not say what a figure Dr. Hook and the Oxford Tract-men cut in the presence of such a statement.

The great reformers and champions of the Reformation knew how to distinguish between what was ESSENTIAL to the FORMATION of a church in times of difficulty, persecution, or confusion, and what was prudent, proper, and orderly in a settled and peaceable state of the church. The following passage from the Epistles of that great reformer, John Calvin, second to none in his day in talents, zeal, and influence in the Reformation, will show this: "Consider this matter fully now,-suppose a person, in a foreign region, desires the opportunity and ability of gathering together a flock for Christ; will not those who are in that place, and who AGREE to receive his MINISTRY, by that very act of receiving him, ELECT him as their MINISTER, even though no rite be used in the matter? I confess, indeed,

primate lived long enough to see the design finished. He read it over with an exactness that was peculiar to him. He employed some weeks wholly in perusing it, and he corrected it with a care that descended even to the smallest matters; and was such as he thought became the importance of the work. And when that was done, he returned it to me with a letter, that as it was the last I ever received from him, so gave the whole such a character, that how much soever that might raise its value with true judges, yet in decency it must be suppressed by me, as going far beyond what any performance of mine could deserve. He gave so favourable an account of it to our late blessed queen, that she was pleased to tell me she would find leisure to read it; and the last time I was admitted to the honour of waiting on her, she commanded me to bring it to her. But she was soon after that carried to the Source, to the Fountain of life, in whose light she now sees both light and truth. So great a breach as was then made upon all our hopes, put a stop upon this, as well as upon much greater designs." "This work has lien by me ever since: but has been often not only reviewed by myself, but by much better judges. The late most learned bishop of Worcester," Stillingfleet, "read it very carefully. He marked every thing in it that he thought needed a review: and his censure was in all points submitted to. He expressed himself so well pleased with it, to myself and to some others, that I do not think it becomes me to repeat what he said of it. Both the most reverend archbishops, with several of the bishops, and a great many learned divines, have also read it. I must, indeed, on many accounts own that they may be inclined to favour me too much, and to be too partial to me; yet they looked upon this work as a thing of that importance, that I have reason to believe they read it over severely and if some small corrections may be taken for an indication that they saw no occasion for greater ones, I had this likewise from several of them."-Preface, pp. 1, 2, fol. Lond., 1699. These things are important.

that where a due order of doing such things HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED in any church, it ought to be maintained, fixed, and immoveable; but the case is widely different, where the very foundations have to be laid anew. For what shall we say as to most of the churches raised up by the Lord through Germany? Shall we deny that those who first laboured there in preaching the gospel were received as true pastors, though no rite accompanied their admission to that office? I do not wish to bind you to the authority of men; but I produce this example as confirming the position I laid down, viz., that the election or appointment of a minister is not necessarily the same in an unsettled state of a church, as it is where a certain form and order have been already established."* This is the view of the Scriptures, of the earliest fathers, and of the greatest reformers. The contrary opinion is indeed belonging to the very essence of Popery. It is an attempt to make that necessary which God never made so; and then to bind the church to human ordinations, personal succession, episcopal consecrations, priestly absolutions : even while, by undeniable history, many of these men have been wicked, heretics, murderers, simonists, traffickers in the souls and bodies of mankind, shedding the blood of the saints, and leading mankind to destruction!

The case of the English reformers was a difficult one. They saw the truth; but a great part of the nation was still under much Popish ignorance. The case very much resembled that of St. Paul with those Jews who were still zealous for the law of Moses. Paul, as a mere prudential measure, took Timothy and circumcised him, rejecting the obligation of circumcision as essential to Christianity. The English reformers, as a prudential measure, because of the multitudes who were still zealous for the ceremonies of Popery, retained, in form, the ordination and consecration of the Popish bishops; not because of their validity and necessity, by divine right, to the existence of the Christian church and Christian ordinances; for they maintained the contrary. The primitive church lived down those Jewish prejudices; and circumcision, even as a circumstance, was utterly put away. The Anglican church should have done the same. It should have gone on to

* Epist., p. 349, edit. Gen., 1575.

declare boldly, that the ordination of its ministers was based on the spiritual and Scriptural qualifications of the men; upon the call of God, moving them by the Holy Ghost to take upon them the ministry; and upon the call of the church, solemnly receiving them as the ministers of God, in the gospel of his Son. It has failed to do this; and the strenuous attempts made by many of its erring advocates to maintain the ESSENTIAL importance of Popish ordinations, episcopal consecration, personal succession, &c. -these efforts, I say, have resulted in a constant leaning to Popery, in many divines and members of the Church of England. Wherever and by whomsoever these things are thus maintained, that church becomes a half-way house to Popery.

Both the foreign and English reformers had great fears about what was left in the Church of England of Popish origin, lest it should afterward lead to the strengthening of Popery. Cranmer and his coadjutors did what they could, according to the times, and hoped their successors would finish what they had begun. Calvin, writing to Cranmer, A. D. 1551, then archbishop of Canterbury, says, "But to speak freely, I greatly fear, and the fear is becoming general here, lest by so much delay, the autumn or harvest should pass, and at length the coldness of a perpetual winter should succeed. You will need to stimulate yourself, as the burden of old age steals upon you ; lest in leaving the world your conscience should distress you, because, through some tardiness in proceeding, all things should be left in confusion. I mention things as being in confusion, because outward superstitions are so corrected as to leave innumerable branches that will be constantly sprouting out again. Indeed, I hear that such a mass of POPISH CORRUPTIONS remain, as not only obscure, but almost bury the pure and genuine worship of God."* That Cranmer was not offended with this plainness is evident, for, in apparently a later letter, Calvin says the archbishop of Canterbury admonished him "that he could not do a more useful thing than to write frequently to the king." The Popish, and semi-popish bishops and divines, conforming and nonconforming, did their utmost to hinder the removal of these evils. There is a + Page 384.

*Calvini Epist., p. 101.

letter to Calvin from a venerable, aged, sorrowing, and almost dying person on this subject, dated Cambridge, 1550, pp. 96, 97. Zanchy wrote a bold letter to Queen Elizabeth on the Popish vestments, requesting her not to enforce them, 1571. The meek and peaceful Peter Martyr, who spent a long time at Oxford, endeavouring to promote and defend the Reformation, was written to by the venerable Hooper, bishop of Gloucester, on the subject of the Popish vestments. Hooper withstood their use. Martyr, at that time, writing in answer to Hooper's letter, declares he most entirely approves of their removal, but thinks that as they were not fundamental matters, they might be tolerated for a TIME: and then, afterward, increasing piety in the church would remove them: "for," says he, "if we first allow the gospel time to be propagated, and strike deep its roots, men will then perhaps be persuaded better and more easily to remove these external trappings." This letter is dated 1550. However, in a few years he altogether changed his mind. Writing to the Popish nobles, (professing to embrace the gospel,) and to their ministers, after recommending them to take care that " no splendour of names or titles, no kings, no fathers, no bishops, no popes, no councils, &c., should blind their eyes;-that the SCRIPTURES ALONE should be the supreme and infallible rule of their faith;" he comes to say, “Use all your vigilance, brethren, that the house of God, defiled, and almost destroyed by antichrist, should be with diligent care rebuilt. Extirpate utterly all superstitious and false notions. This I the rather admonish, because I have seen some who have only cropt the leaves, and flowers, and buds of old superstition: but, having spared the ROOTS, they afterward shot up again to the great injury of the Lord's vineyard. Let all the seeds of evil, and the rottenness of the roots be extirpated in the beginning. For if this be neglected at the FIRST, (I know what I say,) AFTERWARD it will be much more difficult to pluck them up."—February 14th, 1556. And see Bishop Burnet's Letters; the one from Zurich, p. 55, London, 1727, where he shows that the bishops Jewel, Horne, Cranmer, Grindal, took the same views, but that the queen was obstinately opposed to the removal of these things.

SECTION XIV.

GENUINE APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.

We have now searched this pseudo-apostolical succession scheme to the bottom, and have found it a baseless fabric. Those who have attempted its construction, whatever they might be besides, have in this displayed a disposition to erect a system of spiritual tyranny over the whole church of God. Many have been deceived by them. Multitudes of the holiest people upon earth have, in different ages, suffered bonds, imprisonment, and death, under the operation of this antichristian scheme. It will be proper to exhibit in a closing section a view of GENUINE APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION- -the succession of truth and holiness. God has always had a true church and he always will have a true church. The gates of hell never have prevailed against it; and we are assured by himself that they never shall. This church has always stood, as to its foundation, on the truth, and faithfulness, and power of God; and never on any ceremonies or circumstances of church government, or any order of men: thus it will stand

FOR EVER.

LET US REVIEW THE PAST.-In the brief divine history which we have of the antediluvian world, there is no intimation that the church depended on any order of men, as ministers of religion. That there were preachers of righteousness, is plainly testified in the Scriptures. But from all that we can learn, they were not confined to any uninterrupted succession, nor even initiated by any rite of ordination. They appear to have been good men, who, (blessed with the knowledge of God's favour to themselves, and of his plan of saving sinners,) were moved by the Holy Ghost to testify the judgments of God against sin, and his mercy to those who returned to him by repentance, and by trust in that mercy. This was the case for about two thousand years. From the DELUGE to MOSES matters continued in the same state. The priesthood of Aaron was designed to typify the priesthood of Christ: as much oneness, therefore, and continuity was given to it as human things would allow. Hence a personal succession, in one