Primitive truth and order, vindicated from modern misrepresentation with a defence of episcopacy particularly that of Scotland, against an attack..

{

V

DANIELS & SMITH'S

Cheap Book Store,
Cor. Fourth & Arch sts.

PniLADELPHIA.

PI

LIBMRY OF CONGRESS. #

0

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, t

J

y

PRIMITIVE

TRUTH AND ORDER

VINDICATED FRO^I

MODERN MISREPRESENTATION:

WITH

A DEFENCE OF EPISCOPACY,

PARTICULARLY THAT OF

SCOTLAND,

AGAINST AN ATTACK MADE ON IT

BY THE LATE DR. QAMPBELU OF ABERDEEN,

IN HIS.

LECTURES ON ECCLflSIASTICAL mSTORY.

^ , BY THE RIGHT REV. JOHN SKINNER,

TiLN ABERDEEN", SENIOR BISHOP OF TH^ SCOTCH EPISCOPAI. CHURCH,

I

Zf^X THE FIRST AMERICAN EDITION^y?^

To which is annexed, U

A REVIEW OF DR. HAWEIS' CHURCH m^ORY. ::^

PRINTED AND SOLD BY T. (3 J. SWOPP'.
No, 160 Pearl-Street.

1808.

Tbu Library
OF CowoRes^

ADVERTISEMENT
TO THIS EDITION.

The original edition of this work contained
a short " Address to the Episcopalians of Scot-
land." As this address derives its principal
interest from the local circumstances of the
Church in that country, the publishers have
omitted it; and they have subjoined a very
able Review of Dr. Haweis' Church Hhtoryy
extracted from the Anti- Jacobin Magazine,
which, they think, will enhance the value of
the volume.

THE FOLLOWING WORK, IN VINDICATION

OP

PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER,

IS MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED
TO THE HONOURABLE

SIR WILLIAM FORBES, BARONET,

OF PITSLIGOj

BOTH AS A GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT

OF HIS EXERTIONS IN THE SAME CAUSE,

And

AS A HUMBLE TESTIMONY

OF THAT SINCERE REGARD FOR HIS PUBLIC VIRTUES,

AND NO LESS AMIABLE CHARACTER

IN PRIVATE LIFE,

WHICH HAS BEEN LONG AND DEEPLY IMPRESSED

ON THE MIND OF

HIS MUCH OBLIGED, OBEDIENT,

AND VERY FAITHFUL SERVANT,

THE AUTHOR.

CONTENTS.

Introduction^ Page 9—25

Chapter L

The Christian Religion^ beings like its Divine Author^
" the same yesterday^ to-day, and for ever^"* ought
to be received and embraced^ just as it is represented
and held out in the Scriptures of Truth^ " without
adding thereto^ or diminishing from it^^ 27— -88

Chapter II.

The Church of Christy in which his Religion is received
and embraced^ is that spiritual Society, in which the
Ministration of holy Things is committed to the three
distinct Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,
deriving their Authority from the Apostles, as those
Apostles received their Commission from Christ, 89— 2o8

Chapter III.

A Part of this Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,
though deprived of the Support of Civil Establish'
ment, does still exist in this Country, under the Name
of the Scotch Episcopal Church, whose Doctrine,
Discipline, and Worship, as happily agreeing with
that of the first and purest Ages of Christianity,
ought to be steadily adhered to, by all who profess to
be of the Episcopal Communion in this Part of the
Kingdom, 259 — 340

Appendix, containing List and Letters of Consecra-
tions, and Articles of Union, 341— '350

Extract from the Review of Primitive Truth and Or-
der, contained in the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, exhi-
biting a Reply to Dr, CampbeWs Commentar\j on the
Words of Ignatius'-^^'' There is but one Altar as
there is but one Bishop," 351 — o6^

A Review of Haweis* Church History, in zvhich the
Errors and Misrepresentations of that Work are de-
tected and exposed, 355—411

INTRODUCTION.

XF there be any one truth, in embracing which it might
be supposed that the intelligent part of mankind would uni-
versally agree, it is surely the importance of religion, and
the necessity of attending to what it recommends, for pro-
moting the interests of society on earth, as well as prepar-
ing men for the happiness of heaven. Viewing the matter
in this light, it is impossible but that every serious think-
ing person, who wishes well to his country, must sincerely
lament the unhappy divisions, which have so long agitated
the public mind, on a subject so interesting as the nature
and tendency of true religion. However justifiable sepa-
ration may be in some cases ; and however necessary at all
times, for the friends of truth and righteousness to with-
draw themselves from the tents of error and ungodliness;
still it cannot be denied that the numerous sects and parties
into which the Christian world has been divided, and their
almost endless diversity of religious opinions, must be con-
sidered as one of the heaviest calamities with which man-
kind have ever been visited. Nor need we be at much
pains to point out this wild variety of sentiment respecting
the doctrines of the gospel, as the most common source of
infidelity, and most powerful support of irreligion; since
we find it daily appealed to as such, and therefore Industrie
ously encouraged by those " perverse disputers," who, ra-
ther than embrace the " pure undefiled religion" of Christ,
allow themselves to be completely " spoiled through philo-
sophy and vain deceit."

Nothing seems to be better known, nor more carefully
improved, by the adversaries of our common faith, th^i?

iO INTRODUCIION.

the advantage they derive from those unhappy dissentions^
by which the family of Christians, which an Apostle calls
the " Household of faith," is divided against itself. In la-
menting the effects of such shameful division, the church of
Christ may justly say, in the words of the Psalmist, — " It
is not an open enemy that hath done me this dishonour 5
but even those who were once my companions, who took
sweet counsel together with me, and walked in the house
of God as friends." Such " offences," however, we are
assured, " must needs come ;" even although a " woe be de-
nounced against those by whom they come." We are also
forevvarned, that there must, and will be heresies, factions
and parties distinguished by their false and destructive
principles j " that they who are approved" by their steady
adherence to truth, unity and order, " may be made mani-
fest."-—Such then being the divided state of what is called
the Christian Worldj those who have promoted the pre-
sent work do not hope to produce any thing like general
unanimity in a country such as this, wh^re so many jarring
opinions are entertained on the subject of religion. — ^The
object which they have in vieAV is of less extent, and there-
fore more likely to be accomplished. The design of this
publication is to offer some arguments in defence of Episco-
pacy in general, and particularly that of Scotland ; and to
persuade such of the inhabitants of this country as profess
to be of the Episcopal Communion, to walk worthy of that
profession.^ by acting in a manner consistent with it, and
endeavouring to support the constitution, and preserve the
unity of that small remnant of the old established church,
which still happily exists in this part of the united kingdom.
There is no article of the Christian faith, as laid down in
our public creeds, that seems to be so strangely misunder-
stood, and so little attended to, as that in which we are
taught to profess our belief of the " holy catholic church."
And the mistakes and inattention so prevalent with regard
to this important article are the more to be regretted, as the

INTRODUCTION. It

baneful consequences arising from this unhappy cause do
daily exhibit an increasing tendency to disorder, confu-
sion, and every evil work. It is no doubt by preserving
the bonds of ecclesiastical unity, that Christians are to be
kept in the way of obedience to the one God, and depen-
dence on the one Mediator. It has, therefore, been justly
obsen^ed by an eminent writer, that, " if ever this subject
of the church of Christ, now so much neglected, and al-
most forgotten by those who are most concerned to under-
stand it, should come to be better considered, there would
be more true piety, and more peace, more of those virtues
which will be required in heaven, and which must there-
fore be first learned upon earth. Some amongst us err,
because they know not the Scriptures ; and others, be-
cause they never considered the nature of the church.
Some think they can make their own religion, and so they
despise the word of God, and fall into infidelit}^ Others
think they can make their own church, or even be a church
unto themselves ; and so they fall into the delusions of en-
thusiasm, or the uncharitableness of schism."

These are the pertinent remarks of a learned divine of
of the church of England, and they are enforced by an ob-
servation so justly expressed, and so well adapted to my
present purpose, that I must take the liberty of presenting
it to the notice of those for whom this publication is more
particularly intended. " But, as there is nodiing to en-
lighten the minds of men in the doctrines of salvation, but
the word of God; so there is nothing that can unite their
hearts and aft'ections, but the church of God, Ye are one
bread, and one body, saith the Apostle ; one body by par-
taking of one bread ; and that can only be in the same com,"
mimion,^^^ Impressed therefore with the truth and import-
ance of what is here so justly asserted, and earnestly de-

* See the preface to an Essay on the Church, by the late Rev, William"
Jones, of Nayland, in Suffolk.

U INTRODUCTION.

sirous of its producing the same effect in the minds of
those for whose benefit I am now writing, I shall beg leave
to request their serious and impartial consideration of the
subject before us; while, taking a view of the general state
of religion in this countiy, and the danger to which it is
exposed, from professed infidels on the one hand, and from
the fanatical abettors of enthusiasm on the other, we look
back through all this mist of modern confusion, to the pri-
mitive order and uniformity of the church, and see what
necessity there is for our continuing still in the " Apostles'
doctrine and felloivslup^'* as the only source of order and
guard of uniformity. — We shall then close our view with
such a brief, but, I trust, satisfactory account of the ecclesi-
astical orders and administrations of the Episcopal Church
in Scotland, as, notwithstanding the violent attack which
was lately made upon it by a learned Professor of the
establishment, may tend, by the blessing of God, to con-
firm the regard and attachment of its present members; to
promote a becoming union among all those who profess
to be of the Episcopal persuasion in this part of the king-
dom ; and to furnish them with proper arguments for the
vindication of those sound and salutary principles, by
which they have the happiness to be distinguished.

It is an observation of undeniable certainty, that the
same Divine Being, the Almighty Lord of heaven and
earth, who has given to man the good things of creation
for the use and benefit of his body, and the precious truths
of revelation for the instruction and comfort of his soul,
has in both instances met with the most ungrateful and
unworthy returns. The good things of creation have been
abused to the basest purposes of riot and intemperance,
consumed in sin and sensuality, and often made a pretence
for indulging covetousness and ambition, a sordid parsi-
mony and griping avarice; v/hile the precious truths of
revelation have been treated with the most insolent scorn
<uid contempt, exposed to all the wantonness of raillery and

INTRODUCTION-. is

ridicule, and often so strangely perverted, as to pi-oduce no-
thing but blind superstition and enthusiastic presumption.

It is not enough, however, that we acknowledge in ge-
neral the truth of this melancholy observation : let us ex-
amine whether such a charge be strictly just, when applied
to the inhabitants of this land, the country with which we
are most immediately connected. Perhaps, when compar-
ing our moral character with that of other states and king-
doms, we may feel an inclination at once to resist the
charge, because our country cannot in justice be accused of
such flagrant abuses of the divine goodness as are too often
exhibited in other parts of the world. But before we allow
ourselves to be carried away by any such superficial and
flattering comparison, we shall do well to consider, whether
this moral superiority, which at present we undoubtedly
possess, may not be more justly ascribed to a want of
means and opportunity of carrying the pursuit of sensual
and worldly pleasure to the same height with our richeif
neighbours, than to any want of inclination, from principle,
to the abuses which I have been mentioning. It seems
therefore a doubtful point, whether our virtue in this re-
spect is to be traced to the proper source and principle of
all that deserves to be called virtue, or whether our being
" delivered from much of the evil" that prevails in other
places, may not be ascribed to the favourable circumstance
oi our not being so much " led into temptation." But
whatever may be said, either for or against our national
character, on this score, it can only be applied to the first
branch of the charge to which I have alluded, as pointing
to that presumptuous abuse of the good things of creation,
the criminality of which will no doubt be in proportion to
the share that is enjoyed of these temporal blessings ; and
those, to whom little is given, will surely have the less to
account for. But as to the other part of the charge, in
which our country is implicated, as professing to be Chris-
tian, and enjoying the full benefit of divine revelation, I am

U INTRODUCTION.

afraid, that in the contempt, or abuse of its precious truths,
as much guilt and depravity will be found here, in propor-
tion to our numbers, as in the other parts of the united
kingdom.

From the advantages which Scotland has long enjoyed
in the way of literature, and the easy access thus afforded
to the general acquisition of knowledge, has arisen the
powerful temptation, which many have been unable to
withstand, of carrying their speculations beyond the proper
limits, and affecting to be wise even in matters of religion,
above what God has caused to be written for man's instruc-
tion. While such speculations, however, were confined to
the student in his closet, their influence was narrow and
circumscribed; and the general state of society was but lit-^
tie affected by the writings of such infidels as Damd Hume^
till they were better suited to vulgar capacity, and their
deadly venom more widely circulated, by the poisonous
arts of Thomas Paine, and his numerous disciples. These
could not fail at last to attract the notice of government ;
and by its firm and steady exertions, a stop has been put to
the open and avowed propagation of principles so hostile to
the morals, the peace, and good order of society. Yet it is
much to be feared, that in many parts of the kingdom, the
seeds of irreligion and licentiousness have been so plenti-
fully disseminated, that unless their growth be checked by
a returning sense of duty, or some powerful interposition
of Providence, before they come to full maturity, inevita-
ble ruin must be the consecjuence. Already do the presa-
ges of such a fatal issue begin to exhibit themselves. In
some of the most populous districts of Scotland, where the
middling and lower ranks of the people were, some years
ago, exemplary in the discharge of their religious duties,
not occasional neglect only, but a constant derision, and art
avowed contempt of these duties, have now taken place.
The rites and ordinances of the gospel are exposed to
every species of scorn and ridicule. Children are wilfully^

INTRODUCTION. 1>

tvrithheld from the " laver of regeneration ;" and men and
women " count the blood of the covenant, wherewith they
are sanctified, an unholy thing, in pure despite of the spirit
of grace."

The attainment of superior wisdom has been the boast of
the free-thinking tribe in every age, and in every nation ;
and much mischief has been done to the cause of Chris-
tianity by the sophisms of schoolmen, and the introduction
of that false philosophy and vain deceit, the offspring of
metaphysical subtilty, through which so many in the higher
ranks of life have been completely " spoiled and led
away after the rudiments of the world, and not after
Christ." Yet comparatively small was the injury, so long
as the poor had the gospel preached unto them ; so long as
the mass of society was uncontaminated, and the great
body of the people esteemed themselves happy in enjoying
the comforts of religion, and " counted all things but loss,
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus their
Lord." The paitition-wall, however, between learned and
unlearned, is now in this respect broken down. The adepts
of the new philosophy have availed themselves of the faci-
lity, with which the lower classes of the people may be
tempted to get rid of this distinction ; and, if we may bor-
row the figurative language of the Psalmist, " the boar out
of the wood doth now waste it, and the wild beast of the
field doth devour" and tear in pieces, the gospel of that
** God of hosts," who proclaimed himself " the true vine ;"
even the " Shepherd of Israel," of whom the same Psalm-
ist declares, that " he is our God, and we are the people of
his pasture, and the sheep of his hand." — 'What a pity it is
that the grievous wolves of atheism and apostacy should be
allowed to enter in among us, clothed as they are in the
lambskin dress of fraternal benevolence, and universal phi-
lanuiropy ; under which guise, " speaking perverse things
to draw away disciples after them," they spare not the
flock of Christ, but are daily carrying off unstable souls to

16 INTRODUCTION.

the destruction that awaits them! To whom, but to that
same mlght}^ Shepherd of Israel, who neither shimbereth
nor sleepeth, can we look for such aid and protection as arc
necessary to defend us from these enemies of our peace ?

But, while we fly to him for shelter, earnestly praying
that he would take us under " the shadow of his wings,
until these calamities be overpast," we must be equally
careful to beware of the modern " false prophets," and not
listen to the pretensions of such as are ever seeking to
exalt themselves, by going about and saying, " Lo, here is
Christ, or lo there ;" for Christ himself hath left this warn-
ing with us — " Not every one that saith vmto me, Lord,
Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven ; but he that
doth the iviU of my Father which is in heaven."* Now
this heavenly Father being the God of order, not of confu-
sion, his will must in every thing accord with his work ;
and we are to discover what his will is, fi^om v/hat he has
done for the purpose of revealing it to us. His doings^ no
doubt, may be often " marvellous in our eyes ;" but no
man, who is not actuated by the most palpable presumption
and sejf-confidence, will dare to infringe, or pretend to
alter, the order of God's works, whether they refer to his
operations in the economy of nature, or of grace. Bold
and assuming as the naturalist too often is, he never ha*
attempted to invert the seasons ; to make the sun rule by
night, and the moon by day; to oppose the stars in their
courses ; to bring the winds out of their treasures, or to
allay the fury of the tempest by his unavailing " peace, be
still." How then should any one pretend to alter the
system of things spiritual ; — to change the economy of
grace ; — to disjoint the whole frame of religion, by oppos-
ing the revealed will of God, and setting aside the laws
and institutions of his divine appointment? Yet all this
may be jusdy laid to the charge of those wild enthusiasts^

* St. Matthew vii. 21.

INTRODUCTION, I}'

w^ho, full of the assurance of faith, and the inward expe-
rience of a self-confident mind, enroll themselves among
the elect of God ; and, certain, as they suppose, of being
saved themselves, look down with contemptuous disdain on
those humble Christians who are yet content to " work out
their own salvation," in the way that God has prescribed,
** with fear and trembling." — A doctrine, which thus tears
away from the human heart every solid motive to a holy
and religious life ; which tells us, in language as plain as
these people can possibly make use of, that if we are in the
number of the elect, there is no fear, and if we are not,
there is no hope : Such a doctrine, the abettors of it, no
doubt, justly suppose, would require to be supported, not
by human authority, but by an immediate testimony from
Jieaven; and therefore the modern preachers of this new
gospel, despising the commission which our Lord gave his
Apostles, to be handed down by regular succession, have
all at once assumed to themselves a title, by which they
would make the world believe that they have now the
only mission from heaven that exists upon this earth, the
peculiar privilege of preaching what they are pleased to call
the Gospely m. opposition to all that the church of God has
hitherto received under that venerable name.

How long this delusion, which is now spreading so wide
through every part of the kingdom, may prevail, it is not
easy to say ; as the power of delusion is strong, both when
it would appear to be on the side of religion, and when it
operates in a contrary direction. Attempts have been
made, by something like ecclesiastical authority, to stop the
progress of this growing evil, and to administer<?a remedy
to those who are infected by this missionary phrensy ; a
sort of possession more worthy of one who has his " dwel»
ling among the tombs," than of those who reside in the
habitations of men ! But they who prescribe the remedv,
ought to understand well the nature of the disease, and be
able to trace the malady to its proper source. People who

IS INTRODUCTION.

admonish others to beware of falling into any dangeroias
error in matters of religion, ought themselves to be exempt
from the mischief, against which their admonition is direct*
ed. Such warnings come with an ill grace, and therefore
with no great probability of doing much good, from those,
who, perhaps it will be said, derive their own ministry
from the same contempt of a regular apostolic mission, of
which they now see such alarming consequences, as have
at last produced a wish to prevent their farther increase.

In the midst of all this confusion, this melancholy depar-
ture from PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER, we of the Epis-
copal Communion have the credit and comfort of reflecting,
that nothing has been said or done on our part to promote
or encourage such wild deviation from the paths of true re-
ligion, the ways of unity, peace and love, which our blessed
Redeemer marked out for all his faithful foUowers.-^It is
true, we are separated, and must continue to be separate
from the establishment of this country; not as influenced
by a spirit of opposition to whatever is established either in
church or state (which seems to be a prominent feature in
the doctrine of these new Apostles), but because we act on
principles which require and justify such separation ; and
which, if well understood, and duly adhered to, would en-
sure stability to every sound establishment, and prevent
those unhappy divisions, which serve only to multiply
error, and drive men farther and farther from the truth as
it is in Christ.

Such as I have now described it, is evidently the situa-
tion of the land in which we live, with respect to the reli-
gious ch^^acter of a great majority of its inhabitants, very
much resembling the state of things in the Jewish church,
at the time of our Saviour's first coming into the flesh,
when the true religion was either totally set aside by the
infidelity of the Sadducees, or sadly corrupted by the
vile hypocrisy of self-conceited Pharisees. The former,
led away, like our modem Illuminaiiy with a vain affecta-

INTRODUCTION. igr

tion of superior discerivment, coiild not bear the thoughts
of submitting their enlightened understandings to the fa-
miliar tenets of a vulgar faith. They must have a creed of
a different form, perfectly suited to what they are pleased
to call Reason^ and the Fitness of things. This has been
the idol of the unbelieving race, in all ages and places of
the world. And though the vanity of their scheme has been
often exposed in the clearest manner, and to the full satis-
faction of eveiy serious, sober- thinking person; yet it would
seem to require the same divine eloquence now as it did
foi*merly, to " put the Sadducees to silence."

But though it were possible (and with God it cannot be
impossible) to check the licentious railings of these " bold
disputers, who even deny the Lord that bought them ;"
denying, either that they are bought, or that he who bought
them is the Lord— -the eternal. Almighty Jehovah; the
true faith has yet another sort of enemies to combat with,
in the imitators of those pharisaical pretenders to religion,
of whom St. Paul gives a most just and striking descrip-
tion in these words—-" For I bear them record, that they
have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For
they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going
about to establish their own righteousness, have not sub-
mitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."*— Sub-
mission to the righteous will and appointment of God was
no part of the religion adopted by that zealous ignorance,
the effects of which are here so minutely described ; and
similar effects are still flowing from the same unhappy
cause. The pride of infidelity, we may well suppose, is
not a little cherished and supported by the gross absurdi-
ties which prevail among many of those who profess to
believe the great truths of the gospel ; and who, in flying
from the ruinous paths of the impious sceptic, are often
sadly bewildered in ways of their own devising, and plunge

* Rom. X. 3, 3.

^ INTRODUCTIOlsr.

themselves into all the follies of the wild enthusiast* There
seems to be a strange propensity in many of our country-
men to be misguided by such as thus go about to deceive ;
and who, to carry on their deceit the more effectually, lay
it down as an undoubted maxim, very flattering to the va-
nity of the human heart, that any man who can read, may,
with the scriptures in his hands, be able to know and do
every thing necessary to salvation. But this, though partly
true, is not die whole truth ; and well-meaning people
ought to be put on their guard against such an artful mis-
representation. Had the scriptures contained only a few
moral precepts, tending to preserve the peace of society,
and to regulate man's conduct towards his neighbour, with-
out prescribing any sacred rites and institutions, as a testi-
mony of his submission to the will of his God, the maxim
I have mentioned might have been assumed with more
propriety. But is this really the case ? Has a man, in
order to be made a Christian, nothing more to do than to
go to a bookseller's shop and purchase a bible, that he may
peruse it at his leisure and interpret it as he thinks fit?
With all the liberality which this age possesses, no one has
yet ventured to assert so much in plain terms, although the
loose opinions, which so generally prevail, clearly show,
that too many are guided by no other principle.

In tracing these and many other growing evils to their
proper source, we may easily find their original in that
lamentable ignorance of the true nature and constitution of
the Christian Church ; and of consequence, that tot^ want
of regard for the order and succession of its ministers
which have, of late years, so wofully prevailed among us ;
encouraged and countenanced by a numerous set both of
preachers and authors, whose interest it is to flatter men
in this fashionable error, and take advantage of it. Hence
it is, that the Christian world has been bewildered and led
astray by so many unfaithful histories of the church, and
such ill-digested lectures on that subject, as could only

INTRODUCTION. 2i

come from persons who found it necessary to touch these
things very tenderly, because the ground on which they
stood in their official character, was not so firm as to bear
them up in any other language than that of the false pro-
phets of old, " who spoke smooth things, and prophesied
deceits, because the people loved to have it so." A writer
of another stamp, the late pious and learned Bishop of
Norwich, in laying before his clergy a brief account of the
great fundamental doctrines which they were to inculcate,
as essential to Christianity, and without which, it cannot
be considered as a religion true in itself or beneficial to us,
takes care to include in the number of these important doc-
trines, the Constitution and Use qf the Church; " a subject
on which," he says, men's principles for some years past
'' have been very unsettled, and their knowledge preca-
rious and superficial."^ — We need not wonder that this
should be the case, when men are at so little pains to ac-
quire that sound substantial knowledge, which is absolutely
necessary to settle their principles, and give them just and
suitable ideas on a subject of such serious and striking im-
portance, as was ascribed by the blessed Author of our
religion, to the way and manner, the purpose and design of
his building or raising that society, which he was pleased
to call his churchy and which he no sooner entered on his
public ministr}^, than he began to establish.f

Now that this church of Christ, thus established by
himself in person, and afterwards enlarged by his Apostles,
on the plan which he had laid down for their direction,
ought to be considered as a regular, well formed society,
is evident from the names and allusions by which it is
described in the sacred writings. It is there represented
as a body^ a household or family^ a city^ a kingdom; and
must certainly bear some kind of relation to what these
terms are generally known to imply. Indeed, no one who

* See Bishop H<jrne's Charge, p. 21; f See St. Matthew xvi. 18, 19-

22 INTRODUCTION.

reflects for a moment on the nature of these figurative
expressions, can be ignorant wherein it is that this relation
or connection takes place. The church is a ^o^f/ having
many members, of which Christ is the head. The church
is a " household^'* ox family y of which Christ is the master,*--.
" of whom the whole family is named;" and into which
being admitted by baptism, we receive the spirit of adop-
tion, whereby we are allowed and enabled to call the great
Lord of heaven and earth our Father. The church is also
called the " city of the living God j" and Christians are
said to be " fellow-citizens with the saints :" and it is of-
ten mentioned as a kingdom^ of which Christ— -the King of
saints — is the Almighty Sovereign, " to whom all power
is given, in heaven and in earth." In all these respects,
the church must be considered as an outward and visible
society, possessing all the powers and privileges, and im-
posing on its members all the relative duties implied in
the allusions which I have now quoted. As a hody^ all
the members must be joined to the head, and to one an*
other, that they may receive life and motion for the dis-
charge of their several functions. As a family^ its Al-
mighty Father must in every thing be the guide and di-
rector of his children, appointing for them the proper teach-
ers and masters, and training them up in the way of life,
from which they must never depart. As a householdy the
church must not be divided against itself: that it may
stand, it must be upheld in unity and order, and by sub-
mission to such wholesome discipline, as in the charitable
institutions of this world is found necessary to be imposed
on all who are admitted to share in the liberality of the
founders. As a city and kingdom^ the church must be
watched over, and governed by its proper officers, deriv-
ing their spiritual power and authority from that heavenly
Sovereign, who is King of kings and Lord of lords.

Such then being the light in which we are taught to view
the nature and design of that holy and heavenly society,

INTRODUCTION, 2;j

which in scripture is called the church; let us now cast a
veil over the confusions of these latter days, and set our-
selves to inquire after the order and uniformity of the
primitive ages of Christianitj^; when the doctrine and
fellowship of the Apostles were strictly and steadfastly
adhered to, and Christians continued most faithfully and
conscientiously " in the things which they had learned,
and been assured of, knowing of whom they had learned
them." And as in the course of this inquiry, it may be
necessary, for the truth's sake, to speak of things as they
really ai-e, and not " call evil good, and good evil, or put
darkness for light, and light for darkness ;" it is hoped
that such candid and honest dealing will not be misinter-
preted as the indication of an uncharitable, or illiberal,
mind; but jusdy considered as proceeding from an earnest
desire to promote the salvation of men, and to join fer-
vently in the pious wish and petition of the church, as ex-
pressed in one of lier daily prayers, " that all who profess
and call themselves Christians may be led into the way of
truth, and hold the faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of
peace, and in righteousness of life."

How then can any want of true charity, or what de«
serves to be called liberality, be with justice imputed to
him, who, in his professional character, is doing all he can
for the benefit of his fellow Christians, and is not willing
diat any of them should be lost, if he can help it t WiU
toothing serve to constitute a liberal-minded Christian, but
that lukewarm indifference, which is totally unconcerned
about every thing connected with religion ; which looks
on all professions as alike safe, provided men be sincere,
and sees no reason why every one may not hope to " get
to heaven" in his own way t Do we judge thus in matters
of less consequence, and where the interests of the present
life only are concerned? Is he applauded as a liberal-
minded physician, who, seeing his patient indulge himself
in «very thing that tends to nourish disease and impair the

Si INTRODUCTION.

constitution, flatters him that all shall yet be well ; and that
he does right to go on in his own way ? Is he applauded
as a liberal-minded lawyer, who tells his client, that he
need give himself no trouble about the laws and govem-
tnent of this country ; since, in order to preserve the rights
and liberties of a British subject, he may be as well di-
rected in every thing by the municipal code of France, or
Russia, or any other country ? Is the commander of ar-
mies applauded as a liberal-minded soldier, who, in the
day of batde, leaves his troops without orders or instruc-
tions of any kind, and lets them fight the enemy in the way
that seems best to their own judgment? Why then shoidd
the teacher of religion be applauded as a liberal-minded
divine, whose only merit lies in " speaking peace, where
there is no peace," and leaving the people to grope for the
wall of salvation, the pillar and ground of truth ; when by
pointing it out, through the mist of modem error and
delusion, as " a city set on a hill," which is at unity in itself,
he might direct their eyes to that which is the only sure
refuge from sin and misery, the only place of safety to a
guilty world, and, therefore, ought to be " the joy of the
whole earth." Conscious, therefore, of possessing no other
spirit than the spirit of Christian charity, and actuated by
no other motive than the desire of promoting the glory of
God, and the good of my Christian brethren, I shall pro-
ceed to establish the following plain and important facts>
as matters of undoubted certamty, and worthy of the most
serious consideration.

I. That the Christian religion, being, like its divine
Author, " the same yesterday, to-day and for ever," ought
to be received and embraced, just as it is represented and
held out in the scriptures of truth, without " adding there-
to, or diminishing from it."

II. That the church of Christ, in which his religion is
received and embraced, is that spiritual society in which
the ministration of holy things is committed to the three

INTRODUCTION. ^S

distinct orders of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, deriving
their authority from the Apostles, as those Apostles re-
ceived their commission from Christ. And,

III. That a part of this holy, catholic and apostolic
church, though deprived of the support of civil establish-
ment, does still exist in this country, under the name of
the Scotch Episcopal Church; whose doctrine, discipline
and worship, as happily agreeing with that of the first and
purest ages of Christianity, ought to be steadily adhered
to, by all who profess to be of the Episcopal Communion,
in this part of the kingdom.

CHAPTER 1.

/

jr//€ Christian Religion^ bein^, like its Divine Author, " the
same yesterday, to-day and for ever,"** ought to he re^
ceived and embraced just as it is represented and held out
in the Scriptures of Truth, " without adding thereto or
diminishing from it. ^^

i HE truth of this proposition is so evident, as to admit
of no sort of doubt in the minds of those who are rightly
instructed i» the knowledge of divine things : and there
cannot be a more agreeable subject lof Christian medita»-.w>
tiQn, than to survey the various means and instruments by
which God has been pjeased to convey this comfortable in-
struction to man. For this purpose we are assured, that
the same " God, who at sundry times, and in divers man-
ners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son."^ The
only difference, which is here pointed out to our notice,
refers tp the times and to the manners in which God hath
spoken; for under all this variety with respect to the mode
of revelation, the subject was the same, and the speaker
the same, the voice of the one true God proclaiming the
'' one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all,"t It was in
consequence of his giving this all-sufficient ransom, that he
became that powerful Mediator, who alone could make
peaqe between heaven and earth ; and who, according to
the terms of the everlasting covenant of grace and mercy,
did of his own free love, and unmerited goodness to man,
graciously undertake to make reconciliation for iniquity,
and to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself; which sacri-

* Heb. i.l, 2. t ITim. ii. 5, 6.

^S Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

flee, an Apostle tells us, " was verily fore-ordained before?-
the foundation of the world."* Hence it is that the plan of
this glorious design is so often mentioned in scripture a»
God's purpose, which he had purposed from the begins
ning — ^his " eternal purpose, which he purposed in Christ
Jesus oiir Lord ;"t his '•" purpose and grace, which was
given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began ;"J which
had been fore-ordained, or predestined in the counsel aind
decree of the blessed and glorious Trinity, who had been
pleased to bind themselves by an everlasting covenant to
the accomplishment of it. This, we have ground to be-
lieve, is the true scriptural notion of predestination ; not
any absolute, unconditional decree for the salvation of
particular persons ; but only God's general purpose and
resolution of sending his Son into the world, " that whO'
soever believeth in him, should not perish, but have ever-
lasting life."§ With a view to this merciful purpose, the
scripture describes, in terms sufficiently adequate to th©
human capaicity, the several parts, which the three per-
sons in the Godhead, and man too by their appointment,
have to act in this blessed scheme, according to the brief
account given of it, by a venerable writer of the primitive
church, in these words — " the Father Well pleased, the
Son administering and forming, the Spirit nourishing and
increasing, man himself gradually profiting and attaining
towards perfection."|| Such is the beautiful representation,
which may be dfawn from scripture, of the mysterious
scheme of salvation provided for fallen man ; and of the
several parts, which the adorable Three in Jehovah have
been graciously pleased to assign to themselves in carrying
on this mighty work of love and mercy to the human race.
" Known unto God are all his works from the beginning
of the world," particularly that which is the crown and

* 1 Peter i. 20. f Ephes. iii. 11. | 2 Tim. i. 9.

§ St. John iii. 16. f] Irenseus, book iv. chap. Ixxv.

Frhnitive Truth and Order vindicated. 29'

glory of all the rest, the redemption of mankind by the
sacrifice and death of his beloved Son. But had not this
act of mercy been also revealed and " made known" to
men, as soon as their situation required such a comforta-
ble discovery, they could have had no hope of being re-
conciled to God; no encouragement to serve the Lord
with gladness, or to declare with grateful joy, " that his
mercy is everlasting, and his truth endureth to all genera-
tions." It was justly observed by a writer of distinguished
rank in this country, " that if it was the intention of God
to pardon man ; to reclaim him from his sinful state ; to
encourage him to love, fear, and serve his Creator, and to
restore him to a capacity of performing such acceptable
service, it was absolutely necessary, for promoting thatl
design, to acquaint man with his intentions ; to give such
proof of those intentions as should convince and thoroughly
persuade those to whom the revelation was made, and to^
preserve such evidence of that revelation to jnankind, as
should be sufficient to support their faith and hope, and give
them ground to rejoice in the God of their salvation."*
Now all this has been done in the most complete and satis-
factory manner, by that same wise and gracious God, in
the unity of whose essence we are taught to believe, that
" there are three who bear record in heaven" to the eternal
purpose of man's salvation ; and who have not left them-
f elves without witness on earth to that covenanted scheme
of grace, mercy and peace, which was in much compassion
exhibited to fallen man, as soon as his deplorable condition
called for the comfort which was thence to be derived^
The words, in which the inspired historian relates the pro*
mise of mercy, are, " that the seed of the woman should
bruise the head of the serpent ;" that there should, in the*
fulness of time, be bom of the posterity of Eve a Re-

* See Some Thoughts concerning Religion, life, by the late Honomabie
Duncan Forbes, Lord President o^' the Cotrrt of Sessions.

30 Primitive Truth mid Order vindicated,

fjeemer or Deliverer; who, by making satisfaction for the
$ins of men, and restoring them to the love and favour of
their offended Maker, should thereby bruise the head,
and destroy the power and dominion of that old serpent
the devil, who had beguiled our first parents into sin, and
gained, as he thought, a signal triumph over them.

Thus early was the gospel preached, and the glad
tidings of salvation published to the human race.— -The ac-
count given of it by Moses is short and concise; but the
revelation itself, as coming from God, was no doubt full
and explicit. One thing is obvious, that the change which
took place in Adam's condition, as the consequence of his
fall, would necessarily lead to a correspondent change in
jhis religious service : and we may reasonably conclude,
that such a form of worship would be instituted, as might
exhibit his dependence on the covenant of grace entei^d
into by the three great ones in deity, one of whom was
to unite the human nature with his own, and as God mani-
fested in the flesh, to do and suffer whatever was neces-
sary for man's salvation*^ Accordingly we find, that when
Adam's transgression required his expulsion from the
earthly paradise, and his entrance on a state of salutary
discipline, and a new system of faith and trust in his God>
a certain emblematic representation was placed at the east
of the garden of Eden, exhibiting the ever-blessed Trinitj
as joined in covenant to redeem man, and the union of the
divine and human natures in the person of the Redeemer.
The Cherubim^ and the glory around them, with the divine
presence in them, were to keep or preserve the way of the
tree of life, to show man the way to life eternal, and keep
him from losing, or departing from it*']' Before this emble-

* See some very pertinent remarks on this subject, in a volume of ex-
cellent discourses on the great docirine of ato?iement, lately published — by
the Rev. Charles Daubeny, LL. B. author of a Guide to the Church.

f I know it has been thought, that this venerable figure called the
CherubiTn was &et up to the eastward of Eden, tncrely as a guard to keep

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 31

matic representation, which was afterwards, by divine
command, set up in the tabernacle of Moses, and temple of
Solomon^ the church or people of God were taught to per-
form that t\'pical service, which pointed to Christ, as the
way^ the truth^ and the life^ and kept up among them a
constant remembrance, that " without shedding of blood,
there Was no remission of sin."

It was to preserve a due regard to this fundamental arti-
cle of religion, that God was pleased to appoint sacrifices
of expiation and atonement for sin, and required such ser-
vices to be observed through all succeeding generations, till
the Redeemer himself should come, who was to do away
all these shadows and emblems, and to make the true satis-
faction, the only proper atonement. In proof of the earli-
ness of this institution, it has been very justly remarked.

unhappy Adam from coming at the tree of life, and so the mysterious
account here given of it has been much exposed to the scoffs and ridi-
cule of unbelievers. On this subject we find the learned -Lord President
Forbes, in his Thoughts concerning Religion, thus delivering his sentiments
■with great plahtness. — " The Jews, who have misconstrued the angel
Jehovah into a created angel, have thought fit here to understand by the
Cherubiin two of the same sort of angels, who had got a flaming sword,
to frighten Adam from re-entering Eden, and meddling with the fruit
of the tr^ee cf life : and this monstrous story they have made out of a,
text, that necessarily means no such thing, and may fairly be construed to
a sense big with the most important information to mankind. What is
translated, to keep the luay cf the tree of life, with intent to prevent the
coming at it, may as properly be rendered, to observe, or for observing^
and so discovering and finding out, the ixiay to the tree of life. And the
word we translate /)/(Zcef2^, is almost always in every text translated inha-
Sited'* (as in a tent or tabernacle) ; ** and whether you translate it placed
or inhabited, the next word ought to be translated the Cherubim, as things,
or onbletns, well known to those for whom Moses wrote. So that Jeho-
vah's placing or inhabiting these Cherubim, was the method chosen by
him, to make the way to the tree of life kept or observed.'* See more to
the same purpose, tending to show that the Cherubim of the scriptures
were mystical figures of high antiquity and great signification, being, as
Irenaeus calls them, " Resemblances of the dispensation of the Son of
God/' that is, the Christian economy.

32 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated*

that the skins, with which God is said to have clothed thtf
nakedness of our first parents, must have been the skins of
beasts, that had been offered by them in sacrifice, since at
that time they were not allowed to kill them for any other
purpose : And this typical clothing was a most comfort-
able emblem of that covering and protection from divine
wrath, that garment of salvation provided for man, by the
sacrifice of the Lamb of God, who was to take aw^y the
sin of the world.

The rite of sacrifice being thus established by divine;
authority, as the instituted emblem of redeeming love, it
may well be supposed, that Adam and his family would bfe
ready to testify their grateful acceptance of that love, and
dependence on it, by a regular application to the means ap-
pointed for directing the eye of the faithful offerer to that
great atonement, which the blood of the slain animal was
designed to shadow forth. Indeed, we are expressly in-
formed, that the two sons of Adam, Cain and Abel,
brought each of them an offering unto the Lord,^ but with
this remarkable difference, that God is said to have " had
respect unto Abel, and to his offering, while unto Cain, and
to his offering, he had not respect :" The reason of which
is given in these words of the Epistle to the Hebrews; " By
faith, Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than
Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous,
God testifying of his gifts."t This it was that made the
difference between his sacrifice and Cain's, that the one
offered by faith, the other did not ; by faith in the promised
Redeemer, and from a humble hope of being accepted
through his merits. And indeed this difference appears in

* Gen. iv. 3, 4. Where this offering is said to have been brought to tlxe
Lord " in process of thnc," or, as it is translated on the margin of our
Bible, at '* the end of days " or on the periodical return of that day, which.
had been sanctified from the beginning, and thereby more immediatelj
set apart for the celebration of religious worship.

I Heb, xi. 4s

Primitive Truth and Order vi?idicated. $f^

the very nature of their gifts or offerings. For Cain
brought only of the fruit of the ground, as an acknowledge-
ment of the divine bounty, in providing for his temporal
support, and giving him a right to what the ground pro-
duced. But he showed no desire to act in conformity with
that divine plan of salvation which the fall had rendered
necessary for his spiritual comfort. He offered no living
creature as an atonement for sin, and whose blood was to be
shed as an acknowledgement of the forfeiture of life, and
as a type or emblem of the all-atoning sacrifice of the great
Redeemer. In short, he conducted himself as if he had
wished to make it appear, that he had no sin to be atoned
for, no belief in the one Mediator, and no thought of ap-
plying to God, through faith in his meritorious ransom.
Whereas Abel, conscious of his fallen state, and the now
sinful condition of man, offered a living creature to God,
" the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof," as the
instituted type or memorial of the great First-born^ through
whose sacred blood the life that had been forfeited was to
be restored. For which reason Abel is said to have offered
hy faitk^ and the Lord had respect to his offering, on ac-
count of the excellence which was thereby stamped upon it,
and the typical relation which it bore to the sacrifice of that
beloved Son, in whom God has been ever well-pleased.
But the offering brought by Cain had no such qualities : It
meant no expiation for sin, nor any acknowledgement of it ;
It was not made in faith ; nay, it was so far from having
respect to the Divine Intercessor, that it might rather b©
considered as a formal rejection of his intercession; and
therefore it was rejected, and God had no respect to it, or
to the offerer. In this early and remarkable instance we
may see a lively representation, on the one hand, of the
humble and devout Christian, who, after all his most sincere
and diligent endeavours in the way of his duty, yet, con-
scious of his own infirmities, relies upon the merits of his
Saviour ; and on the other hand, a representation of those,

^ Primitive Truth and Order vindicated*

who either ascribe too much to their own merits, or, by a
fatal misapprehension, neglect and undervalue that only-
method of atc«iement and acceptance, through which God
hath declared, he will be reconciled to sinners.

We have no reason to think that God was any " respecter
of persons," in the case of Cain and Abel, as recorded in
the sacred history ; for it was the different quality of their
offerings, and the different dispositions with which they
were offered, that occasioned the difference of respect
which was shown to them : and I have insisted the longer
on this instance, because it gives us so plain, and so early
an account of the origin of sacrifices, and the true meaning
and design of them. It shows us that sacrifice had an evi-
dent reference to the promised Redeemer, and being insti-»
tuted on the first declaration of mercy through him, and
carefully observed by the first family of the human race,
was by them transmitted to all mankind. Hence we may
easily perceive, how the notion of expiating sin, and ap-
peasing the offended Deity by sacrifices, became so univer-
sal, and spread itself into the most distant ages and coun-
tries. When the sons of men began to multiply, and to
disperse themselves in colonies upon the face of the whole
earth, they never failed to carry these sacred rites along
with them, as well knowing how precious a treasure they
contained j and that in the religious and due use of them,
they might humbly expect the forgiveness of their sins, and
the favour of God, through the efficacy of that all-sufficient
sacrifice, which they typically represented, and which was
5n the fulness of time to be offered for the sins of the whole
world. We need not wonder then, that in these primitive
ages, men were so tenacious of such important rites, and
took all due care to evince the high opinion they entertained
of them, as the appointed emblems of that stupendous
transaction, on which rested all their hopes of pardon, and
peace with God.

After the account, which the inspired historian gives us,

Primitive Truth and Order lihidicated'. 3^

of the acceptance of Abel's offering, and the rejection of
Cain's, who, in consequence of " the voice of his brother's
blood crying from the ground, went out frona the presence
of the Lord, a fugitive and vagabond in the earth," we meet
with little, except Enoch's translation, that is particularly
descriptive of the character of God's faithful people, till the
day arrived, when, " by faith, Noah being warned of God,
of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark
to the saving of his house, by the which he condemned the
world, and became heir of the righteousness, which is by
faith."* Such was the effect ascribed by an apostle to the
faith of Noah, who, notwithstanding every appearance to
the contrar)^, being jfirmly convinced that the flood would
cofle, according to the Divine warning, went on with his
awful preparation, and found that safety and protection iff
his righteous course, which were denied to the world of
the ungodly. " His friends and neighbours, who had
either neglected, or presumptuously derided his pious ad-
monitions, looked in vain to him for help! There was no
hiding place ^ no refuge from the stornty but within the ark
*— .and God had shut the door. The waters, which soon
rose above the highest hills, bore all away with irresitible
force ; the day of acceptance was o\'er, and the night of
judgment closed in for ever, on a corrupt and perverse
generation."t But even then, though the pillars of the
earth were shaken from their foundation, and its apostate
and rebellious inhabitants were swept away by the over-
whelming deluge, the building of God, the work of re-
demption was not overthrown. The church of the Re-
deemer, now confined to eight persons, remained safe and
secure 4 And as soon as Noah had gone forth out of the

* Heb. xi. 7.

f See this subject treated with uncommon strength and elegance of
expression, in Sermons preached at Laura Chapel, Bath, during the seasons
of Advent, 1799, by the Rev. Francis Randolph, D. D.

\ There is a beautiful allusion to this circumstance in one of the

S6 Primitive Truth and Ordei* vi?idkated,

ark, and he and all that it contained were placed agaiit
upon a new world, we find him entering on the renewed
duties of life, with an act of worship to his merciful Pre-
server- " Noah builded an altar unto the Lord, and took
of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered
burnt offerings on the altar."^ From the distincticai of
clean beasts and fowls, which is here so particularly men-
tioned, it is evident, that these offerings, as well as this
distinction, must have been made by divine appointment ;
and the life of these creatures was taken away, and their
blood, shed, as a memorial of that everlasiing covenant,
through the blood of which, life was to be restored to man.
It was this divine life-giving covenant, the establishment
of which was promised to Noah before the flood, andflhe
promise repeated after it to him and his sons, in the same
strong expressive terms — " And I," says God, " behold I
establish 77iy covenant with you ;"')' thus challenging an ex-
clusive property in it, and pointing it out as his own act
and deed; not as a thing, which had then only begun to
take place, but had been of long standing, and was now by
this solemn promise so ratified and established, as to give
the strongest ground of assurance that it could not fail, but
would stand fast for ever.

We have seen how the terms of this covenant were
proposed to Adam after his fall, and means appointed for
preserving the remembrance of them, and confirming a
dutiful dependence on them. With the same view they
were renewed to Noah, both before and after the flood ;
and God, we are told, was pleased to set his bow in the.

prayers of the OfEce of Baptism, wherein we beg of that " Almighty •
God, who of his great mercy did save Noah and his family in the ark
from perishing by water, that the child — or infant voyager, being deli-
vered from his wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ's churchy
and so pass the waves cf this troublesome world, that finally he may come
to the land of everlasting life."

* Gen. viii. 20. ^ f Gen. ix. 5*

Frimitii>e Truth and Order vindicated, 37

eioud, as a token of his covenant, a pledge of his mercy
to man, through the merits and mediation of that mighty-
One, whom St. John saw sitting " on the throne in heaven,
and there was a rainbow round about the throne."^ Yet
with this emblem of God's power and goodness staring
them in the face, the descendants of Noah soon began to
forsake the ways of the Lord, and at last filled up the
measure of their iniquity, by that idolatrous confederacy,
which occasioned their dispersion at Babel. Thus " scat-
tered abroad upon the face of all the earth," they departed
also from the worship and service of the true God ; and all
would again have been lost in idolatry and corruption, had
not the divine mercy interposed for the preservation of
truth and righteousness. For this purpose, the wisdom of
heaven judged it necessary to separate some one individual
from the degenerate mass of mankind ; and the person se-
lected was the patriarch Abraham, called by God to be the
father cf the church of the Hebrews, an^ of the promised
seed, which was to bruise the head of the serpent. Th»
history of this distinguished character exhibits, as might
well be expected, many wonderful interpositions of divine
providence, tending to confirm the " precious promises,"
which had been made to Adam and Noah, and still afford-
ing a clearer intimation of the council of God, and a
stronger pledge of the immutability of his gracious purpose
towards all the families of the earth.')' We are assured by
St. Paul, that " the gospel was preached unto Abraham,"^
when it was not only revealed to him, but that revelation
was also confirmed by an oath, that *' in his seed all the
nations of the earth should be blessed." And the same
apostle, reasoning on this important subject, in his Epistle to
the Hebrews, tells us, that " when God made promise to

* Rev. iv. 3.

t See Dr. Randolph's excellent Sermon on the character of Abraham-

I Gal. iii, 8.

38 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware
by himself. For men verily swear by the greater; and an
oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife:
wherein God willing more abundantly to show to the heirs
of promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed him-
self by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it
was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong con-
solation."* Now, what can these two immutable things be,
but first, God's interposing himself^ and then the oath^ both
showing the immutability of his counsel I And how could
we Christians derive consolation from this solemn transac-
tion, unless it referred to a covenant of mercy, in which
the whole race of mankind were concerned, and of which
that partial exhibition made to Abraham, was only designed
to preserve the memory, and secure the benefits of it to
him and his posterity, till the seed should come, to whom
the first promise was made ; even that promise which was
also ratified with an oath, and of which it is said—" Jeho-
vah hath sworn, and will not repent, thou art a priest for
ever, after the order of Melchizedek."'!' St. Paul has
clearly pointed out the person here referred to, and the na-
ture of that unchangeable priesthood, which, according to
the terms of the everlasting covenant, confirmed and even
sworn to by the adorable Three in Jehovah, was to remove
the curse from, and procure a blessing to, all the nations
of the earth. Even Abraham himself was blessed by this
Melchizedek, priest of the most High God ; and beholding
his promised Redeemer under that mysterious character,
he rejoiced to see the day of his incarnation, and our Sa-
viour himself assured the Jews, that " he saw it and was
glad*''\ It was with a view of enforcing conviction on hia
unbelieving countrymen, and showing how strangely they
had departed from the faith of their ancestors, that our
Lord gave them this assurance ; thus proving himself to

* Heb. vi. 13, 16, ir, 18. f Psalm ex. 4. % St. John viii. 5%.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 39

have been the object of hope and dependence to their
venerable progenitor, and that all the predictions and pro-
mises made to the faithful Abraham, were now fulfilled
in him, whom yet they would not believe, because he told
them the truth. Very different were the opinion and be-
haviour of one of their own priests, the father of John the
Baptist, who, on the birth of his son, as the appointed
forerunner of the Messiah, gave thanks to the " Lord God
of Israel, because in visiting and redeeming his people, he
had remembered his holy covenant, and the oath which he
sware to their father Abraham."* From the subject of
this oath, as described in what follows, it is evident, that
Zacharias, on this remarkable occasion, was taught and
directed by the holy Spirit, to celebrate the redemption of
the world by the promised Saviour, as the great objfect of
God's holy covenant, ratified by the oath of Jehovah, and
shadowed out in all the types and figures which exhibited
to the eye of faith that " tender mercy of our God, whereby
the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light
to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death,
and to guide our feet into the way of peace.""!*

This was the mercy which, Zacharias could say, was
*' promised to our fathers," and spoken of by all the holy
prophets, from the beginning of the world. On these pro-
mises and predictions was built that strong and vigorous
faith, which supported the patriarchs in all their trials ; and
in which they lived and died, looking forward, by the light
which they enjoyed, to that salvation, which they knew
was prepared, and would in due time be manifested, " be-
fore the face of all people." It was this light, which con-
ducted the faithful Abraham to one of the mountains of
Moriah ; whither he was ordered by God to " take his son,
his only son Isaac, whom he loved, and oflFer him there
for a burnt-offering :"J And " by faith," says the Apos-

* St. Luke i. 72, 75. t St. Luke i. 78, 79- \ Gen. xxii, 2.

40 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

tie, " Abraham, when he was tried^ oiFered up Isaac ; and
he that had received the promises, offered up his onhf
begotten son^ of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy
seed be called ; accounting, that God was able to raise him
up even from the dead; from whence also he received him
in a figure :"^ or more literally, in a parable^ where some-
thing more is meant than that which is expressed. The
impending death, and unexpected deliverance of Isaac,
the only begotten son of Abraham, are the things here re-
lated : but the actual sacrifice, and resurrection of Christ,
the only begotten Son of God, are the things which are
also meant to be pointed out, with all the circumstances in
which these will be found to agree with what is recorded
of Isaac ; of whom " God said unto Abraham — In Isaac
shall thy seed be called," and St. Paul affirms, that this
seed " is Christ."t

As it is particularly mentioned in the history of these
patriarchs, that " after the death of Abraham, God blessed
his son Isaac,"J as the type or representative of the pro-
mised seed ; so when Isaac was old, and had blessed his
son Jacob, as chosen of God for the same purpose, we are
informed of a very striking vision, in which *' Jacob be-
held a ladder set upon the earth, and the top of it reached
to heaven, and behold, the angels of God ascending and
descending upon it ; and behold, the Lord stood above it,
and said — I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and
the God of Isaac :"§ after which follows a renewal of the
promise made to both these fathers-—" In thee, and in thy
seed, shall all the families of the earth be blessed." So
this vision, with the blessing which accompanied it, was
intended td confirm the patriarch's hope and trust in the
one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ
Jesusj who himself alluded to this symbolical appearance,

* Heb. xi. 17, 18, 19. % Gen. xxv. 11.

t Gen. .xxi, 12, and Gal. iii. 1§. ^ Gen. xxviii. 12, 15.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 41

when he said to Nathanael— .an Israelite indeed — -" Here-
after you shall see," what Jacob's vision prefigured, " Hea-
ven open, and the angels of God ascending and descend-
ing," not on a ladder, but on him that was represented by-
it — '' upon the Son of man."^ But this was not the only
encouraging assurance, which the patriarch Jacob received,
that the *' God of Bethel" was to be " in Christ, reconciling
all things both in heaven and earth to himself." This same
God was pleased soon after to exhibit a most wonderful
support to the hope of his future incarnation, by appearing
as a man to this distinguished patriarch, and wrestling with
him^ for the sake of changing his name from Jacob to
Israel^ and showing what power he had both with God and
with men^ as a Prince: alluding thereby to the name which
he had just received ; for Israel properly signifies-—'"* a
prince of God/'f Though this appears to have been a very
mysterious transaction, we can plainly discern, that the
person who wrestled with Jacob was a divine person,
even " Jehovah God of Hosts." For so we read in the
book of the prophet Hosea, that " Jacob had power with
God; yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed:
he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in
Bethel, and there he spake with us, even Jehovah God of
Hosts: Jehovah is his memorial :"J Agreeably to what the
same God said to Moses — " Thus shalt thou say unto the
children of Israel ;•— Jehovah — the God of your fathers,
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name for ever,
and this is my memorial unto all generations."|| From
which it is evident, that this name Jehovah is his memo-
rial^ his appropriate, perpetual, incommunicable name ;
and what follows is ** a most gracious declaration of this
Jehovah's peculiar connections with the fathers of the Isra-

• St. John i. 51. I Hotea xii. 3, 4, 5.

t Gen, xxxii. 24-— 29. 11 Exod. iii. 15.

42 Primithe Truth and Order vindicated,

elites."* Depending as he well might on this powerful
connection with Jehovah, as his God^ we find " Jacob,
when he was a dying, by faith blessing both the sons of

* So says on6 of the ablest biblical scholars of the age, the profoundly
learned Dr. Horsley, lately Lord Bishop of Rochester, now of St.
Asaph; who, in an advertisement at the end of his admirable translation
of Hosea, adds the following Remark to his note on the word " onemo-
rial" (F. p. 143.) which most beantifully illustrates cur present subject r
namely — That the person, of whom it is said, that the name yehovah
is his memorial, is no other than he whom the patriarch found at
Bethel, who there spake with the Israelites in the loins of their pro-
genitor. He, whom the patriarch found at Bethel, who there, in that
manner, spake with the Israelites, was by the tenor of the context,
the antagonist, with whom Jacob was afterwards matched at Peniel.
The antagonist, with whom he was matched at Peniel, wrestled with
the patriarch, as we read it the book of Genesis, in the human fornj.
The conflict was no sooner ended, than the patriarch acknowledged his
antagonist as God. The holy prophet first calls him angel, f and after
mention of the colluctation, and of the meeting and conference at Be-
thel, saySjij: that he, whom he had called angel, was " Jehovah God of
Hosts." And to make the assertion of this person's godhead, if possi-
ble, Still more unequivocal, he adds — that to hinn belonged, as his ap»
propriate memorial, that name, which is declarative of the very essence
of the Godhead ! This MAN, therefore, of the book of Genesis, this
ANGEL of Hosea, who wrestled with Jacob, could be no other than the
Jehovah -Angel, of whom we so often read in the English bible, under the
name of the " angel of the Lord." A phrase of an unfortunate structure,
and so ill conformed to the original, that it is to be feared, it has led
many into the error of conceiving of the Lord as one person, and of the
angel as another. The word of the Hebrews, ill rendered " the Lord,'*
is not, like the English word, an appellative expressing rank or condi-
tion ; but it is the proper name yehovah. And this proper name Jthovah
is noty in the Hebrew, agenitive after the noun substantive •' Angel," as-
the English represents it; — but the words in the Hebrew translated ye-
hcfvah and Angel, are two nouns substantive in apposition, both speaking
of the same person ; the one, by the appropriate name of the essence, the
other by a title of ofEce. " jfebovab-Angei" would be a better rendering.
The Jehovah-Angel of the Old Testament is no other than He, who Ir
the fulness of time, " was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin
Mary."

t Hosea xii. 4. | Hosea xii. 5.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 43

Joseph ;"* and in so doing, addressing himself to that
^ God, before whom his fathers Abraham and Isaac did
walk ; the God, which fed him all his life long, the Angel
which redeemed him from all evil ;"t which plainly showed
that the hope of a Redeemer^ under the character of the
Shepherd of Israel feeding his flock with all good things,
was to be handed down in the family of Joseph ; whose
typical history served to confirm that " hope of the promise
made of God unto the fathers ; unto which promise," says
St. Paul, " oui/ twelve tribes, instantly serving God day
and night, hope to come. "J

The history of these twelve tribes of Israel, as recorded
in the sacred writings, opens to us a wonderful source of
evidence in support of the proposition now before us : And
by considering what these people were; how they were
supported by tlie power, directed by the wisdom, and in-
structed in the knowledge of Jehovah the true God, we
shall readily perceive their typical relation to his Christ,
the Saviour of the world, and the proof, which their whole
economy clearly exhibits, that the religion of this Saviour
was the same yesterday under the law, as it is to-day under
the gospel, and will continue for every even unto the end
of the world.

The rise and progress of the Jewish nation is one of the
most surprising things to be met with in the page of history.
Descended from these distinguished patriarchs, whose faith
and piety we have been now contemplating, they were
taught to look upon themselves as the peculiar objects of
his providential care, who had so often declared himself to
be " the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," — .Conducted
by his merciful providence into the land of Egypt, they
were there reduced to the most humiliating state of bon-
dage; from which they could find no rehef, till the four
hundred years were expired, which, in tiie wise and mys-

* Heb, xi. 21. t Gen. xlviii. 15, 16. % Acts xxvi. 6, 7.

44 jprmitive Truth and Order vindicated^

terious designs of heaven, had been fixed as the period of
their affliction. Emerging at last from this grievous depth
of servitude, and delivered from their cruel oppressors by
a most miraculous display of Almighty vengeance, they be*
came a great und powerful people; possessed their promised
land for many years, with the full exercise of their rehgion,
and in the firm belief, derived from their sacred writings,
that an extraordinary person, of their blood and kindred,
was to arise, who should deliver them from all their ene-
mies, and set upon a kingdom above all the kingdoms of
the earth. Encouraged by this opinion, and totally mis"
apprehending the character of their expected Deliverer,
they rejected him, when he came; and quarrelling with the
power which had them in subjection, after the most obsti^
nate defence that ever people made, they were utterly over-
thrown, their city and temple destroyed, and those that
escaped the sword, were scattered among all nations;
where their posterity continue to this day, cut off from all
the powers and privileges possessed by those among whom
they reside ; distinguished only by their peculiar obser*
vances, and a firm conviction, that their religion is from
God, and their great Deliverer is still to come.

These are wonderful circumstances, and call for extraor-
dinary attention. They afford the strongest arguments in
favour of the Christian religion ; since all that has hap-
pened to these scattered tribes of Israel was distincdy and
repeatedly foretold in those scriptures of the Old and New
Testement, on whose combined evidence, the truth of our
glorious gospel rests with unshaken firmness. Often do
we find it predicted in these sacred records, that the Jews
should not only despise and reject, and even put to death
the promised Messiah, and on this account be dispersed
into all countries, and exposed to the greatest hardships ;
but also, that they should not be swallowed up, and lost
among their conquerors, as has generally been the case
with all vanquished nations, but should still subsist to latest

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 45

times, and under all their distresses and difficulties, be a
distinct people. And how amazingly has this prophecy
been fulfilled ! Yet the pen, which divine inspiration
guides, could hardly have pointed to a more singular oir
improbable occurrence. Nothing has happened like it in
the course of human affairs. All the mighty monarchies,
both of the east and west, are vanished like the shadows
of the evening, with the setting sun ; their places know
them no more ; while this contemptible race of fugitives
are strangely secure without a friend or protector amidst
the wreck of empires. There are some people now, as in
our Saviour's time, who " will not believe, except they see
sig-ns and wonders." Let them look at this prodigy, which
is daily in their view, and try if they can possibly account
for it in any other way than by allowing it to be " the
Lord's doing, and, therefore, so marvellous in our eyes."

Marvellous indeed must it appear, that a people so highly
favoured of God ; selected from all others to be his pecu-
liar charge, and by his mighty hand rescued from bond-
age ; conducted through numberless dangers and difficul-
ties, and at length settled in a country destined for their
habitation, and there constituted the guardians, as we may
say, of the divine oracles and institutions, should yet
abandon the great object, which all these marks of distinc-
tion had in view ; be totally expelled from the land, which
the Lord their God had given them, and rendered wholly
incapable of performing the peculiar rites of their religious
service ; having neither altar, priest, nor temple, nor anv
vestige left of what the law required for making their so-
lemn sacrifice. Does not all this plainly show that the law
of Moses, in this respect, being already fulfilled, has no more
its original end to answer ; and that the whole Jewish eco-
nomy, being but the shadow of good things to come, has
very properly given place to the substance — to " the body
"B^hich is of Christ r"* He was the real, permanent object

* Col. ii. 17.

-46 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

shadowed out by all these figurative, temporary represen-
tations of the JVIosaic ritual ; and the whole order of the
sacrifices, the whole disposition of the tabernacle, the
whole ministry of the priesthood, pointed to him as the
" one true propitiatory sacrifice, the true tabernacle, which
the Lord pitched, and not man — the eternal High Priest,
who is passed into the heavens, there to make continual in-
tercession for them that come to God by him." To him
give all the types of the law, as well as " all the prophets
witness ;" and it was solely on his account, that the people
of Israel were kept together, and supported by a train of
miracles ; for on his leaving the world, when his work
here below was finished, this chosen nation was dispersed
over all the earth, and its policy completely dissolved.

Such then being the true nature of the legal dispensation,
and such the design of the whole Israelitish economy, the
question needs no longer be asked — " Wherefore then
serveth the law V The same Apostle, who states the ques-s
tion, gives also the proper answer ; when speaking of the
promise of mercy made to Abraham, he tells us, that the
law was " added because of transgressions, till the seed
should come," that is, Christ, " to whom the promise waa
made."^ By saying that the law rvas added^ he plainly in-
timates, that there was something known and practised be-
fore, to which this addition was made ; and what could
that be, but the evangelical promise renewed to Abraham,
and the worship and obedience required, in consequence
of that promise, to which the law was added by way of
preservation, and in order to lessen transgression for the
time to come \ Through the corruption of the patriarchal
religion, many sorts of transgression prevailed among the
heathen nations, who took their rise from the confusion at
Babel, and grew up into the wildest idolaters, worshipping
their imaginary deities with such abominable practices a^

* Gal. iii. 19r

Primitive Truth' and Order vindicated, 47

made them hateful to the true God, and of course very-
dangerous neighbours to those who still believed in him,
and adhered to his service. For this reason God was
pleased to raise a Wall of division between the Hebrews
and the heathens, and laid his people under every possible
obligation that might preserve them from mingling with
those that served other gods, and learning their ways.
As a wise and good parent would keep his children from
the seducing company of profligates and blasphemers, so
did the Almighty Father of heaven and earth guard his
holy family from all the abominations of that bewitching
idolatry, by which they were surrounded. " Ye shall be
holy unto me," said God to the children of Israel, " for I
the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people,
that ye should be mine."*

Thus claiming them as his children, he had also conde-
scended to provide a schoolmaster for them, to teach them
the rudiments of heavenly knowledge, and so train them
up in the true faith and fear of their God. " The law->"
says St. Paul, " was our schoolmaster unto Church ;"f
was designed to instruct those who lived under it in the
character and office of the expected Messiah ; for which
purpose, as scholars are confined in a school, so were they
separated from the world, to learn and practise continually
those signs and figures, by which this wonderful person
was described to them. Nothing can be more plain and
distinct, than the precepts and institutions of the law, if the
mere outward act and observance of them had been all that
was required. Yet we find, it was the fervent desire and
earnest prayer of those who had a just sense of this matter,
that God would teach them, and make them to understand
the precepts of his law, in which they were commanded to
" meditate day and night." And that this constant medita-
tion was necessary to unravel the true meaning and design

* Levit. XX. 26. f Gal. iii. 24

48 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

of it, will sufficiently appear, if we only consider one of
its most striking and solemn institutions, the rite of sacri-
fice, or shedding the blood of living creatures as an offer-
ing to God ; which surely required a considerable degree
of attention in discovering the end and object of it, as well
as the disposition with which it ought to be performed.
It is not onlv contrary to the common sense and reason of
mankind, but declared by an inspired Apostle to be abso-
lutely " impossible, that the blood of bulls, and of goats,
should take away sins."^— -There was no such inherent
value in the blood of these victims ; nor could any neces-
sary connection be supposed between the slaying of these
or any such creatures, and the saving of a sinner. But
then what was wanting in their general nature, was made
up by special institution; and these animals, being once
devoted and set apart for this service, acquired a new rela-
tion, and of consequence a value from the substance, of
which they were only types and shadows. The offering of
these was then only acceptable to the Deity, when it was
considered as his own appointment ; and in consequence of
a due attention to the hidden things of the law, was per-
formed with faith and humility, as a memorial of that
Lamb of God, who was in due time to be manifested^ that
he might take away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

In contradiction, however, to this train of reasoning, so
clearly confirmed by the authority of scripture, it has been
supposed, that the practice of worshipping the deity by
sacrifice was merely a human invention, and kindly ac-
cepted by God, only in compliance with the weakness of
his creatures.— -Nay, it has been assigned as one consider-
able reason for God's sending his Son into the world to
take away sin by the sacrifice of himself, that this was a
wise and gracious condescension to that strong apprehen-
sion, and persuasion, which had so early and universally

* Heb. X. 4.

Primitive Truth and Order vindkafed. 'i|#

prevailed among rtiatiklnd, conceftting the eolation of 3ih,
and Jippeasing the offended Deity by sacrifices of living
creatures. But can it really be imagined, with ^ny sort of
reason or propriety, thjtt the all-wise purposes of heaveft^
and the unsearchable counsels of God, should be directed
of influenced by the vain conceits and inventions of men ;
or that the customs of a blinded and corrupted world should
furnish a proper pattern for the divine proceedings ! No,
certainly: The mysterious dispensation, which produced
the sacrifice of the Son of God, had a much nobler, and a
more appropriate original. It was the result of the greatest
Aiercy conducted by infinite wisdom, aad rests on no other
foundation than the immutability of that divine counsel
which was confirmed by an oath ; that everlasting cove-
riant for nian's redemption entered into by the adorable
TThree in Deity, before the world began. This was th^
source of that gracious undertaking, which prepared ^
body for the promised Redeemer, in which he might do
atid suflFer the will of God, by giving hiniself a ransom for
Itoan ; and from this all-sufficient and meritorious sacrifice,
which in the purpose of God was offered from the founda-
tion of the world, proceeded not only the institution and
acceptance of those offerings which we read of, as brought
to the Lord by his own people, but also the corruption and
abuse of this institution, which prevailed among the hea-
thens, and gave rise to all their abominable superstitions.
For, as has been justly observed in a late excellent publica-
tion, " had there been no true religion, there could not
have been any that is false. Had there been no divine in-
stitutions, superstition would have had no foundation on
which to have raised its imaginary superstructure. The
very abuse of sacrifice, therefore, proves the divinity of its
origin. For to the perversion of sacred tradition, are the
corruptions of heathenism to be traced up :* And as the

• See p. 303. of th« Rev. Charles Daubeny's volume of Discourses orji
The great Doctrine of Atonement, where we meet with the following verjr

7

\

50 Pri7nitive Truth and Order vindicated.

Deity repeatedly and formally disclaimed all virtue, consi-
dered as inherent in the sacrifices themselves, the Divine
appointment of them could have no other object in view, than
to direct the eye of the offerer to that great atonement, which
the blood of the slain animal was designed to shadow forth;
being the appointed emblem of that precious blood, which,
according to the eternal purpose, was to redeem the life of
man. In like manner," says the same learned author,^
'' the offering up that commemorative sacrifice, which cha-
racterizes the Christian altar, is an acknowledgment on our
parts, that our lives were forfeited, and have been re-
deemed by the body and blood of Christ, actually offered
up on the cross. Bread and wine are but-^the instituted
emblems, deriving all their spiritual efficacy from the rela-
tion they bear to that important transaction, which they
were appointed to represent. Thus the typical sacrifice of
the Jewish temple, and the commemorative one of the
Christian church, direct our thoughts to the same divine
object of contemplation ; each in its peculiar way furnish-
ing a figurative exhibition of the recovery of man from the
effects of the fall, through the mediation of that divine

apposite note. — " The more this subject, the most fruitful in the whole
compass of literature, is investigated, the more satisfied shall we be^
that the images of heathen idolatry were but the corruptions, according
to the imaginations of men at different times, of that primitive symbo-
lical representation, originally set up at the fall, for the purpose of pre-
serving the faith, and characterizing the worship of the true religion.
The reader has only to go far enough back, and he will arrive at the same
divine fountain, to which the pure stream of patriarchal religion, and the
corrupt one of heathenish superstition are to be traced up. Mr. Maurice,
in his Dissertation on the Oriental Trinities (which by bringing the coun-
terfeits, the Fagan Triads, to prove the realities, thereby makes the cor-
ruption of revelation bear testimony to the truth of it) has done mucH in
assisting the reader in this interesting research. If the reader would be
further assisted, he will find more useful, because more correct, informa-
tion upon it in the Trinitarian Anaiogy, by that most excellent divine, the
late William Jones;" to be found in vol. i. of his Theological, Philoso-
phical and Miscellaneous Woi-ks, published in -1801. - •

* P. 360, 361.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 3i

person, who by the all-sufficient sacrifice of himself, be-
came the Redeemer of a lost world."

We have now taken a short view of the Jewish economy,
or law of Moses, in the light wherein Sti Paul represents
it ; not only as a necessary addition to the patriarchal reli-
gion, for preserving God's people from the idolatry and
wickedness of the heathen nations, but also as " a school-
master unto Christ," leading men by the discipline of its
types and shadows to the knowledge of real and substantial
truths ; in which capacity, our Lord himself tells us — that
" the law prophesied until John the Baptist ;" till he suc-
ceeded it in that office,-— who seeing Jesus coming to him,
spoke the ver}'^ language of its institutions, when he said
— " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin
of the world."^

This too has been the language of prophecy from the
very beginning of the world ; and as soon as we look into
the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, we find them
unfolding the design of the Redeemer's coming, and the
process of the redemption wrought by him, in the fullest
and most particular manner. We are told, that a great
Person was to come, bringing peace and salvation to aU
nations ; who should be Immanuel or God with us ;— bom
of a virgin, poor and obscure, yet one whom David calls
his Lord; — the Lord to whom the temple belonged, — the
mighty God,— -a great King, — an everlasting Priest— a
Prophet like unto Moses, but much greater; who should
be anointed by the spirit of the Lord God, to preach the
gospel to the poor, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and
comfort to the mourners, and to heal the broken-hearted ;
— who should work miracles of the most merciful and bene-
ficent kind; and yet, notwithstanding all his power and
goodness, should be rejected by the greater part of his
nation ; be despised and afflicted ; a man of sorrows, and

* St. John i. 29.

&i PrimU'voe Truth and Order vindicated.

acquainted with grief ; accused by fi^lse witnesses ; betrayed
by an intimate friend; sold for thirty pieces of silver;
treated by his enemies in the most barbarous manner, and
at last put to a shameful and tormenting death ; while all
the time, he should be led like a lamb to the slaughter,
pot opening his mouth, but to pray for his enemies, and
make intercession for the transgressors. All these and
Jiftany moi'e circumstances of the same kind pointed so
clearly to what really happened in the land of Judah, and
were so punctually fulfilled in the person of Jesus of Naza-^
reth, that it is astonishing how the Jews could overlook the
Striking evidence afforded by so many plain and literal pre-.'
dictions. Perhaps at the time when these things were pas*
sing before them, and they themselves were promoting the
accomplishment of this awful myster}^, they might have
been so blinded by pride and prejudice, as not to see or
consider what had been done, or what they themselveg
were doing. But after they had got time to reflect on all
that had happened, and to compare it with what had been
prophesied ; we may indeed wonder how they failed t9
perceive where the truth lay, and honestly to confess, in
the words of one of our Lord's first disciples-*-'* we have
found him, of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did
write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."^

It was to Moses and the prophets that Abraham is repre-^
sented in the parable, as referring the rich man's unbeliev-
ing brethren for the evidence of a future state ;f and
when Jesus gave this direction to his incredulous country*
men-^-^" Search the scriptures, for in them, ye think ye
l^ave eternal life, and they are they which testify of me ;"J
they were the writings of Moses and the prophets^ tlie only
scriptures then known, which thus bore testimony to him,
as the author of eternal life ta all them that believe. With
the same view, we find him kindly rebuking two of his

• St. John i. 45. f St, Luke xvi. 29—31. \ St. John v. 39.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 4r0

Ibllowei^, as foolishly backward to believe what the pro*
phets had spoken ; and then we are told, that '* beginning
at MoseSy and all the prophets^ he expounded unto them ia
all the scriptures, the things concerning himself."* In imi»
tation of his blessed Master, we find St. Paul employed in
** expounding and testifying the kingdom of God," to the
Jews at Rome, and " persuading them concerning Jesus,
both out of the law of Moses ^ and out of the prophets;''''''^
and that this had been his constant, and most effectual me-
thod of persuasion, appears evidently from part of his ad"
mirable defence before king Agrippa ; wherein he declares,
that '' having obtained help of God, he had continued unto
that day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none
other things than those, which the prophets and Moses did
say should come : that Christ should suffer, and that he
should be the first that should rise from the dead, and
should show light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."f

If then this eminent preacher of the gospel, in the testis
mony which he bore to the truth of it, said none other things,
than what Moses and the prophets had said should come,
with regard to the sufferings, and exaltation of the expected
Messiah, — -the light of the Gentiles, and the glory of his
people Israel ; the obvious and necessary inference to be
drawn from these premises is, that there is no other differ-
ence between the preaching of Moses and the prophets,
and that of an Apostle of Christ, but this-— that the
former points to the promised Saviour, as yet to come;
the latter exhibits him as already come. — But he is in fact
the sum and substance of both parts of divine revelation ;
and what is called the New Testament, containing the
writings of Apostles and Evangelists, speaks no other lan-
Iguage than what the Old Testament had spoken before by
Moses and the prophets, respecting the scheme of man's
salvation, except in so far as relates to the way and manner

* St. Luke xxiv. 3r. f Acts xxviii. 23. % Acts xxvi. 22, 23.

S4f Primitive Truth and Order 'vindicated*

in which that gracious scheme was exhibited to the world.
The Old Testament went before, to announce what was
to be dehvered in the New : and the New Testament came
after, to interpret the Old: but both, like the Cherubim
over the mercy seat, bear a constant and friendly aspect
towards each other, united in^ and intent upon carrying
on, one and the same gracious design of promoting the
glory of God in the salvation of men.

This is the view in which we are taught to behold these
two dispensations of divine mercy, as distinguished by the
characters of Old and New ; not as though they were two
distinct schemes of religion unconnected with each other,
but as what they really are, two parts of the same beauti-
ful whole, mutually confirming and illustrating each other ;
and to be considered as Old and Nexv^ only with respect to
the time and manner of their being manifested to the
world. It is therefore well and wisely declared in the
seventh article of the Church of England, that " the Old
Testament is not contrary to the New ; for both in the Old
and New Testament, everlasting life is offered to mankind
by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and
man, being both God and man. Wherefore they are not
to be heard, which feign that the old fathers did look only
for transitory promises." How can it possibly be feigned,
or imagined, that they looked only for transitory pro-
mises, when an inspired Apostle expressly assures us, that
those whom he enumerates " all died in faith, not having
received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and
were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and con-
fessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth,
desiring a better country, and looking forward to the city,
which God hath prepared for them ; ' even as we Chris-
tians,' having here no continuing city, seek one to come."^
So it is evident, that they and we, having the same object

* Heb. xi. 13—16. and xiii. 14.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. SS

in view, and travelling to the same country, must be di*
rected to it by the same means; that is, by a firm and steady
faith in him, who is " the way, the truth and the life ;"^
the way in which we are to walk, the truth, by which we are
to be guided, and the life in which our journey is to end.

Although the dispensation, under which we live, be
called the New Testament, we are not to suppose, that it
differs in substance from the Old^ or points to any new way
of salvation which was not known before. For since the
fall of man, there has been but one way discovered for
his recovery; one scheme of mercy, at first revealed in the
promise of deliverance by the " seed of the woman ;" —
represented by the emblematic appearance at the east of
the sacred garden, — and afterwards more fully exhibited
in the religious services, and mystical offerings of the
*' old fathers," both before and under the law. These were
appointed to prefigure^ what our eucharistic service is
designed to commemorate as actually accomplished by the
sacrifice of Christ — " the one oblation once offered for the
sins of the whole world." Thus the Patriarchal, the Jew-
ish, and the Christian economy, will all be found to unite in
directing the eye of the faithful to the same object of evan-
gelical hope, from the revelation of the promised seed to
Adam in paradise, through the shadows of the law, to its
designed completion in the person of Jesus Christ, — " the
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." And when,
at the consummation of all things, the Patriarch, the Jew,
and the Christian, shall be assembled before the throne
that is set in heaven; as they will all have had but one
source of hope here below, so will they then join in one song
of praise, with the mystic powers on high— saying — " Bles-
sing, honour, glory and power be unto him that sitteth on
3the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever."'|'

From the account that has now been given of the primi-

* St, John xiv. 6. j Rey. v. 13.

/'

SS Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

tive institution of religion, ^s founded in the immutable
counsel of that " Father of lights^ with whom is no varia-
bleness, neither shadow of turning ;" I think it must evi-
dently appear, that the way of salvation, which divifte
wisdom has marked out for the human race, is no hew
discovery, peculiar to this or that age of the world. It is
as old as the " way of the tree of life," of which a very
early symbol Was appointed to keep fallen man in remeni-
brance ; and with respect to which the last book of the in-
spired volume delivers this encouraging promise-^" To
him that ovefcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life,
which is in the midst of the paradise of God."^ The
same emblem is made use of in both cases, to show that
the means of procuring life to man have been the same
from the beginning, and will continue to the end of the
world* Nothing is more likely to hurt the cause of Chris-
tianity, and obstruct it^ salutary influence on the miads of
men, than the false notions, which prevail respecting its
original, and the mean, degrading ideas, which some are
disposed to entertain with regard to its Author, and the
plan on which it was preached and propagated iti the world
about eighteen centuries ago. Those who view it as a sys-
tem, which was then entirely new, and had never been
heard of before, sit down very coolly to weigh its mel-its as
placed in the balance with the schemes of heathen philoso-
phy, and natural divinity, which then were or since havfe
been set in opposition to it. They do not see, or are not
willing to see that light of evidence, which shows the truth
and purpose of the everlasting covenant, entered into by
the adorable Three in Jehovah for man's redemption, be-
fore the foundations of the world were laid. They overlook
the unity of this grand and merciful design, jmd will not
observe that beautiful chain of connection, by which the
promise was united with the performance^ the prophecy

* Rev. ii. 7.

i(

Primithe Truth and Order vindicated^ ST

•\yith the completion, the anticipation with the event;"*
all tending to illustrate the character, and display the glo-
ries of that Almighty Deliverer, who from the very fall of
man, stood forth his Redeemer and Intercessor. They
do not consider, that for the manifestation of this wonder-
ful person, in whom all the nations of die earth were to be
blessed, there was a fulness of time appointed, to which all
the preceding dispensations looked forward ; just as there v
is now a fulness of time determined, to which our views
ought to be continually directed, when all the nations of the
earth will be summoned to appear before the tribunal of
that " just and righteous One," who came first to save^
and will at last come to judge the world.

These are the great and interesting objects^ which our
Christian principles lead us to contemplate : And when we
survey the imminent danger to v/hich such principles are
^Exposed, from the careless indifference which appears on
the one hand, and the wild enthusiasm which breaks out
on the other, both equally tending to sap the foundation^
and destroy the purity of the Christian faith ; surely we
cannot but see the necessity of exerting our utmost endea-
vours to hold fast our profession, and to fix the certainty
and security of our belief on its only solid basis- — " the truth
as it is in Jesus." If his religion be true, it must be so in
every part that is now exhibited to our view ; it must have
been always so in every period of time ; and those several
objects, about which our faith is exercised, the creation,
the redemption, and the sanctification of man, were all
presented at once to the eye of Almighty love ; they all
began together in the unchangeable purpose of Jehovah, and
will move on in merciful procession, as the covenanted,
confederate work of the glorious Three in one undivided
Kssence, till time shall be no more.

Little then are we obliged to those teachers of natural
theology, those advocates for what is called Rational Reli'

* See Dr. Randolph's Sermons on this sul^ject,

8

58 Primitive Truth and Order vihdicatedi

gion^ who would take us out of the hands of our first, oiit
best, our only safe instructor, to prove to us, that there is
a God who made us, and a future state of retribution re^
served for us ; and after carrying us to the borders of that
awful state, there to leave us without a Saviour, or a Sane-
tifier, who only can enable us to pass the bounds, the great
gulph fixed between our fallen nature and a happy immor-
tality. Is it thus, that the light of the gospel, the meridian
brightness of the sun of righteousness, is to receive addi*
tional splendour from the feeble taper of human reason, the
pitiful glimmering of what is called the Light of Nature ?
is it thus, that philosophy is to be brought in, to the aid of
religion ; and the emptiness of man's fluctuating judgment
and understanding to be opposed to that fujness of wisdom
and knowledge, which dwells for ever in the most High ?
No : it is not by such expedients as these, that the cause of
Christianity is to be supported, and its influence pr'omoted
in the world* We have seen them tried in the balance, and
found wanting* God has pei-mitted the experiment to be
made, and under a pretence of refining and improving the
religion of Christ, by explaining its doctrines in such a
rational manner^ as may recommend it to more general
acceptance, a plan has been carried on with wonderful suc-
cess, for stripping it of all its primary importance, and hold-
ing it up, as but a secondary object in the scale of Divine.
Providence*^

* "This plan seems to be recommended by Archdeacon Paley, who
maintains that •• he, who by a diligent and faithful examination of the
original records, dismisses from the system one article, which contradicts
the apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind, does
more towards recommending the belief, and with the belief, the in-
fluence of Christianity, to the understandings and consciences of seri-
ous inquirers, and through them to universal reception and authority,
than can be eftected by a thousand contenders for creeds and ordinances
of human establishment." This no doubt is partly true, as far as " the
apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind" may be
opposed to " creeds and ordinances of human establishment." But arc

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 59

With this view, it has been laid down as an incontro-
vertible position, that what is called Natural Religion con-
stitutes the basis of revelation, and having therefore prior
authority, must be considered as of superior obligation.
Accordingly, its laws are represented as eternal and un-
changeable, antecedent to the will of God, and indepen-
dent on it ; so perfectly agreeable to reason, and the fitness
of things, that God as well as man, the Creator as well as
the creature, is obliged to conform to them. The light of
nature is thought to be sufficient for the discovery of all
that is necessary to be known respecting the will and perfec-
tions of the Deity ; and as this boasted light can only dis-
cover what are called moral duties, they are said to carry
with them a natural or eternal obligation j while positive
duties are but mere arbitrary" commands, void of all inter-
nal excellency. These and such like metaphysical distinc-
tions have been eagerly laid hold of, to establish the neces-
sity of a constant appeal to the tribunal of human reason ;
and no precept of scripture must be received as a rule of
duty, till it be proved to agree with the dictates of philo-*
sophy, and its utility be tried by the standard of human
wisdom. By thus throwing so much weight into the scale-
of reason, and so little into that of revelation, as if every
one had a right to frame a religion for himself; the autho-
rity of scripture is daily more and more weakened and
despised, the value of Christianity is proportionably depre-

there no creeds and ordinances of divine establishment, every article of
which must be retained as part of the Christian system, however contra-
dictory it may appear to the judgment or apprehension of " the natural
man— the disputer of this world V* Is there not a ♦' faith — once delivered
to the saints," which must he " early contended for " by all who hope to
share in " the common salvation ?" and which faith, he who maintains
in its purity, as founded on the authority of God, does more towards
recommending the belief andi influence of true Christianity, than *' a
thousand such contenders" as Dr. Paley, for '< the apprehension, the
experience, or the reasoning of mankind." See the dedication of his
*' Principles of Moral and f*olitical Philosophy,*' t;o the Bishop of Carlisle.

60 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

ciated ; infidelity raises its proud aspiring head, and taking,
advantage of the high ground on which its favourite religion
of nature has been (even by some men of distinguished
abilities) imprudently placed, exalts itself against that true
knowledge of God, and divine things, which can only be
derived from divine revelation.*

Thus we may plainly see, that nothing has done greater
mischief to our holy religion, than the vain attempts of some
of its teachers to bring down its exalted truths to the stand-
ard of human reason ; these attempts having in some
measure invited its enemies to join issue with those that
appear to be friendly to it, that the former may strengthen
their hands by the unguarded concessions of the latter.-—
So in fact it has been found, that some of the strongest,
and most pointed attacks that have been made on Christia-
nity, have derived their chief strength from the acknow-
ledgment of this principle, that natural religion is the foun-
dation of all that is instituted and revealed : a principle,
which, as some have been pleased to consider as the ground
of their faith, others have been bold to hold forth, at least
with less inconsistency, as the support of their infidelity.
And if it be true, as some Christian divines have thought
proper to allow, that " unless all the great things contained
in the law of nature are first known and believed, the reve-
lation of God himself can signify nothing," it may no
doubt he affirmed with equal confidence, that where all these
things are already known and believed, revelation can sig-
nify but little. For if nature and reason can so easily dis-

* If the reader be desirous of obtaining farther information on this
interesting subject, I would beg leave to recommend him to a work, in
the perusal of which he will be sure to receive both the benefit and
pleasure that must arise from complete satisfaction, and which is very
properly entitled, The Kncnvledge of Divine Things from Revelation, not
from. Reason or Nature. By the late John Ellis, D. D. Vicar of St.
. 'Catherine's, Dublin, and formerly of Brazen Nose College, Oxford.
!S-.ondon, 1771.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 61

cover the most important truths, and be sufficient to direct
man in the way of his duty, and lead him to the happiness
designed for him, there does not appear to be much neces-
sity for any other guide ; nay, there is hardly room left for
any other, where the mind is already preoccupied with the
sufficiency of its own powers, and feels itself in possession
of every religious truth that is worth the inquiring after.
The consequence of all this must be, that in proportion as
reason is exalted, and the comprehension of the human
mind enlarged beyond its proper limits, the importance
and value of revelation will be just so far depressed and
under-rated, till at last reason becomes absolutely indepen-
dent and self-sufficient, and will either have a religion en-
tirely of its own devising, or none at all.

Thus does the pride of human nature tempt men to em-
ploy the reason which God has given them, in direct oppo-
jsition to the will and intention of the Giver, without consi-
dering the folly and baseness of such unworthy conduct,
and into what gross absurdities it must infallibly lead them.
If these men would know what reason is without revelation,
and to what it would lead them in matters of religion, if
unassisted, and left to itself, let them consult the histories
of those heathen nations, who knew nothing of the Old Tes-
tament, while it was the only scripture, or who since then
have never heard of Christ and his gospel. There they
will soon discover what strange work their idol reason has
made in the world ; how it has multiplied Deities like the
sand of the sea, and " changed the gloiy of the incorrup-
tible God, into an image made like to corruptible man, and
to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things ;"*
how it has led men to offer sacrifice unto devils, in a va-
riety of forms, and in the most inhuman and barbarous
manner ; and, in a word, that there is scarce any thing so
absurd and ridiculous, or so monstrous and abominable,

* Rom. i. 23.

6^ Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

but what the vain, self-sufficient reason of man has made
an object of religious worship.

To use the words, therefore, of a late admirable address to
the patrons and professors of the new philosophy: " Let
the modern reasoner, who would make as good a religion
by the help of nature, and his own faculties, as we have
received from the lights of revelation, and the doctrines of
the gospel, take his ground where he will, provided he does
not go without the heathen pale; and let him keep it.-— Let
him borrow no assistance from Moses, and let him as^ime
to himself all the lights that he can find, all the rational
religion he can collect, not only in the world then known,
but in the world since discovered, in all the nations of the
east, where reason surely, as far as arts and sciences were
concerned, was in no contemptible state ; in America, to the
north and to the south, in all the continents and islands,
which modern navigation has added to the map of the
world, as the Romans knew in the Augustan age ; let him
pursue his researches, and vvhen he has made his tour
through all their temples and pagodas, let him erect his
ti'ophies to reason, and publish his discoveries with what
confidence he may. Alas ! for mankind, and the boasted
dignity of human reason, he will bring back nothing but a
raree-show of idols, a museum of monsters, Egyptian,
Indian and Chinese deformities, and non-descripts, the
creatures of earth, air and sea, snakes, reptiles, even stocks
and stones promoted to be gods, and man degenerating,
and debasing himself to kneel down before these dumb
divinities, and pay them worship. — And now, if this is all
that he, who opposes the religion of revelation, can disco-
ver, and make prize of in the religion of reason, I give
him joy of his discoveries, and wish him candidly to de-
clare, if upon result of those discoveries, he can believe
so well of himself as to suppose, that had he lived in those
days, he would have found out any thing more than was
found out by those who lived in them : whether, if he had

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 6$

singly engrossed the collected wisdom of the seven wise
men of Greece, he would have revealed a better system of
religion to the world than Christ has revealed ; and whe-
ther he would have known the will of God better than God
knew it himself, and more clearly have communicated it to
mankind."*

Whoever duly considers the scope and force of this rea-
soning, can be at no loss to discover the obvious conclusion
in favour of divine revelation ; to which it is evident, that
men are indebted for all that pretended religion of natur©
which they so fondly boast of, and which is no other than
what they derived from the use of the sacred writings, and
the instruction received from those who had the care of
their education. Thus the revealed truths, which took
early possession of their souls, which they were taught
with the first rudiments of learning, and of which no per-
son living in a Christian country can be supposed wholly
ignorant ; these they mistake for the pure natural conceptions
of their own minds, and ascribe to reason, and the light of
nature, that very knowledge of divine things which they
have derived from the gospel of Christ, and which they yet
set up in opposition to it. But is it right and reasonable
to treat in such a disingenuous manner the religion of him,
who came to be, and actually proved himself to be the
light, and life of the world t " Ought the withered hand,
which Christ has restored and made whole, to be lifted up
against him ? — Or should the dumb man's tongue, just
loosened from the bonds of silence, blaspheme the power
that set it free r'^f Yet thus basely do these men act, who
employ the knowledge which they have from scripture,
against scripture itself, and make use of their religion of
nature, as an engine to batter down the religion of Christ.

• See this sul)ject farther pursued and illustrated in an excellent little
tract, called, A Jew plain Reaso7is viby ive should believe in Christ, and
adhere to his Religion. By Richard Cumberland, Esq. London, 1801.

t See Bishop Sherlock's Discourses on this subject.

64 Prhnilhe Triilh d7id Order vindicated^

But little do these men consider what it really is, which,
Under the name of Natural Religion^ they thus fondly ad-
mire, as such a powerful weapon in the hands of infidelity:
Little indeed do they seem to know of the true state of
that nature from which they would derive this imaginary
religion. For how can that system of religion be called
natural^ which was never yet discovered by any of the
sons of men, while left to themselves in a state of nature^
without a guide or instructor ? Or if it could have been
discovered by men thus uninstructed and untutored, yet
how could such a religion be suited to man in his present
state, which takes no notice of any change that has hap-
pened to him, but supposes him to be still in, that purcj
holy and happy condition, in which he came originally
from the hands of a pure and holy God, and, therefore,
capable of performing such a worship and service as that
God requires, and will accept from an innocent^ unoffend-
ing creature ? No proposition, I think, can be more clear
and evident than this ; that Natural Religion^ if it has any
meaning at all, must mean that religion which is fitted for,
and peculiar to ih^ present state of man's nature^ as some-
thing very different from that, in which he first received
his being. But how can that be deemed a religion at all
calculated for man in his present state, which leaves out of
the account the doctrines of his Jail and his restoration!
which never tells, nor can tell him, how he died in Adam,
and was and will be made alive again in Christ ? That " in
Adam all died," and in consequence of the mortal nature
received from their first parent, all his posterity are liable
to death, is a truth no less confirmed by experience, than
plainly declared in holy writ. But the cause, as well as the
sting, of death is sin ; and how sin can be pardoned, and
its effects removed from the sinner, no light of nature has
ever been able to show, nor give any glimpse of hope, but
what may arise from the dark, uncertain prospect afforded
by repentance ; of which it can only be said, " who can tell

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 65

if God will accept it V God alone could tell the terms
on which " repentance and remission of sins were to be
preached among all nations j and it behoved Christ to
suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day^"* that in
his name^ the promise of this universal blessing might be
authoritatively declared by those commissioned for that
purpose : " For in him," says one of these authorized
preachers, " all the promises of God are yea, and in him
amen ;"t in him they are all made sure to us, and by him
are truly and effectually accomplished.

But " remission of sins" is not of itself sufficient to fill
up the measure of divine mercy promised to man in his
blessed Redeemer, and which the light of nature could
never have exhibited to the eye of faith : " there is still,"
as an eminent writer beautifully expresses it, " something
farther that nature craves, something which with unuttera-
ble groans she pants after, even life and happiness for ever-
more* She sees all her children go down to the grave j
and all beyond the grave is to her one wide waste^ a land
of doubt and uncertainty : when she looks into it, she has
her hopes, and she has her fears j and agitated bv the vicis-
situde of these passions, she finds no ground whereon to rest
her foot. How different is the scene which the gospel
opens! there we see the heavenly Canaan^ the new Jerusa-
lem; in which city of the great God, there are mansions,
many mansions for receiving them, who through faith, and
patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory and im-
mortality."J How properly, then, may we join in the
words which an apostle addressed to his Saviour, " Lord>
to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal
life." II Thou hast exhibited in thine own person a clear
undeniable proof, that " life and immortality are now

* St. Luke xxiv. 46, 47.

t 2 Cor. i. 20.

\ See Bishop Sherlock's Discourse on St. Johnili. 16,

jl St. John vi. 68.

9

6&1 Primitive Truth and Order vhidicated.

brought to light," and therefore need not be sought In the
dark uncertain guesses of human reason, which may serve
well enough in the affairs of this life, and in pointing out
some of the common duties between man and man ; but
when it exceeds its bounds, and presumes to meddle with
the deep things of God, and to dictate in the great points
of religion, its weakness and insufficiency do then mani-
festly appear. It is but " the blind leading the blind,*' and
will sooner betray us into eiTor and danger, than deliver us
out of them. Shall we then quit the glorious light dis-
played in the gospel of Christ, to follow the faint and feeble
glimmering of natural reason l Shall we seek for clearness
in the midst of obscurity, or hope to meet with truth in
the labyrinths of error and uncertainty? Thou blessed
Saviour of the world ! If we leave thee, to whom shall we
go? Where shall we find a guide like thee, a conductor so
kind, so compassionate, so infinitely wise, so divinely mer-
ciful ? " Thou light of the Gentiles and glory of Israel !"
How great must be the blindness and infatuation of those
who, refusing to be guided by the radiant beams of thy
heavenly doctrine, walk on in the false and treacherous
ways of their own devising, and neither discern, nor desire
to know the truth ? What egregious folly, as well as base
ingratitude is it, thus to spurn at all the gracious designs of
heaven, and seek to fall back into the miserable gulfs of
heathen ignorance and idolatry; there to lie lost and bewil-
dered by the light of that reason which we have now been
view^ing, as set up through all its weakness and wanderings^
in opposition to divine revelation !

Reason, we acknowiedge, is the gift of God to man;^
and had it always been employed, as it ought to have been,
in the service, and for the honour of the Giver, it w^ould
have proved what it was designed to be, an able advocate

* See Mr. Daubeny's excellent reasoning on this subject, in the firs,-,
discourse of his work above ixientioned.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,. 67

ibr the truth of revealed religion ; which, it is evident from
that common mark of distinction, could not have been
known, till it was revealed or discovered by its gracious
Author.* — Yet human reason would be muttering against
this divine truth, and holding up some semblance of reli-
gion as natural to man, which, therefore, it was not requi-
site for God to reveal ; the discovery of which we shall
allow to be a natural enough consequence of the pride and
vanity of the human heart.; — ^But the misfortune is, that
this specious theory happens to be directly contrary to mat-
ter of fact : For if there be any truth in revelation, which
those who talk so much of the connection betweei) natural
and revealed religion seem to acknowledge ; nothing is
more certain than that God spake, or revealed his will to
Adam in Paradise, and that too, as soon as he was created;
a circumstance which cuts off all right of precedence in any
other mode of discovery, and leaves no room for that ima-
ginary system of human invention— -the religion of nature.
Yet no sooner had revelation thus commenced in Paradise,
than we are immediately informed of that ambitious desire
t)f obtaining knowledge by other means, which proved so
fatal to our first parents. " Ye shall be as Gods, knowing
good and evil," was the temptation which took hold of
the human understanding upon its first perversion ; and the
success which the tempter gained on that occasion, has en-
couraged him to go on with a continued repetition of that
same confident assurance ; which, by setting up the reason
of man in opposition to the word of his Maker, laid the
foundation for infidelity, in all that variety of forms in
which it has since appeared, through the several ages and
nations of the world.

The whole train of opinions that attend what is corn-

ed

* It has been well observed, that r't^ht reason, as expressed in Latin
by Ratio recta, must mean reason ruled, or directed by a law, that is,
by the law pr will of God.

68 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

monly called Freethinking, will be found to flow from
some unworthy notion, or settled contempt of divine
revelation, grounded on this false principle, that man's own
understanding must be a sufficient guide to him in all
matters of religious concern. — According to this assump-
tion of the Freethinkers, as the human mind is capable of
advancing by progressive information, to higher degrees of
knowledge, there is nothing to prevent our carrying on the
improvement of religion bj'- the same means, till it be
brought to its utmost degree of perfection. This is placing
religion on the same footing with those arts and sciences,
the study of which opens a wide field for speculation, and
is daily leading to new discoveries, calculated to improve
the condition of man in this world, and produced by the
exertion of those natural faculties with which God was
pleased to furnish him. But religion has a different object
in view, and points the attention of man to matters of in-
finitely greater importance. It invites him to look forward
to a future state of existence, and provides the means by
which he may be prepared for the enjoyment of ever-
lasting happiness. The knowledge and application of these
means, accompanied with a firm belief of the end to which
they lead, make up the great business of religion ; which,
it is evident, man v/as w^hoUy unable to carry on by him-
self, without immediate instruction and assistance from his
Maker. — ^This necessary aid was afforded, as soon as he
was created ; and has been continued in various ways, as
circumstances required, but with a constant attention to
the accomplishment of that gracious object which the Deity
had in view, by communicating the knowledge of his will
to man. Every such communication tended more and
more to comfirm his dependance on God's everlasting pur-
pose ; and that scheme of mercy, which had been projected
in the councils of heaven, and partially revealed from time
to time, was thus seen advancing through all its successive
stages, till it arrived at that fulness of time, which had

Primitive Truth ond Order vindicated, 69

been appointed for its complete manifestation in the per-
sonal ministry of God's incarnate Son.

Such has been the uniform purpose, and continued
progress of divine revelation, from its commencement in
Paradise, to its final termination in the gospel of Christ.
Nothing then can be more certain than this obvious conse-
quence, that religion thus coming from God, and founded
on the clear revelation of his will to man, must be consi-
dered in itself as a perfect institution, and incapable of
receiving any improvement from the utmost efforts of
human intellect. Men may talk as they please, of the pro-
gress of arts and sciences ; these, as human inventions,
will always be susceptible of some degree cf improvement^
in proportion to the weakness, and want of skill displayed
by their several authors : But nothing can be more absurd,
than to speak of a progressive religion; which, as the work
of God, can never receive any additional excellence from
the wit or contrivance of men. If it has been abused and
pei-verted by human folly, a just regard to its original insti-
tution requires that it should be rescued from these abuses,
^nd brought back to its primitive standard. But every
attempt at such necessary reformation ought to have its
object distinctly ascertained, and be directed to the proper
measures for obtaining the removal of those corruptions,
which have given rise to it. Without some such direction
to a specific point, and a well regulated adherence to fun-
damental truths, a boundless field of speculation will be
laid open, and one theory will follow another in such end-
less succession, as to leave those who are thus seduced
from the right way, in the perilous condition described by
ihe^ apostle, " ever learning, and never able to come to the
knowledge of the truth. "^'

" The conceit of superior learning," says a venerable
author, " has always had an ill effect upon Christianit}',

* 2 Tim. iii. 7.

70 Primitive Truth and Of c/er vindicated,

and is frequently found in those who have no great mattcr-s
to value themselves upon. We may be as learned as we
can make ourselves, and yet continue good Christians ; be-
cause true learning, and true religion, were never yet at
variance ; but the moment we are vain of our learning, we
begin to be in danger, and some folly or other is not far
off."* So careful was the author of this pious observation
to guard us against that vain pretension to learning, which
makes some men affect to be wise in matters of religion,
*' above what is written;" while, at the same time, he was
equally careful to withhold every encouragement from that
enthusiastic notion, so fondly cherished by others of a dif-
ferent description, who imagine themselves sure of salvation^
for no other reason, but because they are ignorant and
unlearned. Both these extremes must be equally avoided ;
and there cannot be much difficulty in drawing the line
between that proud display of learning, which looks down
with contempt on the simplicity of the gospel, and the no
less presumptuous ignorance, which foolishly regards all
its inward feelings and imaginary assurance, as certain
proofs of a saving faith, though unaccompanied with any
true knowledge of the ground on which that faith is built.

* And none more near at hand, than what the same author had been
Just before describing. For *' how often," says he, " has it been urged,
that we ought not to receive the faith, which the first fathers of tht;
ehurch, and the succeeding fathers of the reformation, have delivered
to us, because we are of late years so far advanced above them in know-
ledge ? But I have never seen the connection pointed out between any
modern improvement in science, and the new doctrines of reformers in
theology. We are certainly much improved, for instance, in the art of
making time-keepers, above those who lived an hundred years ago; but
no man will say, that we thence derive any advantage for numbering
our days more v/isely, or that we have any clearer ideas of eternity, than
we had before. An eminent artist in this way may doubt of the Apos-
tles* Creed; but then, there is no visible relation between his art, and
his unbelief." See Bishop Home's Charge to the Clergy of the Diocese
of Norwich, 1792.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 71

Being thus convinced, that there is no necessary connec-
tion between the doctrines of Christianity, and the disco-
veries which from time to time have been made in various
branches of science, and therefore no wisdom or safety in
attempting to place subjects under the same point of view,
which are as widely separated from each other, as earth
from heaven ; we cannot but readily embrace this unavoid-
able consequence, and cherish it as a most valuable and im-
portant truth, that the religion of Christ is not a thing to be
new-modelled and improved, in hopes of bringing it to a
greater degree of perfection. It cannot put on those va-
rious modes and shapes, -which are suited to the fashions
and fancies of the times, but must always be expected to
appear in an uniform dress, and to wear the character of
its divine Author, that of being " the same yesterday, to-
day, and for ever." Because his apostles, and their suc-
cessors, have been called ministers of the New Testament,
we are not to suppose that their ministry consists in always
delivering something that is new^ or different from what
has been said before; since the faith for which we are
exhorted ^' earnestly to contend, was but once delivered to
the saints," and therefore what was the whole faith then,
must continue to be so still ; nothing must be added to it,
or taken from it. Perhaps there never was a time which
required so much steady attention to this matter as the
present; when an itch for novelty seems to prevail, beyond
any thing of the kind that has been hitherto observed.
Every age, no doubt, has had that common failing of ima-
gining itself to be wiser than any that preceded it. But
the wisdom of this age pretends to carry the point much
farther than ever was attempted before ; and nothing more
is necessary now to set aside the most venerable truths, and
institutions of religion, than merly to say, that they are old
and obsolete, and founded on such antiquated notions, as
are totally inconsistent with that more just and liberal view
of things, which is the pride of this enlightened age. Thus

72 Pnmithe Truth and Ordef vindicated^

are mankind led away by the mere force of fashion, and
bullied out of their religion, out of every thing that is va^
luable and good, by a few bold unmeaning words, which
serve only to show the folly and confidence of those that
use them. Such persons, we may observe, are ever on
the wing of speculation, devising new theories both of sa-
cred and civil government ; and when any disagreeable
truth stands in their way, they have only to hold it up, as
an exploded doctrine, — a remnant of that hateful thing cal-
led Priestcraft ; which immediately does the business, and
saves the trouble of any farther reasoning on the subject.

These are the errors and delusions with which all sound
and sincere Christians have to contend, and to carry on the
contest in that earnest manner, which an Apostle so warmly
recommends ;^ a contest, which it was never more neces-
sary than at present, to urge with fervour, and prosecute
with zeal and firmness — a zeal proportionate to the danger
to which the true faith of Christ is now exposed, both from
the bold attempts of avowed enemies, and the insidious aid
of pretended friends, appearing outwardly to support, but
secretly undermining the foundation of that authority, on
which rests our belief of the Christian doctrine. In defence
of that doctrine, the credibility of which is so openly at-
tacked by infidelity on the one hand, and its purity no less
endangered by enthusiasm on the other, we must there-
fore strive to arm ourselves with such weapons as are best
calculated for repelling the assault made on it, and the in-
jury done to it, by each of these powerful, but, we trust,
not invincible adversaries. From the manner in which the^
apostle exhorts us to pursue this arduous contest, it is evi-
dent, that by thejaith once for all delivered to the saints, we
are to understand, not an inward conviction of the truth of
the Christian doctrine, or that assurance of faith, which
some modem preachers boast of, as the peculiar privilege

* St. Judc; 5..

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, " 73

of their saints, but something that could be delivered in ail
outward and public manner, could be read, or heard like
tht^^'form of sound words^^ mentioned by St. Paul, which
Timothy was directed to ^'' hold Jast;^''^ thdLt so he might
hand it down to the Christian church, as a model of what
was to be professed and believed in that church, to the end
of the world. Accordingly it is by such a summary of the
Christian faith that the church to which we belong con^-
tinues^ and, I trust, will continue, to profess her belief in
the adorable Three who subsist, with equal power, ma-
jesty and eternity, in the unity of the Godhead, and bear
record in heaven to the merciful scheme of man's salva-
tion. By such a concise and well-composed j^rm of sound
words, we are taught to ascribe our creation to " the Father
Almighty," our redemption to " his only Son Jesus Christ
our Lord," and our sanctification to " the Holy Ghost ;"
adding also our faith in " one holy, catholic church," that
mystical body, of which Christ is the glorious Head, and
in which is enjoyed " the communion of saints," blessed
with the promise of " fori^iveness of sins" in this world,
and of the " resurrection from the dead, and everlasting
life" in the world to come. This is undoubtedly the faith
which Christ established in his church, and which he
authorized his apostles to deliver from him, as a sacred
privilege or blessing to his people, to be received and pre-
served as such, Yjhole and entire, till he should come again
to give a " crown of righteousness," to all them who shall
thus " have ^ept the faith, and love his appearing."

For the preservation, therefore, of such a blessing, the
sum and substance of all the good things which Christ has
made over to his church, and in the hope of that glorious
reward which he has promised to such fidelity, it is surely
the interest, as much as the duty of all Christians, to con-
tend in the most earnest manner ; and they cannot do so

• 2 Tim. i. 13.
10

T4f ^ J^rimitive Truth and Order vindicated.

iiiore effectually, than by holding out the end and object of
their faith in the same uniform light, in which it has ever
been represented, as the effect of that divine immutable
counsel, which admits of no change or variation, and so
makes the volume of revelation speak a clear, consistent
language from beginning to end. It begins with the crea-
tion of the world, and the formation of man j and it ends
with the last judgment, and consummation of all things >
and thi*ough the whole period described in the Old Testa-
ment, we see a regular chain and series of well-connected
events, all leading on to the incarnation of the promised
Redeemer, and directing the attention of God's faithful
people to that great mystery of godliness, God manifested
in the flesh. It was to this mysterious accomplishment of
the Divine counsel, that the law and the prophets looked
forward ; and what was so long shadowed out in their
typical rites, and figurative language, was at last most hap-
pily exhibited in all its substance, under the dispensation of
the gospel ; which is, therefore, to be considered as fulfil-
ling the law, just as the law was predicting the gospel, and
both are to be viewed as constituting one beautiful and con-
sistent scheme of salvation.

It is by adhering to this unity of design, and placing
things in their proper form and order, that the faith of a
Christian is built on such a firm and solid foundation, as
inan cannot lay ; but which was graciouslv laid for him in
the will and counsel of his God before the world began, and
gradually manifested in all the outlines of the marvellous
plan, according to the wisdom of its Almighty contriver.
When things are thus traced back to their proper source,
we can easily perceive the instructive design of those sa-
cred emblems, under which the knowledge of God's mer-
ciful purpose, and good will towards men, is so beautifully
conveyed to us : And it is in this view that we are taught
to behold the ancient patriarchs, prophets, priests and kings,
as typical characters, and their several offices, and the mor^

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated^ * T$

re*narkable passages of their lives, as fore-showing him,
who was to arise, as the Head of the holy family, the great
Prophet, the true Priest, the everlasting King.* Thus the
events which happened to the ancient people of God, wer^
designed to point out, as in a figure, parallel occurrences-,
which should afterwards take place in the accomplishment
of man's redemption, and the rise and progress of the
Christian church : and as we are to view in the same light
the various provocations and punishments, captivities and
restorations of the tribes of Israel, which we are assured
^' happened unto them for ensaraples," " types or figures^-
and were written for our admonition ; so we are to under-
stand in the same figurative sense, what is said of the law,
and its ceremonies ; of the tabernacle and temple, with the
services therein performed, and of the whole economy of
the priesthood of Aaron. AH this the well-instructed
Christian will easily transfer to the new law of the gospel,
to the oblation of Christ, to the true tabernacle or temple
not made with hands, and to what was done therein for the
salvation of the world, by him, who was in one respect a
sacrifice, in another a temple, and in a third a ** High Priest
for ever after the order of Melchizedek ;" after a certain
order, form, or regulation, which was to be the rule and
model of the Christian priesthood for ever.

That the Christian church was to have a priesthood, duly
and regularly ordered, according to a form appointed for

* See this subject admirably illustrated In the preface to Bishop Horne'3
excellent Commentary on the Book of Psalms, which his biographer justly
calls the greatest work of his life, and of which the author himself gave
this account, soon after it was begun : '* The work delights me greatly,
and seems, so far as I can judge of my own turn and talents, to suit me
the best of any I can think of. May he who hath the Key of David,
prosper it in my hand, granting me the knowledge and utterance neces-
sary to make it serviceable to the church !" Let any person of judgment
peruse the work, and he will see how well the author has succeeded, and
kept up the spirit of it to the end.

76 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

that purpose, is abundantly evident from the whole of St»
Paul's reasoning on this subject, in his Epistle to the He-
brews ; in which the figurative economy of the law is repre-
sented as brought to perfection under the gospel, and the
service of the temple as furnishing a typical resemblance of
that of the Christian church. If the faithful Jews were
allowed to draw near to God, through the appointed minis-
trations of the tabernacle ; " we have any altar," says the
apostle, " from which they had no right to eat, while they
still adhered to that unavailing service:" And if as Chris-
tians, we have an altar ^ we must also have a priesthood to
minister at the altar ; for these are correlative terms ; and
St. Paul certainly considered them as such, when he was at
so much pains to point out the analogy in this respect
between the law and the gospel, and laid it down as a set-
tled rule, that " no man ever taketh this honour" (of the
priesthood) " unto himself," or can ever receive it, but
from the hands of those who have power to give it, " those
that are called of God as was Aaron." The apostle, it is
evident, meant to show, that the Christian and Jewish
churches were not two different dispensations, as to their
original plan and purpose, but a continuation of the one
chiirch of God, and one Divine economy for the salvation
of man: And things were thus regularly ordained and uni-^
formly carried on, because it is of infinite importance to
man, that he should always be able to know, if he will but
diligently inquire, where, and with whom he is to find the
commission, which has been faithfully handed down to those
who are appointed to minister in holy things.^ If ever

* See this matter, and others of similar importance, recommended t©
the attention which they justly deserve, in a small tract, lately pub-
lished, called a " Layraan^s Account of his Faith and Practice, as a Mem-
ber of the Episcopal Church in Scotland," and of which the British Critic^
for December, 1801, says — " The principles which the author labours
to establish, are certainly sound, his reasoning is cogent without subtlety,
and his piety serious without moroseneas."

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 7T

such an appointment took place, and we are well assured
it did take place by Divine authority, it must certainly be
continued, and carried on, to answer the end designed by
it: And how can it possibly be continued in a right and
regular manner, but by keeping it within the lines marked
out for its preservation, and in the proper channel, through
which it may pass on to future ages; just " as a river,
whilst confined within its banks, flows on full and far in its
destined course ; but if its mounds are broken down, and
its waters scattered and diffused beyond their natural limits,
it ceases to be a river, it loses its force, its beauty and use-
fulness, and becomes unable to reach the distant ocean, to
which its course was directed."* Such must have been
the case with the Christian ministry, had no limitation been
prescribed, no exclusive rights assigned to it, and no pro-
vision made for transmitting these from the fountain-head,
through streams of regular succession, to the end of the
world. But as all this has been happily attended to, by the
wisdom of our. blessed Redeemer, it follows of course, that
this part of the gracious scheme of redemption must be
stricdy adhered to by us ; no attempt must be made to
" add to, or diminish from it." The means of grace, the
channels of communication, through which the benefits of
the gospel are conveyed to those who are called to partake
of them, must be preserved whole and entire, without any
breach or interruption, as the current of revelation itself;
otherwise, the people of God may be accused now, as they
were formerly, of *' committing two evils-?— forsaking the
fountain of living waters, and hewing out to themselves
cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water."f In our
Lord's conversation with the woman of Samaria at Jacob's
well, the same figurative language is made use of, to show

* See a Sermon, entitled, " A due Ordination as necessary as a due
Call to the Gospel Priesthood." By the Rev. C. C, Church, rector of
Gosforth, and minister of Trinity, Whitehaven.

t Jer. ii. 13.

78 Primitive Truth and Ordef vindicated^

that Christ being the only fountain of " living waters,"^
there is no other way of partaking of this life-giving spring,
but by the means which he has appointed for imparting to
us its salutary virtue ; and for preserving it pure and entire,
liaving hewn us out a cistern, even his church upon earth,
he is said to have given '' this treasure in earthen vessels^
that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not
of us."f In conformity to which, he tells Ananias con-
cerning the appointment of St. Paul to the m.inistry— " Go
thy way, for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name
before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel ;"J
just as the same Lord had shown the necessity of his mak-
ing a similar choice for the same purpose, when he thus
addressed his apostles : *' Ye have not chosen me, but I
have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should go,
and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.^'*^
But the fruit or effect of their apostolic commission could
not have long remained^ far less could that commission
have extended " even unto the end of the world," if it had
not been understood and exercised by them to this effect,
that as they themselves were chasen and sent^ so were they
appointed to choose and send others, with the same ordinary
powers which they had received, for carrying on the work
of the nainistry, and the continued edifying of the body of
Christ.

It would be deemed a verj^ bold and desperate attempt
to think of altering the circulation of the blood through the
human body, and turning it into new channels: Yet even
this hopeless undertaking could not exceed that height of
folly and presumption, which would propose to divert the
progress of divine grace from the channels appointed for
conveying it through the mystical body of Christ ; or give
it a course different from that, which the God of all grace

* St. John iv. 10-14. I Acts ix. 15.

t 2 Cor. iv. 7- \ St. John xv. 16.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 79

has ordained for it. In all societies, even in those which
have only the affairs of this world for their object, we find
iShat certain regulations must be adopted for preserving
peace and order, and securing to the several members the
enjoyment of their peculiar rights and privileges, with all
the benefits and advantages that are connected with the
purpose for which the society has been formed, and which
are expected to arise from it. Such is the case in all those
bodies politic, or temporal societies, which, for the conve-
nience of those concerned in them, are established on just
principles, and supported by the lawful efforts of human
industry. And such, we find, has always been the case,
with respect to that ecclesiastical body, or spiritual society,
instituted by divine wisdom, for the merciful purpose of
communicating to those who are received into it, the means
of grace here, and the hopes of glory hereafter. From
the manner in which it embraces these two grand and im-*
portant objects, it is evident that the economy of this spi-
ritual society must have a two-fold application, and be
considered as partly concerned with the outward, partly
with the inward man.

The human frame, we know, consists of two parts, a
body and a soul ; and hence it is, that an inspired apostle
draws a most beautiful allusion, representing the unity of
the church of Christ, as being one body, animated and in-
fluenced by one spirit. But if the church be designed to
comprehend the whole man, and to hold out the means of
sanctifying and saving both soul and body, and preserving
both unto everlasting life ; to answer this gracious purpose,
it must be so constituted as to exhibit outward and visible
signs suited to the sensations of the body, and convey an
inward and spiritual grace adapted to the necessities of the
soul. — ^The institutions appointed for that purpose, are,
therefore, very properly called Mysteries^ as exhibiting
one thing to the outward senses, and by that sacramental
emblem, disclosing another thing spiritually to the mind.

$0 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

They are the mysterious means, which God has ordained^
under the economy of the gospel, for communicating sal-
vation and life to man : And for that reason, when St. Paul
wished to point out the nature of his ministry, as " serving
God in that gospel," and the regard which was due to his
sacred office, he did it in these terms, — '•^ Let a man so
account of us, as ministers of Christ, and stewards of the
mysteries of God;"^ thereby plainly showing, that none
but the " ministers of Christ," persons set apart for the
service of the church in the way of his appointment, have
a right to be considered as " stewards of the mysteries of
God," duly authorized to dispense that spiritual food and
nourishment, which the heavenly Householder has so gra-
ciously provided for the support and comfort of his happy
family.

It was, no doubt, in allusion to this merciful provision,
that we find our Lord asking — " Who then is that faithful
and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler over his
household, to give them their portion of meat in due sea-
son ?"t By the household here, we are certainly to un-
derstand the church of Christ, which is often distinguished
as " the household of faith — the house, or household of
God :" And as Christ is by office, and in a peculiar man-
ner, the Lord of this household, so the rulers of it are those
officers who act under him, as the governors and pastors of
his church, and who, it seems, must be made such by him,
that is, made " ministers of Christ," — as he has directed,
before they can become " stewards of the mysteries of
God." This, we know, is the case in all well-regulated
households. Those who act as stewards are appointed,
not by the family, but by the Lord or Master of the family,
and are accountable, not to them, but to him, for giving
them their meat in due season. The meat which the
church is to receive from its rulers and stewards, is the

* 1 Cor. iv. 1. t St. Luke xii. 42.

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 81

word of life, or the means of grace and salvation, which
are called " God's mysteries ;" being that mystical provi-
sion which he has laid up in store, to be regularly dealt
out, for the spiritual health and strength of his faithful peo-
ple. Who then can have any power to distribute his provi-
sion but those to whom he has given authority for that pur*-
pose ? Who can pretend to meddle with the " mysteries of
God," or to administer the blessings of his holy and vener-
able sacraments, without a sufficient warrant for so doing ?
Nothing can be more evident, from the nature of the thing,
than that they who are called God's stewards, must have
his commission and authority for what they do, in their
several services to his people. And St. Paul puts the
matter beyond all doubt, when he tells us, that " God has
actually sc^," or constituted officers, and these too of dif-
ferent orders, in the church ;^ which we may know to be
done by him, when we see it done in the manner prescribed
by that Almighty King and Head of the church, who has
all power in heaven and in earth, and from whom all eccle-
siastical authority must be derived. Every ministry, there-
fore, that does not lead up to him, through his apostles and
their successors, is but a bold intrusion into the sacred of-
fice ; an unwarrantable usurpation of those rights, which he
made over to his appointed messengers, when " he sent
them, even as the Father had sent him," with power to do
as he had done, and perpetuate the ministerial order, ac-
cording to the dispensation of the gospel, in the same man-
ner as he had begun it. This is the only way in which it
can be regularly carried forward, on the plan laid down by
its gracious Founder ; and with respect to which plan, we
may truly say, as of all the other parts of his holy religion,
that what it was " yesterday," and is " to-day," the same
it must continue " for ever j"— nothing must be " added to
it, or taken from it."

* 1 Cor. xii. 28.
11

32 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated.

There are some, however, even of the Christian profes-^
sion, who do not admit the truth of this position ; and we
are not ignorant of the arguments, such as they are, on
which their rejection of it is founded.—" It cannot be
proved," they say, " that any plan or form of ecclesiastical
government was laid down in the Christian church, or that
any command was given by Christ for that purpose. And
even admitting, that something like Episcopacy was ap-
pointed by the apostles," still they insist, that " such an
appointment could only take place, in consequence of the
particular circumstances of the church at that time, and
without any view to its being a permanent establishment ;
because no precise- constitution could be framed, "which
would suit the church in its necessary accommodation to
the different arrangements of civil policy, ol* be equall]^
agreeable to the various nations, which might embrace the
Christian faith," Such reasoning as this, if supported by
any thing like proof, might, no doubt, be acknowledged to
have some weight, were it not also certain, that the consti-
tution of the church,^ the authority of her ministers, and
the validity of her sacraments, are all inseparably connected,
as matters of the greatest importance in the Christian
scheme of salvation, and must be esteemed as such by aU
who have a just sense of the high origin, and inestimable
value of the gospel of Christ. To those who consider the
religion of our adorable Redeemer, as nothing ftiore than
a republication of what they call the Religion of Nature,
it must^ to be sure, appear very absurd and ridiculous, to
be inquiring into, or disputing about, the external polity or
government of the church ; since in their opinion the only
thing necessary, is to find out how far the precepts of the
gospel agree with the moral fitness of things, and are sup-
ported by the law or feelings of nature, and the deductions
of human reason. But surely they who regard Christianity
as a religion of divine institution ; who believe, that its
gracious Author came into the world to save sinners, and

Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 83

-that " his name is the only name under heaVfen whereby
they can be saved ;" that his sacraments of baptism, and
the eucharist, are the appointed means of uniting us to him,
and preserving us in that union, and derive all their efficacy
and importance from his blessing and sanctification of them :
Such persons cannot possibly think it a matter of indiffer-
ence, whether the hand from which they receive these
sacraments, be the hand of an administrator, who derives
his authority from Christ, and is empowered to bless in his
name, or the hand of one who has nothing of that kind but
what he has taken to himself, or received from those, who
had as little power as he, to grant any such call or com-
mission.

But to consider the validity of the Christian sacraments,
and the authority of those who administer them, as mat-
ters of such high importance, we have been told by a late
popular writer,* " is placing the essence of religion, not in
any thing interior and spiritual, not in what Christ and his
apostles placed it, something personal in regard to the
disciple, and what is emphatically styled in scripture, the
hidden man of the heart ; but in an exterior circumstance,
a circumstance which, in regard to him, is merely acciden-
tal, a circumstance of which it may be impossible for him
to be apprized." And so, we may say, may " his belief
and obedience of the gospel," be merely accidental, and
depending on the circumstance of his being bom and edu-
cated in a Christian country, yet not the less acceptable to
God, or beneficial to himself, on that account. But the
author of the work to which I am now alluding, calls it
■ ' an absurdity to make the truth of God's promises de?
pend on circumstantials ;" and to him " nothing is more
evident, than that the essence of Christianity, abstractedly
considered, consists in the system of doctrines and duties

• See Lectures on Ecclesiastical History , by George Campbell, D. D^
Principal of Marischai CoUegje, Aberdeen, yol, i. p. 86, Stc.

84 Primitive Truth and Orc^ef vindicated*

revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the essence
of the Christian character consists in the belief of the on«f,
and the obedience of the other." Although we acknow-
ledge, in general, the truth of this observation, we cannot sec
much propriety, or any advantage arising to religion, in thus
splitting it into essentials and circumstantials, for the sake
of weighing the one against the other ; because there is
nnich danger of not making a proper division : and so by
mistaking the nature of what is essential, and what circum-
Hantial, we may throw into the one scale what should be
placed in the other, and thereby make a separation of what
God has been pleased to join together for our comfort and
instruction. It was, therefore, well observed by a learned
and ingenious author,* that " as it is one of the peculiar
weaknesses of human nature, when, upon a comparison of
two things, one is found to be of greater importance than
the other, to consider this other as of scarce any importance
at all ; it is highly necessary, that we remind ourselves,
how gi*eat presumption it is, to make light of any institu-*
tions of divine appointmeut ; that our obligations to obey
ail God's commands whatever are absolute and indispen-
sable ; and that commands merely positive, admitted to be
from him, lay us under a moral obligation to obey him—
an obligation moral in the strictest and most proper sense."
Hence it would appear, that there is not so much ground
as is generally imagined for the common distinction of
moral SLXid positive duties; which, being both alike founded
in the will and revelation of God, must be equally binding
on man, and can admit of no other variety of obligation on
our part, than what is determined by our Lord's own deci-
sion of this matter — " These ought ye to have done, and

* Bishop Butler, in his Analogy, Sic, p. 195, of the fifth edition — a
work which contains much elaborate reasoning in favour of revelation,
yet surely ascribes by far too much consequence to its pretended rival, the
light or religion of rMttne.

JPrimithe Truth and Order vindicated, Sj

not to leave the other undone."^ If we see sufficient rea-
son to embrace the religion of Christ, as the only ground
on which we can hope for salvation and happiness, we
must also be convinced, that, in order to promote that im-
portant end, it must be received whole and entire ; as a
combined " system of doctrines and duties," requiring
our " belief of the one, and obedience of the other," with-
out any other reference to our judgment and discretion,
than what is necessary for our discovering, that these
" doctrines and duties were revealed by our Lord Jesus
Christ," either immediately while he sojourned on earth,
or after his ascension into heaven, by means of the Holy
Spirit, who was " to guide his apostles into all truth."

So far then we are agreed with the learned Lecturer on
Ecclesiastical History^ whose words I have now quoted,
though we shall afterwards have frequent occasion to differ
from him. In his subsequent description of what he deemed
to be the " essence of Christianity," we think, he ought to
have mentioned, what he could not but know, that a part of
the " system of duties," revealed by the Holy Spirit to our
Lord's apostles, and expressly enjoined by one of them,
was obedience and submission to those who have a right to.
*' guide or rule over us, and to watch for our souls i"! AncJ
as it is impossible that such a right as this can be possessed
by any man, or order of men, who have not derived it from
the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, in the way that he
appointed for the transmission of it, we cannot but consider
it as a matter of the highest importance to ascertain, as fdr
as we are able, in what form of church government this
right was originally invested, because to that government
alone can such obedience and submission be due.

On this point, our Ecclesiastical Lecturer is obliged to
allow—-" that a certain external model of government must
have been originally adopted for the more effectual preser*

* St. Mat. xxlii. 23, f Heb. xiii. \7.

86 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,

vation of the evangelical institution in its native purity, and
for the careful transmission of it to after ages."^ And
when there were such strong reasons for the original adop-
tion of a " certain external model of government," it may
well be presumed, that the apostles, supposing them to
have been only possessed of common judgment, without
the benefit of inspiration, could not fail, as governors of the
church, to take the most effectual steps for the future esta-
blishment of what was so necessary to be adopted. Nay,
so much was even Dr. Campbell convinced of the necessity
of such an apostolic institution of government, that he pro-
nounces " any presumptuous encroachment on what is
evidently so instituted, to be justly reprehensible in those
who are properly chargeable with such encroachment, as
is indeed any violation of order, and more especially when
the violation tends to wound charity, and to promote divi-
sion and strife." Happy had it been for the church in this
kingdom, if what is here observed had been duly attended
to by those from whom the author of this just remark
derived his ministry.— -Yet, as if afraid that he had gone
too far in censuring euch presumptuous encroachment a^
justly reprehensible, he immediately adds — ^* But the rcr
prehension can affect those only who are conscious of the
guilt ; for the fault of another will never frustrate to me
the divine promise given by the Messiah, the great Inter-,
preter of the Father, the faithful and true Witness to all
indiscriminately, without any limitation, that he who re-
ceiveth his testimony hath everlasting life."

There is a sense, in which part of this reasoning may^
be received as well-founded ; but we cannot so easity per-
ceive the connection, by which the following conclusion is
drawn from it. "" I may be deceived," says the author,
*' in regard to the pretensions of a minister, who may be
the usurper of a character to which he has no right. I ai?\

* Vol. i. p. 8r,

'Primitiiie Truth and Order vindicated, gf

no antiquary, and may not have either the knowledge, or
the capacity necessary for tracing the faint outUnes of an-
cient establishments, and forms of government, for enter-
ing into dark and critical questions about the import of
names and titles, or for examining the authenticity of end-
less genealogies ; but I may have all the evidence that con-
sciousness can give, that I thankfully receive the testiniony
©f Christ, whom I believe, and love, and serve*"*

But surely this all-sufficient consciousness must arise
from some source or other : and where there is a want of
the " knowledge or capacity necessary" for such inquiries
as are here alluded to, there must be an implicit reliance
on the skill and fidelity of those teachers or spiritual guides,
who ought to serve as " eyes to the blind, and feet to the
lame," who seem to be particularly pointed out for that
purpose in the authoritative direction delivered to God's
people in these words—" Thus saith the Lord, stand ye
in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is
the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for
your souls.""!" There were many, no doubt, in the days of
Jeremiah, who might have availed themselves of this plea,
that " they were no antiquaries, and had neither the know-
kdge nor capacity that was necessary" for such laborious
and useless investigation. Yet the comnmand is general,
and sufficient instruction given how to proceed in discharg-
ing the duty enjoined. There is a " good way" pointed
out for walking in, among the " old paths," which are to be
found out by " asking," with earnestness and circumspec-
tion.— " Stand ye in the ways, and see^ and ask for the old
paths." — " Asking" implies some person or thing, of whom
inquiry may be made ; as where the children of Israel were
commanded to " ask their fathers," and to " ask of the days
that were past," for such information as was necessary for
directing their conduct. The same instructive information

• Vol. i. p. 88. t Jer. vi. 16.

88 Pnmitive Truth and Order vindicated*

may still be obtained, if we are at due pains to apply for it,
and do not trust too much to that inward '' consciousness,"
which oiften promises rest to the soul, without the trouble
of any outward inquiry about " coming" to that Saviour,
in the way and manner which he has prescribed, who alone
can bestow this inestimable blessing, and " give rest to the
soul that is weary and heavy laden."^

Having, therefore, already considered his holy religion,
the only way in which we can " come to him" for spiritual
rest and comfort, as, like himself-—" the same yesterday,
to-day, and for ever ;" and being, I hope, well convinced,
that it ought to be received and embraced, just as it is re-
presented and held out in the scriptures of truth, without
" adding thereto, or diminishing from it," we shall now
; proceed, in consequence of what has been said, to establish
another no less evident and important fact, M=^hich shall be
ihe subject of the following chapter.

* St. Matt. xi. 29.

CHAPTER ir.

The Church of Christy in which his Religion is received and
embraced^ is (hat spiritiml Society^ in which the Ministra*
tion of holy Things is committed to the three distinct Orders
0f BishopSy Priests and Deacons^ deriving their Authority
from the Apostles^ as those Apostles received their Commis-
sion from Christ,

W HEN the converted Hebrews received this command
from an inspired apostle — " Obey them that have the rule
over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for your
souls ;"^ they were thereby put in mind, not only that they
had souls to be " watched for,^' but also that the power or
authority, which these xvatching rulers had over them, was
of a spiritual nature, and such as had relation to that spiri*
tuai life, which, after being begun on earth, was intended to
last for ever in heaven.-^This single observation presents
tis with a just view of the difference between these two
sorts of government, which have the things of earth, and
the things of heaven for their several objects : A distinc-
tion which St. Paul, in another place, seems to point out aS
worthy of our notice, when he tells us, " the first man is of
the earth, earthy ; the second man is the Lord from hea*
ven."f Our earthy man must, therefore, be ruled and
directed by such means and instruments, that is, by such
fbrriis or modes of government, as are suited to the various
sjituations of things on this earth ; where we are placed fot
a while, as in a school of instruction, to fit and prepare uH
for a more pure and permanent state in that heaven, from
which came the second man, the Lord,-r— the -Almighty

* Ileb, xiil. 17. t I Cor. xv 47.

12

90 General Defence of Episcopacy. \

llestorer of our nature, to establish a government suited to
the gracious design of his coming, and most admirably cal-
culated to qualify and dispose his happy subjects for the
possession of that unfading inheritance reserved for them
in " his everlasting kingdom."

Looking forward, with prophetic eye, to the establish-
inent of this spiritual kingdom, and to the solemn inaugu-
ration of its heavenly King, the inspired Psalmist might
justly say of it ; " This is the Lord's doing, and it is mar-
vellous in our eyes."* The setting up a pure and spiritual
kingdom in the midst of a carnal and wicked world, and in
spite of all the opposition which the prince of this world
could make to it ; the founding this spiritual building on a
rock, " against which the gates of hell should not prevail,"
was surely an astonishing exertion of divine power, and
such as evidently showed the hand of that Almighty Lord,
who can do what he pleaseth both in heaven and in earth,
f The " doings" of men are sometimes a little " marvel-
lous in our eyes," when we see them not only pulling down
and destroying those venerable fabrics of civil government^
which have stood for ages,— -the pride of human policy,-—
but even attempting to subvert the foundation of that eccle-
siastical system, which, resting on the solid ground of
divine institution, is not to be altered or new-modelled, as
the work of human device, or in conformity to the manners,
the prejudices, or civil constitutions of the different nations,
in which the Christian church has obtained a setdement.
Here we cannot but observe a remarkable difference be-
tween the " doing of the Lord," and that of man, with
regard to the nature of their respective works. — What the
former does, is done at once, and produced in full per-
fection, according to the nature of the work, and the design
which God has in view by producing it. It has therefore
been justly observed, that '^ God never made his works for

* Psalm cxviii. 23.

General Defence of Episcopacy » 91

man to mend ;" nor does it become a poor, dependent, fal-
lible creature, to interfere with, or pretend to alter, the
appointments of the supreme, all-wise and good Creator,
It is enough for man to reform and improve himself, to
amend what is amiss in his own conduct, and correct those
errors and mistakes, which experience will discover in the
best and wisest plans of government that have ever been
devised by human ingenuity. These, it seems, can only
be brought to their admired perfection by slow and leisurely
degrees. Even the boasted constitution of this country,
which has been so often proposed as a pattern to the neigh-
bouring nations, is well known to have been the gradual
work of ages, the happy consequence of that progressive
spirit of improvement, which can never be so properly
exercised, as in contriving means to supply the defects of
human foresight, and to secure to society the benefits
arising from the accumulated experience of successive
generations.

All this is very proper and necessary to be attended to,
as far as we are concerned with the works and inventions
of men, and obliged to show a due regard to the various
schemes of human policy, which have been contrived, and
established, for thus securing, as far as may be, the peace
and good government of this world. But the temporal
peace and prosperity of such a vain and transitory world,
cannot surely be the only, nor the principal object, which
man has to regard and attend to, considered as a candidate
for eternal happiness in the kingdom of heaven. Viewing
himself in this light, he cannot but see the necessity of cul-
tivating a proper acquaintance with the laws and government
of that kingdom, and of submitting to that course of pro-
bation and discipline which has been appointed for the
church of Christ, while militant here on earth, to prepare
it for that triumphant state, which it is at last to enjoy with
its glorious Head in heaven.— 'When the pious well-dis-
posed Christian sets himself to acquire a proper knowledge

9Z General DtfeiKe of Eplscopcu:y*

of his duty in this respect j what a happy circumstance v& it
^r him, that the nature and constitution of Christ's king-
dom, as settied by himself, were fully declared, and made
l^nown to his apostles ; those select officers, to whom the
original commission was given, " to convert the nations,
and teach them to observe all things whatsoever he had
commanded them ?" On this subject every necessary infor-
mation may be derived from the doctrine and practice of
these aposdes, as handed down in the inspired writings of
the New Testament, and explained and illustrated by the
concurring testimony of the first and purest ages of the
gospel; all which exhibit in the clearest light the foundation
of the Christian church, the form of government esta-
blished in it, and the manner in which it is to be supported
by its Divine Founder, to the end of the world.

Our knowledge of all these circumstances points out the
peculiar nature of that spiritual kingdom erected by Christ,
and shows how widely it differs, even in its first erection,
from the kingdoms of this world. Their constitutions and
forms of government are perpetually changing. What: one
nation adopts, another rejects: What is admired in this
age, perhaps will be reprobated in the next ; because the
mind of man is not capable of fixing to itself any certain
standard for adjusting the merits of those numberless po-
litical theories, which are daily getting abroad into the
world. But what was beyond the compass of human ability,
has been accomplished by divine power and authority.
The church or kingdom of God, as we have already ob-
served, with respect to his holy religion in general, came,
good and perfect from his hands, and might well suffer,
but could never be improved by the inventions of men*
In tracing it to its purest source, the fountains of antiquity
must be resorted to, otherwise we shall see but darkly into
the troubled waters of latter times, which faction and party
have been continually stirring, and thereby producing end-
less disorder and confusion. Such must always be the

Oenfral Defence of Episcopacy. 93

<?ase, when men attempt to form a religion, and a church
for themselves, and are not satisfied with what God has
provided for them.

We must, therefore, endeavour to make ourselves suf-
ficiently acquainted with what the goodness of God in this
respect has done for the children of men ; and with the book
of revelation in our hands, we shall be at no loss to disco-
ver how well the one part of the sacred volume agrees with
the other, and both point to the same object under every
dispensation ; still representing the church or people of
God as one body, actuated by one spirit, and established
in one and the same faith and hope. Thus looking back,
with a well-directed eye, to the state of the church, through
its several progressive stages, from its first establishment
in Paradise, and its confinement afterwards to one single
family in the ark, we can trace its enlargement in the pos-
terity of the chosen father of the faithful race, its wander-
ing state in the wilderness, its settlement in the promised
land, and all that happened to it, till the fulness of time
came for the manifestation of its God and Redeemer,
who was to put his finishing hand to the constitution of this
spiritual society, and place it on a sure and immoveable
foundation. Through the whole of this extended view,
one striking circumstance must constantly arrest our atten-
tion ; that under every dispensation of divine grace, some
particular persons were set apart for performing the sacred
yites of religion, and clothed with suitable authority for that
purpose. The inspired history says but little of what is called
the patriarchal economy. But even in the concise account
which is given of that period, we see evident marks of the
divine institution of sacrifice, as the most essential part of
religious worship, and may thence justly infer that a priest-^
hood also was instituted to minister in holy things ; since
there was the same reason for setting apart certain persons
to represent Christ the Priest^ as there was for constituting
certain offerings to represent Christ the Sacrifice, For

94 General Defence of Eplscopactfi

maintaining this consistenc) ,, we have every reason to be-
lieve, that the right to minister was given to the first-born,
as types of Him, who was to be " the First-bom among
many brethren ;" and it was on account of Esau's despising
and selling this right, that he was denominated " a profane
person ;"^ one who had no just sense of God's appointment,
or the regard which was due to sacred things ; for which
reason he was set aside from the office, and the honour of
the priesthood was transferred to his brother Jacob.

When we come down to the establishment of the church
under the Mosaic dispensation, we perceive its form and
ministry, its authority and independence, displayed in the
clearest manner : and these things are frequently referred
to in the writings of the New Testament, which point to
the ancient constitution as still to be maintained in all things
essential to the being of a church. Thus viewing the di^
vine conduct in the light which revelation throws upon it,
we are taught to consider the Jewish dispensation as the
infancy of the Christian, and the Christian, as the full
growth, and mature perfection of the Jewish. But in both,
the body is formed after the same model j and we can trace
a similarity of features and lineaments, such as is observed
in the progressive advancement of our own bodies from
infancy to manhood. To be sure, '' as the economy of
man's salvation forms one complete whole, it may well be
supposed, that there will be an uniformity in its several
parts ;"t And when we find the God of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, regulating the service of the Israelitish church,
by the express appointment of those who were to minister
in it, we max/ justlv infer, that the same God, when mani-^
fested in the flesh for its salvation, would adopt a similar
plan in the Christian church; thereby showing, that the

* Heb. xii. 16.

t See this argument well handled in Mr. Daubeny's excellent Guide to
tie Cburcb, p. 25, &c.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 95

*' law being a shadow of good things to come," bore a re-
semblance in all respects to the substance, which xhe gospel
exhibited. The law was adorned with a priesthood of
God's own institution — a high priest, and priests of his
own calling-— a whole tribe of Levites of his own select-
ing, separated from the rest of the people, and peculiarly
set apart for the service of the tabernacle ; which, with all
its holy things, was a type or figure of the body, and con-
sequently of the church of Christ. In this church, there-
fore, " which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all
in all," we may expect to find the full completion of all
that was prefigured under the Mosaic economy; and as the
Hebrew ministry was " an ordinance for ever," that is, for
the continuance of the temple and nation of the Hebrews,
so are the divine institution, and perpetuity of the Christian
ministry, expressed in that commission, which our Lord
gave his apostles; — ^' As my Father sent me, even so send
I you: and— -lo, I am with you always, even unto the end
of the world."

If we inquire into the history of these aposdes, before
they received this final and most ample commission from
their Lord and Master, -we shall find, that when the num-
ber of his followers had considerably increased, and he was
" moved with compassion at seeing the multitudes scattered
abroad, as sheep having no shepherd," he thought proper
to " ordain twelve," as the evangelist tells us, " that they
should be with him, and that he might send them forth to
preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast
out devils ;" and these he named apostles^ as being persons
peculiarly sent with power to act in his name, and to carry
on the blessed work, which he had so happily begun. Af-
terwards, when the harvest became too great for so few
labourers as these twelve, our Lord was pleased to " ap-
point other seventy also," who, though of an order inferior
to the apostles^ as appears from their never being distin-
guished by that title, were yet empowered to preach the

sis General JDefence of EphcopacyZ

gospel, and to work miracles for the confirmation of theif
doctrine. Thus early do we observe a subordination
among the ministers of Christ, and a striking similitude
between the Jewish church and the Christian, with respect
to their foundation and establishment. The former was
delivered from the Egyptian slavery by Moses the servant
of God ; and the latter is delivered from its bondage to sitt'
and satan, a slavery infinitely more deplorable, by Jesus
Christ the Son of God. In the former, the twelve tribes were
conducted by twelve officers, the heads of their several tribes,
who were all subject to Moses: and in the latter, twelve
apostles were appointed to guide and instruct the people,
and themselves to be obedient in every thing unto Christ.
And, to complete the allusion, our Lord's seventy disciples
answered to the same number of the heads of families, who
were appointed according to the number of Jacob's family
that went down with him into Egypt,* and also according
to the number of the " seventy men of the elders of Israel,"
who were solemnly set apart for assisting Moses in " bear-*
ing the burden of the people."']' Thus, as some of the old
fathers observed, our Lord first chose twelve apostles, and
afterwards he added other seventy select disciples, that by
this means, the people discovering the resemblance betweeit
him and Moses, might the more readily believe him to be
that Prophet, who, Moses foretold, should come.

Thus far did our Saviour collect and gather his church iit
his own person, and while his ministry was confined to
" the lost sheep of the house of Israel ;" on which account
St. Paul calls him a '^ minister of the circumcision," and
he was frequently styled — " the King of the Jews." But
as his death was to take away the distinction between Jev/
and C:ientile, so after his resurrection he declared, that
" all pov/er was given to him in heaven and in earth ;" as a

* See Dr. Potter on Church Government, p. 49—50.
t Num. xi. 16, \7.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 97

proof of which, he enlarged the power of his apostles, and
gave them a full and absolute commission, to convert, bap-
tize and teach, not the Jews only, but " all nations." The
nature of their commission is sufficiently expressed by our
Lord's telling them — '' As my Father hath sent me, even
so send I you ;" which plainly showed, that as the Father
had sent and empowered him to collect, constitute and
govern his church, and ordain ministers in it, so he devolved
this mission and power upon them ; and as before they had
been only his personal attendants, waiting his orders from
his own mouth, they were now to stand in his stead, to be
officers in ti^ust for the regular administration of the affairs
of his kingdom, and to have authority to send others, for,
the purpose of carrying on and perpetuating the same plan
which he had set on foot, even unto the end of the world,
Though they were thus sent by him, even as he had been
sent by the Father, yet it is certain, they, could not be sent
as mediators and redeemers, as he was ; for there is but
".one Mediator between. God and. men, the man Christ
Jesus." This new commission, therefore, must be under-
stood only of the authority of government and discipline
in the church, which Christ himself had received of the
Father, and of ordaining others to the same office, to which
the apostles themselves had been called by virtue of their
ordination. While our Lord himself continued personally
present with them, they had a commission to baptize, and
preach the gospel, and to do such things as were most likely
to gain credit to their doctrine. But now being sent in a
more ample and solemn manner, to supply the place of
their absent Master, and carry on the work which he had
begun, they were empowered to convey to others that
Episcopal Authority, which they themselves had received
from the chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls ; that so
there might be a continual, uninterrupted succession of
ecclesiastical governors and pastors, who, in consequence of
his gracious promise, were to hope for tlie blessing of his

98 General Defence 6f Episcopdctj^

spiritual presence, protection arid assistance in the exectt*
tion of their sacred office, even unto the end of the world.
Thus were the apostles exalted to the highest station in
die church, according to the account which St. Paul gives
of this matter, when he tells us—that '' God hath set some
in the church, first apostles."^ He set thent^r^^, not
only in order of time, but in dignity of office, and distin-
guished them as the governors of the church, under Christ
its supreme Head : Which enlargement of their power we
find them soon after exercising, by electing one to fill up
the place of Judas, which had fallen vacant by his miserable
end, and prescribing several rites to be observed by the
members of their spiritual society. But though the apostles
were thus constituted the principal labourers in God's vine-
yard, it cannot be supposed, from the daily increase of the
work which it required, that they could long be able to at*
tend to all the minuter parts and branches of it. They
therefore found it necessary, according to the model esta-
bli^ed by their blessed Master, to continue that other in-
ferior order of church officers, in which capacity themselves
had served under him, while he was upon earth* These
are often mentioned under the title oi presbyters or elders^
though the express time and manner of ordaining them be
tiot parti<:ularly recorded.. Thus we are told of the apos-
tles Paul and Barnabas, that in the course of their travels
*' for confirming the souls of the disciples, they ordained
them elders or presbyters in every church."f St. James
directs the sick to " call for the elders or presbyters of the
church to pray for them.'^ St. Peter warns those to
whom he wrote, to be " obedient to their elders^ and he ex-
horts these elders or presbyters to feed the flock of God
which was among them."§ St. Paul puts Titus in mind,
that he " had left him," as bishop, " in Crete, that he

• 1 Cor. xii. 28. % St. James v. 14.

t Acts xiv» 23, § 1 St. Peter v. 1—5.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 9@

should set in order the things that were wanting, and or-
dain elders in every city."* The elders^ in all these passages,
are the same with presbyters or priests^ the second order of
ministers in the church, whom we may suppose St. Paul to
have had in his eye, when, after mentioning — that " God
had set some in the church, first apostles" — he added,
" secondarily prophets;^'* the word prophet being often ap-
plied to signify a person acting by a divine commission, andT
employed in God's immediate service, but without convey-
ing the idea of his foretelling future events, which is now
commonly affixed to the word prophets

But we have farther to observe, from the information
given us in the history of the apostles, that soon after they
had received their Episcopal power, they ordained another
order of church ministers, who, from the nature of their
office, were peculiarly distinguished as deacons or servants.
There were seven of these ordained at first, because the
apostles judged such a number sufficient to supply the ne-
cessities of the church at that time. They had the charge
of the poor people, and took care of the charitable collec-
tions that were made for their relief. But they had also
authority, as they now have with their bishop's license, to
preach the gospel, and to baptize where a higher minister
cannot be had. Thus we find Philip, who was one of them,
baptizing the eunuch ;f while Stephen, another of them, suf-
fered death, for preaching the gospel to his own country-
men.J Accordingly this office was regularly continued in
the church; and in every council or synod, mention is
made of the deacons, their powers are confirmed, and their
duties explained, as being the persons alluded to, whom
the apostle says, God has set in the church, as " thirdly
teachers.''''^

These seem to be all the standing orders established in

* Titus i. 5. I Acts vi. and vii.

t Acts viii. 38, jj 1 Cor. xii. 28.

100 General Defence of Episcopacy i

the church; which therefore St. Paul, we see, distinguishes,
in a particular manner, by mentioning them in their rc'gulaf
order — ^" first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teach-
ers :" Which three gradations of office, thus distinguishing
the Christian, as they had before distinguished the Jewish'
dispensation, were carefully and constantly preserved in the
primitive church, and spread, with the spreading of the
gospel, to the very ends of the earth. In ever)' kingdom
arid corner of the converted world, we find the bishops, as
the successors of the apostles in all their ordinary powers,
presiding over their several portions 6f the flock of Christ;
administering the sacred rite of confirmation, as the sealer
sanction of admission into that flock ; ordaining presbytersy
as the pastors of its several congregations, and deacons for
the particular services allotted to their order ; and exerci-
sing their Episcopal authority, in governing and inspect-
ing, each his own particular diocese, as well as in promot-'
ing and preserving the peace, unity and order of the whole
body of Christians. According to this plan of church
government, so exactly similar to that which was esta-
blished on a smaller scale, under the Levitical priesthood,
we find St. Paul, in that solemn charge which he gave to
Timothy^ when appointed bishop of the church in Ephe-
sus, putting him in mind, among many other things, that
*' he should lay hands suddenly on no man ; that he should
receive no accusation against 2i presbyter^ but before two or
three witnesses ; and that the deacons in his church should
be men of sober and orderly conversation." Here we have
a plain intimation of what was then, and afterwards to be^
the form of ecclesiastical administration. We see the offi-
cers of the church distinguished by their respective sta-
tions; the bishops as governor and inspector of a particular
portion of it, answering to the high-priest under the law ;
and the presbyters and deacons^ subordinate ministers in
it, like the priests and Levites: And where we find these
orders of ministers duly appointed, the word of God

General Defence of Episcopacy* lai;

|ji*eached, and his sacraments regularly administered, there
we find the church of Christ, with its form, its authority,
and every thing that is essential to its nature and constitu-
tion,

" The wisdom of God," says an admirable writer on this
subject, "is hfere very evident, in appointing the orders
of the Christian ministry after the pattern of the Jewish
church, which was of his own appointment so long before.
That there might be no uncertainty in a case of such conse-
quence to the souls of men, there was no novelty, but a
continuation of the like administration with that which had
all along been known and acknowledged in the church,
Aaron was an high-priest^ with a ministry peculiat* to him-
self ; under him there was an order of priests^ twenty-four
in number, who served hy course in the daily sacrifices and
devotions of the tabernacle and temple j and these were as-
sisted by the whole tribe of the Levites» As the law had
its passover, its baptisms, its incense, its sacrifices, its con-
secrations, its benedictions, all to be realized under the
sacraments and oflFerings of the gospel, so its ministry was
but a pattern of the ministry which is now among us ; and.
we cannot mistake the one, if we have an eye to the
other: such is the goodness of God in directing us, through
all the confusions of the latter days, by a rule of such great
antiquity, to the way of truth, and keeping us in it."*

* See Mr. Jones' Essay on the Church, a tract most warmly recom-
imended by two very competent judges of its merit, the late Dr. Home,
bishop of Norwich, and Dr. Horsleyj now bishop of St. Asaph, who,
in the charge which he delivered at his second general visitation of the
diocese of Rochester, in the year 1800, thus addresses his clergy—" When,
by assiduity in your public and private ministry, by the purity of your
lives, and the soundness of your doctrine, you have gained the good will
and esteem of your parishioners, they will be ready to give you their
attention upon a subject, upon which the people of this country, in gene-
ral, much want good teaching: I mean the nature of the church, the
necessity of church communion, and the danger of schism. Upon these
points I know nothing so well calculated for general edification, as a tract>

102 General Defence of Episcopacy,

God has many ways of directing us to what is right, but
none more instructive, than the beautiful order and striking
uniformity to be observed through all his dispensations of
grace and mercy, and particularly in those which are con-
nected with the care and government of his church. There
it is that men are to look for the " old paths," the good and
approved way of God's appointment, that they may walk
therein, and find rest to their souls. But this can never be
the case, if they take delight in following the endless inno-
vations of latter times, and instead of seeking rest in God's
way, and according to his direction, are content to wander
about in ways of their own devising, and will never allow
their souls to rest on the basis of true religion. New
schemes of faith, and false systems of duty are daily re-
commended to men's deluded fancies ; and notwithstanding
all that has been said (and much has been written with
great clearness of reasoning) to show, that the constitution
of God's church must be ever considered as the instituted
means of preserving and conveying the precious doctrines
of salvation, from the beginning to the end of time, it is
still pretended, that the scriptures of truth give us no infor-
mation on this interesting subject, and prescribe no parti-
cular form of ecclesiastical polity " as necessary, or even
more acceptable to God than another."

In the lectures on ecclesiastical history^ of which we have

cntituled, An Essay on the Church, by the late Rev. William Jones,
some time of Pluckley, in this county, bur last of Nayland, in Suffolk.
It has lately been reprinted in a small size, and at a cheap rate, by the
Sockty for promoting Christian Knowledge, of which the author had been
many years a most useful member. Of that faithful servant of God, I
can speak, both from personal knowledge, and from his writings. He
was a man of quick penetration, of extensive learning, and the soundest
piefy And he had, beyond any other man I ever knew, the talent of
writing upon the deepest subjects to the plainest understandings. He is
gone to his rest, and his works, we trust, follow him. His Catholic
Doctrine of the Trinity, and this Essay on the Churchy cannot have too
wide a circulation."

General Defence of Episcopacy, . 103

already taken some notice, it is affirmed, and " will be
owned," says the author, " by those who, on this subject,
are capable of examining with coolness, and pronouncing
with impartiality, that we have not that sort of informa-
tion in holy writ, from which we can with certainty form
a judgment, concerning the entire model of the apostolic
church. What we can learn thence on this subject, we
must coUect from scattered hints given, as it were, inci-
dentally, when nothing seemed less the intention of the
writers, than to convey to us a particular account of the
plan of the society they had formed."* Whether there be
any truth in this observation, or how much regard is due
to it, may be easily inferred from what has been, in the
foregoing pages, very briefly stated respecting the " infor-
mation," which may certainly be obtained from the writ-
ings of the New Testament, " by those who are capable
of examining with coolness." — And were there even less
to be found than is really contained in the sacred records,
on the subject of church government, the conclusion to be
drawn from this seeming silence on a matter of such im-
portance, would be very different from that which this
theological teacher has attempted to draw from it. If such
of the apostles as were employed in writing the gospels
and epistles that go by their respective names, did not
think it necessary to mention in express and positive terms,
the plan of the society which they had formed on the mo-
del laid down by their blessed Master, it is to be remem-
bered, that the government of the church was then in the
hands of the apostolic college, and the form and manner in
which it was administered, being visible to all who had
any concern with it, there was no more occasion for telling
them what that form of government was, than there would
be now, in enforcing a proper behaviour on the subjects of
this united kingdom, to tell them, that they were governed

* Ci-. CampbeU's Lectures, lect. iv.

104 General Defence of Episcopacy*

by a King, assisted in his legislative capacity by the Lords
and Commons in parliament assembled.

Of that which is daily exhibited in practice, there seems
to be no necessity for a minute description in theory ; and
as the practice of the apostles, under the immediate direc-
tion of the Holy Spirit, was perfectly sufficient to show^
how the church was then governed, and in what way a
siiccession of governors was to be continued, as their Lord
had promised, " even unto the end of the world ;" this
was a matter, which, however important in itself, did not
require to be particularly insisted on, in the writings of the
New Testament, because it must have been easily known,
and well understood, by those persons for whose imme-
diate use these writings were originally intended. A great
number of these were either Jews by descent, or proselytes
to the Jewish religion before they embraced the faith of
Christ ; and to people of this description, the form and
order of the priesthood had long been as familiar as the
daily service performed in the temple ; all which, they knew,
were to be considered as " types and shadows of the good
things to come," under the dispensation of the gospel.
Viewing the religion of their fathers in this light, as nothing
else in fact but Christianity under a veil, these converted
Jews, or Jewish proselytes, would naturally infer, from
the little that was said on this subject, that the same orders
of priesthood were to be retained under the gospel that
had been established under the law ; especially when they
saxv three orders actually employed in the work of the
ministry, and heard of certain Christians " perishing in the
gainsaying of Corah j" a thing which to them must have
appeared impossible, if there was not to be still a superior
order of priesthood in the church, the " honour of which,
no man was to take to himself, but he that was called of
God, as was Aaron." Even the converts from heathenism
had been so long accustomed to higher and lower degrees,
among those who were appointed %Q direct its i^.9!fttr9\is

General Defence of Episcopacy, 105

services, that when they saw the worship and discipline of
the church conducted by the three orders of apostles^ pres'
hytersy and deacons^ they could not fail to believe, that this
plan of ecclesiastical polity was to be permanent under the
gospel, as a similar establishment had been under the law
while it remained in force, and that both were acceptable
to that God of order from whom they proceeded.^

It is true. Dr. Campbell is at great pains to expose what
he thinks the absurdity of establishing any analogy between
the priesthood of the Old and that of the New Testament;
the former of which being intended to serve for a time,
he considers as " instrumental in ushering a more divine
and rational dispensation ;"'f more divine than that, which
God himself had instituted-— more rational than that, by
which the reason of his own chosen people had been so
long directed ! On this point he labours, with uncommon
ardour, through a whole lecture, inveighing against the
distinction between clergy and laity ^ and with parti-
cular severity against, what he is pleased to call, " the
priestly pride of some prelatical preachers ;"J where the
force of the censure, no doubt, lies in the beautiful allite-
ration or jingle of the sentence. Were we disposed to re-
tort in something like his own style, it would not, we pre-
sume, be difficult to show, that the pride of presbytery is
much more predominant in these prelections^ than could
have been expected from a professor^ whose general cha-
racter was supposed to place him far above the use of any
such mean, unbecoming language, as that which we have
now quoted. We must take him, however, as he is repre-
sented to us in this posthumous publication, which, we
are assured, " was left fully written out by himself, and in
a proper state of preparation for the press j" and of which

* See this point very properly handled in the Anti-Jacobin JRevieiv of
Dr. Campbell's Lectures — for June, 1801,

f See his Lectures, lect, x. | Lecture x.

J4

106 General Defence of Episcopactf*

it is said, in an advertisement prefixed to the work, that
" such as are acquainted with the subject, will admire the
author's well-digested learning, and will readily perceive
the importance of an accurate historical deduction of the
progress of church power, and the establishment of a hi*
crarchy, and how clear and decisive it is, in all that may
be termed the hinge of the controversy between high
church and others.'^

From this prefatory account of these boasted lectures^
and from what we have heard reported of their extraor-
dinary merit, by those who are prepared to admire and
extol whatever has come from the pen of their author, it
may fairly be presumed, that they are considered as con-
taining the whole strength of the arguments against dio-
cesan Episcopacy, and that every thing which could be
said on the subject, has now been brought forward, " with
that perspicuity, candour and moderation," which are said
to distinguish the writings of Dr. Campbell* It may, there-
fore, be deemed not a little presumptuous in any one, who
has not arrived at the same height of literary fame, to at-
tempt a refutation of such strong and powerful reasoning
as might be expected from a writer whose reputation has
been long established " in the republic of letters," The
only apology I have to offer for such seeming presumption,
shall be furnished by Dr. Campbell himself j who, in the
introduction to his ingenious Dissertation on Miracles, al-
luding to Mr. Hume^ as a " subtle and powerful adversary,"
makes this modest acknowledgment, which I shall beg
leave to apply to my own case :— " With such an adver-
sary," as Dr. Campbell, " I should on very unequal terms
enter the lists, had I not the advantage of being on the side
of truth. And an eminent advantage this doubtless is. It
requires but moderate abilities to speak in defence of a good
cause. A good cause demands but a distinct exposition,
and a fair hearing ; and we may say with great propriety,
it will speak for itself."

General Defence of Episcopacy, 107

To strengthen this confidence in the goodness of thj&
cause, which now claims our support, I have the satisfaction
to observe, that nothing has been said against it, in these
modem, and by some so much admired lectures^ but what
had been often said before, by writers on the same side, and
as often answered by others of a different persuasion. Even
Dr. Campbell, with aU his boasted penetration, and " won-
derful acuteness," has not been able to produce any one
objection to the apostolic, and therefore divine institution
of Episcopacy, which had not been started by others, who
preceded him in the same field of controversy.^ Some of
their arguments he has indeed clothed with a new dress,
and by that means has made them assume somewhat of a
different form and appearance ; but in substance and reality,
we shall find them the same as those to which we have been
always accustomed, with the exception perhaps of one pro-
minent and distinguishing feature, their being accompanied
with a peculiar boldness of assertion, and peremptory mode
of decision, which certainly give no addition to their in-
trinsic value, or to their effect in proving the truth of what
is thus asserted.

Such then being the nature of the work we have to ex-
amine, the materials of which have been furnished by other
hands, and only put together by this eminent artist, we
need only look back to the accounts of those, who have al-
ready inspected them, and see what opinion was given of
them at the time when they were first produced. Since
even this learned and strenuous opposer of Episcopacy has

* In proof of this, it might easily be shown, how much he has bor-
rowed, not only from Blondel, Salmasius, and other foreigners, but also
from writers in the English language, such as Cartviright, Clarkson^
Baxter, Lord King, ZMXih^ox oi ?in Encpiiry into the Constitution, k3'c. of the
primitive Church ;^ and from his own countryman Mr. Anderson, of Dun-
barton against Rhind, to whom he seems to have been particularly in-
debted for some of his most violent invectives against the " High-churcb
party," as may be seen in the dedication, preface, and many other parts
of Mr^ Anderson*s work.

lOS General Defence of Episcopacz/,

been able to say nothing that is new against it, there is na
reason to expect, that any thing new should be said in its
defence. As the mode of attack is still the same, the
means of repelling it must be the same likewise: And
since our acute and ingenious adversary has not conde-
scended to strike out any other way of assailing our eccle-
siastical constitution, than what has been discovered by
those that went before him with the same hostile view, we
must be content to follow him in the beaten path, which so
many of his predecessors have trod, though perhaps not so
capable as he, of giving it all the turnings and windings
which are so curiously displayed in the lectures now before
us.

It is proper to begin the observations, which we have
proposed to make on these theological lectures, by giving
the author's 0\vn account of them. " I intend," says he,
in the beginning of his first lecture, " that the subject of
the present and some succeeding lectures, shall be the sa-
cred history, the first branch of the theoretic part of the
theological course which claims the attention of the student.
This is subdivided into two parts : the first comprehends
the events which preceded the Christian aera ; the second,
those which followed. The first, in a looser way of speak-
ing, is included under the title of Jewish history ; the se-
cond is what is commonly denominated church history, or
ecclesiastic history." It is this second part of his plan,
with which we are more immediately concerned, and which
he introduces, by telling us, towards the conclusion of his
second lecture : " Now indeed was formed a community
of the disciples of Jesus, which was called his church ; a
word that denotes no more than society or assembly, and is
sometimes used in the New Testament, with evident ana-
logy to the common use, to signify the whole community
of Christians considered as one body, of which Christ is
denominated the Head ; and sometimes only a particular
congregation of Christians. In this general society, founded

General Defence of Episcopacy, 109

in the unity of their faith, their hope, their love, cemented,
as it were, by a communion or joint participation, as occa-
sion offered, in religious offices, in adoration, in baptism^
and in the commemoration of the sufferings of their Lord,
preserved by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent
instructions, admonitions, reproofs when necessary, and
even by the exclusion of those who had violated such
powerful and solemn engagements; in all this, I say, there
was nothing that interfered with the temporal powers."
And we are ready to say the same, because Christ himself
assures us, that " his kingdom^'* which Dr. Campbell chooses
to call " the Christian commonwealth^ is not of this world,"
and, therefore, " in no respect calculated to interfere with
the rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jea-
lousy to the secular powers." But when we are told, that
*' this general society is cemented by a communion or joint
participation in baptism^"* we are at a loss to know what
is meant by this expression, as connected with what fol-
lows ; since there is surely no command in scripture, en-
joining the disciples of Jesus to partake jointly^ as occasion
offers^ in baptism^ although they are expressly commanded
to partake jointly in what is here called, " the commemo-
ration of the sufferings of their Lord." We are certain,
that baptism is the only means whereby members can be
admitted into this society ; but we have never learned, that
a set of unbaptized persons, even though united in the be-
lief of the gospel, have any authority to constitute them-
selves members of it, by baptizing one another, which
would seem to be the Lecturer's meaning, in the passage
which we are now considering.

We are also obliged to differ from him very widely, with
respect to what is called the Church; which word, if it
denotes, as he acknowledges, a society^ must also signify,
not a casual assembly^ or even a meeting of persons by
voluntary agreement among themselves ; but, as the deri-
vation of the original word implies, a select society, or

101 General Defence of Episcopae^^

number of people, called or selected, by some persofi ot
persons having authority for that purpose : And as the
kingdom of Christ is declared to be " not of this world,'*
the subjects of that kingdom, or the members of his church,
must be considered as called out of or from the worlds
called by God from " the world that lieth in wickedness,"
that " having delivered them from the power of darkness,
he may translate them into the kingdom of his dear Son."'*^
All this shows the nature and jurisdiction of the church of
Christ to be very different from that of " any private com-
pany, like a knot of artists or philosophers," to which Dr*
Campbell is pleased to compare the society founded by the
Son of God for the salvation of mankind : a comparison
so unworthy of being brought forward on such an occasion,
and so unlikely to answer any good end, by the terms in
which it is stated, that we should not have thought it de*
serving the smallest notice, if it were not evidently intended
to introduce an inquiry into the causes of that woful cor-
ruption, which soon prevailed among Christians, and which,
by a long and fanciful chain of connection, is traced to the
primitive practice of referring their civil differences to the
arbitration of their ministers.

This practice is considered as a natural consequence of
St. Paul's " expostulation with the Corinthians on the
nature and dignity of their Christian vocation, to which it
would be much more suitable, patiently to suffer injuries,
than to endeavour to obtain redress," by going to law in the
heathen courts. But lest there should be any mistake on
this point, by confounding matters of civil controversy with
injuries of a more criminal nature, our Lecturer takes care
to inform us, that not only " such private offences, but also
those scandals which affected the whole Christian fraternity,
were," in the apostolic age, " judged by the churchy that is,
the congregation,'''' '^ Accordingly," he says,! " the judg-

* Col, J. 13. f Lecture iii.

Qeneral Defence of Episcopacy, 111

ment, which Paul, by the Spirit of God, had formed, con-
cerning the incestuous person, he enjoins the church, to
whom his epistle is directed, that is (to use his own words
for an explanation), them who at Corinth are sanctified in
Christ Jesus, called to be saints, to pronounce and execute.
And in his second epistle to the same church,* he says, in
reference to the same delinquent — ^" Sufficient to such a man
is the censure, which was inflicted by many;" vttoIoiv vXhovuv
-^by the community — and (\\ 10) " To whom ye forgive
any thing, addressing himself always to the congregatioUj
I forgive also. We admit, with the learned Dodwell,'j'
tiiat in the censure inflicted on the incestuous person, the
Christians at Corinth were but the executors of the doom
awarded by the apostle. Nor does any one question the
apostolic authority in such matters over both the flock and
the pastors. But from the words last quoted, it is evident,
that he acknowledges^ at the same time, the ordinary power
in regard to discipline lodged in the congregation; and from
the confidence he had in the discretion and integrity of the
Corinthians, he promises his concurrence in what they shall
think proper to do. ' To whom ye forgive any thing, I
forgive also.' Now, though in after times the charge of
this matter also came to be devolved, first on the bishop
and presbyters, and afterwards solely on the bishop, yet
that the people as well as the presbyters, as far down, at
least, as to the middle of the third century, retained some
share in the decision of questions, wherein morals were im-
mediately concerned, is manifest from Cyprian! s letters still
extant. In his time, when congregations were become
very numerous, the inquiry and deliberation were holdeu
(perhaps then more commodiously) in the ecclesiastical col-
lege, called the presbytery^ consisting of the bishop, the
presbyters, and the deacons. When this was over, the
result of their inquiry and consultations was reported to

*- 2 Cor. ii. 6. f De jure hlcorum sacerdotali. c. iii. sec. 16.

1 12 General Defence of Episcopacy.

the whole congregation belonging to that churchy who were
called together on purpose, in order to obtain their appro-
bation of what had been done, and their consent to the re-
solution that had been taken ; for without their consent^ no
judgment could regularly be put in execution."

Such is the surprising account given of this matter in
Dr. Campbell's Lectures ; and such the light in which his
theological students were taught to view the original consti-
tution and discipline of the Christian church ! — Had such
an account been given by one of our modern independent Sy
who boast of their congregational churches, as the only
form of primitive institution ; or had such a lecture been
read in \hQ society for propagating the gospel at home^ we
should have considered it, however ill founded and erro-
neous, as perfectly natural, and consistent with the object
and end of these independent and missionary schemes."^
But how; shall we discover or allow the merit of any such
consistency of character, where we see a man of acknow-
ledged abilities, and holding some of the most distin-
guished offices which the religious establishment of this
country has to boast of, yet supporting and recommending
a system of ecclesiastical order and discipline, almost as
different from that which is established in Scotland, as it is
opposite to every thing of the kind to be met with in the
primitive church ? Have not the friends of this establish-
ment too much reason to suspect that their learned Lecturer
would have been one of its warmest opponents, had not his
opposition been prevented by the liberal provision which
it held out to him, and the preferments which he so long
enjoyed?

But in the preceding extract from bis third lecture^ no

* We have heard, that Greville Eioing, and the Haldenites, hold Dr.
Campbell's Lectures in high estimation. They have also been much ad-
mired and recommended by the Monthly and Critical Revievjers, who, in
general, are not considered as very friendly either to primitive truth or
order.

General Defence of Episcopacy. 113

singularity of opinion strikes us more forcibly than his
Strang' insinuation, that Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, was
no more but the pastor of a single congregation ; when the
keenest adversaries of the Episcopal cause have been oblig-
ed to acknowledge that he was undoubtedly the fixed and
permanent moderator of a presbytery^ which contained at
least eight congregations : And though Dr. Campbell has
asserted it, as a thing " manifest from Cyprian's Letters,"
that in his time, " the people^ as well as the presbyters, re-
tained some share in the decision of questions, wherein
morals were immediately concerned," yet he has not fa-
voured us with the quotation of a single passage to prove
the truth of his assertion ; and we are certain, that many
passages could be produced to evince the direct contrary,
and which would completely overthrow this pretended
jurisdiction of the people.

. Such, indeed, was the remarkable humility and conde-
scension of this primitive martyr, the venerable bishop of
Carthage, that from the time of his entering on his Epis-
>^opal office, as he says in one of his letters — " he had resolv-
ed to do nothing in the public affairs of the church, with-
out the advice of his presbyters and deacons, and the con-
sent or approbation of the people at large."* But, that this
was the effect of his own free and voluntary condescension,
and what he was not bound to adhere to, if he saw good
reason for acting otherwise, is evident from many instan-
ces of his future conduct, and particularly from the letters
written by him, on the subject of reconciling those who,
by sacrificing to idols, during the Decian persecution, had
lapsed or fallen from the communion of the church. In one
of these letters, he threatens his presbyters and deacons
with a heavy sentence, if they should dare to transgress the
Fule, or order, which he had sent them, respecting the treat-

* Quando primordio Episcopatus mei statuerhn, nihil sine consilio ves-
tro, et sine consensu plebis, mea privatim senteniia gerere. Ep, xiv, p. Ho.

15

114 General Defence of Episcopacy 4

tnent of these unhappy persons in his absence.^ Let aay
person read the letters, and try if it be possible to reconcile
them to the character of one, who Was nothing more than
the pastor of a single congregation, or to discover any
thing in them that looks like an acknowledgment on the
writer's part, of that democratic influence in the adminis-
tration of church discipline, which Dr. Campbell seems so
eager to support*

But we need not wonder at his making Cyprian no more
than the pastor of an independent congregation, who » ould
do nothing " without their consent," when we find him
endeavouring to press St. Paul himself into the same ser-
vice. For though he admits, as he could not well do other-
wise, that the Christians at Corinth were but the executors
of the doom " awarded by the apostle ;'' yet he thinks it
evident, that St. Paul " acknowledged the ordinary power
tti regard to discipline lodged in the congregation," because
he told them—' To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive
also j' thus " promising his concurrence in what they should
judge proper to da;" which surely implies, that without hia
concurrence in this affair, they could do nothing ; and that
all their power of judging arose from the authority, which,
in this instance, and for particular reasons, he was pleased
to give them. And so he tells them—" To this end also
did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether
ye be obedient in all things."t Indeed, the language which

* *' Interea, siqnis immoderatos et praeceps, sWe de nostns presbyteris
*el diaconis, sive de peregrinis, ausus fuerit, ante sententiam nostravi,
communicare cum lapsis, a communicatiotie nostra resecetur." See this
subject discussed in a most satisfactory manner, by Bisiiop Sage, in his
Principles of the Cyprianic Age. London, 1695.

t 2 Cor. ii. 9. It is well observed by the Anti-Jacobin Reviewef of
this article, that ** to whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also," is cer-
tainly the language of a superior to inferiors, who have no power eithei*
to punish, or to forgive, but what they derive from him : It is, as if the
king had said to the viceroy of Ireland, during the late rebellion — " I en-
trust yoa v^ith the amplest powers for the public good : such of the rebels

General Defence of Episcopacy, 115

the apostle uses, through the whole of his discussion of
this awful subject, plainly shows, that the power of excom-
municating the obstinately guilty, or re-admitting the peni-
tent, rested solely in himself. For " I told you before,"
says he, " and foretel you as if I were present the second
time, and being absent, now I write to them, which here-
tofore have sinned, and to all other, that if I come again, I
will not spare* ^ And again — ^'^ I write these things, being
absent, lest being present, I should use sharpness, accord-
ing to the power which the Lord hath given me to edificationy
and not to destruction.''''^ Though Dr. Campbell could not
but perceive, that these expressions gave little countenance
to his coiigregational, or independent scheme, yet by trans-
lating the words*— w* tirClk^^ka, uvln v)^ vTo Iwv itXejovwv*--''' the cen^
sure which was infticted by the community, ^^ instead of-^*-
*^ this punish?nfnt which was inflicted of many," he would
seem to insinuate, that the incestuous person was excom-
municated by a vote of the congregation; when the fact was,
that, without referring the matter at all to them, St. Paul
himself had passed the sentence, as he tells us in these
words—" I verily as absent in body, but present in spirit,
have judged already, as though I were present, concerning
him, that hath so done this deed ; in the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit,
with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such
a one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that the
spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."'|' The
apostle then proceeds to show, what should be the effect of
this sentence, by enjoining those to whom he wrote, to
" put away from among them the excommunicated person,
not to keep company with him, and with such an one, no
not to eat ;" which abhorrence of his company and conver-

as you shall forgive, I will forgive also," But will any man say, that in
ordinary cases, the viceroy's power, in consequence of such a speech,
would have been considered as the same Avith the sovereign's?
• 2 Cor. xiii. 2, 10. f 1 Cor. v. 3, 4, 5.

116 General Defence of Episcopaci/,

sation, would of course bring him into public disgrace^ and
that disgrace was the punishment which the Christian peo*
pie had to inflict, in consequence of their apostle's sen-
tence.

But the strain of declamation, in which Dr. Campbell
indulges on this subject, seems all intended to afford him
an opportunity, not only of giving a favourable view of the
discipline of his own church ; which, unless w\xh regard to
" churches and manses, and some other things of little mo-
ment," he considers as perhaps the most unexceptionable
now to be met with; but also of representing in a very dif-
ferent light, " the polity and discipline" of the church of
England, which, he seems to think, have been " devised,
for the express purpose of rendering the clerical character
odious, and the discipline contemptible." As a proof of this,
he tells his audience, that " ecclesiastical censures, in Eng-
land, have now no regard, agreeably to their original
destination, to purity and manners ;" supposing, no doubt,
that his presbyterian students would never look into the
Book of Common Prayer of the Chitrek of England^ where,
in the rubric prefixed to the communion service, and which
was made a part of, and confirmed by, an act of parlia-
ment, the minister is expressly ordered to admit, or not to
admit to the Lord's table, according to what he knows of
the life and conversation of the person applying for admis-
sion ; and in case of " repelling any," he is " obliged to give
an account of the same to his ordinary, who shall proceed
against the offending person according to the canon,"
How then can it be said, that such " ecclesiastical censures
have no regard to purity and manners ?" Yes — says Dr.
Campbell-—" the participation of one of the sacraments
having been with them, by a very short-sighted policy,
perverted into a test for civil offices, a minister may be
compelled by the magistrate, to admit a man who is well
known to be a most improper person, an atheist, bias-

General Defence of Episcopacy,- 1 1 y

phemer, or profligate."* The history of this test^ and the
causes which gave rise to it, and still operate in the opinion
of the legislature, as a sufficient ground for its continuance,
must have been well known to our learned professor ; who
must also have known, had he but taken the trouble to in-
quire, that no such compulsion as that which he supposes^
is ever experienced by any minister of the church of Eng*
land;f and therefore the coarse expression might have
been spared, which alludes to the test, as " a coarse im-
plement of human authority, to compel a thing of so deli-
cate a nature as true religion." The coarseness complained
of lies not in the implement, but in the disposition of those
who are tempted to abuse, or apply it to a wrong purpose ;
and such temptations will always occur, where the profes-
sion of religion is accompanied with those worldly advant-
ages, which, in some shape or other, are often connected
with it, even when embraced in its greatest purity.

Having observed our Lecturer taking so much pains to
convince his pupils, that the discipline of his own church,
though infinitely preferable to that of the church of Eng-
land, was yet far short of the pure apostolic model, by
\f\{\c\\ xht^ congregational OY independent churches are dis-
tinguished, we might have supposed, that any farther

• Lecture iii.

f See this matter very fully discussed by the learned Bishop Sherlock,
in his * Arguments against the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts.*
** The test act," says that able prelate, " forces no clergyman to give the
sacrament to atheists and debauchees, or any other offenders, if they be
openly and notoriously such: and if they are such only in secret, they
are out of the question ; for no clergyman's conscience can be burdened
for admitting an unknown offender to the sacrament. If a clergyman
proceed with discretion and charity, and according to the rules prescribed
him by authority, he has as little to fear from a man with a place, as from
a man without one; and if he be unjustly and vexatiously sued for doing
his duty, the law will give him costs." — Such was the opinion of an
English prelate, who, in regard to this matter, must surely have known
what was " the law of the land," and the power of the magistrate, as
well as any Scotch professor.

\

118 General Defence of Episcopaq/*

inquiry into the original form of church governmentt w*9
either quite unnecessary, or at least a matter of so little
moment as not to require any long or serious discussion,—
For if it be true, that all ecclesiastical authority is derived
from the people, and that the very distinction between
clergy and laity, has its only foundation in the will and
choice of the Christian community, appointing what '19
proper for the preservation of order and decency in their
religious assemblies ; in that case, the question, whether
the persons set apart in the apostolic age for that pur^
pose, were of one, or two, or three orders ; or what were
the powers with which they were supposed to be invested,
is so frivolous in itself, and of so little weight in the scale
of our duty as Christians, as hardly to require or merit
the slightest examination. Yet trifling as it must have
appeared in the eyes of Dr. CampbeU, and of| such of hig
students as viewed it in the same light with him, he obliged
them to attend to it, through seven of his lectures ; " the
subject of which," He told them, " was the internal polity
of the church, and the form she has insensibly assumed ;
with the rules of subordination which have obtained, and
in many places do still obtain in the different orders."

In following him through the course of this inquiiy, W^
are presented with a regular chain of " steps, advancing
from presbytery to parochial Episcopacy, thence to prelacy
or diocesan Episcopacy, from that to metropolitical pri-
macy, thence again to patriarchal superintendency," and
landing at last in the papal supremacy. The first three of
these steps are all with which, properly speaking, we are
concerned, in defending our own ecclesiastical polity ; and
through these we shall endeavour to trace his progress,
with as much order as his frequent excursions will permit.
Before we are regularly introduced to the first step of his
course, we find several things premised^ and laid down for
our direction, which, as I observed already, would seem
to render quite unnecessary all that follows, respecting the

General Defence of Episcopacy.' i 1^

different forms of ecclesiastical administration. For in the
most unqualified language, we are plainly told, that " the
terms of the gospel covenant are no where, in the sa-
cred pages, connected with, or made to depend on, either
the minister^ or the form of the ministry ;"* although he
had just before quoted our Lord's own declaration of the
terms of the gospel covenant in these words — '' He that
believeth, and is baptized^ shall be saved ;" which surely
implies his being baptized after the form and manner
pointed out in the commission which Christ gave his
apostles, at the very time when he made this declaration.
If baptism then must be considered as one of the terms,
or conditions of salvation, how can it be said to have no
dependence on the minister, or no connection with the
form of his ministry ? Are we to understand our Lec-
turer's words, as intended to teach his pupils, that our
Lord's apostles acquired no particular authority from the
commission which he gave them, for making all nations
his disciples, by baptizing them ; and that the form of bap-
tism laid down in that commission, was not more valid,
or more necessary to be observed, than any other form,
which might be adopted for the same purpose ? Then, to
be sure, the original form of government in the church is
a matter of no consequence ; and it is perfectly ridiculous
to give ourselves any trouble in inquiring, or reasoning
about it. Every one that pleases, may take on himself the
office of a minister; and every form of ministry is equally
consistent with the terms, and productive of the benefits,
of the gospel covenant.

The same inference must undoubtedly be drawn from
the account which is afterwards given of the apostolic
commission, where we are told by this learned explainer of
the " sacred pages," that — " the first order given to the
eleven to make converts^ to baptize^ and to teach, can'ies

* Lecture iv.

120 General Defence of Episcopacy.

in it nothing from which we can discover, that it was a
commission entrusted to them exclusively as apostles or
ministers, and not given them also as Christians ; and that
the apostles were particularized, because best qualified,
from their long attendance on Christ's ministry, for pro-
moting his religion in the world; but not with a view to
exclude any Christians, who were capable, from co-operat-
ing with them in the same good cause."* We had just
before been told of a " similitude taken from temporal
things," for the better illustration of this dark and difficult
subject ; and by the help of a little freedom of the same
kind, in which, we hope, there is no harm, we now dis-
cover, that Dr. Campbell's so long possessing the theolo-
gical chair in Marischal College, and instructing his pupils
in the knowledge of sound divinity, was not in consequence
of his having received any commission or authority for that
purpose, but merely because he was " best qualified" for
discharging the duties of the office, and none else were
" capable of co-operating with him in the same good
'cause."f

* Lecture Iv.

t This point is well illustrated by another " similitude," which the
Anti-Jacobin Reviewer of Dr. Campbell's work thus happily makes use
of. ' It is not probable, that his Majesty's commission to the president
pf the supreme court of law in Scotland, expressly prohibits all other law-
yers from executing that office, to which it appoints him; and it is cer-
tainly not improbable, that there are many lawyers at the Scotch bar
perfectly well qualified to preside over any court of law in that part df
the united kingdom. Yet what would Dr. Campbell have thought of
the man, who, having formed opinions of the constitution of courts of
law, similar to those which he had himself formed of the constitution of
the Christian church, should have said — " There is nothing in the com-
mission given to the president of the court of session, from which we can
discover that it is a commission entrusted to him exclusively, as a
judge, and not given to him also as a lawyer; and that he is particu-
larized in it, only because he is best qualified for discharging the duties
of the office, but not with a view to exclude any lawyer who is capable,
from occasionally taking possession of his chair, and presiding with
authority over the court ?'*

General Defence of Episcopacy » 121

But that the opinion which led to this similitude was
the " construction put upon the apostolic charge, in the
days of the apostles," we are told, " appears not impro-
bable, from the subsequent part of the scripture history ;
for Philip the deacon baptized the Ethiopian eunuch; Peter
trusted the charge of baptizing Cornelius and his family,
to the Christian brethren who attended him ; Ananias, a
disciple, was employed to baptize Paul ; and Paul says of
himself, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach
the gospel."

With respect to the first of these instances, it is said,
that " Philip, though no apostle, and probably at that time
no more than a deacon, (that is, a trustee for the poor in
matters purely secular) did all to the Ethiopian eunuch,
which the apostles had in charge with regard to all nations.
He converted, baptized, and taught him." And so he well
might, when the " angel of the Lord" had sent him on the
journey, which led to this conversion, and the " spirit"
directed him how to proceed in it. Our Lecturer takes no
notice of this circumstance, or of the account which is
given of the appointment of the seven deacons ; who,
though men " full of the Holy Ghost," were yet solemnly
©rdained by prayer, and the laying on of the apostles'
hands ; which evidently shows, that this same deacon, or
*^ trustee for the poor," as he is here called for the sake
of lessening his sacred character, was something more,
even in office, than those, who are thought to supply the
place of deacons under the Scotch establishment^; and being
also directed by an immediate vision, or inspiration from
heaven, was sufficiently warranted in all that he did for the
benefit of his Ethiopian convert.

A second instance produced from scripture in support of
our author's opinion, respecting the nature of the apostolic
commission, is the relation of what happened, " when
Peter was sent to open the door of faith to the Gentiles, by
the conversion of Cornelius and his family." To prepare

16

122 General Defence of ]^piscopacy^

the way for that merciful event, an angel of God was seiit
to the devout centurion, not to instruct him directly in the
faith of Christ, but to inform him of one, who " should
tell him what he ought to do.'* This necessary knowledge
of his duty Was to be obtained, not from the first well-in-
formed Christian, who could be found to impart it, but
from an apostle of Christ, who was to be brought from a
considerable distance for that purpose 2 which clearly
shows, that the commission, iii virtue of which the apos-
tles acted, was so " exclusively entrusted to theiri as apos*
ties," that not even an angel from heaven was allowed to
intermeddle with any thing that belonged to it. An apos-
tle, therefore, having been sent for j having come to Come*
lius, and having found, that " on all those in his house,
who heard the word, the gift of the Holy Ghost had been
poured out" in a most wonderful and conspicuous manner^
he naturally puts this question to " the six brethren who
accompanied him," — »" Can any man forbid water, that
these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy
Ghost as well as we ?" And then we read, that " he com-'
manded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord;"^
that is, he gave authority to those that were with him to
administer the sacrament of baptism j and surely no person
can doubt his right to delegate such authority, in conse-
quence of the commission which he himself had received
from Christ for that very purpose. When all these cir-
cumstances are duly considered,— the previous falling of
the Holy Qhost upon these first fruits of the Gentiles,-^
the presence of an apostle,— the attendance of certain
brethren j an apostolic command empowering these brethren
to baptize the converted family ; it is hardly possible to con-
ceive a train of facts more directly contrary to the popular
claim set up by Dr. Campbell, than what appears in the
history of the conversion of Cornelius, and the means by

* Acts X. 47, 48.

General Defence of Episcopacy^ 123

which he and his family were received into the church of
Christ.

What is said of " Ananias, a disciple, being employed
to baptize Paul," is as little to the purpose ior which it is
brought forward, since we know not of what rank in the
church this disciple was, and the apostles themselves are
frequently caled disciples ; neither is it positively said, that
Ananias baptized Paul, any more than that Peter baptized
Cornelius. And if Ananias' saying to Paul, " Arise and
be baptized," proves that in consequence of this command
Paul received baptism from his hands, it may with equal
reason be inferred, that Peter's commanding Cornelius to
be baptized, proves the office to have been performed by
the apostle. In both cases, however, there was a direct
communication from heaven ; and when Ananias acted un-
der divine influence, and according to what " the Lord said
to him in a vision," we cannot doubt of his having sufficient
authority for what he did, whether he was ordained or not
by the hands of men ; and from all that the sacred historian
tells us of him, no man can say, that he was not so ordained.
Even from our Lecturer's own words — ^" Ananias, a dis-
ciple, was employed to baptize Paul," it may be justly con-
cluded, that the disciple was duly authorized by his Master
and Employer: And a similar inference may be drawn
from what Dr. Campbell acknowledges of St. Paul's " say-
ing himself of his own mission^ that Christ sent him not
to baptize, but to preach the gospel ;" which clearly shows,
that, since we are certain he did baptize^ as well as preachy
it was the apostle's own opinion, that he could not regu-
larly do either the one or the other without being sent.

In all these instances,* produced from the scripture

• The same instances, and the sanne arguments founded upon them,
were produced some years ago, for a similar purpose, by another mi-
nister of the Scotch establishment, in a work, entitled — An Inquiry into the
Powers of Ecclesiastics, ij'c. and which was taken due notice of at the
time of its publication.

124 General Defence of Episcopacy'.

history, we have now seen what ground there is for the
construction which our author wishes to show was put
upon the apostoHc charge, in the days of the apostles, and
particularly what was then the opinion of Christians, with
respect to the power of baptizing'^ " which," he says,
" compared with preaching, though a part, was but an in-
ferior and subordinate part of an apostle's charge." Yet
was it particularly specified in the apostolic commission,
and pointed out as the instituted means, whereby the con-
verted nations were to be brought to Christ, and entered
into his school, for the purpose of being " taught to ob-
serve all things whatsoever he had commanded."— -How
then can it be thought, that the administration of baptism
was not an essential part of the commission given to the
apostles, and given to them exclusively, not as Christians,
but as apostles, persons '^ sent by Christ, even as. the Father
had sent him," with power to provide for the regular trans-
mission of the same authority to " preach and baptize^ even
unto the end of the world ?"

Indeed, our Lecturer seems to have been aware of his
having gone too far, in giving such a degrading account of
baptism, and in assigning such unlimited power to the
*' community at large," for the administration of it ; and^
therefore, he adds a sort of caution against any improper
inference that might be drawn from what he had said on
the subject, by telling us, that " nothing here advanced can
justly be understood to combat the propriety of limiting,
for the sake of discipline, the power of baptizing to fewer
hands, than that of preaching, when once a fixed ministiy
is settled in a church, and regulations are adopted for its
government." — But if it be true, as he had said before,
that " the first order given to the eleven to baptize^ was
with no view of excluding^ any Christians, who were capable,
from co-operating with them ;" who are they that could
afterwards pretend to alter that order, or make an exclusion^
where none was intended ? If Christ himself allowed, and

General Defence of Episcopacy. 125

gave his apostles authority to permit, the promiscuous
liberty of baptizing to all Christians, who were capable of
using it; who but these apostles, as acting for Christ, could
with any " propriety limit" the general power, with which
he had thus indulged all his capable disciples ? If Dr.
Campbell's presbytery^ as succeeding to the apostles, or
rather coming after them, (for strictly speaking, he allows
them no successors) did for the sake of discipline, consider
such a limitation proper, and make it accordingly ; was not
this as flagrant an encroachment upon the ^' rights" of the
people made over to them by Christ, as what he so bitterly
complains of in the diocesan bishops, when they began to
limit the powers, and encroach upon the rights of their
brethren presbyters? It might also be asked, who they
were, that could take upon them to ^' settle a fixed ministry
in a church," different from that which the apostles had
settled ; or were entitled to appoint " regulations to be
adopted for its government," if all " capable Christians"
had an equal right to share in that government, and none
were set apart for judging of their brethren's capacities ?

These are questions which our Professor well knew it
would be difficult to answer ; and conscious, as it were, of
the necessity of sheltering, under something like primitive
authority, what he had advanced, respecting the right of
private Christians to exercise those offices, which have long
been considered as peculiar to a public ministry, he tells us
, — *" The doctrine I have been illustrating, so far from
being, as some Romanists ignorantly pretend, one of the
many novelties sprung from the protestant schism, was
openly maintained at Rome without censure, about the
middle of the fourth century, by Hilary, a deacon of that
church, a man of erudition and discernment ; whose opinion,
it seems, as here represented, was, that, " at first, for the
increase of converts, it was allowed to all without disting-

* Lecture iv.

126 General Defence of Episcopactf*

tion, to preach, to baptize, and to explain the scriptuves in
the church."^ Such is the doctrine which this author is
made to teach by giving a few extracts from his exposition
of the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Ephesians ; in
which, finding a number of church officers mentioned by
St. Paul, as having been given by Christ for the work of
the ministry, he wished to make it appear, that even in his
time, they were all retained, though under diiferent names:
and as the practice then was to administer baptism only on
certain days, and at stated seasons, we can easily discover
what this " man of erudition and discernment" means,
when he says — ^that " at first— all taught, and all baptized,
whenever occasion called, without any distinction of days

* The words quoted by Dr. Campbell from the commentary of Hilary,
who is usually called the Pseudo- Ambrose, and which had been quoted by
Mr, Anderson, of Dunbarton, for the same purpose, are these — " Post-
quam omnibus locis, ecclesiac sunt constitutse, et officia ordinata, aliter
composita res est quam coeperat ; primum enim omnes docebant, et omnes
baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus fuisset occasio." A
little after, " Neque Petrus diaconos habuit, quando Cornelium, cum omn»
domo ejus baptizavit; nee ipse, sed jussit fratribus qui cum illo ierant ad
Cornelium ab Joppe." Again ; " U* ergo cresceret plebs, et multiplicaretur,
omnibus inter initia concessum est, et evangelizare, et baptizare, et scrip-
tirras in ecclesia explanare." Such, we are tdd, " were the sentiments
of a respectable member of the Roman presbytery in those days ;" but
we are not told, what was more certain, that this same Hilary attached
himself to one of the most violent men of those days, Lucifer of Cagliari^
and was so far from giving any countenance to the opinion, that all
Christians had a right to administer the sacraments, that he zealously-
contended for the necessity of re-baptizing heretics, and all those whose
baptism had been in any respect irregular ; on which account, his con-
temporary Jerome sarcastically called him — tbe Deucalion of the worlds
All this, Dr. Campbell might have mentioned to his pupils, and should
also have added, what immediately follows his last quotation, in these
words — " Ubi autem omnia loca circumplexa est ecclesia, conventicula
constituta sunt, et rectores, et coetera officia in ecclesia ordinata sunt, ut
nullus cle clero auderet, qui os'dinatus non esset, praesumere officium quod
sciret non sibi creditum vel concessum ; et coepit alio ordine et provi-
dentia gubernari ecclesia, quia si omnes eadem possent, irrationabile essel,
et vulgaris res et vilissima videretur."

General Defence of Episcopacy. 127

or seasons." For by this observation, as connected with
what goes before, and follows it, we are not to understand,
that the sacrament of baptism was, at the beginning, admi-
nistered by all Christians indiscriminately, but only that the
writer of this account thought it was then administered, as
occasion required, by all those, to whom he had been allud-
ing, the apostles^ prophets^ evangelists^ pastors and teachers^
who St. Paul had said, " were given by the Lord, for the
perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for
the edifying of the body of Christ." Whether Hilary was
right or wrong, in supposing that those who were thus
given for the service of the church, were called to it by
the immediate impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not or-
dained by men, we need not stop to inquire, since, if the
case really was so, there could be no doubt of their having
sufficient authority for what they did, and no danger that
what was done by them would not be deemed regular and
valid by those who knew them to be acting under such
divine influence.

Not satisfied, however, with resting the truth of his
opinion on the authority of his favourite Hilar}, which we
see affords it at best but a very weak and questionable sup-
port, our Lecturer appeals next to the testimony of a wri-
ter a little more ancient, and whom he treats in the same
way as he had treated his " respectable member of the
Roman presbytery," by detaching a sentence or two, with-
out giving the whole of the argument to which they refer.
This writer is Tertullian, who, in his Exhortation to
Chastity^ inveighing against second marriages, and having
proved, as he thought, that they were prohibited to the
clergy, makes use of this argument for extending the pro-
hibition to the laity, that the distinction which prevailed in
his day between the priesthood and the people, must have
been only of the church's making ; for, says he, " where
there is no meeting of the ecclesiastical order, thou ofFerest
and baptizest, and art single a priest to thyself. But three

128 General Defence of Episcopa&y,

persons, though laymen, make a church,"* as Dr. Camp-
bell renders this last sentence, and then adds—" It matters
nothing to the present question, that his doctrine of the
unlawfulness of second marriages is unreasonable; it mat-
ters nothing that his argument is inconclusive ; we are con-
cerned only with the fact, to which he refers as notorious ;"
—whereas the truth is, that instead of being 2ifact at aU, it
is merely an inference drawn from very absurd premises, to
serve a particular purpose, and by the same author, who in
his Book on Baptism^ in answer to the question — Who may
baptize ? says — " The chief priest, who is the bishop, has
the right of giving baptism, and after him the presbyters
and deacons, but not without the bishop's authority, "f In
these words, it is plainly laid down, we might say, as " a
notorious fact," not only, that there were these three orders
in the church, of which the bishop was the chief, but also
that even deacons or presbyters could not baptize, or of con-
sequence perform any other ministerial acts, but by autho-
rity derived from him. The same author, in his Prescrip-
tions against Heretics^ says—" Among them a bishop to-
day is not so to-morrow; a deacon to-day is a reader to-
morrow ; to-day a presbyter, a layman to-morrow ; for
they enjoin priestly offices even upon laymen :"J thus point-
ing out as one of the grossest irregularities prevalent among
these heretics, what Dr. Campbell wishes to represent as a
duty, which every private Christian, if capable, is bound to
perform.

But of all the strange things advanced in this fourth
lecture now under our consideration, that which must excite

* TertuUian's wards are — " Adeo ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est con-
sessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos tibi solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia
est, licit laici."

•f His words are — " Dandi quidem jus habet summus sacerdos, qui est
Episcopus, dehinc presbyteri et diacoui, non tamen sine Episcopi anctori-
tate."

4 " Nam et laicis sacerdotalia munera injungunt»"

Verier al Defence of Episcopacy* 129

die greatest degree of surprise, is his attempt to represent
the congregational scheme of ecclesiastical polity, which
he is so anxious to defend, as " conformahle to the doc-
trine of the church of England."* In proof of this agree-
ment, he brings forward the latter part of her twenty-third
article, entituled — Of ministering' in the Congregation ;
where it is said — '' those we ought to judge lawfully called
and sent, which be chosen, and called to this work, by
men, who have public authority given unto them in the
congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's
vineyard. This," he says, " if it 7nean any thing, and be
not a mere identical proposition, of which, I own, it has
some appearance, refers us ultimately to that authority,
however modelled^ which satisfies the people^ and is settled
among them,'''' It is but fair, however, notwithstanding this
ingenious and polite remark, to let the church of England
speak for herself, as most likely to be the best interpreter
of her own meaning. And if we turn to her thirty-sixth
article, which our Lecturer has kept out of sight, because
there can be no doubt as to what it meansy we find her there
declaring, that — " the book of consecration of archbishops
and bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons, lately
set forth in the time of Edward the VI. and confirmed at
the same time by authority of parliament, doth contain all
things necessary to such consecration and ordering; mither
has it any thing that of itself is superstitious and ungodly.
And, therefore, whosoever are, or shall be consecrated
or ordered according to the rites of that book, we decree
all such to be rightly, orderly and lawfully consecrated and
ordered."

Now, the preface to that book, thus confirmed and sanc-
tioned, ("and which preface is as much a part of the viocirine
of the church of England as the thirty-nme articles) runs
in these terms, so plain, that they cannot be mistaken.

• Lecture iv.

17

130 General Defence of EpiscopCtcij*

" It is evident unto all men, diligently reading hoiy
scripture, and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time
there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's churchy
bishops^ priests and deacons: Which offices were evermore
had in such reverend estimation, that no man might pre-
sume to execute any of them except he were first called,
tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as were
I'equisite for the same ; and also by public prayer, with
imposition of hands^ were approved, and admitted thereunto
by lawful authority. And, therefore, to the intent that
these orders may be continued, and reverently used and
esteemed in the church of England, no man shall be ac-
counted, or taken to be a lawful bishops priest or deacon in
the church of England, or suffered to execute any of tht
said functions^ except he be called, tried, examined, and
admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter follow-
ing^ or hath had formerly Episcopal consecration or ordina*
tionJ'^ Had Dr* Campbell introduced into his lecture this
preface^ as well as her twenty-third article^ he could not
have easily brought his pupils to believe, even on his word,
that the church of England " has not presumed to delineate
the essentials of a Christian ministry, or to saj'^ any thing
tvhich could be construed to exclude those who are go-
verned in a different manner from that in which she herself
rs governed."^'

It was equally unfair in the learned Professor, not to tell
his youthful audience, in explaining to them the doctrine of
the church of England, that at the time when her thirty-
nine articles were drawn up, the word congregation made
use of in the tzventy-third article had precisely the same sig-
nification as the word churchy and was used with the same

* See Lectufe iv. where Dr. Campbell has evidently borrowed from
Mr. Anderson, of Dunbarton, who affirms — " that the 19th and 23d articles
of the church of England are conceived in such general words, on pur-
pose that they nnight not be thought to exclude other churches that differ Jrom
them i?i point of government.'* Page 38 of the work already mentioned.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 131

iatitude* Indeed, the two terms were at that time considered
so perfectly synonymous, that in the translation of the bible
then used, Christ is called the " Head of the congregation^
which is his body ;" and is mentioned as saying to Peter— ^
*' On this rock I will build my congregation.'^ To the same
purpose we are told, that forty years after the drawing up of
the thirty-nine articles, the word congregation was used in
the canonical prayer before sermons, lectures and homilies,
in which they were directed " to pray for the whole congre*
gation of Christian people dispersed throughout the whole
world."^ Hence it is evident, that the meaning of the ar-
ticle in question is plainly this — " It is not lawful," that is
'^^by the laxv of God^ for " any man to take upon him the
office of public preaching or ministering the sacraments in
the congregation," or " church of Christy before he be thus
lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we
ought to judge lawfully called and sent," according to the
laiv of God, which be chosen " and called to this work, by
men who have thus public authority given unto them in the
congregation," or church of Christ, " to call and send mi-
nisters into the Lord's vineyard." The lawfulness of such
public authority must mean its conformity to the laws of
God, because the bishops and clergy assembled in convoca-
tion, who were the compilers of the articles, not being civil
judges, had no right to declare what was lawful, by the laws
of the land, or any temporal statvites, but only what they
deemed to be lawful, according to the laws of God, laid
down in scripture for the spiritual government of his church.
And as the twenty-third article is sufficient to show the ne-
cessity of such a lawful commission, so the thirty-sixth arti-
cle plainly declares that the persons invested with such com-
mission, are the bishops, priests and deacons, who are duly
consecrated and ordered, according to the rites of the book
referred to in that article ; and in which book the church of

* See Brett's Divine Right of Episcopacy, life.

132 General Defence of Episcopacy^

England, by her prayers to Almight>' (iod, acknowledges
her belief that every one of these orders was appointed by
his Holy Spirit^ and therefore was certainly of divine insti-
tution. Surely then we may now leave it with our readers
to determine on what ground Dr. Campbell could be jus-
tified in saying, that the church of England has " avoided
limiting the Christian ministry to one particular model."

Whether he has done justice to his own church in as-
signing the same doctrine and conduct to he^ is a point
which we are not called upon to decide ; although we can-
not help taking notice of the unnatural association which
he endeavours to establish between the doctrine of the
church of England, and that of the Westminster Confession
of Faith, the authors of which, at the very time of com-
piling it, entertained such a mortal enmity against that
church, that they had sworn in their solemn league and co-
venant, to " endeavour, without respect of persons, the ex-
tirpation of prelacy, with all ecclesiastical officers depend-
ing on that hierarchy." It cannot be difficult to perceive
how far this conduct in the authors is entitled to the praise
of ^•' moderation," which our Lecturer bestows on the
doctrine of his Westminster confession, " which," he says,
*' is of equal authority with us, as the thirty-nine articles
are of in England ;" and then, after quoting the following
words from the 25th chapter of it, " Unto the catholic
visible church, Christ has given the ministry, oracles and
ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the
saints in this life, to the end of the world ;" he immediately
adds — " And this is all that is said on the subject." We
should suppose, however, that something more is said on
the subject, when, in the 27th chapter of the same con-
fession, we find these words — " There be only two sacra-
ments ordained by Christ our Lord, neither of which may
be dispensed by any but by a minister of the word law-
fully ordained,'*'' And if we wish to know how, in their
judgment, a minister of the word is kavfully ordained, we

General Defence of Episcopacy, 133

are referred, by a v^eiy sensible and spirited reviewer of
Dr. Campbell's lectures, to xh^ form of presbyter lal church
government^ agreed upon by the assembly of divines at
Westminster, and of equal authority with the Confession
of Faith^ where we shall find it decreed — that " every mi-
nister of the word be ordained by imposition of hands ^ and
praver, with fasting, by ikvost preaching presbyters to whom
it doth belong."*

The church of England, however, is weU able to defend*
the doctrine of her own articles and liturgy,— 'V^'ith. the
Westminster Confession of Faith we have at present no
concern, farther than to take notice of Dr. Campbell's very
partial appeal to its decision. But there is another point,
which he brings forward, as particularly applicable to those
of the Episcopal persuasion in this country, and to which
It behoves us, therefore, to direct our attention, with a
view to defend ourselves from the imputation of inconsis-
tency^, in a matter of such importance. It is stated in the
following words — " I shall add to these the doctrine of the
Episcopal reformed church of Scotland, contained in a
confession of faith ratified by law in this country in 15^7 ;
which, though set aside in the time of the civil wars, to
make room for the Westminster confession, was re-enacted
after the restoration, and continued in force till the aboli-
tion of prelacy at the revolution." In the very beginning
of this statement we meet with an expression, which must
appear a little ambiguous, and not easy to be understood,
as made use of by a writer of Dr. Campbell's professional
character. — When we look back to the date which he fixes
for the legal ratification of this confession of faith, it is
natural for us to ask, what he means, by saying, that " it
contains the doctrine of the Episcopal reformed church of
Scotland ?" It was drawn up by those early reformers who
called themselves " the congregation," of which the famous

• See the Anti-Jacobin Review for May, 18G1, p. 21.

1 54 General Defence of Episcopacy*

John Knox was the great leader and director : and we
know, that in the ParHament which gave it a legal sanc^.
tion, there were some bishops^ and men of Episcopal prin-.
ciples. But could Dr. Campbell consistently acknowledge
that these persons were on the reforming side, or had any
leading hand in bringing forward this new confession, when
such an acknowledgment would directly fly in the face of
that fundamental article of the claim of rights which led ta
** the abolition of prelacy at the revolution," and declared
*' this to be one cause of" such abolition, that the " nation
had reformed from popery by presbyters .^"

We must, therefore, suppose, that our Lecturer's vaguo
appellation of the " Episcopal reformed church of Scot-,
land," can only be applicable to the state of that church at
the time when she was regularly formed and constituted,
according to the true Episcopal model. And on this sup^
position we need not wonder, that her Confession of Faith
was set aside to make room for that of the Westminster
reformers, who, no doubt, found their own Confession
more suitable to the purpose of that " solenan league and
covenant," by which they were bound to effect, if they
could, the extirpation of prelacy, and every thing connected
with it. But when our Professor thought proper to men-
tion the " re-enacting of the former confession after the
restoration," he should also have informed his students,
that the act which restored the former Episcopal govern-
ment, declared that government to be most " agreeable to
the word of God." And if he had likewise taken notice
that the re-enacting the confession alluded to, and " con-
tinuing it in force till the revolution," was a thing far from
pleasing to the bishops of that period ; it was no more than
what plainly appeared from the jealousy which they ex-
pressed, in regard to the test act, as it was called, in 1681,
which imposed this confession upon them, under a solemn
oath, enforced bv severe penalties. So great indeed was
their alarm on that account, that some of them refused to

General Defence of Episcopacy* 1 35

lake the oath in the sense which was then put upon it by
the enemies of the Episcopal establishment, till their scru-
ples were removed by an explanatory act of council^ de-
claring, that " though the confession of 1560, being framed
in the infancy of the reformation, deserves due praise ; yet
they were not required to swear to every proposition or
clause in it, but only to the true protestant religion con-
tained there ; and that in the test there is no encroachment
upon the intrinsic spiritual power of the church, as exer-
cised by the apostles, and the most pure and primitive
church of the three first centuries ; nor any danger from
it to the Episcopal government of this national church,
which is again declared to be most agreeable to the word
of God."

But there would have been no occasion for our taking
any notice of this old confession^ if Dr. Campbell had
©ot thought proper to make it the ground of a very
contemptuous and unjust reflection, conveyed in these
Words — " I recur to it the rather," says he, " in order to
show how much, on this article, the sentiments of our late
nonjurors (for we have none of that description at present)
differ from the sentiments of those whom they considered
as their ecclesiastical predecessors, and from whom they
derived their spiritual pedigree."* Here are several
marks of distinction made use of, and all with a view to
throw some reproach on the persons thus distinguished.
They are said to have been lately nonjurors. But if they
are not so now^ was it fair to hold them up in such an of-
fensive light ? They considered themselves as having had
*' ecclesiastical predecessors ;" and as that implies such a
thing as " ecclesiastical succession," nothing more was
necessary to expose them to ridicule, unless perhaps to
brand such " succession" with the odious name of " spiritual
pedigree." Yet, notwithstanding all this load of contempt

* Lecture iv.

136 General Defence of Episcopacy,

laid on the late nonjurors ; as they have still, it seems, suc-
cessors, whom our Lecturer afterwards distii,'guishes by
the title of the " Scotch Episcopal party," he should have
considered how far they acknowledged the relation to which
he alludes, before he involved them in the censure of
" differing so much in their sentiments" from those, whom
he, perhaps, not they, " considered as their ecclesiastical pre-
decessors." He could not but know, that for many years
after the reformation was begun in Scotland, various forms
of ecclesiastical polity were adopted, one after another, and
under as many different denominations. But did he ever
hear, from sufficient authority, that any of these was
acknowledged by the " late nonjurors," to have been the
" Episcopal reformed church of Scotland r" Did he ever
hear that the '^ Scotch Episcopal party," as he calls them,
would expect to find their " ecclesiastical predecessors," in
such times of tumult and confusion, as exhibited nothing
like a regular, well-constituted national church ? If we
come down as far as to the year 1610, when the church of
England gave her support in this country to the reforma-
tion, of which she has justly been called the bulwark, and
contributed, as she again did in 1661, to the introduc-
tion of a real Episcopacy among us, we readily and grate-
fully look back to the bishops and clergy, who were thus
duly " consecrated and ordered," as really and truly our
ecclesiastical predecessors." But we go much higher up
for the fountain of our " spiritual pedigree," however
lightly and sarcastically that phrase may be used by some,
deriving it, under Christ's authority, ^*i?m his apostles, and
only through these " predecessors," as the intermediate
channels of conveyance, which have brought it regularly
down to us.

From the sentiments of these our " ecclesiastical prede-
cessors," on the article of church government, we have
surely not departed. And though there were more ground
than can be shown, for bringing such a charge against us.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 3.7

it would come but awkwardly from one, whose sentiments^
on this same article, differ so much as Dr. Campbell's evi-
dently do differ from those of his " predecessors," if he
would have allowed them to be so called, who, on obtain-
ing their establishment in 1690, expressly declared- — " that
the presbyterian government was not only agreeable to the
inclinations of the people, but likewise founded on the word
of God, and therefore of divine right."^ Yet this divine
rights a minister and professor of that same establishment
has rejected with disdainj and after telling his students,
that what he had advanced on that subject " did not affect
the lawfulness, or even, in certain circumstances, the expe-
diency of the Episcopal model, it only exposed the arro-
gance of pretending to a jus diviiium^'^ — lest this should be
thought applicable only to the Episcopal pretension, he
immediately adds—" I am satisfied that no form of polity
can plead such an exclusive charter, as that phrase, in its
present acceptation, is imderstood to imply. The claim
is clearly the offspring of sectarian bigotry and ignorance."
Such is the language now used by those, who are enjoying
the benefits originally procured by, what, it seems, must
at last be called, the " sectarian bigotry and ignorance" of
their predecessors.

Our Professor indeed had told his hearers, that though it
was his purpose, in considering the question about the
apostolic form of church government^ " to proceed with all
the candour and impartiality of which he was capable ; yet
he was to speak out boldly what appeared to him most pro-
bably to have been the case, without considering what sect

* 'Their great champion, Mr. Anderson, of Dmibarton, expressly de-
clared it to be their ^^ firm belief, that there is but one govemment by
divine right f viz. tho. presbyterian;^' and we find him drawii^g this con-
clusion at the end of his work — " Upon the whole, I conclude that the
presbyterian government is of divine institution." See p. o7 and 341 of
his Defence of the Church Government, Faith, Worship aj;d Spirit of the
Pres&yteriatis, ^c. printed at Glasgow 1714. ,

18

/

138 General Defence of Episcopatiji

or party it might either offend or gratify."^ With this
resolution, he proceeds to the examination of the fact, and
sets out with acknowledging, " that the apostles regularly
established churches, and settled therein proper officers or
ministers,f who were chiefly distinguished by the three
terms — ^bishops or overseers, presbyters or elders, and
deacons or attendants. Now, the doubts that have atisen
are chiefly concerning the two first of these names— ^z5^o/)«
2iwd presbyters ; and the question is, whether they are names
for the same office, or for different offices."} — And then
he immediately adds-*-" This at least is the first question $
for it must be owned, th^t there have been some strenuous
advocates for the apostolical origin of Episcopacyj who
have entirely given up the argument founded on the
names." And when the argument is thus given up, there
needs no longer be any question, 7^r^^ or last^ about that
on which it is founded*

The argument maintained by those who are advocates
lor the apostolical origin of Episcopacy, is not founded on
names but things ; and therefore the question is not whe-
ther the church officers, called presbyters or elders in the
apostles' days, might not also be called bishops or over-
seers, as having the oversight or charge of a certain por-
tion of the flock of Christ? but, whether in that character
they had the apostolic power of ordaining others, and such
authority to govern and direct the inferior overseers, as
Was evidently committed to the highest order of church
officers, who were afterwards peculiarly distinguished by
the title of bishops? In the passage quoted by Dr. Camp-
bell from the Acts of the Apostles, || there can be no doubt
that those who are called elders, or presbyters of the
church, are also denominated overseers or bishops. But it
does not hence follow that they had the power of ordina-
tion, or any such authority as was committed to Timothy,

* Lecture Iv. f Ibid. % Ibid. \\ Acts xx, 17, 28.

%.

General Defence of Episcopacy n 1 39

when he was appointed to take charge of the church at
Ephesus, as its proper bishop and governor. If we only
observe the difference in the apostle's directions to him and
to them, we need no other proof that these presbyters were
uot authori;zed to execute those offices, for discharging
which Timothy had been purposely set over them. In St.
Paul's admonitions to them, he puts them in mind of their
duty as pastors, and warns them to " take heed to them-
selves, and to all that part of God's flock," as distinguished
from the shepherds, which was entrusted to their care
and oversight : Whereas in the charge given to Timothy,
he is empowered to watch over, not the flock only, but the
shepherds also, the subordinate clergy as well as the laity,
in that part of the church committed to his inspection. —
There were some things, which he was not only to " com-
mand and teach," but to charge others, that they should
teach them also. Such as were proposed for the office of
deacons, he was to prove and examine, and if found blame-
less, to admit them to it ; that so, " by using the office of
a deacon well, they might purchase to themselves a good
degree," and in due time be found fit for a higher station
in the church ; even for discharging the duties of elders or
presbyters. Against these presbyters, Timothy was di-
rected to " receive no accusation, but before two or three
witnesses : and them that sinned he was to rebuke before
all, without preferring one before another," and, like an
equitable judge, '^ doing nothing by partiality." In a word,
he was charged to '^ lay hands suddenly on no man ;" that
so, by avoiding such rashness in exercising his power of
ordination, he might not be a " partaker of other men's
sins, but keep himself pure" from any such abuse of his
authority. In tiiis apostolic charge, then, we see delineated,
in the most accurate manner, all the particulars, in which
bishops have been considered, since the days of the apos-
tles, as superior to presbyters ; and he, who will not
acknowledge Timothy to have been bishop at Ephesus,

140 General Defence of Episcopacy.

may as well deny, that there have ever been bishops in any
part of the world, or that there are at present twenty-six of
that order in England.

But in answer to all this, our Lecturer holds up a part
of St. Paul's account, and only one part of what the apostle
says of Timothy's ordination. For — " in regard to the
imposition of hands, which is considered," he says, " by
manif^ (we would hope the Doctor himself was one of the
many) " as a necessary attendant on ordination, we find
this also attributed to the presbytery ;"* as to which, we
are told, but without any proof, that " all Christian anti-
quity concurs in affixing this name to what may be called
the consistory of a particular church, or the college of its
pastors :" therefore as Timothy was ordained by the laying
on of the hands of this presbytery^ or college of pastors, it
could not have been to the office of a bishop, in the proper
ecclesiastical sense of the word, since, according to Dr.
Campbell, no such office was known in the church at that
time. Yet he acknowledges, that " this is the only passage
in the New Testament, in which the Greek word for pres-
bytery is applied to a Christian council ;" and if we may
take the opinion of Qah'm^ as of equal weight with that, of
many of his followers, on the subject of presbyterian or-
dination, he expressly denies, that by the presbytery in this
text, was meant a college of presbyters, and reads it, as
if the apostle had said—" neglect not the gift of the office
of a presbyter which was given thee by prophecy, with the
laying on of hands." It has been thought by some, that as
the apostles themselves were sometimes called elders or
presbyters, therefore, a meeting of a certain number of
them, for the ordination of Timothy, might properly enough
be called the presbytery. But as St. Paul, in another
place,']' speaks of himself as the sole ordainer of Timothy,
so there is a difference of expression in the two accounts

* 1 Tim. iv. 14. t 2 Tim. i. 6.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 141

which he gives of this matter; and from the one it appears
that Timothy was ordained by the putting on of the apos-'
de's hands, to convey authority; and from the other, that
this was done with the laying on of the hands of the pres-
bytery, as a testimony of their approbation.*^ Having al-
ready admitted, that at the time when St. Paul wrote his
several epistles, the elders or presbyters of the church were
sometimes called bishops^ or overseers of what was com-
mitted to their charge, we need hardly take notice of our
Lecturer's " argument,f that there were but two orders of
ministers then established, because Paul, in addressing the
Philippians, expresses himself in this manner, — To all the
saints at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."f For if
we should say, that they also had an apostle of their own,
and, therefore, a bishop " in the proper and ecclesiastical
sense of the word," it would be no more than what St.
Paul said, when he told them, ^' I supposed it necessary to
send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and companion in
labour, and fellow soldier, but your apostle ;"§ on which
Jerome observes-—" By degress, in process of time, others
were ordained apostles^ by those whom our Lord had chosen,
as that passage to the Philippians shows, ' I supposed it
necessary to send unto you Epaphroditus your apostle ;" and
Theodoret gives this reason why Epaphroditus is called
the apostle of the Philippians — " He was entrusted with the
Episcopal government, as being their bishop." The sanxe

• The Greek preposition ^la, signifies the means by wliich the aq-
tliority was conveyed: the other preposition ^(loc^ signifies no more than
concurrence or approbation, such as is still given in the church of Eng-
land, where the rubric directs, that " the bishop, with the priests present,
shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth
the order of priesthood.

t Lecture iv.

\ It should rather be rendered, " with bishops and deacons" — as the
original has not the restrictive articles.

§ Phil. ii. 25, where our translators have rendered it messenger.

142 General Defence of Episcopacy^

Writer tells us,* " those now called bishops, were anciently
called apostles ; but in process of time the name of apos-
de was left to them who were truly apostles, and the name
of bishop was restrained to those who were anciently called
apostles : thus Epaphroditus was the apostle of the Philip-
pians, Titus of the Cretians, and Timothy of the Asiatics*"
— *Yet Dr. Campbell asserts, that " Theodoret was very
much puzzledf where to find the origin of the office of bi-
shop, as the word in his time implied, when he imagine^
he discovered it in a phrase, which occurs but once in the
New Testament,"} where St. Paul mentions his brethren,
as the apostles of the churches. For we know that Barna-
bas, as well as Paul, was called an apostle^ and we have
seen Epaphroditus expressly mentioned as the apostle of
the Philippians, to whom Theodoret made no scruple to
join Timothy and Titus, as the apostles of their respective
churches in Ephesus and Crete.

We have already taken notice of the Episcopal autho-
rity, which was certainly committed to Timothy as Bishop
pf the church at Ephesus ; the evidence is equally clear
and irrefragable for that of Titus in Crete ; to the nature
and design of whose commission, St. Paul refers in the
plainest terms, when he tells him — " For this cause left I
thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things
that are wanting, and ordain elders or presbyters, in every
city, as I had appointed thee."§ As the gospel was al-
ready planted in Crete, it may be presumed, that some
presbyters had been ordained in it likewise j in which case,
if they had power to ordain others, there was no occasion
to leave Titus there for the same purpose, as such an inva-

* On 1 Tim. chap. iii.

^ Not more puzzled than the Doctor himself was, where to find the
origin of the power of his presbytery, when he was obliged to have re-
course for it, to what he acknowledges to be the only passage in the
New Testament, in which the word is applied to a Christian council.

I 2 Cor. viii.23. § Titus i. 5.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 143

sion of their office would have tended to promote strife and
contention, rather than peace and good order. — But sup-
posing that there were no presbyters in Crete, till Titus
was left there for ordaining some ; yet when he had or-
dained a few, he might have gone away and left them to
** set in order every thing that was wanting ;" to carry on
all future ordinations, and govern the church by their own
authority. Yet, instead of this, in consequence of the
Episcopal power which had been committed to him, he i^
directed by St. Paul, not only " to ordain presbyters in
every city," but also to " rebuke with all authority, to ad-
monish heretics," and in case of their obstinacy, to " re-
ject" them from the communion of the church. In all
these respects, it is evident that the authority of Titus in
the church of Crete, was the same as that of Timothy in
the church of Ephesus. The same caution is enjoined to
both in the important affair of ordination, whether of pres-
byters or deacons, and the same reason assigned for their
being thus cautious, because " the^ bishop must be blame-
less, — as the steward of God ;" and we know, it is a pecu-
liar part of the steward's office to provide, inspect, and
watch over the inferior servants of the family.

When we now look back to the clear and distinct account,
which is given of the Episcopal authority in the Epistles
of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus, and see these distin-
guished ministers of Christ exercising the power committed
to them, for the edification and good government of the
churches, over which they were appointed to preside, we
cannot perceive any " species of vanity," far less any " evi-
dent falsehood" in those postscripts subjoined to the epis-
tles, which style Timothy and Titus " the first ordained
bishops, the one of the church of the Ephesians, and the
other of that of the Cretians." Neither are we at all stag-

• Not a bishop, as our translators have rendered it, leaving out the re-
strictive article.

144 General Defence of Episcopacy*

gered in our belief of the truth of these postscripts, by
Dr, Campbell's asserting, that " Timothy and Titus were
not made bishops till about five"^ hundred years after their
death,"t when we find so much unexceptionable evidence
to the contrary.

But still our Lecturer insists, that they could " not be
properly bishops, in the modern acceptation,'^ because the
powers with which they were invested, were conferred
upon them, not as bishops, or fixed governors, but in their
extraordinary and temporary character of evangelists, I
shall not say, that such a man as Dr. Campbell would bor-
row this idea from writers of very inferior talents ; but
nothing is more certain, than its being one of the most
hackneyed topics, even in the meanest publications, which
the two last centuries produced against the apostolic insti-
tution of Episcopacy.J It is still more surprising, that
such an idea should be adopted by the same author, who
tells us, in another of his works, that the word from which
the term evangelist is derived, " relates to the first infor-*
mation that is given to a pei^son or people, that is, when
the subject may be properly called news. Thus, in the
Acts," he says, " it is frequently used for expressing the
first publication of the gospel, in a city or a village, or
amongst a particular people."|| Nay, in the very lecture
now before us, he acknowledges, that the word " denotes

* This word j?w, though not in the list of errata, has been said to be a
mistake of the printer, and for Jive, it seems we should read tbree; which,
to be sure, would lessen the error of the author a little as to the date,
but could make no alteration, in our opinion, as to the Jiact, when we
know so well that Timothy and Titus were certainl}- made bishops in
their own lifetime, as well as evangelists.

t Lecture v.

I See Mr. Anderson's (of Dunbarton) Defence, &c. who affirms, as
Dr. Campbell does, without any proof, that " Timothy and Titus were
extraordz72ary officers, and, therefore, it cannot be thence inferred, that
their superiority of power was designed to be perpetual." p. 104.

II See the Preliminary Dissertations prefixed to his '* Translation- of
th-e Gor,pe!s," p. 293.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 145

properly, to preachy or declare the good news, that is, the
gospel, to those who had before known nothing of the mat^
tef*"-' — It is evident then, that in his opinion, the disciples
whom " Christ gave as evangelists, for the work of the
uainistry," must have been the persons employed, whatever
was their character or station, in communicating the know-
ledge of the gospel to those to whom it was news^^ and who
had never before heard of its glad tidings.-^But how could
Timothy and Titus be considered as evangelhts^ in this sense
of the word, to the churches of Ephesus and Crete, where
St, Paul himself had been preaching the gospel, before
they were empowered to take charge of these churches J
aiid in that of EpheSus, there had been elders expressly
p^rdained for taking heed to the flock committed to their
pare, and feeding them vrith sound doctrine? It is true
Ithat Timothy was directed by St. Paul to do the work of
an e'oang'eiist^ or preacher of the gospel ; but a preaching'
apostle or bishop was no such extraordinary character as to
jbe inve&ted, merely on that account, with a pre-eminence
0\'er the other overseers of the church at Ephesus. If it
was not then as evangelists^ that Timothy and Titus were
entrusted with the inspection and government of the Ephe*
sian and Gretian churches, it must have been as persons^
in whom the apostolic commission was continued, with all
the ordinary powers which were necessary for answering
the purpose of that important commission.

But it has been pretended, by those who oppose the
continuance of such an apostolic commission in the way
of Episcopal succession, that the apostles themselves were
ministers of the same extraordinary character as these evan-
gelists, whose office was not to be continued any longer
than the first publication of the gospel required. Follow-
ing his predecessors in this beaten tract, Dr. Campbell has
affirmed, that " the apostolate itself was one of those extra-
ordinary offices which were in their nature temporary,
and did not admit succession:" in support of which very

19

ft

146 General Defence of Episcopacy i

bold^ if not extraordinary assertion, he brings forward se-
veral arguments, to which the " attention of his hearers is
entreated."* First — he refers them for the character of
an apostle, to the brief description given of it by St. Peter,
as sufficient to show, that the office could be but temporary,
and could have no existence after the extinction of that
generation. The words which are supposed to show the
*' absurdity, as well as arrogance of modem pretenders,"'!*
are those made use of, on occasion of the election of
Matthias into the place of the traitor Judas, when Peter
said — " Whetefore, of these nien, which have companied
with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out
among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the
same day that he was taken up from us, must one be
ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." J Is
it possible, that our learned Lecturer could infer from these
words, that the essence of the apostolic character consisted
in "having seen Jesus Christ in the flesh after his resurrec-
tion,"— when we are assured, " that he Was seen in the
flesh of above five hundred brethren at once, after he rose
from the dead," though at that time there were only eleven
apostles ?-^ And if he had requested the attention of his
pupils to the nature of that commission, which these eleven
received from their Lord and Master, with the promise
subjoined to it, that he was to be with them always, even
unto the end of the world, it must have been no easy mat-
ter, we should suppose, to convince those who firmly
believed the truth of this promise, that the eleven apostles
could have no successors, and their commission *' no exist-
ence after the extinction of that generation."

His second argument, in support of this opinion, is laid
down in these words — " The apostles were distinguished
by prerogatives, which did not descend to any after them.
Of this kind were — ^their receiving their mission immedi-

* Lecture v. f Ibid. + Acts i. 21, 22.

General Defence of Episcopacy. 14/

ately from the Lord Jesus Christ, — ^the power of confer-
ring, by imposition of hands, the miraculous gifts of the
spirit, on whomsoever they would — and the knowledge
they had, by inspiration, of the whole doctrine of Christ."*
But if these " prerogatives did not descend to any after
them," it was not because they constituted any essential
part of the apostolic office, but only as they were qualifica-
tions peculiarly necessary for the discharge of that office,
in laying the foundation of the Christian church, and pro-
pagating the Christian doctrine throughout the world. It
was, no doubt, absolutely necessary, that the first apostles
of the Christian church should " receive their mission im-
mediately from Christ himself," because there was none
else from whom they could receive it. But the same
necessity could not be said to exist, when they, having once
been " sent by Christ, even as the Father had sent him,"
had thereby received power to continue that mission in
such a way, as that it might be regularly handed down to
the end of the world. As to the miraculous powers, and
inspired knowledge of divine truth, with which the eleven
apostles were endued in such an eminent degree, it does
not appear, that these marks of distinction, except perhaps
in that eminence of degree, were peculiar to them ; since
we read of many others, who possessed the same power of
working miracles, and the same extraordinary gifts of the
spirit. The seven deacons were all " men full of the Holy
Ghost, and wisdom j" and it is particularly mentioned of
one of them, that " he did great wonders and miracles
among the people," and that his adversaries " were not
able to resist the wisdom, and the spirit, by which he
spake,""!* It is evident then, that the apostolic office did
not consist in the possession of these extraordinary privi-
leges, which, at the first setting out of the gospel, for the
sake of giving power and progress to it, were bestowed on

* I^ecture v. t Acts vi. 8 — 10-

i4<l General t>efenc6 of J^phcopetcy.

many others of inferior stations in the church.— These
could not possibly preclude the apostles from having suc-
cessors in that superior office, which, for answering all the
Ordinar}^ purposes intended by it, was to be continued as
long as the church itself should exist upon earth.

Yet our Lecturer gives it, as his third argument against
Such an apostolic succession, that " the mission of th6
apostles was of quite a different kind from that of any ordi-
fiary pastor. It was to propagate the gospel throughout
the World, both among Jews and pagans, and not to take
the charge of a particular flock. The terms of their con^-
mission are, Go and teach all nations : Again, Go ye into
all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. No
doubt they may be styled bishops or overseers, but in a
sense very different from that in which it is applied to the
inspector over the inhabitants of a particular district.—
They were universal bishops ; the whole church, or rather
the whole earth, was their charge, and they were all col-
leagues one of another."* All this perhaps is true with
tespect to the general nature of their commission, although
they might find it convenient, if not necessary, to assign to
each a particular portion of the charge committed to them.
It was the current report of antiquity, that they divided
the earth among them ; and to some such division, St. Paul
seems to allude, where he says-—" When James, Cephasj
and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace
that v/as given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the
light hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the hea-
then, and they unto the circumcision."f The same St.
Paul, who though not of the eleven^ is yet acknowledged,
as well as Matthias, to have been an apostle, assures us,
that " he so strove to preach the gospel, not where Christ
was named, lest he should build upon another man's foun-
dation :"J And we have every reason to believe, that thr

* Lecture v. f ^^^' »• 9. | Roj-n. xv. 20?

Seneral Defence of Ephcopaty^ 149

other apostles conducted themselves in the same regular
and orderly manner* No — says our Professor — " If they
|iad limited themselves to any thing less than the world,
it would have been disobedience to the express command
they had received from their Master, to go into all nations,
and to preach the gospel to every creature." But surely
the obedience which they owed to this command, did not
require that every individual among them should actually
go into all nations ; and that the gospel should be preached
to every creature, by each of the eleven apostles, to whom
the command was given. It was enough, that no nation
was omitted, no creature neglected, by the apostles in
general, but that, as St. Paul says of them, " their sound
went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of
world."* But when this was accomplished by their com-
mon and united efforts, there was nothing to hinder them
from exercising their apostolic authority over the churches,
which they had respectively planted, till they should find
proper persons, or " faithful men,"t as St. Paul calls tiiem,
on whom they might devolve the same authority, with
power to transmit it from age to age, or in the words of
(heir Lord's promise^-*" even unto the end of world."

As another objection, however, to this plan of apostolic
succession, our Lecturer brings forward his fourth and last
argument, which he states in these words — *" As a full
proof that the matter was thus universally understood, both
in their own age and in the times immediately succeeding,
no one, on the death of an apostle, was ever substituted in
his room ; and when that original sacred college was extinct,
the title became extinct with it."J But what signifies the
extinction of the title ? Might not the same official powers
be continued under different titles ? To take another simili-
tude from temporal things ; are we not accustomed to hear
of the supreme civil pov/er being enjoyed in one country

* Roni. X. IS. f 2 Tim. ii. 2. % Lecture v.

150 General Defence of Episcopacy.

by a King^ in another by an Emperor^ and in a third, very
lately, by a First Consul; while each of these titles denotes
a person possessed of supreme, and therefore very similar
authority ? Dr. Campbell could not but know the reason
why, as well as the time when, the title of apostle was laid
aside, and that of bishop substituted in its place. Though
he had quoted Theodoret, to expose the folly of his imagin-
ing those to be bishops whom St. Paul described as " the
apostles of the churches," he should yet have recollected,
that the same Theodoret mentions their successors, as
humbly abstaining from the name of apostles, and con-
tenting themselves with that of bishops ; a title expressive
of the care, attention and vigilance, which their office re-
quired.— To what purpose then was our author's remark,
that " on the death of an apostle, no one was ever substi'-
tuted in his room," if by no one he means no apostle?
And that this was his meaning, is evident from the pains he
has taken to show, that neither " the election of Matthias
by the apostles, nor the subsequent admission of Paul and
Barnabas to the apostleship, formed any exception to what
had been advanced ; for they came not as successors to any
one, but were specially called by the Holy Spirit as apostles,
particularly to the Gentiles."* And if they came with
apostolical powers, we are ready to admit, that it is of no
consequence whether " they came as successors to any.
one" or not ; since the point in question is not, whether
there should be now just twelve bishops in the whole Chris-
tian church, and each of them able to trace his succession
from some individual apostle ; but whether in that portion
of every regularly constituted church called a diocese, there
always has been, from the days of the apostles to the pre-
sent time, some ecclesiastical person, so far possessed of
the apostolic commission and character, as to have autho-r
rity to ordain and superintend the presbyters and deacon^

* Lecture v.

General Defence of Episcopacy, \5i

tuider his spiritual jurisdiction, and to assist in preserving
and continuing his own Episcopal order, as also in what-
ever else is necessary to the care and good government of
the particular national church to which he belongs ? Now,
the admission of Paul and Barnabas to the office of apostles,
after the number twelve was completed, settles this point,
so far as it proves, that the apostolic office was not limited
to those " who companied with the eleven all the time that
the Lord Jesus went in and out among them," and, there-
fore, was not such as necessarily " became extinct," when,
as our Lecturer expresses himself — " that original sacred
college was extinct." — On the contrary, we see an addition
made to it in the case now before us ; and though he tells
us that " Paul and Barnabas were specially called by the
Holy Spirit as apostles," thereby making a distinction, and
marking a difference, as it were, between their apostleship,
and that which, he had said, was " received immediately
from the Lord jfesus Christ^'* yet St. Paul himself, who
best knew how this matter stood, assures us, that "he was
an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ,
and God the Father;"* which not only points to the man-
ner in which he himself was called to the apostleship by
the Lord Jesus Christy but at the same time clearly shows,
that when he wrote his Epistle to the Galatians, there were
in the church, apostles, who had been ordained to their
office by the ministry of man. Such, we have seen, was
Epaphroditus, whom St. Paul calls the apostle of the Phi-
lippians.t Such, undoubtedly, were Timothy and Titus,
and those brethren who are distinguished as " apostles of
the churches, the glory of Christ."f

* Gal. i. 1.

f Dr. Campbell's man of discernment— Hilary the deacon, in his
Commentary on the second chapter of the Ep stie to the Philippians,
says expressly, that Epaphroditus was constituted their apostle by St.
Paul himself: His words arc, " Erat enim eorum apostolus, ab apostolo
factus."

I 2 Cor. viii. 23.

142 General Defence of Episcopacy^

Where then could our Lecturer have learned, dr how
could he pretend to teach his pupils, that the apostolioil
office, founded on the commission given by our Lord to
the eleven apostles, " was one of those extraordinarv of-
fices, which were in their nature temporary, and did not
admit succession ?" There was a school, in which this
lesson was taught, but from which we can hardly suppose
that such a man as Dr. Campbell would have imbibed the
sentiments he has avowed on this subject. Yet, when we
observe one of the most strenuous advocates for the papal
supremacy positively asserting, that " bishops are not pro-
perly the successors of the apostles, because the apostles
were not ordinary, but extraordinary pastors, such as, from
the nature of their delegation, could have no successors,"^
we cannot easily refrain from expressing our surprise at
such a striking coincidence in opinion, between the popish
cardinal, and the presbyterian professor ; and from this,
and other instances of a similar nature, we might be in-
clined to suspect, that between popery and presbytery, the
difference, in many things, is not so great as is generally
imagined.

From considering the nature of the apostolic office, as
admitting no succession, and the peculiar business of the
other extraordinary ministers called evangelists, as exem-
plified in Timothy and Titus, our author passes, by a na-
tural transition, to what he terms, the " only one other plea
of any consequence in favour of the apostolical antiquity of

* See Cardinal Bellarmine — ^De Rom. Pont. lib. iv. cap. 24 — whose
v/ords are these — " Episcopi non succedunt propria apostolis, quoniam
apostoli non fuerunt ordinarii, sed extraordinarii, et quasi delegati pas-
tores quibus non succeditur." To this authority Mr» Anderson, of Dun-
barton, seems to have referred, when, combating the argument in favour
of Episcopacy, drawn from a succession in the apostolate, he observed
— " The church of Rome, a society of a very large extent, of a long
&tandin.g, and such as has produced not a few wise and great men, ex-
pressly contradict it, denying that any of the apostles had supcessors,
cave Peter, in the papal chair." See his Defencf^., &c. p. 90.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 153

Episcopacy ; and which he reserved for the last, because
it affords an excellent handle for inquiring into the real
origin of subordination among the Christian pastors. The
plea he means is taken from the Epistles to the seven
Asian churches in the apocalypse, addressed to the angels
of these churches severally, and in the singular number ;
to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and so of the rest."*
At his first setting out on this inquiry, he seems at a loss
%vhat account to give of the peculiar mode of address
made use of in these Epistles, but is extremely unwilling
to acknowledge that any inference can be drawn from it
in favour of Diocesan Episcopacy. This, he thinks, would
be contrary to every just rule of interpretation ; and yet
he appears to be equally dissatisfied with what he says is
" maintained by some zealous patrons of the Presbyterian
model," that by the angel is meant, according to the allego-
rical style, that consistory of elders, called the Preshijtery^
which, the better to show the union that ought to subsist
among the members, is here emphatically considered and
addressed as one person. Between these two interpreta-
tions, which have respectively distinguished the Episcopa-
lian and the Presbyterian party, he chooses to steer a mid-
dle course, and to adopt, what he calls an intermediate opi-
nion, as appearing to him much more probable than either
of the other two. " His sentiment, therefore, is, that, as in
their consistories and congregations, it would be necessary,
for the sake of order, that one should preside, both in the
offices of religion, and in their consultations for the com-
mon good, it is their president or chairman, that is here ad-
dressed under the name of angel."-— This opinion he af-
terwards illustrates, by comparing his chairman to the
" speaker of the House of Commons, and to the prolocutor
of either house of convocation in England, or the modera-
tor of an ecclesiastical judicator}^ in Scotland." The first

* Lecture v.
20

1 54 General Defence of Episcopacy t

of these comparisons is rather unlucky, as the appointment
of the speaker depends on the will of the Sovereign, and,
therefore, implies the acknowledgment of a superior : And
the other two offices, being of a temporary nature, were not
properly adapted to the design of his comparison, unless
he had, or could have shown, that these apocalyptic bishops
ever descended from their station, and became common
members of the presbytery, as he knew to be always the
case with his moderators.

It is indeed true, that the epistles addressed to the angels
mentioned in the first three chapters of the book of the
Revelation of St» John, were intended for the use of those
churches, of which these angels are represented as the
directors and governors. There can be no ground to sup-
pose that the churches themselves were meant by the an-
gels, when the distinction between them is so plainly laid
down in these words, as descriptive of the mystery: — " The
seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the
seven candlesticks, which thou sawest, are the seven
churches."^ Both being thus distinguished by their proper
emblems, the angels could not be the churches, nor any
select number, or collective body of men, because they are
constantly mentioned as single persons, and by a title,
which was well known to bear the same meaning as that of
apostle. Both are applied to signify a messenger of God :
an apostle as one sent or commissioned to carry his mes-
sage, an angel as employed in telling or declaring that mes-
sage. The name of angel, therefore, was very properly
applied to those who immediately succeeded the apostles,
in their office of preaching or publishing God's will to the
church ; and when St. Paul was employed in preaching the
gospel to the Galatians, he says, " they received him as an
angel of God."']* This plainly shows that these angels were
not only single persons, but entrusted also with the care

* Rev. i. 20. t Gal. iv. 14.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 155

aiid government of the several churches, of which they
were called the angels: which will still appear more clearly,
if we consider the subject of the Epistles addressed to them,
and the characters, which are there given of them. On
account of the authority committed to them, we find them
praised for all the good, and blamed for all the evil, which
happened in their churches.— The angel of the church of
Ephesus is commended, because " he could not bear them
that were evil, and had tried those who said they were
apostles, and were not so." Having called them to ac-
count, and examined their pretentions, he found them to
be no other than " liars," and impostors, and therefore
executed the discipline of the church against them ; in doing
which, he receives approbation for discharging his duty.
The ,angel of the church in Pergamos is reproved for not
severely censuring, as they deserved, those who were
guilty of wicked and idolatrous practices; from which it is
evident, that he had authority to correct such disorders.
And the same may be said of the angel of Thyatira, who
is blamed for " suffering Jezebel, who called herself a pro-
phetess, to teach and seduce the servants of Christ," and
so lead them into the basest idolatry. The angel of Sardis
is commanded to be " watchful, and to strengthen those
who were ready to die ;" otherwise our Lord threatens to
*' come on him as a thief, and at an hour which he should
not know ;" plainly alluding to what he had formerly said
to those " stewards, whom he had made rulers over his
household, to give them their meat in due season."

All this is abundantly sufficient to show the office, station
and authority of the angels of the seven churches, and that
we need not scruple to call them, with St. Augustine, and
other ancient fathers, " the bishops and presidents of these
churches."* If they had not been clothed with that cha-

* See this matter fully handled in An History of the Government of the
Primitive Church) ^c. by Fr^vncis Brokesby, B. D. of Cambridge, and

156 General Defence of Episcopacy,

racter, it would be difficult to reconcile the charges given
to them by St. John in the name of Christ, with that princi-
ple of equity, by which we are sure all the divine proceed-
ings ever have been and always will be guided. If the an-
gels of the Asiatic churches had been invested with no more
permanent power than what is committed to the moderator
of a presbytery under the Scotch establishment, it would
have been hard indeed to require more of them than their
office allowed them to perform, or to condemn them for not
doing what they had no right or authority to do. This
would be considered as such flagrant severity and injustice
in any human judicatory, that we cannot possibly suppose
the most distant tendency towards it, in his divine admi-
nistration, who is King of kings, and Lord of lords, and
as " Judge of all the earth, will certainly do right." But
if the angels addressed by St. John had really the same
authority over the seven churches of Asia that was com-
mitted to Timothy and Titus, in those of Ephesus and
Crete : if these angels, apostles, or bishops, had each of
them a right, in virtue of his apostolic commission, to take
cognizance of false and heretical doctrine, to admonish the
heretic, and in case of his obstinate contempt of such ad-
monition, to reject him from the communion of the church:
if to these angels only pertained the power of ordaining
presbyters and deacons in the several churches committed
to their care, and when ordained, of appointing their ser-
vices, inspecting their conduct, and seeing that every thing
was done decently, and so as to promote order and edifi-
cation : If such were the Episcopal powers committed to
these angels of the Asiatic churches, which, we have already
seen, had been committed to Timothy in Ephesus, and

in A Discourse of Church Govenionent, ijfc. by Dr. Potter, who has shown,
from the most early accounts of the primitive church, that bishops were
settled in all the seven churches of the Proconsular Asia, of which Ephe-
sus was the metropolis, at or near the time when these Epistles were
written by St. John, and sent to the angels, or bishops, of these churches.

General Defence of Episcopacy . 157

Titus in Crete, the careful performance of the duties aris-
ing from such an important trust would, no doubt, procure
the praise of their heavenly Master ; while inattention and
negligence, neither reproving what was wrong, nor rebuk-
ing the wicked, nor expelling the incorrigible, would as
certainly expose them to the just reprehension of that
divine Lord, who had employed his servant John thus to
point out their duty, and do the same good office to the
bishops of the seven churches in Asia, that St. Paul had
done before to those of Ephesus and Crete.

Our Lecturer, indeed, after all he had said to show the
resemblance between St. John's bishops in Asia, and his
own moderators in Scotland, acknowledges, that his opi-
nion " is only the most likely conjecture of all he has seen
on this article, which, he owns, does not admit so positive
a proof as might be wished." And yet, from proof so im-
perfect, and evidence merely conjectural, he infers, without
the least hesitation, that " it was doubtless the distinction of
one pastor in every church, marked by this apostle, though
not made by any who had written before him, which has led
Tertuilian, whose publications first appeared but about a
century after the apostles, to consider him as the institutor
of Episcopacy."* To prove that this was TertuUian's opi-
nion, his words are quoted in Latin, with the translation
given of them by Bingham, in his Antiquities of the Chris-
tian Church^ which is called " a palpable misinterpretation
of our antiquary," as by this version, according to our au-
thor, " Bingham avoids showing, what is extremely plain
from the words, that Tertuilian did not think there was
any subordination in the pastors of the churches instituted
by the other apostles."f But this, perhaps, would not

* Lecture v. t Book II chap. i. § S.

:j: TertuUian's words are, as taken by themselves in Dr. Campbell's
quotation, " Ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus in Joannem
stabit auctorem:" (lib. iv. adv. Marcionem) which Bingham translates
thus : ** The order of bishops, when it is traced up to its original, will

158 General Defence of Episcopacy 0

have appeared so " extremely plain" as Dr. Campbell
thought it, had he not omitted the first clause of the sen-
tence, with which the words he has quoted have a neces-
sary and evident connection. In his controversy with
Marcion, who rejected part of the New Testament canon,
TertuUian had been proving the novelty of this heretic's
opinions, from his being unable to show any church that
embraced them, which could deduce its original by a de-
scent of bishops from the apostles ; which was evidently
the case with those churches, in which the sound apostolic
doctrine was still retained. For " let us see," says he,
" what milk the Corinthians drew from Paul, by what rule
the Galatians were reclaimed, what the Philippians, Thes-
salonians and Ephesians read, what, likewise, our neigh-
bour Romans say, to whom both Peter and Paul left the
gospel sealed with their blood. — >»We have also churches
founded by John,* for though Marcion rejects his apoca-

be found to have St. John for one of its authors." This Dr. CampbelJ
proves to be a ** palpable misinterpretation," by the following argument.
Had Tertullian said — " Mundus ad originem recensus, in Deum stabit.
creatorem," would Bingham have rendered it — " The world, when it
is traced up to its original, will be found to have God for one of its crea-
tors ? I cannot allow myself to think it. Yet the interpolation, in ren-
dering creatorem one of its creators, is not more flagrant than in render-
ing auctorem one of its authors." This reflection we cannot help think-
ing too severe, if not Jiagrantly unjust. For Bingham knew well, that
Tertullian did not allow colleagues to God, as creator of the world; but
that he very well might assign, and had actually assigned colleagues to
John, as author of Episcopacy. And as the Latin language has no re-
strictive article, we must be regulated by the context, in rendering aucto-
rem either an author, thereby with Bingham admitting other authors,
or the author, with Dr. Campbell, thereby restricting the sense to one,
which certainly was not TertuUian's meaning, as is evident from the
connection of this quotation with the preceding part of the passage
from which it is taken.

* Habemus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias: Nam etsi apocalypsim ejus
Marcion respuit, ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus, in Joan-
nem stabit auctorem ; where the word tamen evidently shows that the
passage must have a connection with what goes immediately before.

General Defence of Episcopacy. 1 59

iypse, yet the order or succession of bishops in these
churches, when traced up to its original, will be found to
have John for its author," as being the ordainer of the first
bishops in the churches which he had planted.

This, though a kind of paraphrase of his words, is
evidently TertuUian's meaning, and agrees exactly with
what he says on the same subject in another of his works,
which we have already had occasion to mention, his " Pre-
scriptions against Heretics," where he challenges them to
" produce the originals of their churches, and show the
order of their bishops so running down successively from
the beginning, as that every first bishop among them, shall
have had for his author and predecessor, some one of the
apostles, or apostolic men, who continued with the apostles.
For in this manner the apostolic churches bring down
their registers ; as the church of Smyrna from Polycarp
placed there by John, the church of Rome from Clement
ordained by Peter ; and so do the rest prove their apostolic
original, by exhibiting those who were constituted their
bishops by the apostles."^ Here we see not only Tertul-
lian mentioning the circumstance of Peter ordaining Cle-
ment at Rome, as well as John placing Polycarp at Smynia,
both of whom have been always called bishops ; but that
the rest of the churches also had bishops constituted by the
apostles ; and he expressly gives the ver}^ appellation of
"author" to every apostle, or apostolic man, who had founded
churches any where. Had Dr. Campbell acted fairly with
his " young friends, whom he had just before been warn-

* TertuUian's words are these : " Edant ergo origenes ecclesiarum
suarum ; evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successlones ab
initio decurrentem, ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex apostolis, veL
apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum apostolis perseveraverint, habuerit auc-
torern, et antecessorem ; hoc enim modo ecclesise apostolicx census suos
deferunt, sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia habens Polycarpuni ab Joanne con-
locatum refert.; sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordinatum edit :
proinde utique et ceterae exhibent, quos ab apostolis in Episcopatum con-
stitutos, apostolici seminis traduces habeant." De praescript. C. 32.

160 General Defence of Episcopacy*

ing to revere truth above all things, wherever they found
it, and be always open to conviction," he would have laid
before them this passage, which I have now quoted, as
well as the other, and left them to determine for them-
selves, without " prejudice or prepossession, whether there
was any good ground to conclude, that Tertullian " consi-
dered the apostle John as the institutor of Episcopacy.'^
And yet, had the case been really so, the cause of Episco-
pacy could have received no harm from it, when we find
even this learned adversary acknowledging it to be " more
likely, that John, in the direction of the Epistles to the
seven churches, availed himself of a distinction, which
had subsisted from the beginning, than that either the
church was new-modelled by this apostle, or that the dif-
ferent apostles adopted different plans."'^ This last suppo-
sition, indeed, appears to us so very unlikely, we might even
say incredible, that we have no scruple to rest the institu-
tion of Episcopacy on the ground which is here assigned
to it ; because we are certain that all the apostles modelled
the church on one and the same plan, even on the plan of
that distinction^ which had subsisted from the beginning,
and always " implied" that very " difference in order and
power," which our Professor was so unwilling to acknow-
ledge, and laboured so earnestly to make his pupils disbe-
lieve.

In the course of these labours, we have now followed
him through such of his lectures as seem to have more
immediate reference to the authority of scripture, in ascer-
taining the original constitution and government of the
Christian church: a subject on which the inspired writers
give us as much clear information as is perfectly sufficient
to guide us aright, if we will be directed by it in this in-
quiry; and " from which," it is our opinion, " that we can
with certainty form a judgment concerning the entire

* Lecture v.

General Defence of Episcopacy i 161

model of the apostolic church." Dr. Campbell, however,
thinks otherwise, and represents those passages of scrip-
ture which have a reference to this important subject, in a
light very different from that in which the friends of Epis-
copacy have been taught to view them. To whom then
shall we have recourse, as most likely to point out where
the truth lies between such jarring opinions ? To whom
indeed can we apply for direction in judging of a matter
of fact, such as the apostolic constitution of the church,
but to those contemporary or" early writers, who, " as to
what depends on testimony^'* in explaining any part of
scripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every
case, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to have
swayed them, to be preferred before modem interpreters or
annotators ?" This is the account which, in a work pub-
Hshed by himself,* Dr. Campbell gives of the credit that
is due to those who are called the fathers of the church ;
and then he adds—*" I say not this, to insinuate that we
can rely more on their integrity, but to signify, that with
them many points were a subject of testimony^ which, with
modem critics, are matter merely of conjecture^ or, at most,
of abstruse and critical discussion. And every body must
be sensible, that the direct testimony of a plain man, in a
matter which comes within the sphere of his knowledge, is
more to be regarded than the subtile conjectures of an able
scholar, who does not speak from knowledge, but gives the
conclusions he has drawn from his own precarious reason-
ings, or from those of others."

After such a concession in favour of the fathers, limited
as it is in some points, we shall most readily listen to their
evidence in the case befoi-e us, being well assured, that
the government of the church under which they lived, was
a matter that " came within the sphere of their knowledge,"
and that we cannot possibly suspect all the Christian wri-

* See his Preliminary Dissertations, 8tc. p, 106, 107.
> 21

162 General Defence of Episcopacy *

ters of that character, to have been " swayed by any pafti-^
cular passion," to give a false account of what must have
been generally well known, and in a case where the false-
hood could have been so easily detected.

The first of these " ancient testimonies," which our Lec-
turer brings forward, is taken, he says, " from the most re-
spectable remains we have of Christian antiquity, next to the
inspired writings ;" and then adds,* "The piece I allude to
is the first Epistle of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians,
as it is commonly stvled, but as it st}des itself, the Epistle
of the church of God at Rome, to the church of God at
Corinth :" — From which inscription of the epistle, Dr»
Campbell would no doubt infer, as Blondel had done before
him,f that at the time when it was written, both the church
ef Rome and that of Corinth were governed by a college
of presbyters, or rather by the people at large ; since the
whole church at Rome wrote to the whole church at
Corinth, without making any distinction between clergy
and laity. — Yet Blondel could not but know, that such a
distinction is expressly mentioned in the epistle itself ; and
his follower, Dr. Campbell, is at no small pains to show, that
the passage in which it is so mentioned, being " introduced
by Clemens, when speaking of the Jewish priesthood, and
not of the Christian ministry, affords no foundation for the
distinction that was long after his time introduced." How
far this reasoning is just, will appear from considering the
purpose, for which the Jewish priesthood is spoken of on
this occasion, and the situation of those on whom St. Cle-
ment thus presses the necessity of ecclesiastical subordina-
tion.

* Lecture iv.

f Yet Blondel acknowledges that this very Clement was generally be-
lieved to have been the second bishop after St. Peter in the church of
Rome. — His words are, " Plerique Latinorum (Hieronymo teste) secun-
dum post Petrum fuisse putaverunt, ut ante annum domini 65 ad Komanx
eccks^a: cUvuni sedisss neces^e sit." Apologia pro Sent. Hieron. p. 9.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 6a

A fresh spirit of schism and division had broke out in the
church at Corinth, similar to that which St. Paul was
obliged to repress, when he wrote his first Epistle to the
Corinthians: And now his fellow labourer, St. Clement,
making use of some of the powerful arguments which the
apostle had formerly urged, brings the matter home to the
point in question, by showing how the members of the
church at Corinth ought all to conduct themselves in a
quiet and peaceable manner, each within his proper station ;
thus humbly imitating the order and harmony which pre-
vailed in the Jewish church, the instituted type or figure of
the church of Christ. '^ Seeing then," says St. Clement/
that " these things are manifest unto us, it will behove
us to take care, that looking into the depths of the divine
knowledge, we do all things in order, whatsoever our Lord
has commanded us'to do ; and particularly, that we perform
our offerings and service to God, at their appointed seasons
— and by the persons that minister unto him. For the
chief priest has his proper services, and to the priests
their proper place is appointed, and to the Levites belong
their proper ministrations (or deaconships), and the layman
is confined within the bounds of what is commanded to
laymen. Let every one of you, brethren, bless God in his
proper station, not exceeding the rule that is appointed to
him." When we consider the scope and design of this
passage, we must be convinced, that though the venerable
writer is speaking of the economy of the Jewish church, it
is only in the way of allusion, and for drawing the neces-
sary inference, with regard to the Christian ministry. But
neither the allusion would have been proper, nor the infer-
ence just, if the distinctions of ecclesiastical order in the
Christian church had not corresponded to those in the
Jewish, as they are here described by St. Clement, for the
sake of pointing out the resemblance, and showing the
proper conclusion which was to be drawn from it.
Yet our Professor endeavours to make this ancient author

1 64 General Defence of Episcopacy* •

contradict himself, by quoting a passage from liim, in
which, as he thinks, the orders of the Christian ministry-
are represented as but two, and so not the same in number
with those of the Jewish. It was for the same purpose
that Blondel made use of this passage, in which St. Cle-
ment says — ^that " the apostles having preached the gospel
through countries and cities, constituted the first fruits-
of their conversions, whom they approved by the spirit,
bishops and deacons of those who should believe :" From
which words it is inferred, that the apostles, in planting
churches through countries and cities, ordained but two
orders to take care of them.^ And may it not then be
asked, v^hat were the ordainers themselves f Were they
of no order in the church ? Or were they of the same;
order with either of these whom they ordained ? From
the answer that must be given to these question, it is evi-
dent that there were three orders in the church, at the time
when the apostles ordained the two inferior orders, whom
St. Clement, in the current language of the apostolic age,
calls bishops and deacons, and thereby alludes to a text,
which he iuotes from Isaiah,f as rendered in the Greek
translation—r." I will constitute their bishops in righteous-
ness, and their deacons in faith." Whether this be a just
translation, or a proper application of the prediction, Dr,
Campbell acknowledges is not the question.-^" It is
enough," he says, " that it evinces what Clement's notion
was of the established ministers then in the chut*ch." And
his notion, we have no doubt, was the same with what we
have seen prevailed at the time when he wrote this Epistle
to the Corinthians; that under the apostles, the care or

* See the same inference drawn, and the very same reasoning made
use of to support it, in An Enquiry into the Co7istitution, Ijfc. of the Primi-
tive Church, which was so completely answered in An Original Draught
of the Primitive Church, by a presbyter of the church of England, tha,t
it is said to have brought over the Enquirer to this author's opinion.

t Isaiah Ix. 17.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 65

oversight of certain portions of the flock of Christ was
committed to inferior overseers and ministers, whom we
have called bishops and deacons, till it was thought proper
to put them under the government of persons invested
with apostolical power, such as Clemens himself possessed
and exercised in the church of Rome, of which he is al-
ways distinguished as bishops and by another writer of the
same name, Clemens of Alexandria, is expressly called
the " apostle Clemens."^ This is all that can be justly in-
ferred from the passage of his epistle, quoted by Dr. Camp-
bell; which was not at all intended to point out particularly
the number of orders in the church ; and could no more
be considered as setting aside the superior rank and autho-
rity of bishops, than the common language of both Jewish
and Christian writers could be understood as excluding the
high priest, when they mentioned the Jewish ministry
under the general appellation of priests and Levites.'j'

The next testimony which our author produces, to show
that, in the primitive times, there were only two orders of
ministers in the church, is that of Polycarp, bishop of
Smyrna, who is said by Irenseus to have been taught by the
apostles, and to have conversed with many, who had seen
our Saviour; to which account it is added, that Irensus
himself had seen him, in his younger days, and knew him
to have been constituted bishop of Smyrna by the apostles.
One might suppose, that when the adversaries of Episco-
pacy bring forward such a witness as this in support of
their cause, they had certainly discovered in his writings,
some clear, undoubted evidence, on which might be justly
founded the irrejection of the Episcopal order. But, in-

* Strom, lib. iv.

t In some parts of the English liturgy the clergy are prayed for undev
the twofold distinction of " bishops and curates" But no person will
hence infer, that the church of England has but tvio orders of clergy,
when she has so carefully provided for the " making, ordaining and
consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons'*

166 General Defence of Episcopacy^

stead of this, all that we meet with in his Epistle to the
Philippians, is a very brief intimation of " their being sub-
ject to the presbyters and deacons, as unto God and Christ ;
while, at the same time, the very introduction to the epistle
marks the superior character of the writer, in these words
— " Polycarp, and the presbyters that are with him, to the
church of God which is at Philippi,"* And if only the
presbj^ers and deacons of that church are mentioned in the
words quoted by Dr. Campbell,'|' it might be owing to the
Episcopal charge being vacant at the time when this epistle
was written, as was the case at Rome, when Cyprian, bishop
of Carthage, wrote his letters to the presbyters of that place.
But what shall we say of our Lecturer's asserting it, as
" evident from the above quotation, that Polycarp knew of
no Christian minister superior to the presbyters," when,
together with his own, he earnestly recommended, and actu-
ally sent to the Philippians, at their desire, those veVy
epistles of Ignatius, in which the office and the duties of
a bishop, as distinguished from those of the presbyters, are
so fully and frequently insisted on, that Polycarp might
well think it unnecessary for him to say any thing farther on
that subject ? Being himself a bishop, and writing in that
character to the Philippians, he might justly consider the
epistles of Ignatius, which they were so desirous to see, as
perfectly sufficient to establish the regard which was due to
the Episcopal office, especially as one of these epistles was

* If the author of this epistle had not been distinguished by a supe-
rior dignity of office, we could hardly suppose it consistent with his mo-
desty and self-denial, to have named himself only, and made no mention
of his brethren, but by the general name of presbyters : A circumstance,
v/hich obliged even Blondel to make the following remark — '• Id tamcn
in S. Martyris epistola peculiare apparet, quod earn privatim suo et presbyte-
Torum nomine ad Philippensium fraternitatem dedit, ac sibi quandam supra
presbyteros — viri^oxw reservasse videtur, ut jam tum in Episcopali apic«
constitutum reliquos Smyrnensium presbyteros gradu superasse conjicere
liceat." Apol. p. 14.

t Lecture iv.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1^7

addressed to himself as bishop of Smyrna, and another of
them to the church of that place, exhorting them to be obe-
dient to their bishop, and to do nothing of what belongs to
the church without his consent.

Indeed, the epistles of Ignatius bear such strong undeni-
able evidence to the existence of three distinct orders in the
Christian ministry, known by the name of bishops, pres-
byters and deacons, that there is no possibility of evading
the force of this positive testimony, but by boldly affirming,
that the epistles themselves are spurious, or have been so
interpolated by various transcribers, as to leave but a very
small, if any degree of credit due to them. This has been
the pretence, in one shape or other, of all the advocates for
presbyterian parity, from the days of Calvin down to Dr.
Campbell ^ and we have only to take notice of the same
arguments, dressed out perhaps in different forms, according
to the taste and ability of the several writers, who have pre-
sumed to attack those venerable remains of ecclesiastical
antiquity contained in the epistles of St. Ignatius. — It is
very suitable, however, to our present design, to show ali
proper attention to what has been said on this subject ; and
we shall begin with observing, that Ignatius, bishop of
Antioch, having presided over that church with admirable
prudence and constancy, for almost forty years, was at last
condemned to suffer death, about the tenth year of the
reign of the Emperor Trajan, and on the way to his mar-
tyrdom at Rome, wrote his episties to the several churches
to which they are addressed. That some such epistles were
written by Ignatius, is evident from the account, to which
we have just now referred, as given by Polycarp in his
Epistle to the Philippians, in which he tells them — " The
epistles of Ignatius, which he wrote unto us," (that is, to
himself, and to the church at Smyrna) " together with what
others of his have come to our hands, we have sent to
you, according to your order, which are subjoined to this
epistle ; by which ye may be greatly profited ; for they treat

I

168 General Defence of Episcopacy i^

of faith, and patience, and of all things that pertain to edi*
fication in the Lord Jesus."^ To this account from Pol}-
carp, we may add that which is given by his disciple Ire-
nseus, bishop of Lyons, who, as Eusebius assures us, " Was
not ignorant of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius, and men-
tions his epistles in these words — Thus one of our brethren
being condemned for maintaining the faith, to be exposed
to the wild beasts, said — I am the wheat of God, and shall
be ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I may be found
the pure bread of Christ."f Which words, thus quoted by
Irenseus, are found in the epistle of St. Ignatius to the Ro-
mans. To this undoubted testimony, may be added that of
Origen, who was bom before Irenseus died, and has left us
two quotations from the epistles of Ignatius, which are
both to be found in our present copies. And Eusebius, in
his ecclesiastical history ,j gives us a full account of these
epistles, and tells us where the holy martyr wrote them.

Such are the testimonies, which, together with those of
Athanasius, Jerome, and many others, serve to prove, that
the epistles of Ignatius, as published by archbishop Usher,
in an ancient Latin version, and soon after by Isaac Vossius
in the original Greek, from a manuscript in the Florentine
library, are undoubtedly the genuine epistles of that primi-
tive martyr : a point, which has been so clearly established
by the learned Dr. Pearson, late bishop of Chester, in his
admirable work on this subject, as to leave room for no
objection or argument of any weight to appear, against the
genuineness of these epistles, which has not been already
refuted in his unanswerable vindication of them.|| If,
therefore, it shall still be urged by such writers as Dn
Campbell, against the authority of Ignatius, that " we
cannot with safety found a decision on an author, with

* See Archbishop Wake's Translation of the Genuine Epistles of the
Apostolical Fathers, p. 59.

f Irenaeus Contra Her. lib. v. cap. 28. \ Lib. iii. c. S6.

Ij See Vi'iulicix I^natian<e, by Dr. Pearson.

/

General Defence of Episcopacy* 169

whose works transcribers have made so free," we think it
sufficient to reply in the words of archbishop Wake, " that
if it be meant, that the same has happened to the epistles of
Ignatius, as has done to all other ancient writings, that let-
ters or words have been mistaken, either by the careless-
ness or ignorance of the transcribers, we see no reason
why we should deny that to have befallen these epistles,
which has been the misfortune of all other pieces of the like
antiquity. This, therefore, it has been often declared,^
that neither do we contend about ; nor can any one, who
reads the best copies we have of them with any care or
judgment, make any doubt about it. But as for any large
interpolations, such as were those of the copies before ex-
tant jf for any changes or mistakes that may call in question
either the credit or authority of these epistles, as we now
have them, we utterly deny that there are any such in these
last editions of them :"J nor, we may add, has even the
learned Dr. Campbell offered any thing to induce us to
believe that there are. He has indeed acknowledged, that
"the epistles in question ought not to be rejected in the
lump," but still insists " that undue freedoms have been
used, even with the purest of them, by some over-zealous
partizan of the priesthood." And if we should maintain,
that this is an undue freedom used by " an over-zealous
partizan" of presbytery, we could bring forward as much
proof in support of our assertion, as he has produced for
the purpose of stamping the mark of forgery, or interpo-
lation, on the epistles of Ignatius. All that he has offered
like argument on the subject,|| amounts at most, even by
his own account, to " raising suspicions of their authenti-
city, or at least of their integrity ;" but he surely knew,
that it requires more than suspicion^ however strong, to fix
forgery, or prove interpolation in any writing.

* Vossii annot. passim, Pearson Vind. Ignat. Proleg. p. 20.
f That is, before those of Usher and Vossiiis.
% Sec Archbishop Wak<;'s Translation, Sic. p, 39. || Lecture vi.

22

176 General Defence of ^piscopctdt/i

What seems to be the greatest ground of offence, as weii
as of suspicion, is the " nauseous repetition,'* as he calls it,
*' of obedience and subjection to the bishop, presbyters,
and deacons, to be found in the letters of Ignatius." But
has he shown, or even attempted to show, that there are
any manuscripts, or editions of letters, in which this offen-
sive " nauseous repetition" is not to be met with ? No :
but the sentiment itself, and the manner in which it is ex-
pressed, are so different from the spirit and style of the
apostolic age, as to afford " strong presumptive evidence
against the entire genuineness of the letters in question."
Such is the judgment which Professor Campbell wished
his pupils to form on this controverted point ;* very differ-
ent indeed from the opinion delivered by one, who must
be acknowledged a no less competent judge of their merit,
even the learned translator of the epistles of Ignatius into
English, who assures us, that " there is nothing in these
epistles, as we now have them, either unworthy of the
spirit of Ignatius, or the character that antiquity has given
us of them ; nothing disagreeing to the time in which he
\VTOte, or that should seem to speak them to have been the
work of any later author. Now this, as it hardly ever
fails to discover such pieces as are falsely imposed upon
ancient authors; so there not appearing any thing of this
kind in these epistles, inclines us the more readily to con-
clude, that they were undoubtedly written by him, whose
they are said to be."'j' And when we are thus well assured
that they are so, and have every reason to believe that this

* It is worthy of notice, how differently Dr. Campbell himself ex-
{Sresses his opinion of the Ignatian epistles, in the preface to his transla-
tion of St. John's gospel, where he says — " There are evident refer-
rences to this gospel, though without naming the author, in some epis-
tles ©f Ignatius, the authenticity of which is strenuously maintained by
bishop Pearson, and other critics of name — It was in the beginning of
the second (century) when the above mentioned Ignatius wrote his epis-
tles."— Dr. Campbell's Translation of the Gospels is dedicated to a bishop.

t See Archbishop Wake's Translation, p. 34.

General Defence of Episcopacy* \ii

is a true and just accbuht of their character, we need not
be much moved by any of those objections, which the anti-
Episcopal writers have made to their authenticity ; one of
which Dr. Campbell states to be, that " their style, in many
places, is not suited," as he expresses it, " to the simplicity
of the times immediately succeeding the times of the apos-
tles ;" and then, after enlarging a litde on this topic, in a way
that only seems like reasoning, and has but the appearance
of argument, he adds, " but it is not the style only which
has raised suspicion, it is chiefly the sentiments." And
the chief sentiment, which he has selected to justify this
suspicion, is Expressed in the following words of Ignatius
to Polycarp — " Attend to the bishop, that God may attend
to you. I pledge my soul for theirs, who are subject to
the bishop, presbyters, and deacons. Let my part in God
be with them."

After quoting these words, our Lecturer asks—" Was
it the doctrine of Ignatius, that all that is necessary to sal-
vation in a Christian, is an implicit subjection to the bi-
shop, presbyters, and deacons ? Be it, that he means only
in spiritual matters. Is this the style of the apostles to
their Christian brethren ?" Yes ; we answer, it is the very
style even of that great apostle, to whom he immediately
refers, and who, after giving this command to the believing
Hebrews—" Obey them that have the rule over you, and
submit yourselves," gives also the reason and object of his
command — "for they watch for your souls, as they that
must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not
with grief;"* that is, may give a joyful account of your
obedience and submission to them, when they are speaking
to you in the name of Christ, and teaching you to observe
all things whatsoever he has commanded. For it was only
when the bishop, with his presbyters and deacons, were
thus employed in the careful discharge of their duty as

* Bcb. xiji. ir.

1 f2 General Defence of Episcopacy,

ambassadors for Christ, that Ignatius required the Chris-
tians at Smyrna to hearken and attend to them ; and if they
did so, he might very safely assure them of salvation ; just
as we find two of our Lord's apostles quoting that passage
of scripture which saith — ^^ Whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord, shall be saved ;"* where " calling on
the name of the Lord," must necessarily imply faith in that
name, which is the " only one given under heaven, whereby
we must be saved," and obedience to that Lord, " who
became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that
obey him." Yet the same St. Paul, who said of himself
and his fellow apostles — " We preach not ourselves, but
Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants for
Jesus' sake," could also represent himself as a humble in-
strument of that salvation, which this Jesus had purchased,
when, speaking as the apostle of the Gentiles, he said, on
that account, " I magnify mine office, if by any means I
may provoke to emulation, them which are my flesh, and
might save some of tIiem»'^-\

In the same light we find him representing his fellow
labourer Timothy, when having pointed out what things he
was to " command and teach," he exhorts him to " continue
in them, and to take heed unto himself, and unto the
doctrine ; for in doing this," says he, " thou shalt both save
thyself, and them that hear thee.'^''X Where then was the
presumption or impropriety in Ignatius " thus exhibiting
the pattern, which had been given by that great apostle,"
and in the name of his blessed Master, promising salvation
to those who should hearken to the doctrine, and follow
the directions delivered by his commissioned servants, and
agreeably to his holy will ? If this was the " predominant
scope" of Ignatius, in the letters ascribed to him, does he
deserve the imputation of " preaching himself and other

* Acts ii. 21, and Rom. x. 13. f Rom. xi. 13, 14.

\ 1 Tim. iv. 16.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 173

ecclesiastics ?" And was it fair to say, as Dr. Campbell has
said, that " the only consistent declaration which would
have suited the. author of these epistles, must have been
the reverse of Paul's. We preach not Christ Jesus the
Lord, but so far only as may conduce to the increase of our
influence, and the exaltation of our power ; nay,^ for an
object so important, we are not ashamed to preach up
ourselves your masters, with unbounded dominion over
your faith, and consequently over both soul and body."

Where are the words of Ignatius to be found that can
bear such a harsh interpretation? We have read all his
epistles from beginning to end, but have not met with a
single expression in them that can justly be said to lead
to such an unworthy conclusion. On the contrary, we see
his humility no less conspicuous than his zeal, when we
£nd him declaring to the Magnesians — " As one of the
least among you, I am desirous to forewarn you, that ye
fall not into the snares of vain doctrine ;" and to the Ro-
mans— " I do not^ as Peter and Paul command you. They
were apostles, I a condemned man ; they were free, but I
am even to this day a servant;''^ thereby alluding to his ap-
proaching sufferings as the conclusion of his service^ anoF
acting not at all consistently with that affectation of power,
that desire of worldly exaltation, which, on the supposition
of his epistles being genuine, as we have very good ground
to believe they are, our Professor thinks it necessary, for
the sake of " propriety, as well as consistency," to ascribe
to this truly pious and venerable prelate ; of whom it may
indeed be said, in the words of Dr. Campbell, that he has
thus " suffered a second martyrdom" in his character, for
no other reason but because he is considered as " the first
ecclesiastical author who mentions bishop, presbyter, and
deacon, as three distinct orders of church officers." And
what wonder is it, if he were really so, when in the re-
stricted sense of *' ecclesiastical authors," as excluding the
inspired writings, we know of none whose writings are

174 General Defence of Episcopai-tj*^'

received as authentic, prior to Ignatius, unless Clemens of
Rome: and does Ignatius contradict or diiFer materially
from Clemens ? Or does Polycarp, of Smyrna, whom Dr*
Campbell has quoted with so much triumph, differ so
widely from Ignatius, as to show not merely a '* diversity
in style, but a repugnancy in sentiment ?" What though
both these old bishops of Rome and of Smyrna speak in
very honourable terms, not only of presbyters, but of dea-
cons, and seem to direct the attention of those whom they
addressed chiefly to these two orders of ministers ? Do
any such hints and directions, with all that can be drawn
from them in the way of doubtful inference, speak so de-
cisively in favour of Presbytery, as the precise words of
Ignatius, without any comment, do in support of Episco-
pacy ? Are the specious arguments of philosophy held
forth to prove the formation of all things by a first cause,
so clear and satisfying a demonstration to the mind of a
Christian, as this single and express assertion of the in-
spired historian, " In the beginning God created the hea-
%'en and the earth ?"

But it is needless to insist any longer on this part of our
subject, since our Lecturer himself thinks proper to close
it in these words — " But should we admit after all, in op-
position to strong presumptive evidence, the entire genu-
ineness of the letters in question, all that could be fairly
inferred from the concession is, that the distinction of
orders, and subordination of the presbyters, obtained about
twenty or thirty years earlier than I have supposed, and
that it was a received distinction at Antioch, and in Asia
Minor, before it was known in Macedonia, and other parts
of the Christian church. That its prevalence has been
gradual, and that its introduction has arisen from the
example and influence of some of the principal cities, is
highly probable." It is thus that our learned Professor is
pleased to make concessions, for the sake of drawing such
inferences from them, as may best suit his own purpose^

General Defence of Episcopacy. 17^

and at last to decide the very point in question, and a mat-
ter of the utmost importance, by no other argument, than
that his account of it " is highly probable ;" an argument,
which, whatever may be allowed to it in speculative debate,
can have but little weight in determining matters of fact.
Yet if we were to make the most of our adversary's con-
cession, that when Ignatius wrote, the " distinction of
orders, and subordination of presbyters, which we plead
for, was received at Antioch, and in Asia Minor," and to
admit his " probability, that the example of some of the
principal cities" would have considerable influence in favour
of such distinction, we should not be ashamed to own, that
the example of such a " principal" place, as the scripture
describes Ai;itioch to have been, has great weight with us ;
and that we think it a point of no small consequence gained,
to find our scheme of church government so early received
" in a city," where the disciples were first called Chris-
tians.*

But the epistles of Ignatius not only show what was the
form of government in the church at the time when he
wrote them, (which was a very few years after the death
of the aposde St. John) and what it was in the city of An-
tioch, of which he had been bishop near forty years ; they
also exhibit the clearest evidence of his belief, that the
three distinct orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons
were of divine institution, and essential to the regular con-
stitution of the Christian church. In these epistles he men-
tions several of his contemporary bishops by name, Onesi-
mus, bishop of the Ephesians ; Damas, of the Magnesians ;
Polybius, of the Trallians ; and Polycarp, of the Smyrnians ;
and still as he mentions them, he highly commends the
presbyters and deacons for their obedience to them, as to
the command of God, and according to the will of Jesus,
Christ. Having saluted the Trallians in the fulness of his

* Acts xi. 26.

1 76 General Defence of Episcopacy »

apostolic character, he earnestly exhorts them to be subject
to their bishop, presbyters and deacons ; for without these,
there is no church : And then, entreating them to beware
of the poisonous doctrine of certain dangerous heretics, he
adds — -" And this you will do, while you are not puffed up,
nor separated from God, even Jesus Christ ; nor from the
bishop, and the commands of the apostles. He that is
within the altar is pure ; but he that does any thing" (be-
longing to the altar) " without the bishop, presbyters and
deacons, is defiled in his conscience." So likewise in the
inscription of his epistle to the Philadelphians, he " salutes
them in the blood of Jesus Christ, our everlasting and per-
manent joy, especially if they were at unity with the bishop,
and the presbyters that were with him, and the deacons,
who were appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ,
whom he had, according to his own will, established with
firmness by his holy spirit." And in the- epistle to the
church at Smyrna, after mentioning the reverence which is
due to the sacred orders of the ministry, " as the com-
mandment of God," he adds — ••' Let no man do any thing
of what belongs to the church, separately from the bishop.
Let that be esteemed a valid eucharist, which is celebrated
by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Without the
bishop, it is not lawful either to baptize, or to celebrate the
feast of charity ; but that which he approves, is also pleas-
ing unto God, that so whatever is done, may be sure and
well done."

These are some of the many passages which might be
produced from the epistles of Ignatius, to evince his belief
of a truth, which even these few are sufficient to show he
certainly did belieye, that the principal care, and govern-
ment of the church of Christ had been committed by his
« apostles to those, who, immediately after the apostolic age,
were peculiarly distinguished by the title of bishops^ having
under them the two inferior orders of presbyters and dea-
cons^ discharging their several offices always in conjunction

General Defence of Episcopacy* Vjf

with, and subordination to, their respective bishops, with-
out whose authority, in the opinion of Ignatius, no bap-
tism was to be administered, no eucharist celebrated ; no-
thing, in short, to be done, which more immediately be-
longed to the service of the church, or was included in the
commission which our Lord gave his apostles, to be con-
tinued to the end of the world, for making the nations
Christian, and teaching them to observe all things neces-
sary to salvation and happiness. Such was the doctrine
delivered by this holy and venerable bishop of Antioch,
who could not but be perfecdy acquainted with the form of
government, which the apostles, by their Lord's command,
had settled in the church, since he lived so near to their
times, and had not only been instructed by them, but, as
St. Chrysostom tells us, actually received his ordinatioa
from their sacred hands. It is likewise to be considered,
that these episdes were written by him, in the immediate
prospect of that violent death, to which he was condemned
for his bold and steady adherence to the faith of Christ,
and when, having but a short time to live, he was desirous
to leave behind him this last and dying testimony of his
zeal for the honour of his blessed Master, and the advance-
ment of that glorious cause, for which he was about to
suffer. All these are considerations which must add great
weight to the evidence of Ignatius, and may well convince
every impartial reader of his epistles, how unreasonable it
is to expect or desire any stronger, or more ample testi-
mony than that which they bear to the Episcopal govern-
ment of what even Dr. Campbell is obliged to acknowledge
to be the " truly primitive church."

In the middle of his remarks on Ignatius, the Doctor
thought proper to introduce, without much appearance of
connection, another writer of the second age, " in whose
writings," he says, the " names bishop and presbyter,
and others of the like import, are sometimes used indis-
criminately." This writer is no other than Irenseus, who

.23

1 T8 General Defence of Episcopacy,

was first a presbyter, and afterwards bishop of the church
of Lyons, and having successively discharged these two
offices, can hardly be supposed lo confound, or be ignorant
of, the distinction between them. Indeed, our Lecturer
ackno^\dedges, " that the distinction of these, as of differ-
ent orders, began about this time generally to prevail;
although the difference was not near so considerable as it
became afterwards. Accordingly Irenseus," he says, " talks
in much the same style of both. What at one time he as*
cribes to bishops, at another he ascribes to presbytei*s : he
speaks of each in the same terms, as entitled to obedience
from the people, as succeeding the apostles in the ministry
of the word, as those by whom the apostolic doctrine and
traditions had been handed down."-^Now, the proof of all
this similarity of order, and sameness of office in bishop
and presbyters, is taken from one single passage of the
work of Irenseus against the heretics of his time, wherein,
speaking of apostolic tradition, he defines it ta be thaty
" which, from the apostles, is preserved through successions
of presbyters in the churches."* On which passage Dr*
Campbell makes this observation— ^Here not only " are the
presbyters mentioned as the successors of the apostles, but
in ranging the ministries, no notice is taken of any inter-
vening order, such as that of bishops." And for that very
reason, as such an intervening order certainly existed in
the days of Irenaeus, we may justly conclude, that the
presbyters were not mentioned by him, " as the successors
of the apostles ;" nor do his words imply any such thing ;
being solely intended to point out a continued succession
and course of presbyters, or, as we would now say, clergy
in general, as (custodes) guardians of apostolic tradition.

* The words quoted by Dr. Campbell are these: <' Cum autem ad earn
iterum traditionem quae est ab apostolis, quae per successiones presbyte-
rorum in ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus eos, qui adversantur traditioni,
dicent se non solum presbyteris sed etiam apostolis existentes sapien-
tiores, synceram invenisse veritatem." Lib. iii. cap. 2.

Gmeral Defence of Episcopacy, \ 79

It is well known, that the word presbyter may refer to
age, as well as to office; and though the writers of the
second century never apply the title of presbyter to a bi-
shop of their own time, but always appropriate it to sub"
ordinate presbyters, to express the distinction between bi-
shops and them; yet when they speak of bishops of former
times, they make no scruple of giving them sometimes the
appellation of presbyters, as being a term equivalent to that
of ancients^ signifying not their office, but their antiquity
in the church, and in that sense, it might be applied not to
one only, but to all the orders of the sacred ministry.
That this was the sense in which Irenseus applied it, in the
passage cpoted by Dr. Campbell, is sufficiently evident
from other parts of his writings, where it is expressly
mentioned, that in the chief care and government of the
church, the bishops only were the successors of the apos-
tles. Thus, when arguing against the heretics who infested
the church in his time, to show that their doctrine was not
that of the apostles, nor handed down from them, he
makes the following appeal — -" We can reckon up those
who were by the apostles ordained bishops in the churches,
and those who were their successors even to our own time.
They never taught nor knew any of the wild opinions of
these men : And had the apostles known any hidden mys-
teries, which they imparted to none but the perfect (as the
heretics pretend), they would have committed them with
particular care to those persons, to whom they committed
the churches themselves. For they would be extremely
desirous, that those should be perfect, and unreprovable in
all things, whom they left to be their successors, and to
whom they consigned their own authority." — He then adds
— " Because it would be tedious to enumerate the succes-
sion of bishops in all the churches, he would instance in
that of Rome ; which succession he brings down to Eleu-
therius, who was the twelfth from the aposdes, and was

180 General Defence of Episcopacy »

bishop there, when Irenseus wrote this treatise ;"^ in ano-
ther part of which he tells us, that the true knowledge is
*' the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient state of the
church throughout the world, and the character of the
body of Christ, according to the successions of bishops,
to whom they committed that church, which is in every
place, and has descended even unto us."'!' ^^ these pas-
sages of IrensBus, where the succession from the apostles
is plainly and purposely held up to view, we see *' no no-
tice taken of any intervening order," such as that of Dr.
Campbell's presbyters, as in any way necessary to the car-
rying on that succession, which, together with their doc-
trine, was delivered by the apostles to the several churches
founded by them, and is therefore very properly made use
of, to show that the doctrine was most likely to be found
where the succession w^as regular.

The same argument, we have seen, was employed by
another ecclesiastical writer of this period, the much ad-
mired, yet deeply regretted TertuUian, who speaks of it as
a thing universally admitted in his time, that the apostles

• His words are, " Habemus annumerare eos, qui ab apostolis instituti
sunt Episcopi in eccleaijs, et successores eorum usque ad nos, qui nil tale
ijocuerint, neque cognoverunt, quale ab his deliratur. Etenim si recon-
dita mysteria scissent apostoli, quae seorsim et latenter ab reliquis perfectos
docebant, his vel maxime traderent ea, quibus etiam ipsas ecclesias com-
juittebant. Valde enim perfectos, et irreprehensibiles in omnibus eos vo-
lebant esse, quos et successores relinquebant, suum ipsoruro locum magis-
terii tradentes. — Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine, om-
siium ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maximse et antiquissimae, et om-
nibus ccgn.tse, a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis Petro et Paulo Romse fun-
datse et constitutae ecclesise, earn quam habet ab apostolis traditionem, et
annunciatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientehi
usque ad nos, indicantes confundimus omnes eos," &c. Iren. lib. iii. cap. 3-

t Agnitio vera est apostolorum doctrina, et antiquus ecclesise status in
■universe mundo, et character corporis Christi secundum successiones
Episcoporum quibus illi earn, quse in unoquoque loeo est, ecclesiam tra-
diderunt, quae pervenit usque ad nos, &c. Lib. iv. cap. 6a.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 181

placed bishops in all the churches which they planted ; of
which he gives a particular instance in that of Smyrna and
of Rome, and argues against the heretics in the same
manner as Irenaeus had done ; proving, as has been already
shown, that l)y this succession, from the apostles, of regu-
lar and lawful bishops, the true faith was preserved in all
the churches, which had their foundation in some one or
other of the apostles, and thereby retained the apostolic
doctrine. And however Tertullian may have erred in
matters of opinion, by mistaking the meaning of some
texts of scripture, and building too much on his own fan-
ciful interpretation of them, there can be no doubt as to the
regard which is due to his testimony, when asserting such
a well known fact as that of the succession of bishops from
the apostles ; a thing so fully attested by the ecclesiastical
registers to which he refers.

Passing over what our Lecturer says of two short, an^,
we suspect, spurious, letters from Pius, bishop of Rome, to
Justus, bishop of Vienna, as not worthy of notice, we come
to consider a passage quoted by him from Clement of
Alexandria, who wrote at the close of the second century,
and which he thus translates — " Just so in the church, the
presbyters are entrusted with the dignified ministry, the
deacons with the subordinate. Both kinds of service the
angels perform to God in the administration of this lower
world."* Dr. Campbell then adds—" Here the distinction
is strongly marked between presbyter and deacon : But is
it not plain from his words, that Clement considered the
distinction between bishop and presbyter, as, even in his
days, comparatively not worthy of his notice ?"f We
must, however, beg leave to say, that this inference does

• The words in Greek, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, are — O/xotwj ^e xast

i)Vriffiix.viv Oi dtajcovoi, tccvIo,; o(,jx<PoS\a!; oiXKoviocg ayysAot re vrif^lavloci tw
®B(i}, KoCloc rr,v ruv wfpiyEiwv ot/coyo^iav, Strom. 1. 1,
t LfCcture vi.

' 182 General Defence of Episcopacy,

not appear so plain as the Doctor thinks ; not only because
Clement's words evidently refer to the allusion he had been
drawing from philosophy and physic, as administering to
soul and body, the twofold distinction in man ; but chiefly
because in another passage of this very work, he illustrates
what he had said of the services of angels, by observing,
that the faithful presbyter, though not honoured with the
first seat on earthy shall yet sit on one of the four and twenty
thrones mentioned in St. John's revelation ; from which
he takes occasion to show, that the gradual promotion of
bishops^ presbyters^ and deacons^ bears resemblance to the
orders of angels,* and so gives ground for comparing the
hierarchy in the church on earth to that which takes place
in heaven. And that this same Clement was very far from
'' considering the distinction between bishop and presbyter,
as not worthy of his notice," is still farther evinced by
what he says in another of his works, where, having pointed
out some texts of scripture, as containing a summary of
the duties which concern all Christians in general, he adds
4^" that there are other precepts without number, which
concern men in particular capacities ; some which relate to
presbyters, others which belong to bishops, and others
respecting deacons :"t — from which it must plainly appear,
not only that Clement regarded the distinction between
bishop, presbyter, and deacon, as a matter that ought to
be duly attended to, but also that he considered the re-
spective duties of these several orders, as distinctly stated
in the holy scriptures.

■^ Etts* kou Oil svlacvQoi kccJoc t*iv sy.K'KrKncx.v tsfoxovoci^ z'jno'K.OTrwv^ 'a^io'^v

7yyj^a.vso"ty. Strom. 1. VI.

TO-t? ^QxoKi roag oiyioag at juev 'T<TpHcrby'lEpoK»ai ds E7rto">co7roK, a.4 oi oiocKOVon;*
Poedag. lib. iii. c. 12, as quoted by archbishop Potter — On Church Govern-
ment'^^. 165, which may be very usefully consulted by those who wish
to be properly informed on this subject.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 83

We have now brought down the evidence in support of
apostolic Episcopacy, as the government of the primitive
church, to that period which our learned Professor has
thought proper to fix for ascertaining what he calls the
first step of the hierarchy. We must, however, consider
it as the second step of his course, whereby he advances
from presbytery to what he calls parochial Episcopacy,
and which he pretends to found on the unanimous consent
of antiquity, " in assigning to one bishop no more than one
E>cxA>i,-i» or congregation, and one TTot^oiJtta or parish." We
have already taken notice of his opinion respecting the first
of these words, which, though usually translated churchy
" when it is not applied to the whole Christian community,
can only," he says, " denote a single congregation of
Christians ; the plural number, churches^ being invariably
used, when more congregations than one are spoken ofj
unless the subject be of the whole commomvealth of
Christ."* Hence he fondly draws, what he thinks an
unavoidable conclusion, that " as one bishop is invariably
considered, in the most ancient usage, as having only one
church or congregation, it is manifest that his inspection at
first was only over one parish."!*

Laying this down as the fundamental position, on which
rises under his masterly hands that specious fabric which he
has dig-nified with the name of " parochial Episcopacy,"
he seems to feel himself standing on sure ground ; and his
pupils no doubt would be encouraged to view it as such,
having had no intimation given them that it was the very
same ground from which so many of his predecessors had
been successively beaten, and which was assumed, with
the same confidence, about a century ago, by the author of
a work already referred to, called an " Enquiry into the
constitution^ discipline^ unity and worship of the Primitive
Church^"* Of the striking similarity between this work,

* Lecture vl f Lecture vi.

1 84 General Defence of Ephcopaty,

and that part of Dr. Campbell's Lectures which is now
before us, I cannot express my opinion more justly, or to
better purpose, than in the words of a learned divine of the
church of England, who, in some remarks lately published
on this subject, says-—" Having attended to the progress
of this controversy, and particularly marked the ground on
which, from time to time, it has been placed, I have no
difficulty in tracing the road which the Professor has tra-
velled ; and there is little doubt on my mind, that the pub-
lication last mentioned was the one which the Professor
had before him when he put together that part of his Lec-
tures which is now more immediately under consideration ;
because the same arrangement of argument and proof, the
same mutilation of extract, the same want of appeal to that
evidence which the scriptures are competent to furnish,
together with the same turn of expression, are to be met
with in the publications of both writers; a circumstance
not to be accounted for but on the supposition of one hav-
ing copied from the other."*

Now, the foundation, which the Enquirer first, and our
Lecturer after him, have both considered as firmly laid in the
constitution of the primitive church, is plainly this, that the
charge of one bishop was originally confined to one congre-
gation, or parish, which they both define, almost in the same
terms, to be " a competent number of Christians dwelling
near together, having one bishop, pastor or minister set
over them, with whom they all met at one time to worship
and serve God." This Dr. Campbell further explains, by
" obsen^ing once and again, that every church had its own
pastors, and its own presbytery, independently of every
other church : And when one of the presbyters came to be
considered as the pastor^ by way of eminence, the rest were
regarded only as his assistants, vicars or curates, who acted

* See Mr. Daubeny's Prelimviary Discourse to those lately published
on the Great Doctrine of Atonement, p. 90.

General Defence of episcopacy, 1 85

ander his direction ;" just as the Enquirer had before illus-
trated his definition of a presbyter, by observing, " that as
a curate hath the same mission and power with the minis-
ter whose place he supplies, yet not being the minister of
that place, he cannot perform there any acts of his minis-
terial function, without leave from the minister thereof ; so
a presb}i;er had the same order and power with a bishop,
whom he assisted in his cure, yet being not the bishop or
minister of that cure, he could not there perform any parts
of his pastoral office without the permission of the bishop
thereof^ so that what we generally render bishops, priests
and deacons, would be more intelligible in our tongue, if
we did express it by rectors, vicars and deacons ; by rec-
tors understanding the bishops, and by vicars the presby-
ters; the former being the actual incumbents of a place,
and the latter curates or assistants, and so different in de-
gree, but yet equal in order,"

Thus it is, that these two authors go hand in hand in
their definition and explanation of the point in question,
the latter borrowing from the former, and both founding
their application of the term parish^ on the etymology of
the original word, to which they tell us, " that there is
commonly a strict regard paid, in the first application of a
name to any particular purpose," We know very well that
in the primitive times, to which we are now looking back,
a bishop's charge was called his Tloc^oiy.icc or parish ; and
we are told in some Lexicons, that the verb ria^oiKsw, from
which the English word parish is derived, signifies " habi-
tare juxta," to dwell or inhabit near. Yet some of the
writers of the New Testament use the word in a different
sense, of which several instances could be produced ; and a
very " learned and accurate" Lexicographer shows from
these instances, that the word refers to " a sojourning, or
temporary dwelling in a strange or foreign country," and
was therefore very descriptive of the character and situation
of those he*ivenly-minded Christians, who, as strangers

24

5>

1 86 General Defence of Episcopacy,

and pilgrims, passed the time of their sojourning here in
fear, looking forward in hope to a more settled habitsi-
tion.*

Our Lecturer indeed says-—" It must not be imagined,
that he lays too great stress on the import of words, whose
significations in time come insensibly to alter :" And yet,
without taking any notice of the alteration, which time has
introduced into the use of the original word in question,
he immediately after asserts, " that the word Xla^oixta, in
JaSitm parochia, can be applied no otherwise, when it re»
Jates to place, than the term parish is with us at this day ;
whereas the fact is, as clearly exhibited by a learned and
inquisitive searcher into these matters,f that though this
term was applied in the primitive times to signify an Epis-
copal diocese, yet it was so far from being confined to a
single congregation, or to one place of worship, and the
inhabitants near it, that it comprehended all that were in-
<:luded in the civil government of every city, and the re-
gion round about it, and, therefore, was of greater or
smaller extent, according as the government of such city
liappened to have a larger or lesser jurisdiction.

In opposition, however, to this well established fact, our
Professor still insists on his being able to evince, beyond
pll possible doubt, as be affirms in the beginning of his
seventh Lecture, that " the bishop's cure was originally
confined to a single church or congregation ; which he in-

* See in Mr. Parkhurst's Greek and English Lexicon to the Nev) Tes-
tarnent, the words— TTa^oiHEw, occurring Luke xxiv. 18. Heb. xi. 9. —
Ita^ot^ciot, occurring Acts xiii. 17. Applied spiritually, 1 Peter i. 17. — ■
na^ot;co?, occurring Acts vii. 6—29. Applied spiritually, Eph. ii. 19, 1
Pet. ii. 11. In conformity with the meaning annexed to it by the in-
spired writers, Suicer renders the word ITajioijfEw by the Latin — Advena
or Peregrinus sum, and cites as authority for so doing, Pkilo Judaeus,
Basil and Theodoret. — See an Original Draught of the Primitive Church,
ajTc. p. 34, 25.

t See Mr. Bimgham's Origines Ecclesiasticce, or the Antiquities of the
Christian Church, vol. iii. p. 344, &c.

I

General Dejence of Episcopacy* 1 gf

tefids to show from the particulars recorded m ancient
authors, in relation both to him and to it, and which," he
says, " can be verified from the clearest and most explicit
declarations of these primitive writers, particularly of Ig-
natius, of Justin Martyr, of Irenseus, of TertuUian, of Cy-
prian, and several others." It is somewhat strange, that
he should have omitted an author more ancient than any
of these, the writer of the Acts of the Apostles, who gives'
us a particular account of the very first church formed by
them, the church of Jerusalem, and formed, no .dOubt, as?
a pattern to all succeeding churches. Of this church, it
is universally agreed, as Dr. Campbell himself acknow-
ledges, that the first bishop was James, surnamed thd
Jitst^ a brother or near kinsman of our Lord; and whether
he was of the number of the twelve or not, is of no conse-
t[uence, since he is expressly called an apostle, was evi-
dently vested with the authority of an apostolic bishop,
and in that character placed at the head of the church iii
Jerusalem. The marks of distinction, by which he is
plainly pointed out in that station, are too conspicuous not
to strike every attentive reader. When St. Peter had de-
clared the manner of his miraculous deliverance from
prison, to such of the disciples as he found gathered to-
gether, he desired them to " go and show these things to
James, and to the brethren:"* but why to James in particu-
lar, if he was not the principal person to be informed of that
event, and who would most probably have the brethren,
that is, the elders or presbyters with him, as we find they
Were on another occasion, when St. Paul having returned
to Jerusalem, from preaching the gospel among the Gen^
tiles, was desirous to give an account of his success, and
for that purpose " went in, the day following, unto JameS,
and all the elders, or presbyters, were present J"^ In his
epistle to the Galatians, the same St. Paul not only places

* Acts xii. 17. t Acts xxi. 1^.

1 88 General Defence of Episcopacy ^

James before Cephas and John, but speaks of those who
came down from Judea to Antioch, as " coming from
James,"^ and not from the other apostles and elders, of
whom there appears to have been a considerable number
then residing at Jerusalem : And if we turn to the fifteenth
chapter of the Acts, where the cause of those persons
coming down from Judea to Antioch is particularly nar-
rated, we find, that in the council of the apostles and el-
ders, who " came together to consider of the matter" in
question, after Peter, Barnabas and Paul had severally
delivered their opinions on the subject before them, James
spoke last, introducing his discourse with this address —
*' Men and brethren, hearken unto me," and closing it
with a decisive sentence, which, delivered by him as pre-
siding in the council, put an end to the controversy.']*

All these circumstances put together, afford the most
satisfactory evidence, that the person thus distinguished by
the part which he acted, and the respect which was paid to
his authority, was really, what he has been constantly re-
presented by the concurring testimony of all antiquity, the
fixed bishop of the whole church of Jerusalem, having a
number of presbyters and deacons under him, and a great
body of Christians belonging to his Episcopal charge. No,
says Dr. Campbell, he was nothing more than " the pastor
of a single parish, whose whole flock assembled in the same
place, for the purposes of public worship, and that they might
all join in one prayer and one supplication ;" the meaning of
which is plainly this, that let the sacred writers, and the
fathers of the church after them, say what they will of the
numerous conversions wrought by the blessed apostles
themselsves, or by their inspired fellow-labourers, and
successors in the ministry of the gospel, yet the utmost
result of all their labours, during the first three hundred
years after Christ, could never amount to more, even in

* Gal. ii. 12. f Acts xv. 13—19.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 1 89

the largest cities upon earth, including their adjacent terri-
tories, than just such a competent number of believers as
could be contained within the walls of a single oratory, or
place of worship, where they might assemble with their
bishop and presbyters, that is, according to our professor,
with the parson and his elders, "to hear the scriptures
read, and receive spiritual exhortations."*

Of this his favourite scheme of " parochial Episcopacy,"
it might have been expected, that our learned Lecturer
would have began his proof from the place where the church
itself began, and so have taken the Jerusalem-parish, which
has long been esteemed the mother^ as the model likewise
of all the other churches in these early and perilous times,
when, as an ancient writer tells us, this very parish or
church " was so vastly enlarged by the accession of mul-
titudes of believers, yea, even of the rulers or principal
men of the city, that it produced an uproar of the Jews,
of the Scribes and Pharisees, they being afraid that the
whole city would own Jesus for the Christ."'!' Let us try,
then, if we can discover, even from scripture itself, how
far this was the case, since our Professor has given us no
information concerning it, supposing, no doubt, that his
pupils would read, and judge for themselves.

Nothing can be more clearly expressed than the account,
which the sacred historian gives us, of the progressive
enlargement of the parish or diocese of Jerusalem, both
before and after St. James was appointed its bishop by the
other apostles. In the first chapter of the Acts, we are
told, that the number of the disciples assembled, when
Matthias was added to the eleven apostles, was about an
hundred and twenty ; but these could be only a part of
the church, as we are assured, that our Lord appeared,
after his resurrection, to " above five hundred brethren at

* Lecture vii.

t Hegesippiis in Euseb, lib. ii. cap. 23.

i 90 General Defence of Episcopacy 4

once, the greater part of whom remained"^ when St. Paid
wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians. In the second
chapter of the Acts, we read that there were added unto
them about three thousand souls, and that " the Lord was
daily adding to the church such as should be saved." If it
shall be objected, that of these three thousand, who were
converted on the day of Pentecost, there might be a cc-nsi-
derable number, who had come up from other countries
to celebrate that holy feast at Jerusalem, it should be
remembered, that they are said to have " continued in the
apostles' fellowship, and breaking of bread, and prayers ;"
which, as the church was then situated, implies that they
continued with them in Jerusalem, and so became inhabit-
ants of that city, if they were not so before.f But should
any deduction be made from their number, nothing of that
kind can be pretended in the next instance ; for in the
fourth chapter of the Acts, we are told, that on the preaching
of Peter and John, " many of them which heard the word^
believed, and the number of the men was about five thoU'
sandr — Again, we read in ^^ fifth chapter, that '' believers
were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men
and women ;" and in the sixths that " the word of God still
increased, and the number of the disciples multiplied in
Jerusalem greatly, and a great company of the priests wer6
obedient to the faith." In addition to aU these successive
accounts of the vast increase of believers, we are informed
in the twenty first chapter of the Acts, that when Paul came
up to Jerusalem, and went in to James and his presbyters,
" they said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thou-
sands% there are of Jews which believe." And when we

* 1 Cor. XV. 6.

t See this matter clearly stated, and a full and distinct account of the
rising chinch at Jerusalem, in a most elaborate Defence of Diocesan Epis-
copacy, by Henry Maurice, D. D.

\ The original word isMufuJi^e?, myriads, which is generally rendered
ten thousands.

General Defence of Episcopacy , 191

consider, that the inspired historian who relates all this had
but little reason to exaggerate, or boast of, the prodigious
increase of the disciples of Jesus, which at that time could
only serve to increase the rage and violence of their ene-
mies ; as we cannot withhold our belief of such a well-att-
tested fact, we must be equally at a loss how to reconcile to
reason and common sense, the contracting such numbers
into a single congregation, or pretending that so many thou-
sands could possibly assemble in one place, for the exercise
of religious worship, at a time when their peculiar form of
worship was severely prohibited, and could not be cele-
brated or attended, but in the most private and retired
manner.

Dr. Campbell acknowledges, what indeed is well known,
that " there were yet no magnificent edifices built for the
reception of Christian assemblies, such as were afterwards
reared at a great expense, and called churches. Their
best accommodation, for more than a century," he says^
'' was the private houses of the wealthiest disciples, which
were but ill adapted to receive very numerous congrega-
tions."— How then, we may ask, could such a " numerous
congregation," as that which was composed of the " many
thousands*^ of converted Jews, whom St. Luke speaks of,
be received, for " the purpose of public worship," into any
private house, even of the wealthiest disciple in Jerusalem ?
Our Lecturer very justly observes, that " it is not so much
by the measure of the ground, as by the number of the
people, that the extent of a pastoral charge is to be rec-
koned j" and he supposes, " at the time the churches were
first planted by the apostles, that the Christians at a me-
dium, were one thirtieth part of the people." — This calcu-
lation he carries into the country called Asia Minor, and
*' supposes further, that country to have been equal then in
point of populousness to what Great-Britain is at present ;
^o that one of their bishoprics," which we know, were then
only seven in number, " in order to afford a congregation

192 General Defence of Episcopacy*

equal to that of a middling parish, ought to have been equal
in extent to thirty parishes in this island :"^' And on that
supposition, how is it possible that the Christian inhabit-
ants of such an extensive tract of country, and so numer-
ous as they are here calculated to be,f could be considered
as but a single congregation, or " assemble every Lord's
day, for the purposes of public worship, in the same place f^
For so Dr. Campbell translates the Greek words et* to aulo,
which, it seems, he had found in the " writings of those
fathers," whose names he had just before mentioned.

We acknowledge, that there is such an expression to be
met with in Justin Martyr's apology to the heathen Em-
peror for the persecuted Christians ; and though our learned
Professor tells us, that " it is for hrevitifs sake he does
not produce the passage at length,"^ we are yet led to sus-
pect, that this has happened for the sake of something else,
and because the whole passage, short as it is, and standing
in no need of abbreviation, contained more than he was
willing to produce, or found convenient for his purpose.
The apologist, in offering a vindication of the persecuted
Christians throughout the Roman Empire, takes notice of
the general method, which they adopted in performing
their religious service, and for that purpose mentions — that
*' they all throughout cities and countries^ assemble in the
same place ^ as Dr. Campbell renders ett* to aulo."!! But this
surely could not mean, that the whole body of Christians

* Lecture vii.

f This calculation is well illustrated by the Anti-Jacobin Jieviewer of
Dr. Campbell's work, who estimates the present population of Britain
at only 7,000,000, the thirtieth part of which is about 233,333, and that,
divided by seven, the number of angels, or bishops then in Asia Minor,
leaves about 33,333 members for each congregation — a number by far too
great for assembling under one roof, to " hear the scriptures read, and,
ireceive spiritual exhortation."

:|: Lecture vii.

II Justin Martyr's words are, TTavlwy y.oilx roXrtj -n aypa? ixBvo-fluv im:

General Defence of Episcopacy^ t9^

throughout the wide extended empire of Rome, assembled
together in one place^ and made but one congregation ; and,
therefore, to prevent the appearance of such a glaring ab-
surdity, the first part of the sentence, mentioning *•' all
throughout cities and countries l!"^ is prudently omitted, *•' for
the sake of brevity" no doubt, both by our Lecturer and by
the author, from whom he has almost literally copied the
reasoning which he makes use of, on this part of his sub-
ject.* But he should also have reflected, that the pro-
priety of the translation on which this reasoning is founded,
has in general no great authority to support it, and in some
cases cannot possibly be admitted. There was no difficulty,
however, in admitting it, in the beginning of the second
chapter of the Acts, where the twelve apostles are said to
have been " all with one accord in one place P"* But towards
the conclusion of that chapter, after " the three thousand
souls were added to them," where, it is said — ^' all that
believe were stti to ay'/o" — our translators have rendered it—-
" they were all together^'' that is, consorted, or companied
with one another, but not so as to be all crowded into one
place ; which, had it been possible, would at that time have
been very imprudent. Beza's opinion of this passage is,
that—-" the common assemblies of the church, with their
mutual agreement in the same doctrine, and the great una-
nimity of their hearts, were signified by it." — The same
may be said of that passage in the beginning of the third
chapter of the Acts, where it is mentioned—that " Peter
and John went up together^ ett* to ccvV — that is — for the
same purpose, into " the temple, at the hour of ;.rayer."
And in the fourth chapter, where it is said — ''• that the
kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered

* In proof of this, see the whole second chapter of the Enquiry into the
Constitution, i!fc. of the Primitive Church, in the last section ot which
chapter the author indeed quotes the wovds of Justin Mavi\ r, which he
had before omitted, and translates :hem thus — " On Sunday all the in-
habitants, both of city and country, met together," 8;c.

25

/

1 94 General Defence of Episcopacy,,

together^ ett* to ay7o, against the Lord, and against his Christ,"
it would be absurd to suppose that they all actually assem-
bled in one place^ when the passage only means, that they
conspired together for the same purpose, the words plainly
|)ointing to the object^ and not to the place^ of their combi-
nation ; just as that passage of Ignatius, part of which is
quoted by Dr. Campbell, refers not to the place^ but to the
object or purpose for which the Magnesians were to assem-
ble together. " Do nothing, therefore," says Ignatius,
*' without the bishop and presbyters, neither strive to make
any thing appear a reasonable service, which is done in
your own separate or private way ; but in coming together,
let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one
hope ;"^ — all tending to show, that nothing was to be done
in the way of public prayer and supplication, but as ap-
pointed and performed by their bishop and presbyters, and
so as to manifest a becoming love of unity and order. That
such is the meaning of this passage of Ignatius, is evident
from what immediately follows on the same subject, in
which he still recommends the same unity of mind and
spirit, in the public offices of religion ; " wherefore come
ye all together as unto one temple of God, as to one altar,
as to one Jesus Christ." For as he told the Christians at
Smyrna, when exhorting them to " flee all divisions, as the
beginning of evils — that eucharist is to be looked upon as
valid," or well established, " which is either offered by the
bishop, or by him to whom the bishop has given his con-
5m^"f

But to *^ evince," as our Lecturer says, " beyond all
possible doubt, that the bishop's cure was originally con-

* The words of Ignatius are — Mn^s i'/xei? mi\) ra ETrtjxoTrs x-on ruv

aXK ETTi TO aulo, ^la, 7r^ofEK;)^nj ^ko. oiYia-ii^ ng va?, [am £^7rtf• Epist. ad
Magnes. p. 33.
t See Archbishop Wake's Translation.

General Defence of Ep iscopacy, 1 95

fined to a single church or congregation," he still appeals
to the language of Ignatius, and insists, that as there was
but " one place of meeting, so there was but one commu-
nion table or altar, as they sometimes metaphorically called
it. There is but one altar, said Ignatius,^ as there is but
one bishop.'* This saying, we know, has been justly re-
ceived, and understood in its full force, by every candid
Enquirey^ into ecclesiastical antiquity, and our Professor
might have spared the unhandsome reflection cast on those
who differ from him in opinion, with respect to the mean-
ing of it, where he says — " Nothing can be more con-
temptible than the quibbles which some keen controvertists
have employed to elude the force of this expression. They
will have it to import one sort of unity in the first clause,
and quite a different sort in the second, though the second
is introduced merely in an explanation of the first. In the
first, say they, it denotes, not a numerical, but a mystical
unity, not one thing, but one kind of thing ; in the second,
one identical thing."J

In this manner does our learned Lecturer run on, ex-
posing, as he thinks, the " chican^'* of those who pretend
to discover any distinction in the unity referred to in the
words of Ignatius. Yet he might have remembered, that
there are words recorded by an inspired writer, describing
a " sort" of unity which surely requires some distinction
in the application. " That they all may be one," says our
Lord, " as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they
also may be one in us— that they may be one, even as we
are one."|| Here we are obliged to consider the unity re-
ferred to, as of a twofold nature ; a " mystical unity" de-
scribed in the words—" that they may be one," and an

'^ 'Ev ^v?ta?>ifioi» w? *«? ETTicTJCo'Toc, Epist. ad Fhiladelph.
f Dr. Campbell has borrowed from the Enquirer above mentioned, a
great part of his reasoning on this quotation from Ignatius.
\ Lecture vii. |) St. John xvii. 21, 22.

195 General Defence of Episcopacy,

essential unity in the words that follow — " even as we are
one." — The Socinian controvertists will, no doubt, call
this distinction a " contemptible quibble ;" and insisting
that the same " sort" of unity ought to be understood in
both the clauses of our Saviour's expression, they will
argue as fluently in support of their opinion, as Dr. Campbell
has done from what Ignatius says of there being " one altar,
as there is one bishop ;" an expression, which no more
proves the necessity of there being but one congregation in
the diocese of a primitive bishop, than St. Paul's exhor-
tation to " glorify God with one mind and one mouth ,"'^
would prove that all the congregations of Christians ought
to have, as but one mind or sentiment, so literally, but one
mouth to express it.

Our Lecturer, however, is not satisfied with the support
which, on this point, he thinks he has obtained from Igna-
tius ; he even calls in to his aid the authority of one, to
whom, he afterwards says, " he recurs the more willingly,
because he is held the great apostle of high church." Hav-
ing mentioned that "when the eucharist was celebrated,
the whole people of the parish or bishopric, if we please
to call it so, communicated in the same congregation, and
all received the sacrament, if not from the hands of the
bishop, at least under his eye ;"t he immediately adds-—

* Rom XV. 6.

f Nay, and partook also, according to Dr. Campbell, of one and the
same loaf; for so we are told in his Translation of the Gospels, vol. ii,
p. 450, where we meet with the following note on St. Mat. xxvi. 26.
*' The loaf—rov oc^lov E. T. bread. Had it been a,{iov without the article,
it might have been rendered either bread or a loaf. But as it has the ar-
ticle, we must, if we would fully express the sense, say the loaf. Pro-
bably on such occasions o?ie loaf, larger or smaller, according to the com-
pany, was part of the accustomed preparation. This practice, at least
ill the apostolic age, seems to have been adopted in the church, in
commemorating Christ's death. To this it is very probable the apostle
alludes, 1 Cor. x. 17. — '0% Ug oc^log^ h cruJiJ^a. oi 'z^oXXoi ^crixsv U yoc-^ iravm
SK la Jvoj apliJ i^MsxofJ'VJ ; that is — because there is one haft ive, though

General Defence of Episcopacy, lOT"

" Hence it was that the setting up another altar within the
limits of his parish, beside the one altar of the bishop, was
considered as the great criterion of schism;"^ a crite-
rion evidently drawn from those passages of the works of
Cyprian, in which he describes a schismatic as one, " who,
despising the bishops, and leaving the priests of God, dares
to set up another altar, and to offer up different, and un-
authorized prayers ;"'|' and again declares — that " no other
altar can be erected, no new priesthood constituted, besides
the one altar, and the one priesthood."J These, and such
like passages from the works of Cyprian, if brought forward
in support of Dr. Cambpell's opinion with respect to what
he calls " parochial Episcopacy," must be treated with
great violence, before they can be wrested to a purpose so
different from that for which they were originally designed^
and which is uniformly displayed in the writings of the
primitive fathers, every where exhibiting this plain and ob-
vious truth, that the unity of the bishop, of the altar, and
of prayer, is all founded on the common principle of the

tnany, are one body, for tve all partake of the one loaf It is in the common
translation — For we, being inmiy, are one bread and one body,- for we ari
ell partakers of that one bread. Passing at present some other excep-
tions, which might be made to this version, there is no propriety in say-
ing one bread, more than in saying one v^ater or one ivine.^* And we
jYiay add — there is as little propriety in building so much on the article
m this passage of St, Matthew, when, in the parallel places of St. Mark,
St. Luke, and St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians, the word a^ov
is used ivithout the article : Nor do we see much probability, that one loaf
could have been found sufficently large, even for the three thousand soiilst
■who are said (Acts ii. 41, 42.) to have " continued steadfastly in the
apostolic breaking of bread," much less for the many thousands, who
were soon after " added unto them."

* Lecture vi.

f " Contemptis Episcopis, et Dei sacerdotibus derelictis, constituere
audet aliud altare, precem alteram illicitis vocibus sacere." — De Unitate
Mcclesi<e.

\ Aliud altare constitui aut sacerdotium novum fieri, prscter unum
altare, et upura sacerdotium, non potest. — Cypr. epist. 43.

198 General Defence of episcopacy.

Unity of the Christian priesthood. And it has been justty
observed, that no uninspired writer " ever so unlocked the
evangelical secret of this catholic and Christian unity, as
the inimitable Cyprian has done."* Of this we have a
very striking proof in that admirable passage, which has
been so *^often quoted by the writers on this subject: —
*' The Episcopate is 07ie^ of which every bishop holds a
part, so as to have a concern in, or be interested for, the
whole. The church also is one, which by a fruitful increase
grows up into a multitude of members j as the sun has many
rays, yet but one fountain of light ; or as a tree may have
many branches, yet but one root fixed deep in the earth ; or as
when many streams descend from one fountain, they appear
indeed divided in their number, yet all preserve the unitif
of their original."f So is it, with respect to the unity of
the Christian church, which, though distinguished in its
principle by the several primitive expressions of one churchy
one altar^ and one bishops will always be found to consist
with as many churches, altars and bishops, as can be proved
to derive their order, institution and authority from the
same sacred source, the Bishop of souls, and Founder of
the church ; the unity of whose divine power and spirit,
diffused at first among the chosen twelve, is still preserved

* See the Original Draught of the Primitive Churchy which contains a
full and satisfactory answer to the Enquirer, iSfc. above mentioned.

f ** Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur.
Ecclesia quoque una est, quae in raultitudinem latius incremento fsecundi-
tatis extenditur ; quo m®do solis multi radii, sed lumen unum ; et rami
arboris multi, sed robur unum tenaci radice fundatum ; et cum de fonte
uno rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet diffusa videatur, exundantis
copise largitate, unitas taraen servatur in origine." Cypr. lie Unitate
Ecdesice. In a note on this passage, Mr. Marshall, the translator, observes,
" that the words in solidutn are forensic, and allude to the case of divers
contractors, each of whom was bound not only for his proportionable
part, but if the rest failed, was to make good the whole." — By this ac-
count, the bxshops will be found to hold their part of the EpiscopatCf as
we say, conjunctly and severally.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 9^

among those who have regularly succeeded to them, in the
commission, which they received from Christ. Hence it
necessarily follows, that the unity of every regular congre-
gation of Christians, consist in their having the ministerial
offices, with which they are supplied, performed by a per-
son duly authorized for that purpose, and acting under the
appointment and direction of those who, as rightful
bishops, have " authority given unto them in the church, to
call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard."

We have now taken notice of the principal arguments,
to which Dr. Campbell has recurred ; for they have all been
made use of before, to show, that the primitive bishop, in
the period which he has fixed for his " parochial Episco-
pacy," was no other than the pastor of a single congrega-
tion or parish, with the presbyters assisting as his curates.
And after all the pains he has taken to adjust his plan of
the primitive bishopric to the modern presbyterian parish,
we find him still obliged to own, that " the resemblance
does not hold in every particular ; though," he says, " it
plainly does in most ;" and then adds — " perhaps in some
things, the case may bear a greater analogy to some highland
parishes in this northern part of the island, wherein, by
reason of their tenitorial extent, the pastor is under the
necessity of having ordained itinerant assistants, whom he
can send as occasion requires, to supply his place in the
remote parts of his charge."* — The fitness of this analogy
we shall in part admit, as it corresponds pretty nearly with
the ideas which v/e have been taught to form of primitive
Episcopacy; conceiving it to be almost in the Doctor's
own words — " One ordained pastor having power to send
out ordained assistants to supply his place, as occasion re-
quires." But as Christianity began in cities, and popu-
lous countries, and it was a long time before it reached
such uncultivated tracts as are to be foimd in the northern

* Lecture vii.

200 General Defence of Episcopacy *

parts of this island, it is chiefly with these populous settle-
ments that we are at present concerned, such as the church,
parish, or diocese of Jerusalem, where the bishop must
have had many congregations of Christians to superintend,
and therefore many presbyters acting under him in the
discharge of their ministerial duties.

Indeed, our Professor seems to admit as much, in that
passage of his Lecture now before us, where he observes,
that " as the whole of the bishop's parish generally received
the symbols of Christ's body and blood, mediately or im-
mediately from his hand, so they were, for the most part,
baptized either bv him, or in his presence." Here the
words " generallif and ^^ for the most part'"' plainly imply,
that sometimes the case was otherwise, and a kind of similar
acknowledgment is made by what is said of their " receiving
the symbols mediately from the hand of the bishop." By
this expression we cannot properly understand any thing
else but the mediation or intervention of the presbyters, as
his "" ordained assistants." And if receiving from their
hands at the other end of such a capacious room as could
contain thausands of communicants, according to the plan
of our Professor, could be held the same as receiving from
the hand of the bishop, why not at the other end of the
street, and so on to any distance to which his Episcopal
charge might extend ? It must be remembered, that we are
presently alluding to the " parochial Episcopacy" of Jeru-
salem, in which parish, however, from the account given
of it in scripture, we must think it next to impossible, even
had it been expedient, which at that time it certainly was
not, that the three thousand, th^fve thousand, yea the many
thousands of believers, or parishioners^ should meet in one
place, for the purposes of public worship, or form but one
congregation.

It mav well be supposed, that in these variable times of
the gospel, when the churches had now and then a little
rest, and v/ere multiplied, but much oftener were scattered

General defence of Episcopacy » 201

by distress and persecution, there would be some Episcopal
charges, whether we call them by the name of parish or
diocese, where the bishop could easily meet with his whole
flock in one place, and perform every part of his official
duty to them in person. Dr. Campbell has taken care ta
furnish us with an instance of this kind,^ in what h6 calls
the " extensive diocese of Neocesaria," where Tillemont,
he says, " hath shown from Basil and Gregory of Nyssa,
both natives of Cappadocia^ that in the middle of the third
qentury, there were no more than seventeen believers, who
probably all resided in the citv ;" and then asks—" Could
fewer be properly associated into one congregation ?"t But
he has forgot to mention, what the same Basil and Gregory
relate, whether Tillemont hath shown it or not, that the
bishop assigned to the charge of Neocesaria, the famous
Gregory Thaumaturgus, who had himself been converted
by Origen, left at his death only seventeen pagans in all
that " extensive diocese :" And the consequence, we are
told, was, that the " zealous citizens pulled down their
altars, temples and idols, and in every place built houses
of prayer in the name of Christ."J

* The historian Gibbon had mentioned the same instance, and almost
in the same words.— See vol. ii. of the 8vo, edition of his History of the
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire^ p. 360 ; where, after acknowledg-
ing what, he says, " we may learn from the writings of Lucian, aphilo-
sopher who had studied mankind, and who describes their manners in
the most lively colours, that under the reign of Commodus, his native
country of Pontus was filled with Epicureans and Christians,* he adds in
a note, *• Christianity, however, must have been very unequally diflFused
over Pontus, since, in the middle of the third century, there were na
more than seventeen believers in the extensive diocese of Neo-Caesarea.
See IM. de Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiast tom. iv. p. 675, from Basil
and Gregory of Nyssa, who were themselves natives of Cappadocia."
This is one of many proofs that might be adduced of a peculiar " coin-
cidence in sentiment" between our theological Professor, and that cele-
brated historian, whose sceptical opinions are not likely to procure him
any admiration among the real friends of Christianity.

t Lecture vii.

I Gregor. Nyssen, in Vit. Thaumat. torn. iii. p. 5&7. Paris ^dit. 1^38.

26

202 General Defence of EpiscopaCy,

An earlier writer too than Gregory Nyssen, the same
TertuUian, to whom Dr. Campbell has frequently referred,
as favouring some of his sentiments, mentions the Chris-
tians, even in his early age, as *' so numerous, as almost
to constitute the greater part of every city ;"* and in his
apology to the Roman magistrates, he does not hesitate to
speak of the great multitudes of his profession, in these
confident terms, " We are of yesterday ; yet every place
is filled with us ; your cities, your islands, your forts, your
corporations and councils, even the armies, tribes and
companies, yea the palace, senate, and courts of justice ;
the temples only have we left to you.—^Should we go off,
and separate from you, you would stand amazed at your
own desolation, be affrighted at your solitary state, the
stagnation of your affairs, and the stupor of death, which
had in a manner seized your city."")" What a strange ac-
count must this have appeared to the magistrates of Rome,
if their great city was found to contain, instead of such
prodigious numbers, no more than a single congregation of
Christians ? The same observation may be made on what
Eusebius says, in general, of the Christian churches in
every city and country, about the close of the apostolic
age, when he uses such singular terms to express their
amazing numbers, and compares " their thronged and
crowded societies to grain heaped upon a barn floor."J It
will be no easy matter to reconcile this report of a very well

* Tanta hominum multitudo, pars pome major cujusque civitatis. Ter-
tul. ad Scap. c. 2.

f *• Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus; urbes, insulas, cas-
tella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, se-
natum, forum; sola vobis reliquimus templa. St tanta vis hominum in

aliquem orbis remoti sinum abrupissemus a vobis proculdubio expa-

vissetis ad solltudinem vestram, ad silentium rerum, et stuporem quen-
dam quasi mortui urbis. " Tertul. Apol. p. 35. cap. 37.

I This gives but imperfectly the sense of the original, Ka* ci)\a> kvoc

TrXrjSstj oi^^oot!^ sKKXwion cruvEfJrjJCE^av, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 3.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 203

informed and accurate author, with our Professor's imagi-
nary calculation, by which he attempts to show that " one
of the primitive bishoprics, in order to afford a congrega-.
tion equal to that of a middling parish, must have been
equal in extent to thirty parishes in this island."

Having already discovered the extreme weakness of the
materials, and want of solidity in the foundation, on which
this strange position is built ; and being thereby sufficiently
guarded against any conclusion that may be drawn from
such doubtful and dangerous premises, we may be excused
from following our learned Lecturer through all the minute
descriptions of his parochial plan of Episcopacy ; especi-
ally as, by his own confession, there is no complete resem-
blance or conformity to it, in that established system, under
the protection of which he made such a distinguished
figure. The difference indeed, we could easily show in a
number of instances, if it were not more our concern to
defend the soundness of our own, than to expose the de-
fects of other systems ; or if we may be allowed to adopt
the language of him who has attacked us, and say — " It is
neither our province, nor humour, to trace nonsense through
all its dark and devious windings."* There is still, how-
ever, one part of our Professor's specious theory, of which
we cannot well omit to take some notice, as it seems to
touch the main hinge of the controversy, and may serve as
a farther specimen of the skill and address with which the
other parts are constructed.

The point to which I am alluding, occupies, in one way
or other, all that remains of the seventh Lecture, part of
which we have already considered, and is introduced by
the Lecturer's " returning to the administration of religious
ordinances in those primitive parishes," which he had been
describing. After having told us, that " the presbyters

* See Dr. Campbell's application of this remark to the pious and
eminently learned Mr. Henry Dodwell, Lecture iv.

204 General Defence of Episcopacy,

executed certain ministerial offices, in those parts of the
parish to which the bishop found it reasonable to send
them, and also assisted him in the public offices of religion;
that when he was sick, or otherwise necessarily absent,
they supplied his place, and as the charge of the parish
was eminently devolved upon him, they acted in all the mir
nisterial duties by his direction, or at least with his permis-
sion ;" he immediately adds — " The only question of mo-?
inent that has been raised on this head is, whether by his
order or allowance, they could exercise every part of the
pastoral office as well as the bishop, or whether there were
some things, such as ordaining others to the ministry,
which even his commands could not empower them to do?"
On this veiy important question, the learned Professor
gives his own opinion directly in these words—" As the
power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk
gradually, I am disposed to think, that in the course of
two centuries, or even a centuiy and a half, there was a
considerable difference in this respect, in the state of things,
at the beginning, and at the end. Towards the conclusion
of that period, I imagine, it became very unusual for a
bishop to delegate this, which was ever looked upon as
the most sacred, and most momentous trust, to his pres-
byters. The transition is very natural from seldom to
never, and in our ways of judging, the transition is as na-
tural from what never is done, to what cannot lawfully be
done."^

Now, what is all this, but mere declamation, or a fan-
ciful train of reasoning, founded upon gratuitous assump-
tions, and confirmed by the author's own " imaginings^
and dispositions to think'''' so and so, without any thing of-
fered in the way of proof, or even of illustration? The
period which he has assigned for the operation of his " na-
tural transition," we cannot help thinking, is very ambi-

* Lecture vii.

General Defence of Episcopacy * 205

guously defined. He is willing to reduce it to " a century
and a half,'* and yet finds a considerable difference in the
state " of things at the beginnings and at the end." That
period undoubtedly began with the birth of Christ ; so that
the thirty-three years of his life must be struck out of the
calculation, as must also be the subsequent years to the
death of St. John, the apostle ; and then the " course of a
century and a half," will be reduced to little more than half
a century, which is rather a short period for effecting such
9 considerable change as our author alludes to, in the go-
vernment of the church. When he tells us — ** that the
power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk
gradually;" should he not have mentioned more particu-
larly, for the information of his pupils, what it was that
thus raised the bishops and sunk the presbyters, even in
a gradual manner? There were then no flattering Con-
stantines, — ^none of those imperial edicts, which he in-
veighs so bitterly against, to create or support such a dan-
gerous ascendancy in the first of these ecclesiastical orders
above the second. If it was entirely owing to *' seniority,
or superior merit, or distinguished talents," as our Lec-
turer seems to think " probable," what an insignificant race
must those presbyters have been, none of whom could ever
be found to possess " merit or talents" sufficient to pre-
serve their power from sinking, or rather being totally
swallowed up in that gulph of Episcopal dominion, from
which it was never to rise again t

Our author indeed " imagines," (but without assigning
any ground for such an imagination) that towards the con-
clusion of his " century and a half," it became very unusual
for a bishop " to delegate the trust of ordination to his
presbyters ;" and yet we shall soon find him endeavouring
to fix this unusual practice, even upon " the great apostle
of High-church himself," a whole century after the period
to which he is here referring. But the strangest inconsist-
ency, and most illogical piece of reasoning in all that portion

206 General Defence of Episcopacy*

of Dr. Campbell's Lectures now under our consideration,
is that which follows in these words — " We know, that
some time after the period to which I have here confined
myself, ordination by presbyters was prohibited, and de-
clared null by ecclesiastical canons. But the very prohibi-
tions themselves, the very assertions of those whom they
condemned as heretics, prove the practice, then probably
wearing, but not quite worn out."* And it is well, we
say, for those who maintain the necessity of Episcopal
ordination, that its modern rival, ordination by presbyters,
was prohibited so early, as even our Lecturer's vague
expression must mean, " if it mean any thing." — But we
know not well what opinion to give of the manner in which
he accounts for these prohibitions, and which appears liable
to some objection in the terms made use of to define it,
and much more in the consequences that may be deduced
from it*

If by the terms, in which it is expressed, we are to
understand that " the prohibitions themselves prove the
practice to be then probably wearing, but not quite wont
cwif," we must object to that sort of evidence, which esta-
blishes no sort of connection between the proof and the
thing to be proved : and we might say, on much better
ground, if probability be all the point in question, that the
prohibitions rather prove the practice to be thtn probably
wearing in^ and beginning to require correction. — But if it
be the practice itself which is meant to be proved, not only
by the prohibitions themselves, but " by the verv assertions
of those whom they condemned as heretics," might it not
be expected, that our Professor would have let his pupils
know, whether the authors of these " assertions," some of
whom he ought to have named, were really heretics, or
only condemned as such, by those who had prohibited the
practice, to which he was here referring ? His statement

* Lecture vii.

General Defence of Episcopacy » 207

of the case, on the contrary, is dark and dubious, where
the nature of the subject required that his sentiments should
have been delivered in clear and explicit terms. He was
sensible, no doubt, of the ticklish ground on which he
was treading, and, therefore, contrived to make use of lan-
guage, not so plain, and unequivocal, as might have been
looked for. Yet even to insinuate that the assertions of
condemned heretics serve to prove their innocence, or the
lawfulness of that, which they were condemned for main-
taining, is a tenet rather of dangerous consequence, and
not such as might be expected from an established theo-
logical chair. Did the assertions of the Arian heretics,
when condemned by the council of Nice, prove their doc-
trine to be then only " wearing, but not quite worn out?"
Were there no novelties in these old times, which, on
their very first appearance, were stigmatized as heresies ?
And might not this fancy of admitting " ordination by
presbyters," have been but a novelty, when it was first pro-
hibited, at least for any thing that Dr. Campbell has pro-
duced to show the antiquity of its origin, or the continu-
ance of its practice ? Or did the church, so early as the
period " to which he has here confined himself," make
canons against apostolic institution, and primitive usage,
when " wearing, but not quite worn out ?" These are
questions, which, connected as they evidently are with
" the most sacred and momentous trust," it was the busi-
ness of our learned Lecturer to have discussed with a de-
gree of seriousness and attention, suitable to the dignity
and importance of the subject, and not to have left his
hearers without any other impression on their minds, than
what arises from the authority of a great name^ which, he
himself has repeatedly told us, '^ has greater influence on
the opinions of the generality of men, than most people
are aware of."

In the course of our inquiries into the ecclesiastical his-
tory of the first three or four centuries, we meet with an

20S General Defence of Episcopacy*

instance of one Colluthus, a presbyter of Alexandria, vrho^
pretending to have been promoted to the office of a bishop,
began to encroach on the Episcopal power of ordination,
but was soon brought to see his error, and having renounced
his schism, was again admitted to communion as a presby-
ter. This happened about the beginning of the fourth cen-
tury, and so far from being considered as a " practice then
wearing out," it is expressly mentioned as xh^frst attempt
of that kind. Some time after we read of another presby-
ter, Aerius, who, as a judicious writer observes, " seek-
ing to be made a bishop, could not brook that another was
preferred before him ; and, therefore, when he saw himself
unable to rise to that greatness, which his ambitious pride
did affect, his way of revenge was to try, what wit, being
sharpened with envy and malice, could do, in raising a new
and seditious opinion, that the superiority which bishops
had, was a thing which they should not have, there being
no necessary distinction between them and presbyters."^
For holding and striving to propagate this new opinion,
which Epiphanius imputes to his ignorance of the scrip-
tures, Aerius was not only branded as a heretic^ but con-
sidered as no other than a madman ; for " how was it possi**
ble," said those who argued against him, " that he should
constitute or ordain a presbyter, who had no authority to
impose hands in ordination ?"']'

In opposition, however, to these facts (though facts are
usually reckoned stubborn things) our Lecturer produces
some extracts from the works of contemporary writers,
sufficient, as he thinks, to establish his own opinion ; and
" that about the middle of the third century, the presbyters
were still considered as vested with the power of conferring

* See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Politic y book vii. p. 25.

Epiphanius Hsercs Ixxv p, 908— -as quoted by Archbishop Potter in his
Discourse on Church Government, p. 292.

General Defence of Episcopabtji ^09

orders," he says, " has been plausibly argued from an ex-'
pression of Firmilian, in his letter to Cyprian ;" which ex-
pression is thus translated by the " plausible arguer," whom
he^ no doubt, had in his eye.*—" All power and grace is
constituted in the church, where seniors preside, who have
the power of baptizing, confirming and ordaining."']' Now,
says Dr. Campbell, " that by majores natu, in Latin" (here
rendered seniors)^ " is meant the same with 9rpEcr/5y7£poi in
Greek" (or presbyters), " of which it is indeed a literal ver-
sion, can scarcely be thought questionable. Besides, the
phrase so exactly coincides with that of Tertullian, who
says — Probati praasident seniores— -approved elders preside,
•—as to make the application/ if p>ossible, still clearer. "J
Yet we cannot help thinking, that more illustration is still
wanting ; and that no person, who reads with attention the
whole of this epistle of Firmilian's to Cyprian, and pro-
perly considers the nature of the subject on which he wrote^
can have any doubt, that by the " seniors, who preside in
the church," he certainly meant the bishops, as being the
only presidents, who were acknowledged to " have the
power of confirming and ordaining," as well as of bap-
tizing, and to whom he plainly refers a little after, when
mentioning St. Paul as surely " not inferior to the bishops
of whom he had been speaking."|| It is equally certain,
that by Tertullian's " approved presidents," could only be
meant the bishops or heads of the several churches within
the Roman empire ; since he was clearly of opinion, that
the apostles had placed bishops in all the churches which
they had planted, and adduced those of Smyrna and Rome

* See the Enquiry into the Constitution, 13'c. (^ the Primitive Church, so
frequently copied by Dr. Campbell.

f " Qj.iando omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit, ubi pre-
sident majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordi-
nandi possident potestatem." Cyprian. Epist. 75.

\ L.ecture vii.

li '• Nisi si his Episcopis de quihis nunc, minor fuit Paulus."

27

j,f-<. f.-v;.-

SIO General Defence of Episcopacy i

as instances, although he saw no occasion for caUing theniiE
by that name, in the apology which he was now offering
to the Roman governors.

But what we think most surprising in all that part of Dr.
Campbell's Lectures, now more immediately before us, is
the readiness with which he recars to the authority of Cy-
prian.— 'This cannot so well be accounted for, as by ob-
serving, that the only passage which he quotes from that
venerable writer, as favouring the validity of ordination by
presbyters, was made use of, for the same purpose, by his
great friend and oracle, the author of the " Enquiry into
the Constitution^ ^c. of the Primitive Church^"^ — We find
him arguing just as Dr. Campbell has done, from part of
a letter addressed by Cyprian to his presbyters and dea*
cons at Carthage, in which " he, in the most earnest and
pressing terms, intreats them, during his absence, to dis-
charge what was incumbent both on themselves, and on
him, in such a manner, as that nothing might be wanting,
either as to discipline or diligence.''^ Now, says our
Professor,"^—*' is it to be supposed, that he would have so
expressly enjoined them, without exception or limitation, to
discharge the duties of his function, as well as their own, if
neither presbyters nor deacons could do any thing in ordi-
nation, that part^ which was the chief of all ?"J And we
may ask in return, if ordination was included in those du-
ties, which they were to discharge, is it to be supposed,
that he would not have made an exception with respect to
his deacons; as they could have no pretensions to the power
of ordaining, even on Dr. Campbell's principles, who had
just before been observing, " that there was no occasion
for making canons against ordination by deacons, or by

* See the Rnquiry, Isfc. p. 62,

•]■ " Quoniam mihi inreresse nunc non permittit loci conditio, peto vos
pro fide et religione ve&tra, fungairuni illic et vestris partibus et meis, ut
nihil vel ad disciplinara, vel ad diligentiam desit," Cypr, Epist. 5.

:j: Lecture vii.

General Defence of Episcopacy, .- 211

laymen, who did not pretend to such a right ?" Yet here
he adds — " Might it not be justly thought, that if Cyprian
meant to except ordination, he would have given them
some hint in this letter, what method, in case of any va-
cancy in their presbytery, (which during his absence, would
be doubly incommodious) they should take, to get it
quickly and properly supplied ?" And we may easily dis-
cover the reason, why no such hint was given, by a careful
perusal of the letter itself, which was evidently written for
the sake of recommending to his clergy a quiet and prudent
behaviour under their present distress, as well as a charitable
attention to the necessities of those who are suffering for
their faith in Christ, but without any view to the case of a
vacancy in their presbytery, or the most proper method of
getting it supplied.

This very case, however, or any thing similar to it, we
find sufficiently provided for in another of C}^rian's Let-
ters, addressed to two of his colleagues, Caldonius and
Herculanus, neighbouring bishops, and to two of his own
presbyters, Rogatianus and Numidicus, appointing these
four " his vicegerents or deputies, to inquire into the ages,
conditions and merits of the brethren ; that he whose
proper charge or business it was, to promote men to ec-
clesiastical offices, might be well informed about them, and
so promote none but such as were worthy, and humble and
meek."* By such an ample deputation as this, those en-
trusted with it, including in their number two of the Epis-
copal order, were sufficiently authorized to supply what-
ever vacancy might happen in any of the ecclesiastical of-
fices, within the diocese of Carthage, during the unavoid-
able absence of its proper bishop and governor, who, we

• " Cumquc ego vos pro me vicarios miserim — ut states eorum, et
conditiones, et merita discenieretis, utjam, ego, cui cura incumbit, om-
ne.s optime nossem, et dignos, atque huniiles et mites, ad ecclesiastjcK
administrationis officia pronioverem." Cypr. Epist. 41.

212 General Defence of Episcopacy^

see, speaks of himself in the singular number, as the per^
son who had the power of appointing his subordinate ofli-?
cers, and founds that power on his having the care of the
church of Carthage committed to him.

The same sentiment we find expressed in another of his
letters to his presbyters and deacons, and to all his people,
which he begins by telling them, that " though in all cleri-
cal ordinations he had been accustomed to consult them
beforehand, and to examine the manners and merits of
every one with common advice,"* yet in the instance
which he was then going to ipention, he had thought pro-?
per to depart from his usual practice, by ordaining a per-
son without any such previous consultation, and now inti-
mated what he had done, in the common style used by
superiors on such occasions. This he repeats in his next
letter concerning arjother ordination of the same kind, by
desiring his presbyters and deacons, and all his people, to
take notice^ that though on account of their youth, he had
appointed these petsons only to an inferior office for the
time, he " yet designed them for the honour of the pres'?
byterate, and to sit with him as his counsellors, as soon as
their years would admit of that promotion."t All which
plainly shows, that Cyprian considered himself, in his
Episcopal character, as vested with the sole power of or-
dination within his district ; and it will not be easy to dis-
cover, in any part of his works, the least intimation of his
sharing that power with his presbyters, far less of his ad-
mitting, that they had sufficient right to exercise it, as
having equal authority with himself. On the contrar}^, we
fmd him on all occasions vindicating and strenuously as-
serting the supreme power of the bishops in this, as well

* " In ordinationibus clericis solemus vos ante consulere, et mores, ac
merita singulorum communi coosilio ponderare." See the whole of Cy-
prian's 38th epistle to his presbyters and deacons, and to all his people.

f C?eterum presbyterii honorem, designasse nos illis jam sciatis — se^-
suris nobiscum, provectis ft corroboratis annis suis. Epist. 39.

General Defence of Episcopacy, »13

as ia every other matter, connected with the care and go«
vernment of the church.

This is particularly observable in one of his letters writ-
ten to those unhappy persons, who, by sacrificing to idols,
had fallen off from the communion of the church, and after-
wards became indecently importunate, even with insolent
clamour, to be restored to it. After stating to them the
manner in which the frame of the church, and the autho-
rity of its bishops, were constituted by our blessed Lord,
whose precepts we ought to revere and obey, he adds —
** Thence, in the course of time, and by regular succession
downwards, the ordination of bishops, and the constitution
of the church, are transmitted in such a manner, as that the
church being built upon the bishops, all her public acts or
affairs may be ordered by them as the chief rulers. — Where-
fore, since this is God's appointment, I cannot but wonder
at the boldness and insolence of certain persons, who, in
writing to me, have called themselves a church, when a
church is only to be found in the bishop, the clergy, and
the faithful, or steady Christians."^ Such is the reason-
ing made use of by this admirable writer, to show the ne-
cessity of maintaining communion with the bishop, as the
means of preserving that principle of unity in the church,
which is essential to its very existence. And this we find
him again recommending very strongly, in a letter ad-
dressed to all his people on the breaking out of a lamenta-
ble schism in his diocese. Having first put them in mind,
that " God is one, and Christ is one, and the church is one,
and the Episcopal chair is one," he then points to the appli-
cation, and shows what ought to be the consequence of all

• " Inde per temporura, et successionum vices, Episcoponim ordina-
tio, et ecclesias ratio decurrit, lit ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur, et
omnis actus ecclesiK per eosdem prxpositosgubernetur. Cum hoc itaque
divina lege fundatum sit, iniror quosdam audaci temeritate, sic mihi scri-
bere voluisse, ut ecclesise nomine literas facerent ; quanda ecclesia in Epis-
copo, et clero, etin omnibus stantibus sit constituta." Cypr, Epist. 33.

214 General Defence of Episcopacy,

this unity, in the most earnest and affectionate terms.—
*' Ye are brethren," sa5's he, " let no man make you wander
from the ways of the Lord : Ye are Christians, let no man
rend you from the gospel of Christ : Let no man take off
from the church, the sons of the church : Let them who
have a mind to perish, perish by themselves : Let them
alone continue out of the church, who have departed from
the church : Let them alone not be with the bishops, who
have rebelled against the bishops."*

But it was not to " his people," or laity only, that Cyprian
directed these, and such like admonitions, warning them of
the danger of despising the due exercise of ecclesiastical
authority ; he spake the same language to his clergy, and
showed himself equally desirous of enforcing on the inferior
orders of the ministry, a becoming regard to that sacred au-
thority, when thus exercised in the way of Christ's appoint-
ment. Having been informed of the ill usage, which one of
his contemporary bishops had received from a turbulent and
disorderly deacon, he recommended a proper exertion of
the Episcopal authority, as the most likely way of bringing
the delinquent to a just sense of his duty; observing at the
same time, in the letter which he wrote on the occasion, that
*' the deacons ought to remember, that our Lord himself
chose apostles, that is, bishops and governors ; whereas the
apostles, after their Lord's ascension, appointed for them-
selves deacons, to be ministers of the church, and of their
Episcopal office ; so that, if we durst do any thing against
God, who hath made us bishops, they might in like manner
oppose us, by whose authority they have been made dea-
cons."'!*

* " Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et cathedra una
— Nemo, vos fratres, errare a Domini viis faciat : Nemo vos Christia-
nos ab evangelio Ciiristi rapiat: Nemo filios ecclesiae de ecclesia toUat ;
Pereant sibi soli, qui perire voluerunt. Extra ecclesiam soli remaneant,
qui de ecclesia recesserunt. Soli cpm Episcopis non sint, qui contra Epis^
copos rebellarunt." Cypr. Epist. 43.

f " Meminisse autum Diaconi debent, quoniam apostolos, id est Epis*
copos ct prsepositos, Dominiis elegit ; diaconos autem post ascensum

General Defence of Episcopacy* 21

f

• The deacons, however, were not the only order of church
officers, whom Cyprian has described as placed in a sub-
ordinate capacity, and acting under the authority of the
bishops. Even the presbyters also, though always men-
tioned by this venerable prelate in terms of the most affec-
tionate regard, and whom he so often calls his fellow-pres-
byters^ and points out their duty, as partners with him in
the great work of the ministry, are yet as constantly put in
remembrance, that nothing was to be done by them, as
part of that work, but with the allowance and consent of
their ecclesiastical superior ; much less was any thing to
be attempted in despite of his just authority, and from an
avowed spirit of opposition to it. That any such attempt
was considered in the days of Cyprian as highly blameable,
and worthy of censure, is evident from the manner in
which he expressed himself,. when obliged to restrain the
arrogance of some of his own presbyters, who, during his
absence, occasioned by the violence of persecution, had
evinced a desire to take the whole Episcopal power into
their own hands, and to manage the affairs of the church,
as if they had been independent on any superior. Deeply
sensible of the necessity of repressing such a daring spirit
of disobedience, he tells them very plainly, that he had for
a long time taken no notice of their unruly conduct, hoping
by his forbearance to have obliged them to be quiet ; but
their excessive presumption would not suffer him to be
silent any longer, lest the people committed to his care
should suffer through his inattention. " For what," says
he, " have we not to fear from the displeasure of our Lord,
when some of our presbyters, neither mindful of the rules
of the gospel, nor of their own station in the church, and
making no account of the authority of the bishop, who is

Domini in cselo, apostoli sibi constituerunt Episcopaius sui, et ecclesise
ministros. Qjiod si nos aliquid audere contra Deum possumus, qui Epis-
copos facit ; possint et contra nos audere diaconi, a quibus fiunt." Cypv.
Epist. 3.

216 General Defence of Episcopacy.

at present set over them, or even of that future day, which
shall bring every work into judgment, have done what was
never attempted before, and, in defiance of their superior,
have usurped the whole power, which he has a right to ex*
ercise ?""* He therefore concludes his letter with assuring
them, that if they still persist in such factious and disor-
derly practices, he will use the authority which the Lord
had entrusted to him, and prohibit their future discharge of
any ministerial duties.

In all this, we cannot but discover abundant evidence of
the subordination both of deacons and presbyters to their
bishop ; and must be convinced by so many undoubted tes-
timonies, that this was a principle firmly believed in the
Cyprianic age, and received as a part of that apostolic doc-
trine, which was to be handed down in the Christian
church, to the end of the world. Were we to cite but the
most striking passages from the works of St. Cyprian, which
serve to establish the belief of this principle, it would be
only repeating what was done in a most distinct and judi-
cious manner, about a century ago, by a learned writer of
this country ,t who, soon after the publication of this work,
was promoted to the Episcopate, on the same primitive
footing as that on which was placed the authority of the
bishop of Carthage. In maintaining that authority, we
have seen this venerable martyr standing forth as its zea-
lous advocate, under the most trying and difficult circum-

* " Quid enim non periculum metuere debemus de ofFensa Domini,
quando aliqui de presbyteris, nee evartgelii, nee loci sui memores, sed ne-
que futurum Domini judicium, neque nunc sibi prsepositum Episcopum
Gogitantes, quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est, cum
contumelia et contemptu propositi, totum sibi vindicent." Cypr. Epist.
16.

t See the Principles of the Cyprianic Age zvith regard to Episcopal Povxr
and jurisdiction, c5'c. — and a Vindication of that Discourse, &c. both by
the Rev. John Sage, who, before the revolution, was one of the minis-
ters of Glasgow, and in 1705, was consecrated a bishop of the ScotcK
church.

General Defence of Episcopacy » 217

stances, and when his zeal in supporting the character
with which he had been invested, was the certain means of
increasing the dangers to which he was exposed, and plac-
ing him in the very front of the battle, to be more directly
aimed at, by the fury of his enemies. Yet, with all this
malice and opposition staring him in the face, he never
shrunk from the arduous task, which the dignity of his
office imposed upon him. Through evil report and good
report, he persevered in a steady resolution to discharge,
with vigour and firmness, the sacred trust committed to him ;
and, in every part of his writings, we find his theory and
practice uniformly consistent, with respect to the subordi-
nation which had always distinguished the Christian mi-
nistry. On this very point, therefore, it is the more sur-
prising that such a man as Dr. Campbell should endeavour
to represent him as at variance with himself! a misrepre-
sentation, for which we cannot otherwise account, than by
adopting the Doctor's own opinion, that " when once unhap-
pily the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man,
his object is no longer truth, but victory." We are not
ashamed, however, to stand up for Cyprian's self-consis-
tency, or to rank ourselves on his side of the question now
under our consideration, even although it should be held
up to ridicule, under the contemptuous, but mistaken epi-
thet, of High-church ; which, when our Professor thought
proper to apply as a mark of scorn, in the case before us,
he might have reflected that those whom he wished to makq
the objects of this vulgar sneer, look higher up for their
apostleship than even to Cyprian, great and venerable as
they know him to have been, and much as they esteem the
support which he has afforded to the cause of ecclesiastical
unity and order.^

• It was no doubt very pleasing to Dr. Campbell to find his sarcastic
account of the venerable Cyprian, as the " apostle of Jligh-chtirch ." so
happily coifwiding with the opinion of a writer, whose work he admired
as " a most masterly performance." In the History of the Dttcline and

28

218 General Defence of Epucopacij.

Our Lecturer, indeed, looks not so high for support to
his cause ; but, passing quickly over the authority of Cy-
prian, " eminent" as he calls it, he hastens to produce again
that of Hilary, the Roman deacon, with more hope, no
doubt, of finding a friend in him, whom he had quoted be^
fore with approbation, as " a man of erudition and discern-
ment."— In giving our opinion of the sentiments ascribed to
this writer, we could not but take notice of the partial man-
ner in which his words v/ere extracted from his writings, to
give some ground for the forced construction that was to be
put upon them : And the same observation may be applied
to the quotation now before us, wherein this commentator is
represented as inferring from a passage in the third chapter

• of the first Epistle to Timothy, that there is no difference
between the ordination of a bishop and of a presbyter, and

-that '*• Timothy himself was ordained a presbyter, but
because he had not another before him, was, therefore, a

Fall of the JRoman Empire, after being told, that the ambitious " Cypriafi
-ruled with the most absolute sway the ehureh of Carthage, and the pro-
vincial synods," we find his conduct ascribed to a motive as unworthy
of his character as of the author who could thus argue — " Cyprian had
renounced those temporal honours, which, it is probable, he would never
. have obtained ; but the acquisition of such absolute command over the
.consciences and understanding of a congregation, hov/ever obscure or
.despised by the world, is more truly grateful to the pride of the human
heart, than the possession of the most despotic power, imposed by arms

• and conquest on a rehictant people." After such an account of his con-
duct in life, we need not be surprised at the following base insinuation

• v/ith respect to his feelings under the prospect of a violent death — " It
was in the choice of Cyprian either to die a martyr, or to live an apos-
tate : but on that choice depended the alternative of honour or infamy.
Could we suppose that the bishop of Carthage had employed the profes-
sion of the Christian faith only as the instrument of his avarice or ambi-
tion, it was still incumbent on him to support the character which be
had assumed; and if he possessed the smallest degree of manly fortitude,
rather to expose himself to the most cruel tortures, than by a singieact
to exchange the reputation of a whole life, for the abhorrence of his
■Christian bi-ethren, and the contempt of the Gentile world." See Gib-
■bon's History, (Jfc. 8vo. edit, vol.ii. p. 352,435,

General Defence of Episcopacy, 219

bishop." On this our Professor observes — " Nothing can
be more evident, than that the whole distinction of the
Episcopate is here ascribed to seniority in the ministry,
without either election, or special ordination. When the
bishop died, the senior colleague succeeded of course ; as
to ordination, it was the same in both, and bishop meant
no more, than first among the presbyters, or the senior
presbyter."'^' But if this be really the meaning of Hilary's
words, we must be allowed to say, that he expressed him-
self very improperly, when in the same passage he assigned
this as the reason, why there was " one ordination of a hi'
shop and a presbyter ; because they were both priests"—
and there could be no necessity for a double appointment
to the same office, as it was undoubtedly by the same ordi-
nation, that both bishop and presbyter were promoted to
the order of priesthood. — " But," as he immediately adds
— ." the bishop is the first or chief priest ;" the first, not
merely in point of seniority, but in order and authority,
such as the chief priest was in the Jewish church. For
though he was a priest, yet all of that order were not high-
priests, nor did they succeed to that office in the way of
seniority ; just so — says Hilary, " though every bishop be
a presbyter, yet every presbyter is not a bishop i"^ Or, as
our Professor might have said to his pupils, — " though
every moderator be a minister, yet every minister is not a
moderator," nor does he *' succeed to the office of course,
as senior colleague ;" for if we are not mistaken, the choice
generally fails on the junior colleagues ; a very wide depar-
ture indeed from what Dr. Campbell makes Hilary describe

* I^ecture vH.

f The whole passage from Hilary, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, is in
these words : " Post Episcopum tamen diaconi ordinationem subjecit.
Quare ? Nisi quia Ep scopi er presbyteri una ordinatio est ? uterque enim
sacerdos est. Sed Episcopus primus est, ut omnis Episcopus presbyter
sit, non omnis presbyter Episcopus. Hie enim Episcopus est qui inter
presbyteros primus est. Uenique Tunoiheum presbyterum ordinatum
signiticat, sed quia ante se alterum non habebat, Episcopus erat."

^^ General Defence of Episcopacy,

to have been the primitive practice, and to give weight tot
his authority, points him out as " a respectable member of
the Roman presbytery in those days." How far he was
thought to deserve that character, and what respect was
paid to his authority by some of the other writers of ••* those
days," may be easily discovered from the ridiculous and con-
temptible light in which he is represented by the very next
*' witness whom our Lecturer adduces, a man," he says,
" who had more erudition than any person then in the
church, the greatest linguist, the greatest critic, the greatest
antiquary of them all."

This is no other than the presbyter Jerome, who wrote
about the end of the fourth, and beginning of the fifth cen-
tiuy, and whose " eminent authority" requires particular
consideration, " because," according to Dr. Campbell's
distinction, " he is held the great apostle of low-church*^
So much indeed is his authority built upon, in support of
ecclesiastical parity, that the most powerful champion who
has ever yet stood forth in its defence, after composing a
voluminous work against the Episcopal government of the
church, sent it abroad into the world under the title of-*^
^ An Apology for the opinion of Jerome."^ As it is from
this armory that all the subsequent adversaries of Episco-
pacy have borrowed the principal weapons, with which they
have appeared in the field, and fitted themselves for the
combat; we may well suppose, that our learned opponent

* See D. Blondel's " Apologia pro sentcntia Jlieronyvii." Amstel.
1646, as to which Dr. Monro, in his Eivjuiry into the JVew Opinions, ijfc.
very justly observes, that — " when the government and revenues of the
church were sacrilegiously invaded by atheists and enthusiasts under
Oliver Cromwell, the learned Blondel employed all his skill to make the
ancients contradict themselves, and all contemporary records ; and though
every line that he had written, with the least colour of argument, had
been frequently answered and exposed, it was still thought enough for
the enemies of Episcopacy to say that Blondel had written a book of
549 pages, to show that Jerome was of their opinion, and had sufficiently
proved that this ancient Monk vvas a Presbyterian.^^

General Defence of Episcopacy, 221

in this place, would not fail to wield these weapons with
his wonted dexterity ; and so as to make them yield every
possible aid to the cause which he had undertaken to de-
fend, while thus employed in fighting his way through
what he calls " the progress of the hierarchy." With this
view, we now find him bringing forward, in what he, no
doubt, thought the most hostile form, " the testimony" of
Jerome, as attacking Episcopacy from one particular point,
" the practice, which," he says, " had long subsisted at
Alexandria ;" and then gives us the passage in Jerome's own
words, from his epistle to Evagrius, mentioning that " from
the days of St. Mark, the evangelist, down to those of the
bishops Heracla and Dionysius, the presbyters of Alexan-
dria always chose one from among themselves, and placing
him in a higher seat, named him bishop, as an army would
make an emperor, or deacons choose an arch-deacon."*"

This is the famous story, respecting the supposed custom
of the church of Alexandria, which, from the days of
Blondel, has been eagerly laid hold of, to show, what Dr#
Campbell calls — " the sense and strength of the argument"
arising from it, that there can be no essential difference
between the order of bishop and that of presbyter ; since,
to make a bishop, nothing more was necessary at first (and
of this practice the church of Alexandria remained long an
example,) than the nomination of his fellow presbyters ; and
no ceremony of consecration was required, but what was
performed by them, and consisted chiefly in placing him in
a higher seat, and saluting him bishop."t We know well
where it is, that every thing which looks like ceremony in
the holy offices of religion, has been long exploded j but we

* " Alexandria: a Marco evangelista usque ad Heradam et Dionysium
Episcopos, pvesbyteri semper unum ex se electum, in excelsiori gradu
collocatum, Episcopum nominabant, quomodo si exercitus imperatorem
facial, aut diaconi eligant de se quem'industrium noverint, et archidiaco-
num vocent." Hieron. Ep. ad Evagrium.

f Lecture vii.

222 General Defence of Episcopacy.

cannot so readily discover, by what means the sacred rite of
' ordination can be excluded from the account given by Je-
rome of the practice at Alexandria, when the words imme-
diately following the passage just now quoted, so directly
refer to that very rite, and are introduced with the same
connecting particle, on which our Professor appears to lay
some stress — " For'^ even at Alexandria, — " what does a
bishop, which a presbyter may not do, excepting ordina-
tion .^"^ — " True," says he, " Jerome admits this as a dis-
tinction that then actually obtained ; but the whole preced-
ing part of his letter was written to evince, that from the
beginning it was not so." And we may say, it is equally
true, that between " writing to evince," and " actual evinc-
ing," there is a very material difference, as frequently ap-
pears from the latter being by no means the consequence of
the former.

As a proof of this, let us only try how Dr. Campbell's
paraphrase of the words he had quoted from Jerome, will
bear its necessary connection with the perplexing question
which immediately follows them. — " There was nothing,"
says the Doctor, " at first requisite to make a bishop, but
what was performed by his fellow presbyters, no other ordi-
nation, than their election; yor," adds Jerome, — " what does
a bishop which a presbyter may not do, excepting' ordina-
tion ,^" But why except ordination, or deny the power of
it to the presbyters, if no such thing was necessary, or ever
required in the making of a bishop? It is evident, therefore,
that Jerome not only " admits the superiority of bishops in
the exclusive privilege of ordaining," which Dr. Campbell
acknowledges to be " true," but that he also admits it to.
have been so from the beginning, at least from the time
when those divisions broke out in the church of Corinth^
to which St. Paul refers in his first Epistle to the Corin-

* Qiiid enbn fucit, excepta ordination^, Episcopus, quod presbyter nori.
facial ?

General Defence of Episcopacy, 223

thians. For it was immediately after these divisions took
-place, and in the very time of the apostles, that provision
was made for what Jerome calls the " remedy of schism,"
and to which he alludes more particularly in his commentary
on the Epistle to Titus, in which w« find this account given
of the same matter, that when it began to be said, I am of
Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and " every one
thought that those whom he baptized belonged to himself,
and not to Christ, it was decreed through the whole world,
that one, chosen from among the presbyters, should be set
over the rest, to whom should belong the whole care of the
church, that so the seeds of schism might be taken away."*
Allowing now, that such a decree did really take place, on
the occasion which is here said to have given rise to it, we
must still find it necessary to inquire, by whom it was
made, and what authority there was for making it. It
could not be the consequence of any voluntary agreement
-among the presbyters themselves, who were the persons
whose pov^rer, it seems, had been abused, and was, there-
fore, to be now restrained : For such an agreement could
onlv have produced a disposition to submit to this restraint,
but could not imply that they had any competent authority
to impose it. No general council had yet been called, no
assembly of the church held, which could pretend to give
laws to all its members, or to issue any other decrees than
what had come from those who had received power from
on high — to " go and teach all nations." It was to the
apostles^ therefore, and to them only, that we can ascribe
the decree to which Jerome refers, if any such was made
for binding the whole Christian world; so that even on the
principle which he lays down. Episcopacy can be traced to
no other source than apostolic institution.

* " Postquam vero unusquisque, eos quosbaptizaverat suosputavitesse,
non Christi, in toto orbe decrctuin est, ut unus de presbyteris electis super-
ponefetur ceeteris, ad quem omnis ecclesisc cura pertineret, et schisma-
tum semina toUerentur."

224 General DefeiKe of Episcopacy,

If after what has now been said of Jerome's testimony,
it should still be pretended, that his Alexandrian custom,
militates against any such original distinction been bishop
and presbyter, as we have all along asserted, we shall find
a sufficient reply to this objection in Jerome's own words,
used against one of his antagonists on a similar occasion,
*' Quid mihi profers unius urbis consuetudinem ?" Why
do you twit me with the custom of one city t Or, as he
expresses the same sentiment in another place by an antithe-
sis, which suffers from being translated into English—
" Major est (auctoritas) or bis quam urbis,'*'' The example
of a world is of more authority than that of a city. But
indeed there are many arguments which might be adduced
to show, that even the practice of the church in the city qf
Alexandria was not such as Jerome appears, or rather as
his commentators would make him appear to represent it.
There were two writers considerably earlier than he, and
both of them members of this same presbytery of Alex-
andria, which is pretended to have had such extraordi-
nary powers in the nomination or appointment of their
bishop ; and yet no notice is taken by them, not the least
hint given either by Clemens or Origen, of any such pecu-
liar practice or privilege in the church to which they be-
longed. This is the more remarkable in the case of Ori-
gen, who frequently complained of the severity with which
he had been treated by his bishop Demetrius, but never
thought of reminding him of the equality of footing on
which they stood, or of claiming the rights of a fellow
presbyter ; which surely he might have done, had Deme-
trius been no more than a temporary moderator, placed in
the chair with no other ceremony than that of salutation,
and for no other purpose, than collecting the votes of his
brethren, and preserving order in their several meetings.

We are not disposed to call in question the testimony of
Jerome, whose character and abilities we hold in just vene-
ration J and had he personally witnessed, or been contem-

General Defence of Episcopacy. 225

porary with those who witnessed, the singular custom
which he assigns to the church in Alexandria, we should
have paid all due respect to " his testimony, as a testimony
in relation to a matter of fact, both recent and notorious :"
But we are surprised that a writer, so much applauded for
accuracy as Dn Campbell, should have distinguished Je-
rome's testimony in this manner , or held it out as " regard-
ing the then late uniform practice of the church of Alex-
andria ;" as it appears, even by his own calculation, that
from the time when the practice ceased, to the time when
Jerome gave this account of it, there must have elapsed
near an hundred and forty years ; a much longer period
than seem.s to be intimated by the manner in which our
Professor speaks of it : and it may well be ouestioned
whether a transaction at such a distance of time, however
notorious, could properly be termed recent^ or whether, in
referring to the happy event of 1660, an accurate writer
would, in 1800, call it the late restoration.

But we are told, that in support of Jerome's testimony,
" that of the Alexandrian patriarch Eutychius has been
pleaded, who, in his annals of that church, takes notice of
the same practice, but with greater particularity of circum-
stances than had been done by Jerome." And our Lec-
turer might also have told his pupils, that this same annalist
lived as far down as the tenth century, and though a
patriarch, such as the church produced at that day, was
remarkable for nothing so much as his credulity, and the
inconsistency of his narratives, not only with those of more
authentic historians, but often with themselves. Neither
Jerome nor he produces any authorities for what they
report of the practice at Alexandria ; and as to the former,
it is well known, that being a man of warm temper, hot in
disputation, and possessed of extensive learning, and won-
derful powers of mind, he would readily take hold of any
appearance of argument, and push it in every direction, by
his peculiar strength of language, to carry the point which

29

:^6 General DefeiKe of Episcopacy*

he had in view, and was eager to accomplish. That this
was the case when he wrote his epistle to Evagrius, is in
some measure acknowledg-ed by our Professor himself, who
says — ^that what Jerome had been maintaining in the pre-
ceding part of this letter, was " in opposition to some dea-
con, who had foolishly boasted of the order of deacons, as
being superior to the order of presbyters." Feeling, there-
fore, for the dignity of his own office, thus in danger of
being trampled on by such presumptuous folly, Jerome's
object was, by every possible means, to exalt the presbifter^
in order to repress the aspiring pretensions of the deacon^
With this view, a man of such keen resentment, and
warmth of disposition, would naturally push his argument
beyond its proper bearing, and in his haste to keep down
the presumption of an inferior order, would easily run on,
till he encroached on that which was superior to his own i
that so by adding to the height on which he stood, he might
increase his distance from those that were below him*
Those who coolly attend to his train of reasoning on the
subject before us, can hardly fail to discover that this is
often the case ; and, on many occasions, will find it more
difficult to reconcile Jerome to himself, than to draw any
advantage from him, in favour of that cause, which the
followers of his apologist, Blondel, have so anxiously
brought him forward to support.

It has been justly observed, that " in spite of the appa-
rent contradictions to be found in the writings of Jerome,
some of the strongest proofs may be produced from them,
that the original establishment of the Christian church was
Epiacopal^^ in the true and proper sense of that term.^
In this same epistle to Evagrius, he says expressly-—
" That we may know that the apostolic traditions were
taken from the Old Testament, that which Aaron and his
sons, and the Levites were in the temple, let the bishops,

* See an Appendix to Mr. Daubeny's Guide to the Churchy vol. i. p. 66,

Beneral Defence of Episcopacy* 22^

*^esbyters and deacons claim to themselves in the church."^
Here it is plainly asserted, not only that the hierarchy of
<the church is founded on apostolic tradition, but also that
the apostles had the model of the temple in their view, and
raised their plan of church government according to the
Jewish econom}^, by placing the same difference between
bishop, presbyter and deacon, under the gospel, as there
had been between the high-priest, priest and Levite under
the law ; a position, which overturns every argument that
can be brought from any other part of his writings, to
prove the identity of bishop and presbyter, or that the
latter is of the same order with the former ; of whom he
says also in this epistle — " that the power of riches, or the
humility of poverty, does not make a bishop higher or
lower ; but they are all successors of the apostles."*!* On
the same principle he argues against the Luciferians in the
following manner — ^" that the safety of the church depends
on the dignity of the chief priest, (or bishop) to whom, if
a peculiar power be not given, superior to that of others,
there will be as many schisms as priests in the churches."}:
To the same purpose we find him admonishing Nepotian
** to be subject to his chief priest, and to receive him a&
the father of his soul; for what Aaron and his sons were,
that we know the bishop and presbyters to be."|| It may
also be observed, that in his Catalogue of ecclesiastical wri*

* ** Et ut sciam'js traditioiies apostoHcas sumptas de veteri testamento:;
<|Uod Aaron, et filii ejus, et Levitjc, in templo fuerint, hoc sibi Episcopi,
presbyter! atque diaconi vendicent in ecclesia." Epist. ad Evag.

f " Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis humilitas, val subliraiorem vd
inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Ceterum omnes apostolorum succes-
soies sunt." Epis. ad Evag.

\ " Ecclesiae saius in sumrai sacei'dotis dignitate pendet, cui si non
cxors quiedam, et ab omnibt|;> eminens detur potestas, tot in ecclesii^
efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes." Dialog, advers. Luciferian.

II " Esto subjectus pontifici tuo, et quasi animK parentem suscipe:
Quod Aaron et filios ejus, hos Episcopum et presbyteros esse noveri-
mus." Epist. ad Nepot.

^28 General Defence of Episcopacy,

iersy he mentions " St. James the Just, called the brdthef
of our Lord, as ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusa-
lem, Timothy as ordained bishop of Ephesus by St. Paul,
and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, by St. John :" And in the
same work he cites the genuine epistles of Ignatius, as the
third bishop of Antioch after the apostle Peter, in which
epistles we know how clearly the distinction between bishop
and presbyter is marked, and the authority of the superior
order as firmly maintained. To all this may be added what
he says, in his, epistle against the Montanists, that whereas
" among them the bishop was considered as but in the
third degree, among us the bishops hold the place of the
apostles."^

We have now taken a concise, but we believe correct
enough view, both of the " testimony and opinion" of Je-
rome, in regard to the point in question between the advo-
cates for and against Episcopacy. We have seen him ad-
mitting, in his own way, that the church of Alexandria
had this form of ecclesiastical polity in it, from the days of
St. Mark the Evangelist, and that it was adopted as a
remedy for those schisms and confusions, which broke out
in the days of the apostles, and was no longer delayed than
the disease appeared. We have seen him also acknowledg-
ing, that the hierarchy of the Christian church was founded
on apostolic tradition, and that in establishing the evangeli-
cal polity, the apostles had an eye to the legal economy, and
considered the peace and unity of the church as depending
on the authority of the bishops, whom he therefore repre-
sents as standing in the place of the apostles, and succeed-
ing to all their ordinary powers. If these are the senti-
ments, which Jerome delivers in plain unequivocal lan-
guage, when allowed to speak for himself, and without suf-
fering any " violence to his expressions," the friends of
Episcopacy need not be afraid of meeting with any opposi-

* " Apud eosEpiscopus tertius est, apud nos apostolorum locum Epis-
copi tenent." Ep. 54.

\

General Defmce of Episcopacy. 229

tion either from his "opinion or his testimony ;" since both
are equally favourable to their cause, when not wrested to
a sense, which would make him as inconsistent with him-
self as hostile to them.

If after all it should be thought, that Jerome's language,
in some parts of his works, is of a doubtful nature, and
seems to give an account of the origin of Episcopal
government, somewhat different from that which has the
concurring testimony of antiquity in its favour, we may
still be allowed to ask, whether such writers as Clemens of
Rome, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Polycarp, Clemens of
Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, and
many more, long prior to Jerome, were not as capable,
and had not as good opportunities, as he, with all his know-
ledge of antiquity, could pretend to, of " investigating the
origin of any ecclesiastical order or custom," and, therefore,
of discovering what change, or whether any change had
happened in the constitution of the church, from its first
Foundation to their own times ? If such a question must
be answered in the affirmative, we are equally certain, that
they will all be found to agree in this, as a well known truth,
that the ecclesiastical constitution, under which they lived,
consisting of three distinct orders of church officers, with
*' discriminating powers, had been framed by the apostles,
after the pattern set them by their blessed Master, and from
them handed down, without change or interruption, by a
regular and duly authorized succession.

We have observed, from the works of some of these early
writers, how they were accustomed to argue against the he-
retics of those times, from the impossibility of their showing
that regular succession of bishops from the apostles, which
distinguished all the sound and orthodox parts of the Chris-
tian church. But how weak and silly had this argument
been, if the heretics could at any time have proved a breach
in that succession ; much more could they have shown, by
undoubted evidence, that it had no relation to the apostles,

/

230 General Defence of Episcopacy,

and did not at all commence till about thirty or forty yeaM
after the last of them was removed from this world ? Had
this been a fact, known, or even but surmised at that time,
we may well suppose, how eagerly it would have been laid
hold of, by the enemies of the true faith, to cut down at
once the whole force of that reasoning, which, founded
on the apostolic succession of bishops, had been so repeat^
edly and powerfully employed against them.

The strength of this argument did not depend on any in*
genious subtilty in the manner of stating it. — There was
nothing connected with it, which could be considered as
matter of abstruse speculation, that might be differently un^
derstood by the opposite parties. The whole point in ques-
tion was to be decided by an appeal to those ecclesiastical
records, from which the succession of bishops in the several
churches might be easily ascertained ; and no mistake was
likelv to happen, none indeed could generally prevail, when
the public registers were so numerous, and so many monu-
ments remained to bear witness to every important transac-
tion, from the days of the apostles down to that very period^
which some authors in thiese latter times have thought
proper to fix, as the sera of a wonderful change in the con-^
stitution and government of the Christian church.— They
have not indeed agreed as to the precise time when thi§
supposed alteration took place ; but in general their opi-
nions seem to coincide pretty much with that of Dr. Camp-
bell, who acknowledges, that " before the middle of the
second century, a subordination in the ecclesiastic polity,
which he calls primitive Episcopacy, began to obtain very
generally throughout the Christian world, every single
church or congregation having a plurality of presbyters, who,
as well as the deacons, were all under the super mtendency of
one pastor or bishop."^ Now, here is an acknowledgment

* " It was under these circumstances," says Mr. Gibbon, the historian,
•• that the lofty title of bishop began to raise itself above the humble

J

General Defence of Eplscopaey, 23 1

that this extraordinary change in the ecclesiastic polity,
which consisted in the subordination of many, and the su-
perintendencif of one, had its beginning before the middle
of the second century, that is, about forty or fifty years af-
ter the death of St. John. At this period, being the close
of the apostolic age, it is supposed that the ecclesiastic
polity was a state of perfect parity, every church or congre-
gation being under the direction of a college of bishops or
presbyters, the same name being applied to all, with some
iittle distinction in the senior colleague, which though not
easily defined, and, by our Professor's account, " very dif-
ferent from that which in process of time obtained," yet,
he says, " served for a foundation to the edifice, that is, to
the rise of Episcopal superiority."

But even with the advantage of this foundation, we shall
find it very difficult to account for the edifice which was so
quickly reared, and at a time when so few materials could
be furnished for that purpose, either by avarice or ambi-
tion. Our Lecturer indeed thinks it " no reflection on the
church in general, or even on the pastors in particular, to
suppose, that however sincere their zeal for the cause of

appellation of presbyter ; and while the latter remained the most natural
distinction for the members of every Christian senate, the former was
appropriated to the dignity of its new president. — The primitive bishops
were considered only as the first of their equals, and the honourable ser-
vants of a free people. Whenever the Episcopal chair became vacant by
death, a new president was chosen among the presbyters by the suffrage
of the whole congregation, every member of which supposed himself in-
vested with a sacred and sacerdotal character. Such v\as the mild and
equal constitution by which the Christians were governed more than an
hundred years after the death of the apostles. Every society formed
within itself a separate and independent republic." — See a great deal
more to the same purpose, from p. 328 to p. 341 of the 2d. vol. 8vo, of
the History of the Decline mid Fall of the Homan Empire; from which
an attentive reader cannot fail to observe how closely our Christian Pro-
fessor has imitated the sceptical historian. An injidel might have had
reasons for slandering and abusing Episcopacy, of which a believer should
'have been ashamed to avail himself.

232 General Defence of Episcopacy"*

Christ might be, as it undoubtedly was with a very great ma-
jority, they would not be entirely superior to considerations
either of interest or of ambition, when such considerations
were not opposed by motives of a higher nature."* And
we may ask, what higher' motives could have been set in
opposition to these worldly considerations, than those which
must have daily presented themselves to the minds of the
primitive pastors in the age to which we are now looking
back, when many of them must have been ordained by the
apostles themselves, or by their immediate successors, and
all of them may be supposed to have possessed a consider-
able share of the apostolic spirit and disposition, and were at
any rate exposed to the same hardships and sufferings, the
same deprivation of all worldly comforts and conveniences,
which the apostles had to encounter? Is it then to be ima-
gined, that they would pretend to alter that form of mi-
nistry which the apostles had established in the church, or
depart so soon from the rule, which, by the direction of
the Holy Spirit, had been given them to walk by ? Can it
be credited, that men so humble, and heavenly minded,
so meek and unassuming as these primitive pastors unde-
niably were, could dare to bring forward a system of ec-
clesiastic polity in direct opposition to that, which, by
Christ's command, his apostles had delivered to the con-
verted nations, and thus prefer a little temporary pre-emi-
nence among their fellow servants on earth, to the eternal
approbation of their great Lord and Master in heaven?
Could such folly and presumption be expected from men
who, in every other respect, had acted a wise, sober and con-
sistent part, and rather than renounce their Redeemer, and a
due regard to his institutions, had shown themselves ready
and willing to endure, and many of them actually did en-
dure, the most cruel and barbarous sufferings, which the
malice of their heathen persecutors could possibly contrive

* Lecture viii.

^General Defence of Episcopacy, 233

as instruments of a spiteful rage against the faith of Jesus,
and the order and unity which then adorned his church ? — .
Could, for instance, the zealous and venerable Ignatius,
.who was such an ornament to that very period, in which
the pretended innovation is supposed to have taken place ;
--**.GOuld he have concurred in the base presumptuous
scheme of new-modelling the frame and constitution of the
church, when his whole desire was to contribute to its
peace and preservation, and to bear all that his enemies
could inflict, if so he might attain to be with its glorious
Head, even Jesus Christ ? Or could his illustrious contem-
porary, Polycarp, the great light of the Asiatic churches,
have given his sanction to so bold and impious an undertak-
ing ; the man who, when urged to repent of his error and
blaspheme Christ, replied — " Fourscore and six years have
I served him, and he never did me any harm : how, then,
can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?"

Perhaps it will be said, that in the days of these holy
martyrs, the change or innovation alluded to, was only
beginning to make its appearance, and by advancing slowly
in its progress, would be less apt to excite apprehension in
that numerous body of church officers, whose station and
powers in the church were at last so materially affected by
it. Our Professor's plan of parochial Episcopacy, as deli-
neated by his fanciful description, would seem a deviation,
so small and inconsiderable, from his apostolic presbytery,
as to create no alarm in the minds of those who did not,
mid perhaps could not, perceive how gradually it was ap-
proaching to a still greater change, leading insensibly to
what he calls the next step of the hierarchy, " when pre-
lacy, or diocesan Episcopacy succeeded the parochial, and
began generally to prevail." Here again we are presented
with another beginning'^ and what our Lecturer thinks a
new system of ecclesiastic polity, which, not satisfied with
calling diocesan Episcopacy^ he chooses also to distinguish
by the name o£ prelacy; a term which, in the vulgar lan-

30

234 General Defence of Episcopacy,

giiage of this country, being often connected with popery^
has, with many, an invidious meaning attached to it. Yet
we can see no good reason why this title should be consi-*
dered as more descriptive of diocesan than of parochial
Episcopacy, since the bishop had been surely as much a
prelate (praelatus), or person preferred in his parish^ as he
afterwards was in his diocese^ and Dr. Campbell acknow-
ledges, not only that " it was a proper Episcopacy in re-
spect of the disparity of the ministers," which is the very
thing we contend for, but also " that it seems to have as*
stimed the model of a proper Episcopate^ as the word is
now understood^ before the middle of the second century."
And if the case be really so, we shoiild be glad to learn
what occasion there was for our Professor taking so much
pains to establish an imaginary distinction between his pa-*
rochial and diocesan Episcopacy ; which may truly be called
a " distinction without a difference," as is evidently shown
by his own quotations from BurrHs Ecclesiastical LaWy
where that writer justly observes — -" The cathedral church
is the parish church of the whole diocese ; which diocese
was therefore commonly called parochia m ancient times^
till the application of this name to the lesser branches into
which it was divided, made it, for distinction's sake, to be
called only by the name of diocese." Bingham also, a very
industrious inquirer into the antiquities of the Christian
church, whose authority we have already quoted on this
subject,^ informs us, " that the ancient name of an Episco-
pal diocese for three hundred years was commonly '7ro(,^oix.icc,
which some mistake for a parish church, or single congre-
gation ; whereas, as learned men have rightly observed, it
signified then, not the places or habitations near a church,
but the towns or villages near a city, which, together with
the city, was the bishop's Tra^oiKia, or, as we now call it, his
diocese, the bounds of his ordinary care and jurisdiction.

* See page 186.

General Defence of Episcopacy » 235

That thus it was, appears evidently from this, that the
largest dioceses, such as those of Rome, Antioch, and
Alexandria, which had many particular churches in them,
were called by the same name ; as the reader may find an
hundred passages in Eusebius, where he uses the word
ffa^oiJtia, when he speaks of these large and populous cities,
which had many particular churches in them."— He then
adds the testimony of other writers to the same purpose j
and infers from the whole, " that nothing can be plainer,
than the use of the word Tra^oixta for a diocese, to the fourth
century ; and now about this time the word diocese began
to be used likewise."^

Such being the language and practice of the primitive
times with regard to this matter, it was very difficult for
our Professor to fix a precise date for the beginning of his
prelacy^ or diocesan Episcopacy^ as distinguished from that
which was parochial^ and yet was a proper Episcopate,
even " as the word is now understood." All that we find
him attempting with this view, is in a passage of his eighth
Lecture, where, speaking of " the first subdivision of the
pastoral charge into smaller precincts, since called parishes,
the name which had formerly belonged to the whole," he
says, " there can be no doubt, that there had been instances
of it in great cities, long before the expiration of the third
century, in some, perhaps in Rome, Alexandria, Antioch,
even before the expiration of the second, though it was far
from being general till a considerable time after the third.""!*
But as we agree with the Professor in this, that " a pastor's
charge is properly the people, not the place," we can see
no difference in the nature of prelacy, or Episcopacy, whe-
ther the place in wich the people reside, who are under the
bishop's charge, be called a parish or a diocese ; or whether
his charge be of larger or smaller extent. It is the pre-

* See Bingbam's Antiquities, vol. iii. p. 345, 346,
f Lecture viii.

^ Jf> General Defence of Episcopacy.

emmehce of office, or the superior authority annexed to the
Episcopal character, that gives the true criterion of prelacy}
and at whatever period that mark of distinction first ap-
peared in the Christian church, if it did not originate from
the apostles, and show itself in their immediate successors,
it must have been considered as a very striking encroach-
ment on the powers possessed by the parochial college of
presbyters. They must thus have been reduced to a state
of subordination and dependence, which it was strange that
they did not perceive to be the effect of unwarranted usur-*
pation on the part of the bishops, and, therefore, to be re-
sisted by the presbyters with a degree of firmness and re^
solution worthy of the sacred and equal trust which had
beeii committed to them.

Our Lecturer was aware, how unaccountable this must
appear to every person acquainted with the common feel-
ings of human nature, and, therefore, has endeavoured to
obviate the difRculty in the best manner he could. " Some,''^
he says, *' have represented it, as an insuperable objection
to the presbyterian hypothesis, concerning the rise of Epis*-
eopal superiority, that it seems to imply so great ambition
in one part, and so great supineness (not to give it a worse
name) in the rest of the primitive pastors ordained by the
apostles, and by the apostolic men that came after them,
as is perfectly incredible. This they seem to think a de-
monstration a priori., that the thing is impossible."^ And
we certainly do think it, if not impossible, yet at least
highly improbable, and a thing which has never yet oc-
curred in any similar case, either recorded in history, or
handed down by tradition. Dr« Campbell, however, is
very ingenious in pointing out the causes and motives,
which, in his opinion, might lead to it ; '' and so far," says
he, " am I from thinking that the ambition or the vices of
the first ministers gave rise to their authority, that I am

* Lecture vi.

General Defence of Episcopacy * 237

certain that this effect is much more justly ascribed to their
virtues. An aspiring disposition rouses jealousy — ^jealousy
puts people on their guard. There needs no more to check
ambition, whilst it remains unarmed with either wealth or
power. But there is nothing which men are not ready to
yield to distinguished merit, especially when matters are
in that state, wherein every kind of pre-eminence, instead
of procuring wealth and secular advantages, exposes but to
greater danger, and to greater suffering."

Such is the train of reasoning, with a good deal more to
the same purpose, made use of by our Professor, to over-
throw the " demonstration," to which he had alluded, and
to make it appear, that the rise of Episcopal superiority is
to be accounted for, by ascribing it to distinguished merit,
and distinguished danger, on the part of those who were
promoted to that superior dignity. That the first of these
causes could not operate in giving rise to the " Episcopal
superiority," is evident from what has been already said
on the nature of it. And if this superiority be considered
as a bold deviation from the plan of ecclesiastic polity laid
down by our Lord's apostles, and a presumptuous depar-
ture from the parity which they had established, it could
not possibly receive any countenance or support from men
of " distinguished merit" in the service of the church.
With such a character, they could never think of introduc-
ing, much less of accepting, any superiority or pre-eminence
above their equal brethren, whereby they might make them-
selves lords over God's heritage, in the manner which he
had forbidden. This was a species of merit as unknown
to these primitive times, as it was unworthy of the Chris-
tian pastors who lived in them. The" pious Irenaeus of
Lyons, the zealous Cyprian of Carthage, with his contem-
poraries, Fabian and Cornelius of Rome, and many more
whom we could name of the " noble army of martyrs,"
were as much prelates^ or diocesan bishops^ as any that ever
canie after them under that denomination, and some of

jh

238 General Defence of Episcopaeg*

them lived at the times, when even Dr. Campbell admits
the introduction of diocesan Episcopacy in a variety of in-
stances. Is it then to be supposed, that all these holy and
venerable prelates would encounter the severest trials, and
yield themselves to a violent death, in the humble hope
of receiving a crown of life, for assuming a superiority
tt^hich did not belong to them, and transgressing the limits
assigned to their ministerial order by that Lord, from whom,
the whole power of it was derived, and the whole reward
of a faithful discharge of duty to be expected ? If such a
conduct was far from giving them any merit in the sight of
God, it ought as little to have procured for them any hor
nourable mark of distinction among men ; especially among
their fellow pastors, who were thus held out as placed in
an inferior station, on account of their inferior merit, or
rather because they had no merit at all, not even that of
resisting such a daring innovation, and striving to preserve
the rights of their own order from being swallowed up by
this usurped superiority of rank, which, though but newly
introduced, was rapidly spreading, under the name of dio-.
cesan Episcopacy,

It is strange indeed, that through all the churches o^
Asia, Africa, and Europe, the " senior brother" in every
college of pastors, should thus at once have trampled on
the rights and privileges of his colleagues, as if a general
conspiracy had been entered into for that purpose : and yet
it is still more strange and unaccountable, that not one of
these innumerable pastors should have made a single re-
monstrance against so flagrant an usurpation, as if they too
had all combined, at one and the same time, to betray their
trust, and allow themselves to be thus shamefully degraded.
It is as impossible to conceive that any such thing should
have happened then, as to believe now, that all the mode-^
rators of the several synods under the Scotch establishment,
would be allowed to assume at once not only the title, bui
the superior rank and authority, of diocesan bishops, witli=*

General Defence of Episcopacy, 23d

©lit the smallest opposition from any one member of these
synods, or the least notice taken of such a wonderful
change of system.' — Nay, the difficulty must be much
greater, if we wish to make the cases similar: For then we
must suppose the whole of Christendom to be under the
same form of church government as that which is esta-
blished in this northern part of Britain ; to be convinced too
that this form of government is of apostolic institution,
and yet permit a few aspiring ecclesiastics to overturn it,
and introduce in all the Christian churches a new, unknown
scheme of " Episcopal superiority," favourable only to the
views of those who were its first contrivers.

It is further to be considered, that these few ambitious
prelates, who were thus so astonishingly successful in get-
ting themselves acknowledged to be true diocesan bishops,
were widely scattered over the face of the earth, and for the
most part knew very little of one another, and could hold
no general meeting for the purpose of concerting their plan,
or of obtaining the sanction of civil power to recommend it.
And yet so it happened, that under all these disadvantages,
they could contrive to learn each other's sentiments, to think
and act alike in every stage of this refined system of policy,
and at length were able to exhibit an entire new form of
ecclesiastic government, under the name of diocesan Epis-
copacy ; nay, had the amazing address to persuade the
whole Christian world, that so far from any change having
taken place, the church of Christ had all along, from the
days of the aposdes, been Episcopal. Nothing can add to
the degree of surprise, which must be excited by all this
inexplicable procedure, unless it be the consideration of
what Dr. Campbell mentions as another cause of the rise
of Episcopal pre-eminence, that " instead of procuring
wealth and secular advantages, it only exposed to greater
danger, and to greater suffering." This, we believe, was
really the case, in the severe and trying times to which we
are now looking back. As soQn as an edict passed for per-

240 General Defence of Episcopacy,

seciitihg the Christians in any part of the church, the bi-
shops were immediately aimed at, as the most guilty per-
sons, and the first that were exposed to the fury of their
persecutors. As their danger was thus imminent, their
labour too was often no less severe ; for upon them was
laid the principal care of the flock, which frequently re-
quired the greatest vigilance and attention in the shepherd.
To the undergoing all this toil and trouble, they were
inipelled by a sense of duty ; and were supported under it,
by the hope of having their services accepted by their bles-
sed Master. But could they have felt the force of this
motive, or indulged this hope, had they been conscious
at the same time, that they were violating his commands,
and arrogating to themselves a power and pre-eminence,
which he had expressly forbidden ? And of this they must
have been conscious, had their Episcopal superiority been
an infringement of the apostolic institution, and an entire
subversion of that system of ecclesiastic parity, which,
by their Lord's command, the teachers of the nations had
formed and left with his church, that it might be there re-
tained to the end of the world.

In accounting for so early and so universal a departure
from this supposed system of equality among the first Chris-
tian pastors, our Lecturer alludes to the origin of civil
g-ovemment, and thinks it " easy to evince, that the parallel
case of monarchy will, in the nature of things, be found
equally impossible."^ The friends of that form of govern-
ment will, no doubt, think it equally easy to remove this
impossibility, by bringing what they take to be clear, un-
questionable evidence, that monarchy, as well as Episco-
pacy, is founded on divine appointment. But supposing
the case to be otherwise, and that monarchy, or, as our
Professor calls it, " the dominion of one man over innu-
merable multitudes of men," was really a breach of their

* Lecture vi.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 241

original equality, and an encroachment on those " natural
rights of man," the maintaining of which has often made
a noise in the world, and, of late years, has been attended
with the most shocking barbarities ; is it then possible to
believe, that such revolutions work their way in a calm
and quiet manner, and are allowed to pass without notice,
as the effects of natural causes, " in the ordinary progres-
sion of human things?"— Yet of a similar nature, though
perhaps not so difficult to be accomplished, was the change,
which is supposed to have taken place in the church, by the
introduction of prelacy, or the setting up in every diocese^
one pastor above the rest, vested with all the powers, which
have ever since been assigned to the Episcopal office-
Such a change as this from that pastoral equality, which,
it is said, had previously subsisted from the days of the
apostles, we should think, must have excited some alarm,
or produced some disturbance in the church, or at least
have been taken some notice of, by the many writers, who
record the transactions of that very period in which this
remarkable change is pretended to have happened.

Let us but consider the high regard always expressed
among the primitive Christians for every thing which they
believed to be of apostolic institution ; what a controversy,
for instance, was raised on that account, and carried on for
many years, with the greatest zeal on both sides, about the
proper time of observing Easter, the annual festival which
they all celebrated in memory of our Lord's resurrection.
And when such a question as this was deemed to be of so
much importance, although it regarded merely the day that
was supposed to be fixed on by the aposdes, can it be ima-
gined that the constitution and form of government which
they had established in the church, would not be held in
the highest veneration, or that every care would not be
taken to preserve it pure and entire in the very state in
which the apostles had left it? When any schism or heresy
broke out in those days, we find the abettors of it assigning

31

i^42 General Defence of Episcopacy*

various causes, and often at a loss what to assign for their
breaking away from the communion of the church, and,
as it was then called, " setting up altar against altar." But
had they known, or suspected, that any change or inno-
vation had been introduced into the government of the
church, such as our modern opposers of prelacy, or Epis-
copacy, represent it to be, they would have eagerly brought
it forward, as a sufficient reason for their abandoning a so-
ciety which had submitted to such irregular and usurped
authority. The authors of this ambitious project would
have been held up to popular indignatioUj as " lording it
over God's heritage," and it would not have been left to
the declaimers " in our more enlightened times," to ex-
hibit in its proper colours " the priestly pride of such pre-
iatical preachers." Yet nothing of this kind was ever
heard of, in the times to which we are now referring. No
ecclesiastical historian of that or the succeeding ages takes
the least notice of any such departure from apostolic insti-
tution : No adversary of the church in those days ever ob-
jected to it : And from all this silence both in friends and
enemies ; from nothing being said either to justify or con-
demn the change that is supposed to have happened, we
may certainly conclude that no such change had taken
place ; but that the government of the church had still con-
tinued, without any interruption, what the apostles had
left it, a proper and regular Episcopacy, whether we caU
it parochial or diocesan, which makes no difference as to
the nature of the institution, or the authority on which 1%
was founded.

We may, therefore, sura up what has been said on this
point, in the words of a most learned and distinguished
divine, whose works have been long admired for their
genuine piety, and who, in asserting Episcopacy to be of
divine institution, appeals thus to the faith and practice of
Christendom — " Be ye followers of me, as I am of Christ,
is an apostolical precept. We have seen how the apostles

General Defence of Episcopacy » 243

have followed Christ, how their tradition is consequent of
divine institution. Next let us see how the church has
followed the apostles, as the apostles have followed Christ.
Catholic practice is the next basis of the power and order
of Episcopacy. For — ^let us consider-— Is it imaginable
that all the world should, immediately after the death of
the apostles, conspire together, to seek themselves, and
not the things that are of Jesus Christ, to erect a go-
vernment of their own devising, not ordained by Christ,
not delivered by his apostles, and to relinquish a divine
foundation, and the apostolical superstructure, which, if it
was at all, was a part of our Master's will, which whoso-
ever knew and observed not, was to be beaten with many
stripes ? Is it imaginable, that those gallant men, who
could not be brought off from the prescriptions of gen-
tilism, to the seeming impossibilities of Christianity, withr
out evidence of miracle, and clearness of demonstration
upon agreed principles, should all, upon their first adhesion
to Christianity, make an universal dereliction of so consi-
derable a part of their Master's will, and leave gentilism
to destroy Christianity; for he that erects another economy
than what the Master of the family hath ordained, destroys
all those relations of mutual dependence which Christ hath
made for the conjunction of all the parts of it, and so de-
stroys it in the formality of a Christian congregation or
family ? — Is it then imaginable, that all those glorious mar-
tyrs, that were so strict observers of divine sanctions and
canons apostolical, would be also so assiduous in conttmn-
ing the government that Christ left for his family, and
erect another ? To what purpose were all their watchings,
their banishments, their fears, their fastings, and formida-
ble austerities, and, finally, their so frequent martyrdoms ?
Of what excellency or avail, if, after all, they should be
hurried out of the world, and all their fortunes and posses-
sions, by unilmely, by disgraceful, by dolorous deatlis, to
be set bef <^ie a tribunal, to give account of their universal

244 General Defence of Episcopacy*

neglect, and contemning of Christ's last testament, in so
great an affair as the whole government of his church ? If
all Christendom should be guilty of so open, so united a
defiance against their Master, by what argument or confi-
dence can any misbeliever be persuaded to Christianity,
which, in all its members, for so many ages together, is so
unlike its first institution as in its most public affair, and
for matter of order of the most general concernment, is so
contrary to the first birth? Where are the promises of
Christ's perpetual assistance, of the impregnable perma-
nence of the church against the gates of hell, of the spirit
of truth to lead it into all truth, if she be guilty of so
grand an error as to erect a throne, where Christ hath
made all level, or appointed others to sit in it, than whom
he suffers ? Either Christ hath left no government, or most
certainly the church hath retained that government, what-
soever it is."* And he concludes the whole of his reason-
ing on this subject with the application of that golden rule
of Vincentius Lirinensis— " We must take care above all
things to adhere to that which has been believed, in all
places, at all times, and by all persons ; for this is truly
and properly catholic :" And nothing was ever more so
than the government of the church by bishops. Therefore,
as the same ancient author observes — " It never was, is,
nor ever shall be lawful to teach Christian people any other
thing, than that which has been received"t from a primi-
tive fountain, and has descended in the stream of catholic,
uninterrupted succession.

* See section xxii. of an excellent tract, entitled — ** Of the sacred Or-
der and Offices of Episcopacy " &c. bound up with the other polemical
works of Dr Jeremy Taylor, chaplain to Charles the First, and bishop
of Down and Connor.

f " Magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod sem-
per, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Hoc est enim vere proprieque ca-
tholicum. — Annunciare ergo Christianis catholicis, praeter id quod acce-
perunt, nunquam licuit, nunquam licet, nunqua,ni licebit." Vincent. Li-
Tin. adv. Haeres. cap. 3 — 14.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 245

In opposition, however, to all these testimonies of an*
dent times, which have been brought forward in support
of the apostolic or Episcopal succession, there is an argu-
ment still used by some writers, to lessen the force of so
much accumulated evidence, by impressing on the mind
as much doubt and uncertainty as possible, with regard to
the manner in which this succession has been preserved,
or carried on, from one age of the church to another. The
danger of its failing, and the difficulty of knowing whether
it has not so failed, or suffered interruption, were, there-
fore, topics, of which our learned Professor would not fail
to lay hold, when striving to maintain his opinion, that
*' the validity of God's covenant," as he expresses himself,
'' cannot depend on the ministry, or his promises be ren-
dered ineffectual to the humble believer on account of any
defect in the priesthood." To this he had been alluding
in the beginning of his fourth Lecture, and after pointing
out the difficulty of " examining the import of names and
titles, and the authenticity of endless genealogies," he re-
curs to the subject, as an inference from the case of the
thankful Samaritan, whose faith was accepted, although he
did not go and show himself to the priests: And yet —
*' no order of men," says our Lecturer, " existing at pre-
sent in the Christian church, can give any evidence of a
divine right, compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and
of the posterity of Aaron in the Jewish."* Now, if we
should say, that the very reverse of this is the case, the
position might be safely maintained on this ground, that it
could not be so easily proved, that no spurious child had
ever been introduced into the family of the high priest, as
that no unordained person had ever been admitted to the
Episcopal office. But, indeed, we have good reason to
believe, that in either case, nothing of this kind has ever
happened. It was sufficient for the Israelite to know, that

* Lecture iv.

246 General Defence of Episcopacy*

the priesthood under the law having been established in the
family of Aaron, no doubt had ever been entertained of
that family being preserved pure from any illegitimate
mixture. And the Christian has at least equal ground to
be satisfied, that the government of the church under the
gospel having been established by the apostles, in the way
of Episcopal succession, that succession has never yet failed
in the Christian world, however it may have been in some
places despised, for two or three centuries past, and
thrown aside as unnecessary.

It is a circumstance, that must be well known to those
who are acquainted with the history of the Christian
church, that for the preservation of the Episcopal succes-
sion, nothing more was requisite than a proper observance
of the canons made by the church for that purpose, and a
due regard to the doctrine, on which these canons were
founded. It was always a received doctrine in every part
of the church, that no ordination was valid, but that of
bishops ; and the earliest canons required, that every
bishop should be ordained or consecrated by two or three
bishops. By this means, the Episcopal succession has been
carefuUy preserved in every age, from the days of the
apostles to the present time ; and since it was universally
believed, that none but bishops could ordain, it was mo-
rally impossible, that any person could be received as
bishops, who had not been so ordained. This was the
reason, which Mr. Law assigned for the security of the
Episcopal succession, in one of his admirable letters to
Bishop Hoadly^ and then applied it in this manner — " Now,
is it not morally impossible, that in our church any one
should be made a bishop without Episcopal ordination?
Is there any possibility of forging orders, or stealing a
bishopric by any other stratagem ? No ; it is morally im-
possible, because it is an acknowledged doctrine amongst
us, that a bishop can only be ordained by bishops. Now,
as this doctrine must necessarily prevent any one being a

General Defence of Episcopacy. 247

bishop without Episcopal ordination in our age, so it must
have the same effect in every other age, as well as ours ;
and, consequently, it is as reasonable to believe, that the
succession of bishops was not brqke in any age since the
apostles, as that it was not broke in our own kingdom
within these forty years. For the same doctrine, which
preserves it forty years, may as well preserve it forty hun-
dred years, if it was equally believed in all that space of
time. And that this has been the constant doctrine of the
church, we have the most undoubted evidence. We be-
lieve the scriptures are not corrupted, because it was
always a received doctrine in the church, that they were
the standing rule of faith, and because the providence of
God may well be supposed to preserve such books, as were
to convey to every age the means of salvation. The same
reasons prove the great improbability that this succession
should ever be broke, both because it was always against a
received doctrine to break it, and because we may justly
hope the providence of God would keep up his own insti-
tution."^

Such is the clear, satisfactory train of reasoning, by
which a decisive answer is at once afforded to all the " dark
and critical questions," that can possibly arise, even in such
a fertile mind, as that of our late learned Lecturer, " about
the import of names and titles, and the authenticity of end-
less genealogies," the examination of which did not appear
in such a formidable view, in the dawn of the reformation,
and when, after a lapse of near a thousand years, men be-
gan again to look into these questions, and to inquire into

* See the second of the Three Letters written by the Rev. William
Law to Bishop Iloadly, and lately reprinted in a collection of tracts,
called " The Scholar armed against the Errors of the Time" ilfc. In
the preface to which, this reason is assigned for republishing Mr. Law's
Letters, that — " though incomparable for truth of argument, brightness
of wit, and purity of English, and honoured with the highest admira-
tion at their first appearance, they are now in a manner forgotten."

248 General Defence of Episcopacy,

the foundation of that ecclesiastical authority, which they
still saw to be necessary for the preservation of the faith,
the unity and order of the church. Even those who are
considered as the founders of the presbyterian form of
church government, did not object to Episcopacy, on ac-
count of any doubt or uncertainty as to the regular succes-
sion of bishops. So far from entertaining any suspicion or
prejudice of that kind, they reckoned it a most unjust
aspersion to say, that they condemned or threw off Epis-
copacy, because they were obliged to do without it in
Geneva, where they thought it impossible to have bishops,
without submitting to that papal supremacy, which they
had lately renounced. But as this was not the case in
England, they highly applauded the Episcopal hierarchy
of the English church, and congratulated the nation on
their happiness in retaining it. This appears from their
several letters to Queen Elizabeth, to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, and others of the English bishops, in which
they earnestly prayed to God for the continuance of so
great a blessing, bemoaned their own unhappy circumstances
in being deprived of it, because they had no magistrate to
protect them, and owned that the want of Episcopacy was
a great defect, but called it their misfortune rather than their
fault. — " As for their excuse," we shall only say, in the
words of a masterly writer on this subject, " we do not
now meddle with it, for, we think, it was not a good one ;
they might have had bishops from other places, though
there were none among themselves but those who were
popish, and they might as well have had bishops as pres-
byters, without the countenance of the civil magistrate.
It might have raised a great persecution against them, but
that is nothing as to the truth of the thing ; and if they
thought it a truth, they ought to have suffered for it."*

* See a " Discourse on the ^talifications requisite to administer the Sa-
crnments,^' by the celebrated Charles Leslie, and republished, with many

General Defence of Episcopacy, 249

But whatever weight may be allowed to their plea of
necessity, it is evident, from their having recourse to it as
an excuse for their conduct, that they considered the refor-
mation, in which they were engaged, as a renouncing and
withdrawing from, not pure and genuine Episcopacy, but
the corruptions, which papal usurpation had grafted upon
it. This i|5 plainly and openly avowed by their great leader
Calvin, who, in opposing the claims of the Romish church,
gays—" If they would give us an hierarchy, in which the
bishops did so rise above others, as that they would not
refuse to be subject to Christ, and to depend on him as
their only Head, and be referred to him ; \n which they
would so preserve brotherly communion among themselves,
as to be united by nothing so much as his truth, then, in-
deed, I should confess, that there is no anathema, of which
liiose persons are not worthy, if any such there be, who
would not reverence such an hierarchy, and submit to it
isrith the utmost obedience."* And such an hierarchy he
acknowledges that the church of England possessed, to
which he therefore professes to give both inward rever-
ence, and outward respect, assuring the bishops, that he
would gladly have served them, in settling the affairs of
their church.

of his other tracts, in the Scholar Armed, &c. And in confirmation of
the truth of Mr. Leslie's remark, " that the Genevan reformers might
have had bishops from other places," see an Ecclesiastical History of
Scotland, &c. by the Rev. John Skinner, vol. ii. p. 130, &c. where an
account is given of no fewer thaw ten bishops, who, in the beginning of
the reformation, renounced the errors of popery, and could have been
the means of preserving the Episcopal order in any society that chose to
accept of it. ^

* " Talem si nobis hierarchiam exhibeant, in qua sic emineant Epis-
copi, ut Christo subesse non recusent, et ab illo tanquam unico capite
pendeant, et ad ipsum referantur; in qua sic inter se fraternam societa-
tem colant, ut non alio rnodo quam ejus veritate sint colligati, turn vero
nullo non anathemate dignos fatear, si qui erunt, qui non earn reverean-
tur, snmmaque obcdientia observent."— JDe Ncccss. Eccles. Reform.

32

255 General Defence of Episcopdcij

To the same purpose we find Bcza expressing his senti-
tnents, in language as strong as it was possible to use oti
such an occasion — •" If, however, there be any," says he^
*' which you can hardly make me believe, who reject the
whole order of bishops, God forbid that any man of a
sound mind should assent to the madness of such persons."^
'And speaking of the government of the church of Eng-
land by bishops, he says — •" Let her enjoy that singular
blessing of God, which I wish may be ever continued to
her."'!' Many more testimonies of a similar nature might
be produced, to show how little countenance was given by
these leading reformers abroad to their pretended fol-
lov/ers in this countr}^, who would be satisfied with nothing
less than the entire abolition of Episcbjjacy, as " being a
great and insupportable grievance, and contrary to the in-
clinations of the generality of the people."J It were easy
to show how widely they differed in this respect from those
whom they considered as promoting the same cause in
Other countries. One remarkable instance of such differ-
ence of sentiment appears from what is recorded of the
learned Blondel, who is said to have concluded his "apo-
logy for the opinion of Jerome," with words to this pur-
pose— " By all that we have said to assert the rights of th^
presbytery, we do not intend to invalidate the ancient and
apostolical constitution of Episcopal pre-eminence. But
we believe.^ that wheresoever it is established conformably
to the ancient canons^ it must be carefully preserved; and
wheresoever by some heat of contention, or otherwise, it
has been put down or violated, it ought to be reverendy
restored." We aire farthe]^ informed, that " as the book

* " Si qui sunt autem, (quod sane mihi baud facile persuaseris) qtii
omhem Episcoporum ordinem rejiciunt, absit, ut quisquam satis sanac
mentis furoribus illorum assentiatur."

t " Fruatur sane ista singulari Dei beneficentia, q.U3e utinam sit illi
perpetua." Tract, de Minist. Eccl. Grad. cap. i. et xviii.

\ See Claim of Right, after the Revolution in 1688.

General Defence of Episcopacy* 251

iiad been written at the earnest request of the assembly at
Westminster, and especially of the Scots ; when their
agents in Paris saw this conclusion of Mr. Blondel's ma^
nuscript, they expostulated with him very loudly, for mar-
ring all the good he had done in his book, disappointing
the expectation of the assembly, and showing himself an
enemy, instead of a friend, to their holy covenant ; this
they urged upon him with such vehemency, and unwearied
importunity, that they prevailed with him to put out that
conclusion."* His intention however of admitting it, suf-
ficiently shows what his sentiments were on this subject,
and how far he was from abetting or approving those vio-
lent measures, which were then in agitation for overturning
that ancient and apostolic constitution of the church, which
he wished to see carefully preserved, wherever it had been
regularly established.

We shall only take notice of another testimony, given by
a divine of the presbyterian establishment in Holland, who
could not be suspected of any prejudice in favour of Epis-
copacy. This is the celebrated Mr. Le Clerc, whose words,
as quoted by the present bishop of Lincoln, are these—" I
have always professed to believe, that Episcopacy is of
apostolical institution, and consequently very good, and
very lawful ; that man had no manner of right to change it
in any place, unless it was impossible otherwise to reform
the abuses that crept into Christianity ; that it was jusdy
preserved in England, where the reformation was practi-
cable without altering it ; that, therefore, the protestants in
England, and other places, where there are bishops, do very
ill to separate from that discipline ; that they would still da
much worse in attempting to destroy it, in order to set up
presbytery, fanaticisni and anarchy. Things ought not to

* This important piece of informatioti is given at full length in a let-
ter from Dr. P. du Moulin to Dr. Durell, and published in the Appendix,
to his Vievi of the Government and Public Worship of God in the reformed
Churches beyond the Seas, p. 339, 340.

2&2 General Defence of Episcopacy*

be turned into a chaos, nor people seen every where with-
out a call, and Without learning pretending to inspiration.
Nothing is more proper to prevent them than the Episcopal
discipline, as by law established in England, especially when
those that preside in church government, are persons of
penetration, sobriety and discretion."* — ^Yet this same Mr,
Le Clerc exhibits a strong proof of the inconsistency of those
writers on this subject who, if they do not halt between two
opinions, seem desirous however to keep well with both
sides ; for, arguing in another part of his works, against
the necessity of Episcopal government, he tells us-—" It is
nothing to the purpose to show, that Christ and his apostles
instituted this form of church government, and that the
church never had any other kind of government in it for
above fifteen hundred years from our Saviour's days down-
wards, which, though it be so clearly evidenced, that the
truth of it cannot be denied, yet it is of no weight, nor de-
serves to be regarded. For those, who would make the
hierarchy necessary to the constitution of the Christian
church, ought to prove, that God instituted Christianity
for the sake of the Episcopal order, and that the Episcopal
drder was not instituted for the sake of Christianity. — For
if this order was appointed for the sake of the church
(which they cannot deny) they must also acknowledge,
that if it be more advantageous to the church in some
places, to have this order abolished, it is not amiss to lay
it aside in such places.^f

Now, this is an argument for abolishing the Episcopal
order, which, if carried to its full extent, will equally serve
to prove the lawfulness ©r even expediency of laying aside
every " outward and visible sign" in religion, nay, even the
scriptures themselves ; since it may justly enough be said,

* See Bishop Pretyman's Elements of Christian Theology, vol. ii. p.
400, 401.

t Bibliotheqiiey torn. ix. p. 159, as quoted by Dr. Brett in his Account
oj Church Government^ Jj'c. p. Ill, 112.

General Defence of Episcopacy 4 2SZ

that Christianity was not instituted for the sake of the scrip-
tures, but the scriptures, were written for the sake of Chris-
tianity, that the church might have a certain rule to walk
by; and therefore, when any church judges it more advan-
tageous to be without the use of the scriptures, there is no-
thing amiss in laying it aside, as the church of Rome has
done, for what she is pleased to think the greater benefit
of Christianity. By the same reasoning, the two sacra-
ments of baptism and the Lord's supper, being instituted
for the sake of Christianity, and as outward means of con-
veying an inward grace, they too may safely enough be
laid aside, when any body of pretended Christians shall feel
themselves so inwardly moved by the spirit, as to stand in
no need of such outward means of obtaining its grace and
influence ; and the church of Rome is the less to be blamed
for taking away the cup from the laity, since, according to
Le Clerc's argument, she might have deprived them of the
whole sacrament, had she thought it more for the advantage
of the church so to do.

These are modes of reasoning, to which, as advocates for
the truth as it is in Christ, we can never be obliged to have
recourse. We know, that the holy scriptures, and the sacred
institutions of Christianity, were designed by its blessed
Founder to be continued in his church, even unto the end
of the world ; and, therefore, neither the church of Rome,
nor any other church, ^an ever set aside the use of the
scriptures, or the ministration of the sacraments, whole
and entire, as they were instituted by Christ himself: And
we see no reason why the same may not be said of the
Episcopal government of the church, which, being ap-
pointed by Christ himself, who had all power given him in
heaven and earth for that purpose, cannot be set aside by
any human authority, or on any pretence whatever. We
do not say that Christianity was instituted for the sake of
the outward polity of the church, or the church for the
sake of the Episcopal order ; but we may justly say, what

tS4> ' General Defence of Episcopacy,

is plainly said in scripture, and was constantly professed in
the purest ages of the gospel, that the belief of the " holy
catholic church," being a part of the faith which Chris-
tianity requires, and the Episcopal order a part of what
we are taught to believe, concerning the constitution and
government of the church, no separation must be attempted
of what our God and Saviour has thus joined together.
We must receive his scheme of salvation according to the
plan and the terms on which he has offered it to us ; and
notwithstanding all that Mr. Le Clerc and other writers of
the same stamp have affimied to the contrary, we must
conclude, that the necessity of Episcopal government is
most undeniably proved, when we show that it was insti-
tuted by Christ and his apostles, and continued to be the
only form of church government for fifteen huntod years
and upwards.

The strength of the arguments which we have now beea
liandling in defence of the apostolic Episcopacy, lies in this,
undoubted truth, that the Christian priesthood is a divine
positive institution, which, as it could have no beginning
but by means of God's appointrnent, so neither could it
be continued but in the way which he had been pleased to,
appoint for its continuance. The apostolic practice plainly
showed what the method was which God had chosen for
that purpose : For Christ was in all that the apostles did,
and God was " in Christ reconciling the world to himself."
The ministry of this recp^iciliation was committed to the
apostles ; and we have seen how that ministry was branched
out into three distinct orders, and that the persons severally
invested with them, towards the end of the apostolic age,
were distinguished from ,each other by the appropriate titles
of bishop, presbyter and deacon : A distinction which evi-
dently took place in conformity with that which had been
established in the Jewish church, of high priest, priest and
Levite, That such a resemblance would appear between
the Israelitish and Christian economy, may be justly in-

General l5efence of Episcopacy, ^5$

ferred from this consideration, that the former was de-
signed to be the figure and forerunner of the latter, and
that the author of both was the same all-wise and merciful
God, who would certainly contrive and order whatever was
best for answering his own gracious purposes. This was a
matter which could only be settled by divine wisdom and
goodness, and, therefore, would not be left to the deter-
mination of human prudence. For if it be true, as Dr.
Campbell has affirmed it to be " certain, that one model
of church government may be much better calculated for
promoting the belief and obedience of the gospel than
another," we may as certainly conclude that such a mode!
would be prescribed by the divine Founder of the churchy
as he knew to be best calculated for promoting the ends of
infinite mercy and goodness. This was the object which
he had in view, by appointing the orders of the ministry^
and regulating the whole sacred service under the dispen-
sation of the law; and we cannot suppose that he would
leave that of the gospel in an irregular or unsettled condi-
tion, and not make sufficient provision for the permanent
order and polity of that church which he came in person to
establish and to build on such a rock, as that the gates of
hell should not prevail against it. To say then " -with free-
dom^^ as our Professor does, " that if a particular form of
polity had been essential to the church, it had been laid
down in another manner in the sacred books,''^ isj in our
opinion, to speak with more freedom than is becoming on
such a subject, especially when any person may see, who
is not blinded by prejudice, that there is " a particular form
of polity laid down in the sacred books," both in what our
Lord said to his apostles^ and in what they did in conse-
quence of his directions ; and all this laid down, if not in
such a manner as Dr. Campbell would have dictated, yet so
as to enable the primitive church perfectly to understand

* Lecture tv.

255 General Defence of Episcopacy.'

the plan, and continue the form of polity which the apostles
had begun, and which form, we have seen, was properly,
and in the true sense of the word, Episcopal.

If Dr. Campbell did not see this in the same light with
us, and was disposed to put a different construction oa
what is laid down in the sacred books, we can only regret
this circumstance, as an additional evidence in support of
his own observation, " that even good and learned men al-
low their judgments to be warped by the sentiments and
custom of the sect which they prefer; and the true partizan
of whatever denomination, always inclines to correct the
diction of the spirit by that of the party."^ Foreseeing,
no doubt, that this would be more particularly the case,
in the article of church government, our Lecturer proposed
an appeal to those early writers, who, by his own account,
as to what depends on testimony^ in explaining any part of
scripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every
case, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to
have swayed them, to be preferred before modern inter-
preters or annotators." Agreeing very cordially with him
in this opinion, respecting the testimony of the fathers, Wfi
have listened to the evidence of these unexceptionable wit-
nesses, and have found it, from the general and uniform
tenor of their writings, to be full and direct, in favour of
apostolic Episcopacy, as the invariable form of govern-
ment, which had obtained in the Christian church.— -This
was a matter of fact, in relation to which their testimony
could not be doubted ; and if we consider the nature of the
thing, it was surely " a case, wherein no particular passion
could be suspected to have swayed them." The apostolic
institution of Episcopacy was a truth believed, and openly
♦avowed, at a time when no worldly temptation could have
operated in producing that belief, or supporting that " par-
ticular form of ecclesiastic polity." There was no room

* See hjs note on Mat. in. 11. —in his Translatim (f the Gospeis.

General Defence of Episcopacy, 2S7

for a spirit of pride or ambition to exert its influence on the
minds of Christian pastors, when the highest office in the
church, so far from securing to those invested with it any
portion of worldly honour, or legal revenue, served only to
expose them to a greater degree of reproach and poveriy.
The station of a bishop was that of the most imminent dan-
ger; and whoever possessed that degree of zeal and firm-
ness which induced him to accept it, was almost certain,
as soon as persecution commenced, to fall the first victim
to the fury of his enemies.

While the Episcopal character was thus held up, as the
principal mark to be aimed at by the rage of heathen op-
pression, we can hardly suppose that any other motive
would have been sufficient to the undertaking an office so
peculiarly encompassed by danger and difficulty, but the
firm conviction of its being absolutely necessary to the
maintenance of order and unity in the church, and to the
preservation of that apostolic commission, from which must
be derived, by regular succession, all the right that any
man can have to minister in holy things. The form of this
ministry, and the several degrees of office by which it has
been always distinguished, we have now fully considered ;
and by every argument adapted to the subject, we have seen
it clearly evinced, that the constitution of the church, as
established by its divine Founder, and given in charge to
his chosen apostles, was by them transmitted to their
several successors, and so handed down through the pri-
mitive ages as a regular diocesan Episcopacy. This is the
plain and important fact, which we have been endeavouring
to establish as the second part of our plan, with all the ori-
ginal evidence in its favour, which could be required from
scripture, and all the additional testimony which has since
been affi)rded to its support, by " ANTIQUITY, UNI-
VERSALITY and CONSENT." We may therefore be
allowed to recommend, as a matter of undoubted certainty,
and worthy of the most serious consideration, what was

258 General Defence of Episcopaty^

proposed as the title of this chapter—-" That the church of
Christ, in which his religion is received and embraced, is
that spiritual society in which the ministration of holy things
i§ committed to the three distinct orders of bishops, pres-
byters, and deacons, deriving their authority from the
apostles, ^ those apo^tjes received their copimigsion fr<^
Christ.^'

r 259* )

CHAPTER in.

A Patt of this Holy^ Catholic^ and Apostolic Churchy though
deprived of the Support of Civil Establishment ^ does still
exist in this Country^ under the Name of the Scotch Epis-
copal Church, whose Doctrine^ Discipline^ and Worship^
as happily agreeing with that of the first and purest Ages
ef Christianity^ ought to be steadily adhered to by all who
profess to be of the Episcopal Communion^ in this ParB
of the Kingdom.

xT IS a well known fact, that in all the nati6ns of the
#orld, where any sense of a God or religion has been pre-
served, certain persons have always been set apart, as the
more immediate servants of that God, and for performing
Ihe more solemn offices of his religion. The sacred function
appropriated to these persons has, for the same reason, beeh
ever considered as a divine and most salutary institution.
This much may be gathered even from the dark records
ef heathen antiquity. But, if, wishing for clearer informa-
tion than these can aiford, we consult the sacred history,
we shall find this matter set in a just and true light. The
nature of the priesthood is there laid down in the plainest
manner, the design of it fully explained, and its authority
placed on the only proper foundation. The mediation of a
Redeemer, as absolutely necessary to the salvation of
mankind, is there held forth as the source of that typical
priesthood, and those figurative sacrifices, which the law of
God appointed and required, in all that period which pre-
ceded the incarnation of the promised Saviour.-— It was
from their relation to him, and dependence on him, that both
priests and sacrifices derived all their honour and efficacy :
And when at last this glorious Intercessor " appeared upon

260 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

earth, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself," we are
assured, that " he did not glorify himself to be made an
High Priest, but received this honour from his Father that
sent him, and was called of God, as was Aaron."* In
consequence of this high and heavenly commission, he
stood forth as the great High Priest of our profession,
and having purchased his church with his own blood, he
not only " died, but rose again, that he might be Lord both
of the dead and of the living." It was, therefore, after his
resurrection that he was heard to declare, that " all power
was given unto him in heaven and in earth ;" and with this
declaration he introduced the commission which he then
gave his apostles, delegating to them such a portion of his
power as was necessary for authorizing them to convert the
nations to his faith, and teach them to observe whatever he
had commanded, even unto the end of the world. From
the extent of time allotted to the execution of this commis-
sion, we may see, it was impossible for the apostles to ex-
ecute it fully, and to that extent, in their own persons, oi'
in any other way, than by doing what they could them-
selves, and transmitting to others the same charge, which
they had received, that so a succession of such commis-
sioned officers might be continued in the church, to the
end of time.

The manner in which this succession has been carried
on, and the certainty of its having met with no breach or
interruption, from the days of the apostles to the present
time, have both, we presume, been sufficiently established
in the preceding chapter, which has also exhibited the most
ample and satisfactory evidence, to prove the apostolic in-
stitution of the three distinct orders of bishops, presby-
ters, and deacons, to whom the Christian ministry was
originally committed, and by whom, according to their
several degrees of office, it has always been exercised in

* Heb. V, 4, 5.

Paniadar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 261

every sound and regular part of the Christian church.
Those who have opposed this form of ecclesiastical polity,
have often been challenged to produce evidence of any na-
tional or provincial church, existing v/ithout it, for fifteen
hundred years after the first publication of the Christian
faith. The corruptions, which, for a great part of that
period, unhappily prevailed in the Western nations, did
not, and could not affect the validity of the apostolic com-
mission, or put an end to the ministerial power, which it
was designed to convey. The church of Rome, with all
the errors and abuses cleaving to it, which made the re-
formation necessary, did not cease to be a church, anv more

ft
than a man, whose soul is corrupted by vice, and his body

marred by disease, ceases to be a man, while his soul and
body continue united. It often happened that the Jew-
ish church was sadly infected with idolatry, and addicted
to many enormities, which provoked to anger the Lord
their God; yet they still continued a visible church upon
earth, till he at last thought proper to remove their candle-
stick, and allowed " the Romans to come and take away
their place and nation." Though he frequently raised up
prophets to warn them of their danger, and call them to
repentance, yet he never instituted a new order of priests,
nor authorized any but the sons of Aaron, to appear in
his holy place, and offer the sacrifices prescribed by the
law. Their corruptions did not divest them of the priest-
hood, nor make any breach in the order of succession, till
it was completely taken away, and their whole economy
dissolved. And so the church of Rome, while permitted
to retain a succession of the Christian priesthood, by its
preservation of the Episcopal order, must also have the
power of conferring that order, although it could have no
power to prevent those who had thus received their Epis-
copal succession, from doing all they could to reform the
abuses, which had gradually crept into that degenerate part
of the Christian church.

262 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

This is all that can properly be meant by the term te^
formation^ which does not lead to the idea of making a
new church, a thing we can no more do than make a new
bible, but only to that of correcting and amending the old
one, and so replacing it in a state of conformity to the ori-
ginal standard. But the succession of pastors in the three
sacred orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons, was none
of the inventions of popery. It was the continuance of an
apostolic institution, which had spread itself over the wholfe
Christian world, even to this remote island of Britain, long
before the corrupting influence of the church of Rome had
obtained any footing in it.— ^- When Augustin the Monk was
sent over by Pope Gregory to convert the Saxon invaders,
he found an Episcopal church in Britain, regularly consti-
tuted according to the primitive model. And when, many
centuries after, the church of England came at last to en-
gage in the happy work of reformation, which she did most
seriously and successfully, she only returned to the exercise
of her original rights, as an independent national church*
It was on this footing that she threw off the yoke, under
which she had so long bowed to the papal tyranny. But
when she thus separated from the corruptions of Rome, she
did not also throw off a just regard to the doctrines and in-
stitutions of the church of Christ. — Her reformed bishops
saw the necessity of continuing that Episcopal ordination
v/hich they themselves had duly received : And Archbi-
shop Parker having been regularly consecrated by four ot
these bishops, on the 17th of December, 1559, and placed
by Queen Elizabeth in the see of Canterbury, the public re-
gisters will show not only the year, month and day when^
but also the persons by whom, every particular bishop has
been consecrated, from that period to the present time.

Such is the regular manner in which the Episcopal suc-^
cession has been canonically carried on, and can be clearly
traced, in the church of England: And it is also well
knownj that on two remarkable occasions, has that church

Paf$im!af Defince of the J^piscQpacy of Scotland. 263

^(^tributed her friendly aid to preserve the same succession
in her sister-church of Scotland. After the reforming party
in this country had gone on for a course of years, with
aiuch noise and tumult, establishing and altering their va-
rious plans of church government, King James, at last, hav*
ing succeeded to the crown of England, was enabled to put
matters on a more decent and regular footing. For that
purpose, having desired three of those persons who had
been nominated to bishopricks in Scotland, to repair to
London, he told them at their first audience, " that he had
with great charge recovered the temporalities of the church
out of lay hands, and bestowed them, as he hoped, upon
worthy persons ; but as he could not make them bishops,
nor could they assume that honour to themseleves, he had
therefore called them to England, to receive regular conse-
cration from the bishops there, that on their return home,
they might communicate the same to the rest, and thereby
atop the mouths of adversaries of all denominations."*
These three persons were accordingly consecrated on the
21st of October, 1610, by the bishops of London, Ely^and
Bath ; and on their return to Scotland, communicated the
Episcopal powers which they had now received in a right
and canonical manner, to their former titular brethren ; by
which means a regular Episcopacy was introduced into the
reformed church of Scotland, and continued to enjoy the
sanction of legal establishment, till the troubles broke out
in the reign of Charles the First, when the church was
again thrown into the utmost confusion, and a " solemn
league and covenant was entered into for effecting the en-
tire extirpation of '' prelacy, or the government of the
church by archbishops and bishops, and all the ecclesiasti-
cal officers depending on that hierarchy."

Things continued in this disordered and ruinous state,
till the restoration of Charles the Second ; on which happy

* See Skinner's Eccksiastlcal History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 251.

264 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

event, the Church of England immediately revived, and
showed herself worthy of the distinguished place she had
always held among the reformed churches. Her esta-
blished rank and splendour were restored to her. Nine of
her bishops had survived the late calamities, of whom the
worthy bishop of London, Dr. Juxon, who had attended
his dying sovereign on the scaffold, was promoted to the
see of Canterbury. The other eight took possession of
their former bishopricks, and the rest of the sees that had
been vacant, were soon filled with learned and able pre-
lates. A similar resolution was adopted by government,
with regard to Scotland ; but before Episcopacy could be
restored in this country, the necessity of the case required
that application should again be made to the English
church for assistance. The Scottish bishops, who had been
driven into exile by the violence of the times, had all died,
except one, without being able to provide for the Episcopal
succession. It was therefore determined, by those who
had the object at heart, that this necessary provision should
be made, by having recourse to the same expedient which
had been adopted about fifty years before ; and, accordingly
four of the persons who had been nominated for the Scot-
tish Episcopate, were consecrated at London, on the 15th
of December, 1661, by four of the English bishops.^

* In the year 1789, Bishop Abernethy Drummond, Bishop Strachan,
and 1, being at London, soliciting relief to our church from certain
penal statutes ; at the desire of Bishop Seabury, of Connecticut, who
some years before had been consecrated by the bishops in Scotland, we
applied to the archbishop of Canterbury for an attested extract of the
consecration of the Scotch bishops in 1661, and through his Grace's con-
descending attention, received what follows —

" Extract from the Register-book of Archbishop Juxon, in the library

of his Grace, the archbishop of Canterbury, at Lambeth palace" —

Fol. 237.

*' It appears — that James Sharpe was consecrated archbishop of St.

Andrews, Andrew Fairfull archbishop of Glasgow, Robert Leighton

bishop of Dunblenen, and James Hamilton bishop of Galloway, on the

15th day of December, 1661, in St. Teter's church, Westminster, by

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 265

But neither on this, nor on the former occasion, did any of
the two archbishops officiate ; lest their presiding at the
consecration should have been considered as claiming from
the church of Scotland, the acknowledgment of any sub-
jection to the metropolitical sees of Canterbury or York.
On returning to Scotland the four newly consecrated pre-
lates took possession of the several sees to which they had
been appointed, and the other ten bishopricks were after-
wards conferred on the persons, who for that purpose had
received consecration from their hands.

Thus was Episcopacy once more restored in Scotland,
and continued to be the established form of church govern-
ment, till the revolution took place in 1688, when the bi-
shops unanimously refusing to comply with that change,
and to renounce the allegiance which they had sworn to
King James, were obhged to suffer the consequences of
such refusal ; and however imprudent their conduct may
appear in a worldly view, it is evident, from the sacrifices
which they made, that they acted with integrity, and from
the most disinterested and conscientious motives. But whe-
ther it was owing to the offensive principles maintained by
the bishops and their followers, or rather to that article in
the Claim of Right set up by the convention of the estates of
Scotland, which declared *' prelacy^ or any sort of Episco-
pal superiority^ to be a great and insupportable grievance
and trouble to this nation j" — v/hichever of these causes
operated most powerfully in producing the designed effect,
so it was, that the same convention, having been turned
into a parliament, passed an act on the 22d of July, 1689,
for " abolishing prelacy, and all superiority of any office in
the church of this kingdom above presbyters," — In conse-

Gilbert, bishop of London, commissary to the archbishop of Canterbury,
and that the Right Rev. George, bishop of Worcester, John, bishop of
Carlisle, and Hugh, bishop of Landalf, were present and assisting.

'* Extracted this 3d day of June, 1789, by me, William Di^kes, Se-
cretary."

^4

266 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

quence of this abolition, which was followed, the year aftei%
by the establishment of the presbyterian form of church
government, the bishops were deprived of every thing
connected with their office, which the civil power could
take from them. They lost their revenues, and tempor^
jurisdiction ; but their spiritual authority still remained,
and that "gift of God," which they had received by the
imposition of Episcopal hands, they considered themselves
bound to exercise for promoting that Episcopal " work in
the church of God, which had been committed to them."
By virtue of this commission, they continued, in a quiet
and peaceable manner, to discharge the duties of their
spiritual function. They ordained ministers for such
vacant congregations as adhered to their communion ; and
when they saw it necessary to attend to the preservation of
their own order, they proceeded to the consecration of such
persons as were thought most proper for being invested
with that sacred and important trust.—- We have also to
observe, that all the ordinations and consecrations which
have taken place in the Scotch Episcopal church, since the
sera of the revolution, have been and still are invariably
performed, as we have reason to believe they were from
the Restoration to that period, according to the " form and
manner of ordaining and consecrating" prescribed by the
church of England. All this having been duly attended
to, by the prelates who were ejected from their sees at the
revolution, and by those whom they and their successors
promoted to the order of bishops, it is evident that every
thing has been done, which could be deemed necessary for
preserving a regular Episcopal succession in Scotland \ as
may be seen from a list of the consecrations of Scotch bi-
shops from the revolution to the present time, which is
subjoined in an appendix to this work.^

It was, no doubt, from his knowledge of these matters,

* See Appendix, No. I.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 267

and of the care which has been taken to support an Episco-
pal church in this part of the kingdom, though deprived of
the aid of civil establishment, that Dr. Campbell was led to
introduce one of his Lectures^ on Ecclesiastical History^ by
observing, that he should not have thought it necessary " to
be so particular as he had been, in ascertaining the nature
of that polity which obtained in the primitive church, were
not this a matter that is made a principal foundation of dis-
sent by a pretty numerous sect in this country :" by which
secty it is plain that he means the Scotch Episcopal church,
from what immediately follows. — " I do not," he says,
*' here allude to those amongst us, who barely prefer the
Episcopal form of government, whom, in general, as far as
I have had occasion to know them, I have found moderate
and reasonable in their sentiments on this subject. Such do
not pretend that the external model of the church (what-
ever they may think of the antiquity of theirs) is of the
essence of religion."

If by thus making a distinction between the two Episco-
pal " sects*"* in this country, our Professor meant to pay a
compliment to the one at the expense of the other, it does
not appear that the peculiarity of sentiment, which he has
held forth as the mark of distinction, was the most proper
for answering his purpose. It is generally thought, that the
*' foundation of dissent" from that which, in any country,
is by law established, ought to be laid in something that " is
of the essence of religion," or at least supposed to be so by
the dissenting party. And such is our opinion of the neces-
sity of maintaining unity and concord among all " who pro-
fess and call themselves Christians," that we should hold
ourselves highly culpable in keeping up a separate commu-
nion from that which has the law of our country on its
side, were it not for the sake of things which we believe to
be essential to our religion, and a part of that apostolic doc-

* See Lecture viii.

26^ Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

trine, to which, as Christians, we must steackfastly adhere^
If there be any amongst us, as it seems Dr. Campbell had
" occasion to know, who barely prefer the Episcopal form:
of government," on account perhaps of its antiquity, but
without considering it as at all necessary to the being of a
church ; whatever may be said of such people's moderation^
we see no ground for distinguishing them as " reasonable
in their sentiments," if they had no better reason to justify
their separation from the establishment of their country^
and no other benefit from the Episcopal form of govern-
ment^ but what arises from the ministrations of clergy, who
have been Episcopally ordained, but otherwise acknowledge
no such government* The reflection, therefore, w^hich, it
would seem. Dr. Campbell was desirous to cast on one of
the Episcopal " sects" in this country, will be found more
applicable to the sentiments which he has ascribed to the
other, and by marking which as " moderate and reasonable,"
he, no doubt, intended to keep up that unnecessary distinc-
tion between the Scotch and English Episcopacy, v/hich
has already subsisted too long, but ought to afford no more
room for such disagreeable and unworthy comparisons.

All this, however, and more of the same kind, of which
we have been obliged to take some notice, appears but as
slight skirmishing, when compared to the grand battery,
which was at last to be opened against the shattered but
venerable remains of the old Episcopal church of Scotland.
We had seen preparations making for this hostile attack,
in the beginning of our Professor'* Eleventh Lecture^ where,
after some general remarks to show, in his way, that the
terms ordination and appointment to a particular pastoral
charge^ were at first perfectly synonymous, he adds, " If
one, however, in those truly primitive times, (which but
rarely happened), found it necessary to retire from the
work, he never thought of retaining either the title or the
emoluments. — To be made a bishop, and in being so, to
receive no charge whatever, to have no work to execute.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 269

could have been regarded no otherwise, than as a contra-
diction in terms. Indeed, the name of the office implied
the service, without which it could not subsist, that is,
without which there was no office. The name bishop
means overseer, and this is a term manifestly correlative
to that which expresses the thing to be overseen. The
connection is equally necessaiy and essential as between
father and child, sovereign and subject, husband and wife.
The one is inconceivable without the other. Ye cannot
make a man an overseer, to whom ye give no oversight,
no more than ye can make a man a shepherd, to whom ye
give the charge of no sheep, or a husband, to whom ye
give no wife. Nay, in fact, as a man ceases to be a hus-
band the moment he ceases to have a wife, and is no
longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so in the
only proper and original import of the words, a bishop
continues a bishop onlv whilst he continues to have people
under his spiritual care."^

These are the general principles which our Lecturer laid
down, as the ground of a long satyrical strain of declama-
tion, for it can hardly be called reasoning, against the
Episcopal succession in Scotland; that regular and orderly
succession, for the validity of which we have appealed to
undoubted vouchers, those ecclesiastical registers, which
can at any time be shown for the satisfaction of all con-
cerned. But before we come to consider the particular
application, which our Professor has made of these his
*' self-evident propositions," to the case of what he calls—
" the Scotch Episcopal party," let us inquire a little into
the foundation of his supposed analogies, and see what
would be the consequence of those ieferences, which he
intended should be drawn from them. The most likely
one of any to be admitted as a parallel case to the connec-
tion between a bishop and his spiritual charge, is that which

* Lecture xi.

^fO Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

subsists between " sovereign and subject," the connection
in both cases arising from appointment to an office, although
it must be owned, that the mode of appointment is very
different, as well as the object about which each of these
offices is exercised. Our Lecturer, however, was fond of
this allusion— and asked—" For example, what would one
think of the pretext of making a man a king, without giv-
ing him either subjects or a kingdom ?"^ We should cer-
tainly think the pretext very foolish, and the thing itself as
unlikely to happen : Since these king-makers, a privilege
which some people are always glad to keep in view, might
themselves become the subjects, and their lands would of
course be the kingdom. — But the Doctor adds^ — ^" Ye will
say, may not the right to a kingdom be conferred on a man,
whom we cannot put in possession ?" This he readily
admits, but insists that it " is not parallel to the case in
hand." Yet why not parallel, when those who have a right
to make a bishop, surely give him a right, when so made,
to exercise his office in any part of the world, where he can
do so, without encroaching on the charge or right of ano-
ther bishop; and it will not be said that the right to a king-
dom can be conferred but on similar terms. Possession
may be obtained by force, but right is of a more delicate
nature. During all the time of Cromwell's usurpation,
Charles the Second was acknowledged as their rightful
king, by all the loyal part of his subjects ; and the length
of his reign has been always computed from the day of his
father's death, although it was eleven years before his res-
toration gave him the actual exercise of his kingly power.
-—So might a bishop be invested with Episcopal authority,
although placed in a situation which would neither require
nor admit the exercise of it.

The allusion which our Lecturer makes use of, to the
connection between father and child, and between husband

* Lecture xl.

/

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. ^71

and wife, is by no means suited to the case in hand, as these
are mere states or conditions of hfe, the nature of which is
very different from that of an office, the former depending
altogether on a particular relation, whereas the permanency
of the latter will be often found to rest on a more general
footing. Such is evidently the case with regard to the office
of a shepherd, which, as applied to the Episcopal character,
does not necessarily infer an immediate charge of a flock,
since there may be other subjects of inspection that come
not properly within the idea, which that term conve)^s.
When, therefore, our Professor, wishing to ridicule the
notion of a bishop in partibus infdelium^ observed that " a
bishop's charge being a church, and a church consisting
only of believers, infidels are properly no part of his charge,
no more than wolves or foxes are part of the flock of a
shepherd," we are surprised that so complete an analogist
did not recollect, that infidels may become believers, but
wolves and foxes can never become sheep. Will any one
say, that to make believers of infidels is no part of the of-
fice of a bishop, or that his office immediately ceases, when
his Idaours in that way are no longer successful ? If such
were the precarious nature of the shepherd's office, it would
hardly have been applied to point out the highest possible
instance of pastoral care, and we should not have read of
*' sheep going astray, and afterwards returning to the Shep-
herd and bishop of their souls."

The only analogy, therefore, which seems at all applica-
ble to the design in view, is that which our Professor
makes use of, when he says—-" Ye cannot make a man an
overseer, to whom ye give no oversight ;" and this is sup-
posed to arise from the name bishop or overseer^ as con-
nected with, and requiring, things or persons to be over-
seen. He might, however, have remembered his own ob-
servation, that " the import of words gradually changes
with the manners of the times ;" as a proof of which, the
word presbifter has certainly iQst the import which he him-

272 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland

self assigned to it, as a " title of respect," denoting a sena-
tor or elderly person, since it would now be thought ridicu-
lous, instead of " ordaining or making a presbyter," to
speak of " ordaining or making a respectable old man;"
and may not the same change have happened in the applica-
tion of the name bishop or overseer^ even supposing its ori-
ginal import to have been " inspector of a particular
flock ?" Of this, however, the Professor brings no sort of
proof, but runs on, in his usual declamatory style, exp^iat-
ing on his favourite topic, that " a bishop continued a
bishop only whilst he continued to have people under his
pastoral charge, and where no such charge was given, ordi-
nation appeared but a mere illusion, the name without the
thing. For nothing can be plainer," says he, " than that
as yet," that is, in the fifth century, " they had no concep-
tion of the mystic character impressed by the bishop's hand
in ordaining, which no power on earth can cancel."^ A
little after he tells us, that " the doctrine of the character
had not yet been discovered ;" and prosecuting still far-
ther his strained analogy between marriage and ordination,
he boldly asks — " What then is there in the one ceremony
more nugatory than in the other? For if unmeaning words
will satisfy, why may not the mystical, invisible, indelible
character of husband be imprinted by the first, as that of
priest or bishop is by the second ? Holy writ gives just as
much countenance to the one, as to the other."')'

This, we think, is rather rashly affirmed ; and the lan-
guage made use of in delivering such a strange opinion,
appears to us as void of delicacy, as inconsistent with the
character, which ought to be maintained by every professor
of Christian divinity. Is it really suitable to such a profes-
sion, even to suppose, much more to assert, that there is
nothing given in and by apostolical, primitive, regular ordr-
natioDj but such a bare " assignment to some particular

* Lecture xi, f Lectur^ xi.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 273

congregation," as is perfectly similar to the connection be-
tween husband and wife ? What then are we to understand
by the gift {^cc^tcixcx^ which St. Paul twice mentions as in
Timothy, and in both places ascribes it — ^to " the laying on
of hands?" Does this point to any thing like his " assign-
ment to a particular congregation," or to any sort of connec-
tion with a pastoral charge ? Have we not more reason to
believe, that this charisma or gift meant something, which,
notwithstanding Dr. Campbell's sarcastic way of treating it,
might be called a " character impressed" by imposition of
hands, and which Timothy was '^ not to neglect, but to stir
up" and put into exercise, so as to answer the good purpose
for which he had received it t We know, that the charis^
mata^ or gifts so often mentioned ^s peculiar to the early
ages of the gospel, have been generally thought to denote
the miraculous powers with which many of the primitive
Christians were endowed, even down to that period, when
our adversaries are obliged to acknowledge that a true and
proper Episcopacy universally prevailed. Yet as we are
not told of any miraculous works performed by Timothy in
consequence of the gift which was in him ; and as it is ex-
pressly said to have been placed there by the imposition of
hands, and that it might be stirred up in the work of the
ministry, to which he had been appointed, we have every
reason to conclude, that it referred entirely to his ordina-
tion, not as an " assignment to some particular congrega-
tion," but as giving him authority to execute his office in
any congregation, or any part of the flock of Christ, which
might be committed to his charge,

Such, we have ground to believe, was the apostolic prac-
tjice, founded on the nature of the commission which the
apostles themselves received from Christ, as extending to
all nations, and all ages of the world. It was, therefore, a
maxim universally received in the primitive church, that
every bishop, as one of the successors of these aposdes,
had a pastoral relation to the whole catholic church, aii4

35

274 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

that the Episcopal body was thus widely diffused, for the
mutual benefit of all its members, that if any one fell into
heresy, others might be at hand to redress^ the mischief.
Writing to the bishop of Rome on this very subject, Cy-
prian tells him — " Therefore is our body of bishops so
large, and yet so joined together in the bond of unity, and
cemented by mutual agreement, that if any one of our college
should attempt to introduce heresy, and so tear in pieces
and lay waste the flock of Christ, others should step in to
its assistance, and like tender and useful shepherds, gather
our Lord's sheep into his fold. — For though we are many
shepherds, yet we have but one flock to feed, and all the
sheep which Christ has purchased with his blood and passion,
we ought to gather together and cherish."^ From these
words of Cyprian, and man)^ other passages of his writings,
it would appear, that he considered the college or corporation
of bishops, as founded for the purpose of propagating the
Christian faith throughout the world, and preserving it in
its original purity. And though the division of the church
into dioceses, and the placing local bishops over them, be-
came necessary for the sake of order, and for preventing
any improper interference with each others conduct ; yet
when the faith of the church was in danger of being lost,
or corrupted by the prevalence of any pestilent heresy,
every bishop was to consider himself as an universal pas-
tor, and to do every thing in his power for preserving the
soundness, and promoting the welfare of the whole body.
Such being evidently the opinion entertained by Cyprian, of
what he calls the " one Episcopate, of which every bishop

* " Idcirco copiosum est corpus sacerdotum, concordise mutuse glutino
atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut si quis ex collegio nostro hssfesin fa-
cere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subveniant cseteri,
et quasi pastores utiles et misericordes eves Dominicas in gregem colligant.
Nam etsi pastores inulti sumus, unum tamen gregem pascimus, et oves
universas, quas Christus sanguine suo et passione quxsivit, coUigere et
fovere debemus." Cypr. epist. 67. ad Steph.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 2Y3

holds a share for the benefit of the whole," we are indeed
surprised to find Dr. Campbell quoting this very pas-
sage, in support of the opposite notion, which he so warmly
espoused, that a bishop is to be considered as nothing more
than the *' pastor of a particular church or congregation,"
his " assignment" to which is all that is meant by ordina-
tion, and without which, it seems, he could have no share
in the " one Episcopate," which yet St. Cyprian so zea-
lously maintained to be held in common by the whole body
of bishops, and therefore held by them, in virtue of their
ordination or appointment to the Episcopal office, and not
of their " assignment" to any particular charge.

It was proper that we should take notice of all this pre-
paration which our Professor had made for effecting what
seems to have been the principal purpose of the Lecture
now before us, the bringing forward his heavy charge
against the orders of the Scotch Episcopal church, which,
after all that he had said by way of introduction to it, he
still thought might probably excite some surprise, as well
from the novelty of it, as by the confident and peremptory
manner, in which he meant to support it. In both these
respects, we do think it was sufficiently calculated to pro-
duce surprise in the minds of all who might esteem it wor-
thy of their consideration, on account of the station and
character of its author. Had the Principal of Marischal
College boldly asserted, that a civil establishment being es-
sential to the very being of Episcopal government, it is im-
possible that the order of bishops can be continued in a
church which is not supported by the state : It would have
been saying no more, than what had been said before by
men equally high in office, and well versed in all sorts of
knowledge, except that of the nature and constitution of
the Christian church. Or had Dr. Campbell, who was
early bred to the study of the law, given it as his opinion,
that the act of parliament which abolished Episcopacy in
Scotland, or some restricting statute afterward enacted, had

^Sys Pariiciilaf Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

actually deprived the ejected bishops of their whole spi-*
ritual power, and left them no authority even to ordain
priests and deacons, far less to consecrate bishops as their
successors in these powers ; this would have been only re*-
peating the absurdities of those Erastian writers, whd
would make the civil power superior to apostolic institution,
and allow an authority merely human, to annihilate the di-
vine commission granted by him who has all power in
heaven and in earth. In all this there would have been no-
thing new or surprising, however inconsistent with the cha-
racter of a Christian divine 5 because such inconsistencies
have often appeared, and been suffered to pass as liberal
sentiments, flowing from a mind unfettered by any profes-
sional prejudice*

What method then has our Professor taken to support
his strange attack on the depressed but pure and primitive
Episcopacy, which still subsists in this part of the united
kingdom ? Does he pretend to say, that the bishops of Scot-
land, who were deprived of their legal power and privi-
leges, in consequence of the Revolution in 1688, considered
themselves as equally divested of all spiritual authority,
and therefore took no measures for continuing a needless
succession of bishops in a church so suddenly and com-
pletely cut off, as that of Scotland then was, from all its
former connection with the state ? No : even Dr. Camp-
bell admits, that the ejected bishops, dispersed and perse-
cuted as they were, continued their care of the Episcopal
succession, and ordained several bishops, in order to pre*
serve it.— -But the misfortune, or rather the folly, as he
thinks it, was — these new bishops " were ordained at
large;" and because they had not h^^n previously appointed
each to a certain diocese, or had riot received what he
would call " assignment to a particular charge," he main^
tains^ with dictatorial authority, that their ordinations were
null and void, yea, no other than farcical ceremonies, m.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 27 f

which the actors played the fool, for the purpose of impos*
ing on others.

When those, from whom the present clergy of the Scotch
Episcopal church derive their orders, were known to be
men of such unblemished integrity, and disinterested zeal,
as to induce them to suffer the loss of all their worldly dig-
nities and emoluments, for the sake of what they esteemed
to be infinitely more Valuable, truth and a good conscience,
it is hard to hear them reviled as no better than formal
hypocrites, striving to deceive others, and acting a most ri*
diculous farce in pretending to discharge one of the most
solemn functions of their sacred office. It is no less
surprising, that such a severe accusation should be pub^
iished, as coming from a man, who, among his own friends,
was much admired for his meekness and moderation, and
what the world calls liberality of mind. Lest, therefore, we
should be suspected of doing injustice to his character, a
thing which it particularly becomes us to avoid, when he is
no longer able to stand up in its defence, we shall give the
indictment brought against those whom he calls " our
Scotch Episcopal party," in their accuser's own words*
After quoting some authorities, to show the abuse of those
loose ordinations, chiefly of presbyters, which were begin-
ning to take place in the fifth century, he proceeds thus^ —

" One will perhaps be surprised to hear, that our Scotch
Episcopal party, who have long affected to value themselves
on the regular transmission of their orders, have none but
what they derive from bishops merely nominal. I do not
mention this with a view to derogate from their powers, but
only as an argumentum ad hominein^ to show how much
their principles militate against themselves. It does not
suit my notion of Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or
to forbid any to cast out devils in the name of Christ, be-
cause they follow not us. If the lust of power had not

* Lecture xi.

2f 8 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland^

with churchmen more influence than the spirit of the gospel,
greater attention would have been given to the decision of
their Master in a hke case. Even their own writers ac-
knowledge, that immediately after the death of Dr- Ross^
bishop of Edinburgh, the last of those ordained before the
Revolution, there were no local bishops in Scodand, not
one appointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of
any people, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district. But
there were bishops who had been ordained at large, some
by bishop Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who,
after the Revolution, had retired to England. The warm-
est partizans of that sect have not scrupled to own, that at
that gentleman's decease, all the dioceses of Scotland were
become vacant, and even to denominate those who had
been ordained in the manner above mentioned, Utopian
bishops, a title not differing materially from that I have
given them, merely nominal bishops^ for as far as I can
learn, they were not titular even in the lowest sense. No
axiom in philosophy is more indisputable than that quod
nullibi est non e*f.— The ordination, therefore, of our pre-
sent Scotch Episcopal clergy, is solely from presbyters ;
for it is allowed, that those men, who came under the
hands of bishop Ross, had been regularly admitted minis-
ters or presbyters, in particular congregations, before the
Revolution. And to that first ordination, I maintain, that
their farcical consecration by Doctor Ross and others, when
they were solemnly made the depositaries of no deposit,
commanded to be diligent in doing no work, vigilant in the
oversight of no flock, assiduous in teaching and governing
no people, and presiding in no church, added nothing at
all."

Such is the ludicrous manner in which our Lecturer
thought proper to represent a sacred and solemn office,
performed by men of piety and worth, whatever may be
thought of their worldly wisdom, and whose conduct in
this affair ought not, we humbly think, to have been thus

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 279

held up as an object of ridicule, and so wantonly exposed
to scorn and contempt. To add to the mockery too, he
would not have it thought, that " it suited his notion of
Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or to forbid any to cast
out devils in the name of Christ, because they followed
not his party." He had before been quoting the passage of
scripture, which mentioned the occurrence that occasioned
this remark, and had made the following observation upon
it. " The apostles still retained too much of the Jewish
spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause. * He
followeth not us ;' a reason which to this day, alas ! would
be thought the best reason in the world by most Christian
sects, and by every individual who possesses the spirit of
the sectary."^ And is all this particularly levelled at the
" Scotch Episcopal party," as if they were peculiarly pos-
sessed of this sectarian spirit ? Let a miracle, such as
casting out devils in the name of Christ, be wrought as
really and visibly as in the instance referred to, (for the apos-
tles acknowledged that they saw it) and we can safely affirm
that not an individual of our sect would dare to forbid such
a thing, any more than Dr. Campbell himself would have
done. But he certainly knew that there might be pre^
tenders to this miraculous power, who might use the name
of Christ, without any " pious intention to promote his
cause," of which we have a striking instance in the case of
those " vagabond Jews, exorcists, who took upon them to
call over them which had evil spirits, the name of the
Lord Jesus," and were justly punished for their impious
presumption.^

With an appearance, however, of candour and modera-
tion, our Professor told his pupils, that what he had men-
tioned, or was going to mention, respecting the " Scotch
Episcopal party," was " with no view to derogate from their
powers :" to which we shall only beg leave to apply his own

* Lecture iv. f Acts xix, 13— IT.

580 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of iScotland

remark on the conduct of David Hume in a similar case— -
" Was ever so rough an assault preceded by so smooth a
preamble ?"* For in what way could he have more eiFeC'^
tuaUy " derogated from their powers," than by representing
what he thought the source of these powers, as no better
than 2L farcical ceremony, which " added nothing to the first
ordination" of those on whom it was performed, and " from
whom was particularly withheld the right of transmitting
orders to others ?" If this be the " argumentum ad homi-
nem''^ made use of " to show, how much the principles of
the Scotch Episcopalians militate against themselves," the
application of the argument ought to have been properly
pointed out, and these hostile principles particularly speci-
fied : And as this has not been done, it may be presumed,
that the learned Professor knew as little of the principles of
these Episcopalians, as they perhaps know of his " notion
of Christianity," and the propriety of the method which he
has here taken to support it.

In this state of uncertainty, with regard to the applica-
tion and strength of his reasoning, we are led by some cir-
cumstances to conjecture, that the argument alluded to, as
so happily brought home to the " Scotch Episcopal party,"
may probably be drawn from the canon of an ancient coun-
cil, which he has quoted and commented on, as particu-
larly applicable to the case in hand, and to the sentiments
of a " party," who are supposed to hold in peculiar rever-
ence every thing that is truly primitive in ecclesiastical ad-
ministration. The canon referred to, is the 6th of the
general council of Chalcedon, in which he says, " all such
loose ordinations, of bishops at large without a diocese,
are declared, I say not irregular or uncanonical, but abso-
lutely null :" And to give the more weight to this canon,
he adds the decision of Leo, a contemporary pope, or bishop
of Rome, who, he says, " on account of his writings, i^

* Dissertation on Miracles, p. 243.

Fartiailar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 28 X

considered as a doctor of the church, and affirms posU
lively in one of his letters, that the ordination is to be
counted vain, or of no effect, which is neither founded in
place, nor fortified by authority." The first of these clauses
our Doctor explains so as to make it suit his own purpose,
but takes no farther notice of the second, which requires
authority in the ordainer, to give validity to the ordination,
in whatever place the person ordained niay be called to e?^
ercise his niinistry,

In his ne;^t Jecture we find our Professor endeavouring
to procure stiU farther sanction to the authority of the
council of Chalcedon, by putting us in mind of the opinion
of Pope Gregory the Great, who is said to have held the
four first general councils in equal veneration with the four
gospels. And how comes all this to afford any peculiar force
jof argument against the Scotch Episcopal church, which, if
k esteems these two bishops of Rome, the first and best of
their nances, as doctors of the church, and holds in all due
veneration the four first general councijs, is yet entirely of
the opinion of the church of England, as expressed in her
21st article, that " general councils may err, and sometimes
have erred, even in things pertaining unto God ?" With re-
spect, however, to the present point in question, we do not
see that it is at alj concerned with the regard which is due to
the authority of general councils, and which must always be
regulated by the consideration of the particular objects
which their several canons had in view, according to the
circumstances of the church at the different periods when
these ecclesiastical synods were held. The council of
Chalcedon was called for the express purpose of repressing
the Eutychian heresy; and its sixth canon has been gene-
rally thought to point at the danger of increasing that he-
resy, by such irregular ordinations as might tend to give
it additional support, and were therefore prohibited ; which
prohibition was enforced by an imperial edict, evidently
founded on the same reason, and published for the §agj?;

^

282 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

purpos^e. Dr. Campbell has omitted to quote the intro-
ductory part of the canon, in which the prohibition is par-
ticularly levelled at " the loose ordination of presbyters
and deacons^'* as most likely to continue the mischief which
had arisen from the heresy that was now condemned : and
he has also kept out of sight the conclusion of the canon
which seems to prohibit the persons so ordained from
performing the functions of their ministry, lest they should
do it to the reproach or injury of the person who had or-
dained them.* '

We could produce many respectable authorities in con«*
firmation of the opinion which has now been given of the
meaning and design of this Chalcedonian canon. The au-
thor of that celebrated work called " Ecclesiastical Polity ^^
and who is generally distinguished by the title of the "judi-
cious Hooker," argues very strongly against the error of
those, who, " because the names of all church-officers are
words of relation ; because a shepherd must have his flock^
a teacher his scholars, a minister his company which he

* The whole canon runs thus in the original. M>i5'sva ^e aTroXEXy/AEvwj
p;^«^oTov«gSat, ju»jT£ nPESBYTEPON, /x^ite AIAKONON, /x»te oAwj
TivcJt Twv EV ixxKYicyio.'^iv.ta rayfjiOiTi^ H (j^yi tdtJcwf sv ExxX^icria woXsw? ■» HWjU,>if,
n |w.apTi^ptwj ■» juovar»ipt<w o p^stpoTovajUEv^ sTriKvifvlloilo* Tag d£ ocTtoXvTug
^Hforov^iJiivag ufio-sv \ ocytcx, avvoo^^ oc'KVfov £)(^hv rriv roiCK,vlriv ;^Eipo9£iTiav,
KXi y,n^a,[ji^ ^vvoca-Qcci, svifx^v EO) 'YBPEI TOY XEIPOTONHSANTOS.
It is thus translated by a German writer, of Lutheran principles.—
*' Neminem absolute ordinari presbyterurti vel dia'-onum, vel quemlibet
in ecclesiastica ordinatione constitutum, nisi nnaniteste in ecclesia civi-
tatis, sive possessionis, aut in martyrio^ aut in monasterio, qui ordinatur,
mereatur ordinationis publicatse vocabuluna. Eorum vero qui absolute or-
dinantur, decrevit sancta synodus vacuara haberi manus impositionem,
et nullum ejus tale factum valere, ad injuriam ipsius qui eum ordinavit."
To which he adds this remark, •• Recte prohibet hie canon, ne quis, nisi
in publico loco (qualia erant templa, pratoria, et sedificia martyribus con-
secrata) ad ministerium ecclesiasticum ordinetur. Et apud nos hodie
in ducatu Wurtenbergico, ordinationes fiunt in caetu ecciesiae." Vide
Epitome Historiae Ecclesiasiicae. A Lucas Osiauder, D. D, 4to. Tu-
binex, 159^7, p. 356. . • . ,

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 283

ministereth unto ; therefore suppose that no man should be
ordained a minister but for some particular congregation,
and unless he be tied to some certain parish. Perceive they
not," says he, " how by this means they make it unlawful
for the church to employ men at all in converting nations ?
For if so be the church may not lawfully admit to an eccle-
siastical function, unless it tie the party admitted unto some
particular parish, then surely a thankless labour it is,
whereby men seek the conversion of infidels, who know not
Christ, and therefore cannot ht as yet divided into their
special congregations and flocks." For the avoiding, there-
fore, of all confusion in treating of this matter, he thinks
there is nothing more material, than first — to separate
" exactly the nature of the ministry from the use and ex-
ercise thereof. Secondly, to know that the only true and
proper act of ordination is to invest men with that power,
which doth make them ministers, by consecrating their per-
sons to God and his service, in holy things, during the term
of life, whether they exercise that power or no. Thirdly,
that to give them a title or charge where to use their minis-
try, concerneth not the making, but the placing of God's
ministers ; therefore the laws, which concern only their
election or admission to that place or charge, are not appli-
cable to infringe, in any way, their ordination. And, fourth-
ly, that as oft as any ancient constitution, law, or canon is
alleged concerning either ordinations or elections, we forget
not to examine, whether the present case be the same which
the ancient was, or else do contain some just reason, for
which it cannot admit altogether the same rules, which for-
mer affairs of the church, now altered, did then require."

Having laid down these premises, and shown the neces-
sity of attending properly to them, in all questions relating
to the ordination and appointment of the Christian minis-
try, this learned writer draws such a conclusion from them,
as affords a sufficient defence of the Scotch Episcopal ordi-
nations against any misapplication of that canon of the

2$i4f Particular Defence of the episcopacy of Scotland,

touncil of Chalcedon, which is now under our considera*
tion : ** Absolutely therefore," says he, " it is not true, that
any ancient canon of the church, which is, or ought to be
with us in force, doth make ordinations at large unlawful ;
arid as the state of the church doth stand, they are most
necessary. If there be any conscience in men, touching
that which they write or speak, let theni consider as well
what the present condition of all things doth now suffer,
as what the ordinances of former ages did appoint ; as weU
the weight of those causes, for which our affairs have
altered, as the reasons, in regard whereof, our fathers and
predecessors did sometime strictly and severely keep that
which for us to observe now, is neither meet, n6r always
possible."*

To the same purpose, we find another no less v'enerable
author, the pious Bishop Jeremy Taylor, when mentioning
this very decree of the council of Chalcedon, making a dis-
tinction between those ordinations which, for particular rea-
sons of prudence or expediency, were declared to be un-
canonical and irregular, and those which were always held
to be null and void in their own nature^f Of the latter kind
was every ordination, which was not sanctioned by proper
Episcopal authority in the ordainer ; whereas the former
were prohibited merely for the sake of order and regularity,
after it was found expedient to allot a certain portion of the
church to the inspection of every particular bishop, assisted
in certain parts of his pastoral office by the subordinate
clergy of his own di&trict. But this restriction to a pecu-
liar charge was not founded in any thing essential to the
nature of the Christian priesthood : It arose entirely from
local circumstances, and was marked by such limits of con-
venience as were produced by a variety of causes operating^
differently in different countries, but all uniting in the pre-

* See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, book v. p. SZO, 332, 333.
f See Bishop Taylor's Episcopacy Asserted, sect, xxxii.

Particuhr Defence of the £piscopacy of Scotland. ^^^

servation of what St. Cyprian called the " one Episcopate'*
of divine appointment, parcelled out by ecclesiastical autho-
tity and consent, into such parts and portions as might be
severally held by their respective bishops, for conjunctly
promoting the common cause of their great Lord and Mas*
ter, the Shepherd and Bishop of souls.

" Here, then,'* as Dr. Potter,* another eminent divine,
expresses himself on this subject, " we must carefully dis-
tinguish between the ordination of ministers, and their de*
signation to particular districts. For these are things wholly
different, though they often went together ; it being mani-
fest, that One may be a bishops or priest, where he has no
authority to exercise his office ; which is the case not only
of those who are ordained to convert heathens, without any
title to a particular church j but all others who travel be-*
yond the limits of their own district: For a priest who
eomes into a foreign country, where other lawful ministers
are settled. Still retains his sacerdotal character, and yet
has no authority to take upon him the ordinary exercise of
his office there."

All this, indeed, is in perfect conformity to that part of
the established doctrine of the church of England which is
laid down in her ordination offices, as fully expressive of
her sentiments on the point now before us. Thus in the
*' ordering of priests," the candidate " receives the Holy
Ghost, for the office and work of a priest in the church of
God, committed unto him by the imposition of hands ;"
and on receiving the bible from the bishop, he gets " au-
thority to preach the word of God, and to minister the
holy sacraments in the congregation, where he shall be
lawfully appointed thereunto." So likewise in the " conse-
cration of bishops," when the presiding bishop has said —
" Receive the Holy Ghost, for the office and work of a
bishop in the church of God, now committed unto thee,

* See his Discowse on Church Goi'crnmtnt, p. 452.

286 Particular Defence of the Episcopticy of Scotland,

by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen ;"— He
immediately adds — " And remember that thou stir up the
grace of God, which is given thee, by this imposition of
our hands ;" where the admonition plainly alludes to the
p^a^to-jua Ccharisma) the gift or grace, which was given to
Timothy by the same means, and points out both the na-
ture and design of it. But not a word is said in all this
solemn act of immediate " ordination, by laying on of
hands," that has the least appearance of connecting it with,
or making it depend upon, what Dr. Campbell insists, is
absolutely essential, " the solemn assignment of the per-
sons ordained, to a particular charge." Yet this " form of
consecrating bishops, which is according to the order of
the church of England," is the very form by which those
bishops were consecrated, from whom the present Scotch
Episcopal clergy derive their orders, and who, in Dr. Camp-
bell's estimation, " surprising" as the discovery may seem,
were no other than " bishops merely nominal^'' that is, as-
suming the name, but possessing none of the power or au-
thority peculiar to bishops.

Let us, then, examine a little more particularly how this
matter stands, and consider the peculiar situation of the
bishops who were ejected at the revolution, and of those
who were their immediate successors in the Episcopal of-
fice, together with the motives which influenced their con-
duct in providing for that succession i From all this it will
appear what a strange misrepresentation Dr. Campbell has
given of the whole affair, as unworthy of his character, as
it is unjust to those whom he has thus endeavoured, but,
we hope, vainly endeavoured, to expose in the most ridi-
culous and contemptible light. That the prelates of Scot-
land, before their legal ejection took place in consequence
of the revolution, were true and lawful bishops^ in every
sense which t. '^se terms can bear, he has not attempted
to deny ; nor indeed has he deigned to take the least notice

Parikular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 287

of the cause or manner of their ejection, whence it pro-
ceeded, or how it was conducted. The fact, however, is
certain ; and the only point in question is, what these bi-
shops became, after they were thus legally deprived of
their sees, their revenues, and all kind of temporal juris-
diction* We have already seen our Lecturer laying it
down, as " a thing so plain, that one is almost ashamed to
attempt to illustrate it, that as in fact a man ceases to be a
husband the moment that he ceases to have a wife, and is
no longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so, in
the only proper and original import of the words, a bishop
continues a bishop only whilst he continues to have people
under his spiritual care." Plain, however, as all this appears,
we are at some loss to know what is here meant by a *' bi-
shop's having people under his spiritual care .•" Not that
there is any ambiguity in the words themselves, but be-
cause we often find Dr. Campbell putting a very different
sense on the powers and cares of bishops, from that, in
which we think the church has always understood them.
Yet we may surely take it for granted, from his own con-
cession, that the ejected Scotch bishops oiwe had people
under their spiritual care ; and this being acknowledged,
we may also take the liberty of asking two simple questions,
on which may be said to turn the main hinge of the argU'*
ment between Dr. Campbell and us. One of these questions
is — By what means were those bishops invested with this
spiritual care ; or from what source did they derive their
right to it? Our Professor could not say, what no true
presbyterian, indeed no true Christian, will say, that they
derived it from the state, which never pretended either to
exercise or claim any power of " ministering either of
God's word or sacraments," or of conveying any thing-
whatever, which may truly be called spiritual. And if the
case be really so, the next question is — Did the ejection of
these bishops by the civil power deprive them of any
)Jurely spiritual right, which they had possessed before,

288 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

and had been put in possession of, by ecclesiastical power
only ? This question, we hope, will also be answered in
/the negative ; or had there been any doubt about it in the
minds of Dr. Campbell's pupils, they might have been re-
ferred for a solution of it to a divine of the church of Eng-
land, the learned Dr. Prideaux, author of the " Connec-
tion of the Old and New Testament^'' which their Professor,
in his first lecture, had called an " excellent work, and ear-
nestly recommended to their perusal ;" and in which they
would have found the following account of the Christian
priesthood, as, in this respect, similar to the Jewish :

" For to instance in Episcopacy, the first order of it, be^
sides the ecclesiastical office, which is derived fron) Christ
alone, it hath in Christian states annexed to ic (as with us)
the temporal benefice (that is, the revenues of the bishop»
rick) and some branches of the temporal authority, as the
probate of wills, causes of tithes, causes of defamation, &c»
All which latter most certainly is held under the temporal
state, but not the former. — -Were this distinction duly con-
sidered, it would put an end to those Erastian notions which
now so much prevail among us. For the want of this is the
true cause, that many observing some branches of the Epis-p
copal authority to be from the state, wrongfully from hence
infer, that the rest is so too ; whereas, would they duly ex«-
amine the matter, they would find, that besides the tempo-*'
ral power and temporal revenues, with which bishops are
invested, there is also an ecclesiastical or spiritual power,
which is derived from none other than Christ alone. And
the same distinction may also serve to quash another con-
troversy, which was much agitated among us, in the reign
of his late Majesty, King William the third, about the act
which deprived the bishops, who would not take the oaths
to that king. For the contest then was, that an act of Par^
liament could not deprive a bishop. This we acknowledge
to be true in respect of the spiritual office, but not in re^
spect of the beijeficcj and other temporal advantages an4

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 289

powers annexed thereto. For these every bishop receiveth
from the state, and the state can again deprive any bishop
of them on a just cause. And this was all that was done
by the said act. For the bishops that were then deprived
by it, had still their Episcopal office left entire to them ;
they being as much bishops of the church universal after
their deprivation, as they were before."*^

Such is the clear and distinct account which Dr. Pri-
deaux gives of this matter ; and it should be remembered,
that the case to which he alludes, of the deprived bishops
in England, was of a much more perplexed and intricate
nature, than that of their brethren in Scotland ; the former
leading to an unhappy separation of one part of an Episco-
pal church from another, whilst the latter was an overturn-
ing of the whole established Episcopacy at once, and
obliged the Scotch Episcopalians of that day to defend their
cause, as it has been defended ever since, on those general
principles, by which their ecclesiastic polity was supported
in the first and purest ages of Christianity. This was the
apology made for us in the year 1792, when that distin-
guished prelate. Dr. Horsely, then bishop of St. David's,
now of St. Asaph, stood up to plead our cause in the great
council of the nation, with a strength of argument, and
dignitv of mind, which did him equal honour as a bishop
of the church, and a peer of the realm. " These Episco-
palians," said his Lordship, " take a distinction, and it is
a just distinction, between a purely spiritual, and a political
Episcopacy. A political Episcopacy belongs to an esta-
blished church, and has no existence out of an establish-
ment. This sort of Episcopacy was necessarily unknown
in the world before the time of Constantine. But in all
the preceding ages, there was a pure spiritual Episcopacy,
an order of men set apurt to inspect and manage the spi-
ritual affairs of the church, as a society in itself totally un-

* Connection of the Old and A>zy Testament, part ii. book 3, p. 16L

290 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland

connected with civil government. Now, these Scotch
Episcopalians think, that when their church was cast off
by the state at the revolution, their church, in this dis-
carded, divided state, reverted to that which had been the
condition of every church in Christendom, before the esta-
blishment of Christianity in the Roman empire by Con-
stantine the Great ; that losing all their political capacity,
they retained, however, the authority of the pure spiritual
Episcopacy within the church itself.-^That is the sort of
Episcopacy to which they now pretend, and I, as a church-
man, have some respect for that pretension."^

On these principles, therefore, founded in the very nature
and constitution of the Christian church, we may safely say,
that the bishops of Scotland, ejected at the revolution, con-*
tinned to be as much bishops, in the pure ecclesiastical sense
of the word, after, as they had been before their ejection ;
and were so, even on Dr. Campbell's restricting plan, when
supported by all his allusions to father and husband, sove-
reign and shepherd; since it is a certain fact, that, notwith-
standing the parliamentary abolition of prelacy, great num-
bers, both of clergy and laity, or, as the Doctor would rather
have called them, presbyters and people, adhered to the
deprived bishops, and acknowledged themselves to be still
*^' under their spiritual care." And was this " spiritual care"
of the Scotch church to cease entirely at the death of these
bishops ? Or, because our Professor will not allow that the
apostles could have successors, on account of the extraordi-
nary powers with which these apostles were invested, was
there any thing so peculiar in the character of bishops,
precisely such as we have shown the bishops of the three
first centuries to have been, that they could not have others
to succeed them in their spiritual charge, or use the same

* See a ]<Jarrative of the Proceedings relating to an act which was
passed in 1.T2, for granting relief to pastors, ministers, and Jay persons
of the Episcopal communion in Scotland. Printed at Aberdeen, 1792.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 291

means for preserving that succession, as had been used for
the same purpose in every age and under every state or
condition of the Christian church ?

But, says our Lecturer, " even their own writers acknow-
ledge, that immediately after the death of Dr. Ross, bishop
of Edinburgh, the last of these ordained before the revolu-
tion, there were no local bishops in Scotland, not one ap-
pointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of any peo-
ple, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district." And sup-
posing this to have been the case, we shall be able to show
how easily it may be accounted for, and what regular steps
were taken for having again local bishops, appointed to their
several dioceses or districts, as soon as circumstances
would permit. — Even our adversary acknowledges, that
at the period he mentions, " there were bishops in Scot-
land, who had been ordained at large, some by Bishop
Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, after
the revolution, had retired to England."*^ And from
1f\rhat has been already said on the nature of ordination and
Episcopal consecration, it is evident, that these were real,
duly consecrated bishops, possessed of the power of con^
secrating others, and of taking the charge of any diocese
or district that might be committed to their inspection.

It is allowed, even by Dr. Campbell, " that those men
who came under the hands of bishop Ross, had been regu-
larly admitted ministers or presbyters in particular congre-
gations before the revolution ;" and it is equally certain,
that they had flocks, perhaps but " little flocks," yet not

* This seems to bo very inaccurately stated, as none of the ejected
bishops performed any consecration in England, and only one Scotch
bishop was consecrated there, as may be seen in the Appendix No. I.
from which it will also appear, that though Dr. Campbell speaks only
of the bishop of Edinburgh as the ordainer, yet the first consecration ia
Scotland after the revolution, was performed by the archbishop of Glas-
gow, and bishop of Dunblane, in conjunction with the bishop of Edin-
burgh ; and every consecration since has been performed by the canoni-
cal number of hisliops.

i292 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

despicable on that account, which still continued under
their spiritual care, and according to our Professor's de-
scription of the primitiv^e practice, " could assemble with
their several pastors in one house, for the purpose of pub-
lic worship :" And if it were true, as he says, that for
many years after the introduction of Episcopacy into the
church, a bishop's pastoral charge did not extend beyond a
single congregation, then would it necessarily follow on his
principles, that these Scotch pastors, when promoted to the
Episcopal order by a solemn and regular consecration, be-
came not only primitive bishops, but, in his opinion, perhaps
the only primitive bishops, who were then to be found in
Britain, or any other country. They were certainly " paro-
chial bishops," even in Dr. Campbell's view of their charac-
ter ; and we know not what good reason he could have as-
signed, why their parochial charge, however small, might not
have been called their diocese, or might not have swelled to
such an extent, by the addition of neighbouring congrega-
tions, as to become a diocese, even in the modem sense oi
the word. It is of no consequence, that an unprecedented
scheme was afterwards set on foot, for committing the
whole government of the Scotch Episcopal church to a col-
lege of bishops, who were to act in common, without any
of them being appointed to the charge of a particular dis-
trict: And it is now as little worthy of notice, that in op-
position to such a fanciful system of ecclesiastic polity, the
defenders of diocesan Episcopacy thought proper to distin-
guish the members of this college by the title of " Utopian
bishops." All that we have occasion to observe respecting
a controversy, which was soon brought to an end, is merely
this, and it must have been well known to Dr. Campbell,
that none of the writers from whom he borrowed the de-
nomination, which he has so derisively applied, ever ex-
pressed the least doubt of the college bishops, as they were
called, having been duly and regularly consecrated, and
thereby invested with full powers for conveying to othei>

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 29S

the same gift or grace which themselves had received by
imposition of hands, for the purpose of preserving, through
that dangerous and distressful period, a regular Episcopal
succession in the church to which they belonged.

This indeed appears to have been the principal design of
all the consecrations which took place in Scotland from the
revolution, in 1688, to the death of the last survivor of the
ejected bishops, which happened in 1720. It was not till
the number of these prelates was reduced to five, and some
of these also advanced in years, that they saw the necessity
of making some provision for continuing the Episcopal
succession, and thereby preserving their national church
from being again obliged, as she had been within their
own memory, to have recourse to another quarter for a
regular and valid Episcopacy. — Something of this kind is
always alluded to, in the deeds or instruments of their
consecration, signed and sealed in the usual manner:*
And after the first consecration was performed by the arch-
bishop of Glasgow, and other two of the deprived prelates,
we find on every subsequent solemnity of the same kind,
some of the new bishops assisting the old, as long as any
of them remained, and afterwards acting in their own
names, and by their own powers, as prudence or necessity
dictated. At the same time, many considerations might
present themselves to show the propriety of what was pro-
posed, and cordially agreed to on both sides ; that during
the life of any of the old bishops, the government of the
church should remain entirely in their hands, whilst those
whom they had consecrated should, all that time, be vested
with no diocesan power, nor have the inspection of any
particular district, but merely assist the others in keeping
up the Episcopal order, and managing matters for the ge-
neral good of the church.

Such was the plan of procedure suggested by the ne-

* See copies of them in the Appendix, No. II.

^94 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

cessity of the times, and recommended, no doubt, by va-
rious circumstances, as most likely to answer the purpose
for which it was adopted. — And however unsuitable and
improper it may now appear to us, before we can form any
just or candid judgment of the motives which gave rise to
it, we shall find it necessary to look back a little to the state
of things at that period, and consider what might be the
sentiments and feelings of the bishops and clergy of the
lately established church, whom the revolution had de-
prived of their livings and many valuable privileges, had
reduced to the most abject poverty and pitiable distress,
and thereby thrown into a state of dependence on the hopes
of that family, for the support of whose interests they had
suffered this deprivation, and all these accumulated hard-
ships. It is painful, even at this distance of time, to reflect
on the violent and barbarous manner, in which these un^
happy sufferers were driven from their former possessionsi^
The remembrance of such strange and unexpected seventy
was not likely to be soon effaced, and some of the political
measures of those times were but ill adapted to conciliate
the minds of persons, who had so much cause, as they
thought, for being disaffected to the established govern-
ment. Hence it was that the shattered remains of the old
national church came to be considered as a society kept
together for no other purpose than to s^r\'^e the interests,
and support the pretensions of the exiled family. On some
of the principal friends of that family, many of the perse-
cuted clergy had been obliged to depend for protection and
support, and, in consequence of that dependence, had been
much influenced by the wishes and opinions of their pa-
trons. It may also be supposed, that some of them would
retain as much of the prevailing opinion, respecting the ne-
cessary connection between the mitre and the crown, as
might lead them to suppose, that the church could not pos-
sibly subsist, without admitting the same interposition of
regal authority in the nomination of its bishops, to which

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 295

they had been accustomed in the times of constitutional
and legal Episcopacy.

Viewing things in this light, and encourged, perhaps
obliged to take such measures as were most agreeable to
those persons of rank and influence on whom they de-
pended, a part, though but an inconsiderable part of the
Scotch Episcopal clergy, contrived a new scheme for ma-
naging the government of their church, till it should be
seen whether there was any probability, as they, perhaps,
might be led to hope, from their remembrance of what
had formerly happened, of recovering her ancient privi-
leges. The plan proposed, of which we have already taken
some notice, was shortly this ; — that after the death of the
bishop of Edinburgh (who, as we have seen, survived the
other ejected prelates till the year 1720) all the bishops who
had been consecrated since the revolution, and were then
alive, should be formed into an Episcopal college^ for the
general purpose of preserving a succession of bishops, and
ordaining inferior clergy, but without pretending to local
jurisdiction, or the charge of any particular district, which,
as they could not obtain with the formal sanction of govern-
ment, they thought it better to decline, out of respect to
the suffering situation of the person, whom they acknow-
ledged as their king. The scheme accordingly was no
sooner proposed, than it received his approbation, and on
this plan a few promotions soon after took place, in conse-
quence of recommendations from the exiled prince. But
notwithstanding this shadow of support to the collegiate
scheme of church government, and however proper or re-
spectful to the unfortunate house of Stuart, it might have
appeared in the eyes of a few individuals, it was far from
being acceptable to the clergy in general, or giving any satis-
faction to the great body of the laity who adhered to the
communion of the Scotch Episcopal church. They longed
for the revival of diocesan Episcopacy, as that form of
church government, to which they had always been accus-

296 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

toned, and which they knew to be most conformable to
the primitive model. They saw no necessity for con-
founding the things of God with the things of Caesar ; and
since it was an undoubted fact, that the adventitious privi-
leges granted by the state, had laid the foundation of the
grateful concessions made by the Christian church, they
considered that part of it, to which they belonged, being
now destitute of all secular support or encouragement from
the state, as at full liberty to betake itself to its own intrin-
sic powers, and make what provision was necessary for the
succession and continuance of its sacred orders. There
could be no occasion for asking a licence from the crown
for the election of bishops, who were not to be distin-
guished by any mark of the royal favour, nor to enjoy any
peculiar benefit for the support of their profession. They
might surely be promoted now, as they had been of old,
before Christianity became a religion established by law :
And where no interposition of royal authority, no inter-
ference of the state was to be expected, as the church was
left at liberty to exercise those powers communicated by
her divine founder for preserving her in existence ; so, whilst
this was done in a quiet and becoming manner, there was
no reason to fear that government would be offended. '

These were the principles on which the constitution of
our church was settled, as soon as it recovered from the
shock, which was necessarily occasioned by the violent and
abrupt termination of its connection with the state. And
if some of our writers, whom Dr. Campbell calls the
" warmest partizans of our sect, have not scrupled to own,
that at the death of the bishop of Edinburgh in 1720, all
the dioceses in Scotland were become vacant," — ^}'et it can
never be supposed, that these writers believed the whole
Episcopal church in Scotland to have become so far vacant
likewise, as to have no bishops in it capable of being elected
to take the charge of its several districts, or of consecrat-
ing others, that might be elected for that purpose. — This

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 297'

was a sort of vacancy, which none of our writers ever did,
or could acknowledge ; because they all knew well, that
when that event happened, which occasioned this " dioce-F
san vacancy," there were no fewer than six of those bi-
shops alive, who had been consecrated since the revolu-
tion, and whom they always owned to be real bishops^ in
the true and primitive sense of the word. And they knew
likewise, that in less than two months after the death of the
bishop of Edinburgh, the presbyters of that diocese, which
had once been legally and constitutionally under his inspec-
tion, unanimously elected one of the above-mentioned six
bishops to be their diocesan ; and not long after, the pres-
byters of Angus elected another of them, and those of
Aberdeen a third,^ for the same Episcopal charge of these
several districts. It can hardly be supposed, that all these
presbyters, who had been bred for the ministry, and regu-
larly ordained in an Episcopal church, would be so unae-f
quainted with ecclesiastical history, and the canons of an-
cient councils, as to make choice of persons for their bi-
shops, who by being ordained at large, might have assumed
the nanie, but had no just right to the character of bishops,
and to whose first ordination as presbyters, " their farcical
consecration," as Dr. Campbell thought proper to call it,
'* by Doctor Ross and others, added nothing at all." Is it
to be imagined, that so many respectable and experienced
clergymen would have joined in countenancing and abet-
ting such a ridiculous, we may say even impious farce j or
have suffered the government of their church, and the
management of its affairs, to fall into the hands of persons
who had obtained their promotion by such irregular and
unjustifiable means? Yet no remonstrance appeared against
it ; nothing indeed was seen but a general approbation of the
measure which had thus restored the true diocesan Epis^

• See Skinner's Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 628, 629,

38

298 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

copacy ; and a few years after, the whole Episcopal church
in Scotland was settled on the same right and orderly plan,
and certain regulations adopted, which have continued to
be the standard of its discipline to this day.^

We have been obliged ta be thus particular in our detail
of facts, as the best way of repelling that strange, unex*
pected attack, which has lately been made on the validity
of our Episcopal orders, and which, we have seen, has
nothing to support it, but the novelty of the arguments by
which it is maintained, and the peremptory manner in
which they are brought forward. If the refutation of theixl
required any addition to that clear, satisfactory evidence,
which has been already produced, we might easily fin4 it
in the writings of some of the most learned and distin-
guished divines of the Church of England, who have af-
forded most abundant testimony in favour of such a sound
and primitive Episcopacy, as that which still subsists in
Scotland. And when this point came to be debated in the
upper house of Parliament, and a discussion took place on
the nature of our Episcopal succession as far back as the
year 1748, the whole English bench unanimously opposed
the passing of an act, which seemed to infringe the validity^
of our orders ; and some of them argued against it in the
strongest terms, particularly the learned and pious Dr.
Seeker, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop
of Canterbury, who, in his speech on that occasion, ob'
served, that " to preserve the Episcopal church of Scotland,
the bishops, who were auted of their temporalities at the

* Agreeably to these regulations, every bishop is elected by the whok
body of clergy, within the diocese or district over which he is to preside,
and they meet for such election, in virtue of a mandate signed by at least
u majority of the bishops. When the election is over, the issue of it
is reported by the dean of the diocese to the primus, or senior bishop,
who communicates it to his colleagues, and they jointly appoint a day
and place for the consecration of the person elected, which is always
performed by three bishops at least, in a public chapel, and according
to the ordinal of the church of England.

Particular Defence of the episcopacy of Scotland. 2S9

involution, not only conferred orders, but consecrated bi-
shops in the room of those that died ; for surely," said he,
*' the Episcopal party in Scotland have as much a right and
a power to both the one and the other, as the primitive
Christians had, before their religion came to be the esta-
blished religion in any country, and if they would profess
and practise the same submission to the civil government,
I should think them equally entitled to protection and indul-
gence,"*

Another more recent occurrence was the means of pro-
curing a similar acknowledgment in favour of our Episco-
pacy from that branch of the church of England which
was long cherished in the British plantations of North-
America, but could never obtain, till it was torn from the
parent flock, that which would have given it additional life
and vigour, a regular and resident Episcopate. In an excel-
lent discourse on this subject, preached in Virginia, in the
year 1771, the author makes this introductory remark,—
" It was (I believe) about the middle of the last century,
that our want of bishops was sensibly felt and lamented,
and that applications for remedying the evil were made
to the throne. These applications were thought so reason-
able, that under Charles the second, a patent was actually
made out for appointing a bishop of Virginia. By some
fatality or other (such as seems for ever to have pursued all
the good measures of the monarchs of that unfortunate
family) the patent was not signed when the king died ; and
from that time to this, all exertions for the attainment of
this desirable object, though they have never wholly ceased,
have been as languid, as the opposition to them has been
vehement. Never before in any period of our history, or
in any part of the empire, was a measure so harmless, so
necessary, and so salutary, resisted and defeated on grounds
so frivolous, so unwise, and so unjust." Our author then

* See the Scots Magazine for 1748, p. 589, 590.

^00 Particular Defence df the Episcopacy ofScotlantL

proceeds to mention, and answer very fully all the objec*
tions, which had been made to this wise and salutary mea-
sure ; and in an appendix which he subjoined to this dis--
course, when it was published with some others in the year
1797, he concludes with these very just and pertinent ob-
servations—

" That the American opposition to Episcopacy was at all
connected with that still more serious one, so soon after-
wards set up against civil government, was not indeed
generally apparent at the time, but it is now indisputable,
as it also is, that the former contributed not a little to render
the latter successful. The Anti-Episcopalians carried their
point with an high hand, which is no otherwise to be ac-
counted for, than that the party, in perfect union with their
fellow labourers in the British parliament, were in the
habit of opposing every measure that seemed likely to
Strengthen the hands of government. That the object,
which in this instance was opposed, was either in itself
really dangerous, or intended to be so, will not now be
pretended by any one : For hardly was the independence
of the colonies gained, before an Episcopate was applied
for and obtained ;"^ an Episcopate, in every respect simi*
lar to that which had often and earnestly been requested
by the English clergy in America ; that is, bishops duly
authorized to perform the original duties of their office, to
ordain and govern the clergy, and adtninister the sacred
rite of confirmation, but without any temporal power or
preferment, and possessed of no other authority than that

• See " A View •o/' the Causes and Consequences of the American Revolu-
tion, in thirteen Discourses, preached in North-America, between the
years ir63 and 1775 — with an historical preface, by Jonathan Boucher,
A. M. and F. A. S. — Vicar of Epsom in the county of Surry, London.
1797" A work which does equal credit to its author, by the soundness
of the principles which it inculcates, both in religion and politics, and by
the manner in which they are enferced, from the authority of divine
revdation.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 301

which is derived from the church and not from the state,
being of a purely spiritual and ecclesiastical nature.

This was the Episcopacy which was first communicated
to the American church in the state of Connecticut, in the
person of Dr. Samuel Seabury, one of the missionaries
from the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts ^
and a suffering loyalist during the American war, who
having brought with him the most ample attestations of his
character and qualifications, both from the clergy of Con-
necticut, and those of the neighbouring state of New- York,
was consecrated by the bishops in Scotland in the yeat
1784, and some years after joined with, and assisted the
bishops who received consecration at Lambeth, in giving a
bishop to the protestant Episcopal church in the state of
Maryland, and in other business that came before what is
called the House of Bishops in America.^ This happy cO"
alition, in forming and establishing the constitution of the
church in the United American States, was justly consi-
dered by those who had a hand in promoting it, as the best
means of uniting them also in doctrine, discipline and wor-
ship ; whilst it exhibits that becoming desire, and resolution
to maintain a Christian fellowship and communion with
the Episcopal church in this country, which must ever be
regarded as a public acknowledgment on their part, of the
validity of our orders, and the regularity of that Episcopal
succession, from which they are derived.

* This appears from a " Journal of the Proceedings of the Bishops^
Clergy^ and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States
tf America, in a convention held in the city of New-Tork, in September ^
1792." In which journal it is mentioned, that Bishop Seabury preached
by appointment, at the opening ©f the convention, and afterwards as-
sisted Bishops Provoost, White, and Madison, in the consecration of Dr.
Clagget, as bishop of the church in Maryland. " In 1793, Bishop
Seabury published at New- York, two volumes of discourses, which are
such as might have brought credit to any prelate, in any age, and in any
country." He died in February, 1796, and for a character of him, sec
Mr. Boucher's work, mentioned in the preceding note, p. 556, and also
the obituary of the Gentleman's Magazsine for May, 1797, p. 442.

302 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

On this point, therefore, we presume, it would be super-
fluous to add any thing more to that abundant evidence,
which has been already produced, and which, we would
hope, must be considered as perfectly sufficient to show,
how little ground Dr. Campbell had for making use of such
a contemptuous and vilifying comparison, as that which he
laid before his pupils, in the following passage of his
eleventh lecture. " Let no true son of our church be
offended, that I acknowledge our nonjurors to have a sort
of Presbyterian ordination;" (alluding to what he had
said just before, of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy
having their ordination solely from, presbyters) " for I
would by no means be understood as equalizing theirs
to that which obtains with us. Whoever is ordained
amongst us, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops.
It is true, wc neither assume the titles, nor enjoy the re-
venues, of the dignified clergy, so denominated in other
countries J but we are not the less bishops in eveiy thing
essential, for being more conformable to the apostolic and
primitive model, when every bishop had but one parish,
one congregation, one church or place of common wor-
ship, one altar or communion table, and was perhaps as
poor as any of us. Whereas the ordination of our non-
jurors proceeds from presbyters in their own (that is, in
the worst) sense of the word, men to whom a part only of
the ministerial powers was committed, and from whom
particularly was withheld the right of transmitting orders
to others. When we say that our orders are from presby?.
ters, we do not use the term in their acceptation, but in
that, wherein we find it used by Luke, in the Acts of the
Apostles, by Paul in his epistles, and (if the name of
fathers be thought to add any weight) by the purest and
earliest fathers, Clemens Romanus, Polycarp, and others,
presbyters, in short, whom the Holy Ghost has made bi-
shops of the flock. But when we say, their orders are
from presbyters, we use the word not in the apostolicjil,

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 303

but in the more recent sense, for a sort of subordinate mi-
nisters, who are not authorized to ordain, and who, on
Dr. Hammond's hypothesis, as well as ours, were not ori-
ginally in the church."

On a calm, candid, and attentive perusal of the forego-
ing passage, we can hardly refrain from asking even after
the manner, which some perhaps will not think over-polite,
of one of the reviewers of these lectures — ^' Is this the
language and reasoning of Dr. Campbell, the justly cele-
brated author of the Dissertation on Miracles^ and of the
valuable work, entitled. The Philosophy of Rhetoric ? So
says the editor, and we dare not contradict him ; but it
is such reasoning as would disgrace a school-boy who had
ever looked into a treatise of logic."^ Let us examine it
a little, with all the impartiality which can be expected
from persons, whose right to the true clerical character is
held forth by it in, what must appear to them, the most
pitiful and degrading light. Had it even been acknowledged,
that they had reaj genuine presbyterian ordination, per-
haps they would not have thought themselves very highly
complimented ; but to bring them down to something, di-
minutively represented as only a sort of presbyterian or-
dination, is truly humiliating, and would require much
more strength of argument than Dr. Campbell has thought
fit to produce for effecting such a bold depression of our
Episcopal orders. Endeavouring to show the superior au-
thority of the orders of presbyterians, he indeed affirms,
but affirmation is not proof, " that whoever is ordained
amongst them, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops."
If then there be any regard due to succession at all, may it
not be asked, what class of bishops ordained bishop Calvin
at Geneva, or bishop Knox in Scotland? The former, as far
as appears from his history, never had ordination of any kind,
though few bishops ever assumed more of the Episcopal

* See Anti-Jacobin JRevleiv for July, 1801, p. 245,

304 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

power than he did ; and the latter, if he received any or-
ders at all, which seems to be very uncertain, yet could only
have been ordained a presbyter, or one of those to whom,
even by our Professor's own account " a part only of the
ministerial powers was committed, and from whom was
particularly withheld the right of transmitting orders to
others." How then could he or any of the class of pres-
byters at the reformation, take upon them to transmit to
others what themselves had not received ; or pretend to ex-
ercise a right, which had been always, by divine institu-
tion, withheld from the office to which they had been ap^
pointed ?

Were it however to be granted, in contradiction to the
clearest evidence of scripture and antiquity, that bishops
and presbyters being originally of the same order, no dis-
tinction ought ever to have been made between them, nor
any exclusive powers assigned to the one, more than to the
other J yet, as Dr. Campbell allows, that " those men, who
came under the hands of Bishop Ross, had been regularly
admitted ministers or presbyters^ before the revolution,
and that the orders of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy
are derived from these presbyters," we may submit to the
judgment of any unprejudiced person, whether the ordi-^
nation of those clergy be not in every respect as valid as
that of any other body of men who derive their orders only
from presbyters, and much more so than that which can be
traced to no source of ecclesiastical power at all, but owes
its origin solely to the appointment of the people, or the au-
thority of the civil magistrate. In a case so plain, and
where the premises are so clear, it might have been
thought, that the conclusion would be equally obvious, and
that no " true son" of a presbyterian church, would ever
have objected to any sort of, what is really, presbyterian
ordination, or made any difference between the powers of
those presbyters, who were surely all alike subordinate
ministers as well before, as at the time of the reformation^

Particular Defence qfthe Episcopacy of Scotland, 305

and who could not since have acquired a right to change
die inherent nature of their powers, or to make themselves
a different order from what they were originaliv intended
to be. Yet Dr. Campbeil has found out a distinction be-
tween our acceptation of the word *' presbyters,'' which he
<:alls not onlv a *'' more recent," but the " worst sense" of
it, and the .*' apostolical," which is no doubt the best sense
in which he uses it ; as if the difference between his sense
of the word and ours could make any difference in the
nature of the office, or render it better to him and worse
to us, according to the sense in which it is taken. This
seems to be just the same as adopting the popular argu-
ment of the Romish doctors in recommending their tran*
substantiation, '^ crede quod habes, et babes," believe that
you have, and you have it, jL.et a man but believe, that
he possesses any office, or that the office which he possesses
has particular powers assigned tp it, and nothing more is
necessary to put him in possession either of the one or the
other. The absurdity here is the same, as if a subaltern in
the army should take the command of a regiment, because
he believes himself to be as much an officer as his colonel^
©r a justice of die peace assume the powers of the Lord
High Chancellor, because they are both judges.

When Dr. Campbell presumed that his orders were better
than those of the Scotch Episcopal clergy, because theirs
were only from prest)yters, as " a sort of subordinate mi-
nisters who are not authorized to ordain," whereas his
were froni " presbyters in the acceptation used by Luke^
by Paul, by Clemens JRomanus, Polycarp, and others of
the purest and earliest fathers j presbyters, in short, whom,
the Holy Ghost had made bishops of the flock ^"* all this
jamounts to nothing more than bare, bold presumption,
without the least appearance of proof. He could not but
Jknow, that we never pretended to deny the power of the

*• Lecture x\,
39

'306 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland

Holy Ghost to make bishops of the flock, not only of pres*
byters, but even of deacons and laymen too, if he was
pleased so to do. This, however, we are sure, was never
done in the ordinary way, but by a more certain and evi*
dent mode of appointment than any inward '' conscious^
tiess," or mere effect of fancy, which yet appears to be all
that our Professor had to support him, when he thus at-
tacked the pious and learned Dodwell.^ — " I have stronger
evidence that you have no mission, than all your traditions,
and antiquities, and catalogues will ever be able to sur-
jnount." And what is this evidence, which must be strong
indeed, to set aside all these means of ascertaining a divine
mission, which have been so long and generally received ?
We have all that is brought forward against them in what
immediately follov/s— ^" For if he, whom God sendeth^
speaketh the words of God, (and this is a test which Christ
himself hath given us) he who contradicteth God's words
is not sent by him." And by this rule it is, that all the*
pretenders to " mission," even the wildest of our modern
missionaries, endeavour to justify their pretensions on the
ground of their " speaking the words of God," of which
they, no doubt, think themselves the best judges. On this
ground, too, our learned Professor might have saved him-
self a great deal of the trouble he took in seeking for other
arguments to run down the orders of the Scotch Episcopal
clergy, since all he had to do was barely to affirm, that they
^' contradict God's words,"— ^therefore, they have no mis-
sion. It was likewise quite unnecessary, in arguing against
the pretensions of these clergy, that he should take any pe-
culiar merit to himself and his brethren, on account of their
" not assuming the titles nor enjoying the revenues of the
dignified clergy, so denominated in other countries, al-
though they are not the less bishops in every thing essen-
tial, for being more conformable to the apostolical and pri-

* Lecture iv.

Partkuhf Defence of the Episcopacy 6f Scotland. 307

mltive model j" since he knew very well that the Scotch'
Episcopal clergy were as destitute of titles or revenues as'
he could pretend to be ; and however he might have wished
to sneer at the " dignified clergy in other countries," yet
when he condescended to compare his own church with
" our sect," the only question was, which of these two was
most " conformable to the apostolical and primitive mo-
del." It is by this conformity that we think ourselves at
present peculiarly distinguished, in all the instances of unity
which he has mentioned, as they were understood in the
language, and explained by the practice of the truly apos-
tolical church. And if his comparative " poverty" be any
just mark of " conformity to the primitive model," it will
not be easy to deny the preference in this respect to the pre-
sent Scotch Episcopal church, of whose ministers it may
not improperly be said, in the language of an apostle, that
they are " as poor, yet making many rich, as having no-
thing" that can be called temporal, and settled revenue,
*' yet possessing all things" that pertain to spiritual or
Christian edification.*

But there is still something farther to be said in sup-
port of the validity of the Scotch Episcopal orders, when
thus drawn into a comparison with that sort of presbyterian
ordination, which obtains under the establishment of this

* It cannot be thought impertinent to mention here an anecdote recorded
in the life of that truly "dignified clergyman," the late Dr. Home, bishop
of Norwich, who, his biographer says — " from the present circumstances
of its primitive orthodoxy, piety, poverty, and depressed state, had
such an opinion of the Scotch Episcopal Church, as to think, that if the
great apostle of the Gentiles were upon earth, and it were put to his
choice with what denomination of Christians he would communicate, the
preference would probably be given to the Episcopalians of Scotland, as
most like to the people he had been used to." See life of Dr. Home, in
Mr. Jones* Works, vol. xii p. 176. It can give no offence, we hope,
thus to state a President of Magdalen College in Oxford, over against
a Principal of Marischal College in Aberdeen, as at least equally com-
petent to judge in matters of apostolical conformity.

S6S Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

country, where every one that is ordained by the esta*
blished rules, Dn Campbell says, *^ is ordained a bishop
by a class of bishops," He had also before laid it down
as an invariable maxim, that the name bishops which
nieans overseer^ cannot with any propriety be applied to
any person, who has nothing to overilee, and, therefore,
*' a bishop continues a bishop only whilst he continues
to have people under his spiritual care.'" Dr. Campbell,
then, having been ordained a bishop, or what was the
same with him, a minister, could only continue to be so,
whilst he had people under his ministry or spiritual care*
Yet we are told by his biographer, that in June, 1795,
finding himself^ no doubt, as his letter expresses it—" pro-
videntially in a situation of livitig independently of the
emoluments of office," he resigned his charge of minister
(if Grey-friars' church, as well as that of Professor of Di-
%'inity in Marischai College, into the hands of the presby-
tery of Aberdeen, "" entreating them to declare him re*
leased in future from these functions, and the pastoral re-
lation implied in them loosed ;" with a caution^ however,
against any misconstruction of his meaning expressed in
these words—" I hope I shall not be misunderstood by
any to mean, by this deed, a resignation of the character
of a minister of the gospel, and servant of Christ^ In
this character I glory, so far am I from intending to re-
sign it but with my breath ; nor do I mean to retain it only
as a title. For if, by the blessing of God, I should yet be
able to do any real service, either in defence, or in illus-
tration of the Christian cause^ I shall think it my honour,
as well as my duty, and the highest gratification of which
I am capable, to be so employed. It is only from the par-
ticular relation to the people of Aberdeen as pastor^ and the
theological students of Marischai College, as teacher, that
it is my desire to be loosed.''''^

* See the Accemit of his Life and Writings prefixed to his Lectures.

i(

PaHkuhr Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 30S

The reader perhaps will be a little surprized to find in
this letter, some regard expressed for that very thing called

character^'' in a minister of the gospel, which the same
person, in his Lectures, has treated with so much pointed
scorn and disrespect. But what we are chiefly concerned
to lay hold of, is the very appropriate weapon, which is
here put into our hands, for defending the validity of our
orders, against the only blow which Dr. Campbell could
jfind the means of aiming at them. His peculiar attack on
the Scotch Episcopal clergy, we have seen, is wholly sup-
ported by his pretending, that they derive their orders from
*' bishops merely nominal;" and that these bishops were
thus " merelv nominal," because they received no particu-
lar assignment to any Episcopal charge, for want of which
he does not scruple to call their consecration farcical^ or
of no signification. Had he been now alive, we should
certainly have wished to ask him, what material difference
there is, between a man's retaining the title after resigning
the charge, and accepting of the title at first without the
charge ? We see him announcing himself to be a bishop
Or pastor, ordained by a class of the same kind, and by
that very ordination, assigned and bound to a particular
pastoral charge, without which, by his own account, he can
no longer continue to be a bishop, pastor^ or minister ; yet
from that charge he desires to be released, and to have his
pastoral relation to it loosed, but still means to retain his
character as a minister of the gospel, and is willing " to be
employed either in defending or illustrating the Christian
cause, as far as he is able," which can only mean his doing
it, as a minister, bishop or pastor. And what is all this
but intending to act as a bishop ordained at large ; to be a
pastor without a flock, a minister without having any peo-
ple under his ministerial or spiritual care, and to continue
a bishop, even when he had no charge to oversee or in-
spect I If then in this assumed character, he had pre-
tended to baptize a child, or administer the sacrament of

310 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

the Lord's supper, or assist a class of bishops in ordaining^
a bishop, must not every thing of this kind, on his own prin-
ciples, have been no better than a farcical ceremony, per-
formed by one who had no power or right to perfoi-m any
such office, being in fact, no other than a bishop, pastor or
minister ^^ merely nominal?'*'* But as Dr. Campbell, no
doubt, would have spurned at the idea of acting in such a
fictitious character, why was he so ready, without just
ground, to apply the same censure to others, and to hold up
to contempt, as bishops " merely nominal," those who had
surely as good a right to be esteemed real and true bishops,
as he had, even by his own way of arguing, to be consi-
tiered as a minister of the gospel, after he had resigned his
pastoral charge, and so renounced the only title he could
have, by his own principles, to that official character? — If
he wished to retain such a character only on the supposi-
tion of his still " being able to do some service either in
defence, or in illustration of the Christian cause," the same
privilege might have been allowed to those whom he thought
proper to call " nominal bishops," many of whom well could,
and some of them actually did defend and illustrate what
they believed to be the Christian cause, and on that foot-
ing, might certainly claim, as well as Dr. Campbell, to be-
considered as, what they really were, bishops of the Chris-
tian church. We oiFer this reasoning merely in return to-
the Doctor's " argumentum ad hominem," and to show
how much his practice, in the affair of his resignation,
" militated against his principles." If he was at so much
pains to condemn us, as he thought, on our own principles,
it is but fair that we should be allowed to make use of his
principles, as far as we can, in our own vindication.

It is entirely for the purpose of vindicating ourselves,
that wx have been so long detained, and obliged to make
so many remarks, on the lecture now before us, which
appears to have been wholly levelled at, what the Lecturer

Fartkuhr Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 311

i^alls^ " a pretty numerous class, and these not all Roman-
ists :" By which description we may easily perceive, that
he means the class whom he had, twice in this lecture, dis-
tinguished by the obnoxious title of " our nonjurors^'' al-
though in a former lecture he had candidly owned, " that
we have none of that description at present." That some
kind of reflection was intended by this appellation, may at
least be suspected, from his always applying it as a mark
of distinction, without any reference to the political senti-
ments which gave rise to it, and particularly from the abuse
which he pours out, with an unusual flow of acrimony, on
a most learned and distinguished writer, whom he after-
wards introduces to our notice, as " a zealous defender of
prelacy," and what is worse, by the opprobrious designa-
tion of" the Irish nonjuror^ Dodwell,"f distinguishing those
who maintain that Episcopal ordination is necessary to the
valid administration of the sacraments of our religion, by
the title of " Dodwellians ;"{ as if this were a doctrine
peculiar to nonjurors^ and therefore so zealously maintained
by Dodwell.

A similar intention is too obvious to escape notice in the
treatment which our Lecturer bestows on another no less

• Lecture xi.

f Page 96 — 122. This great and good man had, no doubt, many sin-
gularities of opinion, but none that could justify such abusive epithets as
these — " Arrogant and vain man ! What are you, vi\xo so boldly and
-avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant, articles of your own de-
vising, neither expressed nor implied in his words? "Do yoic venture — a
worm of the earth ? Can you think yourself warranted — for your own
malignant purpose — to exhibit Christ, as the head of a faction — your
party forsooth? — Your language is neither the language of scripture, nor
of common sense." P. 90. It was the severity of this language of Dr.
Campbell's, which provoked the Anti-yacobiji Revie-xver to make that bold
and animated retort, which we meet with in his number for June, 1801,
p. 112, and for which he makes a suitable apology, wishing rather to
plead the cause of truth in the words of soberness.

\ An epithet not peculiar to Dr. Campbell, as Mr. Anderson, of Dun«
bai'ton, had niiide use of it long before. See his Defence, is^e, p. 9Q,

.312 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

distinguished nonjuror^ the pious and learned Dr. Hi ekes,
who had been dean of Worcester, and was deprived of
that dignity, as the bishops of Scotland were ejected from
their sees, in consequence of the revolution. The character
of this celebrated divine had been severelv^ handled by our
Professor in his tenth letter, on the subject of the resem-
blance between the Jewish and Christian priesthood ; and
here again, in the conclusion of the eleventh lecture, a
heavy charge is brought forward against him in the follow-
ing terms : — " An author of whose sentiments I took some
notice in my last lecture, has observed,"^^ that as the civilians
have their fictions in law, our theologists also have their
fictions in divinity. It is but too true, that some of our
theological systems are so stuffed with these, that little of
plain truth is to be learned from them. And I think it will
be doing no injury to this dogma of the character, to rank
it among those fictions in divinity. God forbid I should
add, in the not very decent words of that author, (though I
really believe he meant no harm by them) which infnite
wisdom and goodness have devised for our benefit and ad"
vantage* The God of truth needs not the assistance of
falsehood, nor is the cause of truth to be promoted by such
means. The use of metaphorical expressions, or figurative
representations, in scripture, give no propriety to such an
application of a term so liable to abuse." — 'And we may too
justly add, that there is hardly a term in scripture which is
not liable to abuse, nay, which has not actually been abused
by the depravity and perverseness of the human imagina-
tion. The word fiction properly signifies something feigned
or invented, for the purpose of conveying information,
whether true or false. In leading to the discovery of truth,
it is much the same as figure, or representation, and nothing,
we know, is more common, than, in speaking of that mys-
terious institution, to call the consecrated bread and cup in

* Hickes' Christian Priesthood, lib. i. cap. ii. § 8.

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. SIS

the eucharist, the representative symbols of the body and
blood of Christ. Dr. Hickes was treating of the propriety
of calling them so, because they are substituted and deputed
for that bodv and blood, which they thus mystically repre-
sent. " This power," says he, " in legislators, of making
and supposing things to be to all intents and purposes, and
tffects in law, what in reality they are not, is called by the
civil law — fiction,'''' After which, he produces various in-
stances of such fiction in the Roman law, and in the com-
mon law of England, and then adds — " In like manner,
therfe are fictions in divinity, which infinite wisdom and
goodness have devised for our benefit and advantage.
Thus man and wife are supposed to be, and therefore are
made one fleshy as the law makes them one person. Thus
Christ is supposed to be the Lamb slain from the founda-
tion of the xvorld: Thus also the doctrine of adoption \% a
div'ine fiction in the gospel, as it was an human fiction in the
Roman law, and in both cases hath all the effects of real
and legitimate sonship. And, therefore, I hope, it is no
great or dangerous paradox to say, that by divine fiction or
substitution^ the bread is made the bod)^, and the wine the
blood of Christ," &c. And nothing surely can be more
harmless than these observations, which need not to have
occasioned so much horror and indignation, as seem to have
been raised by them in the breast of our Lecturer. We
may, therefore, justly enough observe, that " to have spoken
with proper respect of men of such profound erudition, and
distinguished excellence, as Dodxvell and Hickes^ however
mistaken they might be, would certainly not have dimi-
nished in the least Dr. Campbell's own reputation in the
the world."*

As this is the opinion of a clergyman of the church of
England, as by law established under the present govern-
ment, it cannot be supposed to proceed from any prejudice

* See Mr. Daubeny's ei^ht Discourses on the Doctrine of Atonement, p. fS.

40

514 JParticular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

or partiality in favour of the political sentiments peculiar
to nonjurors : And since Dr. Campbell's account of those
whom he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party," and still re-
presents as continuing in their nonjuring principles, seems
to imply a suspicion that their original or transmitted disaf-
fection to government may have been the cause of some
defect or irregularity in the transmission of their clerical
orders, we cannot do better than sum up what has been al-
ready said on this subject, in the words of the same author
whose opinion we have just now quoted, and who could
not be influenced by any personal or interested motives to
speak of the nonjuring clergy either of England, Ireland
or Scotland, but as they really were, and showed them-
selves to be both in their principles, and their conduct.
Having occasion to mention some of these clergy, as zea-
lous defenders of apostolic Episcopacy, such as Dodwell
and Hickes^ Leslie^ and Law^ he argues in the following
manner on the validity of their ministerial commission.

* In a note subjoined to Bishop Horne's excellent Sermon on the
Duty of contending for the Faith, preached at the primary visitation of th«
present archbishop of Canterbury, in 1786 — we find the following cha-
yacter of Mr. Leslie and his writings — •' The polemical skill of a Leslie
is an expression of Bolinbroke. A clergyman's library should not be
without this author's theological works, in two volumes, folio, containing
his pieces against Deists, Jews, Romanists, Socinians, and Quakers.
He is said to have brought more persons, from other persuasions, into the
church of England, than any man ever did; his skill in conversation
being equal to that in writing. Allowance must be made for a style>
which, though sufficiently perspicuous and nervous, is not according to
the modern ideas of correctness and elegance. Bayle styles him a man
of great merit and learning. Mr. T, Salmon observes, that his works must
transmit him to posterity, as a man thoroughly learned and truly pious.
But a better and more disinterested judge, Mr. Harris, informs us, that
he made several converts from popery, and says that notwithstanding his
mistaken opinions about government, and a few other matters, he de-
serves the highest praise for defending the Christian religion against De-
ists, Jews, and Quakers, and for admirably well supporting the doctrines
of the church of England against those of Rome. See Biqgtaphicai
Dictionary.''* Bishop Home then adds — " Mr. Leslie's writings havfe

Particular defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland^ 815

^' When I consider, that among the nonjuring clergy,
are to be found some of the most pious, most learned and
most conscientious divines that ever adorned the church
of England, I cannot help thinking, that the government
would have gained more in honour, than it would have
lost in security, had such men been permitted to have re«
mained in possession of their preferments. But admit-
ting, that policy demanded that the nonjuring clergy
should be deprived, it is to be observed, that they were
deprived only of those secuUar possessions, which the
church had derived from her connection with the state.
Their offence, if it may be called by so harsh a name, was
of a political nature ; their punishment corresponded to it.
They offended against the ruling powers ; they, in conse-
quence lost their patronage. But all the rights, dignities
and emoluments, which the priesthood derives from the
piety and patronage of civil rulers, are quite distinct fromi
that spiritual commission, by which the clergy administer
the affairs of Christ's kingdom. Of this commission they
could not be deprived by civil rulers, because it had been
received from an higher authority. The office, therefore,
which the nonjuring clergy held in the Christian church,
was precisely the same, and every act of it as valid, ab-
stractedly considered, after their deprivation, as it was be-
fore ; what they had been deprived of, being only those
contingent circumstances of emolument and honour, which
have no necessary connection with the ministerial com-
mission. The spiritual character of a bishop, and his par-
ticular local jurisdiction, have been, at different times, and
under different circumstances, separated from each other :
But a man may still be a true bishop, whether he has or has
not any particular district, over which he is authorized to

been neglected, because he had the misfortune to be a nonjuror. But
since the age is disposed to drop prejudices, it is a pity that this alone
should be suffered to remain, especially as the subject of it is no1^' — ■
* rvaxed old and ready to vanish awav."

MB Particular Defence of the Episcopacif of Scotland,

preside. Such, in a theological sense, I conceive the nont-
juring bishops were ; and 1 do not see how the testimony
of such divines, upon the subject of church government^
can be affected by an offence committed against the civil
power ; on the contrary, I should think such testimony
ought to weigh heavy in the scale, from the consideration,
that the parties who furnished it, (whatever judgment may
be formed of their political opinions) had given the most
unequivocal proof of their being honest men, bv sacrificing
every temporal advantage to the preservation of their con-
sciences."*

" Such is the opinion giveli of the nonjuring clergy in ge-
neral, by a writer who, as we before observed, cannot be
supposed to feel any particular bias in favour of the cause,
for which they were first distinguished by the title of nan--
jurors^ but seems to have a very just idea of their principles
and conduct as ecclesiastics ; and that is now the only light
in which we have any occasion to view their character or
sentiments, all other objects of discussion being at last taken
out of the way, and every question respecting their political
attachments entirely laid to rest* Those, however, who have
succeeded them in their ecclesiastical character, and have
been the means of preserving a regular Episcopal succession
in this country, are still, it seems, suspected of inheriting
also some share of their disaffection to the established go-
vernment ; which must have been the only reason that could
have induced Dr. Campbell to keep up against them the
odious title of nonjurors^ as a mark of their supposed dis-
affection. As we have, therefore, sufficiently vindicated
the conduct of our predecessors in handing down those
spiritual powers, with which the present Scotch Episcopal
clergy, according to the nature of their several orders,
have been duly invested ; it is but fair that we be now al-

* See an Appendix to the Guide to the Church, in answer to Sir Richard
Hill, Bart. By the Rev. Charles Daubeny, L.L. B. London, 1799,

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 317

lowed to speak for Ourselves, and humbly to request, that
the following plain and honest representation of our case
may be properly attended to, by all who have a right to be
satisfied with respect to our loyalty as subjects, and espe-
cially by those who, professing to hold the same religious
principles as we do, are yet, it is said, kept back from join-
ing our communion, by entertaining groundless suspicions
against us, in regard to this very article.

It has been already observed, that in consequence of the
legal abolition of Episcopacy, which took place soon after
the revolution in 1688, those who professed an adherence to
the old ecclesiastical system were on that account suspected
of still maintaining a spirit of disaffection to the new go-
vernment. This is a fact which cannot be denied, and
perhaps may be easily accounted for, from the natural ope-
ration of those heavy penalties by which their worship was
prohibited, or at least the public celebration of it severely
restricted. Under these discouraging circumstances, which
continued in full force for many years, it was hardly pos-
sible for the Scotch Episcopalians to throw off the reproach
of disloyalty which, in the opinion of the public at large,
had been almost inseparably annexed to their religious pro-
fession. All they could do, was to conduct themselves in
such a quiet and inoffensive manner, as might convince go-
vernment, that there was no danger to be apprehended from
their principles, and therefore no necessity for with-holding
from them any longer that lenity and indulgence which they
have so liberally experienced ever since our present most
gracious Sovereign came to the throne. The wisdom and
clemency of his Majesty's government, so happily mani-
fested from the commencement of his reign, encouraged
them to hope, that an offer of their allegiance v/ould not be
rejected: and as soon as they could make that offer in a
conscientious manner, and consistently with the principles
by v/hich, it was known, their conduct had been uniformly
influenced, they had the satisfaction to find, from the King's

318 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

answer to their address, that it was graciously accepted;
in consequence of which, they could not but hope, that the
British legislature would take their case into consideration,
and see the expediency of relieving both clergy and laity
of the Episcopal communion in Scotland from the restraints
and penalties to which they had been long exposed in the
exercise of their religion. With this hope, an application
was made to Parliament in their behalf; and in the act that
was passed for their relief in the year 1792, one of the
clauses of the preamble ran in these terms — " Whereas
there is sufficient reason to believe that the pastors, minis-
ters and laity of the Episcopal communion in Scotland, are
now well attached to his Majesty's person, family and go-
vernment." And if at that time the King and Parliament
of Great- Britain had sufficient reason to believe, that we
were such dutiful and loyal subjects, the subsequent period
has affi^rded the most ample proof of our earnest desire to
embrace every means in our power that might tend to con-
firm that belief, and show us to be worthy of the good cha-
racter which was then so honourably conferred upon us.
The period we allude to has been disgracefully distin-
guished by every possible art that could be devised for se-
ducing subjects from their allegiance. None has ever sur-
passed it in plots and associations, not for promoting the
interests of this or the other candidate for the crown, and
setting up one in preference to another, but for the express
purpose of cutting off at once the pretensions of every
claimant, extirpating the whole race of kings, subverting the
foundation of all government, and bursting asunder not
only the bonds of civilized society, but every religious tie
that connects man with his God, and tends to secure his
peace and happiness both here and hereafter.

During all these wild and lawless attempts, which could
have nothing for their object but the dissemination of anar-
chy and confusion, and every evil work, no such base ima-
gination could be laid to the charge of our society. Attach-

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 319

ment to kingly power has been always the characteristic of
the church to which we belong, and no one has ever been
found connected with any seditious club, or democratic
party, who dared to call himself a regular Scotch Episcopa-
lian. Through the whole of that awful and arduous con-
test, in which our country was lately^ engaged, whatever
aid government could derive from the public solemnities of
religion, was regularly afforded in our sacred assemblies :
And on the days appointed by royal authority, either for
national humiliation, or general thanksgiving, our people
were always seen devoutly assembled in their several places
of worship, using the various forms of prayer and praise^
which were composed for these solemnities, and may still
be referred to as proofs of that appropriate mode of devo-
tion with which they were celebrated. On all these occa-
sions, the clergy of our communion did not fail to manifest
an exemplary zeal in impressing on the minds of those un-
der their charge, a just sense of their duty as good Chris-
tians and as loyal subjects, exhorting them earnestly, in the
words of inspired wisdom, to " fear the Lord and the
king, and not to meddle with them that are given to change."
To the king, as our rightful sovereign, and to his royal
family, as pledges of a happy succession to his crown and
dignity, we feel ourselves attached by all the ties of con-
science, as well as gratitude, and have, therefore, uniformly
promoted, to the utmost of our power, those salutary mea-
sures of his government, which have, from time to time,
been adopted for preserving the internal peace of the king-
dom, as well as its security from every hostile invasion.

For the truth of all this, we may appeal, and have ap-
pealed to the testimony of those who frequent our places
of public worship ; many of whom being placed in offices of
trust under government, would give no countenance to our
religious assemblies, if they did not find them such as are

* This was written diiriBg the short continuance of the hte peace.

320 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

not only consistent with the laws, but worthy of protection;
and were not perfectly sensible, that his Majesty has no
better subjects, nor persons more attached to his govern-
ment, on principles of permanent loyalty, than the bishops
and clergy of the Scotch Episcopal church. May we not
then be allowed to ask on what gi^ound it is, that we are still
to be branded with the title of nonjurors^ as a mark of our
supposed disaffection in refusing to swear allegiance to the
sovereign upon the throne ; a supposition as unfounded, as
it is meant to be unfavourable, and which can only proceed
from a desire to keep up odious and unnecessary distinc-
tions among his Majesty's subjects t Oaths may no doubt
be contrived, and, in some instances have been required,
both of a civil and religious nature, which we should think
ourselves obliged to decline, as neither consistent with our
principles, nor suited to our situation. But it is impossible
that we could with any propriety, even on our present foot-
ing of enjoying toleration only, refuse to swear allegiance
to a sovereign, for whom we solemnly and sincerely pray,
as often as we assemble in the house of prayer, that " God
would be his defender and keeper, and give him the victory
over all his enemies." With these, and such like petitions,
put into our mouths by that excellent liturgy, which we ad-
mire, and venerate, and daily use in our public service," it
is wonderful that the Scotch Episcopal church should yet
be suspected of any thing that looks like disaffection, or any
jealousy be entertained of such an ecclesiastical body, even
though dissenting from the establishment of Scotland, when
by that very dissent, it is more closely united to the esta-
blished church of England. Yet this bond of union, arising
from a similarity of constitution, as far as regards the spi-
ritual authority of the church, has been held up to derision,
as a mere imaginar}^ privilege, and the *' Scotch Episcopal
party J'' as Dr. Campbell has called it, is exposed to ridi-
cule, for adhering to that form of ecclesiastical polity, which
has the sanction of legal and constitutional support in the far

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 321

greater, and most distinguished part of the British Empire.
We need not then be ashamed of its being said, however
we may object to the terms in which it is mentioned, that
this adherence to the pohty of the primitive church " is
made a principal foundation of dissent by a pretty numer-
ous sect in this country." For though we have no right to
value ourselves on our numbers, in proportion to the popu-
lation of Scotland, and it is no part of our belief, that the
truth must necessarily be on the side of the majority, yet
we see no reason why the terms, sect and party ^ should be
applied, as marks of reproach, to those whose religious de-
nomination as Epi^Copaly is countenanced by that of the so-
vereign on the throne, of the ^ Lords spiritual in parlia-
ment assembled," and of much the largv^st proportion of
the inhabitants of the united kingdom, when compared to
those of any other religious persuasion.

These considerations might be thought sufficient to se^
cure the Episcopacy of Scotland from the disgraceful im-
putation of being allied to that sectarian spirit which de-
lights in opposition to whatever is established, and is never
satisfied, till every institution of superior dignity and merit
be brought down to its own mean, debasing standard.
This is not the doctrine by which we wish to be distin-
guished ; nor ought we to be ranked among those modern
authors of division, the founders of new sects, of whom
Dr. Campbell observes — ^^ it is hard to conceive to what
the disciples of some recent sectarians can be made prose-
lytes, unless to uncharitabieness, hatred and calumny against
their fellow Christians, and that on the most frivolous or
Unintelligible pretexts." As we do not deal in '* hatred or
calumny" against any human beings, so neither are the rea-
sons " frivolous or unintelligible," for which we have con-
tinued in a state of separation from the religious establish-
ment of this part of our island : a separation foimded on
tlie most substantial and important grounds ; such as have
feeen long topics of serious discussion, and may be easily

4i

322 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

understood by all who are desirous to inquire into them.
We do not, therefore, consider ourselves as having any re-
lation, or even resemblance to those " modern authors of
division, who are daily introducing new sects in countries,
where Christianity is universally professed, and where
there is free access by the scriptures, both to its doctrine
and to its precepts." Yet Dr. Campbell, who gives this
account of them and their proceedings, might have known,
that these " recent sectaries," e^s he calls them, and who
are still abounding more and more i.i number and influence,
are not slow to vindicate themselves on such pretences as
these — " that the scripture, though in^all hands, is either
abused or neglected ; that Christianity, though universally
professed among us, is no more than a bare profession;
that its doctrines are not properly understood, nor its
precepts rightly applied ; and, therefore, they come with
a charitable zeal, to rectify every abuse, to preach the true
gospel in this unenlightened land, and open the eyes of a
blind, deluded people."

This has been the sectarian cry in all ages ; and how far
it may be either checked or encouraged by some of the ar-
guments made use of in these Lectures^ we shall not pre-
tend to determine. That they have no particular tendency
to repress the sectarian spirit, may indeed be justly inferred
from the character given of them by one sufficiently ac-
quainted with their whole end and object, and who tells us
plainly, that the study recommended by them, " can give
no offence to any, but to those who maintain the^w^ divinum
(divine right) of bishops, and their hereditary succession
from the apostles."^ — Indeed, the Lecturer himself makes
a kind of apology even for those " contentious teachers,"
to whom he had been alluding, and " of w^hom he would
not presume to say, that they may not occasionally do good,

* See the view of Dr. Campbell's Prelections in Theology, prefixed tb*
liis Lectures.

Fartkular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 32

o

though there be but too great reason to dread that the evil
preponderates. And even here," says he, " I am to be un-
derstood as speaking of the first authors of such unchristian
separations. I know too well the power of education and
of early prejudice, to impute equal malignity to those who
may succeed them, whether teachers or disciples."'^

All this, to be sure, is perfectly agreeable to Dr. Camp-
bell's well known sentiments on the subject of heresy and
schism, the last of which particularly he seemed to consider
as a breach of charity^ and not a breach of communion. For
so he had expressly said in a work published by himself —
*' How much soever of a schismatical or heretical spirit, in
the apostolic sense of thiese terms, may have contributed to
the formation of the different sects into which the Christian
world is at present divided ; no person who, in the spirit of
candour and charity, adheres to that which, to the best of
his judgment is right, though in this opinion he should be
mistaken, is in the scriptural sense either schismatic or he-
retic. And he, on the contrary, whatever sect he belongs
to, is more entitled to these odious appellations, who is
most apt to throw the imputation upon others."f This
description we find particularly applied in the work before
us, to that poor persecuted nonjuror Mr. Dodwell, against
whom, after a great deal more of such bitter declamation, our
Lecturer thus goes on—" His unceasing cry was schism ;J
yet in the scriptural sense a greater schismatic than himself
the age did not produce. Whose doctrine was ever found
more hostile to that fundamental principle declared by our
Lord to be the criterion of our Christianity, mutual love ?
Whose doctrine was ever more successful in planting, by

* Lecture iv.

t See his Dissertation on Heresy f prefixed to the Translation of the
Gospels, p, 433, 434 4to. edit.

\ This is evidently borrowed from the coarser language of Mr. Ander-
son of Dunbarton, who had sa d of Dodwell, ♦« Schism, schism was his
everlasting clack." See his Defence, ijfc. p. 31,

324 Particular Defence of the Ephcopdcy of Scotland.

means of uncharitable and self-opinioned judgments, the
principle of hatred in its stead ? The test, to which scripture
points is — Does the teaching in question alienate the hearts
of Christians, or unite them ? Does it conciliate the affec-
tions, where differences have unhappily arisen ? or^ does it
widen the breach ? If the former, the spirit is Christian ;
if the latter, schismatical. The former is not more produc-
tive of charity^ the end of the commandment, or gospel co*
venant, and the bond of perfectness, than the latter is of its
opposite, malignity, the source of discord, the parent of in-
tolerance and persecution."*

We acknowledge that all this sounds well^ and shows the
writer to have possessed a sufficient command of words for
any purpose he might have in view. But does it afford any
clear, distinct idea of the point in question, or serve to il-
lustrate the scripture sense of schism, of which discord,
hatred and malignity may be the effects^ but certainly are
not the essence ? It is true, an apostle speaks of schisms
among the Corinthians, even when they seemed to be of the
same communion, and were assembled for the same pur-
pose. " When ye come together in the church," says he, " I
hear that there be schisms or divisions among you :"t And

* Lecture vi.

f 1 Cor. xi. 18. From this text it has often been inferred, that schism,
can only mean a breach of charitY; not oi coTnmunion ; and with that
view it was frequently referred to by the English dissenters, at the time
when the question about occasional conformity was agitated, and many
pamphlets were published to show, that even the apostles formed differ-
ent communions apart from each other, though they were not scrupulous
about mutually communicating now and then, as occasion required. It
3Tiay, therefore, abate, in some measure, the confidence of Dr. Campbell's
admirers, to find that he has only borrowed from others his strange un-
scriptural notion of schism, the fallacy of which was sufficiently exposed
by the learned Mr. Wall, author of the masterly work on Itifant-Baptismf
who, in another publication called—" A Vindication of the Apostles from
a very false imputation laid on them, in several English pam.phlets, vi?.
that they refused, constant, and held only occasional communion ivith orte
another, andv^ith me another* s churches i^* adverting to the above meii-

Particular ty^fence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 325

.it is likewise evident from the context, that by the schisms
©f which the Corinthians were guilty, the apostle meant
their breaking off into separate parties, that the rich, despis^
ing the poor, might partake of the Lord's supper by them-
selves ; which was such an uncharitable and unbecoming
division, as, if not timeously checked, would soon have led
to that, which even Dr. Campbell acknowledges, " was con-
sidered as the great criterion of schism, the setting up ano-
tiler altar, beside the one altar of the bishop." But when he
flies off from this fair and just standard, by which every
thing relating to schism ought to be measured, and endea-
vours to entangle the subject with a number of questions^
plausible indeed, but far from being pertinent, all we have
to do, is to balance these with a few other questions, much
more apposite and equally important, by asking in return-
Is there no other criterion of Christianity, but mutual love ?
Is there not ^ faith to be contended for, as well as a charity
to be inculcated ? And is not a perversion of the former as
much to be guarded against, as a wounding of the latter ?
Was the beloved disciple of a schismatical or sectarian spi-
rit, when he gave this warning to those whom he loved in
the truth—" If there come any unto vou, and bring not this
doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him
God speed?"* Would Dr. Campbell himself have been
guilty of " wounding charity," if his preaching disagree-

tioned notion of schism, as supported by the text we have quoted, argues
in the following manner. — " This is just as if any one should prove, that
actual killing of a man is not in the scripture notion murder, by this
argument, that the scripture does sometimes call hatred — murder He
that hateth his brother is a murderer. (St John iii. 15.] Or that actual
defiling a woman is not, in our Soviour's sense, adultery, because he
sometimes calls lusting after her by that name If St. Paul do call thuse
animosities, and the taking of sides, which had not yet broken out into
actual separation, and renouncing of communion, but was in a fair way
to it, by the name of schism, how much more would he have called it
so, if they had proceeded to an absolute division, two altars set up in
opposition to one another V*
* 2 St, John V. 10.

3^6 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotland^

able, though necessary truths, should at any time have of-
fended his hearers, and made them prefer more accommo-
dating teachers ? Yet wounding of charity^ like what he lays
to the charge of Dodwell, we may justly say, is his " un»
ceasing cry ;" and when he meets with sentiments conge-
tiial to his own on this subject, he does not fail to recom-
mend them in the strongest terms, as " conveying an idea
of the church truly rational, enlarged and sublime !"*

This, no doubt, may be all very fine, as intended to dis-
play, what our learned Theologist calls — the " liberal spirit
of the gospel ;" But we must confess, whatever shall be
thought of our " ideas" of the matter, that " we have not
So learned Christ," nor been taught to consider any thing
connected with what is now termed " liberality of spirit,'^
as at all favourable to the pure and genuine truths of the
gospel. These truths, we are told, are to be spoken in love ;
but still they must be spoken and maintained, as God has
delivered them to us ; and no separation should ever be at-
tempted between the love which Christianity requires, and
the truth which it reveals. That love which has not this
truth for its foundation, is but a false appearance of charity,
as every thing must be, which encourages men in those er-
rors that are destructive to their souls. Yet nothing is more
evident, than that men are too much disposed to seek this
encouragement to themselves, and too willing to believe,
that while they are sincere in their profession, whatever
that profession may be, no danger is to be apprehended ei-
ther from ignorance or error* St. Paul^ it may be presumed.,
was as sincere in his profession as any man could be, when
*' he lived in all good conscience after the manner of the
law of his fathers, and was zealous towards God, verily be-
lieving, that he ought to do many things contrary to the
name of Jesus :" And yet, after he became a Christian, he
acknowledged, that in all this he had been no better than

* Lecture iv»

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 327

" a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious." It was a con-
fident dependence on his own sincerity, as well as a high
opinion of his superior knowledge, that made him so stre-
nuously resist, before his conversion, all the evidence that
could be offered for the truth of the gospel. And to the
same, or similar causes, it may still be owing, that so many
who profess to receive this faith as delivered to the church
by duly commissioned teachers, are yet unwilling to be-
lieve, that any such commission is necessary either for pre-
serving the faith, or supporting the unity of the church, or
that there is any thing wrong in heresy and schism, if they
be only embraced, and adhered to, " in the spirit of can-
dour and charity."

Indeed, if by the word Church we are to understand
every sect or party which professes to be Christian, what-
ever be the form of its ministry, or the authority of those
employed in its service, there can be no such thing as
schism^ considered as a separation from the church of Christ,
Hatred, or malignity, or something else may be found out,
whereon to fix the imputation of schism, as something sin-
ful in the sight of God ; but this is fividently to clothe one
sin in the dress of another, that by giving the same appel-
lation to both, we may seem to lessen the number of trans-
gressions, though without diminishing the proportion of
their guilt. This is a species of self-deceit, which every
wise man would wish to avoid ; and, therefore, in order to
deal honestly with ourselves, we must take care to view the
things of religion, not according to the passions or preju-
dices of men, but in that light only wherein the scriptures of
truth represent them ; which is particularly necessary with
regard to the nature of the church, and the nature of schism,
as the latter cannot be rightly understood, without a proper
knowledge of the former.

For discovering the nature of any society, we generally
have recourse to the names or titles by which it is distin-
guished, and particularly to the descriptions given of it, by

328 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

those who had been employed in forming or executing the
plan of its constitution, and drawing up the rules that were
to be adopted for the management of its concerns. It is
by the same means that we have come to the knowledge
of the true nature and constitution of that spiritual society
called the church of Christ, and which, among other ap-
pellations and allusions, expressive of its original purpose,
is frequently compared to a body ; — and " as we have
many members in one body," says St. Paul, " and all
members have not the same office, so we being many, are
one body in Christ, and every one members one of ano-
ther."^ And to show us more particularly what this body
is, we are told by the same apostle, that " God hath put all
things under the feet of Christ, and gave him to be the
head over all things to the churchy which is his body, the
fulness of him that filleth all in all."f It was for the edify-
ing of this body, that the work of the ministry was ap-
pointed, that so Christians " may grow up into him in all
things, who is the Head, even Christ; from whom the
whole body, fitly joined together, and compacted by that
which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual
working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of
the body, unto the edifying of itself in love."{

It is this heavenly principle of love, which maintains
unity in the church on earth, and prevents that unhappy
separation, which would otherwise put an effectual stop to
the increase of the body. For this reason, " the members
must have the same care, one for another, that there may
be no schism in the body ;"|| and when the body is thus pre-
served from division, it is very properly said to be edified,
to be kept together by the cement of faith and love, so as
to resemble a compact and commodious building, fitly
framed for answering every purpose intended by it. This

* Rom. xii. 4, 5. f Eph. i. 22, 23.

I Ephes. iv. 15, 16. . |) 1 Cor. xii. 25.

JPartkular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 3SQ

is that " bond of perfectness," as St. Paul calls it, which
would secure the firmness of that spiritual building raised
*' on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus
Christ himself being the chief corner stone." And with-
out this sound, cementing principle of unity, the firmest
foundations, the stateliest walls, the best disposed apart-
ments, would soon become no better than naked and de-
formed ruins, open to every storm, and exposed to all the
desolation of wasting elements. It is under these, and
such like bold and striking metaphors, that the apostles of
Christ, and St. Paul in particular, describe the design and
construction of that solid and durable edifice, reared by
them after the model left them by their blessed Master, and
so different from the airy, fantastic structures which latter
ages have exhibited, according to the humours of the times,
and the ever-varying fancies of popular phrensy. But
from the view which we have already taken of the first es-
tablishment of the Christian church, it must have suifi»
ciently appeared, in what a happy manner the spirit of
unity knit all the members together, and how careful every
one was to know himself, his station, and his duty, and to
think and act soberly, according to the situation which pro-
vidence had allotted to him.-^As the great Head of the
church had appointed divers orders and officers in it, they
could not but see the necessity of preserving the subordi*
nation which he had established ; and they all conspired,
" as workers together" for the same blessed purpose, to be
faithful in their several departments, each contributing his
best endeavours " to the perfecting of the saints, to the
work of the ministry, to the edifying of the body of
Christ."

Such, then, being the nature and design of the Christian
church, considered as a visible society, formed by Christ
himself^ for the gracious purpose of uniting men to him,
in faith, love and obedience here, and by that means, in
everlasting glory hereafter, we may well suppose, that swch

43-

330 Patticular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland,

a holy and heavenly society, so evidently designed for the
happiness of mankind, would not fail to awaken the spite
and envy of that spiritual enemy, who having, from the
beginning of the world, acted in opposition to the Saviour^
has been emphatically called the Destroyer^ as perpetually
bent on the destruction and misery of the human race*
No sooner was the church founded on earth, than the
malice of hell was directed against it ; and as the power o^
its adversary could not prevail, for its total overthrow, his
great object was, to render it as ineffectual as possible to
the merciful purpose for which it was intended, by under-
mining it secretly in the way of discord and division, when
he could not beat it down directly by an open and bold
attack.

Hence, then, we may discover the nature and origin of
that sin against the church, and, consequently, against its
divine Founder, which Christians have been long and
earnestly warned to avoid, as most dangerous and deadly,
under the name of schism^ a word which, from the scrip-
tural application of its original meaning, must signify a
cutting off, or separating from that ecclesiastical body, of
which Christ is the Head, and, therefore, a deprivation of
that nourishment and strength which he affords to all his
faithful members. This was undoubtedly the primitive,
nay, the apostolical sense of the word schism^ whatever at-
tempts may have been made to pervert its natural meaning,
and give a softer turn to the application of it. Custom,
which reconciles us almost to every thing, has brought us at
last to look upon the divisions which now take place among
those who profess to be Christians, in a very different light
from that in which they would have been viewed in the
primitive days of the church : And something which we
have substituted for true Christian charity, requires us, it
seems, to believe, that the church of Christ is to be found,
and, therefore, salvation to be obtained, in any society, or
with any denomrination of persons professing to be Chris-

Farttcular Defence of the Episcopaey of Scotland, 331

tians. Hence it must necessarily be inferred, that as some-,
thing called a church may be found every where^ that which
we call schism can be found no where. This matter, how-
ever, is very differently represented in the inspired writ-
ings of the New Testament ; and if the constitution of the
Christian church be the same now that it was in the days
of the apostles, the sin of schism must be the same like-
wise ; consisting still, as it did then, in a cutting oif, or
being cut off, from the body of Christ, a separation from
the communion, an encroachment on the government, and
a breach in the unity of his church. But the nature and
consequences of schism have been so well described by a
late eminent divine of the church of England, and in such
a concise and energetic manner, that we hope to be excused
for giving the following extract from one of his popular
and most useful tracts, as fully expressive of our own sen-
timents on this subject. Having pointed out some prevail-
ing errors with respect to government, and the setting up
the power of the people as supreme, whereas the scripture
assures us, that " there is no power but of God ;" he then
proceeds to give an account of that, which has the same
effect in the church, that rebellion or sedition has in the
state, and his words are these :

" The same principle which disturbs the order of civil
government, breaks the peace of the church. When it
operates against the state, it is called the power of the peo^
pie ; but in religion it is called private judgment^ and some-
times con*a>72ce ; but it always acts against the judgment
of authority. It has been a great misfortune of late times,
that we have been partakers in other men's sins, by making
too light of the offence and danger of schism. What self-
interest denominates liberality and charity, is really nothing
but indifference or ignorance. The church being the church
of God, it cannot be in the power of man to put ministers
into it, and give them authority to act. The rule of the
scriptures is therefore absolute, that no man taketh this

Mt Particular Defence of the Episcepdcy of Scotland,

honour unto himself but he that is called of God^ which
calling must be visible, because that of Aaron was so, who
is the pattern in the scriptures.— Ministers in the Christian
church act, for God, to the people ; which they cannot do
without God's commission.— The rule, and its reason, are
both plain to common sense, and want no explanation. It
is to be considered farther, that if the promises of God are
made to his church, no man can expect to obtain them, by
joining himself to any other company of men, after his own
fancy. The ark of Noah was a pattern and pledge of the
church of Christ ; and the persons saved in it, were saved
by water, as we are by baptism ; so the church of England
understands it. Now, let us only ask ourselves, what be-
came of those who were out of the ark ? The parallel will
suggest what great danger there must be to those v/ho were
out of the church. Thus did primitive Christians argue^
and unless they had privileges which we have lost, we nmst
argue in the same manner now. If not, we do dishonout^
to the grace of God, who hath mercifully taken us into the
ark of his church, and our indifference will do no good 5
nobody will be gained by it ; offences among men will ht
multiplied, and the authority of God's religion will be
weakened ; for if the church may be any thing, men will
soon conclude it may be nothing ; and who will not own,
if his eyes are open, that much of the relaxation and con-
fusion of latter times hath arisen from the poor, low ideas
which some good men have entertained and propagated
upon this great subject ? Others who have dared to argue
of late years as Christians did of old, have been branded
with the name of high churchmen^ and very deservedly 5
for we know of no other true churchmen j but faction,
seeking rest for itself, can find none, but by inventing
names and distinctions which have no sense in the mouth
of a Christian ; they are all of this world, and calculated to
serve some carnal purpose. Wise people should consider,
that v/hatever examples there may have been of piety,

Farficular Defenee of the Episeopacy of Scotland, $3S

learning, wit or wisdom, joined with schism, they can
never prove that schism is no sin ; no man can be taken as
authority against the laws of God ; and the great law of
charity is supreme over all. It is not kindness, but mean-
ness, which shows respect to sin in any man ; for no man's
person can render sin respectable. What is convenient to
him, if pernicious in itself, and its consequences, ought td
be detestable to us ; and if offence must be given, it it
better to offend man than God. Tenderness tp schism may-
be a fine thing, and pass for true piety, so long as men
shall judge one another : But when God shall judge us all,
it must give an account of itself to him, who is no respectet
of persons."^

From this most just and accurate account of schism^
where a borrowed ray from the true light of the gospel
shines in every period, we may clearly see what it is, which
"the -great law of charity" requires of us. It is not to
find excuses for those who prefer any communion of their
own invention to that of the Chi'istian church, and would
convert into a Babel of confusion, what was designed to
be " as a city that is at unity in itself." This is but a poor
sort of charity, which has nothing to bestow but indulgence
for error, and would rather allow the misguided traveller
to lose his way and perish, than be at any pains to show
him the path of life, or that light from above, which
" would guide his feet into the way of peace." When we
are taught to pray, in one of the collects of our church,
that God would " pour into our hearts that most excellent
gift of charity, the very bond of peace, and of all virtues,"
we are thereby put in mind, that the gift, which we thus
implore from heaven, is given for the sole purpose of bind"
ing us together in peace and unity on earth ; and when it
ceases to operate in this manner, it is no longer that true

• See " A Letter to the Church of England, pointing out some popular
errors of bad consequence; by an old friend and servant to the church s^
X)nblished with the other i\-orks of the Rev, William Jones^

334 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy Of Scotland,

Christian charity which is founded in faith, and supported
by hope, and can no more exist without these two, than
the end can be obtained without using the means. While,
therefore, we pray for the gift oi charity^ as persons united
in one hope of our calling, we must also contend for the
one faithj which was once delivered to the saints ; and of
this faith, we are taught to receive the belief of " the holy
catholic church," as a most essential and important article.

In this light we have now considered it very fully, and
in such a manner as appears to us to be most consistent
with the design for which it is revealed to us in scripture,
and has always made a part of the Christian creed. If the
view we have taken of it, shall be considered as exhibiting
a strong attachment on our part to that side of the contro-
versy, which the opposers of our principles have thought
proper to distinguish by, what they suppose to be, the
odious appellation of High-Churchy we have only to answer,
in the words of a distinguished prelate of the church of
England, that " we are not to be scared from our duty by
the idle terror of a nick-name, artfully applied in violation
of the true meaning of the word," to bring discredit on the
principles of those who, disclaiming any sort of divine
right to those powers, honours and emoluments, with
which the priesthood may be adorned by the wisdom or
piety of the civil power, are yet anxious to maintain the
importance of its spiritual commission, and not ashamed to
acknowledge, that there is in the sacred character somewhat
more divine than may belong to the mere hired servants of
the state, even that spiritual authority which is necessary
for the administration of Christ's spiritual kingdom. Ac-
cording to this sense of the word, adds the learned and
venerable Bishop Horsley, " we must be content to be
High-Churchmen^ or we cannot be churchmen at all. For
he who thinks of God's ministers, as the mere servants of
the state, is out of the church — severed from it by a kind
of self-excommunication. — But for those who have been

Paf^tkular Defense of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 355

nurtured in its bosom, and have gained admission to its
ministry, if from a mean compliance with the humour of
the age, or ambitious of the fame of liberality of senti-
ment (for under that specious name, a profane indifference
is made to pass for an accomplishment) they affect to join in
the disavowal of the authority which they share, or are si-
lent, when the validity of their divine commission is called
in question ; for any, I hope, they are few, who hide this
weakness of faith, this poverty of religious principle, un-
der the attire of a gown and cassock, they are in my estima-
tion little better than infidels in masquerade."*

This, we trust, will serve as an apology for the attempt
that has now been made to vindicate the principles, and
support the sacred character, of the bishops and clergy of
the Scotch Episcopal church. That " the validity of our
divine commission has been called in question," in a man-
ner which we surely did not provoke, and from a quarter
-where we could hardly have expected to meet with such
severe, unhandsome treatment, is a fact which cannot be
doubted by any one, who reads with attention those parts
of Dr. Campbell's Lectures on EcclesiasticalHistory^ which
are particularly levelled against the Episcopacy of Scotland,
and who at the same time is acquainted with the history of
that Episcopacy for at least a century past, and knows how
little foundation there was for such a violent and unexpected
attack. From this consideration, perhaps it may be in-
ferred, that the weapons of an adversary so incautiously
aimed, might have been allowed to spend their force, and
fall harmless to the ground. It may no doubt be thought
a needless waste both of time and labour, to employ them
in the refutation of arguments which, like all those that
have ever been produced against Episcopacy in general,
have been already so often refuted ; or even to take so

* See the truly excellent charge delivered by Dr. Horsley, when Bi-
shop of St. I'Javid's, to the clergy of his diocese, at his primary vi^itjsi'
won in the year 1790.

S36 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland*

much pains in defending our own Episcopacy in particular,
from an attack, which has nothing but its novelty, and
perhaps the character of its author to support it. With
respect to the former, we have already said all that is
necessary to show, how little strength there is in it. In
regard to the latter, we could wish to say nothing; be-
cause we are well aware how much weight will be thought
due to it.

Far be it from us to say any thing that could be supposed
to detract from the personal worth, and purity of morals,
which distinguished the character of Dr. Campbell. We
know him to have been, in general, as his biographer
justly describes him—-" a man of a mild disposition, and
even temper, and who was not much subject to passion*"
We recollect with pleasure the opinion delivered by him in
favour of a repeal of the penal laws, which, in times of civil
commotion, had been passed against the Scotch Episcopa*
lians, as well as against those of the Roman catholic persua-
sion. And as far as we were concerned in the relief which
was obtained from the severity of these statutes, all due
acknowledgment was made, for the friendly part which
Dr. Campbell had acted in recommending the measure, as
reasonable in itself, and what, he thought, would be gene*
rally agreeable to the established church of Scotland. To
express our gratitude on that occasion to him, and to every
one else who had any hand in procuring for us the tolera-^
tion which we now happily enjoy, was both our bounden
duty, and our earnest desire ; and we cannot charge our-
selves with any neglect of what was so justly incumbent ©n
us. Yet our spiritual character we must regard as of infi-
nitely greater consequence, than any temporal indulgence
which we can possibly meet with: And as it was Dr.
Campbell's avowed opinion, that " true religion never flou-
rished so much, nor spread so rapidly as when, instead of
persecuting, it was persecuted, and instead of obtaining sup-
port from human sanctions, it had all the terrors of the ma^

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 33f

^Strate, and the laws armed against it,"* we have some
reason ta suspect, that the removal of these terrors wa^
considered a» no great support to our cause, while room
was left to beat it down from another quarter, and a proolT
of the invalidity of our clerical orders was thought to be a
severer blow than any effect of fines and imprisonments,*
Relieved as we have been from the latter by the clemency
of government, we must still feel the weight of the former,
if not repelled by the force of those arguments^ which
the cause we have to maintain so plentifully affords : And
should these be found to fail in producing the designed ef-
fect on every unprejudiced mind, it must be owing to the
weakness with which they are urged, and not to any want
of strength in the arguments themselves. One thing we
wish to be constantly renaembered^ that this dormant con?-
troversy has not been revived on our part from any other
motive than what has arisen from absolute necessity : And
whatever has been said in the course of ou;* reasoning:
against some of the portions laid down by Dr. Campbell,
has been brought forward entirely in our own defenee, andl
to assert our right to that firm ground, on which the belief
of Episcopacy as a divine institution has hitherto restecl
with inviolable security.

Had our Professor's Theological l,cctures been confined
to the chair from which they were delivered, and reached
»o farther than the cjrcle af his pupils, we should not have
been obliged to take any notice even of that part of thenx
which was directly intended to oppose the principles and
pretensions of what he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party j''
because, as an established Lecturer, he had a rig^ht to in-
struct his students as he thought proper, in the peculiar
tenets of his own and their profession. But when these
instructions were committed to the press, and published tQ

• See his " Address to the people of Scotland, on the alarms which h*^
been ]^aise^ by the bill in favour of the Roman Catholijs."

^3

338 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland.

the world, for the evident purpose of impressing on the
public mind, not only a mean and unfavourable idea of the
established form of church government in the other part
of the kingdom, but a thorough contempt of what still re-
mains of the ancient establishment of this country, we
could not allow ourselves to be wholly silent on a subject,
with which our best and dearest interests are so intimately
connected, nor suffer the Episcopal church of Scotland to
appear as without a friend in the day of her humiliation,
complaining as it were, in the words of the prophet, " that
there was none to take her by the hand, of all the sons
that she had brought up." — If it shall be said, that the ap-
pearance we have now made in her defence would not have
been attempted, had the person himself been alive, out of
whose hands we have endeavoured to rescue her credit and
character, it may be sufficient to answer, that if he had in-
tended the attack to be make in such an open and public
manner, he would have conducted it after a different form,
and so as to have exhibited a more satisfying evidence of
the truth of what has been said in his favour, " that he
was uncommonly liberal to those who differed from him in
religious opinions." If, indeed, he was so liberal to the
infidel Hume, as " to expunge or soften every expression
that either was severe, or was only supposed to be offen-
sive,"^ in his controversy with that sceptical philosopher,
we might hope, that he would have been no less so to a
society, or even " party," as he calls them, professing to be
Christians, and avowing a sincere and uniform belief in
all the great truths of divine revelation,']' But if we must

* See the Account of his Life and Writings, prefixed to his Lectures,
p. 16.

f We have already taken some distant notice of the favourable opi-r
liion which Dr. Campbell entertained of the sentiments professed by one
of the most insidious* and inveterate enemies of Christianity, and shall
now produce a more direct proof of it, in the following letter written
b/ our Professor to Mr. Strahan, the printer, and dated— June 25, 1776.

V>

Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 339

not presume to call in question the assurance given to the
public, that these Lectures on Ecclesiastical History were
transcribed, and revised, and prepared for the press by the
author himself, we can only regret that we are obliged to
rely on the truth of this information ; and in that case may
justly apply an observation which was made on a similar
occasion, that " when an author charges his blunderbuss
to be fired off by his executors, it looks as if he himself
was afraid of the recoil."

We shall now take our leave of Dr. Campbell, with
much concern for having been compelled to accompany him

so long through that thorny field of controversy into which

I* ' _

** I have lateJy read over one of your last winter's publications with
i^ery great pleasure, and, I hope, some instruction. My expectations
were indeed high when I began it; but I assure you, the entertainment
I received, ipreatly exceeded them. What made me fall to it with the
greater avidity was, that it had in part a pretty close connection with a
subject I had occasion to treat sometimes in my theological lectures, to
wit^ the rise and progress of the hierarchy : And you will believe, that
1 was not the less pleased to discover, in an historian of so much learn-
ing and penetration, so great a coincidence with my own sentiments, in
relation to some obscure points in the Christian antiquities. I suppose, I
need not now inform you, that the book I mean is Gibbon's History of
the Fall of the Roman Empire, which, in respect of the style and man-
ner, as well as the matter, is a most masterly performance," — See MiS"
cellaneous Works of Edward Gibbon, Esq. &c. published in 2 vols, quarto,
by John Lord Sheffield, 1796. In this letter we cannot but observe the
most unqualified approbation given to a work, which, even from what
was then published of it, justified too well the remark that was after-
wards made on the whole, that — ** the author often makes, where he
cannot readily ^W, an occasion to insult our religion ; which he hates so
cordially, that he might seem to revenge some personal injury." Yet a
coincidence in sentiment, with respect to " some obscure points in the
Christian antiquities," was sufficient to make our theological Lecturer
applaud, in the most flattering terms, this avowed bater of Christianity.
It was enough to secure every encomium which Dr. Campbell could be-
stow, that this impious scoffer at the worship and worshippers of Christ
held the same opinions as those which the Doctor himself maintained, in
relation to the " rise and progress" of, what they both join ia making
the constant butt of their raillery—the hierarchy.

340 Farticular tiefince ^fthe Ep{$c$pacy ofSeotland.

we have been reluctaiiitly dragged. Nothing cx)iild have
induced us to enter on it but an iniperious sense of duty^
Remanding every effort in our power to protect our ecclesar
Mistical polity from the effects of that sharp and severe treat<*
lnent which it has unfortunately experienced at the hands
f)f one of the jjaost distinguished of our countrymen. It i§
wkh pain that we reflect on a great part of the publicatioH
now before us^ and hence unhappily feel a diminution of
that respect which we would gladly have entertained for
lihe memory of Dn CampbeD. He has, however, afforded
lis an opportunity of reviewing the grounds on which our
principles have so long stood firm and unshaken, resisting
all the force of irony and declamation, even when aided by
the still ipore powerful influence of worldly interests And
liaving thus, as we think, fully established what was pro-
posed as the subject of this chapter,— -that a part of the
holy, catholic and apostolic church of Christ, though de-
prived of the support of civil establishment, does still exisjt
in this country under the naine of the Scotch Episcopal
Churchy whose doctrine, discipline and worship have been
happily found to agree with that of the first aiid purest age^
of Christianity; it will now, we trust, be aij easy matter
to show that these ought to be steadily adhered to by aH
who profess to be of the Episcopal commutiion in this part
of the kingdom ; the showing which, in as plain, inoffen-^
sive, and concise terms as possible^ will, in our humble
opinion, form a very suitable conclusion to the design for
which these persons have been addressed on the present
occasion.

APPENDIX,

No. I.

XHE following List of Consecrations, with their dates^
and the names of the consecrators, as extracted from their
ecclesiastical register, will give a clear and distinct view of
the Episcopal succession in Scotland since the Revolution,
as far as the preisent bishops are concerned.

Januarif 25, 1705* Mr. John Sage, formerly one of
the ministers of Glasgow, and Mr. John Fvli^arton,
formerly minister of Paisley, were consecrated at Edin*
burgh by John Paterson, Archbishop of Glasgow, Alex-
ander Rose, Bishop of Edinburgh, and Robert Douglas,
Bishop of Dunblane.^ Bishop Sage died in yune^ 17H.-<*
Bishop Fullarton succeeded Bishop Rose, as Bishop of
Edinburgh, in 1720, and died in May^ 1727.

April 28, 1709. Mr. John Falcon ar, minister at
Cairnbee, and Mr. Henry Christie, minister at Kinross,
were consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop Rose, of Edin-
burgh, Bishop Douglas, of Dunblane, and Bishop Sage.
Bishop Christie died in 1718, and Bishop Falconer in 1723«

August 25, 1711. The honourable Archibald Camp-
Bell, who had been long in priest's orders, and resided
mosdy in London, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop

* Archbishop Paterson, Bishop Rose, and Bishop Douglas, with the
other b'shops of Scotland, were deprived at the Revolution by the civil
power, because Episcopacy had been voted an insupportable grievance by
tho Scotch convent ien.

34» Appendix,

Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Douglas of Dunblane, and
Bishop Falconar. He was elected Bishop of Aberdeen in
1/21, which charge he resigned in 1724— and &^yw;2e
16, 1744.

February 24, 1712. Mr. James Gadderar, formerly
minister at Kilmaurs, was consecrated at London by Bishop
Hickes,^ Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Campbell. He
was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen in 1724, sind died in
February, 1733.

October 22, 1718. Mr. Arthur Millar, formerly
minister at Inveresk, and Mr, William Irvine, formerly
minister at Kirkmichael, in Carrick, were consecrated at
Edinburgh, by Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Ful-
larton, and Bishop Falconar. Bishop Irvine died Novem-
ber 9, 1725. Bishop Millar succeeded Bishop Fullarton,
as Bishop of Edinburgh, and Primus,'\ and died October 9,
1727.

After the death of Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, which,
happened March 20, 1720,

October 17, 1722. Mr. Andrew Cant, formerly one of
the ministers of Edinburgh, and Mr. David Freebairn,
formerly minister of Dunning, were consecrated at Edin-
burgh, by Bishop Fullarton, Frimus, Bishop Millar, and

■ * Dr. George Hickes, formerly dean of Worcester, was consecrated
in the Bishop of Peterborough's chapel, in the parish of Enfield, Fe-
bruary 23d, 1693, by Dr. William Lloyd, Bishop of Norwich, Dr.
Francis Turner, Bishop of Ely, and Dr. Thomas White, Bishop of
Peterborough. Dr. Lloyd, Dr. Turner, and Dr. White, were three of
the English bishops who were deprived, at the Revolution, by the civil
power, for not swearing allegiance to William IIL They were also three
of the seven bishops who had been sent to the Tower by James IL for
refusing to order an illegal proclamation to be read in their dioceses.

f Anciently no bishop in Scotland had the title of Archbishop, but one
of them had a precedency, under the title of Primus Scotia: Episcopus.
In consequence of the revolution, after the death of Bishop Rose of Edin-
burgh, the Scotch bishops reassumed the old form, one of them being
elected Primus^ with power of convocating and presiding, according to
their canons made in 1743.

Appendioi. 34^

Bishop Irvine. Bishop Cant died in 1721. Bishop Free-
bairn was elected Primus in ITSl, afterwards Bishop of
Edinburgh, and died in 1 7^9.

June 4, 1727. Dr. ^Qhomas Rattray, of Craighall,
was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Gadderar, Bishop
Millar, and Bishop Cant. He was appointed Bishop of
Dunkeld, succeeded Bishop Freebaim as Primus^ and died
May 12, 1743.

June 18, 1727. Mr. William Dunbar, formerly mi-
nister^ at Cruden, and Mr. Robert Keith, presbyter in
Edinburgh, were consecrated at Edinburgh, by Bishop
Gadderar, Bishop Miliar, and Bishop Rattray. Bishop
Dunbar was first appointed Bishop of Moray, and after-
wards of Aberdeen, on the death of Bishop Gadderar in
1733. He died in 1746. Bishop Keith was first appointed
Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Fife. He was elected
Primus after the death of Bishop Rattray, and died in
^yanuary^ 1756.

June 24, 1735. Mr. Robert White, presbyter at
Cupar in Fife, was consecrated at Carsebank, near Forfar,
by Bishop Rattray, Bishop Dunbar, and Bishop Keith. — ^
He was appointed Bishop of Dunblane, succeeded Bishop
Keith as Primus^ and died in August^ 1761.

September 10, 1741. Mr. William Falconar, pres-
byter at Forres, was consecrated at Alloa, by Bishop Rat-
tray, Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was
£rst appointed Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Moray;
succeeded Bishop White as Primus^ and died in 1784.

October 4, 1742. Mr. James Rait, presbyter at Dun-
dee, was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Rattray,
Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was ap-
pointed Bishop of Brechin, and died in 1 777*

* Those clergymen, who, in consequence of the Revohition, were
(deprived of their parishes, are in this list called ministers: And those
who had not been parish-ministers, under the civil establishment, are
Called presbyter!,-.

344 AppendziC*

August 19, 1743. Mr. John Alexakder, presbytei- at
Alloa, was consecrated at Edinburgh by 3ishop Keith^
Primus^ Bishop White, Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Kait«
He was appointed Bishop of Dunkeld, and died in 1776,

July 17, 1747. Mr. Andrew Gerard, presbyter m
Aberdeen, was consecrated at Cupmr, in Fife, by Bishop
White (having commission from Bishop Keith, the Primus^
for that effect). Bishop Falconar, Bishop Rait, and Bishop
Alexander. He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, and
died in October^ 1 767.

June 24, 1762. Mr. Robert Forbes, presbyter m
Leith, was consecrated at Forfar by Bishop Falconar,
Primus^ Bishop Alexander, and Bishop Gerard. He was
appointed Bishop of Ross and Caithness, and died in 1 776*

September 21, 1768. Mr. Robert Kilgour, presbyter
in Peterhead, was consecrated at Cupar, in Fife, by Bishop
Falconar, Primus^ Bishop Rait, and Bishop Alexander,
He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, succeeded Bishop
Falconar as Primus^ in 1784, and died March 22, 1790.

August 24>, 1774. Mr. Charles Rose, presbyter at
Down, was consecrated at Forfar, by Bishop Falconar,
Primus, Bishop Rait, and Bishop Forbes. He was first
appointed Bishop of Dunblane, afterwards of Dunkeld, and
died in April, 1791.

jfune 27, 1776. Mr. Arthur Petrie, presbyter at
Micklefolla, in Fyvie, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bi-
shop Falconar, Primus, Bishop Rait, Bishop Kilgour, and
Bishop Rose. He was first appointed co-adjutor to Bishop
Falconar, whom he afterwards succeeded as Bishop of
Moray, and died April 19, 1787.

September 25, 1782. Mr. John Skinner, presbyter ia
Aberdeen, was consecrated in the chapel at Luthermuir,
by Bishop Kilgour, Primus, Bishop Rose and Bishop Petrie.
He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Kilgour, on whose
resignation he succeeded to the charge of the diocese of

Appendix. 34j^

Aberdeen, in October, 1786, and was elected Prhnm in
December, 1788.

March r, 1787. Mr. Andrew Macfariane, presby*.
ter in Inverness, was consecrated at Peterhead, by Bishop
Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Petrie, and Bishop Skinner. He
Was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Petrie, whom he suc-
ceeded soon after, as Bishop of Ross and Moray.

September 26, 1787. Dr. William Abernethy Drum^
MOND, one of the presbyters of Edinburgh, and Mr. John
Strachan, presbyter in Dundee, were consecrated at
Peterhead, by Bishop Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Skinner,
and Bishop Macfarlane. Bishop Abernethy Drummond
was first appointed Bishop of Brechin, and afterwards of
Edinburgh, which having also resigned, he is now Bishop
of Glasgow. Bishop Strachan succeeded him as Bishop of
Brechin.

September 20, 1792. Mr. Jonathan Watson, pres-
byter at Laurence-kirk, was consecrated at Stonehaven,
by Bishop Skinner, Primus^ Bishop Macfarlane, Bishop
Abernethy Drummond, and Bishop Strachan. He was
appointed Bishop of Dunkeld, that diocese being vacant
by the death of Bishop Rose.

June 24, 1796. Mr. Alexander Jolly, presbyter at
Fraserburgh, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop Aber-
nethy Drummond, Bishop Macfarlane, and Bishop Stra-
chan. He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Macfarlane,
on whose resignation he succeeded soon after to the charge
of the diocese of Moray."^

Though the districts into which the Scotch bishops have
divided their church are not exactly according to the limits
of the dioceses under the legal establishment of Episco-
pacy, yet they still retain the names, by which they were

* A few more presbyters have been consecrated bishops in Scotland
since the revolution; but as they had no hand in carrying on the Episco-
pal succession, it was thought unnecessary, in making out this list, to
mention their consecrations.

346 Appendix,

of old distinguished, with the exception of Fife, instead
of St. Andrews. Every diocesan bishop has his distinct
charge, and without assuming any other local jurisdiction
than what was acknowledged in the primitive church for
the first three centuries, may as properly be denominated
bishop of the place or charge assigned to him, as St. James
has always been called Bishop of Jerusalem, Ignatius, Bi-
shop of Antioch, or Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage. On this
footing the Episcopal college in Scotland consists at pre-
sent of the following members.

Mr. John Skinner, Bishop of Ahrdeefi, and Primus.

Mr. Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross.

Dr. Abernethy Drummond, Bishop of Glasgoxv,

Mr. John Stachan, Bishop of Brechin.

Mr. Jonathan Watson, Bishop of Dunkeld.

Mr. Alexander Jolly, Bishop of Moray.

No. II.

A HE Letters of Consecration granted to Bishop Sage in
1705, and referred to in page 292 of this work, are thus
expressed :

" Apud Edinburgum, die vicesimo quinto mensis Janu-
arii, anno ab incarnato Domino, et Servatore nostro, mil-
lesimo, septingentesimo quinto.

NOS — Joannes, providentia divina, Archiepiscopus
Glascuensis, Alexander, miseratione divina, Episcopus
Edinburgensis, et Robertus, miseratione divina, Episcopus
Dunblanensis, in timore Domini ponderantes plerosque fra-
trum nostrorum carissimorum, et in coUegio Episcopal!
collegarum (hoc nupere elapso, et ecclesise nostras luctuoso
curriculo) in Domino obdormiisse, nosquc perpaucos qui
divina misericordia superstites sumus, multiplicibus curis,

Appendix, 347

maibis, atque ingravescente senio tantum non confectos
esse : Quapropter ex eo quod Deo supremo, Servatori
nostro, sacrosanctae ejus ecclesise, et posteris debemus, in
animum induximus, officium, caracterem, et facultatem
Episcopalem, aliis probis, fidelibus, ad docendum et regen-
dum idoneis hominibus committere ; inter quos quum nobis
ex propria scientia constet, reverendum nostrum fratreni
Joannem Sage, artium magistrum, et presbyterum Glas-
cuensum tanto muneri, aptum et idoneum esse j nos igitur
divini numinis prsesidio freti, secundum gratiam nobis con-
cessam, die, mense, anno suprascriptis, in sacrario Domus
archiepiscopi Glascuensis, supradictum Joannem Sage, or-
dinavimus, consecravimus, et in nostrum Episcopale colle-
gium co-optavimus. In cujus rei testimonium, Sigilla
Joannis Archiepiscopi Glascuensis, et Alexandri Episcopi.
Edinburgensis, (sedis Sancti Andrese nunc vacantis vicarii)
huic instrumento (chirographis nostris prius munito) ap-
pend! mandavimus.

Jo. Glascuen.
Sic subscrib. Alexr. Edinburgen.

Ro. DUNBLANEN.

(Log. Sigil. Episcop. Edinb.) (Log. Sigil. Archiepis. Glas.)

In some of the subsequent deeds or instruments of con-
secration, we find a still more direct reference to the pre-
servation of the Episcopal succession. They are expres-
sed in the following terms :

NOS — &c. — — Afflictissimse hujus, cui nos Deus prae-
posuit, ecclesise Scoticanse concordise, paci, unitati atque
ordini qua licet et quantum in tantis et talibus angustiis

possumus consulentes, dilectissimo in Christo fratri

presbytero, et pastore de — , quem hodie in colle-
gium nostrum Episcopale consecrando co-optavimus, ejus-
dem ecclesise Scoticanse portionem, quae in provincia ecu

34ft Appendix,

ditione »"■ >«■ Deo militat, specialem commendamus, ejvis-
que curae Episcopali, usque quo clementior Deus ecclesise
suae, sui Christi sponsse in hoc terrarum angulo — ^heu
quantum laboranti! benignius prospexerit: Hoc etiam
unum ardentissimis adjicientes votis, ut in Domino confi-
sus, nullisque persecutionum procellis territus, praedictus
floater, ne quando summus simul et sacerrimus orthodoxo-
rum Episcoporum ordo per legitimam ordinationum suc«
cessionem continuatus deficiat, ceu disperdatur, solicitus
advigikt. Datum, &c. -——

No. III.

ARTICLES OF UNION

Proposed by the Rig-ht Reverend the Bishops of the Scotch
Episcopal Church, to those Clergymen who officiate
in Scotland by virtue of Ordination from an English or
an Irish Bishop*

As an union of all those who profess to be of the Episco-
pal persuasion in Scotland, appears to be a measure ex-
tremely desirable, and calculated to promote the interests
of true religion ;■— The Right Reverend the Bishops of the
Scotch Episcopal Church do invite and exhort all those
clergymen in Scotland who have received ordination from
English or Irish bishops, and the people attending their
ministrations, to become pastors and members of that pure
and primitive part of the Christian church, of which the
bishops in Scotland are the regular governors : — With a
view to the attainment of which desirable end, the said
bishops propose the following Articles of Union, as the
conditions on which they are ready to receive the above-
mentioned clergy into a holy and Christian fellowship, and
to acknowledge them as pastors, and the people who shall

Appendix, 349

be committed to their charge, and duly and regularly ad-
here to their ministrations, as members of the Scotch Epis-
copal Church.

I. Every such clergyman shall exhibit to the bishop of the
diocese, or district in which he is settled, or, in case of a
vacancy, to the primus of the Episcopal college, his letters
of orders, or a duly attested copy thereof, that so, their au-
thenticity and validity being ascertained, they may be en-
tered in the diocesan book, or register kept for that purpose,

II. Every such clergyman shall declare his hearty and
unfeigned assent to the whole doctrine of the gospel, as re-
vealed and set forth in the holy scriptures ; — and shall far-
ther acknowledge, that the Scotch Episcopal Church, of
which the bishops in Scotland are the regular governors, is
a pure and orthodox part of tlie universal Christian Church.

III. Every such clergyman shall be at liberty to use, in
his own congregation, the liturgy of the Church of Eng-
land, as well in the administration of the sacrament of the
Lord's supper, as in all the other offices of the church.

IV. Every such clergyman, when collated to any pasto-
ral charge, shall promise, with God's assistance, faithfully
and conscientiously to perform the duties thereof, promot-
ing and maintaining, according to his power, peace, quiet-
ness, and Christian charity, and studying in a particular
maimer to advance, by his example and doctrine, the spi-
ritual welfare and comfort of that portion of the flock of
Christ, among which he is called to exercise his ministry.

V. Every such clergyman shall own and acknowledge, as
his spiritual governor under Christ, the bishop of the dio-
cese or district in v/hich he is settled, and shall pay and
perform to the said bishop, all such canonical obedience
as is usually paid by the clergy of the Scotch Episcopal
Church, or by the clergy of the United Church of England
and Ireland, to their respective diocesans ; saving and ex-
cepting only such obedience as those clergymen, who do or
may hold spiritual preferment in England or Ireland, owe

*SSO ' Appendix,

to the bishops, in whose dioceses, in those parts of the
united kingdom, they do or may hold such preferment.

VI. Every such clergyman, who shall approve and ac-
cept of the foregoing articles, as terms of agreement and
union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, shall testifv his
approbation and acceptance of the same in manner follow-
ing, viz.

" At , the —— day of , I , ordained dea-
con by the lord bishop of , and priest by the lord bishop

of — — , do hereby testify and declare my entire approba-
tion and acceptance of the foregoing articles, as terms of
union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, and oblige myself
to comply with, and fulfil the same with all sincerity and
diligence. In testimony whereof, I have written and sub-
scribed this my acceptance and obligation, to be delivered
into the hands of the Right Rev. — - — •, bishop of — ■—, as
my diocesan and ecclesiastical superior, before these wit-
nesses, the Rev. , and the Rev. , both clergymen

of the said diocese, specially called for that purpose."

£ ■ 351 ;

\The readers of this work will doubtless be gratijied with
the following extract from the review of it, contained in
the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, This extract exhibits a re-
ply to Dr. CampSeWs commentary on the words of Igna-
tius— " There is but one altar, as there is but one bi-
shop,"^— ynore satisfactory than that advanced by Bishop
Skinner*'\

Dr. Campbell takes it for granted, that his Episcopal
antagonists consider the unity in the second clause of Ig-
natius's words as the numerical or physical unity of the
bishop's person ; and, consequently, that they represent
the venerable martyr as arguing thus : " All the altars of
a diocese must be one, because the bishop is but one per-
son." Ignatius, however, neither* argues, nor is supposed
by the advocates of Episcopacy to argue, in this foolish
and senseless manner. His reasoning is perfectly sound,
although Dr. Campbell has either happened, or chosen, to
misunderstand it. I'he unity intended in both clauses of
the sentence is of the same kind ; and in neither of them is
it numerical. In both it is an unity, not in respect of indi^
vidual existence, but in respect of authority, power, and
effect. All the altars of a diocese, however numerous in
respect of place, are one ; because the same (not numeri-
cally) eucharistical service is, with the same spiritual benefit
to the partakers, performed at all of them by the one autho-
rity of Christ, derived to them through the bishop ; and
the bishop is one, because, with respect to his own diocese,
he is the original depositary of this one authority. Nor is
this mode of phraseology confined to ecclesiastical subjects ;
but, on the contrary, perfectly common. We say that
there is but one executive poxver in the kingdom ; because,

352 Extract from the Anti-jfacobin Remew.

although the individuals employed in the execution of the
laws are almost innumerable, yet they all derive their
authority from the one authority of the king^ who, in this
country, is the sole fountain of power. We say that the
act or deed of any one justice of the peace is the same as
that of any other ; not because it is numerically the same,
but because it is of the same validity. We say that their
authority is the same^ because^ in all of them it is the king's
authority. In like manner We say, that every altar in the
diocese is the same with every other ; not because they are
numerically the same, but because they are all erected by
the one authority of the bishop ; and because, of conse-
quence, the eucharist received at one has the same effect
as when received at another.

It is true, indeed, that, in the case of both the king and
of the bishop, this one authority happens to be lodged in
one numerical individual person. But this is a circum-
stance on which the propriety of the above-mentioned
modes of speech in no degree depends ; and which, there-
fore, as far as our argument is concerned, is merely acci-
dental. If we find it difficult to abstract the idea of the
one authority of the king or of the bishop, from the indi-
viduality of the persons invested v/ith it, the difficulty is
wholly owing to the power of early and habitually con-
•firmed association ; for the things themselves may, cer-
tainly, 1d€ separated, not in idea only, but in fact. The
Roman consuls, though numerically two, v/ere possessed
but of one supreme authority ; and when that authority
was, occasionally, lodged, whether in one dictator, or in
ten military tribunes, it was but one authority still. So if it
had pleased our blessed Saviour, or his apostles acting
under his direction, to constitute bishops, in all districts,
by pairs, such a constitution of the church would have
made no alteration in the force of St. Ignatius's argument.
For then, the bishops, who, in respect of personalit)?^, were

Extract from the Anti-Jacobin Review. ^5d

tvfo^ would, in respect of spiritual authority and power,
have been but one.

We repeat, therefore, that the quibble which Dr. Camp-
bell finds in the words of Ignatius, as explained by that
Father's Episcopal commentators, is all his own ; and we
strongly suspect that, by a dialectician of his eminent
acuteness, it would never have been found, if the weakness
of his argument had not stood in need of even this very
feeble support. For no man knew better than Dr. Camp-
bell, that, in all nations and languages, things are viewed
and spoken of as, in some respects, one^ which, in other
respects, are exceedingly different; and that physical, or
numerical unity is, in fact, but one of innumerable kinds,
which are hourly conceived by the human mind, and hourly
expressed in human speech. But Dr. Campbell's conclusion
that " the bishop's cure was originally confined to a single
church or congregation," required that the words h Guo-ioi*
r*)/Aov should signify one individual " communion table or
altar;" and this signification of them, he thinks, is suffi-
ciently secured by supposing «? iTrto-JcoTro? to mean the indivi-
duality of the bishop's person: for otherwise Ignatius
would be guilty of a quibble. We wonder, indeed, that
the very words which he quotes from Dr. Burn's Eccle-
siastical Law did not show Dr. Campbell the danger of
building on such unfirm ground. " The cathedral church,"
says that accurate writer, " is the parish church of the
whole diocese." The bishop, of course, and strictly speak-
ing, is the pastor of the whole diocese. Every altar in it
is, therefore, his altar. If we wished to speak with parti-
cular correctness, we might say that it is a representative
of his altar, meaning the altar of the cathedral church.
Or if we choose to adopt a figurative phraseology, we may
employ a language exactly analagous to that of the cus-
toms, (which calls such a sea-port a branch of the port of
London) and say that every altar in the diocese is a branch
of the bishop's altai*.

45

V

A REVIEW

OF

HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY,

I2T WHICH

THE ERRORS AND MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THAT WORK

ARE DETECTED AND EXPOSED.

EXTRACTED FROM THE ANTI-fACOSm REVIEW.

REVIEW

OF

HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY.

It was resei-ved, for our author to publish a history of
the church, for the express purpose of proving that the
Church of England, in which he enjoys a rich rectory,
has deviated essentially from the original church of Christ
in doctrine, in government, and in worship ; that prelacy is
an usurpation^ and patronage contrary to the principles of
the gospel j that it is the duty of the people, when the regu-
lar clergy preach unsound doctrine, of which the most il-
literate clown is a competent judge, to withdraw themselves
from the church, which, in consequence, becomes schismcC-
tical; that all establishments of one church in preference to
another, are the offspring of a corrupt policy ; that the alli-
ance between church and state has ever been meretricious ,-
and that to contend for the unity of the church in any thing
more than a few articles of faith, of difficult comprehension,
is to be guilty of a sin enormous as that of blasphemy.

Should any of our readers be disposed to waste his time
in attempting to conceive by what means an ecclesiastical
historian reconciles such opinions to the concurring testi-
mony of the fathers of the church, we beg leave to assure
him, that Dr. Haweis employs no means for so vain a pur-
pose. He is perfectly aware that his book and the writings
of the fathers can never be reconciled ; but he must consi-
der this as a matter of no importance, since he represents al-
most all the Catholic writers for the first four centuries as
either so very weak or so very wicked as to be unworthy of
the smallest credit.

358 Review of Haweis* Church History*

He admits, indeed, that there was something respectable
in the character of Augustin, bishop of Hippo, and more in
that of Athanasius ; but he characterizes Clemens of Rome,
Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna, as very mean
writers.

" Justin the martyr, Origen^ Tertullian^ Pantoenus^ and
many others, zealous indeed in apologies for the Christian
cause, and ready to die rather than renounce their profes-
sion, yet held a Christianity of so equivocal a nature, as to
render it very dubious whether they had any real part or lot
m the matter." What extravagant enthusiasts they must
have been ! Ireneus, though he combated all the heresies
then subsisting in the church, yet suffered " his philosophic
opinions to mjngle with, and debase the Christian purity i"*
and, of course, was a heretic himself !

*' Tertullian is a striking instance, how much wisdom and
weakness, learning and ignorance, faith and folly, truth and
error, goodness and delusion, may be mixed up in the com-
position of the same person ! Though Tertullian himself af*
fords but a very wretched specimen of Christianity^ his apo*
logy demonstrates^ that in all the great and glorious features.
of this divine religion, there was a people in that day emi*
nently to the praise of the glory of God^s grace /" We really
should have thought that the author of an apology which de-
monstrates t/iisy must afford a tolerable specimen of Christi-
anity !

Of Gregory Thaumaturgus^ so highly praised by Cave,
and others, our impartial and charitable historian says :— *
" I must be exceedingly hard drove for a Christian, before
I can put such men as Gregory Thaumaturgus into the
number !" What though St, Basil"^ compares Gregory to
the prophets and apostles, affirming that he was actuated by
the same spirit with them, trod in their footsteps, and his
conversation in the gospel during the whole course of his

* De Splritu Sancto. c. 29.

Meview of HaweW Church History • 359

life, from the day of his conversion to the day of his death?
Basil was denominated the Great ; and " the title great^"^
says our author, when speaking of Constantine, " as far as
my observation reaches, usually marks the most destructive,
the most t}Tannical, and the most murderous of mankind."

The learning and genius of Or'igen furnish great cause of
offence to Dr. Haweis, who professes indeed no respect for
learning in any Christian divine antient or modern. Origen,
it is true, maintained many errors ; but our author is the
iirst ecclesiastical historian, whom we have met with, that
did not acknowledge his obligations to the learned labours
of the presbyter of Alexandria. In this he is, however, con*
sistent ; for such an acknowledgment in behalf of Origen
could not reasonably be expected from that man, who boldly
pronounces the labour of Connybeare^ and Warbiirton^ and
Watson in defence of revelation, useless ; and who, notice-
ing *' their elaborate defences of Christianity, and apologies
for the Bible," adds, " did these ever convince one infidel,
or make him a real convert to gospel truth ? I trow not !"

In many things our author admits Cyprian to have been
worthy, and to have merited all the praise he receives ; but
in his offipe he manifested the pride of a too unhumbled
heart (Is the heart of his censurer humbled ?) ; his episcopal
ideas appear too elevated ; he was a visionary ; his asser-
tion that there is only one episcopacy (Episcopatus unus
est, cujus e singulis in solidum pars tenetur) " is unscrip-
tural ;" though the martyr builds it on a text by St. Paul,"^'
which obviously admits of no other meaning. No matter ;
St. Cyprian is pleading for " the unity of an outxvard churchy
which, in the eyes of a spiritually minded man, must be
contemptible ;" and, therefore, our spiritually minded his-
torian thinks himself authorized to quote the tract, De U7ii-
tate Ecclesice^ partially and unfairly ! Nay, he thinks him-
self authorized to affirm, that " the strong lines of popery,

* Eph. iv. 4, 5, 6, &c.

360 Review of Haweis* Church History*

and a visible head of the Catholic church, whose anathemas
were to hurl into the dust every opposer to prelatical pride^
had now begun to make considerable strides, and that no
man hitherto had more contributed to this than Cyprian !"
Yet he must know, if he knows any thing of antiquity, that
Cyprian, in his letters to Stephen, bishop of Rome, chas-
tises the insolence of that prelate, and contends with ear-
nestness and great strength of reasoning for an absolute
equality among bishops ! To belie the records of antiquity,
is a very singular proof of the impartiality of an historian ;
but what could be expected from the man who, while he af-
firms that, in the age of Cyprian, " strong lines of popery,
and a visible head of the church had begun to make consi-
derable strides," suspects that in the very same age, " the
name of bishop and presbyter was still synonimous !" and
confounds Cyprian with certain bishops sent by him and the
African synod, to converse with Stephen on heretical bap-
tism ! To be impartial, a man must be accurate as well as
honest.

Of Constantine the Great, our author thus writes : " The
bounties he bestowed ; the zeal he displayed ; his liberal
patronage of episcopal men ;" (Are there any episcopal wo-
men in the conventicles of Lady Huntingdon ?) " the pomp
he introduced into worship ; and the power invested with
general councils," (What kind of power was this ?) " made
the church appear great and splendid ; but I discover not a
trace in Constantine of the religion of the Son of God.
(You are a discemer of spirits !) As an outward professor,
and for an outward churchy no man more open, more zeal-
ous : as a partaker of the grace of God in truth, either in
genuine repentance for his crimes, or real newness of life^^
(Pray, what is the distinction between these?) " I want
abundantly better evidence than I can see in Eusebius, who,
like many a courtly bishops is very cordially disposed to
exalt on a pedestal, the king that patronizes and increases
tlieir power, wealth, and dignity !"

Review of Haweis* Church History • 36i

To Eusebius, the celebrated historian, our spiritually^
minded man allows no merit. *' He was a great fcivourite
at court. No good sign for a bishops under two such mo-
narchs as Constantine and Constantius, Whether he thought
in all things as Arius, or not, it is certain he supported him
and his adherents. He, with his namesake of Nicomedia,
were the pillars of the Arian heresy! Eusebius is a miser-
able voucher ; and under all the prejudices and credulity*
that are so visibly marked in him, lam cordially thankful
for the more credible testimony of heathen men." (Why-
hot of heathen women T) " I fear he knew as little of real
Christianity as his roval (imperial) disciple Constantine,
whom he so egregiously flatters. The more I read, th&
more I doubt the authenticity of his testimony, and dare
not receive his history as oracular !"

St. Ambrose of Milan is no greater a favourite of our au*^
thor than Eusebius. He was pious, but superstitious; ani^t
** the piety of superstition is awfully equivocal. How high
the spirit of true godliness was in the church of Milan, I
must learn from something besides their church music and
the Ambrosian chaunt. His discipline respecting Theodo-
sius, is a glaring ^vooi oi prelatical insolence over abject su-
perstition, and all done for the honour of the church." (Eu-
sebius is censured for being courtly^ and Ambrose for not
being courtly !) " The divinity of Ambrose is wretched,
and often unscriptural j and his moral treatises insignificant*
Of the doctrines of predestination and grace^ he appears to
have very false conceptions :" i, e, he was no Augustinian,
or what in modern language is called a Calvinist I

Not one of the fathers before Augustin taught the pecu-
liar doctrines of Calvin ; and hence our historian repeat-
edly says of them «//, that " they are but miserable guides
to evangelical truth !" Even of the far-famed bishop of
Hippo himself, he says, that there is more deep reasoning,
solid argument, precision of language, and scriptural evi"
dence^ in one page of Edwards on Free Wijlj than in all

46

362 I^eview of Haweis* Church History*

the voluminous works of Augustin put together ;" though
it is obvious to every man acquainted with the subject, that
Edwards reasons as a philosophical necessarian^ of the same
school with Hobbes and Priestley^ and not as a predestH
narian of the school of Calvin !

It cannot, however, excite great surprize, that Augustin^
and the rest of the fathers, should be considered as insuffi-*
cient guides to evangelical truth by him who considers St*
Paul himself as hardly evangelical. " In compliance with
James's recommendation, he was fulfilling a part of the
Mosaic ritual, respecting vows, in order to show that he
continued to observe the law. Whether he owed it such a
compliance, I have ever doubted ; this and his circumcising
Timothy have appeared to me temporising. But Paul pro-»
bably is right, and I am wrong." Yes, Sir, we think this
probable !

As the testimony of the fathers is necessary to establish
the authenticity of the books of scripture, it may possibly
occur to some of our readers, to ask whether Dr. Haweis,
who has poured upon them greater abuse than Gibbon, be a
Christian. The question is not unreasonable, and deserves '
an answer, which it is proper that the author himself be
permitted to give.

" Having through divine mercy (says he) obtained grace
to be faithful — hn providence r^ctrv^d my education— and
been called to minister in the Church of England, I have
embraced and subscribed her articles, ex animo^ and have
continued to prefer an episcopal mode of government ; and
I am content herein to abide with God^ till I can find one
more purely apostolic."

We are not certain that we understand the avithor where
he says that he received his education in providence. All
men of every religion, and every nation, have been educated
under the superintending providence of the Governor of
the universe ; and therefore on that account Dr. Haweis
can claim nothing peculiar to himself. But if it be his

Review of Haiveis^ Church History » 36S

meaning that he received his education in the town of Pro^
vidence^ in Rhode-Island, we cannot be much surprized at
the contempt which he professes for the writings of the
fathers, for in North- America those writings are very little
studied. This circumstance may likewise account for the
following strange language of " the faithful man who is
content to abide with God in a church under episcopal go**
vemment."

*' When I speak of episcopacy, as most correspondent in
my poor ideas, to the apostolic practice, and the general
usage of the church in the first, and generally esteemed
purer ages, let no man imagine I plead for that episcopacy,
which, rising on the stilts of prelatical pride^ and worldly?
mindedness, has since overspread the earth with its bane-
ful shadow ; or suppose those to be the true successors of
the apostles, who, grasping 2it power and pre-eminence over
churches, which their labours never planted nor watered,
claim dominion over districts, provinces, kingdoms beyond
5dl power of individual superintendance. These a//, every
where^ and in every age^ have manifested the same spirit
of antichrist ; and that just in proportion as their usurpa*
tion of authority over the churches, and the consciences of
men, hath been most extensive, most exclusive, and most
intolerant."

That the church of England is intolerant will not surely
be supposed, since she permits one of her sons to publish
such libels as this ; but that her bishops claim dominion over
districts^ and her archbishops pre-eminence over provinces^
are facts which cannot be controverted. In the opinion of
Dr. Haweis, therefore, she manifests the spirit of antichrist ;
and it is not wonderful that " a man who has obtained grace
to be faithful, should consider it as condescension to abide,
in such a society, even with God !"

But still it may be asked, upon whose testimony our au-
thor builds this impartial history, after thus rejecting in a
lump the testimony of the early writers of the Catholic

S64 Me%}tew of Hawels* Church Htstortfi,

church? Whv, to the testimony oi heathen men^ for which
we have seen him so piously grateful, he adds that of schis-^
mattes^ heretics^ and apostates I Though Ignatius, as a wri-*
ter, appears to him, " low in the scale of excellence, because
he advances many degrees above Clemens in episcopal au-
thority ;" though Cyprian is a blasphemer^ because " his
episcopal ideas appear too elevated, and he says that there
ought to be but one bishop in a Catholic church ;^ and
though Eusebius is accused of " partiality, credulity, and
unfair representations," yet the Novetians^ Donatists^ Me-
letians^ and Luciferians^ are entitled to the fullest credit ;
whilst Julian the apostate is styled almost " as good a Chris«
tian as bishop Warburton, and a much better man."f

The Catholic writers consider the ordination of the
clergy as a matter of much importance, in which indeed
they are joined by the Novetians, Donatists, Luciferians,
and all the sectaries of those early periods ; but they con-
tend likewise for the unity of the church, not only in doc-
trine, but also in government and discipline ; and this our
impartial historian condemns as an intolerable error. He
seems indeed to look upon ordination as far from essential,
though he admits it to be a harmless ceremony when not
employed to exalt the dignity of the prelatical tribe ; but
'' the preservation of the unity of an outward churchy in
the eyes of a spiritually-minded man, must be contemptible^
compared with the holding the unity of the spirit in the bond
of peace, and loving one another out of a pure heart fer-
vently*" Nay, " the unhappy idea of the unity of the

* Our author chooses to quote him (p. 244) as saying that there ought
to be but one bishop in the Catholic church ; but the quotation is false.

f We are far from approving of all the paradoxes advanced in the dl-
'vine legation of Moses ; but vi^e believe that Dr. Haweis is the only author
calling himself a Christian, who has cetisiired either the object or the exe-
cution of the " discourse concerning the earthquake and fiery eruption
which defeated Julian's attempt to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem." He
prefers, howfever, Basnage's account of the matter, because Basnage was
a Walloon pastor, and Warburton an English bi"sliop.

l^eoiew of Hawezs' Church History, 365

church under a particular mode of government^ produced the
plenteous tares of controversy, and the abhorred mutual
excommunications of men, whose duty it was to love one
another out of a pure heart fervently ;" and it seems to be
because the Novetians and Donatists rent the church, that
they are such favourites of this worthy priest of the church
of England !

Though he admits that in " the dispute about the lapsed,
Cf prian's plan is more scriptural than Novetian's," he yet
says expressly — " When I hear Cyprian anathematizing
such a man, I would rather be under the curses with No-
vetian, than utter them with Cyprian. I forbear to quote
the high expressions, to me bordering on impiety,* with
which he honours the episcopal order, and from whence he
derives the claims of obedience. This seems the great blot
in his escutcheon, and the cause of all the indefensible se-
verity with which he treated those who presumed to differ
from him."

It is not merely from the pleasure which our author takes
in reprobating a learned clergy, and in reviling the fathers
of the church, that he expresses himself in this manner : it
is to serve a purpose still nearer his heart. Mr. Milner
having, in his church history, compared the sectaries of the
present day to the disorderly Corinthians in the days of
the apostles. Dr. Haweis says — " I am astonished, that a
man of his Christian knowledge and experience can see any
similitude between a multitude of gracious souls withdraw-
ing from false teachers^ and pastors who walk disorderly,
working not at all, and forming real churches under faith-
ful labourers of their own choice^ and proud and wicked
Corinthians ! Do men withdraw from godly pastors P For

* To forbear quoting the expressions on which a charge of impiety is
founded against a Christian bishop, who laid down his life for the truth,
was extremely unjust ; but it was certainly prudent, because there is not
ill the whole writings of Cyprian a single expression which will admit of
an impious construction.

S66 Rex}iew of Haweis* Church History^

one of their description in the present day, who can be
blamed for so doing ; ten thousand withdraw from their
parochial or heretical teachers, on the surest grounds of
Christian obhgation. The crime and the schism is [are]
with those who cause it [them] by their unscriptural teach-
ing and conduct, not with those who come out from among
them, and separate !"

Such is the substance of the first volume of this impartial
history, comprehending the first four centuries of the Chris-
tian church. Of the author's " inquiries after God's secret
ones, the remnant whom the world knoweth not, the chosen^
and called, and faithful," we have taken no notice ; because
such inquiries, by whomsoever made, must, of necessity,
prove fruitless.

Though that part of the volume, of which 7nen can judge,
appears to us one tissue of errors flowing from the com-
bined sources of prejudice, pride, and ignorance ; we shall
yet attempt no formal confutation of it, because what is not
supported by argument, cannot by argument be overturned.
Our author rests his cause on " his own poor opinion," as
he very properly calls it ; and we trust that our opinion,
though poor likewise, is yet sufficient to balance his. We
beg leave, however, to conclude this article with a few ob*
servations on ordtnatioriy the character of St, Cyprian^ the
veracity of Eusehius^ and the utility of the writings of the
Fathers in general ; because we think it of great importance
to the peace of the church, that the people at large, but more
especially the younger clergy, be on these subjects furnished
with correct notions, which they certainly will not receive
from the volume under review.

Among the errors established by the Council of Trent,
our reformers considered the Romish doctrine concerning
the Christian sacrament. A sacrament was, by that council,
declared to be " an outward sensible action, or sacred sign,
ordained by Jesus Christy as a sure and certain means to
bring grace to our souls. To make a true sacrament, three

Review of HaweW Church History* 367

things were decreed to be requisite : 1. That there be some
outward sensible action performed ; 2. That this be a certain
means to bring grace to the soul; and, 3. That Jesus Christ
be the author of it. The outward action was likewise said
to consist in something spoken and something done ; the
thing done being called the matter of the sacrament, and the
Words spoken, the ybrm of it."*

, These definitions were adopted by the generality of pro-*
testant churches; but the English reformers holding it essen-
tial to a sacrament, that the outward sensible action or sa-
cred sign was ordained by Christ himself'^\iA^ he sojourned
on earth, rejected, of course, five of the seven sacraments
of the church of Rome ; because it is obvious to every reader
of the gospels, that baptism and the Lord's supper are the
onlij sacraments, of which the sacred sign, including what
is here called the matter and the form^ was instituted by
Christ in person* Whether it would not have been better,
with the Greek Church, to denominate baptism and the
Lord's supper the mysteries of Christy which seems to be
scripture language, and to have allowed the name of sacra-*
merits to be extended to other Christian institutions, which
certainly involve in them the obligation of an oath, we shall
not now inquire. It is sufficient to observe, that the refor-
mers of our church unquestionably considered the ordina-
tion of ministers, and the right of confirmation, as institu-
tions of Christ, though the sensible action or sacred sign
employed in each was not instituted till after his ascent into
heaven.

The consequence is, that these rites have, by every true
son of the Church of England, been at all times considered
as of the highest importance, as ordinances indeed of Christ

• We have transcribed this account of the Romish doctrine concerning
the sacraments, from the work of a Romish bishop, in two small octavo
volumes, entitled, " The sincere Christian instructed in the Faith, from
the written Word ;" but we have compared it with Father Paul's history
of the Council of Trent, and found the account correct.

368 Review of Haweis^ Church History,

through the medium of the Holy Ghost, and as laying men
under the most sacred obligations. Some of the clergy, who,
during the persecution under Queen Mary, had fled to Ge-
neva and other protestant countries beyond sea, returned, it
is true, with doubts in their minds, whether bishops and
presbyters were not originally of the same order, and whe-
ther presbyterian ordination and confirmation be not of
equal validity with ordination and confirmation by bishops^
From affected moderation or culpable negligence of inquiry,
the same doubts are professed by two many of the clergy at
this day; but, except among the independents who sprung
up under the usurpation of Cromwell, it never entef ed into
the head of any man calling himself a Christian, to suppose
that the ordination of the clergy is a useless ceremony, till
it became fashionable to confound the religion of Christ
with what philosophers call the religion of nature.

Were Christianity nothing but a system of ethics founded
on the relation which subsists between God as the Creator
and Governor of the world, and man, as a rational crea-
ture, it would indeed be ridiculous to inquire by what form
or what authority the clergy are ordained ; because, in that
case, the ablest moralist, whether ordained or not, would^
of course, be the ablest and most useful minister. But if
Christianity be, as it certainly is, an instituted religion,
founded on the means employed by God to restore to man-
kind that immortality which all had forfeited by the sin of
Adam ; and if immortality be not now, nor ever was the
right of man, either as inherent in his nature^ or as the re^
ward of moral virtue^ (and this is the dictate of sober phi-
losophy as well as of the gospel) it follows that immortality,
if conferred upon man, must be conferred as a '-'•free gift'^
upon such conditions as seemed best to the all-wise Giver.
But the rites of a religion founded on a free gift must de-
rive all the value, and the ministers of that religion all their
authority, not from the relations of nature^ but from the
positive appointment of the author of the gift; and he who

Review of Haweis* Church History, 369

maintains that any man, who is qualified by knowledge,
may act as a minister of the gospel, though he be not or-
dained, must, to be consistent, claim to himself immor-
tality, not as " the gift of God through Jesus Christ our
Lord," but either as the inherent right of his nature, of
which he cannot be deprived, or as a debt due by Qodto his
merit.

Such arrogant claims are in direct opposition as well to
the letter as to the spirit of the Gospel ; and, therefore, he
who has read the New Testament with any degree of
intelligence, and believes it to be a revelation from heaven,
must be convinced that from it only he can learn who they
are who have authority from Christ to preach the word,
and to administer the ordinances of his religion. Into this
question we enter not now, having discussed it at some
length in our ninth volume, and in our notes on Mr. Keith's
letter published in our twelfth volume ; and if our reason*
ings on these occasions be conclusive, it is obvious that
something more than agreement in faith is necessary to con-
stitute that unjon which our blessed Lord requires among
his disciples.

It may not, however, be altogether useless to offer some-
thing in vindication of the mode, or, to use the language of
the Council of Trent, " the sensible action or sacred sign,'^
by which holy orders are conferred in the Church of Eng»
land. This, it is well known, is the imposition of the hands
of the bishop, accompanied with the words which the
reader will find in the offices for the Ordination of Deacons
and Priests^ and the Consecration of Bishops, That impo-
3ition of hands was Jiot the sensible action by which our Sa-
viour conferred the last and highest order on the eleven,
investing them with the authority which is now called
episcopal, is, indeed, certain j because St. John assures us,
that " he breathed on then), saying, Receive ye the Holy
Ghost," &c. This sacred sign was properly employed by
him, " to whom God gave not the spirit by measure," and

>47

3T0 Review of Haweis^ Church History,

who himself conferred the spirit by his own authority ; but
it would ill become any mere man, who, whatever station
he may fill in the church, can communicate the graces of the
spirit only ministerially.

The apostles, therefore, instead of imitating in this in-
stance the example of their divine Master, adopted the sign
which, from time immemorial, had been employed among
their countrymen in the ordination of men to offices sacred,
or of high importance, and whioh Christ himself had em-
ployed on other occasions. Thus, Moses, by the direction
of God, ordained Joshua to be his successor, by laying his
hands upon him, and giving him a charge in the sight of the
high priest and all the congregation."^^ After his example,
the Jews employed the same ceremony in the ordination of
their judges and rabbins down at least to the year of our
Lord 1170;|' and it appears from the Talmud,J that in
the ordination of elders, three elders laid their hands on the
head of the candidate for that dignity.

The ceremony of imposition of hands, therefore, in the
ordination of ministers, was transplanted from the Jewish
into the Christian church. It was employed by the college
of apostles in the ordination of the seven deacons -, by the
prophets and teachers at Antioch, in " the separation of
Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto the Holy
Ghost had called them j§ by St. Paul and Barnabas, when
they ordained (^x'^?°'^°^'^'^'^^^^'d elders in every church ;|| and
by St. Paul when he ordained Timothy. That imposition
of hands was meant to be employed for the same purpose in
the church of Christ, always even unto the end of the world,
is apparent from the injunction given by the same apostle
to the same Timothy, to " lay hands suddenly on no man,
lest be should be partaker of other men's sins j"^ and as the

* Numbers xxvli. 18, &c. f Vide Benjamin, itiner. p. 73.
^ Sanhedr. eap. i. § Acts xiii. 1 — 4. (j Acts xiv. 23.

* This mode of appointing men to important offices has not been pecu-
liar to the Jewish and Christian character. AVe learn from Demostiienes

Review of Haweis^ Church History, 3 71

Apostles were unquestionably directed by the spirit of
Christ, this sensible action or sacred sign may be considered
as ordained by Christ himself, though not ordained by him
m person.

On the subject of ordination, the Catholic writers of the
primitive church all thought as we do ; and as St. Cyprian
treats of it more fully than most of them, he is peculiarly
obnoxious to the modern advocates for lay-preaching. He
knew nothing of that Christian obligation on the grounds of
which the people withdrew themselves, and, according to
our author, are bound to withdraw themselves from their
parochial teachers, and form separate churches under la-
bourers of their own choice. On the contrary, he attributed
all the heresies which then infested the church to such cause-
less divisions ; and embraced every opportunity of exhort-
ing the presbyters and deacons, as well as the people, to
obey their respective bishops ; while he entreated the bi-
shops to preserve unity among themselves. His tract, De
unitate Ecclesice is one of the most valuable works of anti-
quity, breathing throughout a spirit of peace and love, and
written with great perspicuity of language and force of
argument. Yet our author accuses him of prelatical pride^
because he concurred with Cornelius in excommunicating
Novetian as an incorrigible schismatic.

"That Novetian was a dissenter from the church I cannot
perceive ; for he was a bishop as truly chosen and ordained,
from any thing which appears, as Cornelius, He was a man
avowedly sound in all the principles of the gospel doctrine,
and concurring in all the discipline of the church ; nay, dis-
posed to carry it to excess ; and besides this, there rests not
a shadow of accusation against him."

With your leave, good Doctor, this shadow was sufEci-

(Oratione 1. in Philip.) that there were magistrates among the Athenians
constituted x^iot^oncc, and thence styled x,^i§o']ovYflo!,i ; and the same thing
appears from the v/ritings botli of Plutarch and Cicero.

^ >

372 /Review of Haweis^ Church History^

ent to condemn him. The manner in which he pi*evailed
upon three obscure bishops to consecrate him is well known ;
and there is not pethaps in the annals of the church another
consecration so completely scandalous. But granting, for
the sake of argument, that it had been otherwise, the Ro-
man see was already filled by Cornelius, whom you acknow-
ledge to have been sound in the faith, and unexceptionable
in his administration of the discipline of the church. Iii
that state of things, could Novetian claim to be bishop
of Rome, and refuse to hold communion with Cornelius
and his clergy, without becoming a schismatic^ or, as yoii
properly enough express it, a dissented from the church i
Were you to go over to America, get yourself consecrated
by three bishops of the church of the United States, return
to Canterbury, and claim to be rightful metropolitan of all
England, refusing to communicate with any clergyman who
preaches not the doctrines of unconditional election and
reprobation, would ydu or would you not be a schismatic
or dissenter from the church of England ?

To this question it is possible that yod and we may be
disposed to give different answers ; but were a clergyman^
calling himself the Rector of All Saints, Aldwinckle,^ to
open a conventicle in the parish, and seduce the people
from the church, under pretence that you had climbed over
the wall of the sheepfold, by accepting of an unscriptural
presentation ; and were he to rd"use holding any communion
with you, calling you liar and traitor on account of the
tendency of this impartial history, we are persuaded that
you would agree with us in deeming such a man a schisnM"
tic^ who deserved to be degraded and excommunicated by
the bishop of the diocese. Yet his crime would be less than
that of Novetian in the same proportion as a modern parish
is less than the ancient diocese of Rome, and as the har-
mony of a single congregation is of less consequence than

*

* Dr. Haweis is Rector of All Saints, Aldwinckie.

Review of Haweis* Church History, 3f 3

the peace of the church universal. But it is for passing th6
usual censures on Novetian and his adherents that Cyprian
Is here charged with prelatical pride and insolence^ though
it will not be easy to find in all the records of the church
more striking instances of humility, combined with dignity^
than was displayed by the bishop of Carthage on this and
various other occasions^

To his deacon Pontius, who lived in hiis house^ accom-
panied him in his exile, and was present at his martyrdom,
his character was surely better known than to Dr. Haweis^
who, from circumstances to be noticed hereafter, appears
to us never to have read a page of his original works. Had
Cyprian been arrogant and insolent, such a domestic must
sometimes ha.v6 Jelt his insolence. Yet, sptaking of the
reluctance with which he yielded td the clergy and people
demanding him for their bishop, Pontius goes on-^Quidam
illi restiterunt, etiam Ut vinceret. Quibus tamen quanta
lenitate, quatti patienter, quam benevolenter indulsit quam
clementer ignoVit, amicissimos eos postmodum et inter ne-
nessarios computans niirantibus multis ^ Cui enim posset
hon esse miraculo, tarn memoriosae mentis oblivio ?

Could this have been published in Carthage of a bishop
of an unhumbled heart, at a time when thousands were alive
to contradict the eulogiutii ? Or, would the same deacon
have said of an insolent bishop, whose death he had just re-
corded-—Dolebo quod non comes fuerim ? sed illius victoria
triumphanda est. Devictoria triumphabo ? sed doleo quod
comes non sim. Verum vobis tamen et simpliciter confi-
tendum est quod et vos scitis, in hac me fuisse sententia-
Multum, ac nimis multum de gloria ejus exulto; plus
tamen doleo quod remensi.

Our author calumniates Eusebius still more grossly than
he had calumniated Cyprian. He admits, indeed, that " this
famed prelate, remarkable for his knowledge, reading, and
ecclesiastical investigations, stands eminent among the first
authorities for church history ;" yet, as we have seen, as a

3t4f Review of Haw els' Church History*

divine he was an hceresiarchy and as an historian, credulous
2Xid unfaithful !

That Eusebius, who was a great admirer of Origen, and
deeply skilled in the Platonic philosophy of the Alexandrian
school, sometimes expresses himself uncautiously on the
divinity of Christ, must indeed be granted ; but it is impos-
sible to consider as a pillar of the Arian heresy, the man,

who calls Christ auloOsov very God^ and tov Ti'cy.fjJ^a.a-iXioc xat Trccvny

fA.ovx, Kai ccvlov Q'zov^sovereig'n and leader of all thing's, and God
by himself^ Dr. Haweis, however, from his reply to Dr.
Maclane's vindication of Eusebius, seems to consider even
bishop Bull himself a pillar of Arianism ; for that illustri-
ous prelate, in his Defensio fidei Nicense, has a whole chap-
ter de subordinatione filii.

But granting that Eusebius was a semi- Arian, which the
expressions quoted above will not permit us to grant, he
may, notwithstanding, be a faithful historian. His morals
were never impeached ; pietate adeo venerabilis (says
Cave,'!') ut apud plurimas occidentis ecclesias in sanctorum
numero habebatur ; and he was so little ambitious of worldly
greatness, that he refused to exchange the comparatively
poor see of Caesarea for the rich one of Antioch, because
he deemed the translation of bishops from see to see disre-
putable. What could tempt such a man to falsify the re-
cords of the church ? He was no schismatic, nor patron of
schismatics, that he should have written a history for the
express purpose of proving that the church of the fourth
century had deviated esseatially from the original church of
Christ in doctrine, in government, and in worship ! Had
Dr. Clarke, whom our author calls a blasphemer , written a
history of the church of England, does any man in his sen-
ses conclude, that because he was an Arian, or semi- Arian,
he would have given a false detail of the succession of the
Archbishops of Canterbury and York ? Yet, for no other

* Hist. Eccles. lib. x. cap. 4. . f Hist. Litei-.

Review of Haiveis* Church History, SYS

reason than the supposed arianism of Eusebius, does our ju-
dicious and impartial historian question the authenticity of
the list which he gives of the bishops of Jerusalem, and ac-
cuse the learned author of glaring prejudice and credulity !
But does not Eusebius publish letters which were said to
have passed between our blessed Lord and Abgarus, king
of Edessa ? and are not those letters apocryphal, though he
professes to have translated them from the Syriac originals
preserved in the archives of Edessa ? That Eusebius has
published such letters is certain ; and to us it appears
equally certain, that the letters are forgeries ; but we do not
think that Eusebius was the forger, or that it is any proof
of his extreme credulity, that what imposed upon Baronius^
Spondanus^ Vaksius and Vossius^ among the moderns, and
' to which even Cassaubon and Cave seem inclined to give
credit, imposed upon him. The Syriac originals were
doubtless given to him as authentic ; and he inserted trans-
lations of them in his history of the church, just as Livy
inserted some incredible tales in his history of Rome, He
inserted them as letters preserved in the archives of Edessa^
which, with other archives, had been laid open to him by
the command of the Emperor Constantine ; and as he had
a character to lose, and was obnoxious to a large party in
the church, it is not conceivable that he would have appealed
to public archives as containing letters which he was con-
scious that he himself had forged. All that Eusebius at-
tested as consisting with his own knowledge was undoubt-
edly true ; and we beg our learned author, before he makes
another attack on his character as an historian, to read with
as much attention as he is able to bestow, the eighth chapter
of the first part of Bishop Pearson's Vindiciw Ignatiance,
In the mean time he may meditate on the following extract
from that masterly performance, and prove himself, if he
can, an abler judge of such matters than the author!

Si autorem uUum veterem nominare posset, quam Euse-
bius agnovit, et cujus auloritatem testimoniis aliorum con-

3^6 jR&oiew of Haweis* Church History*

iirmatum ivet, qui postea fictor detectus est, aut val in du*'
bium vocatus: aliquid quidam diceret, quod eum a temeri"
tatis et inverecundice crimine^ ut ipse loquitur, liberareU
Ego vero Eusebium tanta diligentia tantoque judicio in
examinandis Christianorum primaBvae antiquitatis scriptis,
in quibus traditionem apostolicam contineri arbitratus est,
usum fuisse contendo, ut nemo unquam de ejus fide aut
descriptis, quae ille pro indubttatis habuit, postea dubitaverit.
Libri qui nunc in dubium vocantur, aut olijn vocati sunt,
testimonium ejus non habent.

Of Dr. Haweis's diligence and judgment in examining
the writings of Christian antiquity, some estimate may be
formed from his calling Ahgarus Agharus ; from his sup»
posing that " most of the Apostles lived and died among
their brethren in Palestine ;" from his affirming that " all
ecclesiastical officers for the first three hundred years were
elected by the people — nay, that Matthias was thus chosen
to fill up what he calls the tribular number of the Apostles;'*
from 4;iis affirming that " no clainis of pre-eminence among
the cleVgy make their appearance in the epistle of Clement
to the Corinthians ;" and that it " was not till the reign of
Adrian ^"dX. the bishop was supposed to stand in the place
of the Jewish high-priest, the presbyters in the place of
priests, and the deacons in the place of Levites."* In far-
ther proof of his accuracy and diligence, he speaks of '' the
Constitutions of Ignatius ^^ meaning, we suppose, the apos-^
tolical constitutions^ which were pretended to have been
written by Clement ; he calls Polycarp, whom all antiquity
represents as the disciple of St. John^ the disciple of Igna"
tius; mistaking the name of an office for the name of a
man, he calls Pontius, the deacon of St» Cyprian, Pontius
JDiaconus ; and, as we have seen, he makes Cyprian him-

* To be convinced of the rashness of this assertion, the reader need£
only to consult St Clement's first epistle to the Corinthians, or vol. ix.
p. 125, of our Review.

Review of Haweis' Church History. 377

self an advocate for popery^ at the very time that he viras
contending for the equal rights of diocesan episcopacy^ and
reproving Stephen^ bishop of Rome ^ for acting as if he thought
himself superior to other bishops ! Has Dr. Haweis read
one page of the writings of Clemens Romanus, of Pontius,
or of Cyprian ?

He has certamly laboured to prove, if confident assertions
©an be called proof, that there are none of the Fathers
whose writings are worth the reading ; but mere asser-
tions will have little weight in a cause where more learned
men had employed, without success, much erudition and
plausible reasoning. The heaviest charge which has been
urged against the Fathers is their credulity ; but " upon an
impartial examination of the passages, upon which this
charge principally depends for support, it will appear, (says
a learned writer*,) that many of the supposed errors arise
from misrepresentation j that many relate to trifling circum-
stances, many are dispersed among the sentiments of indi-
viduals, and not among the tenets of the church, and have
no relation whatsoever to public principles of belief, or pub-
lic terms of communion. How, therefore, these peculiar-
ities conspire to make them generally unserviceable in the
cause of religion, it is difficult to comprehend. If any at-
tempts to elevate the Fathers to the high rank of the apos-
tles, were made by their advocates ; if they were affirmed
to have been assisted by inspiration ;*i' or to have been en-
dowed above the common lot of mankind, with infallibility^
tibe objection would doubtless carry great force against such
ambitious pretensions. Bat we contend only that they de-
serve our regard as witnesses of the opinions of their respec-
tive ages ; as historians of the facts which were accessible to

* Mr. Keith, in his Sermons at Bampton's Lecture.

•j- Dr. Haweis admits the apostolical Fathers to have been assisted by
inspiration, for he says expressly, that •♦ miraculous gifts generally ceased
with the first generation of the Apostles' converts and successors. There*
fdre Clement and Ignatius vsrere inspired.

4§

378 Revleiv of Haweis* Church History,

their inquiries ; and as teachers, whose piety and learning
eminently distinguished them from all their contemporaries.
Sharing the imperfections of other writers, they fairly claim
the same indulgence. The faults imputed to them ought
frequently to be imputed to the times in which they lived ;
when accuracy of research was often precluded by nume-
rous obstacles, and when ardent zeal induced them to press
every circumstance into their service, which carried with it
even the appearance of truth. If the plea of credulity de-
serves to be admitted as a ground of rejection, with equal
or perhaps superior force does it operate against some of
the most celebrated authors of Greece and Rome."

This is placing the utility of the writings of the Fathers in
a proper light. It is as witnesses only that we plead for
them ; and as witnesses they are entitled to the fullest cre-
dit. Their reasonings are often weak, and their criticisms
puerile ; but it is impossible to question the integrity of
men who laid down their lives for the truth : What they
affirm that they witnessed, they undoubtedly witnessed.
Even the opinions^ in which they were unanimous— g'wi^t/
semper^ quod ubique, quod ab omnibus — are not to be hastily
rejected, merely because they tally not with the dogmas of
this or that modern school ; and the man must have a very
high opinion pf his own understanding, who, like our au-
thor, presumes to say that he holds xht gospel truth in greater
purity than the bishops and presbyters of the first three
centuries.

" Pride, surely, was not made for man ;" and men truly
religious are always humble. The most virtuous man on
earth must be sensible that his good deeds cannot benefit
his Maker ; and the most zealous and orthodox Christian,
if he forget not that he possesses nothing which he did not
receive, will not boast of the services which he may have
rendered to the cause of piety and truth. It was not, there-
fore, without surprize, that we found our most orthodox au-
thor, in the preface to the second volume of this history,
expressing himself in the following terms :

Review of Haweis* Church History • 379

" The great design of the adorable Redeemer when ht
came down from heaven, was to procure peace upon earth,
and good will towards men. To correspond with this de-
sirable and blessed purpose, is the great end and object of
this history !"

A comparison such as this we had imagined that no man,
whose mind is not swollen with spiritual pride, would have
dared to make ; and we will venture to say, that the blas-
phemer Clarke, though justly reprehensible for the notions
which he entertained of the Son of God, never in idea com-
pared the designs of that adorable person with his own ! He
left such comparisons to fanatics, and to a species of mis-
sionaries, with which, in his day, the Christian Church was
not acquainted.

Clarke, indeed, as well as more orthodox men, held
hardly any principle in common with Dr. Haweis ; for he
thought that our belief of Christianity rests on the evidence
of miracles and prophecy ; and our impartial historian
affirms, with a confidence, which, were the assertion true,
could become only the searcher of hearts, that " no man
€ver was convinced of divine truth savingly by miracle !"
What though St. Luke assures us (Acts ix. ^5,) that " all
who dwelt at Lydda, when they saw Eneas miraculously
cured by St. Peter, turned to the Lord !" our author, who
thinks it doubtful whether St. Paul or himself had imbibed
most of the spirit of Christianity, may consider the testi-
mony of St. Luke as originating in mistake; for the Apos-
tle certainly understood the doctrine of saving faith better
than the Evangelist.

From the end of the fourth century, to the commence-
ment of the Reformation, our author traces, with a bold
pencil, the rise and progress of the corruptions of Christi-
anity ; but we shall content ourselves, and, we trust, our
readers, with a very cursory view of his detail of the trans-
actions of that gloomy period, because his facts are authen-
ticated only by his own assertions, and are such as furnish

380 Review of Haweis' Church History,

few lessons of instruction to Christians of the present day^
His account of the Nestorians and Eutychians, in the fifth
century, is well told ; but his narrative of the rise, progress,
and present prevalence of Pelagianism is in many respects
objectionable.

When he talks of " Cassian^ a Monk, of Marseilles, dif-
fusing abundantly the pleasing poison of this heresy," we
will not give ourselves the trouble to inquire whether he
may not mean Cassiodorus^ who, from being Minister to
Theodoric the Ostrogath, retired, in his old age, into a mo-
nastery of his own building in Calabria, and published the
tripartite history of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodorite,
with various learned works of his own and other writers.
Cassiodorus, we know, has been accused, most unjustly in-
deed, of Pelagianism, because he published some of the
works of Pelagius, after purging them of their errors ; but
Cassian, as Dr. Cave observes, was " Pelagianorum hostis
acerrimus." Even the view which Dr. Haweis gives of the
opinions of Cassian, though not quite accurate, differs widely
from the heresies of Pelagius. He was indeed styled by
the followers of Augustin, a iS'^mi-pelagian, but with what
justice the reader will perceive when he is informed that
Cassian admitted the doctrine of original sin, and the ne-
cessity of preventing- as well as co-operating grace. He
contended, indeed, as St. Paul had done before him, that
" the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against
the flesh j and that without some such internal struggle as
this, there could be no such thing as human virtue, nor any
receptacle in man for divine grace ; but so far from teach-
ing, that virtue merits heaven, as quoted by the accurate
author of the Historia Literaria, " ex nimio fere pelagia-
nos oppugnandi studio errores, asserit omnes justorum j*w.s-
titias esse peccanta /"

We readily admit, however, that in the writings of Cas-
sian errors may be found, and that Pelagius was a heretic,
whom our author has treated with perhaps greater lenity

Revietu of Hawels* Church History. 381

than, from the nature of his heresy, he could have claimed
at his hands ; but we protest against the uncharitable insinu-
ation, that Pelagianism pervades the Church of England at
present ; and we shall not hesitate to pronounce Dr. Haweis
a false accuser of the brethren, if he charge with Pelagian-
ism, all who dissent from the dogmas of Augustin, Lu-
ther, Calvin, and Edwards. Of the work of Edwards on
Free-will, he perceives not, as we have already observed,
the tendency ; and we doubt much if he fully comprehends
the metriphysics even of his masters Augustin and Calvin.
The following exclamation is the offspring of arrogance and
ignorance :

" I confess my astonishment at Mr. Milner's assertion,
that the doctrine of particular redemption was unknown to
the ancients ; and he wishes it had remained equally un-
known to the moderns ; (we heartily wish the same thing).
I am shocked that the scriptures of truth should be treated
thus slightly, or the greatest and best of men be laid under
so unbecoming a censure."

Whether Mr. Milner's assertion be censure or praise, it
is an undoubted truth, that in the writings of the Fathers,
anterior to St. Augustin, there is nothing which gives the
smallest countenance to particular redemption. But pray.
Sir, when did you discover that the Fathers of the first four
centuries were the greatest and best of men ? In your first
volume you represent them as a crew of turbulent, credu-
lous, contemptible liars, a sort of character to which we
would not be hasty to apply either of the epithets great and
good. With respect to the scriptures of truth, what right
have you to suppose that either yourself, Calvin, Luther,
or Augustin, understood them better than Bishop Bull or
Jeremy Taylor ? We know your answer to this question ;
for, after representing the Church as so totally corrupted
in the end of the fifth century, that no genuine Christianity
was to be found in it but among a few unknown persons,
God^s secret ones, you thus express yourself:

382 Remew of Haweis' Church History.

" The state of things at that time nearly resembled the
present. The greater dignitaries of the Church too much
men of this world; the inferior clergy under their infuence^
and choosing the ministry for its advantages, or an idle life;
and the people^ like their priests^ easily engaged in the page-
antry of rites, ceremonies, and superstitious observances:
though a generation was preserved, who cleaved to the Lord
in one faith, and served him out of a pure heart ferventlv :''
A ver>^ pretty character this of the Church of England and
all her great dignitaries, of whom we know none greater
than the two prelates to whom we have referred you.

The view of the church during the sixth century grows
darker and darker, and presents very little that is worthy
of the reader's attention. To our author*s narrative, how-
ever, implicit credit must not be given ; for he inadver-
tently acknowledges (p. 49), that he has only " looked at
some of the writers of that age, and their works." By
what means he obtained a sight of the writers of that age,
he has not told us ; but we cannot help thinking that a man
ambitious of the character of an impartial historian, was in
duty bound, not only to look at, but to read with care many
of the works of every age, of which he proposed to record
the events and doctrines.

In the seventh century arose the impostor Mohammed,
for whose success our author well accounts, by allowing to
him great abilities, which he undoubtedly possessed, and
by showing what advantages he derived from the igno-
rance, corruption, and condition of the clergy. We doubt,
however, if Dr. Haweis has done more than look at the
original writings of that period. To prove the extreme su-
perstition of the age, he quotes St. Eloi of Noyon's charac-
ter of a good Christian, which he may have found in Lord
Kames's Sketches of the History of Man, We do not say
that he has actually taken it from that work ; but it is some-
what singular that an English historian of the Church
should have quoted, without addition or diminution, the

Review of Haweis* Church History, 383

very passage which had before been quoted for the same
purpose by the Scotch Judge."^

Our author, who, upon every occasion, betrays a fellow-
feeling for schismatics^ is very willing to find the pure doc-
trines of the gospel among the Paulinians of this century ;
though, by his own account of them, they had as little claim
to the appellation of Christians as the modem Quakers.—^
" They regarded the sacraments, he says, as merely allego-
rical, and not literally to be observed ; they treated the Vir-
gin Mary contemptuously'''' (which he seems to consider as
meretorious conduct) ; " and in their church assemblies
they abolished their names, [and offices} of Bishops and
Presbyters, instituting a set of pastors, with perfect equality y
without any peculiar rights^ privileges^ or garb to distin-
guish them from the people !"

His account of the struggles of the Bishop of Rome for
universal supremacy in this age, and of the opposition
which was made to his claims, not only by the Eastern
Church, but by the British, Scotch, and Gallican Churches,
and even by the Bishop of Ravenna, in Italy, would be
valuable, had he referred us to the authors from whom the
account is taken. The man, however, who only looks at ori-
ginal writings might not have found this an easy task ; and,
therefore. Dr. Haweis never attempts it.

His history of the eighth century is a well told tale ; but
it can be considered as nothing more ; for though in gene-
ral true, it rests on no other authority than his own asser-
tions. Not one quotation is given— -not one contemporary
writer referred to. The means by which the Pope obtained
what he has long claimed as the patrimony of St. Peter ;
the origin of the temporal dignities of the prelates, as Dukes^
Marquises^ Counts and Barons ; the final rupture between
the Eastern and Western Churches on account of image

• See Sketches of the History of Man, vol iv. p. 376, 377, and out
author's Impartial Hittory, vol. ii. p. 63, Sec.

384 Review of Hatveis* Church History,

worship ; the conquests of the Saracens, and the first for*
midable appearance of the Turks, are all perspicuously de-
tailed. We have likewise a concise account of the rise of
the new Empire of the West, under Charles the son of Pe-
pin, surnamed (says our author) Charlemagne. This, we
suppose, was said to show his skill in the French language,
as it is probably to display his knowledge of Greeks that a
sect, by all other historians styled monothdites,* is by him
uniformly called monotholites.

In the detail of ecclesiastical affairs during the ninth cen-
tury, we expected some account of the rise and constitution
of the Moravian Church, which has been, from its founda-
tion, independent both of the Roman Pontiff, and of the
Patriarch of Constantinople ; but we were disappointed.
Our author tells us only that it was founded in 850, by two
Greek Monks ; and that it is sufficiently superstitious. He
dwells, however, at some length, on the sufferings of Go^'
teschalcus^ whom he calls a martyr for divine truth ; arid
expresses himself in language extremely reprehensible.

We abhor, as much as he does, all kinds of religious per-
secution; and the peculiar dogmas of Goteschalcus — at least
those dogmas for which he suffered, appear to us harmless,
though certainly not essential articles of the faith ; and, in
one sense of the words, perhaps not true. As our author
mentions them only in general terms, as " the doctrines of
predestination and grace," we shall lay them before our
readers in the words of Goteschalcus himself, that a judge-
ment may be formed of the propriety of Dr. Haweis's
writings.

• From /xovoj and osXw.

t Goteschalcus, called likewise Fulgentius, on account of his eloquence
and science, was a Benedictine Monk of Orbais in France, and flourished
about the middle of the ninth century. Our author uniformly calls him
Godeschalcus, thus confounding him with a deacon of the Church of
Liege, who flourished about the year 767, and is known in the literary
annals of the Church, as the author of the life of St. Lambert the martyr,
a book filled with legends and lying wonders. ^ -

Meview of HaxveW Church History » 38$

** Ego Goteschalcus credo et confiteor quod gemina est
prsedestinatio, sive Electorum ad requiem, sive Reprobo-
rum ad mortem : quia sicut Deus incommutabilis, ante
mundi constitutionem om^nes electos suos incommutabiliter^
per gratuitam gratiam suam prsedestinayit ad vitam seter-
nam : Siiniliter omnino onines Reprobos, qui in die judicii
damnabuntur propter ipsorum mala merita, idem ipse in-
comniutabilis Deus, per justum judicium suum incommu-
tabiliter praedestinavit ad mortem nierito sempiternam."^
This is, indeed, Calvinisni sufficiently harsh \ but he else-
where softens it in the following manner :

*' lUos omnes iinpios et peccatores, quos proprio fuso
sanguine filius Dei redimere yenit, hos omnipotens Dei bo=
nitas ad vitam praedestinatos, irretractabiliter salvari tantum-
modo velit : illos omnes impios et peccatores, pro quibus
idem Dei filius nee corpus assumpsit^ nee orationem, nee
dico, sanguinem fudit, neque pro eis ullo modo crucifixus
fuit, quippe quos pessimos futuros esse prcescivxt^ quosque
justissime in seterna prsecipitandos tormenta prsefinivit, ipsos
omnino perpetim salvari penitus nolit."f

In this last extract, the reader perceives that the predesti-
nation and reprobation of Goteschalcus are conditional; and
though he errs, not knowing the scripture, when he sayg that
Christ was not, in any respect^ crucified for the impious and
the wicked, whom he has certainly redeemed frona the e'uer-
lasting power of the grave^ yet the error carries in it no-
thing of blasphemy. Indeed, we strongly suspect, that had
pr. Haweis weighed well the import of this passage, he
would not have lamented so loudly and so long over the
fate of " poor Goteschalcus and his doctrine ;" for modi-
fied Calvinism like this, seems not to be what he calls " the
truths of vital godliness." At any rate, it ill became him to
stigmatize the opposers of Calvinisni in a body, with the
,. epithets of " unhumbled, unawakened, pharisaical and

* Apud Hincmar. de prsdest, cap. v. f Ibid. cap. xxvii. & xxix.

49

386 Review of Haweis* Church History*

proud ;" for a greater proof of the pride of his own heaft
cannot be conceived than he furnishes by thus seating him-
self in the chair of infaUibility, and pouring forth railing ac-
cusations against such men as the Bishops Taylor and
Home.

But he is still more inexcusable, if an excuse be not found
in his ignorance, when, after using such language as this, he
goes on to say, that " the doctrine of the Trinity hath a
near connection with that oi predestination and grace." Was
the late Mr. Jones of Nayland's faith in the Trinity not
sound ? We hardly think that even our author will dare to
say so ; and yet it is not possible for two Christians to think
more differendy than Mr. Jones and he on the subjects of
predestination and grace. To be convinced of this, let the
reader only compare the two admirable letters by Mr. Jones,
on the modem doctrine of predestination, published in the
fifth volume of our journal, with the following modest ac-
count which Dr. Haweis gives of himself and his brother
Calvinists in this imperfect history :

" The natural man receiveth not the things which be of
the spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they
are spiritually discerned. Happily, the Lord, in every age,
though they were but few comparatively-^(what were few ?
the ages !) — taught some the grace of God, which bringeth
salvation ; and to this day a generation, according to the
election of grace, can say wherein we stand, and rejoice in
hope of the glory of God !!!"

We have an account of the conversion of the northern
nations, in the tenth centurj^ to the Christianity which was
then professed in the churches of Rome and Constantinople ;
and the author gives a rapid sketch, certainly not softened,
of the shocking immoralities which prevailed among the
clergy. No dissenter or deist could give stronger colouring
to such descriptions ; though here, as everywhere else, we
feel the want of references to the original authors.

The eleventh century opens, in this work, with a brief

itemew of Haweis' Church History • SSt

account of the crusades in Palestine ; whence the author
proceeds to the contests between the Emperor Otho and
Pope Gregory the seventh ; and concludes, as usual, with a
detail of the almost universal corruption of faith and morals.
The period was a busy one, and the narrative of its transac-
tions is animated and interesting. A just tribute is paid to
the memory of Berenger, for opposing the doctrine of tran-
substantiation, not yet universally received in the western
church ; but the author betrays his ignorance of the Aristote-
lian philosophy, when he says it was ridiculous to attempt,
by means of it, to defend so monstrous an absurdity. The
Aristotelian division of body into matter and form^ which
may exist separately^ is admirably fitted for the support of
transubstantiation ; and we have often been tempted to be-
lieve, that, on this account, and on this only, the philoso-
phy of the Lyceum was in the middle ages so generally pre-
ferred to that of the Academy, The consequences here
attributed to the prevalence of monkery certainly sprung
from that system ; but, for the credit of the Albigenses,
we hope that they were not a spawn of the Paulinians*

The history of the twelfth century exhibits nothing very
different from that which prevailed in the preceding. The
crusades were carried on with disgrace to the arms of
Christian Europe ; new contests arose between the Empe-
ror and the Pope ; the northern powers continued to con-
vert their Pagan subjects and neighbours by the sword;
and the most ridiculous questions were debated among the
monks v/ith the utmost keenness. This, however, kept
inquiry alive, and sent the lover of truth to the sacred scrip-
tures and the earliest uninspired writers of the church.

Hence much gospel truth was brought to light ; and the
Waldenses^ of whom our author gives a just account, got a
firm footing in various countries of Europe. In this century
were founded several universities, though the Christians
were still indebted, for what knowledge they obtained of
the most useful sciences, to the Saracens j and a copy of the

' - * ^

38S Review of Haweis^ Church History*

pandects being discovered, suggested to the Pope the ex-
pedient of digesting under similar heads the various canons
and decrees published at different periods by councils and
pontiffs. Hence the origin of the canon law^ which being
conjoined with the civile was taught as a science in the uni-
versities, and gave rise to the degrees of L. L. B. and L.
L. D. at that period, or soon afterwards, the most highly
valued of all academical honours, because the reward of
the science employed with most success in support of papal
usurpation.^

The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries present id ti^
scenes in all respects similar to those which we have viewed
in the preceding. Crusades in Palestine and Egypt against
the followers of Mohammed, and in Eur6ije against the
Albigenses ; contests between the Pope and the Emperor,
and between his holiness and the French King ; schisms in
the papacy producing anathemas from Pope against Pope 5
the rise of dominician and franciscan orders of monks ; the
tidiculous disputes among the franciscans themselves ; and
the devotion of the liionks of all orders to the court of
Rome, are here placed before us in glowing colours. This
part of the work is extremely well written, and not dis-
graced by our author's usual illiberality to those who think
differently from himself respecting the distinguishing dog-
mas of Calvin^ He shows that the disputes among the
monks contributed much to the rise of the Lollards on the*
continent, while they stimulated our countryman Wickliff
to search in the scriptures for that truth which he could
not find in the schools; We have likewise some account
of the missions to Tartary and China, and of the stop put
to the progress of Christianity in the eastj by the victorious
arnls of the bigotted Tamerlane*

* It was, perhaps, the discovery of this fact that induced our Pro-
lestant historian, kfter he had inadvertently taken the degree of L. L.
B. to proceed to Doctor in Physic; a process certainly uncommon among
clergymen, or men of general literature.

Review of Haweis' Church History, 3^9

But we hasten to the fifteenth century, of which the his-
tory, in the work before us, opens with the fall of the East-
cm Empire, the discovery of the new world, and the ef-
fects of those great events on the progress of letters and
Christianity. At the beginning of this sera, there were no
fewer than three Popes, each claiming the sovereignty of
the visible church, and denouncing anathemas against the
anti -popes and their various adherents, as well nations as
individuals. To put an end to this confusion, the council of
Constance was called, which deposed two of the Popes j
and, the third giving in his resignation, a new Pope was
chosen, who, by the name of 3Iartin the fifth, assumed
the ecclesiastical supremacy over the western world. The
Greek church, though prostrate in the dust, still maintained ^
as at this day she maintains, her independence of the see
of Rome, acknowledging no visible superior to her own
patriarchs. The principal transactions of the council of
Constance were the condemnation of John Huss and Je-
rome of Prague to the flames, in direct violation of the
promise given to the former of these tnartyrs by the Empe-
ror Sigisniund ; the ordering of the bones of WicklifF to be
dug up and burnt ; and the decree for withholding the sa-
cramental cup from the laity. Another council was called,
during this century^ at Pavia, which deposed Pope Euge-
nius ; and the schisms and dissentions which this occa-
sioned, paved the way for the reformation.

We have accompanied this impartial historian through
1500 years of the Christian church, and have now arrived
with him at the sera of the reformation. Being as little
attached to popery and its corruptions, as any chaplain of
the late Countess of Huntingdon can be, we agree with
' Dr. Haweis that it is an important sera — -even the sera of
the revival of genuine Christianity^ Our zeal, however,
does not prompt us, as his zeal has prompted him, to plead
for the immaculate purity of the motives by which the
earliest reformers were influenced in every stage of their

S§0 Review of HatOeis' Church Htsforgi

controversy with the church and court of Rome. We cer-
tainly believe that " Luther, in his faint opposition to the
corruptions of the age, was animated not by zeal for truth,
but either by avarice or by mean envy for the glory of his
order neglected by a preference of the Dominicans ;" and
yet, if bur author include us among those " popish adver-
saries or infidel historians, to whom, he says, thalignity
and hatred of gospel-truth suggested this opinion," we
hesitate not to say to hiivcb—^Mentiris impudentissime. We
are so far from being ashamed of receiving benefit from
such men as Martin Luther and Henry the eighth, that we
bless the hand which turned the avarice of the one, and
the luxur)' of the other, from their natural mischiefs, to
become instruments of the choicest blessings— even the re-
covery of LETTERS, and the restoration of religion. But
we are not surprised that Erasmus, though he saw the
errors of the church more clearly than Luther himself,
*' trembled at the rude hand of hasty reform j" nor does
our charity, notwithstanding his modest expression, permit
us to say that it was only the cowardice of his own spirit
which made him fear " to be involved in the dangers that
he apprehended." Such sentences can proceed only from
the mouths and pens of Calvinists, who affect to be
searchers of hearts and discovers of spirits.

Dr. Haweis draws an amiable, and, in general, a just
character of Melancthon ; though he says, that " the yield-
ing temper of that reformer, his love of peace, and some
educational prejudices respecting church unity and schism^
led him sometimes into concessions injurious to the cause
which he defended."

We have seen that, in our author's opinion, schism is n®
sin, and church unity unworthy of the regard of a spiritu-
ally-minded man; but Melancthon thought otherwise—^
" Would to heaven, (says he) that I could not only not
enfeeble the power of bishops, but establish their dominion /
for I see but too well, what sort of church we are likely to

Review of Haweis* Church History, 391

Jfeve, if we demolish ecclesiastical government: I am,
sure that the tyranny we have escaped (viz. that of Rome)
will then be nothing to that which we shall see established."*

This, however, is not the only educational prejudice
which our impartial historian undoubtedly finds in the
writings of Melancthon. That great and good man was
no Cahinist^ as appears as well from his Letter to Arch-
bishop Cranmer, as from what he teaches, in the Augsburg
Confession, concerning the promise of grace, and justifica-
tion. In the Letter he says, " Nimis horridae fuerunt
initio stoicce disputationes apud nostras defato^ et disciplinae
uocuerunt. Quare te rogo, ut de tali aliqua formula doctrines
cogitas." In the Confession he thus expresses himself:
" Non est hie opus disputationibus de prsedestinatione aut
similibus. NsLin promissio est universalis ; et nihil detrahit
©peribus, imo exsuscitat ad fidem, et vere bona opera."

Such offences as these are not to be forgiven by our
orthodox historian, who yet, strange to tell, speaks of Zu-
inglius in terms of the highest respect. " Though not
alike famed with Luther, he may justly (says our author)
rank his equal in piety, in learning his superior." Would
the reader, after this, suppose that on free-will^ grace^ eke-
tion^ and reprobation^ Zuinglius held opinions little different
from those of Pelagius on the same subjects ? We men^
tion not his mean notions of the sacrament of the Lord's
Supper, or his making the church the creature of the state.
In the former of these opinions, Dr. Haweis probably agrees
with him ; and though he himself makes the church the
creature of the mob^ we are not surprised at his preferring
Erastionism to Apostolical authority. But, in the name of
consistency, how comes he to praise the reformer, who
maintained that heaven is open to all who live according
to the light vouchsafed to them ; and who seem not to have
l>elieved in original sin P To talk of the " moderate tem-

* Seward's Anecdotes, vcl. iil p. 129.

392 Review of Haxvets* Church History^

per and self-command" of Zuinglius, would be ridiculous in
any man who knows that he put off the character of a cler-
gyman to assume that of a soldier, and died fighting for his
opinions against the Cantons, whom he had not been able,
by reasoning, to convert to the protestant faith ; but of the
particulars of this fact our diligent and impartial historian
must be supposed ignorant. He is not ignorant, however,
that Zuinglius and Luther differed widely in their opinions
respecting the Lord?s Supper^ which, he says, " is a subject
unworthy of contest;" and, apologizing for them, he
requests us to " remember that the best of men are but men
dt the bestf^

His praises of Calvin are not much higher than we
expected from him ; yet an historian truly impartial, after
observing that this far-famed reformer " embraced the
doctrines of truth, and adorned them by a conversation
the most exemplary^'' would have related, with due horror,
the burning of Servetus at a stake, instead of slurring
Calvin's guilt with—." If this ivere a just charge, let the,
reproach rest upon him !" When he passed this feeble
censure on the apostle of Geneva, he had surely forgotten
his own maxim, that " no man ought to vindicate, or, as
he might have added, extenuate, abuses in the cause of
protestantism, whilst he pleads against them in the hand of
popery."

Notwithstanding these effusions of prejudice and partialis
^, he gives a rapid and well written sketch of tlie progress
of the reformation in Germany, France, Switzerland, Swe-
den, Denmark, and Norway ; and then proceeds to state the
doctrines of the reformation, and to contend, in direct op-
position to what he had before related of the contests of
Luther, Carlestadt, and Zuinglius, for a union ofsentimen^
among the reformers !

What he calls the doctrines of the reformation are the
peculiar opinions of Calvin and his more rigid adherents^
>vhich, of course, we must suppose are all that he deeins

Mevtexv of Haxveis* Church History. SQ3

necessary to be received by the Romish Church to restore
her to primitive purity. The condemnation of image-
worship, of transubstantiation, of the invocation of saints j
ihe denial of purgatory and of the supremacy of the Pope ;
and the restoration of the cup to the laity in communion,
a« well as of the privilege of marriage to the clergy, are
aot deemed worthy of notice among the doctrines which
the first reformers unanimously maintained ! The funda-
mental truths, in which all the eminent men among them
concurred, were only

" 1. Of God's eternal purpose and predestination of an
elect people^ and those, comparatively ^w, ordained to life
and glory eternal. 2. That man had lost all ability to do
good^ and freedom of will to choose it ; and was in his
aature, as fallen, inclined only to evil. 3. That nothing
ever did or can alter this propensity of the human heart,
but the Holy Ghost by his own immediate agency on the
souls of men. 4. That a sinner is, and can he justified by
faith only; and this not of himself, being unable either to
comprehend or receive the things that be of the Spirit of
Godi and therefore, the faith itself must be the gift of
God, 5. That merit in creatures there is none nor ever cam
be. From first to last a sinner must be saved by grace.
6. That the vicarious atonement by the one oblation of
Christ upon the Cross is effectual, not for the many called^
but for ^^few chosenP

Were we less acquainted than we are with the principles
and views of Dr. Haweis, we should indeed be surprised
by his hardy assertion, that " these are the things which the
reformers uniformly held ;'' whilst he passes, without
notice, so many other things, about which all Europe
knows that there was no controversy among them. But,
how does he prove the unanimity of the reformers in hold-
ing these abstruse dogmas of Calvinism ? Why, as usual,
by his own confident assertions, and by partial extracts
from the correspondence of Luther with Erasmus !

50

'o.

94f R^iew of Haw'ets^ Church Hi'story-.

Melancthon's sentiments respecting predestination and
election we have already exhibited in his own words,' to
which it is hoped that all our readers, who have not been
chaplains to the late Countess of Huntingdon, will give as
much credit as to the unsupported assertion of our impartial
historian. The sentiments of Zuinglius respecting these
subjects may be safely inferred from the following address
of the minister to the godfathers and godmothers of chil-
dren brought to be baptized, which the reader will find in
the Liturgy of the Church of Zurich, of which Zuinglius
was the founder :— " Consider, therefore, that it is the
will of God our Saviour, that all men should attain unto
the knowledge of his will, through our only Mediator
Jesus Christ, who gave himself up for the redemption of
ALL MANKIND."* Is this Calvinism, or what our author
calls gospel truth ?

The quotation from Luther proves, indeed, that he held
the most shocking of the tenets which have usually been
attributed to Calvin as their author ; but it proves, at the
same time, that, in controversy, he substituted petulance for
'argument, and scrupled not to pervert the meaning of scrip-
ture to support his cause. Erasmus had said — " What can
be more useless, than to publish this paradox to the world ?
namely, that whatever we do, is done, not by virtue of our
cwnfree zvill^ but in a way of necessity^'''' &c. To this very
pertinent question, Luther, after a number of sarcasms,
which the respect due to learning, genius, and virtue, should
have suppressed, replies ; " You urge, where is either the
necessity or utility of preaching predestination? God him-
self teaches it, and commands us to teach it, and that is
answer sufficient."

True ! if God command us to teach it, no other answer
could be required by Erasmus, or will be required by any
one of those Churches, in which Dr. Haweis says, that" the

* Liturgia Figurina, London, 1693.

Sevietv of iTaxveis* Church History* 395

doctrines of the reformation have gone out of vogue :" But
where is this command to be found ?

Predestination, we shall suppose to be an undoubted
truth ; but we find no mention of it in the Gospels nor in
the Acts of the Apostles ; and we hardly think that even
the zeal of our author will contend, that in these five in-
spired tracts, all the truths are not to be found, which our
blessed Lord commanded his followers to teach, when he
said to the eleven, " Go ye into all the world, and preach
the gospel to eiiery creature. He that believeth and is bap-
tized, shall be saved ; and he that believeth not, shall be
damned." The controversies of St. Paul with the Jews and
Greek philosophers, led him into disquisitions on many to-
pics, to which Christians might for ever have safely re-
mained strangers ; and which illiterate Christians can ne-
ver, comprehend. Let not the reader be startled at this asr
sertion. For the character and labours of St. Paul we have
the highest veneration, and believe the world to be more
indebted to him, than to any other individual minister of
Christ ; but even St. Peter, though he did not presume, like
our author, to charge the Apostle of the Gentiles with
temporizings yet acknowledged, that, *' in his epistles are
some things hard to be understood, which they who are
unlearned and unstable, wrest to their own destruction."

The case, indeed, could not be otherwise. St. Paul's
epistles are, every one of them, addressed to particular
churches, or particular men, for the obvious purpose of
guarding them against some prevailing errors, and unra-
velling the sophistry of the Jews, the Gnostics, the Stoics,
and the Epicureans. This being the case, no man can feel
the full force of his reasonings, or apprehend the precise
meaning of the terms which he uses, who has not some
knowledge of the questions that were agitated among those
to whom his epistles were immediately addressed. Such
knowledge can never be. the portion of illiterate. Chris-
tians, who shall therefore be saved, if they believe the pi .in
truths, and fulfil the duties inculcated in tlie four gospels ;

3§6 Ri^i&U) of Haweis^ Church History,

though they pef plex not themselves with the things in St#
Paul's epistles, which St. Peter himself thought hard to be
Understood.

In the gospels, then, must we lo6k for the command
Which Luther says, God has given us to teach ignorant
men, that " whatever they do, is done, not by virtue of their
own free will, but in a Way of necessity," Instead of such a
command, however, he produces only two passages, which,
as they contain no command of any kind, are nothing to the
purpose* The former, in which our blessed Lord says,*
** Many are called, but few are chosen," refers obviously t6
"the calling of the Jews by the first preaching of the gospel j
and the latterf is only a declaration that Christ knew the
temper and disposition of those whom he had called to the
apostleship. After telling the twelve that they " were not
all clean," and setting them an example of condescension
^nd humility, he adds, " If ye know these things^ happy
are ye, if ye do them. I speak not of you all, I know whom
J ha^ve chosen : but that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he
that eateth bread with me, hath lift up his heel against me."
If these words could be supposed to have any relation what-
ever to the doctrine of election and reprobation, (which they
plainly have not), they would operate with the force of de-
monstration against that doctrine ; for they declare that
Judas was chosen as well as St. Peter.

Aware that his illustrious correspondent would not re-
ceive these two texts of scripture, as the command of God to
■teach that what we do, is done, not by virtue of our own free
will, hxxtm a way of necessity, Luther at last condescends
to point out to him the utility of the doctrine : " It tends,
he says, to humble our pride !"

Does it indeed ? Are the Calvinists, in general, the hum-
blest of mortals ? Or does this impartial history indicate the
extreme humility of its author ? Surely the man who pro-
nounces that all the Catholic writers of the first four centu=

* Matt. XX. 16. t St. John xiii. 1*.

Review of HawM Church History m 397

lies arc either weak or wicked, and that all the modems
who think not on these subjects as he does, are " destitute
of learning, not to say common sense," has no pretensions
whatever to humility. Indeed, it is not easy to conceive how
the belief of unconditional election and reprobation can pos-
sibly humble the human heart ; for, as it is natural for him
who is convinced that he is one of the chosen few, to look
down with contempt on the less favoured multitude ; so he
who believes, that whatever he does, is done by necessity,
may indeed, as our Church teaches,* " be thrust either into
desperation, or into wretchedness of unclean living;" but
he cannot be humbled by the consciousness of guilty be-
cause, though a murderer, he was as passive an instrument
as the sword by which he perpetrated the deed. By the
inward operation of divine grace, the elected Calvinist may
indeed be kept humble ; but, by the same operation, the
virtuous remonstrant may likewise be kept humble ; espe-
cially as he is conscious that all his sins are chargeable on
himself.

But the reformer adds another reason to prove the utility
of this doctrine.

" It is one of the highest degrees of faith, he says, sted-
fastly to believe that God is infinitely merciful, though he
saves, comparatively, but few, and condemns so many ; and
that he is strictly just, though of his own will he makes
such numbers of mankind necessarily liable to damnation.
These are some of the unseen things, whereof faith is the
evidence. Whereas, were it in my power to comprehend
them, or clearly to make out how God is both inviolably
just, and infinitely merciful, notwithstanding the display of
wrath, and seeming inequality in his dispensations, respec-
ing the reprobate, faith would have little or nothing to do."

And this jargon Dr. Haweis calls a *' triumphant reply T'
forgetting, it is to be hoped, that God himself appeals to

. * trth Avtide.

S^Z Remeto of. Haxuels* Church History, ,

human judgment for the equity of his ways, which he surely
would not have done, if divine justice had been altogether
incomprehensible by man. In the first chapter of Isaiah's
prophecies, he calls upon the Jews to reason with him on the
subject, and, by the mouth of Ezekiel, thus addresses them:
*' Yet ye say, the way of the Lord is not equal. Hear
now, O house of Israel! Is not my way equal? are not your
ways unequal ?" A question, which the house of Israel
could not have answered, were there any truth in this rea-
soning of Luther's.

Let not the reader be scandalized at the freedom with
which we treat the dogmas and reasonings of this great
reformer. To use the language of a celebrated historian,^
*' The knowledge of truth was not poured into his mind all
at once, by any special revelation : he acquired it by in-
dustry and meditation, and his progress, of consequence,
was gradual." He was liable, therefore, to all the mistakes
of other students ; and was destitute of many aids, which
we now possess, for the discovery of religious truth. Whilst
the irascibility of his own temper, resenting the ill treat-
ment which he received from the church of Rome, drove
him, perhaps, too far from the creed of that church in some
points of doctrine, the inveterate prejudices of education
made him symbolize too much with her in others ; and be
it remembered, that, if he thought " the truths respecting
predestination in all its branches, should be taught and pub-
lished^^ the reformers of our own church were of a very
different opinion ;'[' and that if deference be due to human
authority, it is to them^ and not to Luther, that xve are to
pay it.

From this digression respecting the union of sentiments
among the most eminent reformers, the author returns to
the history of the church. His detail of ecclesiastical aifairs^

* Robertson* s History of Charles V.

t See the conclusion of the liTth Article. *

Heoiew of Haxveis* Church History. 37^

from the diet of Augsburg, to the religious peace in the
same city, is not sufficiently minute; and he has produced no
good authority for his belief, that the Emperor Charles the
fifth died in the protestant faith. The superstitious mumme-
ries of that monarch, at the end of his life, are indeed alto-
gether inconsistent with the supposition ; and Dr. Haweis
might have found, in the spirit and temper of Philip, a suf-
ficient reason for the cruel treatment of Charles's friends
and confessor, without supposing that a Romish priest and
Romish bishop countenanced the apostacy of the Emperor
from the Romish faith ! With Robertson, however, we
think it is not improbable, that Charles, " having found, af-
ter repeated trials, that he could not bring any two clocks
or watches to go exactly alike, might reflect, with a mixture
of surprize as well as regret, on his own folly, in having
bestowed so much time and labour on the mere vain at-
tempt of bringing mankind to a precise uniformity of senti-
ment concerning the profound and mysterious doctrines of
religion." This was a reflection worthy of the most saga-
cious monarch of his age, when, freed from the cares of go-
vernment, he was at leisure to meditate coolly on the powers,
passions, and prejudices of the human mind.
' In the fourth chapter of the book which contains the his-
tory of the sixteenth century, we have a rapid detail of the
progress of the reformation in England, Scotland, Ireland,
Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Brandenburg, Prussia and
Germany. There is, however, nothing in it to which our
readers tan be supposed strangers, except a ludicrous story,
not worthy of repetition, respecting Dr. Cole and the knave
of clubs ; an erroneous account of the constitution of the first
reformed church in Scotland ; and an acknowledgment, we
suppose inadvertently made, that the Augsburg confession
is not Calvinistic, and, of course, that what was formerly
said of the Calvinism of Melancthon, is a falsehood !

We have more than once, in reviewing this work, had
occasion to remark, that to the impartiality of an historian,

400 Review of Haweis^ Church History,

diligence and accuracy are as essential as the love of truth;
and, if our learned 2C[id candid author had given himself the
trouble to read Skinner's Ecclesiastical History; Bishop
Sage's Fundamental Charter of Presbytery ; or even the ii-
turgy compiled for the use of the church of Scotland, by
the reformer Knox, he would hardly have dared to express
himself in the following terms :

^' The intrepid Knox having formed with Calvin, at Ge- ■,
neva, the strictest friendship, and adopted all his opinions
respecting church government, be returned to his native
land ; and with his rough eloquence, and hardihood that
^new no fear, he bore down all opposition, overturned the
whole Popish hierarchy, and established the Presbyterian
government in its stead, to which the church of Scotland
still adheres,^''

We pass over the obvious intention to deceive, in the stu-
died ambiguity of the last clause of this sentence ; and only
beg leave to refer our spiritually-minded vadxiy to the works
which we have mentioned, for a complete proof that the
Presbyterian form of church government was introduced
into Scodand, not by John Knox, but by Andrew Melville ^
and, that for the first fifteen years, the reformed church was
governed by super intendants^ for the ordination of whom
John Knox drew up a form* Superintendants, however,
resemble bishops j and such is our pious priest's unremit-
ting zeal to excite the rancour of the multitude against that
order of men, that, speaking of those, who, in the reign of
our Henry the eighth embraced the " evangelical doctrines,"
he says,

" Some of them, as the excellent Bilney, by whom Lati-
mer was converted, with Frith, and other worthies, fell
victims to episcopal persecution, and died in flames !"

When you wrote this very extraordinary sentence, {give
us leave. Sir, to ask you solemnly) what impression did
J^oii mean to make on the minds of your readers ? You
knov/ perfecdy well, that the persecutions under the reign

Review of Hatvets* Church Hisiory* 401

of Henry, can no more be called episcopal^ than presbyierial
persecutions ; but do you not likewise know, that your ad-
mirers—the infatuated frequenters of Lady Huntingdon'is
chapels— will understand you as here charging bishops of
every communion with cherishing, in the churches which
they govern, a spirit of persecution? That the charge is
Jalse^ a stronger proof cannot be wished for, than that the
rector of All-Saints^ Aldipinckky has never been censured,,
either for his schismatical practices at Bath, or for the num-
berless insinuations of a malicious tendency with which this
history teems agajnst the regular clergy of the church of
England,

We pas§ over the two next chapters, on the learning and
heresies of the times^ and on the accessions made to the Chris-
tian Church ; because from them the reader can learn no-
thing, except that the author, differing widely from Bacon^
is of opinion, that " the more advanced in science proceeded
to the summit of wisdom, to know that there is no GodP^

The seventh chapter, on the Progress of the true Churchy
exhibits a melancholy picture of the religion of those who,
in the western world, acknowledged the supremacy of the
Pope, and, in the east, that of the Patriarch of Constan-
tinople. The author, however, had surely forgotten his own
definition of gospel doctrines, when, speaking of the Greek
Christians, he chose to affirm, that " they are tenacious only
0f their miserable forms and ceremonies, in which all their
Christianity consists, and strangers alike to the gospel doC'
trines, and the purity of godliness." According to him, prC'
destination is the most important of all gospel doctrines ;
and we learn from Dr. King,* not only that it is a dogma
of the Greek church, but also that it is treated bv some of
the Russian clergy, " with a much better kind of logic than
that with which such points are generally discussed." When
I)r. Haweis shall have read this, or rather the work to

* liitcs and Oremoniei of the Greek Church , &c.

402 Meview of Haweis* Church History*

which we have referred him, we trust, that his candour wiii
impel him to make, through the medium of the Russiaa
Ambassador, a proper apologv to the Archbishop of No-
vbgorod, for having thus inadvertently calumniated the
brethren!

The account of the Lutheran churches is given with less
partiality than our author usually betrays. It proves with
the force of demonstration, that the earliest reformers were
not agreed in holding the doctrine of unconditional election
and reprobation ; that the followers of Melancthon were, at
least, as numerous as those of Luther ; and that they were
prevented from explicitly avowing themselves to be what
Dr. Haweis calls Semi-pelagians, only during Luther's life,
lest his irascible temper and overbearing spirit should excite
such dissentions among them, as might give advantages to
their common enemies.

Among the Calvinistic churches enumerated in the same
chapter, is placed the church of England. As our author
produces no other proof than his own assertion, that she
holds the doctrine of absolute decrees, we shall content our-
selves at present with opposing to it our denial; but when
he quotes Bishop Burnet, in support of another position
equally false, the reader may perhaps think him entitled to
more attention. Speaking of the Puritans in the reign of
Elizabeth, he says— -

" Nor were they as averse to the name of bishop or his
superintendance, as to the pomp, and wealth, and political
engagements of the prelacy : for as yet the English bishops
claimed not their office by divine right, but under the con'
stitution of their country; nor pleaded for TTzore than two
orders of apostolical appointment, bishops and deacons."

Has Dr. Haweis never read the Preface to the Form of
ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, published, by au-
thority, in the reign of Edward the sixth ? If not, it is time
that he should read it ; that he may not again oppose the
testimony of an individual respecting the docU'ines of the

Review of Hcrweh^ Church Hktofy. "4t5S

church, to the authoritative declaration of the church her-
self. But the declarations of the church are by him gene*
rally understood in a eense diametrically opposite to the
literal meaning of the words in which they are made.

Thus, in the exhortation at the celebration of the commU'
nion^ the church, by the mouth of the priest, instructs the
people, that " as the benefit is great, if, with a true penitent
heart, and lively faith, we receive that holy sacrament (for
then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his
blood ; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us ; we are
one with Christ, and Christ with us ;) so is the danger
great, if we receive the same unworthily ; for then are we
guilty of the body arid blood of Christ our Saviour ; we eat
and drink our own damnation^ not considering the Lord's
body," &c. But our author, wishing to make the church
in every thing symbolize with the oracle of Geneva, says—

" Calvin supposed the sign or symbol to convey a sacra-
mental pledge of blessing, and that a spiritual presence of
Christ attended it to the regenerate and believing only;
whilst to others the elements remained as common food: and
this the Church of England adopted,"^ Whence it follows,
that, in his opinion, the Church of England means by the
word damnation^ bodily nourishment; for we can hardly
suppose that he really intends, every time that he sits down
to dinner, literallv to " eat and drink his own damnation^ or
to be guilty of the body and blood of Christ his Saviour !"

His account of the rise and progress of the Socinians, In-
<iependents, and Anabaptists, contains little that is new or
exceptionable. Mention is, indeed, made of a city^ of
which we never heard before, called Racow ; and geogra-
phical information we certainly did not expect from a his-
tory of the church. We are afraid, however, that, by all
other historians, civil or ecclesiastical, our author's Racow
is called Cracow^ or Cracovia; and had he studied with
care the works of Charles Leslie, he might have learned,
"with other things of more importance, that the Socinian ca-

4CM Review of Haweis* Church lltstOfy»

techism was published in Cracow^ though to avoid a ca^-
phonie, it is usually called the Racovian catechism. This is
a trifling blundet, but it shows a defect of that accuracy,
without which an historian can never be trusted.

His introduction to the history of the church, in the se-
venteenth century, raised in our minds expectations which
the continued narrative did not gratify. The candour with
whirh he judges of the conduct of the Jesuits, when acting
as Missionaries in the four quarters of the globe ; the cen-
sures which he deservedly passes upon the other orders
which thwarted their measures ; and the disinterested zeal
by which he allows many of that learned and active order
to have been influenced, led us to hope for the same impar-
tiality in his account of the reformed churches, more espe-
cially of the church of England. We were, however, woe-
fully disappointed. James the first he ^nd^ popishly inclined,
and his most respectable bishops impious Jiatterers ; yet the
church of Rome knew so little of this inclination, that, we
are told, she meant to blow up the monarch and his bishops
by gunpowder ! Charles the first leaned still more towards
Rome, and Archbishop Laud was Haifa Papist ; though the
Princess Elizabeth has declared to the world, that the last
injunction laid upon her by her royal father, was to study
the Archbishop's book against Fisher the Jesuit, which
would ground her against popery !

It is indeed known to all who are acquainted with the
history of that period, that no man recovered so many per-
sons from the corruptions of popery as Dr. Laud ; that the
famous Chillingworth was one of his proselytes j and that,
of course, it is to that much calumniated prelate, that the
world is indebted for the ablest defence of the reformation
that ever was written — we mean Chillingworth's Religion
of Protestants^ a safe Way to Salvation, The Archbishop
^as indeed a high -churchman, and discountenanced the
doctrine of absolute decrees ; and the divine right of episco-
pacy, with the universality of redemption, are, in our an-

l^eview of Haweis* Church History* 40S

thorns opinion, the two greatest heresies that can be main-
tained by a Protestant, whether clergyman or layman. They
are much greater offences against God than impiety and hy^
pocrisy ; for, " he hopes that Whitgift and Bancroft were
g^ood 7nen^ and good bishops," though, in the page immedi-
ately preceding that in which this hope is expressed, he had
called the former an impious flatter er^ and the latter, a hy'
pocrite I (vol. iii. pp. 80, 81.)

What he says, (p. 62) of Calixtus, the divinity professor
of Helmstadt, is much more applicable to Laud :— -" No
man appears a more determined Protestant than Laud, or
has written with greater force against the errors of the
church of Rome ; though he was abused as half a Catholic,
because he maintained, that in the church of Rome thefun*
damental articles were still held ; and that salvation might
there be obtained, even though men were under many mis-
takes and prejudices of education. He admitted that the
union of churches was impracticable, imder the decisions of
the council of Trent ;" but earnestly wished that those de-
cisions might be altered, and Rome become such as that he
could unite with her. This surely was no unpardonable of^
fence in the disciple of him, who, in one of his best prayers
on earth, said, " Holy Father, keep through thine own name
those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we
areP

Dr. H. does not think Cromwell just equal to Charles the
first in moral worth ; but " the true religion," i. e. Calvin-
ism, " was infinitely more indebted to him !" Nay, we are
as hiuch indebted to him {or preserving true religion among
us, as to Henry the eighth for introducing it ! Was true re-
ligion then preserved among us by the Brownists, Muggk'
tonians^ ^uakerSy Fifth-monarchy --771671, and all the other
sects without name and number, which sprang up under the
protectorate, and are now mostly forgotten ? A spirituaUy-
minded man, who, preferring the schism-shop to the cathe-
dral, wishes, by all possible means, to lessen episcopal au-

406 Review of Haweis* Church History.

thority, may be of this opinion ; but we trust that the ma-
jority of the nation think differently of true religion.

With respect to the character of Charles the second, we are
not inclined to dispute with him ; but we cannot enough ad-
anire the effrontery of the man, who affirms that the Bishops
and other dignitaries of the church were in that reign igno-
rant, worldly-minded, and negligent of their duty ! Were
the Archbishops Juxon, Shelden, and Sancroft ignorant, or
worldly-minded men I He admits some merit in Kenn^ even
though an Arminian ; and be it recorded to the honour
of Charles, that Dr. Kenn recommended himself to his fa-
vour, not by flattering his vices, but by reproving his mis-
tress'— ^the famous Nell Gwyn. Warburton, though, in our
author's opinion, no better a Christian than Julian the apos-
tate, was probably as learned as Dr. Haweis ; and, as he
was no high-churchman, he may be entitled to credit, when
he affirms of the reign of Charles the second, not only that
*^' it was\ biit is, likely ever to be esteemed our golden age of
theological literature."

Our author, who finds not one unsullied virtue in the so-
vereigns of the house of Stuart, discovers great generositif
in William, Prince of Orange, when he condescended to ac-
cept of three kingdoms ! Magnanimous hero ! He was not
actuated by low ambition, or a desire to humble the French
king. His only motive for deigning to snatch the sceptre
from the hands of his uncle and father-in-law, was a desire
to preserve the profession of the true rehgion in Great- Bri-
tain and Ireland ! How opportunely was he seized with that
Christian desire immediately after the birth of the Prince
of Wales ; — an event which opened his eyes likewise to
another fact, which he could not previously be made to per-
ceive / James, and his brother Charles, had been often ac-
cused of extending the prerogative, and encroaching on the
rights of the people, and the parliament; but William, as
long as he was heir-apparent to the throne, saw no necessity
for restraining the prerogative. He even said to Charles,

Review of Haweis* Church History, 40j?

that it ought not to be restrained ; but he now discovered his
mistake, and came over to England, not merely to prevent
the establishment of popery, but to redress all the grievan-
ces of the nation ! Yet William was not a faultless sove-
reign. He filled the vacant sees with latitudinarian divines^
favouring Arminianismy and some of them even high-
churchmen !

Our learned historian, however, is mistaken, when he
says that the prelates, who could not transfer their allegiance
to him from the abdicated Sovereign, were deposed. No
attempt was made to depose them, if by deposition he meant
degradation. They were, indeed, deprived of their sees by
an act of Parliament; but deprivation of a see, and deposi-
tion or degradation^ are words of very different import,
though Sir Richard Hall and he have chosen to confound
them. A schism, it is true, was, by this rash measure,
introduced even among high-churchmen ; but Sancroft and
Tillotson were both bishops, and the adherents of neither
looked upon the ordination of the other as invalid: they
followed the example of the council of Nice, which ac-?
knowledged the validity of the Novetian ordinations, though
unquestionably schismatical ; and when a clergyman went
over from the one party to the other, he was not re-ordained,
but only required to renounce the principles upon which the
schism was founded. Our reverend physician's insinua-
tions, therefore, that the authority of the regular clergy is
not more apostolical than that of the self-commissioned
methodists, proceeding, like those of his precursor the
Baronet, on a confusion of ideas, serve only to evince how
little he is acquainted with the constitution of the Catholic
church, and how desirous he is to promote fanaticism and
endless divisions.

The history of the eighteenth century opens with a high
panegyric by the author on himself ; and the object of the
detail is to prove that th^re is no true Christianity in the
world, but among the Moravians^ the Me^hodists^ the Ger-

408 Review of HaweiiP Church History,

snan Pietists^ and the various sects of Scottish Seceders^ who
are, indeed, such genuine gospellers^ that they have pub-
licly renounced some of the first principles of moral recti-^
tude.* The Lutheran churches have all deviated from the
opinions of their founder respecting j&«r if ia^/ar redemption
and absolute decrees ; and Dr. Haweis, who holds these opi-
nions, has too good reason to value his own understanding
and progress in godliness, to look upon their universal apos-
tacy as a ground of probability^ if tiot a proof that Luther,
^n these points, had not discovered the truth as it is in
Jesus !

Much undeserved abuse, we believe, has been poiwed
opon the Moravians ; but we cannot pay great regard to
our author's account of their church and doctrines, because
it omits several things of importance to be known, and con-*
tains some assertions, which we have good reason to consi-
der as false. An episcopal succession is indeed a matter of
too little importance to be noticed by our spiritually -minded
man ; but there are readers of our journal, who will receive
pleasure from the information that Archbishop Potter, after
the most diligent research into the history of the church of
the united brethren, admitted the succession of their bishops
to have been uninterrupted, and considered them as a so-
ciety of Christians deserving of the right hand of fellowship.
Our author affirms, that Count ZinzendorfF, " though he
Consented, with Baron Watteville, to be appointed to the
presidence of the brethren's affairs, both spiritual and tern*
poral, in conjunction with the elders of the congregation,
yet continued in communion v/ith the Luthem church to
his dying day !"

This is a tale, in itself, exceedingly improbable. Th&
united brethren, at that period, if not now, considered epis-
copal ordination as necessary to qualify the servants of the
church for their respective functions ,: and it is little Jikely

* See 0i5r eighth volume^ p. 134.

Review of HaweW Church Hhtory, 409

that diey would appoint a lavman of a different communion
to preside over their bishops and presbyters. But we need
not reason in this manner. We have the authority of one
of their own clergy to affirm, that Count Zinzendorff,
after endeavouring in vain to bring over the brethren at
Hernheet to the Lutheran faith and discipline, became
himself a convert to their faith and discipline, and, in 1735,
was consecrated one of their bishops ; having, the year be-
fore, been examined, and admitted into the inferior orders
by the theological faculty at Tubingen. Archbishop Potter,
we are assured, congratulated him on the event, and pro-
mised what assistance he could give to a church of confes-
sors, of whom he wrote in terms of the highest respect, for
their having maintained the pure and primitive faith an4
discipline, in the nqiidst of the naost tedious and cruel per-
secutions.

We have reason to believe, from the detail given us by
the same candid Moravian, that the charge of impurity
brought against the count by the translator of Mosheim'ij
history, and the Bishops Warburton and Lavington, is not
so totally groundless as our author wishes to persuade his
readers. The count, indeed, was innocent ; but it is ad-
mitted by our correspondent, that some of the converts to
the faith and discipline of the unitas fratrum^ having pre-
viously imbibed extravagant notions, propagated them widi
zeal among their new friends, in a phraseology extremely
reprehensible; and that the count himself sometimes adopted
the very improper language of those fanatics, when labour-
ing to bring them from the extravagance of error to the
soberness of truth. It is added, that much of the extra-
vagance and error, which have been attributed to the count,
is to be charged, not to /zzm, but to those persons who,
writing his extempore sermons in short-hand, printed and
published them without his knowledge or consent.

This account of the matter is extremely probable ; and
while it may serve to vindicate these respectable charactejr^

410 Revieio of Haweis^ Church JUstori/.

from one of the blackest calumnies that were ever circu-
lated against meri,^ it shows that Count ZinzendorfF and
the brethren gave no countenance to those impurities,
which, on plausible evidence, were said to disgrace their
society. They have departed, however, far from the ori-
ginal puritv of their principles, if they be amalgamated
with that mass of mushrooms sprung from thd hot-bed o£
fanaticism, arid ycleped the Missionarif Society*

The three apdsdes of methodism were Mr. John Wes-
ley, Mr. George Whitfield, and " the noble and elect
Lady Huntingdon." We have a full account of the birth,
life, and transactions of each of these servants of the Lord,
and revivers of true godliness ; and it may seem rather sin-
gular, that, though Wesley was as zealous an opponent of
Calvinism as any of those dignitaries of the church, whom
our author calls Semi-pelagians, he is yet admitted to have
been " an eminentlv favoured saint of God." But he had
the iaaerit of exciting a schism in the established church,
which, like charity, covereth a multitude of sins.

Whitfield had all Wesley's zeal, with the additional me-
rit of Calvinistic orthoxy, and little learning / Hence it
is, that " no man^ since the days of St. Paul, not even Lu-
ther himself, was ever personally blest to the call and con-
version of so many souls from darkness to light, and from
the power of Satan untd God, as George Whitfield. He

* ** I am informed," says our candid author, *♦ that the impure and
inalignant note inserted by the translator of Moshelm, against the
brethren, in his eeclesiast'cal history, he would, from conviction of its in-
justice, have expunged : but the coijy being shown to the author of the,
divine Legation of Moses, the bishop engaged him to let it stand, and
there it remains a monument of the bitterness, bigotry, and falsehood of
these accusers of the brethren " It would have been singularly obliging
in our impartial historian, to have said^o/n v!?jom he received this curi-
ous piece of information ! The bishop of Gloucester and Dr. Maclaine
were no fools. They could not but be sensible that, if real, this was ti
most nefarious transaction ; and it is not probable that they .would first
commit a crime, and then publish that crime to defeat its •bject, and di: -
grace thctnsdves ,'

Review of ffaweis* Church History, 411

crossed the Atlantic thirteen times, to preach the everlast-
ing gospel, with the power of the Holy Ghost sent down from
Heaven /"

But though no man^ since the days of St, Paul^ has been
so personally blest as St. George Whitfield^ yet the elect lady
seems to have been still more blest ; for she founded col-
leges, endowed innumerable chapels, and patronized Dr*
Haweis ! There are several curious particulars in our au-
thor's account of this lady, which we regret that our limits
permit us not to transcribe ; but we cannot omit the follow-
ing, as it shows the real oh]^ct of some of the Methodists
in " creeping into houses, and leading captive silly women,
led away by divers lusts," whilst it verifies an observation
of the pious Nelson, that " love between the sexes, though
it may begin in the spirit, generally ends in the flesh."

Lady Huntingdon, though exemplary in her conduct
from a child, wished, till some time after her marriage, to
establish her own righteousness, and " by prayer, fasting,
and alms-deeds, to commend herself to the favour of the
Most High and Most Holy ! The zealous preachers, who
had been branded with the name of Methodists, had now
awakened great attention in the land. Lcidy Margaret Hast-
ings happening to hear them, received the truth as it is in
Jesus from their ministry ; and was, some years after,
united in marriae'e with the excellent Mr. Ingham^ one of
the first labourers in this plenteous harvest ! Conversing
•with Lady Margaret one day on this subject^ Lady Hun-
tingdon was exceedingly struck with a sentiment she ut-
tered, that since she had knoion and believed in the Lord
yesus Christ for life and salvation^ she had been as happy
as an angelic To any such seiisation of happiness, Lady
Huntingdon felt that she was yet a stranger !" She obtained
that happiness, however, from her connection with Mr.
Whitfield, and prophesied to Bishop Benson, that, on his
death-bed, " the ordination of George Whitfi "Id would be
one of the fev^^ ordinations on which he would reflect v/itli

412 Reviexo of Haweis^ Church Htstoftf,

complacence."— i" It is worthy of remark," adds the author^
*' that Bishop Benson, on his dying bed, sent ten guineas
to Mr. Whitfield, as a token of his favour and approbation,
and begged to be remembered by him in his prayers !"

Yet this prophetess, this genuine Calvinist, this elect ladif.^
1^ represented by her panegyrist, as having her heart swollen
with spiritual pride, as " thinking of herself much more
highly than she ought to have thought, and not soberly,
according as God had dealt to her and her friends the mea-
sure of faith."^ " The success attending her efforts seemed
to impress her mind with a persuasion, that a particular
benediction would rest upbn whomsoever she should send
forth s^ and rendered her choice not always judicious ! She
had so long directed the procedures of her connection^ that
she too seldom asked the advice of the judicious ministers
who laboured with her ; and bore not passively contradic-
tion?'* This, we suppose, is related to prove the truth of
Luther's opinion, that Calvinism tends to humble the
human heart ; and many such proofs the reader will find
in our author's account of himself, and his brethren of the
connection !

Thus, " Whitfield too frequently indulged in censures of
the clergy, which, however just they might be, seemed the
effect of resentment !"~™^' He, and Wesley, and all of them,
were always at their work, preaching wherever they could
procure admittance into the churches ; and not a little flat-
tered by the popularity attending their ministrations ! They
must have been more than men (they were the elect) if they
had not been so." " The Methodists" (remember, reader,
he is a Methodist who is speaking) " live in a state of
greater piety and separation f om the zvorld xkmn the gene-*
rality of their brethren. They join in none of the fashion-

* Rom. xli. 5.

f We now see the propriety of our author's phrase, " Episcopal menj''
which appeared to us so strange when ^xe first met with it.

Review of Hawets* Church History. 315

able amusements of the age, frequent not the theatres, oi?
scenes of dissipation, court no favour of the great, or human
respects ; their ttjne and fservices are better employed in the
more important labours of the ministry, preaching the word
in season, out of season, and counting' their work their best
wages P^

We have some reason to believe that all Calvinistic Me*-
thodists have not been so disinterested. One of them, said
to be of the elect lady's connection^ agreed to hold a rich
rectory for a minor, but refused to resign it when the minor
became of age, because he had discovered that the transac-
tion was simoniacal and illegal. Simoniacal and illegal it
certainly was ; but had the reccor possessed the spirit of our
author, he would have contrived to fulfil his engagement,
while he prevented the simony. He would have paid the
tithes to the man in whose favour he had promised to re-
sign the living ; but, " counting his work his best wages/*
he would have continued his pastoral relation to the parish
for the sake of the souls entrusted to his care. Such, we
cannot doubt, would have been the conduct of Dr. Haweis,
if he had been so unfortunate as to enter into a simoniacal
contract for the living of AU-Samts, Aldwinckle !

Through the last volume of this work, the author em-
braces every opportunity of expatiating on the Christian
zeal oithe London Blissionary Society^ and pronounces that
society to be " certainly of God." We cannot help being
of a different opinion. The Doctor and his associates may
each be actuated by a disinterested desire to carry the light
of the glorious gospel into the regions of the shadow of
death ; but it would not be easy to persuade us that God is
the author of confusion^ or that the doctrines of Christianity
will be successfully preached among the heathen by men,
not only running unsent, but differing so widely in opinion
as Calvinists and Arminians, Episcopalians and Presbyte-
rians, Psedo-baptists and Anti-psedo-baptists !

In vain may the society direct its Missionaries to abstain

414 Review of ffaweis* Church History »

from controversy, and preach nothing to the heathen but the
essential doctrines and duties of the gospel. The Mi^ion-
aries are not agreed among themselves what doctrin,es and
duties are essential. One thinks the distinguishing tekets of
Calvinism the most essential parts of gospel truth ; another
discovers in those tenets, a series of the most shocking blas-
phemies ; whilst a third, admitting their truth, sees no pro-
priety of inculcating them on the minds of the people. One
Missionary discovers in the New-Testament, that the in-
fant children of believing parents should be admitted into
the church by the sacrament of baptism ; whilst another is
persuaded, that no person is a subject of Christian baptism,
who does not actually believe the gospel. The indepen-
dent, considering the rights of Christians as common, feels
himself bound to " stand fast in the liberty with which
Christ hath made him free ;" but the Episcopalian and Pres-
byterian believe that a ministry, with the poiver of the AeySj
or the exclusive right of administering the sacraments, is
the ordinance of Christ, to which the multitude of believers
are bound to pay obedience ; whilst they differ exceedingly as
to the constitution of the church, and the channel through
which the power of the keys must be derived. Among such
heterogeneous missionaries, preaching the gospel to the
same people, controversies seem to be inevitable ; and their
labours, instead of enlightening the heathen, will only in-
crease their prejudices against the faith, whenever it shall be
carried to them in a more regular manner.

In a \4r0rd, the Missionary Society, like this history of
the church, can do no good, and may be productive of much
evil. With this conviction on our minds, we dare not re-
commend either the one or the other to the public favour ;
but we readily admit, that to preach the gospel among the
heathen is the duty of the church, and that an ecclesiastical
history, really impartial and authenticated by proper refer-
ences to original authorities, is a desideratum in Engliab
literature.

INDEX.

Ai

Page.
lBEL's sacrifice— why accepted 32

Abraham — called to be the father of the chUrch of the Hebrews 27

' trial of his faith, 39

Acts of the Apostles quoted — for the sense of s'rt ro ctvlo 193

Aerius — the heretic — the first opposer of Episcopacy 208

Ananias — a disciple — how employed to baptize Paul 123

Anderson of Dunbarton — followed by Dr. Campbell 107, 130

' again quoted, 137, 144

— — — ■ agrees with the church of Rome 152

Angels of the seven churches of Asia 153

< supposed by Dr. Campbell to be moderators 153, 157

— . proved to be .bishops 154

Anti-Jacobin Review quoted 114, 120, 133, 192

Apostles of Christ — when and how commissioned 9, 95, 97

i.r set Jirst in the church 98

■ in what their extraordinary character consisted 146

. reasons for their not having successors consi-

dered 145, 152

■ ■ when the title was laid aside 149

...I how their Episcopal office has been continued 150

all modelled the church on the same plan 160

Articles XXIII. and XXXVI. of the church of England considered 129
Baptism, one of the terms or conditions of salvation 119
• • administration of it — an essential part of the apostolic com-
mission 146
Bellarmine — Cardinal — denied that the apostles had successors 152
Beza — quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 250
Bingham — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 157

his authority for ^a^oixtcc being used for a diocese 234

Bishops— how successors of the Apostles 100

— — — college of—in Scotland were duly consecrated, 291

— soon became diocesan 297

Bishops in Scotland— how elected 298

416 INDEX.

Bishops, priests and deacons, expressly distinguished by the church.

of England Page 131

Blondel quoted 162

— acknowledges Polycarp's Episcopal character 166

his Apology for the Opinion of Jerome 220

how the conclusion of that apology was suppressed 251

Book of consecration, &c. of the church of England quoted 130

Boucher, Rev. Jonathan, quoted on the American episcopate 299, 300
Bow, in the cloud, a token of God's covenant 37

Brett, Dr. his Divine Right of Episcopacy quoted 131

Burn's Ecclesiastical Laiu quoted 234

Butler's A7ialogy, &c. quoted , • 84

Cain's sacrifice — why rejected 33

Calvin, quoted on Timothy's ordination , 140

" quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 249

Campbell, Dr. — his lectures on ecclesiastical history 83, 335

"■ ■ for what purpose these lectures were published 338

,— __ his opinion of church government 85

— — and of the difficulty of ascertaining the form of it 86

his severity against priestly pride 105

'■ • his lectures said to be prepared by himself for the

press , 106

.- his Dissertation on Miracles quoted . ,.; . ibid

■ " his account of the plan and purpose of his lectures 108
— his nmisrepresentation of the church of England 116, 129

' his reference to the test as a coarse implement 117

— — ' his opinion respecting the terms of the gospel cove-
nant 119

■■ his account of Philip the deacon . ^ 121

■ his popular claim receives no countenance from the

conversion of Cornelius 123

his account of the office of evangelists 144

-r^ , __ his description of the apostolic character 145, 146, 148,

149, 150

his account of the angels of the seven churches 153

his opinion of the testimony oi- the fathers 161

' ■ his misrepresentation of Clemens Romanus 162, 165

*— his objections to the epistles of Ignatius 160, 173

■ ■ his description of parochial Episcopacy 183, 184, 188

his account of church unity 195, 196

— ^ _— . his Translation of the Gospels quoted 196

• ' — ■ his parochial Episcopacy incompatible with that of

Jerusalem 2Q0

his opinion with respect to the pov/er of ordination 204'

INDEX. m

Campbell, Dr.-7-hIs misrepresentation of Hilary the deacon page 219
■■■■ -^ ■ his account of Jerome's Alexandrian custom 221, 222
■ his opinion respecting the rise of Episcopal superi-
ority 231

— — I ■ ■ his distinction between parochial and diocesan Epis-

copacy - „ _ 235

' his reflection on the Scotch Episcopalians 267, 268

his opinion of ordination, as an appointment to a

particular charge ' 268, 269, 271

— — — — his attack on the orders of the Scotch Episcoplal

church " 275, 278

he allows the nonjurors to have a sort of presbyte-

rian ordination 302

his absurd reasoning on that subject 303, 305

his argumentum ad fjoinhmtn retorted on himself 407, 410

his character and disposition ^36

• — ■ his account of Gibbon's History, &c. 339

Chalcedon — general council — referred to by Dr. Campbell 280

■ ■ ■ the purpose for which it was held 2S1

Charisma — or gift — in Timothy — what ? 273

Charity — truly Christian, described 334

Cherubim — mystical figures 30

Christianity — to be embraced as represented in scripture 27

— — the accomplishment of God's eternal purpose 28

Church — Essay on it by Jones, quoted 11, 101

mistakes with regard to it 10, 20, 109

how represented in scripture . 21, 22, 328 — 330

particular persons set apart for its service 93

■ its form of government suiBcienily ascertained 104
Claim of right — set up at the revolution 134, 265
Clemens Romanus — his first epistle to the Corinthians quoted 162
his allusion to the Jewish, in describing the Chris-
tian ministry 162

Clement of Alexandria misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 181

— ^ ■ ■ ■■ — quoted in favour of Episcopacy 182

Clerc, Mr. Le — quoted for and against Episcopacy 251 , 252

his argument against it — dangerous to Christianity 252, 254

Clergy and laity — the distinction opposed by Dr. Campbell 105

College of bishops in Scotland — duly consecrated 291, 292

CoUuthus, a presbyter, censured for pretending to ordain 203

Congregation used instead of church 130

Congregational authority supported by Dr. Campbell 311

— — — — — not supported by St. Faiil 114

Cornelius — his conversion 121

Cumberland, Richard — quoted 62

Cyprian— misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 113, 197, 210, 211

53

418 INDEX.

Cyprian—describts admirably the unity of the Episcopate pag^ 19*

>«— _ — supports the authority of bishops 211 — 216

— — his account of the Episcopal college 274

Daubeny, Rev. Charles — his just account of sacrifice 49

.«_-. — his Guide to the Church quoted 94

. -- his Preliminary Discourse quoted 184

.^ the Appendix of his Guide to the Church quoted 226

, — — his Eight Discourses quoted 313

', , .. his opinion of such nonjurors as Dodwell

ar.d Hicks, Leslie and Law 314

Deacons — set thirdly in the church 99

Diocesan Episcopacy of Scotland 297

Disciples — seventy — how employed 95

Divine right — claimed by Presbyterians as well as Episcopalians 137

Divisions among Christians hurtful to Christianity 10

Dodwell unfairly attacked by Dr. Campbell 306, 311, 323

Dodwellians — an epithet used by Anderson and Dr. Campbell 311

Economy of grace — not to be altered 16

Ellis, Dr. — ^his Kncnuledge of Divine Things, &c. recommended 60

England, church of — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 116, 129

- her ordination offices quoted 285

Inqmrj into the Constitution, iSfc. of the Frimitive Church 183

_; ^ followed by Dr. Campbell 184, 193

JEnthusiasm— the folly and danger of it 20

Enthusiasts boast of the assurance of faith 17

Episcopacy — origin of it not founded on names, but things 135

.m , primitive — how described by Dr. Campbell 230

was never a new thing in the church 241, 242

■ the only form of church government for fifteen hundred

years 261

abolished by the parliament of Scotland in 1689 265

Episcopal reformed church of Scotland misrepresented by Dr. Camp-
bell 135

— — govemmd-nt of the church of Scotland agreeable to the

word of God 135

Episcopal superiority — how accounted for by Dr. Campbell 236, 239

Episcopal character — how exposed to persecution 257

Episcopal succession — regularity of it easily proved 245

.^ , — no reason to believe that it has failed 245, 247

how carried on in England 262

.^ ..., ., . how transmitted to Scotland 263

how continued in Scotland 266

Episcopalians of Scotland — not separatists from the church 38

loyal subjects 317, 321

— — — -• why separated from the establisliTnent 321

Episcopate— one— described by Cyprian 275

INDEX.

419

page 144

202

225.

71

73
74

his strange account of Cyprian
his opinion of primitive bishops
highly applauded by Dr. Campbell

>£vangeiists — Timothy and Titus considered as such
Eusebius quoted

Eutychius— Patriarch of Alexandria, referred to by Dr. Campbell
Faith — once delivered to the saints, to be contended for
.. delivered in zfortn of sound 'words

built on a firm and solid foundation

Fathers — their testimony appealed to 161, 256

Firmilian — his letter to Cyprian considered 209

First born — how types of Christ, under the patriarchial economy 94

Forbes — Lord President, quoted 29, 31

Free-thinkers — boast of superior wisdom 15

^■M their wild and foolish opinions 68

Gibbon — the historian — coincidence between him and Dr. Campbell 201

218

230

338

201

230

313

339

196

217

334

126, 218

126

151

282, 284

307

289

oj5

42

41

ibid

187, 188

141

221

222, 226, 228

226—228

Gregory Nyssen quoted by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon
Heretics-— ancient — could show no regular succession of bishops
Hicks, Dr. — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell
Hierarchy opposed by Gibbon and Dr. Campbell
High-church applied by Dr. Campbell to Cyprian
■■ designed as a contemptuous epithet

.. properly described by bishop Horsely

Hillary the deacon, quoted by Dr. Campbell

. I Jerome's opinion of him

- says expressly that Epaphroditus was an apostle

Hooker — his Ecclesiastical Polity quoted

Home, Bishop — his opinion of the Scotch Episcopalians

Horsely, Bishop— his opinion of the Scotch Episcopacy

— his charge to the clergy of St. David's quoted

Hosea — Bishop Horsely's translation quoted
Jacob's ladder ^

his name changed to Israel

James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem
Jerome — quoted on the succession of apostles
— quoted by Dr. Campbell

■ not hostile to Episcopacy
— ■' - quotations from him in favour of Episcopacy

his testimony not to be opposed to that of the earlier fathers 229

Jerusalem — church of— contained many thousands of believers 189 — 191
Jewish dispensation typical of the Christian 94

Ignatius — account of him as bishop of Antioch 167

his genuine epistles published by Usher and Vossius 168

— — vindication of these epistles 170 174

■ ■ his epistles clearly show the three distinct orders of bishops,
presbyters and deacons 175— 177

4.20 index/

Ignatius — what he means by ** one altar as but one bishop" . page 19p

Illuminati — modern — like the sadducees of old 18

Jones, Rev. William — his Essay on the Church quoted 11, 101

... ■ ■■■■ ' his account of schism 331 — 333

Irenseus quoted 28

" misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 178

quoted in favour of Episcopacy 179, 180

Isaac — the type or representative of the promised seed 40

Israel — twelve tribes of — their wonderful history 43

Justin Martyr's rise of the phrase ett* to otvla 192

Kingdom of Christ — how established 90

«.«. ' .' ■ its government not to be altered 90 — 92

— i-: — : n — — how it differs from the kingdoms of this world 92

Law, Rev. Mr. his arguments in support of the Episcopal succession 246

_ .. . ■ his letters to Bishop Hoadly 227

Layman's account of his faith and practice 76

Leslie, Rev. Charles, quoted 248

--=-^ '■ — r — . account of him by Bishop Home 314

Liberality of mind — how it ought to be shown 23, 24

Melchizedeck — blessed Abraham 38

Ministry — Christian must have a valid commission 77 — 79

Missionaries — their contempt of a regular mission 18

Monro, Dr. — his account of Blondel's apology " 220

Moses— law of — fulfilled 45

__— a schoolmaster unto Christ 47

— ■ predicted the coming of the Messiah ' 52, 53

Natural religion — what ? 58, 59

— folly of opposing it to revelation 60

- — ■■ — mistakes with respect to it 64, 65

Neocesarsea — diocese of— mentioned by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon 201

New philosophy— effects of it' 15

Noah — warned of God, prepared the ark 35

'<•'■' -. God's covenant established with him 36

Nonjurors — Scotch — misrepresented 135

-« ^ their disaffection accounted for 317

■ - Scotch Episcopaliaiis Qught not to be branded

■ as sucii ' 317

Norwich — late bishop of, quoted , 21, 70, 7^

Old paths— how to be asked for *7, 102

Old Testament not contrary to the New " 53 — 55

Ordination by Presbyters prohibited 205, 207

not an appointment to a particular charge 272

— ^ offices of the church of England 285

— — adopted by the Scotch Episcopal church 286'

Original Draught of the Primitive Church quoted 198

Paley, Archdeacon, quoted 58

INDEX. 421

Parish—how applied in the primitive church page 186

parochial Episcopacy described by Dr. Campbell * 183 — 185

T"- ' ■— — — — ■ ' ' its supposed resemblance to some highland

parishes in Scotland 199

Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon quoted 186

Philip, the deacon — his baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch 121

Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna — misinterpreted by Dr. Campbell 166

Popery and presbytery — not unlike in many things 152

Potter, Archbishop — distinguishes between the ordination of minis-
ters, and their appointment to a charge 285
Predecessors — ecclesiastical — how considered by the Scotch Episco-
palians 136
Prelacy applied by Dr. Campbell to diocesan Episcopacy 235
Presbyters or elders set secondarily in the church 98
Presbytery — how employed in ordaining Timothy 140

■ change of it into diocesan Episcopacy impossible 238

this proved by Dr. Jeremy Taylor 242 — 244

Prideaux, Dr. — quoted on the spiritual power of bishops 288

Priesthood — Christian 76, 254

orders of it under the gospel 104 v

Prophecy, language of — from the beginning of the world '51

Reason — not to be opposed to revelation 60 — 62, 66

Reformation of religion — what— and how to be carried on 69

■ " ■-—•!> '—■ — did not make a new church 262

Reformers— foreign — not hostile to Episcopacy * 248

Religion — importance of it 9

•■ patriarchal, Jewish and Christian, all point to the same object 55

Restoration of Charles II. and of Episcopacy 263

Revelation the only source of religious knowledge 63 — &7

Revolutions not eifected without some noise 241

Rome, church ofr^retained the Episcopal succession 261

Sacrifice — a divine institution 32, 48

of Cain and Abel 32

" ■ ■■ carefully observed by the primitive worshippers 34

Sage, Bishop — his Principles of the Cyprianic Age 216

Schism — Dr. Campbell's opinion of it 323

true account of it 330

accurately described by Mr. Jones ool — 333

Scotch Episcopal church vindicated 259, 317, 321
believes agreeably to the 21st article of the

church of England 281

its bishops ejected at the revolution, conti-

nued real bishops 266

.. and had people under their spivitoal care 287, 290

uses the ordination offices of the church of

England 286

432 INDEX.

Scotch Episcopalians— -loyal subjects page 311?^, 320

■ why they separate from the establishment 321

Scotland — moral and religious state of it 13 — 1$

Seabury, Bishop — consecrated in Scotland 301

'■ assisted at the consecration of Dr. Qagget of Ma-

ryland ibid

Seeker, Archbishop — his opinion of the Episcopal succession in Scot-
land 298
Sectaries— described by Dr. Campbell 322
Separation — in some cases necessary 9
Sharp, Archbishop, and others consecrated at London in 1661 264
Sherlock, Bishop, quoted 63, 65, 117
Sincerity — how far to be depended on 326
Skinner, Rev. John — his ecclesiastical history quoted 249, 263, 297
Solemn league and covenant — for the abolition of Episcopacy 263
Stewards of the mysteries of God — how appointed 79 — 81
—• — ■ mistakes with regard to their ap-
pointment I 82
'Taylor, Bishop — on the antiquity of Episcopacy 242, 244

, — — on ordination 284

Tertullian quoted and misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 128, 157', 180
— — — y— translated by Bingham, whom Dr. Campbell quotes unfairly 157

. his sentiments fairly stated 158, 160, 202, 209

Test — referred to by Dr. Campbell, as a coarse implement 117

Testimony of the fathers — how far to be depended on 161

■ ■ fairly appealed to 256

Theodoret quoted 142

Timothy — charge given to him as bishop of the church in Ephesus 139

his ordination misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 140

Timothy and Titus — how considered as evangelists 144

Titus left in Crete with Episcopal authority 142

Vincentius Lirinensis quoted 344

Wake, Archbishop— ^his translation of Ignatius' epistles quoted 168

his vindication of these epistles 177

Wall, Mr. — author of J?tfant Baptism, quoted 324

Way of salvation — no new discovery 56

Westminster — Confession of Faith, quoted by Dr. Campbell 132

Zacharias— how inspired at the birth of John the baptist 39

THE END.

BOOKS

printed and sold by T, ^ J. SWORDS, No. 160 Pearl-Street,

NeW'Tork.

1. Dissertations on the Prophecies which have

remarkably been fulfilled, and at this Time are fulfilling in the
World. By Thomas Nexvton, D. D. late Lord Bishop of
Bristol.

2. A Companion for the Festivals and Fasts of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America.
Priiacipally selected and altered from Nekon^s Companion for
the Festivals and Fasts of the Church of England. By John
Hemy Hobart^AM, an Assistant Minister of Trinity Church,
Nevv-York. To which are added, Pastoral Advice to Young
Persons before and after Confirmation, by a Minister of the
Church of England ; and an Exhortation to Family Prayer,
by Bishop Gibson ; with Forms of Devotion.

3. A Guide to the Church, in several Discourses:

To which are added, two Postscripts : the first to those
Members of the Church who occasionally frequent other
Places of Public Worship ; the second to the Clergy. Ad-
dressed to William Wilber force, Esq. M. P. By the Rev.
Charles Daubeny, L. L. B. a Presbyter of the Church of
England.

4. The Catechism of the Protestant Episcopal

Church in the United States of America. To which is an-
nexed, a Catechism, designed as an Explanation and En-
largement of the Church Catechism : Recommended by the
Bishop and Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the
State of New- York. The third Edition.

5. An Exposition of the Book of Common Prayer,

and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and
Ceremonies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States of America. By the Rev. Andrew Fowler, A. M.
Rector of St. Bartholomew's Parish, South- Carolina. The
second Edition, with Additions and Improvements.

6. A Collection of the Essays on the Subject of

Episcopacy, which originally appeared in the Albany Centi-
nel, and which are ascribed principally to the Rev. Dr. Limi,
the Rev. Mr. Beaslei^, and Thomas T, Hoxv, Esq. With ad-
ditional Notes and Remarks.

7. An Apology for Apostolic Order and its Ad-
vocates, occasioned by the Strictui'es and Denunciations of
the Christian's Magazine. In a Series of Letters, addressed
to the Rev. John M. Mason, D. D. the Editor of that Work.
By the Rev. John Henry Hoharl, an Assistant Minister oi"
Trinity Church. Judg-e righteons judgment, John vii. 24.

Books printed and sold hi) T. £s? J. Sw^ords,

8. Two Letters to the Editor of the Christianas

Magazine. By a Churchman, Be calm in arguing^ for
fierceness makes error a faulty and truth discourtesy. Herbert.
•^—Refellere sine pertinacia, et refelli sine iracundia^ pariti
sumus» Cicero.

9. An Attempt to familiarize the Church Cate-
chism. For the Use of Schools and Families. By Mrs.
Trimmer, First American, from the third London Edition.

10. An Abridgement of Scripture History; con-
sisting of Lessons selected from the Old Testament. For
the Use of Schools and Families. By Mrs, Trimmer,

IL The Christian Institutes; or, the sincere Word

of God. Being a plain and impartial Account of the whole
Faith and Duty of a Christian* Collected out of the Writ-
ings of the Old and New Testament : digested under proper
Heads, and delivered in the Words of Scripture. By the
Right Reverend Father in God Francis^ late Lord Bishop of
Chester. The first American^ from the hvelfih London Edi-
tion,

12. An Apology for the Bible, in a Series of Let-
ters, addressed to Thomas Paine^ Author of a Book entitled^
The Age of Reason, Part the Second, being an Investigation
of True and of Fabulous Theology. By R, Watson^ D. D.
F. R. S. Lord Bishop of Landaff, and Regius Professor of
Divinity in the. University of Cambridge. ^

13. Discourses on several important Subjects. By

the late Right Rev. Samuel Seahury^ D. D. Bishop of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of Connecticut and
Rhode-Island. Published from Manuscripts prepared by the
Author for the Press.

14. The Life of Samuel Johnson, D. D. the first

President of King's College, in New- York. Containing
many interesting Anecdotes ; a general View of the State of
Religion and Learning in Connecticut during the former Part
of the last Century; and an Account of the Institution and
Rise of Yale College, Connecticut ; and of King's (now Co-
lumbia) College, New- York. By Thomas Bradbury Chand-
ler^ D. D. formerly Rector of St. John's Church, Elizabeth-
Town, New- Jersey. To which is added, an Appendix, con-
taining man}^ original Letters, never before published, from
Bishop Berkeley, Archbishop Seeker, Bishop Lowtb, and
others, to Dr. Johnson.

15. The Life and Posthumous Writinr{s of Wil-

iiam Cowper, Esq. widi an Introductory Letter to the Right
Honourable Ear] Cowper. By IVilliam HayleVy Esq.

Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process.
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide
Treatment Date: August 2005

PreservationTechnologies

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive
Cranberry Township. PA 16066
(724) 779-21 1 1

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

0 014 235 380 5

i,;ijjjr];!5

iiliiiiipy

i

ill

Kiiii

lllltllll*'

(Uilll'nIMliliil

I UMilli! Iiti I I'il i 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 i III 1 1 111 III III