most ignorant, or, what perhaps I should 
 have said, the most illiterate age of the primitive Church, 
 was the first, reaching down to the end of the second cen- 
 tury. This may be considered to have been a wise dispen- 
 sation of God, in order to cut off, as much as possible, 
 any channel through which oral tradition might have 
 been conveyed, to which mankind have ever been immode- 
 rately and foolishly attached. I am aware of the conjec- 
 tures of the admirers of antiquity on this point, and the sort 
 of a priori reasoning which they adopt. But their conjec- 
 tures and reasoning do not comport with the circumstances 
 of the times. The history of the Israelites presents in some 
 respects a similar case. After tlieir miraculous deliverance 
 from Egypt, the g'w'mg of the law and the appointment of 
 religious ordinances, their condition as a religious people 
 
ERRORS OF THE EARLY AGES. 
 
 49 
 
 became verij soon exceedingly deteriorated ; but in course of 
 time it improved greatly, that is, under the latter judges and 
 the first kings, as the condition of the primitive Church 
 did as to learning and knowledge in the third, fourth, and 
 fifth centuries. But this improvement among the Israelites 
 was followed, as in the case of the Church, by gradual cor- 
 ruption, until, after various changes, sometimes for the bet- 
 ter, but mostly for the worse, they ceased to be the acknow- 
 ledged people of God. The same thing may be said of the 
 Western Church, the Church of Rome ; it has long ceased 
 to be a part of the true Church ; for how can an heretical 
 and antichristian Church be the Church of Christ ? Similar 
 to the condition of the Jews, it is evidently in a state of 
 apostasy, and has especially one mark which belongs to the yj^^ 
 Jews, an attachment to oral traditions. Appendix, 
 
 I think it right to specify more particularly my reasons 
 for the opinion which I have expressed ; and they are in 
 part the following : — 
 
 1 . The moral and religious, or rather the immoral and 
 irreligious, state of the world at the time. Both the Jews 
 and the Gentiles were exceedingly ignorant and debased in 
 mind and conduct. The Jews had their minds filled with 
 Rabbinical and traditionary tales, and the Gentiles with 
 mythological and idolatrous absurdities. Hence the ex- 
 travagant opinions and the fantastic notions of the heretics 
 of the age, with which the minds of Christians, as it appears 
 from Paul's Epistles, were in a measure tainted : and some 
 traces of which we find in the writings of the earliest Fa- 
 thers : and these are some of the traditions that came down 
 to posterity, and are said by some to have come from the 
 apostles, but, which, in fact, came from Judaizing and Gen- 
 
50 
 
 ERRORS OF 
 
 tilizing teachers ; of which I shall hereafter afford some 
 proofs. 
 
 2. The first Christians and those in the succeeding cen- 
 tury were mostly of the lower orders. They were indeed 
 truly rehgious, but as little competent as such in our day, 
 to transmit any thing to posterity, except the main truths 
 of the Gospel ; and even these were much more safely and 
 correctly conveyed to futvire ages by the writings of the 
 apostles than by them. 
 
 3. The reproofs and remonstrances we meet vdth in the 
 inspired epistles. Some seem to think that the apostles 
 left the Churches in almost a perfect state. WTiat was 
 taught them by the apostles was perfect ; but it was not 
 perfectly learnt, or perfectly followed, any more than in the 
 present day ; and we may gather from the reproofs given, 
 what their peculiar mistakes were. Fables, useless ques- 
 tions, traditions, observance of days, will- worship, volun- 
 
 Vide tary humility', &c. ; these are some of the things which 
 Ap^ndix, prevailing, and with which the apostles had to combat. 
 
 And these are some of the very things made too much of 
 afterwards by the early Fathers. And we may add to 
 these the overv-aluing of outward ordinances and of minis- 
 ters, as in the case of the Corinthians. Preaching and the 
 administration of baptism by certain ministers were consi- 
 dered as matters of vast importance ; for which the apos- 
 tle strongly and expressly reproved them. 
 
 4. The fact, that the writings of Clement, Ignatius, Bar- 
 nabas, and Hermas, were read at first in the churches as 
 if they had been inspired books. \NTiether all these are 
 authentic or not, which is doubted by some, makes no difi'e- 
 rence in the case : the fact of their being read in churches 
 
THE EARLY AGES. 
 
 51 
 
 during the second century is clear both from Irenaeus and 
 Eusebius. Those who could listen to the reveries of Her- 
 nias, could not be altogether free from the mania of super- 
 stition, nor from the taint of Jewish traditions. 
 
 5. The fact, that all the writings of the sacred penmen 
 were not then collected together, and were not universally 
 known and read. When they became more generally 
 known and read, the writings of Hermas and others were 
 discontinued : and it was owing to the inspired writings 
 becoming more known, that the Church became more 
 enlightened, and not owing to any stock of tradition being 
 left by the apostles to the Church. And the later Church 
 had wisdom enough to discard some things adopted by the 
 earlier, but not all that ought to have been discarded. 
 There were two things which operated much in favour of 
 retaining what had been handed down : — The first was, the 
 necessity under which the Church found itself of appeahng 
 to what had been previously taught and practised, owing 
 to the heretics, who claimed tradition in favour of their sen- 
 timents ; — and the other was, the repute and veneration 
 which many of the first Christians gained by their martyr- 
 doms. Even their relics were deemed as sacred : and no 
 wonder, if their opinions, and even their fancies, were 
 looked upon with no ordinary respect. Such instances of 
 Christian sincerity and firmness have been too often viewed 
 as proofs of infaUibUity. 
 
 What may be truly and justly said of the first and early 
 Christians is this ; — They were sincere, self-denying, patient 
 under suflf'erings, holy, and remarkable for unity and love 
 towards each other : and in all these respects they are ex- 
 amples worthy of imitation. But their knowledge of Scrip - 
 E 2 
 
ERRORS OF 
 
 tare was by no means great, and their views of the scheme 
 and doctrines of the Gospel were neither enlarged nor 
 in all respects accurate, their means of information being 
 comparatively very limited. They did not possess one- 
 twentieth part of the advantages of the present day. Their 
 condition as to the means of knowledge was far inferior to 
 that of converts in our day in heathen lands. Our converts 
 in India, in Africa, and the South-sea islands, enjoy privi- 
 leges unknown to the primitive Christians. How, therefore 
 can they be looked upon as infaUible expounders of the 
 Scripture, or as persons conveying to us any additional 
 information, when in fact they seem to come short them- 
 selves of much that the Divine word contains, and when 
 their writings contain some tilings which it does not teach, 
 and which are not consistent with its doctrines } What Dr. 
 Cave, in liis " Primitive Christianity," says of them, is 
 most true. " Their creed," he says, " in the Jirst ages 
 was short and simple ; their faith lying then, not so much 
 in nice and numerous articles, as in a good and honest life." 
 
 The vicious principle of accommodating the ceremonial 
 law to the Gospel, was the origin of many of the mistakes 
 of the primitive Chmxh, especially as to the ministerial cha- 
 racter and the sacraments, as I shall show in a future letter. 
 And the corrupting effects of this principle continue even to 
 the present day. That this principle was adopted by the 
 earliest Fathers is quite apparent from their writings, and 
 even from the few extracts which I have already given ; and 
 that it continued to be adopted to a considerable extent, is 
 evident from the writings of many of their successors. This 
 may appear strange when we consider how strongly and 
 expUcitly the apostles have asserted the abrogation of the 
 
THE UARLY AGES. 
 
 53 
 
 ceremonial law. But we must bear in mind that the 
 ancient Scriptures were more common among the earlier 
 Christians than the writings of the apostles, especially the 
 epistles, which speak most expressly on that subject, — and 
 also, that many of them were Jews by birth and education. 
 It may be said that the preaching of the apostles, while 
 living, counteracted this evil. No doubt it did. But 
 neither did their preaching nor their writings, which con- 
 tained what they preached, as Irenceus expressly tells us, 
 wholly succeed in eradicating this evil. As during their 
 lives, so when their writings became generally known and 
 read, the practice of ceremonializing the Gospel, if I may 
 use such an expression, still continued, and in a measure 
 prevailed. The sanction which the first Fathers gave to 
 this principle had an undue" weight : and some of the 
 extravagances to which the principle gave rise, assumed, in 
 after-ages, the form and shape of positive errors, which are 
 said, and have been long said, by the Church of Rome, to 
 have been derived through the Fathers from the apostles 
 themselves. Thus the fruits of a seed which neither their 
 preaching nor their writings could wholly destroy, are 
 ascribed to their own labours ! Some of the things advo- 
 cated by the Oxford Tracts are of this kind. They are the 
 effects of the Judaizing leaven that was in the primitive 
 Church ; and it seems, that because the Fathers had some 
 of that leaven (though they sometimes disavow it), they 
 must have derived it from the apostles, while the efforts of 
 the apostles, as it is evident from their epistles, was through- 
 out most strenuously exerted m purging it out of the 
 Church. See Col. ii. 8, 16, 18, 20—23. Gal. ii. 12, 13; 
 iv. 9-12. 1 Tim. iv. 1— 3. Titus i. 14. Heb. xiii. 9. 
 
54 
 
 THE CONSENT 
 
 A great difficulty occurs respecting the early Fathers, that 
 is, how to distinguish what they received from the apostles, 
 and what they did not receive. They declare their senti- 
 ments nearly in the same way, without saying, except in a 
 few instances, and those regarding the main truths, what 
 had been received from the apostles. For instance, what 
 Ignatius says about the virginity of Mary, and the death of 
 our Saviour, being "kept secret from the prince of this 
 world," is announced in the same way as what he says about 
 the sacramental " bread " being " the medicine of immor- 
 tality, our antidote that we should not die." The first, I 
 take for granted, most wiU regard only as a Jewish tale, 
 while some may be disposed to regard the second as a holy 
 doctrine derived from the apostles. But there is no evi- 
 idix, 'isnce of the latter being more so than the former. If we 
 deem one a Jewish fiction, we may deem the other as 
 something of the same sort. But it may be said, that those 
 who came after made the distinction. How came they to 
 make it ? Both are declared in the same way ; there is no 
 difference in the mode of announcing them. Now, if sonie 
 of the things said by Ignatius and others of the apostoUc 
 Fathers, who conversed with the apostles and heard them 
 preach, are such as no reasonable man can beheve to have 
 been derived from the apostles, how is it possible to draw 
 the line of distinction It cannot be drawn in any other way 
 than by comparing their writings with those of the sacred 
 penmen. Let, if he can, any man propose any other mode 
 of procedure that reason and common sense wiU approve. 
 
 But the consent of the Fathers, a Romish figment to 
 screen all abuses, and justify all absui'dities, is resorted to. 
 WTiat they approved, it seems, is to be approved, and what 
 
or THE FATHERS. 
 
 they discarded is to be discarded. But how came the later 
 Fathers to know what the earliest handed down from the 
 apostles, and what they delivered as their own sentiments ? 
 Was it by tradition Then how did that tradition come 
 unto them.'' It could not have been any other than oral 
 tradition. They must then have sifted and purged the 
 written tradition of the apostolic Fathers by the oral tradition 
 of the Church. Thus oral tradition overruled the written 
 one, the Romish tradition prevailed over the Oxford Tracts 
 tradition, and both traditions, after all, are not worth a sin- 
 gle straw. And here I might ask, how came the writings 
 of Clement and Hermas, which are quoted as Scripture by 
 Irenseus, to be afterwards disowned as such ? They were 
 e\'idently read as such in the early Churches. If it be said, 
 that they were not universally read, and were on that groimd 
 rejected ; then, in that case, some of the apostolic epistles 
 must have been rejected ; for it was some time before they 
 were universally known and adopted ; but finally they were, 
 and why.' Not because of universal consent in their favour 
 from the first ; but, doubtless, because there were other 
 proofs, both external and internal, afforded, which gave satis- 
 faction that they were what they were said to be. Their au- 
 thority was estabUshed not by tradition, or by the concurrence 
 of the universal Church from the beginning, from the time 
 in which they were written, but by such other proofs as 
 were satisfactory, as " the manner of the phrase and style, 
 and the drift and meaning of the things dehvered ; " as 
 Eusebius says, when he speaks of the proofs by which 
 spurious books were decided to be such. 
 
 It is said by Archbishop Wake, that the works of the 
 apostolic Fathers are the only writings now extant, not 
 
56 
 
 THE CONSENT 
 
 spurious, which we have after the New Testament, till the 
 
 middle of the second century. We have therefore, no other 
 
 documents but them for fifty years at least, after the last of 
 
 the Apostles. What traditions, therefore, we can possibly 
 
 have from the apostles must be from these writings, except 
 
 what was handed down by word of mouth, or orally. We all 
 
 know what changes may take place in the opinions of any 
 
 large body of men during fifty years, £md what credit can 
 
 be given to what is orally reported for such a term of years, 
 
 except in case of well and widely knowTi facts and broad 
 
 Vide truths, such as the essentials of the Gospel. As to particu- 
 jpendix, ... , . . , , , 
 
 O. lar opinions and interpretations, no dependence can be 
 
 placed on such a mode of conveyance. What great changes 
 on many points took place in our Church, especially as to its 
 leading members, within fifty years after the Reformation ? 
 And these changes took place, when not avowed, but even 
 denied. If we are to judge of what was orally conveyed, 
 as to doctines and interpretations, by what has been con- 
 veyed by the writings of the apostolic Fathers, (and this 
 is a fair way of judging,) we must conclude that much that 
 was extravagant, foolish, and even erroneous, was thus 
 conveyed. And what was thus conveyed supphed a portion 
 of the stock of future traditions ! so much valued now by 
 the British Magazine and the Oxford Tracts ! It was 
 through such a channel as this, it seems, that the later 
 Fathers derived their expositions of baptism, of the Lord's 
 Supper, and of other things ! a channel, which, if it was 
 as good as the writings of the first Fathers, could have been 
 by no means safe or certain. But they must have been 
 indebted for their interpretations to a channel of oral 
 tradition much longer than this ; for the writings of 
 
Justin Martyr and IrencBUs, which form the principal 
 documents, not only of what now exists, but of whatever 
 has existed, till the end, or nearly the end of the second 
 centm-y, give little or no countenance to their expositions. 
 So that for nearly 100 years after the death of John, and 
 more than 1 30 after the death of Peter and Paul, they 
 had scarcely anything for their interpretations, but oral 
 tradition, the most varying and uncertain thing in the world. 
 Any exposition derived from a source of this kind must be 
 very uncertain and of no value ; and to adopt and announce 
 it as derived from the apostles is nothing less than an 
 attempt to impose on the credulity of mankind. There is 
 nothing certain or worthy of credit respecting what the 
 apostles taught and practised, but what is contained in their 
 own writings, as the great ChilLingworth most distinctly 
 avows and asserts in his Religion of Protestants. 
 
 The interpretations and peculiar opinions of the fathers 
 of the third and fourth and fifth centuries, were their own, 
 or those of the Church in their time, and are incapable of 
 being traced back to the apostles. There is no chain but 
 that of oral tradition, on which none can depend, except 
 they who wish to deceive themselves and others. The 
 peculiarities of these Fathers, that is, such things as are 
 not clearly taught in Scripture or are inconsistent with it, 
 were either their own or those of the Church in their day, 
 or derived from the hocus-pocus of oral tradition. And 
 this oral tradition, as a snowball, collected, as it rolled 
 onward, new accretions from Jewish rites and traditions, 
 heathen ceremonies, and even from heretical customs and 
 sentiments, but not from any thing that was really apos- 
 tolical, as I intend fully to show hereafter, especially 
 
VALUE OF THE OPINIONS 
 
 with regard to two subjects,— baptism and the Lord's 
 Supper. 
 
 There is one other point to which I have akeady alluded, 
 which requires a more specific notice : it is that of miracu- 
 lous gifts in the early Church ; on account of which some 
 are disposed to attach great importance to its opinions. 
 That it did possess such gifts in the second century, is e\i- 
 dent from the express testimony of Justin Martyr and 
 Irenaeus. But to admit this, is not to admit the Church to 
 be free from errors and mistakes in minor points of doc- 
 trine or practice. The possession of such gifts is consist- 
 ent, not only with a weak judgment, and defective and 
 even wrong views in religion, but with an imregenerate 
 state. Balaam possessed the extraordinary gift of pro- 
 phecy. Judas, as well as the other apostles, performed 
 miracles. And what was the case of the other apostles 
 themselves, before our Lord's crucifixion ? They had e\\- 
 dently very imperfect knowledge of the mystery of re- 
 demption : it was not till our Saviour sufi'ered that it was 
 clearly imderstood by them, though they had previously 
 conferred on them many miraculous gifts. Many of the 
 members of the Corinthian Church had these gifts ; and 
 St. Paul reproved them for many things wrong in their 
 conduct and proceedings. We ought to distinguish be- 
 tween gifts of this kind and the gift of inspiration. The 
 latter is justly conceded only to the writers of the New 
 Testament, while the former were possessed by many not 
 only in the Apostle's time, but for a considerable period 
 after that ; how long it is difficult to determine. The pos- 
 session of them, however, did not secure the Church from 
 mistakes either in doctrine or practice. 
 
OF THE EARLY CHURCH. 
 
 30 
 
 Now I would ask, on luhat grounds is such importance 
 attached to the opinions of the Fathers, either of the early or 
 of the late Fathers ? Were any of them inspired? lam 
 not aware that any will say this roundly : and if any will 
 say so, they will say what is not worthy of credit. Were 
 they 7nore learned than divines in modem times, especially 
 after the discovery of Printing, and the Reformation ? 
 This, I presume, will not be asserted ; and if asserted, it 
 cannot be proved. Modem divines ought to be more 
 learned than they ; for they have vastly greater advantages, 
 more books, far more opportunities for information, and 
 more of every thing necessary for the attainment of Divine 
 knowledge. Modems may stand, as Lord Bacon says, on 
 the shoulders of the ancients, and be thereby enabled to 
 see much farther. But instead of standing thus on their 
 shoulders, the men of the British Magazine and of the 
 Oxford Tracts seem to crouch and lay themselves prostrate 
 before the Fathers, like the heathens before their wooden 
 idols; and with amazing show of humility, they receive 
 and collect what may fall from their hps, be it wise or be 
 it foolish, be it a scriptural truth or a traditionary figment, 
 and lay it up as something oracular. The infatuation of 
 the learned is oftentimes greater than the infatuation of the 
 ignorant. 
 
 I would ask again, on what grounds is so much weight 
 attached to their opinions Is it because of their superior 
 judgment, sobriety, and penetration in interpreting the 
 Scriptures ? This cannot be conceded so long as sound 
 reasoning, extensive knowledge of the Divine word, soUd 
 learning, consistency, and common sense, are deemed ne- 
 cessary requisites. Is it then because they derived their 
 
VALUE OF THE OPINIONS 
 
 interpretations from the Apostles ? Let those prove this 
 who can. But it is incapable of being proved, though it 
 may be easy to assert it. There is no channel of convey- 
 ance that any reasonable man can put any confidence in. 
 What Bishop Jeremy Taylor asserts is most true, when he 
 says, " There are no such things as traditive interpretations 
 universal." But is it on the ground of their piety ? It 
 remains to be proved that they possessed this in a higher 
 degree than many modems. It was undoubtedly mixed 
 with a great deal of superstition ; and superstition is of aU 
 things the most unfavourable to the exercise of correct 
 judgment. 
 
 Once more I ask, what are the grounds on which so much 
 deference is paid to the opinions of the Fathers ? Is it 
 because some of them suffered martyrdom in the cause of 
 truth ? This was, indeed, a proof of sincerity and Christian 
 firmness. But there have been modems who have done the 
 same, and in a spirit far more worthy of the Gospel. Our 
 martyred Reformers afi'ord examples of this kind, which far 
 outshine, in many respects, any to be found among the 
 ancients. There are not to be met with in the primitive 
 Church any martyrs, except, perhaps, Polycarp, who can be 
 compared with our Latimer, Ridley, and some others, who 
 not only stood finn, but were also humble and temperate in 
 spirit, and collected in mind, combining with the courage of 
 the Uon, the meekness of the lamb, and vrith the wisdom of 
 the sei-pent, the innocency of the dove. Their trial was far 
 more difficult than that of any of the ancients. The primi- 
 tive Christians had to contend with avowed enemies of reli- 
 gion, who required them to do what was palpably and grossly 
 wicked and idolatrous, so that the mind had no difficult^^ to 
 
OF THE EAHLY CHURCH. 
 
 61 
 
 distinguish between what was right and wrong ; while our 
 Reformers had to deal with the subtle, cunning, and Jesuitical 
 emissaries of heU, the ministers of Satan transformed into 
 angels of light, who by their diabolical sophistry tried all 
 means to embaiTass and confound them ; by which they un- 
 happily succeeded for a short time with our venerable 
 Cranmer. But in spite of this peculiar pressure of their 
 trial, they remained firm and resolute, and shewed a Chris- 
 tian courage, accompanied with such submissiveness 
 and meekness of spirit, and settled collectedness of mind, as 
 are to be found in scarcely any of the ancients. There 
 was in the primitive martyrs an excess of zeal, a haste, a 
 foi-wardness, an enthusiasm, which clearly proves, that they 
 were in some measure intoxicated with the drug of super- 
 stition. They were too much like heathen devotees. If 
 martyrdom then, borne in the true spirit of the Gospel, be a 
 recommendation to any opinions, we ought to regard those 
 of our Reformers, far more than those of the ancient Fathers. 
 
 We can therefore find no reason to ascribe superiority to 
 the Fathers. If there be any reason, let it be distinctly spe- 
 cified ; and let us not be beguiled into fancies and errors by 
 names of men who have no right whatever to overrule our 
 judgment, and who were far inferior to many modem divines 
 in every thing necessary to qualify persons to interpret Scrip- 
 ture, correctly, soberly, rightly, and consistently. What 
 Arminius said of Calvin's Commentaries, I have no doubt 
 is perfectly just, that is, that, "they are more valuable than 
 anything that the Fathers have left us." * The same 
 may be said with truth of the Commentaries of Scott and Scott. 
 Henry. In enlarged and consistent views of Divine truth, 
 * I shall give the passage entire; and it is especially creditable to Ar- 
 
VALUE OF THE FATHERS. 
 
 and in the application of scriptural verities to the experience 
 and practice of Christians, who among the ancients can be 
 compared with Scott ? And in elevated piety, and evan- 
 gelical train of thought, who of the ancients can compete 
 with Henry ? But the truth is, that, in the estimation of 
 some, the term ancient, or primitive, carries with it ama- 
 zing authority ; it sheds a lustre over what is foohsh, beau- 
 tifies what is ugly, dignifies what is vulgar, moderates 
 what is extravagant, and converts what is fanciful and 
 erroneous, into sober and soUd truth. The heathens made 
 gods of their ancient heroes : and the men of the Oxford 
 Tracts would make a sort of gods in di\inity of the ancient 
 Fathers. It is blind, infatuated, and superstitious human 
 nature, in both instances. 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
 minius, as he differed from Cahin on many important points : — " Dico enim 
 incoraparabilem esse in interpretatione Scripturarum, et majoris faciendos 
 ipsius commentarios quam quicquid Patrum bibliotheca nobis tradit ; adeo 
 ut et spiritum aliquem prophetiae eximium illi prte aliis plerisque, imo et 
 omnibus concedam. — For I declare him to be incomparable in the inter- 
 pretation of the Scriptures, and that his Commentaries are more to be 
 valued than any thing the library of the Fathers delivers to us ; so that I 
 concede to him even a certain excellent spirit of prophecy beyond most 
 others, yea, even beyond all." — Brandt's life of Arminius, quoted in the 
 Edinburgh Review, No. 10^. 1832. 
 
63 
 
 V. 
 
 JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 Sir, February 1, 1838. 
 
 What I propose to do in this Letter is to give some ac- 
 count of the character of Justin Martyr's writings. They Justin 
 are justly deemed more valuable than any that appeared 
 previously from the close of inspiration. He was far superior 
 in attainments to any of the apostolic fathers, and by no 
 means inferior to them in zeal and piety, nor in Christian 
 courage and firmness. His principal works were his First 
 Apology for the Christians, and his Dialogue with Tryphon, 
 the Jew. There are also works of his, called, A Word 
 (Xoyo?) to the Greeks, — An Admonitory Word (Xoyo? 
 ■7rapaiv€T(/(o;) to the Greeks,— concerning Monarchy, — A Se- 
 cond Apology , — and an Epistle to Diognetus, which seems 
 to be of a very dubious authority. His first apology is evi- 
 dently the best of his works. 
 
 Though he was the ablest apologist, yet he was not the 
 first. There were at least two before him. The first was 
 Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, who presented an apology for Quadratus. 
 the Christians to the Emperor Adrian, about the year 126. 
 
64 JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 Aristides. The other was Aristides, a Christian philosopher, as he has 
 been called, living at Athens, who soon after addressed an 
 apology to the same Emperor. Eusebius speaks well of both 
 these apologies, and says, that they were in the possession of 
 many of the brethren in his day, that is, in the fourth cen- 
 tury ; but they are not now extant. Like some other works 
 of that day, (for the most part small treatises,) they evidently 
 did not possess sufficient interest to command that attention 
 and care necessary to transmit them to posterity'. To sup- 
 pose that the best books are lost is to suppose what is con- 
 trary to all experience. The writings that are forgotten are 
 generally the least meritorious ; and those which continue 
 to be read are generally the most valuable. We have, in all 
 probability, very little reason to regret the loss of what has 
 perished of the writings of the Fathers of the second centur}-. 
 "What remains of them is of no great value, with the excep- 
 tion of the works of Justin Martyr and Irenceus. I consider 
 Tertullian and Clemens Alexandrinus as belonging to the 
 third century. 
 
 Justin. Justin was a Greek by birth and education, a native of 
 Neapolis, in Palestine, and brought up a Pagan pliilosopher. 
 He studied, as it appears, all the various systems of Grecian 
 philosophy then known ; but the Platonic was what he most 
 admired and adopted. He was converted to Christianity' 
 about the year 132, when nearly thirty years of age. About 
 the year 140 he went to Rome, and kept a sort of school for 
 the purpose of furthering the interest of religion, retaining 
 still his garb as a philosopher. In the year 150 he wrote his 
 First Apology, addressed to the Emperor Antoninus Pius 
 and the Roman Senate. After a few years he visited the 
 eastern parts of the empire ; and at Ephesus he met 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 65 
 
 accidentally with Tryphon, a learned Jew ; and the two 
 days dispute he had with him forms the Dialogue which he 
 composed, and which is still extant. We find him at Rome 
 again in the year 165, disputing with Crescens, a Cynic 
 philosopher ; and in the following year he wrote his Second 
 Apology addressed to Antoninus Philosophus, the successor 
 of Pius ; but in the year 167 he was put to a cruel death 
 for his religion, being first scourged and then beheaded. 
 His conduct, when examined by the Prefect of Rome, was 
 quite worthy of a defender of the faith. 
 
 His First Apology, as already stated, is a work of great pir&t 
 merit ; bold, and on the whole respectful ; explicit, and for Apologj'. 
 the most part judicious ; showing an extensive knowledge 
 of mythology and of the various forms of idolatry, and also 
 an enlarged acquaintance with the Scriptures. He appeals 
 with great force to the justice and equity of the Emperor in 
 behalf of the Christians, — exhibits the injustice of punishing 
 them for no crimes but a name, — defends them from 
 the calumnies with which they were loaded, — shows from the 
 Scriptures what their sentiments were, and the conduct they 
 considered themselves bound to maintain, — proves the truth 
 of their religion by prophecies already fulfilled, and then 
 fulfilling, and by miracles done by Christ and his Apostles 
 and by his followers, even in that age,— exposes the folly, 
 corruption, and absurdities of idolatrous worship, — and 
 relates minutely the religious rites and services performed by 
 Christians. Tliis is a summary of what this Apology 
 contains. 
 
 His Second Apology is short. As in the first, he complains gg^^jj^^ 
 against the injustice of punishing Christians for no crime Apology, 
 but for being Christians. He brings instances of this. He, 
 
 F 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 then answers a taunt of the Pagans, who said, "If you are 
 going to God, why do you not destroy yourselves ? " He 
 replies, too, to another taunt, which was, " If God is your 
 helper, why does he suffer you to be persecuted and de- 
 stroyed ? " In replying to this cavil he advances some 
 singular things. He says, that when God created the world, 
 he committed the care of it to angels. Some of these be- 
 trayed their trust and became rebellious, ha\'ing been en- 
 ticed by the beauty of women, with whom they cohabited ; 
 and their offspring were the demons, which have ever cor- 
 nipted, and still continue to corrupt, the world. These 
 demons have been invariably inimical to the logos or reason, 
 and have always been persecuting even those among the 
 heathens who had any portion of this logos, such as Socrates 
 and Heraclitus. But Christ being the perfect logos, and the 
 demons knowing this, they became more enraged against 
 him and his followers than against any previously. And it 
 was these demons that instigated men in power to persecute 
 the Christians. The two following passages wiU show his 
 opinion: — 
 
 " God having created the whole world and subjected 
 earthly things to men, and adorned the heavenly elements, 
 which he seems to have made for men, for the increase of 
 fruit and for the change of times, and having ordered this 
 Divine law, delivered the care of men and of things imder 
 heaven to angels, whom he appointed over them. But the 
 angels, having gone beyond the order, degraded themselves 
 by improper commerce with women, and begot children, 
 who are those called demons ; and they afterwards made 
 mankind slaves to themselves.'' — " The demons have always 
 caused to be hated all those who in any way were desirous of 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 living according to reason and of shunning vice. It is no 
 wonder, therefore, if the demons, being reproved, should 
 cause them to be much more hated, who live, not according 
 to a portion of seminal reason (o-nep/xaTixoi' Xoyav,') but 
 according to the knowledge and perception {Bea^iav) of per- A 
 feet reason which is Christ." 
 
 This opinion was evidently grounded on Gen. vi. 1, 2. 
 But, as in other instances of error, the passage was ex- 
 tended beyond its proper limits, and additions were made 
 to it by no means in accordance with the whole context. 
 But this opinion was not peculiar to Justin ; Athenagoras 
 and IrencBus, of the same century, held the same. So 
 that we have the highest authorities of the second century 
 in its favour, and nothing, that I can find, in opposition 
 to it. There is far greater and stronger consent during 
 the second century in its favour than for the existence of 
 three orders in the church. As to bishops, distinct from 
 presbyters, we have no evidence except that of Ignatius, 
 for the two first centuries. Clement and Polycarp most 
 clearly recognise but two orders. Barnabas and Hermas 
 having nothing very distinct on the subject. Justin men- 
 tions only two officers in the Church in his time, whom 
 he calls president (wpoeo-Tw?) and deacon {liaKOio^). Irenceus 
 uses the terms bishop and presbyter indiscriminately. 
 Thus we see the weight of evidence during the two first 
 centuries is against the three orders, which may naturally 
 create a suspicion, that those passages in Ignatius, which 
 refer to them, are interpolations ; for he stands alone in 
 what he states, for the two first centuries, and not only 
 alone, but opposed by the strongest authorities during that 
 period. 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR 
 
 But with regard to this opinion of Justin, it is coun- 
 tenanced by many in that age. It has as much consent 
 of Fathers as any vagary that can be mentioned. It is 
 adopted too by Fathers of succeeding centuries, by Ter- 
 tulHan, Clemens Alexandrinus, Methodius, Origen, Cyprian, 
 Lactantius, and others : and it was not questioned or dis- 
 puted till the fourth century. It is clearly an interpreta- 
 tion, and Athenagoras in his Embassy (vfta^peia) for the 
 Christians, manifestly refers it to Scripture. Whence 
 came this interpretation ? From the Apostles, of course, 
 if we adopt the principles of the Oxford Tracts. It was 
 the opinion of the Church, and the Church derived all 
 that it held from the Apostles ! The nearness of the time 
 to the apostolic period is of course strongly in its favour. 
 But after all, it is what has been clearly derived from the 
 rich stock of Jewish traditions. This is more than inti- 
 mated by Feuardeniius, tbe~Papist, in his Notes on 
 Irenseus : for he plainly tells us that many of the Rabbins 
 held this opinion. What then is there to enable us to 
 find out whether any other interpretation given by the 
 Fathers is not a Jewish tradition of some sort or another, 
 or some figment of their own ? How, for instance, can 
 what they say of Baptism or of the Lord's Supper be 
 proved to have come from the Apostles, any more than 
 this opinion ? But the real fact is, that there is no way 
 to deal with the Fathers, that there is no rule to be 
 adopted in judging of their interpretations and opinions, 
 but what ought to be adopted with respect to uninspired 
 writers in any age, yea, even in our time, that is, to bring 
 them to the test of Scripture, interpreted according to the 
 generally approved rules of sound criticism. Tlie consent 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 60 
 
 of the Fathers even where it really exists, (and it is said 
 often to exists where it does not,) is no sure evidence 
 of truth, as we clearly see in this instance. But I must 
 return to notice the next work of Justin. 
 
 His Dialogue with Tryphon is the longest of his wri- Dialoc 
 tings. He met with this Jew accidentally at Ephesus, in j^l'^p^ 
 company with some other Jews. The conversation turned 
 on philosophy and religion. Justin relates his own con- 
 version, which was by the means of a venerable old man 
 whom he met while walking in a field near the sea, and 
 whom he never saw afterwards. He was so impressed 
 with what the old man said, that he was induced to read 
 the Scriptures ; and the consequence was his conversion to 
 the Christian faith. The Dialogue then turns on the 
 points in dispute between Jews and Christians. Justin, 
 by various references to the prophecies and types of the 
 Old Testament, most clearly proves that Jesus was the 
 long-promised Messiah. A great portion of what he 
 brings forward is to be found in his First Apology, and 
 there are many repetitions as to the passages referred to 
 and the arguments employed. He was, however, success- 
 ful in making a happy impression on the mind of Tryphon. 
 There are some parts of this Dialogue which would be 
 deemed valuable and useful in the present day. This is 
 what may be justly said of most, if not of all the works 
 of the Fathers. There are parts which are very excellent, 
 while there are others which are very foolish, puerile, 
 fanciful, and unsound. The solutions which Justin gives 
 of some Jewish difficulties are very satisfactory, while 
 others are by no means so, being fanciful and far-fetched. 
 The Dialogue, as a whole, is highly credible to Justin, 
 considering the age in which he lived. 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 After this brief notice of his writings, I shall now add 
 some remarks on their character. There was not much 
 room for him, either in his Apologies or in his Dialogue, to 
 go into very minute details as to the peculiar doctrines of 
 the Gospel or the practices of the Church. He does this 
 mostly in his First Apology ; and with regard to the two 
 Sacraments, he is very full and explicit, and gives a parti- 
 cular account of the way in which they were administered. 
 And this account I purpose hereafter to notice in an es- 
 pecial manner ; for I intend sending you a letter on each 
 of these subjects ; and I mean also to introduce what 
 Irenaeus, and others of the two first centuries, have said 
 on them, and at the same time to compare their views 
 with those of the third, fourth, and fifth centuries. 
 
 It appears evident that the opinions of Justin were de- 
 fective and faulty on several points ; and as an interpreter 
 of Scripture he is often wUd and fanciful. 
 
 1 . He is by no means clear or correct in his views of 
 Original Sin. He does not seem very distinctly to mark 
 the difference between man when created and man when he 
 became a fallen being. He speaks of him as still possess- 
 ing the power, independently of Divine grace, of choosing 
 good as well as evU, which he calls auTflov^-io? (self-govern- 
 ing) ; and he represents fallen man as capable of vice and 
 virtue (KaKiai; Kai apcTiji; SeKTiKo?) in such a way as may 
 lead us to think, that he thought him as strongly disposed 
 to the one as to the other. His views on this subject, and 
 those of Irenseus and of others of that centun% seem to 
 be very imperfect ; by no means consistent with Scripture, 
 nor with the Articles of our Church, and paved the way, 
 no doubt, for the introduction of the Pelagian heresy ; for 
 
71 
 
 JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 had not Pelag-ius found many in the Church favourable to Pelagius. 
 his sentiments, he would not have met with that success 
 which accompanied the spread of his errors. The Church 
 was doubtless in a great measure Pelagianized before 
 Pelagius began his mischievous career. There were com- 
 bustibles ready to take fire when Pelagius applied his 
 torch. 
 
 2. Justin does not appear to have possessed correct 
 views on the great doctrine of Justification by faith. This de- Vide 
 feet necessarily follows the former : he who does not clearly Appradix, 
 understand the guilty and sinful state of man, will not be 
 able clearly to comprehend the nature of the remedy pro- 
 vided for him. But it is not only Justin who had but 
 obscure and incorrect views on this subject, but, as I con- 
 ceive, most, if not all, of the early Fathers. This doctrine, 
 after the Apostle's time, never shone forth in its scriptural 
 brightness till the time of Augustine. It was then that 
 the inspired page was sedulously studied, and this rich 
 treasure was brought fully to light. This was not effected 
 hy the help of tradition, for that had in a great measure 
 lost it ; but by the examination and study of the Holy 
 Scriptures, occasioned by the spread of Pelagianism. 
 That error, though substantially adopted before, and no 
 doubt to a considerable extent, when broadly avowed and 
 systematically taught, aroused, through God's grace, the 
 energies of Augustine and some others, and the great 
 truth, by means of controversy, attained a scriptural clear- 
 ness unknown to the early Fathers. It retained its lustre 
 for a time, and prevailed over the opposing error ; but it 
 became soon bedimmed; and though entertained by in- 
 dividuals, it ceased to be the prevailing doctrine of the 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR 
 
 Church, until another Augustine— the great Luther— ap- 
 peared, and, being assisted by other illustrious reformers, 
 dispelled the darkness in which it was involved. Wliat 
 efforts have been since made at different times to becloud 
 and darken this glorious truth ! This is evidently one of 
 the objects of the Oxford Tracts. To be freely justified 
 by faith only, is what will not suit the pride of nature, nor 
 the pride of learning. 
 
 Justin evidently viewed the Atonement more as the 
 source of Sanctification than of Justification. It is corrupt 
 man, rather than guilty man, that he considers Christ to 
 have come to save. It was to redeem man from the 
 power of the demons, rather than from the curse of the 
 law, that he viewed our Saviour's purpose in coming into 
 the world. It is not so much as an offence against God 
 that he regards sin, but as an evil in its effects on man. 
 His views were right to a certain extent, but they were 
 manifestly defective. The justice and holiness of God 
 were in a great degree lost sight of, while his mercy, love, 
 and grace were mostly regarded. Hence there is a strain 
 of legaUty running through his writings. The keeping of 
 the commandments, or penitence, instead of faith in 
 Christ, are mostly stated as necessary to salvation. This is 
 invariably the case with those who lose sight of the justice 
 and holiness of God, and consequently of the high de- 
 mands of the Divine law. And this defect lies at the root 
 of all formality, and of all extreme attachments to outward 
 and ritual observances. Let a man once entertain the 
 notion that he can gain life in any degree by his own 
 works (and this notion he can only have, while his views 
 of Divine justice and hohness are indistinct and obscm-e). 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 and lie will naturally become enamoured with external 
 rites and ceremonies. And here, I conceive, lies the main 
 root of the errors of the men of the Oxford Tracts. From 
 having inadequate and imperfect views of the high justice 
 and pure sanctity of God and his law, they see not the 
 need of the atoning Sacrifice as the only ground of accep- 
 tance with God, and of the merits of the Redeemer, as the 
 only title to eternal life. Attaching undue importance to 
 human works, and viewing them in some way meritorious, 
 they try to patch up something of their own for the pur- 
 pose of procuring life. Hence comes the disposition to 
 magnify externals, and to add to the ceremonials of 
 religion. There is no surer sign than this of a self-righte- 
 ous spirit. 
 
 But I have said that Justin was a fanciful interpreter of 
 Scripture. There are especially two faults in him in this 
 respect : — He makes that prophetical which is not so ; and 
 he represents many thmgs as typical which evidently were 
 not so intended. 
 
 1. He is apt to find prophecies where none exist. 
 This he does in his first Apology, as well as in his Dialogue 
 ivith Tryphon. He interprets even the first Psalm pro- 
 phetically, and in his Dialogue he represents the " tree 
 planted by the rivers of waters " as referring to the Sa- 
 viour. He considers the following passage from Isaiah 
 xxxiii. 16, "Bread shall be given him; his water shall 
 be sure," as prophetic of the sacramental bread and cup. 
 " It is manifest," he says in his Dialogue, " that even in 
 this prophecy it is foretold concerning the bread, which 
 our Christ has taught us to offer (iroieo') in commemoration 
 of his having been embodied (tol o-w.uaTOTror-j^ao-flai avTOf) 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 for those who beheve in him, and for whom he became 
 also passible (7ra9»)T(i?)— and concerning the cup, which 
 he taught us to offer, giving thanks, in commemoration of 
 his blood." While we may justly consider the prophecy 
 very far-fetched, and even misapplied, we cannot but ap- 
 prove of his language respecting the bread and cup ; both 
 are rightly said to be in commemoration (ek ava/*vij<r»y) of 
 what they are intended to signify. Many parts of the 
 first chapter of Isaiah he quotes as prophetic. He appUes 
 the words, "Israel doth not know; my people doth not 
 understand," to the Jews not believing in Christ, and as 
 predictive of their unbelief. " Wash you, and make you 
 clean," was a prophetic intimation of baptism. Many 
 similar instances might be mentioned ; but where he is 
 most fanciful and extravagant is in the following par- 
 ticular : — 
 
 2. He makes things typical to a ridiculous extent. We 
 meet in his Dialogue with many things of this kind : — The 
 lamb of the passover, as fixed on the spit roasting, typified 
 the material cross, being in form and shape hke it ; how it 
 was so, I cannot well understand, notwithstanding his 
 description ; — The offering made by the leper under the 
 law, symbolized the sacramental bread ; — The twelve bells 
 appended to the dress of the high priest, signified and 
 ty|jified the twelve Apostles ;— The two comings of Christ 
 wei-e symbolically represented by Moses and Joshua, while 
 fighting with the Amalekites ; Moses on the hill holding up 
 his hands, represented the cross, which was Christ's first 
 coming ; and Joshua conquering in the field, presignified 
 Christ's second coming, which is to be for the purpose of over- 
 coming all his enemies ; — Moses blessing Joseph, and saying 
 
JUSTIN MAIlTYl!. 
 
 7 
 
 that " his horns were the horns of unicorns?," did thereby 
 give a symbol of the cross ; the application of this I am 
 not able to comprehend ;— The broken thigh of Jacob was a 
 type of our Saviour's suffering; — The double marriage of 
 Jacob was symbolical of what was afterwards to be done 
 by Christ. This is surely symbolizing run mad, not to be 
 equalled by any reveries of modern times. Many other 
 instances might be adduced, but I shall desist. Notwith- 
 standing these faults, Justin deserves great respect. He 
 acted a noble part in defending Christians, and the truth 
 they professed. Considering the age in which he lived, 
 he was eminent, though not to be compared with many in 
 after-ages, especially since the Reformation. There is 
 nothing in his writings that justifies any great confidence 
 in the correctness of his views, or in the justness and 
 sobriety of his intei-pretations. As a guide, many of our 
 reformers are far before him. There is one thing in him 
 highly to be commended— his constant appeal to the Scrip- 
 tures ; and, as to tradition, independent of what the 
 Scriptures contain, he seems to know nothing about it. 
 Had there been a stock of such commodity, as some vainly 
 think, how came Justin not to draw out of it some of his 
 materials He blames Tryphon, indeed, for following the 
 traditions of the elders ; but he brings forward none of his 
 own, but invites constant attention to the Scriptures. 
 He does the same in his first Ajwlogy, and offers the Scrip- 
 tures to the perusal of the Emperor and the Roman Senate. 
 Tlie passage is worth recording, and is as follows : — 
 
 "Through the operation of wicked demons, death has ^^P"' 
 been allotted to those who read the books .... of the 
 prophets ; that through fear they might turn aside men 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 who read for the purpose of attaining the knowledge of 
 good things, and might retain them slaves to themselves ; 
 which, indeed, they have not been able effectually to do ; 
 for we not only fearlessly peruse them, but offer them also 
 to you, as you see, for your inspection, imagimng that they 
 will appear well pleasing to all. And if we persuade a 
 few, we shall gain much ! for we shall, as good husband- 
 men, receive a reward from the Lord." 
 
 This is truly Protestant, a plain recognition of the prin- 
 ciple of the Bible Society, but by no means agreeable, as I 
 conceive, to the Papists, or to the Oxford divines. The 
 latter have not yet gone quite as far as the former, but 
 they follow them very closely. The Scriptures, it seems, 
 are to be perused under the sanction and with the inter- 
 pretation of the Church. Of this poor honest Justin knew 
 nothing in the middle of the second centun,', fifty years 
 after the apostolic age ; for he offers the Scriptures to the 
 Emperor and the Senate of Rome "without note or com- 
 ment," and without introducing the Church or its ministers 
 as interpreters. Tlie Church has grown wiser since, as it 
 appears ; by what means it would be desirable to know. 
 The idea that the Church, or those who have " the 
 external mark" of orders, have the exclusive right of 
 interpreting the word of God, is a vagary unknown to the 
 first ages, and evidently invented for the same purpose, as 
 Justin says, the wicked demons had in view in inducing 
 men in power to prohibit the perusal of the Scriptui-es, 
 that is, to " retain them slaves to themselves." This is 
 manifestly the primum mobile of all the efforts made by 
 the men of the British Magazine and the Oxford Tracts. 
 Let the Bible be sealed or interpreted by tradition, or by 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 the Church exclusively, and the work of enslaving the 
 minds and consciences of men will be done as completely 
 as in the Church of Rome. It is the same thing, whether 
 done under the name of Protestantism, Anglicanism, or 
 Popery. 
 
 The divines alluded to, seem to tread in the very 
 footsteps of the Papists, and the clear tendency of their 
 principles is to enthral the mind, to fetter reason, and to 
 destroy the exercise of individual judgment. And this is 
 the way, it seems, to produce unity — an unity, which, 
 if it coidd be effected, would not be that of intelligence, 
 but of blindness, — not of conviction, but of morbid acqui- 
 escence—not of reason, but of slavish compliance. It 
 would be the unity of mute animals trained to work 
 together, of mules and asses well disciplined, and not the 
 unity of rational beings, enlightened, convinced, and 
 acting a reasonable part, in a willing submission to the 
 will and dictates of the Highest. This is the unity of 
 blind Popery, and not of intelligent Protestantism. 
 
 In perfect accordance with the last extract, is the account 
 which Justin gives of his own conversion. The venerable 
 old man whom he met did not direct him to consult the 
 Church, as the men of the Oxford Tracts would doubtless 
 do, but called his attention to the Scriptures. It is not, 
 I conceive, improper, under all circumstances, to send an 
 inquirer to an intelligent and pious teacher ; but the first 
 point is to give him the word of God. It is to confine the 
 business to the Church that is objectionable, and not the 
 making of proper use of the help which its ministers may 
 afford. But the old man did not only direct him to the 
 Scriptures, but gave him, as it were, a cayion of inter])re- 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 tation, which excels every other, and is far better than the 
 boasted consent of the Fathers, which is a mere figment, — 
 or the decrees of coimcils, which are human, and full of 
 errors and absurdities, — or the teaching of the Church, 
 which is often very erroneous, and always liable to mis- 
 takes. The canon which he prescribed is the safest guide 
 to a right interpretation. It is indeed the only safe guide 
 both to the learned and to the unlearned. Without it the 
 most literate will be sure to grope in the dark as a bUnd 
 man ; and with it the most illiterate will find sufficient 
 light clearly to see every thing necessary for his salvation. 
 It is, in fact, the only key that will unlock the rich trea- 
 sures of Divine knowledge. And as it is an ancient and 
 primitive canon, all lovers of antiquity, will, I hope, adopt 
 it. They will never otherwise get out of the trammels of 
 error. I shall give it in the old man's words, and trans- 
 late it as literally as I can : — 
 
 Et^^oK troj ir/)o navrav fuTO^ anoi-xfi'/inat irtXa;. on yap 
 a-vvottra svSe trvvvoriTa itaaiv ((rriv, ei fM) ra 0eo; 8w a-vneyai 
 Kai 0 Xoiaroi avTov. — But pray that above all things the 
 gates of light may he opened to you : for these flhe 
 Scriptures) are not clearly seen nor clearly understood by 
 any, but by him to whom God and his Christ give (grace J 
 to understand (them)." 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
 Postscript. — There are sentiments announced by Bishop 
 Kaye in his "Account of the writings, &c. of Justin," 
 which require some notice, as they are entertained by not 
 a few. In his first chapter, the Bishop speaks of the 
 benefits of consulting the Fathers : and while on this 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 subject, he adduces in favcur of what he advances, reasons 
 which do not appear to be valid. A difference is said to 
 exist between " human science," and "Revelation," — the 
 one being progressive, and the other not. The compari- 
 son is neither fairly nor justly made ; the two things do 
 not belong to the same class of ideas. The field or book 
 of human science, which is nature, and the field or book 
 of divine science, which is Revelation, are the two things 
 that ought justly to be put in contrast ; and both may be 
 rightly said to be incapable of improvement. But human 
 science and divine science are equally capable of being 
 progressive : and what is true of the first is also true of 
 the second, — that is, that it advances by " the labours of 
 successive inquiries," and that the " crude notions of those 
 who first engaged in the pursuit are discarded for more 
 mature and more enlarged views." This has both reason and 
 facts on its side. The very condition and circumstances 
 of the Fathers, especially the first, forbid us to think 
 that they had any very mature or enlarged knowledge of 
 the wide field of Revelation. They were mostly illiterate, 
 and their knowledge was very much confined to few of 
 the main truths, similar to what the first scientific inquirers 
 possessed. Facts confirm this view. Their writings shew 
 that their knowledge of divine truths was far below what 
 many have attained since their time. A methodist preacher 
 of ordinary abihties in the present day, could write much 
 better epistles than any of those left us by the apostolic 
 Fathers, — epistles that would convey far more enlarged, 
 more correct, and more scriptural views of divine truths, 
 and much more free from fancies, puerilities, and extrava- 
 gancies. This can be denied by no man whose judgment 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 is not warped by prejudice. The Bishop himself, there can 
 be no doubt, possesses far correcter knowledge of Scripture 
 than all the Fathers of the three first centuries ; his very 
 work on Justin is a proof of this. And his opinion as 
 to the meaning of any difficult passage would be justly 
 entitled to a higher regard than that of any of the first 
 Fathers ; yea, it might rightly be preferred, in many 
 instances, to the universal consent of all the Fathers ; — 
 for their consent in many cases, is no more than an 
 assent to what had been handed down from early times, 
 not from the Apostles, but from their fanciful cotempo- 
 raries and nearest successors, environed by the vicious 
 tests of Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis, — tests that 
 would countenance and confirm, if rigidly and strictly ap- 
 plied, the traditions and errors of the Jews, as well as 
 the traditions and errors of the Church of Rome, — and 
 tests, which the very Pagans adopted to a considerable 
 extent, in the first ages, to invalidate the claims of Chris- 
 tianity, as it is evident from the Octavius of Minutius 
 Felix. 
 
 There is another sentence in his lordship's first chapter, 
 which does not seem to be legitimately applied. " The 
 greater," it is said, " the distance from the fountain-head, 
 the greater the chance that the stream will be polluted." 
 Had tradition been the source, and the only source, this 
 would have been just in its appUcation : but as the Scrip- 
 ture is the fountain-head, the appUcation is by no means 
 warrantable. We are now as near the fountain-head as 
 the first Christians; for we have the Scripture, which 
 contains substantially all that the apostles preached, and 
 we have far greater facilities to draw clear water out of 
 
this fountain than the Fathers had. The fountain-head 
 was not so accessible to them as it is to us ; as we have 
 the advantage of the skill and knowledge of succeeding 
 ages to assist us, and many of the disadvantages of the 
 Fathers no longer exist. And yet it is strangely main- 
 tained, that their interpretation is purer and more correct 
 than those of future ages, as if ignorance and scantiness 
 of the means of information tended to throw more light 
 on the pages of Revelation, than the knowledge and the 
 enlarged inquiries of succeeding ages ! How difficult it 
 is to get rid of notions, however groundless, when long 
 entertained and countenanced by great names ! 
 
 , . ^ . , , , . , .rustin's 
 
 It may not be improper to notice also here Justin s Dialogue. 
 Dialogue, lately published in English as a part of the 
 " Christian's Family Library," edited by the Rev. Edw. 
 Bickersteth. It is a translation made by the Rev. Henry 
 Browne, vicar of Nether Sewel, and pubhshed in 1745, 
 and is, on the whole, as far as I can judge, a fair and 
 impartial translation. But there is in the 80th section, 
 a singular instance of undue leaning to one's own views, 
 both in the translator and in the editor. Tlie passage re- 
 fers to the millennium. The translator's rendering tends to Millen- 
 
 mum. 
 
 lessen the number of its advocates in Justin's time, and 
 the editor's correction increases their number so much, 
 as to include almost all the Christians of that age. The 
 passage is the following : — 
 
 " I have already owned, that I and several others 
 (aXXoi iroXXoi) of the same way of thinking with myself. Sect. 80. 
 are fully persuaded that this will most assuredly come to 
 pass. And again I told you, that there are (not) many 
 good and pious Christians who do not believe it." 
 
 G 
 
JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 The translator by rendering tsM.'h, " several," instead 
 of " many," clearly lessens the number of Millenarians : 
 and the editor, by putting in the negative, "not," increases 
 their number greatly. He refers to Mede, for one, as 
 authorizing this alteration : but neither Mede nor any 
 body else can reconcile it with the context. Would 
 Justin have used "many" in the first instance, if he 
 meant that most Christians held this opinion ? Besides, 
 what a strange sort of diction he employs by putting in 
 two negatives, in the way that is done by this construction ! 
 Had he intended to convey the meaning imposed, as I 
 conceive, upon him, the simple mode of stating it would 
 be, — " I and most other Christians believe this : and there 
 are but few, rightly-minded, who do not believe it." But 
 the word he employs with respect to both parties, is 
 "many;" who, according to him, were pretty equally 
 divided. The latter portion of the passage is as, follows : — 
 
 ■ntiXKavq Z'av Kat toiv Tr^q KaBapaf Hat tt/!7efov^ ovtuv XpiiTTia- 
 i/uv yvafA-r)^, TOVTO junj ■yvapi^eiv etT'^y.ai/a <roi : — "'And that many 
 again, even of those who are Christians of a pure and 
 pious mind, do not acknowledge this, I have signified to 
 you." 
 
 Tliis is as literal a rendering perhaps as can well be 
 made. How to introduce the negative, consistently with 
 any propriety of language, it is difficult to see. Neither 
 the original, any more than the English, can in this form 
 admit of a negative with iroXXov? — many. It is only by 
 changing the form of the sentence, that it has been prac- 
 ticable to put in the negative. When rendered, word for 
 word, in its original form, the negative is scarcely, if at 
 all, admissible, as it would make the expression very 
 
JUSTIN MAHTYll, 
 
 8 
 
 strange;— "That not many do not acknowledge this!" 
 Besides, the very question which elicited this answer, 
 seems clearly to be against this proposed alteration. 
 Tryphon asked Justin, whether he really beheved that Tryphon 
 Jerusalem would be rebuilt, &c., or whether he avowed question 
 this for the sake of carrying a point in dispute. Now it 
 is scarcely credible, that Tryphon, a learned Jew, as he 
 has been represented, should be ignorant concerning this 
 opinion, if it were almost universal, as this change in the 
 sentence would make it ! Nay, the very question, coming 
 from a learned man, would lead us to think, that Justin in 
 stating the number nearly equal on both sides, did exhibit 
 the exaggeration of apartizan. 
 
 The conclusion of this section, 80, is so rendered, it 
 is true, in this translation, as to favour this change in the 
 sentence already quoted ; but in my view, the rendering is 
 not just. The original is this : — Eyw Se, Kai £<' T(ye? ettriv 
 opOoyyafA.ovff KaTairavTa. Xfttrriavot, Kai <7af>Koi; avacTaatv "ycv/j- 
 ae<T9ai e'lrta-TajjieBa' Kai xiXia trvj ev leportraXrjfi (ji/<oS<!,«)}9e(0"/) 
 Kai KOT/A'/jSeio-i) Kat i:\aT\jyB(i(T7\, ot Trpo^vjTdi le^exivjX Kat 
 
 Ho-aia?, Kai aXKoi o/AoXoyova-iv. — " But I, and if there are any 
 Christians, orthodox in all things, do know, that there will 
 be a resurrection even of the flesh : and that there will 
 be a thousand years at Jerusalem, when built and adorned 
 and enlarged, the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others, do 
 confess." That the resurrection of the flesh and the thousand 
 years, are not connected, is apparent from a proper rendering 
 of the passage, and also, from the commencement of the 
 next section, which refers only to the millennium. The 
 beginning of the section, and the next words to the above, 
 are the following : — Outu? yap Ha-ata; wepi tij? %iX(Oi/Ta- 
 G 2 
 
84 
 
 JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 cT/jptloi; TatTij? emev. — " For thus Isaiah speaks of this term 
 of a thousand years." Then Isaiah Ixv. 17, to the end, is 
 given at large : and no reference is afterwards made to the 
 resurrection. 
 
 It appears rather remarkable that Justin should confine 
 his opinions respecting the millennium, to those reputed 
 orthodox : for it was held by some of the heretics, such 
 See ^ as the Cerinthians and the Marcionites, in Justin's time, 
 
 Eccl.' Hist, and afterwards by the Meletians. and the Apollinarians. 
 
 B.iii. ch.l. jj. jg jjqj. improbable that the adoption of it by some of the 
 heretics, operated as one reason why in after-times it came 
 to be denounced as heretical. The origin of the opinion 
 was tradition, which is always very unsafe and uncertain ; 
 and it came from one who is represented by Eusebius and 
 others, as a credulous man, and very weak in judgment. 
 Such is the account given of Papias, who may be con- 
 sidered to be the very founder of the miUennarian system. 
 Whether the credulity of its first propagator and his w^eak 
 judgment, have in a great measure characterized its advo- 
 cates in all ages, I will not undertake to determine. That 
 it borders too much in some respects on the Mahommedan 
 paradise, cannot well be denied : nor can it be doubted, 
 that it has been often associated, in many of its abettors, 
 with sentiments very strange and heterodox, and marked 
 with peculiar wildness and extravagance. These things are 
 not of course sufficient of themselves to condemn it, but 
 they go far to lessen its credit in the estimation of many : 
 nor should they be left out in our calculation, when we 
 weigh evidence on th» subject. 
 
85 
 
 VI. 
 
 IREN^US. 
 
 Sir. 
 
 The most important works in the second century, next 
 to those of Justin Martyr, are the writings of Irenaeus. 
 What we have besides, except some fragmentary remains, 
 are Tatian's speech against the Greeks (and he afterwards 
 became a heretic) — Athenagoras Embassy for the Chris- 
 tians, and a treatise on the resurrection, — and Theophilus' 
 three books or rather letters to Autolycus ; all which may 
 be comprised in an octavo volume of 200 pages ; and which 
 contain nothing very interesting to us in the present day. 
 They seem to have been written very much in the strain 
 of Justin, and exhibit the same faults and defects. 
 
 Irenaeus was by birth a Greek, and is supposed to have 
 been born at Smyrna, and to have been instructed by 
 Poly carp. Tliat he knew Poly carp and heard him preach 
 when he was young, is evident from a fragment of one of 
 his letters to one Florinus. He was made Bishop of Lyons 
 in France in the year 178, and about the year 187 he wrote 
 his great work against the heretics in Jive books, addressed 
 
86 
 
 IREN-«US. 
 
 to a fi-iend. This work, accompanied by a few fragments 
 from his other writings, has been often published. The 
 best edition is considered to be that of Dr. Grabe, published 
 at Oxford in the year 1 702. Irenseus \\Tote in Greek ; but 
 the original has been lost ; and what we have now is a 
 Latin translation, supposed to have been made soon after 
 the work was published. Some fragments of the original 
 have been preserved by Eusebius, Epiphanius, and others, 
 and are given by Dr. Grabe in his edition. It appears 
 from these fragments that the style of Irenaeus was not 
 the best : and indeed he confesses in his preface that he 
 was rude in speech, owing to his having Uved so long 
 among a people of a barbarous language. But his trans- 
 lator is still ruder ; for his Latin is so barbarous that it is 
 difficult often to make out the sense. Still the work itself 
 is valuable on many accounts, and shews a mind of consi- 
 derable vigour and capacity, and contains correct views of 
 many important truths. 
 
 In the FIRST book he details with singular minuteness 
 the strange vagaries of the numerous heretics of his day, 
 and the various ways in which they turned and perverted 
 Scripture to support their fantastic notions, contrary to its 
 plain, obvious, and consistent meaning. Their attempts in 
 this respect are very strikingly expressed ; and as what 
 he says may be a warning to others, I shaU quote two 
 passages : — 
 
 Lib. i. " They attempt speciously to adapt (af<07ri(f xa; -npoiraf- 
 jixo^efv) to what is spoken by them, either our Lord's para- 
 bles, or prophetic expressions, or apostolic words, that 
 their system may not appear to be without evidence 
 (aiAagrvpoy) , passing over the order (Ta^iv) and context 
 
IRENyEUS. 
 
 87 
 
 (dfl^oi') of the Scriptures, and as far as they can, loosen- 
 ing the members or hmbs of truth (Xvovtc; ra /AiXvi tvj; 
 aXijfif ia<) ." — " Having patched together old women's fables, 
 then tearing from this and that place sayings, expressions, 
 and parables, they endeavour to adapt to their fables, the 
 words of God." 
 
 He then refers to the known doctrines of the Church ; 
 gives an epitome of them, which may be deemed to con- 
 tain the rudiments of what is now called the Apostles 
 Creed, and maintains that the acknowledged doctrines of 
 the Universal Church give no countenance whatever to the 
 strange notions of the heretics. I shall give this epitome 
 whole and entire, that your readers may see what Irenseus 
 considered in his day as the summary of Divine truth, and 
 that they may understand to what his tradition refers. It 
 forms the second chapter : — 
 
 " The Church, though scattered through the whole ^"P- ^• 
 world, to the extremities of the earth, hath yet received 
 from the Apostles and their disciples, that faith which is 
 in one God, Father Almighty, maker of heaven, and 
 earth, and seas, and of all things in them : 
 
 " And in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, incarnated 
 for our salvation : 
 
 " And in the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets 
 preached the economies, and the advents, and the gener- 
 ation from the Virgin, and the passion and the rising 
 from the dead, and the incarnate ascension of our beloved 
 Christ Jesus the Lord into the heavens, and his coming 
 from the heavens in the glory of the Father, to sum up 
 all things, and to raise up all the flesh of all mankind : 
 that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and 
 
88 
 
 IREN.EUS. 
 
 King, according to the good pleasure of the invisible 
 Father, every knee of those in heaven, and on earth, and 
 under the earth, may bow, and every tongue may confess 
 to him ; and that he may execute righteous judgment on 
 them all :— that he may send into the eternal fire the spirits 
 of wickedness (ra Trvtu/^ariKo. TT); wovv)()(a?), and the angels 
 who transgressed and became apostates, and the ungodly, 
 and the unjust, and the lawless and the calumniators of 
 men ; and that he may, graciously bestowing life, grant 
 incorruption, and confer eternal glory on the righteous 
 and the holy, who have kept his commandments, and 
 have from the beginning or after repentance continued 
 in his love." 
 
 Now Mr. Newman, one of the writers of the Oxford 
 Tracts, according to what is reported, in his Lectures on 
 " The Prophetic Office of the Church," would have us 
 believe that what is called the Apostles' Creed came from 
 the Apostles, at least substantially and nearly in the form 
 we now have it. If there was such a creed in Irenaeus' 
 time, how came he not to use it, instead of forming one 
 himself, as he appears evidently to have done, — at least in 
 part ? There was at that time no creed regularly formed : 
 and what gave occasion to epitomes of this kind was the 
 spread of the Gnostic errors ; and it was on account of 
 future errors that the creed acquired new accessions, 
 until it had attained the form and fulness it now possesses. 
 The creed itself is excellent ; but it is a human composition, 
 and as such our Church receives it. To palm it on the 
 world as Divine, and as coming from the Apostles, is either 
 the effect of ignorance or of strong delusion ; or it is an 
 attempt to foist in sornethinfj else as Divine, besides the 
 word of God, in order to introduce some other things. 
 
IREN.'EUS. 
 
 89 
 
 What Irenaeus says of this summary is, that the truths 
 contained in it, were universally acknowledged and be- 
 lieved : I shall give his own words : — 
 
 " This preaching and this faith, the Church having re- Cap. 3. 
 ceived, as we have said before, though scattered through 
 the whole world, carefully preserves, as if it inhabited the 
 same house : and it likewise believes these things, as if it 
 had one soul and the same heart ; and it harmoniously 
 preaches, and teaches, and delivers (irapaSiSao-jj/) these 
 things, as if it possessed but one mouth. For though 
 the dialects through the world are different, yet the sub- 
 stance of what is deUvered (dwafAi^ tvj? napaSoo-ew?) is one 
 and the same. And neither the Churches founded in 
 Germany believe otherwise, or otherwise deliver (■napa^t- 
 ZoaiTiv), nor those among the Iberians, or among the 
 Celts, or in the eastern parts, or in Egypt, or in Lybia, 
 nor those founded in the middle regions of the world ; 
 but as the sun, the workmanship of God, is one and the 
 same through the whole world ; so also the preaching of 
 the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men who 
 desire to come to the knowledge of the truth. And 
 neither will the most powerful in speech of those who pre- 
 side in the Churches speak things different from these 
 (for no one is above the teacher), nor will the weak in 
 speech lessen what is delivered (tijv ira^iaSoo-iv— the tradi- 
 tion) ; for faith being one and the same, neither he who 
 can say much concerning it enlarges it (eTrXtovairey), nor 
 does he who says little make it less (ojXarTofvjcre)." 
 
 The preceding passage has been given, that it might 
 be seen what Irenaeus meant by tradition. His tradition 
 was evidently the truth conveyed by preaching ; and this 
 
.90 
 
 IREN^US. 
 
 tiTith is mainly included in the summary which he had 
 given. This had been traditioned or deUvered to the 
 Church by the Apostles, and it continued to be thus delivered 
 and taught everywhere. The harmony, of which he 
 speaks, was with respect to this summary of Divine truth : 
 and this harmony still exists, notwithstanding differences on 
 many other points, in all the Reformed or Protestant 
 Churches, and in all Dissenting Churches, except those 
 which are Socinianized. We may now say, as Irenaeus did, 
 that this preaching or this faith is " one and the same," 
 that it is traditioned and taught by all Protestants deemed 
 orthodox throughout the world. But this declaration of 
 Irenseus has often been perverted in the same way as he tells 
 that passages of Scriptui-e were by the heretics. It has been 
 Appendix, separated from its " context," and been made to apply not 
 S- only to all the doctrines of Scripture, but also to all matters 
 of Church order and discipline. This is heretical work. 
 
 In the SECOND book Irenaeus proceeds formally to refute 
 the fantasies of the heretics, shewing by argument and clear 
 reasoning how inconsistent and absurd they were. His 
 object, he says, was to " destroy and overturn what they 
 falsely taught, by denuding and shewing what sort of things 
 they were." They were, for the most part, things beyond 
 the reach of human knowledge ; and the notions they had 
 of them were foolish and contradictor)', or, in his own words, 
 " incongruous, fatuitous, and irrational." Their opinions 
 were indeed truly absurd. They were distinguished by the 
 name of Gnostics — knowing men: but they held various 
 sentiments, differing in many things fi-om each other, but 
 for the most part maintaining divers creations or emanations 
 with respect to the Divine Being, making so many beings or 
 
IREN.EUS. 
 
 91 
 
 emanations to be within what they call the Pleroma, or ful- 
 ness, and so many without it, and holding that the Creator 
 of the world, the God of the Jews and the Saviour, were 
 different beings or emanations, by various generations, from 
 the Great parent of all. But they had many other strange 
 opinions, many of which Irenseus notices and refutes, shew- 
 ing their absurdity and inconsistency with the Scriptures : 
 for they all, at least most of them, seemed to pay some re- 
 gard to the Scriptures, and borrowed something from them 
 to countenance their absurd notions. But Irenseus does 
 not seem disposed on that account to take the Scriptures 
 from them, as the Papists do with respect to the laity (and 
 the men of the Oxford Tracts are rather jealous on this 
 point,) but he encourages them to read the Scriptures, and 
 directs them how to read them profitably. 
 
 While IrencBus very successfully disproves the fantasies 
 of the heretics, he commits a few blunders himself. The 
 heretics made a great deal of numbers, such as seven, ten, 
 thirty, &c., as mentioned in the Bible, and existing in 
 nature. To shew that this was all a vain thing, he brings 
 forward many instances of Jive being a number applicable to 
 many things. He says that each table of the law had five 
 precepts, following in this instance the division of some of 
 the Jewish rabbies ;— that the cross had five points, two in 
 the length, two in the breadth, and one in the middle ; — 
 that the veil of the holiest place had five piUars, whUe 
 Moses only mentions four ; — and that the altar of the burnt- 
 offering was five cubits high, while it was only three. 
 
 But there are certain principles which are truly Protestant, 
 avowed by Irenaeus in this chapter. The heretics perverted 
 the parables to their own purpose, by taking some parts, and 
 
92 
 
 IREN.^US. 
 
 applying them to the support of their systems. How does 
 Ireuaeus deal with them ? Does he refer them to the teach- 
 ing of the Churcli or to Catholic tradition ? No : he pursues 
 another course. He lays down a rule by which the parables 
 might be correctly and safely explained. To shew this I 
 make the following extracts : — 
 
 Lib. 2 " Wliatsoever things God has put within the power of 
 ^' ' man, and subjected to our knowledge — upon these things 
 a mind that is sound, and safe, and godly, and truth-loving, 
 will readily meditate ; and he wUl make progress in them, 
 acquiring to himself easy learning by daily exercise. And 
 these are things which are obvious, and are openly, and as 
 to diction, inambiguously, read in the Divine Scriptures : 
 and therefore the parables ought not to be adapted to am- 
 biguous points. For he who thus explains (that is, by the 
 plain parts of Scripture), explains without danger, and the 
 parables shall receive a similar explanation from all. But 
 those things which are not plainly spoken, aud are not ob- 
 vious, it is folly to couple them with those explanations of 
 the parables, which any one invents as he pleases : for thus 
 the rule of truth (regula veritatis) will be with no one ; but 
 there will be as many truths opposing each other, and con- 
 tradictory dogmas, as there will be expounders. — Because 
 the parables are capable of many explanations, who of those 
 who love the truth will not confess, that to affirm anything 
 from them in the inquiry respecting God, and to leave what 
 is certain, indubitable, and true, is the part of those who 
 precipitate themselves into danger, and who are wholly 
 
 Vide irrational ? " 
 
 ppradix ^j^^ principle of the analogy of faith is here clearly re- 
 cognised. The " rule of truth" is to explain what is 
 
IREN.liUS. 
 
 93 
 
 obscure by what is clear and obvious, otherwise the result 
 will be that there will be "truths" opposing each other. 
 And we shall have presently another direction . Tlie heretics 
 introduced the discussion of many things manifestly beyond 
 the reach of human knowledge, and started curious diffi- 
 culties, and some of them arising from things said in Scrip- 
 ture, but which were such as could not be solved by man. 
 Irenseus very justly and wisely answers them and says : — 
 
 " We ought to refer such things to God, our maker ; cap. 47. 
 very justly knowing, (rectissime scientes) that the Scriptures 
 are indeed perfect (Scripturae quidem perfectse sunt), because 
 they have been dictated by the word of God and his Spirit. 
 And in the degree in which we are less than, and farthest 
 from, the word of God and his Spirit, in that degree we 
 stand in need of the knowledge of his mysteries. — If some 
 things in the works of creation be referred to God, and some 
 come within our own knowledge, what hardship is it, if, of 
 the things sought after in the Scriptures, the whole Scriptures 
 being spiritual, we do, according to God's grace, explahi 
 some, and if some should be referred to God, not only in 
 this present world, but also in that which is to come, that 
 God may be always teaching, and man may be always learn- 
 ing of God ? — If, therefore, according to what we have said, 
 we refer some of the questions to God, we shall keep our 
 faith and continue without danger ; and the whole Scripture, 
 given us by God, will be found by us consonant (o-Kft^aivcic), 
 and the parables will harmonize with the things expressly 
 said, and the things plainly said will explain ((ntXva-e'i) the 
 parables." 
 
 We read nothing here of the teaching of the Church, or 
 of tradition or of traditive interpretation; but of rules and 
 
94 
 
 IREN.EUS. 
 
 directions by which Scripture may be safely interpreted. 
 Tradition is only applied by him to the general truths of 
 the Gospel which continued to be preached in the Church. 
 When he mentions expositions, and solutions of difficulties, 
 he prescribes rules, and such as are suitable to all, not con- 
 fining himself to authorized teachers, but recommending 
 what he says indiscriminately to all, even to the heretics. 
 The Scriptures he recognises as " perfect," and he recog- 
 nises too the necessity of Divine grace in order to understand 
 them aright. The explanation of what is capable of being 
 explained, is said to be given " according to God's grace ; " 
 while, with due humility, what is insolvable, is referred to 
 God. These are truly Protestant sentiments, and not less 
 so is the following : — 
 
 Cap. 54. " For these (the heretics) are not more competent (that is, 
 to teach the truth) than the Scriptures. Nor ought we to 
 leave the words of the Lord, and Moses, and other prophets. 
 Vide and to believe, these, who say nothing that is sane, but dote 
 
 \lipuiaix, unstable things (instabila delirantibus)." 
 
 The application of this to the men of the Oxford Tracts 
 is, in my view, perfectly warrantable. Many of the things 
 they advocate are wholly "unstable" and uncertain, and 
 even by no means sane or sound. What is their Cathohc 
 tradition, the teaching of the Church and the consent of 
 Fathers, but things of this kmd ? They are " unstable" 
 things, and what no spiritually-sane mind ought to receive, 
 when not clearly sanctioned by the Divine Scriptures. The 
 doting on " unstable things " is the character of heretics in 
 every age. That these writers dote and say the most delirious 
 things, on the points above mentioned, is quite evident from 
 their writings. 
 
IKEN.liUS. 
 
 9 
 
 The object of tlie third book, as stated by himself, was 
 to " bring proofs from the Scriptures." Tliese proofs are 
 chiefly from the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. He 
 begins by stating how the Gospel came to them : and his 
 words are remarkable ; and were they adhered to, tradition 
 would receive no more countenance in the world. They are 
 these : — 
 
 " We have not known the method of our salvation through Lib. 3- 
 any but those through whom the Gospel has come to us ; ^ 
 which indeed they first preached, but afterwards through the 
 will of God tradited or delivered (tradiderunt) to us in the 
 Scriptures, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith 
 (fundamentum et columnam fidei nostree)." 
 
 Let us bear this in mind while reading Irenseus, and we 
 shall not mistalie what he says of tradition. The Apostles 
 tradited or dehvered the truth to the Church ; and they 
 tradited or delivered the same in writing. What was deli- 
 vered and preached in his day, he declares to be the same as 
 what the Apostles preached and delivered to writing. Wliat 
 the heretics maintained was the reverse of this, which he 
 strenuously opposed. They held that the Apostles taught 
 things not contained in the Scriptures ; and some of them 
 maintained that the Apostles themselves had not perfect 
 knowledge. On this point he makes this declaration : — 
 
 " After our Lord arose from the dead, and they (the 
 Apostles) were endued with the power of the Holy Ghost 
 coming upon them from above, and were filled with all things, 
 and had perfect knowledge, they went forth to the extremities 
 of the earth, evangelizing those good things which are to us 
 from God, and announcing celestial peace to men, all alike 
 and each of them having the Gospel of God." (Omnes 
 pariter et singuli eorum habentes evangelium Dei.) 
 
9G 
 
 lUEN/EUS. 
 
 There is in the second chapter a very singular passage, 
 well deserving the attention of the men of the Oxford 
 Tracts, as it shews whom they have as their companions in 
 pleading for tradition. The originators, advocates, and 
 patrons of oral tradition were the heretics ; and it has never 
 heen resorted to nor pleaded in any age, except for the 
 support of heretical and erroneous sentiments. The Jews 
 quoted it, and the Papists quote it for the verj' purpose of 
 maintaining what is foolish, superstitious, or unscriptural. 
 The passage is this : — 
 l^gp 2 " When they (the heretics) are reproved from the Scrip- 
 tures, they turn to find fault with the Scriptures, as if they 
 were not right, or were not of authority, both because they 
 Vide are variously expressed (varife dictae), and because the truth 
 )IK^di.x, ^^j^j^^jj. found from them by those who are ignorant of 
 tradition : for that was not delivered by means of writing, 
 but by word of mouth (per vivam vocem)." 
 
 To meet this objection, and to take the heretics, as it 
 were, on their own ground, Irenaeus proceeds to shew where 
 that tradition, if there was any, could reasonably be found. 
 He justly infers, that if there was anything orally dehvered 
 and not committed to writing, it must have been left to those 
 whom the Apostles appointed to succeed them. He then 
 begins at Rome, and traces the succession of bishops or 
 presbyters up to the Apostles, and maintains that the tra- 
 dition or delivery of the truth had continued the same from 
 the first : and thus he completely shuts out oral tradition. 
 Then he goes to Asia, and mentions Polycarp, and says that 
 he taught the same things as he learnt from the Apostles, 
 and refers to his epistle as a proof, they being clearly the 
 truths of the Gospel which the Apostles preached and 
 
IKF.N.EUS. 
 
 97 
 
 delivered to writing. He afterwards refers to the Church 
 uiiiversally in these words : — 
 
 " When, therefore, the proofs are so many, we ought not 
 to seek the truth from some, when it is easy to take it from 
 the Church, since the Apostles had most plentifully poured 
 into it, as into a rich depository, all things which belong to 
 the truth, that every one who wishes may take from it the 
 drink of life." Cap. 4. 
 
 Let what he said before be connected with this, that is, 
 that what the Apostles preached they delivered to us in the 
 Scriptures, and there will be the strongest evidence against 
 any oral tradition, independent of Scripture. They 
 "poured," he says, "into the Church all things belonging 
 to the truth :" and what they thus poured, or what they 
 preached, they delivered to us in the Scriptures. This must 
 have been his meaning, otherwise there would have been a 
 gap to escape for the heretics, who maintained that the 
 Apostles left some things for an oral delivery. The very Vide 
 question he afterwards puts confirms this view : — " What if ■'^PP™'!'^' 
 the Apostles," he says, " had not left the Scriptures to us, 
 would it not be our duty to follow the order of tradition 
 which they delivered to those to whom they committed the 
 Churches .'' " He, throughout, identifies their writings with Cap. 4. 
 what they delivered to the Churches, and admits of nothing 
 else as tradition. This is what no one who reads him im- 
 partially can deny. But Romanists and others have often 
 perverted what he says to support their own views. His very 
 argument necessarily excludes oral tradition, as containing 
 anything different from the truths of the Scriptures. The 
 object of all he advances is, to show the plea of heretics for 
 oral tradition to be wholly groundless. Wliat does he say in 
 
IREN.EUS. 
 
 his preface that he was going to do ? To bring proofs from 
 the Scriptures. And in order to make those proofs to bear 
 on them, he begins by nuUifsdng the vaUdity of any oral tra- 
 dition, independent of the Scriptures, maintaining that what 
 the Apostles preached they committed to writing, and that 
 what they preached continued to be the tradition of the 
 Church in his day. Having cleared his ground, he proceeds 
 to execute the work which he announced in his preface. 
 
 Tlie scriptural proofs he adduces are numerous, and are 
 on the whole appropriate, and sufficiently strong against the 
 heretics. But he states now and then some singular things 
 which appear to us now even ridiculous. He holds that 
 there could not have been less or more than four Gospels. 
 " Since there are," he says, " four regions of the world in 
 which we are, and four general winds, and the Church is 
 dispersed through aU the earth, and the pillar (o-tvac<) and 
 stay (o-Tijpj'yjua) of the Church is the Gospel and spirit of 
 life, it is fit that it should have four pillars, everywhere 
 breathing incorruption and revivifying men (■jn-eovra? 
 
 Cap. 11. Tijv aif^a^ijiaii Kai afa^utrvpovs/rai; tov? avSpanovq.)'' Though 
 
 the reasons given are fanciful, yet there is in this sentence 
 an acknowledgment of a truth w-hich the men of the Oxford 
 Tracts would, as I expect, hardly concede,— the Church 
 having the four Gospels as piUars. But there is an im- 
 portant sense in which this is true, as well as the Apostle's 
 declaration, that the Church is the ground and pillar of the 
 truth. There is a mutual support. The Church is first 
 built on the Gospel, the foundation laid by the Apostles and 
 Prophets ; and then the Gospel is spread and sustained by 
 the Church. He finds a reason also for the four Gospels 
 from the four covenants made with mankind — with Adam, 
 Noah, Moses, and Christ. He makes a false comment on 
 
IRKN.EU; 
 
 99 
 
 tlie expression in Psalm cxxxii. 11, "Of the fruit of thy 
 body," making it different from " the fruit of thy loins," the 
 very word used when quoted in Acts ii. 30; and this he 
 states as a proof that Christ was to be bom of a virgin, and 
 not according to the common course of nature. The stone, 
 mentioned by Daniel, " cut out without hands," was a pre- 
 signification of the same supernatural generation. The rod 
 of Moses becoming a living serpent was an intended symbol 
 of Christ. He strongly maintains the salvation of Adam, as 
 necessary to vindicate the power of God over the enemy ; 
 and Feuardentius tells us in his notes, that it was a general 
 opinion of the Fathers, that Adam, after undergoing many 
 trials, toils, and calamities, came at last to Mount Calvary, 
 died there, and was buried where Christ was cmcified. And 
 the same author says, that many of the Fathers agreed with 
 Irenaeus in most of the foregoing notions. So much the 
 worse for their judgment and discretion. 
 
 In the FOURTH book, Irenaeus adduces against the here- Liber iv. 
 tics the sayings or sermons of our Lord (Domini sermones,) 
 though he does not confine himself to them. While he 
 brings forward what clearly proves that God is one and ^^^ppj^^jx 
 the same, and that there is only one God, being Father, Z. 
 Son, and Spirit, the Creator of the world, the God of the 
 Jews and the God of Christians, he takes the opportunity 
 of obviating the various frivolous objections of the here- 
 tics : and this leads him to notice a great number of sub- 
 jects ; some of which he handles wisely and scripturally ; 
 but there are others on which his remarks are singular and 
 fanciful. I adduce the following as instances : Quoting 
 John's saying — " God is able of these stones to raise up 
 children to Abraham," he remarks, "This Jesus did by 
 H 2 
 
100 
 
 IREN.EUS. 
 
 drawing us from the religion of stones." He applies the 
 saying of Isaiah, i. 22, to the Jewish elders. " Isaiah 
 says," he observes, "Thy vintners mix wine with water " 
 (the Septuagint version) " showing that the elders would 
 mix watery tradition (aquatam traditionem) with the strict 
 precept of God." — Jacob laying hold of Esau's heel, thus 
 striving and conquering, was a type of Christ. — Esau sel- 
 ling, and Jacob obtaining the birthright, svTnbohzed the 
 case of the Jews and Gentiles. — Jacob begetting his twelve 
 sons, the twelve tribes, in a foreign land, betokened that 
 " Christ should begin in a foreign country to generate 
 the twelve-piUared foundation of the Church " (duodecas- 
 tylum firmamentum Ecclesiae). — The variegated sheep of 
 Jacob represented the various nations that believed. — Paul 
 labouring more than the other Apostles, was, because he 
 had more to do to teach the Gentiles, than the others had 
 in teaching the Jews.— Lot's incest is represented as ex- 
 cusable, as well as the conduct of his daughters, and they 
 are made symbolical of what I do not choose to repeat 
 after him. Many similar things might be mentioned. 
 But on almost aU these and the like strange things, Feuar- 
 dentius, the Popish annotator, tells us, that there is a vast 
 consent of the Fathers ; as if the consent of the Fathers 
 could convert foUy into wisdom, and nonsense into sense, 
 and transmute vagaries and Rabbinical fictions into sober 
 Christian verities. And these are the men who are to be 
 almost the infallible expounders of Scripture, and whom the 
 Oxford divines quote, and whose opinions they seem 
 to regard as if they were the dictates of Divine wisdom. 
 
 Notwithstanding these blemishes, there are many pas- 
 sages in this book that are truly valuable. The same truth 
 
IREN/EUS. 
 
 101 
 
 appears throughout it as in the preceding, that is, that the 
 tradition of the Church is the same with the tradition of 
 Scripture ; and, like Justin, he recognises the principle of 
 the Bible Society, that the Scriptures are and ought to be 
 read by all. This is what he says to the heretics : — 
 
 " Read more diligently that Gospel which is given us by 
 the Apostles, and read more diligently the prophets, unAyoM 
 will find every act and every doctrine (omnem doctrinam), 
 and the whole passion of our Lord related in them." '^''P- 
 
 Could he have said this, were any thing more to be 
 learned from tradition ? Here is " every doctrine," and 
 what more was wanted ? Had he allowed any thing more, 
 his attempt to convince them from Scripture must have 
 been useless; for they might have again told him, "These 
 are imperfect, there is another channel, there is oral tra- 
 dition." No: he says, "every doctrine" is here. — For 
 the benefit of those who plead for orders as " the only 
 external mark," what Irenaeus says respecting " unjust 
 presbyters," shall be quoted : — 
 
 " There are those who are believed by many to be pres- 
 byters; but they serve their own lusts, and set not the 
 fear of God in their hearts, but treat others with re- 
 proaches, and are elated by the pride of the principal 
 station. From aU such we ought to stand aloof (absistere 
 — to depart), but to adhere to those who keep, as we have 
 said before, the doctrine of the Apostles, and with the 
 order of the Presbytery (presbyterii ordine) blamelessly ^.^^ 
 exhibit sound speech and conversation for the instruction Appendix, 
 and correction of others." 
 
 One more passage I shall set down from this book, and 
 that for the sake of the traditionists. What he says of the 
 
102 
 
 IREN.-EUS. 
 
 Jewish traditions, is true of almost all traditions. His ex- 
 pressions are these : — 
 
 Cap. 25. " tradition of their elders, which they pretend to 
 observe according to the law, is contrary to the law, which 
 was given by Moses : by which (tradition) they take away 
 some things, and add some things, and some things they 
 interpret as they wish." 
 
 Liber v. I" t^e fifth and last book, the same subject is pursued, 
 and the proofs are mostly taken from the Apostolic Epis- 
 tles. The real incarnation of Christ, and the resurrection 
 of the flesh, are in the former part discussed and proved. 
 The character of Antichrist is then described : and the last 
 subject is the Millennial question. Both Irenseus and 
 Justin were Millenarians, holding the temporal reign of 
 Christ. What is advanced on the two first subjects is for 
 the most part suitable, though mixed with what is ex- 
 traneous and fanciful. What he says on the Millennium 
 shows, that our modern Millenarians have not originated 
 their particular views, nor adduced much that is new in 
 favoui- of them. 
 
 Added to these five books are a few fragments, col- 
 lected from succeeding authors, by whom they were quoted 
 from writings of his, now lost. Tliey contain nothing of 
 much interest, except a part of a letter to one Florinus, in 
 which there is a mention made of Polycarp. He says, 
 that he well remembered " how Polycarp, having received 
 what he preached from eyewitnesses of the word of life, 
 declared all things consonant with the Scriptures (Travra 
 
 The mistakes and defects of Irenseus are nearly the same 
 with those of Justin. His views respecting the effects of 
 
IREN/EUS. 
 
 103 
 
 the fall appear defective ; the corruption rather than the 
 fault of man is set forth and dwelt upon, or sin as a de- 
 pravity rather as an offence against God. Consequently 
 his notions of justification, as distinct from sanctification, 
 are not veiy clear. Like Justin, too, he finds prophecies 
 where none really exist, and carries the symbolizing scheme 
 to an extent that is often quite absurd, even beyond what 
 scarcely any modern fanatics have done. 
 
 There is perhaps no author who has given so much 
 occasion to the plea for oral tradition as Irenaeus ; and 
 there is none, I conceive, when he is rightly understood, 
 who has done more to nullify such a plea. To convince us 
 of this, we have only to consider the design of his wri- 
 tings, and the way in which he executed it. In his first 
 book he describes the strange notions of the heretics, and 
 asserts them to be inconsistent with the general belief of 
 the Church. In his second, he exhibits the inconsistency 
 of their notions with each other, and vnth reason and com- 
 mon sense. And then in the three following books he 
 brings forward the Scriptures against them ; and the in- 
 troduction of tradition m the beginning of the third book 
 was made for the purpose of preventing the heretics from 
 evading the proofs from the Scriptures, which they attempted 
 to do by pleading oral tradition. This was what he was 
 driven to by them, and was not the ground which he had 
 chosen, and on which he designed to carry on the contest. 
 His ground was Scripture ; and on that he fights mostly 
 throughout. The very declaration, that what the Apostles 
 preached they committed to writing, to be " the founda- 
 tion and pillar of our faith," proves most clearly, that he 
 considered tradition and what they wrote to be the same. It 
 
104 
 
 IREN.EUS. 
 
 is by overlooking this declaration and wholly mistaking the 
 main drift of his argument, that what he says can be at all 
 construed favourably to oral tradition. How could he 
 possibly favour what he blames in the heretics, and what 
 he manifestly labours to disprove ? He most explicitly, in 
 several places, rejects entirely the idea of anjthing being 
 secretly taught by the Apostles, or taught to a few, which 
 the heretics vainly pretended, and declares that what they 
 taught they taught to aU without distinction, ha\Tng 
 " poured," he says, " into the Church all things belonging 
 to the truth." 
 
 But I must state, that, contrary to his usual practice, he 
 has mentioned one or two things himself on the ground of 
 oral tradition, though not on that ground only; and strange 
 to say, in both instances his tradition is confessedly and 
 palpably false. He occasionally indeed refers to the tes- 
 timony of some unnamed presbyter on some other points ; 
 but the two subjects that I am going to mention are the 
 most prominent and mostly dwelt upon. Tlie one is re- 
 pecting the Millennium. He reports a certain declaration 
 as having been made by our Lord, and related by John the 
 disciple to some elders, from whom he seems to have 
 received it. " Elders," he says, " who had seen John, the 
 Lord's disciple, have mentioned, that they had heard from 
 him, how the Lord taught concerning these times and said. 
 The days shall come, in which vines shall grQw, each 
 having ten thousand branches, and on each branch ten 
 thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand clusters, 
 and on each cluster ten thousand grapes ; and each grape, 
 when pressed, shall yield ticenty-Jive kilderkins (metretas 
 — twelve gallons) of wine. And ivken any one shall lay 
 
IREN.EUS. 
 
 105 
 
 hold on any of these hvly clusters, another will cry, I am 
 a better cluster, take me, by me bless the Lord." The 
 extravagance of this was too much to gain the consent of 
 the Fathers : and Feuardentius, the strenuous defender of 
 all their follies, gives up this folly as a fiction, originally 
 drawn out of the abundant stock of Rabbinical fables. — 
 The other oral tradition is respecting the age of our Sa- 
 viour. He maintains that it was necessary that Christ 
 should be of every age, that he might save those of every 
 age, that is, that he should be an infant, that he might 
 save infants — a chdd, a youth, a grown-up man, and an 
 old man, that he might save persons of all these ages. 
 " All the elders," he says, " who were conversant with 
 John, the Lord's disciple in Asia, testify, that John de- 
 livered this very thing to them." He tells us also that lj^, jj 
 the Gospel bears the same witness. Tliis he makes out by Cap. 39. 
 what the Jews said to our Saviour, " Thou art not yet 
 fifty years old ; " he hence concludes, that he must have Lib. ii. 
 been then near that age. So that he brings his reason, ^ap. 40. 
 oral tradition, and Scripture, in support of his views ; and 
 in all these respects manifesting a weakness not very un- 
 common to many of the primitive Fathers. 
 
 As to traditive interpretations derived from the Apostles, 
 we have no traces of them in Irenseus any more than in 
 Justin. Both expound and explain the Scriptures, reason 
 upon them, and di-aw their inferences, in a way similar 
 to what Protestants do, without giving the least hint that 
 they had received any traditionary interpretations. And 
 if there were such things, from whom could we expect 
 them, if not from these authors, who lived in the next age 
 to the Apostles, and who were both acquainted with the 
 
106 
 
 IREN.EUS. 
 
 eastern as well as with the western Churches ? And we 
 look in vain to these authors for any oral traditions (except 
 in the instances named as to Irenseus, and these are false) , 
 independent of the Scriptures, left to the Church by the 
 Apostles. How vain and groundless therefore is the ap- 
 parent lament of Mr. Newman in his Lectures, when he 
 speaks of " rich, imcatalogued treasures of a traditionary 
 nature ! " It ia the mere effect of a vagrant and deluded 
 imagination. For if they were " uncatalogued," we might 
 surely expect some references made to them, they being so 
 "rich" and valuable! too rich and "too sacred or too 
 subtle," it seems, " to be recorded in words ! ! " How 
 pitiably superstitious is this ! and how lamentably credulous 
 must such a mind be as to Popish tales ! for he could not 
 find such a thought anywhere else. 
 
 With respect to oral tradition and traditive interpretation, 
 we have no need of either. The Scriptures contain aU the 
 essential truths which the Apostles preached ; and as to in- 
 terpretation, we have only to follow such rules as Irenseus 
 and others have specified, for neglect of which the heretics 
 entangled themselves in their errors. Let us obsers-e the 
 order and context of Scripture, and explain things difficult 
 by what is plain, and refer to God what we cannot thus 
 explain. And let us add the rule mentioned by Justin, 
 which is pi-ay er : and we shall do far better than by follow- 
 ing any decrees of council, consent of Fathers, or any 
 such varying thing as the teaching of the Church, or 
 Catholic tradition. The plain and certain truth is, that for 
 all necessary purposes the Scriptures are wholly sufficient. 
 But if we want to establish what is erroneous, superstitious, 
 or pontifical, we must have recourse to the Fathers and 
 
IRENiEUS. 
 
 Catholic tradition. If we want to propagate the error, 
 that baptism is an opus operatum, or something very near 
 to it, as is done by the men of the Oxford Tracts, we must 
 have tradition, decrees of councils, and consent of Fathers ; 
 and, like the heretics, we must "patch up" something 
 from these resources, and "adapt" to our fable some 
 words of Scripture, " passing over," as Irenseus says, 
 " the order and context of the Scriptures ; " and we shall 
 thus effect our purpose. If we want to establish the Popish 
 doctrine, or something alcin to it, respecting the Lord's 
 Supper, we have only to proceed in the same way, and 
 we shaU succeed in deluding our fellow-creatures, as the 
 men of the Oxford Tracts do in too many instances. 
 If, again, we wisR to make orders " the only external mark 
 of a Christian minister," and establish a priesthood similar 
 to the Levitical, or rather a Romish priesthood, on an ex- 
 clusive and monopohzing principle, we must have recourse 
 to Catholic tradition and consent of Fathers, and say with 
 the heretics, that the " Scriptures are not perfect," and 
 cannot be fully understood without tradition ; and we shall 
 produce a vast show of evidence in our favour, especially 
 if we imitate the practice of the heretics in " speciously 
 adapting " to our scheme some " apostolic words." If 
 any of these or similar things be our objects, we must 
 have Catholic tradition, consent of fathers, and many such 
 strange, false, and useless authorities. 
 
 On the other hand, if we desire to know the truth of 
 God, to understand the will of the Highest, to be ac- 
 quainted with the way which God in his mercy and wisdom 
 has contrived to save sinners, or in other words, to possess 
 all that is really needful for conversion, edification, and 
 
108 IRENiEUS. 
 
 salvation, we want no more than the Scriptures, accompa- 
 nied with such ordinary helps, as means, as are usually 
 employed, and especially with prayer, that " the gates of 
 light," as the venerable old man said to Justin Martyr, 
 " may be opened to us." The Scriptures, and the Scrip- 
 tures alone, conveyed in their own words, or in the words 
 of faithful expoimders, are able to make us truly wise— wise 
 for that purpose for which they have been expressly, and, 
 I may say, exclusively given, that is, " wise unto salva- 
 tion, through faith which is in Christ Jesus," so " that 
 the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto 
 all good works." 
 
 MiSOPAPISTlCUS. 
 
 Postscript. — Subjoined are a few interesting passages 
 from Irenseus on various subjects : — 
 
 " He who will reduce each particular of what is said to 
 its own order, and fit it to the body of truth, will denude 
 their system, and shew it to be baseless." 
 
 " Tliose, called continent, (the followers of Marcion the 
 heretic, and others,) preach celibacy, (aya/^iav, — mimarried- 
 ness) rendering void the ancient formation of God, and 
 indirectly blaming him who made male and female 
 for the procreation of men ; and they introduce absti- 
 nence from those things called by us animals, being un- 
 thankful to God who made aU things." We have here two 
 heretical sentiments, which were afterwards in a great 
 measure adopted by the infallible Church of Rome. 
 
 "Tlie Father of aU is far distant from those affections 
 and passions which belong to men, being both simple and 
 uncompounded, homogeneous, and all like himself and 
 
 Lib. i. 
 Cap. 1. 
 
 Lib. i. 
 Cap. 30. 
 
IllEN^US. 
 
 109 
 
 equal ; for he is all mind and all spirit, and all perception 
 
 and all understanding, and all reason, and all hearing, 
 
 and all eye, and all light, and the whole fountain of all 
 
 good. After this manner it is usual for the religious and 
 
 pious to speak of God. But he is above all these things, 
 
 and for these things, ineffable. For he is well and rightly 
 
 called mind, comprehending all things ; but it is not like 
 
 the mind of men : and he is most justly called light ; .. 
 
 but it is nothing like that light which is in us." Cap. 16. 
 
 " It is better not to know any thing, not even a single 
 cause of any of the things that are made, and to believe 
 God and persevere in love, than to be inflated with such 
 knowledge, and to fall away from love, which vivifies 
 men : and it is better not to enquire after any thing else as 
 to knowledge, save Jesus Christ the Son of God, who 
 was crucified for us, than, through abstruse questions and 
 subtle prating, to fall into impiety." Cap. 45. 
 
 " Language, being carnal, is not adequate to serve the 
 velocity of man's thought, it being spiritual : hence our 
 word is suppressed within, and is not brought forth at 
 once, as it is conceived by the mind, but by parts, ac- ^■ 
 cording to what language is able to supply." tap. 47. 
 
 " That eternal fire is prepared for transgressors, our 
 Lord hath clearly declared, and other scriptui-es demon- 
 strate. And that God foreknew that this would be, the 
 Scriptures in like manner demonstrate, inasmuch as he has 
 prepared from the beginning eternal fire for those that 
 would transgress. But the very cause of the nature of 
 the transgressors (ipsam causam naturae transgredientium) 
 neither has any scripture related, nor has an apostle 
 declared, nor has the Lord taught. We ought therefore ^.^ 
 to leave this knowledge with God." Cap. 49. 
 
110 
 
 IREN.-EUS. 
 
 " He who formed man, who planted paradise, who 
 built the world, who brought the deluge, who saved 
 Noah, — the same is the God of Abraham and the God 
 of Isaac and the God of Jacob, the God of the hving ; 
 whom the law announces, whom the prophets proclaim. 
 Cap 5^5 Christ reveals, whom the Apostles teach, whom the 
 
 Church believes." 
 ^.^ ... " The love which is in God, being rich and bounteous, 
 Pief. grants more than any one asks of it." 
 
 " These are the words of the Church, (after quoting 
 Acts iv. 24—30), from which every church has had its 
 beginning ; these are the words of the metropolis of the 
 citizens of the new covenant, (avrai f tvaiT'ij? f^ijTpomKiu^Tuy 
 Tijc; KatvYji S<aSvjf<-<j5 TroXiTiov) ; these are the words of the 
 Apostles, these are the words of the Lord's disciples, who 
 Lib iii were truly perfect, having been perfected (that is, in 
 Cap. \2. knowledge,) after our Lord's ascension, by the Spirit." 
 
 " We having laboured with these proofs from the 
 Scriptures, and announcing briefly and compendiously 
 what is spoken at large, do thou attend to them with 
 patience, and think it not prolixity, knowing this, that 
 the proofs which are in the Scriptures cannot be shewn, 
 except from the Scriptures themselves. (Ostensione quae 
 j^.^ ... sunt in Scripturis non possuiit ostendi, nisi ex ipsis scrip- 
 Cap. 12. turis.") 
 
 " If any one yields himself easily, as a little sheep, to 
 them (the heretics) and has obtained their redemption, 
 such an one becomes inflated, and thinks himself to be 
 neither in heaven nor on earth, but to have entered within 
 the pleroma, and to be embracing now his own angel ; 
 he walks struttingly and superciliously, having the elation 
 
IREN/EUS. 
 
 Ill 
 
 of a dunghill cock. There are some among them, who say, 
 that the man who comes from above ought to attain 
 good conduct ; on this account they counterfeit gravity j^n,. jji. 
 by some sort of a stately look." 
 
 " Our Lord promised to send the Paraclete to fit us for 
 God. For as one mass cannot without moisture be made 
 from dry corn, nor one bread; so we, who are many, 
 cannot be made one in Christ Jesus without the water 
 which is from heaven. And as the dry earth, if it receives 
 no moisture, does not fructify ; so we also, being at first 
 like dry wood, could never fructify into life, without the j 
 voluntary supernal rain. (Sine supema voluntaria pluvia.") Cap. l.o. 
 
 "Though they (the heretics) speak similar things with 
 the faitliful, they yet relish things not only dissimilar, but 
 even contrary, and altogether full of blasphemies, by 
 which they destroy those, who through similarity of words 
 draw in their poison, which is in nature dissimilar : as any 
 one, giving gi/psum mixed with water, seduces by similarity 
 of colour ; according to what a certain person, superior to 
 us, has said respecting all who in any way deprave the 
 things which are of God, and adulterate God's truth, — l;], 
 " Gypsum is wickedly mixed with milk." In what measure Cap. 19. 
 this apphes to the divines of the Oxford Tracts, the reader 
 will be able to judge when he peruses with attention their 
 writings. There is a large quantity of gypsum, I have no 
 doubt, to be found mixed up in them. 
 
 " It was necessary that the Mediator between God and 
 men, should through his own relationship, (oiK-eioTijTo^, 
 domesticity,) to each, bring together both into friendship 
 and unanimity, (o/xovoiva,) and present man to God, and ^ ... 
 make known God to men." Cap. 20. 
 
112 
 
 TREN.«US. 
 
 "The preaching of the church is everywhere steady and 
 equally perseverant, and has testimony from the prophets, 
 and from the apostles, and from all the disciples. This 
 gift of God, (that is, the Holy Spirit,) is committed to 
 the Church, as breathing to the human frame, for this 
 end, that all the members, receiving it, might be vivified ; 
 yea, in it is deposited the communication of Christ, that 
 is, the Holy Spirit, the earnest of incorruption, and con- 
 firmation of our faith, and the ladder of ascension to God. 
 For " in the church," he says, " God has set Apostles, 
 prophets, teachers," and every other operation of the 
 Spirit : of which they are not all partakers, who resort 
 not to the church, but deprive themselves of life through 
 a wicked opinion and the worst operation. For where 
 the church is, there is the spirit of God ; and where the 
 Spirit of God is, there is the church, and every g^ace ; 
 and the Spirit is truth. Therefore they who do not partake 
 of Him, are neither nourished by the mother's breasts, 
 nor participate of that clearest fountain which proceeds 
 from the body of Christ : but they dig for themselves 
 broken cisterns out of earthly ditches, and drink putrid 
 water from miry places, shunning the faith of the church, 
 Lib iii ^^^^ ^^^7 should be converted, and rejecting the Spirit, 
 Cap. 40. that they may not be instructed." No portion of this is 
 objectionable, if properly understood, and viewed accord- 
 ing to the state of things at that time. The preaching 
 of the Church was then consistent, and the same as to all 
 the points in dispute with the heretics. The Spirit of 
 God and the Church, are doubtless invariably coimected ; 
 for there is no true Church where the Holy Spirit does 
 not exert and manifest his influence. But there have been 
 
IREN.EUS. 
 
 113 
 
 and there are no doubt, many churches, or tliose called 
 churches, where the Spirit of God does not reside. 
 What was the primitive Church when filled with Arianism ? 
 And what is the present state of the Church of Rome ? 
 It cannot surely be said of either, " That where the 
 Church is, there is the Spirit of God," except we ascribe 
 to him the works of the spirit of darkness. Something 
 besides " succession " is necessary to preserve the apos- 
 tolical character of a Church. That the main truths were 
 then held by the Church, and not by the heretics, was no 
 doubt a fact. What is said of those who left it was 
 therefore true. 
 
 " He who wishes to convert them (the heretics,) ought 
 to seek diligently to know their principles and arguments. 
 For it is not possible for any one to cure those who are ill, 
 who knows not what their illness is." Piefatio. 
 
 " Man, being rational, and in this like God, having been 
 made free in will and to be of his own power, is to himself 
 the cause, that he should become sometimes wheat, and 
 sometimes chaiF. He will therefore be even justly con- 
 demned, because, having been made rational, he has lost 
 genuine reason, and living irrationally, has become adverse 
 to the justice of God, delivering himself up to every ter- 
 rene spirit, and serving all kinds of lusts." cap. 9. 
 
 " Because it was impossible without God to know God, j^j^^ 
 he (Christ,) teaches men to know God by his own word." cap. 10. 
 
 " Christ received testimony, that he is truly man, and 
 that he is truly God, from all — from the Father— from the 
 Spirit and from angels — from his own condition — from 
 men and from apostate spirits— from seductors and from 
 the enemy — and lastly, from death itself. And the Son, 
 
 I 
 
114 
 
 IREN^EUS. 
 
 administering to the Father, performs all things from the 
 ^.^ . beginning even to the end ; and without him no one can 
 cap. 
 
 14. know God." 
 
 " Sacrifices do not sanctify a man, for God has no 
 j^jj^ need of sacrifice : but his conscience, who offers, being 
 cap. 34. pure, sanctifijes the sacrifice." 
 
 " As they who see the light, are in the light, and par- 
 take of its brightness ; so they who see God, are in God, 
 and partake of his briglitness : and the brightness vi\-ifies 
 them. They therefore possess life, who see God. And 
 on this account the incomprehensible and the inconceivable 
 and the unseen, makes himself to be seen, and conceived, 
 and comprehended by the faithfiU ; that he might vivify 
 those who comprehend and see Him through faith. For 
 as his greatness is untraceable, so his goodness is unut- 
 terable ; through which being seen. He grants life to those 
 who see Him. Since to live without life is not possible, 
 the support of life proceeds from a participation of God : 
 j^.j^ and the participation of God is to know God and to enjoy 
 cap. 37. his goodness ! " 
 
 " The glorj' of God is living man, and the life of man 
 Ibid. is the vision of God." 
 
 " Eveiy prophecy, before the event, is an enigma and 
 a contradiction (^ai/nXoyia.) to men. When the time comes 
 ^.^ and what is prophecied takes place, then it obtains the 
 
 cap. 43. exactest explanation, (aK/>i?«o-TaT>)? €^riyri<reai) ." 
 
 " On those who believe not, but despise him, God 
 brings blindness, as the sun, his workmanship, does on 
 those who, for some infirmity of the eyes, cannot look 
 much on the light ; but to those who beheve him and 
 
IRF,N;t;US. 
 
 115 
 
 follow him, he grants a fuller and a greater illumination 
 
 of mind." '.^j'' "jj, 
 
 " If God therefore, the foreknower of all things, has 
 even now deUvered up as many as he knew would not helieve, 
 to their own infidehty, and has turned away his face from 
 such, leaving them in the darkness which they have chosen 
 for themselves ; what wonder is it, if even then he de- 
 livered up Pharaoh, who would not believe, together with 
 those who were with him, to their own infidelity ? " Whether jbij 
 this view consists with Scripture and reason, may possibly 
 be doubted by some. 
 
 " Every word (omnis sermo) will appear to him, who 
 may read the Scripture diligently, to be with those who 
 are Presbyters in the Church, with whom is the apostoli- ^'''■59 
 cal doctrine." This is wholly to identify the Church doc- 
 trine with the Scripture. 
 
 " True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles : and 
 the ancient constitution (a-va-Trrj/jLa, system) of the Church, 
 even the character of the body of Christ, is according to 
 the successions of Bishops, to whom they delivered the 
 Church which is in every place ; (in which) there is the 
 fullest handling (tractatio plenissima) of the Scriptures, 
 having reached us, being preserved without fiction, receiv- 
 ing neither addition nor diminution (neque additamentum 
 neque ablationem recipiens,) — and the reading without falsi- 
 fication, — and the legitimate and diligent exposition accord- 
 ing to the Scriptures (secundum Scripturas expositio leg^- 
 tima et diligens) without danger and without blasphemy, — 
 and the chief gift of love, which is more precious than 
 knowledge, more glorious than prophecy, and far more 
 eminent than all other gifts." Here we have " the fullest cap. 63. 
 1 2 
 
116 
 
 IREN^US. 
 
 handling of the Scriptures," without any " addition or 
 diminution," and a "legitimate exposition," not according 
 to tradition, but " according to the Scriptures." 
 
 " We, following the one and only true God as our 
 teacher, and having his words as the rule of truth, (regulam 
 ^.^ . veritatis habentes ejus sermones) we all do say the same 
 cap. 69. things on the same subjects." 
 
 " As many as fear God, and believe in the advent of his 
 Son, and set by faith the Spirit of God in their hearts, 
 these may be justly said to be such men (that is, as have 
 the Spirit,) being both clean, and spiritual, and living 
 to God ; because they have the Spirit of the Father, who 
 cap. 9. cleanses man, and elevates him to the life of God." 
 
 " Since without God's Spirit we cannot be saved, the 
 apostle exhorts us to preserve by faith and holy con- 
 versation, the Spirit of God, lest being destitute of the 
 Ibid. Holy Spirit, we should lose the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 " The win of the intelligent soul is the reason that is 
 within us, as a power ha\'ing authorit}- over itself. The 
 win is a desiderative mind, and an intellective desire, assent- 
 Frag. Ser to what is desired,— OeXvjo-i? ea-n vov^ oj>€KTi(CO?, Kai Ita- 
 de Fide. yovjrtKij o/jefi^, Tfo? to fifXijfifv emvevov<ra." 
 
117 
 
 VII. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 February 22, 1838. 
 
 Tof^ Kara, aXriBeiav euo-fjSef? Kai ftXoa-ofovi; jAovov TaXijflf? 
 
 TijAif.v Kai errepyeiv o Xoyo? vi^ayopevei, Ttapairovf^evovi; So^af? 
 
 vaXaiaiv e^aKoXovOdv dv (favXat oiaiv. — " Reason prescribes, 
 
 that the godly according to truth, and philosophers, should 
 
 value and love only what is true, declining lo follow the 
 
 opinions of the ancients, if they be worthless." — Justin 
 
 Martyr. Apol. i. 
 
 sect. 2. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 I have now completed my review of the Fathers of the 
 two first centuries, at least of the principal Fathers, there 
 being none else whose works are of any importance, especially 
 on the subjects which I propose to discuss, that is. Baptism, 
 and the Lord's Supper. I have also examined the works 
 and fi-agmentary remains of those I have not expressly re- 
 viewed, and I find nothing in them on these subjects addi- 
 tional to what the Fathers I have reviewed contain. My 
 present subject is Baptism. 
 
118 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 Neither Clement, nor Polycarp, nor Ignatius, contain any 
 thing very particular on this point. In Clement's first, and 
 best, and longest epistle, I find no reference to Baptism. In 
 
 his second, he calls Baptism a " seal," which he exhorts us 
 Clement. . ^ 
 
 to keep "without spot." In Polycarp, there is no mention 
 Polycarp. q£ Baptism. Ignatius, in his seven epistles, very slightly 
 Ignatius, refers to it but in three places, and that in no way favourable 
 to the erroneous views of after-ages. All these men seem 
 to have acted in this instance somewhat like the apostles in 
 their writings, who have said comparatively but little either 
 on Baptism or on the Lord's Supper, other things having 
 been deemed of much greater importance. These being 
 outward signs and seals, they attended mostly to what these 
 signified and sealed. They would have doubtless done 
 otherwise, had they viewed them in the same light with the 
 Oxford Divines. 
 
 But when we come to the wild, incoherent, and cabalistic 
 efi^usions of Barnabas, or to the almost insane and fatuitous 
 extravagances of Hermas, we meet with what is verv fanciful, 
 whimsical and exaggerated. What follow's from Bar- 
 Sect II "^^^^'^ epistle, is of this kind. It is, as will be seen, an 
 interpretation of prophecy, and not an apostolic tradition ; 
 an interpretation the strangest that can well be conceived. 
 " Let us now inquire whether the Lord took care to manifest 
 anything beforehand concerning waler and the cross. Now 
 for the former of these, it is written to the people of Israel, 
 how they shall not receive that Baptism which brings to for- 
 giveness of sins ; but shall institute another to themselves 
 that cannot. For thus saith the Prophet : Be astonished , O 
 heaven, and let the earth tremble at it, because this people 
 have done two great and wicked things ; they have left me. 
 
BAPTISM, 
 
 119 
 
 the fountain of living waters, and have digged for themselves 
 broken cisterns, that can hold no water." Then he quotes 
 portions of Isaiah xvi. 1, 2; xlv. 2; xxxiii. 16, 17, and 
 proceeds thus : — " And again he saith in another Prophet, 
 He that doeth these things, shall be like a tree, planted by the 
 currents of water, which shall give its fruit in its season, <SfC. 
 And then he goes on to the end of the Psalm, and appends 
 these observations, but how they apply I cannot under- 
 stand : — " Consider how he has joined both the cross and the 
 water together. For this he saith ; Blessed are they who, 
 putting their trust in the cross, descend into the water ; for 
 they shall have their reward in due time : then, saith he, wiU 
 I give it them." How inapplicable and incoherent is the 
 whole ! After a few hnes, he proceeds thus : — " In like 
 manner does another Prophet speak ; The land of Jacob was 
 the praise of all the e«rM, magnifying thereby the vessel of 
 His Spirit : and what follows ? And there was a river run- 
 ning on the right hand, and beautiful trees grew by it ; and 
 he that shall eat of thern shall live for ever. The significa- 
 tion of which is this, — That we go down into the water full 
 of sins and pollutions ; but come up again bringing forth 
 fruit ; having in our hearts the fear and hope which is in 
 Jesus, by the Spirit." On such authorities as these do the 
 divines of the Oxford Tracts build their system ! If they 
 are men of wisdom, they should not go to folly for support. 
 
 As to Hermas, he fairly outdoes these divines. They have 
 yet to make some progress before they come up to him ; for 
 he is yet some degrees before them. " I asked her," he says, 
 "Lady, why is the tower (the Church) built upon the water ? 
 She replied, I said before to thee, that thou wert very wise, 
 to inquire dihgently concerning the building; therefore, thou 
 
120 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 shall find the truth. Hear, therefore, why the tower is built 
 upon the water ; because your life is and shall be saved by 
 water." Thus the foundation of the Church is water! and 
 not that laid by the apostles and prophets. In the quotation 
 which I have already given in a former letter, he makes the 
 ancient saints, those under the Old Testament, to partake of 
 Baptism in their departed state. How disembodied spirits 
 could be baptized with materieJ water, is a question which, 
 perhaps, never occurred to him. However, the only term 
 he gives to Baptism is " seal," in which he is not wrong; 
 only he connects a wrong idea with it, making it a sort of 
 mark, instead of a confirmatory emblem. 
 
 Relieving myself and my readers from these reveries, I 
 shall proceed to the works of J ustin Martyr. The account 
 he gives of Baptism is very full, and on the whole satisfac- 
 tory. The following extracts from his jirst Apology, con- 
 tain, substantially, every thing he has said on the subject ; — 
 
 " And how we dedicate ourselves to God, having been made 
 new (xaivoTToiiiBei/Tei;) by Christ, we shall also explain, lest by 
 leaving out this, we should seem to do any thing amiss in the 
 narrative. Whosoever are persuaded and believe that those 
 things taught and spoken by us are true, and imdertake to 
 be able so to live, are taught to pray, and to ask, while 
 fasting, of God, the remission of past sins, we at the same 
 time praying and fasting with them. Then, they are led by 
 us where water is, and according to the regeneration by which 
 we ourselves have been regenerated, they are regenerated : 
 for, in the name of the Father of the universe and Lord God, 
 and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, 
 they then undergo the washing which is bv water (to tv t&j 
 viari Toie Xoi/Tpoi- Trotonvrai) : for Christ has Said, Except ye 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 121 
 
 be regenerated (avayfi/vridyire) ye shall not enter into the Apol. i. 
 kingdom of heaven. — Since, being ignorant of our first ge- **' 
 neration, we were bom from necessity, and were brought 
 up in evil customs and wicked practices, that we may not 
 continue the children of necessity and of ignorance, but 
 that being those of choice and knowledge, we may obtain 
 by water the remission of the sins which we have before 
 committed, the name of the Father of the universe and Lord 
 God, is called over him who chooses (tw eXo/tevia) to be re- 
 generated, and who repents of his sins, and we say over him 
 that is to be washed this name alone (that is, of the Father,) 
 when we lead him to the washing ; for no one can give a 
 name to the ineffable God ; and if any should dare to say 
 that there is a name, he is mad with desperate madness. 
 And this washing is called illumination (y«TiV,«o?), since 
 those who learn these things are in mind illuminated. He 
 who is illuminated is washed (o <paTi%oiJ.(i'oi; Xoverai) also in 
 the name of Christ Jesus, who was crucified under Pontius 
 Pilate, and in the name of the holy Ghost, who, through 
 the prophets, fore-annomiced the things concerning 
 Jesus." — "We, after thus washing him who has been jj^.^j 
 persuaded and given his consent, bring him to those called 
 brethren, where they have met together, about to join fer- 
 vently in common prayers for ourselves, and for the illumi- 
 nated, and for all others everywhere, that we may be worthy 
 to learn true things, and be found by works good citizens, 
 and keepers of what has been commanded, that we 
 may be saved with an everlasting salvation." There is 
 a translation of this Apology by one Reeves ; but it is very 
 loose and hiaccurate in these and other parts of it. 
 
 The foregoing account is full and distinct, more so than 
 
122 BAPTISM. 
 
 any other we have during the two first centuries, and not 
 liable to much objection. There are two or three things 
 added to the scriptural account of baptism. The formula, 
 In the name of the Father, &c., is increased. The expres- 
 sions added were no doubt added on account of the heretics, 
 who professed another god, beside the Creator, and denied 
 the actual sufferings of Christ, and rejected the prophetic 
 Spirit, Another addition is fasting ; there being no baptism 
 recorded in Scripture, in which this is enjoined. And there 
 is another term given to it— illumination. The reason 
 given takes away much of the objection to it ; it was so 
 given, because " the illuminated was washed," and not be- 
 cause the washed was on that account illuminated. 
 
 As to Irenceus, we meet with nothing in him that is 
 Irena!us ^^^ditional, except it be a singular idea respecting the 
 necessity of the baptismal water with regard to our bodies : 
 his words are, " Our bodies have received by washing 
 Lib. iii. (lavacrum) that unity which belongs to incorruption ; but 
 ^■ap- If- our souls, by the Spirit." He calls Baptism regene- 
 ration several times. — The only terms then given to 
 this ordinance during the two first centuries, were re- 
 generation, seal, and illumination : and Justin has des- 
 cribed in a particular manner the way in which it was 
 administered. 
 
 I shall now notice the mode in which it was administered 
 in the two succeeding centuries, and also some of the 
 Dr Cave - "^"^^^ given to it. The tenth chapter in Dr. Cave's Primi- 
 Prim. tive Christianity/ is distinctly on this subject —the adminis- 
 nstian. Baptism in " the primitive Church." His 
 
 references clearly show, that his account takes in especially 
 the third and fourth centuries. For the sake of brevity. 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 123 
 
 I shall select certain particulars, which will be sufficient to 
 convey a correct view of its administration : — 
 
 1 . The time for baptizing was mostly confined to Easter 
 and Whitsuntide. 
 
 2. The candidate was made to stand with his face towards 
 the west, the supposed place of darkness, when he was in- 
 terrogated on the renunciation of the devil and his works ; 
 and when he renounced the devil, he was to stretch out his 
 hand, as it were in defiance of him. This renunciation 
 was made twice, before the congregation and at the font. 
 
 3. He YiSiS then exorcised. Dr. Cave's words are these : — 
 " After this there was a kind of exorcism, and an insuffiation 
 or breathing in the face of the person baptized, (which St. 
 Austin calls a most ancient tradition of the Church,) by 
 which they signified the expeUing of the evil spirit, and the 
 breathing in the good Spirit of God." And all this after the 
 person had renounced the devil with the uplifted hand of 
 defiance ! ! 
 
 4. The candidate being stript of his garments, was then 
 nnointed with oil, " a ceremony," says Cave, " of an early 
 date." 
 
 5. Together with this the sign of the cross was made on 
 the forehead. 
 
 6. Then followed the trine immersion : the person was 
 immerged in water at the naming of each person of the 
 Trinity. 
 
 7. After this immersion, another anointing took place. 
 
 8. Then the candidate had a white garment given him, 
 which he was to wear for a whole week ; and then it was 
 to be deposited in the church. 
 
 What an accumulation of ceremonials do we find here ! 
 
124 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 Not one of which is mentioned in the Scriptures in con- 
 nexion with Baptism, nor even in the account which 
 Justin gives us of this ordinance in the year 150, the date 
 of his first Apology. How came they to be adopted, and 
 whence were they borrowed ? From tradition, of course, 
 if we beheve the Papists and the Oxford divines. They 
 were handed down from the apostles : though it cannot 
 be shown in which way. They must have been conveyed 
 by some hidden and underground channel ; for we cannot 
 find any traces of them in the second centur^^ We are 
 not left, however, to what is conjectural on this head : for 
 what the Fathers themselves say, clearly proves how they 
 came into use. Some of them evidently originated in fan- 
 ciful applications of Scripture expressions ; some proceeded 
 from Jewish ceremonies and traditions ; and some from 
 heathen practices. Their different sources were similar to 
 those of the hodge-podge of Mahomedanism, to which the 
 practices of the primitive Church had very probably given 
 the bad example. The particular appointment of Easter 
 and Whitsuntide, was an attempt to assimilate the Gospel 
 to the Jewish dispensation : it was " the observjmce of 
 days," which the apostle expressly disapproves. The re- 
 nunciation of the de\'il with the face to the tvest, was 
 borrowed either from the heathens, or from Jewish 
 traditions. The exorcism was derived from the Jews, 
 for we have proof that it was practised by them. It 
 was also a heathen practice. The unction has also a 
 double origin. Some of the Fathers fancifully refer it 
 to Scripture, and some to the heathen practice of anoint- 
 ing their champions for the games ; and Irenaeus men- 
 tions it as used by heretics in his day. — The sign of 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 125 
 
 the cross, as Dr. Cave reports from Tertullian, was " no 
 law of Christ, but brought in by a pious custom." The 
 trine immersion was a refined improvement on Scripture, 
 an addition, not countenanced by anything it contains, and 
 introduced, as it appears, after Justin's time, for I can find 
 in him no allusion to it. The white garment was a fan- 
 ciful application of the words, " putting on Christ," and 
 of "the white robes" mentioned in Rev. vii. 13. Of 
 laying it up in the Church, I can find no precedent, 
 except it be the keeping of the linen clothes of the priests 
 in the temple. It may have been some heathen custom. 
 
 Such a number of new ceremonies must have been ac- 
 companied with new ideas : and the probability is, that 
 these ideas preceded for the most part rather than followed 
 the ceremonies. The fancies of Barnabas and Hermas, 
 and of similar characters, had no doubt gained ground, 
 and increased as they roUed down the descent of time, and 
 by degrees became embodied in external rites. Nor is it 
 improbable that some of the extravagant words applied to 
 the ordinance, arose from the very imposing appearance it 
 had attained, when surrounded with so many pompous 
 ritual observances. And it is fi'om expressions, derived 
 evidently fi-om such an origin as this, — some, the progeny of 
 extravagant fancies which led to the introduction of cere- 
 monials, — and some, arising from these imposing cere- 
 monials when introduced— it is from such expressions as 
 these that we are to obtain, it seems, a scriptural view of 
 Baptism ! If the writers of the Oxford Tracts wish to 
 tell us what the Fathers thought of Baptism, let them do 
 so ; but let them not tell us such a manifest falsehood, as 
 that their view of it is the view of Scripture. If it was, 
 
126 
 
 lAI'TISM. 
 
 how came they to add so much to the outward rite ? Why 
 did they give such an imposing appearance to it, having 
 borrowed ceremonials for the puipose both from Jews and 
 Gentiles, when, according to Scripture, and according 
 to the manner in which it was administered by the apos- 
 tles and others in their time, it was the simplest ordinance 
 that coidd possibly be ? When it was administered by 
 the apostles, there were no fixed seasons — no fasting — no 
 turning to the west with an uplifted hand to defy the 
 devil — no anointing of the body after the manner of cham- 
 pions — no crossing of the forehead with the ointment — no 
 insufflation or breathing out the devil after the person had 
 defied him with uplifted hand— no white garment — and 
 none afterwards laid up in the church. And these persons, 
 who have added such strange things to the ordinance, not 
 to be equalled by any ceremonials introduced even by 
 Mahomet the false prophet, are those who are to give us 
 as it appears, a sober, correct, and scriptural view of 
 Baptism ! Shame on you, men of Oxford ! And had it not 
 been for you, it would not have been necessary now to 
 disclose the weaknesses and follies of these venerable 
 ancients. But remember, that to choose follies and imi- 
 tate extravagances, is far less excusable, under the favour- 
 able circumstances of our age, than to invent or adopt and 
 propagate them at first. 
 
 Without alluding to whole passages from the Fathers, 
 I shall mention some of the expressions they apphed to 
 baptism. They are such as these— illumination, bounty or 
 gift (xapio-;i>ca), absolution, redemption, the clothing of 
 incorruption (afSapaiai; €vSv//ia), unction, consummation, 
 viaticum, &c. Some of these words seem clearly to be con- 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 127 
 
 nected with the ceremonials, wliicli had been added, such 
 as " unction," and the " clothing of incorruption." " Re- 
 demption " was derived, probably, from the heretics, for 
 Irenseus tells us expressly in his first book that some 
 of them called their baptism by that word: — " tovto civai Lib.i.c.18. 
 T5JV aircXuT/jiiio-o BeXovtrt— they wish this to be (deemed) 
 redemption." Their baptism was also accompanied with 
 ointment ; and it is not unlikely that this gave rise to the 
 custom of anointing before baptism, afterwards adopted by 
 the primitive Church. Baptism was called " viaticum," 
 a voyage provision, because they used to baptize persons 
 on their death-bed, a custom which, as it was often prac- 
 tised, served no other purpose but that of promoting the 
 most awful delusion. 
 
 Tlie vagrant spirit of superstition led many of the 
 Fathers to very strange and incongruous notions ; so that 
 they entertained various and differing opinions respecting 
 this ordinance. Some, as Augustine, maintained, that 
 unbaptized infants could not be saved. Others, a? Gregory 
 Nazianzen, allotted to them a middle state, which was 
 neither hell nor heaven. Cyprian maintained, that the 
 minister possesses the regenerating power. It was on this 
 ground that he held the necessity of baptizing those that had 
 been baptized by heretics ; for that they, not having the Holy 
 Ghost, could not convey him. This was his main argu- 
 ment. Tertullian held, that the water was imbued with 
 a sanctifying power ; and he as well as Augustine held 
 also, that in cases of necessity a layman might justly bap- 
 tize. He indeed maintained, that the laity possessed the 
 right to baptize, only it was their duty to waive it out of 
 respect and deference to those who were appointed minis- 
 
128 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 ters. Many of the Fathers held, that forgiveness was 
 scarcely attainable by those who sinned after baptism, 
 falsely hiterpreting the expression, " being once en- 
 lightened," in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and referring 
 it to baptism. Thus, by " adapting to their own notions 
 apostolic words," as the heretics in Irenseus's time did, 
 without regarding " the order and context," they intro- 
 duced a false opinion, wholly inconsistent with the whole 
 tenour of Scripture ; and by thus imitating the heretics, 
 they " loosened the members of truth." And this strange 
 idea it was that brought in the long and cumbrous train 
 of penances, and those penances engendered the notion, 
 that they were in some way expiatory and meritorious. 
 The penitent was kept in a state of penance for years, and 
 sometimes for hfe. How inconsistent was this with what 
 Paul recommended as to the offender in the Corinthian 
 Church. But to give some idea to my readers of the fan- 
 tastic reveries of some of the Fathers on the subject of 
 baptism, I shall set down some extracts from Tertullian's 
 De Baptismo. 
 
 Tertullian " ^^PP^ Sacrament of our water! by which, being 
 washed from the faults of former blindness, we are made 
 free for eternal life. But we, little fishes* .... are 
 born in water, nor are we otherwise saved than by remain- 
 Ue Bapt. ing in water." He proceeds then, as the Oxford Tracts 
 Sect I men do, in speaking of men's want of faith as to the effects of 
 water, and refers the matter to the Almighty, with whom 
 nothing is impossible. And alluding to the Spirit, " mov- 
 
 * What is left out here borders so much on profaneness, that I choose 
 rather to mention it in a note and in his own words ; — secundum ixSw 
 nostrum Jesum Christum. 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 1-29 
 
 on the face of the waters," he goes on thus : — " Thou hast, 
 O man, in the first place, to venerate the age of waters, 
 because it is an old substance ; and then the dignity, be- 
 cause it was the seat of the Divine Spirit, being doubtless 
 then more acceptable than other elements. 'WTien inhabi- 
 tants were given to the world, the command was first to 
 the waters to bring forth living things (animas). The 
 first liquid brought forth what might live, lest it should 
 seem wonderful in baptism that waters knew how to ani- 
 mate (animare noverunt)." But all this, it seems, is not Sect. ."i. 
 sufficient : neither the age nor the dignity of water, nor 
 its capacity to animate, will be enough, without some ad- 
 ditional virtue being given to it. Tliis, however, is supplied : 
 for he says, — " Tlie Spirit from heaven comes down im- 
 mediately (that is, after the offered prayer,) and remains 
 on the waters, sanctifying them by itself ; and being thus 
 sanctified, they drink in (combibunt) the power of sanc- 
 tifying." But he is not satisfied with even this, for he 
 brings down an angel too to medicate the waters :— " The 
 waters," he says, " being medicated through the interven- 
 tion of an angel, the spirit (that is, of man) is washed 
 corporally (corporaliter diluitur) in the waters, and the 
 flesh is spiritually cleansed in the same (spiritualiter mun- 
 datur)." Sect. 4. 
 
 This is surely enough, if anything can be so, to produce 
 a surfeit even in the writers of the Oxford Tracts. If they 
 can swallow, and digest, and feed on such strange vagaries, 
 it appears to me that the only suitable situation for them is 
 on the banks of the Ganges. For in this country we have no 
 such " medicated waters," as Tertulhan mentions, such as 
 can "corporally" wash spirits, and "spiritually" cleanse 
 
 K 
 
130 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 the flesh, nor any such waters as " drink, or suck in the 
 power of sanctifying." The Ganges, and some other 
 rivers in India, are the only rivers, which, according to 
 report, contain such waters. Are we to be plunged again 
 into the darkness of heathenism } 
 
 As the Fathers often symbolized what is plain, and what 
 is to be taken only in its literal sense, so they sometimes 
 literalized what is symboUcal and figurative. They dealt 
 often with what is figurative ; as the heretics did, according 
 to Irenaeus, with what is paraboUcal. They interpreted 
 figurative language literally, without regarding the con- 
 current testimony of Scripture ; and by thus introducing 
 " o])posing truths, they destroyed the analog)' of faith, 
 and " loosened the members of truth. " Hence their 
 erroneous views on baptism. They interpreted symbolical 
 language literally, and by this means they were led to 
 ascribe to the outward ordinance what belongs to that which 
 it represents. For instance, the expression, " Wash away 
 thy sins," has been taken in a way inconsistent with other 
 plain declarations of Scripture. Who washes away sins 
 really, and actually, and effectually, but God by his Spirit, 
 and that through faith in Christ ? This is what the whole 
 voice of Scripture confirms. Now in what sense was 
 Paul to wash away his sins } In what other way, but 
 symbolically ? He was to use the symbol, calling upon 
 God at the same time to do that for him which the sym- 
 bol represented. Again, •' the washing of regeneration" 
 has been misapprehended in a similar way : some render 
 the word, bath, but very wrongly, for there was nothing 
 then resembling any such thing, no font, no baptistry ; 
 they baptized in rivei s and ponds till the end of the second 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 century. The language of the ordinance is used, but it is 
 to be understood spiritually, as the language of circum- 
 cision is to be taken in the following and similar passa- 
 ges, — " The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart ;" 
 that is, he will do to thine heart what is symbolized in 
 circumcision. The language of the ordinance is here 
 taken, but what the ordinance represents and symbolizes 
 is intended. And " the renewing of the Spirit " which 
 follows, expresses its subsequent and abiding influence 
 in the progressive renewal of the soul. Regeneration 
 is the first act; to be born of God, or of the Spirit, is 
 the commencement : but the renewing is the continued 
 operation of the Spirit. There is nothing in the context 
 to call our attention to baptism. 
 
 Another thing to be remarked in the Fathers is this — 
 they drew their conclusions often from no sound premises, 
 and sometimes from no premises at all ; as in the case of 
 John iii. 5. They seem to have inferred fi'om this text 
 the inseparable connexion between baptism and regenera- 
 tion. And so do the Oxford divines after them, like the 
 blind, following blind guides. Our Saviour says, " Ex- 
 cept a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot 
 enter into the kingdom of God." The only thing de- 
 clared is, that they are both necessary, not indeed for 
 heaven, but for the kingdom of God in this world, the 
 denial of which is another great mistake of the Fathers. 
 There is nothing said about their necessary connexion, and 
 yet it is upon the proof that this text is supposed to afl^ord, 
 that this connexion is maintained ! The Fathers have so 
 interpreted the passage, this must therefore be the true 
 iense ! Tliey have drawn tliis conclusion, though thev 
 
132 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 had nothing to draw it from ! This is surely notliing else 
 but an addition to Scripture, made by uninspired men : 
 and it is upon this miscalled scriptural foundation, which 
 is no other than a sandy foundation constructed by the 
 Fathers, that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration is 
 built ! and this text is brought in, and they " speciously 
 adapt " their fable to it, after the fashion of the heretics, 
 that it " might not appear to be without evidence." The 
 Fathers might have thought of instances contravening 
 their interpretation. If there were none in their days, 
 which probably was not the case, they might have re- 
 membered Simon Magus, who was born of water, but 
 clearly not born of the Spirit, otherwise Peter would not 
 have told him what he did. He could not have been bom 
 of the Spirit, and yet be in the gaU of bitterness and in 
 the bond of iniquity, except spiritual birth be something, 
 and yet nothing, as Bishop Bethell represents it : for he 
 maintains that it takes place in all infants that are bap- 
 tized, on what authority, that is worth any thing, it 
 remains to be shewn ; but when he comes to tell us what 
 it is, his negatives so fuUy balance his affirmatives, that we 
 find nothing left, but the mere " shadow of a shade," and 
 scarcely so much. 
 
 The passage in St. John, referred to above, requires fur- 
 ther notice. In the " Plain Tracts for Critical Times," 
 lately published, this text is considered at large, and the 
 subject is handled witli great acumen and force of argu- 
 ment. The particular view given of the passage is some- 
 what new, but it wholly corresponds with the theory 
 and facts of divine truth ; which is not the case with 
 tlie opposite view, entertained and abetted by the writers 
 
iAPTISM. 
 
 133 
 
 of the Oxford Tracts. There is every thing in the con- 
 text, in the expressions used, and in the general doctrine 
 of Scripture, in favour of the explanation given in the 
 " Plain Tracts," while the context, the expressions used, 
 and the general doctrine of Scripture, are all opposed to 
 the view given by the Oxford Tracts ; and which is not 
 countenanced by any thing, but by the opinions of some 
 of the Fathers. But this is not the only instance in 
 which the Fathers are brought forward to make the Scrip- 
 ture say what it does not say, and what is inconsistent 
 with the context, and with the general tenor of divine 
 truth. An impartial consideration of the whole passage, 
 and of its manifest design and object, cannot fairly lead us 
 to any other conclusion than that stated in the Plain 
 Tracts ; which is, that the purpose for which the water and 
 the Spirit are necessary, is, in order to become the osten- 
 sible members of God's kingdom or Church here on 
 earth. The importance given to Baptism was no doubt 
 on the ground of its being a public act by which a con- 
 fession of Christ is made ; which seems to be one of the 
 main designs of the ordinance. 
 
 It may not be amiss to advert briefly to the language of 
 this passage. In a previous verse, " to be born again," 
 or, " from above," is said to be necessary in order to 
 " see the kingdom of God," that is, as the word often 
 means, in order to comprehend, understand or perceive 
 the kingdom of God. But in the verse in dispute, tlie 
 water is added to the Spirit, the author of the New Birth ; 
 and then the vvord " see," is changed into " enter " — " lie 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God." It seems that 
 the addition made, rendered the change necessary. It is 
 
134 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 most evident that the expression, " the kingdom of God," 
 has different significations as used in different connections. 
 Its meaning is to be determined by the context, and by the 
 terms employed in connection with it. " The kingdom of 
 God is within you " — " he cannot see the kingdom of 
 God" — "he cannot eJiter into the kingdom of God." The 
 very language used requires, in these and other instances, 
 that a different meaning should be admitted. ^Hiat is 
 clearly meant, in the first instance, is the reigning power 
 of God in the heart, influencing and regulating the mo- 
 tives, elevating and strengthening the affections, directing 
 and controlling all the movements within. In the second 
 instance a different idea is conveyed, as connected with 
 seeing or comprehending, then its blessings and privi- 
 leges are clearly intended ; the treasures of the kingdom 
 are the things meant, as being objects of sight or spiritual 
 perception, and enjoyment. But in the third instance, 
 there is still another thing contemplated, which is im- 
 plied, and necessarily implied in the term to " enter." 
 We cannot enter into that kingdom which is within us ; 
 for it has entered into us. We cannot very properly be 
 said to enter into blessings and privileges, which we are to 
 comprehend and enjoy. What then is that into which we 
 enter ? Tliat we may see the propriety of this, we must 
 attach an idea to " kingdom," quite different from the 
 two already given. We must view it as an associated 
 body, as a community joined together : and into God's 
 kingdom, in this sense it is that we can properly be said to 
 enter. And this is evidently its meaning in this passage. 
 
 Now it is quite possible for us to have the kingdom of 
 God within us, and to see the kingdom of God, and yet 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 13 
 
 not to enter into the kingdom of God ; that is, not to 
 join it in its associated form, which is the only meaning 
 it has, and ca)i have, when we speak of entering into 
 it ; while we may still enter into heaven, and be heirs of 
 everlasting glory. All the past history of God's people 
 affords a confirmation to this view. There were some 
 before the flood who " called upon the name of the Lord." 
 The kingdom of God was no doubt within them ; and they 
 saw, perceived and enjoyed its blessings and privileges : 
 but we have no reason to think that they entered into it 
 as a society, for we hear of no rite by which they were 
 united together as one religious community. The same 
 remark apphes to some after the deluge — to Melchisedec, 
 Lot, Job and his friends, and even to Abraham before he 
 was circumcised, and also to the thief on the cross. Bap- 
 tism is now necessary in order to become visible members of 
 God's kingdom on earth, but not indispensable for an ad- 
 mission into the kingdom of glory. 
 
 As to the necessity of baptism, our Church has most 
 wisely determined. It is astonishing how our justly vene- 
 rated Reformers, when their difficulties are considered, 
 had succeeded in throwing off the loads of rubbish which 
 had collected in the Church, even from early ages. They 
 represent baptism as generally necessary to salvation. 
 It being an outward ordinance, and a positive, and not 
 a moral command, its absolute necessity cannot on any 
 just grounds be maintained. Thousands have no doubt 
 been saved without it : and there is nothing in it that 
 is necessarily essential to the sanctification of the soul. 
 The obligation is derived only from a particular command, 
 and not from any essential connection between God and 
 
136 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 his creatures. Its obligation is exactly the same with 
 that of circumcision, it being an ordinance intended to 
 answer the very same purpose. That institution was 
 suspended for thirty years of the Israelites' stay in the 
 wUdemess : and there may be circumstances now which 
 would justify the non-observance of baptism ; as it is plainly 
 admitted even by the Fathers themselves, who entertained 
 such extreme notions respecting it. To interpret scrip- 
 ture rigidly in one particular, under a profession of high 
 pendix '■^^P^ct for its authority, without having regard to its 
 B b. general and concurrent import, has always been the prac- 
 tice of men engaged in the promotion of erroneous and 
 heretical sentiments. This was exactly the case with the 
 heretics of old, as Irenaeus plainly informs us. 
 
 Baptism is an ordinance, necessary to be observed when 
 practicable, as circumcision was. We generally deem 
 it so : and yet the Quakers do not deem it necessarj' ; 
 and they never observe it, for reasons evidently satis- 
 factory to their own minds ; not from any disrespect to 
 the Saviour's authority, but from a conviction that the 
 command is not now obligatory. And what is the re- 
 sult according to apparent evidence ? Most think them 
 wrong ; and yet they, as a body, afford as ample proofs 
 of possessing what the ordinance represents, as any body 
 of Christians who observe it. Many of them most evi- 
 dently possess all those graces and qualifications which fit 
 men for heaven. He who will deny this, will only prove, 
 that he himself is yet blind and ignorant of spiritual 
 things. The fruits of the Spirit being produced, is a clear 
 evidence of the Spirit's influence. And what does this 
 shew, but that God regards this neglect as one of those 
 
lAPTISM. 
 
 137 
 
 things which result from the imperfections of men in the 
 present state, and in this instance as in others, from pre- 
 judices occasioned by the abuse of the ordinance; and 
 that the neglect arising from principle, on a point not 
 affecting any thing necessarily essential to religion, is no 
 hindrance to that intercourse and communion which He 
 deigns to carry on with his people in this world, in order 
 to prepare them, and render them meet to dwell in his 
 presence for ever. 
 
 These obsei-vations are made, not for the purpose of 
 lessening a due and proper regard for baptism, but of 
 diminishing extreme and unwarrantable notions respecting 
 its benefits. I shall now conclude this letter with the 
 appropriate words of Justin in his dialogue with Tiyphon : 
 — " What is the benefit of that baptism, which makes the 
 flesh and the body only clean ? Let yom- soul be bap- 
 tized from wrath and from covetousness, from envy and 
 from hatred : and behold, the body will be clean." 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
138 
 
 VIII. 
 
 THE LORD-S SUPPER. 
 
 ccKoXovBtiv, aXXa &ea km toj; irap' exfiviiu htlayfA.aa-t. — I choOSe 
 Dial, cum rather not to follow men or the doctrmes of men, but God 
 sect. 80'. and the doctrines which are from him." — Justin Martp-. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 It is a matter worthy of observation, that the two sacra- 
 ments occupy but a very small share of attention from the 
 Apostles in their writings. Baptism, merely as an outward 
 ordinance, is not mentioned through the whole Epistles, ex- 
 cept in these three places, 1 Cor. i. 1 3 — 17 ; xv. 29 ; Eph. iv. 
 5 : and in the first it is referred to in such a way as to show its 
 comparative non-importance : in the second, the "baptiz- 
 ing for the dead," is the expression, and one of doubtful 
 meaning; and in the third there is only the mere assertion, 
 "that there is but one baptism." In the seven other instances 
 in which it is mentioned, the reference made to it is for the 
 purpose of showing its spiritual import; Rom. vi. 3 — 5: 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 1 Cor. xii. 13; Gul. iii. 27; Eph. v. 26; Col. ii. 12; Tit, 
 iii. 5 ; 1 Pet. iii. 21. It is never mentioned or alluded to, 
 in fourteen of the Epistles, nor in the Revelation. — And as 
 to the Lord's Supper, St. Paul alone refers to it, and that 
 only in two places,— the tenth and the eleventh chapters of 
 the first Epistle to the Corinthians, and then chiefly for the 
 purpose of correcting abuses connected with it. Neither 
 James, nor Peter, nor John (either in his Gospel, Epistles, 
 or Revelation), nor Jude, make the least mention of it, nor 
 allude to it, as I conceive, in any way. I state these facts, 
 in which I believe I am correct, and I am sure that I am 
 not far from being so, not with any design of depreciating 
 the due importance of these ordinances, but of showing that 
 the Apostles did not give them that prominence which some 
 are now disposed to do. Had the Apostles entertained such 
 high notions of them, as the men of the Oxford Tracts and 
 their friends seem to do, they would not have said so little res- 
 pecting them, especially when the very points mostly handled 
 by them embrace the very things typified in these ordinances. 
 They looked to the substance rather than to the shadow, 
 whilst these men do exactly the reverse. 
 
 If grace is communicated only or chiefly through these 
 rites, how was it that the Apostles made so little of them .'' 
 If these be the only means, or the principal means, or even 
 the common means, how came most of the Apostles never 
 to mention them, and how was it that none of their number 
 alluded much to them This is inexplicable on any other 
 ground that a Protestant can admit, but on this— that they 
 viewed them chiefly, as our church most justly represents 
 them, as " outward and visible signs of an inward and 
 spiritual grace." And they well knew how prone men are 
 
140 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 to make too much of outward signs and ordinances, and 
 therefore directed the whole force of their reasoning, comisel, 
 and exhortation, to enforce what these rites signify and 
 represent. If we allow these ordinances that importance 
 claimed for them by Papists and those papisticaUy inchned, 
 then we must conclude, as the Papists do, that the Apostles' 
 writings are very defective, and stand in need of being 
 supplemented by the Fathers. But the misfortime is, that 
 we must apply to the late rather than to the early Fathers. 
 We must leap over the two first centuries at least, yea, three 
 or four centuries, before we can possibly have the deficiency 
 made up. We have already seen that this is the case with 
 respect to baptism : for none except the cabahstic Barnabas 
 (or the writer of the epistle imder that name : for I can 
 scarcely believe the Barnabas mentioned in Scripture to be 
 its author), and the enthusiast Hennas, quoted as a great 
 authority in the Oxford Tracts, make up this deficiency in 
 any suitable degree. I shall now show that there is a 
 still greater dearth of materials as to the Lord's Supper. 
 
 Even Barnabas and Hermas fail us here : for they con- 
 tain nothing on the subject : there being not in them even 
 an allusion, that I can find, to this ordinance. Nor does 
 Clement or Polycarp say any thing on the point. Ignatius 
 is the only apostolic Father that alludes to it at all, and 
 that only ui two or three places. The sentence already 
 quoted in my fourth letter is the only objectionable one. He 
 indeed mentions the word altar several times ; and so does 
 Hermas, at least in one place. But Ignatius's " altar" is 
 the Church or Church-communion ; and Hermas's, is that 
 mentioned by Paul in Heb. xiii. 10; which is not on 
 earth but in heaven, so called in conformity with the idea of 
 
THE lord's supper 
 
 141 
 
 Christ's having entered into heaven, and liaving become "the 
 minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle." The 
 passage fi-om Hermas in his tenth "command," is this: 
 " For the prayer of a sad man has no efficacy to come up to 
 the altar of God. And I said to him, Sir, Why has not the 
 prayer of a sad man virtue to come up to the altar of God? 
 Because, said he, that sadness remaineth in his heart. "When, 
 therefore, a man's prayer shall be accompanied with sadness, 
 it will not suffer his requests to ascend pure to the altar of 
 God." The apostolic Fathers, therefore, fail to supply the ^' 
 supposed deficiency. I might indeed quote a passage even 
 from Ignatius, which is quite opposed to the views of the 
 writers of the Oxford Tracts. They interpret a portion of 
 the sixth chai)ter of St. John's Gospel in such a way as to 
 refer it, as the Papists do, to the Lord's Supper. The lan- 
 guage of Ignatius, in the following passage from his epistle 
 to the Romans, is nearly the same, but he evidently refers 
 not to the sacrament, but to spiritual things : — 
 
 " I take no pleasure in the food of corniption, nor in the Ignatius, 
 pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is 
 the flesh of Jesus Christ, of the seed of David ; and the 
 drink that I long for is his blood, which is uncorruptible love, 
 and perpetual life." He wrote this on his way to Rome, gect. 7. 
 and in an epistle in which he earnestly requests the Romans 
 not to exert their influence for his release. He could not, 
 therefore, have the sacrament at aU in view. It was spi- 
 ritual eating and drinking alone that he most evidently 
 contemplated : and with respect to the blood, his meaning 
 is expressly and explicitly stated. 
 
 The next author that contains any thing definitely on the 
 subject is Justin Martyr : and what he says is deserving 
 
142 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 of attention ; for, in his first apology, he undertakes to 
 give an explicit account of the ordinance, as in the case of 
 baptism. Tatian against the Greeks has nothing on the 
 subject. Athenagoras in his embassy has, I think, but one 
 sentence, and that is consistent with the \'iews of Justin. 
 I can find nothing to our purpose in Theophilus Antiochanus. 
 Justin's account is the fullest and the most explicit that can 
 be found in any writer of the second centuiy, not except- 
 ing Irenaeus. The words of Justin are the following : — 
 Justin. " Bread is brought to the president (icooea-TaTi) of the 
 brethren, and a cup of water and wine (x^xyia —wine mixed 
 with water) : and having received them, he sends up praise 
 and glory to the Father of the universe through the name 
 of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and offers a long thanks- 
 giving {evxa^ia-rtav tirt moXv naunai) for these things 
 vouchsafed by him. When he has finished the prayers 
 and thanksgiving, all the people present joyfully acclaim 
 (e-Kfvfvjfjiet,) saying. Amen. And Amen, in Hebrew means. 
 Be it so. When the president has thus given thanks, and 
 the people have joyfully acclaimed, they, who are by us 
 called deacons, give to each of those present to partake of 
 the bread and wine and water, which had been thanked for 
 
 (airo Tou enj^a^io-TjjflfVTo; a^TOv kcx.i omov Kat vSaro;), and they 
 
 carry away some to the absent. And this food (rpsf jj) is 
 called by us thanksgiving (evxaoia-Tta) ; of which it is not 
 lawful for any other to partake, but him who beheves that 
 the things taught by us are true, and who has been washed 
 with the washing which is for the remission of sins and unto 
 regeneration (et^ ayayevyyiaiy), and who so Uves as Christ has 
 taught. For we receive not these as common {Koiny) bread, 
 and common drink. But as Christ Jesus, our Sa^^our, 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 
 H3 
 
 having been made flesh through God's word, has both flesh 
 and blood for our salvation, so also have we been taught, 
 that the food, thanked for by the prayer of his word— tliat 
 this food, by which our blood and flesh after the change 
 (that is, from being common into what is not common) are 
 nourished, is both the flesh and blood of Jesus, who himself 
 was made flesh. For the Apostles, in the records made by 
 them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered that 
 Jesus commanded them, — that having taken bread, and 
 given thanks, he said. This do in remembrance of me ; this 
 is my body ; and that having likewise taken the cup and 
 given thanks, he said, This is my blood ; and that he im- 
 parted (these) to them only." In the following section he Apol. 1. 
 says, that after the acclaim. Amen, " a distribution (SiaSoo-i;) • 
 and a participation (//c«TaXvj»|/ii;) of the things thanked for, is 
 made as to each, and sent by the deacons to the absent." Sect. (il. 
 
 In this account, which is very explicit, we have these par- 
 ticulars : — Bread and wine mixed with water, were brought 
 to the president, — He offered praise and thanksgiving for 
 these gifts of God's providence, — The people expressed their 
 assent by a loud Amen ; — Then the deacons distributed to 
 those present, and carried away some to the absent, —And 
 the elements were taken in remembrance of Christ's passion . 
 This was all ; there was no consecration of the elements, 
 but merely the presenting of them as a thank-ofi'ering, or in 
 the words of Athenagoras, "a bloodless sacrifice" (a^aiiJiaKrov 
 6va-ia>). This was the whole ceremony. Then we have the 
 views of Justin on the subject, which appear to agree wholly 
 with Scripture : he indeed grounds them on Scripture, and 
 not on tradition. Consistently with this account is every 
 thing that Justin has said on the point. He indeed applies 
 
144 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 the word, sacrifice (dua-ia.), to this ordinance, but in the 
 figurative sense of thanks-giving or of a thank-offering, and 
 in no other, as the following passages from his Dialogue 
 most clearly show : — 
 Justin. "We, who all, as one man, believe, through the name of 
 Jesus, in God the Maker of the imiverse, having through the 
 name of his first-begotten Son, put off filthy garments, that 
 is, our sins, being purified as by fire through the word of 
 his calling — we are the true high-priestly (a^ixitpaTf/cov) 
 race of God, as God himself testifies, saying, that sacrifices, 
 wcll-pleasing to him and pure, shall be offered in every 
 2)lace among the nations. But God receiveth sacrifices 
 of none, except through his priests. Therefore all those, 
 who through his name offer the sacrifices which Jesus 
 Christ has enjoined to be made, that is, those made at the 
 thanksgiving of (or for) the bread and cup (eir( tij tvxa^nma. 
 Tov aprov Kat rov TroTvjpjoi;) in every place of the earth by the 
 Christians— (all those persons) God haxang preferred tes- 
 tifies to be well pleasing to him ; but the sacrifices that are 
 made by you, and through your priests, he rejects, saying, 
 
 / will not receive your sacrijices from your hands 
 
 Prayers and thanksgivings, done by the worthy, are alone 
 Sect. IIG, perfect (reXeiat //lOKaj) and well- pleasing to him." — " The 
 offering of fine flour, enjoined to be offered for those 
 cleansed from leprosy, was a type of the bread of thanks- 
 giving (rvTTO; Tov aprov ttj; fuj^apnTTias) which Jesus Christ 
 
 our Lord enjoined to make in commemoration (c^ avaf*i'»)o-ii') 
 of the passion which he endured for men whose souls are 
 cleansed from all wickedness ; that, at the same time, we 
 may thank God for having made this world, and all things 
 in it for man, and for having made us free from the evil in 
 
THE I.OIId's supper. 
 
 143 
 
 which we lived, and completely overthrown principalities 
 and powers, through him who became a sufferer according 
 to his will." S,,,.4j 
 
 Bread and wine, according to Justin, were a thank- 
 offering for the creation of the world, and for the salvation 
 of men, accompanied with the sacrifices of praise and thanks- 
 giving : and this offering, and these sacrifices, were con- 
 sidered as done, not only by the president, but also by all 
 present ; for he says that the Christians, yea, all of them, 
 were " the true high-priestly race of God," that they might 
 offer these sacrifices. And he brings a reason why they 
 must be so, for " God," he says, " receives sacrifices of 
 none, except through his priests." The views of Justin 
 scarcely come up to those of many Protestants ; much less do 
 they countenance anything favourable to Popery. His 
 views may be stated in two sentences, — the elements were 
 presented as a thank-offering, or a sacrifice of this kind, 
 accompanied with sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving for 
 the things of creation, and for the blessings of salvation; 
 and they were then taken in commemoration of Christ's suf- 
 ferings. Sacrifice, as applied by Justin, is intelligible, and 
 perhaps justifiable ; but through a gross perversion, it has 
 in after ages been adduced for the purpose of countenancing 
 the greatest of all impieties — the Popish transubstantiation. 
 
 The foregoing account of Justin's view of this Sacra- 
 ment, wholly corresponds with what Bishop Kaye says, 
 in his work on Justin's writings. His words are these : — 
 " With respect to the eucharist, we find that in Justin's Bp. Kaye'3 
 time water was mixed with the wine ; and that the presi- "^"'90' 
 dent, having taken the bread and the wine mixed with 
 water, offered up praises and thanksgivings to God ; that 
 
 L 
 
146 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 the deacons llicn delivered the bread and wine to all 
 present, and carried away a portion to those who were 
 absent." 
 
 The only author in the second century, besides those 
 already named, who speaks explicitly with respect to the 
 Lord's Supper, is Iren<eus. He has several references 
 to this subject in his works ; and his views, for the most 
 part, coincide with those of Justin. He had to do with 
 heretics, who denied the real incarnation of our Lord ; and 
 he very properly brings forward the sacramental institu- 
 tion to prove that our Saviour was really made flesh. 
 Tertullian, after him, made use of the same argument, 
 and some of his words, in his Fourth Book against Mar- 
 cion, and in the fortieth chapter, are these : — " The bread 
 ^Lfbl'lv*" received and distributed to his disciples he made his own 
 Cap. 40. body, by saying. This is my body, that is, the figure of my 
 body (figura corporis mei). But it could not be a figure, 
 unless there was a real body." This is Irenaeus's argu- 
 ment. But in this, as in some other instances, he carries 
 liis point beyond the limits of truth, from too great an 
 anxiety, as even Feuardentius admits on some other sub- 
 jects, to find answers to the heretics. He seems to hold 
 that the consecrated elements had some efiiect in immor- 
 talizing even our very bodies. " As the bread," he says. 
 Lib iv " ^"^^'^^ ^® earth, recei\dng the invocation of God, 
 
 Cap. 34. is no more common bread, but thank-ofi^ering {ivxafia-Tta,,) 
 consisting of two things, what is earthly and what is hea- 
 venly ; so our bodies, partaking of the thank-offering, are 
 no more corruptible (fOa^ta), having hope of the resurrec- 
 tion, which is for ever." It is a notion similar to what 
 he expresses respecting the effect produced by the water 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 
 147 
 
 at baptism on our bodies. With the exception of this 
 fanciful idea, what he says of the sacrament is not liable 
 to much objection, though there seems to have been in 
 his time an evident increase of importance attached to the 
 outward ordinance. 
 
 As in the case of baptism, so with respect to the Lord's 
 Supper, I shall avail myself of what we find in Cave's 
 Primitive Christianity . The eleventh chapter of his first 
 book is on this subject. He undertakes to speak, as to 
 this ordinance, of the persons, time, place, and manner of 
 its administration. I shall select the main particulars : — 
 
 1. The persons. — Those who administered it were the 
 pastors and governors of the Church. The distribution of 
 the elements, according to Tertullian, was made by the Cave's 
 presidents, but according to Justin, by the deacons. The ciuist. 
 practice, it seems, was variable and not uniform, xhe 
 communicants were the baptized, except those under cen- 
 sure ; and they continued so sometimes for life, a severity 
 whoUy inconsistent with Scripture. Newly-baptized in- 
 fants had the Sacrament also given to them ; on what 
 authority and for what good reason it is not easy to know. 
 The elements were also carried to the distant and to the 
 sick, the bread being dipped in the sacramental cup : and 
 in case of those under censures, if they had expressed a 
 desire to be reconciled to the Church, this bread dipt in 
 the cup was given them, sometimes even after they were 
 dead ! ! but this usage was abrogated afterwards by several 
 councils. The Christians also in early times kept by 
 them some parts of the Eucharist against emergent occa- 
 sions ! and gave and sent some to their ft-iends ; but 
 this custom was also abolished by councils. Now almost 
 L 2 
 
148 
 
 THE LORD S SUPPER. 
 
 all these uses made of the sacrament were very fooUsh and 
 strangely superstitious ; and yet they were the usages of 
 the primitive Church. 
 
 2. The time. — It was at first every day, or whenever 
 they assembled for pubUc worship ; then four times a 
 week — Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday; after- 
 wards every Sunday ; then every month ; and at last 
 thrice a year — Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide. This 
 is the universal consent of Fathers ! I do not blame the 
 primitive Church, but the boast of universal consent. 
 These were changes on a point which admits of them, it 
 being one of the many things left wholly to the discretion 
 of the Church, to be determined according to circum- 
 stances. There are those in our day who seem anxious to 
 revive the weekly communion. If such a thing tends to 
 spiritual edification, let it be done. But if the custom is 
 revived for the purpose of propagating a superstitious 
 reverence for the outward signs, and of deluding men with 
 the idea of something like the opus operalum, the attempt 
 is wicked, mischievous, and destructive, and our bishops 
 are in duty bound to put a stop to it. The pretence of 
 edification is of course made ; but then we must consider 
 the views and sentiments of such individuals, and if their 
 views are extravagant and superstitious, their object must 
 be of the same character. Our Saviour has only said, 
 " Do this in remembrance of me;" and did not say how 
 often. But then it is said, this was the practice in the 
 Apostles' times. Very true. But if this practice is bind- 
 ing, how came the primitive Church to change it ? And 
 if this practice is binding, so is the community of goods. 
 Let that also be revived. Besides, on this principle, we 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 
 must have no churches, nor chancels, nor altars, which 
 these men seem so fond of ; but we must celebrate the 
 ordinance in private houses, for this was the practice in 
 the Apostles' times. What a strangely inconsistent thing is 
 superstition ! Again, with respect to the time of the day, 
 there was a great variety in the primitive Church : Ter- 
 tullian says, that it was celebrated at supper-time, and 
 sometimes in the morning, before day. Cyprian pleads 
 strenuously for the morning, and the morning was after- 
 wards the time almost universally observed. This is 
 another point, in which there is no scriptural decision ; 
 but it is left wholly to the judgment and discretion of 
 the Church ; and any stir made by individuals about it 
 can only be ascribed either to weakness, ignorance, or 
 superstition. 
 
 3. The place. — It was instituted in an upper room in a 
 private house. It was celebrated in private houses in the 
 Apostles' time, and some time after, and during perse- 
 cutions, in vaults under ground, and at the tombs of mar- 
 tyrs. When churches were built, it was celebrated in 
 them, and in process of time, at the east-end, first on a v 
 table of wood, afterwards of stone, which was called by the "^Pg 
 Fathers, the altar. When it was that it attained this name. 
 Cave does not say. The Laodicean Council, and many 
 other councils, strictly forbade its celebration in private 
 houses, thus directly undoing the earliest practice. I find 
 
 no fault with them, but with those who stand for things 
 which are to be regulated by circumstances. 
 
 4. The manner. — The sacrament was administered after 
 the public service ; offerings, consisting, among other 
 things, of bread and wine, were then made by the people. 
 
150 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 and placed on the table by the minister. From these the 
 sacramental elements were taken ; and these supplied their 
 love-feasts, held at first before the sacrament, and at a 
 later time after it. Then the deacons brought water to 
 the bishop and presbyters to wash their hands, in imitation 
 of what the Psalmist says, " I will wash my hands in inno- 
 cency :" and they kissed one another. A prayer for all 
 persons and states was then offered, followed by responsive 
 petitions — theconsecratingprayer, and breaking of the bread. 
 Then the minister delivered the elements to the deacons, 
 and the deacons into the hands of the people, who re- 
 ceived them at one time in a reclining posture, afterwards 
 while standmg. We are not told by Dr. Cave when the 
 practice of kneeling commenced. The posture itself is of 
 no consequence ; for there is no rule, no command on the 
 subject : but it is probable that the increased reverence for 
 the ordinance introduced kneeling : but that reverence 
 being reduced in our church into its suitable measure, the 
 posture becomes immaterial ; only it is well, for order's 
 sake, that it should be uniform in every communion. 
 After this they sang hymns and psalms, the bishop prayed 
 and blessed the people, and they kissed each other the second 
 time, and parted. This account evidently includes the 
 practices of the third and fourth centuries ; for there are 
 many more ceremonies mentioned here, than what 
 Justin in the year 150 relates. It is amazing how fast and 
 how abundantly ceremonies grew in former times. They 
 were some of the most prolific things that belonged to 
 antiquity. And yet some would have us believe that they 
 were aU, or almost all, apostolic. 
 
 The foregoing account contains several things very ob- 
 
Tiiu lord's supper. 
 
 151 
 
 jectionablc. The customs were not uniform nor perma- 
 nent, but continually varying. The primitive Church of 
 one century differs widely from the primitive Church of 
 another century : and which of them are we to choose ? The 
 ceremonies were constantly on the increase : if some were 
 cUscontinued, a still greater number were introduced, till 
 the plain and simple ordinance as instituted by our Saviour 
 was fdmost lost in them. The ideas entertained of it of 
 course increased in proportion, till at last, in succeeding 
 ages, the monstrous dogma of Transubstantiation was 
 brought forth ; and being carefully nursed on the lap of 
 superstition, it was finally adopted by the whole body of the 
 Romish Church. It was the progeny of ceremonials early 
 introduced ; and let these ceremonials be renewed again, 
 and the same monster will rise again from them. The 
 writers of the Oxford Tracts seem to know this well ; for 
 they are anxious to increase rituals, and appear disposed 
 to think favourably of this strange doctrine. 
 
 These things being clearly before us, are we to be told 
 that the exposition of this ordinance is to be sought for 
 from the Fathers, or the primitive Church We have 
 the original documents, and we see that they deviated far 
 from them ; and are they the persons to teach us the mean- 
 ing of this sacrament } Are they who gave it to infants 
 and dead men, and kept by them parts of it for emergent 
 occasions, and introduced so many novelties in its celebra- 
 tion, making it more like a Jewish or a Heathen ordinance, 
 than a simple Christian institution — are they the men to 
 instruct us in its spiritual meaning and intention .'' Let 
 those who are intent on being deluded think so, if they 
 please : but let not the public be thus deluded. And let 
 
152 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 not the attempts made to " adapt " the primitive fables to 
 " apostoHc words," after the manner of the heretics, be 
 allowed to deceive any : but let all keep to the word of 
 God, interpreted consistently with itself, and receive the 
 simple meaning of the sacrament as there given, " This 
 do in remembrance of me " — " As often as ye eat this 
 bread and drink this cup, ye do shevj the Lord's death till 
 he come." And to shew what our act in eating and drink- 
 ing means, it is called (the thing signified being put for 
 the sign —a mode of speaking quite common in Scripture) 
 " the communion," or participation of the body and blood 
 of Christ, in the same way as to eat the Passover means 
 to eat the paschal lamb. It is an outward and visible 
 act, which represents what is inward, that is, the act of 
 faith ; and we profess thereby that we feed on Christ by 
 faith with thanksgiving. 
 John vii. To add importance to the eucharist, the Papists connect 
 27—63. ^-j-jj jj. pj^yj. j-j^g gixth chapter of St. John, and main- 
 tain that our Saviour speaks there of this institution : and 
 the divines of the Oxford Tracts seem disposed to do the 
 same. But such an interpretation is wholly illegitimate, 
 being consistent neither with the context, nor with the 
 order of time, nor with scriptural truth, nor with the ex- 
 planation which the passage itself contains. The context 
 cannot admit it. The discourse begins in the 27th verse; 
 and it is by separating a few verses from their connection, 
 that this interpretation gains some appearance of truth. 
 Our Saviour first speaks of the meat that endureth, which 
 he was destined to give. The Jews mentioned the manna, 
 and he took occasion to represent himself as the true 
 manna or bread of life, that came down from heaven, that 
 
THE lord's supper, 
 
 153 
 
 he might give Hfe unto the world ; and as he proceeded 
 with this subject, to give his hearers some idea of the 
 atonement, he refers to his flesh and blood as being this 
 bread of life, and speaks of the necessity of eating the 
 one and drinking the other, that they might not die but 
 live for ever. And he closes this representation of himself 
 as he began, by setting himself forth as the bread of life, 
 which must be eaten in order to obtain life. What 
 sort of eating he had in view is frequently mentioned. 
 Coming to him, seeing him, and believing in him, are 
 expressly stated : and with faith or believing, he several 
 times connects life and everlasting life ; and the same he 
 connects with eating the bread of hfe, and with eating 
 his flesh, and drinking his blood. What then is the ob- 
 vious conclusion, but that eating his flesh and drinking 
 his blood, is what is done by believing, or in other words, 
 that it is to " feed on him in our hearts by faith with Appendix, 
 thanksgiving ; " there being here evidently a similar use " ^^ 
 of language, as when drinking " the living water " is 
 mentioned, which means a partaking of divine grace by 
 faith ? According to an expression of Aiujustine, " Cre- 
 dere in eum est manducare panem vivum ; — to believe in 
 him is to eat the hving bread." 
 
 This interpretation is also wholly incongruous with 
 reference to time. It makes our Saviour to insist on the 
 necessity of that which had not yet been appointed, of 
 what was not even known in any degree, of what had no 
 existence, and of what therefore was wholly impracticable 
 and impossible. That that should be taught as necessary 
 for life, which was wholly unknown, having not been in- 
 stituted, is a notion which nothing but the strongest pre- 
 
 I 
 
154 
 
 THE lord's supper. 
 
 judice or the most deluded ignorance could ever entertain. 
 To anticipate and to realize future events, when revealed, 
 by faith, is practicable : but actually to eat and to drink 
 material elements by anticipation, when those elements are 
 not even known, and when there is no command to do so, 
 is an art and ingenuity, of which Papists, and such 
 divines as the writers of the Oxford Tracts, are alone 
 capable. 
 
 The sense introduced by this interpretation, is also 
 wholly inconsistent with Scripture. Eternal life is most 
 expressly connected here with eating his flesh and drink- 
 ing his blood. This cannot be true of the sacramental 
 eating and drinking : for that, as the Apostle warns us, 
 may be attended and followed by condemnation. The one 
 has eternal life inseparably connected with it, as it is evi- 
 dent from the language used ; but the other may produce 
 death. Besides, the end and purpose for which each is 
 said to be necessary, is essentially different. We are to 
 eat and drink, according to this passage, that we may not 
 die but live for ever : but we are to partake of the sacra- 
 mental elements for another end, in order to commemorate 
 the Saviour's death ; it is to be done in remembrance of 
 Him, or to skew his death till he come. This single con- 
 sideration is quite enough of itself to overturn the whole 
 system, and to prove that the attempt to identify what is 
 said here with the Lord's Supper, is vain and groundless. 
 
 But there is what may be considered an explanation of 
 the meaning given in the 63rd verse : " It is the Spirit 
 that quickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing : the words 
 that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are Ufe." 
 To prevent them from supposing that he meant any thing 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 
 15.5 
 
 material or gross by eating his flesh, he tells them, " the 
 flesh profiteth nothing : " and to impress on their minds 
 the spiritual character of what he had said, he adds, 
 " The words that I speak to you, they are spirit," that is, 
 spiritual, " and they are life," that is, they refer to life. 
 — the eternal life of which he had been speaking to them. 
 Not inappropriate in some respects are the sentiments of 
 Tertullian on this verse : — 
 
 " Because the Jews thought his word hard and intolera- Tertullian 
 ble, as if he had appointed that his flesh should be really De resur. 
 eaten by them, (ver^ edendum), to refer the state of sal- 
 vation to the Spirit, he premised, " It is the Spirit that 
 quickeneth ; " and then added, "The flesh profiteth 
 nothing," that is, to quicken. Then follows also what he 
 wished to be understood as to the Spirit: "The words 
 which I have spoken to you are Spirit, and life ; " as also 
 before : " H€ that heareth my words, and believeth on 
 Him that sent me, hath eternal life ; and shall not come 
 into condemnation, but is passed from death into life : " 
 constituting therefore the word the vivifier, for the word 
 is spirit and life, he called the same also his flesh : and be- 
 cause the Word was made flesh, it is hence to be sought 
 after for the purpose of life, and is to be devoured by 
 hearing, and ruminated on by the mind, and digested by 
 faith." The following are the words of Whitby :—" The -wijitijy 
 words that I speak to you, they are spirit," we cannot 
 doubt but that he speaks of eating and of drinking his 
 flesh and blood spiritually ." This indeed may be done 
 while partaking of the Sacrament ; but there is no neces- 
 sary connection between eating and drinking spiritually, 
 and eating and drinking sacramentally. Tertullian evidently 
 
156 
 
 THE LORD S SUPPER. 
 
 connects the eating and drinking with hearing and with 
 faith. 
 
 But then there is a vast importance and a mysterious 
 meaning attached to the words. This is my body. And 
 we are told by these men, as we are by the Papists, that 
 this is a matter of faith, and that we must believe. BeUeve 
 what ? BeUeve that there is some mysterious meaning in 
 the words ? This is to believe what they say, and not to 
 believe what the words express. How do they know that 
 there is a mysterious meaning in them } The primitive 
 Church does not tell us so, nor the early Fathers : the 
 Church of Rome does, and so do many of the later Fathers. 
 But am I to believe them in what is contrary to the 
 primitive Church ? and not only so, for that would not be 
 much ; but also contrary to Scripture itself, consistently 
 interpreted If I am to beheve, I must have some evi- 
 dence besides the mere saying of any uninspired men ; 
 yea, besides the decrees of all the councils that ever have 
 existed. I must have some evidence, and a Divine evi- 
 dence for a Divine truth, else my faith will be a mere 
 fancy, the faith of enthusiasts and fanatics. If there be 
 some mysterious import in these words, there must be 
 something of the same kind in aU similar modes of speech, 
 such as, that Rock was Christ — / am the way — / am the 
 door — The seed is the word of God — My Father is the 
 hnshandman, ^c. When I find that this mode of speaking 
 runs through the whole Scripture, am I to beheve what men 
 may choose to say, who produce no proof for what they 
 say, at least none that is worth anything ? It is really 
 painful in the extreme to read some of the delirious and 
 Popish ravings of these writers on this subject. 
 
THE lord's supper. 
 
 157 
 
 There is an attempt to propagate the notion, that the 
 Prayer-book expounds the Scriptures, and that the Fathers 
 are to expound the Prayer-book. Nothing can be more 
 groundless than this. What do our Articles say ? How 
 are the creeds received? They are received, "/or they 
 may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scrip- 
 ture," and not because they were received by the primitive 
 Church. How does our Church regard what is called 
 Catholic truth or tradition, and the decrees of councils ? 
 We may learn this from her avowal, " that whatsoever is 
 not read therein (Scripture), nor maybe proved thereby , 
 is not to be required of any man, that it should be be- 
 lieved as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or 
 necessary to salvation." This is to throw overboard at 
 once all tradition and all decrees of councils, and to sub- 
 ject the Prayer-book and all the doctrines of the Church 
 itself to the Scriptures. I will now close my letter in the 
 words of Chdlingworth, " No tradition but that of Scrip- Chill- 
 turecan derive itself from the fountain. There is no suffi- '"S^\<"'"i 
 cient certainty but of Scripture, only for any considering 
 man to build upon. I am fully assured, that God does 
 not, and therefore man ought not, to require any more 
 than this : to believe the Scripture to be God's word — to 
 endeavour to find the true sense of it — and to live accord- 
 ing to it." 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
 Postscript. — The efficacy of Sacraments, next to the 
 virtue of orders, is made a main pomt in the Oxford 
 Tracts. If the Sacraments were represented as means of 
 grace, there would be no objection ; but when they are made. 
 
THE SACRAMENTS. 
 
 or set forth as things in themselves efficacious, provided 
 they be administered by an episcopally-ordained minister, 
 there is a manifest error. Were they not thus made, 
 there would be no reason to say so much about them, as 
 there are no Protestants except Quakers, who do not deem 
 them to be generally necessary, and who do not regard them 
 as useful means of grace, and also as signs of spiritual 
 things and pledges of God's love and mercy. The only 
 difference that can exist is this, — that the Oxford divines 
 view them as having something of an inherent efficacy, 
 while others regard them as efficacious and beneficial only 
 when the mind of the recipient is in a right state. These 
 divines seem not to be quite prepared distinctly to admit 
 the 0}ms operatum of the Sacraments ; and yet what they 
 often say amounts to nothing less. It is not the qualifica- 
 tions of the recipients that are dwelt upon, but the neces- 
 sity and efficacy of the Sacraments ; which can make no other 
 impression on the reader, than that they produce effects 
 of themselves, independent of the state of mind with 
 which they are received, — an error, the most mischievous 
 and delusive that can well be conceived, having no other 
 tendency than to draw away the mind from regarding 
 " the power," and to fix it on " the form of godliness." 
 It is to terrestrialize what is ccelestial, to materialize what 
 is spiritual, by transfering to a bodily act what is peciJiar 
 to the mind. 
 
 Tliat Sacraments have any virtue of themselves, or that 
 any grace is inseparably connected with them, has no coun- 
 tenance from Scripture ; nor is the sentiment consistent 
 with it, nor with reason or common sense, nor with facts. 
 It has nothing in its favour but the opinion or the fancy of 
 
ORDERS. 
 
 159 
 
 some of the Fathers. When the Jews imbibed the error, 
 that there was some inherent virtue in their sacrifices, they 
 became objects of God's displeasure, so that he even ab- 
 horred them. Andean we think that the Almighty other- 
 wise regards the sacraments, when they are viewed as hav- 
 ing some inherent peculiar virtue in them, or as working 
 somehow after the manner of charms. It is not the mere 
 reception of them, but the exercise of repentance and 
 faith and of other suitable graces, that render them bene- 
 ficial. And what therefore ought to be cliiefly enforced, 
 is the necessity of those graces, and not the mere efficacy 
 of the Sacraments : for the whole of that efficacy depends 
 entirely on the possession and exercise of such graces. 
 
 The same may be said of orders. It is not the confer- 
 ing, but the receiving, that is to be chiefly regarded. 
 What a difference on this subject is there between the 
 writings of these divines, and the Epistles of St. Paul ! 
 Their absorbing subject is the apostolical succession, while 
 St. Paul, speaking of ministers, dwells mostly on their 
 qualifications. These writers seem to think that the 
 Bishop by the very act of ordination, confers some spiri- 
 tual gift, irrespectively of any thing in the candidates. 
 He indeed gives them authority, on the supposition of 
 their being previously fitted, to teach publicly in the 
 Church. Whatever other gift he has to confer, he can 
 confer it only on those that are rendered by divine grace 
 capable of receiving it. The reception does no more de- 
 pend on the bishop, than on the minister who administers 
 the Sacraments, but on the recipient. This is scriptural, 
 and stands with reason and with facts. What does ordi- 
 nation do for those who come unfitted for the work they 
 
IGO 
 
 ORDERS. 
 
 undertake ? Does it qualify them by the bestowment of 
 any spiritual gift ? Does it enlighten their minds to under- 
 stand the Scriptures, or make them apt to teach, or trans- 
 late them from a thoughtless state of mind into sober and 
 serious piety ? Does it give them a new heart, or does it 
 give a new bent to their wills and affections ? We too 
 well know, that these are not the effects. The only thing 
 done by conferring orders on those not spiritually quali- 
 fied, is to confer a sacred office on the wholly unfit, and 
 who are more likely to receive thereby a curse than any 
 spiritual gift or a blessing. 
 
 What do these writers aim at ? Is it to propagate the 
 idea that orders can convert the servants of the de\'il into 
 servants of God, or that ungodly and presumptuous in- 
 truders are clothed by means of orders with all the neces- 
 sary qualifications of true and faithful ambassadors ? He 
 who exercises the sacred office without being quali- 
 fied from above, is somewhat like a person authorized by 
 a steward to do something for his master, but whom the 
 master has never recognised ; he bearing not the character 
 required in the master's servants according to his own 
 rules. Those whom God appoints and sends, are appointed 
 and sent to turn men out of darkness into light, and from 
 the power of Satan unto God : and if this be not their 
 main end and purpose, the chief object of their efforts, 
 they are not sent by God, but only by man, and are no 
 more than mere hirelings. To say that every one ordained 
 by a bishop is sent by God, is to make the Almighty the 
 author of sin, and the propagator of evil ; it is to confound 
 his permissive with his ordinative will, and thus to mix 
 good and evil together in one chaotic mass. 
 
ORDERS. 
 
 As the adult person, who is baptized without having 
 repentance and faith, or who takes the eucharist without 
 these and other graces, is an unworthy recipient, so is he 
 who takes orders without the essentially necessary qualifi- 
 cations. If he be not a renewed man, a Christian indeed, 
 and possess not that faith and love which are from God, 
 and the other ministerial graces required in Scripture, he is 
 not quahfied for his office, whatever his learning or know- 
 ledge may be ; he must therefore be an unworthy recipi- 
 ent ; and no commission, no conferring of orders can 
 supply these defects, for it was never designed to supply 
 them. To take orders therefore without possessing those 
 things which qualify for orders, and on the ground of 
 which alone can they ever be justly conferred, is an act of 
 the most awful presumption and imposture ; and to con- 
 nect with such an act the conferring of a spiritual gift, is 
 extremely absurd : it is, as it were, to amalgamate the 
 most repugnant elements. 
 
162 
 
 IX. 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 March 22, 1838. 
 
 Tov i/si/v Tuv aTKiporefuv, Kai mxiAoiKuTiCfiXyiTiv avravf, paZiovp- 
 yovt/Tff Ta y.oyia Kvfiov, tf'/j'yijTai KaKOi ray KoKuf optj/xevav 
 yivonaoi ; kcci mWovi; ayaTpciroviriy, airayoi/nei avTOVf irpopao-fi 
 yi/uirecix;. — H uKav/j Ka6' avTijv /Aey OVK CTH^fiKWrai, tva jAi) 
 yvjAVuBtiaa yfvijTai KaTafapo^ ; irtSavu Ze nepi^XrijActrt iraiovpyciii; 
 KorjA-ovfAivri, kui avT/ji; tjj? aAvjflfijt? aKiiBetnepav eavT/jv irapex^iv 
 fatvciat Zia Tij? elaOev favTaata^ rott; aizeiporepoii. — " They 
 lead astray, through a craftily managed speciousness, the 
 mind of the unexperienced, and captivate them, handling 
 deceitfully the oracles of the Lord, being bad expoimders of 
 things fairly said ; and they subvert many, seducing 
 them by the appearance of knowledge. — Error does not 
 shew itself alone or by itself, lest being naked it should 
 become apparent ; but being craftily adorned by a specious 
 covering, it appears to the unexperienced, through an out- 
 ward splendour, to be truer even than the truth itself." — 
 Irenai Prefatio. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 I have already gone far beyond my first intention on the 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFOKU TRACTS. 
 
 163 
 
 subject that I have been handling. But this shall be my 
 last letter for the present. My design is to point out the 
 general character, and, as it were, to trace the genealogy 
 of the system I am opposing. Its abettors seem to possess 
 certain evident lineaments, by which they may be clearly 
 identified with a set of men, that have ever been the real, if 
 not at all times ostensible, opposers of true spiritual god- 
 liness. And it may be useful to draw the attention of the 
 public to this point, to prevent them from being deceived 
 by things plausible and imposing, while their tendency and 
 consequences are subversive of vital religion. " Error," 
 says Irenseus, " is persuasive (suasorius), and similar to 
 truth, and requires disguises ; but truth is without disguise, ^^ih- iii 
 and therefore believed by children." Ch. 15. 
 
 To conclude that all, who join a party that is really pro- 
 moting an erroneous system, have no religion, is what facts 
 will not justify. There have been some good men living in 
 communion with the Church of Rome, who, notwithstand- 
 ing its essential character as an apostate Church, still re- 
 mained in it, though evidently without partaking of its 
 main errors, and without being tinctured with its Anti- 
 christian spirit. There were some spiritually-minded in- 
 dividuals among the Pharisees in our Saviour's time, 
 though as a party he denounced them as wicked and hypo- 
 critical. There are imperfections belonging to the best 
 of men in this world : but these are to be distinguished 
 from the errors which form the essential parts of a bad 
 system, and which are often concealed or accom- 
 panied by what is commendable and praiseworthy, and 
 even by some things that are true and evangelical. What 
 proceeds from a weak judgment, ignorance or prejudice, 
 M 2 
 
164 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 is very different from what arises from attachment to the 
 erroneous parts of a system. When error is mixed with 
 truth, as is always the case, the good man adopts the 
 system for the truth, and the ungodly or the superstitious 
 man for the sake of the error. So that in this world of 
 darkness and imperfection, such as are truly spiritually- 
 minded may be found at times uniting with the ambitious 
 and worldly-minded in advocating some things essentially 
 wrong, when speciously coloured with the appearance of 
 what is good. 
 
 To ascertain the true character of a system, it is neces- 
 sary to mark its prominent features and the e\ddent ten- 
 Vidc dency of its chief doctrines, or of such as are mostly 
 ndix valued and mostly inculcated. It is the inculcation that 
 proves which are deemed chief, and not the profession. 
 That any system should contain or include some portions 
 of truth, is what must be the case in the present day, in 
 order to insure any success. Some essential truths are 
 professed even in the church of Rome, though they are 
 awfully neutralized by errors, and concealed under such 
 a load of ceremonials that they can scarcely be discovered. 
 The system of the Oxford Tracts contains some important 
 truths, and has evidently improved, in some respects, 
 in the hands of its present advocates : for it is an old 
 system, which has existed for many ages under different 
 forms and modifications. During the last century, it was 
 cold and freezing, embraced indeed and defended, but 
 manifesting no warmth, no vitality. Worldliness had 
 absorbed all its vital spirits. Hence its decay and weak- 
 ness, much deplored now by its present abettors. When 
 religion revived and gained ground, the dry arguments. 
 
TIIR SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 165 
 
 declamation, abuse, and persecution of those who em- 
 braced it, produced scarcely any effect. Combined as it 
 was with worldliness and even irreligion and infidelity, it 
 retained as its adlierents only the caput mortuum of Chris- 
 tianity. But it has since formed a new aUiance. Without 
 this it must have ere now sunk into the grave in this 
 country. A religious feeling had so prevailed, that a cold, 
 worldly, and irreligious spirit could not possibly have 
 gained the popular favour. This was not seen, until the 
 light of the Gospel shone on the country : for these 
 high claims were not disputed, when reUgious darkness 
 overspread the land. But the works of Daubeney and 
 others had in a short time lost almost all their influ- 
 ence. But another opportunity for the revival of the 
 system has occurred. IrreUgion and worldliness, com- 
 bined with all the influence of those in power, had 
 completely failed to support it. It has therefore become 
 allied with other things, and obtained the assistance of 
 other sort of helpers. But its new associates are no 
 strangers to it : they have been its supporters many times 
 before. It has now formed a compact with fasting, long 
 prayers, observance of days, great show of devotion, 
 ceremonials, Catholic truth, and tradition, the most power- 
 ful and influential of any supporters with which it has ever 
 been associated. 
 
 In tracing the genealogy of this system, I might easily 
 go beyond the reasonable limits of a letter. But I shall 
 be brief. I am not sure whether its origin is not from 
 Cain. Though an ungodly man, he brought an offering 
 to God, and seemed e\'idently to think that the offering 
 was sufficient of itself. He had clearly too high an idea 
 
166 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 of a mere outward act of worship. We have the most 
 undoubted proofs of its being the favourite system of the 
 Jews in the time of the prophets. The cry of its abettors 
 then, as well as in other ages, was, " The temple of the 
 Lord, the temple of the Lord," — which means just the 
 same thing as '.' the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church," 
 in the mouths of the advocates of the Oxford Tracts. 
 When we come to our Saviour's time, we find the Phari- 
 sees the strenuous supporters of this system ; — " We are 
 Abraham's children," that is, in the language of the 
 Oxford Tracts, " We are the apostles' lineal descendants." 
 As then, so now, the true descendants, are those who 
 possess the same fciith, and the same spirit. One of our 
 Saviour's own disciples was in some degi-ee infected with 
 this error. He saw one, who did not follow Christ with 
 them, casting out devils, and forbad him. He expected 
 commendation, but instead of that he met with reproof ; 
 and that reproof is as suitable to the Oxford divines, as it 
 was to him. Notwithstanding this evident condemnation 
 of the system by the Saviour himself, it is still adopted and 
 maintained ! St. Paul had to oppose this system in his day. 
 Confidence in the flesh, which means outward privileges, — 
 subjection to ordinances, which were the doctrines and 
 yj^g^g commandments of men, — voluntary humility, — show of wis- 
 dom and will-worship, — traditions of men, — affected zeal, — 
 ii. 20—22. boasting of Uneage, — and bringing to bondage : these are 
 ii ^18°^23 ^"'"^ °^ things which he condemned ; and they are 
 Col. ii. a the very limbs of this system. And were he now to write 
 2 ^Cor? jd! t° the Oxford divines, he would have only to notice and 
 20, 22. reprobate the very same things under some small modifica- 
 tions. In the primitive Church, especially after the second 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 167 
 
 century, we find the same system gaining ground. The 
 austerities practised, needless fastings, observance of saints' 
 days, celibacy, &c., were parts of it : and it was caressed 
 and nm-tured, tiU it finally brought forth the Man of Sin, 
 the monster of iniquity, the very Antichrist that had been 
 long foretold, which is no other than Romish Popery. The 
 system then acquired a perfection it never before attained. 
 This being clearly the case, it is no strange thing, that 
 Popery should be viewed with a degree of complacency by 
 the writers of the Oxford Tracts, it being nothing more 
 than the creature of their own system. There is a sympa- 
 thy which exists between all fraternities : and it would be 
 quite unnatural that it should be otherwise. They have 
 been seduously trying to remove the objections and antipa- 
 thies of Protestants to what Cecil caWs the " masterpiece" 
 of the prince of darkness. They have been attempting to 
 show that Popery is not the Man of Sin, and that instead 
 of being the abomination of all the earth, it is a true 
 Church of Christ; thus converting darkness into light, 
 and ascribing the work of the evil one unto Him who 
 hateth iniquity, and calling a den of thieves the temple 
 of the living God ! 
 
 When we look back on the state of things in this coun- 
 try, we find evident proofs of the existence and prevalency 
 of this system. Thomas A Becket was a celebrated advo- 
 cate of it. From being the most profligate of men, drink- 
 ing the spirit of this system, he became the most zealous 
 and austere saint. It was caressed and embraced by the 
 persecuting Bonner, and was strenuously maintained by him 
 and others against the eftbrts of our illustrious Reformers, 
 who were attempting to destroy it. Hence our Reform- 
 
168 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 eis are no great favourites with the Oxford divines. Bon- 
 ner and his associates are far more closely allied to them. 
 It was the system of Laud and others of his day ; and by 
 advocating it he overturned both the Church and the 
 Throne. Notwithstanding the check it received at the rebel- 
 lion, through the advantages derived from some excesses 
 which then took place, produced in part by its friends in 
 disguise — the Jesuits,— it gained new strength and v-igour 
 during the licentious reign of Charles the Second. Having 
 the civil power on its side, it had no need of affected zeal, 
 mortifications, and austerities. As in some instances in 
 the Church of Rome, many of its strict advocates were 
 notorious for religious apathy and open ungodliness ; some 
 of them became " the apes of Epictetus," and taught the 
 divinity of heathen philosophers ; and a few imitated the 
 austerities of the anchorites. And these, according to the 
 Oxford Tracts, were the palmy days of their system ! TVnd 
 it is from authors of this age they make most of their 
 quotations. Then in the times of James the Second a con- 
 test took place between two parties maintaining essentially 
 the same principles. The Nonjurors wanted to set up 
 an Anglican Popeiy, while James wished to introduce the 
 Romish. This was the true nature of the contest ; and 
 it terminated, through God's gracious providence, in the 
 exclusion of both : and a mortal wound was given to the 
 system, which the Oxford divines are now very anxious 
 to heal. When it was found impracticable, owing to such 
 men as these of the Oxford Tracts, to introduce a moderate 
 system, proposed by the best men of that time, the very 
 prop of the system attempted to be mamtained was re- 
 moved, toleration being granted. Its advocates, nursed on 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 169 
 
 the lap of indulgence, long protected in their unjust claims 
 by the law, had no taste for zealous exertions, and no dis- 
 position to undertake austerities, which is the only stay it 
 can have, when the civil power is withdrawn. This mistake 
 has not been seen, at least no attempts have been made to 
 remedy it, until of late years. The system was found at 
 last to be crumbling into dust : and its abettors, seeing no 
 means of supporting it, but by what, in the absence of the 
 civil power, or in opposition to it, has always been resorted to, 
 have at last gathered fresh resolution, and assumed amaz- 
 ing zeal; and they now strenuously advocate exertions, 
 fastings, mortifications, and austerities, and speak strongly 
 against the apathy of their friends in past times. In the 
 advertisement to the first volume of their Tracts, they 
 complain, that " a lamentable increase of sectarianism had 
 followed, being occasioned (in addition to other more ob- 
 vious causes,) first by the cold aspect which the new 
 church doctrines have presented to the religious sensibili- 
 ties of the mind, next to their meagreness in suggesting 
 motives to restrain it from seeking out a more influential 
 discipline." They are indeed wise in their generation ; for 
 they have recourse to the only means that can possibly save 
 their system from entire ruin. The difierent religious 
 Societies, the glory of the land, have done to it amazing 
 damage, and especially the spread of the Bible, to which 
 they very naturally seem not to be mightily favourable. 
 
 Irreligion in some form or another has for the most 
 part been combined with this system. The most devo- 
 tional, at one time, have often been found the most irre- 
 ligious at another. The Book of Sports, which was 
 to be read on Sunday and practised too, was one of the 
 
170 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 measures devised and enforced by men of this party. 
 The very devout Land was an admirer and promoter of 
 this book ! whom the Oxford divines would have doubt- 
 less canonized before now, had they succeeded in their 
 attempts respecting poor bishop Ken. The people were 
 all to assemble for worship in the morning, and be very 
 devotional, and then, as a sort of premium or bribe for 
 attendance, they were allowed and even encouraged to 
 have recourse afterwards to almost all sorts of rustic sports 
 and amusing games : and this pri\41ege none but Church 
 attendants were allowed ; Puritans and Recusants were 
 expressly excluded. The first half of the Sunday the 
 people were exhorted to be very religious and devotional ; 
 and the other half they were even encouraged, as we may 
 justly say, to be as irreligious and profane as they wished 
 to be. Sports, levity and profaneness usually go together. 
 This was the mode which the abettors of this system 
 deemed needful to promote Churchmanship, and profess- 
 edly to promote religion, working, as it were, by the rule 
 of contraries. The whole was no other than the work 
 of darkness, under the guise of being the work of hght : 
 and yet learned and dignified, and in the world's estima- 
 tion, respectable and reUgious men were its promoters, — 
 bishops and priests and laymen, who made a shew of 
 reUgion, and at times, very great shew, by observing fes- 
 tivals and fast days, and with as long and disfigured faces 
 and sanctimonious gestures as any of the Pharisees of old, 
 their forerunners and progenitors in the art of counter- 
 feiting religion for selfish and ambitious purposes. It 
 is enough to shew the character of the present party, 
 to state the fact, that they admire and honoiu the promo- 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 ters of the book of Sports, far more than our renowned 
 Reformers. 
 
 The general character of those who usually adopt tliis 
 system, is quite sufficient to destroy its credit with all 
 those who possess any measure of spiritual discrimination. 
 Who are those, for instance, who generally fall in with the 
 notion of baptismal regeneration — the worldly-minded, the 
 lovers of fashionable pleasures, the practically irreligious, 
 such as think it quite enough to attend Church on Sunday, 
 and then indulge in all the frivolities and amusements of 
 the gay and giddy world. What has been usually the 
 character of those candidates for orders, who have found 
 no difficulty in adopting the views of such bishops as have 
 most unwisely, and most unjustifiably made this tenet a test 
 of orthodoxy } The easy and complying have been for the 
 most part the thoughtless, the foppish, the gay, such as 
 afforded no proofs of serious religion, no evidence of being 
 influenced by the Divine Spirit, no symptoms of a spiritual 
 state of mind, and whose whole conduct testified their 
 unfitness for the sacred office, and who would clearly have 
 never undertaken it, except for the sake of its honours and 
 emoluments. These very facts, which cannot be justly 
 denied by any acquainted with the state of things, are 
 sufficient to shew the earthly, the human, the erroneous 
 character of the notion ; it being readily imbibed by such 
 as are manifestly worldly in their spirit, and unrenewed in 
 their minds. It might again be asked, what has been the 
 general character of its strenuous supporters through the 
 kingdom ? It has been supported by such Clergy as were 
 foxhunters, attendants at balls, and at other places of giddy 
 amusement, and by such as have been justly suspect- 
 
172 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 ed to be Pelagians, or Arians, or Socinians, or even Infi- 
 dels. All these have been mostly warm advocates of bap- 
 tismal regeneration, as well as abettors of the extravagant 
 views respecting apostolical succession, and of the opus 
 operatum of the Eucharist. Such in general have been the 
 most rigid advocates of this system, the usual resort of all 
 the worldly-minded reUgionists, as well as of those who are 
 great admirers of what is formal, ceremonial and super- 
 stitious in a religious profession. It is the corrupt Protes- 
 tant system in embryo, of which Popery is the full grown 
 offspring. It is a device to soothe conscience and deceive 
 men, by substituting the work of man in the place of the 
 work of God ; by pretending, after the manner of jugglers, to 
 do by a ritual, what is not necessarily connected with it, and 
 to convey by an ordinance, what is attainable only by a divine 
 principle. It is a scheme by which God and mammon 
 may be served, the one in the morning, and the other in 
 the afternoon, and by which vital and experimental re- 
 ligion is rendered nugatory, by a great shew of outward 
 reverence to the Almighty, and by over- scrupulous atten- 
 tion and superstitious regard, when that is deemed ne- 
 cessary, to the outward rites and forms of religion. It is 
 the prostitution and profanation of some of the highest and 
 most valuable truths ; and therefore far worse, and more 
 dangerous, (being especially more insinuating, when at- 
 tended by a great shew of devotion) than an open denial 
 of them. Manifest unbelief is not so mischievous as 
 secret undermining of the Gospel. There is far less dan- 
 ger from rank but open Socinianism, than from slippery, 
 tortuous and subtle Popery, under the guise of Pro- 
 testantism. 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 173 
 
 The new working of this system has commenced now 
 for some time. The Quarterly Revieiv has advocated it 
 to some extent. The Christian Remembrancer was set on 
 foot pur^josely for its support and defence. Tlie British 
 Critic has become its advocate, especially of late. But 
 the Coryphaeus of the party, as a periodical, is the British 
 Magazine, whose tactics are worthy only of the cause 
 which it has undertaken to promote and defend. As for 
 instance, when the Evangelical work of a dignitary or of 
 a popular preacher is reviewed, the work on the whole is 
 praised, and handsome things are said of the author ; and 
 some disapprobation perhaps of some parts is expressed in 
 a very smooth and complimentary way. But if the book 
 be published by a person of no great name, by a curate, or 
 an individual scarcely known, it is sneered at, and treated 
 with supercihous contempt, while it may contain the very 
 same truths as the former. Ye imitators of Jesuits ! 
 Does the station of a writer, or the circumstance of his 
 being not popular as a preacher, make any difference in 
 the truths that are taught ? The fact is, it is not quite 
 safe for the interest of the party to denounce a person 
 high in the Church, or a popular man. " They fear the 
 people," as the Pharisees did. The object is to get into 
 the good graces of the public ; and to effect this a little 
 Jesuitical manoeuvre is necessary : for the party had sunk 
 greatly, and had become very low in the estimation of the 
 religious community. And I hope they will never rise^ 
 notwithstanding their tortuous efforts : for their rise will 
 be the fall of genuine religion. 
 
 There are other things to be mentioned in the present 
 way of promoting this system. There is a manifest change 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFOUD TRACTS. 
 
 in the language used, and in the feehng, at least as ex- 
 pressed, towards those generally who difFer from them. 
 The language in the last centui7 was harsh and abusive, 
 and the feeling shown was \ery hostile, and the spirit 
 quite persecuting. But now, except in few instances, the 
 language is very smooth, civil, and often complimentary, 
 and every harshness is exceedingly blamed, as being very 
 Antichristian. Even of Popery we must speak kindly now; 
 and Popery is everywhere very good and productive of 
 great benefits, except in Ireland, and when intrusive in 
 this country. And as to the Evangelical clergy, who in 
 the last century were undermining the Church, many of 
 them are now very excellent, especially those high in the 
 Church, and who are popvdar; though in a few things 
 they are mistaken. Such is the changed tone of this 
 party. Did it arise from a change of principles, it should 
 be hailed with delight ; but we have no evidence of this : 
 on the contraiy, we have proof enough, that in all the 
 essentials of their system they are the same with their pre- 
 decessors in the last and former centuries ; and that on 
 some points they go farther even than those before them, 
 at least in the last age. The late Bishop Tomline, for in- 
 stance, held doctrinal sentiments the same with the present 
 party, and showed considerable dislike to those called ' Evan- 
 gehcal ' among the clergy ; and yet his views of Churchman- 
 ship were very moderate and truly Protestant. The same 
 Jhing may be said of the present Bishop of Peterborough. 
 His representation of the views of our Church on the sub- 
 ject is very satisfactorj'. But the present party, in addition 
 to some doctrines savouring of Popery held by their prede- 
 cessors, hold and maintain principles of the most exclusive 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 and illiberal character ; and yet they use a much more 
 liberal language. Christian llherality is a high virtue, if 
 grounded on right principles ; but if there be a mere dis- 
 play of it, if it be abundant in words only, and yet not 
 consistent with the principles we hold, it is the hollow 
 liberality of a Jesuit, employed to gain some selfish and 
 ambitious purposes. 
 
 But the Oxford divines are the most unblushing abet- 
 tors of this system. And yet there is a flinching and a 
 tortuosity in their way of deahng with some things. They 
 evidently wish to go so far as the Church of Rome does ; 
 but they are not yet "venturesome" enough. Though 
 bold on many points, and far bolder than any evidence 
 can warrant ; yet they seem sometimes to lack boldness. 
 " They fear the people." This country is not yet ripe, 
 and never will be ripe, I trust, for the full development of 
 their system. They dare not yet deny salvation to those 
 who are not in the Church of England. They generally 
 go no farther than give them over to the uncovenanted 
 mercies of God ; except, indeed, their teachers, who are 
 given up to the condemnation of Korah, Dathan, and 
 Abiram. They frequently, however, hesitate at this, at 
 least in words, whatever may be the sentiment entertained 
 within. But though they deny not in so many words, but 
 even in words allow, the possibihty of salvation ; yet what 
 they say in some parts amounts to a general denial. All, 
 it seems, who are not Episcopalians, have no valid sacra- 
 ments ; and it is through the sacraments, as it appears, 
 that divine blessings are communicated. This is their 
 doctrine, and I find nothing that amounts to a modifica- 
 tion of it. There is a confusion on this subject that 
 
17C 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 would be amusing, were not the matter of too sacred a 
 nature. The style is whaf is called rigmarole, being an 
 imitation of the religious babbUngs of the Romish Synods ; 
 the arguments are mere " adaptations of apostoUc words " 
 to traditionary fictions ; and the materials have been evi- 
 dently borrowed from the Church of Rome. 
 
 Salvation in Scripture is never connected with the sacra- 
 ments merely as sacraments, nor with any order of ministers, 
 not even with the apostles ; but with repentance, faith, love, 
 and obedience. And to represent it as dependant on any 
 such things, is to delude mankind, and spread the most 
 rumous error through the land. The object apparently is to 
 make the minister the dispenser of divine blessings, and the 
 only channel of communication between the Saviour and his 
 people, and that for the purpose of getting influence, domi- 
 nion, and importance, such as are possessed by the Romish 
 priest. One thing more they want — they must teach the 
 existence of purgatory, and pretend to dehver souls from it 
 by prayers and fastings ; then the system will be complete ; 
 and a noble engine of influence would it be ! Purgatory is a 
 Catholic truth no doubt, and the sooner they adopt it, the 
 more Catholic truth they will teach ! But it is no Bible 
 truth, any more than that an " external mark " minister 
 Vide is the only channel through which divine blessings are con- 
 Ap^mhx, ygyg(j -pjjg ^ggt niinister is no more than an instrument 
 employed by God to preach his word and administer his or- 
 dinances ; but the blessing is wholly dependant upon God 
 himself; " the increase " under the Apostles themselves is 
 said to have been from Him only. And it is the word re- 
 ceived — it is penitence exercised and not professed in baptism 
 — it is Christ believed in, and not received sacramentally — 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 177 
 
 it is the Saviour obeyed, loved, and served, and not preached 
 by " an external mark " minister — these, and only these, are 
 tlie things which entitle any to the promises of God in 
 Christ. 
 
 The intellectual and sagacious Bishop Butler says, with Bp. Butler, 
 great truth, "Mankind have, in all ages, been ^rreaf/y^jrone 
 to place their religion in peculiar positive rites, by way of 
 equivalent for obedience to moral precepts;" and it may be 
 added, for the exercise of heart repentance, for cordial faith 
 in Christ, and love from the heart to God and the Saviour. 
 Bishop Hall, in his sermon on the " Mischief of Faction ; " Bp. Hall, 
 has these striking words, which the Oxford divines would 
 do well to attend to:— "This man is right, ye say; that 
 man is not right ; this, sound ; that, rotten. And how so, 
 dear Christians } What ? For ceremonies and circum- 
 stances, for rochets, or rounds, or squares ! Let me tell you. 
 He is right that hath a liyht heart toivards his God, what 
 forms soever he is for. The kingdom of God doth not stand 
 in meats and drinks, in stuffs or colours, or fashions, in 
 noises and gestures ; it stands in holiness and righteousness, 
 in godliness and charity, in peace and obedience. And if 
 we have happily attained to these, God doth not stand upon 
 trifles and niceties of indifferences, and why should we ? " 
 The same excellent bishop, in his Resolutions for Religion, 
 expresses the following just and liberal sentiments :— " An 
 Indian convert, in the remotest part of the world, believing 
 in Christ, may, without relation to any Church whatever, 
 be saved ; and a particular Church, being orthodox in the 
 main principles of religion, upon matter of litigious con- 
 testation, flying off from some more eminent Church, under 
 which it was ranked for order's sake, however it may be 
 
 N 
 
178 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 faulty in an undue division, yet is not hereby excluded from 
 the capacity of salvation ; since such slight jars and unkind- 
 nesses in Churches can no more shut them out of a common 
 interest in Christ, than the hke quarrels of a Paul and 
 Barnabas could keep either of them out of heaven." What- 
 ever theories we may form, the good and ^\nse bishop has 
 stated what facts in our day most abundantly prove. Let 
 us judge by our Saviour's rule — by " fruits," and we cannot 
 hesitate to subscribe to the bishop's views, though very dif- 
 ferent from those of the Oxford Tracts. Their theory is 
 baseless, wild, and extravagant ; and it has no facts to sub- 
 stantiate it ; but all facts are against it. It is like a castle 
 built in the air, the creature of fancy, without any founda- 
 tions, and invisible. 
 
 I shall add the testimony of Bishop Ridley, one of the 
 noblest martyrs on record, as given by Fox in his martyr- 
 ology : — " The Holy CathoUc or Universal Church, which 
 is the communion of saints, the house of God, the spouse of 
 Christ, the body of Christ, the piUar and stay of the truth, — 
 this Church I believe according to the creed. This Church 
 I do reverence and honour Ln the Lord. But the rule of this 
 Chiirch is the word of God ;—Xhe guide of this Church is 
 the Holy Spirit;— the marks whereby this Church is known 
 to me in this dark world are these : the sincere preaching 
 of God's holy word — the due administration of the 
 sacraments— charitij — and faithful observing of Ecclesias- 
 tical discipline, according to the word of God. ' In 
 times past,' saith Chrysostom, 'there were many ways to 
 know the Church of Christ. But from the time that 
 heretics took hold of the Church, it is only known by the 
 Scriptures, which is the true Church. They have all things 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 179 
 
 in outward show whicli the true Church hath in truth ; 
 wherefore, only by the Scriptures do we know which is the 
 true Church.' That Church which is his body, and of which 
 Christ is the head, standeth only on living stones and trut 
 Christians." And in another place he says : — " It is Acts and 
 worthy to be noted what Lyra writeth upon Matthew : The p i^.^c'is. 
 Church, saith he, doth not stand in men by reason of their 
 power and dignity, whether it be ecclesiastical or secular : 
 for princes, and popes, and other superiors have been found 
 to have fallen away from God. Therefore, the Church con- 
 sisteth in those persons in whom is ti-ue knowledge and 
 confession of the faith and the truth." I'^"' 
 
 One exti'act more shall be given, and that from what is 
 called the Archbishop Cranmer's Catechismus, published in Abp. 
 the year 1548, and it is this : — " This company of men, 
 which believe th the Gospel, although here on earth they 
 be severed in sundry places, yet they are called an Holy 
 Catholic or Universal Church of Christ, that is to say, a 
 multitude, a congregation, a company of Christian people. 
 And this congregation receiveth of their head and Lord, 
 Jesus Christ, all spiritual riches and gifts that pertain to the 
 sanctification or making holy of the same body ; and these 
 ghostly treasures be common to the whole body, and to every 
 member of the same. For he that is unfeignedly a faithful 
 and godly man, is made partaker of these benefits." 
 
 It is not on this point only that the men of the Oxford 
 Tracts are wholly at variance with our Refonners, but on all 
 the points that distinguish their system, especially with re- 
 spect to the ground on which our Church is founded. While 
 these men refer to the authority of tradition, and Catholic 
 truth, and consent of Fathers, our Church acknowledges 
 N 2 
 
180 
 
 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 none of them, but recognises the word of God alone. By 
 recognising that alone, it virtually excludes tradition, Catholic 
 truth, consent of Fathers, and all such vagaries, as well as 
 decrees of councils. It in fact refers, expressly refers, the 
 probation of every thing in faith and doctrine, as well as in 
 rites and ceremonies, to the word of God, and to that only, 
 as is quite evident from the contents of the 6th, 20th, 21st, 
 and 34th Articles. Every doctrine must be " read therein, 
 or proved thereby." No ceremony must be "repugnant to 
 the word of God ; " it is not said, to tradition. Catholic truth, 
 or decrees of councils. There is not a word favourable to 
 these things throughout the whole Articles ; but much against 
 them. As to councils, it is said expressly, that they " may 
 err, and sometimes have erred," and that things ordained 
 by them " have no strength nor authority, unless it may be 
 declared, that they be taken out of Holy Scripture." 
 
 This is the fundamental principle of the Reformation and 
 of the Church of England. Our Reformers had influence 
 enough to have this principle laid down and distinctly ac- 
 knowledged in her Articles ; but they were prevented from 
 carrying it out fully in all its bearings by the abettors of the 
 Popish system of the Oxford Tracts. And this system has 
 at every period done incalculable injury to our Church. Its 
 advocates have ever been trying to Romanize the Church, and 
 have ever resisted every attempt made to carry out its ac- 
 knowledged principles into their legitimate extent. Many 
 efforts have been made to do this, at different times ; but 
 they all failed through the mischievous influence of those in 
 love with tradition, consent of Fathers, and decrees of coun- 
 cils ; and their factious and schismatic conduct has been the 
 main cause of almost all the Dissent in the kingdom. And 
 
THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TRACTS. 
 
 now they blame and condemn that very thing which their own 
 Popish system has most undoubtedly produced. To make 
 a crime and to condemn it, is something like the work of 
 the evQ one. How came the laudable attempts to introduce 
 a moderate system, wholly corresponding with the funda- 
 mental principle of our Church, to fail in the reigns of Charles 
 II. and WiUiam III. ? It was wholly through the evil 
 influence of those who maintained the Popish system of the 
 Oxford Tracts ; and their resistance in William's time ren- 
 dered toleration necessary ; and that toleration has nearly 
 demolished the system that occasioned it. Thus the biter 
 was bitten, and most deservedly so. 
 
 But the abettors of this system are entirely aUens to our 
 Church, being the legitimate sons of the Romish communion. 
 They are, in fact, intruders, and have no more right to be 
 its members than the Socinians had to be the managers of 
 Lady Hewley's bequests. And had we a Lord Chancellor, 
 possessing jurisdiction over a matter of this kind, he might 
 with as much justice exclude the influence of this party from 
 the Church, as he did the Socinians from participating in 
 Lady Hewley's charity ; for their principles and sentiments 
 are quite as foreign and opposed to those of our church, as 
 the principles and sentiments of the Socinians are to those of 
 the persons to whom this charitable lady bequeathed her 
 property. And never will our Church be fully what it ought 
 to be, according to her own acknowledged principles, until 
 this party shall cease to influence her proceedings. They 
 have not, indeed, been hitherto able, notvnthstanding aU their 
 efforts, to change any of the doctrines of our Church ; but 
 they have greatly impeded the progress of her improvement. 
 The Church has laid down the right principle — the Bible, 
 
182 THE SYSTEM OF THE OXFORD TUACTS. 
 
 and tlie Bible alone, the test of doctrine, and the regulator 
 of rites and ceremonies ; and she has nothing to do but to 
 act according to this principle ; and were it not for the mis- 
 chievous influence of such men as those of the Oxford Tracts, 
 it could easily accommodate itself, according to such a wise 
 plan as that of Archbishop Usher, to the altered circum- 
 stances of the times, so as to absorb almost all the Dissent 
 in the land. But oh, no ! tradition. Catholic truth, con- 
 sent of Fathers, decrees of councils, the superstitious and 
 heathenish ceremonies of the primitive Church, must be re- 
 garded, consulted, revered, and almost adored ; and truth, 
 and charity, union of faith and love, according to the in- 
 fallible word of the Almighty, are to be cast aside as things 
 comparatively of no importance ! And yet these men crj' 
 for unity. " Diotrephes now of late," says the apostolic 
 Latimer, " did ever harp upon unity, unity ; yea, Sir, quoth 
 I, but in verity, not in Popery. Better is diversit)-, than 
 unity in Popery." Unity they may have to a great extent, 
 only let them give up their vain traditions, their pretended 
 Catholic truth, and their boasted consent of Fathers, all 
 which our Church virtually disowns ; and let them relinquish 
 their Popery, which it disclaims and abhors, as be ng the 
 gi-eatest and most mischievous imposture upon earth. 
 
 MiSOPAPISTICUS. 
 
183 
 
 ADDENDA : 
 
 STRICTURES ON THE TRANSLATIONS IN THE 
 " RECORDS OF THE CHURCH." 
 
 Since writing the foregoing Letters, the Author has had 
 the opportunity of minutely examining the " Records of 
 the Church," published by the divines of the Oxford Tracts : 
 and what follows, is the result of that examination. 
 
 These " Records," are a series distinct from the Tracts, 
 and contain for the most part, translations of some of the 
 works of the early Fathers, such as the epistles of Igna- 
 tius, and some portions of Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian and The 
 others. The epistles of Clement, Polycarp, and Barnabas, ^f™he^ 
 are passed over, and also the works of Hermas. The Church, 
 obvious suspicion in this matter, is, that Clement and 
 Polycarp do not exactly suit the views and purposes of 
 these divines, and that Barnabas and Hermas contain too 
 many strange and absurd things, to allow of a hope of 
 their being well received by the public. It may do to 
 make a quotation now and then from them, as is done in 
 some of the Tracts, and to announce it, as containing the 
 sentiment of an apostolic Father, with the view of confirm- 
 ing some Catholic tnith, or rather, some Catholic error ; 
 but to bring the whole of their writings before the public 
 
184 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 Ignatius, in the present day, would be rather hazardous. Even 
 Ignatius, the great hero of these divnnes, on whose shoul- 
 ders, almost alone, rests the whole weight of extravagant 
 high churchmanship for the two first centuries, is not 
 allowed to come abroad, without being polished and alter- 
 ed. He has been subjected to a Procrustean process : 
 what is curt, has been extended ; and what is too long, has 
 been cut off. And another sort of operation has been 
 adopted ; some strong expressions have been softened and 
 weakened ; and others, rather too feeble, have been made 
 stronger. Of these different processes, some examples 
 shall presently be given, and an opportunity will also be 
 taken of exhibiting some of the curious and strange no- 
 tions of Ignatius, and of pointing out the rhapsodical cha- 
 racter of his writings. 
 
 There is a very just ground of complaint against these 
 Texts and translators, that they have not told us what text they 
 
 Ignatius, have adopted in these epistles ; for there are various texts, 
 widely differing in very many instances, exhibiting discre- 
 pancies to an extent greater than those of any other early 
 Abp. writings. Archbishop Usher informs us, that there had 
 been edited, before his time, two Greek texts of Ignatius, 
 and two Latin versions ; and the text he adopts differs 
 
 Vossius. from both. Vossius, whose edition was posterior to that 
 of Usher, published for the most part what is called 
 the Florentine Text, which varies greatly from that adop- 
 ted by the Archbishop, and is accompanied by a Latin 
 version, as that of that Archbishop is ; but in both instan- 
 ces, the versions differ from the texts, and from each 
 other. There have not been perhaps in any other case, 
 such examples of varieties and discrepancies, as in the 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 185 
 
 texts of Usher and Vossius. There are in the former, 
 many pages that are wanting in the latter ; and not only 
 so, but the very same sentences are differently worded. 
 Usher's text, no doubt, has many interpolations ; and yet 
 it often exhibits the sense much clearer, or it gives a 
 much better sense than that of Vossius. There have been 
 later editions ; one especially by Cotelerius, with which I 
 am not acquainted. Archbishop Wake, in his translation, A bp. 
 refers to it often ; but it appears that his improvement of 
 the text is neither extensive nor very important. The 
 Archbishop's translation, agrees mostly with Vossius's 
 text ; and it is followed to a great extent by these writers 
 in the " Records of the Church." But they seem to de- 
 part fi-om it very often needlessly, and frequently to ad- 
 here to it when it might be easily improved. The supe- 
 riority, no doubt, as a whole, belongs to that of the Arch- 
 bishop ; it being far plainer, more faithful, and much more 
 intelligible. There is sometimes in the renderings of 
 these divines, a taint of mysticism, a degree of oddity, 
 which renders the meaning obscure and mysterious. 
 
 Nothing is more evident than the attempt made by 
 these writers to add importance to Ignatius and his writ- 
 ings. Hence they have prefixed to each epistle, this se- 
 tence : " Epistle of Ignatius, the friend of St. Peter and 
 St. John, and bishop of Antioch, on his way to mar- 
 tyrdom." 
 
 The designed object is quite obvious : it is to prepossess 
 the reader in favour of the contents of the epistles. The 
 author is announced as the " friend" of two eminent 
 apostles, as "bishop of Antioch, and being on his way to 
 martyrdom." That he was on his way to martyrdom, is 
 
186 
 
 ADDENDA, 
 
 evident from his epistles ; but not, that he was the friend 
 of the apostles, or the bishop of Antioch. But he must 
 be connected with inspired men, that people may be led 
 gradually to believe, that he himself was also inspired ! 
 The unremitting effort of these writers, in common with 
 Papists, is to introduce something as divine, beside the 
 Scriptures, — a clear proof that they have purposes to an- 
 swer, and ends to gain, which the Bible does not contem- 
 plate, nor approve, nor sanction. 
 
 The first epistle given in these " Records," is that to 
 the Ephesians. The salutation, as rendered by these 
 writers, is this : — 
 
 " Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to her who is bles- 
 sed in the greatness and fulness of God the Father ; to 
 the predestinate before all worlds, to be ever in mar^^ellous 
 glory unchangeable, united and elect through the true 
 passion, through the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ 
 our God ; to the truly beatified Church, which is in Ephe- 
 sus of Asia, all health in Jesus Christ, and in unspotted 
 gi-ace." The words, "who is blessed in the greatness, 
 &c." are rendered by Wake more intelligibly thus : " being 
 blessed through the greatness," &c. the preposition, ev, 
 having constantly this meaning in Ignatius, being even 
 twice so rendered in this very passage. " United and 
 elect," are connected here with "glory;" but what sense 
 they make, it is not easy to see. Wake follows another 
 copy, and connects them with the " Church," and thus 
 some sort of meaning is preserved. But leaving the trans- 
 lators, what sense can we make of the original ? Let any 
 one examine the dependence which one part has on another, 
 and trace the connection, and he will inevitably find, that 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 the whole partakes much of the character of rhapsody. It 
 sounds like something true and correct, and is in a scrip- 
 tural strain ; but when the meaning is sought after, very 
 little can be found : it is sound, and hardly any thing 
 more—" blessed in the greatness, — marvellous glory, 
 united and elect,— all health in unspotted grace ! " These 
 expressions are more like the rant of an enthusiast than 
 anything else. Similar to this in style is the salutation in 
 most of the Epistles ; in some shorter and in others 
 longer, but in all quite as incoherent. The first paragraph 
 after the salutation, is thus rendered : — 
 
 " I welcome in God's behalf that well-beloved name, 
 which you have attained in all righteousness, {% /ce/cxijo-Se 
 <pv<r(i ^iKai^) according to the faith and love which is in 
 Jesus Christ our Saviour, for that being followers of God, 
 and kindling the inward flame by the blood of God, you 
 have perfectly accomplished the work that belonged to 
 you, (to (TvyytviKOv epyov)." 
 
 The first Greek sentence that is put in, is not correctly 
 rendered ; nor is the last. The one in fact explains the 
 other. The first is, " Which you have possessed by just 
 nature;" and the last means, " a native," or "congenial 
 work." And in the expression " thy much-beloved name," 
 (to iroXu ayairijToi/ crov ovo/za) there is an evident allusion to 
 the name of the city, Ephesus, which means " desirable," 
 as it is remarked by Usher and others. This is the name 
 " which they possessed by just nature." And the latter 
 part should be thus rendered : — " and having rekindled 
 (ava^aTtvpijo-a^Teq) by the blood of God a work that is 
 natural," or " native to you, you have perfectly accom- 
 plished it." This no doubt is the meaning of the passage, 
 whatever may be thought of its divinity. 
 
188 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 The following sentence, ayfiviu x/"^/""!" tw irvft/aan xa 
 Sect. 9. ^y,^^ translated thus by Wake, " using the Holy Ghost 
 as the rope," seems evidently to have appeared too low, 
 and perhaps something worse, as it really is, to these 
 divines, to be literally rendered : they have therefore 
 polished it a Uttle and rendered it thus ; — " With the 
 Holy Ghost as the line by which to ascend." In the same 
 section we meet with a similar attempt to smooth dowTi 
 ruggedness, and set forth the meaning with more propriety, 
 though not very correctly : — " Ye therefore, with all the 
 companions of your way, are full of God, of his spiritual 
 temple, of Christ, of the Holy one." Literally rendered, 
 the passage is this : — " Ye are therefore even all fellow- 
 travellers, (co-re dvn Ka.1 avwlm -Tcavrec) God -bearers, and 
 temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, the Holy One-bearers," 
 — Beofopoi Kai i/aofopoi, Xpta-rofopoi, ayiofopoi. However 
 difficult it may be to find terms suitable to convey the 
 meaning of these words, it is evident that being " full of 
 God," and especially " of his spiritual temple," (what 
 does it mean ?) is not suitable language, it being stronger 
 than the original, which itself is sufficiently so. 
 
 What a needless departure from a Uteral rendering oc- 
 curs in the following sentence : — " No man, possessing a 
 true faith, goes wrong ; neither does he who has charity. 
 Sect. 14. hate any." The words, " true,— goes wrong,— charity," 
 are all improper : the first is not in the text, the second 
 is not a correct rendering, and the third is an obsolete 
 word for the term here used. The sentence is literally 
 this ; — " No one, professing faith, sinneth (a/Aa^Tavei) ; 
 nor does he, who possesseth love, hate." When a literal 
 rendering is practicable, being both plain and intelligible, 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 189 
 
 to seek out another betokens either a want of discrimina- 
 tion, or a desire to obtain countenance to some party 
 views. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Magnesians, some are alluded to ^ ■ 
 who disregarded the Bishop. The sentence is, — x/"^/"? 
 avTov iravra Ttpaa-a-ova-iv, — " but they do all things without 
 him." This is the literal rendering, and as given by 
 Wake, and is plain and intelligible enough : but it does 
 not suit these divines ; for they must have something that 
 sounds more like Catholic truth, and therefore they word 
 it thus ; — " yet they do all without consideration of the 
 office." The office is the great matter, it seems, be the 
 man what he may, good, bad, or indifferent. To sink the 
 man in the office has ever been the attempt of those who 
 are fond of irresponsible power, of lordship, and tyranny. 
 When a person performs the duties of his office, his office 
 gives sanction and authority to his deeds : but when he 
 departs from these duties, he loses that sanction, dese- 
 crates his office, and forfeits its rights. The contrary 
 supposition is quite monstrous. To hold that a man's 
 office justifies what is wrong, or sanctions whatever he 
 may do, is a doctrine that opens all the floodgates of op- 
 pression and injustice. It amounts in fact to nothing less 
 than this, — to claim the sanction of God for the deeds of 
 the devil. It was a leaning to this sort of doctrine, that 
 probably occasioned the introduction of the word " office," 
 into the sentence above quoted. Ignatius in this instance * 
 is too short for the Procrustean bed of these divines : he 
 is therefore lengthened ; and this lengthened part may 
 serve some party purpose on some future occasions, and 
 be quoted as a portion of Ignatius himself. This is the 
 
190 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 way in which errors have sometimes been originated, and 
 afterwards perpetuated. A new piece has been put to an 
 original author, and that has afterwards been referred to, 
 as if it had been his own. 
 
 The following paragraph is quoted from the same Epis- 
 tle :— " The Bishop holding presidency over you, in the 
 place of God ; and the Presbyters in the place of the 
 council of the apostles ; and the Deacons, my weU-be- 
 loved, entrusted with the service of Jesus Christ." There 
 are two needless departures from Wake's translation in 
 this passage. " Holding presidency over you," (irpsKaev)- 
 fA-evov), is put for the plain and literal expression, " pre- 
 siding ; " and "service" is substituted for "ministry." 
 The reason for the last change cannot well be conjectured : 
 but as to the first, some plea may be made for it ; for it 
 sounds fuller, more lordly, and more authoritative. Passing 
 by, however, these things, let us attend to the strange 
 notions of Ignatius himself. The Bishop in the place of 
 God ! So that he is higher than the apostles,— for those 
 who stood on an equality with them were the presbyters : 
 and those "entrusted with the ministry of Christ" were 
 the Deacons. The Bishop presides, the Presbyters form 
 the Sanhedrim, (a-we^pion is the term used,) and the Dea- 
 cons are the efficient ministers or " the working clergy " ! 
 This is the view of things which he gives throughout his 
 epistles, with scarcely any difference. The deacons are 
 represented as more especially the active ministers of the 
 Gospel, the Presbyters as the Cardinals in conclave, and 
 the Bishop as the infallible Pope ! without whom nothing 
 was to be done, and nothing was to appear even " rational " 
 to them, as we shall presently see ! Let these epistles be 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 191 
 
 deemed genuine or not, they clearly contain many things 
 wholly inconsistent with the primitive state of the Church, 
 according to all other documents that we have respecting 
 it. There is only one of two things that must be admitted 
 as to Ignatius — he is either a false witness, or his wri- 
 tings have been grossly changed and perverted in after 
 ages. The latter is the most probable supposition. There 
 were complaints very early of this shameful work being 
 done : and attempts were made on some of the inspired 
 writings ; but their spread, their being so much known, 
 prevented such attempts from being successful. But in 
 case of such works as those of Ignatius, they being con- 
 fined to a few, the attempt was more feasible. 
 
 In the very same section of the same epistle, we meet Iliid. 
 with a sentence so translated, as if it had been done by ^ 
 the mystics ; and it is the following : — " Be ye made one, 
 in the Bishop, and in the superiors, for an example and 
 lesson of incorruption." Wake's translation contains 
 some meaning, which this can hardly be said to have, 
 and is as follows, — " Be ye united to your Bishop and 
 those who preside over you, to be your pattern and direc- 
 tion in the way to immortality." 
 
 We come next to another Procrustean process, by which g^'^^''''. 
 an addition is made, and also a part cut off. The sentence 
 is this : — " Neither seek ye gratification in any thing to 
 your own selfish judgment." Would any one suppose 
 that the hteral rendering, and the one given by Wake is 
 the following ? " Neither endeavour to let any thing 
 appear rational, {€v\oyov) to yourselves apart ; " that is, 
 from the Bishop mentioned in the preceding sen- 
 tence. " Selfish " is put in for the purpose of lengthen- 
 
192 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 ing, and " rational " is cut off for the purpose of 
 shortening the sentence : and being thus adjusted and 
 made suitable, it may now be adopted as containing what 
 condemns the exercise of private judgment. As now 
 framed, it stamps private judgment at once as " selfish " ; 
 and by cutting off the word " rational," it ceases to par- 
 take of its original extravagance. The short limb has 
 been lengthened, and the long one has had a part lopped 
 off. These divines are exceedingly provident, and very 
 dexterous. They prepare instruments for themselves, and 
 secure Ignatius from just reflections. But what a popish 
 sentiment is here announced ! To hold that nothing 
 should appear " rational " to us, but what the Bishop 
 approves, is at once to make a pope of him. Adopt such 
 a sentiment as this, and you must at once become a papist, 
 a downright member of the Romish Church, so deluded as to 
 make a surrender, to a fallible and imperfect mortal, of a 
 gift which God has granted to every one for his own use. 
 Where is there anything of this kind in the divine word ? 
 "Judge ye what I say," is whatan inspired Apostle directed 
 his people to do ; but Ignatius says, ' Let the bishop judge 
 and determine every thing for you.' Bellarmine himself, 
 who compares the people to Job's " asses feeding beside 
 the oxen," the priests, does not go beyond this. 
 Epistle The next example presents another mode of operation, 
 to the which is that of lowering the meaning of terms, that the 
 Tralhans. ° ,• , rrn_ 
 
 . Sect. 3, extravagance of the author may not come to hght. Ine 
 
 only instance of this kind that shall now be adduced is the 
 following passage in the Epistle to the Trallians : — " Like- 
 wise let all men give heed to the deacons as to Jesus 
 Christ," &c. The original words are these :— O/Koia? irayret; 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 193 
 
 (VTf('nea-6u<iav tovi; hiaKOiovi; at; Ivja-cv Xpiarov. To "give heed 
 
 to," is not the meaning of the verb here used, especially 
 when it is followed, as it is here, by an accusative case. 
 It is rendered " revereantur " in the latin version given 
 by Usher, and also in that given by Vossius : and it is 
 rendered " reverence," by Wake, and no doubt correctly. 
 
 The foregoing instances of perverted renderings from 
 the Epistles of Ignatius, form but a very small portion of 
 what might be adduced. Only three epistles out of the 
 seven have been at aU referred to ; and many more in- 
 stances of a similar kind might be adduced even from 
 them. But enough surely has been brought forward to 
 convince every impartial reader, that these divines are not 
 to be trusted as translators, and that they are wholly un- 
 deserving of the public confidence. A still stronger proof 
 of their want of faithfulness will be aflPorded by instances 
 from the works of Justin, Irenseus, and Tertullian. Pre- 
 possessions have amazing influence ; they often warp the 
 judgment in a way almost incredible. Were it not so, 
 it would be very difficult to screen these writers from the 
 charge of intentional dishonesty. 
 
 A free translation, which embodies the meaning of the 
 original, is on ordinary subjects no doubt the best. But 
 then it shoidd contain the whole of the original and no 
 more than the whole. It should embrace the meaning of 
 the author, the whole meaning, and no more than his 
 meaning. But there are in almost every author some 
 parts, in which a free translation, embodying correctly 
 and fully his meaning, can hardly be made, especially 
 when those parts contain matters of dispute. In such 
 cases, the best translation is the most literal that can be 
 o 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 made, provided it be intelligible. No other mode of ren- 
 dering can be satisfactory, except accompanied with the 
 original, or with its literal rendering. These translators 
 are in this respect exceedingly faulty. They give a free 
 translation of parts that ought to be literally rendered, 
 and which might easily be so rendered : and thereby they 
 manage to introduce a meaning which the original does 
 not contain. This is especially their mode of proceeding 
 in the documents which I am going now to notice. It is 
 not so much the procrustean process that they adopt, as an 
 operation by which the original meaning is evaded, and 
 another introduced in its place. This is done in some 
 instances with astonishing art and dexterity, as we shall 
 presently see. The first extracts that shall be noticed, are 
 those from 
 
 JUSTIN MARTYR. 
 
 What refers to Baptism and the Lord's Supper in Jus- 
 tin's first apology, is given in No. 13 of the " Records of 
 the Church." The translation in the " Records" shall be 
 first set down, and then the Uteral rendering. The follow- 
 ing passage is in the 61st section : — 
 
 " We will state in what manner we are created anew 
 by Christ, and have dedicated ourselves to God." 
 
 Literally rendered it is this : — 
 
 Apol. i. " We will state in what manner, we, having been made 
 Sect 61. ,, 
 new through Christ, have dedicated ourselves to God." 
 
 The difference may not appear to a cursory observer to 
 be much ; but there is a material difference. The " dedi- 
 cation," and being " made new," (jfaivo7ro»ij9evT€?), do not 
 appear so distinct and separate in the translation of " the 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 195 
 
 Records," as in the original. The renewal is the previous 
 qualiJicatio7i of such as dedicate themselves to God. The 
 next passage is from the same section : — 
 
 " For they are then washed in that water in the name 
 of God the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our 
 Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit." S'-"'^'- 
 The following is the literal translation : — 
 " For in the name of the Father of the Universe and 
 Lord God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the 
 Holy Ghost, they then undergo the washing which is by 
 water." 
 
 By what authority have they changed the order of these 
 words, iraTpof rav oXav Kai Sto-iroTOK 0eov ? It is the usual 
 phraseology of Justin ; and it had a peculiar meaning and 
 intention, which these divines should have known or re- 
 membered. " The Father of the universe," or the Creator of 
 all things, was adopted designedly in opposition to the 
 sentiments of the heretics. The original of what they 
 have rendered, " they are then washed in that water," is 
 this : TO fv ra uSaTi Toxe Xavrpov notovvrai ; the literal ren- 
 dering of which is given above. Let the reader notice the 
 word Xovrpov, washing. It can have no meaning but 
 washing here, and it ought to be so rendered in all the sub- Kovrpov. 
 sequent parts of the Apology. When a passage occurs 
 which gives a determinate meaning to a word, it should 
 have that meaning, until another passage be found, which 
 may clearly require that another should be attached to it. 
 It is from the same section that the following quotation is 
 made : — 
 
 " He who leads him to be washed in the laver of bap- 
 tism, saying this (name) only over him," &c. yg^t gj 
 o 2 
 
196 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 The literal rendering is this : — 
 
 "This (name) only we say over him, when we lead him, 
 that is to be washed, into the washing," &c. 
 
 The word "baptism," is not in the original; and the 
 word " laver," is an improper rendering. To be " washed 
 in the laver," is not the meaning of the words, which are 
 these, Tovrof XcivofAfvay ayovre? tir» to XofTpov. Leading or 
 introducing into the washing is clearly what is meant. 
 And why is the person changed, " he," instead of " we " ? 
 Is it for the purpose of directing the reader's attention 
 to the minister Everything in these writers bears the 
 same way. Their polar star is the priest, to which they 
 never fail to turn, even when there is no reason for doing 
 so. I quote still from the same section : — 
 
 " And he who is so illuminated is baptized also," &c. 
 
 It shovJd be thus rendered : — 
 
 " And the illuminated is washed also," &c. 
 
 The particle "so," is needlessly inserted ; and the 
 word "baptized," is without any reason put for "washed." 
 The original is this ; xat . . . . o ^ari^owevo? XovcTat. The 
 next sentence is from another section : — 
 
 " We then, after having so washed him who hath ex- 
 pressed his conviction, and professes the faith, lead him to 
 the brethren, where they are gathered together, to make 
 common prayers with great earnestness, both for them- 
 Sect. 65. selves, and for him who is now Uluminated." 
 
 The literal rendering is plainly this : — 
 
 " Then we, after having thus washed him that hath been 
 persuaded and given his consent, lead him to those called 
 brethren, where they are assembled, about to join fer- 
 vently in common prayers for themselves and the illumi- 
 nated." 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 197 
 
 There are no less than three false renderings in this pas- 
 sage : and all seem to have arisen from an attempt to 
 favour certain views. The expression, tov Ttcweta-iAevov, is 
 not, " him who hath expressed his conviction," but, " him 
 who hath been persuaded." The same word is used in the 
 61st section, with reference to the same character, and 
 exactly in this sense. And the word, (TvyKaraTeOeiiAevov, 
 means not him " who professes the faith," but, " who has 
 given his consent," that is, to be baptized. The object of 
 these writers manifestly is, to make out that there was, 
 at this early time of the church, a formal public profes- 
 sion of faith made by the candidate, which afterwards be- 
 came evidently the practice. Justin gives no idea of this 
 in this passage : but these translators constrain him to say 
 what he never said, to speak of a practice which had no 
 existence in his time. But there is yet a worse perversion : 
 the particle " now," is put in, and placed before illumi- 
 nated, which conveys an idea wholly inconsistent with the 
 sentiments expressed by Justin. In a former passage he 
 tells us the reason why " washing is called illumination," Sect. 61. 
 that is, because "those are in mind illuminated, who," 
 as he says, " learn these things," namely, the truths 
 taught by the Christians. But the design of this "now," 
 that is put in by these translators, is to shew, that they 
 are said to be illuminated, because they had been washed 
 or baptized. What will not men, blinded by prepossessions, 
 or as Cecil says, " magnetized by prejudices," be led 
 to do in order to advance their own views, and promote 
 their own schemes ! The following passages refer to the 
 Lord's Supper : — 
 
 " Of the bread that has been blessed," &c. Sect. 65. 
 
198 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 Literally : — 
 
 " Of the bread that has been thanked for, ((vxapKni)- 
 
 6«VT0<.)" 
 
 Sect. 66. " The food which is blessed." 
 Literally :— 
 
 " The food that has been thanked for, (evxaoKn-riOeta-ay.)" 
 Justin never mentions the elements as having been 
 blessed or consecrated. Blessing or thanking God for 
 them as the gifts of his bountiful Providence is vphat he 
 mentions everywhere. And after this thanksgiving, they 
 were taken in commemoration of the death of the Saviour. 
 On the same subject are the following passages : — 
 Sect. 67. " Our head in Uke manner offers up prayers and praises." 
 It should be rendered thus : — 
 
 " Our president (o wpoeo-Ta?) in like manner offers up 
 
 prayers and thanksgivings, (eu/a^jo-na?.)" 
 
 " The consecrated elements are then distributed and 
 Sect. 67. • J I 
 
 received by every one. 
 
 Literally thus : — 
 
 " Then a distribution is made, and a reception by each, 
 
 of the things thanked for, (awo tbv evxafia-rrjOeyTuv.)" 
 
 If thanksgiving for gifts bestowed is what is meant by 
 consecration, then the rendering is justifiable : but this 
 is not the case. Justin is here, as in former instances, 
 made to say what he never said. 
 
 The extracts which next follow, are made from a Letter 
 to Diognetus, which is ascribed to Justin, but with no 
 sufficient reason. It is given in No. 15 of the Records : — 
 Letter to " truths which they hold result not from the busy 
 Diognetus. ingenuities of human thought ; the councils of men in 
 ■ them possess no champion." 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 199 
 
 What may be viewed as a literal rendering is this : — 
 
 " This has not been declared to them for instruction, 
 through any contrivance or ingenuity of inquisitive men ; 
 nor do they, as some, patronize any human doctrine." 
 
 It is difficult to know where the word " truths " has 
 been found, it not being in the passage. The mode of 
 living adopted by the Christians is what is spoken of in 
 the immediate preceding context. Something seems to 
 have been deemed necessary to bear on what those writers 
 consider to be the " busy ingenuities of human thought" 
 in the present day. The word " champion," has not been 
 introduced, it may be, without some intention. The 
 practice of some Christians who advocate the sentiments 
 of some eminent individuals, (not because they were theii- 
 sentiments, but those taught as they conceive in the 
 Bible,) in assuming their names, or allowing themselves 
 to be called after them, has been strongly denounced by 
 these writers, and represented as being almost a proof of 
 apostacy. Such a view is indeed consistent with their 
 usual mode of magnifying what is little, and of nihilizing 
 what is great. It is not improbable that a thought of this 
 kind had something to do with the framing of this sentence. 
 And the expression, "the councils of men," instead of 
 " human doctrine," (ioyfAcno^ avB^uisivov) has apparently 
 been introduced for the purpose of screening themselves. 
 The following is from the same letter : — 
 
 " What man, who hath been taught aright, and nurtured 
 in the kindly word, does not feel an increasing desire 
 clearly to know those things, which by the Word were 
 directly spoken to the disciples, and which he manifested 
 fully to them " Sect. 11 
 
200 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 The following is a literal rendering : — 
 
 " Who that hath been rightly taught and begotten by 
 the kindly word, does not seek clearly to learn the tilings 
 which have been manifestly shewn by the Word to the 
 disciples, to whom the Word, having appeared, speaking 
 openly, has manifested them ? " 
 
 There are here at least two mistakes, or rather perverted 
 renderings. The word yevvTjSej?, born, or " begotten," 
 is most strangely translated, " nurtured." The idea that 
 a person is to be begotten or bom agaui by any other 
 means than by baptism, is to be discountenanced at all 
 risks ! And ^aycpoi;, as it seems, is " directly," and not 
 " manifestly " or clearly. The notion that something was 
 more especially or " directly" addressed to the disciples 
 than to any else, must be propagated. Whether this was 
 the fact or not, is not the question : but whether it was 
 contemplated by the writer of this passage. This, most 
 clearly, was not the case. Have these di\Tnes found out 
 some new meanings for words by means of tradition or 
 Cathohc truth ? or have they been taking lessons of the 
 Jesuits, and are they now practising what they have learnt 
 The next sentence is from the same section : — 
 
 " You shall be taught the truths which the Word com- 
 municates by those whom he chooses in his own good 
 Sect. 11. time." 
 
 The literal rendering is as follows : — 
 
 " You shall know the things, which the Word commu- 
 nicates, by whom he wills, when he pleases, 8/ av ^ovXt- 
 rai, OTi fieXei." 
 
 No sentence could be more artftdly framed than the 
 above, so as to elude the meaning of the original, and yet 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 seemingly to contain it. Were it punctuated aright, the 
 sense would be seen : but the points being left out, a false 
 meaning is conveyed to the reader. The words, " by 
 those," &c. appear now to be connected with " communi- 
 cates," while they ought to be with " taught." Then the 
 word "chooses," is put for "wills," SovXeTui, and "whom 
 he chooses," instead of, " by whom he wills." The 
 whole purpose seems to be to make the sentence favoura- 
 ble to the notion of an " external-mark minister," with 
 which it has no connection whatever. From the same 
 Letter is the following passage : — 
 
 " Knowledge is not that which brings death, but diso- 
 bedience in the way of gaining it." 
 
 The literal rendering is this : — 
 
 " (The tree) of knowledge does not destroy ; but diso- 
 bedience destroys, — (avaiptj, kills.)" 
 
 The ruling passion appears here very strong. According 
 to the Oxford new meaning of words, derived no doubt 
 from tradition. Catholic truth and consent of Fathers, the 
 phrase, TzapaKOrj avai^et, disobedience destroys, is to be 
 translated, " disobedience in the way of gaining it ! " 
 There is an import in the words, " in the way of gaining 
 it," which the uninitiated do not perhaps understand. But 
 they who are acquainted with the system will easily 
 comprehend what it means. The " way of gaining " 
 knowledge, is by tradition, the teaching of the Church, 
 and through the lineal descendants of the Apostles ! and 
 knowledge not gained in this way brings death ! If there 
 be any that really believe this, the only thing that can be 
 said, is, that they are objects of pity and almost of de- 
 rision, being clearly deluded, and under the influence 
 
•202 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 of the wildest fancies. But to attach such a notion to 
 this passage, is to falsify its meaning, and delude the 
 public. The next extracts shall be from 
 
 IREN/EUS. 
 
 There are in No. 14. of " the Records," translations of 
 two chapters in the first book of Irenaeus against the 
 heretics. They are'the second and third chapters. These 
 authors give no references. Is it because they are not 
 willing that what they do should be examined ? The 
 second chapter, which contains what may be called the 
 Irenaeus, creed of Irenaeus, is rendered tolerably well, except the 
 Creed, last part, which is not done unfaithfully, but in a very 
 clumsy manner. There is indeed an expression which can 
 hardly be deemed correct. They have rendered tXaa-fTj- 
 /Aov; Tav avBpwnuv, " profane men," instead of " blasphe- 
 mers " or " slanderers of men." The rendering of the 
 third chapter shews most clearly " the cloven foot." Every 
 thing is done to countenance tradition, and to clothe with 
 lordship and authority the ministerial character ; which 
 the following instances will sufficiently shew : — 
 Cap 3 " '^^'^ message and this is the faith." 
 
 Which should be, 
 
 " This is the preaching (to Kyipvy/A-a.,) and this is the 
 faith." 
 
 The knovsTi unfriendliness of these divines to preaching 
 accounts for this change of " preaching" into a " message." 
 To depreciate preaching, and to exalt prayers and the 
 sacraments, appear evidently to be their great object 
 throughout their Tracts. For they maintain, that " the 
 Sacraments, not preaching, are the sources of divine 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 203 
 
 grace," forgetting, or not believing, what St. Paul says, 
 that the first grace, that by which we are saved, even 
 faith, cometh by hearing ; and hearing is by the means of 
 preaching. One of the peculiarities of the Gospel is 
 preaching; it is thereby distinguished from the Mosaic 
 dispensation, and from all systems of heathenism. There 
 was preaching, it is true, in some measure under the law ; 
 but sacrifices and prayers form the principal part. And 
 it is remarkable that preaching made no part of the reli- 
 gious services of the pagans. " The worship of the gods," 
 says Dr. Adam, in his Roman Antiquities, p. 293, " con- 
 sisted chiefly in prayers, vows and sacrifices : " and he 
 adds, " No act of religious worship was performed with- 
 out prayer : the words used were thought of the greatest 
 importance." Is it the object of these divines to cere- 
 monialize the Gospel, or to heathenize it ? During the 
 dark ages, when popery was rampant, there was very 
 little preaching. True religion and preaching live and die 
 together. Formalists and the self-righteous have ever pre- 
 ferred prayers to preaching. But I proceed to quote the 
 following sentence : — 
 
 " And (which the church,) preaches, teaches, hands 
 down to posterity, as harmoniously as though she had 
 but one mouth." Cap. 3. 
 
 The following is the literal rendering : — 
 
 " And (the church,) harmoniously preaches, teaches 
 and delivers, (irapaSiSaxri)',) these things, as if she pos- 
 sessed but one mouth." 
 
 To give the idea of handing down to posterity to the 
 verb here used, is by no means warrantable. It means to 
 deliver any thing to another, — to convey in this mstance. 
 
204 
 
 ADDENDA 
 
 the truths of the Gospel to others, not to posterity, but 
 to those living at the time. To deliver instruction, is to 
 convey or communicate it : and this idea is included in the 
 verb and in the noun, TrapaSocji? — tradition, derived from 
 it. Tradition, according to Irenseus, is the truth conveyed 
 by preaching, previously received, and deUvered as such 
 to others. So that the proper idea of the word is the 
 very reverse of what is given in this translation ; it is to 
 deliver to others what had been previously received, and 
 not to hand it down to posterity. The only respect in 
 which tradition differs from preaching, is this, that it in- 
 cludes the idea of a previous reception : but the two words 
 are used often by Irenaeus as meaning the same thing. 
 The following sentence betrays the same sort of leaning 
 towards popish views : — 
 
 " There is no difference of faith or tradition, whether in 
 Cap. 3. (.jjg churches of Germany," &c. 
 
 The literal translation is as follows : — 
 
 " And neither the Churches, founded in Germany, 
 have otherwise believed, or have otherwise delivered, 
 (aXA.s)? itapaiidoacriv,) " or, as the perfect tense is often ren- 
 dered by the present, " otherwise believe, or otherwise 
 deliver." 
 
 To get in the word, tradition, which possesses a sort 
 of magic to papists and such as are hke them, the form of 
 the sentence has been completely changed, while the literal 
 rendering is quite as intelligible. The word, tradition, 
 however, is of so much consequence, that it must be 
 brought in, whenever the least occasion is offered. Au- 
 thority and lordship too possess similar attractions, as the 
 following renderings shew : 
 
STRICTUHBS. 
 
 '205 
 
 " Among the rulers of the Church," &c. Cap. .'i. 
 
 " For no one is above his master." 
 These two sentences are thus correctly rendered : — 
 " Among those who preside (vpoeararaf) in the 
 Churches." 
 
 " For no one is above the teacher, (SiSao-KaXov)." 
 
 Now these foregoing instances from Irenseus occur 
 within the space of twenty lines ; for the whole chapter is 
 no more. To spread the truth and promote its interest, 
 is of course the professed object of these writers : but 
 they adopt very singular means for the purpose. To give 
 extracts from the Fathers, and translate them according 
 to their own views, and inconsistently with those of the 
 original authors, is certainly a strange sort of proceeding ; 
 but however strange it may be, it has always been the 
 same : it is like popery, semper idem. It is a proceeding 
 which the admirers of tradition and advocates of Catholic 
 truth, have invariably adopted. There are apes of Jesuits, 
 as well as apes of Epictetus. The last extracts that shall 
 now be noticed are those from 
 
 TERTULLIAN. 
 
 A short historical account of Tertullian is given in No. 
 17 of "the Records," together with some extracts from 
 his writings. Tlie heading of the Tract is, " TertuUian's 
 Account of the Rule of faith." And the work, from 
 which quotations are made, may be called, it is said, in 
 English, " The Church's plea (or demur,) against dis- 
 senters." The original title of the Work is not given, 
 nor any direct reference to the works of Tertullian. But 
 why is the title concealed } Why is this done ? These 
 
206 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 writers, it seems, are resolved to be consistent in every 
 thing, to carry on their objects in the same unfair and 
 dishonest way, — mangling, adding to, lopping ofF, per- 
 verting, concealing, — the usual trade of Jesuits ! But 
 ivhy is the title not given ? Is it because it would not 
 suit the purpose for which the extracts are made ? This is 
 evidently the reason ; for in the notes which they give, 
 they represent those against whom TertuUian wrote, as 
 " separatists," while the expressed object of his treatise 
 was to refute the heretics. The title of his work is, Liber 
 de prcEscriptionihus Hare ticor urn. It is not of separation 
 from the Church as a community that he speaks, but of 
 separation from the truth, as taught in the Scriptures, 
 and as continued according to what he maintains, to be 
 taught by the universal Church. And the pouits he men- 
 tions in his rule of faith, are as purely taught by all our 
 orthodox Dissenters, as by these divines. 
 
 The first extract given is from the ninth section, in 
 which the subject is not commenced, but carried on : and 
 great ingenuity is exercised to make it appear different 
 from what it really is. TertuUian maintains against the 
 heretics that the Scriptures contain all that we need to 
 know, and that we ought to be satisfied with them without 
 further inquiries. His very words are the following, 
 which of course are not given by these divines :— 
 
 Nobis curiositate opus non est, post Christum Jesum ; 
 nec inquisitione, post evangehum. Cum credimus, nihil 
 desideramus ultra credere : Hoc enim prius credimus, non 
 esse quod ultra credere debemus. — " We have no need of 
 a searching curiosity, after (we know) Christ Jesus ; nor of 
 enquiring, after (we know) the Gospel. When we believe. 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 207 
 
 we desire to believe nothing further, for this we first be- 
 lieve, that there is not any thing which we ought further 
 to believe. 
 
 Then in the following section he notices this saying, — 
 " Seek and ye shall find," which the heretics pleaded in Sect. 9. 
 favour of their endless enquiries ; and he answers them by 
 saying, that it was a command to the Jews in our Saviour's 
 time, and not to Christians in general. But in the next 
 section, where the extract in the " Records " begins, he 
 admits its application, and argues against their inferences. 
 
 The real state of the question between Tertullian and 
 the heretics is not specified by these writers : but there is 
 an evident eflfort made to keep it out of sight. The mode of 
 rendering, the selection of parts and the notes, seem all 
 to have been intended for the very purpose of concealing 
 the real case, and of misrepresenting the whole matter. 
 The heretics with whom Tertullian contended, were the 
 heretics of Irenseus, commonly called the Gnostics, who 
 denied various portions of the Scripture, pretended to 
 receive some, and perverted almost the whole. The con- 
 test with them was about the very essentials of truth, and 
 not about regulations of Church discipline ; for they had. See 
 at least some of them, their bishops, presbyters and 
 deacons, according to Tertullian, as well as the orthodox. Sect. 13. 
 Tlie rule of faith (Regula fidei) which he adduces, is a 
 summary of the fundamental articles of faith, (apostolical 
 succession is unfortunately left out,) substantially the same 
 with that given by Irenseus, but worded and arranged 
 very difi"erently. This rule of faith is as fully beheved by 
 all orthodox dissenters in the present day as by these 
 divines. By this summary of truth, truly alleged no 
 
208 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 doubt by Tertullian, to be received and embraced by the 
 universal Church in his day, even from the time of the 
 Apostles, he attempted to prove the heretics wrong and to 
 overturn their system ; which as an argument and a proof 
 was sufficient for the purpose. But strange to say, by this 
 same rule of faith, which is substantially beheved and 
 embraced by all orthodox separatists from the Church, 
 the Oxford Divines now attempt to prove them wrong and 
 confute their opinions ! 
 
 But it may probably be said, that the mode in which 
 it has been derived is the important matter. Though the 
 creed is really and substantially believed and acknow- 
 ledged; yet they have not received it through a right 
 channel. This indeed is the only ground that can be 
 taken. The rule of faith is known and beheved, the Bible 
 too is fully admitted, and all fundamental articles, at least 
 according to Tertullian's creed as well as that of Irenaeus, 
 are acknowledged and embraced; and there is nothing 
 mentioned by Tertullian, which belongs to the present sepa- 
 ratists in common with the heretics of his day, except it be, 
 that they have not received the main truths regularly 
 through the Church from the apostles. This is the only 
 point on which the application is justifiable. Now it so 
 happens, that these very men, according to their own con- 
 fession, are in this respect, exactly in the same predica- 
 ment with the separatists. In a note to the third extract, 
 they say this, " Since his (Tertullian's) time, the Church 
 has gone wrong." If the Church has gone wi-ong, how 
 has the rule of faith been recovered Not by apostoUcal 
 succession, for that conveys only orders, and not the rule 
 of faith, which the church, " going wrong," must have 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 209 
 
 lost, at least in a measure : for otherwise it could not have 
 gone wrong. If it be said, that the rule of faith was never 
 lost in any degree, so it may be said of the Bible as a 
 professed and acknowledged document. But notwith- 
 standing all this, the Church had gone wrong ! And how has 
 the rule of faith been recovered? No doubt in a way 
 similar to that by which the separatists have found 
 and obtained it, that is, by means of the Bible and of 
 books, — a safer mode of transmission than any human 
 teaching. The Church had gone wrong, and it would 
 have never become right again, had it not been for the 
 Bible, the book of God, the precious word of inspiration. 
 How did the Church of England become right in the es- 
 sentials of faith at the Reformation } By tradition, by 
 the rule of faith, by apostolical succession ? Surely not : 
 but by means of the Bible, and by the perusal of such 
 writings as were consistent with, and embodied the grand 
 and main doctrines of the Bible, — yea, of such writings as 
 were condemned by the Catholic Church. 
 
 This is not the place to criticise the sentiments of 
 Tertullian : but these authors misrepresent him, when 
 they say in a note to the third extract, that he " does not 
 mean to decry arguing from Scripture." Herfoesmean to 
 do so most distinctly with respect to the heretics. His 
 words are, — Ergo non ad scripturas provocandum est — 
 " Therefore an appeal to the Scriptures is not to be made." ^ ^• 
 As to his mode of confuting the heretics, it was to a cer- 
 tain extent legitimate, and peculiar as to time : but he 
 carried his principle too far, and made it too exclusive. 
 It was one way of undermining their system ; but ought 
 not to have been adopted to the exclusion of the best way, 
 p 
 
210 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 an appeal to Scripture. Let those who advocate his 
 sentiments, reconcile his theory in his younger days with 
 his practice in his advanced years, and also with the prac- 
 
 Irenjeus ^^^^ °^ Irenseus, the object of whose great work was 
 and principally to confute the same heretics hy an appeal to 
 
 er u mn. g^j-^pf^^g^ Lg^. tijogg -who advocate the consent of Fathers 
 make these two Fathers consistent with one another, — the 
 one refusing, and the other challenging, an appeal to the 
 divine oracles ! But some examples of perverted ren- 
 derings shall be given : — 
 
 Sect. 10. " Now that is to be sought which Christ instituted." 
 The rendering should be this : — 
 
 " What Christ has taught (instituit) should therefore 
 be enquired after." 
 
 The verb, instituo, and its derivatives, are evidently 
 used by Tertullian in this section and in other parts, in 
 the sense of teaching. Hcec est institutio, is rendered by 
 these writers themselves, in section 36, " This is the 
 teaching." To translate it here, " instituted," and to put 
 it in itahcs, seems to have been done with the view of 
 leading the reader to suppose, that Tertulhan referred to 
 some creed or ordinance of Christ. Hence it was fomid 
 necessary in the remaining clause of this sentence to ren- 
 der credidisti, " you have believed," by the phrase, " you 
 have attained to belief." But the following sentence pre- 
 sents an instance of still greater perversion ; the reference 
 is to Paul's charge to Timothy : — 
 
 " His direction about committing to " faithful men" 
 did not imply a secrecy, but of course care to choose such 
 men for the commission as would preach the Gospel wth 
 Sec. 26. judgment and discrimination." 
 
 The whole passage is literally this : — 
 
STRICTURV.S. 
 
 " It was moreover meet that lie should say further 
 (adjiceret — should add,) to him, to whom he committed 
 the ministration of the Gospel, that it was not to be 
 administered everywhere, nor inconsiderately." 
 
 The first clause is not in the original ; nor is there any 
 thing in the text about " the care to choose." There is 
 not a word about "choosing," nor about "the care" 
 necessary for the purpose. These things are proper in 
 their proper place, and when the original expresses them. 
 Indeed the whole purport of the passage is changed. 
 The main design of the original is to shew how the Gos- 
 pel was to be administered, that is, " not everywhere, 
 nor inconsiderately." But the main design of it as ex- 
 hibited by these translators is to shew the necessity of 
 exercising " care to choose " suitable persons for the 
 commission. These writers are constantly influenced by 
 their party notions, and continually bent on the same 
 object, bringing in, wherever they can, by any means possi- 
 ble, what favours their own views. They seem to think 
 of nothing but " the commission." As to the adminis- 
 tration of the Gospel, it is not of much consequence. 
 Where it is mentioned, and made the main subject, it is 
 quite right, as it appears, for translators to put " the 
 commission " in its place ! And this of course may be 
 done with a good conscience, because it is what favours 
 our own views and furthers our own peculiar object ! 
 
 Instances of the like kind might easily be added from 
 the six extracts in the " Records," made from this trea- 
 tise of Tertullian. But I shall only notice here a passage 
 from this same treatise in one of " the Tracts for the 
 Times," No. 57, p. 4 ; in which a change of meaning is 
 
212 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 introduced that can hardly he paralleled. The passage, as 
 translated in the Tract, is the following : — (Tertullian 
 speaks of the heretics.) 
 
 " Their ordinations are off-hand, light, variable ; 
 sometimes mere novices are raised by them to church 
 office, sometimes men engaged in worldly business, some- 
 times deserters from our ranks ; whom they hope to make 
 sure of by the compliment, having no reality [of spiritual 
 power] to offer." 
 
 Now I shall give the original of this passage, accom- 
 panied by a literal translation : — 
 
 Ordinationes eorum temerarise, leves, inconstantes : 
 nunc neophytos conlocant ; nunc seculo obstrictos ; nunc 
 apostatos nostros, ut gloria eos obligent, quia veritate non 
 possunt. "Their ordinations are rash, light, variable : 
 they appoint sometimes novices ; sometimes those held 
 fast by the world ; sometimes our apostates, that they 
 may bind them by glory, because they cannot by truth." 
 
 This is a singular specimen of perversion, which can 
 hardly be reconciled to any thing like common honesty. 
 The perversion was whoUy necessarj' to answer the end for 
 which the passage is quoted : it would have been other- 
 wise entirely useless, being altogether inappropriate ; but 
 the new idea that is introduced makes it exactly suitable. 
 According to this new Oxford plan, we can make the 
 Fathers assert anything, or deny anything, just as we please. 
 To make the passage apphcatory to the present state of 
 things, it is in some measure newly moulded throughout ; 
 but it is the conclusion of it, that receives the completest 
 transmuting touch of the alchymist, by which, quia veri- 
 tate non possunt, is changed into the singular phrase. 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 213 
 
 " having no reality of spiritual power to offer I " It is 
 not the authority to ordain that Tertullian assails, nor the 
 validity of their ordinations ; but the unworthy character 
 of the ordained. It was not the thing itself that he 
 blamed, but " the rash, light, and variable " manner in 
 which it was done. Nor is there anything in this whole 
 treatise, nor in the similar works of Irenseus, that bears 
 at all on the point which these Oxford Divines are so 
 anxious to establish. Like St. Paul, when he opposed 
 false teachers and false apostles, these authors do nowhere 
 call in question the validity of their ordinations, but the 
 truth of their doctrines. 
 
 Thei'e is an evident attempt made in the " Records," 
 to identify the " apostolicity " as it is called, of the 
 Church, with apostolical succession. This is not the doc- 
 trine of Tertullian, as the following passage most clearly 
 shews : — " the heretics will be challenged in the same 
 manner by those churches, which, though they cannot 
 bring forward, as their founder, any of the apostles or 
 of apostolic men, as being much later, being indeed 
 established daily, yet agreeing in the same faith, are deemed 
 no less apostolical, on account of consanguinity of doc- 
 trine (tamen in eadem fide conspirantes, non minus apos- Sect. 32. 
 tohcse deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinse)." 
 
 Corresponding with this view is the r ( count he gives 
 of what may be called the descent of truth. He says 
 that God delivered it to Christ, Christ to the Apostles, 
 and the Apostles to the churches, without singling out the 
 ministers as distinct from the members. This is the pur- 
 port of the following passage : — 
 
 " It therefore appears, that every doctrine, which is 
 
214 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 consistent with these apostolical churches, the wombs and 
 originals of the faith (matricibus et originalibus fidei), is 
 to be accounted for truth, as doubtless containing what 
 the churches received from the Apostles, the Apostles from 
 
 Sect. 21. Christ, and Christ from God." 
 
 This was the opinion of Tertullian, which is in a degree 
 correct, but not wholly so. That the apostles delivered 
 the truth and the whole truth to the churches, is most 
 true ; but that the churches retained this truth whole and 
 entire till the time of Tertullian, is what no man, in any 
 measure acquainted with the history and writings of that 
 age, can for a moment beheve. That the main doctrines 
 were still held, (at least those which the heretics disputed,) 
 may be truly and fully admitted ; but that every doctrine, 
 held by the apostohc churches, was still retained in its 
 purity, entire and unmixed, is what cannot with truth be 
 conceded. The church begayi to " go wrong " in many 
 things very early. 
 
 TertuUiin there is another work of Tertullian translated in 
 
 on the "Records." No. 22, containing a large portion of his 
 
 Baptii-m. jj.g^j.-gg baptism. The translation presents a striking 
 exhibition of the artful tactics of these writers. What 
 suits their views, they select and present to their readers : 
 but what is too low, or too vulgar, or too absurd, they 
 either pass by and leave untranslated, or mould in such a 
 way as to make it appear different ft-om what it really is ; 
 so that much of what they bring before the public, is not 
 what Tertullian has actually said. By this mode the 
 writings of the heretics, and even the Koran, might be 
 quoted in favour of any notions we may choose to adopt. 
 Tlic credit of an author does not depend on insulated 
 
STRICTURES. 
 
 215 
 
 portions of truth which he may advocate, but on the 
 general correctness and consistency of his views. There 
 are some sentiments in this treatise of Tertullian, which are 
 quite sufficient to destroy his credit altogether as a man 
 of sober and correct views on the subject of baptism. 
 But these authors have modified some and left out others. 
 They should have however told their readers, that he 
 maintains the right of laics to baptize, and that he dis- 
 countenances the baptizing of infants. It is enough to 
 say, without producing any examples, that they have, in 
 translating this treatise, betrayed the same want either of 
 discrimination or of honesty, as in the other works which 
 have already been more especially noticed. 
 
21G 
 
 A LETTER 
 
 ON TRADITION. 
 
 I HAVE already sent you some remarks on the "advertise- 
 ment " to the Rev. J. Newman's Lectures on Romanism, &c. 
 and I feel inchned to add a few observations on the Lectures 
 themselves.* The author builds on a false notion of the 
 Church, and a very false view of tradition. Let these two 
 insecure supports be taken away, and his imposing struc- 
 ture will inevitably fall to the ground ; for there is nothing 
 but these two props to support it. But I shall confine my 
 remarks chiefly to tradition, as that is the main prop on 
 which he builds his system. 
 
 His view on this subject differs but little from that of 
 the Romanists. He maintains that there is a stream of 
 tradition in the same sense as the Church of Rome ; only 
 he cuts it off at some indeterminate period, somewhere 
 between the fourth and seventh century. His reasons for 
 the existence of such a stream as he meiintains, will not 
 satisfy any true Protestant ; nor will his reasons for cut- 
 ting short its progress satisfy any Romanist. His opinion 
 
 * It is not deemed necessary to introduce the previous Letter, as it 
 docs not bear materially on the subject of this. 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 is, that there were some truths— and those important 
 ones, without which we cannot well know the genuine 
 faith— left unrecorded, but which were delivered by the 
 Apostles to their successors, and have been transmitted to 
 future generations ; and that they are now to be found in 
 the writings of the Fathers, and in the decrees of coun- 
 cils, as far down, with respect to time, as what cannot be 
 now exactly specified. In the things thus delivered down 
 to posterity, he includes, so far as I can make out, usage, 
 doctrine, and interpretation of Scripture. This appears to 
 me to be his view of tradition. 
 
 For such an opinion, he gives us, as I think, no solid 
 reasons, but only some such surmises and conjectures as 
 the Romanists are in the habit of giving. He takes for 
 granted, as they do, that the traditions mentioned by St. 
 Paul were such as were transmitted orally, and afterwards 
 recorded by the Fathers ; contrary to the statements of 
 some of those fathers themselves, who, as he maintains, 
 did transmit them ; and quite contrary to the current use 
 of the word tradition in that age, and in the ages imme- 
 diately succeeding. 
 
 " When St. Peter," says Bishop Burnet on the sixth Bishop 
 article, " knew by a special revelation that he was near ^"^^ VI, 
 his end, he writ his second epistle, that they might have 
 that as a means of keeping ' those things always in re- 
 membrance after his death.' Nor do the Apostles give us 
 any hints of their having left anything with the Church, 
 to be conveyed down by oral tradition, which they them- 
 selves had not put in writing: they do sometimes refer 
 themselves to such things as they had delivered to par- 
 ticular churches ; but by tradition in the Apostles' days, 
 
218 
 
 A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 and fur some ages after, it is vertj clear, that they meant 
 only the conveyance of the faith, and not any unwritten 
 doctrines." The sensible, reasonable, and scriptural view 
 of this subject given by the bishop on the sixth article, 
 forms a striking contrast to the opinions of Mr. Newman ; 
 who seems to be minutely acquainted with all that the 
 Romanists have asserted respecting the incompleteness, 
 obscurity, and mysteriousness of Scripture ; and hence of 
 the necessity of something additional. No Romanist has 
 ever alleged more for the purpose of depreciating Scrip- 
 ture, and of exalting tradition. Let me call attention to 
 the following extracts : — 
 
 " We consider the Church as a witness, a keeper and 
 witness of Catholic tradition." This notion degrades the 
 Church ; making her the keeper of what cannot now, with 
 any certainty, be known, and therefore worth very little or 
 nothing. How much more dignified does our Article XX. 
 make her, by setting her forth as " the witness and keeper 
 of Holy Writ ! " But the author may say, that she is the 
 witness and keeper of both. He may say so, but our Church 
 does not say so in any of her Articles, or other documents. 
 Newman's He goes On,— " She bears witness to a fact, that such and 
 'p'^3-^r ^^^^ ^ doctrine, or such a sense of Scripture, has ever 
 been received and came from the Apostles." " We con- 
 ^' sider antiquity and catholicity to be the real tjuides, and 
 
 p. 323. the Church their organ." " The present Church, then, 
 in our ^•iew of her office, is not so much the judge of 
 Scripture, as a witness of catholic truths delivered to her 
 in the first ages, whether by councils or by fathers, or in 
 whatever other way." 
 
 The way in which Mr. Newman attempts to prove tra- 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 219 
 
 dition to be of this high character — "the authoritative 
 teacher," as he says in one place, "of Christians "—is 
 exactly the same with that adopted by the Romanists. 
 The only argument wliich seems to have any semblance of 
 truth, is that derived from the fact of the New Testament, 
 itself being received on the testimony of the Primitive 
 Church. The various ways in which he siates this fact, 
 shew a want of discrimination ; for I would not impute a 
 want of honesty. Thus, he says, that we use tradition 
 " for the establishment of the divinity of the Scripture," 
 and that we "receive through tradition both the Bible 
 itself, and the doctrine that it is divinely inspired." But 
 it is not true, that we build the divinity of Scripture on 
 the testimony of the Fathers, or that we receive from them 
 the doctrine that it is divinely inspired. This is wholly a 
 false and distorted statement. Their testimony— that is, 
 written testimony, not oral tradition— is of weight only as 
 it regards certain writings being handed down as the 
 writings of the Apostles and their companions. Their 
 divinity we infer from that fact. We do not receive them 
 because the Fathers say that they are Divine, but because 
 they tell us that they are the writings of the Apostles and 
 their associates. This is the view of Bishop Burnet, as 
 given in his Exposition of the Sixth Article. " A great 
 difference," he says, " is to be made between all this and 
 the oral tradition of a doctrme, in which there is nothing Art. VI. 
 fixed or permanent, so that the whole is only report, 
 carried about and handed down. Whereas here is a book, 
 that was only to be copied and read publicly, and by all 
 persons : between which the difference is so vast, that it is 
 as little possible to imagine how the one (tradition) should 
 
220 
 
 A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 continue pure, as how the other (Scripture) should come 
 to be corrupted." "The authority of these books," adds 
 the bishop, " is not derived from any judgment that the 
 Church made concerning them ; but from this, that it was 
 known that they were writ, either by men who were them- 
 selves the Apostles of Christ, or by those who were their 
 assistants and companions." 
 
 If our author's argument will hold good as to Christian 
 traditions, it may hold good as to Jewish traditions. If it 
 be said. Since you receive the New Testament through the 
 testimony of the Primitive Church, you ought also to re- 
 ceive its traditions : it may be equally said, since you 
 receive the Old Testament through the testimony of the 
 Jewish church, you ought also to receive the Jewish tra- 
 ditions. The Jews, in our Saviour's time, and in succeed- 
 ing ages, might use exactly the same argument with Mr. 
 Newman. Of this he was evidently aware, and therefore 
 he brings in his " cathohcity : " but it does not ser\'e his 
 purpose ; for there is catholicity as much in the one case 
 as the other. It must appear, truly, very strange to any 
 unbiassed mind, that the Christian Church should fall into 
 the same error, as to oral traditions, as the Jewish, espe- 
 cially when it is considered how decidedly and strongly 
 our Saviour condemned traditions, and how He and his 
 Apostles invariably appealed to the written word. It 
 might have been thought that this example would have 
 alForded sufficient warning to eJI preceding ages : but it 
 has not. Man is the same being, essentially, in every 
 age ; fond of shadows, and disliking realities ; enamoured 
 with what flatters his pride, pleases his fancy, and serves 
 his interest ; and turning away from what opposes the 
 selfish and corrupt principles of his nature. 
 
A I.ETTKR ON TRADITION. ^- 
 
 In one of the extracts which have been made, our author 
 speaks of tradition as " coming from the Apostles." Now 
 if this can be proved, it is, of course, entitled to the same 
 attention with Scripture : but he is not " venturesome " 
 enough yet to say so, though, if he continue to indulge 
 himself in such statements as the following, he may, in 
 time, get courage to make such an assertion : — He says, 
 " Whatever might formerly have been possessed of a 
 strictly traditionary nature ; whatever of rich, but un- 
 sorted and uncatalogued treasures ; whatever too sacred 
 or too subtle to record in words, whether comments on 
 Scripture, or principles of interpreting them, or Apostolic 
 usages : still we have the essentials of faith." Mr. New- , 
 
 ° Lectures 
 
 man seems to lament this loss ! And yet he has only to p. 249. 
 go to the Church of Rome, and he will find all that he has 
 lost, " sorted and catalogued " in decrees of councils and 
 in the bulls of the infallible popes : and whatever has been 
 " too sacred and too subtle to be recorded in words," he 
 may find in the oral traditions of that church ! He is, 
 however, very inconsistent : he is either wrong in what he 
 asserts, or he wrongs tradition. If he is right in saying 
 that it comes from the Apostles, then he ought to join the 
 Romanists and say that it is of equal authority with Scrip- 
 ture. But that any man, freed from the fetters of interest 
 and prejudice, knowing what human nature is, and how 
 merely oral reports soon grow into fables, and acquainted 
 in any degree with the history of the Primitive Church, 
 should give to tradition the same weight of authority as to 
 Scripture, is so monstrous as almost to exceed the bounds 
 of credibihty. But what sui-prises me exceedingly, is the 
 attempt made by our author to fix tradition on the Church 
 
A LKTTF.R ON TRADITION. 
 
 of England, which acknowledges its authority, as to doc- 
 trine, in none of her documents. " Our Church," he 
 says, " adheres to a double rule, Scripture and Catholic 
 tradition ; and considers that in all matters necessary 
 p. 326. to salvation, both safeguards are vouchsafed to us." 
 He seems aware of the difficidty of proving this point ; 
 and hence in pages 338 and 339 we have some strange 
 philosophisings on the subject, for the purpose of ac- 
 counting for the omission of more direct reference to 
 tradition. However, he attempts in other parts to make 
 the Church of England recognize the authority of tra- 
 dition. He refers to the first Homily as implying the 
 principle which he advocates ; but I can find nothing there 
 but " the stinking puddles of men's traditions," an ex- 
 pression which surely implies nothing favourable to his 
 scheme. There is an old canon, made in 1571, which 
 seems, at first sight, to afi^ord him some help : but even 
 that yields him no real assistance ; for it mentions only 
 what the Catholic fathers and ancient bishops collected 
 from the doctrine of the Old and New Testament, and not 
 what they transmitted down by oral tradition from the 
 Apostles. And what they collected seems evidently to 
 refer, from the other parts of the canon, not to any doc- 
 trinal subjects, or to the articles, but to matters of disci- 
 phne, especially to the Form of Ordination of archbishops, 
 bishops, priests, and deacons : for the articles are after- 
 wards expressly said to " have been, without doubt, col- 
 lected from the sacred books of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment," and not from tradition, as conveying the Catholic 
 faith. 
 
 The canon itself is too long to be quoted, but the follow- 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 223 
 
 ing are the words respecting the articles : — Articuli illi Collection 
 rehgionis christiante, in quos consensum est ab Episcopis ^^^("^1^^, 
 in legitima et Sancta S}modo, jussu atque authoritate sere- ^^^^ 
 nissimse Principis Elizabethse convocata et celebrata, hand ^ 
 duhie collecti sunt ex sacris libris veteris et novi Testa- 
 menti. 
 
 A portion of the concluding part of this canon I beg 
 leave to recommend to the attention of the authors of the 
 Oxford Tracts. It is as follows : — Vanas et aniles opini- 
 ones, et hceresies, et errores pontificios, a doctrina et fide 
 Christi abhorrentes, non docehunt. Let them observe this 
 part of the canon, and we shall have no more such Oxford 
 Tracts as we have had. It is not necessary to translate 
 the foregoing sentence, for the sake of the authors them- 
 selves ; but for the sake of some readers, I will do so : — 
 " They shall not teach vain and anile opinions and heresies, 
 and pontifical errors, abhorrent to the doctrine and faith 
 of Christ." It is not said, abhorrent to the Catholic faith 
 or Catholic tradition, as our author would doubtless have 
 added, if he had drawn it up. 
 
 There is one more attempt made to link tradition to our 
 Church. The adoption of the creeds, it is said, proves this 
 point : and " the Catholic faith " is mentioned in one of 
 them. Could there be any-thing so flimsy as this, espe- 
 cially when the article states expressly on what ground 
 they are received and adopted ? They ought "to be tho- 
 roughly received and believed," says the article," for they 
 may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture." 
 They are adopted, not on the ground of tradition, but 
 on the ground of their scriptural character. 
 
 These three creeds, especially the Apostles', are made 
 
2-24 
 
 A I.ETTKR ON TRADITION. 
 
 an unw arranted use of by our author. "\'aluable as tliey 
 are, as doctrinal expositions, none of them are entitled to 
 any high regard on the ground of antiquity. The creed of 
 Athunasius is not thought to have been drawn up by him : 
 but to have been collected by some one, nobody knows by 
 whom, from his writings. It is not, says Bishop Burnet, 
 among his works ; nor was it ever heard of before the 
 eighth century, an age not very remarkable for purity of 
 doctrine. The Nicean creed is the creed of a council 
 held at Nice in the fourth century, but not exactly as we 
 have it now : the procession of the Holy Ghost " fi'om the 
 Father," was added in the second general council at Con- 
 stantinople, and, " from the Son," was added by the 
 Western Church. The Apostles' creed is not thought, by 
 any person versed in antiquity, to have been drawn 
 up by them. " There is no reason," says Bishop Burnet, 
 " to believe that this creed was prepared by the Apostles, 
 or that it was of any great antiquity ; since Ruffn, (who 
 lived in the fourth century) was the first that puhlished it. 
 It is true, he published it as the creed of the church of 
 Aquileia ; but that was so late, that neither this nor the 
 other creeds have any authority on their own account." 
 How wisely, therefore, has our Church acted in adopting 
 these symbols, not on the ground of antiquity or tradition, 
 but on the ground of their being capable of proof from 
 Holy Scripture ! They were no doubt viewed by our Re- 
 formers as containing brief and convenient summaries of 
 Divine truths, exactly in the same way as if any Protestant 
 Church were to adopt Dr. Watts' Catechism, without an 
 atom of idea of bearing testimony, as our author would 
 have it, to tradition. 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 2-25 
 
 Durandus, as quoted by Bishop StiUingfleet, in his Durandas. 
 " Council of Trent Examined," &c. has these words : — 
 " Jll truth is contained in the Holy Scripture at large ; but 
 for the peoples' conveniency, the necessary points are 
 summed up in the Apostles' creed." This learned Romanist 
 had a far better idea of the ground on which this creed is 
 adopted, than our author. Many Romanists before the 
 Council of Trent, as Bishop StiDingfleet clearly proves, 
 denied exphcitly what our author maintains, that is, the 
 authority of tradition ; and held expressly, that the Scrip- 
 ture alone is the test of truth and the rule of faith. The 
 following is the testimony of John Gerson, declared by Greson. 
 Zabarella, in the council of Constance, to be the greatest 
 divine of his time :— " Scriptura nobis tradita est, 
 tanquam regula suddens et infallibilis, pro regimine eccle- 
 siastici corporis et membrorum, usque in finem seculi. — 
 The Scripture has been delivered to us as a sufficient and 
 infallible rule for the government of the ecclesiastical body 
 and members, to the end of the world." 
 
 Much is made, by Mr. Newman, of the practice of the 
 Fathers in referring to Tradition. The reason of this he 
 does not clearly or correctly state. Ever\^ thing depends 
 on the grounds on which Tradition was adduced, and on 
 what was understood by the term. The following quo- 
 tation from Bishop Burnet, on the Articles, represents the gp. 
 case very clearly and very satisfactorily : — "It is plain that Bomet. 
 the Gnosticks, the Valentinians, and other heretics, began 
 very early to set up a pretension to a tradition delivered bv 
 the Apostles to some particular persons, as a key for under- 
 standing the secret meanings that might be in Scripture ; 
 in opposition to which both Irenaeu-a. TertuUian, and others, 
 Q 
 
226 
 
 A LETTER ON THADITION. 
 
 make one of two sorts of arguments. Tlie one is the au- 
 thority of the Scripture itself, by which they confuted their 
 errors ; the other is a point of fact, that there was no such 
 tradition. In asserting this, they appeal to those churches 
 which had been founded by the apostles, and in which suc- 
 cession of bishops had been continued down. They say. 
 In these we must search for Apostohcal tradition. This 
 was not said by them as if they had designed to establish 
 tradition as an authority distinct from or equal to the 
 Scriptures ; but only to shew the falsehood of that pretence 
 of the heretics, and that there was no such tradition for 
 their heresies as they gave out." 
 
 Exactly the same view should be taken of tradition when 
 referred to by some of our Reformers in their disputes with 
 the Romanists. They gave no authority themselves to 
 tradition : but as the Romanists pleaded it, they denied, 
 and justly, that early tradition was in their favour, but 
 maintained that it was decidedly and expressly against 
 them. The reason for the appeal to tradition has been 
 exactly the same in latter times, as in former ages. It was 
 made by our Reformers, as it was made by the early Fa- 
 thers, for the purpose of destroying the claims of false 
 tradition, and not for the purpose of making tradition the 
 test of truth or the rule of faith. They referred to it as 
 corroborative of what they held as the doctrines of the 
 Bible. The heretics made the first appeal to tradition ; 
 and the orthodox did the same in self-defence, " to clear 
 themselves," as Bishop Burnet says, " from the imputation 
 of having innovated any thing in the doctrine or in the 
 ways of expressing it." 
 
 In no other way but this, can we account for the strong 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 227 
 
 things they say in some parts in favour of tradition, and at 
 the same time for their many express declarations that 
 nothing is vahd but what the Scriptures contain. When 
 they contended with heretics who pleaded tradition, they 
 adduced tradition to confute them : and yet they spoke of 
 Scripture as the only rule of faith. The author of the " Whole 
 Duty of Man," in his book called " the Lively Oracles," has « ^j^^ 
 collected, on this last subject, the opinions of the Fathers of Lively^ 
 any note during the first centuries, some extracts from 
 which shall in a brief form be added here. 
 
 " The disposition of our salvation is no otherwise known 167—176. 
 by us, than by those by whom the Gospel was brought to 
 us : which indeed they first preached, but afterward deli- 
 vered to us in the Scripture, to be the foundation and 
 pillar of our faith." — IrencRus. 
 
 " I adore the plenitude of Scripture let Hermogenes 
 
 and his journeymen shew that it is written. If it be not 
 written, let him fear the woe which belongs to them that 
 add or detr&ct. "—Tertullian. 
 
 " Whosoever of us will preserve piety towards God, he 
 cannot otherwise learn it than from the Holy Scripture." — 
 Hyppolytus. 
 
 "Whence is this tradition ? Is it from the authority of 
 our Lord and his Gospel, or comes it from the commands 
 of the Apostles in their epistles .'' Almighty God declares, 
 that what is written should be obeyed and practised. If 
 truth have swerved or failed in any particular, we go back- 
 ward to the source of Evangelical and Apostolical tradi- 
 tion." — Cyprian. 
 
 " What are those things which we ought to inquire into ? 
 Even those which are to be found in the Scriptures. Those 
 
A LETTEK ON TRADITION. 
 
 things which are not there to be found, let us not seek 
 after." — Eusebius. 
 
 " It is fit for us to adhere to the word of God, and not 
 relinquish it. Ask not concerning the Trinity ; but learn 
 only from the Scriptures; for the instructions which you 
 will find there are sufficient." — Alhanasius. 
 
 " There is no earthly judge, but one is to be sought 
 from above. Yet there is no need of a resort to heaven, 
 when we have in the Gospel a Testament. The Lord who 
 left his will among us, is now in heaven ; therefore, let us 
 seek his commands in the Gospel, as in his will." — Optatus. 
 
 " Beheve those (things) which are written ; seek not 
 those (things) which are not written."— jBastV. 
 
 " How can we make use of any thing which is not to be 
 found in the Scripture ? "—Ambrose. 
 
 "As we deny not that which is written, so we refuse 
 those which are not written." — Jerome. 
 
 " The Holy Scripture settles the rule of our doctrine," 
 (which is the same thing as the rule of our faith.) — Au- 
 gustine. 
 
 " It is the suggestion of a diabolical spirit to think that 
 any thing besides the Scripture has divine authority." — 
 Theophilus of Alexandria. 
 
 " If the appeal were to reason, in this case there would 
 be just cause of being troubled : but we appeal to the Scrip- 
 tures, and they are simple and certain, vou may easily 
 yourself judge. He that agrees with the Scriptures, is a 
 Christian ; he that resists them, is far out of the way. I 
 pray and exhort you, that giving no heed to what this or 
 that man says, you would consult the Holy Scriptures, and 
 thence learn the Divine riches, and pursue what vou have 
 learnt. "— Cli rysostum . 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION 
 
 229 
 
 And what if some of the Fathers did lay great stress on 
 tradition, and exalt it to a second or first rule of faith ? Except 
 it be proved that they did this on Divine authority, what they 
 did is not binding on us. They maintained, held, and 
 practised many things, which have been long neglected, 
 and deserve to be so. The rule laid down by Vincentius 
 in the fourth century, for discovering the true faith and the 
 true church, is very ingenious — but it is human, and not 
 Divine. It might serve in his day for the purpose of silen- 
 cing heretics ; but it is sadly misapplied, when brought for- 
 ward to weaken or neutralize, in any degree, the supreme 
 and exclusive authority of the Scriptures. 
 
 The notions of our author respecting the Apostles' 
 creed, and the use he makes of it, are very strange. He 
 says that the Church teaches first the creed, or bears tes- 
 timony to the creed as containing the essential doctrines 
 of the Catholic faith, and appeals to Scripture for proof. 
 If he refers to its elementary teaching — to what the Church 
 teaches children— how does he separate the creed from the 
 catechism ? And as to pubHc teaching, the word of God 
 is what our Church requires to be taught first and last ; 
 and not any tradition, or what is called the Catholic truth. 
 The Scripture, it seems, is only for proof ; but the Catho- 
 lic truth is to be taught ! Now, if the Scripture (which 
 he admits) is the final test of truth, what is the use of 
 making the Church travel this useless round ; and how is 
 the point to be maintained, that tradition is a supplement 
 to Scripture, and the expositor of Scripture, with which 
 he seems to hold ? The scheme, it appears, is this : The 
 Church does not preach Scripture, or bear witness to it, 
 but to traditionary or Catholic truth ; and then refers to 
 
230 
 
 A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 Scripture for proof, as the final test of truth. And this 
 is not all, for the Church then, as it seems, brings forward 
 tradition as the interpreter of the final test, the Scripture ! 
 Thus Scripture is at first put in the background ; and 
 when brought forward, it is not allowed to speak but as 
 tradition dictates to it. If this be not pure Romanism, 
 I know not what is. It is too late in the day, I hope, 
 for such anti-protestant and anti- scriptural notions to meet 
 with any success among the members of the Anghcan or 
 any other reformed Church. The following are a few 
 extracts from Bishop Jeremy Taylor, on the subject of 
 tradition, taken from the volume of his Polemical Dis- 
 courses : — 
 
 p. Jer. " When the Fathers appeal to tradition, and with much 
 raylor. earnestness and some clamour they call upon heretics to 
 conform to, or be tied by, tradition, it is such a tradition 
 as delivers the fundamental points of Christianity, which 
 were also recorded in Scripture. That they did rather 
 urge tradition against them than Scripture, was because 
 the public doctrine of all the Apostolical Churches was at 
 Jirst more known and famous than many parts of the 
 Scripture, and because some heretics denied St. Luke's 
 Gospel, some received none but St. Matthew's, some re- 
 jected all St. Paul's Epistles ; and it was a long time 
 before the whole canon was consigned by universal testi- 
 mony, some churches having one part, some another — 
 Rome herself had not all— so that in this case the argu- 
 ment from tradition was the most famous, the most certain, 
 and the most prudent. And now, according to this rule, 
 they had more traditions than we have ; and traditions by 
 degrees did lessen as they came to be written, and their 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 231 
 
 necessity was less as the knowledge of them was ascertained 
 to us by a better keeper of Divine truths. There is, in- 
 deed, scarce any thing but what is turitten in Scripture, 
 that can with any confidence of argument pretend to de- 
 rive from the Apostles, except rituals and manners of 
 ministration ; but no doctrines or speculative mysteries 
 are so transmitted to us by so clear a current, that we 
 may see a visible channel, and trace it to the primitive 
 fountains. Either for the difficulty of their being proved, 
 the incompetency of the testimony that transmits them, 
 or the indifFerency of the thing transmitted, all traditions, 
 both ritual and doctrinal, are disabled from determining 
 our consciences either to a necessary believing or obeying. 
 It was an excellent saying of Basil, and will never be 
 wiped out with all the eloquence of Perron, in his Serm. 
 de Fide — " Manifestus est fidei lapsus, et liquidum super- 
 biae vitium, vel respuere aliquid eorum quse scriptura habet, 
 vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est." (It is a 
 manifest fall fi'om the faith, and the clear vice of pride, 
 either to refuse any thing of what the Scripture contains, 
 or to introduce any thing that is not written.) No man 
 is materially a heretic, but he that errs in a point of faith ; 
 and all faith is sufficiently recorded in Scripture ; the 
 judgment of faith and heresy is to be derived from thence ; 
 and no man is to be condemned for dissenting in an article 
 for whose probatum, tradition only is pretended. It is 
 said that there are traditive interpretations, as well as 
 traditive propositions ; but these have not much distinct 
 consideration in them, both because their uncertainty is as 
 great as the other upon the former considerations, as also, 
 because in very deed there are no such things ns traditive 
 
232 
 
 A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 interpretations universal They are no more argument 
 
 than the particiilar authority of those men whose commen- 
 taries they are. Beside the no-necessity of the traditions 
 — there being abundantly enough in Scripture — there are 
 many things called traditions bij the Fathers which they 
 themselves either prove by no authors, or by apocryphal, 
 and spurious, and heretical. The matter of tradition will 
 in very much be so uncertain, so false, so suspicious, so 
 contradictory, so improbable, so unproved, that if a ques- 
 tion be contested, and be offered to be proved only by 
 tradition, it will be very hard to impose such a proposition 
 to the behef of all men with an imperiousness or resolved 
 determination ; but it wiU be necessan,' that men should 
 preserve the liberty of bebeving and prophesying, and not 
 Pp. 97^ P^*"* ^'th it upon a worse merchandise and exchange than 
 Esau made for his birthright." 
 
 Such were I will not say the opinions, but the arguments, 
 of Bishop Jeremy Taylor. Permit me to add a few ex- 
 tracts from the " Collection of Articles," &c. to which 
 I have already referred. The full title is the following : 
 " A Collection of Articles, Injunctions, Canons, Orders, 
 Ordinances, and Constitutions Ecclesiastical, with other 
 Public Records of the Church of England, chiefly in the 
 times of K. Edward VI., Q. Elizabeth, K. James, and 
 K. Charles I. : published to vindicate the Church of 
 England, and to promote Uniformity and Peace in the 
 same." My copy is the third edition, printed in 1675, 
 Bishop Sparrow is the reputed author or collector. There 
 is no recognition of tradition in this Collection, but of 
 the Scriptures alone, as the only " foundation and pillar 
 of the faith" of our church. Tradition is wholly an 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 •233 
 
 exotic — a plant which in our church has never been 
 "catalogued;" and I hope that every attempt to trans- 
 plant it from the Roman soil will ever be resisted by the 
 genuine sons of the Protestant Church of England. The 
 following passages are taken from documents not generally 
 known ; and they refer us constantly to Scripture, and not 
 at all to tradition : — 
 
 "They (the clergy) shall purely and sincerely declare 
 the word of God ; and in the same exhort their hearers 
 to works of faith, mercy, and charity, specially prescribed, 
 and commanded in Scripture ; and that works devised by 
 men's phantasies besides Scripture .... have not only no 
 promise of reward in Scripture for doing of them ; but 
 contrariwise, great threats and maledictions of God." — 
 Injunctions by King Edward VI., 1547, p. 2. 
 
 " The said ecclesiastical person shall in no wise, at any 
 unlawful time, nor for any other cause, but for their honest 
 necessity, haunt or resort to any taverns or alehouses. 
 And after their dinner or supper, they shall not give them- 
 selves to drinking or riot, spending their time idly by day 
 or by night, at dice, cards, or tables playing, or any other 
 unlawful game ; but at all times, as they shall have 
 leisure, they shall hear and read somewhat of Holy 
 Scripture." — Ibid. p. 4. 
 
 " Whether they have preached, or caused to be preached, 
 purely and sincerely, the word of God, in every of their 
 cures, every quarter of the year, once at least, exhorting 
 their parishioners to works commanded by the Scripture, 
 and not to works devised by men's phantasies besides 
 Scripture, as wearing or praying upon beads or such like." 
 — Articles of Visitation by Archbishop Cranmer, in the 
 second year of Edward W., p. 26. 
 
234 
 
 A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 " Whether they have discouraged any person from read- 
 ing of any part of the Bible, either in Latin or in EngUsh ; 
 but rather comforted and exhorted every person to read 
 the same, as the very Uvely word of God, and the special 
 food of man's soul." — Ibid. p. 26. 
 
 " Whether any have wilfully maintained and defended 
 any heresies, errors, or false opinions, contrary to the faith 
 of Christ and Holy Scripture." — Ibid. p. 31. 
 
 I may here introduce what occurs in the Articles of 
 Visitation, by Ridley, Bishop of London, in the fourth 
 year of King Edward VI., 1550, as it bears on a subject 
 mooted by the Oxford Tracts men. It is respecting sin 
 after baptism. Their view was evidently considered false 
 and dangerous, otherwise the following inquiry would not 
 have been made in the Articles of Visitation : — 
 
 " Whether any saith, that Christian men cannot be 
 allowed to repentance, if they sin voluntary after baptism." 
 p. 37. 
 
 " They (the clergy) shall discourage no man from the 
 reading any part of the Bible, either in Latin or in English, 
 but shall rather exhort every person to read the same with 
 great humility and reverence, as the very lively word of 
 God and the especial food of man's soul, which all Chris- 
 tian persons are bound to embrace, believe, and follow, if 
 they look to be saved." — Injunctions by Queen Elizabeth, 
 1559, p. 69. 
 
 " That the vice of damnable despair may be clearly 
 taken away, and that firm beUef and stedfast hope may 
 be surely conceived of all their parishioners, being in any 
 danger, they shall learn, and have always in a readiness, 
 such comfortable places and sentences of Scripture as do 
 
A LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 235 
 
 set forth the mercy, benefits, and goodness, of Almighty 
 God towards all penitent and believing persons, that they 
 may at all times, when necessity shall require, promptly 
 comfort their flock with the lively word of God, which is 
 the only stay of man's conscience." — Ibid. p. 72. 
 
 There is not a word in these extracts, nor in the docu- 
 ments from which they are taken, about tradition, or the 
 Catholic truth, or the consent of Fathers ; but the Scrip- 
 tures are made every thing both to the clergy and laity ; 
 the clergy are to preach the word of God (and not what 
 is called the catholic faith) purely and sincerely, and all 
 the people are to read it humbly and reverently. What an 
 omission, if tradition is a guide as well as Scripture ! 
 
 The Articles drawn up in King Edward VI, 's reign, in 
 the year 1552— and afterwards ratified, with some few 
 alterations, in 1571 — are essentially the same with our 
 present Articles. And we know that in the Articles there 
 is not one single reference to the Catholic truth or tradi- 
 tion ; but the Scripture is continually appealed to as the 
 only repositoiy and standard of truth, to which not only 
 the doctrines, but the ceremonies and the traditions of the 
 Church, as to forms and discipline, are to be made con- 
 formable. There is not a single mention made of tradition 
 as to doctrine, or of Catholic truth, or consent of Fathers, 
 or the primitive Church. There is nothing acknowledged, 
 or even referred to, as " the foundation and piUar of faith," 
 but the written word of God. And yet it seems that 
 tradition is a guide to our Church as well as Scripture ! 
 It is a guide which she has never recognized ; and which, 
 I trust, she will never recognize ; for it is a bhnd one, and 
 will surely lead her into the ditch of error and corruption. 
 
236 LETTER ON TRADITION. 
 
 The Canons were first drawn up in the reign of James 
 I., in the year 1603. In these, again, we meet with no 
 recognition of tradition or the Catholic truth, or the primi- 
 tive church, except in a few rituals respectingthe ordination 
 of ministers and the sign of the cross in baptism. On 
 the last subject are the strongest expressions — " Freti 
 orthodoxis iis doctrinae regulis, de mediis et adiaphoris, 
 quas Divino Canoni ac Patrum antiquorum concordi sen- 
 tentiae judicamus esse consentaneas." Thus they speak of 
 themselves as " relying on those orthodox rules of doc- 
 trine, as to middle and indifferent things, which we judge 
 to be agreeable to the Divine Canon and to the concurrent 
 opinion of the ancient Fathers." Now if they relied on 
 the same respecting doctrines of faith, we might expect 
 the same sort of statement ; but we find it no where among 
 the documents of our Church : but her invariable language 
 is, that she relies, in this respect, solely and exclusively 
 on Scripture. 
 
 ANTI-PAPIST. 
 
APPENDIX :— NOTES. 
 
 A. p. 3. 
 
 It is singular, that Irenseus in his day, — the end of the ^et i p 3 
 second century, — ascribes the various degrees of fasting at 
 Easter, to the rusticity or rudeness of former times. In 
 his letter to Victor, bishop of Rome, partially preserved by 
 Eusebius, speaking of Easter, he thus proceeds : — " Such '5^4 
 is the variety of those who observe it, not begun now by us, 
 but long before by our predecessors, who kept it, as it 
 appears, beyond what was strict, having made for posterity 
 a custom according to their simplicity and rudeness, (xaO 
 aTrXoTvjTa km iSfoiTio-fx.oi' — vulgarity.") He then adds, that lienaeuu. 
 this difference did not, and should not, create disunion. 
 " And nevertheless,'' he observes, " all these were at peace, 
 and we are at peace, one with another : and the disagree- 
 ment about fasting recommends the harmony of faith. 
 
 Irenseus in this passage, gives us, most probably, a key 
 to many of the practices in the primitive church : which 
 later ages ascribed to the apostles. They began in " the 
 simplicity and rudeness " of the first ages : and how many 
 
238 
 
 APPENDIX B. C. 
 
 of such things have been fathered, without any authority, 
 B Jeremy apostles themselves ! Just and well-founded, no 
 
 ■faybr""^ doubt, is what is said by Jeremy Taylor in his " Dissuasive 
 from Popery," on this point. " Traditions," he says," are 
 said to be apostolical, if they be but ancient ; and if they 
 come from we know not whom, they are said to come from 
 the apostles ; and if postnate, they are called primitive : and 
 Collection ^^^Y argued and laboriously disputed into the title of apos- 
 Poi'dIsc traditions, by not only fallible, but fallacious argu- 
 
 p. 406. ments." 
 
 N. B. There is an omission of the word cap, after " stand up," in p. 9, 
 line 2. 
 
 B. p. 10. 
 
 Let.i.p.lO. -pjjg Archbishop took a wide and a charitable view of the 
 subject, and seemed evidently aware of the truth of what 
 ^fleet^ Bishop Stillingfleet announces, when he says, — " Nothing 
 hath been a more fruitful mother of mistakes and errors, 
 than the looking upon the practice of the primitive chtirch 
 through the glass of our own customs." 
 
 C. p. 11. 
 
 Let.i.p.xi. Tertullian flourished about the beginning of the third 
 century, and was deemed orthodox imtil he became a 
 Montanist : which was late in life. Montanus was a Phry- 
 
 Montanus. gian, and laid claim to a prophetic spirit. He maintained 
 that he, and the two rich ladies, Priscilla and Maximilla, 
 
who were his partners in the delusion, were three chosen 
 vessels, who, being filled with the spirit of prophecy, were 
 destined to " complete the mystery of eternal redemption." 
 They pretended to very great sanctity, were adverse to 
 marriage, and were much given to fasting, and to an aus- 
 tere life. Tertullian joined this strange sect for a time ; 
 then left it, and formed a sect of his own, which continued 
 under his name for some years after his death, but even- 
 tually ceased to exist. His works were mostly written 
 before he became a Montanist. They were in high repute 
 in the primitive church, and Cyprian especially admired 
 them : and they have no doubt been the means of origi- 
 nating and of perpetuating many false and extravagant 
 notions, particularly with regard to baptism. He was a 
 man of a very vigorous mind, but of a fanciful and exu- 
 berant imagination. He also possessed an ascetic temper, 
 and a superstitious spirit, which is sufficiently evidenced by 
 his lapse into Montanism. 
 
 D. p. 13. 
 
 Hardly any thing escaped the notice of that acute and 
 profound observer of men and things. Lord Bacon, jjg Let.i. p.l3. 
 has, in his Essays, particidarized, with his usual discrimi- Lord 
 nation, the different causes of superstition. His words are Bacon, 
 these :— "The causes of superstition, are, — 
 
 Pleasing and sensual rites and ceremonies ; 
 
 Excess of outward and Pharisaical holiness; 
 
 Over-great reverence of traditions, which cannot but 
 load the church ; 
 
240 APPENDIX E. 
 
 The stratagems of Prelates for their own ambition and 
 lucre ; 
 
 The favouring too much of good intentions, which open- 
 eth the gates to conceits and novelties ; 
 
 The taking an aim at divine matters by human, which 
 cannot but breed mixture of imaginations ; 
 
 And lastly, barbarous times, especially joined with cala- 
 mities and distresses." 
 
 E. p. 17. 
 
 Let.i.p.l7. Bishop Jeremy Taylor, sufficiently partial to the Fathers, 
 if not too much so, speaks thus of their authority in his 
 Introduction to his " Dissuasive from Popery," second part. 
 "It is false, that the testimony of the Fathers, as such, is 
 infallible, — since the Fathers never pretended to be assisted 
 by a supernatural miraculous aid, or inspired by infallible 
 Taylor, spirit. If it be said, that they were assisted infallibly in 
 some things, and not in all, it is said to no purpose ; for 
 unless it be infallibly known where the infaUibility resides, 
 every man must tread fearfully, for he is sure the ice is 
 broken in many places, and he knows not where it will 
 hold. S. Austin did not think the Fathers before him to 
 be infallible, when it is plain, that in many doctrines, with- 
 out scruple he rejected the doctrines of his predecessors. 
 And for that, S. Hierom hath given satisfaction to the 
 world in divers places of his own writings. " I suppose," 
 he says, "Origenis, for his learning to be read as Ter- 
 tullian, Novatus, Amobius, ApolUnarius, and some writers, 
 greek and latin, that we choose out that rvkicft is good, and 
 
APPENDIX E. 
 
 241 
 
 avoid the contrary." "So that it is evident the Fathers Collection 
 themselves have no conceit of the infallibility of themselves "^.^^ 
 or others, the Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists only p. 373. 
 excepted. What think we of the saying of the Cardiiial 
 Cajetan ? " If you chance to meet with any new exposition 
 which is agreeable to the text, although perhaps it differs 
 from that which is given by the whole current of the holy 
 Doctors, I desire the readers that they would not too hastily 
 reject it." Again, " Let no man therefore reject a new 
 exposition of any passage of Scripture, under pretence that 
 it is contrary to what the ancient doctors gave." What 
 think we of those words of Petavius " There are many 
 things by the most holy Fathers scattered, especially S. 
 Chrysostom, in his homilies, which, if you would accom- 
 modate to the rule of exact truth, they would seem to be jj 
 void of good sense." P- 376. 
 
 Perhaps no correcter views have ever been given of the 
 Fathers, than by the late Rev. Thomas Scott, in his an- 
 swer to Bishop Tomline. This venerable man seems to 
 have possessed as much sound judgment and accurate dis- 
 crimination, combined with sober and deep piety, as have 
 been united in one person, it may be, in any age. His 
 commentary on the Bible, as a whole, is no doubt superior 
 to any that has ever been published. If the exhibition of the 
 true and consistent meaning of the Divine word be ad- 
 mitted, as it ought to be, the highest excellence. The 
 following passages exhibit the Fathers in their true 
 light :- 
 
 " The ancient Fathers of the Christian church may be 
 read with benefit in various ways; their persons ought in ^^^jj^' 
 general, to be venerated ; even their supposed mistakes are Works. 
 
242 
 
 APPENDIX F. 
 
 entitled to our candour : but they have no authority over 
 our creed, any more than we have over the creed of our 
 remote posterity. So little agreement in sentiment is 
 found among these Fathers, that it would be a very easy 
 task to bring together a long catalogue of their mutual 
 discordances ; and so inaccurate were they as to historical 
 facts, that it would be equally easy to make a long list of 
 their undeniable mistakes. Their comments upon the 
 scripture were often such as would be almost universally 
 
 ^ ^ rejected, nay, despised, in these days. They were unin- 
 
 p. 223. spired men, and fallible, as others are." 
 
 F. p. 19. 
 
 There are a few. besides those mentioned in the text, of 
 whose writings Eusebius and others make mention ; and 
 of the writings of some of them they have retained some 
 fragments : they are the following : — 
 
 Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis in Phrj^gia, the author of 
 the millenarian opinion ; who is said by Eusebius to have 
 been a man of a " very narrow understanding." 
 
 Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, author of an apology, about 
 the year 126. 
 
 Aristides, an Athenian layman, a cotemporary of the 
 foregoing, and a christian apologist. 
 
 Hegessippus, author of " historical memorials, " who 
 lived about the time of Irenseus. 
 
 Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, who wrote several epistles. 
 
 Philippus, Bishop of Gortyna, who wrote a book against 
 Marcion. 
 
APPENDIX G 11, 
 
 24S 
 
 Melito, Bishop of Sardis, who was an apologist, and 
 wrote several books. 
 
 Apollinaris, Bishop of Hierapolis, an apologist, and an 
 author of some books. 
 
 Pynitus, Bishop of the Cretians, a writer of some epis- 
 tles. Eusebius mentions two others, without saying who 
 they were, namely, Modestus and Musanus. The fragmen- 
 tary remains of the foregoing authors give us no high idea 
 of the excellency of their writings. 
 
 G. p. 19. 
 
 There are other things not authentic, besides the canons 
 mentioned in this passage. Echard, in his Ecclesiastical ^'^^^^^ " 
 History, speaking of Clement, refers thus to some of them : 
 — " Several other writings are falsely imputed to St. 
 Clement, as particularly, the apostolical constitulions, an 
 ancient and useful work, but writ long after his death ; — 
 the Recognitions , an ancient book, abounding with errors 
 and fables ; — Clementina, and the Conferences of St. Feter „ 
 and Appion, works of the same nature and authoritv with Eccle.s. 
 the Recognitions." ' f'l^I- 
 
 H. p. 22. 
 
 Tliat this Barnabas was the Barnabas mentioned in Scrip- 
 ture as the companion of Paul, is the opinion of some, and ^"^"Ig''- 
 of Archbishop Wake among others. But when I read the 
 epistle, and compare its contents with the character given 
 
244 
 
 APPENDIX I. 
 
 of Paul's companion, I cannot but think, that the writer of 
 this epistle must have been some other person. Not that 
 it is wholly necessary for us, from such a comparison, to 
 have recourse to such an opinion : for a person once right 
 in the faith and possessing many excellences as a minister, 
 may afterwards, fall into strange fancies and errors. But 
 I find, that many entertain this opinion, and seem quite 
 convinced, that this epistle is the production of some fan- 
 ciful Jewish convert : who, to make his epistle more accep- 
 table, prefixed to it the name of Barnabas,— a practice not 
 uncommon in those days. 
 
 I. p. 38. 
 
 Milner, in his Church History, apologizes for Ignatius's 
 
 Letter iii. , ,. . . , , , 
 
 p. 38. strong language on this pomt, m a way calculated to re- 
 move the objection in some measure, though not to the 
 
 Milner. extent he wishes: — "The circumstances," he says, in 
 which the churches were, sufficiently justify the strong 
 expressions of Ignatius . Heretics of various kinds abounded ; 
 and their specious artifices were likely to seduce the minds 
 of the weak. What, then, could be so just a preservative 
 to them, as to stick close to the society of their faithful 
 
 Vol. i. pastors, the successors of the apostles ? " Ignatius was 
 
 p. 157. no doubt right, in requiring their adherence and subjection 
 to their faithful pastors ; but he was not right in requiring 
 the same honour and reverence to be paid to them, as to 
 God and the Saviour ; nor was he right in not suggesting, 
 which he seems not to have done in any direct and plain 
 manner, that this honour and reverence were only due to 
 
APPENDIX K. 
 
 245 
 
 them, while they taught the truth of God, and followed the 
 precepts of the Saviour. Paul would have his people 
 follow him, as he followed Christ. Ignatius's omission 
 as to this point has been the occasion of great evils in after- 
 ages, and continues to be so still. The notion, that a 
 Minister, as a Minister, independently of what he teaches, 
 and of what he exemplifies in his life and spirit, is to be 
 regarded as a true Minister, is a mistake, for which we are 
 indebted, no doubt in a great measure to the extravagant 
 and unguarded language of Ignatius. The Primitive 
 church was inoculated with this notion, and transmitted it 
 down to posterity : and we have not yet got rid of it. "Ig- 
 natius," says Milner, " certainly would not have wished 
 the Ephesians to follow unsound and unfaithful pastors." 
 This may be very true : but he has not said so, and there- 
 fore his unmeasured language has been too often taken as 
 applicatory to all, good and bad, right or wrong in the 
 faith, provided they be " external mark " ministers. 
 
 K. p. 45. 
 
 A pretence is afforded for reviving saint's-days, by our 
 calendar having retained the notice of them, and by our ^ 
 Liturgy having services for some of them. The practice p. 45. 
 has become nearly obsolete in our Church : and the experi- 
 ence of past ages affords no great encouragement to revive 
 it : and we must be blind indeed not to take lessons from 
 past times. Such observances have ever been, with few 
 exceptions, the nurseries of pharisaical formalists, and the 
 means of promoting extravagant veneration for men. 
 
246 
 
 APPENDIX K. 
 
 What have been, and are still, the effects in the church 
 of Rome ? Their many fasts and festivals, and multiplied 
 seasons of devotion, tend evidently to increase degeneracy 
 and ungodliness, rather than spiritual worship and piety. 
 The mechanical performance of numerous reUgious ser\'ices, 
 ( for it cannot be any thing else,) has a hardening effect 
 on the mind, and fails not to promote and foster a self- 
 righteous spirit. The man who is very punctual in going 
 through his routine of prayers, in observing fasts, in attend- 
 ing mass, and in confessing to his priest, is, it may be, at 
 at the same time, an habitual robber or a pirate, an adul- 
 terer or an assassin. Of such monsters, no community 
 in the world presents so common instances as the church 
 of Rome : which exceeds every other in ceremonials ; its 
 religious, or rather superstitious observances being not 
 equalled by those of any sect even in the darkest regions 
 of Paganism. And yet this is the church which the wise 
 men of the Oxford Tracts would have us to imitate ! To 
 multiply religious observances, to add services of will- 
 worship, to institute fasts and festivals, may have a show 
 of religion and of humility : but the effect has ever been, 
 and is likely still to be, to form h)'pocrites, to create 
 self-judiciaries, to harden men for the perpetration of every 
 wickedness, even while saying their prayers, and to rjiise 
 up a host of senseless devotees, fitter for bedlam than for 
 the avocations of public life. He who "knew what was 
 in man " has not appointed such things ; and were they 
 necessary or useful, he doubtless would have done so. But 
 men would be wiser than the only wise God. To "wor- 
 ship God in spirit and in truth," is the chief and principal 
 matter, and what our Saviour has expressly required. 
 
APPENDIX L. 
 
 247 
 
 The small portion of such observances still recognized 
 in our church, was retained no doubt for the sake of con- 
 ciliating those of the Romish communion ; and not because 
 our Reformers had any predilection for them. This was 
 clearly the opinion of Bishop Stillingfleet. Having spoken 
 of the conciliatory conduct of the French Reformers with 
 respect to the Romanists, he says, — "The same temper was gtilling- 
 used by our Reformers in the composing of our Liturgy, in A'^^'- 
 reference to the Papists, to whom they had an especial 
 eye, as being the only party then appearing, whom they 
 desired to draw into their communion, by cominfj as near 1,.^,,;,. 
 them as they vjell could." And then foUows what is de- p- 122. 
 serving of notice in the present day : — " And certainly, those 
 holy men, who did seek by any means to draw in others, 
 at such a distance from their principles as the Papists were, 
 did never intend by what they did for that end, to exclude 
 any truly tender consciences from their communion. The 
 same reason, which at that time made them yield so far to 
 them then, would now have persuaded them to alter and 
 lay aside all those things which yield matter of offence 
 to any of the same profession with themselves now." The j^j^ 
 Protestant principle is to diminish such observances ; but p. 123. 
 the Romish, to retain and increase them. The former is 
 accustomed chiefly to regard the power, and the latter, 
 the form, of godliness. 
 
 It is remarkable, how the description of what Irenseus Letter iv. 
 calls, " the future apostacy under Antichrist, 
 
•248 
 
 APPENDIX L. 
 
 with the character of the apostate church of Rome. 
 While discussing this subject, he speaks thus : — 
 
 " As many as keep friendship ((plXiav) with God, to 
 them he affords communion with himself ; and communion 
 with God is life and light, and the enjoyment of the good 
 things which come from him. As many as depart from 
 God, in compliance with their own opinion, (xara Trjy yva- 
 lAijii avTuv.) on them he brings the separation which is 
 from him : and separation from God is death, as separation 
 from light is darkness ; and separation from God is the 
 loss of all good things which come from him. They, there- 
 fore, who through apostacy cast away the things aforesaid, 
 being destitute of all good things, remain under punish- 
 ment ; God, indeed, does not in the first place punish them, 
 but punishment itself follows them, because of their being 
 destitute of all good things, (that is, the life and light 
 which are connected with God's friendship and communion.) 
 And the good things of God are eternal and endless ; 
 \j\ therefore the loss of them will be eternal and endless." 
 
 Pursuing the same subject, he has these striking words. — 
 " Since therefore in this world, some run to the light, 
 and through faith unite themselves to God, (ha. rtj? irla-reat 
 ivova-iv eauTOK? ru @ea,) and some depart (afia-ravTou, 
 stand aloof — withdraw,) from the light, and separate 
 themselves from God, the Word of God will come, and 
 appoint an habitation fitted for all, — for those who are in the 
 light, that they may enjoy the good things that are in 
 Him,— and for those who are in darkness, that they may 
 ])artake of the wretchedness that is in it. Therefore he 
 says, that He will call those on the right hand into the 
 kingdom of heaven, and will send those on the left hand, 
 
APPENDIX L. 
 
 249 
 
 into everlasting fire, for they had deprived themselves of 
 all good things. And on this account the apostle says, — 
 " Because they received not the love of the truth, that 
 they might be saved, God therefore will send on them the 
 working of error, (operationem erroris), that they may 
 believe a lie, that they all may be condemned, who have not 
 beheved the truth, but have sided with iniquity." He 
 then speaks of Antichrist, as " concentrating apostacy in 
 himself, and sitting in the temple of God, that they who 
 are seduced by him may adore him as Christ, (Sicut Chris- Lib. v. 
 tum adorent ilium)." After this he apphes to Antichrist, 
 Rev. xiii. 2 — 18, and quotes the verses at large. 
 
 It appears, that the origin and the very essence of apos- 
 tacy, according to Irenaeus, is to depart from the friend- 
 ship of God and communion with Him, or in other words, 
 to depart from the light and to separate from God. It is 
 not to separate from communion with any visible Church, 
 but to separate and depart from Divine light, and the en- 
 joyment of the good things that come from God. A 
 striking comment in chap. 27, bears the same aspect : — 
 ' On this account,' he says, ' the Lord has said, " He 
 that believeth on me shall not be condemned ; " that is, 
 shall not be separated from God, for he is united to God 
 by faith (adunitus est per fidem Deo). The union then, 
 according to Irenaeus, is by faith, and by faith in Christ ; 
 and then follows friendship and communion with God. 
 Now the apostacy of the Romish Church most evidently 
 consists in the very things noticed by Irenaeus. It has 
 most clearly departed from the true light of God's word, 
 and from spiritual communion with God, as its deeds for 
 ages incontestably prove. What does it make necessary 
 
250 
 
 APPENDIX M. 
 
 to salvation ? Not faith in the Saviour, but in effect faith 
 in the Church. It has in fact taken the place that belongs 
 to God and the Saviour, and makes proselytes to itself, 
 and not true disciples to the Great Redeemer. The ten- 
 dency of all the efforts of the divines of the Oxford Tracts 
 is exactly the same. They try with all their might and 
 skill to substitute the teaching of the Church for the 
 teaching of the word of God, which is the only safe 
 light to our paths, — and communion with the Church, for 
 communion with God himself by faith in Christ Jesus. 
 Increase rituals after the fashion of the Church of Rome, 
 make them very important things, enhance the value of 
 Sacraments, exalt the visible Church, represent it as the 
 only medium of communication between God and his 
 people, and depreciate faith in Christ and individual com- 
 munion with God, and you will not fail to produce the 
 awful apostacy which Ircnseus describes, the very apos- 
 tacy of Antichrist : and this is the manifest tendency of 
 the doctrines of the Oxford Tracts. Let all therefore be- 
 ware of them, who dread this enormous sin. The spirit 
 of apostate Rome is evidently working at Oxford with all 
 its accustomed subtleness and plausibility. 
 
 M. p. 50. 
 
 The following remarks of Scott on the points referred 
 V 50. to in the text, are just and appropriate : — " The Judaizing 
 teachers seem to have blended their system with specula- 
 tions borrowed from the Pagans and their sects of Philo- 
 Stott. sophers ; thus the traditions of the sages and those of the 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 251 
 
 Pharisees were incorporated. By tliese means the Jiida- 
 izing teachers had begun to corrupt Christianity with a 
 new and refined species of Idolatry. To add voluntarily 
 to the rule of duty, and thus to render it more strict, had 
 a resemblance of great devotion and extraordinary sanc- 
 tity : but it implied that God gave a defective rule, and 
 that he would be pleased with what he never commanded. 
 The abstaining from meats, with various self-imposed 
 austerities, might haveas^ew of extraordinary spirituality, 
 by which the body was neglected, from an affected superi- 
 ority to animal indulgence, and willingness for mortifica- 
 tions and suffering : yet all this was not in any honour to 
 God, or anything valuable in itself, — nay, the whole 
 tended to satisfy, in a dishonourable manner, the propen- 
 sities of the flesh, or the carnal mind, by gratifying self- ^.^ 
 will, self-wisdom, self-righteousness, bigotry and contempt 
 
 This passage has been found fault with by a correspon- Letter iv. 
 dent in the " Record." Wliat has been objected to was ^' 
 substantially what follows : — 
 
 1. That the sentence from Ignatius, " the medicine," 
 &c. is quoted with approbation in the 27th Homily. 
 
 2. That our Reformers quoted largely from the Fathers, 
 and thereby approved of them. 
 
 3. That our Church teaches on all important points 
 as the primitive Church and martyrs did teach. 
 
 4. And lastly, that I am inconsistent in condemning the 
 Fathers, and praising the Homilies. 
 
 of others." 
 
 Col 
 
 N. p. 54. 
 
252 
 
 APPENDIX N. 
 
 My answer to this correspondent was in substance the 
 following : — 
 
 1 . That the above sentence is quoted in the Homily in 
 a qimlifyingform ; — the Fathers are said, not to have been 
 " afraid " to designate the eucharist by these and similar 
 terms, and that it stands connected in the Homily with a 
 right explanation of the ordinance, and not in an insulated 
 form PS in Ignatius, and therefore not liable to be taken 
 literally, and thus taken wrongly. 
 
 2. That I am fully aware, that our Reformers did quote 
 many passages from the Fathers, evidently approving of 
 them, which I have done also in a measure ; but that this 
 does not shew that they approved of all that the Fathers 
 have said. 
 
 3. That our Church teaches many things taught by the 
 primitive Church, and that it does not teach many other 
 things which the primitive Church did evidently teach, as 
 I have already proved as to several particulars in my Letters ; 
 moreover, that our Church teaches much more than what 
 the primitive Church seems to have known, and that it 
 teaches some things contrary to its most current opinions, 
 the Scriptures being much better understood by our Refor- 
 mers than by either the early or the later Fathers. 
 
 4. And lastly, that my denunciation of the Fathers ex- 
 tends to some things and not to all, — that our Reformers 
 produced from their writings the best things, because this 
 course was most suitable to the circumstances of their case, 
 
 - and that it is my ungracious work to produce the worst 
 things, because such a course is rendered necessary by the 
 circumstances of the present day. 
 
APPENDIX O P. 
 
 253 
 
 O. p. 56. 
 
 It is very doubtful whether even the essentials of the ijptter i 
 Gospel could have been faithfully conveyed for such a term 
 of years without written documents. It was the written 
 Gospel that enabled the primitive Church to retain as it 
 did, even the essentials of truth : and it was no doubt the 
 scarcity of copies that occasioned corruption to creep in 
 so fast into it. The words of Chrysostom on this point 
 are very striking: — " Reading the Holy Scriptures," he Chiysos 
 says, " is a powerful defence against sin, while ignorance 
 of them is a deep precipice, a profound gulph ; it is to 
 renounce salvation and refuse the knowledge of the divine 
 law. This is that which has brought in heresies, occa- Tom. i. 
 sioned the corruption of morals, and disordered all things." 
 
 P. p. 59. 
 
 What Bishop Reynolds says of what is due generally 
 to ancient authors, may justly be applied especially to the 
 Fathers : — " We may assent to them as ancients, but not 
 as oracles. They may have our minds easy and inclinable: 
 they may not have them captivated and fettered to their 
 opinions." 
 
 N.B. The two next referential letters in the margin of the text are 
 wrong ; the O in page 67," should be Q ; and the P in page 7 1 should 
 
 Letter iv 
 p. .51». 
 
 Reynolds. 
 
254 
 
 APPENDIX Q. 
 
 Q. p. 67. 
 
 Letter v. 
 
 p. 07. Justin frequently speaks of the Word or Reason. The 
 J ^. following passages shall be added ; — 
 
 " We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten 
 of God ; and we have before declared Him to be Reason 
 (Koyov), of which the whole race of men partake; and 
 they who live by reason are Christians, though they may 
 be called atheists. Such among the Greeks were Socrates 
 and Heraclitus, and others like them : and among the 
 barbarians (ev €ap€apoii;) Abraham and Ananias, Azarias, 
 Misael, and Elijah, and many others. So also the ancients 
 who lived without reason {a>ev Xoyov), were unprofitable 
 and enemies to Christ, and murderers of those who lived 
 Apol. 1. jjy reason. But they who did and do live bv reason, are 
 
 beet. 40. •' • 
 
 Christians, being both fearless and intrepid." 
 
 "We know that some that were of the opinions of the 
 Stoics, as also sometimes the poets, when they became 
 adorned, as to moral reason (r)6iKov \oyoy), through the 
 seed of reason which is implanted in the whole race of 
 
 ^ J .. men (Sia to ejxjiviov itavn yevd avBfUTiuv tTveoixa lov XoXnv), 
 
 Sect! 8. have been hated and murdered." 
 
 " The doctrines of Plato are not alien to those of Christ ; 
 but they are not wholly similar, nor those of others, as 
 the Stoics, poets, and historians. For everj' one who 
 saw what was native (to <rvyyev£<;), from having portions 
 of seminal divine reason (o-Trep/iaTHcou Oetov Xayov), has well 
 spoken. But they who have said things contrary to them- 
 selves, on the more important matters, seem not to have 
 
APPENDIX R. 
 
 255 
 
 possessed the science that is liidden (airoirrov, unseen), and 
 the knowledge that cannot be refuted. Whatever there- 
 fore has been well said by them all, belongs to us Chris- 
 tians. All writers, by means of the innate seed of im- 
 planted reason (Sja tvj? cvova-^; ef^jivTov rov o-iropa?) 
 could obscurely see things as they are." 
 
 Justin also speaks of a seed given by power (Kara Suva- 
 /Aiv), that is, by created power, if I rightly understand 
 him; and of a seed given by grace (xara ^ajjiv). Hence 
 it is not improbable that the idea of " seminal grace " has 
 originated with Justin, and that he derived it from the 
 heathen notion of seminal reason : and the idea, that the 
 latter is universal, has probably led to the notion, that the 
 former is through Christ become so too. 
 
 R. p. 71. 
 
 The present bishop of Lincoln, Dr. Kaye, in his " Ac- Letter v. 
 count of Justin," distinctly admits that Justin was defective ''• 
 in his views of original sin, but maintains, that on the 
 subject of justification he is " sufficiently clear and cx- Bp. Kaye. 
 plicit ; " two things which appear to me to be incompatible : 
 and the passages referred to by his lordship, do not very 
 clearly bear him out in the opinion which he has expressed, 
 the materials on this subject are very scanty, and are not 
 very explicit. It is not so much the acquittance of a 
 criminal that Justin speaks of, except in one or two in- 
 stances, and those nearly in the words of Scripture, as 
 deliverance from the power of sin and the corruptions of 
 our nature ; so that on this subject he is neither very clear 
 nor explicit. 
 
256 
 
 APPENDIX S. 
 
 S. p. 90. 
 
 Letter vi. Something like this heretical work, though in a singular 
 P- 9**- way, has been actually done by the Oxford divines. 
 Irenaeus's Creed and what follows it, are given in No. 14 of 
 " the Records of the Church," published by these authors. 
 Tliere is then appended an address, as it appears, to all 
 Dissenters, in which they use the following language : — 
 " Wanderers and disputers, perplexed enquirers and weak 
 brethren ! come home to this doctrine of Christ." We 
 are afterwards given to understand that this doctrine is only 
 to be found in the established Church. But is this the fact ? 
 By no means. The doctrine and faith mentioned by Irenaeus, 
 is preached as faithfully and harmoniously in every meet- 
 ing-house in the land, with the exception already speci- 
 fied, as in the Church, and much more fully and faithfully 
 than in the churches of these divines, if we are to judge 
 of their preaching by the contents of their Tracts. And 
 yet people are invited to " come home " to the Church to 
 hear this doctrine ! If these authors wish to maintain 
 the superior claims of the Church, let them do so fairly 
 and honestly, and put its claims on a right footing and 
 not on a false one. To invite people to the Church to 
 hear what they have already got, is extremely absurd and 
 ridiculous. Such a shallow artifice as this can never pro- 
 mote, but is sure to injure the interest of the Church. 
 This is not the time for any Jesuitical trickery to succeed. 
 
APPENDIX T. U. X. 
 
 257 
 
 T. p. 92. 
 
 The following passage is to the same purport : — " Every Letti-r vi. 
 question cannot receive solution hy another that may be ''' " "" 
 asked, nor will ambiguity be solved, by those who have 
 any sense, by another ambiguity, nor enigmas by another 
 greater enigma ; but those things which are of this kind re- ^.^ .. 
 ceive solutions by things that are manifest, consonant and Cap. 10. 
 clear." 
 
 U. p. 94. 
 
 Similar to those in the text are the following words : — Letter vi. 
 " For what soi t of thing is it for us, to leave the words 
 of the Prophets and of the Lord and of the Apostles, and 
 to attend to these (heretics,) who say nothing that is ^.^^ .. 
 sane ! " Cap. 2. 
 
 X. p. 96. 
 
 The lubricity of the heretics was very great, but not 
 without a parallel in after ages, nor in our own times. 
 When beaten on one ground, they ran to and occupied 
 another. When Scripture failed them, they had recourse 
 to tradition : and when tradition failed to serve their pur- 
 pose, they pretended to a higher knowledge than the Apos- 
 tles themselves. " When we summon them," says Irenseus, 
 
Cnp. 2. 
 
 APPENDIX X. 
 
 " to that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which by 
 the successions of the Presbyters is preserved in the 
 churches (quse per successiones presbyterorum in Ecclesiis 
 custoditur), they oppugn tradition, and say, that they 
 themselves have found the genuine truth, being wiser not 
 only than the Presbyters, but also than the Apostles .... 
 Against such we have to contend, who, being slippery 
 like serpents, endeavour to escape on every side. We 
 
 must therefore resist them on every side 
 
 Though it is not easy for a person, that is seized by error, 
 to repent ; it is yet not wholly impossible to escape error, 
 when the truth is laid before us." 
 
 From this extract we see that Irenaeus uses the expres- 
 sion " the succession of Presbyters," though that of 
 " the succession of Bishops," is what he mostly employs. 
 It is singular to find that Irenaeus and Tertullian, the first 
 authorities on the subject, disagree as to the Roman suc- 
 cession, supposed to be the most perfect of all. But the 
 succession even of the infallible Pope is doubtful, is in- 
 volved in obscurity ! The list of Irenseus, as given in 
 Lib. iii. cap. 3, and the list of Tertullian, as given in his 
 verses against Marcion, Lib. iii. cap. 9, are the following; — 
 
 IREN^US'S LIST. TERTULLIAN's LIST. 
 
 1. Linus 1. Linus 
 
 •2. Anacletus 2. Cletus 
 
 3. Clemens 3. Anacletus 
 
 4. Evaristus, &c. 4. Clemens, &c. 
 There has been a good deal said by the Fathers in favour 
 
 of each ; but the point has never been fully settled. And 
 yet the succession is a^nfallible as the Pope himself ! 
 There is another point on which Irenaeus and Tertullian 
 
APPENDIX X. 
 
 •259 
 
 differ with respect to the Church of Rome. Irenaeus says, 
 that the Church of Rome was founded and constituted 
 jointly by Peter and Paul (a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis 
 Petro et Paulo, .... fundata et constituta) : but Tertullian, 
 a little later in time than Irenaeus, ascribes the honour 
 solely to Peter. It may also be added, that according to ^ ^ 
 Irenaeus, neither Peter nor Paul was ever a Bishop of Lib. iii. 
 Rome, for they jointly appointed the first bishop : — " Tlie ^''P' ^' 
 blessed Apostles," he says, (that is, Peter and Paul,) 
 " having founded and built the Church (of Rome,) de- 
 livered to Linus the administration of the episcopacy 
 (Afvw Tijv Tjj{ €7r<(rK07r))5 keirovpyiav tvf)(^eipta-av). 
 
 Who would ever hence conclude that either of the 
 Apostles was ever a bishop of Rome ? If Peter was, then 
 Paul was : or if the first appointment belonged to Peter, 
 it belonged equally to Paul. There is no testimony for 
 the two first centuries that in the least degree favours the 
 extravagant and absurd pretensions of the Church of 
 Rome. It appears from Scripture history, and from every 
 account that exists of an early date, that Paul had much 
 more to do with the Church of Rome than Peter. It was 
 Tertullian in the beginning of the third century, that . 
 began to lay the foundation for its exorbitant claims, by 
 saying among other things, that it possessed the chair 
 (cathedra) of Peter. And these claims increased in suc- 
 ceeding ages to a vast extent, by no divine authority or 
 countenance, but by pride, ambition, ignorance and folly : 
 and they are still maintained by the same means, — claims 
 that are as absurd as they are profane, and as'groundless 
 as they are impious, and justified by a sophistry equalled 
 only by its intolerance, tyranny, and superstition. 
 
•260 
 
 APPENDIX Y. 
 
 Y. p. 97. 
 
 Letter vi. That the heretics maintained that there were some 
 ■ secret truths that were to be dehvered orally, appears 
 evident from various passages. The following is one of 
 them: — "They themselves thus explain and say, that 
 Jesus spoke apart in mystery to his disciples and apostles, 
 and deemed them worthy to deliver these things to the 
 Lib. i. worthy and the obedient." 
 
 Cap. 24. every assertion like this, Irenaeus invariably replies, 
 
 by denying that there was any such secret doctrine, and 
 maintaining, that the apostles taught the whole truth openly 
 and clearly to all. "How can these," he says, "who 
 were never connected with Paul, boast, that they have 
 learnt hidden and ineffable mysteries ? For Paul himself 
 has made it manifest, that he plainly taught those things 
 which he knew, not only to those who were with him, but 
 
 Lib. iii. ^ heard him." Then he refers to his address at 
 
 Cap. 24. Miletus to the Ephesian elders. Having previously allud- 
 ed to Luke, he subjoins the following sentence : — "Thus 
 the apostles delivered plainly to all, even denpng to none, 
 the things which they themselves had learned from the 
 Lord." And in another place, he says : — " The doctrine 
 of the apostles is clear and certain, and leaves out nothing 
 (nihil subtrahens — o-i/o-xetXa; — substracting or contracting 
 
 Cap. 15. nothing) ; and they did not teach some things in secret, 
 but other things openly." 
 
APPENDIX Z. A a. 
 
 261 
 
 Z. p. 99. 
 
 (This letter in the margin of the text, is put eight lines Letter vi. 
 too low.) This notion about Adam, as Feuardentius ^' 
 assures us, was taught with great consent, magna consensu, 
 by the Fathers. He mentions Origen, Cyprian, Athana- 
 sius, Basil. Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Augustin and Jerome 
 — a great host indeed ! What he says of the last is 
 curious, — that in one part of his works he disapproves of 
 this notion, that in another he dares not condemn it ; and 
 that in a third, he embraces it : Hanc sententiam Hiero- 
 nymus in 27 Matth. non probat ; in 5 cap. ad Ephes. 
 (lamnare non audet ; sed Epist. ad Marcellum, earn am- 
 plectitur. 
 
 A a. p. 101. 
 
 Irenaeus connects gifts, succession, conduct, and sound Letter vi. 
 doctrine, together ; and he viewed succession as nullified, ^' 
 or of no benefit, when not accompanied with other things, 
 as is evident from what he says of the " unjust Presbyters." 
 The following passage presents his view very clearly : — 
 "Where the gifts of the Lord are bestowed, there we 
 ought to learn the truth, from those with whom is that 
 succession of the church, which is from the apostles, — and 
 that conduct appears, which is sound and irreproveable, — 
 and that word, which is unadulterated and incorruptible," 
 
 This was his view of the matter, and probably correct ; Cap- 45. 
 
262 
 
 APPENDIX B b. 
 
 corresponding with the state of things in his day. But 
 it does not follow, that the same view should be taken 
 now. If the state of things is changed, our views must 
 change also. The channel of truth may vary, while the 
 truth itself continue exactly the same. It flowed then 
 through the Churches first established : and an appeal to 
 what was taught in the Churches was then proper and 
 just. But since his time, " the gifts of God," " the irre- 
 proveable conduct," and the " unadulterated word," have 
 ceased in many instances to be connected with " suc- 
 cession ; " and the same appeal could not, under such 
 altered circumstances, be justly made. This appeal, made 
 by Irenaeus, TertuUian and others, when arguing against 
 the heretics, wholly depended on time and circumstances 
 and facts : and to deem such an appeal proper, just and 
 valid, when the reasons for it have ceased to exist, be- 
 trays great blindness and delusion. 
 
 B b. p. 136. 
 
 Letter vii. It is amazing what respect is professed at times, by the 
 writers of the Oxford Tracts, for the Scriptures. Were 
 this unifonn, it would be right to regard it as genuine. 
 We are called upon in one of the Tracts on Baptism, to 
 come "to our Saviour's feet," and to "think what his 
 words, teachingly considered, would lead to." Were they 
 always to lie there, and leam at his mouth, the doctrines 
 of their Tracts would be very different from what they 
 are. Where they lie mostly, is evidently at the feet of the 
 Fathers, in order to learn Catholic truth. They lie some- 
 
APPENDIX C C. 
 
 263 
 
 times at the feet of the fanciful Barnabas, and of the en- 
 thusiastic Hermas, to collect their vagaries, with the view 
 of putting them in their Tracts, and also at the feet of 
 Ignatius, to gather his extravagant and unscriptural no- 
 tions respecting the office and authority of Christian minis- 
 ters. This is what is mostly done, instead of lying at the 
 feet of the Saviour, and of his inspired Apostles. But 
 this sort of appeal is evidently made to " the religious 
 sensibilities of the mind," in which they complain, that 
 their predecessors were deficient. This deficiency, it 
 seems, is now to be made up ; and doubtless, it is a very 
 effectual mode of gaining the consent of many. When a 
 profound regard is avowed for the divine word, it tends to 
 prepare the religious mind to receive what is said. But 
 readers should remember, that great professions of this 
 kind, are always very suspicious. An honest man has no 
 need to tell the world, that he is honest ; but the dis- 
 honest finds it necessary to do so. The best proof that 
 we can give, that we regard the authority of Scripture, is 
 by submitting to it in every thing, and in preference to 
 any other authority. 
 
 C c. p. 149. 
 
 The word, altar, seems to be a favourite term with the ^'^"Y4j)'"' 
 divines of the Oxford Tracts, and of the British Magazine. 
 It is sanctioned by the Fathers, which, as it appears, is a 
 far better thing than that it should be sanctioned by an 
 apostle ! " The Lord's table" will not do, though it be an 
 apostolic expression. Altar, is much better, for the Fathers Altar. 
 
264 
 
 APPliNDlX C C. 
 
 have used it ! In the estimation of this party, the Fathers 
 are evidently an authority higher than the Apostles them- 
 selves. Our Church has in this instance, as in many 
 others, departed from the Fathers, and adhered to the 
 Word of God. These writers seem anxious to wean us 
 again from the Scriptures, and to attach us to the Fathers. 
 Like the Papists, they profess great reverence for the 
 Scriptures ; but really and practically, the Fathers are in 
 many instances, their teachers and guides. 
 
 A vsTiter some time ago, in the British Magazine, ap- 
 prised his readers of a new plan which he had adopted in 
 his church, that of introducing a small table, on which the 
 sacramental elements are to be placed by lay-hands, lest, 
 as it seems, the altar should be polluted by them ! His 
 own hands, of course very holy, seem alone to be fit to 
 place the elements on the altar ! It has been said, that we 
 have some Socinians in disguise in our Church. How- 
 ever that may be, it is pretty clear, that we have some 
 Papists and in no way much disguised. But this new 
 plan is defended by the writer, on the ground of its being 
 a revival of an old practice. The primitive Church, it is 
 said, had a table of this kind, as a medium of conveyance, 
 to prevent lay-hands from touching and polluting the 
 altar. It would be well to ask this writer, Wherefrom did 
 the primitive Church derive this custom It was doubt- 
 less derived from the Pagans. The heathen priests had a 
 table of this kind, on which the people placed their offer- 
 ings, which by the holy hands of the priests, were after- 
 wards removed to the altar. See Encycl. Brit, under the 
 article, altar. Now this writer is so enamoured with 
 every thing practised by the primitive Church, however 
 
APPENDIX D d. 
 
 265 
 
 heathenish it may be, and falls in so readily with any thing 
 that tends to impress the people with a high notion of 
 priestly sanctity, that he wholly disregards the prudence 
 of our Reformers, in discontinuing vain and superstitious 
 customs, and exposes himself to the just charge of inno- 
 vating, and even of heathenizing our Church, without any 
 authority : and so pleased he seems to be with this freak 
 of superstition, that he must publish it to the world ; and 
 he has found an easy mode of doing so, through the pages 
 of a Magazine which furthers every retrograde movement 
 towards Popery. 
 
 D d. p. 153. 
 
 The following remarks on eating the flesh, and drinking ^ 
 the blood of Christ, are clear and satisfactory, and whoUy p. 153. 
 correspond with the general system of divine truth : — 
 
 " The flesh and blood of Christ, as separated by death, 
 j)rocured salvation for sinners ; and the expressions here 
 employed, refer to the intention, efficacy and benefits 
 of the sufferings of Christ. These are all needful to the 
 life and health of our souls, in our ruined state, as meat f^*^]"" 
 and drink are to the life and health of our bodies." verse S3. 
 
 " Whosoever eateth the flesh, and drinketh the blood 
 of Christ, in the sense here spoken of, ' abideth in Christ, 
 and Christ in him ; ' and therefore is a true and lively 
 member of Christ's body ; and he shall have eternal life, 
 and be a partaker of a happy resurrection : and so no per- 
 son can either be wicked here, or deprived of everlasting 
 life hereafter, who, in the sense here mentioned, eateth of 
 the flesh, and drinketh nf the blood of Christ. 
 
266 
 
 APPENDIX E e. 
 
 " Now this is very true, of eating spiritually and by faith, 
 as it imports believing in Christ : for " this," saith Christ, 
 " is the will of Him that sent me, that every one who 
 believeth in the Son, may have everlasting life; and I 
 will raise him up at the last day." But then of the sacra- 
 mental eating of Christ's flesh, it is as false ; for this was 
 eaten by a Judas, and continually is eaten by millions, who 
 hitb ' in wicked here, and will be damned hereafter. This 
 
 loco. therefore cannot be the import of our Saviour's words." 
 
 E e. p. 164, 
 
 It is quite amusing to observe, what is made almost 
 every thing in the Oxford Tracts. The beginning, the 
 middle, and the end, is apostolical succession. There are 
 several tracts specifically on the subject, and it is dex- 
 terously introduced into most of them. It is evidently 
 the sum and substance of their divinity. What an omis- 
 sion it was in the sacred penmen, in not setting this forth 
 as the centre of the system ! How unaccountable it is, 
 that it has been left out in the Creeds ! since it ought 
 surely to have been made one of their primary articles, if 
 it be so important as these Tracts represent it. How 
 erroneous was Archbishop Cranmer, in making little or no 
 account of it ! What a mistake did Hooker commit, in 
 admitting it not to be indispensably necessary ! And 
 what inadvertence it was in Archbishop Wake, to allow 
 the validity of sacraments without it ! New light, as it 
 seems, has shone upon the world, or rather a stream of 
 something like light has broken forth from the thick dark- 
 
APPENDIX E C. 
 
 267 
 
 ness of Popery, through the means of which it is now 
 made clear, that apostolical succession is every thing in 
 religion, and that without it, there is no certainty of any 
 thing ! The truth cannot be preached without it ; and 
 without it, there can be no valid sacraments ! 
 
 And yet after all, the fact is, that Apostolical Suc- 
 cession, as taught in the Tracts, is a very uncertain thing ; 
 and the evidence in its favour, during the two first cen- 
 turies, is extremely scanty, and wholly indecisive. What 
 the primitive writers speak of, is not the succession of 
 orders, which is the point so much made of in the Tracts ; 
 but the succession of persons, performing the work of 
 bishops or overseers in the Church. The election of the 
 Church, and not ordination, in the modem sense of the 
 word, was what perpetuated the succession. When one 
 died, another was chosen in his place by the Church ; 
 and of course, the dead transmitted nothing; and his 
 successor was introduced into his place by election. We 
 do not read, either in the apostolic Fathers, or in any of 
 the writers of the second century, of any ordinations by 
 other bishops, though we read of persons being appointed 
 by the apostles. There are two passages in Clement's ciem. 
 first epistle on the subject ; but there is no mention about '''P]2 ' 44*^*^' 
 orders. Nor is there any thing decisive in any of the 
 apostolic Fathers — nor in Justin, nor in Irenaeus ; nor, as 
 far as I can find, in Tertullian. Irenseus speaks often of SeeLib.iii. 
 successions ; but in no words that convey the idea of ^' 
 orders being conferred. The same thing may be said of See Carm. 
 TertuUian. He particularly mentions the successions in Marcion. 
 the Church of Rome ; but by no expressions which imply ^ib. m. 
 the conferring of orders. It was therefore not without 
 
•268 
 
 APPENDIX E e. 
 
 reason, that Archbishop Craumer expressed that opinion 
 on the subject, given in the seventh page of these letters. 
 
 It appears therefore, that the sort of succession main- 
 tained in the Tracts, is a matter of great uncertainty ; and 
 yet upon this uncertain thing, is built the whole super- ■ 
 structure of the system ! and by which every thing in 
 religion is made certain ! Sacraments and every thing 
 else ! To make things certain by what is uncertain, is a 
 new discovery, or rather an qld one revived, first found 
 out in the dark ages. If persons were to read the wTitings 
 of the two first centuries, divested of their preconceived 
 opinions, they would find that many of their sentiments 
 have very little, and indeed no foundation in these docu- 
 ments, and much less in the apostolic witings. The 
 patching business of the heretics, is too much followed; 
 an attempt made to " adapt apostolic words" to a system, 
 which ages of degeneracy and corruption have formed. In 
 this art, the writers of the Oxford Tracts are great adepts, 
 having evidently learnt it of the Papists. 
 
 As a specimen of the style of preaching adopted by this 
 party, I shall give the following extract from No. 10, en- 
 titled, " Heads of a week-day Lecture :" — 
 
 " Thus, in one sense, it is from the bishop that the 
 news of redemption, and the means of grace, (the italics 
 are in the original) have come to all men ; this again is a 
 witnessing church. I, who speak to you concerning 
 Christ, was ordained to do so by the bishop ; he speaks 
 in me, as Christ wrought in him, and as God sent Christ. 
 Tlius the whole plan of salvation hangs together. Christ 
 the true mediator above ; his servant, the bishop, his 
 earthly likeness ; mankind, the subjects of his teaching ; 
 
APPENDIX F f. 269 
 
 God the author of salvation." The sentiments and style Pages 4, f). 
 are as completely popish, as any thing that has been ever 
 penned. But the evident design of the whole tract is, to 
 confine the preaching of salvation to episcopally ordained 
 teachers : and what the author seems throughout to inti- 
 mate, is, "We shall probably lose our tithes; but we 
 must retain our influence, and support our respectability, 
 by apostolical succession." 
 
 F f. p. 176. 
 
 The language of irony may possibly be blamed; and 
 the writer may be found fault with, on this score, by these 
 authors, as he has already been by a papist, when writing 
 somewhat in this strain against him. But fanciful and 
 baseless notions can hardly be dealt with in any other 
 way. Traditionary and superstitious men, cannot be easily 
 made to feel the edge of any other weapon. They are 
 like men inclosed in a sack of wool, which no bullet of 
 reason can penetrate. It must therefore be either ripped 
 up by the keen-edged sword of sarcasm, or pierced 
 through by the sharp-pointed spear of ridicule ; for in no 
 other way can those inclosed in it be effectually remarked. 
 These writers have afforded some proof of this. They 
 seem to feel the piercings of such weapons, more than any 
 thing else, as is evident from a letter by one of the party 
 in the third volume of the Tracts. Very great gravity is 
 assumed, and " the irreverent treatment of holy things" 
 is very seriously reprobated. But these holy things turn 
 out to be nothing more than what are deemed and made 
 
APPENDIX F f. 
 
 SO by the party, such as extravagant notions respecting the 
 eucharist and apostolical succession. How many foolish 
 things are reputed holy by Papists and Pagans ! 
 
 When men make things holy which are not so ; yea, 
 when groundless fancies, and even strange errors are thus 
 made, and this, not by the ignorant, for then there would 
 be some excuse, but by the learned, there is, in my view, 
 no mode of attack that can be too severe. Let them be 
 made the butt of ridicule and irony, as the foolish idolaters 
 were made by Elijah, that they may be ashamed of their 
 doings. If in these Letters or Notes, the writer has in 
 any measure treated divine things with irreverence or 
 with levity, no reprobation can be too severe for him. 
 But if he has only exposed and denuded the fancies of 
 men, the errors and extravagances of even good men, for 
 the purpose of preventing the spread of false notions, as 
 he believes he has done, no charge of irreverence will 
 ever be felt by him as just, and no grave, long-faced re- 
 monstrance from traditionary men, will ever make him 
 repent of what he has done. 
 
r