IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) % ,v-.^ ^ % %^ V. % % 1.0 ^1^ R^ 2.2 us I.I I "^ IIM 1.8 iys iJA IIIIIL6 6" - Photograpb€ Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 |\ iV '^ '^\ ^^'^ ^A "^v CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D D D Coloured CGvers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde at/on pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure B^ank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppidmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilieur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vuc bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmago sont indiqu^s ci-desiious. I I Coloured pages/ / D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pagos restaur^es et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor^es, tachet^es ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ddtach^es Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Quaiitd in^gaie de I'impression Includes «Mpplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item Is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X y 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 2tX 32X The copy filmed here hee been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grflce h la 0AnArosit6 de: La bibliothique "les Arwhives pubiiques du Candda The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in kudping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed oeginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —»> (meaning "CON- TI^UED"), or the symbol V (mv^aning "END"), whichever applies. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec ie plus grand soin, compte tenu &, la condition et de la nettetA de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires origlnaux dent la couverture en papier est imprimie sont filmAs en commenpant par Ie premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empr««inte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par Ie second plat, salon Ie cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimds en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie cas: Ie symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE ", Ie symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre f ilm^s d des taux de reduction diff fronts. Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est fiimA A partir de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre d'inages n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la rnithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 SI LETTER b TO THE liDITOR OF THE CHUIICH; IN ANSWER TO HIS REMARKS ON THE ..-■./^. HEV. THOMAS POWELL'S ISSAY ON APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. BY MATTHEW RICHEY, A. M. KINGSTON, J 843, X ^- PRELIMINARY CORRESPONDENCE, The subjoined prelmiinary correspondence affords a sufficient, and perhaps the most appropriate, explanation of the motives by which I am actuated in coming forward as the Rev. Mr. Powell's apologist ; and at the same time evinces the necessity imposed upon me of pub- Jishing my defence in the present form. „:, .. 1 ", -, Kingston, 22ndi Novemher, l8iZ. Reverend Sir, — I have read the articles that have appeared in the two last numbers of the Church, relating to the Rev. Mr. Powell's Essay on Apostolical Succession. I confess I am grieved at the unjustifiable acrimony and palpable violations of the laws of Christian charity by which they are -conspicuously marked ; and conceiving it to be my duty to submit some remarks to the public in vindication of the impugned honor of my friend, as well as of the cause with which his name has become so prominently connected, I am desirous of ascertaining whether you will permn me to do so in the pages of your Journal. • I am, Reverend Sir, Yours respectfully, MATTHEW RICHEY. The Rev. Dr. Bethune. Cobotirg, Novcmhcr 24th, 1843. Reverend Siu, — In the autumn of 18537, the Bishop of Toronto (then Arch- deacon of York) finind it necessary to animadvert upon certain proccedinrrs of the Kiric of Scotland, in which the Hon. Wtn. Morris bore a prominent share ; and Mr. Morris, as you may recollect, requested that [ would permit his reply to those animadversions to be inserted in " The Church." I declined this request and gave my reasons at some length for doing so ; reasons which, I beg to say, apply with at least equal force to the comments or explanations you propose to furnish in answer to a recent review of Mr. Powell's Work on " Apostolical Succession." Moreo'ver, I could not possibly pledge myself to the insertion of articles which I have not had the opportunity of reading. If, upon the publication of the remarks which you propose td make, I should discover that you have madd it apparent that Mr. Powell has, in any resj)cct, been misunderstood or mis'*epresentecl, I shall be happy, as an act of justice, to insert such explanation ; but I must necessarily exercise my own judgment as to the suc- cess, or the reverse, of the attempt which is made to vindicatci Mr. Powell. My impression, at present, is that his work is palpably, and 1 fear wilfully, a dishonest one, and that it evinces no very latent hostility and dislike to the Church of England. Where such feel- ings and principles are apparent, a reviewer is justified in using a little plain severity, although it may unfortunately expose him to the charge of acrimony and uncharitableness. I have the honor to be. Dear Sir, Very truly and ob'ly. yours, A. N. BETHUNE. The Rev. M. Richey. LETTEU. &f. Reverend Sir, — Cicero, in his admirable disquisition de Amicitia, propounds it as a fundamental axiom in the laws of amity, — '• never to require from a friend what he cannot grant vv^ithout a breach of his honor; and always to be ready to assist liim upon every occasion consistent with that principle. So long," ho continues, " as we shall act under the secure guard of this sacred barrier, it will not be sufficient merely to yield a ready coftipliance with his desires — wc ought to anticipate and pre- vent them." I cannot divest myself of the impression that I should be justly liable to the imputation of practically repudiating this noble sentiment, so perfectly accordant with the system of evangelical morality, and with the spontaneous feelings of every well-constituted mind, were I to remain silent under thn acri- monious attack you have made in your paper of the 10th and the 17th instant, upon a respectable minister of that branch of 'the Church of Christ to which I have the honour to belong j in which, for the ulterior purpose of neutralizing his influence as a writer, you most unwarrantably stigmatize his character as a Christian. That his celebrated Essay on Apostolical Succession should have occasioned palpitations of alarm in the ranks of the High Church party, and excited them to act vigorously on the defensive, no one who has glanced, however superficially, over its pages, can for a moment wonder : for whatever estimate may be formed of its literary merit, or of the range and accuracy of the research it evinces in the recondite lore of Patristic theology, there is one excellence which it unquestionably possesses in a very eminent degree ; — it presents an array of facts and reasonings completely destructive of the exclusive claims of Episcopacy, of which no higher qualification is required to appreciate the over- whelming force, than plain common sense. It is on that account peculiarly adapted for the purposes of popular con- viction, and has accordingly been widely cflectivc. Hence the many sallies of indignation, and volleys of sophistry and G abuse, wliioli Mr. Powell lias been doomed to encounter from those whose citadel he has had the temerity to assail. All this, wc confess, is perfectly natural, since even "Tho mopiri},' owl (Ioch to the moon complain Of Biuh us, waiid'riri^ near licr secret Ijower, Molusl her aiicit-iit solitary roit^n." Nor was it by any means to be expected that you. Sir, whose well known zeal for iIk^ succession would seem to indi- cate a full conviction that it constitutes the Alpha and Omega of Christianity, should, under such circumstances, remain neutral ; and just as little was I (llsapp(»inted that at your hands the author of the Essay should receive no mfvcy. liut surely even an opponent is entitled to somethinfjj likc^*Ms//ce. That unhallowed triumph which is achieved by a reckless endeavour to immolate character, is neither to be coveted nor envied. Such unworthy expedients have too often been the opprobrium of theological debate ; and you arc evidently unwilling they should become obsolete. Freely availing yourself of the " Weapons oi" Schism," as your friend, Mr. Stopford, not inapproj)rialely designates his performance, you are not content with representing Mr. Powell as a sciolist ; in that ,upcrcilious style in which you are universally allowed to excel, )'cu laboin- most strenuously to turn public odium upon him as a person devoid alike ' *" cliristian principle and common probity. If the opprobrious colours m which you dipped your i)encil when drawing his portrait are true to nature; if he is capable of the '• unseriptural devices" and practices "directly iniquitous;" of the "'unsciupulous employ- ment of downright mutilation and falsilication" — nay, more- over, of " imposture unparalleled perhaps in the annals of literary dishonesty and i)olitical legerdemain," which you attribute to him ; if, to complete the beautiful cliinax, you "make him speak as a knave!" only because he has "laboured very zealously lor that distinction " — then he is unworthy of an effort to defend him. Let meiited obloquy be poured upon his head — let his nainc, if destined to live, descend on the roll of infamy ; and, whenever it is mentioned, let those whose cause he has dishonoured by an alliance with such Macchia- vellian policy crimson with conscious shame. But sofdy, my dear Sir I This species of logic forcibly reminds me of a certain preacher whom Dr. Jortin relates to have said m his hearing: " If any one denies the uninterrupted succession of fiishops, 1 shall not scriiplo lu (tall him a downright AtlicAsl*^ The Doctor .shrewdly adds, *' lie iiii<^ht havo said />rti/ut/;?-oA-cr, smuf^^ler, or pickpocket. This, when 1 was young, was sound, orthodox, and fashionable doctrine." * The cstiinahle individual whotn yon represent as actuated by principles so detestible, has lor many years sustained an unblemished reputation as a Minister of Christ. To the '^0011 report' he has obtained I believe him to be fully entitled ; and neither the conlidence with which you denounce him as an impostor and a knave, nor the speciousness of the jL,'rounds on "which in some instances your assertions arc predicated, has caused my faith in his christian rectitude to waver for a moment. Nor do I despair of beinf^ able to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of every im])artial judge, that your allegations affecting his character, are without exception, aspersions as gratuitous as they arc gro.ss and invidious. I have only further to premise, that as in my a[)prehen- sion, the sacred claims of truth intimately coalesce with those of friendship in imposing Mi)on me the duty to which I now address myself, I" shall endeavour to discharge it with fidelity to both. The leading design of your strictures on Mr. Powell's production is to convict him of palpable and deliberate dis- honesty, in falsifying and perverting the testimony of Christian Antiquity on the question at issue betwixt him and the advo- cates of Episcopacy. A very grave charge certainly. It remains to be seen by what evidence you attempt to justify yourself in so confidently preferring it. Following the order which your observations prescribe — I refer, first, to Clement of Rome : — " On the testimony of this father, " you tell us, " Mr. Powell takes no high stand." In this opinion, few I appre- hend will be disposed readily to acquiesce, who have consulted his work for themselves ; and why, entertaining that view yourself, you should have deemed it necessary to put forth so much strength to dislodge him from his position, I am unable to discover. A most injudicious "appellant to the early Church •Jortin's Tracts, yoJ. 1, p. 436. i!« 8 in favour of" IVcsbytcrinl ^'ovcriiinont" he would indeed have proved hiinselt* ' hv, liad he "ot talieu a higii stand on one of tiie most valuable and authentic monuments of ecclesiastical antiquity, the Epistle of this Apostolic i'alhcr to the Corinthiau Church — a document iVau^dit with iliustnitivc allusions to the Christian ministry, not the less valuable as evidence for being purely incidental. Tluit Clement hneir no ili(j'crence between a Bishop 071(1 a Preshi/ter, is the ecpially just and significant inference deduced by Mr. Powell from the tacts, of wliich the epistle in qucst'on supplies abundant conlirmation. namely — that the appellations Jiinhnp and Pnshfjtcr are uniformly em- ployed by him as equivalent; that lie accordingly a[)pro- priates them inditfercntly to the same officers in the Church ; and that the only other sacred order recognized by him is that of Deacons. Now this we think is taking a pretty high stand, though certainly not more elevated than tenable ; and Mr. Powell is careful to fortify it by a variety of considerations, which, in our estimation at least, render it perfectly impreg- nable. Among these are, the observable coincidence of style on this topic between Cleuient and the M'riters of the New Testament; the fact that though the design. of his epistle was to compose certain disscntions in the Church at Corinth, afford- ing him thus a fair opportunity to refer to the peculiar preroga- tives of the Bishop, had any such existed, not a syllabic of reference to them drops from his pen — and that, moreover, ho describes those dissensions as a sedition against the Presbyters^ whom just before he calls Bishops ; add to which, he never speaks of a Bishop in the singular number. Coincidences so numerous and striking afford more than presumptive evidence of the point they are adduced to establish. Now in what manner do you meet the argument founded upon the incidental testimony thus furnished by Clement to the equality or rather identity, in his day, of Bishops and Pres- byters ? Do you appeal to the evidence of a solitary fact ? No. Do you attempt by reasoning to invalidate the con- clusion ? Not at all. What then ? Why, to solve the diffi- culty with which you evidently feel yourself pressed, you present us with an hypothesis entirely destitute of solidity, and indeed of every other species of merit, save the ingenuity with which, in the embarrassing absence of a better resource, it is adju ed to the exigency of the occasion. I shall bestow on that theory all the notice to which it is entitled in the sequel. TWT- 9 I In the mean time, |)ermit tno to express my surprise that you inhould imn^^inc us irt any (huiger from taking ('lement'n testimony with its obvious and logical consc(|uonces, of dero- gating from the appropriate dignity ot" the Apostles. On our principles such a contingency is efJectually precluded. We view the Aj)ostles in their distinctive capacity, as occupying a high, honoured, and separated sphere of" (jflicial glory, wliicU cannot be given to another; as having had no etpial^ while living, and no successors since. To your intiujation that Clement " was Bishop of Homo at the very time he was press- ing on his lellow Christians at Corinth the duty of ecclesiastical submission," it is sufHcient to reply, the Preshi/ters of Ephesus were all Bishops at the very time l*aul addressed tiicm on the responsibilities of their charge; and they arc so designated by him — ^" over which" says he, "the Holy Ghost hath made you Episcopous Bishops" (Acts xx. 2H,) Hut like yourself, Sir, I had aJmost forgotten your declaration, that you "do not |)rofess to weigh the merits of a Divine institution by the laws oi phi- lology ; " a pretty intelligible indication of distrust in your cause, when subjected to the test of that species of legitimate criticism. Aided however by Mr. Stopford, you "can distinguish in this Epistle" of St. Clement " a chief ruler of the Church with two orders of subordinate ministers, just as there was a.nong the Jews, a High Priest, with a body o*" Priests and a body of Levites under him." If you have made such a discovery, I can only say, you must be endued with extraordinary powers of discrimination. It may be worth while for a moment to examine, whether what you confidently pronounce a disco- very, is not a mere optical illusion produced by a deceptive medium of vision. Clement does, indeed, say, " for the Chief Priest has his proper services; and to the Priests their proper place is appointed ; and to the Levites appertain their proper ministries : and the layman is confined within the bounds of what is enjoined upon laymen." But that is not all he says. Hear him out ; and the way-faring man, though a fool, must immediately apprehend his meaning, and smile at Mr. Stop- ford's and your perversion of it. The venerable father conti- nues-^" I et every one of you therefore, brethren, bless God in his prop«^ >• station, with a good conscience, and with all gravity. 10 not exceeding the rr''^ of service appointed to him. The daily sacrifices are not oflbrcd every win le; nor \\\epeacb ofierings, nor the sacrifi ?s appointed tor sins and transgressions ; but only at Jerusalem — thoy therefore who do any thing which is not agreeable to his will arc pimishcd with death. Consider, brethren, by how rniick the better the knowledge God has vouch- sai'ed to us, b}' so mucii the greater danger are wo exposed to." Can a single doubt now linger in any mind, that, in the phraseology to which you allude, he is speaking not of the Christian Ministry, but of the Jewish Priesthood^ as he after- wards clearly indicates. If, nevertheless, you are determined to adliere to your own construction, we must insist upon your applying the s;unc principle of interpretation to the entire passage. And where will the application of it to the *^ sacrifices for sins and transgressions'^ land you ? In the central region of Popery, exhibiting the sanction of the first Apostolical father to tub sAcniFicE or tuc Mass ! — a dogma which the jlw^-Zo-Catholic school, I presume, is not yet quite prepared to digest. You cannot be ignorant that, in point of fact, this is a prominent use which Papal theologians make of the passage under review ; nor would it be possible for you to expose the falaciousness of their inference, without abandoning the prin- ciple of exposition wiiich you apply to the previous portion pf it. For further satisfaction on this topic, I beg to refer you to an elaborate historico-theological dissertation, written by the erudite Buddeus, a leading obiect of which is to evince that Clement does not here favour the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass. The truth is, that your friend and yo.u'h!lve totally misapprehended the sentiment of the passage, which is simply and obviously this : — that if it was. imperative upon the Jews strictly to observe the institutions of the law, still more obligatory is it upon Christians, whom God has blessed with the superior light of the Gospel, to discharge the duties appropriate to their respective stations, with fidelity and order, I must apoligize ibr having occupied so much time in endeavovn'ing correctly to appreciate the precise bearing and amount of Clement's testimony on the subject of this discus- sion. Its proximity to the times of the Apostles — the very general concurrence of sentiment am^ng the learned as to its authenticity, and the fact that it was written ex nomine Romana EcclesicB, and therefore exhibits the united judgment 11 'ot the uncorrupted Church of Rome, as well as the writer's own sentiments — are considerations which stainj) this docu- ment with pre-eminent value. I now dismiss it with the full conviction, in which I think every unbiassed mind must parti- cipate, that it presents not the faintest trace of the existence, in Clement's day, of an order of tViiniSters superior to Presbyters. |f such an innovation was even thought of at so early a period, it lay sn^ouldering among the latent aspirations of ecclesiasti- cal ombitibrt, which subscquonl afjjcs indeed rapidly developed, but which had not then acquired a local habitation or a name. I pass on with you, secondly, to tiic Ignatian Erii^TLEs. While the cliampions of Potit.ifex Maximus triumphantly eulogize these epistles as " one of the bulwarks of the Pope- dom," you as confidently pronounce Ignatius "a staunch Epis- copalian," and characterise his testimony as " the strongest bulwark which primitive times have afforded to Episcopacy." Be this as it may, "Noil nostrum inter vos tant;/s compoiiere lites." My immediate concern is with your allegations respecting the unworthy treatment, which you allege these relics of antiquity have received at the hands of Mr. Powell. I may be excused, I suppose, from noticing the edifying sentiments which you put into his mouth, any further than simply to call attention to them, as afTording an example of your exuberant charity. — Endorsing the statements, and glowing with the ardour of the Reviewer, you tell us : " Whatever has been done with Igna- tius has been wilful and intentional. Clement only requires to be mistaken or rnisreprented ; but Ignatius can neither be mistaken nor misrepresented : he must be managed by arts of a different kind." The specific charges which you prefer against the writer of the Essay, in relation to the Ignatian epistles, are, ^rs^ — a mo^t dishonest effort to damage their character; and, secondly — falsification in the quotations he professes to give from Archbishop Wake's translation. in attempting to make good the former, you commit ScvcTal egregious offences against historical truth as well as conVfoversial justice, which, since they are directly calculated to mislead the reader, who implicity abandons himself to your guidance, it is necessary I should particularize. And first — you mislead the illiterate reader by assuming that all the ques- tions touching those epistles of Ignatius, whicfi Usher and Pea?'- 12 Sun contend are genuine, are regarded by the learned as finally settled. To evince how gratuitous and false such an assump- tion is, it will only be necessary to refer to two accomplished historians, than whom none arc more entitled to deference on a point of ecclesiastical criticism. " The whole question" says jMoshiem, "relating to the epistles of Ignatius in general, seems to me to labour under much ohscurUi/, and to be embar- rassed with many difficulties."* " Certainly," observes Neander, •* these epistles contain passages which at least bear completely upon them the character of antiquity. This is particularly the case with the passages directed against Judaism and Docetism; but even the shorter and more trustworthy edition is very much interpolated "■\ So remote are important questions relating to these epistles still, from terra firma I so little reason had you to feel indignant at Mr. Powell, for ushering them into notice with a salutary caveat. You mislead your reader, secondly — by insinuating that Bishop Pearson regarded even those epistles, in favour of which he considered the testimony of antiquity exhibited in his Vindiciae Ignatiance, decisive, exempt from interpolation — an insinuation at direct vari- ance with fact. You greatly mislead your reader, thirdly^ by affirming the accuracy of what you call the '■'^ genuine Latin translation of them," which Archbishop Usher, after much research, discovered in the Library of Caius College, Cam- bridge ; and which you tell us corresponds with the Greek M.S. copy, found by the celebrated Vossius. These are most extraordinary assertions ; and I hesitate not to say utterly in.^usceptible of proof. The genuine Latin translation found by Usher accurate ! This statement, as any one acquainted with this department of investigation must be aware, is alto- gether erroneous. That that version is much less vitiated than the one before in his possession, is true ; that an inspection of it confirmed his previous suspicions in regard to the other, and materially aided him in correcting it, is also true : but that he found or regarded it immaculate, or in perfect accord with the most approved Greek text, is utterly wwtrue. So wide is this of the real facts of the case, that, by collating th'^ one with the other, and both with the Greek text, the learned Archbishop detected in both many additions and interpola- tions, which he has carefully marked by red lines drawn ,, *Ecc. Hist. Cent. 1, part 2, cliap 2. ; ... , - *.; tHist. three first End. of Christ Church, p. 410 (Philad. Ed.) ^ .:i 13 under them in the edition he himself published ; and the most valauble notes he has appended to the work actually relate to those discrepancies.* These arc positions of which 1 challenge refutation. What then ? Because your unsuspecting reader is imposed upon, and receives an unjust bias I'rom your mis- representations on points vitally aflecting the question in debate, shall I accuse you of wilful and intentional deception ? Shall I stigmatise you as a consummate adept in artifice, doing evil that good may come ? God forbid. ' can easily imagine, that treading upon ground with which you were not very familiar, you incautiously permitted the ardour of your feelings to precipitate you to conclusions, for which charity itself can suggest no better apology, than your manifestly incompetent knowledge of the subject. . i ' You alledge that "amongst other artifices, Mr. Powell ap- plies to the epistles in question the objections that were made by Archbishop Usher to a false translation of them." By the epis- tles in question, you of course mean those vindicated by Bishop Pearson, mentioned in the preceding sentence ; for surely you would not injure the reputation of a Father whom you so much venerate, by contending for the larger ones. Here again, as if by a species of fatality, you involve yourself in palpable error, and Mr. Powell in unmerited censure. His remarks, (as you might have readily ascertained by consulting liis work) like those of the Archbishop, relate to a Latin version, comprising not seven, but twelve, epistles attributed to this Father, of which that eminently holy and learned Prelate pronounced six to be suppositious, and the rest in many places corrupted by inter- polation. And let it be distinctly remembered, so far was he *Hanc nostrum, non tain conjectuiani, qiiain as^ertionem veris- simam, confirmatam daliii llevereniiiss. Jacobus Usserius. Archiepiscopus Armachanus, Hiberniae Primas, vir non solum cloctissirnus Ecetesiasticse antiquitatis scrutator diligentissinius, sed etiam siyncerse pietatis cultor eximius, & assertor ; iu quo, cum eruditione summa, certant candor et humanitas, quam hoc ipso tempore in eo experiur, is milii conmiunicavit novam editionem Epistolar. Ignatii, quauj snbjecil praslo Oxoniensi, in qua non solum supposititias Epistolas d genuinis separat ; sed eas etiam ipsas, quas pro Ignatianis habemus, ostendit varie fuisse in^er- polatis, ex collatione duorum exemplariuin MSS. L-itinoe interpreta- tionis, quara contulit, cum exemplari Crseco edito; et additiones, quae in Latinis illis codicibus non ha'oentur, minealis iineis, in textu distinxit, accuraiissime ; additis etiam noiis doctissimis. Rivets Critici Sacri, Lib. 3,, ch, 1. i4 from iraintaining that those to which he has affixed his sanction as genuine, have escaped the deteriorating process to which, it is matter of notoriety, nearly all the uninspired monuments of christian antiquity have, in their transmission to us, been sub- jected, that he not merely maintained, but demonstrated^ the contrary. In short, the almost unanimous judgment of eminent critics upon this topic, is embodied in the words of that distin- £!:uished ornament of your own Church, v/ho was no friend to dissent. Doctor Jortin : "But though the shorter epistles be on many accounts preferable to the larger, yet I will not affirm that they have undergone no alteration." * It is but just how- ever to add, that any thing but union exists among the learned in lespect to the extent of that alteration. Nor are these observations inapplicable to the Greek text; as the detailed collations exhibited by the incomparable Rivetus, in the work to which I have already i-eferred, amply attest. In such perplexing incertitude are we involved, whenever we exchange the unshaded light that beanris from " the holy oracle," for the misty atmosphere of ecclesiastical antiquity. Our surest and best protection against that perplexity, with^its interminable train of attendant evils, would be an unreserved and practical adoption of the noblest sentiment attributed to Ignatius, and which is worth all the rest of his writings put together — "My Antiquity is Jesus Christ." Reluctant though i am to impugn motives, when even on the largest scale of allowance to human infirmity, they are susceptible of a favourable construction, I acknowledge my inabily to conciliate with rectitude of intention the expedient employed by Mr. Stopford, and in the imagined success of which you evidenily feel exultant, to convict Mr. Powell of falsification in quoting from Archbishop Wake's translation. An impression of the justice of the imputation is indeed very likely to be obtruded upon the credulity of the reader, by the imposing array of quotations you have paraded in your page in order to give it full effect. But I hope to satisfy every impartial judge that your triumph is premature ; and that the odium of inexcusable disingenuousness falls not on Mr. Powell, but on his accuser. The radical fallacy of the attempt, by which you labour to sustain the charge of dishonesty against my clerical friend in respect to those citations consists in very " Remarks oil Eco. Hist. vol. I,pagp357. ' . ■ ^ ■ 15 conveniently overlooking lils explicitly avowed object in bring- ing them forward. What was that object ? In language as lucid and unequivocal as can well be conceived, he thus expresses it : — " Whatever he (Ignatius) makes of Bishops, he yet makes Presbyters as high as we can desire for our argu- men<." In your version of his object, the words, " Whatever he makes of Bishops," and also the significant conjunction ^^yet," arc entirely omitted — a mutilation of his words that indeed admirably subserves your design, but completely falsifies his. I know not in what light you may regard such unpardonable perversion in an Episcopalian, but I can easily imagine the terms of execration in which you would denounce it in a Non- conformist. And such honourable means employed, forsooth, to fix upon Mr. Powell the stigma of dishonesty ! I have not done with this matter. In order to place it in the clearest poss ble light, I shall exhibit the citations from Apb. Wake's translation of Ignatius, as you have yourself given them, mark- ing in Italics ^the portions of them cited by Mr. Powell ; only t)egging to apprise the reader of the importance of bearing in niind Mr. Powell's design, according to his own version, not according to your jaer-version, of it : — * My fellow servant, Sotio, the deacon in whom I rejoice, forasmuch as he is subject unto his Bishop as to the grace of Qod, and to the Presbytery as to the law of Jesus Christ.* * I exhort you that ye study to do all things in a divine concord; your Bishop presiding in the place of God ; your Presbyters in the place of the Council of the Apostles ; and your deacons, most dear to me, being entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ.* * It is, therefore, necessary that as ye do so without your Bishop, ye should do nothing ; also be ye subject to your Pres- byters, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, in whom, if we walk, we shall be found in him ; the deacons also, as being the ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, must by all means please all.' ^ '^*In like manner, let all reverence the deacons, as Jesus Christ ; and the Bishop as the Father ; and the Presbyters as the Sanhedrim of God and college of the Apostles. — Without THESE THERE IS NO ChURCH.' * Being subject to your Bishop as to the command of God^ ^nd so likewise to the Presbytery.' 16 * See that ye all follow your Bishop, as Jesus Christ (fol- lowed) tlie Father, and the Presbyters as the Apostles ; and reverence the deacons as the conunand of God." Now is it not manifest, as Mr. Powell states, that " what- ever^* in thcs(3 passages or elsewhere, Ignatius " nnakcs of Bishops, he yet m'lkes Presbyters as high as we can desire for our argument?" What opponent of the succession ever ascribed higher authority to the Presbytery than to the law of Christ ; elevated it above the Council of the Apostles ; represented its nnembers as entitled to greater deference than the Apostles of Jeius Christ our hope,o\' exhorted ail to reverence them move profoundly than aj the Sanhedrim of God, and college of the Apostles? Whatever then may be said of Bishops, who, 1 ask, among the most tenacious sticklers for the dignity of Presbyters, ever dreamed of investing them with more august attributes, — of honouring them with more magnificent titles? Make of Bishops what you please, or let Ignatius make of them what he may, is not all this quite enough for our argument ? And by what principle of justice, or indeed of propriety, was Mr Powell bound in relation to the quotations in question to do more than exhibit what was really relevant to the position he proposed to establish — a position which, on the very face of it, admits that Ignatius makes a distinction between Bishops and Pres- byters, and freely accords to Episcopalians, for the sake of argument, the full benefit of that admission — a position, let me emphatically add, not in the slightest degree invalidated by any thing contained in your ampler citations. The impu- tation of dishonesty in this affair to Mr. Powell is thus left without the shadow of a pretext. I am anxious, and from my appreciation of your character strongly inclined, to believe that you never read the work, upon which you have animad- verted with so much acrimony and injustice ; but that, confi- dingly resigning yourself to the conduct of Mr. Stopford, you mistook his " Weapons of Schism " for lawful instruments, and wielded them unwittingly against idolum cerebri, or rather employed them to " beat a fellow servant" without a cause. If I am not mistaken in this conjecture, then your transgression comes under the denomination of "sins of igno- rance," and may be partially atoned for by pror pt and unreserved confession ; but, if unrepentingly persisted in, it will assume the more malignant a.<'pect of those for which t' ^ law provides no expiation. , - - -"•■^- (fol- and 17 Had Mr. Powell made those quotations for tho purpose of evincing, whutlicr professedly or by insidious implicatiou, that Ignatiuf?, like Clement, recognizes no religious funclion- Jiries superior to Presbyters, there would have existed some ostensible gn^und for so unceremoniously ordering him to the jpillory as a knave. In that case even, you might with a great deal more propriety have designated him a /«.>/; and then, without compromising your own principles, have benevolently saved hi« moral character, by extending to him the plenary indulgence usually accorded lo menUd imbecility. For assu- redly, vo one hut a fool, could, in opposing Episcopacy, think of f^ilsil'yitig the epistles of Ignatius, in the hope of escaping detection, and that an English trandalion of them too ! — seven epistles with which literate High Churchmen seem much better acquainted, than with the Epistles of the ascended Saviouh to the seven Churches in Asia. In regard to the admitted and palpable distinction indi- cated by the Ignatian epistles between Bishops and Presbyters, I may here remark, that it involves various contested points which of themselves constitute a se])arate and important branch of thi§ controversy. When did that distinction origi- nate ? What was its precise nature and extent ? and Whence was it — from Heaven? or of men? are questions concerning which tlie disputants maintain widely different views. One historical solution of these difficulties we have, and only one ; and since on a subject of this nature — a matter of fact — all theories and conjectures must give way to authentic history, that solution demands the admission of every unprejudiced enquirer after truth. I refer to the testimony of Jerome, to whom, the learned generally concur with Erasmus, in award- ing the paJm of erudition and eloquence. In his commentary on Titus, 1, 5, That thou shou shouldest ordain Presbyters in ecery city, as I have appointed thee, his words (mark them well) are as follows : — *" What sort of Presbyters ought to be * '• Qui qualis Presbyter debe.it oiiTinari, in consequt ntibus disserens hoc ait : Si qiiis est sine crimine, iinius uxoris vir," et caetera : postea ititulit, " Oporiet n. E|jiscopuin sine ciiniine esse, tanqu-im Dei dispell- satoi«m " Idem est ergo Presbyter qni est Episoopns : et antequ. m, diaboli instinctu sludia in religione fierent. et dicereuir in po[)ulis : 'MCgo sum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego smtem Cephae :" communi Presbyteroriim consilio ecclesieB gubernibantnr. Poslquam vero unusquii^qne eus, quus bapt»zaverai, sues putaba tesse, non Christi: in toto orbe decretum est, ut c f i 38 ordained he shows afterwards — If (my be blamdess, the husband of one wife, &c. and then adds, /or a Bishop must be blamelesSf as the steward of God, &c. A Presbyter, therefore, is the same as a Bishop : and before there were, by the instigation of the devil, parties in religion, and it was said among different people, / am of Paul, and I ii>m, sed nostram, esse seiitenthin Episcopuin el Presbyieruin uniiin esse; et aliud setutis, aiiiid esse noineii officii : rele^'it Apusluli ad Philippeiises veil)a (li( eiitis : Pauliis et Ti'motheus servi Jesu Chrisli, omnibus Sanctis iit (Jhristo Jesu, qui sunt Pliillippis, cum Kpiscnpis el Diaconis, gratia vobis et pax, ct leliqua. Phillippi una est nibs Mace- doiiije : et ceite in una civitale plures et nnncupantur Episcopi non esse pottrant. Sed quia eosdem Episcopos illo tempore quos et Preshyttros appellabant, piopterea indifferenter de Episeopis quasi de Presb^'teris est locutus. Adimc bos alicui videatur ambiguum, nisi altera testimonio coniprobetur. In Aciibus Apostoloruni scriptum est, quod cum venissel Apostolus IVIiletuin, niiserit Epbesuni, et voeaveril Presbjteros ecclesise ejnsdeu), quibus postea inter csetera sit ioculus; attendite vobis, et omni gregi in quo vos Spiritus sanclus posuit Episcopos, pascere eeclesiam Domini qtiam acquisivit per sanguinem suum. Et hoc diliuentius observate, quo n\o(\o unius civitatis Epbesi Presbyteros vocans, postea eosdem jBpt»- copos dixeril — Usee propterea, ut osiendereinus apud veterts eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos et Episcopos. Paulatim vero, ut dissensionum plantaria evellerenter, ad vnum omnem soliciiudinem esse delatam. — Sicut ergo Presbyteri sciunt se ex ecclesia consuetudine e\,, qui sibi propositus fuerit, esse subjectos, ita Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quern dispoai- tionia dominicce veritate, Presbyteris esse majores. ... .. HiEROjJYMi Com. in Tit. 1. i. Opp. Tom. VI. " V ^4., vv P- 168„c(/ Victoriif Paris, 1623, Fol, 19 one cily there could not be seiieral bishops, as tliey nrc now styled ; but as they, at that time, called the very same persons bishops whom they called I'rcshytcrs, the Apostle has spoken without distinction of bishops as Presbyters. * Should this matter yet appear doubtful to any one, unless it be proved by an additional tcistimotiy ; it is written in the act^ of the Apostles, that when l*aul had conic to Mik.'tum, he sent to Ephesus and called the Presbyters of that church, and «mong other things said to them, * take heed to yourselves and to all the flock in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops.' Take particular notice, that calling the Prehijytkus of the single city o*' Ephesus, he afterwards names the same ))crsons BisHOPi). * Our intention in these remarks is to show that among the ancients, Presbyters and Bishops were t'je very SAME. But that DY LITTLE AND LITTLE, that the plants of dis- sentions might be plucked up, the whole concern was devolved upon an individual. As the Presbyters, therefore, know that ^hey are subjected, by the custom of the church, to him who is set over them ; so let the Bishops know, that they are greater than Presbytei-s more by custom than by any real appoint- ment OF CHRIST. The stubborn historical facts, so luminously stated by Jerome in this important passage, and which he challenges the whole world to refute, annihilate at once your hypothesis as to the original form of ('hurch government noticed on a previous page, by demonstrating that her prelatical constitu- tion was not established by dioine right, but is an innovation on primitive order, introduced by degrees ^paulatimj till at length, it acquired the coherence of a fully developed system, ^nd fortified, its claims by the authority of prescriptive usage. There is a sad progressiveness, according to your account, k^ Mr. Powell's course of delinquency. Obdurated by the babit of bearing false witness, he proceeds to the ruthless work of decapitation ! "rhtH''t ' .' '' " Nemo repente fit turpissimus." He strikes off the head of a passage of your favorite Father, and that too when in the very act of settling the whole question in dispute, by a single enunciation. How fortunate. Dear Sir, thai by your prompt and skilful interference, it has been put on 9gain,'and that from its adhesive and vital properties, we may *J0 51] i t irvcy thco5 sublime of \\\:it passage in its primal dignity* louk at it : — " Sec that ye toliovv your Bishop, as Jesus <10W sui Let us Christ followed tUe Fat/ter ; and the Presbytery as the Apostles; and reverence the deiicons as the command of God." — This sentence^ itahcisud in accorchmcc vvitfi your wishes, repels, you think, the inleri)retati(m which Mr. Powell attaches to the term " lawful " in the sequel of the passage, as denoting nothing lYiorc than a human arrangement, by "establishing the sacred origin and authority of Episcopacy in very distinct language." Now permit me to say, that although to you this may be perfectly obvious, yet as we do not regard Ignatius (giving him credit for this singular prescription) entitled to the same profound deference with the inspired writers, wc cannot recognize his authority as sufficient to establish the sacred — if by sacred you mean divine — origin, of any doctrine or insti- tution of our holy religion, any farther than he can be shown to speak as the oracles of God ; believing, as we do, " that whatsoever is not i^ead tiikreiv, nor may he proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." And were we in the present instance, to admit his authority as decisive, what advantage would you gain by the concession ? None that we can perceive, but the reverse, since it is manifest if the sentence referred to proves anything, it proves that not Bishops, hut Presbyters, are the true succes- sors of the Apostles. . - Mr. Powell having cited from Ignatius the following general proposition, intended to enforce due respect and sub- mission to the authority of the Bishop, " Whatever the Bishop shall approve of, that is pleasing to God" proceeds to reason from it thus : — " Now it is clear that he makes the power or authority of the Bishop, in restraining and in permitting, to be equal. Whatever he could prohihit the Presbyters from doing» he could equally appoint and approve of their doing the same thing. He could restrain them from baptizing, and he could appoint them to baptize. His authority in hoih respects was equal. Apply this to orrfrtinin^ Ministers. Sup- |iose he could restrain Presbyters from ordaining, he could equally appoint them to ordain Ministers ; and then the per- formance of this duty would 'be pleasing to God.' Then Presbyters, as Presbyters, have as much inherent power to 21 js; oitDAiN as tliev have to baptize, or lo do a\y Tiirvo else Irt the Church. 'J^Wih is cicnrly the doctrine of Ignatius." 'J'lius fur Ihc author ol the '* VVEAPoNri of Sciiihm" gives Mr. Powfir* words, and here he makes a drnd and oninious pause, dex- terously parrying the dreaded point of the argurnenlum ad hominem, with which Mr. I'owell mings the preceding reason- ing home to the business and bosoms of ihc advocates of prelacy ; but which pungent application, Mr. Stopford deemed it most prudent to su/tpress. Singular inconsistency truly, in one to whoso sensitive conscience the very semblance of artifice is so abhorrent ! We trust, however, to the reader's candour and sense of justice, to take the close of Mr. Powell's argument in connexion with its commencement, and then, • without any solicitude about the result, we shall leave him to form his own judgment of its real value. " Now," continues Mr. Powell, " all Churchmen allow they have the power and authority as Presbyters to fjuptize. They have, therefore, from the principles of Ignatius, power and authority to ordain Ministers, to confirm, &lc., as much as Bishops have. The only difference was, that, for the honour of the Bishop and by ecclesiastical arrangement, they were not to do these things without the permm/on of the Bishop." . Not satisfied with casting the very pith of Mr. Powell's argument into the shade, Mr. Stopford tries to invalidate the force of that portion of it, which he is pleased to exhibit, by tracing the absurdities to which the position that forms its basis legitimately leads ; appparently forgetting, that for those consequences, Ignatius, not Mr. Powell, is responsible. How tinuch more satisfactory would it have been to discerning minds, for Mr. Stopford to have fairly met and grappled with his antagonist's argument in its unbroken form, than to throw dust in tne reader's eyes by such wretched evasions : sed hie labor y hoc opus est. ,,.;., f I proceed briefly to notice the testimony of Polycarp : — No writing of Christian antiquity, since the completion of the sacred canon, has come down to us with less disputable claims to our unsuspicious confidence, both as to genuineness and authenticity, than the Epistle to the Philippians, written by this venerable disciple of the Apostle John. Those claims are sufficiently established by Photius, in his celebrated Bibli- otheca (No. 126), written in the ninth century, and containing 22 n critical examination of 2H(> ancient writers. He justly characterises Polycarp's ICpistle us ro{)!etc with sahitary aJ- monitions, and as hearing impressed upon it, in regard to Btylo as well as sentiment, the signatures of iiiitiquity. With this view the judgment of that illustrious scholar, Fr. Spanhem, by no means disposed to he crcdidous on such questions, fully accords : " Nee in hoc (juiaiuflni"\ \w. ohserves, " quod a aimpliciate ejus (rvi recedere viikalur.'"* Lardner and I'aley pronounce it of undouhted g(?nuinencss ; and the learned Neander, whose penetrating and practised eye has exj)lorcd every nook of ecclesiastical antiquity, acquiesces in the same opinion. Extremely few, in fact, of any eminence as critics, have agitated a doubt upon the subject. How different the history of criticism in respect to the Ignatian epistles, whose number has at various times risen and fallen, and which no one of any party asserts, or can assert, to be pure from interpolation. I make these remarks simply to show, that not merely do we admit, as you cautiously intimate Mr. Powell does, the genuineness ot this precious fragment of the writings of Poly- carp, but that we cordially recognize it ; and that, in giving it, as a testimony, our decided preference to the epistles of Ignatius, we are justified by the best writers of your own, as well as other Churches. But this epistle, you inform us, was written as an acconjpaniment to those of Ignatius, and is therefore a standing monument of their genuiness and authen- ticity. There are, however, unfortunately, two drawbacks to the veritableness of this statement : First — you assume that all the writings of Ignatius in question were sent by Polycarp with his own letter, for which you can produce no historical authority : and secondly, you lost sight of a fact, of which you might have been reminded by looking into the first volume of Lardner's Credibility, namely, that it is not quite certain whether those epistles of Ignatius, are the same that ' were read by Irenajus, Origin and Usebius, or not. Neither does it appear that any of them were autographs ; these, it would seem, having been conveyed to their respective desti- nations by the Christians who attended him on his journey to Rome, and who gave money to his guards, that he might he permitted to write them. Before you charged; Mr. Powell ;Ui:::M.F.; r 'Imiod. Ad. Hist. Nov. Test. Fa;c. 2. • ' 23 with i^Mioranco on these tojMcs, it would not li;ive hco't auv.M for yon to Ii;iv(! <|u;ilil"nMl yours* If |i)r tlu; I'liiiclious ol' your ccnsorsltip, l)y ;ic(|iiiriii;^ a iiioiu; (jxtiiidcd and accuialo know- ledge ot tlwni yoursclt". Ikit the manner in which these points uro sc tiled cannot aflect I'olycarp's testimony on the question now under discussion — a testimony, it is hardly necessary to say, perfectly coin<;idenl with that of Clement. Like him, I'olycarj) ev m:rs an utter un<'<>Msciousness of more than two orders of Ministers in the Church ; and hy exhort- ing the IMiilipplans, chaj*. v., to be suhject to their Presbyters and deacons as to (mjd and (^mur r, he indisputably prccludca the idea of any higher lunctionary to whom they owed eccle- siastical submission, "lie could go no higher for a similitude; nor could he decently have gone so high, had he known of a higher order in the Church. Not a syllable of the Bishop, who, in less than a hundred and lifty years after, would havo been the principal, if not tlu; oidy, person to whom their sub- jecliou would imve been enjoined by any Christian writer." On a review of the most unexceptionable evidence dedu- ' ciblo from the writings ol the- apostolic fathers, in relation to the orders of ministers in the Church, in the age immediately succeeding the times of the AjMjstles, it must, 1 think, be apparent to all who have eyes to see, that none was then known superior to Presbyters ; and that therefore, whatever distinction was subsequently introduced, originated not by divine right, but by conventional appointment. The presby- terial hypothesis therefore manifestly accords with the exem- plified constitution of the primitive (Jhurch. And it derives no slight confirmation of its truth from the inextricable perplexity and mutual contentions in which the rejection of it involvcH Episcopalians. Dodwell, ( ne of the staunchest advocates of prelacy, repudiates the notion that there was a Bishop in the world, save James at Jerusalem, whom he represents as a universal Bishop, or species of Pope, at the time Wi. Clement and Polycarp wro^e their epistles. Dr. Hammond maintains that the Presbyters mentioned by Clement, were all Bishops, and that there was no middle order of Presbyters in the Church at that time ; while Dr. Burnet contends, in opposition to both, " that Clement mentions Bishops and Presbyters, and he means Presbyters by Deacons.* At least an equal number "• Dr. Mitchell's, Primitive Triiili and Order, page 3'J. II ,i-»a'-' [1 ;' I! II IMJ n 24 of ihcorics liuve been Irained to elude the plain and obvious inference from St. Paul's omission of any reference to Picsby- ters as distinguished I'rom B'<^' ops in his Epistle to the Phiilippians. Tal<'tig leave now of the apostolic fathers, we pass do\^'n the sti\.atn of time to the writings ofliiENiSus: — In reiterating with indciatigablc pcrtcnacity your wonted charges of fraud and artifice agj»inst Mr. Powell, in respect to this author, there is a confusion in your remarks which renders it difficult to analyze or apprehend them. And here you have permitted your itMpetuosity to involve you in the humiliating blunder of scH-contradiction. Mr. Powell, we are told, "gives a passage from Book iii. ehiip. ii., in which Irenajus speaks of * the successions of Presbyters in the Churches ;' then to show that irena^us used the word Bishop synonymously, he says, that in the ucxt chapter, he calls this succession the succession of Bishops." These are his words as cited by yourself; and yet, mirabile dictu ! you wind up your remarks on this head, by asserting that Mr. Powell declares that Ircna:^us, in speaking of the individuals who presided over the Ohurchcs, never uses any other name than that of Presbyter." We cease to wonder at your misrepresenting him, when you are so palpably incon- sistent with yourself. There is indeed one Church, the Church of Rome, in reference to which Mr. Powell says specifically, that Irena)us in his Epistle to Victor, never calls the presiding ministers Bishops : can you evii.ce the contrary ? The passage has an important bearing on the general question ; and wc shall therefore j:)ermit Mr. Powell to speak for himself : — " in the very celebrated EpislJe, above-mentioned, to Victor, Bishop of Rome, he speaks of Anicetus, Pius, Hy- ginus, Telesphorus, and Xystus, presiding as Presbyters over the Church of Rome ; though *hcse persons, by later writers, are all reckoned as Bishops of Rome. These Presbyters are all, even by Papists and high Churchmen, put as links into the succession chain : they have no chain without them. He repeats the same mode of speaking of these Presiding Presby- ters three times over in this letter, though a short one, and NEVER uses any other — never calls them Bishops. He uses the word Bishops as to the Asiatics ; but not as to the Romans ; which would almost lead one to think that the tenr Presbyter, at Rome, in that age, w as still considered the most honourable denomination, as it ceriainly seems to have been in the Apostles' days, and ibr some lime after." '25 'lUUS sby- thc we Had Irenoeus anticipated tlie agitation of the question as to Vvhether he meant to employ the tern. Bishop and Presbyter synonymously, vvc cannot conceive how he could have supplied a more apposite and conclusive argument, to settle the matter in the affirmative, than is embodied by him in the following words ; — *' VVheretbro olxnlicuce ought to be rendered to those who mrcPreshi/lrrs in (he (■hurch. who have as we have shown, succession from f.'ic Apoallar., ;uiff who, with the succession of their Episcopacy, have a sure deposit of the truth divinely granted to them, according to the good pleasure of our Hea- venly Father." * 1 can regard in no other light than as a specimen of egregious trilling, y. .r ostentatious display of the passage in lrena)us Lib. J, in referring to which, Mr. Powell freely grants every thing you can prom by it. And what, I ask, was the author's main design in that passage ? To prove a personal succession from the Apostles ? No ; but to prove the uninterrupted succession of the "faith which was once deli- vered to the Saints," the very suocession in which wk glory. "But" saj , Irenaius, "when we appeal to that tradition which has been preserved to us per buccesshjnes Pri:suyti:iiorijim, by the succession of Presbyters, in the ('hurches, they " (the propagators of false doctrines) " presume they arc wiser not only than the Presbyters, but even than the Apostles, and that they have found the Tuuxn in a purer form."t I have, ijow become so accustomed to the bursts of your indignation, and they have hitherto proved so perfectly impo- tent, that the opprobrious accusations of "dishonesty" and of " direct and premeditated falsehood," with which you usher Tertuli,ian into notice, instead of exciting alarm, inspire me with confidence. — Before referring to the passage Mr. Powell has passed over in silence, but to which Mr. Stoptbrd has given due prominence, as an inexpugnable argument in favour of the **. svcceimon" I shall briefly notice your well meant attempts to assist Mr. Powell in the critical task of translar tion. Fault is found with him, ^n the first place, for giving "faith " as the meaning of the term " sacramenti " — a word, we are irjforoied, "including all the solemn rites of religion 98 it was ti^en, used." On this correction I have to remark, , •J^jt>' >v. chap. 45. fLib. 8, chap. 2. D ^,- .ayx \>y,^-y ',?! ■ ■> V t • m ' 26 that it does not evince a very intimate knowledge of the usiis loquendi of the ancient fathers. It is v^^ell known to all who have passed their novitiate in this department of learning, that they mo ! commonly use this term to designate ** all articles peculiar io Christian faith ; as well as al! duties of religion containing that which sense or natural reason cannot of itself discern." To illustrate this by example, take the term in the meaning which you assign to it, and translate it in the following passage from Tertullian: "Let us guard that sacra-. MENTUM of our Constitution, which establishes the uhity in Trinity, recognizing three — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirt ; but of one substance, of one condition, of one power, because they are one God."* Take an example alsa from Jerome : " Velum scissum est, et omnia Legis sacra- MEtiT Ay qucB pri2is tegebantur, prodita sunt.'*-\ It is unneces- sary to multiply references. (See Gesneri Lingua; Latinae Thesaurus, in voce.) You must be satisfied on reflection, thai your unguarded adoption -of Mr. Stopford's extremely erro- neous criticism is not calculated to add to your lite^'ary repu- tation. Mr. Powell is perfectly correct. No term more appropriate than faith, could have been selected to express the sense of sacramenti in the passage quoted by him, as its entire scope, and the usus loquendi in the writings of the fathers, most perspicuously indicate. 'f •=>" !:>;;! »f* Your animadversion on the passage, " Proesident ]p,ro- bati quiqucs seniores, honorum istum nonpretis, secif testimonies adepii ; neque enim pretio ulla res Dei constat" — is equally infelicitous, and still more inexcusable. Proceed upon that scheme of interpretation, and you will transform, not oply the face, but the import, of a large proportion of the passages in which ^seniores' occurs in the Latin Vulgate; and in many cases niake the best theological writers in Latin utter unintelligible .iargon ; writers who as little imagined — as did Tertullian — r when they used the word seniores to designate Presbyters officially, they would be understood simply as meaning, per- sons advo ced in years ! Your translation of testimonio, is liot only novci, but inadmissible. It properly signifies evidence, de- position ; and Mr. Powell's rendering of it, though free, is faithful, and distinguished by idiomatic propriety. Few besides '♦T^rtyl. adv. Praxean. fin Mauh. c. xxvii. 27. '^ .i 21 yourself, it is apprehended, will discover any anology between the official act of a Presbytery, expressed by testimonio, and the terms " well reported of," by which St. Luke notices the favourable opinion prevalent concerning Timothyv ,, * But it is time to hear the teslimonium of TertuUian, iot overlooking which Mr. Powell is visited vviih such unmeasured reproach: — "This way the Apostolical (Churches calculate (he series of their Bishops, as it is related that Polycarp was placed by St. John in the Chinch of the Smyrnajans ; as also that Clement was ordained in that of the Romans by St. Peter; as moreover, the rest also exhibit as grafts of Apos- tolic seed, being appointed to the Episcopate by the Apostles. Can Heretics feign any such thing ?" " Here," says Mr. Stop- ford, "the succession was of single individuals in Churches, ia which we know there were manv individuals ; and this was a thing appointed and settled by the Apostles themselves, in all the Churches they founded." It was doubtless, we reply, a succession of individuals ; but the distinctly avowed design of the enumercition was to establish, in opposition to Heretics, the fact of the transmission of the uncorrupted Gospel of Christy through the organ o^ faithful men, from the times of the Apostles. That fact was as fully established by this method as if Tertullian had undertaken the impracticable task of giving a list of every Presbyter in everv distinct Church- Mr. Stopford sees nothing here but a personal succession, designed to vindicate the divine right of Bishops ; although nothing could be more remote from the intenticm of Tertul- lian, who employs this argument to evince that the depositum of the doctrine^ entrusted to the Apostles ii..„ l>eeti kept invio*- late, while the Heretics, against whom he argues, had grossly corrupted it, by the admixture of legendary traditicwn, and extravagant and seducing speculations. And, after all, as to anything approaching certainty in regard to this succession, it is really most vain to appeal with triumph to the testimonies of Irenseus or Tertullian. or to any or all ancient writers, on *he subject. The pretensions of the Church of Rome, which will in this view be admitted to be equally well founded with any other, are far from being satisfactorily sustained. Irenaeus and Eusebius place Anacletus next to Linus ; Tertullian places Clement ia the nearest proximity tp Peter ; Epiphanius and Optatus seriously affirm, in their turn, that Anacletus and 28 *i -■■' ilSfei Cletus were before Clement; Jerome, Augustine and Damasus; are at varaince with them all, and assert that Anacletus, Cletus, and Linus, were all predecessors of Clement. Su'^h is the ' rudis indigestaque moles, ' out of which it is proposed to deduce demonstrative evidence of the succession. And Were some sublime genius, such as has never yet illuminated the world, to arise, and prove all this " discord, harmony not understood," and place the unbroken series in the most lumi- nous point of view, what, I ask, would it now be worth, to esta- blish the momentous point, in proof of which Irenasus and Ter- tullian refer to it — the unbroken continuity of saving truth ; — a succession that " opposeth and exalteth itself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped" — a succession which, instead of " holding forth the Word of Life," has " taken away the key of knowledge " — a succession that anathf^matises your Church as a formidable system of heresy and schism, deliver^ ing every man of you, en masse, over to Satan — a succession, in a word. " drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martys of Jesus. ^^ - - -t./ i, r » s? Jnv*'; ' v->j» * I can hardly prevail upon myself to descend to notice in detail, the contemptible quibbles by which you endeavour to " find occasion " against Mr. Powell respecting his quotations from OiiiGEN and Cyprean. An alleged inaccuracy in a reference, readily susceptible of explanation from typographical error, were error proved lo exist in the case, is magnified by malignant perversity into deliberate falsification. Your pro- posed amendment of Mr. Powell's translation of the term concilium, I vvillingly leave to the decision of any one acquainted with Latin, on ecclesiastical subjects. I do not myself recognize theinfallibility of the Pope, even when presiding in a oecumenical council ; yet I am disposed to think that he understands Latin, and that the title by which such deliberative assemblages are designated, " Concilia Generalia,^' is unexceptionably correct. You, however, would have suggested another word, as concilia means nothing more than advices ! Of Cyprian's writings there are several printed editions and a variety of manuscript copies, by no mean^ marked by perfect accordance, " j^x tractatibus"~stiys Ilivetus, in his Cri- tici Sacri — " qui hoc tempore Cypriani nomine circumferuntur quidam a Cypriano quidem sunt scripti, sed ab aliis interpol^H; insertis quibusdam adulterinis sententiis, quibus verus autoris 29 SUSf tUSy the to ere the not mi- 5ta- er- xensus deformatur." Under these circumstances, the edition from vvhich any important citation is taken, ought, in justice, to be mentioned. Tliis Mr. Povvcii has not omitted to do ; and if the version consulted by Mr. Stopford difTorcd in a single word from that, the question arises, On which are we to rely ? In point of fact, it is of little consequence how this question is decided. In proof of this we drop the olfonding word, and give the reading approved by Mr. Stopford. Addressing the Presbyters associated with him he says : — "I rely on your love and religion, which I well know, and by thr^o letters I exhort and COMMIT the ciiarce to you, that you, w ^ '■ i':r i '^ If — ■- i ■ ;.'t • } Vm I. , ■ '. 1 ■ 1 I ,■•;■■!,,'■.■ I •/,).■ 0:!7"Had I been aware of the fact, just announced in the Christian Guardian, that a reply to Mr. Stopford's work has appeared from Mr. Powell's own pen, I should have been strongly tempted to spare myself the pains-taking, which, from the nature of the subject, the composition of the preceding pages rendered neces- sary, under the disadvantages of a very indifferent state of health. ■ !;;■•■' V J.-. ', !■' ;■; "j^ ..■-•< ^. , -1:1.; 'rr;: :• v :^H^(!'/ •■iii.f t- I -lit \ill4 lit /(.rifi., .K -itfy"i-l'/,-*l« ••Jfi'J' ♦*♦ JSrrota: — Pag^ 13, line 28, for suppositious read aujrpoaititimia. — Paafe 21, line 4, for omnious read ominotts. — Page 22, line 8, for eimpliciale reaa ft»t> ' jrftdtaU.— Pax9 %% hOB 96, for .Usebiua r^^ad Emtfiius, '): i V .1 • '