Page images

advocate of Establishments will find it difficult to repel, even though the Essays themselves should pass for mere verbiage, or a sort of opening speech, made only for the purpose of introducing that evidence. But let it be remembered, what has been well observed by a critic in reference to the former Edition, that “nothing short of an inductive reply will meet the real emergency of the case.” It is easy for any one to reply to a few points upon any question whatever, and to leave the main matters in dispute altogether unanswered.

Not that we expect to convince any one by the weight of these authorities. We are only fulfilling the Scripture injunction on our part, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. But if men believe not Moses and the prophets, that is, the simple word of God, neither will they be persuaded, though a thousand witnesses should rise from the dead. The truth is, that with most persons the quarrel is not in the head, but in the heart; nor have we a doubt, (indeed, we know it for a certainty,) there are multitudes, who think with us on the main matter in debate, if they could only be prevailed upon to act with us also; that is, to come forth without the camp, bearing His reproach. But it is even now as it was in time past-many believed on him, nevertheless they did not confess him, because they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. This, namely, the dread of singularity, coupled with considerations of interest, is, we are verily persuaded, the real reason why people do not, or rather will not, sometimes see even a self-evident proposition. Interest blinds

their eyes to all inconvenient truths; and they cannot believe a system to be wrong, which they find to be so exceedingly beneficial. But let such be assured, that, by so doing, they lose their reward, even in this life. For my own part, I can truly affirm, that I never knew what real happiness was, till I took upon me, in some small measure, the reproach of Christ; and I can add, with a like sincerity, that I have scarcely known what disquietude was ever since ; even though my mind has been much occupied in what may be called “controverted" subjects; and though I have been myself the object of some not very temperate attacks, and that from quarters from which I least expected them.

But to return to the more immediate subject of these Essays. The attention of the reader is particularly directed to the testimony of Hooker, as illustrated by Neal, on the strict analogy that subsists between the supremacy of the Pope, and the supremacy of the Crown-a testimony which, it is hoped, will be sufficient to silence the cavils of some churchmen at least, and to protect us from the charge of singularity in identifying the latter kind of supremacy with the Second Beast, as the former confessedly belongs to the First. It may be doubted, indeed, whether the whole ceremony of the coronation of the kings of England be not, in itself, a most antichristian practice; and as complete an exemplification, as ever was exhibited at Rome itself, of that scripture in its most literal acceptation, which speaking of the man of sin, says: That he opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or “ reverend,” (literally,

"a thing to be, or, that is, revered," " sebasma'') that is to say-
above both prophet or preacher, and priest. For as they called
them gods, to whom the word of the Lord came, and the scrip-
ture cannot be broken ; so a priest, as every one knows, is a
thing called reverend. The passage in question proceeds : “So
that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God,” that is upon a
throne, or chair of state, elevated on a stage erected for that
purpose, within the very walls of the house of God itself—"shew-
ing” or exhibiting himself “ that he is God," and being “recog-
nized” as such—homage being done him, as the dispenser of all
power, spiritual as well as temporal, even to the power of confer-
ring a right to administer both the Word and the Sacraments. This
power, it is well known, not even the Pope claims in his own
right, as the kings of England do; but as delegated to him,
however preposterous the pretence, by Christ himself through
_St. Peter. In this particular, therefore, the kings of England
have exceeded even the Pope himself. They have arrogated to
themselves not only the temporal sword, which of right belongs
to them, but the spiritual one also, which is the prerogative of
God only. They have assumed to themselves, as it was expressed
at the coronation of King Charles the First, not only “ Paul's
doctrine, but Peter's key of discipline,” and that without the
apology even of an Apostolical succession. If any one wishes
to be further satisfied on this most interesting subject, let him
consult, if he please, a curious account of the coronation of King
Edward the Sixth, among the Illustrations, which may be

considered as the grand original of all such superstitious cereThe lateste which comestitate themfovereign Med the Church, begins that," albeid the King Majesty jodly rightfully irgought to be the Supreme Head of the Church of

land" 26. Hen. Vill. col. - Iwendused ask why

Wky Landouched to be?

An what authority is that a fertes ? & Why, keasliar to the king of lugland alone, ámmg all the Christian Sovereigner in the world? . a like Sufrencacy exists mix no other Christian Limetty hoheveu sic the adjoining kegion of Scotland, The Starake

monies in this Protestant country; and was conducted by
Cranmer himself, albeit he had taken the oath of canonical
obedience to the Pope in the preceeding reign. On this subject,
and with this example before us, we would fain ask his present
successor in the See of Canterbury, how far such obligations
are binding, either on subject, or sovereign?

There is another point, relating to the present inquiry, to
which we are anxious to invite a special attention. It has been
announced, with sufficient confidence, it must be confessed, on
the part of those who have made the announcement, that “the
Church of England is the only church in this realm, that has a
right to be quite sure, that she has the Lord's body to give to
his people.” Now if there be any truth in the following inter-
pretation, and it is presumed there is a great deal, it will ap-
pear, on the contrary, that the Church of England is the only
church in this realm, that has a right to be quite sure that she
has not the Lord's body to give to his people ; for not only are
His people commanded to come out of her, and that with a voice
from heaven; but it is a thing utterly impossible, that the same
ceremony can represent at once both the body of Christ, and a
mark of the beast. That we do not stand alone in this opinion
either, singular and even extravagant as it may seem in the
eyes of certain parties, will appear from the testimony of no less
a person than John Knox himself ; who not only denounces the
Sacraments, as administered in the Church of England, “ with
crossings and kneelings annexed," as specific marks of the beast,

but does it (in language which, for its decisive tone, we should be proceeds to say that this trage of the Church was toe you tref os extink all orror, heretie thereumnities pretty labow to be accessed orech men as Hecery VII, & in Eick-kegeuh Crom well.!! – and the Shahedegthe six

articles is widence of the excellent manner in Which Keurry' Dutiev, ad Head of the Church, bere dischargedé. 6.8.18.)

[ocr errors]

afraid to adopt at this day perhaps) with this addition moreover, that he calls them “diabolical inventions, any one jot of which (says he) will I never counsel any man to use.” The whole passage, which will be found in the Illustrations of Essay First, is well worth the perusal of all, especially of all Presbyterians; and will serve to screen us from a like charge of singularity, we should hope, on the part of the sister establishment, in respect of our interpretation of these marks. If we err on either of these two most important points of the present development, that is to say, either on the Supremacy, or on the Sacraments, 80 called, it is our satisfaction at least, that we err in company with Hooker and Knox; and with these preliminary observations, we take leave, for the present, of both those establishments, to which these two mighty champions respectively belonged.

Newcastle on Tyne,

August, 1838.

« PreviousContinue »