
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ■ 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 1 
 
 
BX 5883 
 
 .W44 1821 1 
 
 Weller, 
 
 George, 
 
 1790-1841. 
 
 A reply 
 
 to the 
 
 Review of Dr. 
 
 Wyatt's sermon 
 
 and Mr. 
 
REPLY 
 
 TO 
 
 Of Dr. Wyatfs Sermon and Mr. Sparks^s Letters | 
 
 ON THE 
 
 PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 
 
 WHICH ORIGINALLY APPEAREB 
 
 IN THE CHRISTIAN DISCIPLE AT BOSTON, 
 
 AXD SUBSEQUENTLY, 
 
 IN A SEPARATE FORMAT BALTIMORE 
 
 IN WHICH 
 
 IT IS ATTEMPTED TO VINDICATE THE CHURCH 
 
 FROM THE CHARGES OF THAT REVIEW. 
 
 BY A PROTESTANT EPISCOPALIAN- 
 
 " Founded in truth ; by blood of martydom 
 Cemented ; by the hands of wisdom i-eared 
 In beauty of holiness ; with ordered pomp, 
 Decent and unreproved." 
 
 BOSTON : 
 
 R. p. k C. WILLIAMS, CORNHILL-SQUARE, 
 
 (Between 58 & 59 Cornhill.) 
 
 1821. 
 
TO THE READER. , 
 
 IT is proper to premise, for the correction of an erroneoufi 
 opinion which we know has been industriously circulated, that this 
 controversy did not begin on the part of Episcopalians. The ser- 
 mon of Dr. Wyatt, to which Mr. Sparks grappled himself with such 
 eager haste, was written, as we understand, for the ordinary 
 duties of the pulpit, without any view to publication. Its delivery, 
 as we dicover from the author's address to his parishioners, was 
 occasioned by a public discourse of one of the presbyterian minis- 
 ters of Baltimore to a congregation collected by advertisements in 
 the newspapers of that city, and in which the clergy of various de- 
 nomination,s were included : the appointment, at that time, of 
 ruling eld,ers led the minister to exhibit his views of the constitu- 
 tion of the ministry and of the doctrines of the gospel. " Both the 
 opportunity and the manner were deemed unexceptionable," says 
 Dr. Wyatt. About the same time, a sermon, intended as an at- 
 tack on the peculiar principles pf the Episcopal church, and which 
 had been recently delivered before a Presbyterian synod in a 
 neighbouring part of Virginia, was publickly advertised and offered 
 for sale at the Bookstores in that city. About this time too, had 
 occurred the ordination of Mr. Sparks ; to be present at which the 
 clergy of that city were invited by an advertisement in the newspapers.* 
 
 * " The ordination of Mr. Jared Sparks, to the pastoral charge 
 of the first Independent Church of Baltimore, according to the an- 
 cient and established usages of New-England, will take place to- 
 morrow. The gentlemen who have been invited, together with 
 the delegation from the respective churches to compose the or- 
 daining council, are, &c. &c. Several of these gentlemen will 
 assist in the services oi' the day. The Sermon will be preached 
 Ijy the Rev. Mr. Ctwmng. The services will be commenced at 
 10, o'clock in the morning. Seats will be reserved for such of the 
 clergj' as feel disposed to attend," &c. 
 
 Baltimore JVewspaper., May 4^ 181 9o 
 
Had they attended, they were to have been gratified with the 
 sermon, then deUvered by the Rev. Dr. Channing of Boston, since 
 pubHshed, and controversial in the highest degree. These cir- 
 cumstances known, it is not to be pretended, even for a moment, 
 that the Episcopal church, has, in this instance, manifested a dis- 
 position for controversy. On the other hand, the publication of 
 Dr. Wyatt's sermon was eagerly seized on as a pretext for an at- 
 tack on Episcopalians, and lest a volume should not be sufficient, 
 either in bulk or strength, it was backed, in true bitterness of spirit, 
 by the Review in the Christian Disciple. 
 
 We have not taken our pen with the view of protracting this 
 controversy. Much of this Review was deemed very objectiona- 
 ble, and calculated to give very false ideas of the church, to those 
 who know very little concerning it. Better fitted for general cir- 
 culation, it would probably reach places, whither Mr. Sparks's 
 volume would not penetrate. The correction of the misstate- 
 ments was easily made, and it was therefore thought best to fur- 
 nish some corrective, which, partaking of the ephemeral character 
 of the attack, might be quickly read, and pass away with its cause. 
 As our object is not controversy, and as perhaps, we have said 
 enough for the purpose we had in view, we shall not easilij be pre- 
 yailed on to, give the subject farther notice in this way. 
 
REPLY. 
 
 X HE " leaven of the Pharisees," which so bitterly 
 actuated some of the first settlers of New-England, 
 both before and after their emigration, has not ceased 
 its workings, if we may judge from this review, among 
 those, who, almost their antipodes in principle, yet 
 claim to be the sons of the Puritans. 
 
 If there is merit in an actual descent from the fathers 
 of New-England, we have claims, which, perhaps, 
 would not suffer in comparison with those of the Re- 
 viewer; but when we consider that they were men 
 who unhesitatingly transacted the very deeds they had 
 so loudly exclaimed against in others, we would rather 
 speak of their sufferings in any other cause than that of 
 religion ; the best interests of which, as we think, they 
 unnecessarily opposed, though, as we would charitably 
 believe, " through ignorance they did it." 
 
 We are not well informed as to the extent of the in- 
 jury done to Episcopacy by what the Reviewer calls 
 ** the formidable assault of Dr. Mayhew in 1763 ;" but 
 as the church in New- England, or at least in Massa- 
 chusetts, was then only a little flock, we should con- 
 clude, from its condllion during our memory, that the 
 injury was not very great, nor the assault very magnani- 
 
mous, A few small congregations were but thinly 
 scattered over the state ; their ministers — when they 
 were favored with them — were chiefly supported by the 
 English Society for propagating the gospel, and when, 
 the revolution, and not Dr. Mayhew's formidable as- 
 sault, compelled the Society to withhold the scanty 
 stipend upon which these men depended, it was a very 
 necessary consequence that these congregations should, 
 at the least, languish, if not wholly expire. The alarm 
 however, does not seem to have spread through New- 
 England so thoroughly as the Reviewer would have 
 his readers to suppose. The learned and able Dr. 
 Samuel Johnson, of Stratford, than whom no mai^i was 
 better qualified to judge, believed that thechurclion the 
 whole had gained ground in New-England by th^s con- 
 troversy.* Bishop White says,f when the revolution, 
 ary war began, there were not more than about eighty 
 parochial clergymen of the church to the northward; 
 and eastward of Maryland, ^' and yet in 1792, when the 
 shock of the war was scarcely spent, the number was 
 about the same ; and at this time it has considerably 
 more than doubled.'^ It is certainly cause of gratitude, 
 that where her adversaries are the chief, our Ziou is 
 enabled to look up and shake herself from the dust. 
 
 To judge from the manner in which the Reviewer 
 speaks of the present increasing prospects of the 
 church, we should suppose that the apprehensions of her 
 becoming dangerous had bereft him of his patience ; 
 and he falls into some mistatemeuts, perhaps froii^ 
 mere dread of encountering the whole truth. In speak 
 
 * Life of Johnson by Dr. Chandler, p. 113. 
 t Hist. Prot. Ep. Church, in U. S. A. p. 1. 
 
ing of the progress of " Episcopal peculiarities^^ in 
 Maryland, he does not seem to be aware that these ^c- 
 culiarities were once establislied by law in that state, 
 and that through the want of clergymen her altars were 
 deserted, and Methodism brought in to supplant her. 
 But a better day has risen, as we trust, on the church, 
 both in that state and Virginia. In Connecticut, too, 
 ftnp would suppose that he believed Episcopacy had 
 Started in her full dimensions, from the late political 
 dissensions in that state on the subject of toleration. 
 That state had twenty-two Episcopal clergymen in 
 1792, while she now numbers more than forty. In 
 Bishop Hobart's diocese (New- York) the number of 
 parishes is one hundred and twenty, and in Bishop 
 Kemp's (Maryland) sixty-one. The clergy in the 
 former are about seventy, in tlie I^Uqi- forty -eight. Some 
 person has attempted to correct the Reviewer by a note 
 to page 5, of the Baltimore edition. Whoever he may 
 have been, he does not seem to have known that there is 
 any difference between ^^ preachers'^ and parishes. 
 
 For the information of our readers we state, that the 
 number of Episcopal clergymen throughout tlie United 
 States, is now about three hundred and twenty ; and 
 that they are to be found settled, and that conventions 
 are organized, in nearly all of the states. 
 
 In the next paragraph, the Reviewer, with some 
 warmth, and a glimmering of good will, for exhibiting 
 which he is almost angry with himself, endeavors to 
 make his readers believe that Dr. Wyatt is the author 
 of, what is to himself, a very obnoxious opinion, that "to 
 the order of Bishops alone belongs the power of ordain- 
 ing ministers : and that an ordination performed by the 
 
s 
 
 hands of a priest, deacon or layman, would be devoid 
 of any degriee of validity or efficacy in conferring spirit- 
 ual office and power." Was it from apprehension 
 that some of bis readers, (whose minds, we are instruct- 
 ed to believe, pursue very ardently their enquiries for 
 truth,) would examine into the factsj that induced him 
 thus to garble Dr. Wyatt's observation, which truly is, 
 ' — " thus it has been the faith uf the universal church, 
 without exception until the period of the r^e^ormation, 
 that to the order of Bishops alone belongs," &c. ? In a 
 note at the foot of the same page of the sermon, Dro 
 W. also says, '' The divine institution of the ministry, 
 consisting of three orders, which possess distinct pow- 
 ers, is maintained by the great bodij of the christian 
 world. The denominations which are destitute of a 
 succession of Bishops from the Apostles, occupy a com- 
 paratively small portion of Christendom. TJiis pre 
 valence of Episcopacy in Christian countries ; and the 
 favourable opinionentertained of it by those eminent men, 
 (Luther, Calvin, Melancthon, Beza, and others,) whose 
 peculiar circumstances notwithstanding, seems to have 
 justified a departure from it, are adduced to show that 
 it is neither a singular, nor an offensive doctrine which 
 we are stating, — and that while in the just exercise of 
 their civil and religious liberty, — both of which may 
 God preserve ! — -some large and devout protestant de- 
 nominations reject it, we claim only a similar, and not 
 an indefensible privilege in holding and advocating it.*' 
 Now we most sincerely doubt, whether there is, in the 
 Whole of the Review, a single sentence written in so 
 calm and charitable a manner, as these few sentences 5 
 in which the author tells his parishioners, that the doc= 
 
trine of their church — the doctrine which he advocateg— 
 was^ and is, received and acted on by the great body 
 of the Christian world. But it is only so '^ according 
 to this writer.''^ Is the Reviewer's learning ho limited 
 that he did not knov/ this opinion to be no novelty P If 
 lie kneAV otherwise, it would have been but honesty in 
 him to have said so. 
 
 The contrast between the abilities of Dr. Wyatt, 
 and Mr. Sparks is so strongly stated, that if we take 
 either side, without deduction for truth, we can scarce- 
 ly avoid the conclusion that the other is carricature. 
 We can allow much for personal feeling, but in a ques- 
 tion like this, we shall mistrust a mind and cause which 
 needs such bolstering as the friendly RevieAver gives 
 his friend Mr. Sparks. That the latter has respectable 
 talents we do not doubt, but they ivill speak for them- 
 selves. That he has a more temperate spirit than the 
 Reviewer we doubt as little. But we have heard, and 
 seen, too much of the talents which Unitarians possess 
 of playing into each other's hands, to regard such ob- 
 servations as more than matters of course. 
 
 Good breeding is an essential requisite to a sound 
 education. The man possessed of it will not seek to 
 undervalue his opponent by little arts, — by contemptuous 
 expressions, — ccrtairdy not by those, of which the just 
 application can be questioned by men of not less erudi- 
 tion than himself. Still greater will be his caution, who, 
 to a sound education, adds the feelings and the princi- 
 ples of a Christian. He will sustain himself by the 
 merit of his cause — he cannot stoop to detraction. The 
 Reviewer gives such an opinion as he pleases upon 
 Br. Wyatt's style, (and we suppose we may reasonably 
 2 
 
10 
 
 say, is somewhat unjust in his censures,) while he fui*- 
 nishes to liis readers, nine in ten of which, he well knew, 
 Would never see Dr. Wyatt's sermon, no opportunity 
 whatever to judge for themselves. Is this the course of 
 a well-educated and candid mind ? Nay, " an enemy 
 hath done this.'^ 
 
 We fear that these engrossers of " all the talents'^ as 
 their light increases, will persuade themselves that all 
 true learning, as well as "•' uncorrupt Christianity/^ 
 is confined to " a small spot in Massachusetts.^^ To 
 judge from the confident tone and manner of their publi- 
 cations against the church, we siiould suppose them 
 very near that extremity now. We /ear it, not because 
 we assume all their pretensions as facts, but because 
 such men will meddle on all subjects, whether they 
 understand them, or not, and like Goldsmith's school 
 master, 
 
 " Tho' vanquished they can argue still." 
 *^* Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit ? There is 
 more hope of a fool than of him." 
 
 ^^ Mr. Sparks in his first letter," says the Reviewer, 
 " controverts the assumption, that the Episcopal is the 
 only true church, that its ministry originated with the 
 Apostles, and has descended down to the present time, 
 through an unbroken, and divinely protected succession ; 
 and that ordinations performed by any other person than 
 Bishops are devoid of every degree of efficacy in con- 
 ferring spiritual office and power." 
 
 <^This is a controversy," says Ur. Bowden, ^^ which 
 must every now and then berevived ; and our opponents, 
 not being deficient in sagacity, see very clearly, that it 
 will not do to take notice of the several triumphant an- 
 
11 
 
 swei's that have been given at different times to their 
 hypothesis." This is very plainly the case, in the in- 
 stance before us. No notice is taken of the many very 
 able works which the clergy, and others, of the English 
 church have written in her defence. Sir Peter King^s 
 work against the above position could be quoted with ap- 
 probation, and not a syllable be dropped on the fact so 
 often, and so confidently asserted, and never yet denied^ 
 that he was made a convert to this very position by the 
 reply of the Rev. Mi\ Slater, to his own book.* 
 Nothing is said of the very able work of Dr. Bowden, 
 of our own country, which certainly has done much to 
 create, and strengthen that attachment to Episcopal pe- 
 culiarities, which is spreading throughout our country. 
 To notice these defences, — to admit that they have done 
 any thing to advance theinterests of Episcopacy — would 
 be to direct inquiry into the wrong path ; which might 
 result like some recent, and more restricted, examina^ 
 tions, disagreeable to the Reviewer and his party. 
 
 *^Mr. Sparks appeals in the first place, to scripture 
 evidence," and concludes with a statement of eight 
 positions, all of which are resolvable into ttco — that 
 
 * " By some inadvertency,''' says the Reviewer, " the inquiry 
 into the Constitution of the primitive church is ascribed in Mr. 
 Sparks's work to Archbishop King.'''' We suppose Mr. S's notes of 
 college lectures may have become illegible at this place ; and that 
 he had not seen the book. It was a good story, however, for the 
 purpose. An Archbishop opposing Episcopacy ! Who afterward 
 could defend it ? Sir Peter was afterward Lord Chancellor of 
 England, and preferred Mr. Slatr r in the church. It would cer- 
 tainly be well for those inclined to adopt Sir Peter's opinion, to 
 read Mr. Slater's book, entitled, '■- An Original Draught of the prim- 
 itive Church,'"' before they consider him conclusive. 
 
12 
 
 there is no evidence in the scriptures of three orders 
 in the ministry, and that no means are indicated in them 
 by which the ministry might be perpetuated. The in- 
 ference from these positions would be a fair one, that 
 the church of Christ has long since ceased from the 
 earth ; while the Reviewer, perhaps, w^ould wish us to 
 deduce the consequence, that all men are left at liberty 
 to form churches as they please. The Episcopal 
 church, for many, and obvious reasons, rejects both 
 these positions. It is a prevailing principle among her 
 well-educated, and well-informed members, that her 
 ministry is of divine institution. This term may 
 need some explanation. We give it in the language of 
 Dr. Bowden. ^'^ A thing may be said to be divinely in- 
 stituted in three senses. 1. As God positively ordains 
 it by his own express command, or by the express 
 command of his son Jesus Christ. In this sense, I do 
 not take Episcopacy to be of divine institution. Nor in 
 this sense is the christian sabbath, or infant baptism, or 
 the canon of scripture, entitled to the sanction of divine 
 institution. 2. A thing may be said to be of divine in- 
 stitution when it is delivered by men divinely inspired ; 
 ^ are all those precepts and ordinances, delivered by 
 *be apostles and prophets by divine inspiration. Every 
 thing of this kind must be deemed to be of divine in- 
 stitution, because God by his Holy Spirit has com- 
 manded it. 3. Whatever is founded upon a divine 
 commission, as the preaching of the gospel, the adminis- 
 tration of the sacraments, and the power of the keys, 
 is of divine institution. In the two last senses, I take 
 Episcopacy to be of divine institution. For if the Holy 
 Spirit inspired the apostles to establish Episcopacy in 
 
the cliurcli, it is certainly of divine institution, although 
 there may be no formal and express precept for the pur- 
 pose. Or if the apostles, by virtue of the commission 
 which they received from Jesus Christ, established 
 Episcopacy, it must, if not immediately, yet mediately, 
 be grounded upon divine institution. For if the apos- 
 tolic commission was founded upon divine authority, as 
 it certainly was, then all coramigsions derived from that 
 scource,and within thelimits of that commission, are also 
 mediately formed upon divine authority ; and in this 
 sense, at the least, every one who believes Episcopacy 
 not to be a mere human institution, must believe it to 
 have a divine sanction. This statement is, I believe, 
 agreeable to the sentiments of the best writers on our 
 side of the question.'^ 
 
 ^^ It is evident unto all men, diligently reading Holy 
 Scripture, and ancient authors," says the preface to 
 the ordinal of the church, "that, from the apostles' times, 
 there have been these officers in Christ's church, bishops, 
 priests, and deacons." The fii>6t, or superior order, 
 were intrusted with the government of the church, 
 and with the power of ordaining or admittbig men to 
 the inferior orders. The second order, deriving their 
 power through the hands of Bishops, were empowered 
 to preach the gospel, and administer the sacraments of 
 the church. The third order, were general assistants 
 in the service of the church, and cliarged with tlie care 
 of sick and poor people. These tliree orders are 
 known in scripture, by the names, first, of apostles, 
 — second, of bisfiops or cluers, — and third, of deacons. 
 The two appelhidons for the second order were used as 
 synonimous, till the deaib of the apostles, wJien it was 
 
14 
 
 thought best in the church, to appropriate that name 
 exclusively to those who had " seen the Lord/** and 
 had received their commission personally from him ; but 
 the office being retained, the name of bishop was ap- 
 plied to those who performed its duties, as a substitute 
 for that of apostle. The otlier offices retained the name 
 of elder or presbyter, and deacon. But, ncunes aside^ 
 let us see whether there are not in the scriptures clear 
 indications of the existence of three distinct offices or 
 orders, performing different duties. 
 
 1. There was an order of men governing the church 
 and ordaining others exclusively. Unquestionably the 
 apostles were in this rank, and there is ample evidence, 
 in the scriptures, that they associated others in the same 
 work with themselves. Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, 
 Epaphroditus, and others exercised the saviie office- 
 performed the same duties.* What was the nature of 
 these duties may be seen on a perusal of the Acts of 
 the Apostles, and the Epistles of St. Paul, especially 
 those to Timothy and Titus. It is succinctly stated in 
 the last. ^^ For this cause," says St. Paul, "left I thee 
 in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things 
 which are wanting, and ordain elders in every city. c. i. 
 
 *Actsxiv. 14 — Epistle to Timothy and Titu?, passim. Bishop 
 Fell, in a note to the second chapter ofthe epi?tle to the Pliilippians, 
 has the following- passage ; " Tertullian in prescrip. saith, that 
 St. Paul instituted an Episcopal see at Phihppi ; Chrjsostom, 
 Jerome, Theodoret, and others., name Epaphroditus to he the first 
 Bishop. And the epithets given him by the apostle do seem to 
 confirm this." See also Skinner's Vindication of primitive truth 
 and order in reply to Dr. Campbell's Lectures on Eccles. Hist. pp. 
 138 — 151, and Bowdenon Episcopacy, vol. 1. p. 289. 
 
1$ 
 
 V. 5. We read of Paul and Barnabas, that, '^ wlieii 
 theij had ordained them elders in every churchy and had 
 prayed, witli fasting, they commended them,'' &c» 
 Acts xiv. 23. NoAV the scriptures, though they in- 
 form us of other ministers, (as in these tvro passages, 
 of elders,) yet make no mention of their performing 
 tliese duties. True, there is a passage in the Epistle to 
 Timothy, where St. Paul is considered by many as in- 
 timating, that presbyters or elders were associated with 
 himself in his ordination. ^'•'Neglect not the gift that 
 is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the 
 laying on of the hands of the jrreshijterij.'^ 1. Tim. iv. 
 14. Some of the best critics arc, however, of opinion 
 that tlie term here used applies properly to the college 
 of the apostles, 8L Ptiul, however, only speaks here 
 of a concurrent act : such as is practised in the Episco- 
 pal church, while in the second Epistle, i. 6. he speaks 
 of himself as the actual ordainer.- 
 
 2. There was an order of ministers, not exercising 
 the duties spoken of above, but having other duties as 
 signed them, which, nevertheless, were common to both 
 orders : namely, preaching and administering the sacra- 
 ments. Beside which, they were, from time to time, 
 charged with the oversight of particular congregations, 
 and were in this respect bishops or overseers ; which 
 name, we have admitted, was applied to them during 
 the life-time of the apostles. Of this class were the 
 '^ other seventy'' sent by our Lord, — as also the elders 
 
 * Bishop Fell, in loc. — Calvin's Institutes, L. 4. c 3. — Assem- 
 bly's Annotations on 2 Tim. i. 6. — Skinner's Primitive Truth, p. 
 140. — Slater's Original Draught, p. 183. — Bowden on Episcopacy, 
 vol. 1. p. 305. — Bishop White's Lectures on the Catechism, p. 109. 
 
ordained by the apostles, asabovcmentioned, — those or- 
 dained by Titus — those sent for from Ephesus to Mile- 
 tus by Paul, — those addressed by Peter in his first 
 Epistle, — those bishops ordained by Timothy, agree- 
 ably to the directions given him in the first Epistle of 
 Paul, — and tliose, whom Paul associates with all the 
 saints f and the deacons, in the address of his Epistle to 
 the Philipians.* "While all allow, that a commission 
 was given by our Lord to the apostles, to gather, and 
 establish his church, yet no one pretends, tliat a similar 
 commission was given to the seventy ; and that they 
 were not equal to the apostles, is fully shown by the 
 manner in which the place of Judas was supplied. 
 (Acts, c. i.) And with regard to those elders with 
 whom Timothy and Titus were connected, it is ap- 
 parent from the epistles addressed tp these last, that 
 they were vested with control over the former. They 
 were to take care that no innovation in doctrine be ad- 
 mitted, — to punish such of tJie elders and others as dis- 
 oheyed, — to give double honor to such as laboured dili- 
 gently in the word and doctrine ; and they were to lay 
 hands suddenly on no man, but to use great caution with 
 regard to those whom they admitted to the ministry. 
 3. There was an order of ministers called deacons, 
 who were general assistants in the service of the church. 
 That there was such an order in the church at Jerusa- 
 lem,— that the persons on whom it was conferred, were 
 
 * " And the day following Paul went in with us to James ; [whoni 
 all Ecclesiastical History concurs in admitting to have been made 
 Bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles,] and all the elders were pre- 
 sent," Actsxxi. 18. " The apostles and ciders, came together,"' 
 Acts XV. 6. 
 
17 
 
 DliOsen by the people, and set apart, or ordained, by the 
 imposition of the hands of the apostles, is not to be de- 
 nied. But it is said, they were set apart onhj for the 
 purpose of taking charge of the offerings at the altar 
 for the benefit of the poor. We shall not deny that 
 this was the object for which the order was first in- 
 stituted ; but were they limited to this duty by the 
 apostles ? AVe have farther accounts of only two of 
 them. Stephen is spoken of as an able preacher and 
 defender of the gospel ; and we are informed that in 
 consequence of the persecution which arose after 
 his death, — the disciples being dispersed,— Philip 
 went down to Samaria, and preached Christ to the 
 people of that city. We soon find him baptizing. 
 Now preaching and baptizing Avere certainly acts of the 
 ministry superior to the mere care of the poor. In these 
 transactionsj we find he was sanctioned by the apostles, 
 as Peter and John were sent from the council of apostles 
 at Jerusalem, not to rebaptize, but to lay their hands on 
 those whom he had admitted to the church by baptism. 
 But it is said, that this PJiilip was an Evangelist, and 
 that this accounts for these transactions. If the term 
 Evangelist denoted an office, it was simply in the same 
 sense as Missionary in our day ; one who travelled to 
 preach the gospel. At the very time Philip is called by 
 this name, he is also spoken of as ona of the seven. 
 (Acts xxi. 8.) And it is evident, that Peter and John 
 were his superiors. Besides, the charge of the altar of- 
 ferings was a part of ministerial duty ; the apostles exe- 
 cuted it till the election of the seven. St. Paul, in his 
 first Epistle to Timothy, speaks twice distinctly of the 
 
 *^ office of a deacon.^^ " They that have used the office 
 3 
 
18 
 
 of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree, 
 and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.'" 
 (1 Tim. iii. 13). ^'^ Hence it appears — says the learned 
 Grotius — that there are several degrees, or orders in the 
 ministry of the church ; and that the deacons have their 
 share too in the ministi^ of the word : ^md that they 
 were not instituted only for the care of the poor.^'* 
 
 In connection with what has been shown above, let 
 the reader view together the following verses from the 
 Epistle to the Philippiaus. "Paul and Timotheus. 
 the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ 
 Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and dea- 
 cons.^' (v. 1.) ^* I supposed it necessary to send to you 
 Epaphroditus,my brother, and companion in labour, and 
 fellow-soldier, but your apostle.^^ (c. ii. v. 25. )t Bishops, 
 deacons, and saints of Philippi, Epaphroditus is your 
 apostle ! To use the Reviewer's language, "' one would 
 think this enough for a protestant !'' 
 
 If then the scripture does furnish evidence of the estab- 
 lishment of three orders in the ministry by the apostles, 
 acting under the authority of our Lord, and also of the 
 means by which that ministry might be perpetuated, 
 through the laying on of the hands of apostles, and their 
 successors, and by directions from the apostles them- 
 
 * Hinc apparel diversas esse ministrorum gradus, et diaconas 
 habuisse aliquam partem in ministerio verbi, et non ad solam pau- 
 perum curam institutes fuisse. Grotius. 
 
 t In our translation of the Bible, the Greek word A^ae-roAos is 
 here incorrectly rendered messenger^ — " not the word messenger 
 but the word apostle — says Bishop White — should have been used ; 
 as it is in every other place of scripture except one." Lectures 
 on the Catechism, p, 136. See also Whitby, in loc. and note 
 page 14, 
 
19 
 
 selves, tlicD all the coucein we can have with the an- 
 cient fathers is to ascertain whether suitable care was 
 taken for continuing the ministry thus established ; — 
 whether being divinely instituted it was also divinely 
 protected. This is a question of fact only. And 
 surely if the fathers will furnish us with satisfactory 
 testimony an this point, we may be pardoned a little 
 fondness for their writings, and a reasonable desire for 
 their preservation. 
 
 '' We have cause to believe that, what these primi- 
 tive professors taught concerning the doctrine, the 
 government, and the discipline of the church, they re- 
 ceived, — as Archbishop Wake observes, — from the 
 apostles, the apostles from Christ, and from that blessed 
 spirit who directed them, both in what they taught and 
 in what they ordained." 
 
 The earliest father, whose writings have come down 
 to us, is Clement of Rome. He lived at the close of 
 the first century ; had doubtless conversed with several 
 of the apostles, and left one Epistle directed to the 
 church at Corinth ; the only copy of which known to 
 exist was found written in the same volume with the 
 books of the New Testament.^ In this Epistle he writes 
 thus, — '^ It will behove us to take care that, looking in- 
 to the depths, we do all things in order, whatsoever our 
 Lord hath commanded ns to do. And particularly, 
 that we perform our ofterings and service to God at their 
 appointed seasons : for these he has commanded to be 
 done, not rashly and disorderly, but at certain deter- 
 
 * Eusebius says, L. 3. c. II. — '• This Epistle we have known to 
 be publickly road in many churches, bolh of old, and amongst u? 
 
 also." 
 
20 
 
 minate times, and hours. And therefore he has ordain- 
 ed, by his supreme will and authority, both where and 
 hy what jJ^rsons, they are to be performed ; that so all 
 things being piously done unto all well-pleasing, they 
 may be acceptable unto him."* Again: ^'The apostles 
 have preached to us from our Lord Jesus Christ, Jesus 
 Christ from God. Christ therefore was sent from God ; 
 the apostles by Jesus Christ ; so both were orderly 
 sent, according to the will of God. For having received 
 their command, and being thoroughly assured by the 
 resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ; and convinced by 
 the word of God, with the full assurance of tlie Holy Spirit^ 
 they went abroad, publishing that the kingdom of God 
 was at hand. And thus preaching through countries 
 and cities, they appointed the first fruits of their conver- 
 sions, to be BISHOPS and deacons over such as should 
 afterwards believe, having first proved them by the 
 spirit."! This extract proves, that a ministry was estab- 
 lished through divine influence in the church, and that 
 there were two orders resident at Corinth, under the 
 control of the apostles,| — some of whom were then 
 living ; St. John and Clement, according to Dr. Cave, 
 both dying in the same year. In less than fifty years 
 after the writing of this Epistle, Hegesippus, travelling 
 to Home, was accompanied by Primus, then vested with 
 the government of the church at Corinth as apostolic 
 bishop. II 
 
 Another witness to the fact of the apostolic establish- 
 ment of three orders in the ministry, is Ignatius, who 
 
 * S. Clem, ad Cor. Epist. i. sec. xl. 
 t Ibid. sec. xlii. Cotel. pat Apost. vol. i. p. 170 — ITl. 
 j See also Slater's Draught, p. 213. — Skinner's Primitive 
 Truth, p. 164. jl Quoted by Eusebius, L. 4. c. 22. 
 
21 
 
 was appoiuted by tlie apostles themselves, apostolic- 
 Bishop of Aiitioch ill Syria. He was martyred at 
 Rome, in the early part of the second century. Great 
 efforts have been made to destroy the credibility of his 
 writings ; apparently, because he is the first of the 
 fathers who use* the names of bishop, presbyter, and 
 deacon, as designating three distinct offices. His 
 Epistles are, however, quoted by Polycarp, Bishop of 
 Smyrna, by Irenseus, Bishop of Lyons, by Eusebius, 
 the father of Ecclesiastical History, and by Origen. 
 Full testimony is borne to them by Eusebius, Chrysos- 
 tom, Jerome, Theodoret, and Gelasius, fathers of the 
 fourth century. The great body of the learned of all 
 denominations, — says Dr. Bowden, — acknowledge the 
 shorter epistles, published by Archbishop Usher, and 
 Vossius, to be genuine, and entirely /ree from those cor- 
 ruptions which are universally admitted to belong to 
 the larger epistles.* 
 
 Two or three extracts, only, will be made from these 
 epistles, and they are conclusive. ^' He that is within 
 
 * Unitarians also object to these Epistles tliat they savour too 
 strong of the doctrine of the Trinity. There are, then, two co- 
 gent reasons why they should endeavour their destruction. But 
 they have been advocated as genuine by Abp. Usher, Abp. Wake, 
 Bp. Bull, Bp. Pearson, Dr. Cave, Cotelerius, Vossius, Grotius, Du- 
 pin, Petavius, Tillemont, Leclerc, Bochart, Fabricius, Dr. Ham- 
 mond, and many others. See Horsclcifs Letters to Priestly^ p. 34. 
 Even Dr. Lardnersays, '• I do not affirm that there are in them any 
 considerable corruptions, or alterations." Credibility of Gospel 
 History, vol. 2. p. 69. Blondel, Daille, Salmasius, and Albertinus 
 acknowledge that we have the epistles which Eusebius had. See 
 Eusebius, L. 3. c. 32. Bowden, vol. 1. p. 174, Bp. White's Lec- 
 tures, p. 457. Skinner, p. IGu 
 
22 
 
 1;lie altar is pure, but he that is without, that is, that 
 does any thing without the bishop, and presbyters, and 
 deacons, is not pure in his conscience." Hj^. to Tral- 
 lianSy sect. 1. " See that ye all follow your bishop, 
 as Jesus Christ, the father, and the presbytery, as the 
 apostles, and reverence the deacons as the command of 
 God. Let no man do any thing of what belongs to the 
 church separately from the bishop.'^ Ej). to Smyr- 
 nceansy sect. 8. " I salute your very worthy bishop, 
 and your venerable presbytery, and your deacons, my 
 fellow servants." Ibid. sect. 12. 
 
 The only remaining father of this early period, whose 
 writings can be adduced in this controversy, isPolycarp^ 
 and all that is now extant of his writings, is an epistle 
 to the church at Philippi, in which he does not himself 
 speak of three distinct orders, yet he recommends to 
 the Philippians, the above mentioned epistles of Igna- 
 tius, Avhich, we have seen, are unequivocal on the 
 subject. 
 
 Here then are two, if not three, witnesses testifying 
 to the existence of Episcopacy in the early part of the 
 second century. These men lived almost within the 
 fipostolic age ; the last of them, indeed, is said to have 
 conversed with the apostles ; and Jerome says, he was 
 consecrated bishop of Smyrna by St. John. There 
 are no other christian writings of this period extant, ex- 
 cept a few fragments preserved by other, and later 
 fathers, which, however, contain no evidence on this 
 subject. 
 
 Thus we have the testimony of scripture, to the 
 apostolic establishment of Episcopacy, and the concur- 
 rence of all the christian writers of the first century, 
 
2f3 
 
 who mentron the subject, to its continuance to thci? 
 time. 
 
 Irenaeus, Bisliop of Lyons in France, lived about 
 seventy years after the last of the apostles. The Re- 
 viewer quotes Mr. Sparks as asserting that he was or- 
 dained by presbyters, but there is no evidence, that we 
 have yet seen, by which this assertion can be supported. 
 When but a preshytev he was sent with an account of 
 tlie sufferings of the churches at Lyons and Vienne, to 
 Eleutherus, Bishop of Rome. Pothiims, Bishop of 
 Lyons, had just received martyrdom. Irenseus, either 
 at Rome, or on his return, was consecrated his successor. 
 He states, that the church of Rome was founded by the 
 apostles, names the first twelve bishops, and then as- 
 serts, — '^' By this SMCcessio)?, that tradition in the church, 
 and publication of the truth, which is from the apostles, 
 is come to us." — Boole against Heresies, lib. iii. c. 3, 
 Again — "^* The apostolic tradition is present in every 
 church. We can enumerate those who were constituted 
 bishops by the apostles, in the churches, and their sue 
 cessors, who tauglit no such tiling. By showing the 
 tradition, and declared faith of the most ancient church 
 of Rome, which she received from the apostles and 
 which is even come to us through the succession of 
 bishops, we confound all who conclude otherwise than 
 as they ought." — Ibid. Again — **' We can reckon up- 
 to you those who w ere instituted bishops by the apostles 
 themselves, — to whom they committed the churches, — 
 left them their successors, delivering up to them their 
 own proper place of mastership.*' — Ibid. Now 
 let these passages be viewed in connection with what 
 has been already stated from scripture and the early 
 fathers. 
 
25 
 
 Clement of Alexandria floiirislied about twenty year? 
 later than Irenoeus. Having pointed out some texts of 
 scripture as applicable to Christians in general, he- 
 says,— "There are other precepts Avithout number, some 
 which relate to presbyters, others which belong to 
 bishops, and others respecting deacons."' Poeda^og. L. 
 iii. c. 12. Clement was a presbyter under Demetrius 
 bishop of Alexandria. 
 
 TertuUian flourished about A. D. 200. He says — • 
 " The chief or liighest priest, who is the hisliop, has the 
 right of giving baptism, and after Iiim the presbyters^ 
 and deacons, but not witliout the bisliop's authority.*' 
 (De Baptisnw. c. il.J The following extracts from 
 the same father will iUustrate the quotations above froni 
 Irenseus : appealing to the rulers of the Homaii Empire 
 in favor of the persecuted Christians, he says, — " We 
 are but of yesterday, and we have filled your cities, 
 islands, towns, and boroughs,- — the camp, the senate, 
 and the forum. Our adversaries lament that every age^ 
 sex, and condition are converts to the name of Christ.'' 
 fJipol. c. SI. J Again : speaking of many countries in 
 which Christianity prevailed, he says, "In almost every 
 city we form the greater part." fM Scap. c. 2. J " I 
 do allow," — says Paley,* — " that these expressions are 
 loose, and may be called declamatory. Eut even de- 
 clamation hath its bounds ; this public boasting, upon a 
 subject which must be known to every reader, was not 
 only useless but unnatural, unless the truth of the case, 
 in a considerable degree, correspond with the descrip- 
 
 * Works. — Boston Ed. Vol. ii. (Evidences) p. 330, See al?o 
 Bowden, vol. iii. pp. HO — 3 
 
25 
 
 tion ; at least, unless it had been both true and no- 
 torious, that great raultitinles of Christians, of all ranks 
 and orders were to be found in most parts of the Roman 
 Empire." Was this the case at this early period ? 
 And will it be said that tlie bishops mentioned in the 
 above quotations, were ^''parochial clergymen and 
 nothing more ?" It is incredible. 
 
 It is unnecessary to continue these extracts, as Euse- 
 bius, who lived about a liumlred years later than Ter- 
 "tullian, and, from his situation and character, must 
 have been competent to the task, amply testifies to the 
 fact in cpiestion. He furnishes us with lists of the 
 bishops who have successively presided in the churches 
 of Antioch, Jerusalem, Home, and Alexandria, taken 
 by himself from the records of those churches.* " There 
 can be no making light of his testimony,'' says Bishop 
 White. Blondel, Salmasius, and Daille, all great 
 champions of presbyterianism, and opposevs of Kpisco- 
 pacij, admit that diocesan Episcopacy Avas the general 
 government of the church, before the time of Clement of 
 Alexandria, whom we quoted above. Du Moulin, in 
 his defence of presbyterianism, says, — "Truly the 
 Episcopal form of government, all churches, every 
 where, received, presently after the apostles times, or 
 even in their times, as ecclesiastical history wit- 
 nesseth." Bucer, Calvin, Baxter, and Leclerc, say 
 
 * The first Bishop of Jerusalem was St. James ; (Acts xv. 13. 
 and xxi. 18.) of Rome, Linus ; of Alexandria, St. Mark ; of Antioch, 
 Evodius ; of Athens, Dionysius, the Areopagite ; of Ephesus, 
 Timothy; of Crete, Titus; of Smyrna, Polycarp ; — all of them 
 ©rdained, and constituted bishops of the respective churches by 
 the apostles themselves. 
 4 
 
26 
 
 the same in substance. Doddridge admits its existence 
 in the time of Ignatius.* But even were we to 
 
 * Bowden, vol. i. 159 — and ii. 135. Religious World displayed, 
 by the Rev. R. Adam. Philad. Ed. vol. ii. p. 282. We must not, 
 however, pass without notice the proof which the Reviewer gives 
 us from Jerome that Episcopa government was an usurpation. 
 The extract is as follows. — " Till through the instinc*t of the 
 devil, there grew in the church, factions, and among the people it 
 began to be professed, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of 
 Cephas, churches were governed by the common advice of pres- 
 byters, but when every one began to reckon those whom he had 
 baptized, his own, and not Christ's, it was decreed in the whole 
 worlds that one, chosen out of the presbyters, should be placed 
 over the rest, to whom all care of the church should belong, and 
 so the seeds of schism be removed." This passage cer- 
 tainly proves, that the congregational, or presbyterian system, 
 was fruitful in schisms, and that Episcopacy was found the most ef- 
 fectual antidote. But can the Reviewer inform us what period 
 Jerome refers to ? We have no doubt !hiit it is to the time when 
 Paul actually used the language which Jerome quotes. It is very 
 evident, we think, from the scriptures, that none of the apostles, 
 (James, perhaps, excepted) located themselves at an early period, 
 but, with those whom they had chosen into their number, general- 
 ly did the work of Evangelists, travelling for the wider spread of 
 the gospel, " ordaining elders in every church ;" to whom doubt- 
 less they committed the local or pastoral government, at the same 
 time exercising over them a general superintendence. The schism at 
 Corinth demonstrated the necessity of a local and resident Episcopa- 
 cy. They accordingly, — Jerome tells us, — established it " through- 
 out the world." And it is remarkable, that the epistles to Timo- 
 thy and Titus in which Paul charged them with the governmenf. 
 of the churches at Ephesus and Crete, and instructed them how 
 to proceed in calling men to the ministrj^, &c. were both written, 
 either in the same year, or subsequently, to that in which the 
 first epistle to the Corinthians was written. The same remark 
 applies to the epistle to the Philippians. We, elsewhere, find 
 
27 
 
 admit, that the apostles established Congregationalism, 
 or presbyterianism, still it is allowed on all sides that 
 a different state of things existed at the time of which 
 we are now ^^Titing ; how, or when, or by whom, was 
 this change effected ? It must have been known for a 
 long time afterward ; — there must have been some re- 
 cords of the fact, for we find events of much less im- 
 portance amply attested ; — we should have heard of it, 
 at least, by allusion, but the silence of those who 
 slumber in the grave is not more perfect, than is that of 
 all antiquity on this point ; no syllable can be produced 
 to attest it ; all the evidence we possess of the early 
 history of the church is against it ; — those who have at- 
 tempted to establish it, have generally disagreed as to 
 the period ; — and yet in the face of all this, there are 
 men who can assert that Episcopacy was an usurpa- 
 tion ! " When" — says Chillingworth — that Chilling- 
 worth whom the Reviewer represents, with others, as 
 merely acquiescing in Episcopacy, — "When I shall see 
 all the democracies, and aristocracies in the world, lie 
 down to sleep, and awake into monarchies ; then will 
 1 begin to believe, that presbyteriau government, (and 
 we suppose we may be permitted to say — or congrega- 
 
 Jerome expressly mentioning-, that Timothy was made Bishop of 
 Ephesus, Titus of Crete, and Epaphroditus of Phihppi, by St. Paul. 
 In another place he says, (we quote it, to show that he does not 
 speak of parochial bishops) — " We may know that the apostolic 
 traditions were taken from the Old Testament ; that which Aaron, 
 and his sons, and the Levites, were in the temple, let the bishops, 
 presbyters, and deacons, claim to themselves in the church." 
 {Ep. ad Evag.) See Bowden, vol. i. letter 1. and vol. iii. let. 5. 
 Hobart's Festivals and Fasts, 2d. ed. p. 36. Slater's Original 
 Draught, p, 207. Skinner's Primitive Truth, p. 223. 
 
28 
 
 iionalf) having continued in the church from the apostles' 
 times, should presently after he whirled about like a 
 stone in a masque, and be transformed into Epis- 
 copacy/*'! 
 
 t Quoted in Rev. R. Adam"? Religious World, vol. ii. p. 282. 
 See Chillingworth's Apostolic Institution of Episcopacy demon- 
 strated. The testimony of Cyprian, Bp. of Carthage, Firmilian, 
 Bp. of Caesarea, Jerome, Hilary the deac6a,Xiirysostom, Bp. of 
 Constantinople, and others which we cannot quote, may be seen 
 in Bowden, vol. i. letters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. As to the confident as- 
 sertion of Mr. Sparks, that, " Bishops were for a long time or- 
 dained by presbyters at Alexandria,"" we refer our readers to Bp. 
 Pearson's vindication of the epistles of Ignatius, where he quotes 
 several authors, who particularly mention that the Bishop of 
 Alexandria was always ordained, not by presbyters, but by a 
 bishop. We shall adduce one. Simeon Metaphrastes says of St. 
 Mark, that " he ordained as his successor, Anianus, Bishop of 
 Alexandria : and gave to other churches, bishops, presbyters, and 
 deacons." Lib. xi. c. 43. See also Eusebius, lib. ii. c. 15. The 
 Reviewer, not content with adopting Mr. S's opinion with regard 
 to the Alexandrian church, says farther, that the church at Car- 
 thage was congregational ! So said Sir P. King before him. Slater, 
 after examinmgand refuting all his arguments, says of this church, 
 that, " little as she was in her flourishing times of peace and 
 safety, the number of her lapsed members only., was such, in the 
 Decian persecution, that thousands of tickets were daily granted 
 by the martyrs and confessors on their behalf, to procure their 
 reconciliation with the church, — what manner of single congrega- 
 tion such a church would make before the fatal fall of so vast a 
 number of her members, and after their blessed union again, I 
 leave to any impartial man to judge." Original Draitght, p. 99. 
 We have seen above, what Tertullian, who was a native of this 
 city, says of the prevalence of Christianity in the cities of the 
 Empire. The address of St. Cyprian's 39th epistle alone would 
 prove the establishment of Episcopacy in Carthage. Indeed so 
 strong is the testimony to this effect, that Dr. Bowden, says vol. i. 
 
29 
 
 As it respects iiie origin of the cburcii of Rome it is 
 jiot necessary to our purpose to go into particulars liere; 
 tlie fact that it commenced with Episcopacy, being uni- 
 versally admitted. Tlie difficulty respecting the first 
 seven bishops is substantially only a difficuiiy about 
 names. There is reason however to believe, as shown 
 by Dr. Hammond, that the Jewish and Gentile converts 
 differing, as they did, in many observances, had also 
 their separate bishops, and to this cause is the confu- 
 sion in this respect, perhaps, to be traced. Nor are we 
 concerned with the succession in that see to a later 
 period, than thetimeof Gregory the great, as he is called, 
 memorable for his refusing the title of universal bishop, 
 which is now meant by that of Pope, and for sending to 
 Britain, Augustin, who was the first Bishop of Canter- 
 bury. 
 
 We believe the assertion that ^^ English bishops were, 
 at an early period, consecrated by presbyters,*' to be 
 destitute of credibility. On turning to Mr. Sparks's 
 book to discover the instance alluded to, we find he re- 
 fers to an occurrence, which, so far as we can understand 
 from his statement, (and we are not able to refer to 
 Doddridge) took place in Scotland. What relation it 
 bears to the English succession we do not see. On re- 
 ferring to Dupin we find that about this time Adeodatus 
 was Archbishop of Canterbury ; he, dying, was suc- 
 ceeded by Theodorus, ordained at Rome and sent to 
 England in 668 at the request of King Egbert. Just 
 
 p, 71. '• Look, sir, at the sun when it is blazing in the firmament, 
 and say it doc - not shine, and you will come as near the truth, as 
 when you say Cy^irian was the bishop of but a sing^le congrega- 
 tion." See Skinner's Primitive Truth, p. 231, for the aacient 
 distinction between diocesf and parish. 
 
before this event, Wilfred, educated at Home, and or- 
 dained priest by Hagilbert, Bisiiop of Dorchester, was 
 nominated Bishop of York. There being then but one 
 bishop in England, he went to Paris and was there con- 
 secrated by the Bishop of Paris, and others. " During 
 his absence they that stood for the way of the Irish 
 churches (on the subject of the clerical tonsure and the 
 observance of Easter) persuaded King Oswi to put into 
 the cliurch of York Ceadde, Abbot of Lindisferne, wJio 
 was consecrated hy one English and two British 
 f Welsh J Bishops.^^^- Wilfi-ed returning, the King 
 gave him the diocese of Litchfield, and he supplied the 
 diocese of Canterbury during the interval between the 
 death of Adeodatus and the arrival of Theodorus. 
 Here then we see that there were six bishops at least in 
 England and Wales, about the tiuie in which Mr. 
 S. considers Episcopacy to have become nearly extinct. 
 
 * Dupin's Eccles. Hist. London ed. 1693, pp. 45—125. " These 
 matters of fact, — he says, — are certain, heing affirmed by Eddi, 
 who was Wilfred's disciple and author of his life, — by Pope John 
 the Vllth's letters, — and the naiTatives of Bede, and William of 
 Malmesbury." While referring to Mr. Sparks's work we will no- 
 tice what happens just now to strike our sight on the opposite 
 page (36) to the one we have been commenting on. The senti- 
 ment ascribed to Eusebius is not his, but appears to be quoted, 
 through Doddridge, perhaps, from Milton, " whose rage against 
 Episcopacy was too great," — as Bp. White justly observes, — "to 
 permit the exercise of his judgement on any point connected with 
 it." Eusebius referring to the lesser dioceses, intimates, that " it 
 cannot be affirmed how many^ arid what sincere followers of the 
 apostles, have governed those churches, but so far forth as may 
 be gathered out of the words of Paul." This passage is at the 
 place of his second reference ; the Jirst is to a chapter not in the 
 book. 
 
Indeed whoever examines the history of the church, at 
 this period, and observes the stress laid upon the suc- 
 cession — the frequent appeals to Rome in matters of dis- 
 cipline, &c. and the influence of that see in England^ 
 will not be content with doubtful assertions impugning 
 acknowledged facts, but will require indubitable testi- 
 mony before h& surrenders his opinion. Such testimony, 
 we humbly conceive, is not to be produced. Dr. 
 Campbell, Dr. Miller and other able opponents of Epis- 
 copacy, appear either not to be aware of the circum- 
 stance on which Mr. S. relies, or what is most probable, 
 deemed it unworthy of credit. 
 
 It is believed that no other diflRculties are alleged, 
 affecting the succession, till the time of Elizabeth, and 
 those which were then urged by the partizans of Rome, 
 (and are now it seems to be urged anew by another 
 class of men,) were not very important. They laboured 
 to prove that the bishops who consecrated Matthew 
 Parker, Archbishop of Canterbury, were not themselves 
 consecrated, but it appears that they were true bishops, 
 although they had been deprived of their jurisdiction 
 by Mary.* In the same breath, they asserted that the 
 reformers did not hold to the necessity of consecration 
 to that office, and yet, that they liad forged records to 
 prove Bishop Parker to be duly consecrated ! But 
 these were not the opinions at Rome, for it is clearly 
 testified by two respectable historians that Pius IV. 
 offered Elizabeth to confirm what she had done, pro- 
 vided his supremacy was acknowledged.f 
 
 * Robert Adam's Religious World, vol. ii. p. 381. — jXote. 
 t Cambden's Elizabeth, and Baker's Chron, Anno. 1560. We 
 have before us a work by a romanist containing' 6i"teen proposition.': 
 
32 
 
 We know that Archbishop Bancroft has been fre- 
 quently quoted as saying that ordination by jjresbjjtevs 
 was valid. But on what occasion was this expression 
 said to have been made ? Wlien three ministers of 
 the Scotcli church, presbyterially ordained, were called 
 up to London to be consecrated bishops. If the ordi- 
 nation by presbyters was valid, where, we Avould ask, 
 
 why the EngUsh orders are not valid. Among- others, — they 
 were not legal, nor canonical ; — legal accoi'ding to the laws oi" 
 Mary then partially in force, — canonical according to the canons of 
 the church of Rome. For the benefit of the Reviewer and his 
 friends, we will lay before our readers the last proposition, meant, 
 as we suppose, for the strongest. '■'• It cannot be safe for a Chris- 
 tian to continue iu a communion, where there are no true orders 
 of bishops, and priests, or at least no certainty of such orders. 
 Because, without true orders they can have no sacrament &.c. no 
 absolution, no eucharistic sacrifice, no lawful preaching, no ke3's 
 &c. in a word, no church and no Christ," &c. We suspect that 
 congregationalists come in for a share of anathema here. The 
 validity of the English orders has been proved in an elaborate 
 work, by Le Courayer, a divine of the French church ; but it 
 brought him under the censures of his brethren, and obliged him 
 to take refuge among those whom he had defended. The " in- 
 foj'mality in English ordinations," which we are told, the rom.anist 
 considers as nullifying them, was simply, the omission in the ritual 
 of Edward the VI. of words designating in the sentence of ordina- 
 tion, the peculiar office to which the candidate was admitted, 
 though it was fully expressed in the former and latter parts of the 
 services. The truth is, the reformers were desirous of conform- 
 ing as strictly as possible to the scriptural practice ; the woi'ds 
 used in consecrating, therefore, were similar to, if not the same 
 with, those used by our Saviour in ordaining the apostles. Mil- 
 bourne in his Legacy to the church of England, vol. i. p. 302. et 
 seq. shows that a similar defect, if it is one, existed in the Greek 
 ordinal, and that the orders of the Greek church were neverthe- 
 less allowed at Rome. 
 
83 
 
 \vas the necessity for Spatswood and his brethren, to 
 receive imposition of Episcopal hands, that their future 
 ordinations mii^ht be such ? •• A different account how- 
 ever is given," — -says Dr. Bowden, — '^ by Heylin, 
 Collier, and Gray. Archbishop liancroft said, there 
 was no necessity for their passing through the inter- 
 mediate orders of deacon and priest, as the Episcopal 
 character might be conveyed at a single consecration ; 
 and for this, he cited two precedents in the ancient 
 church, Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, and Nectariusj 
 Bishop of Constantinople." And it was doubtless on 
 this ground, that Bishop Andrews, who first suggested 
 the difficulty, assisted in their consecration. Bishop 
 Burnet, however, says that the question was overruled 
 by King James. ^ The three bishops returned to Scot- 
 land and consecrated others, " by which means a true 
 and regular Episcopacy was at length introduced into 
 the reformed church of Scotland," — says Adam ; who 
 also quotes Bishop Guthry as saying, that, ^* it was 
 not without the consent and furtherance of many of the 
 wisest among the ministry." Their Episcopacy, cer- 
 tainly, was but of short duration. In twenty-eight 
 years occurred an event, which the Reviewer, after the 
 example he has set us, will certainly pardon us for not 
 easily forgetting, and, surely, we have some cause to 
 remember it. The Solemn League and Covenant for 
 the entire extirpation of prelacy, was framed, sworn 
 to, and carried into unrelenting execution. But this is 
 a subject, on which, we must thank the Reviewer for it, 
 we shall have occasion to speak hereafter. The 
 
 ♦History of his own times, vol. i. p. 139. See also Collier's 
 Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 702. 
 .5 
 
a4 
 
 bishops were driven into exile, where all died^ except 
 one. Twenty-four years afterward, Episcopacy was 
 again restored to Scotland. Four persons were conse- 
 crated bishops in England ; two of them being pre- 
 viously admitted deacons and priests ; and the others 
 already in Episcopal orders. From that time to the 
 present, the succession has been regularly preserved in 
 that country, and it was by the imposition of the hands 
 of three of their successors that the late Bishop Sea-^ 
 bury of Connecticut, derived his Episcopal autliority.f 
 
 It is admitted, by the Reviewer, that the ^English 
 succession may be traced upward to Archbishop Parker. 
 
 It is sometimes attempted by our opponents to ^how, 
 that the reformers, did not believe in the di\ine institu- 
 tion of Episcopacy. It was in the second year of the 
 Feign of Edward VI. that the reformed ordinal was 
 adopted ; from it we select the following passages f — 
 *^ It is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy 
 Scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles' 
 time, there have been these orders of ministers in 
 Christ's church, bishops,priests and deacons." Preface. 
 ^^ Almighty God, who, by thy divine providence hast 
 appointed divers orders of ministers in thy church, and 
 didst inspire thine apostles to choose into the order of 
 deacons,"^&c. " Almighty God, giver of all good things, 
 who by thy Holy Spirit hast appointed divers orders of 
 ministers in ih J chm-ch,^^ kc. Collects. Other passage* 
 might be produced to the same import, but these are 
 
 t For a list of their bishops, see Skinner's Prim. Truth, Appen- 
 (2tx, No. i. p. 341. or, Journals Gen. Coavention Prot. Ep. Ch. in 
 U. S. (1789) p. 108. 
 
35 
 
 sufficient. Noav is it possible that men, such as those 
 were who drew this ordinal, could deliberately state 
 these sentiments, — suffer them to go down to posterity 
 as theirs ; nay, could embody them in prayers to God, — 
 in prayers which they expected would be used by mul- 
 titudes, — in prayers set forth to be used at solemn ordi- 
 nations, and yet not believe them ? It would be a sad 
 blot indeed upon their memory, if there were any ground 
 on Avhich to sustain such a charge of perjury. That 
 there might be some among them, who, in expressing, 
 on ot!ier occasions, their private opinions, would not 
 use precisely the same plmiselogy, we are not prepared 
 to deny. This was not a period when the temperature, 
 or aspect, of any man's mind, was of the same grade, or 
 complexion, with all those around him. The free 
 spirit of inquiry which had gone forth, v/as greatly ad- 
 verse to the spirit of harmony ; and it is something in 
 favour of the demands of our church, that it was so well 
 understood, at such a time, on what points to rest. We 
 see that the reformers agreed in the fact that these three 
 orders were established by inspired apostles. We ask 
 no more. We are not disposed to quarrel about words. 
 Both the Reviewer and Mr. S.as quoted by liim, dis- 
 cover a pretty strong disposition to turn against us the 
 arms of the church of Rome. We admit that we have 
 derived the succession through the bishops of that church, 
 but we certainly do not see how the revocation by any 
 bishop, — for such and such only, do we allow the Pope 
 to be, — can render void the official acts of one, or more 
 bishops, acting within tlieir commissions, and by 
 authority equal to, and transmitted in the same manner 
 as his own. Our church acknowledges no such power ; 
 
36 
 
 on the contrary her divines have uniformly declared this 
 claim of power on his part, even as exercised over the 
 Homish church, to be rank usurpation. Have these 
 writers never heard of the resistance made to this princi- 
 ple by the Gallican clergy ? Will the platforms of 
 New-England permit a pastor of one independent con- 
 gregation to exercise such power over the pastor of 
 another ? The cases are precisely paralel. In this 
 this view there is sometiiing superlatively absurd in the 
 '^ argument" which the Reviewer condescends " to sug- 
 gest to Mr. S. that he may enlarge upon it in another 
 edition." We should hope, on the contrary, that before 
 Mr. S. commences another edition he would study the 
 subject thoroughly for himself— depend less on " the 
 literary republic of the east," and divest himself of the 
 iron shackles of prejudice, with which, in truth, he 
 seems overloaded, while he thinks himself free. If the 
 Reviewer Avill but take the trouble to look back upon 
 the conduct of the church at Rome, he will find that 
 nearly all churches which have not submitted to the 
 lawless dominion of the Pope, have not only been ex- 
 communicated, but even anathematised ; and doubtless 
 he will find her at one time admitting, — then denoun- 
 cing, — and then again admitting, the orders of the 
 numerous and powerful Greek church. But what does 
 this prove ? Nothing but an inordinate lust of power. 
 
 The Reviewer conceives he has no\v arrived at a 
 position so firm, that " he does not see how any im- 
 fartial person" can fail to be as fully persuaded as 
 himself. When a writer with an ex -parte statement tell^ 
 his readers whatow^/z^ to be the judgement of imjmrtial 
 persons he deserves to be suspected. He lias iiothing 
 
87 
 
 to do with his judges, farther than to state his argu- 
 ments. And when he descends to this sort of cant, we 
 may compare him to a lawyer, wlio should tell a jury, 
 that if they would be impartial^ the^^ must believe all he 
 says. We are, perhaps, wasting our reader's time by 
 remarks of this sort, but it is fit that they should sec how 
 far tlie Reviewer js disposed to judge for them in this 
 question. 
 
 Notwithstanding the firmness of Jiis position, the 
 Reviewer seems desirous of adding a sort of buttress to 
 increase its strcngtii, by asserting that till some impor- 
 tant deficiency is found in it, he shall be quite content to 
 rest upon it, and to have his ordination '• as regular as 
 that of Barnabas and Paul, who were ordained by cer- 
 tain jjvojjjiets and teachers at Jiyitiochy 
 
 We suppose, the Reviewer w ould wish to be under- 
 stood here, as referring to congregational ordination. 
 If so, Ave are somewhat doubtful, whatever may have 
 been his individual case, whether those who have pre- 
 ceeded him, in his shadowy line, have been so favoured 
 as to have prophets and teachers for their ordainers. 
 He v^'ill not, we suppose, be willing to allow Robert 
 Brown to be the founder of his sect, nor w ould we be 
 so uncharitable as to trace its origin to that man of un- 
 happy memory ; yet Robinson of Leyden, who w^as 
 perhaps its true founder, admitted, in his Apology pub- 
 lished at Leyden, in 1619, that they were commonly 
 known by the name of Brownists. In the New-Eng- 
 land memorial there is an account of what is believed 
 to have becti the first congregational ordination in 
 America. Al Salem, oii the sixth of August, 1629, the 
 ponfcssion of faith and covenant being solemnly read, 
 
38 
 
 thirty persons professed their consent to it, and then 
 proceeded to ordain Mr. Shelton, j^astor, and Mr. 
 Higginson, teacher, of the church there. Gov. Bradford 
 of Plymouth, afterward arrived and gave them the right 
 hand of fellowship.'^ Upon this point we might dila^te, 
 
 * N. England Mem. p. 82 and onward as quoted in Churchman's 
 Mon. Blag. a^oI. ii. p. 228. See also Alden's account of the religious so- 
 cieties of Portsmouth, N. H. for a similar transaction, p. 29. Trum- 
 bull's Hist. Connecticut, vol. i. Ibid. Hist. U. S. vol. i. p. 89. It is 
 not easy to ascertain, what are the principles, which, in our daj, 
 constitute Congregationalism. The Cambridge and Sa^'brook plat- 
 forms are, in a great measure, disused, and creeds of all kinds are 
 becoming very unfashionable. At the first settlement of the 
 country, none but laymen ordained, and their ordination was im- 
 posed, even upon those who had previously been Episcopally or- 
 dained in England. This ordination was performed, either, by all 
 the members of the church as at Salem, or by certain members of 
 it, called, in allusion to Proverbs ix. 1. — the seven pillars. If a 
 minister of another congregation was present, he, as a general 
 rule, was not allowed to interfere, lest the rights of the church 
 should be infringed. Latterly, a diflTerent practice has prevailed ; 
 a council of laity and clergy appoint a clerical committee to per- 
 form the act of ordination. If the minister leaves one congrega- 
 tion, and is chosen to another, a reordination takes place after the 
 same manner, in nearly all respects, but called installation. We 
 suppose then, we are not mistaken in the belief, that the essence 
 of Congregationalism is, that each separate congregation is a per- 
 fect christian church, with full right to appoint its own officers, 
 though the ceremony of ordination, which is, perhaps, but a 
 pubhc acceptance, be performed by others. That a minister, 
 then, should be considered lawfully authorized while he continues 
 to officiate to the church of which he is an officer is reasonable, 
 but upon what ground is it, that he is permitted to exercise the 
 office., when he ceases to be an officer ? We recollect an instance 
 of a gentleman who began his career with the title oi reverend., as 
 minister of a church in Boston ; and terminated it with the title of 
 esquire., as magistrate of a neighbouring town. But we now set 
 
39 
 
 but it would oblige us to digi'css to too gi-eat an extent. 
 We return to the consideration of the ordination^ as the 
 Reviewer calls it, of Paul and Barnabas. Is the Re- 
 viewer vvilling to rest his reputation as a Biblical critic, 
 on the fact, that this was an ordination to the work of 
 the ministry by which these apostles were now first com- 
 missioned ? What then does Paul mean, when he says 
 of himself, that he was ^''an apostle not of men, neither 
 by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the father ?'' 
 fGal.i.l.J Had not both Barnabas and Paul exer- 
 cised their ministry before this time at other places, as 
 well as a whole year in this very city of Antioch? And 
 were they not in truth designated by the Holy Ghost 
 fo^ a special mission ; the performance of which is fully 
 narrated in Acts xiii. and xiv. ? " The Holy Ghostj, 
 said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work 
 whcrcunto I liave called them." — ^^ So they being sent 
 forth ])y the Holy Ghost, departed," &c. — visited sun- 
 dry places where, probably, the gospel had not been 
 preached, — gathered churches, renewed their visits to 
 some of them, ordained elders, in every church, and 
 then returned to Antioch '^ from whence they had been, 
 recommended to the graee of God, for the work which 
 they had fulfilled.'^ " The whole history of the con- 
 version of St. Paul shows him to have been miraculous- 
 ly called, — says Bishop White,^ — under as strong evi- 
 dence of the fact, as the miraculous appointment of the 
 twelve. Not only so, he says expressly, " I neither re- 
 persons quitting the pastoral charge, accepting professorships in- 
 colleges, teaching schools, &c. and yet retaining the clerical 
 character. We do not wonder, that uniformity and consistency 
 are considered hy such men as vices in the Episcopal church '. 
 
40 
 
 ceived it (tlie gospel) from man ; iieltliei* was 1 taiighi 
 it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." (Gal. i. 12.) 
 And again in regard to his entrance on the niinisti'yj — 
 "I conferred not with flesh and blood." (v. 16.) And 
 in two places in the 2 Cor. (ix. 5 aiid xii. 11.) he places 
 himself on a level with the chief of the apostles.* 
 
 We may now,— we trust, — be permitted to use the 
 language of the Reviewer, under a& strong conviction of 
 its truth, as his, tiiougli in a different sense. "It seem^ 
 to us, that there are not many things in: church history 
 which less admit of dispute than the rise and establish- 
 ment of Episcopacy." 
 
 The Reviev/er next devotes a page or two, to a neat 
 speculation on the rise and progress of Ecclesiastical 
 government. It forcibly reminds us, liovrever, of the 
 author, who is said to have made up a book of travels 
 through a certain country, while he was comfortably 
 seated in his own closet. The book would pass very 
 well among those, who had never seen the country, nor 
 read a genuine account of it, but very different would 
 be its reception with those who had. Just so with 
 the Reviewer. His account may pass with those 
 who will not examine into the early history of the 
 church, but will have very little credit with those who 
 do. He gives us his conceptions of such a church as 
 we, probably, might have had, if he had been the guide 
 and counsellor of the apostles. He admits that " the 
 early preachers of our faith, [apostles] pursued the 
 course which men Osgood sense, not to say men divinely 
 inspired might be expected to adopt," and we are happy 
 
 * Lectures on the Catechism, p. 430. See also Doddridje fc- 
 loc. — Bowden, vol. i. p. 27B 
 
41 
 
 to find him allowing thein so much credit, for we were 
 really ia some doubt as to the estimation in which, ia 
 this respect at least, Unitarians are disposed to regard 
 them. It is a notorious fact, that the opponents of 
 Episcopacy, have not been able to agree as to the time 
 in which it was imposed on the church. They are not 
 only at variance with each other in regard to this cir- 
 cumstance, but they are equally so with regard to the 
 causes which, — they say, — produced its imposition. 
 Some of them impute it to the corruption of the clergy, 
 aye, even in times when to be eminent in the cause of 
 Christianity was to set one's self up as a mark for the^ 
 shafts of poAver ; — when the putting on of the mitre, 
 was soon followed by the stripping off the garments at 
 the stake : — in times when even the heathen enemies of 
 Christianity speak of uncomraon purity of life and prin- 
 ciple, as the universal characteristic of its followers ! 
 Others of them ascribe it to the virtue and piety of the 
 church. It must then be a form of government good in 
 itself, and they should blush for their opposition But 
 was it a pious deed to overthrow institutions, which our 
 opponents say, were founded by apostles ? Was it vir- 
 tuous to trample upon what sacred authority had estab- 
 lished ? The Reviewer, however, seems unwilling to 
 agree with either of these classes, but supposes that the 
 motives which led to one usurpation after another, were 
 '• like a mingled yarn, of good and ill together.'' 
 What credit shall we give to either, and who will guide 
 us in making the distinction ? 
 
 W^e are next favoured with some arguments, to ac- 
 count for the moderation of the reformers in stopping 
 6 
 
42 
 
 their purgations on the other sidfe of Episcopacy, in- 
 stead of opening the flood gates to sweep away VQot 
 and branch. We do not doubt, that the Reviewer and 
 his party are very willing to do, w^iat the reformers 
 omitted. =f^ If the dispositions manifested in this Review, 
 and in a certain ^* Letter" published a little before, are 
 any evidence, we certainly are at liberty to draw thi& 
 conclusion. AVe thank Grod, that these writers were 
 not in the place of the reformers. The characters and 
 abilities of the ecclesiastical reformers we are willing 
 to leave to the estimation of all m«n, assuredly believing 
 that they stand mi too sacred ground, — that they are 
 too far above the reach of malevolence, to be injured by 
 pedantry or sectarian bitterness. Their reputation is 
 as a rock, and has stood harder buffets by far, than 
 these writers are competent to give. We are not 
 now speaking of rulers and kings, nor of that civil 
 policy which might lead them, now to cherish, and 
 now to discountenance, the efforts of pure and undefiled 
 
 * " If amidst so much that is admirable, in the character, and con- 
 duct of the first reformers, we might be permitted to allot the 
 meed of praise to any particular part, I should have no hesitatioe 
 in assigning it to that singular moderation and discernment, which 
 distinguished the Reformation from all other Revolutions, — which 
 overcoming the common infirmities of ou r nature, by which men 
 are apt to run from one extreme to its opposite, controlled the 
 spirit of innovation in the moment of reform, rejected nothing 
 without examination, retained nothing without authority ; and 
 when it abjured the usurpations of the church of Rome, discarded 
 only its corruptions, and left all that had the stamp of Christianity 
 behind ; like the fire which separates and consumes the dross, — 
 but presjerves and refines all that was pure in the ore." Dr 
 Toylor'^s answer to the question.^ Why are you a Churchman. 
 
43 
 
 religiou, escaping fiom the enthraltneats of spiritual 
 dominion and corruptiofi.f 
 
 t The Reviewer makes use of an old puritan parody on the 
 scripture ; for what purpose he best knows. When he says that 
 the Episcopal church " still stands on the foundation of the Lords 
 .and Commons of England,'''' did he mean to convey the idea, that 
 the Episcopal church was necessarily dependant on the church of 
 England, or, that there is any connection between the church in 
 America, and the government of England ? If he did, and one or 
 two other passages bear the same construction, we envy neither 
 his opinion nor his principle : and not much more honourable to 
 him is this parody, if he meant to assert by it, that even the 
 church of England as a spiritual communion rests on that founda- 
 tion. True, he quotes Mr. Sparks as saying, that " the power of 
 the English clergy is confessedly derived from the king and not 
 from any church," but it is the precise reverse of this assertion 
 which is true, and it is so easily proved so, that we might positively 
 dispute the learning of those who commit themselves upon it. 
 They do not seem to comprehend any distinction between inherent 
 povver. and legal jurisdiction. " It is undeniable, — says Dr. Bowden, 
 (vol. ii. p. 115.) alluding to the reign of Henry Vlllth, that it was 
 the doctrine of the king, of the bishops, and the whole nation, that 
 authority to administer the sacraments, and to perform all other 
 spiritual offices, was derived not from the crown, but from Christ. 
 This doctrine was explicitly maintained in the " Institution of a 
 christian man," as may be seen by consulting CoUier. And that 
 it was maintained by the king, is evident from a letter of his to the 
 convocation of York, explaining the supremacy. That letter may 
 be seen in Chandler's Appeal defended, (p. 51.) Therein the 
 king makes a clear distinction between the temporal and spiritual 
 power of the bishops; the former he derives from the state, — the 
 latter from Christ. During the reign of Edward Vlth, bishops 
 were commonly appointed by the king's letters patent. '■ By those 
 letters it is clear, — says Inshop Burnet, — that the Episcopal 
 function was acknowledged to be of d'n-ine appointment, and that 
 the person was no other way named by the king than as lay 
 
44 
 
 The next weapon with which the Reviewei- ^eeks to 
 prostrate Episcopacy, is by misrepresenting the opin- 
 
 patrons present to livings, only the bishop was legally authorised, 
 in such a part of the king's dominions, to execute that function 
 which was to be derived to him by imposition of hands.'''' Hist. 
 Refor. ii. 128. Adam says, — " That the Episcopal character is 
 not derived from, nor alienable by, the civil power, is a doctrine 
 well known in England, as well as in Scotland ; for when Dr. Par- 
 ker was consecrated, upon a question of the competency of bishops 
 to consecrate, as they had been legally deprived in the late reign, 
 it was determined that as they had been once consecrated, the 
 Episcopal character remained, and they might convey it. He re- 
 fers to Neal, vol i. c. 4. ; to Bishop Jewel's View of a Seditious 
 Bull, p. 14. can. 39. and to Gray's Bampton Lectures, passim.'''' 
 Religious World displayed, vol. ii. p. 381. JVote. Had Mr. Sparks, 
 or the Reviewer, have examined the thirty-seventh of the Articles 
 of Religion, in the English prayer book, they would have found 
 the following passage which we think sufficient of itself to put this 
 subject to rest. " Whereas we attribute to the king's majesty the 
 chief government, by which titles we understand the minds of sonie 
 slanderous folks to be offended : we give not to our princes the 
 ministering either of God's word, or of the sacraments, the which 
 thing the injunctions also,latterly set forth by Elizabeth our Queen, 
 do most plainly testify ; but that only prerogative, which we see 
 to have been given always to godly princes, in holy scripture, by 
 God himself ; that is, that they should rule all estates committed 
 to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical, or tem- 
 poral, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil 
 doers." The nomination of bishops to the different sees had no 
 necessary connection with the supremacy, for it had been exercised 
 long before, while the English church had submitted to the 
 papacy. It may be proper here to take notice of an assertion, 
 bearing some connection with the above, which, we learn, has been 
 openly made, and which we find repeated in a book, (Cooper's 
 discourse on Asbury) which accident threw in our way, that the or- 
 flers of the American Episcopal clergy are not recognized in England, 
 
45 
 
 ions of tlic reformers. We suppose those whom he 
 now brings forward, are not those of whom he had just 
 before said, ^* learning was little predicable, and piety 
 still less/' as in that case, doubtless, we should not 
 be favoured with this statement of their views. Hebe- 
 gins with Wickliffe, whom he quotes as saying, — " One 
 thing I boldly assert, that, in the primitive church two 
 orders were thought sufficient, viz. priests and dea- 
 cons" &c. But Wickliife also held the doctrine of a 
 stoical fate, and that all things proceeded from ne- 
 cessity : — he denied infant baptism : — he disallowed 
 imposition of hands in ordination. He asserted that 
 God always acts to the extent of his power, and can do 
 nothing otherwise, nor more, than he does : — that he 
 
 In the book referred to, an instance is adduced of the Rev. T. 
 Vasey, who being ordained by an American bishop and going after- 
 ward to England, " was not acknowledged, recognized, or known, 
 as a minister of the church of England." Of the truth of this in- 
 stance we have no doubt. The cause will be explained by a re- 
 ference to the act of Parliament, passed in 1786, which permitted 
 the English bishops to dispense with the oaths of allegiance^ and 
 certain other forms imposed by the government of that country 
 upon those who are admitted to Holy Orders ; and these being 
 dispensed with, there was, of course, an exclusion of those bishops, 
 and of all clergymen deriving their power from them of being 
 " enabled to exercise their respective offices within his majesty's 
 dominions." The act at large may be seen in the Journals of the 
 Gen. Conventions, p. 39 — and in Bishop White's Memoirs of the 
 Prot. Ep. Church in the U. S. p. 373. Even persons ordained by 
 bishops of the English church in the present colonies of England, 
 are not admitted to livings in that country on the same terras as 
 native clergymen. Is there not something ridiculous in supposing 
 that the English church disputes an authority which herself 
 conveyed ? 
 
46 
 
 cannot alter the state of the creation^ — the order Qt 
 things, — or make the world greater, or less tlian it is : — 
 that the first cause is limited in the creation of human 
 souls, and cannot exceed such a fixed, and determinate 
 number, or annihilate any thing i-rr^that our Saviour had 
 three natures in a separate sense, &c.* These im- 
 puted opinions, are it is true, taken from the writings 
 t)f the enemies af Wickliffe, but, so likewise, is the 
 opinion given as his, by the Reviewer. Is the Re- 
 viewer then ready to adopt Wickliife's opinions in all 
 respects, or will he subscribe to those alone which 
 make against Episcopacy ? 
 
 The Reviewer also brings before us the question, or 
 rather one of the questions of Henry VIII. to his pre^ 
 lates. To the tenth question, whether bishops or 
 priests were first ? Cranmer gave the following answer, 
 — ^' Bishops and priests were at one time and were no 
 two things but both one office, in the beginning 
 of Christ's religion." And to this we most fully 
 assent as will be seen by recurring to our scripture ac- 
 count of the orders of the ministry. " The two ap- 
 pellations for the second order, were used as synoni- 
 mous, till the death of the apostles," &c. But what 
 was meant by the prelates will appea^r by their an- 
 swers to the 11th question which the Reviewer lias not 
 chosen to produce. " Whether a bishop hath authority 
 to make a priest, by scripture, or not ?" Dr. Iled- 
 mayn's answer, in part was ; — ^''As for making, that is, 
 to say, ordaining, and consecrating of priests, I think it 
 especially belongeth to the office of a bishop, as far as 
 can be shown from scripture^ or any example ^ as I sup- 
 
 * Collier, as quoted l)y Bowden.vol. ii. p, 81 
 
47 
 
 pose from the beginning." "In short," — ^says Dr. 
 Bowden, from whom the above is taken, — " they all 
 agreed that none but bishops liave authority to make 
 priests ; — a ^ew making exceptions to cases of extreme 
 necessity/^' It is obvious that the term bishop in this 
 question refers to bishops as then constituted.* 
 
 We arc next told, tliat " the pretensions to a divine 
 right of Episcopacy seems indeed to have been first 
 started by Dr. Bancroft in 1588.*' And yet this is the 
 same Dr. Bancroft, wlio, is relied on to prove that 
 presbyterian ordination was considered valid in the case 
 of the Scotch Bishops 1 C'ould he hold both these 
 opinions ? Certainly not. We liave shown his opinion 
 in the latter case to be not such as represented by our 
 opponents. •• The doctrine, — says the lleviewer, — 
 was then so new even to high-churchmen, that Whit- 
 gift, than wljom no man was ever more tenacious of 
 chiirch autliorlLy, said, he rather wished than believed 
 it to be true." The want of credibility to this anecdote, 
 does not seem to have staggered our opponents, who 
 bring it up on all occasions of attack. Dr. Cliauocey 
 quoted it from Neal, in his controversy vvitli Dr. 
 Chandler many years since. Neal refers to Strype's 
 life of Whitgift. Dr. Chandler sought it, and lo ! it 
 was not there. But he found, however, that, in 1589, 
 one year later, Whitgift said in his reply to the calum- 
 nies of Martin Mar-prelate, that, ^* he was persuaded 
 
 * Dr. Bowden refers to Burnet's Hist. lib. iii. p. 323, et seq. — and 
 to Collier's Ecclesiastical Hist. Col. records, No. Ixix. p. 50, et soq. 
 See also Bowden, vol. iii. p. 325. et seq. We need not ask e 
 stronger testimony to Episcopacy than the extract given by the 
 Reviewer from the king's book. The ikree orders are distinctly 
 mentioned. 
 
48 
 
 th6re ought to be, by the Word of God, a supel'ioiity 
 among the ministers of the church ; and that it was 
 sufficiently proved in his own book agiinst Cartwright. 
 And that he was at all times ready to justify it by the 
 Holy scripturesj and by the testimony of all antiquity. 
 This clearly shows that Whitgift did not merely wish 
 but believed Bancroft's doctrine to be true."* And yet 
 he is here speaking of the same book from which an 
 extract is given in a note to the llevie\Yi He was con- 
 tending against the notion early adopted by the Puritans, 
 that, " God had given in the scripture^, a complete aiul 
 unchangeable form, both for church and state govern- 
 ment ;" and the utmost of his meaning, in the Reviewers 
 quotation, is, that there is not in scripture any such de- 
 tailed and prescribed system. Else how are we to un- 
 derstand his own opinion, above expressed, of his own 
 book ? And how shall we understand the following 
 expressions, which occur in his letter to Beza ; (1593) 
 <^ We make no doubt that the Episcopal degree which 
 we bear is an institution apostolical and divine ; and so 
 hath always been held, by a continual course of times, 
 from the apostles' to this very age of ours." Again ; 
 *^ What Aaron was to his sons, and to the Levites, this 
 the bishops were to the priests and deacons ; and so 
 esteemed of the fathers to be by divine institution.'^j 
 
 * Chandler's Appeal defended, p. 37, as quoted by Bowden, vol. 
 ii. p. 101. The truth, as it regards Bishop Bancroft, seems to be, 
 that he was the first protestant divine, of whom we iiave informa- 
 tion that he preached publicly the doctrine referred to. The Re- 
 viewer appears to have substituted started (or preached. Hence the 
 error. 
 
 t Strype's life of Whitgift, pp. 350, 460. Quoted in How's let- 
 ters to Miller. 
 
49 
 
 Both these extracts are taken from the same volume to 
 which the Reviewer refers for the extract which he 
 has adduced to support his own opinion. Had he no 
 knowledge of them ? If lie had, can he feel justified in 
 endeavouring to represent as Whitgift's opinion, what 
 he must have known not to have been his ? These 
 testimonies are explicit and cannot be evaded ; and the 
 Reviewer's extract must be interpreted in consistency 
 with them. It was sixteen years after the publication 
 of Whitgift's reply to Cartvvright, that Bancroft's ser- 
 mon was preached. 
 
 Archbishop Usher neither denied nor doubted the 
 
 distinction between bishop and priest. He professed 
 
 to deduce Episcopacy from the apostles ; and though 
 
 lie contended for the distinction of the schoolmen, that 
 
 the difference was in degree^ and not in order, yet he 
 
 certainly admitted that where ordination by bishops 
 
 could be obtained, that by presbyters was invalid.* 
 
 Bishop Burnet in his Exposition of the Thirty-nine 
 
 Articles, says " Christ appointed a succession of pastors, 
 
 in different ranks, to be continued in his church for the 
 
 work of the gospel, and as the apostles settled the 
 
 churches, they appointed different orders of bishops, 
 
 priests and deacons.^f What credit then shall be 
 
 given to the assertion so boldly made by the Reviewer, 
 
 [that these divines ^^ either denied or doubted the dis- 
 
 I tinction between the orders of bishop and priest ?" 
 
 i Or what regard shall be paid to the sweeping clause 
 
 I with which he includes ^^ most of the learned and 
 
 [moderate reformers," as collectively publishing to the 
 
 * Bowden, vol, ii. p. 112. 
 t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 119. 
 7 
 
50 
 
 world, what, individually, they either doubted or de- 
 nied ? These statements are extremely well fitted for 
 circulation among men who have little acquaintance 
 with, or have prejudices against, the Episcopal church ; 
 but they ill become men, who openly boast of their 
 talents and learning ; and they certainly are but bad 
 specimens of ^* uncorrupt Christianity." 
 
 The Reviewer considers it '^^ very remarkable that in 
 the very articles of that church which now asserts (as 
 if it was a novelty !) tliis distinction of orders to be vital 
 to its constitution, the distiiictiou is entirely overlooked, 
 in that part which treats of the institution of ministers 
 to their office ; so doubtful a thing was the existing or- 
 ganization thought to be.'' Now will it not be sup- 
 posed, from this remark, either that the church in her 
 public formularies has said nothing on the subject of 
 orders, but what is contained in this article, or that the 
 Keviewer was desirous, at least, it should be so consider- 
 ed? That the first is not the true case will now be 
 shown ; our readers Avill form their own opinion as to 
 the last. The thirty-sixth article of the church says — 
 " The book of consecration of bishops, and ordering 
 of jJriests and deacons, set forth by the General Con- 
 vention of this church in 1792, doth contain all things 
 necessary to such consecration and ordering ; neither 
 hath it any thing that of itself is superstitious and un- 
 godly ; and therefore whosoever are consecrated or or- 
 dered according to said form, we decree all such to be 
 rightly, orderly and lawfully consecrated, and ordered.'** 
 
 * The 36th Article of the Church of England, from which the 
 American is taken with such modifications as were rendered ne- 
 
51 
 
 From the ordinal, we liave already given some extracla 
 Mhich relate to this point, and we now give anotlier ; — 
 '' To tlie intent that these orders may he continued, and 
 reverently used and esteemed in this church, no man 
 shall he accounted or taken to he a lawful hisliop, priest, 
 or deacon in this ciiurch, or suffered to execute any of 
 the said functions, except he he called, tried, examin- 
 ed, and admitted thereunto, according to the form 
 hereafter following ; or hath had Episcopal consecration 
 or ordination." Prpface. The twenty-third article, 
 to v» hicli the Reviewer refers, simply declares, as will 
 be apparent to those who peruse it, — that no man ouglit 
 to take ou himself the ministry ; on the contrary, those 
 ouglit to be received as such who are appointed by men 
 having authority therefor. Who has that authority ? 
 How are we to know Avhen men are lawfully sent ? 
 
 ces?ary by the change of our pohtical condition, runs thus : — " The 
 Book of Consecration of [Archbishops and] Bishops, and ordering 
 of priests and deacons, [lately] set forth [in the time of Edward the 
 sixth, and confirmed at the same time by authority of Parliament] 
 doth contain, Lc. 
 
 " And therefore whosoever are consecrated [and] ordered ac- 
 cording to [the rites of that book since the second year of the 
 aforenamed king Edward unto this time, or hereafter shall be con- 
 secrated or ordered according to the same rites,] we decree, &c. 
 
 We have subjoined the English Article, including in brackets 
 the parts altered or omitted in ours, in order to give the Re^ 
 
 I viewer's argument all the force it can receive. Not even the 
 Reviewer will suppose that the American Episcopal Church in-r 
 
 I tended to overlook the distinction of orders, as a doubtful organiza- 
 tion. His whole argument therefore rests upon the supposed inten- 
 tion of the original framers nftlie Articles, or of the Convocatiou 
 inl5G2. 
 
52 
 
 When tliey are consecrated bisliops, and ordained 
 priests, or deacons, — according to the ordinal,— says 
 the thirty-sixth article : and till tliat is done, or they 
 have had Episcopal ordination, — says the preface to the 
 ordinal, — they shall not be snffered to execute the 
 functions of the ministry in this church. Will it be 
 said, that if this is the doctrine of the church it ought 
 to be stated fully in the twenty-third, or any other arti- 
 cle ? Where is the necessity for this ? Is not the ordi- 
 nal substantially a part of the thirty-sixth ? Or is it not 
 as fully the doctrine of the church ? The Reviewer, 
 however, would have it supposed that the church is 
 studiously indistinct on this point, and yet, when the 
 odious sin of Calvinism is to be fixed upon her, in de- 
 fiance of the opinions of multitudes of lier learned 
 divines, oh then ! her language is " studied jyrecision/^ 
 ■ — and if this is disallowed, — ^^ it will be difficult to 
 prove any thing by human testimony." Hoav abundant 
 is that liberality, which finds us forever in the wrong; 
 which charges us " with shutting our eyes upon what? 
 ever learning and piety may do to illustrate certain 
 obscurities in the religious system," and which will not 
 allow us even to understand the principles to which we 
 have solemnly promised to conform, but would hold us 
 up to the world as blind leaders of the blind, — as de- 
 ceiving and being deceived. 
 
 The Reviewer in his zeal against Episcopacy forgets 
 his prudence. He tells us on one page, that the divine 
 right was first started by Bancroft in 1588, and yet on 
 the next he quotes Henderson as saying in the name 
 of the clergy of Britain, in 1646, fifty-eight years 
 later, that it " was not pleaded till of late by somefeu\^^ 
 
53 
 
 Henderson,— if we are not mistaken, — was a jpresby- 
 terian minister of Scotland, and ntterly destitnte, as 
 we believe, of any authority to speak in tlie name of 
 the clergy of Britain. Hume calls him a popular and 
 intriguing preacher. He was one of the commission' 
 ers sent up from Scotland to Charles I. at Oxford, to 
 press him to an admission of their principles. At this 
 time he cautiously shunned a conference with the divines 
 of Oxford on this same point.*- Besides, the assertion 
 does not appear to be true. We have shown that the 
 reformers themselves held the doctrine, though, per- 
 haps they did not publickly " plead" or defend it. In 
 that same year (1646) — that memorable year — " the 
 hierarchy,'* — says the lleviewer, — "was abolished by 
 act of Parliament, the same authority by which it is 
 now upheld. '*-^Here we must lay down our pen, and 
 pause to recover our abused patience. 
 
 Is it for the purpose not merely of exciting against 
 the church, the opposition of principle, but to render it 
 odious, he so constantly exhibits to his readers the 
 calumny that its ministry was, and is ?LCii\?d\y founded 
 on the government of England ? — that he labours at 
 every possible opportunity to sliow its dependence upon 
 that government ? Is his mind too dull to discriminate 
 between the things which are Caesar's, and the things 
 which are God's ? When he says ^' the hierarchy was 
 abolished by act of Parliament," does he mean that the 
 Pailiament took away the spiritual power of the 
 bishops ? — that it took away from them tlieii- inherent 
 right to ordain and govern in the church ? He certaiu- 
 
 * Hume's History of England. Pali:, eil vol. vi. p. 38. 
 
54 
 
 ly must knowj that the Parliament never had, and never 
 pretended to have, any such power ; of course, tliat they 
 never exercised, or pretended to exercise, such poMer; 
 except, perhaps, when the " godly"^ and ^' well-affected^^ 
 Independents formed its majority. The only power 
 which it possessed, and from the nature of the case, the 
 only power which it could possess, was that of depriving 
 the bishops of their revenues, and of their temporal 
 jurisdiction. That is, tliey threatened them witli the 
 power of the secular arm, (no trifling menace, when we 
 consider what spirit nerved it,) if they dared to exercise 
 it. But does the Reviewer believe that if tlie General 
 Court of Massachusetts — (we allude not now to what 
 has been J should abolish Episcopacy from the state, 
 and prohibit its ministers from officiating, that they 
 would thereby be deprived of their ministerial character? 
 The case is applicable, and if he does not see it so, it 
 is from his liabit of thinking that spiritual poAver is 
 derived from the people, and not from Clirist. Docs 
 lie believe that either the English parliament, or the 
 Englisli church, deny the validity of the orders of the 
 American bishops, and tlicir ability to exercise the au- 
 thority of those orders? And yet what have those 
 bishops to do with the English parliament, church, or 
 king ? Has the Reviewer never heard of the Episco- 
 pal church of Scotland ? Is he ignorant that though 
 the bishops of that church, were, at the Revolution, de- 
 prived of every thing connected with their office, which 
 the civil power could take from them, yet they continued 
 to exercise their spiritual functions in the very face of 
 penal laws made against them, in consequence of their 
 adherence to the fallen house of Stuart ? " They 
 
55 
 
 lost,'' — says Skinner, — ^* their revenues, and temporal 
 jurisdiction ^hwi their spiritual authority still remained ; 
 and that ^ gift of God/ ^vhich they had received by 
 tlie imposition of Episcopal hands, they considered 
 themselves bound to exercise, for promoting that Episco- 
 pal Avork in the church of God, which had been com- 
 mitted to them. By virtue of tliis commission, they 
 continued in a quiet manner, to discharge the duties of 
 their spiritual function. They ordained ministers for 
 such vacant congregations as adhered to their commun- 
 ion, and when they saw it necessary to attend to the 
 preservation of their own order, they proceeded to the 
 consecration of such persons as were thought most 
 proper for being invested Avith that sacred and impor- 
 tant trust, without asking permission either from the 
 exiled or reigning prince." When in 1792 they ap- 
 plied to the British parliament for a repeal of the laws 
 against them, Bishop Horsely said of them, that, 
 ^' losing all their political capacity, they retained, how- 
 ever, the authority of the pure spiritual Episcopacy 
 within the church itself ;" and the v.hole bench of 
 English bishops unanimously opposed the passing of aii 
 act which seemed to infringe tlie validity of the Scotch 
 Episcopal orders. The laws against that church were 
 repealed, and though, even now, she has no connection 
 with the state, she still preserves her pure Episcopacy, 
 and holds up her head as a distinguished and venerable 
 branch of the church of Christ.* Many of the most 
 
 * Skinner's Primitive Truth, pp. 2G5 — 289. See also R. Adam's 
 Relig. World displayed, vol. ii. p. 411. Prideaux's Connections, 
 Charlestoivn ed. vol. iii. p. 222. Aud above note on page 43. 
 
56 
 
 distinguished laity of the kingdom, — says Adam, — • 
 have since entered her communion ; — sev cral clergy- 
 men ordained by English bishops have entered her 
 service, and one of them has been raised to the Episco- 
 pate.f When Episcopacy was abolished in Scotland, 
 the presbyterian government was established as its sub- 
 stitute : has any one, whether in ^^ presbyterian fetters" 
 or out of them, ever pretended that presbyterianism was 
 therefore founded on the English government ? Was 
 it the case with Congregationalism in New-England's 
 early day ; a time when no church could be formed 
 without permision from tlie civil magistrate ? Or must 
 we remind the Heviewer of the adage, which teaches 
 incautious persons to beware of casting stones? 
 
 But the hierarchy was abolished. In one sense we 
 admit it was. The bishops were deprived of their 
 revenues, forbidden to execute their office, and driven 
 
 t In Edinburgh, the literary metropolis of Britain, " from what- 
 ever cause, the Episcopal party is evidently increasing* in numbers., 
 personal consideration and resources." Christian Observer^ vol. xviii. 
 p. 644. " The Scotch Episcopal Church, can produce a very re- 
 spectable list of learned names," — says Adam (vol. ii. pp. 444-5) 
 " notwithstanding her fluctuating fortune, and under all the disad- 
 vantages arising from her frequently depressed condition." Among 
 her modern writers may be mentioned the elder Skinner, author of 
 an Ecclesiastical History of Scotland in two volumes, and " one of 
 the best Latin poets that Scotland can boast since the days of 
 Buchanan," — Bishop Skinner, son to the former, and author of the 
 work in reply to Dr. Campbell, entitled Primitive Truth, &c. which 
 we have frequently quoted, — Dr. Alison, author of some volumes 
 of Sermons, and of a work on Taste, — and among her laity, Sir 
 William Forbes, author of the life of Dr. Beattie, &c. 
 
57 
 
 into exile.* It was the victory of men of sanguinary 
 minds and blood-stained hands. " Thus was christian 
 liberty recovered for a little season in England." 
 
 The rieviewer does not say expressly^ for he, proba- 
 bly, had his doubts, but he leaves his readers to imply 
 that the Waldenses, a sect, which existed in Piedmont, 
 were not Episcopalians. They were not only such, 
 but they were the earliest protestant Episcopalians of 
 Avhora we have any account. Tliey date their origin 
 as a sect in the time of Sylvester, Bishop of Rome, 
 A. D. 316, and they were certainly known to exist 
 as early as the latter part of the seventh century. Dr. 
 Mosheim, who is by presbyterians and congregational- 
 ists in general, allowed to be a correct, as well as candid 
 writer, and who was not himself an Episcopalian, says 
 expressly, — ^" that the government of the church, was 
 committed by the Waldenses to bishops, priests, and 
 deacons, for they acknowledged that these three eccle- 
 siastical orders were instituted by Christ himself.''f 
 Our readers will doubtless be satisfied with this declara- 
 tion, but if not, we refer them to Dr. Bowden's Letters 
 to Dr. Miller, vol. ii. p. 77, et seq, and vol. iii. p. 331, 
 et seq. v/here as we think, the question is put to rest 
 forever. The Moravian Church is acknowledged on 
 all hands to be Episcopal, and it was from the bishops 
 of the Waldenses that the Moravians first received the 
 
 * Nine of the English bishops were" providentially preserved," 
 and returning at the time of the restoration of the king, were re- 
 instated in their former dioceses, except Dr. Juxon, who was ap- 
 pointed to Canterbury, — the vacant dioceses were soon filled, and 
 the church re-established. Adam, vol ii. p. 409. Skinner, p. 264. 
 
 *Eccles. Hist. vol. iii, p. 120 
 8 
 
58 
 
 Eipiscopacy. The labours of tills Imiiible branch of 
 the church, the missions she has established in Green- 
 land, in South Africa, in tlie West Indies, aud on the 
 borders of our own country, cannot be unknown to our 
 readers. Many of iier missionaries are unlearned and 
 simple men, but, with a self-denial approaching to 
 martyrdom, they have carried the light of truth to 
 regions where the religion of the cross, and almost all 
 the charities of life were unknown. God has blessed 
 their labours : — may he still continue to bless them. 
 
 Our readers can now judge, with what force of rea- 
 soning, accurate learning, and copious proofs, the ad- 
 vocates of Episcopacy were to be driven from all their 
 positions. We have little doubt of the issue. 
 
 But another question occurs. The Reviewer, sup- 
 posing he has displaced Episcopacy from the ground 
 of divine institution, goes, at some length, into the ques- 
 tion of expedieyicy. Now with this question, we, as 
 members of the church have, literally, nothing to do. 
 We have shown that its divine institution, is the 
 doctrine of the churcii, — was the belief of the reformers, 
 and of the fathers, — and that Episcopacy is plainly to 
 be found on the pages of Holy Scripture itself. AYe 
 see then no necessity for discussing it on humbler pre- 
 tensions. (Questions of mere expediency stretch them- 
 selves over a wide extent of ground, and very generally 
 terminate at the same point at whlcli the discussion ; 
 commenced. The speculator exhau-«ts himself, and in 
 vain, for he finds, at last, he has done little, or nothing, 
 towards conviction. Such is the structure of the human 
 mind, that whatever subject may be left open for opin- 
 ion, will create variance. Let us reason then as we 
 
59 
 
 may ou this question, destitute, as wc are, of any fixed 
 and acknowled^^ed principles, from which to draw con- 
 clusions, we should never ])ring it to an end. We con- 
 sider the true question to be a question of fact. We 
 would not remove it from its hallowed base. Its long 
 and almo.it uniform existence, contrasted with tlie. 
 variable nature of all other systems, is enough on tlie 
 score of expediency. 
 
 We cannot, however, lightly pass over, every thing 
 the Reviewer has mifjgled with his speculations. He 
 is frequently at war with fact, and we must expose him. 
 He represpnis as barely acquiescing in Episcopacy, and 
 of course denying its divine institution, " the best of the 
 early reformers, and the most judicious writers of later 
 times.'' Our readers have seen what dependence is 
 to be placed on his representations of the opinions of 
 the reformers, and his cxamj)lcs of the most judicious 
 writers of later times, as will be shown, are not much 
 more to his purpose. Bishop Sanderson, writing upon 
 this subject, says,— •'^ besides that it is clear from evi- 
 dent texts of scripture, and from the testimony of as 
 ancient and authentic records, as the world hath any to 
 show, for the attesting of any other part of the estab- 
 lished doctrine of the church of England ; so it is evi- 
 dently deduced out of sundry passages in the book of 
 consecration (ordinal) and hath been constantly and 
 uniformly maintained by our best writers and by all 
 the sober, orderly, and orthodox sons of the church."* 
 T!je Reviewer calls to his aid tlie names of Sir. p. 
 King, Ciiillingworth, Hor.'.liy, Hammond, Prettymau, 
 
 * Quoted l»y Bowdcn, vol. ii. p. 127. 
 
60 
 
 Locke and Paley. Sir P. ICing we consider too 
 doubtful to be any support to his cause. He wrote his 
 " Enquiry" at twenty-two, from an ardent and lauda- 
 ble desire to still the religious djssentions of his country ; 
 it was refuted by Slater ;: — it is variously said, that he 
 acknoAvledged the refutation ; and it is certain, that, 
 when he became Lord Chancellor he preferred Slater 
 in the church. These things have often been stated in 
 church controversy, and never yet denied.* It is not a 
 little remarkable, that the very writers who exclaim so 
 loudly against the use of the ancient fathers, can have 
 so ready recourse to the work of this author, made up 
 of garbled extracts from these very fathers, and of rea- 
 soning, inconclusive, because built upon those extracts, ! 
 Chillingworth wrote a treatise to demonstrate the 
 apostolic institution of Episcopacy, and we have already 
 exhibited an extract from that treatise, which, one 
 would think, was plain enough on this poiut. Pretty- 
 man (now TomlineJ Bishop of Lincoln, on the twenty- 
 third article, after a long detail of authorities from the 
 New Testament and early fathers, says,-r-" It seems 
 therefore as clear as written testimony can make it that 
 Bishops were appointed by the apostles ; that there 
 were three distinct orders of ministers, namely, bishops, 
 priests and deacons in the primitive church ; and that 
 there has been a regular succession of Bishops from the 
 apostolic age to the present, and we may safely chal- 
 lenge the enemies of Episcopacy to produce evidence of 
 a single ancient, independent church which was not 
 governed by a Bishop." Hammond, speaking of the 
 
 * Adam's Relig. World, vol. ii. p. 292.— Skinner's Prim. Truth, 
 p. 164. n0te. Bowden, vol. ii. p. 121. 
 
61 
 
 powers given to the apostles by tlie Holy Ghost, says, 
 " 4thly, to ordain others, and to commit the same powers 
 to those which the Holy Ghost had settled in themselves, 
 and so to provide a ministry of his holy, celestial call- 
 ing, fsent by Christy as he was by the Father, John 
 XX. 21.) to continue by succession to the end of the 
 world.'''* By what fatality could the Reviev/er have 
 quoted such a writer as opposed to the divine institution 
 of the ministry ? Even Dr. Miller says of him, that 
 he was, ^'^ perhaps the ablest advocate of prelacy that 
 ever lived." Hoadhfs opinion was not always such as 
 in the Bangorian controversy. In his Reasonableness 
 of Conformity, (p. 4.) he has left behind him the fol- 
 lowing testimony, — " We think w^c can demonstrate 
 that in the primitive times, the administration of eccle- 
 siastical affairs was in the hands of bishops, who had 
 presbyters subject to them. That as the apostles main- 
 tained a superiority over the presbyters of the churches 
 they constituted, so upon occasion of their absence they 
 settled others in that superiority. That as these suc- 
 ceeding the apostles had the power of ordination com- 
 mitted to them, &c." In another place speaking of the 
 universal concurrence of " every one who speaks of the 
 government of the church in any place,'^ he says, " from 
 "which testimonies I cannot but think it highly reason- 
 able to infer that Episcopacy was of apostolic institu- 
 tion.''! Was it perfectly fair then that the Reviewer 
 should claim these ^'judicious writers" as merely acquies- 
 Qing in Episcopacy ? We think not. Fuley and Locke 
 
 * Practical CaU;rbigm ; London ed. lG77,p. 311. 
 t Quoted by Bowden, vol. iii. p. IGI. See also the same wiiter, 
 vol. i. p. 303, and vol. ii. p. 276. 
 
62 
 
 we suppose we must yield to him. Eot then what a 
 powerful host of great names mi,2;ht we throw into the 
 opposite scale. Bacon, Hooker, Andrews, Hall;, Leslie, 
 Law, Taylor, Home, Jones, Horseley andimnimerable 
 others who shone as lights of the intellectual and moral 
 world ? If numbers availed, the question might soon 
 be decided, for, ^^ the church of England hath constant 
 ly iusi^ted," — says Mosheim, — "^ on the divine origin 
 of its government and discipline/'* 
 
 The presumption of the lleviewer, with regard to the 
 opinions of the mass of churchmen in this country is 
 indeed ^?*oss presumption, and sufficiently proves upon 
 what inconclusive ground he is disposed to rest. 
 
 In the course of his remarks, tlie Reviewer brings 
 forward a very serious charge, which, before he ven- 
 tured to put it upon paper, he should have been well 
 satisfied was fully true. But it is not true : and it is 
 one of the lightest expressions which can be bestowed 
 on his conduct, cither that he Avas ignorant of the sub- 
 ject, or that he was careless as to faci^, provided a 
 strong case be made out against the Episcopal church. 
 In dealing with such an enemy our forbearance is 
 greatly put to task. We arc prepared to bear much, — 
 to witness much misrepresentation, — to read many 
 strange tales. — but we must be expected to feel in some 
 manner, when our enemies cast off principle, that they 
 may accuse us of a want of it. The Reviewer says,— 
 " We believe we may say without contradiction that in 
 no other denomination is discipline in so low a state. — 
 We speak of evils belonging to the system. — We speak 
 of the control over communicants, the only spiritual 
 
 * Ecclcs. Hist. vol. ii. p. 231. 
 
C3 
 
 authority now exercised. — Instead of a good life aud 
 conversation, t!je condition of sharing in the most sacred 
 act of clni.^jtian fellowship set forth in the formularies 
 of a sect which defines the church to be ^ a congregation 
 of faithful men,' is his ability to repeat the creed, the 
 Lord's prayer, and the ten commandments, and to an- 
 swer such other (|uestions as in the short catechism are 
 contained. A candidate who can stand this ordeal has 
 ?i right to confirmation by t!;c bishop, and the jiviest is 
 Halle io ecccGiiiuinnication if after this he refuse him the 
 elements.*' AVith (.hurchmen, this statement will re- 
 quire no explanation, for they will at once see \\o\y false 
 it is : but it is calculated, as ^vc have said of some of 
 his fcrmcr statcjnents, to impose en others. Now, what 
 is the fact ? All baptized persons are required to pre- 
 sent themselves to the bishop for two purposes, that they 
 may ratify and confirm the ( ouditions of faith and re- 
 pentance upon which they had been baptized, and that 
 tlie bishop may ratify and confirm by the laying on of 
 hands the act of baptism performed by an inferior 
 minister whose authority is derived from him. A dis 
 cretiouary power is by the rubric vested in the minister 
 of every parish, for preveiiiiug uniii;, or improper persons, 
 from being imposed on the bishop, and, questionless, on 
 all such occasions, he should use that power. And ^* to 
 the end that confirmation may be administered to the 
 more edifying of such as sh-ili receive it, the cluirch 
 hath thought good to order, that 110116 shall he confirmed 
 hut such as can say the creed, the Lord's prayer, &c. 
 which order is very convenient to be observed, to the 
 end, that children having now come to years of discre- 
 tion; and having learned what their Godfatiiers and 
 
64 
 
 1^0 dm others iiad promised for tliem in baptism, inay 
 themselvp.s tvitli their own mouth and consent ^ ratifi/ and 
 confirm tha same, and also promise that by the grace 
 of God, they will evermore endeavor themselves faith- 
 fully to observe all such things as they, by their own 
 confession, have assented unto.*' Now heie, so far 
 from giving a right, to all who can say the creed, &c. of 
 admission to confirmation, the object is to prevent from 
 receiving it all those who have not a proper understand- 
 ing, of the baptismal vow or covenant : and one would 
 think with regard to the promise required, that if as- 
 sumed in sincerity, it must have a near, if not an in- 
 timate, connection witli " a good life and conversa- 
 tion." We are not prepared to say, however, that 
 this ordinance is not occasionally abused, that children 
 beneath years of discretion, are not sometimes, made its 
 subjects, and that the vital deficiency of sincerity in the 
 promise, is not, in some instances, subsequently ascer- 
 tained. And we doubt not, that impositions of this na- 
 ture have sometimes found their way into the congrega- 
 tions of the " Boston association of ministers," as well 
 as into other congregations based upon the platforms of 
 New-England, even at the solemn ^' owning of the 
 covenant." We question the ability of any men to form^ 
 an inquisition which can penetrate to the heart, and ob- 
 serve its secret workings ;— we know not how many ap- 
 parently ^oo<Z actions may have originated in &a(Z motives; 
 and it is easy to be seen, that tlie popular opinion, even 
 ©f good men, is not always unanimous. We have had 
 some experience on this subject, and have deeply felt 
 its difficulties. W^e could quote one of the "judicious 
 Avriters," of whom the Reviewer has spoken, if we ha<i 
 
65 
 
 loom, to this purpose, but we must be content with re- 
 ferring our readers to him.* We see, then that the 
 rig'ht is not sucli as the Reviewer represents, but that 
 there are some very serious checks, sufficiently strong, 
 we would say, for one "» not over much attached to nar- 
 row conditions of admission to cliristian privileges." 
 But the chief aim of the Reviewer is at the communion 
 discipline, and this, it is obvious, he does not, or will not, 
 understand. A rubric, at the end of the confirmation 
 office, sa^^s, — " There shall none be admitted to the 
 Holy Communion until such time as he be confirmed, or 
 be ready and desirous to be confirmed." Would any 
 of our readers from such a rule have dvr^wn the opinion, 
 that all confirmed persons, whatever may be their lives 
 and conversations, should have necessarily a right to 
 the Holy Supper, the refusal of which in a priest, 
 should render him liable to excommunication P Yet 
 such is the case with the Reviewer, for there is not, in 
 all the offices and rubrics of the church, a single rule to 
 justify this preposterous opinion. The following rubrics 
 are for the government of the clergy in this respect. 
 '^ If among those who come to be partakers of the Holy 
 Communion, the Minister shall know aiiij to be an open 
 and notorious evil liver, or to have done any WTong to 
 his neighbours by word or deed, so that the Congregation 
 be thereby offended; he shall advertise him, that he pre- 
 sume vMto come to the Lord's Table until he have open- 
 ly declared himself to have truly repented, and amended 
 bis former evil life, that tlie Congregation may thereby 
 [)e satisfied; and that he hath recompensed the parties to 
 
 * See Hammond's Practical Catechism, p. 393, et seq. 
 9 
 
66 
 
 whomliehath clone wrong; oratleast declare himself to be] 
 in full purpose so to do^ as soon as lie conveniently may. 
 The same order shall the Minister use with those, be- ■ 
 twixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reign ; 
 not suffering them to be partakers of the Lord's Table" 
 until he know them to be reconciled, &c."*' How much 
 farther would this rigid disciplinarian stretch the eccle- 
 siastical power ? In England, for tlie Heviewer carries 
 us thither on this point also, these rubrics are LaiVj and 
 are as much a rule to the Judges in Westminster Hall, 
 as to the Curate of a parish. f 
 
 The Reviewer next lays before us some farther specu- 
 lations upon the possihilities and jJ^i'adventures of the 
 Episcopal system ; to all which we need only say that 
 most of them are amply refuted by experience, and the 
 rest are mere conjectures as to what may possibly occur 
 by the abuse of the system. " We are not of those who 
 dream of perfection in tliis world," to use the language 
 of Gov. Winthrop ; and we know of no system ad- 
 ministered by man which has not its difficulties. We 
 think, however, that Episcopacy is as free from them as 
 any, at least, which its opponents have been able to 
 devise. What is the case with regard to congregational- 
 ism ? Is not its character much changed from the firs! 
 foundation of Robinson, and even from the platforms o 
 Cambridge and Saybrook ? Is there at present a per< 
 
 * See also Canon xxv. General Convention, and Canon iii. 1^17 
 t See Sherlock and Horseley on the Test Acts. — The Reviewei 
 differs we suspect from Dr. Priestley. He was desirous of having 
 the Lord's supper administered to children. — Had an Episcopaliar 
 proposed this hew loud would have been the shout, — a Papist, 
 Papiit. 
 
67 
 
 feet concord among its adhereuts inrej;ard to its beauties 
 md defects? Is tkere no desire for alteration? Is 
 there no angry opposition to tliat desire ? Is it not a sys- 
 tem, almost to a proverb, various, and disconnected, 
 — transient as the rainbow, and, like it, indescribable ? 
 [t would be far from our wishes to defend all the details 
 of the English church, connected as she is with the civil 
 government of that country. We are no friends to such 
 an union, whether the Ecclesiastics are, as in England, 
 ^' my Lords Bishops,'' or as in New-England formerly, 
 '»' my Lords Brethren." Episcopacy in this country 
 must rest upon its intrinsic merits, and, founded as it is 
 upon primitive and apostolic principles, we make no 
 question of its being Avell adapted to its object. The 
 Episcopate may, in one sense, be considered a desirable 
 station, for it is evidently one of respectability and 
 dignity, but it certainly calls to greater trials, responsi- 
 bility, and cares, than an inferior office, and one of the 
 present House of Bishops has even quoted the observa- 
 tion of Bishop Taylor, that '' the honour does not pay 
 the burden ;'' and as to emoluments, none, deserving the 
 name, are in any instance attached to it. Of the re- 
 spectability, the talents, and the piety, of those who 
 now fill that station among us, we believe no question 
 will be made. Several of them are learned, and all of 
 them are well educated and well informed men. 
 I But the Reviewer brings us back again to the divine 
 right. And here ice must rest Episcopacy. In our 
 jconsciences we believe the claim to be just. We hope 
 our readers are prepared, if not to admit it, yet, at least, 
 to believe it a point deserving iVill examination. Let 
 them enquire then into its evidences ; they will fip.d 
 
68 
 
 tliem copious and strong. And let iliem take ^long 
 with tliein this reflection, tliat it has been advocated, 
 through a series of ages, by men of powerful talents, 
 of unquestioned erudition, and of the sinccrest piety. 
 Still however, let us not be misunderstood. We repeat 
 that by the divine institution of Episcopacy, we mean 
 the establishment of three orders in the ministry, 
 bishops, priests and deacons, by the Apostles, acting un- 
 der the plenitude of power, given them by our Lord 
 and Saviour Jesus Christ. 
 
 Our attention is next called by the Reviev/er, to the 
 consideration of forms of prayer in general, as intro- 
 ductory to some "^ graver charges against the Episco- 
 pal book of common prayer." He does not deny the 
 lawfulness of set forms : — He esteems it a matter of 
 minor importance, whether our petitions are offered up 
 in the words of others or our own : — He is not blind 
 to the advantages, or defects, of either of the different 
 methods adopted in congregations, and he does not de- 
 fend extemporaneous prayer, but admits that there are 
 objections to it which we have been accustomed to con- 
 sider both strong and serious. What then would he 
 liaye ? He prefers fi-ee prayer : — That is, he, as a 
 leader of the devotions of his congregation, shall be at 
 liberty to pray as he pleases ; — that he may to-day 
 pray without any form at all, — to-morrow take with 
 liim into the pulpit an outline, or skeleton, to wliich, on 
 the impulse of the moment, he may give dimensions and 
 stature, and the next day '^^ read prayers to God" from 
 a form of his own compilingj borrowed, perhaps, in 
 no trifling measure from that identical book of common 
 prayer^ which he would have his readers esteem such a 
 
69 
 
 bugbear. We have mixed, somewhat, in our earlier 
 days, among those who reject the use of Liturgies, and 
 we assure our readers, that we have frequently dis- 
 covered this purloining practice, where a different opin- 
 ion is considered desirable. We are inclined to think 
 that this assumption of the minister to act his own 
 pleasure in every respect, in so important a transaction 
 as the worship of Grod, is somewhat ^' papistical," if not 
 rather on the worst side of popery.* Have the congre- 
 gation really nothing to do in worsliip, but to listen ? 
 To pretend they can do more, under these circumstances, 
 is, to our view, preposterous ; and we suspect from the 
 manner in whicli tne Reviewer treats this part of his 
 subject, that his own convictions lean to forms, and that 
 whatever he may write against them for popularity's 
 
 * The following extract may serve to amuse th^ reader : — a 
 glance of the eye will convince him where it is applicable. " The 
 laity of the church of Scotland lie under greater hardships, with 
 respect to public worship, than the laity of any church on earth. 
 And this hardship is rendered still more galling to those who have 
 sense enough to feel it, by the pompous harangues that we are 
 frequently entertained with, upon the privileges that we possess 
 above other Christians, the religious lihertij that we enjoy, and 
 the singular jmriUj oi OUT worah-i^. Sure, gentlemen, you must 
 mean yourselves Avhen you ascribe these great blessings to our 
 church, or you insult us in the nlost cruel manner. If you mean 
 that you enjoy great privileges, and a most extensive liberty, it is 
 very true, for ?/ou pray what you please, t/o" sing what you please, 
 you teach w hat you please, and our whole public worship is s« 
 much of your own manufacture, that there can hardly be found 
 room for a verse or tv/o of scripture ; and these iiou choose a^ 
 you please. In a wor.i, every parish minister is a little pope."' 
 Letter to ilia elders and lainisier.-- of the church of Scotland, bi/ n 
 Blacksmith. 
 
70 
 
 sake, yet he is, abilities and cultivation out of the ques- 
 tion, often constrained to use them. He certainly does 
 not venture upon any tiling that deserves the name of 
 argument, and the most conspicuous expressions to be 
 found in the six or eight pages he has covered Avitli his 
 verbiage, are those in which he insinuates that set forms 
 are useless among men, who (like himself, we suppose) 
 being able to preach, are, of course, able to pray ; as if 
 he did not know that the most bitter opposition to forms 
 of prayer^ has come, almost universally, from the weak 
 and ignorant, and that their use has been advocated by 
 the most able talents which liistory has recorded. He 
 is, certainly, desirous to keep /izwsf'//* unshackled, how- 
 ever much his course of proceeding mny tend to shackle 
 others. Are any of our readers disposed to believe 
 that they may safely trust the management of their wor- 
 ship to the discretion of their minister ? We would re- 
 ply, though the remark is a trite one, that what is left to 
 the discretion of the minister is left also to the indiscre- 
 tions and the jJussions of the man ; — and we sometimes at 
 least find the two last, where the first only was looked 
 for.* But, even admitting that the congregation do more 
 
 * We are familiar with an instance of a candidate for the con- 
 gregational ministry, who visiting, during his probation, one of our 
 largest cities, attended the ministry of two of the most respeclabJe 
 presbyterian clergymen. In the morning, Dr. — , an advocate 
 for the war^ used in relation to it, in praijcr, words something like 
 these, — " May God go forth with our armies, — teach their hands 
 to war, and their fingers to light," &,C- In the evening. Dr. — , 
 an advocate {or peace, prayed that " God would have mercy upon 
 our abandoned soldiery, — restr.ain them from blood," &,c. This 
 glaring inconsistency had such an effect on this gentleman, that it 
 produced a revolution in his opinions, and led him ultimately into 
 
71 
 
 thau listen, — that they actually are able to join with 
 their miuister in his free prayer, they then, as we con- 
 
 tlie Episcopal church ; of whicli he is now a respecteible minister. 
 Wc might till a volume with iiislances of these absurdities. Doubt- 
 less all of our readers, who are familiar with this mode of worship, 
 can recollect some which have occured within their own knowl- 
 edge. AYho does not know of the disposition to meddle with 
 state affair;, which, time immemorial, has been vented in the 
 pulpit throughout New-England on the semi-annual returns of fast 
 and thanksgiving days. If it is said, that Episcopal pulpits are not 
 free from this censure, we reiiiy that it has not yet been able to 
 find its way into the desk^ to mingle with the prayers, an advantage, 
 which we dispassionately think, to be no small one. The English 
 authors of a "• New Director}' for non-conformist Churches," 
 quoted in a review in the Christian Observer, after condemning a 
 similar practice in their own country, as well as other defects in 
 their mode of worship, say — " This is highly reprehensible. But 
 how much more so is it, in Christian ministers, when addressini>" 
 the Alm.ighty, to throw out bitter reproofs, or sarcastic rcllectlons, 
 on any of their fellow Christians, whether present or absent, on 
 account of either obnoxious sentiments, or suspicious conduct. 
 Yet we are sorry to say, we have known ministers ready, on all 
 occasions, in this way to indulge their angry passions, and that, 
 even towards their brethren." The following is from the same 
 source. " It may serve to set some people right in this matter 
 [the dissenting mode of prayer] to reflect upoa the ingenuous con- 
 fession, made by one who had been much admired, and followed 
 for his talent in praying extempore. Dr. Mapletoft, having a pray- 
 er read to him, which had been a good time before, taken from 
 his own mouth in short-hand, and being asked his judgement of it, 
 found so many absurd and indecent expressions, that when he was 
 told, he zvas the man who had used it, he begged God's pardon 
 for his former bold presumption and folly, and resolved never 
 more to offend in this kind, but to pen first of all the prayers he 
 should hereafter use in public." .See also the Blacksmith's Letter. 
 The same authors, speaking of the disiwe of the Bible among tjie 
 
72 
 
 ceive, undeniably pray by a form, and, as far as they 
 are concerned, a set form too ; for they pray in the 
 words of another, in words which they participate 
 neither in framing nor in uttering, and of which indeed 
 they have no knowledge till they are uttered. Of all 
 forms we conceive these the most objectionable.* 
 
 It is an unquestioned fact tliat the Jews in their public 
 worship used a set form of prayers. " Fhe world/' — 
 says Wheatley, — '* is fully satisfied of this truth from 
 the concurrent testimony of the best writers on antiqui- 
 ties." In what way could this custom have arisen ? 
 As it was intimately blended with their religious in- 
 stitutions, it is hardly probable that it could have origi- 
 
 Independents and others, which it seems was kept aside only to be 
 used as a sort of crecc?, say, — " Half a century ago, there was 
 scarcely one of these societies in London, where the reading of a 
 chapter in the Bible would have been tolerated, and in most of 
 their meetings in the country, (though almost half the people 
 could not read) it would have been considered as a mark of 
 heterodoxy for a minister to read the Bible to them 1" Have 
 their brethren in this country purged out this leaven, or are they 
 still a Huh " papistical" 1 
 
 * The Reviewer does not seem to have been aware that some 
 of his own reasons are, substantially, in favour of set forms. — 
 " The topics of prayer are, from its nature, limited ; and ought 
 to be and in a great degree are familiar. — Every person has forms 
 of expression, which in some respect belong to him, and are a 
 guide to his meaning before the whole is uttered. — Nor is every 
 prayer offered in the church wholly different from all others," &c. 
 If resemblance in part to forms enhances the value of extempora- 
 neous prayer, how much better would be entire conformity. — And 
 if these remarks are true where the congregation are coafincd 
 mostly to their own minister, how does it operate where exchanges 
 of pulpit service, occur almost every week ? 
 
73 
 
 Hated in the unguided imagination of their own minds. 
 jMen had, doubtless, " prayed to God/' as the Review- 
 !er quotes Palmer as saying, — " two thousand years be- 
 fore any books were written,*' but does it necessarily 
 follow that because there were no books, there were no 
 forms of prayer ? Was oral communication impossible? 
 Had tradition no existence ? In one of the earliest books 
 which was written, that of Deuteronomy, in thecompassof 
 a page or two there are no less than four forms of prayer, 
 of divine appointment ; and in the book of Numbers, 
 there is also the well Icnown blessing of the priests.* 
 That our Saviour made no olyection to forms but rather 
 approved them is shown by his attending the service 
 of the Jcwisli Synagogue, where forms were always 
 used, and from his giving a form to his disciples, whether 
 as a pattern merely, or a set form, it is not now material 
 to inquire. There is reason to believe that set forms 
 were used in the primitive church. Foley f-\ speaking 
 of the writings of Polycarp, who, he says, '^^ Had 
 been taught by the apostles,-' observes, — "I select the 
 following as fixing the authority of the Lord's prayer, 
 and the use of it among the primitive Christians. — If 
 therefore wapraij the Lord that he will forgive us, we 
 ought alsotoforgivey " With supplication &eseec/i2?i^ 
 fclie all- seeing God, not to lead us into temptation.^' 
 Wheatley quoies several of the ancient Fathers to the 
 
 * Numbers vi. 23-26. Deuteronomy xxi. 7-8. — xxvi. 3, S-ld. 
 13-15. These instances, with that of our Saviour, are, doubtless, 
 ivhat Dr. VVyatt alluded to, when he said, " the lawfulness of rormis 
 of prayer was established by a divine appointoaeat ." 
 
 t Work?, vol. ii. p. 112. 
 10 
 
74 
 
 same effect.* True, the Reviewer quotes Tertullifiii 
 as saying, — " that they prayed without any other 
 prompter than their own hearts/' but we certainly be- 
 lieve such prompting to be perfectly compatible with 
 the use of a prescribed form ; and we also believe the 
 same as to the sense of hi?> quotation from Justin 
 Martyr, — " That the president prayed according to his 
 ability,'' or as we should read it, icith all kis ability. 
 The ancient Liturgies called by the names of St. Peter, 
 St. Mark, and St. James, although it will not now 
 be asserted that they were actually written by those 
 apostles, are yet unquesiiouably very ancient. That of 
 St. James was certainly used in the church at Jerusa- 
 lem in St. Cyril's time, who was chosen Bishop of 
 Jerusalem, about A. B. 350, and who, says St. Jerome, 
 wrote a comment upou it in his yoimger days. Forms 
 of prayer were used then in the primitive days of the] 
 church, — in the days of her purity, and it Avas not, 
 probably, till " ignorant and unwortliy ecclesiastics" 
 intruded themselves upon the church, ^» in the fourth 
 and fifth centuries," that it was found necessary to im- 
 pose authoritatively what before had been performed by 
 common consent and freeAvill. 
 
 Of the expediency of forms of prayer in public wor- 
 ship we make no doubt, for we think them productive oi 
 great advantage. 
 
 They can be thoroughly digested and understood by 
 the whole congregation before they are called upon to 
 use them. The very nature of public worship sup- 
 poses a participation on the part of the people. It is 
 
 * TertuUian, Cyprian, Cyril of Jerusalem, Chrysostom an« 
 others. 
 
75 
 
 not to hear their minister pray to God ; — it is not to be 
 captivated with the entlmsiasm, or eloquence of his man- 
 ner in pr.iycr, that congregations are assembled ; neither 
 is it ijrinci pally for tbe purpose of hearing his in- 
 structions, however practical, useful, and necessary they 
 may be. But it is for public or coiamon prayer ; — it is 
 for the purpose of joining together in acts of homage, 
 praise, and supplication to God. '* The minister is 
 but tne moulii of the coih;regation, and the mouth should 
 speak the mind of tlie congregation." The duty 
 belongs to the assembly in its collective capacity. The 
 audible performaace of some parts at least, should 
 therefore be assigned to them, and the remainder 
 should, at least, be fully understood by them before 
 its utterance, that they may be able to give, or (if their 
 peace of minds so require) to refuse, the full assent of 
 their minds. This cannot be the case with extempora- 
 neous, or free prayer, because in both tiiese cases the 
 minister substitutes his own mind for the mind of the 
 people. They know not wliat he is about to address to 
 the Deity in their name. If their minds are lifted up to 
 God at the close of the sentence they must immediately 
 withdraw them again, and fix them upon their minister, 
 till he has finished another : so at the close of the prayer 
 it is doubtful whether C)Iod,or the minister, has been most 
 in their thoughts. But where the same form which the 
 minister is to use is before the people, this cause of dis- 
 traction is removed ; they can follow him v.lLhout in- 
 terruption, while their thoughts are fixed upon God, 
 and the warm feeling of devotion stimulates them to 
 pray witii the spirit and M'ith thq understanding also. 
 
76 
 
 Of a religion purely spiritual man knows notliing.— 
 He must be interested through the medium of his senses. 
 We have formerly been struck with the truth of this 
 remark when witnessing "the simplicity of congrega- 
 tional worship." We have observed the many awk- 
 ward positions, into which a congregation would be 
 thrown upon the summons to prayer. Instead of hum- 
 bly falling on the knees, and shutting out from the sight 
 every thing which could distract the attention, it rather 
 seemed an object to place the body in a situation of ae 
 much ease as a partially erect posture would admit ;* 
 the looks of many indicated inability to fix their minds 
 either upon the object, or the organ of their devotions, or 
 perhaps, a disposition to scrutinize the situation and ap- 
 pearance of others. If tlie devotion of the minister hap- 
 pened to begreater than usual, restlessness became obser- 
 vable, — now and then a beseeching eye was turned to the 
 pulpit, as if to remind its occupant that his hearer^s atten- 
 tion was exhausted. We do not say that these habits 
 are discernable in every congregation of this sect, but 
 we certainly have sometimes witnessed them. We 
 think, however, it will not be questioned, ih'di a. consider- 
 able portion of such congregations esteem themselves 
 rather sls hearers of prayer than as j^ra^iw^ themselves. f 
 
 * With this view, some of the congregational meeting-houses of 
 New-England have seats made moveable with hinges, so that the 
 body may rest against the sides of the pew. 
 
 t " The pious Mr. Bennet, an eminent dissenting minister," 
 quoted in the non-conformist's Directory, (p. 47.) says — " There 
 is nothing I apprehend we are more generally defective in, than 
 in performing this part of religious worship. That careless air, ■ 
 jvhich sits upon the face of a congregation, shows how httle they 
 
77 
 
 'J'liese difficulties do not exist, — certainly not to this 
 extent, — witii those who use set forms. By them the 
 attention is secured : the posture excludes impediments^ 
 and is, of itself, a help to devotion : the prayer book re- 
 minds them of their share in the duty before them, and 
 instructs them how to perform it. Thus external cir- 
 cumstances are brought in to aid in exciting devotional 
 feelings ; these, again, have their action on tiie mind, 
 and impel to greater earnestness in the solemn prayers 
 and praises. ^^ In regard to the importance of prayer, 
 the ideas of serious church people seem generally the 
 most correct,'' says the Non-conformist's Directory.* 
 
 Neither are we disposed to regard it as a light ad- 
 vantage of forms that they serve as a standard of doc- 
 trine. The Reviewer and his party, we know, object 
 to this, as an entrenchment protecting error from the 
 
 know of the matter, and how iew seriously join in puhUc prayar. 
 Some gaze about them, others fall asleep, others fix their eyes on 
 the minister." The following anecdote, we have recently learnt 
 has been for some time current in Boston. A certain eminent 
 congregational preacher, having, on a certain occasion, greatly 
 exceeded his competitors in this species of pulpit eloquence, was 
 said, by one of his enlightened congregation, to have " delivered 
 the most delightful prayer ever addressed to a Boston audience !'* 
 We have graver authority for this opinion, hi the Journal of the 
 Convention which recently sat in Boston, for the alteration of the 
 Constitution of Massachusetts, (with the Chief Justice of the State 
 for its President, and many eminent laymen and clergymen for its 
 members,) as published in the Boston Centinel, we observe, that 
 en Dec. 22, 1820, the Convention met and '' heard prayers, by the 
 Rev, Mr. Jenks:" and also that on Jan. 3, lo21, they '•^ heard 
 prayers by the Rev. Mr. rallVoy."' — These geutlemen were its 
 chaplain?. 
 * Page 56; 
 
78 
 
 assaults of truth, but 2£'eliave uot yet subscribed to theii* 
 definitioQ of error, and we certainly shall wait till "the 
 glorious blaze of light" which they suppose to be 
 kindling all around them, shall become less fluctuating, 
 before we deem them jirepared to answer the question, 
 what is truth ? All men are not learned, nor can they 
 be ; many, even in our own hnppy country, cannot 
 read the Bible when it is placed in their hands, and 
 g;reat is the number of those in all Christian countries 
 who look to the public services of religion for the ac- 
 quisition of religious knowledge. However disposed, 
 then, the clergy may be, and they certainly are but 
 men, to neglect the duty of instruction, to v/andcr into 
 remote and abstract speculations, or to speak in 
 language above the comprehension of the whole or a 
 part of their hearers, still the beacon of the Liturgy 
 bears a steady and uniform light, perceptible to the 
 dimmest vision. 
 
 As it regards extemporaneous prayer, the truth seems 
 to be, that, when it was first introduced, it was on the 
 ground of its being a sort oi secondary inspiration, and 
 on this ground its use is still defended by most of the 
 illiterate sectarians of the present day. The Reviewer 
 is conscious that this notion is indefensible, he therefore 
 bids adieu to the Puritans, and comes half waij to church. 
 
 It is time, however, to notice his grave charges against 
 the Episcopal book. He first objects that it is a per- 
 petual form : and tliis he supports by the very grave 
 assertion that our addresses to the throne of grace are 
 dictated by men, all of Avhom have been in their graves 
 more than an hundred, and some more than a thousand 
 years. We wonder it did not occur to him to object, 
 
79 
 
 also, that the text hoolc on which our public discourses 
 are founded, and which dictates our religious principles, 
 is equally as ancient if not more so. Our readers may 
 smile, but we should like to have the difference in the 
 arguments pointed out to us, if they can find any. As 
 uo small portion of the Liturgy is drawn from the 
 scriptures, and many of the prayers are in their very 
 words, we suppose we may say that the apostles have 
 some claim to be considered among these dictators. ^ — We 
 may possibly go farther, and include our Saviour himself, 
 for we certainly use " fast days, feast days, and saint's 
 days, the whole year long, and every year," the very 
 prayer wliich he instructed his disciples to use. We 
 have, moreover, the Psalms mingled in a variety of 
 ways witii our service, which are still older than the 
 Lord's prayer. We certainly cannot perceive tlie 
 we'urht of this arirument. Of what importance is it 
 that ^* since their time the modes of thinking and ex- 
 pression are considerably changed," or that '^ we arc 
 able to apprehend the same thoughts in a somewhat 
 different shape and order :" Almost every objection 
 against the church, w hich is to be found in this appalling 
 Review, is as old as the earlier Puritans, and not one 
 of theiii, as we believe, can date its first existence as 
 late as the last century, aiid yet, though they appear 
 here in a " somewhat different shape and order," we 
 I do not see that they are a wliit " more interesting," or iu 
 I any respect more convincing. But to be serious. Can 
 the reader bring himself to believe, tliat this objection 
 I is produced as of weight against forms of prayer ? Can 
 he convince himself that it will be any gratification to 
 the Deity ; — that it will call his attention more forcibly 
 
80 
 
 io otli* prayers, if wc vary their language only, while 
 their essence remains the suns ? Is there not some- 
 thing, considering from what quarter it comes, of egre- 
 gious self-exaUation in this ? What is it hut saying, 
 '^ true Christianity is a common blessing ; all its advan- 
 tages are laid open to all men, who, nevertheless, ever 
 have been and ever will be much the same ; they still 
 have sins to c(»!ifess, mercies for which to be thankful^ 
 and wants to be supplied. To express unitedly, our 
 feelings on these points to our Father in Heaven we 
 publickly assemble ; but then as the frequent repetition 
 of these things would tire, it is best to allow the clergy 
 to display their talents in transposing the thoughts, and 
 varying the language. Tiiis will give scope for their 
 abilities and cultivation ?"* It would only he more un- 
 reasonable, in our opinion, to require each individual of 
 the congregation to perform the duty by turns ; if novel- 
 ty is tiie only, or chief object, this method would as 
 effectually, and not ^rnuch more objectionably, produce 
 
 * Bishop Dchon thought ditTerently on this subject. The follow- 
 ing eloquent pas«iage is from his Sermon delivered before the 
 General Convention, 1814. " Wbo w'buld not wish, in the temple, 
 to bear upon his lips those psalms, and prayers, in which the 
 glorious company of the apostles, the goodly fellowship of the 
 prophets, and the noble army of martyrs, have uttered their devo- 
 tions to God ! How dead must he be to the finest associations^ 
 ■which can affect the mind^ who is not animated to a devout and fer- 
 vent performance of his part of the service of the sanctuary, by 
 the consideration, that, upon this same censer, which the church 
 holds out to him, incense has been put by hands which are now 
 extended before the throne of the Almighty, and that as the smoke 
 ascended, thosQ eyes were lifted up to Heaven, which are now 
 fixed upon the visible glory of God and the Lamb." We recoiu-' 
 mend this Sermon to the attentive perusal of our readers. 
 
81 
 
 it. Personal blessings, as we conceive, have, in ^^eneral, 
 Hotliini; to do with public congregational worsliip ; they 
 belonj^ to the closet. 
 
 Neither do we think, with the Reviewer, that the 
 pro^Tcss of scriptural knowledge, or, at least, that 
 species of it, which he would commend, is like to pro- 
 duce much change in the sentiments of Episcopalians 
 with regard to the Liturgy. That all the members of 
 the church are not perfectly satisfied with regard to 
 every part of her formularies may be true. But this 
 may arise from various causes : it would be natural to 
 look for it in tlie structure of the human mind, which is 
 acknowledged on all sides to be desultory in its views, 
 (and, in this respect, it is in our opinion not a little in 
 favour of the Liturgy, that the attachment is so strong 
 and general) ; — it may be occasioned by possessed, or 
 supposed, increase of knowledge ; and it is just as 
 likely to be produced by ignorance. There are, it is 
 true, great pretensions to scriptural knowledge in our 
 day, but we are not quite clear that these pretensions 
 have ample foundations, and we are somewhat afraid 
 that their progressive tendency is, to deprive us of all 
 those portions of such knowledge, which are of impor- 
 tance to us as disciples of a crucified Saviour. When 
 the Reviewer asserts, that " the mass of Episcopalians 
 at the present day dissent in many particulars (unim- 
 portant, they will say) from tbe sentiments of the au- 
 tJiors and comjjilers of the service book," he shelters 
 I himself behind an entrenchment, so broad and compre- 
 I hensive, that we know not where to find him. With 
 i the sentiments of the authors and compilers of that 
 book, we have no more to do in onr prayers and reli- 
 11 
 
82 
 
 gioLis services, thau we have with the sentiments of 
 Churchmen at any period subsequent, to that in which 
 they lived. And it was certainly for no very generous 
 purpose that such an insinuation was thrown out. The 
 sentiments of the prayer book have a higher orighi. 
 If however, the particulars in which some, or even the 
 mass of Episcopalians dissent from these sentiments, 
 are in their own opinion unimjwrtant^ upon what 
 groimd does the Reviewer undertake to censure them ? 
 We have mixed much, and familiarly, among Episco- 
 palians through a large portion of our country, and yet 
 we are unable to surmise to what particulars the lie- 
 viewer can have reference, and we utterly deny the ex- 
 istence of this difficulty in any important, or even uni- 
 form extent. Doubtless there are some among us, who 
 cither from the natural bias of their minds, — from some 
 prejudice of education, — from ignorance of the motives, 
 and reasons on which it is founded, or from other 
 causes, find it convenient, and necessary to their peace 
 of mind to omit participating in one, or another, part of 
 the service, and while their motives are honest, we, at 
 least, will not blame them. But may not this principle 
 exist and as actively too, where free prayer or extempo- 
 raneous is used ? Are all the preachers, wlio adopt 
 these methods, as cautious as the Reviewers plan' 
 would require ? We greatly fear, that even among 
 them some dark mountains might be found, on which 
 the feet of the pious Avould stumble. Here, however, 
 we think, the Liturgy has the advantage, for those, if 
 there are such, who cannot conscientiously adopt all its 
 services, may find some parts, and those, it may be, suffi- 
 cient in which they can participate : and so much is the 
 
 I 
 
83 
 
 iervice broken into short prayers and forms, that they 
 >vill find no necessity for mental reservation, but may 
 !;ive, or Avithhold, their assent as they find it expedient; 
 vhile on the other side there is no room for the exer- 
 •ise of this liberty, — they must add their amen to the 
 vhole or omit it altogether. 
 
 Tlie Reviewer appears someAvhat uneasy when he is 
 uduced to speak of the strong hold which the Liturgy 
 las on the affections of Churchmen. He greatly dreads, 
 hat, being placed too near the Bible, it may in time take 
 ts place. Now, we think, we may with perfect sin- 
 :erity assure him that it is not with Churchmen that 
 he Bible is in danger of being undervalued, or of being 
 iuperseded by any book whatever. If that blessed book 
 )e in danger, we have no doubt, tliat even the mass of 
 Uongregationalists will join us in saying, it is from a 
 lifferent quarter. We believe there can be no impro- 
 iriety in terming the Liturgy admirahUy and we cer- 
 ainly have full license to place it in the very front of 
 ill iininsjnred compositions.* That it was preserved 
 
 *Dr. Adam Clark, author of a Commentary on the Bible, novt 
 jublishing, in which as extensive and various erudition is displayed, 
 IS, perhaps, in the works of any modern writer, — a methodist, 
 ind, of course, a dissenter from the English church, says of the 
 Liturgy, that '• it is a work almost universally esteemed by the 
 ievoutand pious, of every denomination, and the greatest effort of 
 |hc reformation next to the translation of the scriptures into the 
 English language.*' — Commentary. Note to preface. " The English 
 yiturgy,'' — says the learned Grotius, " comes so near the primitive 
 battern that none of the reformed churches can compare with il.'' 
 obert Hall, a baptist, and one of llie most eminent of the English 
 issenters, speaks of it thus — " I beliere the evangelical purity 
 of its sentiments, the chastened fervour of its devotions, the majestir 
 
84 
 
 IVom the violent hands of Papists and Puritans, in the 
 veign of Elizabeth, by the terror of penal laws, we 
 are not disposed to deny : — It is certain such lawi 
 were passed, and, doubtless, in some instances executed. 
 We are not able at this time to judge fully of the mo- 
 tives which led to their enactment, but we certainly 
 have no disposition to defend such a polfcy. Ought we 
 not, however, to have expected a policy somewhat more 
 liberal, when, at a period near a century later, '^^ the 
 best scholai's, preachers, and men in the nation," — that 
 is, — the Puritans had acquired the government, by w hat 
 means we are not concerned to state ? Things seem, 
 however, to have been managed much the same as be- 
 fore.* The Solemn League and Covenant admitted of 
 
 simplicity of its language, have placed the English Liturgy in the 
 very first rank of uninspired compositions." — Speech before Leices- 
 ter Bible Society. We cannot think even Episcopalians would wish 
 to speak of the Liturgy in stronger terms than these writers. 
 
 * We are sorry that the Reviewer entirely overlooked the fol- 
 lowing counterpart to his extract from Blackstone. " If any per- 
 son or persons^ shall wse, or cause to be used^ the book of common 
 prayer^ (which, let it be remembered, all the clergy stood bound by 
 their ordination vows to use) every such person so offending^ shall 
 for the first offence pay five pounds^ for the second ten, and for thei 
 third, suffer one -whole yearns imprisonment without bail or mainprize^H 
 May 9, 1644. One would think this sufficient; but it seems it wai 
 not found so. " Every Minister who shalt not henceforth observe tk 
 Directory, according to its true intent and meaning, in all the exercis 
 of the public worship of God, shall for every time he shall so offend^ 
 forfeit and pay forty skillingsy " Every one who shall bring it hit 
 contempt, neglect, or oppose it ; who shall preach, write, print, oi 
 cause to be published, any thing against the directory, shall for ever 
 such offence, pay such a sum of money, as itpon trial shall be thought fit 
 provided it be not wider £^, nor above £50". August 23, 164& 
 
85 
 
 no temporising spirit. And it is certainly through no 
 fault of these godly men, as they styled themselves, that 
 M'e are now able to utter our prayers in the language of 
 apostles, prophets, and martyrs. But even granting that 
 the Liturgy was upheld by the terror of law in the days 
 of Elizabeth, and even subsequently in England, by 
 what force ha^ it been supported, and so widely spread 
 in our own country that several stereotype presses are 
 in almost constant operation to supply the demand for 
 it?* The Reviewer appears to think, that, on the 
 point of veneration for the Liturgy, he cannot .accuse us 
 too strongly. He says that ^' even the word of God is 
 by many not thought Jit to go abroad without the book 
 of common prayer by its side, &c.'' We, at once, al- 
 low that there are societies both in this country and 
 England for the joint distribution of the Bible and 
 prayer book, and it is certainly true that many Epis- 
 copalians deem this the best mode of proceeding in re- 
 ference to both ; but that any will go the extent of the 
 Reviewers assertion we utterly deny. What is the 
 practice of these societies ? " Li truth," — says one of 
 their public documents, — '^ they hold them both with an 
 equal hand, giving both or either, according to the needs 
 and desires of the applicant ; if he had not a Bible, they 
 
 Now all this was done by Puritans, and to us has very much the 
 appearance of retaHation, an eye for an eye, k-c. That these laws 
 were not so severe in their penalties as those of Elizabeth, is 
 owing we believe more to the fact, that their operation would be 
 upon the mass of the clergy who were already under coun- 
 ter obligations, which, of themselves, they could not remove, 
 rather than to any lenity in those who passed them. 
 
 * Ten thousand copies were printed in the city of Pfew-York in 
 the vear 1817 alone ! 
 
86 
 
 gave him one ; if lie had a Bible the girt was best 
 doubled; by giving him that book which aided liim in 
 the pra(itical use of it/' But is the Reviewer and his 
 sect so infatuated; that they suppose whatever may be 
 wrong in others is perfectly right in themselves ? Kvea 
 since the publication of this Review, a society has been 
 established at Baltimore, '^ for distributing the Bible 
 and other books giving rational and consistent views of 
 Christianity.** Does the Reviewer think, we do ..ot re- 
 gard the Liturgy as both rational and consistent in its 
 views of the gospel ? Or is it, in any degree, probable, 
 that works so long established, and as generally accep- 
 table as the prayer book, will be found upon the cata- 
 logue of the Baltimore society ? We do not think him so 
 credulous as this. And when he refers to the opinion 
 of Bishop Marsh, does he not know, that the contro- 
 versy in England, was not about the value or usefulness 
 of the Liturgy, but about the expediency of Church- 
 men instituting a society for the distribution of the Bible 
 alone, when there already existed a society of extensive 
 labours, and in need of funds, for the purpose of circu- 
 lating the Bible and practical religious works in 
 general ?* 
 
 * Some of our readers may not be acquainted with the fact, that 
 a Society was instituted at London, by members of the EngUsh 
 fhurch, so far back as 1698, " for the promotion of Christian 
 knowledge,'' and that, since that period, they have distributed an 
 immense number of Bibles, prayer books, and other religious books 
 in Europe, Asia, and America. The amount distributed in one 
 year, as stated in the Report for 1819 — follows, — Bibles (exclusive 
 of the Society's Family Bible,) 32,150. New-Testaments and 
 Psalters, 53,905. Common Prayer Books, 91,621. Other bound 
 books, 74,889. Small tracts, half bound, &c. 913,483. Books 
 and papers issued gratuitously, 261,700. 
 
87 
 
 The second grave cliaige of the Reviewer is that •'• the 
 English form of worship/*' as in the fuUness of his Uh- 
 eraliti/ lie calls it. — •• is substantially one form.'' It is 
 so indeed. What then ? Why, *^' come a famine, or a 
 war; be a church in the garment of praise, or in (he 
 spirit of heaviness ; let a pestilence depopulate a land, 
 or a fire lay a city in ashes : an insurrection threaten a 
 state, or a despaired of victory preserve it, when you 
 would expect to hear one loud burst of praise, or thrill- 
 ing cry foij mercy, the inflexible prayer book claims all 
 its due, &c.'' What a pompous, sonorous, piece of de- 
 clamation ! We read it aloud to try its force, and it still 
 rings in our ears. The argument, however, has visited 
 our ears before, and we esteem it a very trifling one. 
 The following extracts will be conclusive with regard 
 to it. ^' The wants and consequently the matter of the 
 petitions of a Christian congregation, must in tlie main 
 I)e always the same : they will at all times have sins to 
 confess, still have need to ask pardon, and implore the 
 divine grace to direct their thoughts, words and actions : 
 it will ever be their duty to pray for all ranks of men,&c. 
 If any general calamity should happen such as war,-' 
 famine, jiesiilencey proper forms may be provided. In 
 private cases, perhaps, it might be more for the honour of 
 our religion and decency of our worship, that we did 
 not descend to particular circumstances so much as we 
 do. It is needless to describe the diseases to an omni- 
 scient Ciod : nu>st cases of this nature might be compre- 
 hended under the general names of sickness and dis- 
 tress : but if it be proper to deal with God as with an 
 ordinary doctor, and to lay the case before him at full 
 
 * Boo note on pnif^ 70 above. 
 
88 
 
 length, methods may be found to indulge the huuiour of 
 the clergy in this respect, without leaving our whole 
 worship to their discretion, and putting all our public 
 petitions in their power.*" We have before remarked 
 that those congregations which do not use set forms are 
 very apt to consider themselves but as hearers of prayer, 
 and when Ave find the Reviewer sophistically saying, 
 that the same sermon preached thus often would fail 
 to sustain attention, we are almost tempted to think 
 
 * Letter to the eldei's and ministers of the church of Scothmd, 
 by a Blacksmith. We do not see why this " burst of praise, or 
 thrilUng cry for mercy," is to be expected from tlie minister only^ 
 and yet, be the cause what it may, the people of his congregation, 
 must patiently wait " while he begins at the beginning and reads," 
 or repeats, or invents, *•' to the end," before their lips may open, 
 and then but for a solitary cvncn. What room is here for the en- 
 thusiasm of the worshipper to display itself ? Surely it is as com- 
 pletely limited as by any form whatever. In the Episcopal service 
 there would be some place, at least, where the fervor of gratitude 
 would find its vent, — the fire would kihdle, and they would speak 
 with their tongues. " I think it would be scarcely possible for 
 any want to arise of a private or domestic nature which is not 
 somewhere comprehended in the Litany, and every individual will 
 find the peculiarity of his case so adverted to, that he will be able 
 to give a distinctness, and earnestness, to the petition which em- 
 braces his heaviest trials to the Father of mercies and without any 
 one but himself, (which is a great advantage,) being conscious o. 
 what IS passing in his mind, or having the least idea of the pecu- 
 liarity of his case." J crrairi's Conversations on Baptism^ (^Boston 
 ed. p. 162.) Special prayers are provided in the Liturgy for most 
 cases of necessity ; and the 38th Canon provides for forming such 
 prayers, as peculiar and important events, of a general nature, may 
 call for. It may not be amiss to remark here, that among Dr. 
 Priestley's published forms of prayer there is one " for the pre- 
 sent state of Christians to be used on Easter Sunday.''^ 
 
89 
 
 that he believes so too; at least, it shows the habit of 
 thinkins; into which this practice lias led liini. We 
 have not the least hesitation in saying, that where set 
 forms are not used it is necesikry for the preacher to in- 
 trod;ice into his prayers as much novelty as he conve- 
 niently can, and we have heard it asserted that it is the 
 constant endeavour of some of the most eminent of this 
 class to he as striking as possible in this part of thei? 
 duty ; not from any belief of its being necessary in the 
 sight of God, nor because it tends to stimulate their 
 own devotion, for this labouring after words and phrases 
 is obviously of a contrary tendency ; but because of the 
 difficulty of exciting a proper devotional temper in the 
 uuinteresled mass before them. Till this elFect is pro- 
 duced, their labours seem in vain, and in the end, per' 
 haps, they discover to tlse wounding of their pious feel- 
 ini:s, that thev have had full credit £;iven them for their 
 skill, by those who had forgotten to pray for themselves. 
 That forms may be used witJiout a correspondent de- 
 A'otional feeling at the heart, we do not doubt, and we 
 have as little doubt that this may be the case where /ree 
 prayer is used. The external action of devotion is, of 
 itself, nothing. It should follow the devout feeling as 
 any other elTect follows its proper cause. If devout 
 feelings do not exist, we know not how the congregations. 
 of the Reviewers sect, are j^ossihly to proceed beyond 
 mere attention; and if these feelings should not be pro- 
 duced till near the close of the prayer, and then by the 
 enthusiasm or eloquence of the preacher, Ave see not 
 bow they are to assent to a prayer, one half of which, 
 perhaps, they neither understood nor heard. Besides, 
 at the moment when the hearer's attention is fully excit- 
 12 
 
90 
 
 e.d,, the ill-timed entrance of some person by whom ji 
 door is sent creaking to its close ; a cough, which some 
 feeble individual is unable, or some thoughtless youth 
 Unwilling to restrain; or the careless, bustling movements 
 of the sexton, may interrupt his hearing the beginning, 
 or tlie conclusion of a sentence, while he is seeking a 
 clue to which, anotlier is so imperfectly heard, that 
 neither are more than half understood. When the Re- 
 viewer seeks to illustrate his position, by what most 
 persons experience with regard to the Lord's prayer, 
 does lie not see that he is literally arguing against its 
 use* in childhood, and that the same remarks apply to 
 the use of tlie scriptures, or portions of them, in schools? 
 Will he reject this laadable practice, lest, subsequently 
 we should come to tlieir perusal without claiming for 
 them the recommendation of novelty? 
 
 The next grave charge of the Reviewer is, that " the 
 Liturgy isfaultij in its general jdan,^^ He dislikes ^' its 
 separation into parts,"' and *^ would think it much better 
 if it were more consolidated.*' This is, as he says, mat- 
 ter for the judgement of every individual, and every one 
 knows that what may be particularly acceptable to one, 
 would be, perhaps, as fully disagreeable to another. 
 A superficial observer may not indeed see much connec- 
 tion between the parts of the service, but then modesty 
 should teach him, that he, perhaps, does not understand 
 the motives which led to the offensive arrangement. 
 We do not recollect to have heard any objection of this 
 sort from those w ho are at all accustomed to its use ; on 
 the contrary we have generally found the feature, liere 
 objected to, an admired one. ^* But," says tlie RevieAV- 
 cr, <• if each of the numerous prayers contain what 
 
91 
 
 belongs to a prayer, the repetition must be not a little 
 tiresome : if not, they are defective in themselves.'"' iSo 
 tliat we are, one way or another, dpcidedly wron;:^. 
 Without stopping to explore, liis quibble on the word 
 prayer, we remark, that, in our opinion, even a scliool 
 boy might have ascertained that these prayers are each 
 perfect in themselves, that is, that each contains all, per- 
 haps, that is necessary to s?iy upon the single sul)ject 
 wliicli is its object. If then there is for each subject 
 which is prayed for, a distinct prayer, there ought to be, 
 of course, as many of them as the general necessities of 
 tlie worshippers require, or if there be some points, and 
 there are many, which do not well admit of this ar- 
 rangement, they should be combined in some general 
 prayer. None of the prayers of the Liturgy are long, 
 and their separation puts it in the power of the worship- 
 pers to give their assent to eacli particular. By this 
 means their attentiDu is continually attracted to the 
 duty before them, and the mind is more forcibly re- 
 strained from wandering, than, probably, would be the 
 case were they all thrown into one. " The arrange- 
 ment is not huppy,'^ says the lieviewer ; " no good rea- 
 son appears why parts of the service should stand in 
 the appointed order rather than any other.'' This is a 
 curious argument, and we cannot, Avithout taking out- 
 readers through a review of the whole Liturgy, reply 
 to it better than by saying, that there appears no reason 
 for change, since no better disposition of any of its parts 
 is su"-"-ested. The latter part of the Litany, of which 
 be particularly complains, is very ancient and ^^ as pre- 
 pared for use in times of persecuf ion. God be thanked, 
 we have no occasion of tiii* kind now. and it is there* 
 
92 
 
 fore in this country, at least, 2;cne rally disused. Tiio 
 repetitions altogether arc not so great, nor the misman- 
 agement so obvious, as is asserted : — The rubrics do 
 not require the Lord's prayer to be used more tliau 
 once, except the Lord's supper be adaiinistered, or 
 some other extra service be used, when it is required 
 in a single additional iustance iti each of these services ; 
 in every other instance its use is either discretionary, or 
 merely customary. The Gloria Fatri too is reffdired to 
 be used hut once in the course of the service, though it 
 is permitted to be used oftener. * He complains, too, of 
 
 * Cartwright, the leader of the Piiiitans in the days of Elizabeth, 
 ?ipeaks thus of the Gloria Pt\tri, — " It was lirst brought into the 
 church to the end that men thereby should make an open pioi 
 fession in the church of the divinity of the Son ol'God, against the 
 detestable opinions of Arius and his disciples, wherewith at that 
 time marvellously swarmed almost the whole of Christendom.t 
 Now that it hath pleased the Lord to quench that fire, there is 
 no such cause why these things should be used in the church, or, 
 at the least, why that Gloria Patri should be so otten repeated." 
 To the same eliect he remarked upon the use of the cross in 
 baptism, which, from some cause the Reviewer has not noticed, 
 Were he alive in our day, as well as many other of the early 
 Puritans, we think they would admit their policy to have beet 
 short-sighted in the extreme. The religion of the Cross is nc 
 variable ; our chuixh, as we believe, has conveyed to us ihefuii^ 
 once delivered to the saints, and we have no objection to the tanga 
 ble signs, and clear expressions, which primitive Christia( 
 thought necessary in their day for the distinct expression of tlieiT 
 faith. Let the church retain them " till the consummation of all 
 things." See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, b. v. sec. 35, 36. 
 
 t Bishop Bull says it was in use from the earliest times, and thui it 
 was recognized by Justin Martyr and the Jlpostolicul Constiiutio%h\ 
 Sermon on forms', &c, j 
 
93 
 
 the mannt'i' in which the Psalms are used in tlie ser- 
 vice " with all their localities and personalities of 
 meaning." T!ie Psalms are used in the service of the 
 church, as they have been forai^es, in their prophetical, 
 evangelical, or spiritual sense, as acts of [jraise. Many 
 of them have had their application to man's redemption 
 settled, isi an express majiuer, I)y the inspired writers ; 
 audit is probable, that few, or none of them, are to he 
 restricted to temporal events and occasions. But ^' it 
 may be asked, are we concerned with the affairs of 
 David and of Israel ? Have we aiiy thing to do with the 
 ark and the temple ? They are no more. Are we to 
 go up to Jemsalein, and to uorsliipon Sion ? They are 
 desolated and trodden under foot by tlie Turks. Are 
 we to sacrifice young bullocks, according to the law? 
 The law is abolished never to be observed again. Do 
 Ave pray for victory over Zvloab, Edom, and Philistia ; 
 or for deliverance from Babylon ? There are no such 
 nations, no such places in the world. ^Vhat then do 
 we mean, when, taking such expressions into our own 
 mouths, we utter them, in our own persons, as parts of 
 our devotion before God ? Assuredly we must mean a 
 Biiiritual Jerusalem and Sion ; i\. spiritual ark and tem- 
 ple ; a spiritual law ; sijiritual sacrifices ; and spiritual 
 enemies ; all described under the old names, wliich are 
 still retained, though ^ old things are passed away and 
 all things are to become ncvv/ Dy substituting Messiah 
 for David ; the gospel for the law ; the church Ctiristian, 
 for that of Israid ; and the enemies of the one, for those 
 of the other ; (lie Psalms are made our own. ]^i^ay, 
 they are, with more fullness and propriety, applied now 
 to the substanc^^ tlia» they were of old to ^ the shadow 
 
94 
 
 of good tilings tlieii to come' And therefore, ever 
 since the commencement of the Christian era, the churcli 
 hath chosen to celebrate the gospel mysteries in the 
 words of these ancient hymns, rather than to compose, 
 for that purpose, new ones of her own."' It may be 
 proper to remark, that there are in the American prayer 
 book selections of Psalms which may be used instead of 
 those appointed for the day, and thus these localities 
 and personalities, if they are to be considered such, are 
 easily obviated. The use of Psalms by course, is 
 tliought to have been introduced by Ignatius Bishop of 
 Antioch in the apostolic age.* 
 
 The next grave charge is, that ^^ the Episcopal ser- 
 Tice appears too formal to cherish the spirit of devotion, 
 and too pompous to be a fit religious homage.'' The 
 first assertion is somewhat indefinite. jVloro or less of 
 form is witnessed among all Christian denominations, 
 and we are not aware of any undue excess of it in the 
 church service. No man of pious feelings, as we think, 
 could esteem it improper, or too formal, to kneel duri^iig 
 prayer, and to stand during praise, and all classes of 
 Christians sit (hiring instruction. Neither do we see 
 any very strong tendency to pomp in the service. The 
 reader will seek in vain through the prayer book for 
 any information concerning the clerk, and he will seek 
 equally in vain, through nine in ten, at least, of the 
 Episcopal churches in this country for this officer, ex- 
 cept, perhaps, in the same character and situation as 
 the chorister of other denominations. The wardens 
 too, are but temporal officers of the church, and are 
 
 * Bishop Home's Commentary on the Psalms. — Frrfacc. Se$ 
 f^Tso Hooker, b. v, sec. 37. Socrates Ecc) Hist. L. 3. c. 8. 
 
S5 
 
 mentioned but ence in the whole prayer book ; and 
 tiien arc morely called upon to collect tlie alms of tlie 
 congregation ; a duty assigned, \\t believe; by thecongVe- 
 gationalists, and others, to their deacons, who, if we are 
 not mistaken, generally have a prominent seat in the 
 congregation, — wliile this is so rarely the case with 
 churcli wardens tiiat we do not recollect ever to have met 
 "witli more than half a dozen instances.* Congrega- 
 tionalists formerly o])jected to both the gown and sur- 
 plice, but, since they have adopted the identical gown 
 and cassock of the Episcopal clergy, we hear only of 
 the change of dress and the use of the surplice. At 
 some future time, doubtless, these objections, will 
 vanish also.f But of these two robes, if we must have 
 but one, ice decidedly prefer the surplice, because it is 
 one of those robes w hich God himself appointed for the 
 
 * We are of opinion tkat the original office of church wardea 
 has been divided, by the Congregationahsts, between their dea- 
 cons and tythingmen. Some of them, however, retain the nmm 
 of church warden to this day> See Alden's account of the reh- 
 I gious societies of Portsmouth, N. H. p. 31. Church wardens ia 
 I England, if we are not mistaken, and in some parts of this country, 
 laswe are assured, were empowered by law to keep the peace 
 I about the premises of the church during worship j hence, probably, 
 i arose the us£ of staves. 
 
 I t We are inclined to believe that the following account applies 
 to an English Unitarian Chapel. " In passing a place of worship 
 «ome time since which had the appearance of an Episcopal 
 chapel, I entered, and found the fitting up of the interior, the ar- 
 rangement of the communion table, with the clerk and reader's 
 desks, &c. almost precisely the same as I had been accustomed to 
 see in chapels of ease in the establishment. The Reader also 
 was robed in a aurpllce and frUe ckrk in a gown, Giiristian Obser- 
 ver, vel. IC.p. 493. 
 
dress of tlie Jevyisb priests, — Ijccausc soloug has itsii-5C 
 been established in the Christian church, tliai wc cannot 
 tell when it was introduced ; and because it is cmbieJiiat- 
 ical of the ])iirity, with which we sliunUl co-.uii b;*rore 
 God, in prayer and praise.* Garments of o.Tice niPvy 
 certainly be considered amosi;^ those th]ii;^N included in 
 the apostle's direction to tije church at C'orinth, to '^^ let 
 all things be done decently, and in order."' If the Re- 
 viewer complains that the performances of the cluircli 
 have a theatrical air, we must remind him, that such 
 airs are to be witnessed in places and on occasions wc 
 eould name ; not formally connected vvU'i thesu. it is 
 true, but put on, apparently, for the purji-ose of pppsonal 
 disjdai/. In trnth, when we consider th;^ barrenness of 
 the ceremonial, allowed by sopae denominations of pro- 
 fessing Christians, we are not surprizevl that a kind of 
 
 * " Jerome, — snys Wheatloj^ — at one and the same time shows it? 
 ancient use, and reproves the needless scnipuiosity of such as 
 oppose it." Hooker also, quotes Chrysostom, as alluding to its 
 use. Wheathij says, that in his day, the only clerical garment in 
 general use was the surplice. Dr. Adam Clarke, in his commen- 
 tary on Exodus, chap, xxviii. v. 2. observes, " Should not the gar- 
 ments of all those who minister in sacred things, still be emblemati- 
 cal of the things in which they minister ? Should they not be for 
 glory and beauty, expressive of the dignity of the gospel ministry, 
 and that beauty of holiness without which none can see the Lord ? 
 As the high-priesfs vestments under the law, were emblematical of 
 what a-cfs io come, should not the vestments of the ministers of the 
 gospel bear some resemblance to that which is come? The white sur- j 
 plicc in the service of the church,is almost the only thing that remains '. 
 of those ancient and becoming vestments which God commanded to ^' 
 be made for glory and beauty. Clothing emblematic of office, is of i 
 more consequence than is generally imagined," Let it be remem- 
 bered Dr. Clarke is an English dissenter. 
 
97 
 
 iiecessity is di<!covere(l to exist, for the exercise of all 
 the little arts which are found to produce attention. 
 Men, as we have before intimated, are swayed through 
 their senses. It is through this medium that learned 
 and unlearned are alike affected. This is evident from 
 the practice of all who arc desirous of influencing popu- 
 lar assemblies, and none make greater use of it than our 
 opponents. For tliis reason a sensible worship is ne- 
 cessary, and upon this principle are the services of the 
 church arranged. A form tending to edification and 
 instruction, with a few simple ceremonies, but without 
 offensive parade, is easily reconciled to the feelings of 
 all, even of those who have been accustomed to ^^ the 
 simplicity of congregational worship,^' if they are not 
 possessed of incurable prejudices on the subject, and are 
 not fully convinced they should be hearers of prayer 
 only.* 
 
 * We will g-ivfi the statement of Justin Martyr from another 
 source than Neal, of whose impartiality as an historian Bishop Mad- 
 dox and Dr. Gray have given abundant reason to doubt in many 
 respects. Writing to the heathen Emperor, in vindication of the 
 persecuted Christians, he speaks in ageneral way of their mode of 
 worship, thus : " Upon Sunday all those who live in cities, or coun- 
 try towns, or viliages meet together, and the writings of the 
 apostles and prophets are read, as the time will allow. And the 
 reader being ended, the President (Sir Peter King says, the Bishop) 
 , deUvers a discourse, instructing and exhorting to an imitation of 
 I those things which are comely. We then all rise up, and pour 
 out prayers. And as we have related, prayers being ended, bread 
 and wine and water are brought, and the President as above gives 
 I thanks with all his power,, and the people signify their approbation 
 by saying amen. Distribution is then made to every one that has 
 joined in giving thanks ; and to those who are absent it is sent by 
 the deacons." — Apology. Iq the same work he speaks incidentallj' 
 13 
 
98 
 
 We do not feel ourselves called to defend what may 
 be done, or omitted to be done, in the protestant Cathe- 
 dral of Canada ; but we should like to be told upon 
 what ground it is tliat the Reviewer brings forward as 
 belonging to the l^jpiscojjol system^ ceremonies and 
 practices which are no more connected with it necessari- 
 ly than they are with Congregationalism ; and to find 
 authority for which, he will search all the offices of the 
 church in vain. Were it not that the assertion is gener- 
 al and unlimited that "^ some of the ceremonies of the 
 churcli are fantastic beyond all but popish examples," 
 "\ve would suppose, that it referred only to Canadian 
 practices. • As it is, we reply to it in the words of 
 Hooker ; — ^^Such speeches are scandalous ; they savour 
 not of God in him that useth them ; and unto virtuously 
 disposed minds they are grievous corrosives. Our 
 case were miserable, if tliat, wherewith we most en- 
 deavour to please God, were in his sight so vile and 
 despicable as men's disdaiiiful speech would make it."^ 
 Whatever may have been the character of the poetry 
 used at the consecration of the Bishops at Dublin in 
 1660, we have read with much pleasure the prose de- 
 livered on that occasion by Bishop Jeremy Taylor 5 
 and if our readers w ill take the trouble to peruse it they 
 will find proofs of the substantial base on which Epis- 
 copacy rests, — too strong to be removed by the compara- 
 
 of the Common Prayers. Several thing's are deserving of notice 
 in this extract : the President or Bishop had an assistant, — the 
 reader, — the deacons were employed in a duty additional to that 
 which was assigned them at their original institution ; (Acts 6.) 
 the scriptures were read in their public worship, — and the people 
 pined audibly in it. 
 * Book V. sec. 33. 
 
99 
 
 lively pigmy efforts of the Reviewer.* But we do not 
 recollect ever to have met with a more gross perversion 
 of aijy writer than is fomul iu this Reviewer's assertion 
 t!iat '' the. Homily on the time and place of prayer ex- 
 2iressly condemns chanting and playing on the organ as 
 sorely displeasing to Giodj and filthily defiling his holy 
 house.*' Ignorance is the only refuge we can allow him, 
 for he does not appear to have known that, prior to tlie 
 introduction of the common prayer, the popish service 
 had heeu wholly chanted, accompanied by the organ ; 
 so that, as in the service of some modern sectaries, the 
 many were entertained with the skill of the few ; — there 
 were no prayers ; no actual devotion. The Homily al- 
 luded to was set forth in the reign of Elizabeth, at a 
 time when this abuse of organs was purged away, ])iit 
 their sober use laudably retained. Speaking of '^ Avick- 
 €d people who pass nothing to resort to church, — for 
 that they see the church altogether scoured of such gay 
 gazing sights, as their gross fantasy was greatly delight- 
 ed with, — as may appear by this, that a woman said to her 
 neighbour, ^ alas. Gossip, what shall we do at church, 
 since all the saints are taken away, since all the goodly 
 sights we were wont to have are gone, since we cannot 
 hear the like piping, and singing, chanting, and playing 
 on the organs that we could before ?' But dearly be- 
 loved, we ought greatly to rejoice, and give God thanks, 
 that those things which displeased God so sore, and 
 filthily defiled his holy house and place of prayer for 
 tlie which he hath justly destroyed many nations, ac- 
 cording to the saying of St. Paul, ^ If any man defile 
 thetemjjle of God, God will him destroy.^ And this w& 
 
 * See Jeremy Taylor's Sermons, Boston ed. vol. 3. p. 96.^ 
 
100 
 
 ought greatly to praise God for, that such superstitions and 
 idolatrous manners as were utterly naught, and defaced 
 God's glory, are utterly abolished, as they most justly 
 deserved : and yet those things that either God was 
 honoured with, or his people edified, are decently re- 
 tained, and in our churches comely practised."* Now 
 it is an undoubted fact, that the use of organs as an 
 accompaniment to the singing or chanting of Psalms, 
 was at that time retained iu the churches in which this 
 Homily was appointed to be read. 
 
 We might pass over his remark that ^^ tlie feasts and 
 fasts in the observance of which Christians find so much 
 satisfaction, were introduced to conciliate pagans," 
 sheltering ourselves under its general application. But 
 "we are not willing so to pass his quotation from the amia- 
 ble Theodoret for the support of an opinion which we 
 believe never entered into the head of the good father. 
 We should judge from the specimens which increase 
 upon us as we advance, that the Reviewer was acquiring 
 a fondness for the ancient fathers, at least when he 
 thinks they will serve his purpose. He lias quoted 
 Jerome, Justin, TertuUian and now Theodoret ! Yet 
 these writers lived in that period of antiquity, in which 
 he accuses Episcopalians of calling in ignorant and un- 
 w orthy Ecclesiastics as their allies ! Does this savour 
 much of sound education ; to reject them, with con- 
 tumely, when they are found too strong for him, and to 
 receive them humbly, when they can be brought to fight 
 on his side ? We must be permitted to doubt it. But ; 
 this is not the first time that this extract has been brought 
 up with the view of casting a stigma on the church. 
 
 * Homilies, Oxford and New. York ed. p. 294, 
 
101 
 
 It is taken, we believe, from the eighth of Theodoret's 
 twelve discourses, against tlie false opinions of the 
 heathen, " which he wrote, says Dupin, to satisfy some 
 objections which had been made to him. In this book 
 lie undertakes to defend the honour which Christians 
 gave to the martyrs, shewing by the testimony of their 
 philosophers, poets, and historians, that the Greeks had 
 honoured the memory of eminent men by offering sacri- 
 fice to them after their death, and by bestowing on them 
 the qualities of gods, demi-gods, and heroes, although 
 the greatest part of them had been infamous and crimi- 
 nals : and this he does to give them a clearer demon- 
 stration, that the Christians did honour their martyrs 
 far more deservedlij.^''^' This seems to us to be very 
 much in the nature of a triumph on the part of Theodovet 
 against some such objector as Mr. Sparks, or the He- 
 viewer. 
 
 The next grave charge, ^ — and, if it has any basis, it is 
 a very grave one, — is that »^ the Episcopal service, au- 
 thorises a rite not christian.^' This term seems to have 
 been selected with some care, but it does not sufficiently 
 cover the intention. A rite has prevailed, we cannot 
 say precisely how long, among the congregationalists of 
 New-England, called, owning the covenant, which is 
 used, we believe, when any person desires to be received 
 into full communion, and which is like, very like indeed, 
 so far as we understand it, to confirmation, saving that 
 the minister does not impose his hands upon the candi- 
 date, from an apprehension, 2jrobablyy that it would be 
 not christian. Notwithstanding this usage, however, 
 
 * Dupin's Eccles. Hist. Life ofTheodoret. Century fifth. 
 
102 
 
 >ve are told that confirmation has no decent sJiow of 
 scriptural evidence ; and a text or two of scripture is 
 adduced by the Reviewer as having no cojinection with 
 the subject, wliich, really, we do not recollect ever to 
 have seen quoted in its favour ; and which, we suspect, 
 is brought forward now, simply because it contained the 
 word whicli modern use has claimed for the name of the 
 rite as best expressing its object. We, at least, can dis- 
 cern no other grounds for it. There certainly are, in 
 our opinion, texts of scripture, which, as far as needful 
 for humble faith, speak of confirmation as a rite used 
 by the apostles and beneficial to the church. The sixth 
 chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews opeus with the 
 following passage, which, the Reviewer ought to have 
 known, is couaiuered an important testimony to the 
 early and continued use of confirmation. — "• Therefore 
 leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us 
 go on unto perfection ; not laying again the foundation of 
 repentance from dead works, and cf faith towards God, 
 of the doctrine of baptisms and oflaijing on of hands, and 
 of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgement.'' 
 Now what is the meaning of the expression, — laying on 
 of hands, here ranked among the principles of the doc- 
 trine of Christ ? It is obviously something of general 
 interest to Christians, for it is part of a system, of uni- 
 versal application to them. The position of ilie doctrine 
 is worthy of notice. It is laid down witli the otliers in 
 the precise order of their effect upon the Christian life. 
 Still however, standing, as it does, abstracted from any 
 unequivocal guide to its meaning, we can only learn 
 what we are to understand by it, by referring to other 
 parts of scripture, and thus ascei'taiuing the practice in the 
 
103 
 
 lase. And here we are to rememljer that the apostles 
 addressed their epistles to churches, v.hich, having often 
 perliaps, witnessed their practice in Christian duties, 
 needed not to be minutely informed, as to what they had 
 already seen. Doubiless this was the case in the in- 
 stance before ns. In tlie eiglith chapter of Acts, we 
 read of Philip's going down to Samaria where he 
 preached the gospel, and baptised : when the apostles 
 heard this, "they sent thither Peter and John, who, when, 
 they were come down, prayed for them tliat they might 
 receive tlie Holy Chost (for as yet he was fallen upon 
 none of them, only they were baptized in the name of 
 the Lord Jesus.) Tljen laid they their ijands on them, 
 and they received tlie Holy G'host.'' The apostles 
 hear that Philip had made converts in Samaria, and 
 they forthwith send two of t!ieir own number to them, — 
 for what purpose? To lay thp.ir hands on Ihem 
 fur their confirmation in llie faith, and that ilicy ujight 
 receive the Holy Ghosl. We know that when the gift 
 of the Holy Ghost is mentioned in scripture it implies,- 
 generallij, aw extraordinary gift, yet it docs not always 
 mean the same thing. In the case of the Samaritans 
 we have 7io ground to suppose that tlieir gifts were of an 
 extraordinary class. That it did not give them power 
 to convey to others what they had received is plain from 
 the oiler of Simon Magus (o buy it with money, and it h 
 equally plain that the apostles did possess this power- 
 Whatever may l;avebeen the nature of this gift it wa-? 
 certainly an establishment of their baptism into Christ 
 and. an acknowledgement of their being admitted to « 
 participation in the faith. Some years after this Pawl 
 arriving at Kphesii^, found there certain disciples v.'hry 
 
104 
 
 had received John's baptism. He asked them whether 
 they had received the Holy Ghost since they believed ? 
 but they had not so much as heard whether there were 
 any Holy Giiost. They were then baptised, after 
 which " Paul laid Ms hands on them, and they spake 
 with tongues and prophesied.'' Here the gifts are ex- 
 pressly mentioned, but they were attendant, as before, 
 on the laying on of hands ; they were not even a conse- 
 quence of the subjects of them being rebaptised in the 
 presence, if not by the liands of an apostle ; and this, 
 we think, sufficiently marks the importance of the rite.* 
 From the circumstance that these acts are incidentally 
 mentioned, and from the importance which seems to be 
 intrinsically attached to them, we suppose we may 
 fairly infer that the laying on of hands, was generally, 
 if not universally, practised by the apostles. The Re- 
 viewer, Avith his- accustomed confidence, asserts the per- 
 fect accuracy of the remark of Mr. Sparks that these 
 instances of laying on of hand-* always imply, either " a 
 communication of extraordinary gifts, or induction to 
 some office." The last is not pretended to attach to 
 either of the instances we have produced, and we allow 
 that in the instance at Ephesus the gifts were certainly 
 extraordinary, but we think that even the lieviewer is 
 not willing to have it supposed that the whole body of 
 believers in Samaria, including Simon Magus, were on 
 the same footing. There is, at least, no authority for 
 it. In the very city, and about the very time, when 
 Paul imposed his hands as above, he tells his Co- 
 rinthian converts in his first Epistle to them, (chap, xii) 
 
 * In the instance of our Saviour the Holy Ghost descended upoa 
 h\\Xi at his baptism. Matthew iii. 16. 
 
 I 
 
105 
 
 that though ^* the manifestation of the spirit is given to 
 every man to profit withal," yet, ^' there are diversities 
 of gifts/' and ^» tliere are different administrations," 
 and "there are diversities of operations." "'For to one 
 is given by the spirit the word of wisdom ; to another 
 the ivord of knowleds;^ by the same spirit ; to anotlier 
 faith by the same spirit," &c. Of all the gifts men- 
 tioned, that wliich, perliaps, was most general, because 
 most necessary, jvas a confiding faith in the gospel ; 
 and by the gifts of the word of Avisdom and tlie word of 
 knowledge, is, doubtless, to be understood the ability to 
 perceive and understand the gospel of Jesus. These 
 gifts were necessary then, and they, doubtless, are so 
 now, but if these are to be called the extraordinary gifts 
 of the spirit, what, we should like to be told, are his 
 ordinary gifts ? 
 
 We think now, that it is evident, that the imposition 
 of the hands of the apostles in the two instances men- 
 tioned in tiie book of Acts, must have been the same 
 rite which, in the Kpistle to the Hebrews, is ranked 
 among the principles of tlie doctrine of Christ. 
 
 We may be told, however, that, admitting such a rite 
 to have been used when extraordinary means were ne- 
 cessary for the promulgation of the gospel, and as evi- 
 dence of its truth, — when that necessity had ceased to 
 exist, or rather when the use of extraordinary means 
 ceased, this rite had, of course, no farther operation. 
 Wti have shown above, that it is doubtful, at least, 
 wiiether its original institution was for extraordinary 
 purposes only, and we are of opinion that this argument, 
 if admitted, bears equally hard against Christianity in 
 its whole extent. 
 14 
 
106 
 
 As the Reviewer has quoted two of the ancient fatk- 
 ers to show the mode of worship prevailing in their day, 
 and anotlier, with a view to the destruction of Episco- 
 pacy, we suppose we may be allowed to produce their 
 testimony to show, that the practice of the primitive 
 church was in favour of this rite. Tertullian says 
 *^ that after baptism succeeds laying on of hands, 
 with prayer, calliuij; for and invoking the Holy Spirit;" 
 and Jerome, " as for those who are baptised afar oft* in 
 the lesser towns by presbyters and deacons, the Bishop 
 travels out to them, to lay hands on them, and to invoke 
 the Holy Spirit.'' Again : " if you ask where it is 
 written, it is written in the Acts of the Apostles : but if 
 there were no authority in scripture for it, yet the consent 
 of all the world in this particular is instead of a com- 
 mautl."* There can be no room for doubt, then, 
 that the practice was begun by the Apostles, and con- 
 tinued by their successors. 
 
 Confirmation, in its modern use, is the solemn laying* 
 of the hands of the Bishop upon such as have been 
 
 * Whoever wishes to see the numerous testimonies of the best 
 and most ancient writers on this subject, may find great collections 
 ©f them made by Dr. Jackson, Dr. Hammond, Dr. Comber, and 
 ether divines of our own church. Many foreign divines, since the 
 Reformation, have judiciously cleared it, as Calvin, Chemnitius, 
 Paraeus, Rivetus, Casaubon, and others. And it has also been as- 
 serted, and recommended by some considerable English writers, 
 who have not in all things agreed with us in the matter of church 
 government, as we see in Hanmer's Exercitation, and Baxter''s 
 Treatise on the subject, in which they greatly lament the disuse 
 of it as a thing of pernicious consequence to the Christian religion.'* 
 — Pastoral Advice. See also Owen's Commentary on th« He- 
 brews, c. ri. V. §. 
 
107 
 
 bnpiised and are coine to years of discretion. It is, 
 as we have before said, a confirmation on his part of tlieir 
 admission to churcii membership, and on theirs, the 
 confirmation, or assumption of the vows of baptism. 
 It is not pretended that the i>ishops have the power of 
 conveying the Holy Ghost ; and yet we humbly trust 
 that the proper use of this ordinance will make it sub- 
 servient to the spiritual edification and advancement of 
 those M'ho receive it. 
 
 'i he Reviewer next objects to some expressions in 
 the form of administration, which we can pardon him 
 for misunderstanditjg, since others, with better motives, 
 have done so before him. We conceive we shall best 
 explain them in the language of Archbishop Seeker, 
 *• The commemoration sets forth that Gud hath regener- 
 ated his servants by water and the Holy Ghost ^ that is, 
 entitled them by baptism to the enlivening influences of 
 the Spirit, and so, as it were, begotten them again into 
 a state inexpressibly happier than their natural one ; 
 a covenant state, in which God will consider them 
 while they keep their engageuients with peculiar love as 
 his dear children. It follows that he hatli given them 
 forgiveness of all their sins, meaning, that he hath 
 given them assurance of it upon the gracious terms of" 
 the gospel. But that every one of them hath actually 
 received it by complying with those terms since he 
 sinned last, though we may charitably hope, we cannot 
 ipresume to affirm ; nor were these words intended to 
 iaffirm it, as the known doctrine of the church of Eng- 
 iland fully proves. And therefore, let no one misunder- 
 stand this expression, which hath parallel ones in the 
 
lOS 
 
 New-Testament,* so as either to censure it, or to delude, 
 himself with a fatal imagination that any thing said 
 over him can possibly convey to him a pardon of sins 
 for wliich he is not truly penitent. AV^e only acknov/- 
 ledge with due thankfulness that God hath donehispart, 
 but which of the congregation have done theirs, their 
 own consciences must determine."! The remark of 
 the Reviewer concerning tlie slender preparation ne- 
 cessary to the participation in this rite, we have before 
 shown to be unfounded. The candidates for con- 
 firmation are required to understand the nature of the 
 baptismal vow, which they then assume, and for this 
 purpose are, at the least, to be sufficiently instructed 
 in it, and the very nature of the institution supposes 
 them capable of making a prudent and firm resolution 
 for observing it. 
 
 The next charge of the Reviewer, and one which we 
 take to be the strong hold of some feiv of the Sons 
 of the Puritans is, that the Liturgy involves false 
 doctrine ; meaning that he and his party so esteem it. 
 He Avould have us, it seems, strike from the Liturgy 
 every expression which savours of doctrine, lest, unhap- 
 pily, we should be found so ungracious, as ^' to try one 
 owho comes to put himself on our Christian hospitality 
 by a doctrinal shihhulethy It is nothing to the pur-, 
 pose, for instance, that we, Trinitarians, deem it our 
 duty to pray to Jesus Christ, as our God and Saviour, 
 and i\mi Jlrians deem it their duty to ascribe ^^ blessing 
 and honour, and glory and power to him that sitteth on 
 the Throne, and to the Lamb forever and ever." lliese 
 conceptions of duty on our part are to be set aside by 
 
 *Ephes. i. 7. Col. i. 14. 
 t Sermon on Confirmation. 
 
109 
 
 UP, because Unitarians say, that, considering Jesua 
 Cijrist uS a man, it is contrary to tlicir duty to oiler him 
 any sort of hoaia2;e. There seem to be then three 
 distinct opinions upon this subject, and it is no greater 
 oflence ag.iinst liberality for us to adhere to our opinion 
 than for the Utiitarian or tiic Arian to adliere to iiis. 
 It is to no purpose that the Unitarian tells us his method 
 would coaiprisc all ; it would not do so without the 
 tacii abandonment of duty in the others. iJesides the 
 Dtist :nii;ht, with as great propriety, make use of tiie 
 saaie argument. 
 
 There can be no doubt, we think, that every reli- 
 gious community have a perfect right to preserve in 
 their M orship, or in any otlicr reasonable Avay, such 
 fundamental doctrines as they believe may be fairly 
 drawn from the scriptures. To this, ice think, none 
 but the capricious, and the uncharitable, can object. 
 And, v,e further think, that tliose who do object to it, 
 afler having placed themselves at an irreconcileable 
 distance, are justly lialde to the charge of making a 
 gross attack on Christian liberty. 
 
 But let us examine this suijject a little closer. ^* The 
 doors of our sanctuaries are open, — to use the language 
 of the late Mr. Buckminster, — to the infidel as well as 
 to the believer, to the Jew and to the Pagan, to the Ma- 
 iiometan from the shores of the Mediterranean and to 
 the savage from the banks of the Missouri." Surely, 
 the Reviewer would not extend his comprehensive 
 scheme so far as to include all these classes, and yet 
 why, should he not? The distinguishing points lie- 
 tween his creed and some of theirs, may not be greater 
 or more insuperable than those between Episcopalians 
 
110 
 
 and Unitarians. Pope lias a prayer of this comprehen- 
 sive cast ready prepared to our hands. 
 
 Father of all ! in every age, 
 
 In every clime adored, 
 By saint, by savage, or by sage, 
 
 Jehovah, Jove, or Lord, &c. 
 
 But we will give tiie Reviewer the credit of our be- 
 jtief, that he would stop much short of this point. He 
 "wishes, we will suppose, such prayer as will contain 
 nothing offensive to believers in the gospel. Admitting 
 the principle, would he be able to prepare, extempora- 
 neously, as his thoughts roll on, a prayer so critically 
 correct as to leave no room for objectious on this score ? 
 If so, he must have a mind unusually well disciplined, 
 and remarkably free from the recollection of Jiis private 
 studies. But the j^rincijde is a fallacious one. We 
 have produced an instance or two above. We will 
 now adduce another. There is a sect of Christians 
 called Friends, who, quiet and unobtrusive, make but 
 few claims to the notice of society at large ; who, what- 
 ever may be the errors of their system, are not justly 
 chargeable with that fundamental one of " denying the 
 Lord that bought them ;" and who openly worsliip 
 God after their own manner. And yet we believe that 
 the Reviewer would find not a little difficulty in accom- 
 modating his very accommodating plan to their princi- 
 ples, even in such a degree only as to make them willing 
 to be hearers of his prayers. On the other hand, we 
 <lo not suppose, tliat he would be willing to modify his 
 own scheme so far as to adopt their method. We 
 should suppose that it required only plain common 
 sense to perceive that it is literally impracticable in the 
 
Ill- 
 
 present state of the Cliristian world to adopt such a 
 method of worsliip as should be perfectly unexccptioii^ 
 able to all who call tiicmsolves Christians. The 
 scheme is perfectly Utoj)ian ; it seems however to answer 
 very well to linir {i<e changes oi' liberality upon. After 
 al!, tliere is perhaps no system in which persons of 
 various shades of belief could meet to so much advan- 
 tage as in the Episcopal cliurch ; her doctrines are sub- 
 stantially the doctrines of the far greater portion of 
 Christendom ; and the worshipper may select before 
 hand the prayers to which liis mind does not assent, 
 thus precluding embarrassment. We, for our own 
 part, admire the wisdom which wrought the doctrines 
 OF THE Cross into the service of her altars, " like 
 raiment of needle work," and we bless God that he hais 
 preserved to us, our Liturgy, when, like the ark, it was 
 surrounded by Philistine hosts ; and in other, and later 
 times, wiien Uzzahs would stretch forth their feeble 
 hands to better its condition. 
 
 1. The first instance of y?//se doctrine is, tliat the 
 Trinity is supposed in several places in tlic Liturgy.* 
 
 * With regard to the truth or falsity of this doctrine let ns notice 
 the opinion of a Jew ; of course an unbiassed witness. Mr. Levi, 
 in his published correspondence with Dr. Priestley, quoted in 
 Adam''s Religious World displayed (vol. ii. p. 204) says, that " the 
 divinity of Christ, — his pre-cxistence and power to abrogate the 
 ceremonial part of the law ; as also the miraculous conception 
 are all taught in the gospels ; and the ceremony just mentioned 
 [baptism] points out the essential qualification of a Christian : con- 
 sequently he that does not believe the doctrine of the Triuity, cannot 
 be a Christian, if the Gospels be true.''' — Letters to Dr. Priestley. 
 1789, p. 21. To the same effect is the opinion of a learned 
 Deist as given by Bishop Burnet [History of his own Times, v^!- 
 
112 
 
 Doubtless: it is not only svipposed, but is plainly assert- 
 ed, in more than one place. The Liturgy too requires 
 worship to be addressed to our Saviour, "f/ie Lamb of 
 Gi)d who taketh away the sins of the world."' In these 
 respects the Episcopal church throughout the world U 
 not alone. ^Umo-st universallyj wherever the name of 
 Christ is knovrn, praiier is made ever unto him, and 
 daily is he jiraispd. Even Trinitarians are not singu- 
 lar in this last respect. The ^' most judicious" Arians 
 in former, and later times, if not their entire body, have 
 deemed themselves required by the scriptures to tvor- 
 sJiip Christ/'^ Tliese points are common to almost all 
 
 ii. p. 212.] " When in 1898, one Firmin undertook to distribute 
 tracts against the doctrine of the Trinity (which, Smollet says, 
 abounded at this time, and took their rise from the licentiousness 
 and proiiigacy of the times) many undertook to write in this con- 
 troversy, some of whom were not fitted for handhng so nice a sub- 
 ject. A learned Deist made a severe remark on the progress of 
 (his dispute ; — He said he was sure the divines would be too hard 
 for tlie Socinians in proving their doctrines out of scripture ; but 
 if the doctrine could once he laughed at^ and rejected as absurd, then 
 its being proved how well soever out of scripture, would turn to 
 be an argument against the scriptures themselves, as containing 
 such incredible doctrines." Our opponents we believe have 
 reached his premises, and, unwittingly, v/e doubt not, are rapidly 
 travelling to his conclusions. 
 
 * Whiston, Samuel Clarke, Emlyn, Chandler, Benson, Pierce, 
 Grove, and in short all the most eminent Arians have been wor- 
 shippers of Christ. Carpenter compiled in 1793, a Liturgy for 
 the use of his congregation. In thf; advertisement prefixed he 
 says, " I think it right, in our public worship to pray to the Father 
 only in the name of Christ. But as praise is certainly ascribed to 
 him in the scriptures, and as love to Christ is made an essential 
 branch ©f his religion, 1 cannot but think we are justified in ad- 
 dressing him with hymns of praise and thanksgiving " In the 
 
113 
 
 dasses of Christians, and as we have limited ourselves 
 ill these strictures to Episcopal peculiarities, we thiuk 
 it unnecessary to enlarge on these topics here. 
 
 2. If the popish error of the real presence is not dis- 
 countenanced in the parts of sentences which he has 
 so disingenuously quoted, yet he has not the hardihood 
 to allege that this error is any where supported, or ad- 
 mitted hy the church ; on the contrary he must know 
 full well, that it was one of the principal points, oil 
 which the reformers laid such stress, as obnoxious to 
 divine truth, and that the Episcopal church has ever 
 been distinguished for the strength of her opposition to 
 this very error. Did he feel no hesitation in endeavour- 
 ing by such indirect methods to fix upon the church the 
 odium of retaining a long exploded superstition ? Will 
 his principles permit him to feel no uneasiness under the 
 knowledge that these unchristian statements might reach, 
 and perhaps satisfy many who would have little knowl- 
 edge of the church but from his remarks ; and wlio 
 
 Litany, (which is formed on the basis of the Episcopal) although 
 he strikes out the petition to the Trinity, yet he retains the others 
 in the form of prayer to the Father, viz: — '■'■through the interces- 
 sion of thy well-beloved .So/i, our Redeemer, have mercy upon us,'''' ^c. 
 '• by the direction and assistance of thy Holy Spirit, have mercy upon 
 ?«," »S-c. Lindsey had previously (in 1774) adopted the prayer 
 hook of the English church altered on the plan of Dr. Clarke- 
 The petitions of the Litany resemble those in Carpenter's — the 
 second petition is, " O God, who by the precious blood of thy only 
 begotten Son, hast purchased to thyself an holy church, and placed it 
 under thy continual protection, have mercy upon us.'''' The third is, 
 " O God, who by thy Holy Spirit, dost govern, direct, and sanctify^ 
 the hearts of all thy faithful servants, have mercy upon w.s." This 
 last, if we are not mistaken, is the Liturgy used at King's Chapel, 
 , Boston. 
 
 15 
 
114 
 
 would probably never hear of any denial of tlieir truth, 
 even should it be publickly made ? 
 
 Will our readers believe that the extract which he 
 llrst quotes is from a prayer in which tiv? following 
 passage previously occurs, and of which his quotation is 
 but the same sentiment prolonged ? '* Vouchafe to bless 
 and sanctify with thy word and Holy Spirit, these thy 
 gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that we, receiving 
 them according to our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy in- 
 stitution, in remembrance of Ids death and passion, may 
 be partakers of his most blessed body and blood/'' 
 The other extracts which he has adduced stand thus 
 connected in the Communion office : '^ The body of our 
 Lord Jesus Clu-ist Avhich was given for thee, preserve 
 thy body and soul unto everlasting life : take and eat 
 this in REMEMBRANCE that Christ died for thee and feed 
 on him in thj heart by faith with thanksgiving.^^ '^ The 
 blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for 
 thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life, 
 drink this in remembrance that Christ's blood ivasshed 
 for thee and he thankful.''^ It did not suit the Review- 
 
 * We know not how language nmre expressive and better 
 adapted could be used. '' This perfectly secures us, — says Arch- 
 deacon Daubeny, — from the gross corruptions of the church of 
 Rome ; because the commemoration of a fact cannot be the fact 
 itself; the representation cannot be the thing designed to be rep- 
 resented ; the sign cannot be the reality which it is meant to signi- 
 fy." Guide to the Church. — jlppendix^ vol. ii. p. 414. It is not 
 improbable that Edward VI. may have written in the style which 
 the Reviewer quotes, though we should like some better authority 
 for it, than that which he adduces ; and we should Hke also to 
 have seen how the same Edward ■would have xn'ritten to protestant 
 dissenters, had they been known to him : we might then perhaps 
 
115 
 
 ei's purpose to exliihit them in this connection, nor to 
 refer his readers to the article of tlie church on tlie suh- 
 ject. That article ( the twenty-eighth) has these words : 
 ^f The hody of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the 
 Supper, only after a heavenlij, spiritual manner. And the 
 mean, whcrehy the hody of Christ is received and eaten 
 in the Supper is faith.'' " The real presence of Christ's 
 most hlessed hody and hlood," says Hooker, ^' is not 
 to he sought in the sacrament, hut in the worthy re- 
 ceiver.*' 
 
 3. We are ciiarged witli holding that haptism is a 
 saving ordinance, — that is to say, the Liturgy inculcates 
 the doctrine of haptismal regeneration. It is impossible 
 IW us to go at large into the evidence on this point ; our 
 limits forbid it. and we can only givea very brief explana- 
 tion. ^' When the churchman,'' — says Bi;^hop Hobart, 
 in his third charge to his clergy, — ••' in the language of 
 scripture, of primitive antiquity, and of the articles and 
 liturgy of his church, calls baptism, regeneration, he 
 does not employ the term in its popular signification 
 among many protestants to denote the divine iniluences 
 upon the soul in its sanctification, and renovation ; iu 
 aholishing the hody of sin, and raising up the graces 
 and virtues of the new man. The term regeneration 
 is used by him in its original appropriate and technical 
 acceptation, to denote the translation of the baptised 
 
 have been able to discover how much to allow for a time-serving 
 disposition. While we are on the subject of popery, we v. ill ven- 
 ture to ask whether sitting at the communion may not be termed 
 popish, since (according to \\heatley) the great Pope always r€- 
 ceives in that posture ! The practice is not derived from our 
 iSaviour ; for in his time the table posture was not sitting, but, re-= 
 clining. 
 
116 
 
 person from that slate, in which, as destitute'of any 
 povenant title to salvation, he is styled the child of 
 wrath, into tliat state, which, as it proflers to him in all 
 cases, the covenanted mercy and grace of God, and in 
 the exercise of repentance and faith actually conveys 
 to him these blessings, is styled '^ a state of salvation. ^^^ 
 '^ Whatever some few persons, or some petty sects," — 
 says Dr. Barrow, — " may have deemed, it hath been 
 the doctrine constantly, and with very general consent, 
 delivered in the Catholic church, that to all persons, by 
 the holy mystery of baptism duly initiated to Christian- 
 ity, or admitted into the communion of Christ's body, 
 the grace of God's Holy Spirit certainly is bestowed, 
 enabling them to perform the conditions then under- 
 taken by them.''t Hooker calls " baptism the door of 
 
 * See John iii. 3-5. Titus iii. 5. "Whoever," says Justin 
 lyiartyr, " are persuaded and beUeve that the things said by us 
 are true, and undertake to live agreeably to them, are led by us to 
 a place where there is water, and are regeiierated in the same man- 
 ner that we were regenerated, for they are baptized in the name 
 of God the Father and Lord of all, of our Saviour Jesus Christ, 
 and of the Holy Spirit. For Christ said " if ye are not regener- 
 ated ye cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven." Quoted by Bp. 
 J\Jant. — Tracts of the Eng. Society for promoting Christian KnowledgCy 
 vol. vi. " He came," says Irenaeus, speaking of Christ, " to save all 
 persons by himself; all, I say, who are regenerated by him unto 
 God, infants, and Uttle ones, and children, and young men, and old 
 men." Again : " The ordinary way of being freed from original 
 gin^ — he says, — is baptism, which is our regeneration unto God." 
 Quoted in Bp. Bagofs Serious Caution against the Anabaptists. The 
 truth concerning this term seems to be, that it is borrowed from 
 the Jewish practice. See WaWs Hist. Infant Baptism. Introduc- 
 tion., section vi. 
 
 t Sermon xlv. qwoted in Quarterly Review vol. xv. p. 491 — 
 which see, and also Barrow on the Creed, London ed. 1697. p. 443:- 
 
117 
 
 (dod'.s house ;" in making use of it for the admission of 
 men^thechurchrequiren faith, repentance and the promise 
 of future and unreserved obedience astlie conditions upon 
 which she receives them.* TJiat principle which leads us 
 to ascribe every thins; in us which is good to God leads us 
 also to ascribe to his Holy Spirit every tiling which iias 
 a tendency to draw us to liiuiself. We neither repent 
 nor believe sincerely, but by the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit.f Where these requisites are apparent, baptism 
 is rightly administered, and the promises of tlie new 
 covenant being in that baptism sealed to him, the person 
 baptised may justly be said to be regenerated, or born 
 anew.t But it may be said, that many persons are 
 baptised and of course declared regenerate, whose pro- 
 fession of faith and repentance is utterly insincere — a 
 mere mockery. We know tiiis may be the case, for 
 the scriptures te&tify that Philip, Peter and John were 
 successively imposed on by Binion Magus, — and where 
 it is so, we can only say with those apostles, such per- 
 sons have neither imvt nor lot in this matter. Doubt- 
 less they are in the same situation with those contem- 
 plated in the twenty-ninth article ; ^' the wicked and 
 such as be void of a lively faith, although they do 
 carnally and visibly press with their teeth the sjjcra- 
 ment of the body and blood of Christ, yet in no wise 
 are they partakers of Christ, but rather to their c;)n- 
 demnation do eat and drink the sign or sacrament of 
 so great a thing." Still however, as it is impossible for 
 us to know the sincerity of the applicaiii;^ and as it is an 
 
 * See Romans v. 12. Eph. ii. 3. Acts ii. 37-38 — and viii. 3G. 
 
 t I. Cor. xii. 3. Actsxi. 18. 
 
 \ Johniii. 5. Il.'Cor.i. 21. (?ol. ii. 12, 
 
118 
 
 acl in wliicli lie, as far as his own profession & go, gives 
 himself up to GotFs own government, we must leave it to 
 him, who is head ovei* the church, to decide ; and con- 
 scious that we have done our part, according to our 
 best conceptions of the duty he has assigned us, we 
 may, with the utmost sincerity, thauk "' God that it hath 
 pleased him to regenerate his servant ;'' for, as well as 
 we can judge such is the fact. The same remark ap- 
 plies to the baptism of infants ; born of parents who 
 are within the covenant, they are baptised on the faith of 
 their parents, who, with others, are sureties to the church 
 for their instruction in the faith. As in circumcision, 
 what they are incpable of, is not required of them.^^ 
 
 4. " Bishops are able to communicate the Holy 
 Spirit, and confer the power of forgiving sins.'' lu 
 the sense in which the Reviewer wishes to be under- 
 stood we can with great safety deny the charge, and as- 
 sert that the church assumes no such power. The form 
 4n ordination of priests, which he quotes, and Avhich is 
 
 * See Barrow on the Creed p. 442. In a note the Reviewer says, 
 that " Dr. Wyatt calls the baptismal font the laver of regeneration^ 
 Is he ignorant that many very learned^ and able divines have done 
 the same ? For instance Cranmer, Andrews, Burnet, Barrow and 
 others. The Reviewer, when he quoted the 27th article of the 
 church, might have mentioned, we think, for the information of 
 his readers, that the same doctrine is to be found substantial!}' in 
 the standards of Protestants generally throughowt Europe ; and 
 that the very language of the article is infused into the Cambridge 
 and Saybrook platforms. He sneers at the article, indeed, but he 
 does not inform us on what grounds he believes its doctrines to be 
 false. Mr. Dodwell's opinion, if such as the Reviewer quotes, and 
 we have no reason to believe it is not, is a singular one, but we do 
 not see what tlie church has to do with it, 
 
119 
 
 not the form at present used, is taken from St. John's 
 account of the manner in which our Saviour commission- 
 ed his Apostles. It is not pretended hy any, so far as 
 we arc informed, that, Avhen our Saviour uttered these 
 Avords, and hreatlied on the Apostles, any more was 
 meant by him than to convey tlie power of the ministerial 
 olficc. It is certain, that this event occurred some time 
 I)efore the miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost on the 
 Apostles^ and there is no ground on which to assume 
 that they were before that descent favoured with any 
 portion of his special influences. " The Holy Ghost 
 may be used," says Hooker,* ^' to signify not the per- 
 son alone, but the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and we 
 know that spiritual gifts are not only abilities to do 
 things miraculous, as to speak with tongues which were 
 never taught us ; to cure diseases without art, and such 
 like ; but also, that the very authority and power which 
 is given unto men in the church to be ministers of hohj 
 tlings, this is contained among the number of those 
 gifts of which the Holy Ghost is author, and therefore 
 he which gives this power, may say, without absurdity 
 or folly. Receive the Jlohf Ghost, such power as Christ 
 hath endued his Church withal, such power as neither 
 prince, nor potentate, king, nor Csesar on earth can 
 give. So that if man alone had devised this form of 
 speech thereby to express the heavenly wellsprins: of 
 that power which Ecclesiastical ordinations doth bestow, 
 it is not so foolish but that wise men might bear with it." 
 Upon Unitarian principles we should suppose the ob- 
 jection might be extended higher, for on the presump- 
 tion that our Saviour was a faUihle and peccable mav^ 
 
 * Ecclc-s. Pol. L. V. ?. 77. 
 
130 
 
 this language would seem improper to fall from his lips 
 also. Probably our opponents have a solution ready 
 for this difficuliy. We know of none. We cannot 
 here bring into discussion what has been technically 
 called ^^ the pow'er of the keys ;''* and can only say, 
 that it is obvious our Saviour intended by tlie words 
 " whose soever sins yc remit, they are remitted unto 
 them, and whose soever sins ye retain they are retain- 
 ed" — to convey to the Apostles the power, simply, of 
 exercising discipline in the churches which they Avere 
 to establish. They, and by consequence their succes- 
 sors, w ere to admit men to the church, to administer the 
 laws which he had laid down for its government, and 
 to exclude notorious offenders from its privileges. The 
 power to perform these duties resting with the church, it 
 is conveyed in ordination, and it was thought best to 
 adopt the words of our Saviour, so ftir, at least, as to 
 allow them a place in the ordination office, as expres- 
 sive of the original object of the ministry. No power 
 to forgive sins, in the common acceptation of the term, 
 is claimed by our church, as the declaration of absolu- 
 tion in the morning and evening services will readily 
 convince any one.f The form actually used in or- 
 
 * See Barrow on the Creed, p. 278. Bishop White's Lectures? 
 on the Catechism, p. 43. 
 
 t" Declaration of absolution, or remission of sins to be pro- 
 nounced by the Priest alone. Almighty God, the Father of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, who desireth not the death of a sinner, but 
 rather that he may turn from his wickedness and live ; hath given 
 power and commandment to his ministers, to declare and pro* 
 novmce to his people, being penitent, the absolution and remission 
 of their sins, He pardoneth and absolveth all those, who truly 
 repent and unfeignedly behove his holy gospel. Wherefore, let 
 
121 
 
 Jaiuing priests is, as follows ; ^' Take thou authority 
 to execute the office of a priest in the church of God 
 now committed to thee by the imposition of our hands, 
 and be tliou a faithful dispenser of the word of God, 
 and his holy sacraments. In the name of the Father, 
 the Son, and tiie Holy Ghost/' If then it were admit- 
 ted that the Bishops claim the power of conveying the 
 Holy Ghost and forgiving sins, in their common accep- 
 tation, yet it is certain they do not attempt to exercise 
 any such anthority. 
 
 These four instances oi false doctrine the Reviewer 
 gives, as *•' samples of the service book," and we sup- 
 pose he would have his readers infer, that they are but 
 sanqdes of a thoroughly infected mass. He has indeed 
 traversed the prayer book much in the same manner as 
 a certain deistical writer once traversed the Bible ; and 
 as in his case too, the hasty conclusions of a distemper- 
 ed judgement are given to the world for indubitable 
 facts ; — the rash constructions of a heated adversary 
 are exhibited as unquestionable truths ; and he who 
 would be imimrtial is required to believe that this im- 
 puted deformity is radical in the very nature of the thing. 
 We know not, and we are unwilling to believe, that 
 Unitarianism has any advocates within the church ; and 
 we most devoutly wish that all the efforts of the He- 
 viewer may be realised in keeping from her ministry 
 
 us beseech him, to grant us true repentance and his Holy Spirit ; 
 that those things may please him which we do at this present, 
 and that the rest of our lite hereafter may be pure and holy ; so 
 that, at the last, we may come to his eternal joy, through JesH» 
 Christ, our Lord." 
 
 16 
 
122 
 
 every mau infected with it. We, like himself^ can 
 have no sympathy with such 
 
 — " Sycophants who kneel, 
 Christ's nanxe adoring', and then preach him man." 
 
 It is a system which has no attractions for us ; we see 
 nothing in it to console us under affliction^ or to smooth 
 for us the bed of death. Knowing our native helpless- 
 ness we feel the value of real Christianity, — we sec our 
 need of one " mighty to save.'' We are not perhaps 
 prepared with Bishop Warburton to speak of Unitarian- 
 ism as ^' infidelity in disguise ;" nor with Mr. Wilber- 
 force to consider it " a sort of half-way house from 
 nominal orthodoxy to absolute infidelity ;"' yet it seems 
 to us, as to Mrs. Earbauld, to be at least '^ Christianity 
 in the frigid zone.'^* 
 
 We come now to the very grave objection that ^^ the 
 book of Common Prayer contains improprieties of lan- 
 guage ;" and this is the more important because security 
 from this objection is the " single advantage^^ of forms 
 of prayer ! This charge however, is not produced by the 
 Reviewer's own observation, but is based on the authority 
 of the Protestant Dissenter's Catechism. We are per- 
 mitted to understand that the extract refers to the Ens:- 
 lish copy of the prayer book, and that in the American 
 some/ez£' of the obnoxious passages are corrected. 
 
 AVith the Dissenter's Catecliism we are not conver- 
 sant, nor indeed do we much desire to be. We hope 
 we mistake its object, but if it be, like that of the 
 church, '^ an instruction to be learned by every person" 
 before they be admitted to " a participation in Christian 
 
 * See R. Adam's ReUgious world, rol. ii. p. 176. 
 
123 
 
 onHnances'' with protestaut dissenters, it cau have no 
 very powerful tendency to produce '^'agood life and con- 
 versation ;" and it seems to us, a method as strange as 
 any imaginable, of guarding against scandal.^ 
 
 We have first a list of '^ uncouth and obsolete 
 words and phrases." Without stopping to enquire 
 upon what principle a word is to be termed obsolete 
 "while it is found in a standard book, of very extensive 
 use, and admitted as authority by the best lexicograph- 
 ers, we remark that of the thirteen instances produced 
 under this head, hnifoxir are to be found in the American, 
 prayer book, and on referring to Johnson we find that 
 two at least of these are used by some of the best stand- 
 ard writers in our language. It is probable that his 
 quotations from the Psalms are correct ; some of them 
 w^e know to be so. We do not however think, that 
 any of these expressions are so uncouth, as to cause any 
 difficulty in understanding them, though some of them, 
 might probably be altered to advantage. This transla- 
 tion of the Psalms was made chiefly from the Greek of 
 the Septuagint, and from this cause may not possess in 
 
 * The British Critic, in a Review of the charge of Archdeacon 
 Thomas to the clergy of Bath, 1819, referring to the obnoxious 
 manner in which the principles of dissent are inculcated in Eng- 
 land, says, "for full proof of this offensive mode of proceeding on 
 the part of the dissenters, we need only refer to their Catechism ; 
 which, instead of teaching the fundamental doctrines of Christiani- 
 ty, as might be expected from its title, is wholly designed to in- 
 struct, and establish young persons in the principles of non-con- 
 formity, by a regular attack upon .the frame and constitution, the 
 orders, the liturgy, the ceremonies, the articles, and the disciphne 
 of our church.-' Trnly, the Reviewer mast have an ample source 
 to draw from". 
 
124 
 
 all respects a literal conformity to the Hebrew, yet 
 we are not aware of the existence of any ^'^ gross mis- 
 translations." It was very properly retained in the 
 American prayer book, as excellent in itself, and 
 familiarised by custom. As to redundancies in the ser- 
 vice, the Reviewer should liave remembered that every 
 repetition does not deserve to be thus classed, or if he 
 thinks otherwise, still we shall not willin£;ly concede 
 our opinion to him, in regard to some, at least, of tha 
 instances lie adduces. "'^ It is true neither in philoso- 
 phy nor fact," says a writer, " that devotion abhors re- 
 petition." Of the three instances oiivant of connection 
 which he produces, oize only is to be found in the Ameri- 
 can prayer book, and that one is not fairly stated.* 
 The next class of passages to which he objects, he 
 calls absurd or unintelligihle. The stumbling block 
 in this case appears to be, not so much in the language 
 as in the doctrines of the incarnation, and of the Trinity, 
 ■which it conveys. Has it ever occurred to the Review- 
 er, or his party, to bring this same objection to the form 
 of words directed by our Savionr to be used in baptism ? 
 Abundant pains have been taken to destroy its Trinita- 
 rian sense. But if in this sense it is absurd or unintel- 
 ligible, we have never seen a Unitarian explanation of 
 
 * We give the entire Collect referred to. " A Collect for 
 Peace, [spiritual and temporal.] O God, who art the author oi peace 
 and lover of concord^ in knowledge of whom standeth our eternal 
 life, whose service is perfect freedom ; defend us thy humble ser- 
 vants in all assaults of our enemies, that we, surely trusting in thy 
 defence, may not fear the power of any adversaries, through the 
 might of Jesus Christ, our Lord." If there is a want of connec- 
 tion here, it is certainly not in the words referred to by the Re- 
 viewer. 
 
125 
 
 it, 'VNTticli was not infinitely move so. The slioricst way, 
 perhaps, would be to class it with these extracts from 
 Ihe prayer book, and thus get rid of all of them at 
 once.-^" 
 
 ^' From this specimen of faults in the Liturgy" tlie 
 lleviewer would have us give up our boast of its excel- 
 lence. Perhaps, it will be time enough to do so, when 
 ihe learned and able men, tliose of tliem at least, who 
 are living, retract their opinions as already given by us. j- 
 We do not believe, however, nor are we accjuainted 
 with any who do, in the absolute perfection of our 
 liiturgy. It is a human composition, and tlierefore not 
 free from the faults which must ever attend upon the 
 labours of men. In the language of the editors of the. 
 Christian Observer, we may say tliat ''•Ave would not be 
 thought in our struggle for the honour of our Liturgy 
 to be the champions of every expression contained in 
 it. We are its admirers, not its idolators ; and there- 
 fore not in love with its blemishes. There are a few 
 parts, which would, perhaps, admit of the knife ; but 
 
 * " In one of the prayers in the communion service," says the 
 Reviewer, " God is styled Holy Father. But the rubric orders 
 that on Trinity Sunday this title shall be omitted ;" and he draws 
 an inference from this, which only serves to expose his ignorance, 
 for, if he really had read the book, he would have seen that the 
 same page explained what he chooses to consider as done without 
 adequate motive. The true reason why this term is to be omitted on 
 Trinity Sunday is, because it verbullij disagrees with the language 
 of the proper preface, for the day, as it is called ; but if another 
 preface, also provided for that day, is used, then the term Holy 
 Father is to be retained, because thei*e is then no disagreement of 
 that nature. 
 
 t See note p. 83. 
 
126 
 
 then Ave do not see into whose h.iiul ii could safely bo 
 trusted. We are content, however, to take it as it is, 
 and are rather disposed to wonder it is so good, than to 
 complain it is no better. Every day's experience shews 
 us, it is perfectly competent under tiie divine blessing 
 to produce, and what is perhaps more, to revive a 
 spiritual religion." 
 
 As the Reviewer admits that our church is not dis- 
 tinguished, though lie would liave her considered dis- 
 lionoured, in declaring that she has authority in matters 
 of faith ; we do not deem ourselves called upon to de- 
 feud her in this respect. It is a principle to be found, 
 we believe, more or less plainly expressed in the for- 
 mularies of all denominations out of the frigid zone. 
 And even tliere it is virtually assumed, as is evident 
 from the agreement in denoiincing Trinitarianism, Cal- 
 vinism, &c. Mr. Sparks's '^ strain of good sense and 
 eloquence," quoted by the Reviewer, seems to us, to be 
 destitute at the least, of the first, if not of botli, these 
 attributed qualities. Is there not, for instance, some- 
 thing superlatively ridiculous in comparing Theology 
 to Astronomy, when the principles of the former Averc 
 permanently settled by its author eighteen hundred 
 years ago ; Avhile of the latter, Ave knoAV nothing except 
 by the actual discoAery and demonstration of principles, 
 heretofore, and till receiitly, utterly unknoAvn, and per- 
 haps not even yet fully and permanently settled ? We 
 should have thought a mind regulated by good sense 
 and a sound education, would have scorned to employ 
 such a burlesque upon reasoning. But admitting, for a 
 moment, that there is any thing like sufficiency in such 
 arguments. aaIjo or Avhere is the Bacon, or the Coperui- 
 
127 
 
 CHS, or the Newton, who is to stand forth, and show us 
 ground upon which we may set our feet, and from which 
 we may seetliat we dwell not in an immeasurable void, 
 or in a pathless chaos ? Sis all we take Mr. Sparks, or 
 Mr. Belsham, or the Reviewer ? We doubt, not a little, 
 w hethcr either of these gentlemen have yet found a sub- 
 stantial base for their own feet, notwithstanding their 
 anxiety to spring a mine beneath ours.* Why then 
 should we look to either of them for support, when we 
 have only their assertion that our present footing is un- 
 safe ? We are of opinion Avith Bishop Pearson — ^' that 
 there is no concerning truth in Christianity which is not 
 old, and that whatsoever about it can be proved to be 
 new, is for that reason alone decidedly false.'' We 
 hold that creeds are valuable, not as standards inde- 
 pendent of scripture, but as summaries collected out of 
 it. This we conceive to be the case witli the formularies 
 of the church, and with this belief of tlieir orighi, wA 
 shall not be prevailed on by pompous diction, or bold 
 assertion, to abandon them : certainly not till those 
 who would dissuade us from them, know themselves 
 what to believe. t 
 
 * '' Mr. Belsham, in the introduction to his Letters on Arianism, 
 &c. remarks, that having begun to think, he knows not where to 
 stop, as he still professes to seek after knowledge, and is ver}' 
 far from Hattering himself that he approaches the conlinc>7 of dis- 
 coverable truth." R. Adam's Relig. world, vol. ii. p. 17 k Dr. 
 Priestley and others have remarked to the same purport. 
 
 jMr. Sparks's remark about the infallibility of the church, soemie 
 to us, to be nearly, if not equal!}', as applicable to individuals. 
 We are told in the scriptures that we are saved by faith and that//r 
 that believeth not shall be damned ; unless every individual be infalli- 
 ble, then, there can be no certaint'j of his having the onlij true faith, and 
 he may even spare himself the trouble of claiming (hf right U^ 
 have his oi&n particular creed. 
 
128 
 
 That Milton was an admirable ^;oei it would be trea- 
 son against learning and literature to deny ; he was 
 nevertheless but a miserable divine, and a most un- 
 charitable man. We ask the reader to peruse the fol- 
 lowing invective against tlie Bishops of the English 
 church, in connection witii the Reviewer's quotation from 
 liis " prose works," concerning creeds, and he will see 
 some grounds for tiiis opinion : ^' But they, that by the 
 impairing and diminution of the true faith, the distresses 
 and servitude of tlieir country, aspire to high dignity, 
 rule and promotion here, after a shameful end in this 
 life, (which God graxt them !) shall be thrown down 
 eternally into the darkest and deepest gulph of hell ; 
 where, under the despiteful control, the trample and 
 spurn of all the other damned, who in the anguish of 
 their torture, shall have no other ease than to exercise a 
 raving and bestial tyranny over them as tlieir slaves 
 and negroes, they shall remain in that plight forever, 
 the basest, the lowermost, the most dejected, most un- 
 derfoot, and down-trodden vassals of perdition.*'* Is 
 
 * Treatise on Reformation, vol. i. p. 274. Quoted h}' Jones on 
 the church, note to chap. iii. In continuation of the extracts 
 made by the Reviewer from Mr. Sparks's Letters, we find the fol- 
 lowing parody, as we call it, on a text or two of scripture. " St. 
 Paul enjoins the Galatians to ' stand fast in the liberty — wherewith 
 Christ had made them free, and not be entangled again with the 
 yoke of bondage ;' and to the Corinthians he writes, — ' We 
 have not dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy, 
 for by faith ye stand.' Not by faith in Creeds, for this would be 
 giving up our liberty, taking upon us a yoke of bondage, and sub- 
 mitting to the opinions of others ; but by faith in the word of God, 
 which all persons are free to consult, — and this freedom all must 
 be allowed to enjoy before they can be required to believe or 
 obey." Did not Mr. ?. very well know, that in the text from the 
 
129 
 
 it not enough to make the blootl run cold in oar veins 
 to read such denunciations as these ? Is it to be won- 
 dered at, if men of such temper as this extract displays, 
 should be the enemies, not of creeds alone, but of every 
 species of human obligation ? With what feelings then, 
 must we be inspired when we see such a writer cited, 
 
 epistle to the Galatians, St. Paul was alluding to the attempt made 
 among that people by Jndaizing teachers to reduce them under 
 the dominion of the Mosaic law — " to put a yoke upon the 
 necks of the disciples, which" tho Jews themselves had not been 
 " able to bear ?"' Suppose zae were to make a similar accomoda- 
 ting use of another text in the same epistle, and say to our readers, 
 *■' there be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel 
 of Christ ; but though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach any 
 other gospel unto you, than that we have preached unto 
 you, let him be accursed." We suspect Mr. Sparks would 
 think the application far fetched and somewhat unreasonable. 
 With regard to that other text, tc?e suppose St. Paul's meaning to 
 be, that he had not power to change the faith which he had preach- 
 ed to them, and in which they were now established, and that, 
 though he was coming among them to revive neglected discipline 
 in respect to their practice, yet as respected their faith, he was 
 rather disposed to rejoice with them, for in that they had remained 
 stedfast. Mr. Belsham asserts, that the doctrines of necessity and 
 materialism [though admitted according to Adam, by the most dis- 
 tinguished Unitarians,] have no more to do with their peculiar 
 creed, '• than they have with the mountains in the moon." As 
 little, we conceive, have the texts quoted by Mr. S. to do with 
 creeds of any sort. We think the strain of Mr. Sparks's reasoning, 
 generally, as here quoted by the Reviewer, of a deistical tendency ; 
 for it proceeds upon the supposition, that the fundamental princi- 
 ples of Christianity have not been revealed to us, but are to be 
 sought out, in the same manner, as the fundamental principles of 
 Astronomy have bee» discovered. It is the course of an advocate 
 lOT the religion of nature, a system frigid indeed. 
 
 17 
 
130 
 
 as tlie solemn advocate of Christian liberty in this en- 
 lightened age ? 
 
 The E,evie^yer asserts that the earliest reformers 
 have not to answer for this obnoxious clause. There 
 is reason, he thinks, to believe that it was surreptitious- 
 ly inserted after their time ; antl yet however this sur- 
 reptitious insertion formed no objection to its adoption 
 on the restoration of the church in 1660 ! We have 
 not, unfortunately, either Prettyman or Neal at hand to 
 consult, but we have read the Reviewer's statement with 
 some surprise. Adam says, on the authority of Brougli- 
 ton, that the authenticated original of the Thirty-nine 
 Articles Was destroyed in the tire of London ; and that 
 the copy now at Cambridge was the private copy of 
 Archbishop Parker ; which is allowed however, to be 
 the most authentic extant.* 
 
 We have at length arrived at the arguments, which 
 are to prove, beyond all contradiction, that the articles 
 of the church are Calvinistic. We consider of very lit- 
 tle importance to this question, what may have been the 
 individual opinions of the Reformers. We believe that 
 it was their intention in drawing up the articles not to 
 give their own opinions, in which we may reasonably 
 suppose there might not have been perfect conformity, 
 but to make such a statement of doctrines as could be 
 fairly drawn from the scriptures, should be sufficiently 
 explicit against the church of Rome, and yet should 
 
 * R. Adam's Religious world, vol. ii. p. 369. — Broughton's Hist. 
 Library, vol. i. p. 84. Selden and Heylinboth assert the genuine- 
 ness of the clause to which the Reviewer objects. It was in the 
 copy of articles adopted in 1552, thoug^h suri'eptitiously erased in. 
 subsequent editioni?. 
 
131 
 
 leave no room for dissention among themselves, on 
 points, at least, with w liich they were tlien conversant. 
 This is the opinion of many of the ahlest divines both 
 of the English Church and of the Episcopal Church in 
 America.* The question is simply, are the articles of 
 tlie church Calvinistic ? It is very easy to overtlirow 
 the whole superstructure of what the lievieAver is 
 pleased to call the " unanswerable reasoning^^ of Mr. 
 Sparks ; nay, wa might by the same process prove the 
 articles to be Armini'an. The doctrines of the depravity 
 of man and of universal redemp'aon are both explicitly 
 laid down in the articles : if then it is true that all men 
 are born into the world depraved, and incapable of sal- 
 vation ; and if there has been " made a perfect redemp- 
 tion, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of 
 the whole world, both original and actual,"' then it is 
 a natural and necessary consequence, that all persons 
 are made capable of salvation ; they have been perfectly 
 redeemed, entire satisfaction has been made for all their 
 
 * The framers of the articles, " holy men, did prudently pre- 
 discover, that differences of judgment would unavoidably happen 
 in the church, and were loth to unchurch any, and drive them off 
 from an eueharistical communion, for such petty differences ; which 
 made them pen the articles in comprehensive words ; to take in 
 all, who, differing in branches, meet in the root, of the same reli- 
 gion." Fuller''s Hist. ^. 12. quoted in Bishop White's Comparative 
 Views, vol. ii. p. 23. It may be of importance to remark that 
 Fuller was a Calvinist. To the same effect, say the editors of the 
 Christian Observer, whose sentiments on this controversy, are 
 well known. " Our Reformers, v.hatever might be the private 
 opinions of some of them on disputed points, framed the articles 
 with a view to include all pious Christians, without exacting a 
 full and precise conformity to their own particular tenets." 
 (christian Observer, vol. xi.x.. p. 51,-»-.Vofe. 
 
132 
 
 sins ; and they must retain this condition. If it is said 
 that we entirely omit to notice the article on predestina- 
 tion, we reply, in the same manner, does Mr. Sparks 
 neglect all notice of the article on universal redemption ; 
 nay, more, he draws inferences in direct contradiction to 
 its express terms. Do our readers need any thing more to 
 show the absurdity of this piece of unansiverable rea- 
 soning f Did they ever hear of a man's being called 
 upon to subscribe to doctrines which were matter of in- 
 ference ovAy'^ Suppose we were to infer that these writers 
 are Mahometans, because they agree with them in a 
 point or tAvo which might be named, would they think 
 us justified?* 
 
 But that our readers may have an opportunity of de- 
 ciding for themselves on this point, that they may see 
 how cautious is the language of the Church, and with 
 
 * Mr. Spax'ks's /)remw«, as founded on the articles, are false 
 The doctrine of depravity is not laid down either in the articles 
 or homilies in stronger terms than in the third point of Arminian- 
 ism ; and the article on predestination no where speaks of " a 
 CERTAIN number'''' of the elect. The language of the article is ex- 
 tremely guarded in this respect. See Bishop White's Comparative 
 Views, vol. ii. p. 30. The paucity of the extracts of the Re- 
 viewer from the Homilies, to support his construction of the 17th 
 article would be, in such a work, we think, conclusive evidence 
 against the opinion that the Reformers intended to express that 
 doctrine distinctly. We conceive, however, that even they have 
 no reference to the doctrine, and as a plain proof of it, we give 
 the following from the sa7ne Homily. — " Our Saviour Christ testi- 
 fieth of poor men, that they are dear unto him, and that he loveth 
 them especially ; for he calleth them his little ones, by a name of 
 tender love : he saith they be his brethren. And St. James 
 saith, that God hath chosen them to be the heirs of his kingdom." 
 Will it be pretended, therefore, that all the subjects of alms giving 
 wore God's chosen ones' 
 
133 
 
 what an evea hand she holds the balance between the 
 rival systems of Calvinism and Arminianism, we will 
 set before them side by side, the Articles of the Church 
 which are referred to, and tiie " five points"' c,t' the 
 other systems, taken from R. Adam's Ueligious World 
 Displayed. 
 
 Calvi 
 
 has 
 
 1. God 
 chosen a cer- 
 tain number in 
 Christ to eter- 
 nal glory be- 
 fore the foun- 
 dation of the 
 world, accord- 
 ing to his im- 
 mutable pur- 
 pose, and of 
 his free grace 
 and love, with- 
 out the least 
 foresight of 
 faith, good 
 works, or any 
 condition per- 
 formed by the 
 creatures ; and 
 that the rest of 
 mankind he 
 was pleased to 
 pass by, and or- 
 dain them to 
 dishonour and 
 wrath for their 
 sins, to the 
 praise ©f his 
 vindictive jus- 
 tice. 
 
 Articles of the Church. Jlrminianism. 
 
 17tb. — Predestination unto life 1. God from 
 is the everlasting purpose of God. all eternity, 
 whereby (betore the foundations determined to 
 of the earth were laid) he hath bestow salva- 
 coastantiy decreed by his coun- tion 07i those 
 scl, secret to us, to deliver from whom he /ore- 
 curse and damnation, t/iose saw '^rndd per- 
 whoni he hath chosen in Christ out severe unto the 
 of mankind, and to bring them end in their 
 by Christ to everlasting salvation faith in Christ 
 as vessels made to honour. Jesus ; and to 
 Wherefore they which be endued intiict ever- 
 with so excellent a benefit of lasting punish- 
 God, be called according lo God's ments on those 
 purpose by his spirit working in who should 
 due season : they through grace continue in un- 
 obey the calling: they be justi- belief, and re- 
 tied freely : they be made the sist to the end 
 sons of God by adoption: they his divine assign 
 walk religiously in good works, tance : so that 
 and at length by God's grace, election was 
 they attain to everlasting felicity, conditional^and 
 
 As the godly consideration of reprobation in 
 
 Predestination, and our election like manner, 
 
 in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant the result of 
 
 and unspeakable comfort to god- foreseen inti- 
 
 ly persons, and such as feel in delity and per- 
 
 themselves the workings of the severing wick-, 
 
 spirit of Christ, mortifying the nes.s. 
 works of the flesh, and their 
 earthly members, and drawing up 
 tiieir minds to high and heavenly 
 tilings, as well because it doth 
 greatly establi:-;h, and confirm 
 their faitL cf eternal salvation to 
 be enjoyed through Christ, as 
 because it doth, forventiv kindle 
 
134 
 
 Calvinism. Articles of the Church. 
 
 their love towards God : so for 
 curious and carnal persons, lack- 
 ing the spirit of Christ, to have 
 continually before their eyes the 
 sentence of God's predestination, 
 is a most dangerous downfall, 
 whereby the devil doth thrust 
 them either into desperation, or 
 into wretchlessness of most un- 
 clean living, no less perilous thaa 
 desperation. 
 
 Furthermore, we must receive 
 God's promises in such wise as 
 they be generally set forth to us 
 in holy scripture : and in our 
 doings that will of God is to be 
 followed, which we have ex- 
 pressly declared unto us in the 
 word of God. 
 
 2. JesusChrist Art. 31. The offering of Christ 
 
 ty his suffer- once made, is that perfect re- 
 
 ings and death, demplion, propitiation and satis- 
 
 made an atone- faction for all the sins of the whole 
 
 ment only for worlds both original and actual, 
 
 the sins of the and there is none other satisfac- 
 
 dect. tion for sin, but that alone.* 
 
 Arminianism. 
 
 2. JesusChrist 
 by his suffer- 
 ings and death, 
 made an atone- 
 ment for the 
 sins of all man- 
 kind and of 
 every individual 
 in particular ; 
 none, howev- 
 er, but those 
 who believe in 
 him, can be 
 partakers of 
 their divine 
 benefit. 
 
 * " When the question concerning the extent of the design of 
 the death of Christ," says Bishop White on the authority of 
 Brandt, — " came on in the synod of Dort, in the 74th session ; 
 two of the English deputies Ward and Davenant maintained that 
 it was for all mankind, while the Bp. of Landaff and Goad aflirmed 
 it to be partial, and when the 31st article of their church was brought 
 into view the Bishop interpreted it as being intended/or all sorts 
 of men. Balquanquall, the representative of the Scotch church, 
 spoke at large for the partiality of redemption." The good 
 
135 
 
 Cahinisiii. ^Irticles of the Church. 
 
 3. Mankind Art. 9. Original sin standeth 
 are totdlly de- not iti the following of Adam (as 
 praved in con- the Pelagians do vainly talk) : but 
 sequence of it is the fault and corruption of 
 the fall ; and the nature of every man that 
 by virtue of naturally is engendered of the 
 Adam's being offspring of Adam, whereby man 
 their public is very far gone from original 
 head, the guilt righteousness and is of his own na- 
 of his sin was ture inclined to evil., so that the 
 imputed and a flesh lusteth always contrary to 
 corrupt nature the spirit ; and therefore in every 
 conveyed to person born into the world it 
 all his posteri- deserveth God's wrath and dam- 
 ty, from which nation. And this infection of na- 
 proceed all ture doth remain, yea, in them 
 actual trans- that are regenerated ; whereby 
 gression, and the lust of the flesh, called in 
 by sin we are Greek (p^ovtjftet c-ct^xoi which some, 
 made subject do expound the wisdom, some, 
 to death and sensuality, some, affection, some, 
 all miseries, the desire of the flesh, is not sub- 
 temporal, spir- jecito the law of God. And al- 
 itual aad cter- though there is no condemnation 
 nal. for them that believe and are 
 baptised : yet the apostle doth 
 confess that concupiscence and 
 lust hath of itself, the nature of 
 sin. 
 
 4. All whom 10th. The condition of man 
 
 God has pre- after the fall of Adam is such 
 
 destinated to that he cannot turn and prepare 
 
 life, he is himself by his own natural 
 
 pleased, in his strength, and good works, to 
 
 appointed time, faith, and calling upon God : 
 
 effectually to wherefore wt- have no power to 
 
 cM by his do good works pleasant and ac- 
 
 Arminianisnb, 
 
 3. True faith 
 cannot pro- 
 ceed from the 
 exercise of 
 our natural 
 faculties and 
 powers, nor 
 from the force 
 and operatioa 
 of freewill ; 
 since man in 
 consequence of 
 his natural cor- 
 ruption^ is in- 
 capable either 
 of thinking or 
 doing any good 
 thing : and 
 therefore it is 
 necessary to 
 his conver- 
 sion that he be 
 regenerated, 
 and renewed 
 by the opera- 
 ation of the 
 Holy Ghost, 
 which is the 
 gift of God 
 through Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 4. Divine 
 grace or the 
 energy of the 
 Holy Ghost, 
 begins and 
 perfects every 
 thing that can 
 be called good 
 
 Bishop, it seems, was obliged to travel out of the hteral and 
 grammatical sense of the article, in order to accommodate it ttj 
 Calvinism, while the Scotch deputy, having the explicit language 
 of his church to favour him, needed no such tiBesse. See White"? 
 Gumparative Views, vol ii. p. iO. 
 
136 
 
 Calvinutn. 
 
 word and 
 
 spirit, out of 
 that stale of 
 sin and death, 
 in which they 
 are hy nature, 
 to grace and 
 salvation bj' 
 Jesas Christ. 
 
 Articles of the Church. 
 
 ceptable to God, without the 
 grace of God by Christ preven- 
 ting us. that we may have a good 
 will, and working with us when 
 we have that good will. 
 
 5. Those 16th. Not every deadly sin, 
 
 whom God has willingly committed alter bap- 
 
 eft'ectually cal- tism, is sin against the Holy Ghost 
 
 led and sancti- and unpardonable. Wherefore 
 
 lied by his the grant of repentance is not to 
 
 spirit, shall not be denied to such as fall into sin 
 
 finally fall after baptism. After we have re- 
 
 froin a stale of ceived the Holy Ghost we may dc- 
 
 grace. part from grace given^ and fall 
 
 into sin ; and by the grace of God 
 
 (we may) arise again and amend 
 
 our lives. And therefore they 
 
 are to be condemned who say 
 
 that they can no more sin so 
 
 long as they live here, or deny 
 
 the place of forgiveness to such 
 
 as truly repent. 
 
 [ The Puritans^ at the Hampton 
 Court Conference in 1604, re- 
 quired that the words — yet neither 
 totally nor finally — shoidd be in- 
 serted after.) — may fall into sin. 
 This, however., which would have 
 made this article Cahinistic^ wms 
 refused them. 
 
 Anainianism. 
 
 in man, and, 
 consequently, 
 all good works 
 are to be 
 attributed to 
 God alone ; 
 nevertheless, 
 this grace is of- 
 fered to all, and 
 does not force 
 men to act 
 against their 
 mclinations,67<i 
 may be resisted^ 
 and rendered 
 ineffectual by 
 the perverse 
 will of the im- 
 j>enitent sin- 
 ner. 
 
 5. God gives 
 to the truly 
 faithful who 
 are regenera- 
 ted by hi? 
 grace, the 
 means of pre- 
 serving them- 
 selves in this 
 state ; the re- 
 generate may 
 lose true justi" 
 fying faith, fall 
 from a state of 
 grace, and die 
 in their sins. 
 
137 
 
 It will be seen by the reader that the two doctrines 
 of tiie depravity of human nature, and predestination 
 unto life, are not peculiar to cither creed, but are held 
 ])y all thou^^h differently expressed in each. The doc- 
 trines of irresistible grace, of the perseverance of the 
 saints, and of particular redemption, are found only in 
 the Calvinistic system, and are more or less distinctly 
 opposed in the others. We shall now allege some 
 facts to show, that the Articles of the Church have never 
 been considered by those best qualified to judge, to be 
 clearly Calvinistic. 
 
 That the articles have not been considered as possess- 
 ing this character is shown : 
 
 1. By the dispute at Oxford in 1595, which seems 
 to have been on a point similar to that now before us, 
 to settle which on tlie principles of Calvinism, Arch- 
 bishop Whitgift drew up and sent as " the undoubted 
 sense of the Church of England,'' the famous Lambeth 
 Articles^ some of which, in our opinion, are ratlier in- 
 consistent with the articles of the church. Besides, to 
 use the language of Bishop White, ^' what occasion was 
 there for them if their sense liad already been declared 
 in the Tliirty^-nine ?'** 
 
 2. By the fact that they were adopted by the Church 
 of Ireland in 1634, tlirongh the influence of Archbishop 
 Laud whose principles are acknowledged on all hands 
 to have been anti-calvinislic.\ 
 
 * Comparative View?, vol. ii. p. 174. — ct seq. 
 
 t A set of articles drawn up by Archbishop Usher had pre- 
 viously beeft adopted by the Irish church, but Archbishop Laud 
 succeeded in having- them rejected, and the Thirtj'-nine introduced. 
 K Adum'.-i Rclis^ious World, vol. ii. p. 369. 
 18 
 
138 
 
 3. By tlie fact tliat the Westminister Assembly of 
 ( Calviiiistic) Divines, ^vhicll sat in 1643, rejected the 
 Thirty-nine Articles ; and drew up a new system, in 
 Avhicli great precision was used on the points peculiar 
 to Calvinism. 
 
 4. By the declaration of King Charles I. annexed to 
 the Englisli articles, that " in those curious points, in 
 which the present differences of men lie, m6n of all sorts 
 take the articles to be for tliem."* 
 
 5. By the " Dissenters reasons for separating from 
 the Church of England," drawn up by Dr. Gill, an 
 eminent Calvinistic Baptist. In the fourth reason, re- 
 ferring to the articles, it is said, they '^ are very defec- 
 tive in many things : there are no articles relating to 
 the two covenants of grace and works ; to creation and 
 providence ; to the fall of man ; the nature of sin, and 
 the punishments for it ; to atlojjtion, effectual vocation : 
 sanctification, faith, repentance and the final persever- 
 ance of the saints ; nor to the law of God ; Christian 
 liberty ; church government and discipline; the conj- 
 munion of the saints, the resurrection of the dead, and 
 the last judgement." 
 
 6. In the Liturgy ^^^'o/^osef^ to be adopted by the Gen- 
 era! Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church 
 
 * " Though some dilTerences have been ill raised, yet we take 
 comfort in this, that all clergjmen within our realm have always, 
 most wiUingly subscribed to the articles established : which is an 
 argument to us that they all agree in the true, usual, and literal, 
 meaning of the said articles, and that even in those curious points, 
 in which the present differences of men lie, men of all sorts take 
 the articles to be for them." This is a very distinct reference lo 
 the Calvinistic and Armmian controvei'sy. See also Bishop 
 White's Comparative Views, vol. ii. p. 182. 
 
139 
 
 held in Pliiladclpliia in 1785, the articles were reduced, 
 in number to ticenty, and were somewhat altered, cer- 
 trJuly without any additional bias to Calvinism, and yet 
 in the preface, Avhere an account of the alterations is 
 given, it is said, " the articles of religion have been re- 
 duced in number, yet it is humbly conceived that the 
 doctrines of the Church of England, are preserved en- 
 tire ; as beingjiidged jierfectly agreeable to the gospel.^'' 
 
 7. It has l)cen publickly asserted, and never yet de- 
 nied, that in the General Convention, which, in 1801 
 unanimously adopted the Articles as they UQW stand^ 
 there was not a single person, who either lield the pe- 
 culiar doctrines of Calvin, or who understood the Ar- 
 ticles as supporting tliem.^- 
 
 8. The Protestant Episcopal Church of Scotland, on 
 being admitted to tlic benefits of toleration, was re([uire(l 
 to adopt the Thirty-nine xVrticles. Tlie clergy accord- 
 ingly subscribed them in a general Convocation at 
 Lawrencekirk in 1804 ; and they subscribed them, "'• 1 
 believe,'- says Adam, " to a mayi in the anti-calvinistic 
 sense.-\ 
 
 9. The Reviewer concedes that ^^ a great majority 
 of the clergy of the English church both in Europe 
 and America is understood to entertain sentiments the 
 opposite of those of Calvin,'^ and "yet to these articles in 
 euteiing on their oj0Bre tliey give in the most solemn man- 
 ner their assent." And the editors of the Edinburgh En- 
 
 * Six only of the members of the Convention, which in 1703 set 
 forth the '• proposed book," were members of that in 1801. Tuvq. 
 states not represented in the fornior, were in the latter; and two 
 states represented in the former were not in the last. Consider- 
 able opportunity was thus afforded for diversity of opinion, 
 
 ,t R. Adam's Rehgious world, vol. ii. p. 425. 
 
140 
 
 cyclopedia admit, tliat ^^some of the most learned and 
 conscientious of her divines have doubted whether the 
 articles are Calviriistic or Lutheran." Adam asserts 
 on the authority of Burnet, Waterland and others, that 
 some of the Reformers were inclined to the f 'alvinistic, 
 and others to the Arminian scheme. It is, however, an un- 
 doubted fact, that many persons, subsequently to the re- 
 turn of the exiles from Holland and Geneva to England 
 in the reign of Elizabeth, have construed the articles in 
 a Calvinistic sense as far as they go, and have defended 
 them as such, but it is equally unquestionable, tliatsuch 
 persons have ever considered them defective as a 
 scheme of Calvinistic doctrine.* 
 
 Upon what grounds, then, consistent with that cliarity 
 which Iwpetli all things, or even with manly feeling, 
 could the RevieAver represent the conduct of so large a 
 body of learned and enlightened n^en as are included 
 in the English, Irish, Scotch and American Protestant 
 Episcopal Churches, entertaining sentiments different 
 from Calvin, as giving ichen entering on their office, 
 their assent in the most solemn manner to calvinistic 
 articles f Does he suppose tliat the person subscribing 
 is bound by the construction , for it is notliing more, of 
 Mr. Sparks, of the Reviewer, or indeed of any other 
 person than himself? Can he be considered as sub- 
 scribing, to ma^^ers of iw/erewc?^ in opposition, both to 
 the majority of those who have gone before him, and to 
 the express terms of the articles themselves ? How 
 preposterous ! 
 
 'llie Reviewer asserts that with regard to subscription, 
 tlie English Clergyman is more leniently dealt with 
 
 * Review, p. 51. — Edin. Ency. vol. viii. p. 625, Philadelphia 
 rdiuou. R. Adam's Relig-ious world, vol. ii. p. 371. 
 
141 
 
 than tlie Araeiican ; for he is required only to engai;e 
 for the present, and to ^^ acknowledge all and every 
 of the articles to be agreeable to the word of God," 
 while ^' tiie American must take on him obligations for 
 the future.'*'* He proba])ly did not know that in Eng- 
 land and Ireland before any clergyman can be admitted 
 to a benefice, or, as a lecturer, he must make a similar 
 declaration of conformity ; — aud that in Ireland sub- 
 scription to all, or any of the articles is not necessary 
 either at ordination, or institution.! As to his remarks, 
 that the clergy of the Episcopal church are required 
 formally to renounce the advantage of future enquiry, 
 ^ve need only say tliat the doctrine of the church is cx- 
 
 * Bisliop White it seenis thinks differently, and as the sentiments 
 of this amiable and learned prelate ought to have weight, botli 
 from his character and the part he has taken in the whole of Hie 
 general transactions of the church, we give it here. '^ There is 
 one particular in \vhich there is less provision for uniformity of 
 sentiment in this church, than in the church of England, It is in 
 the form of subscription : that of the/on/tej- church, being in vyords 
 not admitting of the construction that the articles require consent 
 in every minute particular. Unless a candidate for the ministry 
 be fully satisfied with them as a bod}' of Christian doctrine ; he 
 prevaricates if he assents to them. But this does not pledge him 
 to the extent here affirmed to he avoided.'''' Comparative Views, vol. 
 ii. p. 191. The only subscription, or declaration, required of a 
 candidate for orders in the American Episcopal Church is the fol- 
 lowing. " I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and Xew 
 Testaments to be the word of God, and to contain all things ne- 
 cessary to salvation. And I do solemnly engage to conform to the 
 doctrines and disiipiiue of the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
 these United States." 
 
 t See Christian Observer. \ol. xviii. p. ')i5. Browne's Eccle- 
 siastical Lciw, vol. ii. p. 'M!. t]i;ot"(i in K. Adant*; IltiiJgious Worlil, 
 vol. ii. p. 37* >. 
 
142 
 
 plicit only on points considered fundamental, and gen- 
 erally received as sucli, while considerable latitude is 
 allowed for the indulgence of private opinion and re- 
 search. The fundamental doctrines of the gospel are 
 not to be sought for, at this late period ; they have long 
 been established and known. Conformity may with 
 great propriety be required to thcin, and he who is not 
 prepared for this, is not fitted to enter the ministry of a 
 church which rests upon them.* 
 
 The Reviewer next travels out of the points in con- 
 troversy to give us a review of Paley's chapter on sub- 
 scription. Thither we shall not follow him. We can, 
 by no means, assent to Paley's doctrine ; on the con- 
 trary, we think it highly dangerous, and should regret to 
 see it defended. 
 
 We arc next favoured with a neat speculation on the 
 use of creeds ; — those nuisances of creeds, — as he, 
 
 * We are fully aware of all that may be said about the hindling 
 of a glorious blaze of light in our day, and around us. Its lustre 
 already has dazzled and sometimes confused us a little. We have 
 looked with some patience to a few critics, who have promised us 
 to lighten our darkness with large poi-tions of this illumination, 
 but we have found the rays to partake very much of the random 
 and eccentric character of the northern lights^ or more classically', 
 the Aurora BoreaUs. We have endeavoured in vain to fix our 
 eyes steadily upon them. One linds copious faults in the good old 
 translation of the Scriptures, and obligingly asks us to submit to his 
 rendering of the places to which in particular he objects ; this, per- 
 haps, is literal, or nearly so. We look at it, and discover that it 
 •needs another translation to make it intelligible. This difficulty 
 ho obviates, by politel}'' giving us his owii exposition^ or opinion^ 
 which, perhaps, it would be a sin to call a cj-ecd. Another how- 
 ever is more liberal, and suppUes us with half a dozen different 
 rendering?, telling u.« with all the rourteousness of a s^iop-keeper 
 
143 
 
 scavens;er like, is plensed to term them. We are sure 
 that men of good sense will smile at the self-compla- 
 
 " take which you please, gentlemen." Give up the received 
 translation on the points obnoxious to these enlightened men, and 
 all is well. 
 
 '' Hence comment after comment, spun as tine 
 As bloated spiders draw the tlimsy line : 
 Hence the same word, that bids our lusts obey, 
 Is misapplied to sanctify their sway — 
 If stubborn Greek refuse to be his friend, 
 Hebrew, or Syriac, shall be forced to bend : 
 If languages and copies all cry, no — 
 Somebody proved it centuries ago. 
 Like trout pursued, the critic, in despair, 
 Darts to the mud. and linds his safety there." 
 
 Co'x.'pcr's Progress of Erraf. 
 
 The translators of the Bible who were commissioned for that 
 purpose by King James, formed together a mass of learning and 
 ability, such perhaps,asit might be diflioult to collect even in our day. 
 " These learned men," says Dr. Gray, "iniact took in the whole 
 scope of scripture, and collated its diil'erent parte, so as not to judge 
 of expressions trom a solitary view, but from a full and accurate 
 examination." We do not undertake to say this translation is 
 thoroughly perfect, but then when we cast our eyes upon the 
 variety of improved versions and modern paraphrases, and observe 
 in them the prevalence of party views, and discordant expositions, 
 we are greatly in despair, not only of obtaining a better, but even of 
 seeing as good, from any modern hands. We have in the course of 
 our readuig met with an anecdote which may serve, perhaps, to al- 
 lay in some degree the feverish propensity for improvements. 
 Walton, in his life of Bishop Sanderson, says, that before Sanderson's 
 elevation he accompanied " Dr. Kilbic, who was one of the transla- 
 tors of the Bible in King James's time, into Derbyshire, and they 
 being together on a Sunday at a parish church, found there a young 
 preacher, who bad no more discretion, than to waste a great part 
 
141 
 
 cency with which tlie Reviewer lias laid down a train 
 for them to take up and believe. He accuses the Re- 
 formers of endeavouring ^^ to perpetuate the Idind 
 doctrine of destiny/' as if he was ignorant, that Unita- 
 riansj — modern and distinguished Unitarians, — had 
 advocated the stupid as well as blind, doctrines of mate- 
 terialism, and its consequent, necessity ; between which, 
 and the highest ground of Calvinism, we leave to him 
 to discriminate, heedless for ourselves, as to whicli he 
 receives or condemns. *^ In the conclusion of iiis specu- 
 
 of the hour allotted to the Sermon, in exceptions ag^ainst the late 
 translation of several words, and shewed three reasons why 
 a particular word should have heen differently translated. 
 When the service was ended, the preacher was invited to the 
 house of the doctor's friend, where after some other conference 
 the doctor t©ld him that he might have preached more usefid doc- 
 trines, and not have filled his auditor's ears with needless exceptions 
 against the late translation ; and as for the word, for which he of- 
 fered his poor congregation three reasons why it ought to have 
 been translated as he said ; he and others had considered all of 
 them, and found thirteen more considerable reasons, why it was 
 translated as now printed." The unlearned Christian may be 
 satisfied with his own Bible till he finds the learned ahle to agree 
 upon a new translation. The reader who would wish to see the 
 opinions of Bishop Middleton, Dr. Doddridge, and Dr. John Taylor, 
 of Norwich, (an Arian) is referred to IIorne'*s Deism Refuted, 
 note 2. 
 
 * We have before us a little volume, entitled, " The doctrine 
 of predestination unto life explained and vindicated in four Sei- 
 mons, preached to the church of Christ, meeting in Brattle-street, 
 (Boston,) and published at their general desire. By Williana 
 Cooper, one of the Pastors of said church. With a preface by 
 the senior Pastors of the town of Boston." " This doctrine," 
 they say, " is embraced by «5, as it was by the Reformers from 
 popery, because we find it in our Bible. This it is, that makes us 
 
145 
 
 latioii he argues, as wc think, less against the value of 
 creeds than in favour of a principle, which yet, we can- 
 not suppose he will adopt, — tlie depravity of man. Wc 
 should like to know by what principle it is, that every 
 man is to be permitted to mistake the conclusions of his 
 own mind for the immutable decreeof truth? To adoptthe 
 Reviewer's own simile, ^^ it would be as promising an 
 attempt to dam the ocean, or hold a comet with a kite 
 string,*' as to ascertain under such circumstances, that 
 trutii is consistent with itself The natural tendency 
 of the human mind is, not to truth but to error, — " the 
 imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth," and, 
 we think, the Reviev/er concedes something to this 
 principle, when he ventures to predict what may occur 
 to the Andover Institution. 
 
 The Reviewer passes over Mr. Sparks's chapters on 
 the Trinity, with a general commendation, (we sup- 
 pose, of all that they contain,) and the observation, 
 that *" he shall he happy, at some future time, to find 
 an opportunity to recur to them." This is all very 
 well. We are inclined to the opinion, that the Unita- 
 rian side of the question is getting somewhat stale, even 
 
 Predestinarians and Calvinists : for Calvin, nor Augustine, nor any 
 names whatever, are any thing- to us, but as they speak to us from, 
 the Holy Scriptures. These are our only oracles. What we find 
 there we believe and profess, though incomprehensible to our 
 weak and shallow minds, which are by no means the measure of 
 truth. And we think we act a perfectly rational, as well as rever- 
 ent part before the High God, the inlinite intelligence, in bowing 
 our understandings to his revelations respecting truth and duty, 
 even where we cannot answer every scruple or objection for the 
 reconciling seeming oppositions." Signed by Coleman, (Cooper's 
 colleague) Sewall, Prince, Le Mercier. and Webb. April 15. 1 7 10. 
 
 19 
 
146 
 
 in Boston ; its novelty is wearing off ; and it is in a nem 
 field, where the liabit of thinking has been different, 
 and where the novelty of the subject will, doubtless, pro- 
 cure it some attention, that it may be discussed to most 
 advantage ; a random ray may there, perhaps, fall on 
 some eye not wholly averted, and the happy man may 
 discover, or think tliat he discovers, more of the nature 
 of God, than he knows of his own. 
 
 We are now come to a subject on which we enter with 
 real pain, because it relates to errors aud infirmities 
 which we, most willingly, would give to oblivion. We 
 confess we feel much disturbed in the complacency we 
 have hitherto been desirous of feeling towards the Re- 
 viewer on all the points of this controversy. But we 
 will sU'ive to be temperate, — we are determined to be 
 just. 
 
 The Reformation in England is not to be considered 
 as having attained a settled character, till after the ac- 
 cession of Elizabeth. This we conceive will be admit- 
 ted : it would detain us too long to enlarge upon it. 
 The nation generally was then satisfied. No opposi- 
 tion was made, except by those who still adhered to 
 the Chiu'ch of Rome. If the principles of the Church 
 at that time were not perfectly satisfactory to the other 
 reformed churches, yet there was, on their part, no op- 
 position to them. This state of harmony was not, 
 however, of long duration, for when those who had 
 been driven by the fear of Mary, to different parts of 
 the continent successively returned, many of them mani- 
 fested an attachment to the forms of protestantism which 
 they had severally witnessed. It was not, however, 
 
147 
 
 till the lOtli year of Elizabeth, that they begaa to (Us* 
 play themselves openly, and from this time, notwith- 
 standing the efibrts made to check them, till tlie time of 
 Charles I. they continued to increase. In the 18th of 
 this reign (1643) the famous solemn league and 
 COVENANT was framed in Scotland, and subscribed by 
 multitudes both in that country and in England ; the 
 person subscribing, at the same time solemnly swore 
 " with his hands lifted up to the Most High God/' to 
 endeavour the entire extirpation of prelacy, or the 
 government of the Church by Archbishops and 
 Bishops : and all the ecclesiastical qjficeps depending 
 on that hierarchy. Both churcli and state were brought 
 to the dust by this horrible league of superstition and 
 tyranny. The profession of Episcopacy Avas, for a 
 long time, not even tolerated. Even the King, while a 
 prisoner in the Isle of Wight, was prohibited the use of 
 the Common Prayer Book in his own family. Near 
 twenty thousand clergymen were actually turned 
 out to beggary and want, and, as if this was not de- 
 gradation enough, it was endeavoured to attach epithets 
 of infamy to their persons.* This course of things 
 
 * " The severities exercised against the Episcopal clergy," 
 says Hume, " naturally affected the royalists, and even all men of 
 candour^ in a sensible manner. By the most moderate computation 
 above one half oi the established clergy were turned out for no. 
 other crime than their adhering to the civil and religious princi- 
 ples in which they had been educated, and for their attachment to 
 those laws, under whose countenance they had at tirst embraced 
 that profession. To renounce Episcopacy and the Liturgy, and 
 to subscribe the Covenant, were the only terms which could save 
 them from so rigourous a fate ; and if the least mark o( -malignancy 
 as it was called, or affection t© the King, who so eutirely loved 
 
148 
 
 did not last many years. In 1660, the Church was 
 re-established, on the return of tlie King ; and the 
 
 them, escaped their lips, even this hard choice was not permit- 
 ted." And in a note, referring to Walker's account of the suffer- 
 ings of the clergy, he adds : " the Parliament pretended to leave 
 to the sequestered clergy one ffth of their revenue, but this 
 author makes it suffi«iently clear, that this provision, small as it 
 was, was never regularly paid the ejected clergy." History of 
 England, Baltimore edition, vol. vi. p. 123. These acts of oppres- 
 sion were performed by a committee of the House of Commons, 
 which continued to sit for several years, and was denominated the 
 committee o( scand^aloiis ministers. " The proceedings were cruel 
 and arbitrary, and made great havoc, both to the Church, and to 
 the University. They began with harrassing, imprisoning, and 
 molesting the clergy, and ended with sequestrating and ejecting 
 them. In order to add contumely to cruelty, they gave the suffer- 
 ers the ephithet of scandalous^ and endeavoured to render them 
 as odious as they were miserahle. The greatest vices, however, 
 which they could reproach to a great part of them, were bowing 
 to the name of Jesus, &c." Ibid. vol. v. p. 359. Afterward came 
 the ordinance of Cromwell in 1G51, and swept from their churches 
 the remainder of the Episcopal clergy. The follov/ing extracts 
 from the Journal of John Evelyn, Esq. whose character is well 
 known, and who was contemporary with the times alluded to, may 
 be found in the Quarterly Review for April, 1810, and will serve 
 to elucidate the note at the hottom of page 59, of the Review be- 
 fore us. " Dec. 7. — This day came forth the Protector's edict, or 
 proclamation, prohibiting all ministers of the Church of England 
 from preaching or teaching any schools, in which he imitated the 
 apostate Julian." " 25th. — I went to London, when Dr. Wilde 
 preached the funeral sermon of preaching, this being the last day, 
 after which Cromwell's proclamation was to take place, that 7ione 
 of the Church of England should dare either to preach, or administer 
 sacraments, teach school, ^c. on pain of imprisonment or exile.'''' 
 The reader will perceive that the " convenient time," which the 
 Reviewer says was allowed for their removal, was from the 
 seventh to the twenty-fifth of December, 
 
149 
 
 Puvitans suftered in their turn. Most of those who 
 came into power had felt the effects of tiie spirit of 
 Puritanism, and, perhaps, were not so lenient as they 
 sliould have heea, placed as they now were ahove its 
 influence. Endeavours for conciliation were certainly 
 made on the i)art of the Church, for which there was no 
 precedent on the other side. At the Conference in the 
 Savoy, held by order of the King, it was easy to be 
 seen, that little less was to be required than allowing 
 Baxter to remodel the Church and its Liturgy. Whatever 
 disposition existed on the part of the Church for concilia- 
 tion there was certainly none on the other side. ^^ They 
 were however," says l^ishop Burnet, " divided among 
 themselves. Some were for insisting only on a few im- 
 portant things, reckoning that if they were gsined, and 
 a union followed, it would be easy to gain other things 
 afterward. But all this was overthrown by Mr. Baxter. 
 There was a great submission paid to him by the whole 
 party. So he persuaded them that from the words of 
 the commission, they were bound to offer every thing 
 that they thought might conduce to the good, or peace 
 of the Church, without consideruig what was likely to 
 be obtained, or what effect their demanding so much 
 luisiht have in irritatina; the minds of those who were 
 then their superiour body, both in strength and num- 
 ber."* This inexorable disposition, was not only 
 manifested by them, at the Conference, but they were also 
 in the habit of speaking and preaching openly against 
 the Church from wliich tliey derived their subsistence. 
 No alternative luing left to the Church, but, either to 
 tolerate a Babel within itself, by allowing these practi- 
 
 * 'History of his own lime, vol. i. p. ISO, 
 
150 
 
 ces to continue, or to require conformity, the act of uni- 
 formity was passed, containing restrictions, perhaps, 
 unnecessarily severe, though but in strict retaliation for 
 the measures of tlie Puritans. It Avas expected, too, 
 that the larger portion of the party, would not fall under 
 the restriction, but that, in general, they would con- 
 form ; "those however, who led the party," says 
 Burnet,* '• took great pains to make them all stick to- 
 gether. They infused it into them, that if great num- 
 bers stood out, it would show their strengtii, and pro- 
 duce new laws in their favour, whereas, they would be 
 despised, if, after so much noise made, the greater part 
 of them should conform. So it v/as thought many went 
 out in the croud to keep their friends company." They 
 still continued, however, to preach whenever opportuni- 
 ty was given them, and no farther restrictions were 
 imposed, till during the plague at London, when the 
 Court and Parliament being removed to Oxford, some 
 of the ejected ministers intruded themselves into some 
 vacant pulpits in London, and openly reflected on the 
 the Court. ^' This," says Burnet, *' was represented 
 very odiously at Oxford," and it produced a law ban- 
 ishing them five miles from any church, &c. in which 
 they had before served ; a measure which ive do not 
 undertake to justify, though it will be extremely diffi- 
 cult to show, that it was as unjustifiable as the previous 
 conduct of the Puritans themselves, when in power. 
 A more effectual method of checking their oppositiou 
 was afterAvard found. In 1672, an order was passed 
 in council, for paying a yearly pension of fifty pounds 
 to most of the deprived ministers, and a hundred pounds 
 
 * Ibid. vol. i.p. 192. See also Hu^e, vol. vi. p. 370. 
 
151 
 
 to the leaders of the party. Baxter declined, but most of 
 them accepted it. J3isliop Burnet says that UishopStilling- 
 flcet assured him tl»is was true. ^* And thus," he adds, 
 ^•' tlie Court hired them to be silent and the greatest 
 jmrt of them were so, and weiv. very compliant.^' Dr. 
 lleyuolds was prevailed on to accept a Bishoprick.*^ 
 It is easily seen how Baxter played the part of a Bishop, 
 notwithstanding his hitter opposition to the name and 
 office. In Scotland, Archbisliup Leighton laboured 
 liard and long, to produce conciliation but in vain.\ 
 The Solemn League and Covenant was the shibboleth 
 by which all true religion was to be testetl, and, rather 
 than yield even the most atrocious of its oblisrations its 
 disciples resorted to arms and bloodshed. The fero- 
 cious spirit which was manifested in that war, by these 
 men, is well known. 
 
 We may now see what leaven it was whicli, workin"' 
 Avithin tlie very l)osom of the Church, called for the 
 expurgatory act of iiniformity. And yet because of 
 this, — because she did not, at a period now remote, 
 succumb to these mistaken men so 
 
 " True to the jingling of their leaders bells ;" 
 
 the English Church is now accused of delaying the 
 progress of the reformation ! For not folding their arms 
 
 * Ibid. vol. i. p. 308. Hume, vol. vi. p. 371. 
 
 t Archbishop Leighton, will be at once allowed, we believe, to 
 have been a man of the purest piety, of tolerant principles, and of 
 eminent learning. He was educated in the severest prejudices 
 against the English church, and conformed to it from principle. 
 His character and his patient etforts to produce peace in the 
 Church of Scotland may be found detailed in Burnet's Historv 
 above quoted, vol. i. p. 134. — et passim. 
 
152 
 
 wliile tlie rights which primitive Christianity hatl given 
 thein were sought to be trampled under foot, her clergy 
 are accused of fettering the gospel ! For not casting 
 herself, without an oar, on the boundless sea of preju- 
 dice and fantasy, she is charged with having broke the 
 spirit of the reformation ! And noble, pure, and self- 
 devoting as this spirit is allowed to have been, yet, she 
 is accused of having corrupted it with " store of mitres !'' 
 But cold must it have become ere such a bawble 
 could have so strong attraction. For ciiecking the 
 spirit of enthusiasm and fanaticism, which would have 
 swept away every thing which the mind had valued in 
 religion because it was not iieiv^ or not fanatical y she is 
 in this enlightened age stigmatised as intolerant and 
 parricidal ! Onr opponents feel no hesitation in 
 making the sweeping declaration, that these restless, in- 
 tolerant spirits ; — these men who had so mucli of fanati- 
 cism, and nothing of moderation in their disposition, 
 were, in one general assertion, " the best scholars, 
 preachers and,'' even, '^ men in the nation !*' We turn 
 with loathing from such disgusting adulation.^" 
 
 The identity of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 
 with the Church of England, " in doctrine, worship, 
 
 * " The writer of the Magnalia," says Dr. Eliot, " divides into 
 three classes the eminent preachers who emigrated to New-Eng- 
 land. The first were in the exercise of the ministry when they came 
 over. They were educated either at Oxford or Cambridge. The 
 second class comprehends those whose education was uniinished, 
 and had only such advantages to complete it, as they could obtain 
 in the plantations. The third consisted of those who were ejected ^ 
 from the ministry, after the restoration of the monarchy and establish- 
 ment of the Episcopal church. They were pious and good men ; 
 but in their literary accomplishments they were not superior to 
 those who were educated at Harvard College^ <^c.'" 
 
 
153 
 
 and discipline," has been officially declared.* We 
 do not, however, suppose that we are obliged to answer 
 every cliarge wliichthe ignorant, or the calumnious may 
 advance. We see nothing to approve in the circum 
 stance of her connection with the civil power ; for thougli 
 she may have derived some certain advantage from that 
 connection, yet it lias also been productive to her of 
 evils of no light or transient character. In our descent 
 from, and communion with, the English Church, we have 
 much reason to be proud. She was the bulwark of the 
 reformation. To her early labours, were even the 
 Puritans indebted, for the first dawn upon them of 
 Christian liberty. Her Homilies, the preaching of her 
 ministers, and the use of her Liturgy, gave them the first 
 knowledge they possessed of the gospel of truth. The 
 first use which they made of the light she had shed 
 upon, and the liberty she had wrought for them, was 
 to turn upon her, and seek to drive her from her altars. 
 Cranmer, and Latimer, and Ridley, and Hooper, with 
 all those noble spirits who had given their lives for the 
 establishment of Christian truth, had they lived to 
 the days of the Puritans, would have found Gardi- 
 ners, and Eonners, in the other extreme of error, 
 who would readily have stript them of their dignities, 
 and have deprived them, even in their closets, of the 
 use of that Liturgy, which some of them had aided in 
 preparing. It v,as no half way measure which these 
 men sought : mere toleration was, to their conception, 
 no better than nonexistence. They were to be the 
 dominant church, — they were to possess the livings of 
 the country, — Episcopacy was to be entirely extir- 
 
 * Sep Journals of General Convention, p. 310. 
 20 
 
151 
 
 FATED. AVlien at length the Church was overthrown, 
 what special form was to appear in its stead ? Behold^ 
 among the Puritans sixty different sects rise up ; all 
 of them claiming to found their principles on the scrip- 
 tures ; and all of them setting up exclusive claims to 
 correctness : — the Church of Christ become but another 
 name for gross fanaticism, and interminable confusion : 
 religion wholly obscured, if not overwhelmed, the Uni- 
 versities disgorged of their baneful learning, — and Eng- 
 land herself sitting down by Babel of old to learn wis- 
 dom in melancholy experience. 
 
 The Reviewer brings forward some general charges 
 against the Englisli Church, of too gross and abusive a 
 character to do her injury. He who can descend to use 
 such language against a Christian Church so fully in 
 the view of all the world, carries along with him his 
 own refutation.* He alludes in the course of them, 
 rather obscurely to the attempt made iu 1772 to obtain a 
 repeal of the act requiring subscription to the Thirty- 
 nine articles. At that time there were about Eighteen 
 Thousand Clergymen in England, and yet but two hun- 
 dred and fifty were prevailed on to sign the petition! 
 Some, it seems, and therefore, we should think, not of 
 the ivovtliiest, were desirous to enjoy the livings of the 
 Church, while they wished to be released from the con- 
 trol of her principles. Dr. Paley, though applied to for 
 the purpose, refused to sign this petition. 
 
 * Those of our readers who niiiy wish to see a candid and tem- 
 perate examination of the Dissenting Gentleman's Letters, from 
 which the Reviewer gives a long extract in a note, containing ex- 
 aggerated, and as we have shown, in some instances,tm<rMe accounts, 
 are referred to the fifth chapter of Jones of Nayland's Essay on 
 the Church. 
 
155 
 
 We are yet to learn what assistance the Puritans ren- 
 dered the English Church in its struggle against Popery. 
 They were unknown as a body till after the settlement 
 of the Church in the time of Elizabeth : while this was 
 eftecting they were waiting the event abroad. After 
 this period there was no apparent danger from popery 
 till the time of James II. and during that reign^ we 
 believe only a solitary tract by Pendlebury was pub- 
 lished. " The Clergy of the Church^^^ says Burnet, 
 *^ wrote and iiiiblisheil genevallij a^^ainst jioperij, which 
 however the dissenters did not.''^' As Puritanism was 
 not its ally against popery, so, neither did the Church 
 oppress it till it had lifted its own parricidal arm against 
 lier. No ! Puritanism looked on when Protestantism 
 was in danger, and then aimed to destroy the buhvark, 
 which had stood between it and the flames ! . 
 
 Plainer proof is desirable, than any we have yet 
 seen, to satisfy us that the ministers who were deprived 
 by Archbishop Laud were all excellent men. Tiiat all 
 of them were " parricidal" in their conduct toward the 
 Church, is not to be denied. The heat and bitterness of 
 the Puritans, almost necessarily produced opposition to 
 their demands. And even if the charge, against Arch- 
 bishop Laud, of intolerance and persecution could be 
 supported upon unequivocal s,i'omn\. surely, some atone- 
 ment to society may be supposed to have l)een made, in 
 the sacrifice of his life^ by those who were alike the ene- 
 mies of his Churchy and his jJerson.-f 
 
 * History of his own timci:, vol. i. p. 673. — Milboiirne'^s Lcgacv 
 to the Church of England, vol. ii. p. 1G2. 
 
 t " This blemish [intemperate zeal] is more to be regarded as a 
 general imputation on the whole age, than any particular failing of 
 Laud's, and it is sufficient for his vindication to observe that hb 
 
156 
 
 We see then that tlie spirit of persecution Avas visible 
 among the Puritans, as well as in the English Church : 
 and yet one would suppose, from reading the eulogies 
 of such writers as this Reviewer, that these men had 
 been sufferers only, and had never sought to give any 
 measure of retribution, worthy of more notice than a 
 line or two, in passing. Trace now the facts. In the 
 reign of Charles 1. three hundred (we take the Review- 
 er's numbers) ministers were deprived, for denying the 
 validity of the Episcopal aulhority exercised over them, 
 and refusing submission to the laws of the Church, and 
 of the country, by which all the rest were content to 
 be bound. Wlien this party, on the other hand, came 
 into power, they cast out, with contumeli/, to beggary 
 and want, near twenty tJiousand, that is, all the clergy 
 of the realm, who would not openly forswear the 
 Church, to which, at her own altars, they had solemnly 
 vowed to adhere. When the Church again obtained 
 
 errors were the most excusable of all those which prevailed during 
 that zealous period." Huine, vol. vi. p. 80. Again. " That 
 Laud's severity was not extreme appears trom the fact that he 
 caused the acts or records of the high commission court to be 
 searched, and that there had been fewer suspensions, deprivations 
 and other punishments by three during the seven years of his time, 
 than in any seven years of his predecessor Abbot. 1 own that it 
 is very questionable whether persecution can in any case be justi- 
 fied : But at the same time it would be hard to give that appella- 
 tion to Laud's conduct, who only enforced the act of uniformity, 
 and expelled the clergymen that accepted of benefices and yet re- 
 fused to observe the ceremonies which they previously knew to 
 be enjoined by law. He never refused them separate places of 
 worship, because they would have esteemed it impious to demand 
 them, and no less impious to allow them."' Ibid. vol. vi. 7iote [D.] 
 end of the volume. 
 
157 
 
 authority, tlirougli the free will of the nation ; two 
 thousand were ejected for requiring tlie Church to over- 
 turn her whole fahric ; which they utterly despised, and 
 many of them had sworn to extirpate. And yet the 
 Church of England is represented as a persecutor, and 
 the Dissenters are only " not to be acquitted of a perse- 
 cuting spirit," while many of them are the best and the 
 worthiest of men. Do we undertake to approve the 
 severities which the Church exercised ? Far be it from 
 Us to do so. Neither can we approve the conduct of 
 those, who from mere imrty motives can, in our day, 
 represent these matters in such unjust colors. '* The 
 truth is," as Bishop Jewel says in the preface to his 
 Apology for the Churcli of England, " this Church has 
 been iiersecuted, because she alone, of all the Churches 
 in Europe, has had the blessing and singular favour of 
 God to reform with prudence, moderation, and an exact 
 and regular conduct ; after great and wise deliberation, 
 by the consent of our Bishops, Convocations, States, 
 and Princes, without tumults or hasty counsels. So 
 that the Pa2;?sfi.' themselves do even envy our primitive 
 doctrine, government, and discipline, and both fear and 
 hate us more than any other of the reformed churches- 
 They are the same things that have raised the spleens 
 and animosities on the other side, w ith whom whatever is 
 older than Zuinglius and Calvin, is presently ^70/>er^ 
 and must be destroyed. Tell them that Episcopacy 
 was settled in all churches in the days of the very Apos- 
 tles, and by them ; and they reply that the mystery of 
 iniquity began then to v» ork ; intimating if not affirming, 
 that this Holy Order was a part of it." 
 
 Let us now turn to our own country, and see whether 
 ihoee. wh^, as it is nov/ technicalhj said, ^^ fled from 
 
158 
 
 persecution/' — those "who went out into a wilderness to 
 establish Christian liberty, adopted more enlightened 
 principles, or pursued a more tolerant course. 
 
 The first settlers of Plymouth were part of the con- 
 gregation of Robinson at Leydcn. This congregation 
 was not, we believe, composed entirely of those who 
 fled from the persecution of the English j^^^otestant 
 Church. If we are not mistaken, many of them were 
 the remnant or the descendants, of those who left 
 England on the accession of Mary. They were 
 first collected by Robert Brown, whom we liave 
 before alluded to, and who left England with a 
 few others in the reign of Elizabeth. In 1610, 
 John Robinson, a non-conformist minister, who had 
 had been deprived in England at a time when as we 
 may say, on the authority of Hume, '^ the execution of 
 the laws was tempered with humanity," came among 
 them. ^' This toell-meaning man," says Moshiem, 
 *• perceiving the defects which reigned in the discipline 
 of Brown, and in the spirit and temjjer of his followers, 
 employed his zeal and diligence in correcting them, and 
 in modelling anew the society, in such a manner, as to 
 render it less odious to his adversaries, and less li^jblc 
 to the just censure of those true Christians who looked 
 upon charity as the end of the commandment."* In 
 1620, a part of this congregation embarked for America. 
 The motives which led to this removal do not appear to 
 have haen purely religious, as they are often represent- 
 ed ; and many of those who emigrated had, probably, 
 spent most of their days in Holland. Their number was 
 
 * Eccles. His. vol. v. p. 405. These we believe are all or 
 nearly all the particulars of this man's life which have come down 
 to us. 
 
159 
 
 ttiie hundred and one. The next yetiYCSimethirty-Jive,a.nd 
 tlie year succeeding, s/it?^y.- Both these parties, we believe, 
 consisted chiefly of adventurers from England. Among 
 these emigrants, there happened unfortunately for him, 
 to be a clergyman whose name was Lyford, and at a 
 lime, — according to Trumbull,* — when this little 
 colony was enduring ^' the sad experience of famine," 
 in a w ilderness ; when " the best dish," which they 
 w'ere able to furnish this last company of emigrants, 
 was " a lobster without bread, or any other article, ex- 
 cept a cup of fair spring water," religious animosity 
 could, so far operate upon them, that Lyford, and a Mr. 
 Oldham " were discharged from having any thing more 
 to do at Plymouth ;*' in other words, — they were ordered 
 to ''^ go into another icildernesSy'^ and they, — at the risk 
 of starvation,^ — were obliged to do so."t 
 
 The next settlement was made at Salem, in 1629. 
 The settlers were from England. Here, as we have 
 before stated, was formed the ^rs^ completely organized 
 church in New-England. Thirty laymen ordained a 
 pastor, and a teacher, and the Governor of Plymouth 
 gave them the right hand of fellowship. It so happen- 
 ed that among this colony, there were two gentlemen 
 named Brow n. These gentlemen, disliking this pro- 
 cedure, were so imprudent as to express their dislike, 
 and to charge the persons concerned with a separation 
 from the Church of England ; refusing themselves to 
 participate in it, and introducing the use of the Liturgy. 
 
 * History of the United States, vol. i. pp. 69-81. 
 
 t Topographical and Histoi-ical description of Boston : By 
 Charles Sha^^; Esq. member of the Americau Antiquarian Society, 
 p. 15. 
 
160 
 
 Here was room for the exercise of toleration. 15ut no such 
 jjestilent heresy was to be tolernted : The colony con- 
 sisted of three or four hundred, and it might spread 
 among them. The Governor, therefore, rather cavalier- 
 ly told them, that " New-England was no place for 
 such as tliey," and therefore they, and their prayer 
 books, were sent back to England, in the very ships 
 which had brought them out.* 
 
 Governor Winthrop's colony, which settled Boston 
 and the neighbouring towns, was much the largest, and 
 most respectable, we believe, of those which came out 
 at any one time. In this company were four English 
 non-conformist clergymen, who, a few months after tlieir 
 arrival, — no regard being paid to their Episcopal ordi- 
 nation, — were required to submit to a lay ordination af- 
 ter the Salem plan, before they could be considered as 
 entitled to the charge of their respective churches. 
 
 MiNOT, speaking of these colonists, says, ^'whilst they 
 scrupulously regulated the morals of the inhabitants 
 within the colony ; and offered it as an asylum to the 
 oppressed among mankind, they neglected not to pre- 
 vent the contagion of dissimilar habits, and heretical 
 opinions from without. A law was made in 1637, that 
 none should be received to inhabit within the jurisdic- 
 tion, but such as should be allowed by some of the 
 magistrates ; and it was fully understood that differing 
 from the religion generally received in the country, was 
 as great a disqualification as any political opinions 
 whatever. No man could be qualified to elect, or be 
 elected, to any oflBce, who was not a church member, and 
 
 * New-England's Memorial, p. 85, quoted in the Churchman's 
 Magazine, (New-Haven) vol. ii. p. 229. 
 
161 
 
 no church could he formed hut hy a license from the 
 magistrate."* This law does not appear to have proved 
 eflfectual, for we have the following substance of a law 
 which was published at Boston in 1649, given us by 
 Shaw.f " Respecting » heresie error^ it is ordered, 
 that if any Christian within this juristliction shall go 
 about to subvert, and destroy, the Christian faith and re- 
 ligion, by broaching any damnable heresies, as denying 
 the immortality of the soul, or resurrection of the body ; 
 or any sin to be repented of in the regenerate ; or any 
 evil done by the outward man to be accounted sin ; or 
 denying that Christ gave himself a ransom for our sins ; 
 or shall afiBrm that we are not justified by his death and 
 righteousness, but by the perfection of our own works ; 
 or shall deny the morality of the fourth commandment; 
 or shall openly oppose, or condemn, the baptism of in- 
 fants, or shall purposely depart the congregation at the 
 administration of tliat ordinance, or shall deny the or- 
 dinance of magistracy, or their lawful authority to maka 
 war, or to punish the outward breaches of the frst table^ 
 or shall endeavour to seduce others to any of the errors 
 or heresies abovementioned ; every such person, con- 
 tinuing obstinate therein, after due means of conviction, 
 shall be sentenced to banishment.'' ^^ Any one deny- 
 ing the Scripture to be the word of God, for the first 
 offence to be fined fifty pounds and severely whipped ; 
 for the second offence, banishment or death as the 
 Court should adjudge." 
 
 The following extract is given by Shaw as illustra- 
 tive of the opinions and style of the writers of those 
 
 * Quoted in Shaw's Description of Boston, p. 134. 
 t Description of Boston, p. 136. 
 21 
 
162 
 
 times on "= toleration in religious matters." " One of 
 the four things my heart hath naturally detested is tol- 
 erations of divers religions, or of one religion in segre- 
 gant shapes. To authorise an untruth by toleration of 
 the state, is to build a sconce against the walls of Hea- 
 ven to batter God out of his chair. — That state that will 
 give LIBERTY OF coxsciENCE iu matters of religion, must 
 give liberty of conscience and conversation in their 
 moral laws ; or else the fiddle will be out of tune, and 
 some of the strings will crack." 
 
 In 1640, a few Episcopalians, who bad settled what 
 is now Portsmouth in New-Hampshire, made a grant 
 of fifty acres of land, upon which they erected a par- 
 sonage house and chapel. The Rev. Richard Gibson, 
 who had been chaplain to a fishing establishment, was 
 called to be their " first parson." '' He was wholly ad- 
 dicted," to use the courteous language of Dr. Belknap, 
 " to the hierarchy and discipline of Kngland ; and ex- 
 ercised his ministerial functiua according to the ritual." 
 But as this place was then under the government of Mas- 
 sachusetts, such schismatical proceedings were not to be 
 suffered ; — it was building a sconce to batter God out of 
 his chair. He was accusedof scandalizingthegovernment 
 at Boston and denying its title. Summoned before it, 
 he made his submission, and being about to depart the 
 country, was discharged without fine or punishment. 
 He probably had dropped some indiscreet remark re- 
 specting the prevalent opinions, or the right of Massa- 
 chusetts to govern New-Hampshire, which furnished 
 an opportunity, in his fear of the consequences, to get 
 rid of him effectually. But this is not all. The Puri- 
 tans obtained possession of the glebe, called the chapel 
 
163 
 
 a meeting houses and notwithstanding the congregatioi;i 
 >vhich made use of it has been subsequently divided, 
 yet, for no other apparent purpose than to retain this 
 property, they continue to choose church wardens, an 
 oflRcer otherwise unknown in their system.* 
 
 The members of the first Baptist congrei^ation in 
 Boston were originally gathered at Charlesto wn, but they 
 afterwards met for some years on an island in the har- 
 bour of Boston. " Some of them had been imprisoned 
 and hanislied ; and they were not allowed to meet 
 openly in town till 1672. In 1678, they built a house 
 for worship, out of which tliey were soon shut, and for 
 some time encountered severe opposition. The Gener- 
 al Court declared that the house was built without legal 
 permission, and therefore forfeited to the county, &c. 
 The act however was not enforced.! 
 
 In 1679, in consequence of the opposition of the local 
 government, some respectable inhabitants of Boston, 
 who were desirous of adopting the Episcopal ministry 
 and worship, were obliged to petition the King for ^;?'o- 
 tection, whicli being granted, they soon after obtained a 
 minister, and built a church ; not, as may easily be sup- 
 posed, without many hindrances.:!: 
 
 We might go on to detail accounts of this nature to a 
 very indefinite length ;— we might tell of the banish- 
 ment of Roger Williams into the wilderness, and of the 
 gentle hint given him by the Governor, that he had not 
 
 * Alden'saccount of the Religious Societies in Portsmouth, p, 5, 
 and note A. The original " ciuirch wa|:dens and their successors" 
 were made " feoffees in trust." 
 
 t Description of Boston, p. 242. 
 
 \ Churchman Is Magazine, (New-Haven,) vol. ii. p. 137 
 
164 
 
 gone quite far enough, because lie was yet within an 
 imaginary line ;* — of Quakers scourged at the cart tail. 
 or deprived of their lives at the gallows, ■[ &c. &c. But 
 enough has been said to show^ that the instances of per- 
 secution on the part of the Puritans, are neither rare, 
 nor trivial in their character. These acts, let it be re- 
 membered, were performed by men who " fled from 
 tyrannizing Bishops,'' — by men who '^^ for the sake of 
 rendering a spontaneous obedience, and breathing an 
 unfettered prayer, were willing to sit at their board 
 with famine, and lay themselves to rest on rocks.** 
 We are willing to rest the whole on the testimony of 
 Dr. Belknap. ^^ They maintained that all men had 
 liberty to do right, but no liberty to do wrong ; and it is 
 too evident from their conduct, that they supposed the 
 power of judging to be in those who were vested with 
 authority, — a princijde big with all the horrors of jjer- 
 secution. The exercise of such authority they con- 
 demned in the liigh Church party, who had oppressed 
 them in England, and yet, such is the frailty of human 
 nature, they held the same niiNCiPLES, and prac- 
 
 * " Roger Williams," says Trumbull, (Hist. U. S. vol. i. p. 105) 
 " was a gentleman of benevolence, and those who repaired to him 
 [after his banishment] were sure of meeting with the kindest 
 treatment. Whatever may have been his errors, he leas in one 
 point more illuminated than his brethren ; that to punish a man for 
 any matters of conscience is persecution. While the Massachusetts, 
 therefore, were excommunicating and banishing people for their 
 religious sentiments, here they found a welcome retreat." 
 
 t If Cotton and Norton, who are said to have led and participat- 
 ed in these persecutions, could be characterized as we have more 
 than once known them to be, as " eminent and holy divines," we 
 think, that charity itself would not find it difficult to speak of Arch- 
 bishop Laud, in a style to the full as courteous. See note, page 155. 
 
165 
 
 TISED THE SAME OPPRESSIONS, ON THOSE WHO DISSENT- 
 ED FROM THEM.'^* 
 
 Perliaps oar readers are now prepared to admit, that 
 we, in our turn, have some ground to rail at establish- 
 ments ; for certainly, tlie instances we have adduced, 
 abundantly prove, that Massachusetts, in her early day, 
 allowed a union between ciiurch and state, equally as 
 dangerous, as arbitrary, and oj>pressive, as that of her 
 mother country. We too might clamour concerning 
 ^' the selfishness, the chicanery and violence," exhibited 
 in its history. We inight dilate upon that " wanton 
 severiiy," which exiled men more illuminated than 
 themselves into a savage wilderness, and " beyond the 
 reach of those who would have stood between them and 
 starvation." We too could make outcries against a sect, 
 '^ whose history is that of unrelenting strictness when 
 in po\^er, and of abject artifice and false professions 
 w hen in disgrace." We too might tell how " through 
 some changes of fortune, and with the loss of the power 
 of persecuting, wrested from it by tlie growth of better 
 principles in politics, it has continued, '• with here and 
 there an exception, to breathe the same haughty, ex- 
 clusive," and intolerant "^ spirit." But shall we do 
 this ? Charity forbid. We pity the infirmities and the 
 errors of the fathers of New-Eiigland, for they were 
 our fathers too. We lament for the spots which stain 
 their otherwise fair escutcheon, and we would have al- 
 lowed the knowledge of them to have slept with tliem 
 in the tomb. They had many virtues, upon the bright- 
 ness of which we could dwell with pleasure. It is 
 true, they did little, or notiiing, towards achciving reli- 
 
 *Life of Winthrop. p. 3Ff'K qiiotod }»y Sliciw. 
 
166 
 
 gioiis liberty in the true sense of the term ; yet if tJieij 
 (lid not understand the principle of toleration, witli 
 which later times have made us fully acquainted, it was 
 the error, too, of the sincere and pious Charles I. of Ba- 
 con, of Clarendon, and, we suppose we may he permit- 
 ted to say, of Laud. The truth is, that with regard to 
 the times of which we have heen speaking, the true 
 principles of toleration seem to have been utterly un- 
 known. Those who held each different class of reli- 
 gious priuciples, strove earnestly for the predominance 
 over all others ; each believing that their system alone 
 formed the acceptable religion ; each rejecting toleration 
 as soul poison. Instead, then, of prolonging the spirit 
 and temper of those calamitous times, we ought rather 
 gratefully to thank God, that he has suffered us to have 
 our existence in a time, when the search for the know- 
 ledge of religion is as free as any enlightened mind can 
 desire. 
 
 But not so must we part with the Reviewer. His 
 spirit belongs to the times long since gone by. His Re- 
 view exhibits the grossest intolerance, and the most ar- 
 rogant, presumption on almost every page. With the 
 relief formed by his chisel, we see his^He?i^, and fellow 
 champion, striding forth as a giant in talents and learn- 
 ing, while the writer, whom he chose to attack, sinks 
 back into the shade of sympathy, and is unworthy of 
 his titles ! Who are " the best of the early reformers ;" 
 — who " the most judicious writers of later times," but 
 those whose opinions he thinks he can warp to coun- 
 tenance his theory ? Who are ^» the best scholars^ 
 preachers, and (even) men in the nation'^ of England i 
 
167 
 
 —who ii the best boast of the protcstant name,'' but 
 those whose case happened to suit liis purpose, and en- 
 abled him to brin- forth a well turned period ? " That 
 was excellently observed, say I, where I read a passage 
 •11 an author whose opinion agrees with mine When 
 we differ, there I pronounce him mistaken/' And this 
 as was said in another case, " is undoubtedly the philoso- 
 phy of the matter." 
 
 With the spirit of such writers, we trust, we have 
 not much in common. Claiming to ourselves, in this 
 happy country, the hallowed right of a conscientious 
 and undisturbed enjoyment of those principles which 
 wei-e the delight of our youth, and are the settled con- 
 viction of our soberer manhood ; we cheerfully yield to 
 others a similar right ; against which, God forbid, that 
 we should wish to infringe ! Attacked in so boasting 
 and pompous a style, by a writer possessed of such 
 overweening self-confidence, we have thought it our 
 duty to say something in self-defence : because it may 
 tend to relieve our characters from the imputation of 
 believing in an indefensible system. Perhaps this was 
 unnecessary ; for we see, and we rejoice that we do see, 
 the Church which the Reformers consecrated by their 
 BLOOD,— which has nourished within her bosom talents 
 of as mighty power and as noble cast as any the world 
 has seen,— and which has kindled the devotion, and re- 
 ceived the vows, of holy and pious men for ages,— is 
 now spreading to a glorious extent through our own 
 country; while our brethren of Europe, are carryin- 
 forth the standard of the ckoss, to supplant, we fru^L 
 the idols of heathenism. 
 
I 
 
 168 
 
 In laying down our pen, we feel constrained to take 
 our farewell of the Reviewer, in what was once said of 
 Gibbon's History : " The author often makes, when he 
 cannot readily find, occasion to insult our religion : 
 which he hates so cordially, that he might seem to re^ 
 vengc some personal injury." 
 
Vindicaiion of the Episcopal Church — Erratii. 
 
 The circumstance of the Author^s not resulln^Mn the vicinitv of 
 the press, will, it is hoped, be considered as an apology for "^th*- 
 number and the magnitude of t!io followino- 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 6 Lines 18 and 22 omit the inverted commas. 
 8 3 omit from. 
 
 11 Line 19 for disagreeable read disagreeahhj. 
 
 21 22 for strong read stron<rhj 
 
 .' wu^'^ f"? l^ *^^ quotation from Chilhngworth should read thus 
 
 When I shall see all the democracies and aristocracies in the 
 world he down and sleep, and awake into monarchies, then will 1 
 begm to believe that presbyterian government (and we suppose 
 we may be permitted to say-or congregationaO having continued 
 in the Church durmg the apostles' times, should presently after 
 agamst the apostles' doctrines and the zs ill of Christ, be vvhirled 
 about hke a scene in a masque, and transformed into Episconacv " 
 Page 37 Line 5 for readier'* read readers' 
 
 41 last line before moderation insert great. 
 
 43 Line 2 for dominion read domination. 
 
 47 7 for pretensions read pretension. 
 
 56 19 for execute read exercise. 
 
 75 22 for the sentence read a sentence. 
 
 " 24 for so at read so that at. 
 
 78 23 tor sectarians read sectaries. 
 
 86 12 for a* generally read so generally 
 
 r 7,^,? .u ?\ after rAannsert ^^ our Churches are delivered out 
 of all ; so that the sentence will read thus : " We ought g-reatly 
 to rejoice, and give God thanks, that our Churches are deliverefi 
 out ot all those things which displeased God so sore, &c 
 Page 122 last line for they read he. 
 
 129 18 for ^/m« other text read <Ae other text. 
 
 144 19 for /iM poor read ^/m< poor. 
 
 148 14 for University read Universities. 
 
 155 10 for published read preached, 
 
 1&9 IQ omit inverted commas after «o. 
 
I 
 
 
■ 
 

 
 I i i 
 
 4 
 
 1 , 
 
 ^ 1 ' '