.» o 7 : ^ v ^ ;• V ^ ^<6 ^ fefc ^/ -'2&: V* :S&-. I / y ^V> ^°» » ^. r« a < V »!*•- * > * v >°^ -•iq* •" •>* *♦.••■•• * -£%e Church of England, 104, 242-3, 198, and elsewhere. XXIV THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lead " an episcopalian to consider that they had almost thrown down the Church itself?" Why, they just followed where their ministers led them — no great crime, one should suppose, in the eyes of a prelate; and also, in conformity with the prophetic enuncia- tion of their God-commissioned apostle, they fancied, that the " best way to prevent the rooks from return- ing was to pull down their nests," a proceeding, the prophetic sagacity of which has been demonstrated by the history of the Church of England, in whose dark cloisters rooks have continued to roost ever since the Reformation, to which as their safe retreats they betake themselves whenever the moral effulgence of the truth becomes painful to their distempered optics, and from which, as at present, they come forth in darkening clouds whenever the fields seem ripe for their pillage. But let us return to the history of the Anglican Reformation. When Elizabeth ascended the throne, Popery, as restored by Mary, was the established religion. Those Protestants who had, in the words of Fuller, "con- trived to weather out the storm" of Mary's persecu- tions at home in England, depending upon the pro- testantism of the daughter of Anne Boleyn, the early patroness of the Reformation, now ventured to cele- brate public worship according to the liturgy of Ed- ward VI. This was done with still more zeal by the exiles who had fled to the continent to avoid the persecution of Mary, and had now returned in the hope of enjoying liberty of conscience in their native land. Elizabeth, ho wever, had hitherto done nothing to indicate thai she was favourable to the reformed faith, but much to the contrary. She had been crowned according to the forms of the popish pontifi- cal, of which a high mass was an essential^part. The exiles, however, presuming at least upon a toleration, began to celebrate public worship according to the reformed ritual, and to preach to the people the un- searchable riches of Christ. Elizabeth, when appriz- ed of this proceeding, issued a proclamation, forbid- ding all preaching, and the use of Edward's liturgy, THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXV and commanding that in public worship the missal in Latin should be employed, except the litany, the Lord's prayer, and the creed, which were tolerated in English. The only instruction to be given to the people consisted of the " gospel and the epistles of the day/ 7 with the ten commandments, which were allow- ed to be read in the English tongue. Religion, through- out this year (1558) continued precisely as it had been in the reign of Mary, and was celebrated by precisely the same priests, with the addition of so many of the exiles as had returned, and the few Pro- testants who had remained at home.* Elizabeth, however, was aware that some altera- tion in religion must be made. Accordingly, about the period at which she summoned her first parlia- ment, she appointed certain divines, under the presi- dency of Secretary Sir Thomas Smith, to prepare a liturgy which might be laid before the legislature. These divines were instructed to compare Edward's two liturgies with the popish offices, and to frame such a form of prayer as might suit the circumstances of the times. They were, however, to give a prefer- ence to Edward's first liturgy, which retained many popish dogmas and usages, in all matters to be very wary of innovations, and especially, to leave all mat- ters in discussion between the Protestants and the Papists so undefined, and expressed in such general terms as not to offend the latter. Elizabeth's great desire in this, and, indeed, in all her measures, was to comprehend the Papists in any form of religion which might be established. She never seems to have enter- tained any desire to conciliate or concede any thing to her Protestant subjects. The divines having finished their work, brought the draft of a liturgy to Cecil, in order to its being submitted to her majesty. Before presenting it to parliament Elizabeth made various important altera- tions on it, all for the express purpose of reducing it to a nearer conformity to the popish liturgies, and thus conciliating the Papists. It were altogether beyond * Strypc's Annals, i. 59, 71, 77 ; Burnet ii. 585; Collier vi. 200. XXVI THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. our present limits to give a minute enumeration of the various alterations introduced by Elizabeth into the draft presented to her by the divines, or to show in what, and how many particulars, her prayer-book, which (with a few verbal alterations since introduced) is the liturgy at present in use in the Church of Eng- land, is still more popish than even that which was in use at the death of Edward. A {ew, however, must be mentioned.* In the litany ot' Edward's second liturgy there was a prayer in the following terms : — " From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome, and all his detestable enormi- ties, good Lord deliver us." This was cancelled in the liturgy of Elizabeth, — we can be at no loss to divine for what reason. In the communion office of the former, when the minister delivered the bread to the communicant, he said, " Take, and eat this, in re- membrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thine heart by faith, with thanksgiving ;" and when he delivered the cup, he said, " Drink this in remembrance that Christ's blood was shed for thee, and be thankful," — clearly implying that it was mere- ly an eucharistic commemoration, rendered efficacious only through faith. In the communion office of the latter, the priest, in handing the bread, said to the communicant, " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. Take and eat this," &c. And when delivering the cup, "The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. Drink this," &c. — words that were expressly intended to imply the real presence, and an opus operatum efficacy, with- * Those who desire fuller information, we recommend to study Dr. Cardwcll's History of Conferences on the Book of Common Prayer ; the two Liturgies of Edward VI. compared, by the same author; Dr. Short's Sketch of the History of the Church of England, 537 — 549 ; Collier's History, vi. 248—250; and Records, No. 77; Strype's An- nals, i. 98 — 123; sec also Baillie's Parallel of the Liturgy with the Mass Book, the Breviary, and other Romish Rituals, 4to., 1641; Wheatley's Rationale of the Book of Common Prayer, and the other Ritualists ; Palmer's Origines Liturgicoe. Burnet, Neal, and the other historians, all take up the subject, but very imperfectly. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXV11 out any regard whatever to the faith or spiritual con- dition of the communicant. In order to prevent the idea that when kneeling was retained as the required posture at the communion, it was intended to imply- that Christ was bodily present, or that any adoration was designed to be given to the elements, a rubric was added to the office in Edward's second prayer- book, which declared that the elements remained unchanged, and that no adoration was given them. This rubric was omitted in Elizabeth's prayer-book, and the communicant was left to believe and to adore as he had been accustomed to do. The divines who had drawn up Elizabeth's liturgy left it to the choice of the communicant himself to receive the communion kneeling or standing ; Elizabeth made it imperative upon all to receive it kneeling. These divines, be- sides, had disapproved of any distinction being made between the vestments worn by the ministers while celebrating the eucharist, and those worn at other parts of the service; Elizabeth, however, made it im- perative on the officiating priest to administer the sacrament in the old popish vestments, as was the case in Edward's first liturgy, but had been altered in the second; and in order that the benighted Papists might, by act of parliament, and of the supremacy royal, have every encouragement to continue in their idolatry, it was ordered that the bread should be changed into the wafer formerly used at private masses. Not satisfied with the popish innovations she had already made, and seemingly apprehensive that if she went at once so far as she felt inclined in her re- trogression towards Rome, she might find some diffi- culty in carrying the prelates and the parliament along with her, Elizabeth introduced into the act of uniformity (to which we shall allude immediately) a clause by which she was empowered " to ordain and publish such further rites and ceremonies as should be most for the reverence of Christ's holy mysteries and sacraments;" words of ominous import; and, as we have already stated, she told Parker that if it had not been for the power thus conferred upon her, XXV111 THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. " she would not have agreed to divers orders of the book. The liturgy having been thus prepared was intro- duced into parliament, in a bill for " Uniformity of prayer, and administration of sacraments," and passed through the Commons, seemingly without opposition, in the short space of three days. It met with some opposition in the upper house from a few of the popish prelates and peers, but was carried, without one word being altered, by a most triumphant majority; and having received the royal assent, became law. The population of England at this time consisted of two great parties, Puritans and Papists, with of course some neutrals, who were prepared to join either party according as their interests might seem to dictate. Both of these great parties differed, as in every thing else, so also in their estimation of the prayer-book. We now proceed to consider the opin- ions and the conduct of each of these parties in regard to the newly imposed liturgy. The intrinsic character of the Anglican liturgy may be very safely inferred from the sources whence it was drawn, and the estimation in which it was held by Papists. In regard to the former, it is known to all in any measure conversant with the subject, that the book of common prayer was taken from the Ro- mish service-book. "In our public services," says the present bishop of Sodor and Man, " the greater part of the book of common prayer is taken from the Roman ritual." Again, — "In giving an account of the Common prayer book, it will be more correct to describe it as ;i work compiled from the services of the Church of Rome, or rather as a translation than as an original composition." Again, speaking of Edward's first prayer-book, of which, indeed, he spoke in both the preceding instances, lie says, u almost the whole of it was taken from different Roman catholic * Peiroc's Vindic. of Pis. p. 47, Strype, Burnet, Collier, &c., fancy that some of these alterations were introduced by parliament, but Dr. Cardvvell has shown that they were the work of Elizabeth ; see Cardwcll's History of Conf. pp. 21, 22. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXIX services, particularly those after the use of Salisbury, which were then generally adopted in the south of England, and the principle on which the compilers proceeded in the work was to alter as little as possible what had been familiar to the people. Thus the litany is nearly the same as in the Salisbury hours." Speak- ing of the Anglican ordination office, he says, " its several parts are taken from that in use in the Church of Rome," with few exceptions, which he mentions. In a note, he states that those parts of the liturgy which were not taken from the service books of the Church of Rome were drawn from a prayer-book compiled about this time by Hserman, the popish bishop of Cologne.* Edward's second prayer-book was a revised edition of the first, omitting some of the grosser abominations of Popery which the first contained. The present prayer-book of the Church of England stands about half-way between the first and second of Edward, and was, as we have seen above, taken almost verbatim from the popish ser- vice book. Such, then, is the parentage of " our apostolic prayer-book — our incomparable liturgy— our inestimable service book," of which even evan- gelical members of the Church of England cannot speak in terms sufficiently expressive of their rap- turous admiration. Bearing all this in mind, we shall cease to feel any surprise at the fact mentioned by all historians of the period, that so well satisfied were the Papists with the Reformed (so termed) services, and so little dif- ference did they discover between the modern and the ancient ritual, that for the first ten years of Eliza- beth's reign they continued, "without doubt or scru- ple," as Heylin says, to attend public worship in the Church of England. Indeed, as all acknowledge, who know any thing of the subject, if the court of Rome had not altered its policy towards England, excommunicated Elizabeth, and forbidden her sub- jects to attend the Established Church, the Papists * Sketch of the History, &c, 201, 537, 510, 511. XXX THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. would have remained conscientiously convinced, that in worshipping in the Anglican establishment, they were still attending upon the Romish services; so imperceptible to their well-practised senses was the difference between the two, and so well did the com- pilers of the prayer-book or the revisers of their work accomplish the task prescribed to them by the queen, viz. to frame a liturgy which should not offend the Papists.* Nay, but what is more, when a copy of the prayer-book had been sent to the Pope, so well was he satisfied with it, that he offered, through his nuncio Parpalia, to ratify it for England, if the queen would only own the supremacy of the see of Rome.t Such was the estimation in which the Pope and his followers held the prayer-book, which Anglicans now can never mention without exhausting all the super- latives in the vocabulary of commendation to express their most unbounded admiration of " our inimitable, inestimable, incomparable, apostolic, (?) and all but inspired liturgy." Nothing strikes so painfully upon the ear as to hear a man of evangelical sentiments utter such hyperboles in laudation of a Popish com- pilation, which even antichrist offered to sanction. In attempting to account for so startling a phenome- non, we have heard men less charitable than our- selves surmise, that the only principle on which it can be accounted for is, that the less intrinsic merit any object possesses, the more loudly must it be praised, to secure for it popular acceptance. For our own parts we must say we rank the matter under the category de gustibus, &c., and say there is no * Sir George Puule relates in his panegyric on Whitgifl, that an Italian Papist, lately arrived in England, on seeing that ambitious primate in the cathedral of Canterbury one Sabbath, " attended upon by an hundred of his own servants at least, in livery, whereof there were forty gentlemen in chains of gold; also by the dean, prebenda- ries, and preachers, in their surplices and scarlet hoods, and heard the solemn music, with the voices and organs, cornets and sackbuts, he was overtaken with admiration, and told an English gentleman, that unless it were in the Pope's chapel, he never saw a more solemn sight, or heard a more heavenly sound." — Wordworth's Eccl. Biog., iv. 388-9. t Strype's An., i. 340. Burnet, ii. 645. Collie'r, vi. 308—9. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXXI disputing about taste. And if members of the Church of England were satisfied with enjoying it them- selves, without thrusting it upon other people, and if moreover they did not, as some of them do, place it upon a level with the Bible, we should for our own part be as little disposed to deny them its use as we certainly are to envy them its possession. The commendations bestowed by Papists upon the Anglican prayer-book might of itself lead us to infer that it did not satisfy the Reformers ; and the conclu- sion thus arrived at is as much in accordance with historic facts as it is the result of logical accuracy. The continental Reformers to a man expressed both contempt and indignation towards the Anglican litur- gy. Calvin* declared, that he found in it many (tolerabiles ineptias), i. e., "tolerable fooleries;" that is, tolerable for the moment, as children are allowed (to use quaint old Fuller's illustration) to "play with rattles to get them to part with knives." Knoxt declared, that it contained " diabolical inven- tions, viz., crossing in baptism, kneeling at the Lord's table, mumbling or singing of the liturgy," &c, and " that the whole order of (the) book appeared rather to be devised for upholding of massing priests, than for any good instruction which the simple people can thereof receive." Beza,i writing to Bullinger about the state of England and the English Church, says, "I clearly perceive that Popery has not been ejected from that kingdom, but has been only transferred from the Pope to the queen; and the only aim of parties in power there is to bring back matters to the state in which they formerly stood. I at one time thought that the only subject of contention (between the Puritans and the Conformists) was about caps and external vestments; but I now, to my inexpres- sible sorrow, understand that it is about very dirfer- * Epirt. p. 28, t. ix. cd. 16G7. t Caldcrwood's History, (Wodrow ed.), i. 431. See the whole let- ter, pp. 425—434. t Strypc's An. ii. Rec. No. 29. The whole letter deserves a care- ful perusal. XXX11 THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. ent matters indeed," even the most vital and fun- damental elements of the Christian Church, as the sequel of the letter shows.* Beza concludes by say- ing, "such is the state of the Anglican Church, ex- ceedingly miserable, and indeed, as it appears to me, Intolerable." We might quote similar sentiments from other continental divines, such as Bullinger and Gualter, and may perhaps do so ere we close. But since the opinions of the Anglican Reformers them- selves will be, in the circumstances, of more import- ance, and since we are very much hampered for want of space, we come at once to the recorded judgment which these great and good men passed upon the prayer-book and the Church of England. The opinions of Grindal, successively bishop of London and archbishop of York and Canterbury; of Sandys, successively bishop of Worcester and Lon- don, and archbishop of York; of Parkhurst of Nor- wich, Pilkington of Durham, Jewell of Salisbury, and others, we need not refer to, as every one knows that they expressed themselves as strongly against the state of the Anglican Church as Sampson, Fox, Coverdale, or Humphreys. The only prelates of the first set appointed by Elizabeth who are claimed by Anglicans themselves, as having been in favour of the reformed condition of the Church of England, are Archbishop Parker, Cox of Ely, and Home of Win- chester, (as for Cheney of Gloucester and Bristol, we give him up an avowed Papist,) and if we show that these were dissatisfied with the condition of the Church of England, even her apologists must acknow- ledge that all Elizabeth's first prelates desired that that Church should he further reformed. Parker was one of the compilers of the prayer-book, and we have already seen how much the first draft excelled the present liturgy. Even after it had been enjoined, both by parliament and the queen, that the * The vicar of Leeds not only admits, but contends that Beza was correct in stating that the contention entered into the vital elements of Christianity. See Dr. Hook's Sermon, a Call to Union, &c, 2d ed., 74, 75. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXX111 communion should be received kneeling, Parker ad- ministered it in his own cathedral to the communi- cants standing.* At the very time when he was per- secuting the Puritans for nonconformity, (1575,) he wrote Cecil, " Doth your lordship think that I care either for caps, tippets, surplices, or wafer bread or any such?"t And Strype says expressly, that his " pressing conformity to the queen's laws and injunc- tions, proceeded not out of fondness to the ceremonies themselves/' which he would willingly see altered, "but for the laws establishing them he esteemed them."± " It may fairly be presumed/ 7 says Bishop Short, " that Parker himself entertained some doubts concerning the points which were afterwards disputed between the Puritans and the high church party; for in the questions prepared to be submitted to con- vocation in 1563, probably under his own direction, and certainly examined by himself/' for his annota- tions stand yet upon the margin of the first scroll, " there are several which manifestly imply that such a. difference of opinion might prevail."§ The ques- tions here alluded to by Bishop Short embrace most of those matters which were at first disputed between the Puritans and conformists. In particular, " It was proposed that all vestments, caps, and surplices, should be taken away; that none but ministers should bap- tize ; that the table for the sacrament should not stand altar-wise; that organs and curious singing should be removed ; that godfathers and godmothers should not answer in the child's name;" and several other mat- ters, which were then loudly complained of, but which remain in the Church of England till this day.|| It was only after he had been scolded into irritation by the queen, after his morose and sullen disposition and despotic temper had been chafed and inflamed by the resistance of the Puritans, and he felt or fancied that his character and the honour of his primacy were in * McCric's Life of Knox, 6th ed., p. 64, note. + Strypc's Parker, ii. 424. t Ibid. p. 528. § Sketch, &c., p. 250. II Burnet, iii. 457, 458. Strype's Parker, i. 386. Rec. No. 39. C XXXIV THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. jeopardy, that Parker committed himself to that course of persecution which has "damned his name to ever- lasting infamy." Had he even the inquisitor's plea of conscience, however unenlightened, to urge in his own defence, some apology, how inadequate soever, might be made for him. But Parker was a perse- cutor only from passion, or at best from policy.* Par- ker himself then was inclined to a further reformation of the Church of England. As to Cox again: in a letter to Bullinger, in 1551, we find him writing thus:—" I think all things in the Church ought to be pure and simple, removed at the greatest distance from the pomp and elements of the world. But in this our Church what can I do in so low a station?" (he was then, if we rightly remember, only archdeacon of Ely:) " I can only endeavour to persuade our bishops to be of the same mind with myself. This I wish truly, and I commit to God the care and conduct of his own work."t In the follow- ing year we find him complaining bitterly of the oppo- sition of the courtiers to the introduction of ecclesi- astical discipline, and predicting that if it were not adopted, " the kingdom of God would be taken away from them."$ After his return from exile, he joined with Grindal (whose scruples in accepting a bishopric were hushed only by all the counsels and exhortations of Peter Martyr, Bullinger, and Gualter)§ and the other bishops elect in employing the most strenuous efforts to effect a more thorough reformation in the Church of England, before they should accept of dioceses in it. When they found that they could not succeed, they seriously deliberated whether they could accept preferments in so popish a Church. At last they were induced to yield to the counsels of Bul- * Bishop Short candidly acknowledges, that "when Parker and the other bishops had begun to execute the laws against nonconfor- mists, they must have been more than men," or less, "if they could divest their own minds of that personality which every one must feel when engaged in a controversy in which the question, really is, whether he shall be able to succeed in carrying his plans into execu- tion." Sketch, &.C., p. 251. t Burnet, iii. 303—4. t Strype's Mem. Ref. ii. 366. § Strype's Grindal, 41—44, Ap. No. 11. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXXV linger and Gualter, and other continental divines whom they consulted, because the rites imposed were not in themselves necessarily sinful; because they anticipated that when elevated to the mitre, they should have power to effect the reformation they desired, and because, moreover, by occupying the sees they might exclude Lutherans and Papists, who would not only not reform, but would bring back the Church still further towards Rome.* Even Cox, then, desired further reformation in the Church of England, and was so dissatisfied with its condition, that not- withstanding of the gold and power it would bestow, (and both of them he loved dearly) he scrupled to accept a bishopric within its pale. When we bear in mind his conduct at Frankfort, and his subsequent career in England, we may safely conclude that the Church that was too popish for Cox had certainly but few pretensions to the name either of Reformed or Pro- testant. And finally, as to Home, he not only had scruples at first, like the rest, as to accepting a bishopric, but when he found that the reformation he anticipated he should be able to effect after his elevation could not be accomplished, he deliberated with himself, and consulted with the continental divines, whether it did not become his duty to resign his preferments. In conjunction with Grindal, he wrote for advice to Gualter, asking, whether, under the circumstances, he thought they could with a safe conscience continue in their sees. Gualter induced Bullinger, whose in- fluence was greater, to answer the question submitted to him. Bullinger accordingly replied, that if, upon a conscientious conviction, it should appear that, upon the whole, and all things considered, it were better to remain, then it became their duty to occupy their places, but if the reverse, then it was as clearly their duty to renounce them. He cautions them, however, against imagining, that because he gives this counsel, lie therefore, in any manner, approved of the con- duct of those who were for retaining "Papistical * Slrypc's An. ii. 263. Strypc's Grindal, 41—49, 438. XXXVI THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. dregs." On the contrary, he urges, with the greatest warmth, that the queen and the rulers of the nation should be importuned to proceed further with the Reformation, and that, among other reasons, lest the Church of England should remain "polluted with Popish dregs and offscourings, or afford any ground of complaint to the neighbour Churches of Scotland and France." Further information on this subject will be found in the note below.* * Since attempts have been, and are still made, to represent the divines of Zurich as having been satisfied with the length to which reformation was carried in the Church of England, it is necessary to show that the very reverse is the truth. Those who have access to the work, and can read the language, we would recommend to peruse in full the letters sent by Grindal and Home to Bullingcr and Gualter, and the answers returned by these divines, as they appear in Burnet's Records, B. vi. Nos. 75, 76, 82, 83, 87. Those who cannot read the original, may form some idea of their contents from the translated Summary, iii. pp. 462 — 476. Grindal, whose scruples were never removed, and who therefore wrote frequently and anxiously to foreign divines to obtain their sanc- tion to the course he was pursuing, had, in conjunction with Home, written to Bullinger and Gualter, requesting further counsel regard- ing the propriety of their remaining in the Church of England. Perceiving, most probabby, the wounded state of the consciences of their brethren in the Lord, Bullingcr and Gualter wrote a soothing reply, saying as much as they conscientiously could in favour of remaining in their cures. When the Anglican prelates received this answer, they at once saw that the judgment of those eminent foreign divines would go far to stop the censures which the Puritans pro- nouneed against their conforming brethren; and although the letter was strictly private, they published it. As soon as Bullinger and Gualter wire apprised of this act, they wrote a letter to the Earl of Bedford, one of the leaders of the Puritan party, complaining of the breach of confidence of which Grindal and Home had been guilty, and explaining the circumstances in which their letter had been written, deploring that it had been made theocccasion of further per- secution against their dear brethren in Christ (the Puritans,) and urg- ing upon the good Earl Id proceed strenuously in purifying the t 'hureh of Bnglaqd of the dregs of Popery, which, to their bitter grief, they found were still retained within her. When Horn and Grindal learned the feelings of their continental correspondents, they sent them a most submissive and penitential apology. In reply, Bullinger and Gualter mentioned several of those errors still existing in the Church of England, which they urged all her prelates to reform; such as subscriptions to new articles of faith and discipline, theatrical singing in churches, accompanied by the "crash of organs," baptism by women, the interrogations of sponsors, the cross, and other su- perstitious ceremonies in baptism, kneeling at the communion, and the use of wafer bread (which Strype informs us was made like the THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXXVll Such, then, was the judgment deliberately formed and often repeated, even of those Anglican High Church prelates, regarding the constitution and usages " singing cakes" formerly used in private masses, Life of Parker, ii. 32 — 5,) the venal dispensations for pluralities, and for eating flesh meat in Lent, and on " fish days," (which dispensations were sold in the archbishop's court,) the impediments thrown in the way of the marriage of the clergy, the prohibition to testify against, to oppose or refuse conformity to those abuses, the restricting all ecclesiastical power to the prelates; and conclude by imploring them, "in the bowels of Jesus Christ," to purge the temple of God from such Popish abominations. In reply to this faithful appeal, poor Grindal and Home write a very penitent and submissive letter, which we cannot read over at this day without the most painful emotion at the condi- tion to which these men of God were reduced between their desire to serve God in the gospel of his Son, and their scruples of conscience against the antichristian impositions to which they were subjected. The drift of their letter was to show that they had no power to reform the evils complained of, (and which they condemn and deplore as much as their correspondents,) and that either they must remain as they are, or abandon their benefices, and see them filled by Papists, who would destroy the flock of Christ. In conclusion, they promise- but we must give their promise in a literal translation — " We shall do the utmost that in us lies, as already we have done, in the last sessions of parliament and of convocation, and that, even although our future exertions should be as fruitless as the past, that all the errors and abuses which yet remain in the Church of England shall be corrected, expurgated and removed, according to the rule and standard of the word of God." In a preceding part of their letter they had said, that " although they might not be able to effect all they desired, they should not yet cease their exertions until they had thrust down into hell, whence they had arisen," certain abuses which they mention. And are these, then, the men who are to be regarded as approving of the extent to which reformation had been carried in the Church of England? We have given the sentiments of the divines of Zurich at the greater length, because some of their letters are, till this day, perverted, as they were at the time when they were written. Had this been done only by Collier, Heylin, and their school, we should not take any notice of it in our present sadly limited space. But when such writers as Strype, Cardwell, and Short, lend their names to palm such im- positions upon the public mind, it is necessary at once to show what was the real state of the case. Dr. McCrie (Life of Knox, note R.) has charged the Anglican prelates with having given " partial repre- sentations" to the foreign divines for the purpose of obtaining their sanction to the state of matters in England : and any man of com- petent knowledge of the subject, who reads over their letters, must be painfully aware, that, although they may not have designed it, yet, as was so very natural in their circumstances, they did write in a manner which could not but lead their correspondents into the grossest mis- takes. XXXV1H THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. of the Church of England. We should much deepen the impression we desire to produce upon our readers, had we space also to give the sentiments of the more evangelical prelates; of Parkhurst, for example, who, in a letter to Gualter in 1573, fervently exclaims, — "Oh, would to God, would to God, that now at last the people of England would in good earnest pro- pound to themselves to follow the Church of Zurich as the most perfect pattern;"* or of his scholar and fellow-prelate Jewell, who calls the habits enjoined upon the ministers of the Church of England, " thea- trical vestments — ridiculous trifles and relics of the Amorites," and satirizes those who submitted to wear them as men u without mind, sound doctrine or morals, by which to secure the approbation of the people, and who, therefore, wished to gain their plaudits by wear- ing a comical stage dress."t But it is unnecessary. The following passage from a High Church writer of the present day concedes all we desire to establish. After having condemned the Erastianism of Cranmer, and the want of what he terms " catholic" feeling and spirit in his coadjutors, and having denounced Hooper as " an obstinate Puritan — a mere dogged Genevan preacher," (the most opprobrious epithets the writer can bestow,) and Coverdale as " a thorough Puritan and Genevan, who officiated at the consecra- tion of Archbishop Parker in his black gown" (in italics, to indicate the sacrilegious profanation of the act — we wonder whether it invalidated his share, or the whole of the proceeding,) the writer proceeds thus : — "The immediate successors, however, of the Re- formers, as often happens in such cases, went further than their predecessors did, and were more deeply imbued with the feelings of the day. The Episcopate, in the first part of Queen Elizabeth's reign, were successors of Hooper and Coverdale, almost more than they were of Cranmer and Ridley; indeed, it was * Strype's An. ii. 286-342. + See many such passages in Dr. McCrie's note last referred to, and the letters in Burnet's Records. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. XXXIX only her strong Tudor arm that kept them within decent bounds," (that is, that kept them from assimi- lating the Church of England to the other Reform- ed Churches. ) " The greater part of them posi- tively objected to the surplice — including Sandys, Grindal, Pilkington, Jewell, Home, Parkhurst, Ben- tham, and all the leading men who were for sim- plifying our Church ceremonial in that and other respects, according to the Genevan, (that is, Pres- byterian) model ; Archbishop Parker almost stand- ing alone with the queen in her determination to up- hold the former.'' * (And we have already seen that he was about as little enamoured of them as his co- adjutors.) After having referred to some of Jewell's letters to the foreign divines written against the Anglican cere- monies, the writer makes an observation which ought to be ever present to the minds of those who read the censures of Jewell and his contemporaries. "It was no Roman Catholic ritual, we repeat, of which he thus expressed himself, but our own doubly reformed prayer-book — the divine service as now performed '."* Who now are the lineal descendants and proper re- presentatives of the Anglican Reformers ? — the Puri- tans who desired further reformation, or those who so loudly praise our < ; Catholic Church, our apostolic establishment," and vigorously resist every attempt to amend the most glaring corruptions in the Church of England ? We wish the evangelical party would ponder the answer that question must receive : — we say, the evangelical party, for we are aware that high churchmen, if they moved at all, would move in the direction of Rome. Having thus shown the opinions of the prelates regarding the constitution and ceremonies of the Church of England, let us now show the opinions of the inferior clergy': And here one fact may stand for all. In the year 1562, a petition was presented to the lower house of convocation, signed by thirty- two members, most of them exiles, and the best men * British Critic for October 1842, 330, 331. Xl THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. in the kingdom, praying for the following alterations in the service of the Church of England. 1. That organs might be disused, responses in the " reading psalms" discontinued, and the people allowed to sing the psalms in metre, as was the custom on the conti- nent, and had also been practised by the English exiles, not only when there, but after they had re- turned to their native land, and as was also the case among the Puritans when they non-conformed to (for they never seceded or dissented from) the Church of England, of which they could never be said to have been bona fide members. 2. That none but minis- ters should be allowed to baptize, and that the sign of the cross should be abolished. 3. That the impo- sition of kneeling at the communion should be left to the discretion of each bishop in his own diocese ; and one reason assigned for this part of the petition, was, that this posture was abused to idolatry by the igno- rant and superstitious populace. 4. That copes and surplices should be disused, and the ministers made to wear some comely and decent garment, (such as the Geneva gown, which all the early Puritans wore.) 5. That, as they expressed it themselves, " The min- isters of the word and sacrament be not compelled to wear such gowns and caps as the enemies of Christ's gospel have chosen to be the special array of their priesthood." 6. That certain words in Article 33, be mitigated, which have since been omitted alto- gether. 7. That saints' days might be abolished, or kept only for public worship, (and not as was then the case for feasting, jollity, superstition, and sin,) after which ordinary labour might be carried on. This petition was eventually withdrawn, and an- other very much to the same purpose substituted for it. This second petition prayed for the following alterations: — 1. That saints' days be abolished, but all Sundays, and the principal feasts of Christ be kept holy. 2. That the liturgy he read audibly, and not mumbled over inaudibly, as had been done by the massing priests. 3. That the sign of the cross in bap- tism be abolished as tending to superstition. 4. That THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. Xli kneeling at the communion be left to the discretion of the ordinary. 5. That ministers may use only a surplice, or other decent garment in public worship, and the administration of the sacraments. 6. That organs be removed from churches. After a protracted and vigorous debate, these arti- cles were put to the vote, when forty-three, most of them exiles, voted that the petition be granted, and only thirty-five against it; thus leaving a clear ma- jority of eight in favour of a further reformation. When, however, proxies were called for, only fifteen appeared for, while twenty-four appeared against the petition, being, on the whole, fifty-eight for, and fifty- nine against, leaving a majority of one for rejecting the prayer of the petition.* There is one point mentioned in the minutes of convocation, an extract from which is given, both by Burnet and Cardwell, which must be kept in view, to enable us to arrive at a correct conception of the sentiments of those who voted against the above articles. In the minute, it is distinctly mentioned, that the most of those who voted against granting the prayer of the petition, did so, not upon the merits, but only from a feeling that since the matters in debate had been imposed by public authority of parliament and the queen, it was not competent for convocation to take up the subject at all Thus, the motion for which they really voted was, not that the abuses complained of should be continued, but that the con- vocation had no power to alter them. A second sec- tion of those who voted against the articles, was composed of those who had held cures under Ed- ward, and had a hand in the public affairs of his reign, and, who having remained in England during , the reign of Mary, had not seen the purer churches on the continent, and regarded the reformation of Edward as sufficiently perfect. A third section of the majority consisted of those who held benefices under Mary, and who were of course Papists in their • * Strype's An. i. 500 — 6. Burnet iii. 454, 455. Records, Bk. vi. No. 74. Collier, vi. 371— .'3. CardweH'a Hist, of Conf. 117—120. Xlii THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. hearts, and would therefore vote against any further reformation. After we have thus analyzed the par- ties, and weighed, instead of numbering, the votes, and when, besides, we bear in mind that a majority of those who heard the reasoning upon the matters in dispute, voted for further reformation, it is easy to see on whose side truth and justice lay. There is, besides, another point to which Dr. Card- well has called our attention.* which we regard of the very highest importance, and to which, conse- quently, we call the special attention of our readers. It is this, that although, since the time of Burnet and Strype, it has been always said that the number of those who voted for the Articles was fifty-eight, yet, when we count them fairly, they are fifty-nine, pre- cisely the number who voted against them. Now, if we give the prolocutor (the same a§ our moderator,) a casting vote, No well, dean of St.Paul's, who was prolocutor of that convocation and voted in favour of the Articles, and would of course give his casting vote on the same side, this would give a majority in favour of further reformation. But how are we to account for the fact that, if thus the numbers were equal, that fact should not be known to the members ? We should be glad to hear of any other way of solving the difficulty, but the only mode of doing so that occurs to us, is to suppose that Parker or the queen had recourse to the artifice employed by Charles I. in the Scottish parliament, viz., concealed the roll and declared that the majority was in their favour, while it was against them, as was clearly seen when the original came into the hands of the public. That Parker was capable of the manoBUvre, no man who knows his character can for one moment question : And that Elizabeth would feel at the least as little scruple in doing so as Charles I., he that doubts may consult the note at the foot of the page.t * Vt supra, p. 120, note. t In 155!) a bill passed through parliament authorizing the queeri^ to restore to their former cures, such of the returned exiles as ha speak of those who are known as avowed Puritans, may he mentioned Bishop Coverdale, Fox tlii- martyrologist. Parker used every means to indue.' Fox to conform, in order that tin influence of his name might prevail upon others to follow his example. "Bui the old man, producing tament in Greek, 'To this,' saith he, ' I will subscribe.' But when a subscription to the canons was required of him, he r< 1112:. 'I have nothing in the Church save a prebend at Satis* bury, and much good may it d^ you if you will take it away.' "t The best part of the inferior clergy again, who conformed, did so in the hope that the prelates whom they knew to be of their own sentiments would, now that they were elevated to places of power, be able to accomplish the further reformation which all so very ardently desired. Of all the true Protestants, not one would have consented to accept ;i preferment in _■ : i « ■ .- 1 1 1 Church, it he had been at the outset aware that no further reformation was to be accom- plished. What, then, it may be asked, continued to retain them in her communion, when they (bund that »uld not reform that Church? It is a delicate m, hut we have no hesitation in rendering an answer. The deteriorating influence of high stations of honour, power, and wealth, has been rendered pro- verbial by the experience of mankind; but never was it more disastrously manifested than by Elizabeth's ops. Not one of them had escaped the cor- ■ Strvj.c's Ann.ii. 43; t Fuller*! Ch. Hist I hitgirt about filling up some bishoprics then icb worldlincss in many that were otherwise affected before they came to cathedral churches, thai he (eared the places altered the nun." Strypc's Whitgift, i. 338. He makes very much the same complaint to Grindal in 1575. Strypi dal,281. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. xllX rupting influence of their stations.* Having so far overcome the scruples they at first entertained against conformity., not it must be feared without doing vio- lence to their convictions, it was but natural that they should entertain not the most kindly feelings towards those whose consistency of conduct not only would degrade them in their own eyes, but open up afresh the wounds yet raw in their consciences. The apos- tate is ever the most vindictive persecutor of his for- mer brethren. Besides, no one can fail to have noticed that when a man has irretrievably committed himself to a cause which he formerly opposed, he is compelled, by the necessity of his position, to become more stringent and inflexible in his proceedings than the man who is now pursuing only the course on which he first embarked. Bishop Short, in a passage already quoted, has candidly admitted, that " when Parker and the other bishops had begun to execute the laws against non-conformists, they must have been more than men if they could divest their own minds of that personality which every one must feel when engaged in a controversy in which the question really is, whether he shall be able to succeed in carrying his plans into execution." We could assign other reasons for the conduct of Elizabeth's first bishops, but we entertain too high a regard for what they had been, to take any pleasure in exposing their faults. What now would these great and good men do were they, with their avowed principles, when they returned from exile, to appear in our day? Would they praise the Church of England as " our primitive and apostolic Church, — the bulwark of the Reforma- tion, — the safeguard of Protestantism, and the glory of Christendom?" as some who boast of being their successors continue to do. Would they even accept cures in the Church of England, knowing, as all her ministers now do, that no further reformation is so much as to be mooted, — nay, that it must not be * Sec ;i painful letter on this subject from Sampson to Grindal. Strypc's Parker, ii. 37G, 377. 1 THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. so much as acknowledged that it is required? He knows neither the constitution of the Church of Eng- land, nor the character of the reformers, who hesitates for one moment to answer, and with the most marked emphasis, they ivould not. And what B lesson of solemn warning do the con- sequences of a compromise of principles, as seen in the subsequent history of the Church of England, read to our own ministers in their present arduous Struggle. The second set of bishops appointed by Elizabeth were, without a single exception, men of more Erastian sentiments, of more lax theology, of more Popish tendencies, than their predecessors. The first prelates had been trained amid the advancing reformation of Edward, and among the Preshyterians on the continent, and had imbibed the sentiments of their associates. But their successors had been trained in the Church of England, and bore the impress of her character. And such would also be the case in our own Church, were our ministers, by an unhal- lowed submission, to yield to the antichristian invasion of the Church's rights and liberties now attempted. To these onr ministers, God has committed a glorious cause. May they be found worthy to maintain it. Their deeds arc before men and angels. Future his- torians shall record their acts, and inscribe their names in the glorious muster-roll of martyrs and confessors, or denounce them to eternal infamy. We shall watch their proceedings with an interest which the shock of armed empires would not excite in our bosoms, and, by God's grace, shall lend our aid to make known to posterity how they have fought the good fight and kept the faith. The arena of their struggle may ap- pear obscure and contracted. But it is the Ther- mopylae of Christendom. On them, and on their . under God, it depends, whether worse than Asiatic barbarism and despotism are to overwhelm Europe, or light, and life, and liberty, to become the birthright of the nations. May the Captain of the host of Israel ever march forward at their head. May the blue banner of the covenant, unstained by THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. li one blot, be victorious in their hands, as it was of yore. May the sword of the Lord, and of Gideon, now unsheathed, never return to its scabbard, until the Church of Scotland shall have vindicated her rights, and established her liberties on an immovable basis. No surrender ! No compromise ! Better the mountain side, like our fathers, and freedom of communion with our God, than an Erastian establishment, which would no longer be a Church, — than a sepulchral temple, from which the living God had fled. We return from this digression, (for which we make no apology, — we would despise the man that would require it,) to relate the internal condition of the Church of England at and after the accession of Elizabeth. One fact will prove, to every man who regards " Christ crucified as the power of God and the wis- dom of God unto salvation," that the Church of Eng- land was at this time in the most wretched condition imaginable, both moral and spiritual. Of nine thou- sand four hundred clergymen, of all grades, then bene- ficed in that Church, and all, of course, Papists, being the incumbents of Mary's reign, only one hundred and ninety-two, of whom only eighty were parochial, resigned their livings; the rest, as much Papists as ever, and now, in addition, unblushing hypocrites, who subscribed what they did not believe, and sub- mitted to what they could not approve, remained in their cures, and became the ministers of the Protes- tant (?) Church of England.* We should do these nine thousand two hundred and eight who remained in their cures, an honour to which they have no claim, were we to compare them to the most ignorant, scan- dalous, and profligate priesthood at present in Europe. Many of them did not understand the offices they had been accustomed to " mumble" at the altar. Some * The following is Strype's list of those who resigned, — yiz., 14 bishops, 18 deans, 14 archdeacons, 15 heads of colleges, 50 pre- bendaries, 80 rectors, 6 abbots, priors, and abbesses, in all 192. Annals, i. 106. Burnet, ii. 620, makes them only 189. Collier, vi. p. 252, following, as is his wont, Popish authorities, when they can add credit to their own Church, makes them about 250. Ui THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. of them could not sign their names, or even read the English liturgy. Yet into the hands of these men did Elizabeth and her prelates commit the immortal souls of the people of England. And if at any time the people, shocked at the immoralities and Papistry of their parish priest, attended ordinances under some more Protestant minister in the neighbourhood, they were compelled, by fines and imprisonment, to return to their own parish church. When, in the course of a few years, several of these papistico-protestant priests had died, and others of them had fled out of the kingdom, there were no properly qualified ministers to replace them. Patrons sold the benefices to laymen, retaining the best part Of the fruits in their own hands. Thus the parishes remained vacant. Strype, speaking of the state of the diocese of Bangor in 1565, says, "As for Bangor, that diocese was much out of order, there being no preaching used." And two years afterwards the bishop wrote to Parker, that " he had but two preach- ers in his whole diocese," the livings being in the hands of laymen.* In 1562 Parkhurst of Norwich wrote Parker, in answer to the inquiries of the privy council, that in his diocese there were 434 parish churches vacant, and that many chapels of ease had fallen into ruins.t Cox of Ely, in 1560, wrote the archbishop, that in his diocese there were 150 cures of all sorts, of which only "52 were duly served," — many of them, of course, only by readers, — 34 were vacant, 13 had neither rector nor vicar, and 57 were possessed by non-residents. "So pitiable and to be lamented," exclaims Cox, "is the face of this diocese; and if, in other places, it be so too," (and so it was,) "most miserable indeed is the condition of the Church of England."} We never can think of the condition of England, — when thus darkness covered the earth, and thick darkness the people, and when, emphati- cally, the blind led the blind, — without admiring grati- * Strype's Parker, i. -101, Cm. \ Strype's Parker, i. 143, 144. t Strypc's An. i. ~>'.l*, 540. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lift tude to that God who did not altogether remove his candlestick, and leave the whole nation to perish, through the crimes of their rulers, civil and eccle- siastical. In order to keep the churches open, and afford even the semblance of public worship to the people, the prelates were compelled to license, as readers, a set of illiterate mechanics, who were able to read through the prayers without spelling the hard words. * The people, however, could not endure these immoral, base-born, illiterate readers ; and then, as if the mere act of ordination could confer upon them all the re- quisite qualifications, "not a few mechanics, altogether as unlearned as the most objectionable of those eject- ed, were preferred to dignities and livings."! The scheme, however politic, failed, through the inde- corous manners, and the immoral lives, and the gross ignorance, of these upstart priests. £' And then an order was issued to the bishop of London to ordain no more mechanics, because of the scandals they had brought upon religion ;§ but the necessity of the case compelled the provincial bishops still to employ lay readers, and ordain mechanics to read the prayers. Such was the condition of England when Parker, partly goaded on by the queen, and partly by his own sullen despotism, commenced a course of persecutions, suspensions, and silencing against the Puritans, who were the only preachers in the kingdom. In January 1564, eight were suspended in the diocese of London. It was hoped that this example would overawe the rest, and three months afterwards the London clergy were summoned again to subscribe to the canons, and conform to all the usages of the Church of England ; but thirty refused, and were, of course, suspended. || A respite of eight months was given to the rest; and then in January 1656 they were cited, and 37 having refused to subscribe, were suspended.1T These, as we * Strype's An. i. 202, 203. || Strype's Grindal, 144, 146. + Collier, vi. 264. T Ibid. 154. t Strype's Parker, i. 180. § Strype's Grindal, 60. Collier, vi. 313. Uv THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. may well believe, were, even in the estimation of Parker himself, and. indeed, as he acknowledged, the best men and the ablest preachers in the diocese.* The insults offered, and the cruelties inflicted upon these men, would, had we space to detail them, in- tensate the indignation of our readers against their ruthless persecutors. The silencing of such preachers, and the consequent desolation in the Church excited the attention of the nation. All men who had any regard for the ordi- nances of God, were shocked at the proceedings of the primate, and bitter complaints were made of him to the privy council. Elizabeth herself ordered Cecil to write him on the subject. Parker sullenly replied, that this was nothing more than he had foreseen from the first, and that when the queen had ordered him to press uniformity, "he had told her, that these precise folks would offer their goods, and even their bodies to prison, rather than they would relent. "t And yet Parker, who could anticipate their conduct, could neither appreciate their conscientiousness, nor respect their firmness. The persecutions commenced in London soon spread over the whole kingdom. We have already seen the most destitute condition of the diocese of Norwich, in which four hundred and thirty-four parish churches were vacant, and many chapels of ease fallen into ruins. Will it be credited, that in these circumstances thirty-six ministers, almost the whole preaching min- isters in the diocese, were, in one day, suspended, for refusing subscription to the anti-christian impositions of the prolates?| This is but a specimen of what took place throughout the kingdom. And when the peo- ple, having no pastor to teach them, met together to read the Scriptures, forthwith a thundering edict came down from the primate, threatening them with fines and imprisonment if they dared to pray together or read the word of (>o(\. In a certain small village a revival took place, under the ministrations of a reader, * Strypc's Parker, i. 429. t Strype's Parker, i. 448. t Ibid. ii. 341 . THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lv so illiterate that he could not sign his own name. As always happens under such circumstances, the people formed fellowship meetings. No sooner was this known than they were summoned to answer for such violations of canonical order. In a simple memorial, which would melt a heart of stone, these pious peasants stated to the inquisitors, that they only met together in the evenings, after the work of the day was over, to devote the time they formerly misspent in drinking and sin, to the wor- ship of God, and the reading of his word. Their judges were deaf to their petitions and representations, and forbade them absolutely to meet any longer for such purposes, leaving it to be inferred, by no far-fetched deductions, that a man might violate the laws of God, without impunity ; but wo be unto him that should break the injunctions of the prelates.* And what was the crime for which these Puritans were suspended, sequestered, fined, imprisoned, and some of them put to death? Simply because they would not acknowledge that man, whether prelate, primate, or prince, has authority to alter the constitu- tion of God's church, to prescribe rites and modes of " will- worship," and administration of sacraments, different from what He had appointed in his word. Nothing but gross ignorance, or grosser dishonesty, will lead any man to say, as has been said, and con- tinues to be said down to this day, and that not by ministers of the Church of England alone, but by others of whom better things might be expected,! that the Puritans refused to remain in their ministry merely because of the imposition of " square caps, copes, and surplices;" or even, which are of higher moment, because of the " cross in baptism," and kneeling at the communion; these things being considered simply in themselves. What they condemned and resisted was the principle, that man has authority to alter the economy of God's house. " Considering, therefore," said the ministers of London in 1565, in a defence * Strype's Parker, 381-5. t See Orme's Life of Owen, commented on by Dr. McCrie in his Miscellaneous Works, pp. 465, 466. Ivi THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. they published of their own conduct, * considering, therefore, that at this lime, by admitting the out- ward apparel, and ministering garments of the Pope's church, not only the Christian liberty should be mani- festly infringed, but the whole religion of Christ would be brought to be esteemed no other thing than the pleasure of princes, they (the London "ministers) thought it their duty, being ministers of God's word and sacraments, utterly to refuse" to submit to the required impositions. But if the prelates were deter- mined to proceed in their infatuated career, then these enlightened servants of God professed their willing- ness " to submit themselves to any punishment the laws did appoint, that so they might teach by their example true obedience both to God and man, and yet to keep the Christian liberty sound, and show the Christian religion to be such, that no prince or poten- tate might alter the same."* When Sampson and Humphreys were required to subscribe and submit to the prescribed impositions, they refused upon the following, among other ac- counts:— " If," they said, "we should grant to wear priests' apparel, then it might and would be required at our hands to have shaven crowns, and to receive more Papistical abuses. Therefore it is best, at the first, not to wear priests' apparel."t It was the prin- ciple involved in these impositions they opposed. And well are we assured, that had it not been for the resistance to the first attempts to enslave the con- science, which were made by these glorious confessors and martyrs, other and still more hateful abuses of Popery would have been perpetuated in the Angli- can church. Only grant the principle, that man lias tli ( " right to make such impositions, and where is the application of the principle to find its limit? And as to the stale objection, that these men relin- quished their ministry for frivolous rites and habits, it is enough to reply, that the objection is not founded upon truth. * Apud Strype's An. ii. 1GG, 167. t Strype's Parker, i. 340. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. Mi " As touching that point," (the habits,) says Cart- wright, "whether the minister should wear it, although it be inconvenient; the truth is, that I dare not be au- thor to any to forsake his pastoral charge for the in- convenience thereof, considering that this charge (the ministry) being an absolute commandment of the Lord, ought not to be laid aside for a simple incon- venience or uncomeliness of a thing which, in its own nature, is indifferent. . . . When it is laid in the scales with the preaching of the word of God, which is so necessary to him who is called thereunto, that a woe hangeth on his head if he do not preach it ; it is of less importance than for the refusal of it we should let go so necessary a duty."* We might challenge their accusers, whether Bro wn- ist or Prelatist, to show us sentiments more enlight- ened or more consistently maintained, since the world began. We have said so much upon this point, because we do not mean at present to enter upon a formal defence of the Puritans, although we may, perchance, do so elsewhere, and at greater length, hereafter, if God spare us. W r e have done this also to prevent our readers from being carried away by the oft-repeated libels of pert pretenders to liberality, or of servile con- formists to hierarchical impositions, against the best men that England has ever produced. The universities did little or nothing to provide ministers for the necessities of the times. The condi- tion of Oxford at the accession of Elizabeth was deplorable in the extreme. t In 1563 Sampson, Hum- phreys, and Kingsmill, three Puritans, were the only ministers who could preach, resident in Oxford :± and as if to deliver over that university to the unrestrained sway of Popery, the two former were ejected, while Papists swarmed in all the colleges. In one college, (Exeter,) in 1578, out of eighty resident members, * Rest of Second Rcplie to Whitgift, ed. 1577, p. 262. t See Jewell's Letters to Bullinger and Peter Martyr on the State of Oxford ; Burnet's Records, bk. vi. 48, 56. t Strype's Parker, i. 313. lviii THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. there were only four professed Protestants.* When- ever a Puritan was discovered, lie was instantly expelled; but never, — so far as we could discover, and we paid attention to the point, — never, for mere Popery, was one Papist ejected, from either cure or college, throughout the whole reicrn of Elizabeth. Oxford continued thus the stronghold of Popery; and instead of providing ministers for the Church of Eng- land, it provided members for Popish colleges "be- yond the M'.is."t It is instructive, not less to the statesman and the philosopher, than to the divine, to find the self-propagating power of error, and the ten- dency to conserve corruption, which has been mani- fested in that celebrated seat of learning. Whenever Popery is assailed, it uniformly finds a safe retreat in Oxford. In the reign of Edward, Cambridge had received a larger diffusion of the gospel than the rival university. Almost all the first prelates of Elizabeth had been educated on the banks of the Cam, and all the princi- pal preachers of the same period had been trained in the same place. Cambridge, in fact, alone with Lon- don, was the head quarters of Puritanism, not less among the undergraduates, than the heads and mem- bers. Prom a faculty which had been granted by the Pope to that university, to license twelve preachers annually, who might officiate in any part of the king- dom, without having their licences countersigned by the prelates, Cambridge seemed destined to be the sal- vationof England. The Protestant prelates, however, could not tolerate a licence to preach, which even their Popish predecessors had patronized, and never e< ased until they had deprived Cambridge of its privi- lege. TS'ol satisfied with this prevention of preaching, Parker and Ins successor determined to root out Puri- tanism from its stronghold ; and as they had silenced its preachers in London, so they silenced its professors at Cambridge. Cartwright, Johnson, Dering, Brown, Wilcox, and their fellows, were expelled, some of * Strype's An. ii. 196, 197. t Ibid. 390, 391. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lix them imprisoned, and some of them driven into ban- ishment. The salt being thus removed, the body sunk into partial corruption. Of Cambridge, however, it is right that it should be recorded, that whatever of Protestantism England possesses, it owes to that uni- versity. How singular it is, that after the lapse of three centuries, the two English universities should, at this day, retain the distinguishing features which characterized them at the Reformation. In order to supply as much as they possibly could some instructors for their parishes, the Anglican pre- lates established in their dioceses what was called " prophesy ings," or " exercises," that is, monthly or weekly meetings of the clergy for mutual instruction in theology and pulpit ministrations; and the plan was found to work so admirably, that, as Grindal told the queen in 1576, when she commanded him to sup- press the prophesyings, and diminish the number of preachers, " where afore were not three able preach- ers, now are thirty meet to preach at Paul's Cross, and forty or fifty besides able to instruct their own cures."* The prophesyings, however, were suppressed, and the people left to perish for lack of knowledge. On a sur- vey of the condition of England at the time, nothing can more strongly convince a pious mind of the super- intendence of a gracious Providence, than that the kingdom did not sink into heathenism, or at least remain altogether Popish. The moral character of the Anglican priesthood was of a piece with their ignorance and Popish ten- dencies. This subject is so disgusting, and the disclo- sures we could make so shocking, that we hesitate whether it were not better to pass by the subject in total silence. We may give an instance or two, how- ever, as a specimen of what was the almost universal condition of this clergy, and our specimens are by no means the worst we could adduce. Sandys of Wor- cester, in his first visitation in 1560, found in the city * Strype's Grindal, Rec. B. ii. No. 9, p. 568. We recommend to our readers to peruse the whole of that noble letter, the noblest that was ever addressed to Elizabeth. IX THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. of Worcester, five or six priests, " who kept five or six whores a-piece. ,M And wore they suspended? Our author gives not one single hint that they were. But had they preached the gospel at uncanonical hours, or saved .sinners in uncanonical garments, they would not only have 1 n deposed, but fined, impri- soned, and perhaps banished or even put to death. The laws of God might he violated with impunity, hut wo unto him who broke the laws of Elizabeth and Parker. Again, in L559, at a commission ap- pointed to visit the province of York, comprising the whole of the north and east of England, with the diocese of Chester, which includes Lancashire, " the presentments," that is, the informations lodged against the incumbents •• were most frequent, almost in "every parish, about fornication, and keeping other women besides their wives, and for having bastard children."t " As to Bangor, that diocese was much out of order, there being no preaching used, and pensionary con- cubinacy openly continued, which was an allowance of concubinacy to the clergy by paying a pension (to the bishop, or his court,) notwithstanding the liberty of marriage granted." And Parker himself was openly charged with having " such a commissioner there as openly kept three concubines."^ This, let it be noticed, was not a libel by " Martin Marprelate," but an official report from ;i royal commission presented to the privy council. While Puritans crowded every pestiferous jail in the kingdom for merely preaching the truth as it is in Jesus, these infamous priests filled every parish in England. Let any man assert that we have given the only, or the most scandalous in* stances we could rake up from the polluted sower of the early Anglican church history, and we shall give him references to fifty times as manymprej for Ave decline polluting our pages with such abandoned pro- fligacj . One of the most fruitful sources of those enormous * Strypc's Parker, i. 1 56. + Strypc'e An. i. 246. t Strypc's Furker, i. 404. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. Ixi evils under which the Church of England at this time groaned, was that prolific mother of all corruption, patronage, which has never existed in a Church with- out corrupting it, and which threatens, if God inter- pose not, to destroy our own beloved Zion. In 1584, "a person of eminency in the Church" gives a fearful picture of the evils which "the devil and corrupt patrons" had occasioned to the Anglican establish- . ment. "For patrons now-a-days," he says, "search not the universities for most fit pastors, but they post up and down the country for a most gainful chap- man; he that hath the biggest purse to pay largely, not he that hath the best gifts to preach learnedly is presented."* And what is the difference between this state of matters and what has existed among our- selves, but that the patron, instead of selling his pre- sentations for money, has bestowed them in return for votes for his nominee to parliament, for support in gaining the lieutenancy of a county, or (as now seems the current price) for support in "'swamping" the present majority in our General Assembly? The bishops were just as corrupt in the disposal of the benefices in their gift as the lay patrons. Curtes of Chichester, for example, was charged by several gentlemen and justices of peace of his diocese, among other malversations of office, with keeping benefices in his gift long vacant, that he might himself pocket the fruits, and selling his advowsons to the highest bidder.! After a visitation of his province, Parker writes Lady Bacon, that "to sell and to buy benefices, to fleece parsonages and vicarages, was come to that pass, that omnia sunt venalia;" that all ranks were guilty of the practice, "so far, that some one knight had four or five, and others, seven or eight benefices clouted together," and retained in their own hands, the parishes all the while being vacant; while others again set boys and servants "to bear the names of such livings," and others again bargained them away * Strype's An. ii. 146. Ibid. Whitgift, i. 368. t Ibid. 117. Ixii THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. at a fixed sum per year. And/*' he adds, "this kind of doing was common in all the country."* When the Simonists came for orders or institution, they sometimes were rejected by the more conscien- tious prelates, on account, not indeed of their Simony, which, sn far as we have noticed, never happened, but on account of their gross ignorance and scandal- ous Lives. But the patrons, and these dutiful sons of the Church, anticipating by three centuries, the prac- tices with which we are, alas, but too familiar in our own day. were not thus to be defrauded of their "vested rights" and "patrimonial interests." They commenced suits in the civil courts, and harassed the bishops with the terrors of a quart impedi t, and of a praemunire. They did not always, however, put themselves to that trouble. Some of the presentees at once took possession of their benefices without waiting for orders, (as we shall bye and bye show,) and set themselves to read prayers, and administer quasi sacraments, or what was much more congenial to their tastes, to cultivate their glebes; varying the monotony of attending "farmers' dinners" by occa- sional other indulgences much less "moderate;" an example this, which (barring the last part,) we take have most humbly to commend to those unpopular presentees who are not fortunate enough to get pre- sentations to parishes within that paradise of mode- ratism. the synod of Aberdeen, or the presbytery of Meigle. Iu consequence of this state of matters, pluralities and non-residence became universal. Nor could it well be otherwise when the prelates set such exam- ples as that we are about to adduce before men by no means disinclined to follow them. We could show * Strypc's Parker, i. 495-8. By the 22d apostolical canon, the 2d council of Chalcedon, and the 22d Trullan canon, Simonists, if pre- lates, or priests, or deacons, were to be deposed and excommunicated. Pray, what becomes of the "apostolical succession" in the Church of England, if these canons are held valid? And if the canons are re- jected, pray, on what other foundation docs the Church of England stand ? THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lxiii several examples of pluralism such as never, we are persuaded, was witnessed in any other Church. The case of the following Jacobus de Voragine, however, may stand for all. From the frequency and the urgency of the complaints that came up to the privy council regarding the state of the diocese of St. Asaph, a commission was appointed in 1587 to visit it. The visitors, on their return, laid the following report be- fore the high commission court, viz., that "most of the great livings within the diocese, some with cure of souls and some without cure, are either holden by the bishop (Hughes) himself in commendam" or by non- residents, the most of whom were laymen, civilians, or lawyers in the archbishop's court, through which dispensations to hold commendams were obtained. The prelate kept to his own share sixteen of the richest benefices. Fourteen of the same class were held by the civil lawyers, of course as fees for grant- ing him dispensations to hold the rest. There was not a single preacher within the diocese, the " lord bishop only excepted," but three. One of the resident pluralists holding three benefices, two of them among the richest in the diocese, kept neither "house nor hospitality," but lived in an ale house. The prelate also sold (some on behoof of his wife, some on that of his children, and some on his own) most, if not all, the livings in his gift, besides those reserved in his own hands. He would grant the tithes of any living to any person who would pay for them, reserving for the support of an incumbent what would not maintain a mechanic; in consequence of which the parishes remained vacant. In his visitations he would compel the clergy, besides the customary "procurations," as they are called, (that is, an assessment upon the clergy to pay the ordinary expenses of a prelate during a visitation through his diocese,) to pay also for all his train.* Our readers will not be surprised to hear that this wholesale dealer in tithes and benefices was amassing * Strype's An. iii. 435, 436, and iv. Ap. No. 32. lxiv TIIE ANGLICAN* REFORMATION. a handsome fortune and purchasing large estates, be- sides dealing in mortgages and other profitable specu- lations. Hut they will he surprised to hear that no eommendam could he held without a dispensation from the archbishop's court, and that while hundreds of parishes throughout England were vacant for want of ministers to supply them, and while hundreds more i } r that they could not support a minister,* Parker was accustomed to grant dispensations to pre- lates to hold commendams, tor the purpose of being able to maintain what In- so much loved and com- mended to others, viz.. "the port of a bishop;''! and they may also he surprised, that is to say if they are well acquainted with the primate as we hap- pen to he. when we tell them that Parker was paid a tort of per centage upon all these dispensations; not that we insinuate that this had any share in inducing him to grant them, although his own maintenance of the "port of a bishop" entailed upon him no trifling expense.! Our readers will now be prepared to receive the * There arc in England 4513 livings, if living* they can be called, under L. 10. Sec an extract from a document from the state paper office on the value of all the benefices in England in Collier ix. Rec. Nc :•:•. "The Church of England probably stands alone," says Bishop Short, "in latter times as exhibiting instances of ecclesiastical provided with any temporal support." Sketch, &c. p. 188. Mine poverty which lias been entailed on many of our tiring*," In- ."ays again, "is one of the greatest evils which afflicts our Church prop rty," p. 509. And he says elsewhere, that if it were not for the ncunber of persons of independent fortune who take orders in the Church of England, allured of course by the higher prizes,) many of the nm s musl remain vacant. The manner in which the Church o!' England, and our own Church also, were pillaged at the Reformation by our benevolent friends the patrons, is an inviting sub- tation, bat we must not enter upon it here. t For this purpose, he granted to Cheney a dispensation to hold Bri.>tol in commeudam with Gloucester. And for precisely the same purpose, h B thyn of Landaff a dispensation to hold the .,! v "i Bn con, the i< ctory of Roget, a prebend in Landaff, r of Sunningwcll, and in addition, "to hold aZia quacunque, (juotcu in/in , mtaliacunqut, not exceeding L. 10U per an." Strype's Parker, n. 121, I As a specimen i f the manni r in which Parker maintained the "port of a bishop," the read, r may consult Strype's Parker, i. 378 — 380, 253, S, 1 ; i.. 278,396, 9 II THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. 1XV following account of the state of the Church and king- dom of England, drawn up by the industrious Strype* from the papers of Cecil : — "The state of the Church and religion at this time (1572) was but low and sadly neglected. . . . The churchmen heaped up many benefices upon them- selves and resided upon none, neglecting their cures. Many of them alienated their lands ; made unreason- able leases and wastes of their woods; granted re- versions and advowsons to their wives and children, or to others for their use. Churches ran greatly into dilapidation and decay, and were kept nasty and filthy, and indecent for God's worship. . . . Among the laity there was little devotion; the Lord's day greatly profaned and little observed; the common prayers not frequented ; some lived without any ser- vice of God at all; many were mere heathens and atheists; the queen's own court an harbour for epi- cures and atheists, and a kind of lawless place because it stood in no parish ; — which things made good men fear some bad judgments impending over the nation." And yet ministers of the Church of England can find no terms sufficiently strong in which to praise the reformation in their own Church, or dispraise that in the other Protestant churches. It may not be improper, although we have scru- pulously confined ourselves to Church of England authorities, to give the testimony of a contemporary Puritan as to the condition of that Church about 1570:— " I could rehearse by name," says our author, " a bishop's boy, ruffianly both in behaviour and apparel, at every word swearing and staring, having ecclesi- astical promotions — a worthy prebend (prebendary?) no doubt. I could name whoremongers being taken, and also confessing their lechery, and yet both enjoy- ing their livings and also having their mouths open, and not stopped nor forbidden to preach. I know * Life of Parker, ii. 204, 205. lXVi THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. also some that have said mass diverse years since it was prohibited, and upon their examination confessed the same, yet ore in quiet possession of their eccle- siastical promotions. I know double beneficed men that do nothing but eat, drink, sleep, play at dice tables, bowls, and read service in the Church, — but these infect not their flocks with false doctrine, for they teacli nothing a1 I Where is the man who ponders over these state- that will not sympathize with the bishop of Sodor and Man. in the reflection with which he closes his history of the reign of Elizabeth ? — " The feeling which the more attentive study of these times is cal- culated to inspire," says Dr.Shortyf "is the conviction of the superintendence of Providence over the Church of Christ." Assuredly but for the watchful provi- , dence of the God of all grace, the Church of Christ in England could never have survived the reign of Elizabeth. There is just one subject more to which we must allude before we bring the lengthened sketch of the Anglican Reformation to a close; and wc do so in order to show our readers that if ''apostolical succes- * Parte of a Register, p. 8. See also p'lssim, the first of the Mar Prelate Tracts, just reprinted by .Mr. John Petheram, bookseller, 71 Chancery Lane, London. The .Mar Prelate Tracts having been written in ;i satirical style, were disclaimed by the stern and severe Puritans of the times, but so far as facts arc concerned, we hold them perfect 1\ We have read through Martin's Epistle, just published, and will at any time, at five minutes' warning, undertake to establish by positive or presumptive evidence the substantial, and in the L r rtat majority of cases the verbal, truth of any important fact . Petheram intends, should he receive snificient en- OOoragement, to reprint by subscription, in a neat cheap form, several of the old Puril i as The Troubles at Frankfort, Ad- monition to Parliament, Parte of a Register, and others exceedingly valuable, but so exceedingly rare, that not one in a hundred of our r have Been tin in. Mr. Petheram illustrates these judicious antiquarian notes, that add greatly to their value. v. mmend our readers in the strongest terms I curious and valuable productions, and trust Mr. Petheram may r< c< f><- bu< b < neouragement in his spirited enterprise as may induce linn to reprint rks of the old Puritan divines, + Sketch, &c.p. 318. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lXVU sion," or an uninterrupted succession of ministers canonically baptized, and prelatically ordained and consecrated, be essential to the being of a Church, then the Church of England not only cannot prove that she has this essential qualification, but we can prove that she has lost it, at least to an extent that invalidates all her pretensions to its possession. We have some time ago shown, that, on canonical principles, baptism is valid only when it is adminis- tered by a minister canonically, that is, as it is com- monly understood, prelatically ordained; and that without such baptism a man's orders, however canoni- cally conferred, are null and void, inasmuch as he wanted a qualification which is essential as a sub- stratum for orders subsequently received. Ministers of the Church of England, if they would prove that they possess an apostolical succession, must first prove that all through whom baptism and orders have de- scended to them have themselves been canonically baptized and ordained. But how can this be proved in the presence of such facts as the following ? Mid- wives, about the period of the Reformation, were, it would appear, frequently guilty of changing infants at birth, strangling and beheading them, and bap- tizing them in what were called cases of necessity, with perfumed and artificial water, and "odd and profane words" and ceremonies. On these accounts it was deemed necessary not only to bind them over to keep the peace towards these "innocents/' but to grant them a species of orders, by which they might be admitted among the subaltern grades of the hier- archy. Parker, for example, in 1567, grants to Elea- nor Pead, a license to administer baptism, (having first exacted of her an oath of canonical obedience) of the following tenor, — "Also, that in the ministration of the sacrament of baptism, I will use apt, and the accustomed words of the same sacrament, that is to say, these words following, or the like in effect, ' I christen thee in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost/ and none other profane words."* * Strype's An. i. ii. 242—3. Ixviii THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. Now, without being so hypercritical as to maintain that, Parker, in calling the words "I christen thee," &c. " profane w in the above sentence he necessarily does, seems himself to acknowledge the invalidity of such pretended sacrament; and without maintaining that the omission of the scriptural term "I baptize." and the substitution of the unscriptural and heretical term k, I christen," invalidates the whole act, (even had it been performed by Parker himself) but granting that these irregularities derogate nothing from the validity of the ordinance, as performed by the said Eleanor, we yet beg leave to demand of every pretender to the apostolical succession in the Anglican Church, to prove to our satisfaction that some of his ghostly fathers were not "christened" by Eleanor Pead, or some of her "sage" sisterhood; and if they were, then to show us any authority whatever that such " sage femme" has to administer baptism any more than the Lord's Supper; and finally, if he contends that Eleanor Pead did, or could possess such authority, then we ask on what ground could she be inhibited from performing the other acts of the minis- try, or why deacons, priests, and prelates are at all necessary, seeing an apostolical succession of mid- wives is just as sufficient as that of prelates or Popes? We trust these remarks may not be considered very unreasonable. lint we possess ample evidence that mid wives were not the only uueauonieal administrators of sacraments during the Anglican Reformation. We have already shown that the bishops were persecuted, both by patrons and presentees, when ordination and institu- tion were refused to unqualified candidates.' But we have now to show that many of those whose only objects 111 getting a "living," was what the term so expr inlies. on meeting with patrons, whose only desire was to make the most of their "patri- monial rights, and vested interests," not, indeed, in the patriotic form ol "swamping" a noble-minded majority, who will neither he bullied nor bribed into * Sue for example Strypc's Parker, ii. bi — 87. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lxix a sacrifice of the rights and liberties of Christ and his people, (that plan was reserved for Scottish patrons in the nineteenth century) but in the more substantial, though not more offensive shape, of getting a good price for the presentation, or a long lease, or fee-simple pos- session of the best part of the benefice, had recourse to a plan which we again beg leave to recommend to those of our unpopular " moderate" preachers who may happen to have got into the good graces of our Dukes of Richmond, our Earls of Kinnoul, and our Sir James Grahams; that is, in plain terms, these Anglican intrusionist presentees, without troubling prelate or primate for orders, at once, in simple virtue of their civil presentations, not only took possession of the temporalities, but set themselves to perform all clerical acts, as ministers of the parishes. Are we wrong in thinking, as we really do, it were more manly and rational for those who maintain that a pre- sentation, in ordinary circumstances, necessarily leads to ordination, at once to take possession of their bene- fices, in virtue of a warrant from the Court of Session, rather than trouble themselves and others for ordina- tions (so termed) from men who have no power to confer orders but in virtue of warrants from the civil courts? If, when the Church hath withdrawn the orders she conferred, the Court of Session can confer orders of its own (for that is the true state of the case,) why not remain satisfied with a civil title to a civil right, or with orders from the civil court rather than an unmeaning ceremonial at the hands of its nomi- nees? But leaving these suggestions to be pondered on by those whom they may concern, we return to the history of " unordained ministers" in the Church of England. Let us just present a sample of the numerous cases we could refer to by simply searching through the notus extracted by our own hand from the works of the "industrious Strype." In 1567, in a visitation of the cathedral of Norwich, it was discovered that one of the archdeacons (a part of whose functions it is to institute, or as we call it, to induct, into benefices) 1XX THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. and a prebendary were not in orders at ah\* In 1568, the bishop of Gloucester wrote Parker that he had dis- covered in his diocese two men who had "adminis- tered the communion, christened infants, and married people, and done other spiritual offices in the Church, and yet never took holy orders. One of them had counterfeited that bishop's seal, and the other was perjured. "t In 1574, there was '-one Lowth, of Carlisle side, who, though he had for fifteen or six- tern y .1 the function, yet he proved to be ordered neither priesl nor minister."! He was dis- I m conseq ome irregularity in his conformity, which led to his examination, and incon- sequence of which he was discovered to be a mere layman. Had he conformed, like so many more who were in similar circumstances, he might perhaps, lay- man though lie was, have risen to the bench. In 1832, the bishop of St. David's wrote to Walsingham that he found in his diocese "divers that pretended to be ministers, and had counterfeited divers bishops' seals, as Gloucester, Hereford, LandafT and his pre- decessors, being not called at all to the ministry." There must have been at least lour of them, and they had been in their cures - by the space of eight, ten, twelve, and some fourteen years."§ "But among ndalous churchmen in these days (1571,) the neatest surely." says Strype,|| who. however, knew far too much to be very confident in his assertion, — u the greatest surely was one Blackall He had four wives alive He had intruded himself into the ministry for the space of twelve years, and yet w;is never lawfully called, nor made minister by any bishop. ... lie was a chopper and changer of bene- fices," (that is, lie was successful in getting a variety of presentations to benefices in various pans of the country, into which lie intruded himself, without ask- ing the leave or concurs nee of any prelate — a very frequent occurrence at the time,) "little caring by • Btrrpe*i Parker, i. t Ibid. i. 534. t [bid.il 400. I. iv of Grind*], 875—6. § Strype's Lift oHirindal, 401. || Annals, iii. 144—5. THE .ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lxxi what ways or means so (as) he might get money from any man. He would run from country to country, and from towji to town, leading about with him naughty women, as in Gloucestershire he led a naughty strumpet about the country, (nick) named Green Apron. He altered his name wherever he went, going by these several surnames, Blackall, Barthall, Dorel, Barkly, Baker!!" Was there ever a church upon the earth in which such a monster as this could exist, in which such atro- cious irregularities,, and not only irregularities, but criminalities, could be openly perpetrated for the space of twelve years, without censure or detection, but the Church of England alone ? And are we now, in blind unenquiring submission to " bulls" from Oxford, or London or Lambeth, in spite of such infamous facts open to the whole world, — are we, renouncing the characteristic attributes of man, and resigning the direction of our judgments, and the interests of our souls into the hands of the successors, not of the apos- tles, but of such miscreants as Blackall, to receive, as the only commissioned messengers of Heaven to our land, the ministers of the Church of England ? So common in fact was the practice of taking possession of benefices without orders, and when the right of pos- session was at any time questioned, to forge letters of orders, that in 1575, that is, seventeen years after the Anglican Church was settled under Elizabeth, the mat- ter was brought before convocation, and it was en- acted, that " diligent inquisition should be made for such as forged letters of orders," and " that bishops certify one another of counterfeit ministers."* The reason of this last enactment was, that when one of these "counterfeit ministers" was detected in one dio- cese, he fled into another, and so little unity of action was there, or can there ever be, in a prelatic regimen, (unlike our Church courts) that the same course of "counterfeit ministry" might be gone through in suc- cession in all the dioceses in England. * Strype's Grindal, 290. One of these was e.g. summoned before the convocation of 1584. Strype's Whitgift, i. 398. IXXii THE ANULICAX REFORMATION. What now, we repeat, becomes of the claim to the apostolical succession, so confidently and offensively put forth by ministers of the Church of En£ ''Even in the memory of persons living," says arch- bishop Whatrly.' "there existed a bishop, concerning whom there was so much mystery and uncertainty prevailing, as to when, and where, and by whom he pad been ordained, thai doubts existed in the minds of many persons whether he had ever been ordained at all," . . and from the circumstances of the case, and from the fact that such doubts did prevail in the minds of well-informed persons, it is certain "that the cir- cumstances of the case were such as to make manifest the possibility of such an irregularity occurring under such circumstances." Such an irregularity, then, as a man not only officiating in the lower grades of the ministry, but even rising to the primacy of the Church of England, without ever having been in orders, or rather such a subversion of the very first elements of an apostolical constitution, was not confined to the dark and troublous period of the Reformation, when the whole framework of society was dissolved into its first rudiments, and every species of irregularity not only might, but as we know did occur, but the very same « unchurching" irregularities have existed in the Church of England down through every age of its history, "till within the memory of persons now living." Any one who will look at a "genealogical nd obset ve how many wide spreading and far distant branches may spring from one stem, will easily perceive how a v< ry few such unordained or ••coun- terfeit ministers" as we have referred to, and shown to have existed in the Church of England, were amply enough to have destroyed all apostolical sua in tin- kingdom. Such withered branches could not transmit any portion of the "sacred deposit." All who have succeeded to them are no successors of the apostles; and we challenge any, and every minister in the Church of England to prove to us that he has not received all the orders he ever possessed, through some of these Eleanor Peads, Lowths of Carlisle side, * On the Kingdom of Christ, p. 178. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lxxiii or Blackalls — a glorious parentage, certainly, of which they have great reason to be vain. We have not, for our own part, been very much ad- dicted to boast of our ancestry, albeit it contains names of whose call and commission from Heaven we have no more doubt than we have of those of the apostle Paul. We have commonly found, in private life, that such boasting is very much a characteristic of upstart parvenus, and we have yet to learn that it is greatly different in regard to official descent. Should occasion, however, demand, we have no great dislike to pay a visit to the Herald's College, and demon- strate to our Southern neighbours that we have no such bar sinister in ours as defaces their clerical es- cutcheon. May we therefore drop a hint to certain parties, that, however they may do it in private, where no one may mark their confusion, they should be specially chary how, in public, they turn up any ec- clesiastical " Debrett." Much as they decry, and often as they twit our Wesleyan friends, he must have a peculiarly constituted taste, indeed, who would not prefer even genuine " Brumagem orders" to such as have been forged by such ghostly progenitors as they boast of. We had purposed to show multifarious and other irregularities in the organization of the Church of England. We have, however, more than exhausted our present space. But should God grant us health we may soon return to the subject, for we can assure our readers we have only broken ground, and simply tested the range and capabilities of our ordnance. It is assuredly in itself no grateful task to rake up the errors of the dead, and expose the defects in our neighbours' ecclesiastical constitution. But it has become necessary. We have now no option. The Church of England has now, for years, unprovoked, unresisted, poured upon us such torrents of abuse, from her lordliest prelates to her obscurest curates, — she has vilified all we held sacred, insulted all we held dear, and we must either tamely submit to see our beloved Church covered with infamy, or hurl back the foul missiles upon the aggressors. IXXIV THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. An observation or two in conclusion. We have, upon this occasion, confined our remarks to the history of Elizabeth's first prelates. The second set became much less pious and Protestant, and consequently we iected the period most favourable to the Church of England. This is clearly implied in a passage we vcn from the British Critic, and we may here- after prove n. should any call it in question. Our authorities have been exclusively from Church of England writers; not certainly because we deemed them more trustworthy than others, for no man of any pretensions to candour will dispute, as Bishop Short lias remarked/ that members of other com- munions cannot be supposed to be more prejudiced against her than her own members are in her favour. We have selected this course, because we have found her own writers establish all that we desire in order to accomplish our end. When they write against the Church of Scotland, will they follow our example? If they do. it will present a new phasis in the contro- versy. Hitherto they have taken as their authorities works written by non-jurors, and Scottish prelatic sectaries, the most unscrupulous controversialists that ever disgraced a cause that had. little indeed to com- mend it. We have said that the Church of England, ry thing of importance, stands now precisely where she stood at the demise of Elizabeth. This may he called in question by those who know not the facts of the case. We therefore appeal to the follow- ing testimony of one of her living prelates. "The kingdom," says Bishop Short, t " has, for the last two hundred years, been making rapid strides in every of improvement, and a corresponding' altera* 119, i ofthe History ofthe < Church of England, 2d edit. pp. 436-7. I ins is n work which we recommend to our renders. That with Dr. Short in many of his statements we have not com ealed. But we should do him injustice it' we did not Bay, that although his work ia brief, too brief, and not free from faults, from which we n. \. : ■ history ofthe Church of England, by one of her own ministers, altogether exempt, s«till it is incomparably the beat work on the. suhjeet which an Anglican clergyman has ever produced. THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION. lxXV tion in the laws on every subject has taken place; during this period nothing has been remedied in the church" (the italics are ours.) So grievous are the abuses which the anomalous constitution of the Anglican church has entailed upon her, that Dr. Short hesitates not to say, (with his usually inter- jected " perhaps," whenever he gives utterance to an unpalatable sentiment) that "the temporal advan- tages which the establishment possesses, are, perhaps, more than . counterbalanced by the total inability of the church to regulate any thmg_ within herself, and the great want of discipline over the clergy ; . . . . while the absurd nature of our ecclesiastical laws ren- ders every species of discipline over the laity not only nugatory, but when it is exercised, frequently unchris- tian, ridiculous, and in many cases very oppressive," as in the case of excommunication, by which a man is deprived, not only of all ecclesiastical privileges, but even of civil, yea, of all social rights. Some of our readers may be inclined to ask, if ail these things be in reality so, how does it happen that good, pious, enlightened men remain in the commun- ion of the Church of England? Now this is a question that ought not to be asked, and being asked, ought not to be answered. We judge no man. To his own master he standeth or falleth. We can, however, assign one reason, which, besides the all-powerful one of the prejudices of education, is sufficient to account to our own mind, and that without any im- putation against them, for such men remaining in the Anglican church, and that is, total ignorance of her character and constitution. Let not this insinuation startle our readers. We shall prove that such ignor- ance exists. Dr. Short, in the preface to his work, (p. 1) assigns as the reason that ]ed him to commence his history, that he " discovered after he was admitted into orders," and when engaged as tutor in his college, " that the knowledge of English ecclesiastical history which he possessed was very deficient He was distressed that his knowledge of the sects among the philosophers of Athens was greater than his infor- mation on questions which affect the Church of Eng- I.XXVi TIIE ATCUCAH REFORMATION. land." Dr. Short's is no singular case. The ignorance of Anglican ministers upon the history and constitu- tion of their own church would astonish our readers. A memorable instance of this has recently come to light in this city, and we allude to it because the well-known conscientiousness and high character of the party con- cerned give the instance all the greater authority. The Rev. I). 'I'. K. Drummond, for whom personally ertain the wry highest respect, has shown, in one ni Ins recent tracts, thai he never, till within the w days, had examined, or at least understood, D0D8 of that sect of which he was a minister; or at all events, that lie was ignorant of what it re- gards ashy far the most important part of its services, — the communion office. Mr. Drummond was, for years, a minister in that body, and it does not ap- pear that a shadow of suspicion ever crossed his mind that its constitution contained anything either positively erroneous, or sinfully defective; indeed his character is a sufficient guarantee that no such thought ever found harbourage in his breast, for had he but entertained the suspicion, he would not have remained one day in that communion. And yet in the consti- tution and liturgical oliices of that sect there existed all the while a plague-spot so deadly, that, on its dis- covery. Mr. Drummond is compelled, as he values his own soul, to come out of Babylon, that he he not a partaker of her sins and punishment. Such will also he the result to which pious ministers in the Church of England will he brought, should they ever unpre- judicedly and dispassionately examine her constitu- tion. And -honld Mr. Drummond, as we doubt not he will, continue his investigations in the spirit in which he has commenced them, we shall he aston- ished, indeed, if his love of truth, and of Him who is the truth, does ,| ( ,t | r ;,,i ],,,,, | () renounce all commu- nion with the Church of England, as he has already done with the Scottish prelatic sectaries. A sifting lime is at hand; and when the breath of the living God has blown over the thrashing floor of the Church, we confidently anticipate that only the chaff shall remain in the Church of England. THE EXCLUSIVE CLAIMS PUSEYITE EPISCOPALIANS TO THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY INDEFENSIBLE: WITH AN INQUIRY INTO THE DIVINE RIGHT OF EPISCOPACY AND THE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION: m A SERIES OF LETTERS TO THE REV. DR PUSEY. By JOHN BROWN, D.D. 11 Nothing- has so effectually thrown contempt upon a regular sue cession of the ministry, as the calling no succession regular but what was uninterrupted, and the making the eternal salvation of Chris- tians to depend upon that uninterrupted succession, of which the most learned can have the least assurance, and the unlearned can have no notion, but through ignorance and credulity." Hoadlv. "They who would reduce the Church to the form of government thereof in the primitive times would be found pecking towards the Presbytery of Scotland: Which, for my part, I believe in point of fovernment cometh Dearer than cither yours the Popish) or ours of episcopacy to the first age of Christ's Church." Lord Digby. CONTENTS. LETTER I. Ungenerous and unprovoked attack by Puseyite Episcopalians on Presbyterian Churches. — Alarming view presented by the former, of the spiritual condition of the latter. — Necessity imposed on Presbyterians to defend their principles., ... 17 LETTER II. Exclusive claims of Puseyite Episcopalians to the Christian ministry by no means of recent origin. — Saravia not the author of them, but Laud. — Account of the principal individuals in the Church of Eng- land who have brought them forward at different periods, when they considered her to be in danger. — Their doctrines proved to be con- trary to her principles, from the Thirty-nine Articles, the writings of the Bishops who composed her Formularies, and their immediate successors, their conduct towards Presbyterian Churches, the Char- ter granted by Edward the Sixth to these Churches in London, and the establishment of Presbytery by Elizabeth in Jersey and Guernsey, 21 LETTER III. These doctrines condemned in the strongest terms by the most dis- tinguished Protestant Statesmen after the Reformation; Cecil, the Lord President of Queen Elizabeth's Council, Sir Francis Knollys, and Lord Bacon, and denounced as " a Popish conceit," by the leading bishops and clergy. — Dissimilarity between the Church of England, beyond whose pale, and that of the Church of Rome t Puseyites deny that there is any hope of salvation, and the Apos- tolic Church, in the extent of its bishoprics, the civil power exercised by its prelates, the multitude of its ceremonies, and "its want," ac- cording to its own acknowledgment, "of a godly discipline,". . .38 CONTENTS-. LETTER IV. Extracts from ; Minn - the doctrines of Puseyite > opinion : by the whol< bo were zealous for the spiritual impro for five hundred years n, by the who! I >nt Churches at that iiit morablc p< riod, and I ministers, who subscribed the Artich s of Smalkald, which declare that bishops arc ii"i superior to pr< Bbyters by divine right — Improbability that idividuala and I ( hurches ins righl 61 LETTER V. Presumptive evidence that diocesan bishops have not been appointed by God, ily bishops mentioned in Scripture among riding ministers of the Church are presbyters, and no passage can be produced specifying the qualifications required in bishops as distinct from presbyters. — This inexplicable, if there was to be an order of ministers, denominated bishops, superior to presbyters. — Presbyter, a nameof higher honour than bishop. No minister of an inferior order distinguished by the name of a minister of a superior order. — Deacons never called presbyters, bul pi always represented as bishops — The powers of ordination and government ascribed in Scripture to presbyters. — Wickliffe held the principles of Presbytery, and maintained that Scripture gave no countenance to diocesan Episcopacy, 71 LETTER VI. Additional evidence that the principal Reformers of the Church of England rejected tin- divine right of Episcopacy, and pi' rtical polity, chiefly on the ground that they •'• r adapted to absolute monarchy. — Testi- monies against tin- dh inc right of Episcopacy, and acknowledging that Presbyterianism is sanctioned by Scripture, from the writings ofTimlal. Barnes, Lambert, Cranmcr, Tonstall, S n, Robertson, George Cranmcr, Willet, Bedel, and Lord LETTER VII. I cunent for diocesan Episcopacy, from the different orders in the ministry und« r the Jewish proved to be more favourable to Popery tli t .iblishes the latter, it liirm lent merely for a CONTENTS. single bishop in a nation, with far more limited powers than those of any modern bishop. — No resemblance between the powers and functions of the Jewish priests and Levites, and those of priests and deacons in Episcopalian Churches. — Argument acknowledged to be inconclusive by some of the leading defenders of Episcopacy, . . .93 LETTER VIII. The argument of Dr. Brett and Bishop Gleig for diocesan Episcopacy from the different orders in the ministry, during our Lord's minis- try, inconclusive. — The Old Testament Church had not then ceased to exist, nor was the New Testament Church established. — Their account of the ministry which was instituted at that time not sup- ported by Scripture, contrary to the representations of it given by the Fathers, and so far as it furnishes a pattern of the Gospel minis- try, would warrant the appointment of a single bishop over the Universal Church. — Archbishop Potter's hypothesis equally unsatis- factory, and would lead to a similar conclusion, 102 LETTER IX. The same argument, as stated by Bishop Bilson, Mr. Jones, and Bishop Skinner, invalid. — Upon their hypothesis there would be no deacons in the Church. — No higher powers were possessed at that time by the Apostles than by the Seventy ; and the different cir- cumstances mentioned by Archbishop Potter, to prove the supe- riority of the former, do not establish it. — The office of the Seventy- seems to have terminated with their mission, or, at furthest, at the death of the Saviour, and consequently they could not be an order in the Christian Church, Ill LETTER X. The argument of Archdeacon Daubeny and Bishop Gleig, for the order of bishops, from the extraordinary office assigned to the Apos^ ties in the New Testament Church, proved to be fallacious. — It no more follows from what is said in Matthew xxviii. 20, that there are to be Apostles till the end of the world, than from what is said in Ephesians iv. 11-13, that there are to be New Testament Pro- phets and Evangelists till that time. — That office proved to have ceased as to its peculiar powers with those who were first invested with it, because no one since their death has possessed the quali- fications which it required, nor has been called to it in the way in which they were appointed, nor has been instructed by inspiration like them in the truths which he was to deliver, nor could perform miracles. — Sutclive, Willet, Barrow, and others, deny that bishops succeed Apostles in their peculiar powers, 121 1 10 CONTENTS. LETTER XL \- presbyteri ran perform the work of "discipling the nations" by preaching and baptizing till the end of the world, and are the higl landing ministers mentioned in the New Testa- ment, they are entitled to I" considered as the successors of the -tl.s.— This :k knowledged by Willet — The report that the Apostles divided tbe # world into different parts, and that each of them laboured in one of them as its bishop, proved to he fabulous, though repeated by Bishop Gleig. — It cannot be inferred from the application of the name Apostles by the Fathers to some of the bishops that the latter succeed the Apostles, for they give it also to presbyters, and even females. — Refutation of the argument for Episcopacy from the appointment of James to the Bishopric of Jerusalem.— -Quotations from Bpurious writings of the Fathers, in support of this fiction, by Bishop Gleig and the present Curate of Derry exposed, --^ 13? LETTER XII. Bishop Bilson represents the argument for Episcopacy, from the powers conferred on Timothy and Titus, as "the main erection of the Episcopal cause;" and Bishop Hall declares, that if it fails, "he will yield the cause, and confess that he has Lost Ids senses." — None of the Fathers during thejirat three centuries represent them as diocesan bishops; and Willet, Stillingfleet, and Bishop Bridges acknowledge them to have been extraordinary ministers, or Evan- gelists. — .Nature of the office of Evangelists, as illustrated bv Scrip- ture and the writings of the Fathers.— Different from that of dio- mi bishops, and superior to it. — Diocesan bishops never said to have been associated with Evangelists or Apostles in any act of jurisdiction <>r government, though Presbyters repeatedly took part with them in such acts. — No notice of diocesan bishops as an order r rifting in their days. — The argument in every point of view in* < onclusive, 156 LETTER XIII. Examination of the argument for diocesan Episcopacy, from the tagels of the seven Asiatic Churches. — Refutation of it as stated by Miher, who would restrict the superintendence exercised by bishops to ten or twelve congregations, a plan which would create in England a thousand diocesan bishops.— Refutation of it as stated by Bishop Gleig, who represents these Angels as single individuals and prelates. — Them ■ Angel borrowed from one of the ministers of the Jewish synagogue, who had no authority over other syna- CONTENTS. 11 gogues, and was not the sole or chief ruler of his own synagogue. — Remarkable blunder of Bishop Russel respecting the Angel of the synagogue and its other officers, for which he is praised by the Rev. Mr. Sinclair. — If the Angels of the Churches were single persons, no evidence that they were diocesan bishops. — Three arguments to prove that they were not single individuals, but representatives of the whole ministers of the different Churches, as each of the stars mentioned in Rev. i. represented the whole of the ministers of each of the Churches, who shed their united light on the members. — Striking remarks of Lord Bacon on the unprecedented powers vested in bishops, and on their being allowed to exercise some of them, without any appeal, by lay-chancellors,. 178 LETTER XIV. Apostolical succession. — If the Apostles were neither diocesan bishops themselves, nor ordained such bishops, the apostolical succession, as explained and claimed by Puseyite Episcopalians, never began. — Waving that objection, as far as there was a succession, it was pre- served to Presbyterian Churches before the Reformation, as unin- terrupted as to Episcopalian Churches ; and since that time it has been preserved as regularly in the former, by Presbyterian ordina- tions, as in the latter by Episcopal. — Unfounded allegation by Spottiswood and others, that the adoption of Presbytery at Geneva originated in a wish to assimilate the government of the Church to that of the State, and that this led to the adoption of that form of ecclesiastical polity in other countries. — The contrary proved from the reasoning of Farel with Furbiti, who preceded Calvin, and is considered by many as the modern father or reviver of Presbytery. — Eusebius acknowledges that he could not trace the succession in many of the early Churches. — Jewel and Stillingfleet confess that it cannot be traced in the Church of Rome, from which many of the ministers of the Church of England have derived their orders, 199 LETTER XV. The succession destroyed in all those instances in which individuals who had only Presbyterian baptism, and were not rebaptized, joined Episcopalian Churches, and were made presbyters and bishops. — Confirmation cannot remedy this defect, because, as Cranmer admits, "it was not instituted by Christ," nor was the Redeemer himself, or any individual mentioned in the New Testa- m i at, confirmed, and because, as some of the leading English Re- formers acknowledged, "it is a dommc ceremony," and il has no promise of uracc connected with if." — Butler, who had only Presby- terian baptism, and was not rebaptized, made a bishop, baptized many, who were afterwards ministers, and made a number oi' 3, — Seeker, who had only the same baptism, made Primate 12 CONTENTS. of England, ordained many presbyters, and a number of bishops, and baptized two kinirs, who for a long time were heads of the Church. — Tillotson, though the son of a Baptist, and though there is no evidence that he was ever baptized, or ordained a deacon, made Archbishop of Canti rbury. — Succession destroyed for more than two hundred yean in the important Church of Alexandria, and in the early Church of Scotland, in consequence of the ordina- tions by the Culd* < presbyters. — Account of the presbyters of Iona, theu evangelical due trine, their Presbyterian government, and the acknowledgment of thi ii ecclesiastical authority by the Clergy of Scotland, 216 LETTER XVI, The succession destroyed in the early Church of England, in conse- quence of the ordination of its first bishops by Scottish presbyters. — Scottish missionaries who were ordained by presbyters, acknowledg- ed l.y Other to have Christianized the greater part of England. — The Presby te rian Culdean Scottish Church asserted in the twelfth century, before an assembly of English bishops and nobles, to be the Mother Church of the Church of England, and not contradicted. — An Archbishop of Canterbury in that century never consecrated, and a Bishop of Norwich consecrated by a presbyter who was an archdeacon. — Succession destroyed in the Church of Ireland through the ordination of many of its clergy by the Scottish Culdec presbyters. — Eight individuals who never had any orders, Archbishops of Armagh, and Primates of all Ireland. — Succession destroyed among the Scottish Episcopalians, who, according to Dr. Pusey, are not a Christian Church. — Their first prelates in 1610 never baptized, and their orders irregular. — The orders of their next bishops in 1G61 uncanonical, and those of the usage bishops, from whom their present bishops derive their orders, pronounced by the college bishops in 1727 to be null and void, 246 LETTER XVII. Fhe < hurch of Denmark, as its first superintendents were only pres- byli -rs, and alter the Reformation received imposition of hands only from Bugenhagen, a single Lutheran presbyter, without the rao- '. and upon the principles of l>r. Pusey, nol a Christian Church. — The same, ton, the condition ot* the Church of Sweden, and of all the foreign Protestant Churches which have only super- intendents. — Superintendents both among Lutherans and Calvin- ists, when appointed to their office not ordained anew, but. appointed merely the chairmen <>r moderators of presbyters, by whom they may be deposed. — Their ( 'I m relies, of course, not Christian Church- \ COUnl of the ancient Scottish superintendents, whose office is misrepresented by Episcopalians. — The Church of Prussia not a church, nor the Protestant Churches of Prance, Geneva, Switzer- land, Holland. America and Scotland. — The Presbyterians in Ire. CONTENTS, 13 land and Great Britain, with the Methodists and Independents, not Churches, and their members without any covenanted title to salva- tion. — The succession destroyed in the Church of Rome. — Pagans baptized some who became ministers — laymen ordained to be bishops — bishops often ordained to Sees which were not vacant. — ■ This the case with Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, 272 LETTER XVIII. Additional evidence that the succession has been lost in the Church of Rome. — Boys ordained to be Bishops, and striplings made Popes. — Atheists and avowed infidels raised to the Popedom. — Papal canon, that "if a Pope should carry with him innumerable souls to hell, no man must presume to find fault with him." — Simoniacal ordinations declared void by the canons of many Coun- cils, and yet for eight hundred years there were many such ordina- tions, both in the Western and Eastern Churches, — Idiots, and per- sons, "who, when they read, prayed, or sang, knew not whether they blessed God or blasphemed him," ordained to be bishops. — Multitudes of the most immoral individuals, some of whom " drank wine in honour of the devil," made Popes and Bishops, 286 LETTER XIX. The Bible the only standard by which we are to regulate our opinions respecting faith and practice, the orders in the ministry, and the rites and ordinances of the Christian Church. — This the doctrine of the Bible itself, and of the early Fathers, each of whom rejected the opinions of the other Fathers on every subject when not sup- ported by Scripture, or contrary to its statements. — This the doc- trine, too, of Luther, and of the most eminent Reformers of the Church of England. — The Fathers not safe guides respecting the meaning of Scripture on other subjects besides Church govern- ment. — Numerous instances of the gross misinterpretation of the plainest passages in the writings of Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, and Jerome. — Numerous instances also of their departing from the doctrine of the Apostles on some of the leading points of evangeli- cal belief, and of their introducing into the Church superstitious rites and idolatrous observances. — This acknowledged by Whitgift and Cox. — Presumptive proof which it presents that they might depart as far from the original form of ecclesiastical government which was appointed for the Church, .305 LETTER XX. Extraordinary opinion of the Oxford Tractarians, that the Scriptures, though a rule of faith, are not a rule of discipline and practice, and that the latter is to be found in the traditions of the Fathers, along with the Scriptures. — This an impeachment of the perfection of 14 CONTENTS. the Scriptures in opposition to their own explicit statements, and a mean of virtually adding t<> the Institutions which they prescribe to the Church, in opposition to th< ir express and solemn warnings. — Tin traditions of the Fathers not a safe guide, because those who deliver them wire weak, inexperienced, and fallible men, though they lived Deal to the Apostles; and if the Scriptures, which were written by men who wen- inspired, are not sufficient to direct us, v.r can have do assurance thai when we are following these tradi- tions we are not embracing error. — As much danger of our doing this, and of "ur making void the institutions of Christ, by our not trusting in the Scriptures exclusively, but adopting what is recom- mended by tin- traditions of the Fathers, as there was to the Jews of makinir void the law of God by following the traditions of the elders, because they lived mar to the prophets, instead of trusting exclusively in the writings of the prophets. — Busebius and So- eratM condemn some of the traditions of the Fathers, and others of them such as even Tuseyites would reject, 32-1 LETTER XXI. If the reasoning employed in the two preceding letters be well founded, it will not follow that diocesan Episcopacy received the approbation of the Apostles, though it could be proved that it existed in the age next to the apostolic, unless it could be demonstrated that they had expressed their approbation of it in their writings ; but it cannot be proved that it existed in that early age. — The mere catalogues of bishops, to which Episcopalians appeal, will not establish this, un- 1« >s they can show that these bishops had the same powers which belong exclusively to their prelates. — This, however, they have never yet done; and Jerome declares, that even toward the end of the fourth century the power of ordination alone distinguished a bishop from a presbyter. — In his Commentary on Titus, and his Epistle to Evagrius, he represents bishops and presbyters as the same, not only in name, hut in authority, and diocesan Kpiseopacy i mere human institution, introduced by the Church to prevent schism. — He d< scribes it farther as adopted by degree*, aa divisions tuns, in ditfrrriit C/iiirclits tlcs, is acknowledged by Jerome io have been Presbyterian, he seems to CONTENTS. 15 have approved of a modified Episcopacy as a human arrangement for the prevention of schism. — This remedy acknowledged by Gra- tius to have increased, in place of repressing the evil. — Invalidity of the objection to Presbyterian principles, that they were held by Arius, who denied the divinity of Christ, inasmuch, as though he might err on the latter point, it would not follow that he erred on every other ; for he agreed in many things with Episcopalians, and especially with those of them who condemn prayers for the dead. — Hilary, Augustine and Chrysostom admit the identity of presbyters and bishops. — Clemens Romanus mentions only two orders of ministers, and never refers to diocesan bishops. — No re- ference to them in the Epistle of Polycarp. — The short Epistles of Ignatius proved to be corrupted, so that no dependence can be placed on their statements respecting the orders in the ministry ; and even admitting them to be genuine, no such powers are ascribed in them to bishops as are possessed by modern diocesan bishops, 363 LETTER XXIII. No allusion to the powers of diocesan bishops in the writings of Her- nias. — Nor any notice of such ministers, or of the sign of the cross in baptism, or of confirmation, by Justin Martyr. — No reference to them by Irenaeus, who speaks of the ministers who maintained a succession of sound doctrine from the time of the Apostles in the different Churches, alternately as presbyters and bishops. — 'The Churches of Gaul describe him as a presbyter, nine years after he was Bishop of Lyons, in the Epistle which they sent with him to the Bishop of Rome, considering it as the most honourable name which they could give him. — Irenaeus represents Polycarp as a presby- ter. — No such powers as those of diocesan bishops ascribed to bishops in the writings of Clemens of Alexandria, or Tertullian, or Origen. — Examination of the writings of Cyprian, whose language respecting the dignity of bishops is frequently extravagant. — Proofs of his erring grievously on other subjects, so that it would not be wonderful if he had erred also on this. — Evidence, however, even from his Epistles and other writings of the early Christians, that presbyters, both in his day, and for some time afterwards, could not only ordain, but sit in councils and even preside in them. — Pas- sages in Cyprian's writings, which furnish more plausible argu- ments, not only for bishops, but for a Pope, than any which are to be found in the preceding Fathers, 389 LETTER XXIV. Reply to the argument for Episcopacy, that there was always impa- rity among the orders in the ministry under the preceding dispen- sations, and there ought still to be imparity under the New Testa- ment Dispensation. — This proved to be a begging of the question, and that we must learn from the Scriptures themselves whether If) CONTENTS. imparity was to continue among the ministers of the Gospel. — Dr. Raynolds acknowledges, that " those who had been most zealous for the Reformation of the Church for five hundred years before that did not believe in the divine institution of Episcopacy. — Dr. Raynoldl and Hooker admit this to have been the doctrine of t)i« Waldensian Churches, and of Huss and his followers, who had no minister raperiof to presbyters. — This proved to be the highest order of their minister! by the testimony of their own pastors, and other authorities.— Calvin and Beza, according to Dr. Raynolds, Hooker, and Heylin, denied the divine right of Episcopacy, and this Confirmed by their writings. — The rest of the leading foreign Re- formers rejected it, though Melancthon would have submitted to bishops, and wren I Pope, tor the sake of peace. — Zanchius unfairly claimed by Episcopalians as approving of the powers possessed by their bishops. — The foreign Protestant Churches without bishops, not from necessity, as Episcopalians allege, but from principle. — This proved by Jeremy Taylor, 412 LETTERS PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. LETTER I. Ungenerous and unprovoked attack by Puseyite Episcopalians on Presby" terian Churches. Alarming view presented by the former, of the spirit- ual condition of the latter. Necessity imposed on Presbyterians to defend their principles. Reverend Sir, — You cannot feel surprised, that, as a minister of the Presbyterian Church, I should ad- dress you on a subject, of paramount importance to Presbyterians in general, and especially to the clergy of the Church of Scotland, namely, the validity of our orders, the efficacy of the sacraments, as we adminis- ter them to our people, and the covenanted title of the pious individuals who belong to our communion to the blessings of salvation. You concede the charac- ter of a true Church to the Church of Rome, though it is stated in your homilies, that, " for the space of nine hundred years, it has been so far aside from the nature of the true Church, that nothing can be more;" and yet you deny it to us and our Presbyterian breth- ren. And the least offensive terms in which you are accustomed to speak of us, are like those employed by the late Archbishop Magee, when he said of us, as compared to the Papists, that, " while they had a church without a religion, we had a religion ivithout a Church." I have waited with anxiety to see whether these charges would be repelled by any of your leading 2 18 LETTERS ON dignitaries, and whether they would speak of us in the same terms of brotherly kindness in which Cran- mer spake of Knox, when he recommended him to be one of King Edward's preachers, for spreading the true religion in England; or in which Parker, Grindal, Whitgift, and Hooker spake of the orthodox Presby- terian Churches in their day; or whether they would evince the same spirit which was displayed by Bishop Hall, Ur. Carlton, and Dr. Ward, when they sat as the representatives of the Church of England in the Synod of Dort, of which the president was a Presby- terian, and the majority of the members were minis- ters and elders of Presbyterian Churches. But I have unhappily been disappointed; and while no friendly voice has been raised on our behalf by any of your bishops or your superior clergy, we continue to be de- nounced as destitute of any right to the honourable character of Christian ministers, because we have not derived our orders from diocesan bishops, who were regularly baptized, and received their orders from other bishops, in an unbroken succession from the Apostles. Our Churches are asserted to be unworthy of the name; our sacraments are represented as with- out virtue, and our people as only " midway" between the favoured members of Episcopalian Churches, "and the heathen, who are without God, without Christ, and without hope in the world." And on a recent occasion, when our title to the very name of a Chris- tian Church was directly questioned in the committee of the Society for propagating Christian Knowledge, neither the Archbishop of Canterbury nor the Bishop of London, though among the most moderate of your prelates, said a word in support of it, but instructed their friends merely to move the previous question. You will not then think it strange, that when no one else will undertake our defence, we should attempt it ourselves; and while we acknowledge willingly your National Church to be a Church of Christ, should state he grounds on which we claim that character to our own Church, and to the rest of the orthodox Presby- terian Churches, which, though they have not dioce- PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 19 san, possess, we are persuaded, scriptural bishops, and enjoy as fully as any churches the means of salvation. I am aware, that if you were able to establish your position, it would be attended by the most serious and alarming consequences to the great majority of the Protestant Churches; and that they could not too soon either enter your communion, or apply to your Church to furnish them with bishops; for the only alternative, as far as is revealed in Scripture, would be diocesan Episcopacy, or perdition. How melan- choly would be the feelings which it would awaken in our breasts, respecting the numerous Presbyterians who lived in England in former times, whose Calamys, Pooles, Howes, Henrys, Wattses, and Doddridges could no longer be regarded as Christian ministers, nor the most pious individuals who were connected with their churches, as having had any well founded hope of future happiness, as well as respecting the whole of the learned and excellent individuals among Presbyterians, Methodists, Independents, and Baptists in the present day. How affecting would be the state of the sainted martyrs of the Scottish Church in former ages, and of her Chalmerses, Gordons, and other dis- tinguished clergy, and of her pious people at the pre- sent time ; as well as of the ministers and members of our Dissenting Churches, all of whom would be labouring under a fearful delusion, as to the validity of their orders, and the efficacy of their privileges; and who would not only be living without the means of grace, but without the smallest prospect, from aught that is revealed in the sacred Scriptures, of their being received when they die into the abodes of blessedness! How painful would be the condition of the Presby- terians in Ireland, the effects of whose labours for the religious and moral regeneration of their country, especially in Ulster, will bear to be compared with those of the clergy, who received their orders from diocesan bishops, in any district of England, but whose Blairs, and Livingstons,* and Lelands, and * Blair and Livingston, with other eminent ministers of the Church of Scotland, laboured for a considerable time in Ireland. 20 LETTERS ON PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. Plunkets,* of former times, as well as their Cookes, Hannahs, Stewarts, and Edgars in the present day, cannot be recognised as Christian ministers; nor can the members of their churches have any thing better to trust in at last, than God's uncovenanted mercy. And how dismal would be the state of the Presbyte- rians in France, who amounted, at one time, to a third part of the nation, and who numbered among their clergy, Daille, La Roque, du Moulin, and Blondel, and among the members of their communion, Marga- ret of Navarre, several princes of the blood, Coligny, du Plessis, and other distinguished individuals; and of the churches of Geneva, Switzerland, Holland, and the North American States, as well as of the Luther- ans on the Continent, who have only superintendents, and not diocesan bishops. Surely an opinion which leads to such consequences, and which unchristianizes at once the living and the dead, and takes from them all covenanted hopes of salvation, would require to be sustained by the most convincing reasoning; and it must be due at once to the memory of the one, and to the comfort of the other, to examine the evidence on which you maintain your position. I remain. Reverend sir, Yours, &c. » The father of Lord Plunket, the late Lord Chancellor of Ireland, .vas a Presbyterian clergyman. See Philip's Specimens of Irish Eloquence, p. 357. And Lord Campbell, who succeeded him, was the son of a Scottish Presbyterian minister, and had only Presbyte- rian baptism ; so that both these Judges, though keepers of the con- science of the Sovereign, according to Dr. Pusey and .Mr. Gladstone, ;ould not be Christians, or have any hope of salvation. 21 LETTER II. Exclusive claims of Puseyite Episcopalians to the Christian ministry, by no means of recent origin. — Saravia not the author of them, but Laud. — Account of the principal individuals in the Church of England who have brought them forward at different periods, when they considered her to be in danger. — Their doctrines proved to be contrary to her principles, from the Thirty-nine Articles, the writings of the bishops who composed her Formularies, and their immediate successors, their conduct towards Presbyterian Churches, the charter granted by Edward the Sixth to these Churches in London, and the establishment of Presbytery by Elizabeth in Jersey and Guernsey. Reverend Sir, — I am aware that your views of the spiritual condition of Presbyterian Churches, though startling to those who never heard them before, are by no means new. As Papists are accustomed to deny to your Church the name of a Church, and ad- dress the most alarming statements to her members, to induce them, if possible, to join their communion; so some of her more violent and indiscreet defenders have, at different periods, imitated then example, and attempted to terrify the Presbyterians of their day to enter within her pale, telling them that yours was the only Protestant Church in our native country, the ministers of which have authority from Christ to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments, and in which they can attain any covenanted title to sal- vation. If we may judge, however, of the measure of success which will attend your labours from the amount of theirs, it will be small indeed; and you will be far more likely to add to the converts to the Church of Rome from the Church of England, than to diocesan Episcopacy from the Presbyterian Churches. I lament to hear that the former has been the case to an appalling extent, and that there is reason to fear it will rapidly increase; for, as O'Connell remarked with great exultation, in a recent debate in the British Parliament, " you and your followers are on your way to Rome."'* And I am firmly persuaded, that * How much is the conduct of Dr. Pusey, as well as his writings, fitted to promote this painful result, when, as he acknowledges, he 22 LETTERS ON if sentiments like yours continue to spread among the clergy of your Church, and arc propounded as openly, and it" not the smallest cognisance of them in the way of censure is taken by your bishops, and if some who maintain them, as in the case of Dr. Hook, are even promoted to new ecclesiastical honours, it may injure her materially, in the estimation of a number of her most pious members, and may constrain them in a short time to leave her communion. The first person in your Church, according to Voe- tius,* who avowed your opinion, was Adrian Sara- via, who was at one time a pastor of the Flemish Church, but became a convert to Episcopacy, and who, in a treatise which he published on degrees in the ministry, applied the same language to his former brethren, which is applied to your clergy, in common with the ministers of all other Protestant Churches, by the Church of Rome. It is but fair, however, to acknowledge, that this statement is controverted by Archbishop Whitgift, who says in a letter to Beza, that "his (Saravia's) purpose was wholly undertaken wilhout the injury or prejudice of any particular Church, and was designed merely to prove that it was agreeable to Scripture, and should be adopted in England. "t And this exposition of his sentiments seems to be confirmed by what is said by Saravia himself, who declares, in his answer to Beza, that he " admitted and excused what was done by the rest of the Reformed Churches, in regard to their polity, and did not blame or condemn them.":j: fell on his knees lately at the elevation of the Host in a Popish chapel in Dublin. He says, indeed, that he did not worship the consecrated wafer, but was desirous only to show his respect for it. How he can reconcile this with his remaining' a minister of the Church of England, whose homilies speak of the Church of Rome in the lan- Mim quoted p. 17, or with the apostolic admonition, that " we should abstain from all appearance of evil, and do nothing to hurt the con- science of a weak brother," I cannot comprehend. * PolitiiL' Ecclesiastics, pars sccunda, p. 837. See, too, Discourse on the Union between Scotland and England, p. 137. t Strype's Life of Whitgift, pp. 409—434. t " Factum Ecclesiarum Kcformatarum accipio ct excuso, non in- cuso nee exprobro." In his letter published by Strype, (Life of Whit- PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 23 But though he did not adopt, to their full extent, your intolerant views, they were embraced in part by a few of his cotemporaries, who, according to Sadeel, an early Reformer, contended for the necessity of Episcopal ordination, while they acknowledged the foreign " Reformed Churches to be true Churches of Christ."* They were avowed, however, without any limitation, by Archbishop Laud, who, as far as I can discover, was the first individual in the Church of England that maintained them openly, and who, according to Queen Henrietta, " had the heart of a good Catholic."t And though you have lately rob- bed him of the honour of giving a name to the party who profess his sentiments, and who are now deno- minated Puseyites, you ought certainly to resign it, for you, Dr. Hook, Mr. Newman, and Mr. Gladstone, are only his followers. "In July 1604," says Prynne, " hee proceeded batchelour in divinitie. His suppo- sition, when he answered in the divinity schooles for his degree, concerning the efficacie of baptisme, was taken verbatim out of Bellarmine, and hee then maintained there could bee no true Church without gift,) p. 424, he says of Presbytery, which he calls " a new mode of governing the Church," " that it was to be borne with till another that was better could be obtained." * " Veras Ecclesias Christi," Treatise de Legitima Ordinatione Ministrorum, p. 542, of his works. He represents Dr. Pusey's doc trine as held at that time to its full extent only by Papists, and reject- ed by the whole of the Reformers. t It is remarkable that even Heylin, though an admirer of the Archbishop, and a fierce Anti-Calvinist, says in his life of Laud, p. 252, in reference to the changes in favour of Popery, which took place under his primacy, " The doctrines are altered in many things; as for example, the Pope not Antichrist, pictures, free will, &c. the thirty-nine articles seeming patient if not ambitious of some Catho- lic sense.'' , What a faithful representation of the interpretation given of them in the present day, as to many things, by Dr. Pusey, Archdeacon Wilberforce, Mr. Gladstone, and many others. As far as relates to the doctrine of the Articles on the leading points of evangelical belief, the testimony of Bishop Carlton is deci- sive. " I am well assured," says he, in his Examination of Mon- tague, p. 49, " that the learned bishops who were in the Reformation of the Church, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, did so much honour St. Augustine, that, in the collecting of the articles and homilies, and other things in that Reformation, they had an especial respect unto St. Augustine's doctrines." 24 LETTERS ON diocesan bishops, for which Dr. Holland (then Doc- tor of the chaire) openly reprehended him in the schooles for a seditions person, who would unchurch the Reformed Churches beyond the seas, and sow a division between us and them who were brethren, by this novell Popish doctrine."* And when he was elevated to the primacy, he censured Bishop Hall for admitting that the foreign Protestant Churches were Churches of Christ; " a concession," he affirmed, (and you and Mr. Gladstone I have no doubt will agree with him,) " which was more than the cause of Epis- copacy would well bear."t It was the doctrine of Bishop Montague, who was at one time Archbishop Laud's chaplain, for he asserts expressly that " ordi- nation by Episcopal hands is so necessary, as that the Church is no true Church without it, and the ministry no true ministry, and ordinarily no salvation to be obtained without it." % It was the opinion of Durel, Beveridge and others, in the end of that century, for we are told by the younger Spanheim, who had laboured without success to reconcile them and the Presbyterians, that "he was little solicitous" about what they thought of a proposal which he had made to them for that purpose, " because to such a degree of perverseness had matters been carried by some of them, that they declared that out of the Episcopal communion there was no ordination, nor ministry, nor sacraments, nor Church, nor faith, nor salva- tion.'^ It was held by Dr. Hickes, who used the fol- lowing extraordinary language respecting the Church of Scotland: "Such a Church I think altogether as unworthy of the name of a Church, as a band of rebels in any country, who have overthrown the con- stitution of it, would be of the name of a kingdom, statu, or republic, because such a pretended Church * Trynnc's Brcviatc ofhis Life, p. 2. t Brcviatc, ]». 399. X Montague's Originea Ecclesiastics, p. 463 — 4G4. § "Scu jam Hierarchicia h»c conditio probaretur, seu minus, Spanhemioa Bcaphara, icapham dixit, parum sollicitus quid Monla- cutius, quid DurclluH, quid Beveregius," &.c. Letter against Van der Wayen, p. 110, note. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 25 is not only a variation from the Catholic Apostolic Church, but a sworn destructive confederacy against it, even the abomination of desolation in the house or kingdom of God, of which their pastors are not minis- ters, but most malicious enemies, — not pastors, but wolves of the flock."* And without dwelling on the names of Law or Dodwell, in regard to the last of whom, it is surprising that Bishop Burnet should have erred so egregiously, as to say that it was he who gave rise to this conceit," 1 1 may briefly notice, that it was maintained by Mr. Jones, the projector and patron of the British Critic, who affirms, that it was as impossible for any one to be saved out of the Episcopal Church from future wo, as it would have been for Noah and his family to have been saved from the deluge out of the ark. And it was strenu- ously defended by the late Archdeacon Daubeny in his Guide to the Church, who, in 1803, gave a remarkable proof of his adherence to your principles, for he refused to obey the orders of his primate to read a prayer on the national fast, because it recog- nised as true Churches the different Presbyterian Churches, in which act of contumacy he was follow- ed, I believe, by his colleague, Dr. Spry 4 It is pos- sible, however, that Archbishop Laud and you, with Mr. Percival, Mr. Gladstone, and others of your fol- lowers, may be right, and more liberal Episcopalians may be greatly in the wrong, and you may be acting under the influence of the truest kindness when you tell us, that as our ministers did not receive their * Preface to his Treatise on the Priesthood and the Dignity of the Episcopal Order, p. 200. In the same spirit, Wetmore, in his Vindi- cation of the Professors of the Church of England in Connecticut, pp. 29 — 30, describes Presbyterian Churches as resembling, "in the mystical body of Christ, excrescences or tumours in the body natural, or perhaps as funoosities in an ulcerated tumour, the eating away of which by whatever means tends not to the hurt, but to the sound- ness and health of the body.' 1 '' t History of his own Times, vol. ii. p. 603. X With a strange inconsistency, he acknowledged, at the same time, as Christian ministers some foreign missionaries, who had only Lutheran orders. u The legs of the lame," as Solomon remarks, " arc not equal." 26 LETTERS ON orders from diocesan bishops, regularly baptized and ordained in an unbroken series from the Apostles, they cannot be considered as Christian pastors, nor can their ministrations have any efficacy, nor can our peo- ple have any covenanted title to salvation. Now, the first observation which I have to offer on this doctrine is, that whether it is true or false, it is not the doctrine of the Church of England. The best way to ascertain the doctrine of a Church on any subject, is to examine what is said on it in her public formularies, in the writings of the individuals by whom they were drawn up, and of those who suc- ceeded them, and the course she pursued during the best and purest period of her history, when she acted honestly in accordance with her principles. Now, if we try your opinion by any of these tests, it appears to me to be destitute of the least semblance of support, and to be directly opposed to the doctrine of your Church respecting other Protestant Churches. The only things essential to a Christian Church, according to your 19th Article, are, "the pure preaching of God's word, and the due administration of the sacraments, according to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of neces- sity are requisite to the same." Now, the experience of centuries furnishes proof which you will not easily answer, that the word may be preached as purely by Presbyterian ministers as by those who have been ordained by diocesan bishops. Even Daubeny speaks with the highest respect of the writings of Doddridge, who never had Episcopal orders; and Archdeacon Wilberforce confesses, that it was by the perusal of one of them, the Rise and Progress, that his own vene- rable father was led to become pious; and he will not, I presume, venture to deny, that the very same doctrine may be preached to their hearers, by Presbyterian ministers, which has been so signally blessed, when it is met with in their writings.* And, * No work published by any Episcopalian divine, during the last century, has been so much honoured in the conversion of sinners, in all countries where Christianity is professed, as that invaluable trea- tise. Many ministers and members of the Church of England, as PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 21 in regard to Presbyterian baptism, Mr. Gladstone at least ought to acknowledge its validity; otherwise his father, who was baptized by a Presbyterian, and was never re-baptized, would evidently be unchristianized, and could have no hope of salvation. Besides, as you acknowledge baptism by midwives, captains of ships at sea, and Popish priests, though some of the latter, as Jewel informs us, have been so ignorant as to use these words, when administering that ordinance, which are not to be found in any language, " Ego te baptizo in nomine Patria, Filia, et Spirita Sancta*," and as the Church of Rome, which you so much admire, accord- ing to the 36th and 23d canons of the Canon Law, considers baptism, even by Pagans, in case of neces- sity, as valid, I cannot see on what ground you can question the validity of Presbyterian baptism. It is declared, indeed, in your 23d Article, that " it is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching, or ministering the sacraments in the congregation before he be lawfully called." But it is added, " those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called to that work by those who have public authority given unto them in the congregation to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard." Upon which Bishop Burnet remarks, when commenting on the words, " those that are law- fully called and sent," (and his exposition was approv- ed of by Archbishop Tillotson, Bishop Stillingfleet, and other prelates,) " the article does not resolve this into any particular constitution, but leaves the matter open and large for such accidents as had happened, and such as might still happen. They who drew it up had the state of the different Chiwches before their eyes that had been differently constituted from their own." And says Bingham, your great anti- quary, " Episcopal divines have no need to have Epis- copal government put into the article (the 19th) as a well as others, have confessed, that it was the means of awakening their first serious convictions about salvation. * Defence of his Apology, p. 206. 28 LETTERS ON third note of the Church, though the good men, the JBroivnists, were once for having discipline made a third note of the Church, and so aggrieved for the want of it, that," as you do toward us, " they un- churched the Church of England"* " In all their disputes with the Papists they never require more than these two notes of the Church, namely, the preaching of the pure word of God, and the due ad- ministration of the sacraments, according to Christ's ordinance, as stated in the 19th Article."! Agreeably to which, Hooper remarks, (Declaration of Christ and his Offices, c. 11,) "The commune wealthe of the trew Churche is knowyn by these two markes, the preach- ing of the Gospele, and the right use of the sacra- ments." If the language, however, of your formu- laries is so very general that it may be applied to Pres- byterian as well as to Episcopalian Churches, and if they were drawn up in this way, as is acknowledged by these prelates, and that distinguished antiquary, to avoid the smallest appearance of imputation against the validity of the orders of the former Churches, it cannot certainly be the doctrine of your Church that Presbyterian ministers ought not to be considered as Christian ministers, and that their people can have no covenanted hope of salvation. * French Church's Apology for the Church of England, vol. ii. of his works, |>. 7:27. + Page 7:26. The same view of the meaning of the 19th Article is given by Bishop Tomline, who represents Dr. Pusey and Mr. Glad- stone's sentiments as opposed to the principles of the Church of Eng- land, and held only by the Church of Home. "In like manner," says he, in his BlemcnU of I heoiogy, vol. ii. p. 3:25, " we often speak of the Church of England, of Holland, of Geneva, and of the Lutheran Church, and all these different Churches are parts oftht visible Catholic Church. It is well known that the Church of Rome considers itself as the only Christian Church; but, on the other hand, we extend the name to any congregation of fn it h fn I men in the which I fir pure icord of Qod is j,i< tirhi el, and the sacraments duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance^ in all those things that of necessity arc requisite to tin same. The adherence, therefore, to the fundamental principles of the Gospel \e sufficient to constitute a visible Church." And he adds, p. 326, M Upon the same principle we forbear to inquire what precise additions or defects in the administration of the sacraments ordained by Christ annul their efficacy." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 29 This view of the principles which I attribute to your Church is confirmed by the fact, that neither Cranmer, nor any of your leading Reformers who drew up the forty-two articles of Edward, nor Jewel, who bore a principal part in reducing them to thirty- nine in the reign of Elizabeth, believed in the divine origin of Episcopacy, but taught expressly, that in the days of the Apostles, bishops and presbyters con- stituted only one order. I shall show afterwards that this was the opinion of Jewel; and it was undeniably that of Cranmer and his fellow Reformers, for Bishop Burnet has preserved a paper subscribed by him, the Archbishop of York, eleven bishops, and many doc- tors and civilians, in which they say, that "in the New Testament no mention is made of any degrees or distinctions of orders, but only of deacons or ministers, and of priests or bishops." Nor is it any objection to this statement, that it is affirmed in the preface to the Book of Ordination, that " from the Apostles' time there have been three orders, bishops, priests and deacons;" for it is said only that they were from or after their time, but not in their time. But if they admit distinctly that the superiority of bishops to presbyters was a matter of mere expedi- ency, and not of divine institution, will it be believed, for a moment, by any candid individual, that they could intend to teach in your articles the doctrine which you advocate, namely, that Presbyterian min- isters, however orthodox and pious, are not Christian ministers, and that their people are only midway between you and heathenism? And that such cannot be the doctrine which is sanctioned by your formularies will be manifest, I apprehend, if you look into the writings of the men who made them, and give them credit for ordinary honesty and consistency, or into the writings of their successors for seventy years, and attend to their con- duct either towards Presbyterian ministers, or Pres- byterian churches. If Cranmer, for instance, had held your views, and had intended to introduce them into the Articles, would he have "sent letters," as 30 LETTERS ON Strype informs us, "to Bullinger, Calvin, and Me- lancthon, disclosing to them his pious design to draw up a book of articles, and rcquesiijig their counsel and furtherance?" Or would he have appointed Knox, along with Grindal, to examine it before it was adopted? Or would he have submitted the Prayer Book to the Genevese Reformer, or said to him, that " he could do nothing more profitable to the Church than to write often to the King?" Or would he have made two of his friends, Bucer and Martyr, the first Protestant Professors of Theology in Oxford and Cambridge?* Would any of the bishops have recommended that the youth should be examined in his catechism after evening prayers? (Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 91.) Or would his insti- tutes, as is mentioned by Bayle, " have been placed in the parish churches, that the people might read them, and in each of the universities, that after the students had finished their course of philosophy, those of them who were intended for the ministry might be first of all lectured from that book?" If Edward the Sixth, and his bishops and counsellors, had enter- tained your views and Mr. Gladstone's, and had considered them as taught in your Articles, would he have granted a charter to the Church of the Germans in London, though they were not Episcopalians, allowing them, among other things, " to exercise their own proper rites and ceremonies, and their own pro- per peculiar ecclesiastical discipline — that a Church instructed in truly Christian and apostolical opin- ions and rites, and grown up under holy ministers, might be preserved . ? t If Elizabeth and her prelates, and the enlightened statesmen who directed her counsels, had believed that your sentiments accorded • Strype's Lift of Cranmer, pp. 407-413; Council Book and Strype's Cranmer, p. 273; Nicholas Comment, on the Book of Com- mon Prayer, Preface, p. •>; Gerdesii Hist Reformationis, torn. iv. p. 36.3; Btrype's Annals, vol. ii. p 91. Peter Alexander also, a minister of* the Protestant Chart h of Prance, and other foreign Pro- testant clergymen, received prebends from Cranmer. t Some excellent observations on this charter may be met with in an lOssay on the Loyalty of Presbyterians, published in 1713. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 31 either with Scripture, or with the Articles of your Church, would she have passed an act in the thir- teenth year of her reign, as is mentioned by Strype, " by which the ordinations of the foreign Reformed Churches were declared valid, and those that had no other orders were made of the same capacity with others to enjoy any place in the ministry within England, merely on their subscribing the Arti- cles?"* Would she have interposed in behalf of the Reformed Churches, when the Lutheran princes threatened to persecute them, because they refused to subscribe the Form of Concord, denominating them " Pious Churches," or proposed that they should meet with deputies from the Churches of Scotland, Basil, Embden, Bremen, &c. and draw up a common Confession of Faith, which was to be reviewed by Gualter, and Beza ;t or, as is stated by her successor and Dr. Heylin, would she have " established the French Presbyterian Church" in the islands of Jer- sey and Guernsey? % If Archbishop Parker, and the bishops of his day, had concurred in your exposition of the doctrines of your Church, would they have approved of the Second Helvetic Confession ? (Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 488); or would his successor Grin- dal have applied to the magistrates of Strasburgh, in behalf of the Dutch Church in that city, representing its members as " members of Christ. ?" or to the Lords of the Council for a contribution to Geneva, " for the relief of that poor town, which had served for a nursery unto God's Church, as well as for the main- tenance and conservation of true religion?" or would he have sustained the orders of a Scotsman of * Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 514. t Blondel's Actcs Authcntiqucs des Eglises Reformecs de France, Germanic 1 , Grande Bretagne, Pologne, Hongric, Pais Bas, touchant la Paix tt Charite Fraturnellc; edit. 1655, pp. 61-62. Elizabeth sent an ambassador to a meeting of the deputies of these Churches at Frank- fort. t In regard to the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey, see her letter to the baiilie and jurats of the former, in Fallo's Account of Jersey, p. L23. When a synod of the Churches met, June 28, 1576, and drew up their plan of Church government, the Governors of the island attended and ratified it by their signatures; pp. 124-125. 32 LETTERS ON the name of Morison, " according, " as he expressed it, " to the laudable form and rite of the Reformed [Presbyterian) Church of Scotland?"* And with- out quoting at length the sentiments of Jewel ;t of Bishop Cox, who, in a letter to Gualter in 1565, speaks of the Church of Geneva as a Church of God, and its ministers as faithful ministers; J of Hooker,§ and of Sutclive, who, in his treatise on the Church, maintains, that " that is an orthodox and truly Catho- lic Church, which, though dispersed throughout Eng- land, Scotland, Germany, France, and other countries, is united by a harmonious confession of the Christian faith ;" and of Bridges, who says that "the ditference of these things, (t. e. the manner of orders, offices, rites, and ceremonies,) concerning ecclesiastical gov- ernment, is not directive materiall to salvation, neither ought to break the bond of peace and Christian con- cord," || may I solicit your attention to the opinion of Archbishop Whitgift, who was likely to be as well acquainted with the doctrine of your Articles, as you, or Dr. Hook, or any of your followers? " The essentiall notes of the Churche," says he, " be these only, the true preaching of the worde of God, and the right administration of the sacramentes, for, as Master Calvine sayth, in his booke against the Anabaptistes, This honour is meete to be given to the worde of God, and to his sacramentes, that wheresoever we see the worde of God truely preach- ed, and God accordyng to the same truely wor- shipped, and the sacramentes withoute superstition administered, there we may without all controversie conclude the Churche of God to be. The same is the opinion of other godly and learned writers, and the judgment of the Reformed Churches, as appeareth by their Confessions. So that notwithstanding govern- ment, or some kynde of government, may be a parte * Strypc's Grindal, p 271. + Defence of tin- Apology, p. 28. X Strypc's Annals, vol. i. Appendix, p. 57. § Ecclesiastical Polity, book iii. p. 152. || Defence of the Government of the Church of England, p. 87. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 33 of the Church, touching the outward forme and per- fection of it, yet it is not such a part of the essence and being, but that it may be the Church of Christ without this or that kind of government, and there- fore the kynde of government is not necessarie unto salvation/'* It is true, that after his elevation to the Primacy, he first suspended and then deposed Tra- vers, because he had not received ordination from a diocesan bishop; yet it was not because he regarded Presbyterian orders as invalid in a religious point of view, but because he considered Episcopacy as best adapted to the civil constitution of England;\ for he declared expressly, that "he did not pinch at any Church that used Presbytery, so that they had the consent of the civil magistrate; 7 ' % and that "he did not condemne any Churches where that govern- ment was lawfully and without daunger received, but had only regard to whole kingdomes, especially this realme, where it could not," he supposed, "but be dangerous," § because Elizabeth was an absolute monarch, and would admit no control either in Church or State. I might show how much your sentiments about the meaning of the Articles differ from those of James the First and his counsellors, for, in 1615, he sent Du Moulin to the Presbyterian Synod of the Isle of France, to urge them to unite with the other Protes- tant Churches who were sound in the faith, and ready to acknowledge each other as Christian Churches, and to exercise mutual forbearance, in so far as they dif- * Defense of his Aunswerc to Cartwright's Admonition, p. 491. t See a number of passages in the Defense immediately before p. 658. Notes on Travers' Reasons, Append, to Strype's Whitgift, p. 108. J Defense of the Aunswerc, p. 633. § Defense of the Aunswerc, p. 658. In p. 658, 659, he attempts to prove that " there is no one ccrtainc kinde of government in the Churche which must of ncccssitie be perpetually observed;" and in p. 389, that "the cxtcrnall government of the Church must bee accord- ing to the form of government used in the commonwealth," which goes to the opposite extreme of error to the opinion of Dr. Pusey and the Papists. 3 34 LETTERS OX fered, about ceremonies and Church government.' And he issued a proclamation at the same time, con- firming the establishment of Presbyterianism in Jersey and Guernsey, " after the pious example of his sister Elizabeth, and for the advancement of the glory of Mmighty dud. anil the edification of his Church.^i "He is blind," said Bishop Andrews, though a high Episcopalian, "who does not see churches existing without it, (Episcopalian Church government,) and he must have a heart as hard as iron, who can deny them salvation. "i "Your praise," said Dr. Carlton in the Synod of Uort to the ministers of the Church of Holland, " is in all the Churches."§ " In doctrine and the profession of the orthodox faith," says Dr. Cra- kenthorp, " there is no difference between us and the Reformed Churches; and while we agree in this, we can easily forbear with each other as to ceremonies and government." || And without quoting at length from the writings of Dr. Abbot, Bishop of Salisbury, who acknowledges that "there lived in the Church of England many reverend and worthy men, which did not reject the Presbytery;"^ of Dr. Field, who, in his treatise on the Church, employs a whole chapter to prove against Cardinal Bellarmine, a strenuous de- fender of your opinion, that the Reformed Churches, "whose ministers were ordained only by presbyters, did not cease, on that account, to have any ministerie at all;"'** r and of Bishop Davenant, who says, "we * Sec the Escrit de M. du Moulin, Envoye de Londres au Synode Provincial de l'lsle de France, in Blondcl's Actes Authentiques, p. 72—74. t He declares them to be " true and lawful Churches," because they were not in England, but in part of the duchy of Normandy, for toleration was then unknown in Britain among- the Episcopalians, though it was practised among the Presbyterians in Holland. I Keapon. ad Secundatn Epist. Molintei, inter opera, p. 35. § Brandt'l History of the Reformation, vol. iii. p. 4 — 6. iio Ecclesioe Anglicans contra do Dominis, p. 254. He says, p. 255, to (i« Dominis, who had censured the Church of Eng- land for endeavouring to effect a union between herself and the other Reformed Churches, "neither yon yourself nor any other could have bestowed on her a finer encomium." 1 Eleutheria, p. 90. »• (hap. 39, book 3. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 35 account of them, (the Scottish, Irish, and all other forraigne Churches of the Reformation,) as our breth- ren in Christ, and doe solemnly protest that we enter- tain a holy and brotherly communion with them,"* I shall notice only further, the sentiments of Arch- bishop Usher and Bishop Hall, who were certainly as likely to be acquainted with the true meaning of your Articles, as you, Mr. Newman, Mr. Gladstone, or any other of your followers. " For testifying my communion with these Churches," (those of France and Holland,) said the first of these prelates, "which I do love and honour as true members of the Church Universal, I do profess, that with like affection, I should receive the blessed sacrament at the hands of the Dutch ministers, if I were in Holland, as I should do at the hands of the French ministers if I were in Charenton."t And, said the second, " Blessed be God there is no difference in any essential matter between the Church of England and her sisters of the Refor- mation ; we accord in every point of Christian doc- trine without the least variation ; their public Confes- sions and ours are sufficient conviction to the world of our full and absolute agreement : the only differ- ence is in the forme of outward administration, where- in we are so far agreed, that we all profess this forme not to be essential to the being of a Church, (though much importing the well or better being of it, accord- ing to our several apprehensions thereof) and that we do all retain a reverent and loving opinion of each other, in our own several ways ; not seeing any reason why so poor a diversity should work any alienation of affection in us towards one another."^ I might easily have added many other testimonies from your most eminent writers during the first sixty years of the seventeenth century, but I trust that what has been produced will be considered as sufficient to au- thorise me to maintain, that there is not a fact more * Drury's Fides Catholica, p. 41. t Judgment of the late Archbishop of Armagh on certain points, p. 1 1 '5. t Peace Maker, vol. iii. of his Works, p. 560. 36 LETTERS OS clearly established in the history of your Church, than that the sentiments which have been expressed by yourself and your followers, respecting the ministers and members of Presbyterian Churches, are in direct opposition to her fundamental principles. You may tell me, I am aware, with the late Arch- deacon Daubeny, that " if I read over the 9th, 10th, and 11th canons, I will find that no meetings, assem- blies, or congregations of the King's born subjects, but those of the Established Church, may rightly chal- lenge to themselves the name of true and lawful Churches."* But you must surely know, that these canons were never confirmed by act of Parliament; that they were passed by the Convocation, when the principle of toleration was unknown, and that now, when it is recognised by the law of the land, they are virtually neutralised. The men who made them did not deny that Presbyterian Churches in other coun- tries were true and lawful Churches, but maintained merely that they were not so in England, because they imagined that the Sovereign might model as he pleased the government of the Church, and the only polity which ought to be established there was that of diocesan Episcopacy, because it was best fitted to promote absolute monarchy. Such, we have seen, were the sentiments of Whitgift, and others of your bishops. Such were the sentiments of Downam, who observes, in the defence of his famous sermon, seven years after the passing of these canons, " the King indeed doth say, that it is granted to every Christian king, prince, and commonwealthe, to prescribe to their subjects the outward form of ecclesiastical regi- ment which may seem best to agree with the form of their civil government.''^ Such were the senti- ments of Lord Bacon, whom James at one time con- sulted frequently in regard to the Church. " I for my part,'* says lie, "do confess, that in revolving the Scriptures, I could never find, but that God had left the like liberty to the church government, as he had * Appendix to his Guide to the Church, p. 270 t Page 8. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 37 done to the civil government, to be varied according to time, and place, and accidents. The substance of doctrine is immutable, and so are the general rules of government; but for rites and ceremonies, and for the particular hierarchies, policies, and disciplines of Churches, they be left at large."* And, says James himself, " I protest upon mine honour, I mean it not generally (the name of Puritan,) of all preachers or others that like better the single form of policie of our Church, (the Church of Scotland,) then of the many ceremonies in the Church of England, that are per- suaded their bishops smell of Papal supremacies that the surplice, the corner cap, and such like, are the outward badges of Popish errors. No, I am so far from being contentious about these things, (which, for my own part, I ever esteemed indifferent,) as I do equally love and honour the learned men of either these opinions."! But if such were the sentiments of the King himself, and of some of his principal advisers, and of the leading members of both Houses of Convo- cation, who made these canons, can you seriously believe it to be the doctrine of these men, or the doc- trine of your Church in the present day, that none but clergymen who have received their orders from dio- cesan bishops, in an unbroken series from the Apos- tles, are Christian ministers, and that none but the members of Episcopalian Churches have a covenant- ed title to the blessings of salvation? % I remain, Reverend Sir, yours, &c. * Considerations touching the Pacification of the Church, address- ed to King James, vol. iii. of his Works, p. 150. t Basilicon Doron, p. 144 of his Works. X James no doubl endeavoured afterwards to crush the Presbyte- rians, but it was owing entirely to their refusing to submit to his absolute authority, in religious as well as civil matters, and to the gross flattery which he received from the bishops, while the former spoke to him openly and honestly, when they could not agree to his claims. " I have ever," said Bishop Barlow, (preface to his account of the Hampton Court Conference, p. 2,) u accounted the personal commendation of living princes in men of our sort a verball symony.^ And yet compare with this remark the adulation which he acknow- ledges was paid to James at this conference by the Episcopalians, f>. 20— G2, 83—84. Bancroft fell on his knees and said to him, "I protest my heart melteth for joy that Almighty God, of his singular 3S LETTER III. These doctrines condemned in the strongest terms by the most distinguish- ed Protestant Statesmen after the Reformation ; Cecil, the Lord Presi- dent of Queen Elizabeth's Council, Sir Francis Knollys, and Lord Bacon, and denounced as " a Popish conceit," by the leading bishops and clergy. Dissimilarity between the Church of England, beyond whose pale, and that of the Church of Home, Puseyites deny that there is any hope of salvation, and the Apostolic Church, in the extent of its bishoprics, the civil power exercised by its prelates, the multitude of its ceremonies, and " its want," according to its own acknowledgment, "of a godly disci- pline." Reverend Sir, — I trust that it has been proved in the preceding letter, that so far were your principles from receiving the smallest countenance from the clergy of your Church, for seventy years after the time of the Reformation, they were spoken of gene- rally in terms of the strongest and most decided dis- approbation. Nor were these feelings confined to your leading dignitaries, but were expressed by some of the most talented and distinguished among the laity ; and, in particular, by some of the most illustri- ous of Elizabeth's ministers, who constituted the pil- mercy, hath given us such a king, as since Christ's time hath never been." And said Chancellor Egerton, " I have never seen the king and priest so fully united in one person." Upon which it was observed by Warburton, that " Sancho Panza never made a better speech, nor more to the purpose, during his government." Nay, in the pre- face to the edition of the works of James, which was published by Bishop Bilson, a. d. 1G1G, during the life of that monarch, he con- cludes one of ihc most fulsome pieces of flattery that was ever writ- ten, by raising him in one respect above Solomon ! How justly these praises were bestowed, may be learned from James's " Counterblaste to Tobacco," to which he had a great aversion, and his Treatise on Dcmonologic, the last of which 19 represented by the bishop as " a rare piece for many precepts and experiments, both in divinitie and naturall philosophic." The following is a specimen of his wisdom and learning, taken from the titles of some of the chapters of the lat- ter work, and the illustrations are not less worthy of the man who was superior to Solomon. " The forme of the conventions of witches, and of their adoring of their master;" book ii. chap. 3. "What are the ways possible, whereby the witches may transport themselves to places farrc distant;" chap. 4. " Why there are more loomen of that craft than men;" chap. 5; and, "What sort of folkcs are least or most subject to receive harm by witchcraft;" chap. 6, &c. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 39 lars of her political greatness, and whose extensive acquirements, even in theological learning, present a very striking and instructive contrast to those of Mr. Gladstone, as far as we can judge from his writings. So far was Cecil from approving of your sentiments, that he urged his Mistress to attempt that general union among Protestants to which I have already alluded, without any regard to their different forms of ecclesiastical polity. So little did another of her most enlightened counsellors sympathise with your views, that when Archbishop Sandys endeavoured to deprive Whittingham of the deanery of Durham, because he had received only Presbyterian orders, it failed. And when the attempt was renewed, "it again, 7 ' says Strype, "fell to the ground; the Lord President ob- serving, with some warmth, before the Archbishop and the other members of the Commission, that he could not in conscience agree to deprive him for that, for it would be ill taken of all the godly and learn- ed at home and abroad, that we should allow" as you propose, "of the Popish massing priests in our ministry, and disallow of ministers made in a Reformed Church"* So greatly was Lord Bacon opposed to your opinion, when it was brought for- ward by some in the days of Laud, that he speaks of it in terms of decided reprobation. " Yea, and some indiscreet persons/' says he, "have been bold in open preaching to use dishonourable and derogatory speech and censure of the Churches abroad, and that so far, as some of our men, (as I have heard,) ordain- ed in foreign parts, have been pronounced to be no lawful ministers. Thus we see the beginnings were modest, but the extremes are violent, so as there is almost as great a distance now of either side from itself as was at the first of one from the other."! Ami in 15SS, when Bancroft, in his sermon at Paul's Cross, advocated only the divine institution of Episco- pacy, without unchurching the Presbyterian Churches, * Strypc's Annals, vol. ii. p. 523. rtisemcnt touching the Controversies of the Church of Eng. land, Works, vol. iv. p. 426. 40 LETTERS ON it excited the astonishment of Sir Francis Knollys, Queen Elizabeth's kinsman, who had never heard such doctrine propounded before ; and upon writing to Dr. Reynolds, he received a long and able confuta- tion of it, which I am firmly persuaded you have never seen, and which cannot be too generally perus- ed by the members of your Church in the present day. Not only, however, was your opinion condemned by the clergy and laity of your Church, at the period referred to, but it was considered as one of the pecu- liar and most obnoxious tenets of the Church of Rome, by which she was distinguished from the whole of the Protestant Churches. Papists, you know, say of their Church, that it alone is the true Church in which you will meet with the real apostolical succession and the means of salvation. "Nevertheless," says Jewel, "in this they triumph;" and it is the very language which is employed by your followers respecting the Church of England to British Presbyterians, "that they bee the Church; that their Church is Christ's Spouse, the pillar of truth, the arke of Noe, and that without it there is no hope of salvation."* And Professor Nichol Burn, in an address to James the First, gives thanks to God, " be- cause of his infinite gudness, he had granted him knowlege to his aeternal salvation, delivering him out of the thraldome and bondage of that idolatrous Cal- vinisme, (Presbytery,) with the quhilk, alace, manie, be ane blind zeal, ar fraudfullie deceavit, to the lament- able perdition of their awin saulis, except be earnest repentance spedelie they retnrne to their spiritual mother, the halie Catholic Kirk."t Now, it is impos- sible to conceive stronger terms than those in which your Reformers reprobate the idea, that communion either with the Church of Rome, or any other Epis- * Apology, part 4. chap. 9. divis. 2. Sec, too, part 6. chap. 20. divis. 1. t Disputation concerning the Controversit Headdis of Religion, halden in the realme of Scotland, the zear of God ane thousand five hundred and fourscoir zeirs, &C, by Nicol Burnc, p. 2. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 41 copalian Church, is necessary to salvation, or that orders derived from diocesan bishops are necessary, on the part of faithful pastors, to give efficacy to their ministrations, or to entitle their Churches to the hon- ourable character of Christian Churches. " There- fore," says Jewel to Harding the Jesuit, " we neither have bishops without church, nor church without bishops. Neither doth the Church of England this day depend of them whom you often call apostates, as if our Church were no Church without them. Not- withstanding, if there were not one of them, (the clergy who had received their orders from diocesan bishops,) nor of us (the bishops) left alive, yet will not therefore the whole Church of England flee to Lovaine" for orders. And he declares, that in such circumstances pious laymen might renew the succes- sion* "The Pape," observes Whitgift, (and it is remarked by Strype, that his Aims were to Cartwright may be justly esteemed and applied to as one of the public books of the Church of England,!) " The Pape says, that to be subject to him is of necessitie unto salvation; so do not our archbishops." % "Here is the difference between our adversaries the Papists and us," says Willet. " They say it is of necessitie to be subject to the Pope, and to bishops and arch- bishops under him, as necessarily prescribed in the word; but so doe not our bishops and archbishops, which is a notable difference between the bishops of the Popish Church and of the Reformed Churches. Let every Church use that forme which best fitteth their state: in external matters every Church is free, not one bound to the prescription of another, so they measure themselves by the rule of the word."§ And, * Defense of the Apology, p. 129-130, &c. It deserves to be remembered, that Strype says, " it was composed and written by the reverend father as the public confession of the Catholic and Christian faith of all Englishmen, wherein is taught our consent with the Ger- man, Helvetian, French, Scotch, Genevan, and other Reformed Churches." Annals, vol. i. p. 251. t Slrype's Whitgift, p. 42. t Defense of his Aunswere, p. 382. § Willct's Synopsis Papismi, Appendix to the Fifth General Ques- tion. 42 LETTERS ON says Downam to a Puritan who had animadverted on his sermon, " the Popish opinion is farre different from that which I hold; for they hold the order and superiority of bishops to be jure divino, implying thereby a perpetual necessitie thereof. Insomuch that where bishops are not to ordaine they thinke there can be no ministers or priests, and consequently no church. I hold otherwise. Wherefore my opinion being so different from the Popish conceit, who seeth not that the judgment of our divines which is opposed to the doctrine ofthq Papists is not opposed to mine?" Nor was the difference less forcibly characterised by Dr. Holland, when he denounced your opinion, as stated by Laud, as " a novell Popish doctrine." If your divines, however, till the days of Downam, con- sidered that opinion as " a Popish conceit," and " a novel Popish doctrine," and the opposite principle as constituting " a notable difference" between your Church and the Papists, I trust you will not consider me as wanting in charity, if, under the sanction of such high and venerable authority, I represent you in the character which they would unquestionably have assigned to you, had they been living at present, namely, as a patron of Popery, and to express my astonishment that you and your followers should be allowed to continue in the communion of your Church. But you may tell me, that though it is a Popish, it is nevertheless a scriptural doctrine, for the Church of which we read, Eph. ii. 20, as having been founded by the Apostles, and out of which there is no salva- tion, contained in it bishops, priests and deacons, and it is only when a Church resembles the Church as it was then constituted in the orders of its clergy, and its form of government, that it is entitled to be con- sidered as a Church of Christ. You must prove, how- ever, before you deduce this inference, that the Church which is there referred to, and out of which it is declared, in other passages, there is no salvation, is the visible Church possessing in all respects the very form of external government which was at first estab- lished. The Church of England at the time of the PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 43 Reformation, as I have already showed you, did not think so, nor was it the opinion of any of the Protes- tant Churches. " There are two kyndes of govern- ment," said Whitgift; "the one invisible, the other visible; the one spiritual!, the other externall. The invisible and spirituall government of the Church is, when God by his spirite, gyftes and ministerie of his worde, doth governe it by ruling in the hearts and consciences of men, and directing them in all things necessarie unto everlasting life. This kinde of gov- ernment indeed is necessarie unto salvation. The visible and external government is that which is exe- cuted by manne, and consisteth of external discipline and visible ceremonies, practised in that Church." And then, after remarking that " the worde necessarie signified eyther that without the which a thing cannot be, or that without the which it cannot so well and conveniently be/ 7 he adds, "I confesse, that in a church collected together in one place, and at libertie, government is necessarie in the second kind of neces- sities but that any one kind of government is so neces- sarie, that ivithout it the Church cannot be saved, I utterlie denie."* And he was justified in doing so, for it is not to faith produced only by the preaching of a diocesan bishop, or of clergymen ordained by him, that salvation is promised in the Scriptures, but to true faith produced by the preaching of any pious ministers who have received their orders through a regular channel. It is not to repentance resulting from the instructions only of Episcopalian clergy- men deriving their orders from diocesan bishops y that forgiveness is promised through the blood of the cross, (Acts iii. 19; xi. 18;) but to sincere repentance, whoever may be the ministers whose impressive state- ments and touching appeals, accompanied by the influ- ences of the Holy Spirit, have implanted it in the heart. And it is not to holiness attained only tinder the ministry of Episcopalian clergymen, but of all evangelical pastors, that the Almighty has declared, Heb. xii. 14, that the individual who possesses it shall * Defense of the Aunswere, p. 81. 44 LETTERS ON' "see the Lord." But perhaps I am wrong in sup- posing that you will admit that faith, or repentance, or personal holiness, can be attained without the j)ale of Episcopalian Churches, and that to your other tenets this must be added, (I shall be glad if you disclaim it,) that nothing which can be regarded as spiritually good can result from the labours of Presby- terian ministers.* But if there be no revealed or covenanted hope of salvation to the members of a church, unless she con- tinue in the state in which the primitive Church was left by the Apostles as to the orders of her clergy, and government, and worship, is there no reason to fear as to their personal salvation to the ministers and members of the Church of England? Does she remain in the state of the Apostolic Church, both as to the offices and distinctions which exist among her ministers? The most eminent individuals who laboured zealously for the purification of the Church, from the earliest ages till the time of the Reformation, would not have thought so, for they have declared it as their opinion, that in the time of the Apostles there were only two orders of ministers in the Church, bishops or presbyters, whose office appeared to them to be the same, and deacons, and that there ought still to be no more. Such was the opinion of the author of the work entitled Aetates Ecclesias, which, according to Flaccius lllyricus, was written long be- fore the Reformation. t Such was the opinion of the * I would like to know whether Puseyites believe that the pious conversation of wives, who are Presbyterians, is likely to win their husbands to the faith, and love, and obedience of the Gospel, accord- ing to the statement of Peter, in his 1st Epistle, iii. 1, or whether it must be expected to fail, because they have never had Episcopal bap- tism, and are not in communion with Episcopalian Churches. And I would wish also to be informed, whether they believe the conversa- tion of pious Presbyterians can do no good to others in health or sickness, or when they happen to visit them on their beds of death. I take it for granted that they are persuaded there is no reason to hope that the preaching of the most pious Presbyterian ministers can lead to the conversion of a single sinner. t " Distinguitur autem juristis ipsa primitiva ccclesia in primam et secundam undc Dist. 93. legimus, &c. The Primitive Church is distinguished by the jurists into the first and second. In the first PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 45 celebrated Archbishop of Armagh, the great reformer of his day, usually denominated Ricardus Armacanus, who, though himself a dignified Episcopalian, bears a striking testimony to Presbyterian principles, as characterizing the Apostolic Church, for he observes, that "in the writings of the Evangelists or Apos- tles, no difference is to be discovered between bishops and simple priests who are called Presbyters, whence it follows that their power in all things is the same, and they are equal from their order"* Such, too, was the opinion of Wicklif, the harbinger of the Reformation in England, for one of his principles, which was controverted at great length by Wood- ford, was, that, "in the time of the Apostle Paul, two orders of clergy were reckoned sufficient for the Church, priests and deacons; nor were there in the days of the Apostles any such distinctions as those of a pope, patriarchs and bishops."t And what, per- primitive Church, the office of bishops and priests, as well as the names, was the same. But in the second primitive Church, the names and offices began to be distinguished. Therefore the names presbyter and bishop were entirely of similar import, and their power was the same, for ^ the churches were governed by a common council of priests. Therefore, as there was no difference from the beginning, the prelates ought not to carry themselves too haughtily above the priests." * " Non invenitur in Scripturis Evangelicis aut Apostolicis aliqua differentia inter episcopos ct simplices sacerdotes qui appellantur Presbyteri, &c. Lib. 5. ad Quaest. Armenorum. He flourished in the fourteenth century. t "Quod tempore Apostoli Pauli sufficiebant ecclesiae duo ordines clericorum, sacerdos ct diaconus, nee fuit tempore Apostolorum dis- tinctio papa?, patriarcharum, episcoporum." Woodford quotes against him a decree, as he terms it, of C lemens Romanus, and adds, " In quibus verbis sicut Clemens distinguit inter presbyterum et diaco- num, sic inter cpiscopum et presbyterum," and prosecutes the argu- ment very fully. See the whole disputation in the Fasciculus Rerum Expet. et Fugiend., published at Cologne, in 1535, by Orthunius Gratius, and republished by Edward Brown, 1600, vol. i. p. 209, from which it is evident that Wicklif must have been a Presbyterian, Ilenricus de Jota also, or according to others, de Heuta, who taught at Vienna in 1371, and who is highly celebrated by Gerson, Chancel- lor of Paris, asserts, " that the reservation of causes to the popes and bishops vvas a matter not of divine but human appointment, for all priests have equally the power of the keys. Reservationem istam casuum jam papia et cpiscopis usitatam non divini, sed humani juris 46 LETTERS ON" haps, will have more weight with you than the opin- ion of these reformers, as they appear to have been Presbyterians, even Jewel himself, when he wrote his Apology, does not seem to have thought so; for, says he, " in St. Hierome's time, there were metro- politans, archbishops, archdeacons, and others. But Christ appointed not these distinctions of orders from the beginning."* Here, then, is one point of very great importance, in which there is a striking differ- ence between your Church and the Apostolic Church. Again does your Church resemble that Church in respect to her ceremonies, guarding against the error which was pointed out by the Redeemer, when he said, " In vain do they worship me, teaching for doc- trines," in regard to my service, " the commandments esse : Omnes enim saccrdotes aequale jus clavium habere." Is not this Presbyterianism ? Atto, Bishop of Verceil in Italy, who, according to Ughellus, flourished about the middle of the tenth century, says, in his treatise on the judgment of bishops, published by D'Achery in the eighth vol. of his Spicilcgium, "the order of bishops and that of presbyters were not two different orders in Paul's time, but were distinguished afterwards." Francowitz, or Flaccius Illyricus, in his Catalogus Testium Veri- tatis, fol. 1793, tells us, that Florentinus, when speaking of the here- sies of Petrus de Corbaria, and John and Michael Cesanas, of the order of the Minorites, mentions as one of them, that " all priests, of whatever grade, by the institution of Christ, have equal authority, power and jurisdiction. Quod saccrdotes omnes, cujuscunque gradus existant, sunt acqualis authoritatis, potestatis et jurisdictionis insti- tutionc ( hristi." They lived in the fourteenth century. The copy of the Catalogus, from which I quote this and some of the other testimonies to Presbyterian principles, belonged to Archbishop Leigh- ton. Marsilius Patavinus, who lived a. d. 1324, is said, in the Catalo- gus Testium Vcritatis, p. 488, to have maintained this opinion in his treatise, entitled, Defensor Pacis, " that all bishops and priests are equal. Omnes episcopos ct saccrdotes esse acquales." * Defense of the Apology, p. 92. "Concerning this work," says Strype, (Annals, vol. ii. p. 41)0,) " three great princes successively, Queen Elizabeth, King James and King Charles, and four arch- bishops, were so satisfied with the truth and learning contained in i(, that they enjoined it to be chained up and read in all parish churches throughout England and Wales." Mockct, Archbishop Abbot's chaplain, mentions many more dis- tinctions among the clergy of the Church of England than Bishop Jewel. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 47 of men ?" Jewel observes, " The old father S. Augus- tine, complaineth of the multitude of vain ceremonies, wherewith he even then (beginning of the fifth centu- ry) saw men's minds and consciences overcharged."* And yet, according to Hooper and Cecil, you have a greater number of them in the Church of England than were to be found either in the Jewish Church, or in the Christian Church in the days of Augustine. " Further," says the former, " to augment the ceremo- nies of the Churche, and bring in a new Judaisme and Aaronicall rites, is against this commandment, (the fourth). As the bishopes hath usyd the matter, there be more ceremonies in the Churche of Christ than were in the Churche of the Jewes, as it shall easily apere to him that will confer our Churche with the bookes of Moses."t And says the latter to a noble Italian at Rome, whom he wished to convert from Popery, " Yea, as for external discipline, I can assure you, our Church is more replenished with ecclesias- tical riles than was the primitive Church in five hundred years after Christ. Insomuch as the Church of England is, by the Germans, French, Scots, and others that call themselves reformed, thought to be herein corrupted, for retaining so much of the rites of the Church of Rome." % But if this is really the case, (and he could not be mistaken,) it constitutes a very great and serious difference between the worship of your Church and the Apostolic Church.§ * Apology for the Church of England, part 5, chap. iii. divis. 5. t Declaration of the ten holy commandments. t Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 533. § We are told by A'Lasco, in his Treatise de Ordinatione Eccle- siarum Peregrinarum in Anglia, published a. d. 1555, and dedicated to Sigismund, King of Poland, that Edward the Sixth and his Coun- cil were anxious to accomplish a far more extensive reformation of the Church of England than has, ever been effected. "When I was called by that King," says he, " and when some laws of the country stood in the way, that it was not possible that the rites of public di- vine worship used under Popery should be immediately purged out, though it was what the King himself desired ; and while I was earn- estly standing up for the churches of the foreigners, at length it was his pleasure that the public rites in the English churches should he reformed by certain degrees, as far as it could possibly be got done for the laws of the kingdom. But that strangers, who were not so strict- 48 LETTERS ON You restrict your clergy, in their public services, to forms of prayer which were never employed in the Apostolic Church, though they prevent your ministers from applying to the Spirit, as a Spirit of grace and supplications, to suggest intercessions to them, accord- ing to this part of his blessed character, (Romans viii. 26, 27,) which they may present for their people, and though, as Bishop Wilkins remarks, "prayer by book is commonly flat and dead, and has not that life and vigour to engage the affections, as when it proceeds immediately from the soul itself; and set forms do especially expose people to lip service and formal- ity."* And he might have added, that they want ly obliged by the laws of the country in this matter, should have churches granted them, wherein they might freely perform all things according to apostolical doctrine and observation only, without hav- ing any regard to the rites of the country, that by this means it would come to pass that the English churches would be excited to em- brace apostolical purity, with the unanimous consent of all the states of the kingdom. "The king himself, from his great piety, was both the chief author and defender of this project. For, though it was almost universally acceptable in the King's Council, and though the Archbishop of Can- terbury himself promoted the thing with all his might, yet there were some who took it ill, and would have showed more reluctance to it, had not the King given them a repulse, both by his authority and the reasons he gave for this design. The churches of strangers being accordingly allowed, upon condition, or rather with a liberty, that all things in them should be ordered according to the doctrine and prac- tice of the Apostles, the care of them, by the authority of the King and Council, was committed to me, and I was commanded to choose such colleagues for myself, as I should judge fittest for that service, that their names might be inserted in the King's patent. Cum ego quoque per regem ilium vocatus cssem," &c. Such is the statement of A'Lasco, whom Edward and his counsel- lors denominated in the patent, "homo propter intcgritatem et inno- centiam vita? et morum, ct Bingularem eruditionem, valde Celebris." He published his book about lour years ailerwards ; and his state- ment accords with the appointment of thirty-two commissioners by Ed- ward, (of whom A'Lasco was one,) to draw up the Reformatio Legum Ecclcs-iustii •arum. That work was stopped, in consequence of the death of the King, and little progress was made in the reformation of the Church under Elizabeth. .Many of the bishops, during the reign of that Princess, lamented it greatly; but it gratified the Papists, and is still a source of great satisfaction to them, for one of their bishops declared lately, that " he loved the Church of England, because she was the least reformed of all the Reformed Churches.^ * Gift of Prayer, by Bishop Wilkins, p. 9, 10. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 49 that variety which is suited to the ever varying cir- cumstances both of the private Christian, and of the Church at large ; and that it is equally uncomfortable to hear the very same prayers repeated annually, for forty, or fifty, or sixty years, as it would be to hear the very same sermons repeated annually for a similar period. Besides the prayer-book you use, and on which you will suffer no alterations, as Edward the Sixth said in his letter to the Kentish rebels, is just "the old Popish service translated into English/' which James the First, you know, denominated at one time " an ill-said mass." In administering baptism, you make the sign of the cross on the forehead of the child, though it was nei- ther made on the forehead of the Saviour at his bap- tism, nor of any other individual who is mentioned in the New Testament, and though, as Barlow acknow- ledges, in his account, of the conference at Hampton Court, no example of it can be produced before the days of Tertullian, when, as is proved by the author of Ancient Christianity, Sir Peter King, and others, many gross superstitions had been introduced into the Church. And if you tell me that it was adopted at a very early period, I reply, with Bradshaw, " so are many other Popish traditions, (for the mystery of ini- quity soon began to work) ; and if on that ground we are to retain it, why do we not give the baptised milk and honey? for this was practised along with the other. Why do we not bring offerings for the dead? for Ter- tullian, the first of the fathers that ever mentioned the cross, doth establish these and the sign of the cross by one and the self-same warranty. Besides, if upon the fathers' tradition we use the cross, then must we receive and use it as they have delivered it unto us, that is, with opinion of virtue and efficacy, not only in the act of blessing ourselves, and in expelling of devils, but even in the consecration of the blessed sacrament. For the first, Tertullian is witness, saying, at every passage, at every setting forward, at every coming in and going out, at putting on of our clothes, shoes, &c, we stamp our forehead with the 4 50 LETTERS ON sign of the cross." * And surely, if you make the sign of the cross in baptism on the child's forehead, because the fathers did it, you are bound equally to make it on your own forehead, when you put on or off* your hat, or coat, or any part of your dress, or your shoes; and for the very same purpose, namely, to chase away devils; and I have not yet heard that you have come so far as this in your imitation of the ancient Church. Nor do you use that sign even in baptism as it was employed by the fathers, for, as he further remarks, " it is apparent that Cyprian, Augus- tine, Chrysostom, and others, in those times, did con- secrate the element (or water) therewith, and did not cross the child's forehead, but referred that unto the bishop's confirmation, so that onr crossing the in- fant's forehead, and not the element ofbaptism, is a meere novelty "\ In this respect, therefore, you differ both from the apostolic and the ancient Church. * Treatise on Worship and Ceremonies, p. 114. He adds, " for chasing of devils, Jerome counselleth Demetrius to use the cross," (Epist. ad Demetrium;) "and with often crossing guard thy forehead, that the destroyer of Egypt find no place in thee." Lactantius saith, (lib. 4, cap. 24,) " Christ's followers do by the sign of the cross shut out the unclean spirit." Chrysostom, on Psalm 109, says, "the sign of the cross guardeth the mind; it taketh revenge on the devil; it cureth the diseases of the soul." t " Neither will that place of Tertullian de Resurrectione Carnis prove the contrary." "The flesh," says he, "is washed, that the soul may be purged ; the flesh is anointed, that the soul may be con- secrated; the flesh is signed, that the sotil may be guarded ; the flesh is shadowed by the imposition of hands, that the soul may be by the spirit enlightened; the flesh doth feed on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul may be filled and fatted of God. In which words he, joining together diverse ceremonies of the Christians, doth indeed mention the signing of the faithful; but it may be as well referred to confirmation, expressed by imposition of hands, as to baptism, un- derstood by washing of the body, and that on better reason, for it is more than probable that the sign of the cross tons not yet used in bap. fisra, seeing Justin Martyr, in Defens. ad Anton., and Tertullian, de Baptismo ct de Corona Militis, do describe the form of baptism used in those times, and yet make no mention of the cross therein, which in all likelihood they would not have omitted if it had been used therein, especially Tertullian, who in that place spcaketh of the cross as used out of baptism in the ordinary blessing of themselves." He says, in his Treatise on Kneeling in the Sacrament, p. 94, of the preceding work, that " Papists themselves call the Church of England, for retaining this and other Popish Ceremonies, Puritan PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 51 You lay the stipulations in baptism, not on the parents, who are enjoined by the Almighty to "bring up the children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord," but on god-fathers and god-mothers, who seldom see them, in regard to which even the Epis- copalian clergy at Aberdeen confess, "we have no precept or example of it in the Holie Scripture ; yea, some of our learned divines affirm that it was insti- tuted by Pope Higinus."* You represent every one who is baptised as regen- erated, or, in the language of your Catechism, as " made thereby a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven." And Archdeacon Wilberforce affirms, that " the seed of grace," which was implanted in his father at baptism, was preserved; while his father himself acknowledges, that, till he met with Doddridge's Rise and Progress of Religion, and it was blessed to him by God, he was dead in trespasses and sins. And yet you are informed in Scripture that Simon Magus, though baptised by an Apostle, whose orders surely would be valid, continued " in the gall of bitterness, and the bond of iniquity." And as Frith remarks, "if a Jew or an infidel (as has sometimes been the case) should say that he dyd beleve, and beleved not in deede, and upon his words were baptised in deede, (for no man can judge what his heart is,)"t he could not be in the state described in your Catechism, for it is distinctly stated, that while he who believeth shall be saved, "he who believeth not shall be damned." You receive the communion at an altar like the Papists, and not at a table like Christ and his Apos- Papistical," and appeals in proof of it to the Concertatio Cathol, Eccles. in Argurn. In the Almanac Spirituel, an old Waldensian Tract, published by Leger, in his Hist, des Eglises Vaudois, p. 65, the sign of the cross in baptism is condemned. " Le signe de la croix sur l'enfant a la poitrenc et au front." And the Churches of the Waldenses were " the cradle" of the Churches of the Reformation. * Duplies to the Answers of some Reverend Brethren concerning the Covenant, p. 97. t See his Myrrour or Looking-GIasse, wherein you may beholde the sacrament of Baptisme described, Works, p. 91. 52 LETTERS ON ties, and the early Christians, and you take it kneeling, though they took it in the posture which was common at meals. This is certainly surprising, since as Peter Martyr, who was to have been one of your first pro- fessors of divinity, says, " Kneeling at the sacrament was introduced on account of transubstantiation, and the real presence/'* And it is still more extraordinary in a Protestant Church, if it be true, as is mentioned in the notes by Alexander de Hales, that the Pope, when he communicates, does it sitting, because the •Apostles communicated sitting. In this respect also you differ widely from the Apostolic Church, and are less scriptural in your worship than the very Pope.t * Per transubstantiationem et realem presentiam invecta est in ecclesiam. Colum. sect 21. t " At the least," says the author of the Re-examination of the Five Articles of Perth, " kneeling was left free in the days of King Edward the Sixth. The Papists making a stir about want of reve- rence to the sacrament at the second reviewing of the book of Com- mon Prayer, kneeling was enjoyned upon this reason that the sacra- ments might not be prophaned, but holden in a holy and reverential estimation. This was done by the directors and contrivers of the book, partly to pacify the Papists, partly because their judgment was not cleare in this point." *• That supper had all sitting in common together, saith Chrysos- tom, as he is quoted by that writer, p. 19. GEcumenius hath the like. This is not to eat the Lord's supper, says he. He meaneth that supper which Christ delivered when all his disciples were present. For in that supper the Lord and all his servants sat to- gether." " The two thousand soldiers," he remarks, p. 24, " who were re- conciled to the Emperor Mauritius about the year 590, by means of Gregorius, Bishop of Antioch, receaved the sacrament sitting upon the ground, as Evagrius reporteth." (Evag. lib. 6, cap. 13.) " Dr. Lindsay alledgeth the like done to the Scottish armie at Ban- nockbum, in the dayes of King Robert Bruce." (See his Defence, p. 53-54.) "Balsamon, upon the nineteenth canon of the Concilium Trullan- um, saith, the devouter sort, upon Saturday at midnight, sat in the kirke, and did communicate. Alexander de Hales, in the second part of his tractate concerning the masse, sayth, the Pope communicateth sitting, in remembrance that the Apostles at the last supper commu- nicated sitting. Si quaeratur quare Dominus Papa sedendo commu- nicat, &c. "That the Waldenses sat will appear from Balthazar Lydius. And Luther, expounding the epistle upon St. Stephen's day, saith, Christ so instituted the sacrament, that in it we should sit at the sacrament. But all things are changed, and the idle ordinances of men art come PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 53 ^.You bow during the reading of the Gospels at the name Jesus, and not at the name Christ or Immanuel, or any of the other names of the Redeemer, or any of the names of the other persons of the Godhead, justi- fying your adoration of that particular name, which never appears to have received that external token of homage in the apostolic age, by an erroneous inter- pretation of Philippians, ii. 10. And yet you are aware that Archbishop Usher, one of your most dis- tinguished prelates denied that the practice could be founded on that passage, and "wondered at some learn- ed men's assertions, that it was the exposition of all the fathers upon it. And as the wise composers of the Liturgy gave no direct injunction for it there, so in Ireland he withstood the putting it into the canons in 1634."* "I think the place to the Philippians," says Bishop Babington, " not well understood, hath and doth deceive them. The place is borrowed from the Prophet Isaiah, and therefore, by conference, evi- dent that the word name signifies power, glory, hon- in place of divine ordinances. Zuinglius, setting down the forme of celebration used at Berne, Zurioke, Basile, and other neighbour townes, say th, sitting and harkening with silence to the word of the Lord, we eat and drink the sacrament of the supper. We have put down altars," says A'Lasco, " and use a table, because it agreeth bet- ter with a supper, and the Apostle hath given the title of a table to denominate the Lord's supper. And again, the terms supper and table of the Lord very familiar with the Apostle Paul, seeme to re- quire sitting rather standing, kneeling or passing by." " The Bishop of Chester," says Calderwood, in his strictures on the Perth Assembly, p. 19, admits that it is true Christ did adminis- ter the sacrament in a kind of sitting gesture, and that in the same gesture the Apostles did receive it." Defense, p. 248. " Is it said that we should kneel in this ordinance, because we worship God in it ? Then we should do so in praise, and when we swear an oath. God has a right certainly to appoint the gestures which he requires in every act of worship. Is it alleged that it is called a sacrifice, and therefore we should kneel? Upon the same principle, then, we should kneel when we give alms, for it too is call- ed a sacrifice, or when we praise," &c. 11 Dionysius Alexandrinus," says Mr. Anderson, in his Answer to the Dialogue between the Curate and the Countryman, p. 57, " is the earliest that Dr. Cave can find, that makes mention even of standing; but of kneeling, not a syllable to be heard for many hundredyears after. * Judgment of the late Archbishop of Armagh on certain points, p. 132. 54 LETTERS ON our, and authority, above all powers, glories, honours, and authorities; and bowing the knee signifieth sub- jection, submission, and obedience of all creatures to his beck, rule and government, for what materiall knees have things in heaven, hell, 8?c. ? This knew the an- cient father Origen, and therefore, writing on the 14th of the Romans, where these words be, again saith, Non est carnaliter hoc accipiendum. These words are not to be taken carnally, as though things in hea- ven, as the sun, moon, angels, &c. had knees or tongues, but that all things shall be subject to him."* And says Dr. Fulk, in his Reply to the Rhemists, "it is certain that the bowing of the knee at the sound of the name of Jesus, as it is used in Popery, (and it is the same in your Church, and among the Scottish Episcopalians,) is not commanded nor prophesied in this place, (Phil, ii.) but it pertaineth to the subjection of all creatures to the judgment of Christ, when not only Turks and Jews, which now yield no honour to Jesus, but even the devils themselves shall be constrained to acknow- lege that he is their Judge." And he adds, " Capping or kneeling at the name of Jesus is superstitiously used in Popery, in sitting and not veiling at the name of Christ, Emanuel, God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and bowing only at the name of Jesus." And yet such is the practice which is followed by your Church, though, while you bow with the knee when that name is mentioned, you do not confess with the tongue that Jesus is Lord; and in this, as well as the multitude of your other ceremonies, of which Cecil speaks, you resemble the Popish but differ very wide- ly from the Apostolic Church. t * See him on the Creed, p. 169. t It is plain from Bishop Burnet's Sermon before the House of Commons in 1G88, and his Letters, p. 46, that a number of the first Protestant bishops were anxious to have many of these ceremonies abolished, but did not succeed. And says Strype, (Annals, vol. i. p. 162 — 164.) Parker, Grindal, Cox, Sandys and others, urged a num- ber of arguments to Elizabeth for laying aside altars, and using ta- bles in the communion, as approaching most nearly to the institution of Christ, but she would not listen to them. Bishop Pilkington, in a letter to the Earl of Leicester, (Append, to Strype's Parker, p. 41,) gives the following account of the reasons PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 55 And omitting many other things on which it would be easy to enlarge, does the extent of your bishoprics correspond to that of the bishoprics in the early Church, even admitting that their bishops were diocesan pre- lates? This, you must be sensible, is a point not only of great, but of paramount importance ; for, if you as- sign to your bishops an amount of duty which it is impossible for them to perform, and not only twenty or thirty, but even a hundred times more than was expected from any of the primitive bishops, you an- nihilate completely the efficiency of their office, and have bishops only in name. And yet such is the case with almost the whole of your bishoprics. In Philip- pi alone, where the number of Christians could not be great, we are informed, (Philippians, i. 1,) that " there were several bishops." Bishop Burnet acknowledges that Cenchrea, the seaport of Corinth, formed a bish- opric distinct from that of Corinth, and that the little village of Bethany, about a mile from Jerusalem, had a bishop of its own.* And Fuller confesses, that a long time afterwards, "some of the bishops' seats in Palestine were such poor places as they were ashamed to appear in a map. For in that age bishops had their sees at poor and contemptible villages."! The bish- opric of Polycarp was so small, that he could be ac- why so many Popish ceremonis have been retained by the Church of England. " They have so long- continued," says he, " and pleased Poperie, which is beggerlie patched upp of al sorts of ceremonies, that they culd never be roted out sins, even from many professors of the truth." And said Bishop Parkhurst to Gualter, (Strype's An- nals, vol. ii. p. 186,) "Would to God once at last al the English peo- ple would in good earnest propound to themselves to follow the Church of Zuric, (Presbyterian) as the most absolute pattern." But how much more happy would it have been for the church of England in the present day, if she had followed the model proposed by Hooper in his Treatise entitled the Declaration of Christ and his Offices. " It is no reproache of the dead man," said he, " but myne opinion unto all the world that the Scripture solely and the Apostelles' Churche is to be folowcd, and no man's authoritie, be he Augustine, Tertullian, or other cherubim or seraphim. Unto the rules and canones of Scrip- tures must man trust, and reforme his errors thereby, or else he shall not reform himself, but rather deform his consciens." * See his Observations on the 1st and 2d Apostolic Canons, p. 48. t History of the Holy War, p. 46. 56 LETTERS ON quainted by name with the different individuals who were under his superintendence. " Let your assem- blies/' said Ignatius to him, " be more frequent ;" or as it is rendered by Archbishop Wake, " let them be more full; inquire after all by name; despise not the man-servants nor maid-servants; but let not these be purled up with this circumstance."* And in the extensive diocese of Neocsesarea, in the middle of the third century, there were only seventeen Christians, and these probably all residing in the city. In the time of Cyprian, Sage admits that there were only eight presbyters belonging to the Church of Carthage, three of whom, on one occasion, voted for him, and one against him.t In the time of Cornelius, in the third century, there were only forty-six presbyters in the Church of Rome, all of whom, according to Dod- wel, did not preach; and even in the fourth century, according to Optatus, it contained little more than forty parishes,:]: or a considerably smaller number than in the Scottish Presbytery of Glasgow, who are under one moderator or president. Victor Uticensis says, that in the fifth century there were nearly as many bishops as there were parishes in one of the provinces of Africa; and Bishop Burnet allows that in the time of St. Augustine there were about five hundred bish- ops in a very small district. § And if it be a fact, as is stated by Dr. Hammond, on the authority of Ter- tullian and Justin Martyr, that the early Christians received the Eucharist from the hand of the bishop, it is evident that his charge could not be large. [| But * TIvx.\vri£ov yai ynvrQuo ctv, &c. " Where he evidently re- commends to him to examine, at their usual meetings, into the state of every individual who was under his care, and not merely, as is alleged by Sclater in his Original Draught of the Primitive Church, p. 79, " to matriculate them in a register." The latter circumstance, moreover, would have been much less fitted to elate the men and maid sen ants than the special notice which, on the former supposi- tion, Ignatius exhorted him to take of them at their public meetings. t Vindication of the Principles of the Cyprianic Age, p. 348. t Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 6, cap. 43. Optatus contra Parmen. lib. 2, 40. § Conference, p. 348. || " Sic et Tertullianus de Cor. Mil. Non de a'.iorum quara de PITSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 57 while such was the extent of the primitive bishoprics, how different is the size of most of your dioceses! Calderwood remarks, that " the bishopric of Lincoln hath devoured many bishoprics which were in the time of the Saxons, and howbeit it hath been greatly impaired, yet there are twelve hundred and forty- seven parish churches in it at this day/'* " The bish- oprick of York/' too, he says, "hath devoured many lesser bishoprics next adjacent, as Cambden relateth in his Britannia." And the bishopric of London con- tains a million and a half of souls, all of whom, with their clergy, are placed under the oversight and spir- itual jurisdiction of a single individual, which is as great an absurdity is if there were only a single physician, however eminent, to watch over their health, and cure their diseases, or a single magistrate or judge to administer justice to them, in matters which affected their temporal interests. The same observation applies to many of the other bishoprics, the duties of which are far beyond the powers of the best of your prelates. And as you will not contend that any of them are possessed of a hundred times more mental or physical energy, or learning, or piety, than Polycarp, or Irenseus, or Cyprian, or Cornelius, while they have a hundred times more work, you are bound to admit that this also is a point fraught with the most injurious consequences to religion, in which you have departed very grievously from the more judicious arrangements of the early Church. pracsidentium manu Eucharistiam sumimus, quod idem sub Trgwrwrcev nomine affirmat Justinus. Dissert. 3, cap. 7, par. 5, et Dissert. 4, cap 17, par. 14." Illud autem a Tertuliiano, &c. * See his English edition of his Altar of Damascus, p. 84, which lie afterwards enlarged and published in Latin. My friend, the late Dr. Andrew Thomson of Edinburgh, was in error when he said, in his life of Calderwood in Brewster's Encyclopedia, that the only copy of the English edition in existence was one which belonged to our mutual friend, Dr. McCrie, as there is at least another belonging to the University of Glasgow, from which I have taken the above quo- tation. It is a small octodecimo. The diocese of Lincoln contains still, 1 believe, one thousand and seventy parishes, or as many as there are in the whole of Scotland, and all under the superintendence of one bishop. 58 LETTERS ON I have only further to remark, that in addition to the numerous and overwhelming duties of their spi- ritual function, you impose upon them others, as British peers, when they attend in Parliament, and deliberate on important political questions, which must secularise their minds, involve them unnecessa- rily in civil discussions, and alienate a considerable portion of that time which ought to be devoted entirely to their sacred vocation. And yet nothing can be more contrary to the injunctions of Scripture, which calls upon them to " give themselves wholly" to the latter; or to the apostolic canons, the eighth of which declares, " we have already decreed that a bishop or presbyter, or deacon, ought not to interfere in public administrations; but ought to employ him- self entirely in ecclesiastical matters. Either, there- fore, let him be persuaded not to do so, or let him be deposed."* Nothing, too, is more strongly repro- bated by your Reformers, though, as Cartwright re- marks, " if they had to exercise both offices, it is to be ascribed to the tyme, — because the cloudes which Popery had overcast our land with could not be so quickly put to flight."! " They know," says Hooper, " that "the primitive Churche had no souch bishops as be now a daie, as examples testine, until the time of Silvester the First."± " Looke upon the Apostles cherTelie, and upon all their successoures for the space of four hundred years, and then thou shalt se good bishoppes, and souch as diligentlie applied that pain- ful office of a bishope to the glorie of God, and honour of the realmes they dwelt in, for they applied all the ivitt they had unto the vocation and ministerie of the Churche. Our bishopes have so mouch witt, they can rule and serve, as they say, in boothe states of the Churche, and also in the civile policie, when one * ETio-xoToc » 7r£iT£-jTf£K, » cf;*;tcvGf, &c. Consult the notes of Zona- ras on this canon. It is mentioned also by Cyprian in his Treatise de Lapsis, p. 278, as one of the sins of his time, which had provoked God to send a persecution on the Church. t Second Reply to Whitgift, p. 30. t Treatise on the Commandments, p. 182. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 59 of them is more than any man is able to satisfie, let him do all waies his best diligens."* " They are otherwise occupied," says Latimer; <; some in King's matters, some of the Privie Councell, some are Lord's of the Parliament. Is this their duetie? Is this their office?"^ And says Jewel, after stating that " the bishop's charge is to preach, to minister sacra- ments, to order priests, to excommunicate, absolve, &c, you must remember, M. Harding, that all other privileges, (as Lords of Parliament,) passed unto the clergie from the Prince, and not from, God; for from the beginning you know it was not so. "J So sensible, accordingly, were the other Protestant states, at the time of the Reformation, of the incompatibility of such power with the office of the clergy, that they provided against it; and the only prelates of whom I have ever heard, who would have had leisure to exercise it, if it had been lawful, were these bishops among the Scots Episcopalians, who were ordained by Dr. Ross before his death, without any diocese, (for there was none to give them,) and merely to keep up the succession. "Their warmest admirers," says the late Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen, " have de- nominated them Utopian bishops; and in their farci- cal consecration by the Doctor and others, they were solemnly made the depositaries of no deposit, com- manded to be diligent in doing no work, assiduous in teaching and governing no people, and presiding in no church — in short, they were husbands married to no wives. "§ If this letter had not already been too far extended, I might notice your want of a godly discipline, which, as Burnet admits, is " owned in the Preface to the Office of Commination," and which, though you have been praying for it annually on Ash Wednesday since the days of Edward the Sixth, you have never yet * Treatise on the Commandments, p. 184. t Sermon on the Plough, fol. 12. t Defense of the Apology, p. 550. See, too, the Apology itself, part v. chap. 3, divis. 7. § Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p. 355. 60 LETTERS ON obtained. I might have adverted to the practice of your bishops in transferring their power of juris- diction to lay-chancellors, in regard to which, it is remarked by Bishop Bedel, that " it is one of the most essential parts of a bishop's duty to govern his flock, and to inflict spiritual censures on obstinate offenders, and he can no more delegate this power to a layman, than he can delegate a power to baptize and ordain."* And even Whilgift admits that the power of excommunication " was in the beginning joyntly in the bishop, dean and chapter alone;" that afterwards " through custom, it was appropriated to the bishop, and that it was solely by the authority of the civil lawes" that he was latterly permitted to devolve it on an official or vicar-general, chosen from the laity. t And with respect to the visitations of archdeacons, it is confessed by Bishop Burnet, that " they were an invention of the later ages, in which the bishops, neglecting their duty, cast a great part of their care upon them. Now," he adds, u their visitations are only for form and for fees; and they are a charge upon the clergy; so when this matter is looked into, I hope archdeacons, with many other burdens that lay heavy on the clergy, shall be taken away. "J It is unnecessary, however, to add to these details; and I shall only further remark, that if, according to your opinion, there must be a resem- blance in great and leading points between any Church in the present day and the primitive Church, before the former can be entitled to the name of a Church, and its members have any covenanted hope * See his Considerations for better establishing the Church of England. t Strype's Whitgift, p 93, and Appendix, p. 33. t History of his OwnTimcs, vol. ii p. 642. He says also, p. 636, " No inconvenience could follow on laying aside surplices, and regu- lating cathedrals, especially as to the indecent way of singing prayers, and of laymen reading the Litany. All bowings to the altar have at least an ill appearance, and are of no use ; the excluding parents from being sponsors in baptism, and requiring them to procure others, is extremely inconvenient, and makes that to be a mockery, rather than a solemn sponsion, on too many." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 61 of salvation, it suggests considerations which are fitted to awaken very painful feelings in the ministers and members of the Church of England. I remain, Reverend Sir, Yours, &c. LETTER IV. Extracts from the Oxford Tracts asserting the doctrines of Puseyite Episco- pacy to be the doctrines of Scripture. — A contrary opinion avowed by the whole of the Bishops and clergy who were zealous for the spiritual improvement of the Church for five hundred years before the Reforma- tion, by the whole of the Protestant Churches at that memorable period, and by eight thousand Protestant ministers, who subscribed the Articles of Smalkald, which declare that bishops are not superior to presbyters by divine right. — Improbabilily that these distinguished individuals and the whole Protestant Churches were wrong, and Puseyite Episcopalians right. Reverend Sir, — I have referred, in the conclusion of the preceding letter, to the acknowledgment which has been annually made by your Church for nearly three hundred years, of her want of " a godly disci- pline." And justly may she do so, for it must be evident to any one who reflects for a moment on the small number of individuals who are entrusted with the superintendence of her ministers and members, and who alone have the power to correct the errors and heresies of the one, and the immoralities of the other, that all which she possesses of this important privilege, so essential to the spiritual prosperity of a Church, is little more than the name. I admit the respectability of many of her bishops, but I would ask any candid and impartial judge, whether twenty- seven prelates, or rather twenty-seven lay-chancellors, can exercise such an oversight of seventeen thou- sand clergy, as to their principles and conduct, and about sixteen millions of laity, or at least the large proportion of them who belong to your communion, as was done by the rulers of the primitive Church 62 LETTERS ON over her ministers and members, and as is indispen- sable to the welfare of every Church? And yet such is the whole amount of superintendence which is pro- vided in your Church for this important end, and which, if Episcopalian church government, as has- often been alleged, be far better fitted than Presby- terian polity for preventing schism, and promoting orthodoxy, and unity, and spirituality, ought to ren- der your Church the most sound and united and spiritual Church that is to be met with in Britain. But how does the actual state of your Church cor- respond with these anticipations? So far from being free from schism and discord, and remarkable for her unity, is she not torn with dissensions, which are spreading further and further, from day to day, throughout the whole of your cities and towns and parishes? Nor do they relate merely to externals, like those which divide some other Churches, but to the fundamental principles of religious truth and Scriptural Christianity. And in place of the exercise of a godly discipline toward those who are infusing into her some of the worst and most deadly principles of Popery, and who are attempting to overthrow her as a Protestant Church, not a single bishop has put forth his power to expel these heretics, and cut them off from the body whose spiritual health they are seriously injuring. Yes, sir, you are allowed to retain your professorship, though, by your own confession, you prostrated yourself lately in a Popish chapel at the elevation of the host. And Mr. Newman and others retain their livings, though they have been pleading for the mass, and recommending the resto- ration of auricular confession, and advocating re-union to the Church of Rome. What would the spirits of Cranmer and Latimer say of such conduct, if they were permitted to speak to us? And in what light would it have been viewed by Cecil and Walsing- ham, who gloried in your Church as the bulwark of Protestantism? But perhaps it does not arise from any want of fidelity on the part of your prelates, but from their want of power, and the utter insufficiency PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 63 of Episcopalian church government to correct such an evil. How different was the course which was pursued a few years ago by the Church of Scotland towards Mr. Irving and his followers, when, after endeavouring in vain to reclaim them from their heresies, she deposed them from the ministry,* and arrested their errors within the pale of the establish- ment. Happy would it be for the Church of England and the cause of Protestantism if similar measures were adopted by your bishops; and never was there a time when it was more imperatively the duty of her pious members to labour and pray that the Lord- would restore to her a godly and vigorous and salu- tary discipline. But whatever may be the apparent defects and im- perfections in the constitution and discipline of your National Church, there is one thing you allege of the very highest importance, in which she has a decided advantage over Presbyterian Churches. Her clergy, you affirm, having derived their orders from diocesan bishops, in an uninterrupted series from the Apostles of Christ, must be considered as his ministers, and her ordinances as his ordinances, and her members as his members, children of God, and inheritors of the king- dom of heaven. But the ministers of these Churches having received their orders only from Presbyters, who, in your opinion, had no right to bestow them, cannot be regarded as invested with that sacred and venerable character, nor can their sacraments have any virtue, nor their members any covenanted title to salvation. And so far from acknowledging them as Christian Churches, you represent them as occupying the very same position with the temple of Samaria, which was not recognised by the God of Israel, and denounce their clergy, when they ordain others to the office of the ministry, as involved in the guilt, and * Presbyterians do not believe in the indelibility of the clerical character, as maintained by the Church of* Rome and the Church of England, but think, that if, as is stated, Acts i. 25, even an Apostle " fell from his office by transgression" the same thing may happen to an inferior minister. 64 LETTERS ON likely to be subjected to the doom of Corah, Dathan and Abiram, who wished to extend the powers of the priesthood to the whole of the heads of the families of Israel. That I may not, however, appear to charge you with sentiments which you do not really entertain, I beg to appeal to the following extracts from the Ox- ford Tracts, to which I have reason to believe that you are a principal contributor. " It is not merely that Episcopacy is a better or more scriptural form than Presbyterianism, (true as this may be in itself,) that Episcopalians are right and Presbyterians are wrong, but because the Presbyte- rian ministers have assumed a power which was never intrusted to them. This is a standing condem- nation from which they cannot escape, except by arti- fices of argument, which will serve equally to protect the self authorised teachers of religion."* " Samaria has set up its rival temple among us. — Had not the Ten Tribes the school of the prophets, and has not Scotland at least the Word of God ? Yet what would be thought of the Jew who maintained that Jeroboam and his kingdom were in no guilt? Consider our Lord's discourse with the woman of Samaria: Ye worship ye know not what; we know what we worship. Can we conceive his making light of the difference between Jew and Samaritan?"! * The parties which are separated from and oppo- sed to the Church, may be arrayed into three classes: 1. those who reject the truth; 2. those who teach a part, but not the whole truth ; 3. those who teach more than the truth; i. e. 1st, Socinians, Jews, Deists, Atheists ; 2d, Presbyterians, Independents, Metho- dists, Baptists, Quakers; 3d, Romanists, Swedenbor- gians, Southcotians, Irvingites. " Churchman, whoever thou art, that readest the follies and errors of the second and third classes, into which the pride of man's heart, and the wiles of Sa- tan, have beguiled so many of those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus, first, give to God great * Oxford Tracts, No. 7, p. 2. t No. 47, p. 4. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 65 thanks for having preserved you a member of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, which teaches the way of God in truth, neither handling the word of God deceitfully like the second class, nor following cunningly devised fables like the third; and (with reference to the second and third classes, as well as the first,) pray that God would be pleased so to turn their hearts, and fetch them home to his flock, that they may be saved, together with his true servants, and be made one flock under one shepherd."* "Here is the difference between such persons as have received their commission from the bishops, and those who have not received it, that to the former Christ has promised his presence shall remain; that what they do on earth shall be ratified and made good in heaven. But to those who have not received this commission, our Lord hath given no such promise. A person not commissioned from the Bishop may use the words of baptism, and sprinkle or bathe with water, on earth, but there is no promise from Christ that such a man shall admit souls into the kingdom of heaven. A person not commissioned may break bread, pour out wine, and proceed to give the Lord's supper, but it can afford no comfort to any to receive it at his hands, because there is no warrant from Christ to lead communicants to suppose, that while he does so here on earth, they will be partakers of the Saviour's heavenly body and blood. And as to the person himself, who takes upon himself without warrant to minister in holy things, he is all the while treading in the steps ofKorah, Dathan and Jlbiram, whose awful punishments we read of in the Book of Numbers."! Now, on this statement, I would offer the following observations : In the first place, it is founded on the assumption, that an order of ministers, denominated bishops, has been instituted by Christ, who are not only distinct from, but superior to, presbyters, and to whom alone he has committed the powers of ordination, confirma- * No. 35, p. 6. t No. 35, p. 3. 66 LETTERS ON tion and discipline. But this is a position, which, as you question my orders and those of my brethren, I am compelled to controvert, (and you have provoked the discussion,) and the utter groundlessness and fal- lacy of which I shall endeavour afterwards to estab- lish more fully. I shall remark only in the meantime, that such an order was not discovered in Scripture, as I have already showed you, by Cranmer and others of your leading reformers, for they admitted the va- lidity of Presbyterian ordination. It was not discov- ered by Usher, one of your greatest theologians, who Avas surpassed by none in his acquaintance with the writings of the early Christians. " I asked him also his judgment," says Baxter, "about the validity of Presbyterian ordination, ivhich he asserted, and told me that the king asked him, at the Isle of Wight, where he found in antiquity that presbyters alone ordained any? And that he answered, I can show your Majesty more, even where presbyters alone suc- cessively ordained bishops, and instanced in Hierome's words, Epist. ad Evagrium, of the presbyters of Alex- andria choosing and making their own bishops, from the days of Mark to Heraclas and Dionysius."* It was not discovered by Willet, whose Synopsis Papis- mi is said to have been approved of by the bishops J for he represents the vesting of the powers of ordi- nation, confirmation, and government exclusively in bishops, as mere human inventions for their aggran- disement. " To the ecclesiastical policie in the ad- vancing of the dignitie of bishops," says he, " these things (of human appointment) doe pertaine. First of all St. Hierome saith of confirmation committed only to bishops, — Disce hanc observationem, &c. Know that this observation is rather for the honour of their priesthood, than by the necessitie of any law" Ad- vers. Luciferian. " Secondly, The Counsell of Aquisgrane, cap. 8, saith, that the ordination and consecration of min- isters is now reserved to the chief minister only for authoritie sake. * Baxter's Life by himself, p. 206. t Acta Regia, p. 289. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 67 "Fourthly, The jurisdiction of the Church, which, in time past, Hierome saith, was committed to the Senate or College of the Presbyters, was afterward, to avoyd schisme, devolved to the bishop. And of this senate mention is made in the Decrees, Caus. 16, Quaest. 1, cap. 7. As the Romanes had their senate, by whose counsell every matter was dispatched, so we have our senate, the companie of elders. " Fifthly, St. Ambrose saith, 1 Tim. hi., a bishop and a presbyter have but one ordination, for they are both in the priesthood. And St. Hierome saith, that in the Church of Alexandria, the presbyters did make choice of one whom they placed in a higher degree, and called him their bishop, like as if an armie should chuse a general, or the deacons should choose an industrious man, whom they make their archdea- con ; Hierome ad Evag. So it should seem that the very election of a bishop in those days, without any other circumstances, ivas his ordination"* And so far was Dr. Field, one of the most eminent men of his day, from adopting your opinion, that he says of the fathers, " who made all such ordinations voide as were made by presbyters, that it was to be under- stood according only to the strictness of the canons in use in their time, not absolutely in the nature of the thing; which appears in that they made all ordina- tions sine titulo to be voide, all ordinations of bish- ops ordained by fewer than three bishops with the Metropolitane, and all ordinations of presbyters by bishoppes out of their own churches, without special leave."t It was rejected by the ivhole of the Pro- testant Churches at the time of the Reformation, almost all of whom united in setting aside diocesan Episcopacy, while the few who retained it, adopted it, not because it was of divine institution, but from * Page 277. t Treatise on the Church, book iii. p. 158. Consult also chap. 39, where he proves, in opposition to Bellarmine and to Dr. Pusey, that those churches among the reformed, whose ministers were ordained only by presbyters, do not cease, on that account, "io have any min- isterie at (Osiander's Epitome of Church History, torn. 6, pars 1, p. 299,) " Hie docet Hieronymus, distinctos gradus episcoporum et presbyterorum sive pastorum tan- turn humana autlioritate constitutes esse; idque res ipsa loquitur, quia officium et mandatum plane idem est, et sola ordinatio postea discri- men inter episcopos et pastores fecit. Sic enirn postea institutum fuit, ut unus cpiscopus ordinaret ministros verbi in plurimis ecclesiis. "Quia autcm jure divino nullum est discrimen inter episcopum et pastorem, non est dubium ordinationem idoneorum ministrorum a pastore in ecclesia factam jure divino ratam et probatam esse." And they say with regard to jurisdiction, p. 301, "Constat jurisdictionem illam communem excommunicandi reos manifestorum criminum per- tinere ad omues pastores, et earn episcopos iyrannice ad se solos ad qucestum suum turpitrr explendum attraxisse." And they add, p. 302, "Cum igitur banc jurisdictionem episcopi tyrannice ad se solos transtulerint eaque turpitcr abusi sint — certe licet hanc furto et vi ablatam jurisdictionem rursus ipsis adimere et pastoribus ad quos ea de mandato Christi pertinet restituere," &c. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 71 tors, forty-five Dukes, Marquesses, Counts, and Ba- rons, the Consuls and Senators of thirty-five cities, but by Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, and Fagius, and about eight thousand other clergymen."* If these things, however, are so, and if neither the founders of your own Protestant Church, nor the most eminent minis- ters of the other Protestant Churches for many years after the Reformation, who enjoyed so much of the teaching of the Spirit, and studied so successfully the word of God on other subjects, could discover the smallest evidence for diocesan Episcopacy, and pro- nounced it to be entirely a human institution, I would press it most earnestly on your serious consideration, whether it does not furnish at least a very strong pre- sumption that you are likely to be wrong when you maintain, in opposition to their united opinion, with the Church of Rome, that Presbyterian ministers can- not be regarded as Christian ministers, and that their people can have no covenanted title to salvation. I remain, Reverend sir, Yours, &c. LETTER V. Presumptive evidence that diocesan bishops have not been appointed by God, because the only bishops mentioned in Scripture among the stand- ing ministers of the Church are presbyters, and no passage can be pro- duced specifying the qualifications required in bishops as distinct from presbyters. — This inexplicable, if there was to bean order of ministers, denominated bishops superior to presbyters. — Presbyter, a name of higher honour than bishop. — JNo minister of an inferior order distinguished by the name of a minister of a superior order. — Deacons never called pres- byters, but presbyters always represented as bishops. — The powers of ordination and government ascribed in Scripture to presbyters. — Wick- liff held the principles of Presbytery, and maintained that Scripture gave no countenance to diocesan Episcopacy. Reverend Sir, — But even though I should concede to you, for the sake of argument, that an order of ministers, superior to presbyters, and denominated * Vincent. Place. Syntagma de Scriptis ct Scriptor. Anonymis. 72 LETTERS ON bishops, is sanctioned by Scripture, it remains for you to show that the difference between them is so very great, as to authorise you to unchristianize every Church, the ministers of which have been ordained only by presbyters; and yet, so far are you from being able to prove this, that the contrary seems to be established by two important considerations. In the Jirst place, not only are bishops distinguished some- times by the name of presbyters, but presbyters are denominated bishops, though in one of the principal passages in which they are designated by that name in the original language, our Episcopalian translators have substituted the term " overseers." Thus, in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, we are told, that " from Miletus, Paul sent for the elders or presbyters of the Church, and said to them/' according to WicklifFs version, " Take ghe tent to ghou and to al the flok in which the hooli goost hath set ghou bischoppes to reule the Church of God, which he purchased with his blood."* And that it is presbyters who are here represented as bishops is admitted by the Church of England herself, for in the form of ordering of * I have already produced evidence, that Wickliff held Presby- terian principles with regard to the government of the Church-. Flaccius Illyricus, or, as is stated by Czvittinger, in his Specimen Hungariae Literaturae, p. 153, the celebrated Francowitz, one of the three Centurists of Magdeburgh, who wrote under that name, says, in his Catalogus Testium Veritatis, p. 493, that he taught " tantum duos ministrorum ordines debere esse nempe presbyteros et diaconos." And Dr. Allix says, p. 222, of his Remarks on the Albi- genses, "that even Knighton was obliged to acknowledge that one half, yea, the greater part of the people of England owned his doc- trine." I may further appeal to the following decisive testimony by Wai- singham, who flourished a. d. 1440, which puts it beyond a doubt that Wickliff was a Presbyterian. " Lollardi," says he, in his His- tory of England, p. 33!), ,l per idem tempus in errorem suum plu- rimos seduxcrunt, ct tantam prassumpserunt audaciam ut eorum pres~ byteri more pontificum novos crcarent presbyteros asserentes (ut fre- quenter supra retulimus) quemlibet sacerdotem tantam consecutum potestatcm ligandi atque solvendi, et cetera ecclesiastica ministrandi quantain ipse Pupa dat vel dare potest." " Unum audacter assero," said Wickliff, as quoted by Neal in his History of the Puritans, vol. i. p. 3, note, "One thing I boldly assert, that in the primitive Church, or in the time of the Apostle Paul, two orders of clergy were thought sufficient, viz. priest and deacon ; and PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 73 priests, published in 1549, she appointed this passage to be read to them to point out their duty. But if they are denominated bishops, it seems evidently to follow that they must be little inferior to them, or to speak more correctly, that they must be equal to them; for if you would infer the equality of the Son and the Spirit to the first person in the Godhead, because the same names are given to them which are applied to the Father, I would be glad to know on what principles you can prove that a similar equality must not exist between presbyters and bishops. Nor is it any answer to this to say, as has been often done by Episcopalians, that even Apostles are sometimes denominated presbyters; 1 Pet. v. 1; for though some of the ministers in the primitive Church who were of a superior order were called occasionally by the name of ministers of an inferior grade, because they could discharge their duties, I am not aware of any instance, (and I call upon you to produce one if you are able,) in which a minister ivho belonged to an inferior order ivas designated by the name of a minister of a higher order, to the exercise of xohose poivers he was completely unequal. Deacons, for instance, are never represented as presbyters or bishops, and yet presbyters are often denominated bishops. And, I do also say, that in the time of Paul,/«if idern presbyter atque epis- copus, a priest and a bishop were one and the same.'''' Even Nicol Burne, the Papist, translates the passage referred to in the text, (Acts xx. 28,) " Tak tent to zour selfis and the hail flok over the quhilk the Halie Ghaist hes apoyntit zou bischops to gov- erne the kirk of God, quhilk he hes conquesed with his blude;" p. 107, of hi? Disputation. Miles Coverdale renders it, " Take hede, therefore, unto your selves, and to all the flocke among the which the Holy Goost hath set you to be bishoppes to fede the congregacion of God, which he hath purchaced thorou his oune bloude." The Bishops of Gaul and Germany, in their Epistle to Anastasius, quoted by Illyricus or Francowitz, p. 41, of his Catalogus, render it, " posuit episcopos;" and the same version is given by Stephens, Diodati, and even Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Polity, p. 377, book 7, or rather by Dr. Gauden, who wrote the last three books of that work. And lajfl the learned Hoornbeck, in his Notes on Usher's Reduced Plan of Episcopacy, p. 51, " Versio .Ethiopica pro episcopis habet papis. Etenim apud veteres, papa pro episcopo venit, Cypriano Papa?, Augustino Pape," &c. 74 LETTERS ON secondly, not only is the name of bishops bestowed upon presbyters, but the very same qualifications are required from them, (Tit. i. 5 — 9,) for the dis- charge of their office; and I challenge you to produce any passage of Scripture where a single attainment, intellectual or moral, is demanded from a bishop which is not exacted from a presbyter.* Now, if a presbyter is designated by the name of a bishop, and must have all his qualifications, I would be glad to be informed on what ground you maintain that he is not equal to a bishop, for, as is proved in the notes, the former is even a name implying higher honour. Or if there be any difference, whether it can really be so great as to warrant you to affirm that Churches * Dr. Whitby observes, on Titus i. 7, " Hence, say the Greek and Latin commentators, it is manifest that the same person is called a presbyter in the 5th, and a bishop in the 7th verse." Hoornbeck, in his Notes on Usher, shows that the term presbyter implies greater honour than that of bishop, which renders it very strange, if the office of a bishop was intended to be superior to that of a presbyter, that the latter should receive the name expressive of greater dignity. " Neque dubium esse potest," says he, p. 47, "quin ab Judaeis nomen presbyterorum ad Christianos, et ex ipsorum politia in ecclesiam defluxerit, prout apud illos semper honoratissirni fuerunt, ot Tr^sr/Zwri^ci, 7r^i7 (ivri^'ji tuv lovJsuctiv, Actor, xxv. 15; 7rg£3-/2:/Tego< rcu Io-qxhk, Act. iv. 8; 7r£iv, 5o|at Xgi$ov, Apostles of the Churches, the glory of Christ. And such undoubtedly were Timothy, Titus, Sosthenes, and Silvanus, whom Paul so frequently associates with himself as his partners, fellow-helpers and brethren; and to the two first of whom he assigns such offices at Ephesus and Crete, as, by the confessions of all parties, evince them to have been of an order superior to presbyters. Hence it is that we read of false Apostles, (2 Cor. xi. 13,) and of some who said they were Apostles, and were not, but were found liars, (Rev. ii. 2 ;) for as * The word9 of Hilary are, " Erat enim eorum Apostolus ab Apos- tolo factus." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 141 none of those liars, could possibly pretend to be St. Paul, or any of the twelve, all of whom were dead before that period, we must of necessity infer that they practised their imposition upon their knowledge, that there were then in the Church many true Apos- tles, the Apostles SV mB^tlov, or by the ordination of man."t Now, I would remark upon this passage, that as it does not contain the slightest proof that the greater part of the individuals to whom it refers were denomi- nated Apostles in the proper sense of the word, or that any one of them is so designated who had not seen the Lord after his resurrection, and who could not exhibit the signs of an Apostle by working mira- cles, it will not warrant the conclusion, that others who wanted the qualifications for the apostleship, which were before mentioned, were elevated to that high office, and were appointed to be the fellow- labourers and successors of the Apostles. Calderwood imagines that an exception as to the name ought to be made in regard to Barnabas; for he observes, " In what manner he was called to the apostleship does not appear, and yet that he was an Apostle, and of the same rank with Paul, is evident from many cir- cumstances. He is denominated an Apostle, without any limitation of the meaning of the word, Acts xiv. 4-14; and was sent to the Gentiles, with the same authority with Paul ; Acts xiii. Others were in their company, and yet Barnabas is mentioned always as the equal of Paul, and not merely as an assistant. The inhabitants of Lystra considered Barnabas as Jupiter, Acts xiv. 12, and Paul as Mercury. He is always distinguished from the other companions of Paul, both during their journey among the Gentiles, and when they went up to the Council at Jerusalem. And the controversy which took place between them, so as that they were obliged to separate, as well as the power of choosing as his assistant John, whose surname was Mark, which was exercised by Barna- bas, proves that he was an Apostle, and not an Evan- * Anti-Jacobin Review, vol. ix. 142 LETTERS ON gelist."* But if be was really an Apostle, there is reason to believe, that as he was one of the seventy- disciples, as is acknowledged by Cavet and other Epis- copalians, he would see the Redeemer after his resur- rection. And we know that he performed miracles; Acts xiv. 1-4, 14. As to the case of Epaphroditus, it is plain, not only from our own and other translations, but from what is acknowledged both by Whitby and Willet, that he is denominated arto S 'oa.o$, because he was the " messenger" who carried the contributions of the Philippians to Paul. " Concerning the instance of Epaphroditus," says the latter, " he is called their Apostle, i. e. messenger, because he brought the be- nevolence of that church unto Saint Paul ; Phil. iv. 18. And so this word •Apostle is taken both in the civill and canon law, in so much that letters dimissorie, * " Barnabas quo modo vocatus fuerat non constat. Extra ordinem tamen in Apostolorum numerum co-optatus est." Altare Damasce- num, p. 157. t Historia Literaria, p. 11. Clemens Alexandrinus, in his Stro- mata, lib. ii. p. 300, makes the same statement ; " o " that if he was not an Apostle unto others, yet doubtless he was to them" which, according to this observation, would reduce him to be merely the Bishop of Corinth. See, too, Causabon, Exercit. 14, p. 313. * " Learn all things more fully," soys he in his Epistle. M Abraham, who first practised circumcision, looking forward through the Spirit to the Son of God, performed this rite, receiving the mysterious infor- mation from three letters. For it says that Abraham circumcised three hundred and eighteen men of his house. What, then, was the in- struction which was imparted to him by this? Observe, first, the eighteen, and then the three hundred. The eighteen are denoted by ;», which point out Jesus. And because the cross by which we were to obtain grace resembles T, which marks three hundred, therefore he adds three hundred. By two letters, then fore he denotes Jesus, and by the third his cross. He who has implanted within us the engraf- ted gift of his doctrine knows that no one has ever learned from me a more certain truth, but ye are worthy to receive it. Mxbrn ovv vulva, Trigt Travrav," &c; p. 29, of Cotclerius's Aposlolici Patres. How un- fortunate that Barnabas did not recollect that Abraham could not speak Greek! And how unaccountable that Clemens Alexandrinus, PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 145 that the spies who were concealed by Rahab, were the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,* and that Origen interprets Balaam's ass, on which first the soothsayer rode, and afterwards Christ, as denoting the Church; the five kings of Canaan who were overcome by Joshua as the five senses, and the ten plagues of Egypt as the ten commandments, we will not feel surprised at their finding apostles and bishops in many parts of Scripture where no one else can dis- cover them.t Nay, so vaguely is this term employed by the fathers, that they apply it indiscriminately to the first disciples of the Saviour,± to presbyters,§ and and others of the fathers who are cited by Cotelerius in his notes on this passage, should have fallen into the same absurdity. * " But she received," says he, "the spies who were exploring the whole land, and hid them with her, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Suscepit autem speculatores," &c. Lib. 4, cap. 37, p. 268, cle Haeresibus. t " And perhaps," says he, " this ass, that is, the Church, first carried Baalam, but now Christ. Et forte haec asina, id est Eccle- sia," &c. 13th Homily on Numbers, torn. i. p. 249. " The five kings signify the five bodily senses, sight, hearing, taste, touch and smell. Quinque autem reges," &c. 11th Homily upon Joshua, torn. i. p. 346. Consult moreover his account of the little ones of the daughter of Zion, in Psalm cxxxvii. 9. Treatise against Celsus, lib. 7, p. 731, of the 2d vol. of his works. Are these the men whose opinions we are to value so highly, and from whom according to Dr. Pusey, Mr. Newman, and Mr. Glad- stone, we are to learn the doctrine, or government, or worship of the Christian Church? X " The word Apostle," says Valesius, upon a passage in Euse- bius's Eccles. Hist., lib. i, cap. 13, p. 33, where it is applied to one of the seventy disciples, " must be understood with greater latitude, in like manner, as particular nations and cities called those persons Apostles from whom they first received the truth of the Gospel. For it is not bestowed merely upon the twelve, but all their disciples, companions and assistants are in general denominated Apostles. Sed Apostoli nomen his latius sumitur," &c. The whole of this long note is worthy of attention. See also Jerome on Gal. i. 1, 2. § It is observed by Blondel in his Apologia pro Sentent. Hierony- ini, p. 65, that "by many of the ancients the seventy disciples," who are represented as presbyters by Bishop Gleig and other Episcopa- lians, " are denominated Apostles, and that the secen deacons are distinguished by that name by Caesarcus Monachus;" Dial. iv. resp. 292. Consult especially Theodoret upon 1 Cor. xii.; and says Origen, in his twenty-seventh Homily upon Numbers, torn. i. p. 312, " But since our Lord and Saviour chose not only the twelve, but other 10 146 LETTERS ON to females, such as the woman of Samaria, Thecla, and many others,* whom you will scarcely acknow- ledge as diocesan bishops, and yet, as far as we are influenced by their opinion, all of them were Apos- tles. It is contended, however, by Hooker,t that the Apostles must have been bishops, because the office of Judas, which was conferred upon Matthias, is de- nominated in our translation of Acts, i. 20, " a bish- opric," or, as it is expressed by Bilson,| "a bishop- ship." But even admitting this version, which was the basis of a similar argument to the Papist Furbiti, when he defended Episcopacy against Farel before the Council of Geneva, it will not authorize the con- clusion that the Apostles were diocesan bishops, or that the latter are Apostles and their successors. Bishops and presbyters, as is conceded by Downam, were for a considerable time convertible expressions,§ and consequently the bishopric which is there attribu- ted to Judas would be equivalent only to the presby- ter ate. Or though we should grant that it was superior, yet as the bishopric of the Apostles was uni- versal and peculiar to themselves, it can furnish no argument for modern diocesan Episcopacy. But it is far from being evident that this translation is cor- rect. The word Staxo^a occurs in the 17th verse, and seventy-two, therefore we are informed that there were not only twelve fountains, but also seventy -two palm trees ; and they too are denominated Apostles, as is plain from what is mentioned by Paul ; for when speaking- of the resurrection of the Saviour, he says that he appeared to the eleven, and afterwards to all the Apostles; in which he shows that there were others who were Apostles besides the twelve. Verum quloniam non solum illos duodecim," Sec. * Chrysostom, Theophylact and Oecumenius think that Junia, who is mentioned in Rom. xvi. 7, was a woman, and that she is there call- ed an Apostle. Theophylact, upon John iv. denominates the Sama- ritan woman uk-co-tokos. And in the account of the martyrdom of Thecla, (Grabe's Spicilegiurn vol. i. p 95,) she is distinguished by that name. See, too, Fronto Ducaeus upon Chrysostom, torn. i. p. 90. Women are denominated in Scripture, Rom. xvi. 3-12, the help- ers and fellow-labourers of the Apostles. t Ecclesiastical Polity, book 7, p. 394. X Perpetuall Government, p. 227. § Defense of his Sermon, book iii. p. 64, and book iv. p. 16, PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 147 yet our translators have not rendered it " deaconship" as they ought to have done, on the principle on which they rendered the other word, but "ministry," lest Matthias should have appeared to be only a deacon. And they were equally bound to have rendered £7tv6xori^ " office" or " ministry," and not "bishopric," though, from their leaning towards Episcopacy, they have adopted the latter term, with the view of repre- senting the Apostle as a bishop. Such is the transla- tion of it in the Syriac, Ethiopic, and one of the Arabic versions, where it is rendered " his ministry, ministe- rium ejus." And such is the version that has been given even by our translators of the passage in the Book of Psalms, which is quoted by Peter, Acts i. 20 ; for they render the Hebrew word mpa, to which sTt^xortYi corres- ponds in the Septuagint, Ps. cix. 8, by the word office; and yet, merely to serve an end, they render the latter term in the Acts by the word "bishopric."* Nay, they give a similar version of the very same word in Numbers, iv. 16, though the expression in the Septuagint be tn^xoTt^. And this version agrees better with the authority which was possessed by Judas, whose office, according to Peter, was to be transferred to Matthias, for as was demanded by Farel, " if Judas was a bishop where was his bishop- ric . ? "t He was only a presbyter, according to Bishop Gleig; and according to Archbishop Potter but a dea- con; and nothing, of course, could be more absurd than to represent him as a diocesan bishop. But if the term t*.<.6xoitv\ in the Acts, as in the corresponding passage in the Psalms, be rendered office, and not bishopric, the argument of Hooker, or rather of Bishop * As it was precisely the office of Doeg, or the unbeliever, who is referred to in Ps. cix. 8, that his successor was to take, so the same thing holds true as to the office of Judas, which was bestowed on Mat- thias, though it might be enlarged in respect of authority to the latter. t " Si Judas etoit Eveque, ou son Eveche?" Ruchat's Histoire de la Reformation dc la Suisse, torn. v. p. 115. The whole of his short but spirited refutation of Episcopacy, which took place before the Council of Geneva, before Calvin was known in that city, is deserving of attention. 14S LETTERS ON Gauden, the author of the three spurious books of the Polity, necessarily falls. If it be maintained with Bilson, that whatever may be the meaning of this passage, " all the fathers with one mouth affirme the Apostles both might bee, and were bishops,"* I answer with Valesius, that when they are so denominated, it is not to be strictly under- stood.! Nay, it is observed by Whitaker, that " it almost borders on insanity, to assert that Peter, or any other of the Apostles, teas properly a bishop, for they possessed the very highest ecclesiastical autho- rity, and the office of a bishop is nothing to that of an apostle."% And says Dr. Barrow, " The office of an apostle and a bishop are not in their nature well consistent: For the apostleship is an extraordinary office, charged with the instruction and government of the whole world. Episcopacy is an ordinary stand- ing charge affixed to one place. Now, he that hath such a general care can hardly discharge such a par- ticular office, and he that is fixed to so particular an attendance, can hardly look well to so general a charge. A disparagement to the apostolical ministry for him (Peter) to take upon him the Bishoprick of Rome, as if the King should become mayor of London — as if the Bishop of London should be vicar of Pancrass."§ When the fathers, therefore, speak of the Apostles as bishops, they can mean merely, that wherever they came they exercised the authority which was latterly assumed by bishops, but which belonged every where to the apostolic office; and in this sense of their words, the Apostles might exercise that authority in ten, twenty, or fifty places, and yet they had not as many bishoprics. Nay, this authority might be exercised * Perpetuall Government, p. 226. t M The Apostles," says he, in his Notes on Eusebius, Eecles. Hist, book 3, cap. 14, " were extraordinary ministers, and were not reckoned in the number of bishops. Apostoli vero extra ordinem crant," &c. {"Hoc cnim non multum distat ab insania dicere Petrum fuisse proprie Episcopum, aut rcliquos Apostolos. Summam enim minis- terii authoritatem habucrunt. Munus Episcopi nihil est ad munus Apostolicum." De Pontif., Quaest. 2, cap. 15. § Pope's Supremacy, p. 120, 121. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 149 by more than one of them at once* in the very same place, as in the case of Paul and Peter at Rome.t And it is an established principle among Episcopa- lians, that there cannot be more than a single bishop in one city. No argument, accordingly, can be drawn from these expressions of the fathers to prove that the Apostles were diocesan bishops. But it is asserted by Bishop Gleig, and many of the Episcopalians of former times, that St. James at least must have been a bishop of this description, because " he is expressly said by Hegesippus, \apud Euseb. lib. ii. cap. 23,) to have been constituted Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles. St. Ignatius, who suf- fered martyrdom in the year 107, affirms (Epist. ad Trail.) that St. Stephen was deacon to St. James; and Clement of Alexandria, who nourished about the year 192, is quoted by Eusebius, (lib. ii. cap. 1,) as saying, that immediately after the assumption of Christ, Peter, James and John, though they had been highest in favour with their Divine Master, did not contend for the honour of presiding over the Church of Jerusalem, but with the rest of the Apostles chose James the Just to be bishop of that Church. In the fourth century we find Jerome, a man of great learning and research, affirming, (de Script. Eccles.) that immediately after the passion of our Lord, St. James was constituted Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles; and St. Cyril, who was himself bishop of that Church in the year 350, and therefore an authentic witness of its records, expressly says, Catech. 16, that St. James was the first bishop of that city.":}: Now, upon this I would remark, 1. That it is exceedingly questionable whether he * Bilson, in his Perpetuall Government, p. 206, affirms, that Peter was Bishop, first of Antioch, and afterwards of Rome, in which he is supported hy a number of the fathers; and the author of the Chro- nicon Alexandrinum, quoted by Cotelerius on the Apostolic Constitu- tions, lib. 7, cap. 46, assigns to him the see of Jerusalem before it was committed to James. But upon the principle stated above, he and his brethren must have had many bishoprics. t Eusebii Eccles. Hist. lib. iii. cap. 1 ; lib. iv. cap. 1. X Anti-Jacobin, vol. f J. 150 LETTERS ON was out of the twelve, or of the seventy disciples. We are informed of a James by Eusebius, (Eccles. Hist. book i. eh. 12,) "who was one of the seventy, and of the brethren of our Lord." And it is observed by Valesius on the place, that u many of the ancients were of opinion that the James who was the first Bishop of Jerusalem was not one of the twelve, but of the seventy: Thus, Gregory Nyssene, in his second Oration upon the Resurrection of Christ; Clemens, in the second Book of his Constitutions, ch. 59, and in the first Book of his Recognitions, near the end, p. 20; Dorotheus, in his Book upon the Apostles and Disci- ples of the Lord, and Michael Glycas, in the third part of his Annals." And he adds, " Paul seems to favour this opinion in his Epistle to the Corinthians, for in his enumeration of those to whom the Saviour appeared after he rose from the dead, after mention- ing the twelve Apostles, and five hundred others, he subjoins, afterwards he was seen by James and the other Apostles. Paul therefore distinguishes James from the twelve Apostles, and in this sense Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. 4 and 14,) (to whom Bishop Gleig ascribes an opposite opinion erroneously,) understood this passage of St. Paul."* But if James was only one of the seventy, and consequently but a presbyter, it weakens exceedingly the credibility of the story, for there are few, I presume, who will believe that such an inferior minister would be raised to an honour, which, according to the third of the authors quoted by the Bishop, was superior to what was possessed by the chief of the Jlpostles. But granting, even, that he was an Apostle, I ob- serve, in the second place, that the authorities on which this report is delivered are unworthy of credit. The first of them is a fragment of Hegesippus, which has been preserved by Eusebius, (Eccles. Hist, book ii. chap. 23,) but which, though often quoted by Epis- * " Multi quippe ex vcteribus Jacobum fratrem Domini," &c. The same, too, was the opinion of the author of the Apostolic Constitutions, lib. 6, cap. 12, and lib. 8, cap. 4, as well as of Hammond and Bishop Taylor. PTTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 151 copal ians, is undeserving of attention. It tells us, indeed, that "he received the government of the Church of Jerusalem along with the Apostles;"* but adds at the same time, that "he alone could enter into the Holy of Holies," though he was not the high-priest; "that he was buried near the Temple," though the Jews buried only without the gates of their cities ; — and that " his tomb was still standing in the second century/' though not a stone of Jerusalem was left standing upon another after it was taken by the Romans. If it blunder, however, as to these and other important particulars which are pointed out at length by Scaligert and Valesius,J it must be as un- worthy of our belief as to what it says about the for- mer, were it susceptible of the interpretation which has been put upon it by the Bishop. And if its leading authority be overthrown, the others must fall with it. The second of his quotations is not to be found in the editions of Ignatius by Vossius or Usher, but only in a corrupt edition, which every one who is beyond a sciolist in these matters knows to be spurious! But how the Bishop, who has been held out as a man of the highest attainments in professional learning, and who talks so contemptuously of the acquirements of his opponents, could have fallen into this mistake I cannot understand; and can account for it only on the supposition, that he copied it from the works of some of the older Episcopalians, from whom, in common with many of his brethren in the present day, he has often copied his arguments without due examination of his authorities, and being unacquainted with Igna- tius, though he refers to him frequently, could not detect the error. § * It is observed by Salmasius, in his Walo Messalinus, p. 193> that, even allowing this passage to have all the credibility which could be desired, it merely affirms that he received the government of this Church with, and not from, the Apostles, /uit* tuv a.7rorT Churches, I shall pass them over at present, and con- sider them afterwards as they are referred to by another of the defenders of Episcopacy. And as to the extent of the dioceses which he would assign to bishops in the present day, I would briefly observe, that while none of these angels, admitting them, for the sake of argument, to be diocesan bishops, would have under his care the ministers of ten or twelve of the neighbouring churches, a proposal to reduce the bishoprics of your Church within similar limits, and to oblige your prelates to preach, and to restrict their dioceses to ten or twelve parishes, is a measure of reform, which, though it assimilate them more nearly to the primitive bishops, would call forth feelings of the greatest consternation throughout the whole of your Establishment. Archbishop Usher, you are aware, brought it forward formerly, and it did not succeed, and it is less likely to be accepted if it were to be brought forward at present. In the diocese of Lincoln, in place of one you would have nearly a hundred bishops; and throughout the whole of your dioceses they would amount to a thousand. Your bishops would cease, as in other Protestant countries, to be spiritual lords, for they would outnumber the peers; or they would sit in the Legislature by a few representatives chosen from among themselves ; or, as others might prefer, they would be represented both in the Lords and Commons, (and the privilege might be extended to other Protestant Churches,) by some intelligent and experienced members of your communion, chosen, like the representatives of your three Universities, by your bishops and dignitaries, and a select number of your inferior clergy.* But it * " I have heard," says the author of a pamphlet published in 1641, " that divers abbots voted in Parliament as anciently as bishops. Yea this answerer hath informed me that anciently the bishops were assisted in Parliament," before it was divided, " by a number of mitred abbots and priors;" p. 33. And Sir Edward Coke informs us in his Commentary on Littleton's Institutes, sec. 138, that "he found in the Parliament rolls twenty-seven abbots and two priors." In all causes affecting the Church which come before the Supreme Court of Denmark, two bishops are now allowed to sit in that court. In all other causes they are not permitted to judge. PTTSETITE EPISCOPACT. 181 is obviously unnecessary to speculate on these matters, as such a proposal as is thrown out by Mr. Milner will never be entertained. And yet it is upon this ground alone that he pleads for Episcopacy; for, as it exists in your Church with all the overwhelming duties of your dioceses, and the secular duties which devolve on your bishops, the superintendence which they exercise must in a great measure be nominal. Bishop Gleig however contends, like most Episco- palians, that the angels of these churches were single persons, acting, not as Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen had supposed, as the moderators of the presbyteries belong- ing to the churches, but in their individual capacity ; and he thinks it plain, both from the name bestowed on them, and the duties required from them, that they were diocesan bishops. " Had Dr. Campbell," says he, "taken the trouble to search the Old and New Testaments on this occasion, and to compare Scrip- ture with Scripture, he would very soon have found that the application of the name ayytxosto a person in the ministry or priesthood is by no means peculiar to the mysterious book of the Apocalyse. Thus (Mai. ii. 7,) the Jewish high-priest is by the Seventy called ayysxos Kr^tot; rtavtoxgato£o$ ; and St. Paul, in his Epis- tle to the Galatians, says, " that he was received by them as an angel of God." Now, as the Jewish high- priest, compared with the other priests and Levites, was certainly much more than a mere chairman, and as no man will pretend that in the Churches of Gala- tia, St. Paul was only the first among his own order, is it not natural to infer that the angels of the seven Churches were likewise something more than mere chairmen or moderators, especially as the charges given to them cannot be reconciled with equity upon the hypothesis advanced by Dr. Campbell? If indeed they were vested with the authority which the Apostle gave to Timothy and Titus over the Churches of Crete and Hphesus; if they had each a right to take cogni- sance of heretical doctrine, to admonish the heretic, -mil, in case of pertinacity, to reject him from the com- munion of the Church; if they only had authority to 182 LETTERS ON ordain presbyters and deacons in the several cities of Asia; if they were enjoined not to admit any man to the order of deacons till after competent trial, nor to ordain an elder or presbyter till after he had acquitted himself well in the deaconship; if they were autho- rized to receive accusations against presbyters, and to rebuke them before all when found guilty ; if such were the powers of the Asiatic angels of the Churches, and such their duty resulting from those powers, then indeed, but not otherwise, were the orthodox and virtuous angels of the Churches of Pergamos and Thyatira properly reproved for suffering to be taught under their jurisdiction the doctrines of the Nicolai- tanes, of Balaam, and of Jezebel/'* But upon this statement of the argument, (and I have selected it as one which was greatly praised soon after it was published, and as one of the most plausible which I have met with,) I would beg to submit the following observations: No argument can be founded on the term angels as applied to the ministers of these Churches, to show that they were invested with jurisdiction over the rest of the ministers, and the instances to which the bishop refers in proof of this are not in point. It is not of the high-priest, as he alleges, that Malachi says, ch. ii. 7, that " the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and the people should seek the law at his mouth, for he was the messenger" or angel "of the Lord of Hosts," but of every priest; and it is astonishing that a man who was lauded for his high professional attainments by his brother prelates, and especially for this article, should not have seen it. Lowth accordingly remarks on the passage, " As it was the priests' duty to under- stand the meaning of the law, so the people were required to resort to them for instruction in any diffi- culty that arose concerning the sense of it; see Lev. x. 11, Deut. xxii. 9. For this reason the Levites had forty-eight cities allotted to them among the several tribes, that the people might more easily consult them upon every occasion. See Numb. xxxv. 7." Besides, * Anti-Jacobin Review, vol. ix. PUSETITE EPISCOPACY. 183 if it had been the high-priest who was meant, it would not have served the bishop's purpose, for he had no jurisdiction over the other priests ; and though pre- sident of the Sanhedrim, he had only his casting vote, and was even himself subject to their authority. And when Paul says to the Galatians, ch. iv. 14, that they had "received him" at first "as an angel of God," he surely never intended to tell them that they had received him as a bishop! for he was far higher than a bishop, but as if he had been really a messenger sent to them immediately from the heavenly world, just as he says, ch. i. 8, "But though we or an angel from heaven (sure- ly not a bishop) preach any other Gospel to you let him be accursed." And certainly it is impossible to see any thing in the term angel itself which is applied to these ministers, or in the corresponding term of stars which is employed respecting them, or in what is said of them in the latter character, (ch. i. 20,) which would lead us to suppose that they were superior to the other ministers of these churches, or had any juris- diction over them. Every other minister of these Asiatic Churches who preached the Gospel, and who shed spiritual light on the minds of the members, had as good a title to the metaphorical name of an angel who brought the message of reconciliation, and every one of them who communicated that light to the name of a star, as a diocesan bishop ; and compared at least to modern prelates, who seldom preach, he had a pre- ferable claim. And I cannot believe that it was pre- lates alone, whom, as the stars of these churches, the Redeemer held in his right hand to protect and defend them, any more than that it was they alone who were angels or messengers, because it was to them alone that he had committed the message of salvation. Such is the view which is given of these terms by some of the more candid Episcopalians, and in par- ticular by Dr. Lightfoot, a man who had few equals in scriptural knowledge and Jewish learning; and if he be right in his account of the source from which the first of these terms was taken and applied to the ministers of Christian churches, it overthrows the 184 LETTERS ON argument which has been founded on it, for any thing like superiority on the part of the angels of the Asia- tic churches over the rest of the ministers of these churches. " Besides these/' (the three rulers of the synagogue,) says he, " there was the public minister of the synagogue, who prayed publicly, and took care about the reading of the law, and sometimes preached, if there were not others to discharge that office. This person was called Sheliach Zibbor, the angel of the church, and the Chazan or bishop of the congregation. Certainly the signification of the word bishop and angel of the church had been determined with less noise, if recourse had been made to the proper foun- tains, and men had not vainly disputed about the meaning of words, taken I know not whence. The service and worship of the Temple being abolished, as being ceremonial, God transplanted the worship and public adoration of God used in the synagogues, which was moral, into the Christian Church ; to wit, the public ministry, public prayers, reading God's word, and preaching, &c. Hence the names of the ministers of the Gospel were the very same, the angel of the church, and the bishop which belonged to the ministers in the synagogues."* As the She- liach Zibbor, then, or angel, or bishop of the syna- gogue, had no authority beyond the single congre- gation in which he ministered, and as he exercised that authority along with the rulers of the synagogue, (though he was not the chief ruler,)t it is plain that * Vol. ii. of his Works, p. 133. t Bishop Russel, in his Sermon on the Historical Evidence for Episcopacy, p. 31, attempts to construct an argument for that form of ecclesiastical polity, from the term angel of the churches, but blun- ders exceedingly respecting the place of the Sheliach Zibbor in the Jewish synagogue, as well as of the other officers. And yet the Rev. Mr. Sinclair, in his Dissertation on Episcopacy, p. 43, says that he coincides with him, and that " on all questions connected with Jew- ish antiquity, the Bishop's views must be acknowledged of the highest authority." " This mode of phraseology, it deserves to be remarked," says Dr. Russel, " is borrowed from the usages of the Jewish syna- gogue, where the person who presided in divine worship, usually called the ruler of the synagogue, was not unfreqnently denominated the angel of the congregation. He had under him, also, two classes of ministers, corresponding to the priest and deacon of the Christian PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 185 the application of the name angel to the minister of each of these Asiatic churches, even supposing him to be only a single person acting on his own individual capacity, furnishes no proof that he had authority over the ministers of other congregations or Chris- tian synagogues, and much less would it justify any bishop in the present day for being invested with authority over a hundred or a thousand ministers, and as many congregations. As to the censure which is pronounced on some of the angels for suffering false teachers, and their being enjoined to pursue a different course, it remains to be proved, that the acts which they were blamed for not performing, and which they were commanded to per- form afterwards, were acts of jurisdiction. And though this should be allowed, it will by no means follow that these angels might not have been the moderators of the presbyteries of these churches, and that letters might not be addressed to them, as in the present day, assemblies; and, in other respects, there are so many points of resem- blance, as to remove all doubt that the ecclesiastical model recom- mended by the Apostles was raised upon the platform of the Levitical establishment." Now, upon this I beg to remark, in the first place, that the syna- gogue was not a part of the Levitical establishment, but was intro- duced afterwards, so that in the Bishop's argument there is evidently a non-sequitur, there being something in the conclusion which is not in the premises. 2dly, It will surprise the reader to learn, after the encomium pronounced on Dr. Russel by Mr. Sinclair, that though there were three rulers in every synagogue, none of them was ever called the angel of the synagogue, or its bishop, but they were entirely distinct from that minister, as every one knows who has directed his attention to Hebrew antiquities! See Dr. Lightfoot; Godwin's Moses and Aaron, p. 71. Home, in his Introduction, vol. iii. p. 242, says, •' Next to the A£%tyo?, or ruler of the congregation, was an offi- cer, whose province it was to offer up public prayers to God for the whole congregation : hence he is called Sheliach Zibbor, the angel of the church, because, as their messenger, he spoke to God for them." His other duties are described by Dr. Lightfoot, who also represents him as next to the rulers, or to the chief ruler. And, in the third place, so far were there from being " two classes of ministers" under him, corresponding to presbyters and deacons, there was only one, according to Home, who had the charge of the sacred books ; or, according to Lightfoot, (who does not mention that officer,) three deacons, two of whom collected the alms for the poor, and the third distributed them. 186 LETTERS ON as the chairmen or representatives of these presbyte- ries, expressive either of censure or approbation, which they were to communicate to the presbyters; for, as was long ago remarked by an old writer, "why may not the Senate be saluted in the Consuls, Parliament addressed in the Chancellor, or the House of Com- mons in an epistle to the Speaker?"* But as I do not consider them as acting in their individual capacity either as the moderators of their presbyteries, accord- ing to Dr. Campbell's hypothesis, or as diocesan bish- ops, the objection which has been urged against them in the former character, though it had possessed a force of which I conceive it to be destitute, would not apply to my opinion. And as to the assertion of the bishop, that these angels must have been authorised to ordain presbyters and deacons, it is unnecessary to notice it, as not a word is said in any of the Epistles respecting the exercise of such powers by any of these ministers. I would farther remark, that "the titles of angels and stars," so far from denoting "single men," as Archbishop Potter maintains,! "which," he thinks "puts it beyond dispute" that they were bishops' appear to be intended to represent the whole of the ministers of these early churches. Such was the opinion of the celebrated Dr. Henry More, who says " Methinks it is extremely harsh to conceit that these seven stars are merely the seven bishops of any par- ticular churches of Asia, as if the rest were not sup- ported or guided by the hand of Christ ; or as if there were but seven in his right hand, but all the rest in his left. Such high representations cannot be appropria- ted to any seven particular churches whatsover " "And by the angels," he says, "according to the Apocalyptick style, all the angels under their presi- dency are represented or insinuated."^ And this opinion is confirmed when we look into the epistles which were addressed to these angels, and into the * Principal Forrester on Episcopacy, p. 73. + Church Government, p. 147. X Exposition of the Seven Churches, Works, p. 724. PT7SEY1TE EPISCOPACY. 187 first chapter of the Book of Revelation. Each of these ministers is represented, indeed, in the singular number, as a star and an angel. But each of the seven churches is represented also in the singular number, chap. i. 20, as one candlestick with different branches, shedding light around them, in the cities where they were placed, though as Sclater thinks he has proved in his Original Draught of the Primitive Church, and as Episcopalians in general affirm, it was composed, at least, of several congregations. But if each of the candlesticks represented the ivhole of the congregations in the city, which formed toge- ther one Church, why may it not be supposed that with equal propriety the whole of their ministers may be described as forming one star, the different parts of which, combined in one great luminous body, dis- pensed those rays of spiritual light which illuminated these congregations, and that the ivhole of their min- isters were represented by one angel or messenger, cis they all delivered the same message of salvation to guilty men? And if there be any difficulty in conceiving that one angel should represent the whole of the ministers of the congregations in each of these cities, as they would amount probably to four or six, we have only to turn to the 14th chapter of this very book, v. 6, where John tells, that " he saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the ever- lasting Gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people;" which angel represents not merely a single minister, though the term literally denotes, like each of the angels of the churches, a single individual, but thousands of ministers. Since it is evident, therefore, that each of the angels of the seven churches may possibly be intended to represent the whole of the ministers of the congregations which were connected with it; and since it is as probable that this was the case, as that each of the candlesticks represented perhaps four or six congregations forming that Church, it is proper that we should examine the epistles themselves, and ascertain whether the angels 188 LETTERS ON are to be considered as addressed in their individual capacity as diocesan bishops, or as representing the whole of the ministers of these churches. And that the latter is the character in which we are to view them, will appear, I apprehend, from the following considerations: In the first place, if the angels are addressed only as single individuals, and not as the representatives of the whole of the ministers of the different churches, then the rest of the ministers are never referred to at all. Now, this certainly would be a strange omission in epistles descriptive of the state of the churches, when you consider their number as contrasted with a single diocesan bishop, and their corresponding in- fluence on the members of the churches for good or evil. In Ephesus, especially, the church seems to have been large from its very commencement, for the value of the magical books burnt by its members is said to have been fifty thousand pieces of silver. And at the time of Paul's last visit to them they had a number of presbyters, whom he calls upon to perform the duty of bishops; (Acts xx. 22.) Nor were they the bishops or presbyters of the neighbouring church- es, as some have affirmed, for, as Dr. Whitby observes, on Acts xx. 17, this is plainly contrary to the text. And as he farther says, " Chrysostom, St. Jerome, Theodoret, GEcumenius and Theophylact knew no- thing of Paul's sending to any other bishops besides those of Ephesus; for otherwise they could not have argued, as they do from this place, that these persons could not be bishops, properly so called, because there could be only one bishop in one city." And if such was the number of the presbyters in that Church at that early period, we have reason to be- lieve that it would be still greater at the time when this epistle in the Book of Revelation was addressed to the angel. If the angel, however, did not represent these numerous presbyters, or the whole of the minis- ters and was merely a single person like a diocesan bishop, then they are never noticed for good or evil in this Epistle, though their conduct must have had a far PTTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 189 more powerful influence than that of the bishop. And this is the more unaccountable, that it is asserted by Episcopalians the people are noticed in two of the Epistles, while not a word is said in any of them re- specting the presbyters. 2dly, If the angel of the Church of Ephesus be ad- dressed as a single person, and not as the representa- tive of the whole of the ministers, is it not farther in- explicable, that because he alone had left his first love, the Redeemer threatens, if he did not repent, to extinguish that church, or remove its candlestick out of its place? And this is still more surprising, if Timothy, who according to Pererius and Alcazar, was then alive, was the bishop or angel of that church. But if the angel represented not merely a single pre- late, but the whole of the numerous ministers of that church, and if all of them had sunk into that grievous state of spiritual declension which is described in the Epistle, and if the people, as is probable, followed their example, we can perceive a reason for such a denunciation. I infer, therefore, from this circum- stance that the angel could not possibly be a single person ; but must be addressed as the representative of the whole of the ministers of that early church. And in the third place, no one can look into the Epistles to the angels of the Churches in Smyrna and Thyatira, without perceiving that they address them sometimes in the singular, and sometimes in the plural, which is incompatible with the idea that the angels were intended to represent only single persons like diocesan bishops. Thus, the Redeemer says to the angel of the former Church, " I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, but thou art rich. Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer : behold, the devil shall cast some of you (fywj/) into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto the death, and I will give thee a crown of life." And he says to the angel of the Church in Thyatira, " I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first;' 7 (Rev. 190 LETTERS ON ii. 19.) After which he adds, v. 24, but unto you I say, (in the plural, tyttt) and unto the rest in Thyatira, (as many as have not this doctrine, &c.) I will put upon you none other burden : but that which ye have already, hold fast till I come." Now, if after saying to the angel of the Church in Smyrna, v. 10, "Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer," he in- stantly subjoins, " Behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, and ye shall have tribulation ten days," and if, after addressing the angel of the latter Church in the singular number, he adds soon after- wards, " But unto you I say," in the plural, it seems impossible to resist the conclusion, that the angels of these churches must not have been designed to be viewed as single persons like diocesan bishops, but as the representatives of a number of persons. And as the members of the church or the people are said in the first chapter to be represented by the candlesticks, and the ministers by the symbols of the angels and the stars, I cannot see how, without setting aside our Lord's interpretation of these symbols, you can con- sider the plurality of persons represented by the angel, (for as the pronouns are plural he must represent a plurality,) as any other than the whole of the minis- ters of these different churches. It is alleged by Episcopalians, that when plural pronouns are used in these Epistles after a singular noun or pronoun, it is the people who are referred to by the former. But I would remark, in the first place, that even according to this interpretation, the rest of the pastors except the bishop, though by far the most numerous part of the ministry, remain un- noticed ; and can we suppose that they would have been overlooked in such particular descriptions of the state of the churches ? 2dly, These Epistles are not addressed to the angels and churches of Smyrna and Thyatira, as we would have expected to be the case if this exposition had been correct, but merely to the angels ; and no other party is introduced afterwards, and addressed separately. 3dly, If it be the people who are intended when the plural pronouns are used, PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 191 v. 10, without any notice of a change of the persons who were to be addressed, and if it be the bishop alone who is referred to when the singular pronouns are employed in the first and last clauses of that verse, there is an inexplicable mixing of the persons who are addressed. And what is still more inexplicable, while the people are told that they are "to suffer, and to be cast into prison," they have no promise address- ed to them to animate them under their tribulations, nor the least comfort administered to them, but it is given exclusively to the bishop, who alone is told in the last clause, that " if he is faithful unto the death," the Redeemer will "give him a crown of life." But suppose that the angel to ivhom every thing is ad- dressed in both these Epistles represents not merely a single individual, like a diocesan bishop, but, as the plural pronouns evidently suggest, a number of indi- viduals ; and suppose further, that these individuals are not the members of either of these churches, who are represented by the candlesticks, but the only other persons who remain, namely, the whole of their min- isters, and all these difficulties are removed; and you see how all of them could appropriate the promise, and though they were cast into prison, if they were " faithful unto the death," might be cheered by the assurance that they would "receive a crown of life." So evidently are these views suggested by the Epistles, that they are adopted by Stillingfleet with his usual candour, who scouts the idea that the angels of the churches were diocesan bishops. " If the name angel," says he, "imports no incongruity, though taken only for the Sheliach Zibbor in the Jewish synagogue, the public minister of the synagogue, called the angel of the congregation, what power can be inferred from thence, any more than such an officer was invested with? Nay, if in the prophetical style an unity may be set down by way of representation of a multitude, what evidence can be brought from the name, that by it some one particular person must be under- stood? And by this means Timothy may avoid being charged with leaving his first love, which he must of 192 LETTERS ON necessity be by those that make him angel of the Church of Ephesus at the time of writing these Epis- tles. Neither is this any wayes solved by the answer given, that the name angel is representative of the whole Church, and so there is no necessity the angel should be personally guilty of it. For first, it seems strange that the whole diffusive body of the Church should be charged with a crime by the name of the angel, and he that is particularly meant by that name should be free from it. As if a prince should charge the mayor of a corporation as guilty of rebellion, and by it should only mean that the corporation was guilty, but the mayor was innocent himself. Second- ly, if many things in the Epistles be directed to the angel, but yet so as to concern the whole body, then of necessity the angel must be taken as representa- tive of the body; and then why may not the word angel be taken only by way of representation of the body itself, either of the whole Church, or which is far more probable, of the consessus or order of pres- byters in that Church?"* If the angels, however, of these early churches re- presented the whole body of the presbyters, and nei- ther a diocesan bishop, nor the people or members, the last of ivhom could scarcely be called angels, for it is not their province to deliver the message, but rather to receive it, it is easy to perceive how they could perform the different acts of jurisdiction which are ascribed to them by Episcopalians. Pres- byters are declared to be worthy of double honour if they rule well, and why might not the presbyters of the Asiatic Churches have attained that honour, by performing acts which were required from the angels of Pergamos and Thyatira? I acknowledge with For- rester, that the expulsion of the individuals from the communion of these churches who taught the here- sies, and were guilty of the immoralities which are mentioned in the Epistles, would have been judicial acts j but they were acts to which the authority com- * Irenicum, p. 289, 290. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 193 mitted to presbyters, as was formerly proved, was fully equal. I have only further to observe, that while I look upon the angels as intended to represent the ministers of these churches, because they alone were to deliver the message of heaven by preaching the Gospel, Dr. Hammond considers them as designed chiefly to re- present the people. " Though the angels," says he, " were single persons, yet what is said to them is said not only to their persons, but to the universality of the people under them, whose non-proficiency, or re- mission of degrees of Christian virtue, especially their falling off from the constancy and courage of their profession, do deserve (and accordingly are threaten- ed with) the removal of their Christian knowledge, that grace, those privileges of a Church which had been allowed them, ch. ii. 5, which is not so properly applied as a punishment of the bishop, as of the peo- ple under him. And therefore, in the paraphrase I have generally changed the singular into the plural number, by that means to have it indifferently to the bishop of every church, and the people under him."* The same, too, was the opinion of Willet, who says, in a passage formerly quoted, " the Holy Ghost wri- ting to the angels and chief pastors of the seven Churches, Apoc. ii. 3, imply eth the rest of the minis- ters and Church there, as may appear by the matter of the Epistles, wherein the faults of the whole Church are reproved, and their virtues commended." And it was the opinion of many of the ancient fathers, who seem never to have imagined that the angels repre- sented only a single individual. Thus, when John says in the first Epistle, " To the angel of the Church of Ephesus," Aretas, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappado- cia, says, "he means the Church in it."t When he exhorts the angel of the Church of Smyrna to " fear none of these things," the author of the Homilies on the Apocalypse, which are bound up with the works * Consult him on these Epistles. t Comment, in Apoc. t» ev aum ixx.kiirnt. xryu. 13 194 LETTERS ON of St. Augustine, observes, " he says it to the whole Church."* When he says to the angel of the Church of Pergamos, "I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is," it is remarked by the same writer, " these things under a singular word are said to the whole Church, because Satan dwells everywhere by his body."t I might go over the whole of these little Epistles, and appeal to simi- lar quotations from the fathers in confirmation of my statement, but I consider it as unnecessary. And though I differ from them in their account of the per- sons represented by the angels of the Churches, they agree with me in this, that these early ministers were not intended to be regarded as single persons, and that you will look to them in vain for the smallest support to your ecclesiastical polity. Having finished this review of the different argu- ments for diocesan Episcopacy, which have been ad- duced ftpm Scripture by its most distinguished advo- cates, and endeavoured to show, that on whatever you found it, it cannot be on the statements of the word of God, I might conclude this discussion, which has been far more extended than I at first anticipated. But, before I do so, I beg to subjoin a view of the powers which you commit to your bishops, by one of the most enlightened and illustrious men who ever lived in England, and which he pronounces to be as inconsistent with all the principles of good govern- ment, as I have attempted to show, that they are des- titute of any warrant from the sacred volume. The individual to whom 1 allude is the great Lord Bacon, who, in his Considerations touching the paci- fication of the Church, addressed to James the First, makes the following observations: " There be two circumstances in the administra- tion of bishops, wherein I confess / could never be satisfied, the one, the sole exercise of their authority, the other, the deputation of their authority. " For the first, the bishop giveth orders alone, ex~ * Augustine, Op. torn. x. Horn. 2, in Apoc. "Omni Ecclesiae dicit." t Horn. 2. in Apoc. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 195 communicateth alone, judgeth alone. This seemeth to be a thing almost without example in good gov- ernment, and therefore not unlikely to have crept in, in the degenerate and corrupt times. We see the greatest kings and monarchs have their councils. There is no temporal court in England, of the highest sort, where the authority doth rest in one person. The King's Bench, Common Pleas and the Exche- quer are benches of a number of judges. The chan- cellor of England hath an assistance of the twelve Masters of the Chancery. The Master of the Wards hath a council of the court, so hath the Chancellor of the Duchy. In the Exchequer Chamber the Lord Treasurer is joined with the Chancellor and the Bar- ons. The Masters of the Requests are ever more than one. The Justices of Assize are two. The Lords President in the North and in Wales have councils of divers. The Star-Chamber is an assem- bly of the King's Privy Council, aspersed with the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, so as in courts the principal person hath ever either colleagues or asses- sors. " The like is to be found in other well-governed commonwealths abroad, where the jurisdiction is yet more dispersed, as in the Court of Parliament of France, and in other places. No man will deny but the acts which pass the bishop's jurisdiction are of as great importance as those that pass the civil courts : for men's souls are more precious than their bodies or goods ; and so are their good names. Bishops have their infirmities, and have no exceptions from that general malediction, which is pronounced against all men living, Vse soli, nam si occideret, &c. Nay, we see that the first warrant in spiritual causes is direct- ed to a number, Die Ecclesise,* which is not so in temporal matters; and we see, that in general causes of Church government, there are as well assemblies of the clergy in councils, as of all the states in Parlia- ment. Whence should this sole exercise of juris dic- * « Tell the Church." 196 LETTERS ON Hon come? Surely I do suppose, I think upon good grounds, that ab initio non fuit ita* and that the deans and chapters were councils about the sees and chairs of bishops at the first, and were unto them a presbytery or consistory ; and intermeddled not only in the disposing of their revenues and endowments, but much more in jurisdiction ecclesiastical. But it is probable that the deans and chapters stuck close to the bishops in matters of profit and the world, and would not lose their hold; but in matters of jurisdic- tion, which they accounted but trouble and atten- dance, they sufTered the bishops to encroach and usurp; and so the one continueth, and the other is lost. And we see that the Bishop of Rome, fas enim et ab hoste doceri, and no question in that Church the first institutions were excellent, performeth all ecclesiastical jurisdiction as in consistory. " And whereof consisteth this consistory, but of the parish-priests of Rome, which term themselves cardi- nals a cardinibus mundi, because the bishop pre- tendeth to be universal over the whole world? And hereof again we see many shadows yet remaining, as that the dean and chapter, pro forma, chooseth the bishop, which is the highest point of jurisdiction : and that the bishop, when he giveth orders, if there be any ministers casually present, calleth them to join with him in imposition of hands, and some other particulars. And therefore it seemeth to me a thing reasonable and religious, and according to the first institution, that the bishops in the greatest causes, and those which require a spiritual discerning, namely, in ordaining, suspending, or depriving ministers, in excommunication, being restored to the true and proper use, as shall be afterwards touched, in sen- tencing the validity of marriages and legitimations, in judging causes criminous, as simony, incest, blas- phemy and the like, should not proceed sole and un- assisted : which point, as I understand it, is a refor- mation that may be planted sine strepitu, without any perturbation at all. * " From the beginning it was not so." PUSETITE EPISCOPACY. 197 " For the second point, which is the deputation of their authority, I see no perfect nor sure ground for that neither, being somewhat different from the exam- ples and rules of government. The bishop exerciseth his jurisdiction by his chancellor and commissary offi- cial," &c. "We see in all laws in the world, offices of confidence and skill cannot be put over nor exer- cised by deputy, except it be especially contained in the original grant; and in that case it is dutiful. And for experience, there never was any Chancellor of England made a deputy; there was never any judge in any court made a deputy. The bishop is a judge, and of a high nature. Whence cometh it that he should depute, considering that all trust and confi- dence, as was said, is personal and inherent, and can- not, nor ought not to be transposed? Surely, in this again, ab initio non fuit sic; but it is probable that bishops when they gave themselves too much to the glory of the world, and became grandees in kingdoms, and great counsellors to princes, then did they delegate their proper jurisdiction, as things of too inferior a nature for their greatness, and then, after the similitude and imitation of kings and counts-palatine, they would have their chancellors and judges."* I trust that the name of the eminent individual from whom I have taken this quotation, and the weight of his authority, will form my apology for introducing it, notwithstanding its length. And as you still continue to intrust to your bishops those high powers, their title to which you cannot establish from the Sacred Scriptures, and which he demonstrates to be inconsis- tent with all the principles of good government, I leave it to impartial judges to say what we ought to think of the modesty of your pretensions, when, along with your friends of the Church of Rome, and a large proportion of the Scottish Episcopalians, you tell us that yours are the only churches in which there is a Gospel ministry, right ecclesiastical government, sacra- * Vol. iii. of his Works, p. 150-152, edit. 1765. 198 LETTERS ON PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. ments which have any virtue, and a covenanted title to the blessings of salvation. I think it unnecessary to advert to the arguments for Episcopacy from mere expediency, as I have engaged in this discussion with a view chiefly to repel the unprovoked attacks of those of its advocates, who, not satisfied with preferring it on other grounds, advance for it the claim of an exclusive title to a divine institution, and imitating the conduct of Papists to- wards themselves, have ventured to unchurch Presby- terian Churches. But I may briefly notice, that if it be alleged that it is the best and most effectual means for preventing schism, the numerous divisions in the Church of Rome in every age, and the state of your own Church in the present day, prove that it is an expedient which is utterly powerless. Besides, if that be a reason for establishing Episcopacy, it will lead to consequences, of which many who urge it do not appear to be aware. " For," says an old and able writer, " if there be a necessity for setting up of one bishop over many pastors, for preventing schisms, then there is as great necessity of setting up one arch- bishop over many bishops, and one patriarch over many archbishops and one Pope over all ; unless men will imagine that there is danger of schism among ministers, but not among bishops, archbishops, and patriarchs, which is contrary to reason, truth, history, and our own experience."* I am, Reverend Sir, Yours, &c. * Letter from a Parochial Bishop to a Prelatical Gentleman in Scotland, p. 101. 199 LETTER XIV. Apostolical succession. — If the Apostles were neither diocesan bishops them- selves, nor ordained such bishops, the apostolical succession, as explained and claimed by Puseyite Episcopalians, never began. — Waving that ob- jection, as far as there was a succession, it was preserved to Presbyterian Churches before the Reformation, as uninterruptedly as to Episcopalian Churches; and since that time it has been preserved as regularly in the former, by Presbyterian ordinations, as in the latter by Episcopal. — Un- founded allegation by Spottiswood and others, that the adoption of Presby- tery at Geneva orginated in a wish to assimilate the government of the Church to that of the State, and that this led to the adoption of that form of ecclesiastical polity in other countries. — The contrary proved from the reasoning of Farel with Furbiti, who preceded Calvin, and is considered by many as the modern father or reviver of Presbytery. — Eusebius ac- knowledges that he could not trace the succession in many of the early Churches. — Jewel and Stillingfleet confess that it cannot be traced in the Church of Rome, from which many of the ministers of the Church of Eng- land have derived their orders. Reverend Sir, — If diocesan Episcopacy, as I trust has been proved in the preceding letters, has failed completely in establishing its claim to a divine insti- tution, it may be considered as unnecessary that I should inquire any further into your boasted privilege of the apostolic succession; for if the Apostles were neither bishops themselves, nor ordained bishops, the series of unbroken Episcopalian ordinations which you represent as the peculiar privilege of your churches, at what ever time it commenced, must be a mere human invention. But waving that strong and insuperable objection to your doctrine of the succession, I am willing to meet you on lower ground, and I shall proceed to examine whether the series of regularly ordained bishops, which, you allege, began in the time of the Apostles, has been preserved uninterrupted in any of these churches till the present day. If the chain which connects either your own bishops, or the bishops of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, with the first in the series, has unfortunately been broken either at the tenth, or fiftieth, or hundredth link, the con- sequences on your principles must evidently be fatal ; for neither of these Churches can be considered any longer as a Christian Church, nor can any of its minis- 200 LETTERS ON ters be Christian ministers, nor can any of its mem- bers have any revealed or covenanted title to salva- tion. And the same, too, would be the state of the Roman Catholic Church, and of every other Church on the face of the earth. The question then to be considered is briefly this, can it be proved that the series, allowing it to have commenced, if not with the Apostles, yet in the apostolic age, (the opposite of which, I apprehend, has been established,) has never been interrupted ? or can it be demonstrated on the contrary, that there is not a single Episcopalian Church in which it has not been frequently broken ? I observe in the first place, that in as far as the succession remains uninterrupted, we can claim it for our churches, as much as you are entitled to claim it for yours; for our first reformers when they left the communion of the Church of Rome were possessed of orders which were equally valid with those of your reformers. It was so with Bucer, who was a Popish presbyter before he became a Protestant; and with Farel, who defended Presbytery before the Council of Geneva, against the artful Furbiti, a number of months before Calvin accidentally visited that city,* * Ruchat says of Farel, in his Histoire de la Reformation de la Suisse, torn. i. p. 231, that he was "Reformateur d'une bonne partie de la Suisse Romande, d'Aigle, de Morat, de Neuchatel, de Geneve, et en partie de Lausanne. And the following- is a part of his account of the discussion between the Reformer and Furbiti, who was a doctor of the Sorbonne, before the Council, in January 1534, on the subject of Episcopacy. " Furbiti," says he, torn. v. p. 114, " voulut prouver la superiorite de l'Eveque par dessus le Pretre, lmo, Parce que Jesus Christ a elu douze Apotres, (Mat. x,) qui ontete Eveques, comme c'il paroit par Judas, de qui il est dit, qu'un autre prenne son Eveche. (Ruchat adds in a note, that it is quoted by Peter from the ll)9th Psalm, and one may judge whether David, when he wrote it, icas thinking of bishops.) 2do, Parce que S. Paul dit, Eph. iv. que le Seigneur ai donne les uns pour etre Apotres, les autres pour etre Pro- phetes, les autres Pasteurs et Docteurs, &c. En un Diocesse il n'y a qu'un Evequc, qui a sous plusieurs Pretres, &c. il Farel, apres avoir releve en passant ce que Furbiti disoit du Pape, et soutenu que Jesus Christ n'a point de Successeur montra que dans les Epitres de S. Paul les mots Eveque et Pretre sont synonimes ; lmo, par 1'Epitre a Tite, (c. i.) ou il lui dit qu'il la laisse en Crete, pour y etablir des Pretres Tr^c-gur^cvc, v. 5, si quelqu'un soit irrepre- hensible, &c. 2do, Par Act xx. ou S. Paul fit venir les Pretres PTTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 201 and more than a year and a half before he published his Institutes,* and who accordingly has been con- sidered by some as having had a preferable claim over the latter Reformer, to the honourable character of the modern father, or restorer of Presbytery. And I may remark in passing, that it is impossible for any one to look into the arguments employed by Farel, as they are stated below, or into some of the facts which are mentioned in the notes, without being struck with the groundlessness of the assertion of Spottiswood, d'Ephese, v. 17, et leur dit, Prenez garde a vous et a tout le troupeau sur lequel le Saint Esprit vous a etabilis eveques, v. 28. 3mo, Par S. Pierre, qui au commencement du ch. v. de sa premiere Epitre, ne s'appelle, ni Pape, ni Archeveque, mais Pretre avec ou comme les autres. 4?no, II y avoit plusieurs Eveques dans une vijle, comme il paroit par ceux d'Ephese qui etoient plusieurs, et par le commence- ment de l'Epitre aux Philippiens ou S. Paul salue les Evrques et les Diacres. 5mo, Si Jesus Christ a institue 12 Apotres et ensuite 70 disciples, (et non 72,) il n'a point ^retendu marquer par la difference des Eveques et des Pretrcs : Les noms (TEveque et de Pretre signijient la meme (Lignite. Le premier marque le soin de inspection, et le second l'age, signifiant proprement Ancien, car il faut qu'il soit Ancien de moeurs et de Savoir, pour conduire le peuple. 6mo, Si Judas etoit Eveque, on son Eveche ? Mais bien lui convientdit il avec les Eveques qui au lieu de porter la parole de Dieu portent la bourse, derobent ce qui doit venir aux pauvres," &c. It is plain from this, that when Presbytery was established in Ge- neva, it was not because as Heylin, Spottiswood and other Episco- palians affirm, it resembled the republican government of the state, but because it appeared to be agreeable to the word of God. Besides, as the Grand Council of the city, which was composed, according to Ruchat, of two hundred or two hundred and fifty members, chose all the members of the Little Council, Petit Conceil, and of the Council of Sixty, and as the little or lowest council decided in certain matters without appeal, there was no resemblance in point of fact between the courts of the state and the Presbyterian courts. And yet how often have the fictions of Spottiswood been retailed by others. * Historia Literaria de Johannis Calvini Institutione, torn. ii. part 1, page 453 of the Scrinium Antiquarium of Gerdesius. It deserves also to be mentioned, that after the celebrated Helvetian Assembly, which was held for inquiring into the necessity for a Re- formation in 1523, and at which, according to Gerdesius, (Histor. Evangel. Renov. vol. i. p. 290,) nine hundred deputies were present, the magistrates of Geneva and Switzerland published an edict, in which among other things they condemned organs and all instru- mental music. "Sacerdotibusquoque mandatum est ne organis pos- thac ludant in templis." This paper, says Fusslin, in his Document. ad Ilistor. Reform. Helvet, torn. i. was drawn up with the concurrence of Zuinglius, Eugelbardt and Leo Juda. 202 LETTERS ON that Presbyterian Church government was adopted at Geneva merely to assimilate the constitution of the Church to that of the State. It was so with Luther, who was ordained a presbyter of the Church of Rome, and afterwards ordained many presbyters, and who, along with three presbyters, made Amsdorf Bishop of Nuremberg, and, with some other presbyters, made George, Prince of Anhalt, Bishop of Marsburg.* Nor did the Prince imagine that he acted irregularly when he asked the Reformer to ordain him ; for, as Seckendorf informs us, he thought he was justified -in doing so, by the example of Paul and Barnabas, who were ordained by prophets and teachers at Antioch, and by the opinion of Jerome, who represented bishops and presbyters as equal. t * Melchior Adami Vitae Germanorum Theologorum, p. 150 ; Seek- endorfs History of Lutheranism, lib. iii. p. 392. f " Addit," says Seckendorf, lib. iii. p. 500, speaking of what is mentioned on this subject by George himself, in a preface to his Ser- mons, "sequidem rogasse Matthiam a Jagow, Episcopum Brande- burgensem, ut ordinationem suam in se susciperet, sed ilium eo tem- pore mortuum esse. Itaque Pauli et Barnabae exemplo, quos pro- phetae et doctores Antiocheni, Actorum, xiii, 1, 2, 3, ordinaverunt, D. Martinum Lutherum piae memoriae, aliosque accersitos fuisse, a quibus solenniter et pie accepto etiam Sacramento, per manuum impositonem ordinatus fuerit, eoque nomine se gratias Deo agere dicit. Subjungit inde ex Hieronymo quae nota sunt, ab ipso tamen egregie deducuntur, de paritate Episcoporum et Presbyterorum." I may add here, that when a false account of a change of sentiment on the part of Luther and Melancthon was handed about by the Papists in 1539, Seckendorf says, lib. iii. p. 228, "Luther and Melancthon never thought that the episcopal office was necessary with all that power and authority as it exists in the Church of Rome, nor did they recognise any essential difference between bishops and presbyters, as is manifest from all their writings which have never been recalled, and especially from the tract on the power and jurisdiction of bishops, composed by Melancthon at Smalkald, in 1537, and subscribed by Luther, and annexed to the articles which they drew up between them. Lutherus et Melancthon nunquam statuerint neccssarium esse illud munus Episcopale," &c. Seckendorf remarks, too, lib. iii. p. 240, that in the Ordinatio Eccle- siastica, which was issued by the Elector of Brandenburgh, the an- cestor of the present King of Prussia, in 1539, that Prince acknow- ledges, that " at the beginning, as Jerome declares, there was no dif- ference between the ordination of bishops and presbyters ; and that it was plain from the Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles to Timothy, that bishops received it by the imposition of the hands of the college of Presbyters. Refert ex Hieronymo, et post eum ex aliis Doctoribus, PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 203 It was so in regard to the leading Reformers of the Church of Scotland. It was admitted by Winzel, the Popish priest, respecting Knox; for in one of his letters to him he addresses him in the following terms: "As S. Paul ordinatit Timothe and Tite, gevand thaim power and command to ordour utheris, quherin ap- peres the lauchful ordinatioun of ministeris, zour lauchful ordinatioun be ane of thir two wayis, (he had mentioned another,) we desire zou to shaw sen ze renunce and esteemis that ordinatioun null or erar wickit, (rather wicked,) be the quhilk sum tyme ze war callit Schir John," the title of a Popish priest;* upon which Keith, the Episcopalian historian, re- marks, "here is a plain and certain instruction that John Knox had formerly received the ordination of a priest."! And it was acknowledged by Bishop Forbes, an ancient Scottish prelate, with whom none of their present bishops can be compared, either as to learning or orthodoxy, so far as we can judge from their writings, for he says to the Papists, of the founders of our Church, "Who of our first preachers were not ordinarie churchmen ere they Scholasticis et Canonistis, praesertim Panormitano in Cap. Quando de Consuetud. nullum fuisse ab initio inter episcopos ot presbyteros ratione ordinationis discrimen," &c. Melancthon, in his tract de Ordine in Ecclesia, 2d vol. of his Works, p. 8G7, bears the following decided testimony against the divine insti- tution of diocesan Episcopacy. " Sed quaerat aliquis annon etiam gradus diversi sint ac ordo ? Respondeo, Est in Ecclesia vera minis- terium docendi, sunt doctores ac pastores alicubi, ut scriptum est, alios quidem dedit doctores, alios pastores, ne circumferamur variis ventis doctrinae. Est igitur officium, et sunt gradus donorum. Sed hinc non sequitur jure divino episcopum a presbytero discernendum esse. Imo Hieronymus aperte testatur non esse jure divino diversos gradus episcopi et presbyteri." In other words, he admits that there are different degrees of gifts, but denies that it follows from thence that " there is any difference between a bishop and a presbyter; and says, that according to Jerome, the orders of bishops and presbyters are not distinct from each other by divine right. * See Strype's Cranmcr, pp. 100 and 101, where it is given to four Popish priests. TindaFs Practice of the Popish Prelates, p. 343 of his works, and Frith's Aunswer to my Lord of Rochester, p. 59. Dr. Mackenzie, in his Life of James Tyrie, says, that " in the title of one of that Jesuit's books, in controversy with Knox, he styles him Sir John Knox." t Appendix to his Church History, vol. i. p. 204. 204 LETTERS ON had their admission to the ministerie by the Reformed Churches of England, Geneva or Germanie ? If they were not blindlie miscarried, they might perceave that which they speake and write of our men in derision and contumelie, calling them Sir John Knox and Frere John Craig, it verified! their ordinarie vocation."* As far as the succession then could be kept up by ordina- tions obtained from the Church of Rome, of which the Scottish Episcopalians say in their Confession of Faith, " we fly the doctrine of the Papistical kirk in par- ticipation of the Sacrament, because their ministers are not the ministers of Christ Jesus,V and which is represented in Scripture as " the mother of the spi- ritual abominations of the earth, out of which the saints are exhorted to come, if they would not be par- takers of her plagues, within which the great Anti- christ sits in the Temple of God, and exalts himself above all that is called God, and where that wicked one bears rule, whom the Lord is to destroy with the spirit of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming," as far, T say, as the succession could be kept up by ordinations obtained from such a Churchy it was pre- served to us as well as to you ; and while it has been maintained among you since that time by bishops, and among us by presbyters, I have only further to add, that if you question the validity of our orders, because we received them only from presbyters, you would be bound, for the same reason, to question the validity of the orders of Barnabas and Timothy, one of whom, as has been proved, was ordained even to the office of an Apostle, and the other to that of an evangelist, by presbyters ; and you do so in opposition to the fifty-fifth canon of your own Church, to which you swear obedience, and which, though made in 1603, when the Church of Scotland was Presbyterian, enjoined her clergy at that time, and commands them * Defence of the Calling of the Reformed Churches. t Confession of Faith which they used before the Revolution ; and yet it is from these men, whom they deny to be the ministers of Christ, that the present bishops of what they haughtily denominate the Reformed Episcopal Church of Scotland derive their boasted apos- tolical succession ! PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 205 still to pray for our Church as a sister Church* Be- sides, if you deny the validity of our orders, you must set aside also the validity of our baptisms. And this, as I shall endeavour to show you immediately, will lead to consequences of which you are not aware ; for on the very same principle it may be easily demon- strated that you are not a minister, nor Mr. Gladstone a Christian, nor the English and Scottish Episcopalian Churches, Churches of Christ. In the second place, it is impossible for you or any of your followers to prove that such an uninterrupted apostical succession, as that in which you glory, has been preserved in your Church, or in any other Epis- copalian Church which exists upon earth. Before you can either satisfy your own minds, or demonstrate to others that you have such a succession, you must be able to show who were the bishops from the apostolic age from whom your present clergy have derived their orders, and that there was not so much as one of them for the last eighteen hundred years whose baptism or ordination was irregular. If, as has already been remarked, the chain which you imagine binds you to the Apostles has happened to be broken by an essential defect in the baptism or orders of any of your bishops, or of those who pre- * u The very canons of the Church of England," says the dissent- ing gentleman in his answer to Mr. White, p. 227, u to which you have sworn obedience, acknowledge the Church of Scotland to be a sister Church, commanding all its clergy to pray for the Churches of England, Scotland and Ireland, as parts of Christ's Holy Catholic Church, which is dispersed throughout the world." How different from Dr. Pusey's sentiments about the Church, and those of a number of the present Scottish Episcopalians, were the views of Dr. Forbes, one of their ancient professors of divinity, who, in his Irenicum, defends this position, p. 158, that " a church which retains the orthodox faith, but wants bishops, though it may be defec- tive in its constitution, does not cease to be a true church, nor falls from that ecclesiastical authority which is possessed by churches that are governed by bishops." Presbyterians will deny that it is defec- tive, and will maintain that it resembles more closely the apostolic churches than other churches which have diocesan bishops, an order of ministers whom Christ has not instituted. But still it shows the estimate, that even as an enlightened Episcopalian, he formed of the difference between the two Churches, where the doctrines of the Gos- pel were faithfully preached. 206 LETTERS ON ceded them, whether they were the fiftieth, or the hundredth, or the two hundredth in the series, it is fatal upon your principles; for it cannot be mended, and we must wait till some Apostle rise from the dead, and begin a new succession, before there can be a church or a minister whose labours can be attended with the smallest benefit to the souls of men on the face of the earth. The first of these qualifications is indispensable, for, as Dr. Hickes observes, " baptism is a fundamental qualification for the priesthood, and the want thereof must utterly render a man uncapa- ble of being a Christian priest, because it makes him utterly uncapable of being a Christian."* And you are sensible that by the canons of the first four Gene- ral Councils, which are recognised both by your Church and by the Scottish Episcopalians, all baptisms performed by schismatics are considered as invalid, and since the conference at Hampton Court, none but ministers who have been ordained by bishops can legally administer that ordinance.! And the second qualification is no less necessary. Now, I apprehend that you cannot tell who were the persons who bap- tized those individuals from the days of the Apostles, who were afterwards bishops, (and in the days of Tertullian and afterwards it was often done by lay- men,) and who were the bishops that ordained the latter till the time of the Reformation. The Jews had a series of genealogical tables from the time of the institution of their priesthood, by turning to which they could know at once who had been high-priest, or priests and Levites, from the days of Aaron. By appealing to these, any one who was descended from a priestly family, upon attaining the age appointed in the law, could demand that he should be put into that office ; and by referring to them also, the priests and the people could ascertain whether he had a right to it, and whether his ministrations would be valid. * Letter to Lawrence, p. 37. t Both English and Scottish Episcopalians attempt to remedy this defect in different ways when converts join their Churches; but they are always unsatisfactory, unless the individuals are re-baptized. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 207 But you, I presume, have no such record of the pre- decessors of your bishops, from the apostolic age, nor did they succeed, like the Jewish high-priest, by mere lineal descent, nor can you or the prelates of the Scot- tish Episcopalians, who are beginning to vaunt of their apostolical succession, though their forefathers, in the nineteenth article of their Confession, deny " lineal descense" to be "a mark of the true kirk"* produce any evidence of the regularity of their baptisms, or of the validity of their orders, or tell in many instances which of them was first and which of them was last. Eusebius, the most early of our Church historians, confesses that he could not do it ; for he says that he was " like a man walking through a desert, with only here and there a light to direct him;" and that he had been able to collect such notices as he had procured " of the successors, not of all, but only of the more illustrious Apostles."! And if such was his want of light in the fourth century, will you, or Mr. Newman, or Mr. Gladstone, throw more light on these matters in the nineteenth? And he says in another passage, " Who they were, that imitating these Apostles, (Peter and Paul,) were by them thought worthy to govern the Churches which they planted, is no easy thing to tell, excepting such as may be collected from Paul's cnvn words"! On which Stillingfleet remarks, then " what becomes of our unquestionable line of succes- sion of the bishops of several Churches, and the large diagrams made of the apostolical Churches, with every one's name set down in his order, as if the writer had been Clarencieux to the Apostles themselves ? Are all the great outcries of apostolical tradition, of per- sonal succession, of unquestionable records, resolved at last into the Scripture itself, by him from whom all these long pedigrees are fetched? Then let succes- sion know its place, and learn to vaile bonnet to the * The article relates to " the notes of the true kirk," of which it says, "they are neither antiquity, title usurped, lineal descense, place appointed, nor multitude of men approving an error.'''' It was their Confession of Faith before the Revolution. t Hist. Eccles. lib. i. cap. 1. X Lib. iii. cap. 4. 208 LETTERS ON 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 times of the Church, for it will be hard to others to believe them, when Eusebius professeth it so hard to find them."* Dr. Cave admits that " there is a wonderful and almost irreconcileable discrepancy among later as well as ancient ecclesiastical writers in determining the age and succession only of the first Roman bish- ops."! Bishop Jewel, though he lived nearly three hundred years before you, acknowledges in the most explicit terms, that it cannot be determined, for he says to Harding the Jesuit, who denied that your Church had the apostolical succession, " But where- fore telleth us, M. Harding, this long tale of succes- sion? Have these men (the Papists,) their owne suc- cession in so safe record? Who was then the Bishop of Rome next by succession unto Peter? Who was the second? who the third? who the fourth? Ire- neeus reckoneth them together in this order, Petrus, Linus, Anacletus, Clemens. Epiphanius thus, Petrus, Linus, Cletus, Clemens. Optatus thus, Petrus, Linus, Clemens, Anacletus. Clemens saith that hee himself was next unto Peter, and then must the reckoning goe thus: Petrus, Clemens, Linus, Anacletus. Heere- by it is deer that of the foure first Bishops of Rome, M. Harding cannot certainly tell us who in order succeeded other. And thus talking so much of succession, they are not well able to blase their own succession." % And says Stillingfleet, who, though he published his Irenicum when he was very young, never retracted any of its leading statements, or re- futed its reasoning after he was made a bishop, come we therefore to Rome, and here the succession is " as muddy as the Tiber itself; for here Tertullian, Rufi- nus, and several others place Clement next to Peter; * Irenic. p. 297. t "Miram ac pene irreconciliabilem discrepantiam," &c. Histor. Literaria, p. 17. X Defense of the Apologie, p. 123. PTJSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 209 Xrenaeus and Eusebius set Anacletus before him — Epiphanius and Optatus both Anacletus and Cletus — Augustine and Damasus with others, Anacletus, Cle- tus and Linus all to precede him. What way shall we find to extricate ourselves out of this labyrinth?"* "And as to the British Churches," he says, "that from the loss of the records we cannot draw down the succession of bishops from the Apostles' time!" But if these things are so, and if you cannot trace the whole of the bishops in the different Churches through eighteen centuries, and attain decisive and satisfactory evidence that their baptisms and ordinations were regular, you can have no proof that your boasted apostolical succession has been preserved either in your own Church or in the Church of Rome, or among the Scottish Episcopalians, or that there is a single individual on the face of the earth whom you are warranted to recognise as a Christian minister, or who has reason to hope that he has a covenanted title to the blessings of salvation. Do you object to this reasoning, that upon the same principle I might question the genuineness of the New Testament, and require before it is admitted, " we should be able to trace it from manuscript to manu- script, and (after the invention of the art of printing,) from one edition to another, from the original writers to our own time," and see that no important altera- * Irenicum, part ii. chap. 6, p. 322. He says, too, p. 321, "At Antioch, some, as Origen and Eusebius, make Ignatius to succeed Peter. Jerome makes him the third bishop, and placeth Evodius be- fore him. Others therefore to solve that, make them cotemporary bishops, the one of the Church of the Jews, the other of the Gentiles, with what congruity to their hypothesis of a single bishop and dea- cons placed in every city, I know not." See a still more striking view of the difficulties connected with the episcopal succession at Antioch, in Dr. Calamy's Defence of Moderate Non-Conformity, vol. i. p. 165—169. Some have attempted to account for the number of bishops at Rome who received that name near the same time, on the principle that it was given to the presbyter who presided during the year in the as- sembly of presbyters, though he had no pre-eminence as to authority over his brethren, just as the individual among the nine archons or chief rulers at Athens, who presided over them for the year, gave his name to the year, and was called the Archon iTrmvfxo;. 14 210 LETTERS ON tion has taken place? I answer, that the cases are not parallel, and that this objection which was originally urged by Law, and which has been often since re- peated, does not apply. The uneducated Christian is convinced that the New Testament is the word of God, without any such inquiries, from its perfect ac- cordance with the wants of his soul, as a guilty and suffering and immortal creature; and because the more carefully he lives under the influence of its truths, it renders him at once more happy in himself, and more like to his God: and judging from its effects, he never has the slightest doubt of its genuineness.* And it is enough to satisfy a man of learning, that his copy of the New Testament is genuine, when he finds it correspond with the earliest manuscripts, and most ancient versions, such as the Syriac and the old Latin, and sees these confirmed as the writings of the Apos- tles and Evangelists, by the quotations from them in the works of the primitive Christians during the first five centuries. And he cares no more for any cor- rupted copies in later times, than Vossius or Usher, who believed, (though I think without sufficient evi- dence,) in the genuineness of the lesser Epistles of Ignatius, because they contained, as they imagined, the passages which were quoted from them by the * "Historians inform us," says Fuller in the introduction to his Gospel its own Witness, p. 2, " of a certain valuable medicine, called Mithridate, an antidote to poison. It is said to have been invented by Mithridates, King of Pontus; that the receipt of it was found in a cabinet, written with his own hand, and was carried to Rome by Pompey; that it was translated into verse by Democrates, a famous physician; and that it was afterwards translated by Galen, from whom we have it. Now, supposing this medicine to be efficacious for its professed purpose, of what account would it be to object to the authenticity of its history? If a modern caviller should take it into his head to allege that the preparation has passed through so many hands, and that there is so much hearsay and uncertainty attending it, that no dependence can be placed upon it, and that it had better be rejected from our materia medica, he would be asked, has it not been tried, and found to be effectual, and that in a great variety of instances ? Such are Mr. Paine's objections to the Bible, and such is the answer that may be given to him." And such is the way when he applies the New Testament to himself, in which the unlet- tered Christian is convinced of its genuineness. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 211 early Christians, would have cared for the larger spu- rious Epistles where these passages are wanting. But it is a very different thing with the apostolical suc- cession, for though it had been preserved uncorrupted during the first five centuries, (and you have no evi- dence that it was so,) yet if it was vitiated afterwards in the seventh, or eighth, or any other century, it would be utterly destroyed, and could not possibly be restored, except by the mission of an Apostle to com- mence a new ordination of ministers. And if you tell me with Law, that " it is impossible the succession could be broken, because it has been a received doc- trine in every age of the Church, that no ordination was valid but that of bishops; and as there is no pos- sibility of forging orders, or stealing a bishopric in the Church of England in the present day," so it must have been equally impossible in every other Church at every period ;* I reply, that facts are stubborn things, and it is an extraordinary mode of reasoning to infer from what was the doctrine of the Church, what must also have been its practice in every in- stance, from the days of the Apostles. It has been the doctrine of the Church, for example, in every age, that three bishops could not legally ordain little children to be bishops; and you might maintain on this ground, that it never happened, though Bing- ham informs us that it was actually done, " as the Popes have ordained some at seven."! It has been the doctrine of the Church, that no bishop should obtain ordination through simony, and you might affirm on this ground that it has never taken place, though I trust I shall prove to you that it has fre- quently been the case. And it has likewise been its doctrine, that bishops who were drunk could not be- stow legal orders on a bishop or presbyter, and you might argue from this circumstance that no instance of it had occurred, for it could not occur in the pre- sent day in the Church of England. And yet it has been asserted by Pyle in his Strictures on Law, and * Postscript to his Second Letter to Bishop Hoadly, p. 101. t History of Lay Baptism, Works, vol. ii, p. 622. 212 LETTERS ON has never been contradicted, that " Novatian, in the third century, procured himself to be ordained a bishop by the hands of three bishops whom he had made drunk for that purpose."* I might easily have added many other instances, in which the practice of the Church in regard to ordination, was directly the reverse of some of her leading doctrines, and it might as consistently be maintained, in opposition to the testimony of the most respectable historians, that they did not occur, as that there never was an in- stance since the days of the Apostles, of an indi- vidual being made a bishop whose baptism or or- ders were irregular, because it ivas the doctrine of the Church that both of them should be in strict accordance with its canons. But do you remind me with Bishop Skinner, that the apostolical succession is often mentioned by the fathers as a distinguishing mark of the true Church ? For says Tertullian of some of the heretics who exist- ed in his 'day, " Let them produce the original of their Churches, show the order of their bishops so running down successively from the beginning, as that every first bishop among them shall have had for his author and predecessor some one of the Apostles, or apostolic men who continued with the Apostles." And says Irenaeus of some others, " We can reckon up those who were by the Apostles ordained bishops, and those who were their successors, even to our own time. They never taught nor knew any of the wild opinions of these men."t I might content myself with referring * Second Letter to a Member of the University of Cambridge, p. 77. The fact is admitted by a friend of Mr. Law, who calls himself P. F., and yet in his letter to Pyle, p. 40, " because the consecration was performed in the name of the Holy Trinity by those who v:ere duly commissioned for that purpose," he affirms that it was valid ! Would a similar appointment to any civil office in the name of a superior, by persons who were duly commissioned to make it, but who were drunk at the time, be held valid? Upon the same princi- ple it would follow, that if three drunk bishops were to give episcopal orders to an idiot or fatuous person in the name of the Trinity, it would be valid, and he would keep up the apostolical succession! t Tertullian de Praescript., c. 32. Irenaeus adversus Haeres. lib. iii. cap. 3. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 213 you to what is said by Bishop Jewel, in answer to the very same objection, when it was urged by Harding for the apostolical succession in the Church of Rome, which that Papist contended was wanting in your Church,* and with merely remarking, that when you reply to his arguments I will reply to yours.t But I would observe further, that they appeal to the suc- cession not to establish your position, that an uninter- rupted series of ministers deriving their orders from diocesan bishops, from the days of the Apostles, is essential to the existence of a church, but only to show that their own doctrine, which they asserted was taught by the ministers who succeeded the Apostles in the different churches, till the time in which they themselves lived, was more likely to be true, than that of these heretics. Such was the purpose to which it was applied by Irenaeus, for after mentioning that it would be tedious to go through the successions in all the Churches, he says, "selecting the Church of Rome, and showing them the tradition/' or as it is explained in the beginning of the chapter, the doctrine which it has from the Apostles, (" traditionem Apos- tolorum in toto mundo manifestatam,") and "the faith announced to men by successions of bishops extending to us, we confound them all."J And the same also * Defense of the Apologie, p. 122, 123. t [Even Laud himself, who is an object of almost idolatrous vene- ration with Puseyite Episcopalians, however accustomed to extol the succession in his attacks upon the Puritans, was constrained to assume a different language when in controversy with Fisher the Jesuit. He was compelled then to say, " Besides, for succession in the general, I shall say this : it is a great happiness where it may be had visible and continued and a great conquest over the mutability of this present world. But I do not find any one of the ancient fathers that makes local, personal, visible and continued succession, a neces- sary si^n or mark of the Church in any one place.' 1 '' And then to make his testimony still more remarkable, he admits, "most evident it is, that the succession which the fathers meant, is not tied to place or person, but it is tied to the verity of doctrine."] — Am. Editor. X "Quoniam valde longnm est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclc- siarum enumerare successioncs, maximac ct antiquissimae, et omni- bus cognitae a gloriosisflimis duobus Apostolis Petro ct Paulo Romae fundatae ct constitutae Ecclcsiae cam quam habet ab Apostolis tra- ditionem, et annunciatam hominibus fidem, per successioncs Epis- 214 LETTERS ON is the purpose to which it is applied by Tertullian, for while he appeals at one time in proof of the purity of his principles to the doctrines taught by the suc- cessors of the Apostles, he appeals in other passages to the Churches themselves, which had their authentic epistles.* Besides, though these fathers speak of the evangelical doctrine, as preserved by a succession of bishops, they never mention a word from which you can infer that they were diocesan bishops, and they as frequently represent the succession as having been kept up by presbyters. "Wherefore," says Irenaeus, " we ought to obey those presbyters in the Church who have succession, as we have shown, from the Apostles, who with the succession of the Episcopate, received the certain gift of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father."! And in the following chapter he says, "Such presbyters the Church nourishes concerning whom the prophet says, I will give your princes in peace, and your bishops in righteousness." % Nay, Jerome even says, that " presbyters occupy the place of the apostles, (in loco Apostolorum,") and " suc- ceed the Apostles, (Apostolico gradui succedere.") No- thing, therefore, can be more just than the remark of Stillingfleet, that " it is the doctrine which they speak of as to succession, and the persons no further than as they are the conveyors of that doctrine ; either then it must be proved that a succession of somt persons in apostolical power is necessary for conveying this doctrine to men, or no argument at all can be inferred from hence, for their succeeding the Apostles in power, because they are said to convey down the apostolical doctrine to succeeding ages."§ I have only further to coporum pervenientes usque ad nos, indicantes, confundimus omnes eos." * Age jam qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis tuae percurrcre Ecelesias Apostolicas apud quas ipsae adhuc Cathe- drae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur, apud quas ipsae authen- ticae eorum literae rccitantur, sonantes vocem et representantes fa- ciem uniuscujusque. Proxime est tibi Achaiam ? habes Corinthum. Si non longe es a Macedonia, habes Philippos, habes Thessaloni- censes," &c. De Praescript, cap. 36. t Adv. Haeres., lib. 4, cap. 43. t Ibid. cap. 44. § Irenicum, p. 305. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 215 observe, that both these fathers lived scarcely a hun- dred years after the last of the Apostles, and that even if they had been successful in tracing the bishops of the different Churches during that short period back to these first ministers of the Gospel, (which is denied, as I have showed you, by Jewel and Stillingfleet,) it by no means follows that you, or Dr. Hook, or any of your followers, can trace your succession through eighteen hundred years, and prove that the bishops from whom you have derived your orders, without a single exception, were regularly baptized, and re- gularly ordained.* And yet all this is necessary upon your principles, before it is possible to establish the claim of any minister in the Church of England, or among the Scottish Episcopalians, or even in the Church of Rome, which you so greatly admire, to the honourable character of a Christian minister, or the title of any of the members of these Churches to the blessings of salvation. I remain, Reverend Sir, i Yours, &c. * Dr. Inett, in his Origines Anglicanae, vol. i. p. 200, says that "the difficulties of succession in the see of Canterbury, betwixt the year 768 and the year 800, were invincible." And in p. 329 he says, that after the death of Dunstan, " Ethelgar, late abbot of the new- monastery in Winchester, and at this time Bishop of Winchester, succeeded to the chair of Canterbury the year following ; but dying the same year, our historians are not agreed who succeeded, some confidently pronouncing in favour of Siricius, others of Elfricus." In like manner Keith remarks, respecting the diocese of Dunblane, in Scotland, that " the writs of this see have been so neglected, or perhaps wilfully destroyed, that no light can be got from thence to guide us aright in making up" even the list of ancient bishops. Sir James Ware, the learned Irish antiquary, acknowledges, in his account of the bishops of Raphoe, that he cannot tell so much as the names of the bishops in some of the Irish sees, and he leaves whole centuries blank. 216 LETTER XV. The succession destroyed in all those instances in which individuals who had only Presbyterian baptism, and were not rebaptized, joined Episco- palian Churches, and were made presbyters and bishops. — Confirmation cannot remedy this defect, because, as Cranmer admits, " it was not in- stituted by Christ," nor was the Redeemer himself, or any individual men- tioned in the New Testament, confirmed, and because, as some of the lead- ing English Reformers acknowledged, "itisadomme ceremony," and " has no promise of grace connected with it." — Butler, who had only Pres- byterian baptism, and was not rebaptized, made a bishop, baptized many, who were afterwards ministers, and made a number of bishops. — Seeker, who had only the same baptism, made Primate of England, ordained many presbyters, and a number of bishops, and baptized two kings, who for a long time were heads of the Church. — Tillotson, though the son of a Bap- tist, and though there is no evidence that he was ever baptized, or ordained a deacon, made Archbishop of Canterbury. — Succession destroyed for more than two hundred years in the important Church of Alexandria, and in the early Church of Scotland, in consequence of the ordinations by the Cuklee presbyters. — Account of the presbyters of lona, their evangelical doctrine, their Presbyterian government, and the acknowledgment of their ecclesiastical authority by the Clergy of Scotland. Reverend Sir, — The charge which I have preferred against you in the previous letter, and which I trust has heen established, is apparently uncourteous. I have asserted that you hold, without any thing like proof which you would consider as satisfactory on any other subject, though of far inferior importance, the extraordinary opinion that the apostolical succession has never been interrupted. But the charge which I have to urge against you in the present letter is far more serious, for I affirm that you hold it in opposi- tion to very strong and decisive evidence that it has actually been broken. You contend that orders which have been ob- tained from the hands of Presbyterian ministers can- not be valid, because they were received from men who had no right to bestow them, and whom you consider as schismatics. Now, upon the same prin- ciple, it is obvious that baptism, when administered by the very same individuals, must be equally invalid, because in your opinion they had no right to give it ; and those who have received it, and who have not been rebaptized, cannot be Christians. Nor will it PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 217 obviate this difficulty to allege, with Archdeacon Daubeny, that what was defective in such baptisms may be supplied in confirmation, when those who have been the subjects of them join your Church. In the first place, I see no warrant in Scripture for the rite of confirmation, or the laying on of the hands of a bishop on those who are baptized; and if the Re- deemer did not appoint it, I cannot perceive how it can be accompanied by his blessing, or followed by his acceptance, or how it can supply an essential and momentous defect in the mode of administering one of the sacraments of the Church. He himself did not perform it during his personal ministry upon any who were baptized, and surely if the communication of the sanctifying and confirming influences of the Spirit, by the laying on of hands, after an individual has been baptized, be necessary now, before he is admitted to the holy communion, it was no less necessary in the days of the Saviour. And the only two instances mentioned in the New Testament in which the Apos- tles laid their hands on those who had been baptized, (Acts ch. viii. and xix.) were cases in which miracu- lous gifts were communicated, which cannot, I pre- sume, be imparted at present to those who are con- firmed by any bishop. " After that the bishops had left preachyng," says Tindal, when speaking of this rite, as performed merely by the imposition of hands, without any of the Popish ceremonies, " then fayned they this domme ceremonie of confirmation, to have somewhat at the least whereby they might raigne over their dioceses. And as to that they layd against him in the eighth chapter of the Acts, where Peter and John put their hands on the Samaritanes," he " denies that it will establish it. God had made the Apostles a promise, that he woulde with such mira- cles confirme their preaching and move others to the faith. The Apostles, therefore, beleved and prayed God to fulfill his promise, and God for his truthe's sake even so did."* So decidedly was Cranmer of * Obedience of a Christian Man, p. 152. of his works. See also his Aunswere to Syr Thomas More, p. 276, 277. 218 LETTERS ON the same opinion, though he was obliged to allow this rite to remain, that when he was asked his judg- ment respecting it, along with " divers bishops and doctors in commission," he gave the following answer to the question, "Whether confirmation be instituted by Christ?" " There is no place in Scripture that declareth this sacrament to be instituted by Christ.* " Secondly, these acts were done by a special gift given to the Apostles for the confirmation of God's word at that time. " Thirdly, the said special gift doth not now re- main with the successors of the Apostles" And said Dr. Edmonds, Master of Peter House in Cambridge, " Confirmation is not a sacrament of the new law instituted by Christ by any expressed word in the Scripture, but only by the tradition of the fathers. " Confirmation hath no promise of any invisible grace by Christ by any expressed word in Holy Scrip- ture. " There be no promises of grace made by Christ to them that receive confirmation.^^ The same also was the opinion of Jewel, who says, in his Treatise of the Sacraments, p. 264, " Confirmation was not ordained by Christ." And though Bancroft stated, at the Conference at Hampton Court, that he con- sidered it as " founded on Heb. vi. 2, where it is rep- resented as a part of the Apostles' Catechisme,± and not so much upon the places in the Acts of the Apos- tles," as some of the fathers had often showed, yet it is evident that the laying on of hands, which is referred * Cyprian calls confirmation and baptism two sacraments. Epist. 72. Bishop Bilson, as we have seen, not only admits that it was the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit which were bestowed on the Sama- ritan converts, (Acts viii.) by the laying on of the hands of the Apos- tles, and in particular the gift of tongues, but says, that this and these other gifts were imparted to them to qualify them for preach- ing the Gospel immediately to them who understood these languages. Can bishops bestow any such gifts now on those whom they confirm ? t Append, to first vol. of Strype's Memorials, p. 88, 235-238. X Dr. Barlow's Account of the Conference at Hampton Court, p. 32. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 219 to in that passage, denotes rather ordination to the ministry, which, as Archbishop Usher acknowledges, is far more worthy of being described as one of the fundamental principles of the doctrine of Christ than the rite of confirmation.* And the same is the opinion of your feilow-tracta- rians, for when speaking of Presbyterians, Indepen- dents and Methodists, (Tract 36,) they say, " These three do not receive or teach the truth respecting the doctrine of laying on of hands, which St. Paul classes among the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, (Heb. vi. 2;) and by which the Christian ministry receives its commission and authority to administer the word and sacraments." And, 2d It/, even admitting that it may be lawfully performed, though, as is mentioned in an old Walden- sian work, " Christ, the pattern of all his Church, was not confirmed in his own per son. ,t and it has not been instituted by him, but rests solely on the tradi- tion of the fathers, and no grace has been promised to those who receive it," not an instance can be pointed out in tuhich it was administered to any one whose baptism was invalid.% On what principle, * Melancthon, in his Apology for the Confession of Augsburgh, torn. i. of his Works, fol. 95, says, in the name of the Lutheran Churches, " Confirmatio et extrema unctio sunt ritus accepti a Patri- bus." And in the Saxon Confession which he drew up, he says, fol. 129, « ideo non servantur in nostris ecclesiis." t Sir Samuel Morland's History of the Waldenses, p. 142. Dr. Gilly has been very anxious to show that they were Episcopalians. They not only, however, reject confirmation in the passage quoted above, but add immediately afterwards, that Christ did not require it or unction in baptism. " And, therefore, such a sacrament was intro- duced to seduce the people, and that by such means they might be drawn more easily to believe the ceremonies and the necessity of bishops." " It has been inferred," says Dr. Jamieson, in his Historical Ac- count of the Culdees, p. 206, " from the language of Bernard, that confirmation was quite in disuse, if at all ever known among the Irish Culdees; for, in his Life of Malachy, he says, that he anew instituted the sacrament of confirmation." t Jt might be maintained with greater consistency, that the obser- vance of the Lord's Supper, which is a divine institution, would make up, on the part of a Presbyterian who joins an Episcopalian Church, for the want both of confirmation and baptism, than that confirma- 220 LETTERS ON then, baptism, when it has been dispensed by Presby- terians, whom yon consider as schismatics, and as having no authority to perform it, can be regarded merely as defective, and not as a perfect nullity, like Presbyterian ordination, 1 am at a loss to understand. You cannot, however, be ignorant, that many who had received only Presbyterian baptism joined your Church soon after the Restoration, and others since that time; nay, that some of them, though they were not rebaptized, have been admitted among your clergy, and have risen to places of power and influ- ence. Two cases especially occurred during the last century, in which young Presbyterians, without being rebaptized, entered your communion, attained your highest ecclesiastical dignities, and contributed to an extent which it is impossible to ascertain to break the succession. One of them was Butler, who, while he was Rector of Stanhope, baptized a number of the members of your Church, some of whom may have become ministers; and who, while he was Bishop, first of Bristol, and afterwards of Durham, ordained many clergymen, and assisted in the consecration of many bishops from whom your present bishops and ministers have descended. If, therefore, the baptisms which he administered, and the orders which he gave tion, which is a mere human invention, can make up for the want of baptism. It is admitted by the Oxford Tractarians, (Tract 41, p. 7,) that all that is required from an individual for confirmation is to be able " to say the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, no- thing being said of a change of heart, or spiritual affections." And yet, upon this mere external profession, the children receive the impo- sition of the bishop's hands, "to certify them by this sign of God's favour and gracious goodness towards them," because they can repeat these things, after which they are admitted to the communion. How different is the practice of faithful ministers in the Presbyterian Church, where there is no such unauthorised rite as confirmation, to which no grace is promised, but who meet with those young indi- viduals who are candidates for communion for a number of weeks, or even months, before, pray with them, instruct them carefully in the great truths of religion, and in the end of the institution of the sacra- ment of the Supper, and endeavour to impress them with a sense of the necessity of faith and personal piety to acceptable communion, and who, upon their being encouraged to form a favourable opinion of them as to these points, admit them to that privilege ! PTJSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 221 to those who afterwards gave orders to others, in many of your dioceses, were invalid, because he him- self was unbaptized, what must be the spiritual con- dition of your Church? The other was his friend and companion, Seeker, who, as the son of a Dissenting Presbyterian minister, had only Presbyterian baptism, and was never rebaptized. After joining your Church he was promoted first to be Rector of St. James's, then successively to be Bishop of Bristol and Oxford, and latterly Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of all England.* But if he himself was not a Christian, and yet baptized not only many of the ordinary members of your Church, but George the Third,! whom he also * " Mr. Thomas Seeker, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury," says the late Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke, vol. xii. of his Miscellaneous Works, p. 171, " was the son of a dissenting minister, born in 1693, was baptized after the form of that Church, and studied at three dis- senting schools successively until he was nineteen years of age, when he went to the University of Oxford, and afterwards entered the com- munion of the Church of England. He was in 1732 nominated one of the Chaplains to the King; in 1733, was appointed Rector of St. James's. January 5, 1734, he was elevated to the Bishopric of Bris- tol, to that of Oxford in 1737; in 1750 exchanged a prebend in Dur- ham, and the Rectory of St. James's for the Deanery of St. Paul's, and in 1758 he was named and confirmed to the Archbishopric of Canterbury. He officiated at the funeral of King George the Second, and at the proclamation of his present Majesty, whom he had bap- tized when Rector of St. James's, and whom with his Queen he mar- ried, and crowned 8th September 1761, and on the 8th September 1762, he baptized the Prince of Wales, and afterwards several of their Majesties' children. We hear nothing of his ever having been re^ baptized." t The same thing happened to Charles the First, whom Episcopa- lians commonly denominate the Royal Martyr for Episcopacy, and yet whom Dr. Pusey, and his followers among the Scottish Episcopa- lians, cannot consider as a Christian, though they keep the anniver- sary of his death, for he was baptized by a Scottish Presbyterian min- ister in the Chapel Royal at Dunfermline, and was never rebaptized. "In the month of December this year, (1600,)" says Wodrow the historian, u Mr. David Lindsay baptized the King's son, Charles the First, who was his father's successor, (at Falkland, born November 19,) in Dunfermline, upon Tuesday, the 23d of December 1600, as a book in the Lyon's Office at Edinburgh bears." But how much more extraordinary must have been the situation of the Church of England during the reign of George the Third, when neither that pious and venerable Monarch, the Head of that Church, nor Archbishop Seeker, the Primate of the whole kingdom, could be Christians ! And in what a light does it exhibit the conduct of our present gracious Sovereign, 222 LETTERS OS married, and George the Fourth, both of whom were for a long time the heads of that Church, and if, as you must be well aware, he ordained many bishops, priests and deacons, the injury which he must have done to the apostolical succession in the Church of England is absolutely incalculable. As you cannot, therefore, raise him and his illustrious friend, and others of your bishops who had only Presbyterian baptism, from the mansions of the tomb, and get them rebaptized and re-ordained, nor raise up along with them the bishops and clergy whose orders they vitiated, and get the error corrected, not only in the orders of the dead, but in those of the living, I trust that we shall hear no more from you, or Dr. Short, or Mr. Newman, or Mr. Gladstone, of your unbroken succession. And I sin- cerely hope, that you will inquire anew into the truth of a doctrine which leads unavoidably to these tremen- dous consequences, and that none of you will in future join in the lofty and presumptuous assertion, which you have already so confidently made, that "yours is the only Church in the realm ivhich has a right to be quite sure that she is a Church of Christ, and has the Lord's body to give to his people." But if the succession has been broken in all those instances in which bishops and presbyters have been baptized by Presbyterians, and have not been re- baptized, you will scarcely deny that it has been still more seriously injured, if any of your prelates have been raised even to the highest dignity in your Church, and yet were never baptized, either by a in inviting her relation, the King of Prussia, who, as he was neither baptized by a bishop, nor by a minister who was ordained by a bishop, cannot, according to Dr. Hook or Mr. Gladstone, be a Christian, to stand as godfather to the young Prince of Wales ! The mind revolts at principles which lead to such consequences. And yet these are the consequences of the present doctrine of the apostolical succession, which is gaining rapidly numerous converts in the English Univer- sities, and for the propagation of which in the New College of what the Scottish Episcopalians modestly denominate the Reformed Catho- lic Church of Scotland, the English Society for Propagating Chris- tian Knowledge have, through the strenuous advocacy of Mr. Dodes- worth, a most zealous Puseyite, supported by Mr. W. Gladstone, voted a thousand pounds. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 223 layman, Pesbyterian, or Episcopalian. And yet there is reason to believe that this was the case with Tillotson, who occupied for a long time the See of Canterbury, and the primacy of England. No evi- dence has been produced, though it has been often demanded, of his having been ordained a deacon, and yet he was permitted to hold the office of a deacon. Nor will it at all appear wonderful, that such irregu- larities should have been tolerated at that period, when you consider what has taken place almost in our own day. " Even in later and more civilized and enlightened times/' says Dr. Whately, " the probabi- lity of an irregularity, though very greatly diminish- ed, is yet diminished only, and not absolutely de- stroyed. Even in the memory of persons living, there, existed a bishop, concerning ivhom there ivas so much mystery and uncertainty prevailing, as to when, where, and by whom he had been ordained, that doubts existed in the minds of many persons, whether he had ever been ordained at all." I do not, however, refer so much to his want of deacon's orders, and the invalidity of all the baptisms which he administered, nor to the invalidity of his priest's orders, which he received from Sydeserf, whose own orders were uncanonical, and who, as he was a Scot- tish bishop, had no right to confer orders in England, who, we are told by Birch, " ordained all those of the English clergy who came to him, without demanding either oaths (of canonical obedience,) or subscriptions (to articles) of them, merely for a subsistence, from the fees for the orders granted by him, — for he was very poor;" — I say I do not refer so much to either of these circumstances, as to his want of baptism. He did not receive that ordinance in his infancy, for his father was a Baptist ; and though he was often challenged to produce any evidence of his having been baptized afterwards, none was brought forward ; and unless it can be furnished by you, or by some of your friends in the present day, or by some of the clergy of the Church of England, we must consider him as unbaptized. But if the man who was so long 224 LETTERS ON the Primate of that Church, and who made so many bishops, and priests, and deacons, had not even such baptism as could be obtained from a midwife, I leave it to you to say what must be the value of your own orders, or of the orders of any of the clergy of your Church, who hold your principles, and what must be the virtue of their ministrations, and what the pros- pects of final salvation to those who hear them.* But passing from your Church, I would further re- mark, that the succession must have been injured in all these instances in which bishops and presbyters were not only baptized, but were ordained by pres- byters, and were not re-ordained. Now that this was the case from the earliest ages is beyond a doubt. It was the case in the important See of Alexandria, where, as Usher stated to Charles the First, upon the authority of Jerome and Eutychius, the presbyters for a long time made not only presbyters, but bishops. "For even from Mark the Evangelist," said the first of these writers, "to the Bishops Heraclas and Diony- sius, the presbyters always named as bishop one chosen from among themselves, and placed him in a higher degree, in the same manner as if an army should make an emperor, or the deacons should choose from among themselves any one whom they knew to be industrious, and should call him archdea- con, "t Upon which Willet, as was noticed formerly, * " In Mr. Percival's Catalogus," says the author of an exceed- ingly able article on Scottish Prelacy, in the Presbyterian Review p. 30, note, "there occur the following- names, of whose consecration there are no records, and of course no evidence extant, viz. William Downham of Chester, in 1561; J. Stanley of Sodor, 1573; J. May of Carlisle, 1577; G. Loyd of Sodor, 1600; translated to Chester, 1604; B. Potter, Carlisle, 1628; William Leorster, Sodor, 1633; R. Parr, Sodor, 1635; li. Feme, Chester, 1666; E. Rainbow, Carlisle, 1644; J. Wilkins, Chester, 1668; H. Bndgman, Sodor, 1671; T. Smith, Carlisle, 1684; N. Strafford, Chester, 1689. Even the cele- brated Pearson of Chester, so well known by his works on the Creed and on Ignatius, has no extant record of his consecration. Nor has Lake, who, in 1684, was translated from Sodor to Bristol, and in the following year to Chichester; and of very necessity, no man who has received orders thiou>jh any of these has or can have any evidence that he is in orders at all." + "Nam et Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraelam et Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 225 remarks, " So it would seeme that the very election of a bishop in those days without any other circum- stances was his ordination." And says Stillingfleet, who answers at considerable length the numerous objections urged by Bishop Pearson to this interpreta- tion of the passage, "it appears that by election he means conferring authority by the instances he brings to that purpose; as the Roman armies choosing their emperor, who had no other power but what they received by the length of the sword, and the deacons choosing their archdeacon, who had no other power but what was merely conferred by the choice of the college of deacons."* And says Eutychius, who is represented by Ebn Abi Osbae as a "man well acquainted with the sciences and institutions which were in use among the Christians,"! and whose testimony coincides with that of Jerome, " Hananias was the first of the patriarchs who were set over the Church of Alexandria. For Mark the Evangelist appointed along with the Patriarch Hana- nias twelve presbyters, who should continue along with the Patriarch, so that when the patriarchate became vacant they should choose one of the twelve presbyters, upon whose head the other eleven laying their hands, should themselves bless him and create him a patriarch ; and then they should choose some distinguished man in his room who was made pa- triarch, that so there might be always twelve. Nor did this institution respecting the presbyters at Alex- andria, that they should create the patriarchs from the twelve presbyters, cease till the time of Alexander, Patriarch of Alexandria, who was of that number cxcclsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant; quomodo is exercitus imperatorem faciat, aut diaconi eligant de se quern indus- triuia noverint, et Archidiaconum vocent." Epist. 85, ad Evagrium. * Irenicum, p. 274. t "Scientiarum et institutorum quae apud Christianos in usu sunt pcritus. ,, Seidell represents him as spoken of in terms of high respect by ancient writers. And Moshcim says, vol. ii. p. 414, that "no author among the Arabians attained higher reputation among the Arabians than he, 1 ' and refers to Fabricius's Bibliographia Anti- quaria, p. 17"J. 15 226 LETTERS ON three hundred and eighteen. But he forbade the presbyters afterwards to create the patriarch, and de- creed that when the patriarch was dead the bishops should assemble, who should ordain the patriarch. Also he decreed, that when the patriarchate was vacant, they should choose either from any quarter, or from these twelve presbyters, or from others, some eminent man of approved probity, and should create him patriarch. And thus vanished that more ancient institution, according to which the patriarchate was wont to be created by the presbyters, and there suc- ceeded in its place the decree respecting the creation of the patriarch by the bishops."* And as it is ob- vious that he could have no inducement to make this statement, but a regard to truth, because, as he him- self was a patriarch, it was fitted to lessen the re- spectability of his order, inasmuch as it showed a deviation from the mode of creating the patriarchs, which had been recommended by the Evangelist; and as it is confirmed by Jerome, who was born only about eighty years after the change took place, and who had the best opportunities to become acquainted with the fact, as he lived much in the East, it is per- fectly capricious on the part of Episcopalians to ques- tion their testimony. Usher, who was one of the most able and learned of their bishops, examined the evidence in former times with the utmost care, and declared himself to be satisfied, and there appears to *"Hananias fuit Patriarcharum qui Alexandriae praefecti sunt primus. Constituit autem Evangclista Marcus una cum Hanania patriarcha duodecim presbyteros qui nempe cum patriarcha manerent, adeo ut cum vacaret patriarchatus, unum e duodecim presbyteris eli- gerent, cujus capiti reliqui undecim manus imponentes ipsi benedi- cerent, et patriarcham crearent; deinde virum aliquem insignem eligerent quern secum presbyterum constituerent loco ejus qui factus est patriarcha, ut ita semper extarent duodecim. Neque desiit Alex- andriae institum hoc de presbyteris, ut scilicet patriarchas crearent ex presbyteris duodecim usque ad tempora Alexandri Patriarchae Alex- andria, qui fuit ex numero illo trecentorum et octodecim," &c. An- rials, vol. i. p. 331. Gibbon says that Jerome's statement " receives a remarkable - confirmation from the Patriarch Eutychius, whose testimony he knew not how to reject in spite of all the objections of the learned Pearson." PUSETTITE EPISCOPACY. 227 be no good reason why it ought not to satisfy them now. If they have perfect confidence in the lists of bishops of some of the Churches given by Eusebius, though he lived nearly three hundred years after the time when they commenced, nothing but a conviction that it bears so strongly against diocesan Episcopacy, and the apostolical succession, could prompt them to doubt the statement of Jerome, who lived so much nearer to the event which he reports, corroborated as it is by another individual who himself presided over the See of Alexandria, and might have access to its records, and who will be acknowledged at least to be an impartial witness. But if the bishops of Alexan- dria, as Usher affirmed, for two hundred and fifty years were made by presbyters, either by election without ordination, or by laying their hands on their heads, and setting them apart to their office, I would like to be informed whether the succession must not have been broken even at the the very beginning, during that long period. And as Alexandria was one of the largest and most populous bishoprics in the early Church, I shall leave it to any candid individual to say, whether he can estimate the amount of the disorder and confusion which may have been intro- duced into other sections of the Christian Church, by clergymen coming into them, whose orders, upon your principles, must have been irregular and invalid. Another part of the Church where there was no succession of diocesan bishops for several centuries, was the early Church of Scotland. According to the testimony of all our historians, this part of the island embraced Christianity in the year 203, and no bishop appeared in it till the year 429, or 430, when Palla- dium was despatched thither by Pope Celestine. Such is the statement of Prosper of Aquitaine, who, ac- cording to the late Bishop Skinner, " lived in the time when, and the place where Palladius resided" before he came to Britain ; for says he, " two hundred and twenty-seven years before Scotland was converted, or in the year 430, Palladius being ordained by Pope Celestine, was sent to the Scots believing in Christ, as 228 LETTERS ON their first bishop, (primus episcoptis.) It is confirmed by Bede, though a zealous Episcopalian, who repeats the very words of Prosper.* John of Fordun, a re- spectable writer, and not, " a dreaming monk, anxious merely for the honour of his order/' as Bishop Lloyd calls him, says, that " before the coming of Palladius, the Scots had, as teachers of the faith, and adminis- trators of the sacraments, only presbyters and monks, following the custom of the primitive Church A And a similar statement is contained in the Breviary of Aberdeen, where the Scots, before the time of Paila- dius, are described as " having had for teachers of the faith, and ministers of the sacraments, presbyters and monks, following only the right and custom of the primitive Church.^" And says John Mair or Major, of whom Bishop Lesley remarks, that " he was more studious of truth than eloquence, § in the year of our * Chron. Tempor. p. 26. Hist., lib. i. c. 13. t Scotichronicon, lib. iii. c. 8. Sir George Mackenzie, in his De- fence of the Royal Line, p. 26, says that "he was a presbyter and not a monk, as St. Asaph calls him." Dr. Jamieson, in his historical account of the Culdees, p. 97, says, "It is a singular circumstance, that however much later writers have affected to despise the testimony of Fordun with respect to the Culdees, the Canons of St. Andrews did not hesitate to avail them- selves of it, (I quote the passage, chiefly to show the general respect- ability of Fordun,) when it was subservient to their credit in the meantime, though at the expense of giving a severe blow to Episco- pacy in an early age. As there had been a dispute, at a meeting of Parliament in the reign of James I., with respect to precedency be- tween the priors of St. Andrews and Kelso; the King having heard the arguments on both sides, determined it in favour of the former, on this principle, that he was entitled to priority in rank, whose monas- tery was prior as to foundation." «' We have a proof of this," says Fordun, " from St. Columba, who is represented as Arch-Abbot of all Ireland, and who was held in such pre-eminence among the inhabi- tants, that (and he was only a presbyter) he is said to have confirmed and consecrated all the Irish iisttops of his time." (Scotichron. lib, vi. c 49.) "The whole of this chapter," says Dr. Jamieson, "not excepting the passage last mentioned, has been embodied in the Re- gister of St. Andrews." t " Ilabcntcs fidei doctores et sacramentorum ministros presby- teros ct monachos primitive ecclesiae solummodo sequentes ritum et consuetudinem." In lulic, fol. 24, 25. § " Veritatis ubique quam eloquentiac studiosior." Hist. Scot. lib. ix. p. 414. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 229 Lord 429, Pope Celestinus consecrated Saint Palladius a bishop, and sent him to Scotland, for the Scots were previously instructed in the faith by priests and monks, ivithout bishops."* Here, then, was another part of the Church, which, according to the united testimony of these writers, all of whom were Episcopalians, was without bishops for more than two hundred years, and which was instructed and governed by presbyters, not according to the form of polity which existed in the days of either Prosper or Bede, but ac- cording, as they express it, "to the custom of the pri- mitive Church."t As the Church of Scotland during that long period had no diocesan bishops, and therefore, upon your * " Anno Domini 429, Sanctum Palladium Caelestinus Papa epis- copum consecrat et ad Scotiam mittit. Nam per sacerdotes et mona- chos sine Episcopis Scoti in fide erudiebantur." Hist. Maj. Brltan- niae, lib. ii. cap. 2, fol. 23. + Some have questioned whether Palladius ever visited Scotland. Dr. Jamieson shows that he laboured for a time in that country. 1 Fordun," says he, p. 9, " confining the mission of Palladius to the Scots in Britain, says that Eugenius gave him and his companions a place of residence where he asked it. In the MS. of Coupar, there is this addition : Apud Fordun, in lie Mearns, i. e. at Fordun, in the Mearns. This perfectly coincides with the modern account." This parish (Fordun) is remarkable for having been for some time the re- sidence, and probably the burial place of St. Palladius, who was sent by Pope Cclestine into Scotland, in the fifth century, to oppose the Pelagian heresy. That Palladius resided, and was probably buried here, appears from several circumstances. There is a house which still remains in the church-yard, called St. Palladius 1 chapel, where, it is said, the image of the saint was kept, and to which pilgrimages were performed from the most distant parts of Scotland. There is a well at the corner of the minister's garden, which goes by the name of Paddy's well." u To this it may be added, that the annual market held at Fordun, is still universally, in that part of the country, called Paldy, or, as vulgarly pronounced, Paddy fair. This is a strong presumption that a church had been dedicated to him there : as it is a well known fact, that at the Reformation, when the saints' days were abolished, the fairs, which used to succeed the festivals, and were denominated from them, were retained. Hence, their very name from Lat. Feriae, holi- days. Camerarius asscits, on the authority of Polydore Virgil, that the precious reliques of this saint were formerly worshipped at For- doun," &,c. "According to Sigibcrt, Palladius was sent to the Scots, A. 432. It would appear, that finding his labours unsuccessful in Ireland, he had attempted the conversion of the Picts, for Fordun was in their territory." 230 LETTERS ON principles, could not be a Church, so it is impossible to see how she could attain that character, even after the arrival of Palladius ; for as the individuals whom he ordained had been baptized only by presbyters, and consequently were not Christians, nothing which he did could make them Christian ministers. And this was especially the case in regard to those of them whom he raised to the episcopate ; for as he had not a single bishop along with him, it was in direct oppo- sition to the whole of the canons, that he himself alone should consecrate bishops. And in addition to these facts, which show that the boasted apostolical succes- sion, so far from being preserved, was not even begun by Palladius, so, though it might be introduced after- wards, (of which there is no satisfactory evidence,) we have reason to believe, that if it was actually be- gun, it was speedily destroyed after the Culdees arose, and during the whole of the time that they governed the Church. The founder of their institutions was the celebrated Columba, who, according to Dr. Jamie- son, was of the blood royal of Ireland, and who, after he became pious, devoted himself to the ministry, and coming over to Scotland with twelve presbyters, esta- blished a monastery in Ii or Iona, of which the fol- lowing account is given by the author of the Scotichro- nicon, under the year 560. " Columba, presbyter," says he, " came to the Picts, and converted them to the faith of Christ, those, I say, who live near the northern moors ; and their king gave them that island, which is commonly called Ii. In it, as it is reported, there are five hides (of land,) on which Columba erected a monastery ; and he himself resided there as Abbot, thirty-two years, where he also died, when seventy years of age. This place is still held by his successors. Thenceforth there ought to be always in Ii an abbot, but no bishop, and to him ought all the Scottish bishops to be subject, for this reason, that Columba was an abbot, not a bishop."* * " Deincops perpetuum in Ii Abbas erit, non autcm Episcopus; atque ei dcbent esse subditi oinnes Scotorum Episcopi, propterea quod Columbanus fuerit Abbas, non Episcopus." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 231 This monastery, it would appear, was speedily fol- lowed by the erection of others, which as Dr. Jamie- son observes, " may more properly be viewed as colleges, in which the various branches of useful learning were taught, than as monasteries. These societies, therefore, were in fact the seminaries of the Church, both in North Britain and in Ireland. As the presbyters ministered in holy things to those in their vicinity, they were still training up others, and sending forth missionaries, whenever they had a call, or any prospect of success."* Nor was the number of them small; for they had similar institutions, each of them like that of Iona, (to which they all professed subjection,) with an abbot, and twelve presbyters, at Abernethy, Lochleven, Dunkeld, St. Andrews, Brechin, Dumblane, Muthil, Mortlach, Monymusk, Dunfermline, Melrose, Go van, Abercorn, Inchcolm, Tyningham, and Aberlady.t And whether you con- sider the religious principles taught by Columba and these presbyters, or the authority exercised by them over the Scottish clergy of every order, the facts related respecting them are deeply interesting. " The doctrine of the Culdees, as far as we may judge from that of Columba, was at least comparatively pure. As he was himself much given to the study of the Holy Scriptures," like Luther, "he taught his disci- ples to confirm their doctrines by testimonies brought from this unpolluted fountain; and declared that only to be the divine counsel which he found there. His fol- lowers, as we learn from Bede, would receive those things only, which are contained in the writings of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles.j: Hence, it has been said that for several generations — with the errors which at that time prevailed in the Church of Rome, they seem not to have been in the least tainted. § •Page 35. t Ibid. 105-187. t " Tantum ca quae in Propheticis, Evangelicis et Apostolicis Libris disccrc pott-rant pictatis ct castitatis opera tliligenter obser- rentes." Hist. lib. iii. c. 4. § Jamieson, p. 29, 30. 232 LETTERS ON " They rejected," says To! and, " auricular confes- sion," which some of your followers so earnestly recommend, "as well as authoritative absolution; and confessed to God alone, as believing God alone could forgive sins."* They never practised confir- mation, which, though it was never performed after baptism on the Saviour or his Apostles, or any of their disciples who are mentioned in the New Testa- ment, is practised by Episcopalians, who glory in their Churches as the purest Apostolic Churches.t " In their public worship, they made an honourable mention of holy persons deceased, offering a sacrifice of thanksgiving for their exemplary life and death, but not by way of propitiation for sins. They neither prayed to dead men, nor for them/' as the late Bishop Gleig recommended; for they were persuaded, that while we are in the present world, we may help one another, either by our prayers or by our counsels; but when we come before the tribunal of Christ, neither Job, nor Daniel, nor Noah, can intercede for any one, but every one must bear his own burden."^ "And they were so far," says the same writer, "from pretending to do more good than they were obliged (to do,) much less to superabound in merit for the benefit of others, that they readily denied all merit of their own, and solely hoped for salvation from the mercy of God, through faith in Jesus Christ: which faith, as a living root, was to produce the fruit of good works, without which it were barren or dead, and consequently useless."§ " They paid no respect to holy reliques, or to the mass; but" when they were persecuted for it at St. Andrews, "chose rather to forsake their church and property than desert their principles." || And when Boniface was sent from Rome to propagate the principles of his apostate Church, he encountered a noble and magnanimous opposition from Clemens and Samson, two illustrious * Nazaren., Letter 2, p. 24. § Ibid. p. 25, 26. + Ibid. p. 22. || Jamieson, p. 214. t Nazaren., p. 26. PUSETITE EPISCOPACY. 233 Culdees, who told him, " that he and those of his party studied to bring men to the subjection of the Pope, and slavery of Rome, withdrawing them from obedience to Christ, — that they were corrupters of Christ's doctrine, establishing a sovereignty in the Bishop of Rome, — and that they had introduced in the Church many tenets, rites and ceremonies, un- known to the ancient and pure times, yea, contrary to them."* In short, their doctrine and worship, in * David Buchanan's Preface to Knox's History. The following is the account given by Bower, in his History of the Popes, vol. ii. p. 523, of the way in which Pope Gregory ordered the missionaries, whom he sent from Rome, to model the worship of the East Saxons. " Not satisfied," says he, " with directing Austin not to destroy, but to rescue for the worship of God the profane places wheie the Pagan Saxons had worshipped their idols, he would have him to treat the more profane usages, rites and ceremonies of the Pagans in the same manner, that is, not to abolish but to sanctify them, by changing the end for which they were instituted, and intro- duce them thus sanctified into the Christian worship. This he speci- fies in a particular ceremony; "whereas it is a custom," says he, " among the Saxons, to slay abundance of oxen, and sacrifice them to the devil, you must not abolish that custom, but appoint a new festival to be kept either on the day of the consecration of the churches, or on the birth-day of the saints whose reliques are deposited there ; and on these days the Saxons may be allowed to make arbours round the temples changed into churches, to kill their oxen and to feast, as they did while they were still Pagans; only they shall offer their thanks and praises, not to the devil, but to God." Such was the principle on which many of the Pagan ceremonies were adopted by the Church of Rome ; and it was for this reason, more than from the difference of the time at which Easter was observed by them, that the bishops or presbyters sent to England by the Culdees refused to conform to the practices of the Popish clergy among the East Saxons. "Boniface the Fourth," says Bower, vol. iii. p. 1, 2, " availing himself of the partiality of Phocas to his See, asked of him the famous Pantheon, (built by Agrippa in honour of Cybele and all the other gods and goddesses, and thence it took its name,) and having obtained it he changed it into a church, substituting the mother of God to the mother of the gods, and the Christian martyrs to the other Pagan deities adored there before; so that only the names of the idols were altered.' 1 Tnia took place in a. d. 609. And says Ranke, in his History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 9, " Men saw with surprise a secular building erected by heathens, the Basilica, converted into a Christian temple. The change was most remarkable. The Apsis of the Basilica contained an Augusteum, the images of those Caesars to whom divine honours were paid. The very places which they occupied, received, as we still see in numerous Basilicas, the figures of Christ and his Apostles. The statues of the rulers of the world, who had been 234 LETTERS ON an age of abounding superstition and corruption, were worthy of the purest days of Protestantism; and if I were requested to name the section of the Church which resembled most nearly the Church of the Apos- tles during the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries, I would say, that with the single exception of the Vau- dois, it was the Church of Scotland. If such, however, was the case, it must be import- ant to ascertain what was the constitution of that early Church, and what were the powers which were exercised by the highest order of its ministers. Now, there is no fact respecting it more fully established than that it was governed by Presbyters. You meet, indeed, occasionally, with a reference in our histo- rians to the Scottish bishops of that age, but the term seems to have been convertible with that of presby- ter, the highest dignity of the episcopal office, as Ja- mieson remarks of a bishop whom the presbyters of Iona first consecrated and then sent to England, " being made to lie in this that he was a preacher.*" After observing that the term bishop was used then in a very different sense from that attached to it after- wards, he adds, " Ninian is called a bishop by Bede, and he probably received the title during his life. He says, that the Southern Picts were converted by the preaching of Ninyas, as he gives his name, the most renowned bishop. Ninian receives the same regarded as gods, vanished, and gave place to the likeness of the Son of Man, the Son of God." " The feast of the purification of the Virgin Mary," says Bower, vol. ii. p. 227, " commonly known by the name ol'Candlemass, because candles were blessed, as is still practised in the Church of Rome, at the mass of that day, is thought by some to have been introduced in the room of the Lupcrcalia, (the feast of Pan.)" He adds in a note, " The candles that are blessed on Candlemass-day are thought to be a sure protection against thunder and lightning, and therefore are lighted by timorous persons in stormy weather. But their chief vir- tue is to frighten the devils and drive them away ; and for this reason they are kept burning in the hands of dying persons, so long as they can hold them, and by their beds, from the time they begin to be in agony, till they expire, none of the spirits of darkness daring to appear where they give light." Many other Pagan ceremonies have been adopted by the Church of Rome. * Page 333. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 235 designation from Alcuin, Boece, Leslie, and a variety of writers. Yet he seems to have been no more a bishop than Columba. Nor could Bede use the term in that canonical sense which was become common in his own time ; for he afterwards says, ' Pethelm is Bishop of Candida Casa, or Whithern, which, in con- sequence of the increase of the number of the faithful, has been lately added to the list of episcopal sees, and had him for its first prelate'* In the MS. History of Durham, under the year 664, and long after the age of Ninian, it is expressly said, Candida Casa as yet had no bishop. William of Malmesbury, also, in his account of the bishops of this see, although, after Alcuin, he calls Ninian a bishop, using the term in its loose and general sense, says, that toward the end of Bede's life, Pethelm was made the first bishop, that is, as Selden explains it, according to the canonical ideas of Episcopacy then generally received through- out Christendom." He further remarks, " The character of the Irish bishops, in early times, may assist us in judging of the rank of those who were ordained at Iona ; espe- cially as Columba, who was not a bishop, but an abbot and presbyter, is designed not only Primate of the Scots and Picts, but Primate of all the Irish bishops.t Till the year 1 152, they seem to have been properly Chorepiscopi, or rural bishops. Their num- ber, it is supposed, might amount to above three hundred. They, in the same manner with the Scot- tish and Pictish bishops, exercised their functions at large, as they had opportunity.:}:" " That bishop in Ireland," says Toland, " did, in the fifth or sixth cen- turies, (for example,) signify a distinct order of men, by whom alone presbyters could be ordained, and without which ordination their ministry were invalid ; this I absolutely deny ; as I do that those bishops were diocesan bishops, when nothing is plainer, than * " And he was thaerc stowe the aercste biscop." Hist. Alfred's Translation, vol. xxiv. + "Omnium liiberncnsium Episcoporum Primas." X Jumiesori, p. 335. 236 LETTERS ON that most of them had no bishopricks at alt in our modern sense ; not to speak of those numerous bi- shops frequently going out of Ireland, not called to bishopricks abroad, and many of 7 em never pre- ferred there*" It was mentioned formerly, that the College of Iona was administered by an abbot and twelve presby- ters; and it would appear from what is said of it by the venerable Bede, that the ecclesiastical polity of the kingdom of Scotland was at that time Presbyte- rian. "That island," says he, "is always wont to have for its governor a presbyter abbot, to Avhose authority both the whole province, and even the bishops themselves, by an unusual constitution, ought * Nazarenus, Lett. 2, p. 37, 38. Jamieson mentions also, that "the abbots of Hij, because of their great authority and extensive influence, were sometimes called bishops. For this reason, in relation to that monastery, the terms Abbas and Episcopus seem to have been used as synonymous. Hence, Sigibert speaks of Adamannus, the Presbyter and Abbot of the Scots. As the prelacy gained ground, the rage for multiplying bishops, in preceding ages, also increased. On this principle, as would seem, Spottiswood includes both Columba and Adomnan, in his list of the early bishops of Scotland, appended to his history. According to Fordun, Regulus was only an abbot. The Register of St. Andrews, however, makes him a bishop;" p. 336, 337. " There seem to have been no regular dioceses in Scotland before the beginning of the twelfth century. The foundation of diocesan Episcopacy was indeed laid in the erection of the bishopric of St. Andrews. In this erection, we may perceive the traces of a plan for changing the whole form of the ecclesiastical government, as it had hitherto been exercised within the Pictish dominions." " He first," says the Register of the Priory at St. Andrews, speaking of Grig, "gave freedom to the Scottish Church, which till that time was in servitude by the constitution and custom of the Picts. This surely refers, says Mr. Pinkerton, to the subjection of the Pictish churches to Hyona, from which they were delivered hy erecting St. Andrews into a bishopric;" p. 338. It will by no means follow, as Keith alleges, (Catalogue, Preface, 18,) that the English would not have applied on different occasions to the Culdees for bishops, if the bishops ordained by the latter were not diocesan, and differed essentially from their own. The English were in want of preachers, and would not for a time attach the same importance to a difference in the form of ecclesiastical government. And he might as well have alleged that they would not have applied to them, because, according to the decision of the Church of Rome, with which they were connected, the Scots were schismatical in their mode of observing Easter. PtTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 237 to be subject, after the example of their first teacher, who was not a bishop, but a presbyter and monk."* That subjection was cheerfully yielded to Columba, the first abbot, and, as would seem from the language ascribed to Colman, when he was ordained by the President and the rest of the College, it was given at the same time to the whole of the presbyters. And it was enjoined to be rendered to all their successors, not merely by one bishop, as is insinuated by Lloyd, to evade the argument which it furnishes against Episcopacy, but by the whole of the bishops in every part of Scotland, and not only in one diocese, as he would explain the word " province," for there were no dioceses in that country for nearly six centuries after the time of Columba, but as Gillan interprets, "the northern province of the Scots," of which Bede speaks in his third chapter, "the north of Ireland, the Western Scottish islands, and those parts of Britain that were inhabited by the Scots."! He denominates this constitution, " an unusual constitution," and he might justly so describe it; for while the Church of England, and almost every other Church with which he was acquainted, was subject to the authority of diocesan prelates, the whole of the simple scriptural bishops in the country of Scotland, who had no dio- ceses, were required to be subject to the Abbot of Iona, who was not a prelate, but only a presbyter, and to his fellow presbyters, whose original predecessors founded the parent college of the kingdom, where its future clergy were to be educated and ordained. The power of these presbyters over the clergy of Scotland is further confirmed by what is said by Tur- got, Prior of Durham, in his history of that See. " In these days," (a. d. 1 108,) says he, "all the right (lolum jus) of the Culdees, throughout the whole kingdom of Scotland, passed into the Bishopric of St. Andrews." * " Habere autem solct ipsa insula rectorem semper abbatcm prcs- byterum cujus juri omnia provincia, et tpsi etiam Episcopi ordine jnusitato, debeunt esse subje ti, juxta exemplum primi doctoris illius qui non episcopus, scd presbyter extitit, et monachus." Hist. Jib. iii. c. 4. t Remarks, p. 57-79. 238 LETTERS ON "The learned Selden," says Jamieson, "seems justly to view the term jus, as denoting the right, which they had long claimed and exercised, of electing arid or- daining bishops, without the interference of any others in order to their consecration. Had the writer meant to speak of their temporal rights, or even of the privi- leges attached to particular priories, he would most probably have used a different term. At any rate, had these been in his eye, he would have spoken of rights in the plural, as referring to the whole extent of their property. But when he speaks of ' the right of the Culdees throughout the whole kingdom of Scot- land, 7 it is evident, that he must refer to one distin- guishing privilege, belonging to them as a body, by virtue of which their jurisdiction had no limit, save that of the kingdom itself. And what could this be, but. the right of choosing, without, any conge d'elire from the Sovereign, and of ordaining, without any consecration from a superior order of clergy, those who were called bishops in a general sense, or Bish- ops of Scotland, as exercising their authority some- what in the same unlimited way in which the Cul- dees exercised theirs?"* * " The Bishop of St. Asaph conjectures," says he, " that it might be the right of confirming the elections of all the bishops in Scotland. This had been done by them, (the Culdees,") he says, "as being the primate's dean and chapter, but was now taken from them, and per- formed by the primate himself.'' Here the learned prelate finds him- self under the necessity of conceding to the Culdees a very extraordi- nary power. But this power must originally have centered in the Monastery of Iona. This monastery, then, must have been to all intents the primacy of Scotland, of the country at least which has now received this name. This power must have belonged to the college, as the chapter, if it must be so. But who was the primate ? No bishop, from all that we have seen, but the abbot himself. Thus the Bishop of St. Asaph finds it necessary to admit, however reluc- tantly, what he elsewhere tries to set aside, the testimony of Bede, with respect to the subjection of " all the province, and even of the bishops themselves, in an unusual manner to this abbot. Even after he has made an ineffectual attempt to show, that the province refer- ed to by the ancient writer could signify only a single diocese, he in- advertently gives up the point in controversy, making all the bishops in Scotland to be at least so far subject to the Culdees, that they had the right of confirming their elections ;" p. 341, 342. Lloyd says, (Historical Account, p. 102,) "it appears there was PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 239 But what places the matter beyond all dispute is the testimony of Bede in another part of his history, where, after speaking of the settlement of Aidan in England, who had been sent thither by these presby- ters, and of his being followed by a number of his countrymen, who preached the word with great zeal, and administered baptism, he mentions that churches were erected, and lands appropriated for establishing monasteries; "for," he says, "they were chiefly monks who came to preach. Bishop Aidan himself was a monk, forasmuch as he was sent from the island always one (bishop) in his (Columba's) monastery, as Bishop Usher tells us out of the Ulster Annals, Prim. p. 701. Usher's own words in the passage referred to are, ' The Ulster Annals teach us, that even that small island had not only an abbot, but also a bishop.' This is somewhat different from their being always one in his (Col- umba's) monastery. Usher, however, does not quote the words of the Annals, but immediately subjoins in the same sentence, — ' From which (Annals) it may perhaps be worth while to learn the first series of abbots. He then adds a list of ten in succession, giving various no- tices concerning some of them. Would it not have been fully as na- tural to have given a list of the pretended bishops if he could have done it? But, although superior to abbot-presbyters, it is not a little singular, that antiquity has thrown a veil over their names." " Besides the ten abbots of Hii mentioned by Usher, there were, according to the extracts from these Annals, appended by Mr. Pin- kerton to his Enquiry, during the lapse of about three centuries, other nine who are expressly designed abbots, ten called co-arb?, and one denominated 'Heir of Columbcille.' Johnstone, in his Extracts from the same Annals, gives the names of two abbots not appearing in Mr. Pinkerton's. But not another besides Coide is mentioned as bishop;" p. 48, 50. "In Colgan's List, as given from Innes's MS. Collections, we find twenty-six successors of Columba, in the course of two hundred and sixty-three years, and besides Ceudei, who is evidently the same with Coide, only one of these abbots has the title of bishop. This is Fer- ganan, surnamed the Briton, the third in this list, the same person with Fergnaus, who also holds the third place in Usher's. But Usher takes no notice of his being a bishop, and Smith, who, in his Chron- icle, calls him Fergna, gives him no other designation than that of abbot. His name does not appear in the Extracts from the Annals of Ulster. Smith also mentions Coide under the name of St. Caide or Caidao, but merely as Abbot of Hij." "To the article respecting Coide, Johnstone affixes the following note : ' The Abbots of Iona, Derry and Dunkeld, are frequently styled bishop*.' This remark seems to be well founded, from what follows in the Annals, a. 723. Faolan McDorbene, Abbot of Iona, was suc- ceeded in the primacy by Killin-fada;" p. 51. 240 LETTERS ON which is called Hii, the monastery of which for a long time held the supremacy among almost all the monasteries of the Northern Scots, and those of all the Picts, and presided in the government of their peo- ple;"* or, according to King Alfred's Anglo-Saxon Version, "it received the principality and exaltation." Here, it is worthy of notice, that it is not only the abbot, but the abbot along with his presbyters, or the * " Monachus ipse Episcopus Aidan, utpote de insula, quae vocatur Hii, destinatus: cujus monasterium in cunctis pene Septentrionalium Scottorum, et omnium Pictorum monasteriis non parvo tempore arcem tenebat, regendisquc eorum populis praeerat." Hist. lib. iii. cap. 3. " It has been urged," says Jamieson, p. 71, " that we can conclude nothing from this unusual authority against the establishment of Epis- copacy in Scotland, because the government of Oxford is vested in the University, exclusively of the bishop who resides there, (Lloyd's Histor. Account, p. 180, 161.) But the cases are by no means paral- lel; for, 1. The government of the whole province was vested in the abbot and college of monks. It has been said, indeed, that the Kings of England might have extended the power of the University of Ox- ford through the whole diocese, had they pleased, and that it would not have been a suppressing of the order of bishops. But, not to say that such a co-ordinate power would have been extremely galling to the episcopate, it has been proved, that the power of the monastery extended far beyond the limits which Bishop Lloyd has assigned to the pretended diocese of Hii. 2. The power itself is totally different. Although the Bishop of Oxford be subject to the University in civil matters, as well as the other inhabitants of that city, what estimate would he form of the pretensions of that learned body, were they to claim a right of precedence regendis populis, in governing all the people of his diocese; and as a proof of the nature of the government, the same which Bede gives, of sending forth missionaries to teach, to baptize, and to plant churches? (Hist., lib. iii. c. 3.) The Bishop, I apprehend, would rather be disposed to view this as a virtual suppres- sing of the order." The supposition has been otherwise stated with respect to an uni- versity. It has been said, (Life of Sage, p. 52,) " When a bishop is head of a college in any of the universities, (which has frequently happened,) he must be subject to the jurisdiction of the vice-chancel- lor, though only a priest, and perhaps one of his own clergy. In reply, it has been properly inquired, were the bishops of Lindisfairn no otherwise subject to the Monastery of Icolmkill, than the head of a college in any of the universities, becoming afterwards a bishop, must be subject to the jurisdiction of the vice-chancellor, who may be a priest in his own diocese? The cases must indeed be viewed as totally dissimilar; unless it can be shown that the head of a college may be sent, ordained, and consecrated to be a bishop of any diocese in England, and yet continue subject to the university from which he was sent." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 241 monastery, that is represented as invested with this supremacy over the other monasteries, and as presid- ing in the ecclesiastical government of the people, both of the Scots and Picts. And accordingly, the passage is thus translated by Stapleton: "The house of religion was no small time the head house of all the monas- teries of the Northern Scottes, and of abbyes of all the Redshankes, (the term by which he renders Pictorum,) and had the soveraintie in ruling of their people."* And we have positive evidence of their ordaining bishops, and sending them to England; and if they exercised that power in regard to ministers who were to labour in that country, it furnishes evidence which is fitted to satisfy any unprejudiced mind, that they must have exercised the same power in regard to those ministers who were to officiate in their own country. Bede informs us that Oswald, an English Prince, "sent to the elders of the Scots amongst whom he had been baptized, that they might send him a bishop, by whose doctrine and ministry the nation of Angles which he governed might be instructed in the Christian faith, and receive the sacraments."t The presbyters of Iona accordingly sent him Cormac, whom they ordained to that office ; but as his manners were too austere, he failed in conciliating the affections of the people, and was soon obliged to return. Upon his arrival at the monastery, the presbyters met to receive his report; and as the passage which relates to it has been considerably perverted by modern Episcopalians, and has been inaccurately rendered in the version of 1723, I shall give it in the old version of Stapleton, who, though a zealous Papist and Episcopalian, has translated it more faithfully. " He returned," says he, " into his countre, and in the assemble of the ehlers,he * Bede, Hist. lib. iii. cap. 3. t " Idem ergo Oswald mox ubi regnum susce^>it, desiderans totam cui praeesse coepit gentem fidei Christianae gratia imbui, cujus ex- periinenta pcrmaxima in expugnandis Barbaris jam ccperat misit ad majores natu Scottorum inter quos exulans ipse baptismatis sacra- menta, cum his qui secum militibus, consecutus erat, petens ut sibi mittcrctur antistes," &c. Hist. lib. iii. c. 3. 16 242 LETTERS ON made relation, how, that in teaching, he could do the people no good to the which he was sent, for as much as they were folkes that might not be reclaymed, of a hard capacite, and fierce nature. Then the elders (as they say) began in counsaile to treat at long what were best to be done.' 7 * While they were deliberat- ing about what ought to be done, Aidan (who, for aught that appears, was previously only a monk and not a presbyter) rose and addressed them, and they were so struck with the wisdom which he displayed, and which they had not anticipated, that they resolved to appoint him in the room of Cormac, and ordained him and sent him to King Oswald. "Having heard this," says Bede, "the faces and the eyes of all who sat there were turned to him; they diligently weighed what he had said, and determined that he was worthy of the episcopal office, and that he should be sent to instruct the unbelieving and illiterate, it being proved that he was supereminently endowed with the gift of discretion, which is the mother of virtues, and thus ordaining him they sent him to preach."t The * " Redierit patriam, atque in convenlu Seniorum retulerit, quia nil prodesse docendo genti ad quam missus erat potuisset," &c. Lib. iii. c. 5. t " Quo audito, omnium qui consedebant ad ipsum ora et oculi con- versi, diligenter quid diceret discutiebant, et ipsum esse dignum epis- copatu, ipsum ad erudiendos incredulos et indoctos mitti decernunt; qui gratia discretionis, quae virtutum mater est, ante omnia probatur imbutus; sicque ilium ordinantes, ad praedicandum miserunt." Hist. lib. iii. c. 5. Gillan says, " What can be the meaning of his being thought wor- thy of the office of a bishop, and his being ordained? Certainly he was a presbyter before he was a monk of Hii, and a member of the synod, and spoke and reasoned, and made a great figure in it." (Life of Sage.) But what assurance have we of this? says Jamieson, p. 66. " Bishop Lloyd shows that many monks were laymen. Bede himself admits that of the many who daily came from the country of the Scots into the provinces of the Angles over which Oswald reigned, and entered the monasteries, only some were presbyters. He seems to say, that they all preached, or acted as catechists ; but that those only baptized who had received the sacerdotal office. Having observed that they instructed the Angles in regular discipline, he adds, for they were for the most part monks who came to preach. Bishop Aidan himself was a monk, &.c. As he had already distinguished those who had the sacerdotal office from such as were merely monks, there is great reason to suppose that he means here to say, that Aidan had been a mere monk before his ordination as bishop." PTTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 243 same persons, it is obvious, ordained and sent him who had ordained and sent his predecessor, and who were met to receive the report of the latter. And these were not, as Bishop Lloyd supposes, (for he merely mentions it as a supposition,) the diocesan bishop of Iona, of whose existence not a shadow of proof can be produced, and the Bishop of Dumblane, and some other bishop, of whose presence on the oc- casion, if there were any such prelates, there is not the slightest notice, but the presbyters of Iona, with their president, the abbot-presbyter, or as the historian denominates them, the seniors of the Scots, (Majores natu Scottorum,) and the assembly of the seniors, (Conventus Seniorum.) And though Gillan insinu- ates, without producing his authority for it, that they were diocesan bishops, yet these names, Majores Natu, and Seniores, are never applied by Bede to such ministers, while he repeatedly uses them to denote the senior monks in monasteries, who were commonly presbyters. Stapleton accordingly translates the pas- sage in such a way as shows clearly that this is the only just interpretation, for he gives the following version of it: " Al that were at the assemble looking upon Aidan, debated diligently his saying, and con- cluded that he above the rest was worthy of that charge and bishopricke, and that he should be sent to instruct those unlerned Paynims. For he was tried to be chiefely garnished with the grace of discretion, the mother of all vertues. Thus making him bishop, they sent him forthe to preach." And that this is what the historian intended to intimate, is further evident from what immediately follows, for says he, " from this island therefore, from the college of these monks, was Aidan sent to the province of the Angles, who were to be initiated into the Christian faith, hav- ing received the degree of the episcopate. At which time Segenius presided over this monastery, as abbot and presbyter."* * " Ab hac ergo insula, ab liorum collegio monachorum, ad pro- vinciam Anglorum instituendam in Christo, missus est Aidan acccpto gradu Episcopatus. Quo tempore eidem monastcrio Segenius abbas et presbyter pracfuit." Hist. lib. iii. c. 5. 244 LETTERS ON As the episcopate which Aidan received at Iona was conferred upon him by a college of presbyters, with an abbot-presbyter as their president or mode- rator, so we are told by Bede, that after he died, they ordained Finan to succeed him. " But Finan," says he, " succeeded him in the episcopate, and to this he was appointed from Hii, an island and monastery of the Scots."* And again he says, "Bishop Aidan being dead, Finan in his stead received the degree of the episcopate, being ordained and sent by the Scots,"! i. e. obviously the Scottish presbyters in the island of Iona, as is stated in the first passage. They appear also to have ordained Colman, who became Metro- politan of York ; for when vindicating his mode of celebrating Easter in the Synod of Straneschalch or Whitby, in 664, he said, " the Easter which I keep I received from my elders [or presbyters,] who sent me hither as bishop, which all our ancestors, men beloved by God, are known to have celebrated in the same manner.":}: It is in vain, therefore, to deny that the power of ordination was exercised by these presbyters; and if it was from them that those ministers who were sent to England derived their orders, it must have been they too who conferred their orders on the clergy of Scotland. It is mentioned, I am aware, by Bede, that Finan, "seeing the success of Cedd," who had been sent to preach to the East Saxons, " and having called to him two other bishops for the ministry of ordination, made him bishop over the nation of the East Saxons," and that Cedd, " having received the degree of episcopacy, returned to the province, and with greater authority, fulfilled the work which he had beg an, erected churches in different places, ordained presbyters and deacons, who might assist him in the word of faith, and the * " Successit vero ei in episcopatum Finan, et ipse illi ab Hii Scottorum insula ac monaeterio destinatus." Hist. lib. iii. c. 17. + " Aidano episcopo ab hac vita sublato, Finan pro illo gradum episcopatus a Scottis ordinatus ac missus acceperat." Ibid. c. 25. t " Pascha, inquit, hoc quod agere soleo a majoribus meis accepi, qui me hue episcopum miserunt," &c. Lib. iii. c. 25. PTJSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 245 ministry of baptism."* He might be induced, how- ever, to ordain him in this way, in compliance with the prejudices of the Saxons, who had been previously in connection with the Church of Rome, though for a time they apostatized, and might otherwise have con- sidered his orders as uncanonical. And as bishop Lloyd acknowledges that the bishops who assisted Finan on that occasion were, as Bede says, " Scots," and as they had only like him Presbyterian ordination from the College of Iona, it is plain, that upon your principles the orders which Cedd himself received, and those which he afterwards conferred upon others, were perfectly irregular, and so far from preserving, they must have contributed to destroy the apostolical succession in the Church of England. I shall con- sider, however, more fully in the following letter, the effects resulting from these Scottish ordinations, and remain, Reverend Sir, Yours, &c. * " Qui ubi prosperatum ei opus evangelii comperit, fecit eum epis- copum in gentem Orientalium Saxonum," Sec. Hist. lib. iii. c. 22. " It ought to be observed that Bede," says Jamieson, p. 90, " when speaking of the episcopate, describes it only by the term gradus, and not by any one expression of difference of office or order. Now, it is well known, that many learned men who have opposed diocesan Epis- copacy, have admitted that the term bishop was very early used in the Church, as denoting a distinction with respect to degree, while the office was held to be essentially the same." In what sense this dis- tinction has been made consult what he says, p. 331, 332. And for an answer to the other objections of Episcopalians to the argument for Presbyterian Church Government, from the institutions of Iona, see his able Historical Dissertation. 246 LETTER XVI. The succession destroyed in the early Church of England, in consequence of the ordination of its first bishops by Scottish presbyters — Scottish mis- sionaries who were ordained by presbyters, acknowledged by Usher to have christianized the greater part of England. — The Presbyterian Cul- dean Scottish Church, asserted in the twelfth century, before an assembly of English bishops and nobles, to be the Mother Church of the Church of England, and not contradicted. — An Archbishop of Canterbury in that century never consecrated, and a Bishop of JNorwich consecrated by a presbyter who was an archdeacon. — Succession destroyed in the Church of Ireland through the ordination of many of its clergy by the Scottish Culdee presbyters. — Eight individuals who never had any orders, Arch- bishops of Armagh, and Primates of all Ireland. — Succession destroyed among the Scottish Episcopalians, who, according to Dr. Pusey, are not a Christian Church. — Their first prelates in 1610 never baptized, and their orders irregular. — The orders of their next bishops in 1661 uncanonical, and those of the usage bishops, from whom their present bishops derive their orders, pronounced by the college bishops in 1727 to be null and void. Reverend Sir, — I think I may now assume it as a fact established by the united and uncontradicted tes- timony of our earliest historians, that the Culdees of Iona were merely presbyters. But if this was really the case, it is attended by consequences of a very serious description to diocesan Episcopacy. It pre- sents to us the purest Church on earth, with the ex- ception of a few handfuls of humble Christians in the valleys of Piedmont, preferring the simple form of Presbytery to your ecclesiastical polity, even in its most modified form; and when we are asked by our opponents, in the haughty spirit of Bancroft and Hey- lin, where was there a Church governed by presbyters before the days of Calvin, we can point to the early Church of Scotland, which from its very foundation was Presbyterian. And along with the noble ex- ample which it exhibits of steadfast adherence to the government and doctrine of the Primitive Church, while diocesan Episcopacy existed only in Churches which acknowledged the supremacy of the Church of Rome, and ivere tainted with its corruptions, or which adopted the superstitions of the Eastern Church, it furnishes an argument against your favourite doc- PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 247 trine of the apostolical succession, which I challenge you to answer. It was they who ordained for seve- ral hundreds of years, till the emissaries of Rome ob- tained the ascendency, the whole of the ministers of the Church of Scotland. And if your position be true, that ordination of bishops, who have themselves been regularly baptized and ordained by those who had power to do it, in an uninterrupted series from the Apostles, be essential to the existence of a Christian Church and a Christian ministry, and a covenanted title to salvation, it evidently follows, that the Church of Scotland, during all that time, even passing by the previous period of her history, could not be a Church ; nor did she possess within her pale a single minister or a single individual who could cherish the smallest hope of salvation. And if such was her state during that long period, I would like to be informed how the defect was remedied, and how our Scottish Episco- palians, who are the descendants of these men, not- withstanding their new and lofty pretensions to the apostolical succession, can be in a better condition in the present day. Not only, however, was the Church of Scotland supplied with ministers ordained by these presbyters, but we have decisive evidence that the greater part of England was planted with churches by zealous and active Christian ministers, who had no other orders except what they received at Iona. It was they, as we have seen, who ordained Cormac, Aidan, and Finan; and, in addition to them, they sent forth many others, who laboured with great and remarkable suc- cess. We have a striking testimony to this fact in a speech delivered in a. d. 1176, by Gilbert Murray, then a younger Scottish clerk, and afterwards a bishop, before the Pope's Legate, when the latter attempted to bring the Church of Scotland into subjection to the Archbishop of York, and the kingdom of England. " It is true," said he, " English nation — thou attemptest, in thy wretched ambition and lust of domineering, to bring under thy jurisdiction thy neighbour provinces and nations, more noble, I will not say in multitude, 248 LETTERS ON or power, but in lineage, and antiquity; unto whom, if thou wilt consider ancient records, thou shouldst rather have been humbly obedient, or at least, laying aside thy rancour, have reigned together in perpetual love ; and now with all wickedness of pride that thou showest, without any reason or law, but in thy am- bitious power, thou seekest to oppress thy mother, the Church of Scotland, which from the beginning hath been catholique, and free, and which brought thee, when thou least straying in the wilderness of heathenism, into the safe-guard of the true faith and way unto life, even unto Jesus Christ, the author of eternal rest. She did wash thy kings and princes in the laver of holy baptism; she taught thee the com- mandments of God, and instructed thee in moral duties; she did accept many of thy nobles and others of meaner rank, when they were desirous to learn to read, and gladly gave them daily entertainment without price, books also to read, and instruction freely; she did also appoint, ordain, and consecrate thy bishops and priests ; by the space of thirty years and above, she maintained the primacy and pon- tifical dignity within thee on the north side of Thames, as Beda witnesseth. " And now, I pray thee, what recompense renderest thou now unto her that hath bestowed so many bene- fits on thee ? Is it bondage, or such as Judea rendered unto Christ, evil for good? It seemeth no other thing. If thou couldst do as thou wouldst, thou wouldst draw thy mother, the Church of Scotland, whom thou shouldst honour with all reverence, into the basest and most wretchedest bondage. Fie, for shame, what is more base?" &c* * Petrie's Church History, p. 378. He adds, "When Gilbert had so made an end, some English, both prelates and nobles, commend the yong clerk, that he had spoken so boldly for his nation, without flattering, and not abashed at the gravity of such authority ; but others, because he spoke contrary unto their minde, said a Scot is naturally violent, and in naso Scoti piper. But Roger, Archbishop of York, which principally had moved this business to bring the Church of Scotland unto his See, uttered a groan, and then with a merry coun- tenance laid his hands on Gilbert's head, saying, Ex tua pharetra non PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 249 " St. Aidan and St. Finan," says Archbishop Usher, " deserve to be honoured by the English nation, with as venerable a remembrance as, I do not say, Wilfrid and Cuthbert, but Austin the monk, and his followers. For, by the ministry of Aidan was the kingdom of Northumberland recovered from Paganism, where- unto belonged then, beside the shire of Northumber- land, and the lands beyond it unto Edinburgh Firth, Cumberland also, and Westmoreland, Lancashire, Yorkshire, and the bishopric of Durham; and by the means of Finan, not only was the kingdom of the East Saxons, which contained Essex, Middlesex, and half of Herdfordshire, regained, but also the large kingdom of Mercia converted first unto Christianity, which comprehended under it, Gloucestershire, Here- fordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Leicester- shire, Rutlandshire, Northamptonshire, Lincolnshire, Huntingdonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Shropshire, Nottinghamshire, Cheshire, and the other half of Hertfordshire. The Scottish that professed no subjection to the Church of Rome, were they that sent preachers for the conversion of these countries, and ordained bishops to govern them, namely, Aidan, Finan and Colman, successively, for the kingdom of Northumberland; for the East Saxons, Cedd, the bro- ther of Ceadda, the Bishop of York, before mentioned; for the Middle Angles, which inhabited Leicestershire, and the Mercians. Diuma; for the paucity of priests, saith Bede, constrained one bishop to be appointed over two people, and after him Cellach and Trum- here. And these with their followers, notwithstand- ing their division from the See of Rome, were, for their extraordinary sanctity of life, and painfulness in preaching the Gospel, wherein they went far beyond those of the other side, that afterwards thrust them out, and entered in upon their labours, exceedingly reverenced by all that knew them."'* And, says Dr. exiit ilia sa$ i^v u.va$a6iv tjvtZa-to • that the feet of Christ, which the woman anointed, (Luke vii.) denoted his divine doc- trine, which travelled to the uttermost parts of the earth with distinguished glory;" and that marriage is pfoper, because, when our Lord says, (Mat. xviii.) that " where two or three meet in his name, he will be in the midst of them, it means a man, his wife and his child, avbe,o. xat, yumixa xat tsxvov. ,} § Take Ter- tullian, who says that the mark which Ezekiel was to * I cannot insert what follows, as it is so grossly offensive to every delicate mind. t Dialog, cum Trypho. p. 40 ; Second Apol. p. 38 ; Dial. p. 70. t Lib. ii. cap. 41, De Haer.; lib. iii. cap. 19 ; lib. v. cap. 8. § Paedag. lib. i. cap. 9, p. 93, 94; ibid. lib. i. cap. 10, p. 96 ; ibid, lib. ii. cap. 8, p. 129. Stromata, lib. iii. p. 331. 312 LETTERS ON put on the foreheads of the men who sighed and cried in the midst of Jerusalem " was the letter Tau, or the sign of the cross ; that the reason why the Israelites overcame the Amalekites, was because Moses lifted up his hands in the form of a cross, and they were commanded by one whose name was Jesus or Joshua; that it is the Saviour who is spoken of, Deut. xxxiii. 17, when it is said, ' His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of uni- corns, and that with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth,' because the horns of the bull resemble the two extended arms of the cross; and that by Simeon and Levi, who are mentioned, Gen. xlix. 5, we are to understand the scribes and pharisees who were to persecute Christ."* And omitting the vision of Hermas and other early writ- ings, on which I am unwilling to enlarge, consider out of the many passages which might be selected from Origen what he says of the servants of Isaac, who contended with the Philistines, " whom he affirms to have been Matthew, Mark, Luke and John;" and the proof which is produced by Cyprian to show that the Redeemer is God's hand from these words, " Is God's hand weak that it cannot save?" (Is. lix. 1-4.) That the Jews would fasten him to the cross from these passages; "I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people," (Is. lxv. 2.) " Thy life shall hang in doubt before thine eyes, and thou shalt . fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life," (Deut. xxviii. 66;) and " that they would not understand the Scriptures," because Paul says, fl Cor. x. 1,) 'I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our fathers were under the cloud.' "t And reflect only further on what is said by Jerome, can. 3, in Mat. vi. 26, where he maintains very gravely, " that by the fowls of the air, who neither reap nor gather into barns, we are to understand the devils; and that by the lilies of the field, which neither toil * Lib. iii. contra Marcion, p. 813. Lib. advers. Judaeos,"p. 169. t Orig. torn, i, p. 44. Cyprian's Testimonies against the Jews, p. 26, 41, 56. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 313 nor spin, are meant the angels." Are these then the men, I ask now, as I inquired formerly, when I wrote the article from which I have taken a number of these extracts,* (and I might have given a thousand other instances,) " who have interpreted so correctly the word of God; and is it to them that we are to look up with such submission and respect, when they point out to us from Scripture either the articles of our faith," or the particular form of ecclesiastical polity which the blessed Redeemer has appointed to his Church? It may be alleged, however, that though their inter- pretation of these passages is extremely absurd, and displays an ignorance of the meaning of the Scriptures which is seldom to be met with in Protestant coun- tries in the present day, yet the errors into which they fell when they delivered these expositions are of in- ferior moment; and it will by no means follow that they erred as to doctrine, or deviated from that form of ecclesiastical polity which was sanctioned by the Apostles. " As the three authors," says Bishop Rus- set, " from whose writings I have quoted, were dis- ciples of the Apostles, lived in their society, knew their doctrines and their views in regard to the consti- tution of the Church, we cannot permit ourselves to imagine that they would sanction a polity which had not the example and approbation of those heavenly teachers to support it. It is universally allowed among the earliest Christian writers, that Ignatius and Poly- carp were ordained by the hands of the Apostles ; and St. Paul himself informs us, that Clemens was a fellow- labourer with him in the Gospel of Christ. Are we not then entitled to regard the model of ecclesiastical constitution which these holy men adopted, as pos- sessing the full authority and sanction of their inspired masters ? Or must we believe, that, under the very eye of those from whom they received their knowledge of the faith — the immediate and personal servants of the Redeemer — those divine commissioners upon * Review of Bishop Tomline's Refutation of Calvinism in the Edin- burgh Christian Instructor, vol. iv. p. 394, 395, which I published many years ago. 314 LETTERS ON whom the foundations of the Church were laid, they deviated from the pattern with which they were thus supplied, and constructed a system according to their own views or convenience?"* And in the following page, he endeavours to show that it is equally impro- bable that Irenaeus, " who lived about the middle of the second century, and who, as he himself tells us, was acquainted with Polycarp, and heard him preach," would depart from the polity which had been approved by the Apostles ; and the same reasoning has been applied to the fathers, even in the days of Cyprian. I shall by and by inquire into the amount of supe- riority ascribed to bishops in the writings of these fathers, and if I am not greatly mistaken, it will avail but little for promoting the cause of diocesan Epis- copacy. But at present I content myself with meeting the statement of the extreme improbability of their departing in the least from the form of polity which was approved by the Apostles by a similar statement of an equal improbability, that they would depart from the doctrines, and rites, and practices which had received the sanction of these illustrious ministers. And if it shall be found upon inquiry, (and it is a question of fact,) that they departed in a short time from a number of the latter, it will appear equally credible, since we are told by Paul that " the mystery of iniquity had begun to work" even in his day, that they might, to a small extent during the first two cen- turies, deviate from the former. Now, it is plain that they departed at an early period from the doctrine of the Apostles on several important points. When Cecil accordingly wrote to Cox to assist Elizabeth with his advice about the perusal of the fathers, the bishop replied, that " when all is done, the Scripture is that that pearseth. Chry- sostom and the Greek fathers favour Pelagius; Ber- nard sometimes is for monkery; and he trusted her Grace meddled with them but at spare hours."t And * Historical Evidence of the Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy, p. 27, 28. t Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 324. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 315 said Whitgift in his Answer to Cartwright, p. 472, " My comparison of the Church of England with the fathers shall consist in these three points, truth of doc- trine, honesty of life, and right use of external things. Touching the fyrst, that is, truth of doctrine, I shall not need much to labour; for I think T. C. and his adherents will not deny, but that the doctrine taught and professed by our bishops at this day is much more perfect and sounder than it commonly was in any age after the Apostles'* time. For the most part of the auncientest bishops were deceyved with that grosse opinion of a thousande yeares after the resur- rection, wherein the kingdome of Christe should here remaine upon earth, the fauvorers whereof were called Millenarii. Cyprian and the whole Council of Car- thage erred in re-baptization. And Cyprian himself also was greatly overseene in making it a matter so necessarie in the celebration of the Lord's supper, to have water mingled with wyne, which was no doubt at that tyme common to moe than to him. But the other opinion which he confuteth, of usyng water only, is more absurd, and yet it had at that tyme patrones among the bishops/' And it is impossible to look into the writings of the fathers without perceiv- ing the unsoundness of many of their opinions. Justin Martyr, for instance, asserts that demons were the offspring of women who had connection with angels; and he asserts, that the spirits of the saints, and even of the ancient prophets who died before the coming of the Saviour, were under the power of these demons ; " in potestatem venisse talium virtutum ;" and that therefore, when Christ was dying, he commended his spirit to his heavenly Father.* And he believed very firmly in the doctrine of the Millennium, as it was taught by Papias, of which the following account is delivered by lrenaeus, and it is certainly most unlike to what was learned from the Apostles. " The days," said he, " will come, in which there shall grow vine- yards, having each 10,000 stocks; and each stock, * First Apol. p. 7, and Second Apol. p. 15. Dialog, cum Trypho. p. 79, 80; ibid. p. 63. 316 LETTERS ON 10,000 branches; each branch, 10,000 shoots; each shoot, 10,000 bunches; each bunch , 10,000 grapes, and each grape squeezed shall yield Uventy-five mea- sures of wine; and when any of the saints shall go to pluck a bunch, another bunch will cry out, I am a better, take me, and bless the Lord through me. In like manner, a grain of wheat sown shall bear 10,000 stalks; each stalk, 10,000 grains; and each grain, 10,000 lbs. of the finest flour; and so all other fruits, seeds and herbs in the same proportion. These words Papias, a disciple of St. John, and companion of Poly- carp, an ancient man, testifies in writing in his fourth book, and adds, that they are credible to those who believe." Irenaeus asserts that the Saviour lived upon earth " forty or fifty years;" and says that this is not only mentioned in the Scriptures, but was even reported by the elders who had been acquainted with St. John to have been declared by that *flpostle ; that Enoch, before he was translated, was employed by God on a mission to the angels ; " Dei legatione ad Angelos fungebatur ;" (and the Commentaries of Cy- ril, Lyra and Feuardentius, who would understand by the angels the antediluvian giants, are contra- dicted by the expressions that follow;) and that the souls of the dead depart into an invisible place which is appointed for them by God, and remain there till the resurrection, when they are admitted into heaven.* Very grievous errors were maintained by Clemens Alexandrinus, one of the best of the fathers. Though he acknowledges in one passage that " we are alto- gether corrupt by nature," yet it is plain, from what he says elsewhere, that he considered mankind as cor- rupt only from practice, for he asks, " how the child who has done nothing can have fallen under the curse of Jldam?" And after asserting, that those who had lived under the law before the coming of Christ would be justified by faith only, and that those who were to be justified from among the Gentiles required not only faith, but as they had followed phi- * Lib. ii. cap. 39 ; lib. iv. cap. 30 ; lib. v. cap. 31. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 317 losophy, needed to be converted from idolatry, he remarks, "that the Lord, after he died, went down to Hades, and preached to the Hebrews, that they might obtain that blessing; and that his Apostles, when they died, preached to Socrates and the other virtuous Gentiles, that they might reclaim them from the latter, and prepare them for being justified."* And he affirms even that the Redeemer himself, though he was perfectly holy, was regenerated at his bap- tism ; for after referring to the administration of it to him by his forerunner, he adds, " Let us ask, then, the wise, is Christ, who was regenerated to-day, perfect ? Jivdaptda ovv tiov aoq>(*v orpsgov avayswrjOsis 6 X^ct-oj r;8ri rtXftoj f Paedag. lib. i. cap. 6, p. 68. In short, while it was the opinion of Origen, that neither the sufferings of the wicked, nor the happiness of the righteous, would properly speaking be eternal, his sentiments about the atonement and many other subjects were in direct opposition to the doctrine of the Apostles. He admits, indeed, the substitu- tion of Christ, but asserts at the same time, that not only apostles and prophets, but even the celes- tial angels and glorified saints may be our pro- pitiatory sacrifices for appeasing the Jllmighty.\ Nay, as is acknowledged by Dr. Cave, he imagined that Christ died not for men only, " but for angels, and devils, and the heavenly bodies"% And so gene- * Strom, lib. ii. p. 287; ibid. lib. iii. p. 342; ibid. lib. vi. p. 459, 460; Comp. Strom, lib ii. p. 277. t Tom. i. p. 121, 136, 150. "Sic ergo fortassis, et si quis est ange- lorum, coelestiumque virtutum, aut si quis justorum hominum, vel etiam sanctorum propbetarum atque apostolorum, qui enixius inter- veniat pro peccatorurn hominum hie pro repropitiatione divina velut aries aut vitulus, aut hircus oblatus esse sacrificium ob purificationem populo impetrandam accipi potest," torn. i. p. 40, 93. X Review of Tomline's Refutation of Calvinism, Christ. Instructor, vol. iv. p. 397. Ernesti, though not a Calvinist, makes the following remark in his unpublished MS. Lectures on the doctrine of the fa- thers : M Videtur existimasse," says he of Justin Martyr, " hominem habere a natura libcrum arbitrium, h. e. facultatem eligendi bonum et malum, rectc et male agendi, servandi Dei praecepta et violandi. Verum si ex verbis est judicandum (mines fere doctores rcclesiae hujns criminis rei sunt, quia omnes fere de libero arbitrio non satis accurate locuti sunt." 318 LETTERS ON ral was this apostasy from the purity of the faith, that, as was remarked again by Whitgift, " almost all the bishops and learned writers of the Greke Church, yea and the Latines also, for the. most part were spotted with the doctrines of free will, of merites, of invocation of sainctes, and such lyke." Nor did they deviate less from the example of the Apostles, in regard to many rites and religious obser- vances. We have a remarkable instance of this in the time which was selected for the celebration of Easter, the one-half of the Church contending, with Polycarp, that it ought to be kept on the day of the Jewish Passover, and appealing in support of it to the opinion and practice of the Apostle John, and the other, with Anicetus, maintaining that it ought to be kept on a subsequent day, and appealing in proof of it to the opinion and practice of Peter and Paul. It is plain, however, that one of them at least, and most probably both, must have erred as to this matter, for no day seems to have been fixed for it, as far as can be collected from Scripture, in the time of the Apostles. And if they departed in this respect from the example of these early ministers of Christ, though many of them had seen them, and were acquainted with their practice, is it not equally conceivable, that they may have departed from their form of ecclesiastical polity? The Apostles never prayed for the souls of the dead ; but it would seem from what is mentioned in the writings of Tertullian, Cyril, and others, that this was the practice of the Church from an early period. " Then," says the last of these authors, " we pray during the celebration of the Eucharist for all who have lived among us, believing that it is a great assist- ance to those souls for which prayer is made, while that holy and awful sacrifice is presented on the al- tar."* And in the Greek Liturgy of Chrysostom, they say, especially for our " most holy, immaculate, most * B.nA x.*t u7ri£ 7rsLvrw a.7rhco T/jg ayix; 7rgo9-^oem. E/ t/? I7rio-K.OTOC » Trpso-fiurtpys ttolpz t»v tou kvp^iov xopus nisi primus presby- ter? Nam in Alexandria et per totam iEgyptum, si desit episcopus, consecrat presbyter," &,c. t " Quanquam secundum honorum vocabula quae jam ecclesiae usus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio major sit," &cc. Epist. 19. ad Hieron. X " Quaeritur cur dc presbyteris nullam fecerit mentionem, sed eos in episcoporum nomine comprehenderit : quia secundus, imopene unus est gradus, sicut ad Philippenses," &c. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 371 why so ? Because there is not much difference be- tween bishops and presbyters ; for presbyters are or- dained for the instruction and government of the Church ; and the same things which he said to bishops apply to presbyters ; for in ordination alone they are superior to presbyters, and appear to be above them."* But admitting that these writers agree with Jerome, and the difference between them, if there be any, is extremely small, let us consider very shortly what is said on this subject by the early fathers. And here I must repeat a former remark, that it will not avail the cause of Episcopacy, though we should meet with the names of bishops, priests and deacons, unless it be distinctly stated, that the powers which were possessed by the primitive bishops correspond to those which are claimed at present by diocesan bishops. The first of these is Clemens Romanus, whose first Epistle to the Corinthians is perhaps the purest pro- . duction of Christian antiquity, though his argument for the resurrection from that of the Phoenix is so weak and contemptible, that we would scarcely have expected it to have been used by a man who was entitled to the high character which is ascribed to him by Episcopalians."! It deserves, however, to be * " To rm Tr^&uTioav ray/ua aqu;" &c. Homily on 1 Tim. iii. 1. Theodoret, too, says, "The Apostle calls a presbyter a bishop, as we showed when we expounded the Epistle to the Philippians, which may be also learned from this place ; for, after the precepts proper to bishops, he describes the things that agree to deacons, But, as I said, of old they called the same men both bishops and presbyters." + "Let us consider," says he, " that wonderful type of the resur- rection, which is seen in the Eastern countries, that is to say, in Arabia. There is a certain bird, called aPbcenix: of this there is never but one at a time, and that lives five hundred years; and when the time of its dissolution draws near, that it must die, it makes it- self a nest of frankincense, and myrrh, and other spices; into which, when its time is fulfilled, it enters and dies. But its flesh, putrefy- ing, breeds a certain worm, which, being nourished with the juice of the dead bird, brings forth feathers ; and when it is grown to a perfect state, it takes up the nest in which the bones of its parent lie, and carries it from Arabia into Egypt, to a city called Ilelio- polis: and flying in open day, in the sight of all men, lays it upon the altar of the sun, and so returns from whence it came. The priests then search into the records of the time, and find that it re- 372 LETTERS ON noticed, that it is neither addressed to a bishop, but to the Church of Corinth ; nor is there the slightest notice of him in any part of the Epistle, but he speaks always of their rulers, (yyov/xtvoi) and presbyters, (n^eo^vr^oi,) though Archbishop Wake, in order to keep the latter out of view, translates the term, " such as were aged." And says Stillingfleet, " Had Episcopacy been insti- tuted on the occasion of the schism at Corinth," (as many Episcopalians contend,) " certainly of all places we should the soonest have heard of a bishop at Corinth for the remedying of it; and yet almost of all places, these heralds that derive the succession of bishops from the Apostles' times are the most plunged whom to fix on at Corinth. And they that can find any one single bishop at Corinth at the time when Clemens wrote his Epistle to them, (about another schism as great as the former, irhich certainly had not been according to their opinion, if a bishop had been there before,) must have better eyes and judg- ment than the deservedly admired Grotius, (and he was a great friend of Episcopacy,) who brings this, in his Epistle to Bignonius, as an argument of the un- doubted antiquity of that Epistle, that Clement no where mentions that singular authority of bishops, which, by Church customs, after the death of Mark at Alexandria, and by its example in other places, began to be introduced; but Clement clearly shows, as did the Apostle Paul, that then, by the common council of the presbyters, who, both by Paul and Cle- ment, are called bishops, the Churches were govern- ed. ,? * Nay, when he speaks of the persons against whom the schismatics had risen up, he represents them as the presbyters, and never makes the smallest allusion to a diocesan bishop. " It is a shame, my belov- ed," says he, "yea, a very great shame, and unworthy of your Christian profession, to hear that the most firm and ancient Church of the Corinthians should, turned precisely at the end of Jive hundred years." And yet Cle- ment, who retails this fable, and reasons from it, is the best of all the fathers. * Irenicum, p. 279, 260. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 373 by one or two persons, be led into a sedition against its priests/' as Archbishop Wake renders it, or, ac- cording to the original, "its presbyters, (rf££oj3urf£cn;$.") And it is the same persons to whom he endeavours to bring them into subjection. "Who is there among you that is generous? Let him say, if this sedition, this contention, and these schisms be on my account, I am ready to depart, to go whithersoever ye please, and to do whatsoever ye command me ; only let the flock of Christ be in peace, with the (elders, Arch- bishop Wake,) presbyters that are set over it, (xa9iga t u(viov 7ie,£ofivtse,M.") And yet Clement is one of the writers to whom Bishop Russel, Mr. Boyd, and other Episcopalians are accustomed to appeal, as proving that the Church was then governed by dio- cesan bishops. Clement indeed says, that "the Apostles knew, by our Lord Jesus Christ, that contention would arise on account of the name of the episcopate. And there- fore, having a perfect foreknowledge of this, they ap- pointed persons, and then gave directions how, when they should die, other chosen and approved men should succeed in their ministry." And he tells us in another passage, that the Apostles, "preaching through countries and cities, appointed the first fruits of their ministry bishops and deacons (Archbishop Wake, ministers,) over such as should believe, after they had proved them by the Spirit. Nor was this any thing new, since long before it was written con- cerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture in a certain place, I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith." Now, the first observation which is suggested by these passages is this, that, he mentions only two, and not three orders of ministers as appointed for the Church. And it is impossible to escape from this remark, by saying with Mr. Boyd, that the Apostles were still living, and that they occupied the place of the first order: for it is evident, from the first quotation, that he enumerates the orders of ministers who were to govern and instruct the Church after their death. 374 LETTERS ON And it is further evident, that the highest of these two orders, or the bishops, were the presbyters, of whom he had been speaking throughout the whole Epistle as set over the Church of Corinth, as well as other Churches, and in reference to whom he says at the conclusion, " Do ye therefore, who laid the founda- tion of this sedition, submit yourselves unto your presbyters, bending the knees of your hearts." Milner accordingly admits this ; for, says he, " At first indeed, and for some time, church governors were only of two ranks, presbyters and deacons. The Church of Corinth continued long in this state, as far as one may judge from Clement's Epistle"* And says Fa- ber, " Here we may observe no more than two orders are specified, the word bishops being plainly used as equipollent to the word presbyters; and all possi- bility of misapprehension is avoided by the circum- stance of Clement's affirmation, that the appointment of these two orders was foretold in prophecy which announced the appointment of exactly two descrip- tions of spiritual officers. Had the Church in Cle- ment's time universally acknowledged and believed that three distinct orders of clergy had been appointed, that father never could have asserted such a form of polity to be foretold in a prophecy which announced the appointment of no more than two sorts of officers, described as being overseers and ministers."! And it agrees exactly with the interpretation of the pro- phecy given by Irenaeus, in a passage before quoted, where he observes, " Such presbyters the Church nourishes, of whom the prophet says, I will give thee thy princes or rulers in peace, and thy bishops in righteousness." And though, as Bishop Russel re- marks, " Clement reminds them, that, in the Jewish Church, the high-priest had his proper services to perform ; that to the priests their particular place was appointed; and that the Levites also had their allotted ministry to discharge;" it can no more be inferred that he intended to assert that there ought to be as * Church History, vol. i. p. 161. t Consult him on the Vallenses and Albigenses, p. 558. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 375 many orders in the Christian ministry as in the Jewish, than it could be alleged that he meant to teach us that there ought to be as many orders in it as there were gradations of rank in an army ; because, when enforcing subjection, he says in another passage, "all are not generals, nor colonels, nor captains, nor in- ferior officers, but every one in his respective rank does what is commanded him by the king, and those who have the authority over him." And though he says that " the Apostles knew by our Lord Jesus Christ that there should contentions arise upon account of the episcopate," yet it is plain, from the conclusion of the paragraph, that it means merely the over-sight or superintendence of a con- gregation ; for he represents it as an oversight or epis- copacy which could be performed by presbyters. " It would be no small sin in us," says he, "should we cast off those from the episcopate," or, as it is trans- lated by Archbishop Wake in the notes, " bishopric, who holily, and without blame, fulfil the duties of it." After which he adds, showing that he is speak- ing of presbyters, "Blessed are those presbyters, (7t£s6j3vtee,o(,,) who, having finished their course before these times, have obtained a fruitful and perfect dis- solution, for they have no fear lest any one should turn them out of the place which is now appointed for them." Not a particle of evidence, then, can be produced from Clement for diocesan Episcopacy.* * When Clement says that the Apostles, foreseeing there would be contentions about the episcopate, appointed fit persons to succeed them, Dr. Hammond, in his Power of the Keys, c. iii. p. 413, and Dr. Arden, in his Discourse on the passage, translate the word, ewc«»v, list, and render the phrase thus, " They left a list of other chosen and approved men to succeed them in their ministry." " They set down," says Hammond, a list or continuation of successors ;" which version the Tractarians in their notes on this passage seem to favour. It would be truly satisfactory if any of the Tractarians, or any other Episcopalian, could mention a single father who had seen the list, and examined the names in it, and ascertained whether it fixed their suc- cessors for the following century, or the first six centuries, or till the end of the world, and whether it included their successors in all the Churches. And it would be still more satisfactory, if he could tell where it was now to be found. If it could only be discovered, how invaluable would it be to the Christian Church! It would settle 376 LETTERS ON The next document which is quoted by Bishop Russel in proof of the existence of three Episcopal orders, is the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians. But he has omitted to tell us in what part of it he found them, and I have been unable to discover it. Polycarp does not represent himself as a bishop, and for aught that appears, he might have been only the senior presbyter or moderator of the Church of Smyrna. He makes no allusion to a diocesan bishop at Philippi, or to any vacancy in that see, or to any bishop in any other diocese. And though he points out the duties of deacons and presbyters, he does not give the smallest hint of a superior order, nor make any reference to the duties belonging to it. And as Archbishop Wake fixes the date of this Epistle " at the end of the year of our Lord 116, or in the begin- ning of 117," (Preliminary Discourse, p. 119,) the silence of Polycarp respecting the Episcopal order, so far from supporting the assertion of Bishop Russel, furnishes a strong presumptive proof that it had not at that time been introduced into the Church. The third, however, and the principal authority to which Episcopalians appeal for the existence of these orders at that early period, are the short Epistles of Ignatius, which were written, according to Bishop Russel, in the year 110, or in 116.* But before any argument can be founded on them in support of their principles, two things must be proved ; 1*/, not only that they were written by Ignatius, but that they are so free from interpolation, as that we can depend on them as the uncorrupted writings of Ignatius ; and, 2dly, that if they are genuine, as when they issued from the pen of the Martyr, they present such a view at once, by ocular demonstration, all dispute about the apostolic suc- cession; for we would require only to look into it, to see whether the bishops who had come after them in all the Churches for 1800 years, were the very individuals whom the Apostles, before they died, put down in their list. And there would be no need for the sovereign to issue a conge d'elire in future to any dean and chapter to elect a new bishop, for they would require only to examine some certified copy of the list, and see who came next. It is difficult to write with any thing like patience of such absurdities. * Sermon, p. 28. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 377 of the powers of bishops as is inconsistent with Pres- bytery, and confirm the powers which are claimed and exercised by diocesan bishops. Now, I deny that they can establish either of these positions, though, from the length to which this discussion has already extended, I am prevented from entering so fully into the subject as I had originally intended. I am aware, that when Calvin and the Centurists of Magdeburgh rejected these Epistles, it was the long Epistles, and not those which were discovered by Usher and Vossius, and therefore I do not found on their opinion with regard to the latter. But I would remind Episcopalians, that Whitgift, and Bil- son, and others of their bishops, contended as zealously for the genuineness of the former, though it is now abandoned by every one as utterly untenable, as they themselves contend for that of the short Epistles. Salmasius and Blondel deny the genuineness of the latter, and were ably supported not only by Daille, but by La Roque, the suppression of whose second dissertation, through the influence of the Episco- palians of his day, was acknowledged by his son, as is mentioned by Mr. Jamieson in his Examination of the Fundamentals of the Hierarchy.* Dr. Owen, too, of whom the Rev. Mr. Sinclair says that he was re- spectable for his piety, as well as erudition,! so far from entertaining an opposite opinion, as he supposes, * " La Roque, in favour of his deceased friend, (Daille,) undertook the patrociny of this hero; and except fame be altogether false, has fortunately defended his judgment. These observations were again assaulted by the famous Beveridge, to whom our author, preparing an answer which we have by us, almost perfected, through the impor- tunity of some friends, was suddenly turned another way. Thus he, and who these friends were we are informed by another author, a man of the Episcopal persuasion, and therefore may the better be believed in this matter, viz. Jos. Walker, translator of La Roque's History of the Eucharist, who, describing the life of La Roque, which he pre- fixes to his translation, tells us, that at the request of some persons favouring Episcopacy, he did not finish this second piece." Jamie- son's Fundamentals of the Hierarchy examined, p. 112. t Dissertations vindicating the Church of England, p. 57, note. — It is evident that Mr. Sinclair is not acquainted with the writings of Dr. Owen, which contain a view of his sentiments respecting these Epistles. 37S LETTERS ON says, that " these Epistles seemed to him to be like the children that the Jews had by their strange wives, Neh. xiii., who spake partly in the language of Ash- dod, and partly in the language of the Jews."* Mo- sheim says, " So considerable a degree of obscurity hangs over the question respecting the authenticity of not only a part, but the whole of the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius, as to render it altogether a case of much in- tricacy and doubt." And again, he remarks, " to ascer- tain with precision the exact extent to which they may be considered genuine appears to me to be beyond the reach of all human penetration. "t Dr. Neander re- presents them as " interpolated by some one who was prejudiced in favour of the Hierarchy;' 7 (Church History, vol. i. p. 190.) And Ernesti declares in his MS. Lectures, that " though he sat down to the pe- rusal of them under an impression that they were genuine, he was forced, while reading them, to come to the conclusion, that it was scarcely credible that an apostolical man, such as Ignatius was, could have written them as they now are. "J And that this con- clusion was just will appear, I think, from the follow- ing considerations : 1. Passages are quoted from them by some of the fathers which are not now to be found in them. Jerome, for instance, says, (Dial. 3, contra Pelag.) " Ignatius, an apostolical man and martyr, writes boldly, that the Lord chose as Apostles men who were sinners above all others." It was indeed a bold say- ing, but it does not occur in any of the Epistles; and if they have undergone some changes, and have some things left out, why might they not undergo others, and have some things put in? * Preface of his Treatise on the Perseverance of the Saints, p. 13. "The foysted passages," says he, p. 10, " in many places are so evi- dent, that no man who is not resolved to say any thing - , without care of proof or truth, can once appeare in any defensative of them." + Commentary by Vindal, vol. i. p. 276,278. t " Ernesti vero se etsi ad lectionem harum epistolarum cum opinione esse genuinas acccsserit, tamen inter legendum cognovisse profitetur, vix credible virum apostolieum, qualis fuerit Ignatius, sic scripsisse," &c. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 379 2. Many weak and foolish things occur in them, as Ernesti observes, " and scarcely worthy of an aposto- lical man. You meet with numerous passages about the dignity and prerogatives of bishops and presbyters ; and the constant song of almost all the Epistles is this, "Honour the bishop, and you will honour God the Father; honour the presbyters, and you will honour the Son; honour the deacons, and you will honour the Holy Spirit. Such a comparison of the ministers of the Church with the Sacred Trinity is unquestion- ably unworthy of an apostolical man."* And it is impossible, I think, to look into these Epistles, with- out perceiving that his observations are well founded. In the first of them, for example, the duties of the Church of Ephesus to the bishop, (and it extends to little more than eight jjages,) are dwelt on more fre- quently than the duties of the members of the Church to its ministers in the whole Neiv Testament. In the second, (the Epistle to the Magnesians,) which extends to five pages, the bishop is brought forward six times; in the third, (the Epistle to the Tralhans,) which is scarcely five pages, seven times; in the fifth, (to the Philadelphians,) which is little more than four pages, five times; in the sixth, (to the Church of Smyrna,) three times; and once in very strong terms in the short Epistle to Polycarp. And compare the language in which the Scriptures point out the degree of respect, and the other duties which are due from Christians to their ministers, with that which is used in these Epis- tles to express the respect which was considered to be due especially to bishops. "We beseech you breth- ren," said Paul to the Thessalonians, (1 Thess. v. 12, 13,) "to know them which are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake." " Let the presbyters * " Multa jejuna et viro apostolico vix digna. Multa enim in iis repcriuntur loca de di^nitate et praerogativa episcoporum et presby- terorum ; et continua fere omnium epistolarum cantilena est, Jionora Episcopum, ct honorabis Deum Patrern ; honora presbyteros, et honorabis Filium; honora diaconos, ct honorabis Spiritum Sanctum. Talis vero eomparatio ministrormn ecclesiae cum S S. Trinitate pro- fecto est indigna viro apostolico." 380 LETTERS ON that rule well," said he to Timothy, ( 1 Tim. v. 17,) "be counted worthy of double honour," (or, as ap- pears from the following verse, maintenance, tifirj, where it is required,) "especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." And said he to the Hebrews, (xiii. 17,) "Obey them that h?s', as is done in the New Testament; axxm-ka, GtTtooi'Ka, and others which are found in no Greek writer 384 LETTERS ON of that age."* And when Dr. Hammond had replied to this objection, that " many more Latin words occur in the New Testament than are used in these Epis- tles," Dr. Owen answered, that "there is scarce one but it is expressive of some Roman office, custom, money, order, or the like : words which pass as proper names from one country and language to another, or are indeed of a pure Greek original, or at least were in common use in that age, neither of which can be spoken of the words above mentioned used in the Epistles." And he adds, " I would indeed gladly see a fair, candid, and ingenuous defence of the style and * " Vocabula Latina quae sec. 1. et 2. nemo Graecus scriptorum usurpavit, sed quae demum a scriptoribus Graecis, sec. 7. et 8. usur- pari coepta sunt, v. c. JWggTwg, pro quo scriptores horum temporum omnes dicunt a.7roa-xKnc, ut etiam dicitur in N. T. ctx.x.i7rhx., cri7ro ire,o tuov,) and disciples of the Apostles, never delivered unto thee;" and after referring to Polycarp, he adds, "I am able to testify before God, that if that holy and apostolical presbyter (a7to$ouxo$ 7te,tapvtte,os) had heard * Euseb. Hist. Eccles., lib. iv. cap. 5, who quotes the Epistle, t Ircnicurn, p. 311, 312. 396 LETTERS ON any such thing, he would at once have reclaimed and stopped his ears, and after his manner cried out, Good God ! to what times hast thou reserved me?"* But if the highest rank which he assigns to Polycarp was that of a presbyter, and if the highest title which was given to himself by the presbyters of Lyons, in their commendatory letter to the Bishop of Rome, was the name of " a presbyter of their Church, and their brother and colleague," you will appeal in vain to him or to them to show that at that time diocesan bishops, or an order of ministers superior to presbyters, existed in the Church. The reference to the different orders in the ministry in the writings of Clement of Alexandria, which were published either in the end of the second or in the be- ginning of the third century, are so few and indistinct, that it is difficult to ascertain his opinion. You meet, indeed, with one passage, (Stromata, lib. vi.) where he mentions the three names of bishops, presbyters and deacons ; and with another in his Paedagogus, (lib. iii. cap. 12, p. 194,) where he puts presbyters be- fore bishops, and says, "very many commands relative to particular persons are written in the sacred books, some to presbyters, some to bishops, some to deacons, and some to widows." But he never points out the dif- ference between bishops and presbyters, nor represents the former as possessing exclusively the powers of or- dination, confirmation, and government, like modern bishops, nor says even a word from which it can be inferred that they were any thing but the standing moderators or presidents of the councils of presbyters. On the contrary, he represents himself, though he was only a presbyter, and all who were pastors, as govern- ing the Churches; for, says he, (Paedag. lib. i. p. 120.) " If we who bear rule over the Churches are shep- herds or pastors after the image of the Good Shep- herd," &c. And in the eleventh chapter of the same book, (p. 182,) he tells us that presbyters gave impo- sition of hands, whether for confirmation or mere bene- * Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. 20. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 397 diction does not appear; for, says he, " On whom does the presbyter lay his hand, (*u>i ya£ 7te,tofivT£e.o$ sTiittQr^i xsi%*, &c.) whom does he bless?" He says, (Strom, lib. hi.) that Paul declares it "to be necessary, that those should be appointed bishops, who, from ruling their own house, were prepared for ruling the whole Church ;" but he never specifies the extent of their powers; and though he speaks, (Strom, lib. vi.) of "a presbyter, who, though a righteous man, had not attained the chief seat on earth, (rf^oxa^S^a,") yet there is no evidence that it was any thing but the seat of the president, or moderator of the presbyters. Nay, as far as we can discover his sentiments, he appears to have thought there were only two orders, presby- ters or bishops, and deacons. Thus, in the third book of his Stromata, after quoting the words of Paul in 1 Tim. v. 14, 15, he adds, " But he must be the hus- band of one wife only, whether he be a presbyter, or deacon, or layman, if he would use matrimony with- out blame." And in book seventh, he says, " Of that service of God, about which men are employed, one is that which makes them better, {^'ktiu.tixri) ; the other, that which is ministerial, (vTts^tixri.) Pres- byters maintain that form of service in the Church which makes men better; deacons that form which is ministerial. In both these ministries the angels, as well as he who is endowed with knowledge, serve God, according to the dispensation of earthly things." Nor is it any objection to this, that he says in the sixth book of his Stromata, as Episcopalians have often asserted, " Now, in the Church here, the pro- gressions (rt^oxortas) of bishops, presbyters, deacons, I think are imitations of the angelical glory, and of that dispensation which the Scriptures declare they look for who have lived according to the Gospel in the perfection of righteousness, walking in the steps of the Apostle. These men, the Apostle writes, being taken up into the clouds, shall first serve as deacons, and shall then be admitted among the presbyters, ac- cording to the progression in glory." If he con- sidered the progressions among the ministers of the 398 LETTERS ON Church in the present world, as imitations of the two degrees of glory which shall be bestowed upon the angels in heaven, corresponding either to the higher services which they rendered to men upon earth, (as he says, book vii.) resembling those of presbyters, or to the lower services, resembling those of deacons, then it is plain that he must have looked upon these progressions among the ministers of the Church in this world as extending merely to the tivo offices of presbyters and deacons, the discharge of which led to the performance of these two kinds of service, which were copied by the angels. And as he does not speak of a third kind of service, or that of diocesan bishops, something like to which was rendered by the angels, it is evident that he could not intend to represent these prelates as a third order or progression in the Church on earth. And this is confirmed by the fact, that he describes the faithful ministers of the Gospel, after they are caught up together in the clouds, as minis tering first only as deacons in the heavenly temple and then promoted to be presbyters, after which they never rise to any higher order ; for if he regarded presbyters as the principal order in the Church in heaven, he must undoubtedly have looked upon them, as far as we can judge, as the principal order in the Church on earth. Little occurs in the writings of Tertullian bearing on the question. In his work against the heretics, he appeals to the successions of bishops in the different churches, from the age of the Apostles till his own day, in proof of the truth of the doctrine which was taught in the orthodox churches; but he does not spe- cify the powers which were exercised by these bishops, so as to enable us to judge whether they were of a superior order to presbyters. And the following is the account which he gives of the rulers of the Church in the end of the second century: "In the Church," says he, in his Apology for the Christians, (and I quote his words, as they are translated by Usher in his Re- duced Scheme of Episcopacy, that I may not be sus- pected of giving a turn to the passage to favour my PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 399 own views,) " are used exhortations, chastisements and divine censure; for judgment is given with great advice, as among those who are certain they are in the sight of God; and in it is the chiefest foreshowing of the judgment which is to come, if any man have so offended that he is banished from the communion of prayer, and of the assembly, and of all holy fellow- ship. The presidents that bear rule therein are cer- tain approved elders" or presbyters, " who have ob- tained this honour, not by reward, but by good re- port;"* " who were no other," says the Archbishop, " as he intimates elsewhere, (de Corona Militis, cap. 3,) but those from whose hands they used to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist." But if these presi- dents were seniors or presbyters, who were pastors of churches, and administered the communion to their members, and if he never mentions any order above them, though he denominates their moderator or chairman " the chief priest," who first had authority to baptize for the honour of the Church, and after him the presbyters and deacons, (de Baptismo, cap. 17,) you will look in vain also to him for support to the cause of diocesan Episcopacy. The view which is presented of the orders in the ministry in the writings of Origen, who flourished to- wards the middle of the third century, are by no means clear. Sometimes he speaks as if there were only two orders, that of the presbyters or priest, and that of the deacons, whom he compares to the Levites. Thus, in his second Homily on Numbers, (torn. ii. p. 203,) he says, " Let a man walk according to his or- der. Do you think that those who are appointed to the office of the priesthood, and who glory in the order of the priesthood, walk according to their order, and do all things which are worthy of that order? And in like manner, do you think that the dea- cons walk according to the order of their ministry? Whence, then, is it that you often hear men speaking ill of them, and saying, See what a bishop, or what a presbyter, or what a deacon! Are not these things * Apology, cap. 39. 400 LETTERS ON said, when a priest or a minister of God is seen to be- have in a way which is contrary to his order, and to perform any thing unworthy of the priestly or leviti- cal order ?"* where he evidently represents priests or presbyters and bishops as belonging to the same or- der. And he says again in his fourth Homily on Joshua, (torn. i. p. 327,) " The priestly and levitical order is that which stands near the ark of the testi- mony of the Lord, in which the law of God is carried; and they enlighten the people respecting the com- mands of God, as the prophet says, Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my paths. This light is kindled by the priests and Levites."t And yet he mentions in other passages bishops, presbyters and deacons, as in his sixth Homily on Isaiah, (torn. i. p. 635,) where he says, " No deacon, or presbyter, or bishop, taking a linen cloth, washes the feet of those who come to him."± And he refers to them else- * "Homo ergo secundum ordinem suum incedat. Putasne qui sacerdotio funguntur, et in sacerdotali ordine gloriantur," &c. t " Sacerdotalis et Leviticus ordo est qui assistit arcae testamenti Domini, in qua lex Dei portatur," &c. t u Nemo enim quibuscunque venientibus assumens linteum, dia- conus, vel presbyter, sive episcopus Javat pedes." He says indeed, in his fifth Homily on Ezekiel, torn. i. p. 715, " Those who are connected with the Church, and who have tasted of the word of God and transgress it, deserve to be punished; but it ought to be according to their different degrees in the Church. He who presides over the Church, and sins, must be visited with heavier punishment. A catechumen deserves more clemency than one of the faithful, a laic than a deacon, and a deacon than a presbyter. Omnes enim qui in ecclesia peccatores sunt, qui sermonem Dei gustaverunt, merentur quidem supplicia," &c. But still the language is general, and conveys no definite idea of the powers of the president; and does not even enable us to judge whether he was more than the president, if not of a congregation, at least of a council of presbyters. He says, too, when interpreting the word " nyovjuivi? y chief, in Luke xxii. 26," so I think he may be termed, who, "in the Church, is called bishop." But what the powers of that minister were he does not say; and sometimes he represents even a whole church as meeting in a private house. Thus, he says of Gaius, in his Commen- tary on Romans xvi. 23, that he was " a hospitable man, who not only received Paul and other Christians to share of his kindness, but afforded to the whole Church a place of meeting in his house. Eccle- siae universae in domo sua conventiculum ipse praebuerit." He says, too, " If Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is subject to Joseph and Mary, shall not I be subject to the bishop, who of God is ordained to be my PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 401 where in his eleventh Homily on Jeremiah, (torn. i. p. 679,) and eighth on Ezekiel, p. 726; as well as in his Homilies on Matt. xv. 19, (torn. ii. p. 29 and 88.) But whether bishops differed from presbyters any further than the first among equals, primi inter pares, and what was the extent of their powers, if they were of a superior order, I have not been able to ascertain. I intended to have examined at considerable length the different statements respecting the office of bishops which are to be met with in the writings of Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, who flourished from a. d. 24S to a. d. 260; but as my remarks on the works of the preceding fathers have exceeded the limits within which 1 had hoped to restrict them, I must do it at father ? Shall not I be subject to the presbyter, who by the divine appointment is set over me?" But it is evident from what he says in his third book against Celsus, who had represented the Christians as excluding from their communion all learned and prudent men, that he understood by a bishop, a pastor or teacher. " It is evident," says he, " that Paul, in his account of those whom he calls bishops, describing what manner of man a bishop ought to be, requires that he must be a teacher, saying, that a bishop must be able to convince the gainsayers, to the end that by his wisdom he may stop the mouths of vain talkers and seducers. And as he prefers in his choice of a bishop one who is the husband of one wife, before him who has mar- ried a second time, and one who is blameless before him that is faulty, and a vigilant man before him that is not so, and a sober man before one who is not sober, and a modest man before a less modest, so he wills that a bishop duly constituted be apt to teach, and able to con- vince the gainsayers." And though he says, "there is a debt pecu- liar to widows maintained by the Church, a debt peculiar to deacons, and another peculiar to presbyters; but of all these peculiar debts, that which is due by the bishop is the greatest. It is exacted by the Saviour of the whole Church, and the bishop must smart severely for it if it is not paid;" yet Jamieson, in his Cyprianus Isotimus, remarks upon it, p. 410, "as if Origen could not judge, that he to whom the Church had committed the chief care of affairs was to account to God for more than were others. Might not the ancients think that the archdeacon was accountable for more than were the rest? Did they therefore believe that he, as contradistinguished from other deacons, was of divine institution ? Now, that there was pretty early an archdeacon, who had a power over the other dea- cons, appears plain from Hieromc's Epistle to Evagrius; and this he never doubted to be cither lawful or expedient." To what extent, however, the power of the bishop was superior to that of the presby- ters, or the power of the archdeacon to that of the deacons, docs not appear. 26 402 LETTERS ON present more briefly. And here I would observe, that the terms in which he speaks of it are certainly more lofty than those which were employed by any of his predecessors; for even Milner, who, I think, deline- ates his character too favourably, and extenuates his faults, is forced to acknowledge, that " there are some expressions savouring of haughtiness and asperity to be found in his writings; and that the episcopal autho- rity, through the gradual growth of superstition, was naturally advancing to an excess of dignity"* He speaks, for instance, of the episcopal office as " the lofty summit of the priesthood;! (though no such ex- pressions are applied in Scripture even to the office of an Apostle;) of the vigour of the episcopate, and the sublime and divine power of governing the Church ;"| of "the honour of the bishop, § and of the honour of his priesthood and chair ;"|| and he orders a deacon who had offended his bishop to " honour him, and with full humility or prostration, to make satisfaction to him;"1F while the Roman clergy, in their letter to Cyprian, say that it was time that the lapsed, " by rendering the honour which was due to the priest of God, should obtain for themselves the divine mercy."** Nay, he represents bishops as the succes- sors of the Apostles,tt and says, that " through the courses of times and successions the ordination of * Milner's Church History, vol. i. p. 457. t "Sacerdotii sublime fastigium." Epist. 52. \ " Actum est de episcopatus vigorc, et de Ecclesiae gubernandae sublimi et divina potestate." Epist. 55. § "Nee honorem episcopi cogitantes." Epist. 11. || " Nee episcopo honorem sacerdotii sui ct cathedrse reservantes." Epist. 12. II " Honorem sacerdotis agnoscere, et episcopo prajposito suo plena humilitatc satisfacere." Epist. 65. ** " De honore debito in Dei saccrdotem eliciant in se divinam misericordiam." Epist. 30. In his fifty-eighth Epistle, he represents presbyters as united with the bishop in the honour of the priesthood, but what their portion of it was he does not say. " Qui cum episco- po prcsbyteri sacerdotali honore conjuncti." ft " Haec enim," he observes to Cornelius in his forty-second Epis- tle, " vel maxime frater et laboramus, et laborare debemus, ut unita- tem a Domino et per Apostolos nobis successoribus traditam, quan- tum possumus, obtinere curemus." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 403 bishops, and the order of the Church, descends to us, so that the Church is constituted upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is regulated by the same rulers; that the Church is constituted on "the bishop and clergy, and all who stand steadfast in their Chris- tian profession;"* that "the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and that if any one is not in the bishop, he is not in the Church."! And while such is the place which is assigned to bishops, he tells us at the same time that the Church is found- ed on the Apostle Peter, and has only one ruler; and makes use of expressions, on which the Papists found very plausible arguments for the supremacy of the Pope, as the successor of Peter, and the one universal bishop, of which there is no example in the earlier fathers. Thus, in his seventieth Epistle, he says, " There is one Church founded by Christ the Lord, the origin and principle of unity, upon Peter.":): And again, in his seventy-third Epistle, " The Church, which is one, is, by the declaration of the Lord, found- ed also upon one who received its keys."§ Justly, therefore, might Whitaker say of Episcopacy, which had been adopted as a preventive of schism, (and Heylin observes, that he was a zealous defender of your Church against Cartwright,) that " the remedy was well nigh worse than the disease itself; for, as at the first, one presbyter was set over the rest of the presbyters, and made a bishop ; so afterwards, one bishop was set over the rest of the bishops. Thus, that custom hatched the Pope with his monarchy, and by degrees brought him into the Church." Nor will these extravagant expressions about the power * " Inde per temporum et successionum vices episcoporum ordi- nate, et Eccles-iafi ratio decurrit, ut Ecclesia super episcopos consti- tuatur, et omnis actus Ecclesia^ per eosdcm prcepositos gubernetur. Ecclesia in episcopo et clero, et in omnibus stantibus sit constituta." Epist. 27. t " Episcopum in Ecclesia esse, et Ecclesiam in episcopo, et si quis cum episcopo non sit, in Ecclesia non esse" Epist. u'!). X " Una Ecclesia aChristo Domino super Petrum originc unitatis et ratione fundata." § " Quae una est, et supra unum qui et claves ejus accepit, Domi- ni voce lundata est." 404 LETTERS ON and dignity of bishops appear at all wonderful, when you consider what erroneous sentiments he express- ed on other subjects, and what corruptions he sanc- tioned in the early Church. He states it, for instance, to have been his own opinion, and that of a council of sixty-six bishops, at which he was present, that the baptism of infants was essential to their salvation ; for, says he, " as the Son of man came not to destroy the souls of men, but to save them, as far as depends on us, if it (salvation) can be procured for them, (in- fants,) no soul ought to be lost."* He thought, that while the blood of Christ obtained for men the par- don of the sins which they had committed before bap- tism, almsgiving procured for them the forgiveness of those sins which they committed after baptism, and delivered them from eternal death. " Almsgiving," says he, (and this is overlooked by Milner, in his laudatory account of Cyprian,) "frees from death; not that death, our liability to which the blood of Christ once abolished, and from which the grace of baptism and of our Redeemer has rescued us, but from that which has crept upon us afterwards through our sins."t He approved of unction after baptism; for, says he in his seventieth Epistle, " it is necessary that he who is baptized should be anointed, that having received chrism, he may become by unction the anointed of God, and have the grace of Christ in him- self."! He represents those who were baptized as brought afterwards to the bishop, that they might receive, through the laying on of his hands, the Holy Ghost, and might be perfected by his making on them the sign of the cross.§ He thought that the cup in * " Quantum in nobis est, si fieri potest, nulla anima est perdenda." Epist. 59. t " Eleemosyna a morte liberat, et non utique ab ilia raorte quam semel Christi sanguis extinxit, et aqua nos salutaris baptismi, et Re- demptoris nostri gratia liberavit, sed ab ea, qua? per delicta post mo- dum serpsit." Epist. 52. X " Ungi quoque necesse est eum qui baptizatus sit ut accepto chrismate, id est, unctione, esse unctus Dei, et habere in se gratiam Christi possit." § " Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur, ut qui in ecclesia bapti- zantur praepositis ecclesiae offerantur, et per nostram orationem ac PUSETITE EPISCOPACY. 405 the Eucharist should contain wine and water; for, says he, " the cup of the Lord is not water only, or wine only, but both must be mingled, just as it is not the Lord's body, if it is flour only, or water only, but both must be united into one substance, and become one solid piece of bread."* And he sanctioned the practice of praying for the dead; for he says, in his sixty-sixth Epistle, that " it had been determined by the bishops, his predecessors, that if any one appoint- ed a clergyman to act as a tutor for managing his se- cular affairs after his death, no offering should be made for him when he died, nor any sacrifice for his repose."~\ If he was capable, however, of teaching such errors, and countenancing and recommending such corruptions, it is certainly not more surprising that he should have deviated so far from the doctrine of Scripture, and from the whole of the fathers who lived before him, in his pompous expressions about the dignity of bishops. Still, however, it deserves to be mentioned, that whatever may be the lofty and unwarrantable claims which he advances occasionally in regard to the honour and authority of bishops, there is not a power which is possessed by the latter, that he or his corres- pondents do not acknowledge at other times might be exercised by presbyters. Thus he not only tells his clergy in his sixth Epistle, that from the very begin- ning of his episcopate he had resolved to do nothing from his own private opinion without their council and the consent of his people; % but in his fifth, which was written to them during his banishment, " he re- manus impositionem Spiritum Sanctum consequantur, et signaculo Dominico consummentur." Epist. 73. * " Calix Domini non est aqua sola, aut vinum solum, nisi utrum- que sibi misceatur, quomodo nee corpus Domini potest esse farina sola, aut aqua sola, nisi utrumque adunatum fuerit, et copulatum, et punis unius compage solidatum." Epist. 63. t "Ac si quis hoc fecisset non ofterretur pro eo, nee sacrificium pro dormitione ejus celebraretur, ncque enim apud altare Dei nierc- tur nominari in sacerdotum precc qui ab altari sacerdotes et minis- tros voluit avocarc." t " Quando a primordio cpiscopatus mei statuerim nihil sine con- eilio vestro, et sine consensu plcbis meae privata sententia gercre." 40G LETTERS ON quests them to perform their own duty and his, that nothing which related either to discipline or diligence might be wanting."* In his seventeenth Epistle, he says, that he would not "prejudge the case of the lapsed, nor assume to himself the sole power of decid- ing respecting it, but would wait till he returned;"! and in his fifteenth, he mentions with approbation the presbyters and deacons of the Church of Rome who had exercised discipline, and displayed, as he expres- ses it, " the energy of the priesthood in restraining some who had rashly communicated with the lapsed." % In his thirty-third Epistle, he tells his presbyters that he was " always accustomed to consult them before he conferred orders," and apologizes to them for not doing it in the case of Aurelius, whom he had ap- pointed to be a reader.§ And in his fourteenth, he says to them, that " trusting in their affection as well as religion, of which he had sufficient evidence, he both exhorted and commanded them by that letter, that those of them whose presence there might be least invidious, and attended with least danger, might per- form his part in managing those things which the administration of religion required." || And in like manner, the presbyters of the Church of Rome who appear to have been without a bishop, say to the presbyters of the Church of Carthage, during Cyprian's exile, that " it was incumbent on us, (*. e. on both,) who seem to be set over the flock, to keep it in place * " Peto vos pro fide et religione vestra fungamini illic et vestris partibus etmeis, ut nihil vel ad disciplinam vel ad diligentiam desk." t "Quae res cum omnium nostrum consilium et sententiam spec- tet, praejudicare ego et soli mihi rem communem vindicare non audeo," Sec. t " Presbyteris et diaconibus non defuit sacerdotii vigor ut quidam minus disciplinae memores, et temeraria festinatione prjecipites, qui cum lapsis communicare jam coeperant comprimerentur." § " In ordinationibus clericis, fratres carissimi solemus vos ante consuiere, et mores et merita singulorum communi consilio ponde- rare" || " Fretus ergo et dilectione et religione vestra, quam satis novi, his Uteris et hortor et mando, ut vos quorum minime illic invidiosa, et non adeo periculosa praesentia est, vice mea fungamini circa gerenda ea quae administrate religiosa deposcit." PUSETITE EPISCOPACY. 407 of the pastor or shepherd."* And says Firmilian, the Bishop of Caesarea, an intimate friend and corres- pondent of Cyprian, who could not fail to be acquaint- ed with the powers which were at that time vested in presbyters, " All power and grace are established in the Church where elders (or presbyters) preside, who possess the power of baptizing and confirming, as well as of ordaining."! But if the presbyters of Carthage could perform not only their own duties, but those of Cyprian, during his long continued exile ;J and if it be stated by so distinguished a prelate as Firmilian, that presbyters in general possessed the powers of ordination and confirmation and were entitled to exercise them, it neutralises in a great measure the pompous descriptions of the episcopal dignity which are given by Cyprian ; and it not only proves that the powers of presbyters at that early period were of a superior kind to those of presbyters in Episcopalian Churches in the present day, but makes it extremely probable, that when he speaks of the * " Et incumbit nobis, qui videmur praepositi esse, et vice pastoris custodire grege'm," &,c. f " Omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit, ubi praesi- dent majores natu, qui et baptizandi et manum imponendi, et or- dinandi possident potestatem." Upon which Rigaltius remarks, "Seniores et vere irgttrfiuTtqpt qui et baptizandi et manutn imponendi et ordinandi possident potestatem, ordine sic ab ecclesia constituta. Sed quare hie non fit mentio oiferendi, nisi quod tacite trium illorum potestate includitur ?" J "If there be no Church without a bishop," says Stillingfleet, (Irenicum, p. 376,) "where was the Church of Rome, when, from the martyrdome of Fabian, and the banishment of Lucius, the Church was governed only by the clergy? So the Church of Carthage, when Cyprian was banished; the Church of the East, when Meletius of An- tiocli, Eusebius Samosatenus, Pelagius ol' Laodicca, and the rest of the orthodox bishops were banished for ten years' space, and Flavianus and Diodoru3, two presbyters, ruled the Church of Antioch the mean while. The Church of Carthage was twenty-four years without a bishop, in the time of Ilunerick, King of the Vandals; and when it was offered them that they might have a bishop, upon admitting the Arians to the free exercise of their religion among them, their answer was upon those terms, Ecclesia Episcopum non delectatur habere ; and Balsainon, speaking of the Christian Churches in the East, deter- mines it neither sale nor necessary in their present state to have bishops set up over them." The whole of these Churches for that long period were governed by presbyters. 408 LETTERS ON Church as established in the bishop, he regarded him merely as the president or chairman, and on some occasions, (if he alone ordained, like the president of the Sanhedrim,) as the representative of the presby- ters.* I cannot proceed further at present with this part of the subject, but shall only remark, that though bishops, after this, made gradual encroachments on the privi- leges of presbyters, the latter were allowed, even in the fourth century, to ordain priests and deacons, with the consent of their prelates, and bishops were enjoined to do nothing without consulting their presbyters. Thus, it is decreed in the thirteenth canon of the Council of Ancyra, held in the beginning of the fourth century, that " it be not lawful for chorepiscopi to ordain priests or deacons, nor for city presbyters in another parish, without the permission of the bishop;"! evidently implying, that if he gave them leave they might confer orders. Origen, though only a presbyter, is said to have been chosen to preside at a synod, held at Phila- delphia, a. d. 327; and Malchion, a presbyter of An- tioch, presided in the second council held in that city, a. d. 269, in which Paul of Samosata was condemned.;}: Thirty presbyters sat in judgment along with three hundred bishops, in the year 295, on Marcellinus, Bishop of Rome, who had apostatized and burnt in- * The Rev. Mr. Sinclair remarks, after Sage, (Dissertation on Episcopacy, p. 82,) that " we read," in Cyprian's Epistles, " of bishops having a primacy, an absolute, arbitrary, sovereign jurisdiction, for which they are accountable to none but to our Lord Jesus Christ, who singly and solely has the power of preferring bishops to the government of his Church, and of calling them to account for the administration of it." But any one who is acquainted with the writ- ings of this father will perceive that it is one of those pieces of rhodo- montade about the power of bishops, in which he frequently indulges. Cyprian was aware that the Lord Jesus Christ called bishops to ac- count, even in the present world, before councils or synods, which were composed not only of bishops, but presbyters, and in which, as will be immediately proved, the latter occasionally presided, and caused them, when their opinions were heretical, or their conduct schismatical or immoral, to be censured, and even deposed. Instances of this are mentioned in his Epistles. t " Xa>£i7rta-x.o7rou$ jun «|'s/v«;," &.C. \ Letter from a Parochial Bishop to a Prelatical Gentleman, p. 39. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 409 cense in the temple of Tsis and Vesta, and pronounced sentence upon him.* Thirty-six presbyters subscribed * tl Hic Marcellinus convictus est, quod thurificasset in templo Isidis et Vestae, per Gaium et Innocentium diaconos, et Urbanum, Castorium et Juvenalem, presbyteros et per alios testes. Et tandem in Synodo 300 episcoporum et 30 presbvterorum caput cinere con- volutum babens, Marcellinus, Episcopus urbis Romae, voce clara damans dixit, Peccavi coram vobis, et non possum esse in ordine sacerdotum, quoniam avarus me corrupit auro. Et subscripserunt in ejus damnationem, et damnaverunt eum extra civitatem dicentes, quia ore suo condemnatus est, et ore suo anathematizatus, accepit maranatha." See Carranza's Summa Conciliorum. " Marsilius Patavinus," says Jessop, in his Remarks on Episco- pacy, p. 55, " disputing 1 concerning the order of priesthood, or of a presbyter, (for they are all one,) and the power of the keyes to bind and loose, observeth out of the forementioned father, (Jerome,) the Church hath these keyes in the presbyters and bishops, and gives this reason why Hierome, speaking of this power of the keyes, doth men- tion presbyters before the bishops; because this authoritie belongs to a presbyter, as a presbyter primarily and properly. Praeponens in hoc presbyteros quoniam authoritas haec debetur presbytero, in quantum presbyter, primo, et secundum quod ipsum. " Bartholomaeus Brixniensis and Joannes Semeca," says he, p. 56, " both glossators of the common law, doe maintaine and prove even out of it, that by right presbyters may excommunicate, though the bishops, by custom and prescription, have taken the power out of their hands. Ecclesiarum praelati de jure coramuni possunt excommuni- care, licet episcopi jam praescripserint contra multos praelatos. Gloss, in caus. 2, ques. 1, cap. 11. verbo Excommunicat. Not only have bishops taken away this power from presbyters, but if the following account of the way in which they exercise it in the Church of England be true, it is impossible to think of it without the deepest regret. " If there be any thing," says Bishop Crofts, in his Naked Truth, p. 58, " in the office of a bishop to be challenged pecu- liar to themselves, certainly it should be this, (excommunication) ; yet this is in a manner quite relinquished to their chancellors ; laymen who have no more capacity to sentence or absolve a sinner, than to dissolve the heavens or the earth. And this pretended power of the chancellor is sometimes purchased xcith a sum of money. Their money perish with them ! Good God, what a horrid abuse is this of the divine authority 1 But this notorious transgression is excused, as they think, by this, that a minister, called the bishop's surrogate, but who is indeed the chancellor's servant, chosen, called and placed there by him to be his crier in the court, no better; that when he hath examined, heard and sentenced the cause, then the minister forsooth pronounces the sentence. Just as if the rector of a parish church should exclude any of his congregation, and lock him out of the church ; then comes the clerk, shows and fingers the keys, that all may take notice that he is excluded. And by this his authority, the chancellor takes upon him to sentence not only laymen, but clergy, men also brought into his court for any delinquency ; and in the court of Arches sentences even bishops themselves.'''' 410 LETTERS ON the canons of the Council of Elliberia, which related to excommunication, and not merely to doctrine; and twelve presbyters subscribed the canons of the Council of Aries, concerning the suspension of bishops. Nay, even the imperial law seems to intimate, that pres- byters might excommunicate as well as bishops. " We charge," it says, " all bishops and priests, that they separate no man from the communion before they show the cause, &c. And he that presumes to excommunicate, let him be put from the communion." Nov. Constitut. 125, c. 11. And though the Fourth Council of Carthage decreed, in their 35th canon, that " the bishop, when he was in the church, and sitting in the presbytery, should be placed on a higher seat," yet they required him " when he was in the house to acknowledge himself the colleague of the presbyters;" enjoining him, in their 22d canon, "to ordain no one without the advice of his clergy, and the consent of his fellow-citizens;"* and that "he should hear the cause of no one without the presence of his clergy, otherwise his sentence should be void."t Attempts, indeed, were soon made to circumscribe the powers of presbyters, and to increase the dignity and autho- rity of bishops, and to depress the power of the bishops of smaller sees, and subject them to the bishops of cities and to metropolitans. Thus it was decreed in the 6th canon of the Council of Sardica, that "no bishops should be settled for the future in villages and country places, lest the name and authority of a bishop should fall into contempt ;"% by the Council *"Ut episcopus sine consilio clericorum suorum clericos non . ordinet, ita ut civium conniventiam et testimonium quaerat." t "Ut episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia clerico- rum suorum ; alioquin irrita erit sententia episcopi nisi clericorum praesentia confirmetur." \ So rapidly did corruption spread, that the Council of Carthage say, in their twenty-fourth canon, that "their fathers had deservedly granted the pre-eminence to the episcopal throne in Rome, because it was the imperial city; xzi -yct^ tco Sqcvco y Von der Hardt, in his Magnum Constantiense Concilium, torn. iii., he refers to the disciples of the Reformer as hold- ing that opinion, and attempts to refute it. " Sic illi maxime peccant qui detrahant Papae dicentes, quod non Papa sit major saceidos, sed fatten cum ;.l is Bac< rdotibup, quia Apostoli vocabant se invicem fra- tres. Et sic illi errant, sicut quidam haeretici de sccta Graccorum qui errabant dicentes, quod Papa non sit majoris auctoritatis quam simplex sacerdos. And so they err, as certain heretics of the sect of the Greeks erred, who affirmed that the Pope had no more authority than a simple priest." 21 418 LETTERS ON and was never retracted. Melancthon, indeed, who was too ready to give up even great principles for the sake of peace, inserted a liberal statement about bishops in the Confession of Augsburg; and from a desire to conciliate the Papists, expressed the willing- ness of the Lutherans to submit to them to a certain extent, if they would only be subject to Christ, and not tyrannize over their brethren.* But, as Mr. Hickman remarks, "he complains repeatedly how much he was blamed for it by his brethren."! And we know that under the influence of these feelings, he declared his willingness not only to have diocesan bishops, but even a Pope, (though we never hear of it from Episcopalians;) and thought it might be use- ful, because it would unite all nations in the faith, if he would only take care that sound doctrine should be preached throughout the Church. When he sub- scribed, accordingly, the Articles of Smalkald, which were drawn up by Luther, we are told by Osiander, (Epitom. Hist. Eccles. p. 285,) that he did it in the following terms : " I, Philip Melancthon, approve of the preceding articles as pious and Christian. And in regard to the Pope, if he would admit the Gospel, I think that for the common peace of Christians, who are under him, or who shall in future be under him, we could allow him that superiority which he pos- sesses over bishops, as a mere human arrangement.''^ * In the conference between the Papists and Protestants, which took place at Augsburg, in 1530, Sleidan says, that "as far as re- lated to the power and jurisdiction of bishops, the Saxons, including Melancthon, were disposed to make large concessions, but the Land- grave of Hesse, the inhabitants of Luneburg, and others, did not approve of it. Sed neque Luntgravius, neque Luneburgici, neque Noribergenses probabant," &c. Upon which Osiander remarks, (Epitome Hist. Eccles. cent. xvi. p. 185,) "Melancthon seems to have been inclined to make some concessions to bishops as to juris- diction ; for he hoped, if this were done, that they would be less un- favourable to the pure doctrine of the Gospel ; but Philip did not consider that the wolf might change his hair, but not his disposition. Sed non cogitabat Philippus," &c. t "Certum est Melancthonem episcopis in Augustana confessione aliquid concessisse quo nomine quantum a fratribus incusatus fuerit ipse non in uno loco conqueritur." Apologia pro Ejectis in Anglia Ministris, p. 122. X " Ego Philippus Melancthon suprapositos articulos approbo, ut PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 419 In his tract, however, upon order, which was written many years after the Augsburg Confession, as well as in his exposition of the 118th Psalm, and others of his works, he denies in the most pointed and explicit terms the divine institution of Episcopacy; and, as Seckendorf informs us, both Luther and he retained that opinion till the day of their death. And the view which is presented by Dr. Raynolds of the sen- timents both of Calvin and Beza is equally correct; for though, in consequence of repeated and earnest applications from the English prelates, and from the respect which they entertained for the English Go- vernment, as the principal protector of the Protestants, they expressed themselves favourably on different oc- casions respecting orthodox bishops, yet we have in- contestable evidence that they did not look upon Episcopacy as founded upon divine appointment, but regarded it merely as a human institution. Such, for instance, is the statement of Hooker respecting Calvin, for in a passage before quoted, he includes him among those who did not think that " the Apostles appointed it either by word or deed ;" and he was as likely to be acquainted with the opinion of the Reformer as any Episcopalian in the present day. Such, too, was the statement of Heylin, who wrote long after his time, and after the publication of the whole of Cal- vin's works; for he says to Burton, in a passage be- fore referred to, "if by your divines you meane the Genevian doctors, Calvin and Beza, Viret and Fa- rellus, Bucan, Ursinus, and those other of forreine Churches, whom you esteem the only orthodox pro- fessors, you may affirm it very safely, that the deriva- tion of episcopal authority from our Lord Christ is utterly disclaimed by your divines. Calvin had never else invented the presbytery, nor with such violence obtruded it on all the Reformed Churches; neither had Beza divided episcopatum into divinum, pios ct Christianos. Dc Pontifice autem statuo, Si Evangclion ad- mitteret, posse ei propter paceni, et communem tranrjuillitatem Chris- tianorum, qui jam sub ipso sunt, et in posterum sub ipso erunt supe- rioritatern in episcopos quain alioqui habet jure humano etiarn a nobis permitti." See, too, Gerdcsii Hist. Evang. Kenovat. vol. iv. p. 123. 420 LETTERS ON humanum, and Satanicum, as you know he doth." And such, as is evident from the writings of Calvin, was undeniably his opinion. Thus, after remarking, in his Exposition of Philippians, i. 1, that "the term bishop was common to all the ministers of the word," he adds, that " from the corrupt signification of the word, (when it was appropriated to one,) this evil ensued, that under the pretence of this new designa- tion, one has usurped authority over the others, as if all the presbyters had not been colleagues called to the same function." "It was therefore a very wicked deed," says he in his Institutes, "that one man having got the power into his own hand which was common to the whole college (of presbyters,) paved the way to tyrannical domination, snatched from the Church her own right, and abolished the presbytery ', which had been ordained by the spirit of Christ."* And in his Commentary on the 20th chapter of the Acts, which was written shortly before his death, he says, " Concerning the word bishop, it is observable that Paul gives this title to all the presbyters of JSphesus ; from which we may infer, that according to Scripture, presbyters differed in no respect from bishops, but that it arose from corruption, and a de- parture from primitive purity, that those who held the first seats in particular congregations began to be called bishops. I say that it arose from corruption, — not that it is an evil for some one in each college of pastors to be distinguished above the rest, but. because it is in- tolerable presumption that men, in perverting the titles of Scripture to their own honour, do not hesi- tate to alter the meaning of the Holy Spirit. "^ * Lib. iv. cap. 11, sec. 7. f When one of the presbyters was elevated above the rest, he says in the same work, lib. iv. cap. 2, that it originated in an arrangement by the Church, and not in a divine appointment, " pro temporum ne- cessitate humano consensu inductum." And Whitaker observes, Controv. iv. quaest. 1, cap. 2, "Datquidem Calvinus fuisse olim in singulis ecclesiis episcopos singulos, in provinciis archiepiscopos et patriarchas, sed nullum his Calvinus aut episcopis aut archiepiscopis principatum vel dominatum in reliquos fratres tribuit." How much is this opposed to the representations of Calvin's sentiments, which are made by modern Episcopalians ! PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 421 It is plain, not only from the testimony of Heylin, that similar sentiments were held by Beza, but from WhitgitVs letter to him in 1593, in which he reminds him that " the same year, (1572,) he writ to Mr. Knox against the degree of bishops, however they professed the Gospel, that the bishops brought forth the Papacy, that they were bishops falsely so called, and Were the relicts of Popery j"* as well as from the part which he took in drawing up the second Helvetic Confession, the declaration of which respecting the identity of bishops and presbyters is exceedingly explicit. And that this account of his views is strictly true, whatever Mr. Sinclair or modern Episcopalians may allege to the contrary, is undeniable. It is placed beyond a doubt, by what Bancroft says in his Survey of the pretended holy discipline, p. 39, where he tells us, (and if the Reformer had changed his opinion, it would have been known to that keen and haughty prelate, and he would have turned it to his advantage,) that Beza, in his account of the three kinds of bishops, asserts, that " all bishops, other than such as have an equality amongst them, and such ashealloweth and requireth that every minister should be, must of neces- sity be packing." And says Beza to Knox, "I wish you, dear Knox, (Epist. 77,) and the other brethren, to bear this also in mind, which is even now passing before our very eyes, that as the bishops begat the Papacy, so the pseudo bishops, the relicts of the Pa- pacy, will bring infidelity into the world. This pes- tilence let all avoid who wish the safety of the Church ; and since you have succeeded in banishing it from Scotland, never, I pray you, admit it again; how- ever it may natter you with the specious pretext of promoting unity, which deceived many of the an- cients, even the best of them."t * Strype's Whitgift, p. 408. t I quote his words from Professor Killen's translation of them, (Plea fur Presbytery, p. 64,) as I happen to have no opportunity at present to examine them in the original. Even in the most favourable statement which he makes ahout Epis- copacy, he speaks of it as a mere human institution. "Tyrannidis non insimulassc episcopos veram Christi rcligioncm profitentes et docentes, atque in hoc humano gradu ita se gerentes, ut eo ad aedi- 422 LETTERS ON Nor were the sentiments of others of the Continen- tal Reformers less express and decided. Zepper, in his Treatise on Ecclesiastical Polity, represents the following as the only form of Episcopacy which ex- isted in the early Church. " Before," says he, " the tyranny of the Roman Pontiff arose in the Church, they chose, by the suffrages of all, one of the ministers distinguished by his age, learning, zeal, piety, ex- perience, and other spiritual gifts, who being received, according to the rule of the divine word, as a more noble member of the Churches, by a synod of minis- ters, and the pious magistrate, without assuming any primacy, superiority, and dominion over his colleagues and brethren, or claiming any exemption from the order or office of the ministry or the laws, under- took the superintendence or principal care of these Churches."* "That no one," says Conringius, "should be allowed to teach or perform the offices of religion, unless he has been ordained by bishops, is enjoined by no divine law."t "As long," says Damaeus, " as the apostolic constitution continued in the Church, the presbyters that laboured in the word and doc- trine did not differ at all from bishops. But after that, by the ambition of those who presided over other presbyters, and took to themselves the name of bishops, the apostolical form and discipline was abol- ficationem ovium sibi commissarum uterentur." De Minist. Evano-el. Grad. cap. 23. The Oxford Tractarians admit (Tract. 4, p. 7,) that Beza called the Presbyterian polity, which he considered as " the system handed down from the Apostles, a divine episcopate." * "Ante Pontificis Romani tyrannidem fuisse in Ecclesia, quod unum quendam ministrum aetate, eruditione, zelo, pietate, experientia, aliisque donis spiritualibus praestantiorem communibus suffrages elegerunt, qui secundum verbi divini normam, et leges illi consen- taneas a synodo ministrorum atque magistratu pio, tanquam nobiliori ecclesiarum membro, unanimo consensu et approbatione receptus sine primatus cujusdam, superioritatis et dominii in collegas etconfratres usurpations aut e corn muni ministerii ordine, officio, aut legibus ex- ceptione, atque immunitate, primariam ecclesiarum illarum curam humeris suis sustineret." Lib. ii. cap. 14. t " Quod nemini porro docere religiosa sacra liceat, nisi in id ab episcopis merit ordinatus, non praefecto ulla est divina lege insti- tutum."' Apologia pro Reformatione Evangelica, published by Ger- desius in his Scrinium Antiquarium, torn. vi. pars 2, p. 694. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 423 ished, then the bishops began to be distinguished even from these presbyters that preached the word, and to these bishops, contrary to God's word, the whole dignity was ascribed, nothing thereof almost being left to the presbyters; which thing, and the ambition of the bishops, did in time ruin the whole Church, as the matter itself appears in the Papacy. And so the apostolic episcopate was abolished, and a human Episcopacy began, from which sprang the Satanic Episcopacy, as it is now in the Papacy."* " Upon the same account," says Chamier, " we may likewise say, that equality among pastors is better in a certain respect, to wit, for avoiding the tyranny of a few over the rest of their brethren, yea, of one over all. And how great an evil tyranny is, and how wide a door has been opened to it from the ambition of this presidency, experience has long since more than sufficiently proved. There is none who doubts that this custom (of investing one with the presidency) was introduced by good men, and with a good design; would to God not rather from carnal prudence, than by the direction of the Spirit."! And without quot- ing at length the opinion of the professors of Leyden, who say, (Disput. 42,) that " bishops are called such, not with relation to any supposed subordinate bishops or presbyters, but to the Church committed to their care, in which respect alone they have that title in Scripture, and not upon account of any prerogative or authority zohich one minister has over another;" of Saumur, who say, that " pastors being in the be- ginning constituted by the Apostles, governed the Church by common suffrages, (communibus suffragiis, communi solicitudine et cura;" (Thes. 7, de divers. Minist. Grad.;) of Walleus, who declares, that "in all the Scriptures there is no mention of such eminency and power of bishop over pastors ;" (de Funct. Eccl. ;) and of Arnoldus, who says, on Acts xx . 17, that " bishops and presbyters are not names of different gifts in the Church, but of one and the same office;" * Controv. 5, lib. i. cap. 14. t Panstrat., torn. ii. lib. ix. cap. 14, 424 LETTERS ON I shall notice only further the sentiments of Zanchius, who is often referred to hy Episcopalians as a great admirer and zealous patron of their ecclesiastical polity. But it is certainly surprising, if this was really the case, that, as is stated by Maresius, Zan- chius should have declared " he could not but love the zeal of those who hated the very names of bishop and archbishop, being afraid that with these names the ancient ambition and tyranny, with the ruin of the Church, would return."* And the Reformer himself, in his exposition of the fourth commandment, gives the following account of the extent to which he could acknowledge the power of bishops, which dif- fers not only from that which they possess under every form of diocesan Episcopacy in the present day, but under every form of it which has existed in the Church for the last fourteen hundred years. "In course of time/' says he, " not long after the Apostles, a practice obtained by which one from among many pastors, presbyters and bishops was set over the rest, not as a lord, but as a guide or director to the rest of the seniors, (or rulers,) to whom especially the care of the whole of any particular church was committed, while the rest were his coadjutors and colleagues. This practice was adopted, as Jerome declares, that schisms and dissensions might be prevented, and the Churches might be preserved in a better state; there- fore this institution and practice of pious antiquity cannot be condemned, provided the bishop does not claim greater authority to himself than the other ministers possess, as Jerome rightly advises "^ But * Exam, Prim. Quaest. Theolog., p. 65. I quote the words merely to bear witness to his opinion, without approving of his feelings about the names. t " Successu temporis non ita multo post apostolos obtinuit con- suetudo, ut ex multis pastoribus, seu presbyteris et episcopis, unus praeficeretur reliquis omnibus, non tanquam dominus, sed ut rector reliquis senatoribus, cui imprimis commendata esset cura totius ali- cujus ecclesiae; reliqui illius essent co-adjutores et collegae. Con- stitutionem hanc factam esse ut tollerentur schismata et dissensiones, ut Hieronymus testatur, meliusque servarentur ecclesiae : idcirco damnari hanc piae vetustatis ordinationem et consuetudinem non posse ; modo plus sibi auctoritatis non usurpet episcopus, quam reli- qui habent ministri, ut recte monet Hieronymus." PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 425 where is the bishop, either in your Church, or among the Scottish Episcopalians, or in the Church of Rome, or in any of the other Episcopalian Churches, who assumes no more power in ordination or jurisdic- tion than he concedes to his presbyters? And if, as you are well aware, there is not a prelate on the face of the earth who is content with the measure of ecclesiastical authority which Zanchius would give him, is it fair in Mr. Sinclair, in his Dissertations on Episcopacy, or any other advocate of your ecclesias- tical polity, after the example of Bishop Prideaux, to claim for it the sanction of this venerable Re- former? I consider it unnecessary to prosecute this inquiry into the opinions of these Reformers to a greater ex- tent, as it will be evident, I apprehend, from the pre- ceding quotations, as well as from the confessions of their Churches, that you will appeal to them in vain in support of the claims of diocesan Episcopacy. Some of them, after proving, by the most convincing argu- ments, that it was not instituted by God, but was an arrangement of the Church in the early ages, may have expressed a wish, that where it had long existed, and was associated with protestantism, it might still be preserved; and if any one would prefer a form of polity devised by men to that form of government which is delivered in the Scriptures, it would be wrong to deny him all the asssistance in maintaining Epis- copacy which he can derive from their testimony. Nothing, for instance, can be more precise and direct, than the declaration of the sentiments of Blondel re- specting the perfect identity of bishops and presbyters, according to the statement of Scripture. Thus he says in his Apology, " If we will listen to Jerome, accord- ing to Scripture and the ancients, a presbyter is the same as a bishop ; a bishop and a presbyter are one thing ; the same persons are called presbyters and bishops." Again, "Whoever, when intending to prove what kind of person ought to be ordained a presbyter, describes him as bishop, decides purposely that a presbyter is the same as a bishop. But the 426 LETTERS ON Apostle does so in his Epistle to Titus. Therefore the Apostle, on purpose, decides that a presbyter is the same as a bishop. Whoever is called upon to feed the flock, and to perform the duty of a bishop, is really a bishop, and has a title to the name. But presbyters (Peter being witness) are required to do so. A presbyter, therefore, (Peter being witness,) is really a bishop, and is entitled to the name. Whatever was the government of the church at Philippi, Ephesus, Jerusalem, in Pontus, &c. during the age of the Apos- tles, was the form of government every where among Christians of all nations. But the government in each of these churches, during the whole age of the Apostles, was such, that the brethren in it were subject to a plurality of bishops and rulers, who governed it in common. Therefore the government of the Church among Christians of all nations was such, that the brethren in each church were subject to a plurality of bishops and rulers acting together, who governed it in common."* I could easily quote many similar passages from other parts of his Apology, and show it to have been his opinion, that even when bishops were first introduced, the only pre-eminence which they possessed was that of constant moderators, and that they had nothing like the powers of modern bishops. I am aware, however, that it was reported by Du Moulin, that Blondel " concluded his Apology * " Si Hieronymum audiamus, idem est presbyter, qui et episco- pus ; episcopus et presbyter unum sunt, iidem presbyteri et episcopi dicuntur. Quisquis qualis presbyter debeat ordinari probaturus, epis- copum describit, eundem presby terum qui et episcopus sit ex professo statuit. Apostolus Epistola ad Titum qualis presbyter ordinari de- beat probaturus episcopum describit. Ergo Apostolus Epistola ad Titum eundem presbyterum et qui episcopus sit, ex professo statuit. Cujuscunque est pascere gregem Dei et episcopum agere, is est veri nominis episcopus. Atqui presbyteri cujuscunque (Petro teste) est pascere gregem Dei et episcopum agere, &c. Qualecunque ecclesiae inter Philippenses, Ephesios, Hierosolymilas, Ponticos, &c. toto Apos- tolorum seculo regimen fu.it, tale inter Christianos omnes ubivis gen- tium fuit. Atqui tale ecclesiae inter Philippenses, Ephesios, Hiero- solymitas, Ponticos, &c. toto Apostolorum seculo regimen fuit, ut pluribus una episcopis, praepositis, &c. subjiceretur fraternitas, qui earn in commune regerent. Ergo tale inter Christianos omnes ubivis gentium regimen fuit, &c. Apology, p. 3 and 4. See, too, his third, fourth, and fifth Observations, p. 7, besides many other passages. PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 427 with words to this purpose. " By all that we have said to assert the rights of the presbyter, we do not intend to invalidate the ancient and apostolical con- stitution (he calls sometimes what is ancient, apos- tolical) of episcopal pre-eminence. But we believe, that wheresoever it is established conformably to the ancient canons, it must be carefully preserved; and wheresoever by some heat of contention, or otherwise, it has been put down, or violated, it ought to be rev- erently restored." It is alleged, however, that he was prevailed with by some of the agents of the Westminster Assembly to erase them ; and upon Du Moulin's stating this to Blondel's brother in London, and requesting him to write to Mr. D. Blondel, and inquire whether it was true, "he did not fail" to do so; "and then," says he, "in three or four weeks after, he showed me a letter from him, wherein he remembered his love to me, and acknowledged that that relation was true." Now, upon this extraordi- nary statement, which is quoted continually by the advocates of Episcopacy, I remark, in the first place, that it is certainly very wonderful this letter was never published, which would have removed completely all doubt upon the subject; and as this never was the case, though Durel and others brought forward every letter from the foreign divines which favoured them in the least, it appears to me unaccountable. Besides, though Mr. John Blondel was living in Lon- don, not a single individual has ever been mentioned, even by any Episcopalian, as having seen this letter, but Du Moulin himself, whose zeal for Episcopacy was of no ordinary kind, and who would be one of the very last, if there was really such a letter contain- ing these words, to keep it a secret; and, 2d.li/, admit- ting that there was actually such a letter, though the world has never seen it, all that it would amount to would be merely this, to stultify Blondel, and demon- strate his inconsistency, but not to answer his power- ful and irresistible reasoning. I have showed you that he considered presbyters and bishops to be per- fectly the same in name and power during the whole 428 LETTERS ON apostolic age, and declared that every Christian Church was governed at that time by a common council of presbyters, who were bishops! And as you cannot suppose that he believed in two apostolic constitutions existing at once, it is plain, that when he represents primitive Episcopacy by that name, he could intend only to tell us that it was ancient, according to a fre- quent use of that expression. Episcopacy, however, as described by him, when it was first introduced, was very different from yours, or that of the Scottish Epis- copalians ; and if he was really chargeable with such gross inconsistency as that which is imputed to him by modern Episcopalians, I shall leave it to you, or Bishop Russel, or Mr. Sinclair, to estimate the re- spect which is due to his opinion, and allow you, without a grudge, all the assistance which it can ren- der to your cause. Nothing, too, can be more groundless than the re- port which was formerly circulated by Episcopalians, and which has been repeated of late by some of the most eminent and influential of your prelates, that it was necessity alone, and not choice or principle, which prevented the Protestant Churches on the Continent from having diocesan bishops. So far was this from being the case, that it is not only affirmed, but proved by testimony which cannot be set aside, to have been directly the reverse. " M. du Plessis," says Jeremy Taylor, in his Episcopacy asserted, p. 191, "a man of honour and great learning, attests, that at the first Reformation, there were many archbishops and car- dinals in Germany, France and Italy, &c. that joined in the Reformation, whom they might, but did not employ in their ordinations. And, therefore, what necessity can be pretended in this case, I would fain learn, that I may make their defence. For the Dutch Church, let the celebrated Gisbert Voet be heard. Nos, says he, qui ordine illo episcoporum caremus, neque etiam indigemus, ab Anglicanis, aut Germanis ordi- nationem in forma petere semper potuimus; neque illi negarent. De Desp. Caus. Papatus, lib. ii. sect. 1, p. 110. He says, they could have had episcopal or- PTTSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 429 dinations if they would, but thought they needed it not, and therefore would hardly have taken it kindly of any one, that would have pleaded for them that they would have had it, (as the present Bishop of London says,) if they could. For the French Church let Peter du Moulin's letter to Bishop Andrews be considered; where, excusing himself for not making the difference between bishops and presbyters to be of divine appointment, he pleads, that if he had laid the difference on that foundation, the French Churches would have silenced him; which doth not argne that concern among them for bishops, as would be requisite before such a plea from necessity were allowed them. And I have been credibly informed, that the French King was so earnest with them to ad- mit bishops among them, that they durst not desire an English bishop to preach there, though they ad- mitted him to communicate." Nor would there have been the smallest difficulty in procuring funds for the maintenance of bishops, either in France, where at one time a great number both of the nobility and gentry were Protestants; or in Holland, where it would have been the form of polity adopted by the State; or in Saxony, Prussia, or Hesse Cassel, as well as other countries, where it would have been sup- ported by the Sovereign; so that on what ground it can be alleged, as is done at present by some of the zealous friends of Episcopacy, who are anxious to ex- tend it among these Protestant Churches, that it was necessity alone which prevented them from estab- lishing it, I am at a loss to understand. And my sur- prise is increased, when I see it declared in the 18th chapter of the Helvetic, the thirtieth Article of the French, and the thirty-first Article of the Belgic Con- fession, that according to the Scriptures all the minis- ters of the word "have equal power and authority, (una et aequalis potestas et functio, eadem et aequali inter se potestate praeditos, eandem et aequalem turn potestatem, turn autoritatem omnes, habeant;") in the first Article of the National Synod at Embden, that "no minister is to exercise any authority over 430 LETTERS ON another;" in the Wirtemburg Confession, that "a bishop and a presbyter are the same;" in the first Danish Confession, that " true bishops or priests are all the same;" and in the Articles of Smalkald, that "by divine right there is no difference between a bishop and a pastor or presbyter, and therefore there is no doubt that the ordination of fit ministers by pastors is ratified and approved by divine authority;" my surprise, I say, is increased, on the supposition that they were honest and upright men, that they would have introduced these statements into their public Formularies, or suffered them to remain, if nothing but necessity kept them from adopting dio- cesan bishops. I have only further to add, that as you have intro- duced one order into the Christian ministry, or that of bishops, for which you have never yet produced any warrant from Scripture, so you have changed entirely another order, or that of deacons. In the primitive Church they were instituted to serve the tables of the poor, (Acts vi.,) and no other office was ever assigned to them, though Philip, having executed the office of a deacon well, obtained for himself " a good degree," and was promoted to be an Evangelist. But in your Church, and that of the Scottish Episcopalians, they are allowed not only to preach, but to baptize, and are relieved, I believe, from the care of the poor. But this, as Dr. Whitby candidly acknowledges, is a deviation from the practice of the Apostolic Church, and an innovation on its constitution. " The an- cients," says he, in his sermon on Mat. xii. 7, " were so far from believing this, that they expressly forbade all deacons to baptize, and introduce this as a prohibi- tion laid on them on this very account, that baptism was an office belonging only to the priesthood." "A deacon," say the Apostolic Constitutions, "doth not baptize, or offer." And again, "it is not lawful for a deacon to offer sacrifice, or to baptize." And again, "we permit only a presbyter to teach, to offer, and to baptize." See this fully proved by Cotelerius, in his notes on the word ite.a,tsvoai, p. 206, 207, where he PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 431 introduceth an old author saying, that if baptism, in case of necessity, be performed by the minor clergy, we expect the event, that what is wanting either should be supplied by us, or reserved to be supplied by our Lord. The baptism, therefore, of deacons, ivhich is now commonly in use among us, can only be of human institution. It was permitted only in the third century, from which time till the Reforma- tion even laymen were allowed to baptize in cases of necessity; and if any thing be wanting to that baptism in those cases, we have like reason to believe it will be supplied by our Lord."* What reason the doctor could have for entertaining that belief, when the ordi- nance of baptism is performed by a deacon, either in your Church or among the Scottish Episcopalians, while no power to administer it is given to him in Scripture, I cannot conceive ; and if he exercise a power not contained in the commission bestowed on him by the only Head of the Church, it suggests unquestion- ably very serious considerations to the members of all Episcopalian Churches, when they apply to him for baptism to their infant children. How you will be able to remedy that defect, I cannot tell. " We permit none of the clergy to baptize," say the Apos- tolic Constitutions, "but only bishops and presbyters." But you permit those who have no right to do it to administer that ordinance. The Russians formerly, as is mentioned by Reuss, used to re-baptize all who joined their communion;! and when the daughter of Christian the Fourth of Denmark, who had been betrothed to the Grand Duke in 1643, refused to be re-baptized, the marriage was broken off. But what will you do in the case of these individuals who were baptized by deacons in their early days, and who * u Their deacons," says Archbishop Whately, of the churches in the time of the Apostles, "appear to have had an office considerably different from those of our Church." — Essays on the Kingdom of Christ, p. 131. t "Olim," says he in his Dissertatio Historico-Theologica de Ecclesia Ruthenica, p. 335, " ne baptisma quidem extra suam et Graecorum ecclesiam susceptum lcgitimum ct validum arrogantis- sime opinati sunt," &c. 432 LETTERS ON have never been re-baptized? I trust that Bishop Russet instead of repeating those trite objections to what he is pleased to denominate the office of lay- presbyters, which have been frequently answered, will direct his attention to this perplexing question, and point out the way in which baptisms received by innumerable individuals from the hands of men, who, as Jerome remarks, " were only the ministers of the tables," and who had no right to perform them, may be most effectually remedied. There are several other topics of considerable mo- ment, to which I was desirous to advert, but I must close this discussion. I hope that nothing which has been said in these Letters will be construed by any one as implying a doubt that I do not look upon your Church as a Christian Church, or that I am insensible to the great and important services which, especially at the period of the memorable Revolution, along with the Church to which I have the honour to belong, she rendered to the cause of our common Protestantism. I have noticed her defects, but I have far greater pleasure in acknowledging her worth ; and while you compare myself and the other ministers of the Church of Scotland, as well as the ministers of the other Presbyterian Churches in our native land, to the priests of Samaria, I concede most willingly to your sound and pious bishops and clergy the honour- able character of ministers of Christ. But how, upon your principles, you can claim that honourable cha- racter to yourself, or grant it to any other minister of your Church, or consider her as a Church, or cherish any sure and certain hope of the salvation of a single individual within her pale, or of a single individual in the Church of Rome, or of any individual on the face of the earth, I cannot perceive. May she not only seek, but attain that more thorough and impor- tant Reformation which was intended by Edward, and longed for by Cranmer, and of which there is an admirable outline in the Reformatio Legum ; which was drawn up by that great and illustrious prelate, and the other commissioners who were appointed by PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. 433 that young and enlightened Prince. Would to God that her Professors of Theology could adopt in some measure the language of Dr. Prideaux, when he said to James the First, a few years before his death, <• Within the last nine years Oxford has sent forth seventy-three Doctors in Divinity, and more than one , hundred and eighty-three Batchelours in that sacred science. I, as your Majesty's Professor of Divinity, had the honour of being concerned in conferring these degrees; and I can confidently affirm, that all these two hundred and fifty-three divines, and more, are warm detesters of Popery, remote from favouring Arminianism," though I have no wish they should add, "strong disapproves of Puritanism,"* if by that term be meant Presbyterianism. May purity of doc- trine distinguish her ministrations, and a spirit of piety and Christian benevolence extend its influence throughout all her parishes; that Ephraim may no more vex Juclah, nor Judah vex Ephraim ; and that while the ministers of Episcopalian and Presbyterian Churches differ from each other on certain points, it * " Intra proxime elapsum novennium, obstetricante pro modulo meo qualicunque professoris tui conatu," &c. If the directions contained in the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasti- carum, prepared by Cranmer, Ridley, Knox, and the rest of the thirty-two commissioners of King Edward, were followed out, the clergy of the Church of England would, like the Scottish Presbyte- rian ministers, have ruling elders, or as they call them, lay elders, to assist them in exercising a kind and -prudent oversight of their parishioners. Would not this be a benefit? But what would Bishop Russel say of it, after the note in the Appendix to his Sermon on Lay Presbyters? Besides what Cranmer proposed in the Reformatio Legum, Strype informs us, that when the monasteries were proposed to be dissolved, 11 the Archbishop is said to have counselled and pressed the King to it, but for other ends than the former had in view, viz. that out of the revenues of these monasteries the King might found more bishop- rics; and that dioceses being reduced into less compass, the dioce- sans might the better discharge their office, according to Scripture and primitive rules."— Life of Cranmer, p. 35. 28 434 LETTERS ON PUSEYITE EPISCOPACY. may be with feelings of mutual kindness and forbear- ance, and it may still be said, " See how these Christians love one another." I remain, Reverend Sir, Yours, &c. THE END. W Ph 82 H ;• J'S l' ^**. V w • - ^c* V 1 ^ % *™ A _o*a*> V .** >^i%A> * >^ ,9 *>v • / V 4 O if* t v ♦', » U V A V ><°- °^ '/To < ^o ^^ *.• ™v v °.vw" <*>* % * # s 3* <$>* '* _ •P'^K * H °* v% .£&:•."%. 5*** *. - c°* ... • m o - v * .** °<* 'iMssSfy* v°-^_> - , ^ .*£:.. ^ ••"•' ^o' V> >•:•*-. ^ -It: V ; ^- jg^ MAR 82 I ;. "V^ *M&* * 4 ^ N.MANCHESTER. ,0 * SUf^ ! ^>V .°^ INDIANA 4""- o. •JTi« .o-'