ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE TWENTY-FIRST.

NOTE A.

TRUE DOCTRINE-THE TRUE SUCCESSION.

THAT the true doctrine is the true mark of a pure and safe church of Christ, we will further prove by some additional authorities:

"This hath ever been reckoned a most certain ground of principle in religion, that that church which maintained without error the faith of Christ, which holdeth the true doctrine of the Gospel in matters necessary to salvation, and preacheth the same, which retaineth the lawful use of those sacraments only which Christ hath appointed, and which appointeth vice to be punished, and virtue to be maintained, notwithstanding in some other respects, and in some points, it have many blemishes, imperfections, nay, divers and sundry errors, is yet to be acknowledged for the Mother of the Faithful, the House of God, the Ark of Noah, the Pillar of Truth, and the Spouse of Christ. From which church whosoever doth separate himself, he is to be reckoned a schismatic or an heretic."-Archbp. Bancroft's Serm. at Paul's Cross.

"To this trial one will stand," says Bp. Bull, in his Vindication of the Church of England, "let that church that most earnestly presseth this real piety, carry the bell, and be acknowledged for the best church.”—Oxf. edn. p. 6.

Bishop Heber, in his Life of Taylor, (Taylor's Wks. vol. i. p. 183,) remarks, "In the first of these supposed consequences, Taylor assumes that "the government of the church is in immediate order to the good and benison of souls.' But this is plainly untrue, since for this great end nothing more is immediately necessary, (speaking always in subordination to the merits and sacrifices of Christ,) but the sincere word of God, as delivered in scripture, to enlighten and establish our faith, and the means of grace, which are afforded us in baptism and the Lord's supper. The government of the church is in immediate order to the faithful preaching of the truth and the decent and orderly ministration of the sacraments, but it is only through their means, and as a consequence of them, that it seeks the salvation of souls. It must rank, therefore, as Hooker wisely teaches, not among the points essential to salvation, but, 'those things that are accessory hereunto, those things that so belong to the way of salvation, as to alter them, is no otherwise to change that way than a path is changed by altering only the uppermost face thereof, which, be it laid with gravel, or set with grass, or paved with stones, remaineth still the same path.' Archbishop Whitgift himself speaks of the doctrine established in the churches of England, which is the main note of the churches.'" (Stype's Whitgift, i. 248, in Price's Hist. Prot. Nonconf. vol. i. p. 333.)

Dr. Barrow, on the Unity of the Church, shows at length, that departure from the faith, ipso facto, cuts off from the Catholic church. (Wks. vol. i. p. 763.) See the testimonies of the English martyrs, Philpot, Bradford, in Fox and Willet, p. 83, Syn. Pap. See the testimonies of Huss, Barnard, Lambert, the forged Clementine Epistle, Pope Felix, and Petrum Antioch. Symmachus Decret. p. i. Barlaam, lib. de princep. c. xiii. &c. in

NOTES TO LECTURE XXI.

549

Dr. Willet on Syn. Pap. p. 167, 168, and others again at p. 83, where there are many. For this article, among others, Huss died, that the Pope was not a true successor of, but contrary in doctrine and life to, the apostles. (Ibid.)

"When the Apostles were removed, their writings were put in their place. The New Testament succeeded to the Apostolic administration." (Dr. Rice in Evang. Mag. vol. ix. p. 551.)

"The case," (ibid, p. 552,) he adds, "of ordinary ministers of the gospel is very different. They bring no new terms, they reveal no truths unknown before, they make no new discoveries in religion. But their simple business as preachers is, to assist their fellow-men in understanding the terms of salvation, and to persuade all men to embrace them as they are revealed in the gospel.-The whole authority is lodged in the gospel as a revelation of the will of God; and not an atom of it is in man.'

He then goes on to exhibit in contrast the presbyterian and the prelatic doctrine.

Reviewer.-"Having

been appointed a teacher in the church of Christ, I do declare unto you that such and such are the doctrines of Christ, as revealed in the Bible. Believe them, not because of my word, but because they are the doctrines of Christ. It is this which gives them their whole authority to bind your consciences, and regulate your faith. The authority, I repeat, is not in the man, but in the word. I speak as unto wise men-search the scriptures, and judge ye what I say."

Bishop.-"I, the authorized agent of heaven, the substitute for the person of Christ on earth, do declare that the will of God is so and so; and by the authority vested in me, I pledge the God of truth to fulfil these promises of his word. This is a peculiar power vested in me, and in all my brethren, with which no other men on the earth are clothed. If, therefore, you would escape perdition, and cherish an authorized hope of heaven, receive the truth as I deliver it to you."

"The unity of the church, then, let all bishops know, consists essentially in that which constitutes her identity, UNITY OF DOCTRINE IN MATTERS NECESSARY TO SALVATION." (Dr. Rice in Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 529.) After giving a short summary of fundamental doctrines, he adds, (ibid p. 530,) "We believe that all who, with the whole heart, receive these doctrines, are united to Christ, and belong to that one body, of which he is the Head and King; that they are bound to recognize each other as brethren, and hold communion as disciples of a common Lord; and that any who reject from the fellowship of saints, those who receive and live by these truths, are schismatical and contentious, laying a stress on outward things, which Jesus Christ has not laid, and thus deeply injuring the true interests of the Church which he has purchased with his blood. Here are the principles on which we are willing to hold communion with Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Congregationalists, or christians of any outward form whatever."

That truth of doctrine is the only sure and infallible mark of the church of Christ, see asserted also by Dr. Freeman, in Notes of the Ch. Ex'd. and Refuted, pp. 69, 71, 75; Dr. Payne, in Notes of Ch. pp. 150, 155, 156; Dr. Claggett do. pp. 170, 180, 190, 194; Bishop Fowler in do. pp. 111, 121; Dr. Resbury in do. p. 283; Dr. Scott in do. pp. 198, 209; Bishop Williams in do. pp. 103, 121; Bishop Sherlock pp. 2, 6, 10, 16, 29, 34, 35, 40, 41, 44; Bishop Patrick p. 89. See authorities quoted in Willet Syn. Pap. p. 86; Stillingfleet's Irenic. pp. 114, 4to, ed. 2nd, 1662; Storr and Flatt's Bibl. Theol. p. 501, sect. cvi.; De Moor Comment in Marckii, vol. vi. sect. ii. p. 54; Turretini Opera, tom. iii. p. 121, and tom. iv. De Secessione, p. 316; Rutherford's Due Right of Presb. p. 286; Limborch's Body of Div. B, in ch. iv. vol. ii. p. 946.

CONCLUSION.

We have now brought this examination of the prelatic doctrine of apostolical succession to a close. We have endeavored fairly, fully, frequently, and in the language of many of its most received advocates, to state the doctrine in question, with the several claims and consequences inseparable from it. To many we may have appeared needlessly circumstantial and prolix. But the developments which are daily made of the prevalence of these views, even among the laity, and of their open avowal and defence by a numerous and increasing body of the clergy, will, we believe, fully justify the extended investigation which has been made of this important subject. As it is, we have left many points unnoticed, to which our attention has been directed, and many materials untouched, with which our argument might have been greatly enlarged in its dimensions.

For all the reasons which have been brought forward in the course of this discussion, the conclusion of the whole matter is, that the assumed exclusive prerogatives, to which the prelacy lays claim, upon the strength of its apostolical succession, are baseless, without any honest credentials whatever, and altogether unworthy of our regard.1

1) "We have seen," says the Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel, in his First Five Centuries of the Church, (or, the Early Fathers no Safe Guides, Lond. 1839, p. 31,) "that the unscriptural exaltation of the clergy laid the foundation for all the other abuses which crept into the church; almost all the false doctrines and senseless ceremonies, which then disfigured it, being introduced by them."

"We have read and heard a great deal," says Dr. Rice, (Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 534,) "about

the virtue of what is called apostolical succession. For the life of us, we never could get down to the meaning of this thing; but we are perfectly sure, that it has no efficacy in this most important part of a minister's office. Undeniable facts afford most decisive evidence, that there is no stream of wisdom or knowledge running through the succession, and pouring out its rills, through episcopal fingers, into those on whom bishops lay their hands;" nor is this denied to any because he was not episcopally ordained.

This doctrine, upon which, as a foundation, the whole system of the prelacy rests, has been found utterly wanting, when weighed in any one of the balances provided. The tests laid down by the authority of its advocates, can be met in reference to no one link in the entire chain of this boasted succession, from St. Peter to the present time. Its historic evidences are found to be in no better preservation, nor of any greater strength, than the relics of its mouldering abbeys, whose name, date, and origin, have sunk beneath their accumulated ruins. This doctrine, which, like a proud, triumphal arch, was to span the earth and climb the heavens, depends for its support upon the undoubted certainty of myriad millions of probabilities, any one of which might fail, and by the failure of which, its instantaneous demolition was inevitable.

These prelatical successors sue in the court of law, for the entire and exclusive possession of a divine inheritance, by a grant of primogeniture, and in defeasance of all other claims. But when we demand the exhibition of their patent and charter, that we may there see the exact boundaries of their grant;the charter itself is wanting; the boundaries cannot possibly be traced in any extant record; nor can it be even shown that the estate itself has been in perpetual possession of this boasted ancestry.

We ask for the signs of an apostle, the title, the offices, the gifts, the duties; but these successors have them not. There is in fact, nothing characteristic of an apostle, as such, to be found about either them, or their office, except the assumption of an authority which is supported only by empty claims. They are apostles, and apostolical, by virtue of a descent in which all apostolic qualifications are utterly lost; and "they are canonically appointed to govern," while in the appointment of many of them, every canon, human and divine, has been notoriously broken. And this succession secures the power of transmitting divine virtues, and the plenitude of grace, though the giver may have been an atheist, a murderer, and every thing that was selfish, carnal, and devilish; and although the receiver may have waxed worse and worse, in imitation of his apostolic predecesMore palpable, and therefore less preposterous, is the system of the Calmuck Tartars, whose successive priests drink,

sors.

Where, in the New Testament, is any thing to warrant such opinions as these? In the rule given us by our blessed Saviour, form is nothing, truth is every thing; it is by

the truth we are sanctified; by the truth we are made free; by the word of God we are begotten to a lively hope."