.a^*'"'^.

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

i4.

4ss

^■^

L<'r

1.0

I.I

M |28

||1|..5

- m

11^

' IM

112.0

fwi.i.'r

|i-8

i.25

!.4

1.6

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WiST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, NY 14580

(716) 872-4503

CSHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

1981

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliogrephiques

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
rep'oduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a dt6 possible do se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dessous.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couieu;

□ Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

D
D

Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagde

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e

Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag^es

Cartes g^ographiques en oouleur

□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes

Q Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages ddcolordes, tachet^es ou piqu6es

□ Pages detached/
Pages d§tach6es

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

Showthrough/
Transparence

j — I Colourec' plates and/or illustrations/
I I Planches et/ou iliustrations en couleur

D Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Quality of pr-nt varies/
Qualit^ in^gale de I'impression

□ Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplementaire

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

Blank leavis added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omittou from filming/
II se peut que ceriaines pages blanches ajout^es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., nave been refi'med to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obsourcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t6 fi!m6es d nouveau de fapon ^
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supptdmentaires:

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqi-6 ci-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

13X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 da:

La bibliothdque des Archives
publiques du Canada

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Original copies in printed paper covors are filmed
beginning with the fiont 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 beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on ^he last page with a priced
or illustrated impression.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim^e sont film6s en commen9ant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou o'illustration, soit par le second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en comrrengant 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.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — «► (meaning "CON-
TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END "),
whichever applies.

Un das symboles suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image Je cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbole V signifie "FIN".

iVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in onn exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The follovring diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
film^s d des taux de reduction diff^rents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clichi, ii est filmd d partir
de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'imsges n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

THE

■

II n

COMPANION TO THE PRATEE BOOK =*
DEPEISTDED

MIST HIE mmM\) mm\m of the m. n. i. w. d, cray,

BY REV. P. COSTER,

AXD

Jk. It E I» JLi

To Ik Rev, F. Coslor's Dcfciicc of tk' " Cmiiiiaimii ti) tlic Piiiyrr Bsdk,"
BY REV. I. W. D. GRAY, D. D • .

.\I.SO,

A STATEMENT OF FACTS,

As they occurred at the Annual Meeting of the Diocesan

Church in 1849, with

A e[PLy TO mi mis-sthtemeiits m immm

In the Rev. F. Coster's Defence of the "Companion to the

Prayer Book,

BY DR. BAYARD, M. D., &c.

Allofivhich were2mUishe(l in IS.p, and now re-xaihlishcd and

TRTXTED BY GEO. AV. DAY,

1S75.

PUBLISHER'S PREFACE.

In 1SJ0, au clVort Wii? secretly made iu tlio City of Saint Julin. to introduce into
the Dopo^ilories mmiI L Ijiirics ronieclel with the Kplsooiialian ])enoininn-
tion. Books beionglM^' to the '' Jriictiiriiiu" iidiool. Tlie inovenient was <liscovciedi
and at cnce aroused (he Kvan^'elicnl Party. The rc-iult was a partial disavowal of
the senliineMt.-; ol'the Uooks by their iinportcr.-', and the Ijani.-hnient of thcin from
the Pari.-h. I', is known to many that n controversy hy pamidiiet ra{;ed nrt a liitle
fiercely for some tiuu". T'.ic deleni.-e oithe IJook-s was mainly and ably conducted
by the lute Kev. F. C'\sTi;p, then Hector of Carloton : while on the ether side were
rnjjaKed the pens of such a caustic and jiowerlul writer as the late Dr. 11. Bayaud,
(father of Dr. Bayard still yiiivivin;.',) a>id ol' that tearless, /ealous, scholastic, and
elo'iue»tcham|iion of the Truth, the Rev. l>r. J. W. D, Gf at, whose death is yet
. remc-uibcred with universal rr^ret, as having pioduced a loss whieh has so far been
irreparab'e. I h i> Ix on noti -ed. mainly t'lrougii the iiK-tnimcntality of Dr. Bors-
I'OKU of this City that the eli'orl to Ilomani/,e the E)tiseopal Church is now repeated
in Saint John, by the sctret introduction of Books deeply tinged with Sacrniueat-
arism, or openly lea -hiii^' the Anti-l'rotcstaut doctrine ol' TrauMibstantiation I It
has been thought deeply ilcsirable, thireiore, that some information on asuVijcctof
the kindsh uild be irivon forth ; and (he Publisher believes that great good must
buacoomplifehed by reproduc-iii',' the three jirincipnl pjmphicts of the former con-
troversy. 1< will be well for tlie cause of Truth, if the pre-cnt discu-sion shall call
to the front any m.ri of the culture, retinemeat, erudition and power of Dr. Gkay,
or at all comi-araidc, for ability, \\ ith any who crossed their jiens at that time. >io
memorable iu the history of [!i Ejiiscopalian Church of .>aint .Fohn, and indeed of
NewBru iswick. If the re-public ttlon of this foimercontroversy.and the revival of
it in its present form, shall secure the removal of Trantarian Books from the stores
of Church Depositories, and the shelve ol Sunday rfeliool Libraries. — whether they
be the /(vo'iKfrV (/; volumes (d such liitualists as Sadlei, or those Jesuitical books
for the scholars, whidi me puisonir g the youmr by apparently haunless doses of
iieresy and error, Protestants of all Denominations will have abundant causes to
thank (ic;). and take courage,

St, JcHN, NovKMiiKi'., 187i%

\ •

THE mmm to thf mm book" oependeo

ACAIKST THE

UNFOUNDED OBJECTIONS OF THE REV. DR. I. W. D. GRAY,
i;r.( roK or tkinitv cai'ijcii, sr. joiix,

nv F. COSTKR, RECIOR OF ST. GEORCxK'S, C'ailetou, SI. John.

WiiKN l)i; 1jvvaj;i) made his ill-:iclvisoil attack upon some of tlie
Books which had been imported for ilie Diocesan Clmrch Society, at
the late Anniversary Meeting of tlnit Society, he culled npon tlie l{r;v.
j)r. 1. W. 1). GuAV, as his spiritual instrnctor, to state to the meeting his
opinion of one of them, Nvhich he tlien held in his hand, the "(compan-
ion to the rrayer-book." In answer to that call Dr. Gray did give his
opinion of that work, and as nearly as I can recollect, it was in these
words: — '"in my opinion the doctrines contained in that book are not
"in accordance with the doctrines of the Church of England, but are
" in .•ccordance with those of the ''luirch of Home." Within the last
few days 1 have been periuitted to see and transcribe the live extracts,
with his remarks upon th(!m, which Dr. <;ray brings ibrwiird in sup-
port of the charge he thus preferred. As I am th>: person chietly re-
flected upon for the importation ol those hooks (and no one liki-s to
be under the imputation of being the introducer of improper book-*,;.
! mean in the following pages to .'^^how, which 1 feel contident I shall
be able to do to the satisfaction of (ivery candid mind, that the "("'um-
pauion to the I'rayer book" is not fairly ol)no\ious to the ciuirge ot
being as to lis doctrines, as Dr. (iiay says, " iiot in araniltuicr trith fh'.'.
^'■iloiUi'in.cs iif the Church of Ell f/1 1 1 ml, hut, [a <'yrurdi(iice v:'dh those (,/ (h';
'^ 'jhitrrh of Jioiii'!." I should, however, observe in the outset, that
the words " o/ liome" should, 1 tnink, have been inserted i)y the author
in tlie llrst extract, though the sense is su(!lcienlly oI>vious without
them; and that in the fourth of them, the supeilative '■^ the JhH," f-n
unguarded cxprc-ssion as it seems to mo, should htive been altered bv
liini to the positive *' a (jomh" or have been (luuh.'ieil by some such
words as -^011' of" or *' lu-xl lo CDiifi'.Hsioii to (rod."

*• The Companion to the Prayer-book'' is taken almost word for word
iVom a very cele^rateil work, the " Rationale of the Book of ('oumioii
l^rayer," by Bishop Sparrow, one of the bes' Ititu.dists that the Cliurcii
ol ICiigland has produced. He lived during the stormy periotl of the
(ireat liel)eHion, and was expelled from his College at C;.ml)ridge, by
the Puritans, in IC+'V for refusing to subscribe to the Solemn League
and Covenant. Soon after the Ilcstoration he was prt)moted from the
Archdeaconry of Sudbcry to the See of lOxeter, and afferwanls trans-
lated to that of Norwich. He was deeply read in ritual matters, and
■compiled a collection of Art'cles, Injunctions, Canons, vtc., which is
highly esteemed. I mention these particulars to shew that this excel-
lent little book is not the production of any mean or incompetent per-
son, nor of any one in any way connected with what is called, the
modern Ilounini/ing school. Kxcellent a:< tiie work really is, it liardly
excites surprise that, as the author was himself persecuted and (jectctl
from his preferments by V,g Puritans of the 17th ct;ntury, his book
should be assailei and cried down by their successors of the l!)th.

'J'hat it is of pure f'l'nit'stdiit (luality, notwithstantling all that is said
against it we have abundant evidence at the very commencement of it.
The rtrst eight pages arc lllled with a noble extract lioni Hooker's Kc»
clesiastical Polity. This is followed by a short insT"i:i( ai. noik.i:,
the (ir;;t seiilence of wliich is in exa;;t accordance wiih the HUh .Vrti-

THE COMPANION TO THE PRAYER BOOK DEFENDED.

cle; but not by auy means in accordance with Iloiunn doctrine. It
Hays, "The Service-books of every Cliurcli were originolly composed
" in tlie language of tlie people for whose use they were intended."
The teaching to be derived from this passage obviously is, that the
Kervice-books ought to be continued in the same language in which
they were at first v/ritten, that is, in the language of the people v^ho
have to use them; or iu the words of the Article, that *' Public Prayer
"in the Church should not be in a tongue not understanded of the
"people," which in the Church of Home it is. Acain, in the Preface,
p. 21, is another passage which, though in accordance with our 31st
Article, is entirely repugnant to the Roman «loctrine, against which
that Article is a protest, viz., that "in the sacrifice of the Mass the
" Priest offers Christ for the quick and the dead ;" or as the Catechism
of Trent expresses it, that " its benefits extend not only to those who
" communicate, but also to all the faithful whether living or numbered,
"among those who have died in the Lord, but whose sins have not yet
"been fully expiated." The passage is as follows: "This public s'er-
" vice is accepted of God. not only for those who are present and say
" Amen to it; but for all those that are absent upon just cause, even.
" for all that do not renounce communion with it and the Church:
" for it is the common service of thenj all, commanded to be offered
" up in the name of them all, and agreed to by all of them to be ottered
"up for them all, and there/ore is accepted for all them, though present-
" ed to God by tlie Priest alone." Here mention is made of the present
and the absent, but not a word of the dkal I And it will be founvl that
it retains this same Protestant character throughout.

I shall in each case give at full length the passage to which Dr. Gray
objects, as he sets it out, word for word, and the remarks he makes
upon it; putting in italics those words which he quotes as the words of
the author, and leaving those which are his own not so distinguished.

1st. " In a note to p. 87 it is asserted to be the office of the Chris-
" tian Priest to make an atonement for th<: people, and that with a view
" to make the people tmderstantl this, the Church orders that token thus
^^makiny an atonement for them, and offering up for them the i^assion of
" Christ, the Priest shovldsay the Prayer secretly, miisticall >j. Surely this
" teaching is at variance wiih the doctrines of our Prayer-book, and
" derogatory to the honor of Christ."

That Dr. Gray mistakes the teaching of this passage is perfectly
clear from this simple fact, that his extract, to all appearance, makes
the Author of the " Companion" to say that " the Church" of England
" orders that the Priest should say the Prayer secretly, mystically ;'' where-
as he actually says in express terms that '^this C7t?n'c/i" of England
" does not order the Priest to ftay the<e prayers secretly." I will transcribe
the whole note :

" The reason of these secreta, secret prayers said by the Priest, may
be partly for variety to refresh the people, but, chiefly, as I con-
ceive, that by this course the people might be taught to understand
and reverence the office of the Priest, which is to make an atonement
for the people, and to present their prayers to God, by that very of-
fering of them, making them more acceptable to God; all of which
depends not upon the people's consent or conSrmation of his ofllce,
but upon God's alone appointment aud institution, who hath set him
apart to these oflices of offering gifts and sacrifices for the people.
And therefore as it was appointed by God, that when Aaron by his
priestly oHlce was to olTer for the people aud make an atonement for
them, none of the people were to be present; so the Church orders
that at some tunes, when the Priest is making an atonement for the
people, aud ofloring up for them and the acceptation of their prayers,
the merits and passion of Christ, none should seem actually to assist,
but the Priest should say it secretly and mystically. The Church of
England is generally in her Common Prayers, as for an humble, so
for an audible voice, especially iu the Lord's I'rayer, appointing it to

(I
((
<(

<(
<(
((
((
((
l(
t(
(«
<>
(I
<<

THE COMPANION TO THE PRAYER BOOK DEFENDED. 5

'•• ^e said, In the Rubric before it, with a lo'id, that is, an audible voice,
•' not secretly : au(! tnis for the ujore earnest repetition of so Divine
"word;*, and to niivke them more familiar to the people. Uut though
'♦ this Church docs not order the Priest to say these prayers secretly^ yet
•' she retains the same order of offering up by the Triest in Collects
" following the people's foregoing supplications."

The fact is that Dr Gray passes over the sentence which does relate
to the Church of England, because It would not suit his purpose, and
■ applies to her one which relates nut 10 her, but as I conceive to the
'Church of Home.

When the Author says that the office of Priest is " to maJce an atone-
ment (or tho pcoplti" he speaks of that otllce in the general; and in
describing the oflice of the Priest such expressions are very common
with our best, soundest, most Protestant divines, aa for instance Dr.
Thomas Jackson, one of the ablest opponents ot Popery the Church of
England has produced. He says that " to be a Priest implies as much
"as to be a Mediator or Intercessor for averting God's wrath, or an
" Advocate for procuring his favours and blessings." Commentaries.
B. 11, c. 2. With respect to the Jewish I'rlest it is said In Scripture
repeatedly, as I Chron. vi. 49, "That Aaron and his Sous were ap-
" pointed to make an atonement for Israel." And Hooker says, Rook
5, s. 78, "that a Priest is a Clergyman who offereth sacrifice to God.
" The Fathers o/the Church of Christ call usually the ministry of the
" Gospel Priesthood, in regard of that which the Gosp.'l hath propor-
" tionably to ancient sacrifices, namely the Communion of the blessed
" body and blood of Christ, although it hath properly no s.icriflce."
The Author says that when the Jewish Priest was to make an atone-
ment for the people, as was appo.nted by God, none of the people were
to be present. And further tliat in the Church of Rome (for I con-
ceive that tlie Church of Uorae is meant by *' the Church" in the pas-
sage which Dr. Gray quotes, because Wheatley says, p. 155, that
" it is a custom there" (in the Romish Church) "for the Priest at all
the long Prayers" (the Collects as opposed to the preceding short Ver-
sicles) " to kneel before the altar, ana mutter them over softly to him-
self") when the Priest is offering up the passion nf Christ, that none
: should seem aaiially to assist, ih*'. Church orders him to say the prayers
secretly, mystically. But when he speaks of the Church of England, not
a syllable does he say of making atonement, not a word of offering up
. the passion of Christ, but simp]y dGcl&r as, with a view, to all appear-
ance, to putting a negative on all such conceits, that thi~ Church does
not order the Priest to say these prayers secretly, though she does retain
the order of offering up by the Priest in Collects, following the Peo-
ple's foregoing supplications; " the Minister," as Wheatley says, "col-
lecting into short forms the people's petitions which had before been
oivided between him and them by Verslcles and responsee!."

Dr. Gray's extracts are very often verv unfairly made. Whoever
•will coi.descend to quote as unfairly as he habitually does, may find, in
;auy book he lays his hands upon, " teaching at variance with the doc
trjues of our Prayer-book," and even in Holy Scripture itself, teaching
" derogatory to the honor of Christ !"

2nd. "Again, p 126, two Collects in our Post-Communion service
" are aaid to teuch that the great benefits of </ie Sacrament are remission
" of sins, end yet other thinos, and that not only for those who are present
" in the body and communicate, but for all the tchole Church. Now is
" this really the doctrine of the Collects? The Catechism of Trent
"says, ' Such is the efficacy of this sacrifice (the Mass) that its bene-
" ' fits extend not only to the celebrant and communicant, but also to
" • all the faithf il whether living or numbered amongst those who have
" 'died in the Lord, but whose sins have not yet been fully expiated.'
"But where in the beautiful language of the Collects in question do
" we find such a doctrine as this."

In answer to Dr. Gray's first question, I say that in the passage he

TIIK COMPANION TO TIIK PRAYIIR BOOK DEIENDKD.

I !

ror.i.Krr.
"That wo iinil all tliy wliolo Ohun-li
' may obtain remission ul' our ,«in?, and
all otiinr bcnclitH of hi," pafision."

f|Uotcs from the •' Companion," there Is uot only the doctrine of the
Collect, but Its very lanj;rii.if;e iihnost wonl for word. To show thlt«,
T will place iho (-xtnict 'roin Mm; •' Companion" and one from the Col-
lect In parallel columns— the ideuilty of the language will theu be
clearly seen.

CoMI'ANIO.V. ]

"Tho Kfoat Ijonelits of the Sacri.uient|
*' arc romivsioii of sin.-^i and jot othorj
"tliinjfH, anil that no only for tlioHc who
"arui>resent in the Ir-dy aipl coiuninui-
"catn. ijut lor all tiiu whole Cluircli."

This is a saiL^fiictory answer to the first qtiestlou. Before I can as
satisfactorily auswer the second, I shall have to transcribe the whole
paru'Jtraph from which Dr. Gray malces his extract :

" Two Collects follow (whereof the Priest shall select which he
" plcasclh) full of high anil holy doctrine. In the first we acknow-
♦' ledge the great benefits of the Holy Sacrament, vl/. remission of
*»sins, and yet other things, and that not only for those who are pre-
•' sent In the body and communicate, l)ut for all the whole Church.
♦' AV'c pray that hereby we may be fulfilled with God's grace and hea-
" venly benediction, and tliatour sacialice, unworthy though we be to
"offer It, may be accepted for all those purposes for which it was be-
•'fore ackuowledgfd to l)e eJllcaclous, accompanied as we desire it to
"be, with the offering of ourselves, our souls and bodies to the ser-
" vice of oi'.r gracious God."

Now neither in the extract made by Dr. Gray, nor In the whole pa-
ragraph from which he makes it, is there one word about the i>i;Ai>,
uot a word al)OUt " the faithful numbered amongst those who have
"died in the Lord, but whose sins have not yet been expiated" 1 1
AVhat then coukl be Dr. Gray's motive for giving this extract from the
Trent Catechisu)? It is easy to imagine a motive for it, bat not easy
to express one's thoughts in language which would not be harsh, and
disagi'eeable. The doctrine of the Popish Catechism Is not to be found
in either the Companion or the Collects; and that fact could not have
escapt'd Dr. Gray's observation while engaged in transcribing that
part of the Catechism.

3rd. " At page 156, it Is hald nuthinii seems more poxcerful irith God
^Ui) nt'ni-iira that (a gracious absolution at the daij of Judymttnt) than lib-
*■' c.rnUiii to the poor, is thi-^ in har.-nouy with our 11th and i2th Ar-
" tides?"

To shew tlmt this teaching is in harmony with tho authorized for-
mularies of the Church, 1 shall make some extracts from the " Homily

OF AI-MS DKKDS AM) MKltCIll '-NKSS TOWAI.'DS TIIK PoOU AND NiCKDY."

Dr. Gray will recollect that this Homily is in the Second Book: he will
also recollect the words of the ;J5th Article, to which he has repeatedly
affixed his subscription — " the Second Book of Homilies doth contain
" a godly and wholesome doctrine," &c. That godly and wholesome
doctrine in tins particular is as follows :

" Amonpst the manirold duties that Alniifj'hty (Jod roriuireth of his faithful ser-
" vants the true Christians, by the which he would that both his nanie should be
" sloiitied, and the eertainty of their voeatinn declared, there is none that i.s either
'■ more aL'fepta(>le vmto him, or more profitable for thom, tliau are the works of
" mercy and piety shewed upon the poor whieh be nfflietcil with any kind of misery.
*■ — The Holy Seripture in sundry places reeordeth, nothing can be more thankfully
" taken or aecepted of Ciod. I. Pro v. xix. Malt, xxv. Deut xv.)— Tho Holy Apostles
'■ and i-Msciples of Christ, who l)y reason of his daily conrersation, ^aw by his deeds,
" and hoird in his doctrine how much he tendered the poor; the godly Fathers also
" that were t»oth before and since Christ, endued without doubt with the Holy
" (ihoft and most certainly certified of God's holy will : they both do most carneitly
" exhort us, and in all their writings almost continual y admonish us, that we would
" remember the poor, and bestow onr charitable alms uiion them (St. Paul, holy
" Father Tobit, the learned and tfotlly doctor Chrysostom). As .all these (Abraham,
" holy Fathers .Job anil Tobit) by their mercifulness and tender compassion, which
•'they showed to the miserable afflicted members '<f Christ, in the relieving, helping,
•' and succouring them witli their temporal goods in this lite, ohfninrd (ioil\ favour,
" and were dear, accei)table and pleastnt in his sight; so now they themselves take
" pleasure in tho fruition of (iod in the pleasant joys of heaven, and arc iK'ho in

'God'a ttent'.if trorU net Iji/orv lit, ('« jtcr/cct cjcuiiipfvi ever bcfoi-e our eyes, hotU

THE COMPANION TO TIIE PRAYER BOOK DEE ENDED.

" hull' ti'f iiinii nlrn»fi (itnl, in th'x'iiir iintrtnl fi/r, niul nfmi lioir ir< iii'ii/ iiinir to lifi'
" hi ion with t'l'ni in rrrr/ii'ifiii'i f>tf' mrr niiif /iliiitn." (Thin is, I |ir«>.''iiTiin, rot-pivo
a Krncious nlHohition iit tlio <1 •> of jtulrmpnt.) " Eor ino<'t true i^ (liat -tyinif
"which St. Autcurtino hnth. tliat tho /n'rimi o/n/uih inul nlii rino ,,f th> imor ii th>'
'' I'ifjhl ii'ii/) fi) hi'iiriii, I III 1 ,1 Ii jiiiiijirr I xt : tif in ur imlu, ninth If, in thr n'liu tit
' hriu-ni. Tlif^y iisi-tl in limpn pti-t fo set in th'' hinhw.iy ,«i<l('< t!i" pii'tiiicr of iMcr-
"iMiry i oiiifin;,' with liis (inecr wiii<'!\ w!i« tiio ri^lit w:iv t«i t'»wn. Hut (lod's won! (n?
" St. Ani;nsUii'' s;uth > luith st>t in tin- "'",'/ in Ik hvh the noor iii:ui anil h'-' hoii.-'o. so
'' that wh(»:^o '.•/''/ iti) iirii/lii ihithi-r, iiml »<>t turn (iiit of the wiiy, /«(»«' 'm Im thi- /lonr,
"Tho poor inin is t!iat Sic eury that shiill .-=01 us tho reaijy way : arnl if we look well
*■ to this murk, woslnll not wimlor much o;it of iho rijiht way, Eur so saith t!i«
'' Wise Mai), In- ifhii h kIi' inth Huriii tn tin- jtimr, (liiUi III)/ liii iiioiii II ill hunh to lh>'
*' LitfdtJi'i' II liirtir iiit- 1- it mill iiiiiii : tJM ;.'iiii heinK oliiofly tlio pi.sjpssion of tho
" lifocvcrla.«lin(f. tliroui;h tlio merits of our .-^avioar .lo.siis Ciiiist." (1 prcsiimi' tliHl
nonp will jrain possession of thn life everlftinffi unless they reeeive a gmeiouii abso-
lution at the (lav of jud'^'inent.)

Dr. Gray asks whether tills tetichin:? U in harmony with our 11th
and I2th Artich^.s? I sliall leave tho lloinilist to answci' tliis (juostion,
bc^rging Dr. Gray to rcintMubcr titut tlie ItNirneU ni.sliop Jew.?l is that
person. Mr. Lol'.us, in liis Ilt'o of tli:ir, (Mninent I'rei.ito (publislunl by
tho Society for proinotinii; Cliristinn Ktiowlc-fljro), t«)ls us, p. 18(5, tliat
"in 1571 Archbi-hop I'arlxer felt it expedient to raise, if possible, an
*' effective barrier ai^ainst th(! flelui»e of innovations which Cartwright
" (tlie I'nritan) was lettin;; hjosc; upon tiie laiul. Ho accordln;j;ly sul)-
" niitted t!ie matter to tlie Rishopa assembled in Oonvocation, and the
" result of their deliberations was an unanimous resolution that tlio
" Articles of1."»fi2" (whicli Jewel had assisted in revising;) "should bo
" printed under the supervision of tin; ]Jisho[) of Salisbury" (Jewel).
So that we llnd the same person, and lie well qtmlitled for the task, at
once tlie Author of the Homily, the lleviser of the Articles, iind the
Supervisor of the printini? of them.

''But hero," eontiiiues the Tloinily, "some will ri.ny unto us, If almsgivinfr ami
" our charitahlt work.-i tow.irils tho poor bo able to wash away '^ius, to ri-concilo u^*
"to (Jod, to deliver us from the peril of datniiition, and mnko us the suns and huirs
"of (xod's kinjrdoin" (in tho WDnis of the ** (/(>m))anion." to procure us a pracious
absolution at the day ol judcmonf, " tlicn are (Jhri.st's merits delac-e<l. and iiis blood
" sihed in vain ; then arc Wi' justilieil i)y works, and l>y our deeds may wo unfit hm-
" ven : then do we in vain bi-iiiive that Chi-ixi ilinl ^» jinl nn-nii imi r niiin, luul thni he
" rov/nr our ./uxii/iroiion as St. Paul toachoth." All which is the doctriiu! ot the
11th and li!th Articles, ilo then shows how tho doctrines harn;oni/e, and concludes
tiius: " Alms deeds do wash away our sins" (do prooaro us a yiacious absolution at
the day of iudumcnf " becMuso liod dotli vouchsafe th. n to repute us c1(mu and
"pure, when we ilo them ft)r his sake, and not because they dosorvf or merit our
" purging, or for that they have any such slrensth and virtue in themselves," Now
as tho Author of tho " Companion" has not asserted any thing like this, his leaishins
harmonizes with the Ilomilv: and as the Homily haiujonizes with the Arti(*les, tlio
teaching of tho " Companion" does of course harmonize widi the Articles also.

4th. " At page 1"7. To confustt our sins to a Priest even, in health is
*^ainoiif< and ancient cnstom, and not only a sign of repentauce, Intt the
'^best means of ohtninin(j p'lrdan and aniendiiuj onr lives. Tlie I'rayer-
" book recommends in a certain specilled case 'openin^ij our ^rief to a
" ' Minister of God's word,' or ' rcceivinu: absolution' at his hands with
"a view to * a quiet conscience.' liut I cannot see that this is ideuti-
"cal with saying that tlie best way to obtain pardon and amendmeut
" of life Is to confess our sins to a Priest. "

I have alreatly said that I look upon "?/<e host"' in this passage as an
unguarded expression. It would have been well if the Author had lelt
the adjective in tlie positive state " a good," instead of raising it as he
has done to the superlative degree " the best;" or if he had qualitied
it by the addition of some such words as " one of the best," or " next
to confession to God the best." However, Dr. Giay admits tliat " the
"Prayer book does rccomnjeud in a certain specified case opening our
"grief to a Ministci of God's word, or reeciving absolution at his
"hands with a view to a quiet conscience." The place where thjse
words are to be found is the Exhortation in tho Communion Service.
But doeis Dr. Gray mean to say that this is the only place iu the Autho-
rized Formularies of the Church in which the subject is mentioned?
That there is only one certain specijicd case in which opening grief to a
Minister is recommended by the Church? That there is only one » iew

g THE COMPAXION To THE PRAYER BOCK DKFENDED

with respect to which receiving al)soIution Is recommended by the
Church? That there Is nothing said in any of the Authori/.ed Formu-
laries expres8ly about ConfKusion to a Priest in lieuitU as well as lu
sickness? nothing ahbut benelit.s to result Troni it? nothing about Ab-
.so/?(«/o>i and its benetlts? Are the great C'hurch writers when setting
forth and expounding her doctrines silent about (Confession and Abso-
lution, and is every thing comprised in that vne cet'taia sptdjkd case?
Let us see whether any thin:; is said on this subject in the Hook of IIo-
mlUes — let us see what tjodli/ and inhdlettome doctrine Is to be found in
the Homily of •' Mki'kxtaxck and of ruut: HKcoxciLivrioN with God."

"Now," says the Homily, "there be four |).irt8 of rcpentiiiiue, wh ch being set
''together may be likened to jin efiffy and iihort lathlor, whereby we \a\y climb from
** t'.ie bottoiuleH.^ pit of perdition, that w<? ca.><tourselv h into l>y our daily otfenctsund
" Rrieviiufl ain^, up to the custle or tower of eternal *nd eadlc^^ salvation." — " Tho
" Meeond of them li an unfeigaod uonfu/islon xn laolinowledxing of our Am tu liud—
"for without thin confeii.siou nin '\* not forgiven. Thid then is the chiefext and most
" prineipiil (not the only, but tho ehicfe^t and most principal) eonfc!<3ion that in tho
" Scriptureit and word of Ood we are bidden to m.ikt-.an 1 williout the which we shall
" never obtain puriion and forgiveness ol our sinH. Indeed btMtdes this there is an-
"ofhcr kind of ConTcwon whUsh i« nkkukul, andnkckssaiiy. Andof the same doth
" Siiint .)amc!4 Hpe.ik after this manner, saying. ' icknowlcdite your faults one to
"another, and pr.iy one for another that yo m ly b • saved.' As if he should say,
"open thit wiiioh grieveth you ihat remedy mny bj found."— He then eoes on to
nhew that this text affords no support tj tho Komani.sts in their doctrine of/»rce(^
auricular sa'tramenttil confession : he s.iysthat in alleging this text to support that
dootrint', "they are greatly deoeived themselves, and do shamefully deceive oth-
" crs." To this lie adils, '* being therefore not led with con»^cience therecf, let us
"with fear an I trembling, and witli a true contrite licirt, use that kind of Oonfe.s-
" sion tint God iloth command in his wor I; and then doubtless, as lie is faithful
"and rightjous, hw will forgive us our sins and make us cle ir irom all wickedness.
'' I do not say but tliat, if any do tind tiiemselves tr ubled in c;inscienoe they may
" repair to their learned curate or piistoi" (not one certu in npccijied ca<i>t only, but
whenever occiusion may rc<iuire), " or to some other godly learned minister, nn/l
"show tho trouble and dtiubt of their conscience to them that they may recoive at
"th<'ir hand the comfortable salve of (}(id's w>ird : but it is agiinst the true Chris-
"tian liberty, thnf miu ninii nfmu/il be Ih/iukI to the numbering of his sing, us it hath
•'been useu heretofore in time o* blindness and ignorance,"

The Author of the " Companion" says, Confession to a I'rlest is a
&pious custom. The Homily says, that Confession to God, though the
chleftist and most principal confession, is uot the only kind of confes-
sion that, in the Scriptures and word of dad we are bidden to make : if
then, confession to a Priest is bidden us in the Scriptures and word of
God, it is a pious custom, being the discharge of a duty which we owe
to God.

lie says too that it is an ancient custom. H JOker, b. G, > 3, p. 30,
says that the " first and anclentest Father that mentioneth (private)
" confession (.o a Priest) is Origen" (who flourished a. d. 230), " by
•' whom it may seem that men being loath to present rashly themselves
•' and their fau.ts unto the view of the whole Church, thought it best
" to UHfold first their minds to some one special man of the clergy,
•'which might either help them himself, or refer them to a higher
" court if need were."—" Men thought it the safest way to disclose
" their secret faults and lo crave imposition of penance from them (the
*♦ clergy) whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath left in his Church to be
** spiritual and ghostly physicians, the guides and pastors of redeemed
" souls, whose office doth not only consist in general persuasions unto
" amendment of life, but also in private particular cure of diseased
•' .-iinds."— " Tne greatest thing which made men willing and forward
•* upon their knees to confess whatever they had committed against
"God, was their fervent desire to be helped and assisted with the
"prayers of God's saints— so that it hath been heretofore the use of
'• penitents to unburden their minds even to private person^* and to
" crave their prayers. But because of all men there is, or should be,
'•none in that respect, more fit for troubled and distressed minds to
" repair unto than God's ministers, Gregory, Bishop of Nice.' (who
'•flourished A >. 370), •' proceedeth further— maA-« the Friest, as a
'^father, partaker of thy affliction and grief, be bold to impart unto him
•' the things that are most secret, he wilt have care both of thy safety and
*' of thy credit."

Hi''

THE COMPAXIO.S TO THE PEAYER HOOK DEFENDED.

lie says it U a xiyn of I'fpentance, This may l)e taken for granted,
lor very few would coufeHs that of whkli Miey did not repent

He Buys It Is (the bent, or an, 1 think, it would htive been better ex-
pressed, had he called U. a good or une nfthtbest, or next to Confession
to God) If best means vf tihtainittif pardon. Hooker says, " In the or-
" uer which Christian rcli;j:iou hath tauglit for procurement of God's
"mercy towards sinners (in other words pardon). Confession is ac-
*• kuowledi^ed a principal duty, yea. In some casfjs confession to man,
" not to God only." m. G, v. ;i, p. 4C.

He says that It is the best mrnns of amending oi'r lives The Homily
says that while Confession is the second of the four steps of tlic short
and easy ladder whereby we may climb from perdition to endless salva-
tion — amendment of life is the fourth. " The fourth step Is, an amend-
"inent of life, or a new life in bringing forth fruits worthy of repent-
•' ance." Surely the best way to reach the i'ourih step of a ladder, must
be by making use of the lower steps, the second as well as the rest.

Thus is the teaching of the " Companion" in this passage which has
bien so much talked of, exactly in accordance with that of the ilomily
and of Ilooktr; and with the alteration I have suggested perfectly
sustainable In every particular.

5th. " At p. 123, it is said this Sacrament shuiihl be received ftsting.
" It is to the honour oj so high a Sacrament that the prccians bod'j of Christ
*• should rtrst enter before any other meat. Again the words of Cyril, p.
♦' 123, let every one be car^fid to keep it, for ^chosoever carelessly loses any
**part (f it, had better lose a part of himself. Is not the implication In
" both the passages more in harmony with ih« C'hurch of Home than
** with that of England?"

To make this extraci a fiiir one Dr. Gray should hare stated that the
flrst of the two pjissages are tlie words not of the Author of the "Com-
panion," but of St. Ar<;isTixi:, one of those eminent men whonj the
Homily styles " godly Fathers endued without doubt with the Holy
•• Ghost," and whom another of them calls "the best learned ot all an-
" cient writers." " It is," he says, " true that our Saviour gave it (the
"Sacrament) to his disciples after supper; but dare any man quarrel
" with the Universal Chun:h of Christ for receiving it fasting. This
" also pleased the Holy Ghost, that, lor the honour of so great a Sacra-
" mcnt, the body of Christ should Jirst enter into t/i^- Christian's month be-
*^fore all <>ther meats." St. Augustine seems to think, says tlie Author
ol the "Companion," that the Catholic Church received this custom
of receiving the Sacrament fasting from St. Paul. Hence, perhaps,
bis saying " it pleased the Holy Ghost."

The otluT passage he does say are the words of St. Cyril, a Father
almost as eminent in his day, as St. Augustine had been thirty years
before him. The Homily againsi •' Peril of Idolatry," styles him
" Cyrellus, an old and holy doctor." Ilepreslt' ' at the General Coun-
cil at Ephesus, the third of those "six Counci. ■ which were allowed
" and received of all men," as the Homily says, ilowever lightly mod-
ern Puritans may think and speak of this eminent servant of God, the
165 Bishops assembled at the Second Council ol Constantinople, the
tlfth of the (Jtncral Councils, esteemed him and his writings so highly,
that they auatliciuaMzed Ibas for writing " an impious Epistle calling
" the twelve chapters of the Holy Cyril impious and contrary to the
" right faith :" and among the older IJivlnes of the Church of England
his Epistles have been quite as much esteemed as they were by the
older fathers. The learned Author of "the Treatise oi the Pope's Su-
premacy" (a work lately published by the Society lor Promoting Chris-
tian Knowledge), Dr. Barrow, quotes him several times, and each time
to establish some important point in opposition to the great Roman
dftctrine of the Papal Supremacy. For instance to prove— 1st. That
the sheep whom our Lord bids St. Peter to leed were not, as the Ro-
manists say, his fellow shepherds, but the common believers or people
of God; 2nd. That an Apostle, being an CEcumenical Judge, and an
Instructor of all the sub-celestial world, was not aflQxed to any diocese,

\Q TUE COMPANION' TO, THE PRAYER BOOK DEFENDED-

and could not be excluded from 1103-, like t!ic Tlsbop of IJorac, or anjr
other Bishop with restraint; 3rd. That both the Scriptuies and the
Fathers represent the Temporal Sovereign as supreme over his sub-
jects, Cicrical as well as Lay, being above all next to God.

With rei^pect to ihisfnstiufj, the Author of the " Companion" does
not puo it on very high ground, lor he culls it only " a circumstance of
time," &c. ])r. Gray eislts if the implication is not more in harmony
with the Church of IJonie than with the Church of England! He may
perhaps see, as he professed to do in the case of the l'ost-Commui;iou
Collect, something about the Dr.Ai) to b'i implied.- but as the mere cir
cumstance of receiving the Sacrament, /«,s</;<f/ is the only implication
which the langutige '.vill justify, tliut is quite in accordance with the
Church of England. In the case of Adult IJaptism the Church directs
that the candidates are to be exhorted "to prepare themselves wiih
" prayers and fasting for the reception of that Holy Sacrament;" sure-
ly there cannot be any iiiiplication of Popery wl en an Author recom-
mends as a circumstance in the reception of one of the Sacraments,
that which the Church enjoins as a pi-cjxirotion for the other. And as
to iheory, the Tieface to the Prayer-book declares that at the last re-
view it was maue a principle " to reject every alteration proposed,
" which struck at any laudable praeiice of the whole Catholic Ch.urch."
And we have the authority of St. Augustine for .saying, that receiving
the Lord's Supper /asii?j(/ was the practice of the whole Catholic Church
up to his d.iy, which was as early as 300.

The words of St. Cyril stand in connection with the manner in which
the bread is to be delivered 10 the j^eople, that is not according to tho
practice of the Komau Church iuio their moi'ths, but as the Itubric in
the Prayer-book directs ";';Uo their hands." Companion, p. 122. I can
see nothing implied in these words of Cyril beyond r verence'xn handling
the symbol of Christ's Vl.ssed Body; that same reverence which the
Prayer-book inculcuies, where the IJidjric enjoins the " Minister rerer-
" entli/ to place upon the Lord's table what remaineth of the consecra-
' ted elements, covering the same with a fair linen doth;" and another
that "he und other of the comnmuicauts ahixll r vcrently cat and
'* drink the same."

By way of conclusion I shall briefly recapitulate what I have written.
TheflrstofDr. Gray's objections rests upon a misapprehension and
misquotation on his part of the language of the Author of the " Com-
panion," and falls to the ground as soon as the one is explained and
the other exposed. In tho second Pr. Gray in effect charges our Post-
Commcnlon Collect with teaching that the beneOts of the Sacroment
of tiie Lord's Supper extend to the j>kad as well as tho living, which
neither it nor the passage from the " Companion" which he quotes,
does in any conceivable way. In the third J)r. Gray in effect charges
l'.e Homily of AL^[^ i>K,i;uo with being not in harmony with the Mth
and 12th Articles, which both it, and the passage from the •' Com^/ac
ion" which he quotes, strictly are. In the fourth he d .nies that which
the Homily of Kki'Kntaxci: and Hooker aflirui. And i 1 the tilth he as-
ser*^^s, that a circumstantial riicommended by emi.ient Fathers and
practiced by t!ie Universal Church, and said to have originated with
St. Paul, is objectionable, which is in c'ircct opposition to a fundamen-
tal principle of the English Keformatiou.

Having thus shown how utteny groundless all of Dr. Gniy's tlve ob-
jections really arc, thi- two passages being altered in the way I have
suggested, I can safely leave it to the Jleujbers of the (Miureli and the
Church Society, to deeide whether the teaching of this little book is of
so objectionable a character as to justify what has been both said and
UouH respecting it; and witli the greatest willingness do 1 leave Dr.
Gray in full and unenvied possession of all the satisfaction he may be
role to extract from the consciousness, which he must feel, of having
been the originator, contriver and manager of a " most distre- -ing
discussion," to use the words of a friend of his own ; 01 as it might
with great propriety have been called, a most disgra-^eful row.

1?^^

TO REV. F. OOSTER^'S DEFENCE

TO THE

"COMPANION TO THE PRAYER BOOK."

BY EEV. I. W. D. (iKAY, D. D., KECToR OF SAINT JOllX.

TTtEFJCE.

Tm; I{r.v*i>. Mu. Costkh has lately circulated throughout my Parish,
and for aught 1 kuow, througjj otlicr parts ol" the Diocese-, a printed
j)apcr. entitled '* The Companion to the Prayer IJook delended against
the unfounded objections of the liev. Dr. I. W. J), (iray." Tl<e first
question that presents itself is, How did Mr. Custer become possessed of
those ohjcctious? This is a point that requires some explanation. 15y
some unusual process, dilleriug ceriainiy from the ordinary routine of
conventional practice, a portion of my prjvat.e.., correspondence with
the Lord Bishop of the Diocese has found its way aiio Mr. Coster's
possession, aud has fjitiiwilh been made tlie basis of a personal atts-ck.
upon mo, through the medium of the Press. Had tlic correspondence
been a public one, even in tuat case, it would have been unfair for a
thini party to interpose, and throw the weight oJ his opinions into the
scale, until it had reacned its termination. But, wheu private letters,
instead of the public Press, had been the channels of commnnicatiou,
and while the interchange of those letters was still pending, for a gen-
tlemau, unchallenged, uninvited, anautliorized, as far as it yet appears,
to enter the arena, and l)ringing with him a fragment of the corres-
pondence on owe side of the question, to undertake the refutation of
it beA)re the public, does certainly, in some measure, set at deilance
the courtesies of the social compact. 1 may be mistaken, but I an>
under the stron^j; impression tliat, throughout society, in any of its
gradations, a candid and iutclligeut person could scarcely be found,
whose judgment would not prououu ; upon such a proceeding the
verdict of condemnatijn.

One simple fact, that sliows the impropriety of this course, is, that
a few brief quotations in my letter are, without the slightest hint as
to the circumstances under which they were made by me, held up to
public view as unfair extracts. The correspondence which enjbodied
them arose in consequence of a request, on the part of the Lord
Bishop, to be referred to the names of Auiliors, aud to passages in
their Works, which had been thought objectionable. In compliance
with that request. Books w. re named, passages referretl to, and, where
it seemed necessary to point oyt the particular clauses to which the
objections applied, short extracts were given; given, not to the pub-
lic, to inform them of the contents of Works to wliich they hac not ac-
cess, but to the Lord Bishop, who had tlie Works in possession, and
consequently ihe means of examining the entire contents. Was it
consouani with the laws of legitimate controversy to take those ex-
tracts in their isolated form, unaccompanied by the correspondence
that explained them, and hold them up to the piblic as specimens of
unfair quotations? But Air. Coster has gone furiner: He has not only
condemned prematurely the exuacts, as unfair, but u..dertakes to in-
sinuate that this supposed unfairness was the result of improper itio-
thrs. To such a charge as this, 1 can afford to be siloU. It will not
harm the accused : it will not beuetlt the accusf^r. It is possible, in-
deed, that some of my readers, while perusing the following payes,
may think,— well, here is indeed a scope for rcturuiug the compliment ;

12 A REPLY TO THE RE\ . F. COSTER'S DEFENCE

hut I shall not avail myself oflt. The object of my reply is not to im-
peach Mr. Coster's motives, or to vindicate my own ; but to place the
truth before my readers in such a form, that they may be guarded
against error. While, in aimliag at this end, I de^.n it better not to
retort the personalities with which Mr. Coster's paper abounds; in
reference to its theology, I shall examine It closely, and use as little
ceremony as possible in showing the unsoundness of its principles.
Of those principles, as contained in the little work euti led the " Com-
paaion to the i'rayer Book," which Mr. Coster undertakes to defend,
but from which the Bishop of the Diocese has withdrawn his sanction,
I certainly did affirm, at the late meeting of the Diocesan Church So-
ciety, that they were not in accordance with the doctrines of the
Church of England. I affirm it still. They are not so. They are
" strange and erroneous doctrines," opposed alike to the Bible and
the Prayer Book — dishonourable to God — injurious to mat. — and, to
the best of my ability, God being my helper, 1 will endeavor to banish
them from my Parish.

REFJ^Y.

Mr. CosTicn's first argument, in favor of the " Companion to the
Prayer Book," is drawn from external sources. He says, '* It is taken
almost word for word from a very celebrated Work, • The Rationale
of the Book of Common Prayer,' by Bishop Sparrow, one of the best
Ritualisis that the Cburcli of England has produced." And hence, Mr.
Coster infers, that " this excellent little book, ' as he terras it, " is not
the production of any mean or Incompetent person, ntr of any one in
any way connected with what is called the modern Kcn.anizing School."
Now really this mode of reasoning is too great a demand upon our gen-
erosity. While, as yet, we are not in a conceding mood, it supposes
us willing to concede every thing. First, we are required to grant,
without evidence of the fact, that all the extracts in this little Work,
are taken from Bishop Sparrow ; whereas, in the whole Work, we have
hut three references to Bishop Sparrow, acknowledged by the Author;
and two of these are from his coiJectiou of Articles. In ?ll the other
instances, we are referred to Councils, as of Carthage, Toledo, Laodi-
cea, &c., or to Fathers, as Irenajus, TertuUiun, Chrysostom, Cyril,
Augustine, Gregory, &c , without even a hint Irom the Author that
these are Sparrow's authorities. But, suppose all the extracts in this
little Compendium to be taken from Bishop Sparrow, the question Is,
do they fairly represent his opinions? Are they a faithful transcript
of the doctrines he means to Inculcate in his " Rationale?" lu tracing
the origin of rites, a learned Ritualist may have quotsd from all the
Fathers that have ever lived, and all the Councils that have ever sat,
in Christendom, ancient or modern, without meaning to adopt, as his
own, or inculcate upon his Church, all the sentiments contained in his
quotetious. Before we can be expected to take these upon his autho-
rity, we require to know, distinctly, which he authorizes, and which
he does not. And when we knov this, Mr. Coster must go a step fur-
ther, and prove to us, that every sentiment adopted by Bishop Spar-
row is a rule for us, now, in tlie Church of England. ' This is a con-
cessioM we are not prepared to make. We know that Bishops and
Popes, Churches and General Councils, are all fallible, — that all have
erred, and egregiously loo. Their opinions and decrees are conse-
quently, no further a rule for us than they accord with our ouo great
standard, the llobj Scriptures, and our own Church's exponents of that
standard, the Articles and Prayer Book. A Rationale ol the Book of
Common Prayer may be instructive as an historical record, and graii-
lying to the Ecclesiastical Antiquary, but it is no rule for the Church
of England upon doctrinal points: and it is easy to see how a little
•Compendium flrom such a work, may be constructed for the purpose

OF x'HE COMPANION TO TUB PRAYER BOOK. JJ^

of perverting:, instead of correcting, the faith of the unwary. If such
authority in to be appealed to, let the appeal be a fair one. Let Mr.
Coster prove to us satisfactorily, first, that all the extracts in this lit-
tle Tforlc are takeu, word for word, from Bishop Sparrow's Rationale
of the Ilook of Commou Prayer; secondly, that they are $o taken, and
so combined, in that Compendium, as to present the genuine sentiments
of that author; and thirdly, that there are no tenets expressed or re-
commended in Bishop Sparrow's worlv, but what the members of the
Church of England are bound to subscribe to. Every one of these po-
sitions he ought to substantiate before he can expect us to adopt his
conclusion ; instead of which, he begins hi» defence of the boolc, by
presenting us with a " nou sequitur" as to its authorship. The ex-
tracts, he says, are taken from Bishop Sparrow, therefore the Com-
panion "is not the production of any mean author, or of any one in
any way connected with the modern liomanizing school." iiut who
can tract here the connextion between antecedent and consequent ?
Because Mr. Coster's paper contains extracts Irora Hooker, does it
follow that his paper is not tlie production of any one connected with
the modern liomanizing school ? The remote ancestor of tlie " Com-
panion " might have been a good Kitualist; but its immediate father
a very unsound member of the Church of Ihigland, perhaps not a mem-
ber of it at ail. The question is not, whether the extracts ure fron>
Bishop Sparrow; but who was the modern Sparrow, that picked these
feathers from the old Sparrow's nest, and glued them tog'*ther in their
present form ? My miud is not prone to suspicion, but I cannot help
thinking ihat he is one of those delicate birds, that have been in the
lialjit of migrating to Home in the winter season, for a more genial
climate. Let, however, this retiring bird, who aits at present in the
shades of anonymons ol>scurity, come forward and show his plumage,
and tlien we will undertake to show, that whether he belongs to the
old Romanizing school, or the new one, it matters not, if his work be
one of liomanizing tcmloncy, which any true Protestant, one would
think, might easily discern that it is.

Mr. Coster's next argument is drawn Irom internal sources, from the
contents of the book itself. It contains, he says, "a noble extract
from Hooker's Ecclesi-istical Polity." Be it so. There might be fifty
extracts from Hooker found in tlie writings of Roman Catholic authors ;
but this would hartlly prove that their writings are of " pure Protest-
ant quality." It contains also a notice of an historical fact, viz., that
the " service books of every Church were originally composed iu the
language of the people for whose use they were intended." Why, auy
iiomtin Catholic acquainted with history will admit this. Harding, for
example, the opponent of Jewel, says, " In the time of the primitive
church, the people celebrated holy things in the vulgar tongue." —
" Tempore Primitivas JOcclesijc populus iu lingua vulgari sacra cele-
brabat." Does this prove his writings to have been of " pure Protest-
ant quality?" But Mr. Coster quotes anotlier passage from the '• Com-
lianion," to prove the purity of its Protestantism, as follows;

"This public service is accepted of God, not only for those who are presont and
*'siiy Jimon to it, but for all those \vh i a e absont upon just cause, even for all that
*' do i,ot renounce communion with it and the Church ; for it U the common service
" of them all, and agre-sd to by all of them, to be oftorcd up for them all, and tlicre-
" fore is accepted for all them, though preseiitcd to God by the Prio<t .nlono, o« (he
" Lamb nffertd up to ft'itd lnj ihr l*ii(iif (.Kxod. li*,'.' wanthc mjcri/iiy o/ flic nj/iol*; oon-
"' ureoiOioii i)f the rhildren n/ lurnrl, n nwret nmrrliin;/ MUO'>ur,it mivoiir of rent, to
■' itdvifu Alxiightu (Jud duify, ninl to continue hie/uvonr to them, ond nin/.-r klm dwell
" with them."

This is the entire passage. The words in italics v/cre omitted by Mr.
Coster, but I have given thorn as they stand in the " Compf.uiou," that,
with the full extract before lam, the reader may be able tojudgeof the
amount of Protestantis)ii which the passage contains. He wUl find in it a
comparison drawn between ttieoflice of the Jew,/i^^ Priest, which was to
offer a Lamb daily to (Jod for the whole congregation of Israel, *• to
pacify," says the autuor of the Companion " Almighty God daily/' add

14 A REPLY TO THE IlEV. F. COSTEIVS DEFENCli;

that of the Christian Priest, who, in the daily service, according to this
Avrlter, makes an offering to God, iu his capacity as Priest, for all the
Cliurch, whether present or absent. Tiiat the implication contained
in this pa.ss.ijje, as to the power vested in tlie Christian Priest, to make
a propiator oftering for Ciod's Cluirch, Is in harmony witli lioi'^anism
and at variance \vith Protestantism, every sound Protestant will ad-
mit, lie will be able to diecrimir.ate between the office of nfarinj up
praijer fill' (lotVs chnrdi, iu which tlw vhole coixjrcyalioa, no less than
the Priest, unites; and the eydnsice power here claimed for the Priest,
of making ii propitiatory offering for the Cluirch. In a word, he will
perceive thai the parallel here attempted to be shown, between the
Jewish and the Christian Priest, does not iu reality exist; and that Mr.
Coster's extract from the " ('ompaniou" is a positiya proof of the lio-
maniziug tendencies of its author. As to tlie ne<jat!re proof that Mr.
Coster attempts to tlraw, from the fact that the writer makes " men-
tion ofpre.snu and absent, but says not a word of the dead,"' it is really
too feeble to merit a serious reply. His acquaintance \7ith Ifoman Ca-
tholic writers ought to Jiave made him familiar with a multitude of
passages in which, even when speaking of the Eucharist (wliich the
author of the Companion is not) the (d)seiit are named without specify-
ing the dead. To give an example, a celebrated Romanist s.iys, " For-
asmuch as Christ said to the Apostles, 'do this,' he thereby directed
them to do as he himself had done, and therefore since tlu. Kucharlst
is a propitiatory sacrifice, he thus constituted them Priests, and en-
joined them and their successors to ofter that sacrifice continually, for
(/ie?/(sr?i'c.s and forthe sins of o;/ir-As'." Now, will Mr. Coster say that
the work of this IJomanist is of ".onre TrolcstaM'. qnalifjj" because
while he asserts one tenet ot his Church, lie omits to state another?
because wliile he maintains that tlie Eucharist is a propitiation for the
the trluAe Vkuj'ch, jircsoi/ and, ahsi'ut, he does not add for the dead, like-
wise?

Such then are the arguments tc prove ^'(he juire Pnde.-^tanti.yin" of
the " Compauinn to tlie Prayer Book." It has extracts said to be Irom
IJishop Sparrow, wliich are full of Uomisli doctrines; it has a ((uota-
tiou from Hooker, which any Uomish book might have; it acknowl-
edges an liisiorical fact which any well-informed Koman Catholic will
do; and contains a passage which implies a doctrine tliat Ilo^nan Ca-
tholic writers explicitly maintain I! These, I repeat it, are the argu-
ments put forth, ill the exordium of Mr. Coster's defjuce, to fascinate
the miuds of Protestants, to produce a fivorai)le impression iu regard
to this " excellent little book," and render them more charitable to its
failings which have subsequently to be explained away. I put it tcj
the common sense and candor of reflecting persons, whether such ar-
guments as these, sought out with dilligcnce by a skillful person and
advanced iu the fore-front of his defence, are not suflicient of them-
selves to stamp upon this work the superscription of llomanism?

Mr. Coster next enters formally upou the work ot "defence," and
takes up seri'tira, the olijections I liave urged against tlic " (^'ompan-
iou," in my private correspohdouce witii the Lord lilshop. His .//<■«/.
quotatiou from my letter is as follows :

" In a note to i>:igL' S7, it is ii-ssfitovl to \>'i tlie oilK-o of tho Cliristinn l'ric«it * '<>
" iiioli-r an iituii'-ni'iii j\ir llir if'iiil',' ami tll.'lt witli il viuw to iiiit/.r flit j)ft,ji/c uiii/i'r-
" mIkiiiI this, the (Jimrcii ordorr' thiit ' icIkii iIikk m-d.-imj nn iiti,iiri,i>uit for iln-ni, und
" (1,0 c rill;/ II /> for till' III th' iinnsiiiii u/ I 'liriit, tin I'ritxt mIidhIiI kh/i tln' itrniifrx unjrrt-
'~ /)/, ,iij/M/li-(i/ffi.' Surely tills tciichiniu' is at Viiriiuuc with the iloftnui'S of » ur
" rriiyer Hook, 'uul i.icioy;;itory to the hoiioiir ol Clnist."

I'pou this extract Mr. Coster commenls as follows:

*' That T-)r. (Ji'.iy inisitalics the niciining of this i)tis<iiy:e i> i)erfcilly clear fVoin the
"simi'lf liU't, that his extnut to all ap|'t;;ii'aiice makes tlie author of the ' t'oiiipan-
*' ion,' to siiy ' that the C/ii/r'A ' of Eii(.'laiul '"/■'/' /v tlmt ilir l'r'nnt Hhonld mni tin-
" pruiicfM Hi'rrrthi, iiiiinti<<dhj :' whereas he iutually says in ex|nvf>s tonus that ' thin
" ('Imri'li ' of EnKlaiid (/'<<■» not '>rd< r tlir I'riixi l<i mni 'li'xc jirnfirrH n';'i-,th/.''

Now let the reader turn to Dr. Gray's extract upou which Mr. Cos-
ier comments, and he will see that the words *• or Enolam/' are added

OF Tin: COMPANION TO Till: PRAYER F?O0K. j^

e^l h]i ifr. (Aiatcr huiiselj\ not by Dr. Clniy. Yet these very words are
the point upon which Mr. Coster's objeeiion turns. He liiniself (fi/c'*'
tlic words that originate tlie error, mikI tlien from hl.«! own addition iii-
I'er.s that " it is perfectly cl«ar that Dr. («ray is mistaken," wliereas, in
poiLt offact, the only thin^:? " perlectly clear" is that ]\Ir. Cosier Ims
made a blunder. ^Fr. Coster proceeds to say —

' I will tran.^cribe the whole not*

The reason of tlH'.xc

/", SI ir« t nntycri'

'said by the Priest may \)v p.irtlv lor va Itty to retreeh tlu' in'uplc, out chiillyas I
eiiiiccive. that by this course, the jiooplc misfht lie taiifrl.t to i.inUrsl.iiitl ami rov-

eren

fO TlIK OKFICK OK TMK. PlUIlSV, V.HK li IS IM MAKK AN xroNKMKNT

I «m THK

I'KOi'LK, ajid to itrt'siMit their jjrayer.-i to (ioil by that very olieiiiijr ot iht-ni, uiak-
" irif? them uiorr acueptable to ilnd ; all ot which (lc|>eiiil> liOi. ii. dii ii e |>i'i»|ile's

*■ consent orconliriiiation ot'hi? offic . but iiii'in (bid's a 'one a |i point iit ai;>l iosri-

'* tution, who hath sot him apart to th' s<! otii<;t,'S ot otlerin^' (iil'i- a iii sat-iifices fur
"thepeoi'le. Ami therL-lbre as ii was appninteu by Go i. tli.it when Aaiou by his
" Priestly otiice was to otTir lor the people ami umke an aitiUimini lor t tui, nnne
" of the peo|.lt! were to be pre-ent; sn 'ii:;: Ciiiurir ()i;i)i;i;s rii.N r at so.mk timi>,

- WHK.N TIIK PllIKST IS M »KIN(; AV ATIINKMKNT I'Oll mV. VVA\\'\.V., Iiml Oft'<'rill>,' up UtV

" them and the acceiifation • 1 their prayers, the merits auo pas.<ion of t'liri.-t, no

SllOil

;vein

•tuaily to assist. Ijut the Priest sliould s;ij' i.. se'-relly luv;

The Cluinh of England is penerally in hor eonniion pr.ivcrs :is fi ran lnunbl(, f.)
" for an audible voiec) especially in the Lord's Prayer, .ippiiiniinjr ii tn on said in
" tbe Rubric before it. with a baid. that is. an audible voiri', not sc ivti.v : and tliis
■' for the more earnest repetition ) so divine wiu'ds, and hi nialvi- thoni more famil-
" iar to the people. But thoiifjli 'liix f'lu',-' h tlminot urili r i!n /',-i<.-,t ti,-<iiiitli<>'>
'' liriijK IX xK-.-tihi, yet she retains thesjiiue order of orterinjr up by t e Prie-t in col-
'■ lects following the people's foregoing supplicitions " " Tlie f i.i. is that Dr. (Jiay
" pisses over t!ie sentea<-e which docs relate lo the t'huicli o; r.ojf jMid. t.ecaot*e ii
■* would not suit his purpose, and apr>lies to her one ^^'hich re .'itcs n^jt to lier, but as
** I conceive to the Church of Rome."

In the above note, the words printed in caplt ds .iro \.\v\ cladses re-
ferred to in my extract. The///v{ clause so printi-d, cxp'-esst^s tiie au-
thor of tlie " Companion's" opinion as to the orilce of a I'liost in (ji-h-
>:ral; therefore, of course, of his oflice In the Cli"i''h of' L\i<ili(,itl Mr.
Coster sees this very plainly, and uudertal<es to vin<li(a't' t.'iis <»pinioii
by tlie authority of Dr. Thomas Jackson, of IIo )ki;r. and of llie (lr.>b
IJook of Chronicles. 1, shall give attention to theso n-ien-uef's presently.

The second clause so !>rinte(l, Mr. Coster tells us, fih»''.y, as h" con-
':eivf:s, to the Chnrch "f Jiotnc. Suppose now we-ir.int this, (kjos it mn
make llie matter icorse than before? Are we, in a '• (Jo npanion to our
Pra.ver Hook," to have the Chid' h of Jiimic represented as "Tin:
i.'uuin II,' and her doctrines broupfht to bear upon the hirij;ii ;e ofoiir
l^iturgy, so as to give it a sense which is really fori-igu to it: Are we
to have, without warning or intimation, her teaching mixed up with
that of our own Church, in such a way as to convey h';r stHiiiiucnts
secretly and mystically to the minils of our peopl ? IJnt, wliy did io
not occur to Mr. Coster, as it did in referenc j to the t wm Priest, thai
when using the terms "rnr. Ciifncii," tlie writer was referrinir not to
the t'hii.rrli of l^oinc in /frticiilar, or to the Churrh of Iitxjfnnd in pnrti-
<:uh(i', but to the Cluwck <ji-niu'ii.l, '"' Cath lie/ II he had carefully read
the pages of this little work, the 'Companion," whicii he so highly
eulogizes, he would have seen that this is the way the author of it
usually refers to tlie Church Catholic, as distinguished from any parti-
cular In'anch of it. If In dolii!; so he means to identify the Church Ca-
tholic aud the Chnrch l{oman, as .Mr. Coster's intei-pretation imi)lie.«,
ilien tlie author of this work is o!it and out a liomaaist; for no
man on earth does this buu a Romanist. If he means to desig-
nate X\vi Church Catholic, as distingiiishtd from the Churcli
lloman, then Mr. Coster is wrong in his interpretation, aud after all,
the difllculty is not removed, for tlieu we h.ive a writer bringini; for-
ward what he regards a^j the opini<»ns of the Ciiurch ('atholic to per-
vert the teaching of the Church of Knuland. ^[ark how ko does this.
The Church (i. e. Catholic,) orders the Priusts to say tliese prayers
secretly; the ('hurcli of Kngl,tn<! does not: here is her trivial .///rer-
cwie. The Church (i. e. Catholic,) recognizes the olllce of the Priest
to oft'er up an atonement for tlic people ; the Church ofEnghind retains
'• the same order of olferiug up by the I'riest:" here is her tissoiitial
rc.sf •u'jUiHri\ .Atid where ihjcs ,*^iic rcL.iiii iliis order? ^VIly in the

A REPLY TO THK REV. P. COSTER'S DEFENCE

^■'il

prayers vth\cU arc offered by the Priest alone, .ifter the Litany, lie
offers them alone ; they are " secreia," secret prayers to be said by
him alouo, to teach the people to reverence his office, which Is to make
an atonement for them. This, Church of Eu^^laud men, is the teacl'.lng
ycu are to receive from the "Companion." Your Prayer Book tells
you that ••Christ h!is offered a full, perfect and sufllclent sticilllce, ob.
lation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world ;" the •• Com-
panion" tells yon a different story, viz., that your Priests make an
atonement for you from time to time, by offering up for you the pas-
sion of Christ. Which will yon believe ? Which will you adhere to;
your Prayer IJook complied by the venerable Itofonners ofyour Church,
or this anonymous production called the " Companion to the Prayer
]Jook," but which, in my humble opinion, ou^jht to have been styled
the '• Companion to the Romish Missal ?"

But T turn to Mr. Coster's authorities. To support the Idea that it is
the office of the Priest in general to make an atonement for the people,
he reasons as follows :

"In (lesciiblns the ofTicc of the Prient such exiircsj^ions are very common with our
"bf^rtf, sou^^clc^•t. most Protestant Divines, as for instance. Dr. Thomiis .Judiso'i, one
"of the ablest opponeiils of Popery the Clmreh of linKliind has produceil. lie siya
"thnt to be a Priest imiilies iis much n? to be a Miilintnr or fnttiy-iior for avorting
"(iod's wratli, or an J'/i"<p(f/r- t'orproourinjf his fivimrs und blessings — Commeu-
" taries Ji, 11. C. 2. Witli respect to the .Jewish Priest it iss:iid in cripturo ro-
" pditedly as in 1 Ciiron vi. 4'.", " tli;it Aaron and his sons were apponited to malio
"an atoiiriiiiiit for Israel.' And Hooker s ly?, Book V. S. 7S. 'That a Priest is a
" clorBymnn who offereth a icrifice to 'lo I. The Fathers of th? Church of Christ call
*' usually the ministry of the («ospel Priesthood in rcKMid of that which tho Uospel
"hath proportionnbly to incicnt Bacriti'ses. viz., the eoniinuni'm of the blessed body
" and blood of Christ, althouKh it hath properly no saerifii.!e.' "

As to Dr. Jackson, when we have the context of the above passage,
we shall be able to Judge of the value of the extract. xVt present, suf-
lice it to say, that the language quoted from him is not parallel to that
in the •' Companion ;' and if it were, he is no authority for us any fur-
ther than bis teaching accords with Scriptu>'e. As to the reference to
Chronicles, where it is said that •' Aaron and his sons were appointed
to make an atonement for Israel," it is sufficient to say, that we have
not Aaron and his sous now. The L'lviticd priesthood has passed
away. The Christian rainisny has succeeded. We have ao literal
sncrijicina Prient under the Christian dispensation, except that glorious
High Priost who sits :;t the right hand of God. We do not even retain
the name of a sacrificing Priest, as applied in Its literal sense to the
Christian minister. Mr. Coster knows full well that the •'Hiereus" of
the Law is not the " Presbyter" of the Gospel, and that the term Priest
as the trunnlatioH ofthe furriyr, is of diflerent import from the term
Frief<l as the cnurartiou of the latter. The Christian Minister, as such,
has not the term '• Hiereus" applied to him, and for this obvious rea-
son, because he offers no prupitiatori/ saciilice, and by consequence,
m&kes no (Uonevievt for sin. He has no ^mii^er to do so; he has no
iiced to do it; for thi-s work has been done for him, in the sacrifice of
Christ upou the cross, done "once for all," fully, effectually, forever.
It needs no addition, no repetition, no fresh off^'ring up by Priestly
substitution. '-Christ was oin-e ojfcred to bear the sins of many."
(lleb. 9.) " By oi<e or}eri»(i he hath perfected forever them that are
sanctified." (Heb. IG.) '• Their sins and Iniquities will 1 remember no
more. Kow where rendssion of these is, there is 7w mote oJ)'eritin for
sin." (Heb. 10.) Such Is the plain teaching of the Divine oracles, and
all terms that convey an opposite meaning, or are fairly capable of an
opposite construction are to ,be carefully shunned. The use of iuac
curate language leads to the adoption of Kn.sound opinions. Justly has
it been remarked by a Dignatory of our Church, that the *' incautious,
"ambiguous, figurative, anil illustrative expressions which abound in
" the wirks of the Christian Fathers, little versed, in general, m criti-
•• cal accuracy, and, except when contending with Pagan or Heretical
" opponents, chiefly intent cu devotional or pastoral instruction, were
" easily diverted from their original and sounder racauiug, and wrest-

or THE COMPANION TO TIIK rilAVliK iJOOK. '^'^

" cil to the countenance} ami support ol" the grossc^st errors and abuses
"both of the Kastorn and Western Cliurdies" 'VUa " hicautious,"
"Mnibij;ijous," " llgaratlve" han^ua.uc o{ .some of the iiioileru IhiUuu's of
the 17tli century, and of some of their ardent admirers in tlie lUtli, is
lial)le to th<^ saujc evil.

But Mr. Coster has referred to Hooker, a name justl.v revered in our
Church, and has f;iveu, in combination, two l)rief extracts from his V.
Bool\. Commencing; witli tlie /ir.-<t of tiiese, I sliall j^ive Jlookcir's
words at sutlh.ient lenj^tli to include tlieui botli, requesting,' my readers
to iKjte tliat Mr. ('oster's extracts are exliibited l)y liie words in i/'fh'i-s,
and otlier important clauses by the words in c'.vrir.vi>. Kemarkin^f
upon tlie distiuciion betvveen tljo original and popular meaning of
terms, Hooker says —

'■ If jou ii.<k (if the coininon sort wliiit any I'ertain word, for oxain|»lo. 'it, a
I'lic-t iliitli .-iyiiWv, dii'ir uiaiitinr is not to answisr, </ l'ri<Kt is n l'li'i-tniiii:i,i ilili
t i'f f!i xii'i-iii't! Ill fioil, hnt \\my slicw sonio p iitieiil.ir jiorsoii whom tlii-yi-at'i
i<;ll li.v ili.it iiiiiuc. Ami, if we ii.-t to (le.scuinl to ^raiumir. WL' aiv loM by uVi^ its
in tliosc .sfhot)!H tliat the i'orii Priest liati: lii.s ri;,'!if jii .c«! ''in iiini wliosi; nu-ro
luni'tion or cliaijrc is tlie service of (iml.'] Il(»wljeit. beeiuso the most eminent pare
iiotii of llcatlienis!) and Jewish seiviee (lid eonsist in saeriliee, when learned men
'leela re what llic word Piiest dotii p:oi)ur!.v si;:!Uty according; to the mind ol tlio
lirst iniii'tscr ot ilril name, their oidinary seh-ilies do well expound it to imply sa-
• ritiee. Skkini; thk.v rii \t s achiiick is now no vaiw or t'ik Cmi imii MisisTKY
how should the nam- of Priesthood bo th'rcunto rightiy iipiiiied'.' ^Surely even a.-<
''t, Paul ai)pUclh ibe name of t'lcsii unto that very ^ubstanee of !is!ies whieii hatli ,i
proportionable correspondence, to tiesli, altlioii!^:!! it b(! in nature another tiiin;?.
Whereupon when pliilosopher will speak warily, they nniko a ditfcrenee between
(li.-sii in one sort of ILvinsereatures and that oihei sul'.vt;ince iu the rest whieh hath
but a kind of analo^'y t ' llcsh : the Apostle contrariwise ha\ ing jnatler of greater
import ince wiiere(d' to speak naiueih inditVeiently bijth llesh. VVm /■'ntlimi t\l' tli,
<'lilir<-h •!!' (^Itrixt iritli Hl,i: liViKriff/ of 1,11, rli iiiH iinii,illii till: Miiiivtrii '// till litixiiil
I'l untliii-id ill ri ijiifl of tliiit n-liiili tlir lluspil lintli ji, ii/ifirtiitiiii/i/' to iiiiiiinfmirri-
j'rrt^, mniicly till' t 'i)iiiiiiii iii'iii iij tlir lili •'xiil lloihi i' ■!■! Itliniil nf I'lirisf, iillhuiiiili it
huer jimjii i/fi ii"ir itit ni'irijif- A^ lor_th(i people when they hear the name ii
druweth no more tlieir minds to any cogitation of sai:ri!ic(i, than the name of a ^lenu-
tor or of an alderman eauseth them to think upon tdd a^'e. or to ima;,'ine that every
'■nc so terme(l mn- 1 needs be ancient because years were resjtee'ed in the tirst nomi-
nation of both. Wherefore, to |)ass by the name, let them u-e what dialect liuy
will, whether wo call it a Priesthood, a P es ytership.ora Mmistry, i. skilleth not :
Ai/riKUOH IN Titrrn tiik woiin Piiksuv ri;i! >k)tii s^kv mok,-; i it. and in imms-

I'KIKTV OV .'SPKIU'H MOIiK A(iH};KAIU.K TUAN i'UlKSI' WITH TIIK DRI I'T O; TIIH WlfOI.K

<JOSi'h:L o," Jksi :-! ChK'st. For wh it are they that cmljraee the (iospel l»iit >-ons of
<tod ".' W hat are Churches but hi.* lamilics ? Seeing therefore wcrec ive the adop-
tion and state of sons by th. ir ministry whom (Jod h ith chosen out tor that puriiose,
seeing also that when wo are the sons of (Jod, our continuance i- .still under their
care which w n: our pn)Kenit(n-.s, what l)etter title could there be jjivcn them than
the lleverend name of Presbyters or tiithcrly guides? Thk IIoi.y (Jhost Tni;or(;ii-

< IT Tin; BOBY OK Tin; Ni;W TkSTA.MKNT MAKIX(i so .VHTM .MKNTIOX Ol' TUK.M POTH
XOr ANY AVUKJJE flAI.f. TIIKM PUIKSTS."

This is Hooker's view of the case. The sum o^ it is, that the term
Priest originally siiinifled one who /.flered sacilJoe, though in popular
use it is not so uiderstuod tit present. l)y analuyu we may apply it to
t!ie ministers of llie Ciospel, as the Fathers did; but the term " Tre.s-
byter" is more proper than •' Priest," as sacritice is now no part of
the Cliurch ministry ; and hence the Holy Ghost, tliough intiking so
much mention of Christ's ministers throu.i^hout the New Testament
doth no where call them Priests. Now it is this passage of Hooker,
containing these sentiments, from whicli Mr. Coster has atldiiced two
f»hort extracts, to prove that the author of the '•Companion'' is right
in saying that it is the olHce of a Priest to make an titonement for the
people, and iu assigning this as a reason why certain Collects in our
Liturgy are said by the Priest alone. I do not in the slightest degree
mean to impeach ^Ir. Coster's motives, but 1 would simply ask my
readers to consider, whether the next paragraph on Mr. (^osters pa-
per, viz., "Dr. Gray's extracts tire often very unfairly made," comes
in gracefully or not, at this particular point?

I proceed to Mr. Coster's 6econti quotation liu.i ray letter.

*' L'd. Agnin, 1). 111(5. two Collects in our 1\ st-Counnunion Sevice. are said to teach
thatthetfrt-tit benefits of the. V«i''»''»//(f;i^f»;-«f niiiiniioii of liiix, niul i/it otlny things, uml
thnt not vu/i/ for thone who are jtri'xent in thr Imdn nnd vomninnii-nti;, hut I'or nil the
irh'ih Church. Now is this really the doctrine of the Collects V The Ciitechism of
lr«.nt s.ys, ' Such is the elliciicy of this kicrilice uhe Muss,) thac its iieneftts extend

:ii

in parallel coluuins— tho iJeiititj' ot the lanjui g<}

coi.i-Kcr,
" That we and all thy whole Church
may obtain remission ot our sins, and all
other benefit's ol hi^ passion."

^g A RFPLY TO THE RKV. F. COSTER'S DEFENCE

not only to the celebrant and communicant, but also to all the faithful whether liy-
in;f or numbered amongst tho.-o who have (lied in the Lord, but who-'P .iins have not
.▼•t been fully wxpiateil." But wlw-re in the beautiful language of the Collects in
(lueation, do w« tind .''uch u doctrine ad thi.^! ?

Such is the (juotutlou. Mr. Coster thcu proceeds :

"In answer to Dr. flray's Qr.st<iuestioD. I ^ni that in the passage lie quotes from
the '' Companion," tliere is not only the doctrine of the Ccllect, Imt it,-' very lan-
guage almo.st word for word. '£.> show this 1 will place the extract from the " Com-
panion" and one from the Collect in
will then bo clearly seen."

COMi'ANlON.

"The great bcnelita ot the Sacrament
arc remission of sins and yet other things,
and that not only tor those who are pre-
sent in the body and communicate, but
for all the whole Church."

After presenting the above parallel, Mr. Coster observes, "this is a
batlj^factory answer to the first question." How fur it is " satisfacto-
ry'' \Till be more obvious, when my readers have loolced at the triw
parallel, which is as follows :

roMPAXION. I Ci>I.t,K(T.

"The great bentlits of, the Kaerament' ''Thatnv the MKurts and dkatii ok
are remission of sins and yet oti. or thing.-i.THV So.N Jksus Christ, and thr()ul.u
and that not only for tliose who are pre-iJ'AHH in his islood. we and all thy whole
fccnt in the body and conimunicato, but Church may obtain remission of sins and
for uU the whole Chinch." |ali other benefits of his pission."

Let tlie reader observe, that the words printed in capitals in tlie
above quotation from the Collect, are left out by Mr. Coster in his
quotation between the words "that" :iud " we;" left out without the
remotest hint that any thing is oraitled. And yet these very words
mark one important dillerence between the " Companion" and the
"Collect." The exti act Irom tlie " Companion" is a dedaraiiun tliat
we get remission of sins /'(/ /,'te ,yac'?Yn/!e;ii; that from the "Collect" is
v^pra'jcv \A\i\\.J>ii the lacrits ami death of Jesus Chrixt, ami throxKjh faith
i)i hia blood, we may receive remission of our sins. Let tlie reader
mark, and mark well, and bear it in mind when he lays this pamphlet
down, thu the Uoctrine of the "Companion" and that of the "Collect"
are not, in this instance, the same, but colally different, and that this
diflerencc, broad and palpable as it is when they are brought fairly to-
gether, is k( "if, out of sight in Mr. Coster, s quotation of the Collect,
by an elision jf tlie very words that mark the distinction.

And as the above extracts show the dissirailo.rit>j between the " Col-
lect" and the " Companion," so that from the "Companion" exhibits on
the other hand the similaritij between the doctrine of the '^Cijinpanion'
and the " Catechism of Trent." Let us place these in parallel eoluams,
and then we shall be able to estimate the weight of Mr. Coster's denial
of any coincidence between them.

COMPANION". j _ TRENT CATKCHISM,

The great benefits ol the Sacrament avei Such is the etRcacy of this Sacrifice (the
remission of sins and yet other things,! iMass) that the benefits extend ?i'</ oa/;/ ^'
and that )io^ ()/(/// fur tlm^'' irhu arc pre- the rcli (>rnHt oxd contiuiniivuiif, hut f'j<i,''
:nt ill the lodii and communicate, ",jUt for the faithfvl whether living or numbered
vl( the whole Uhvreh. amongst those whohaveUied intheLord,

but whose sins have not yet been fully
expiated.

Here observe what the " Companion" asserts, viz., that the henefits
of the tSacrament, which are remission of sins and yet other things, ex-
iiiiKl not onh/ to those icho ate present and communicate, but to o/? the
v:hole Church, and then observe what the Catechism of Trent says, viz.,
that the benefits of the Mass extend not onlj to the celebrant and communi-
cant, but to all the faithful. Here 1 think is one coincidence that is
tolerably plain. But let us go further — the "Companion" says "not
only lor those who are present in the hody and communicate, but for all
the vhole Church." Now what is the fair meaning of the expression,
" tlie whole Church," when placed in contrast with those who are
'present in the bodj, but the Church, including those in the bod>i and
those out (fit; iu other words, 'the faithful, wiiether living or niivi-

OF TilK COMPANION TO THi: rilAYER BOOK.

hered amoiKjst those n-fio have dml in the Li-nK' So that here Jigain,
notwlthstamliiif; Mr. Coster's disclaim or, tliore Is .1 rcry siriliiiig coln-
cidenco between tlie " tJompauioii" and the •• Cathecldsni ol" Trent."

The more closely you examine the phraseolo.i;y of this little work,
the more evident does this coincidence become. Tliere are two ex-
pressions, In words nearly tlie same, but in nieaiiiug widely tlillereiit ;
vi/.., the expressions " present in Ixxly" and " present in the l)ody."
The former is employed to ^i.^nlfy the beln„' iicr.s'>aall[i present in any
particular place, as opposed tv)bein<; tiiere in hiiiul or sinrif ; the latter
to si;;nily the diJrercMil condition of tlie soul, as a t<nnnt <>/ thi' f"><f;' or
in a (/w >///></(?/■((/ Stat". Ton will (in*! iliis tlistinctiun observeil in our
English Translation of the Scrii)lur('S. Thus, St. I'aul si)eakiu;i of
belug7)(;?"sy«oi/y prosent or .nljsent, says, " I verily as absent in bmhj
but present in xi>irU have jiidijed,"' &c., (1 Cor. v. ;),) but when r-jfer-
rlng to the Hoiif'.'* pri.-n'nrc oy absfHCcfi'O'.i lh< hmhj, lie says, '• Whilst
we are at home in the bodij, we are absent from the Lortl;"' uiid aualu,
" We are coutldeiit, 1 say. and willing raiher t(t be absent from t c hnhj
and present with tlie i^ord," ('i Cor. v. (», 8.) So auain, (2 Cor. xli.
2,) *' Whether ia the hodij, 1 cannot tell," >.<;c. Again, (llcb. xlii. 'J.)
" As being yourselves in IhehoOy. Now the author of the •'Conipauioii"
had his option of these two expres.'^ioiis. Wliicli iias he rlio>en i That
wliich refers to the soul's rela; ve \ NJlioii as to tlu; Ijody. "Not
onl>," he says, "for those who are pn-scnt in the h<nhj." In other
words, he has chosen that mode which eonveys a sentiment in accord-
ance with the Calechissn of Trent. True, lie does not say in plain
terms, as tlie Catecliism doeii, " thu faith/"l licimj in' }miu'>'.rid uiiu>nij.<
thi.'se i':ho hucf died i>) the Lord:'' he employs a softer, less iuteliiglblc
expression, but one which conveys the same idea, and is iherelore
better calculated to insinuate this pernicious tenet into Hie minds of
rrotestants by fa mii arizing their ears U) a phraseology, whicli as
jva/^/ tiiough not so o6va/?(.s.'//, conveys 11. Here then let ine '.autlou
the reader against the attempt to iui[>!e»s the nund with the idi a that
the Collect and the Companion convey a parallel meaning, becausic
both happen to refer to "the whole Church." In the Collect these
wonls mean the ^' ichnle milUdni Chnnh, ' or as it is expres^ed in an-
other part of our Communion Service, ''the nlinle st^'t.' of Christ's
Church miJit'nif hire on earth ;" but in the " Companion," if ,ve are to
construe terms in their ordinary accepiation, they include the uiilitu.t
Church, 'Ui?id those v:ho have died in the Lord:" in oiijer words, " the
liring and the dead i)> Chrit<t."

1 trust I have now shown pretty clearly "what Dr. Cray's motive
■was for giving the extract from the Trent Catechism," and have saved
my Keverend Urother the trouble of " imagining one tliat would not
be easy to express in language that would not be liars h or disa^^reea-
ble."

1 proceed to the third qj,otaiiou from my letter:

"rtl. "At page I'O, It is Sfuil, nothing s- cms iDore powerful witli (j oil to procure
that (a gracious absolution at tlu! day of ju(!;.'uiciitj than liberality to the poor, l.-
iiii- in liaiiuony viithtur lUli ami lijtii Aiia-li;.- '.'*'

Belore 1 consider ^]r. Coster's auswtr to this question, I shall quote
the Articles to which it refers. They are as follows:

Art 11th. " AVe nru accounti"! riplit> ou.« l^orore (toil only for the mo.^it of our Lor I
nn 1 Savi iir .Jesu-i t'hn.-'t by faith, ainl not ic^rourov u worU.sor doscrvings: W'hure-
foro. that we are jusiilini L-y l-aitli only is a uioit wholusoiue i>octniio, ami very full
of oonitort. as more lurKcly is twpn-sscit in the Ui luily ol'.Justitii-ation.

Art.l^tji. Albeit that t>ootl \\oiks, whiili are the tiuits ot t-aiili, and follow after
Ju.stitie.!tion. cannot luit aivay our sin,--, ■,:v.d Liiuuie the severity 01 (foil's .JudgUK ut ;
yet aio they pleasii'g snul aceeptiiide to God i" (. lirist, i.iid do Npiing out neeuss.irily
<>f a true and livel> l-'aitii ; i noniucli tliat bj thcui a lively i'aitu may beasovidem-
iy Icnown as a tree di;-ecrned by tiie fruit."

The question proposed upon these Articles was this— Is the teach-
ing of the " Companion," lliut nothing is more pov.erful with God tu
procure a gracious absolutioi^ at the day of Jud^uieni than liijerality tu
the Poor, in harmony with theiu? To this Mr. Coster replies :

*)() A UKJ'LY TO TilK RKV. 1". COSTKR'.S DK/KXCK

"Td s!ui\v t'.i'it thii tciioliiuK ii in liiiniiotiy with the iiiilliori/.ed f'oriinil iries nf tlie
Chiiri'li, I -tiiill iiiikc^oiuc cxtr.ict^ f'Mui llie " llo.Mir.v «i' h.m* ukkdh and mkuci-
1 1 lnks.h row AUDS TiiK r.)iiii AM) NKKDv " Div < i I'.iy uiil r('(!()llnct tliiit (liH Homily
i<< ill the Sffiin I lioolt : he nill uImi rccdllect the words >i| ti>c ;!')lii Artii-lu. tn wiiicti
ho \\\>' r(j|>'jiiteilly iiHi\t'i| his .suh.^cripii'iii,— ' fht; rioi-oml hook of Hotuiiics dolli c.oii-
l.iiii itK') lly mid whole.-(oiii(< <ioctriiio.' iVu, That i^odly an 1 whulcsotno doctrine, in
thi.s i),iitii;uhir, im a.x lullow.-' :"

Mr. Costui- liero jjivcs thu extract, ami thou adils :

" r>r. •Jniy ^.-Uf" whislior this tcaeliinif iii in iianuoiiy with our 11th iiml 12lli Arti-
olo.'? 1 Htiiill IcMVii ih(! llii:.i;li.st t'j iiiiswer tiiis cm('«tioii, liey^ini' Dr. (iniy to lu-
luonihcr that the eiriiud liishop -Icwl'! i-i tliat pt'is.»iii" Ac.

Iliit why ri-fcr mo to the Ilomllist? Why not answer tlio (jiie.stlou
direcily? Why ttii'n Croni tlie plain unf(|Mivocal teaehlii^i; (»f the Aiti-
cU'S, to a pa<>aj^t! in the Homily of .Miiis deeds? Has Mr. Coster an
aversion to tlji; Aiiieios? VVliile he relera to their testimony in favor
fif thu llomilii's, docs he shrinii I'rom the iU»etrine which they Ihem-
selves contain ■/ .As a Clerj,yman, Is he not pledged on oath to all that
the Articles contain, in their plain {grammatical seuse; while as it re-
;;ards tiie Homilies, he is only pledired to the j?eneral proposition that
" Mit.y '.ontaiu a fiodly doctrine?" IJut furtlua, 1 would ask, if Mr.
Cosier preferred the Homilies, why not have aoue to " the Homily of
Justilleatioii," which the nth Art. itself pointed him to, as "more
largely expressing; its teaching?" Or still fnrther, and this Is the more
important enquiry, if the ilomily of .Alms deeds was to be (pioted at all,
why not' have given its full testimony upon the suliject in ilebate? He
has taken a long extract from this Ilomily whieh refers to sundry pas-
sagos of Scriptuiv, as Trov. xix.. Matt, x.w., Dent, xv., tending to
show how liiglily acceptable to God is mercy to the poor; and also to
certain Fathers, as holy I'ather Tobit, godly l)v. L'hrysostom, and St.
Augustine, the last of whom compares the pour man to a picture of
Mercury on a linger-board pointing the way to Heaven; and this ex-
tract Mr. Coster appears to think is a full warrant lor the teaching of
the
c

jlUV-.!/ I'll. V.V^.J.'--. — ,.|»~....^ -■ " .—.• ..— .V,. w..« ~v.u^.....g X.>«

, he '• CJompanion" that " nothing is more powerful with God to pro-
jtue absolution at the day of judgment than liberality to the poor."
IJul a little lartlier on, this Homilv gives its own interpretation of
these strong expressions, and tea( hes ns how to take "a godly doc-
driue"out, of ih'-m. Mr. Coster alludes lo this passage; gives us the
begiuuing of it, and a clause at the end, but cuts out the middle of it,
where this Important expliv.-atiou is contained. The passage which
has euUered elisiou is as follows :

k> •' Dut yo .-li.ill undci.-laiid, dearly heloved, that neither tho-!o places of Scripture
beloic ailvijod, neither the doctrine ot't: e blestied martyr Cyprian, neitherany other
ijoilly or iei;nied man, wlien tiiey in cxtollins the dijfnity, profit, fruit, and ellect of
virtiloUH and liberal aim-, do jay that it wa.>iheth >'\vay .-iin.'j, and briiiKelh u.s to the

fl-
our
was
that

inci'-y ■ Jid e.-pecial iavoiir to\vaid.< them, whom lie hath a!>|iointea to everlatitii u
sal'Mtion. Iritli ^o oti'ered his grace esiu'iiiliy. and they have no received it I'ruitlul
ly, iiiit alth u','li. by reason of their .-iintul livinj; . ul\vai<lly, they seemed before to
have been the ehiliireii ol w.alh and neraition; yet now the :"|» rit of God niiKhtily
working in them, unto oliedience to OimI's will and comniandnK'Ht.«, tiiky dkci.aki:

BY TUKll! I't ; \V Al. II DKKDS AM) l.Il;K, IN TIIK SIIKWINU UK MKliCY AKIJ CHARITY,

(which eaiiiiot come but of the .spirit ol (mmI, .mu hi:* special grace,) that tiiky are
THK I ND"i •""•■" ^ "■'■'""■•'^ *" *-'^'^ Ai'i'(U\ri;i) TO KVKHi.ASTi.M; 1,11'r.. Andi«(), as
by *heir wiclicdne. -s and untfoUly living they shew thcm.selves aecordinj to the
iudgiueiit ol men, Avhicli lollow the outward appciirance to be reprobates and cast-
aways ; SI) NOW BY TlllllK OliKUll-.NeK L NTO (jun's llul, Y WILL, AND HY THKIK MKE-

CiiiLNiss A u ri:.M)Lic I'lTV, vwhereiu they shew themselves to be like unto (Jod,
who is tlie fountain and spring ol all meicy) tiiky dkclauk oi'KXLY and maxU'KST-

LV CNTl) THK SIUIIT «.K MKN, THAT TllKV AliK THK SONS ')f (ioD. AND THK KLKCT Ol"

iini INTO SALVATION, i' or US llic Kood i ruit is not i he cause that the tree is uood.
but the tree imist lirsi be goon betuie it can bring Coith good fruit; s-i the good
deeds of a man i.re not tin cause that makcih man go d, but he is first made good
by tlie spirit and Ki'i'ce olljiod, that elkctiially worketh in him, and afterward he
briiigcth forth goo tiuits. And then as the good Iruit doth argue the soundne.-Js of
the tree, so doih tiik cood and mkucii i i. 1)Kki> uk thk man ahuck and ckiitainlv
I'HOVi" iHKiiooDXKss ' 1 HIM THAT i)o 1 11 IT, accoidiig to Clirist's sayiiiffs : "Vc shall
know them by tneir fruits." And il any man willo- jeet, that evil and naughty
uieu do ftomeuuiei by iheir deeds appear to be very godly and virtuous; I will an-

OF TIIK COMPANfOX TO THE PRAYER HOOK.

8Wor, HO iloth tlio prnh iind ilin;ik-|)(':ir "t'oiii oiitwiMilly to hive Homctiinc n.-' fnir n
rod, iinil ii.« inollow ii cdlonr. iis tho fruit wlii<Oi !•< kooiI irnliTil, lint lu; tlint will
l)ito mill tak«> it t;i!»t('. sliail noisily jiidfri' betwixt tin; "iviir liitti'iiu>-'< of ilio oin*. anti
tho Hwoot xiivourinc.''-' of tiio oth<T. And a- fht« tiin' l.liri^'tian inaii> in lllankfnllu•s^*
of lii.i heart for tho irdcnu'tion of his soul purchasrd hy ('hrisfn do:ith, showoth
kindly hy tho fruit of hi-i laitfi his ol)odic>K'o to (!od ; so fiio otiior. a-< a ni<T<di:>nt
with (ioi). dotli nil fur his own train, 'iiinkins; to v in licavi-n l)y tlio merit of his
work . and so dtdafcth and olis<nretii (Ik- pncr of Christ's f)lood, who only wroutflit
our |)urKation. 'i'lio inrianiiiK tlion of those sayinir^ in the Scriptures and other lioly
writin>?S ; " .1 /mx ilmlx iln imsh n imii iin r mIiih : II II <f III' rill In ill'' /iii'ir ilnlli hint out
>.!(/• (>//.;irr*, is, tliat we, doing t'.ifsc I iiiuKs aecordiiiR to tJod's will ami our dutj,
liHvo our sins indi'cd washed away, and our oH'oneos idotted out ; Nor loit thk wor.-

TIIINKSS (ir TIIKM, I'.T T IIY THK (IKACKOK (Jul) WHK II WOUKKTM 1\ A 1.1,, AM) THAT I'OR
THK I'llOMlBK Til Vr <Mil> llATIt MaI»K TO llll-M Tit iT AttK OilKIHKNr INTO IIISCOAi-
MAXDMKNT, TII»T UK WHICH IS'IHK TUtTH MKJlIT UK .ll'.STiriKli IN I'. liroKMINti THK
TRITII Dt'K TO HIS riJOMISK."

Tills i.s thu pint wlilcli, Willi ii p.isslng notice, Mr. Coster cut out of
his quomiloii. It. is one of'tliose line passa;;oM with which the Iloini-
lies tiboiiiid, rich in Script'irnl truth, cont;iiiiinf; inileed "a ^odly doc-
trine," beautifully harinoniziim with the lllh and 12rh Article.s above
referred to, but, in the same proportion, jit variance with tin; teachiufj;
of the "Companion." 1 have only to add upQii tills point, that I can-
not but heartily join with Mr. Coster in the hi.i^h eulo^luni he pro-
nounces upon JBishop Jewel, and r*joice to think that that eminent
prehite who was so well qualified for the task, was "at once the au-
thor c>f the Homily, thu reviser of the Articles, and the supervlser of
the printing of'ihein."

I proceed now to the /o?;)7/t quotation from my letter :

**4th» At pasro 1">". 'i'n '■nnJ'rxH 1)11 r ri 11^ to It I'livxt rrril ill liriilth in ti piollH iinil
iinciint cuhIoiii, mill not otilji II nif/n nl' rciiciilnilii-, hut the hint iiimim of iilitiiiniiifl
jiiirilon mill inin ikUii'i our iin-ri. Tho Prayor liook roconunond.', in a certain spoei-
fied caHC, "opening our grief to a minister of (iod's word," or " roeoiving ahvolu-
tion"iit his hands, witli a view to "ii auiet eonseienco." IJut 1 cannot hoc that ihi.s
;8 identical -.vilh saying that the " he.-«t way to obtain pardon and ainemlment of
jifc, is to confess our sins to a Pri< sf."

Upon this passage Mr. Coster's first comment is as follows :

" I have already said that I look upon " tho best" in this pnp^.ipo s'S nn unguarded
cxpre.-<sion. It w;)uld have been well if the autlior had loft the adjoetive in the
positive state "a good," instead of raisins it as he has done to tiio suporlative^ de-
gree " the best ;" (.r if ho hadfiualified it by the addition of some such words as "one
of the best," or " ne.vt to confession to <io i the best-"

Now It must be acknowledged that this is a somewhat novel mode of
defending a book against the charge of heterodoxy, and yet 1 must
candidly suy, I regard it as the best part of Mr Coster's defence of the
work, for it is notliing more or less than a conleasion (periphrasis and
soothing epithets notwithstanding) that the work itself is, in this par-
ticular at least, indefensible ; that nothing better can be .<»aid for it in
the way of argument, (luotation, or otherwise, than that the author
Lad better have written something else than he has done: in other
words, that what he has written coniains false doctrine. So then after
all, " this excellent little book,'" as Mr. Coster terms it, has to be given
up as a false teacher, unless we can change that unfortunate little word
"best," into "geod," or " one of the best," or "next to confession to God
the best!" Alas! we have to deal with the book o.s- it stands; and, as
it stands, the word is '^ best," and being " best," the doctrine is false.
Of what avail then are all appeals to other writings, whether Homilies,
Church writers, or Fathers, to prove that It may be useful to open our
minds to others, whether Priests or Laymen? This is not the point
in debate. The case before us is the assertion in the " Companion" as
it stands. Call it " unguarded"— call it " superlative"— call it by what-
ever name you please, it is false doctrine, and therefore to be rejected
by every sound Protestant.

Still, it is worth while to examine, once more, Mr. Coster's quota-
tions. He is really most unfortunate in his selections. It seems as if
he had only the alternative of quoting wrong, or quoting against him.
self. His tlrst appeal is to the " Homily of Repentance," as follows :

" Now, there be four parts of H epentance, which being set together may be liken-
ed to an easy and short ladder, w ereby we may eliinb from the bottomless pit of
perdition, that we cast oui selves into by our daily offences and grievous sins, up to

A RKPLk TO TIIK KEV. F. t'OSTKIfS DKIKNCB

"if

the oiistle or tower of elornnl iiiid cnillt'.«H Ralviitir>n.'' " Tho frcontl oftlitin ir, un
unffisriH •! confcK^ioii and iK"l<nowlc(|j{iii)f of'our ciiiH to (Jod— lor witliouf tliin con-
tei<!<iiui fiin iH not (orKiMMi. Tl'i" tlioi (!< Ilio cliicte^t iiml tMo«t pri ciptil (not tho
onlj', t)Ut ihf ■ hift'i'xt mul iiioct ipriiiciitiilironfcHhion thiit in the iSi-ripturcs .iinl word
of (Joil w«! iirv hidilfU to n.akc. ii'id without the uhiili w«> i<h .11 ni^ver ohtaiii piinloti
ami foiuivt ii('H!< ol Our ciim. Intleiil henidps thio thne is iinotln-r kind of conlosniori
which i.^ NKKJiKtl. AXi» XKipssARY. A nd of t hi> Hiinn- dot h St. •) i nu!s:'peiik uflcr thi.-i
inaniifT j'ltjinjr. ' nfknowledde .Vdiir liiulti' one to iimtliwr, nnd i>rny one fontnothcr,
thiit ye niiiy he Hiived.' Aii if he Mhuuld miyi open that uiiich Ki'icvoth youi tliut
rcjnedy niiiy ''« found."

Mr. Co.ster ciuls with tlie ti'rni '' fouii<l," l)iit I cun assure my read-
ers that there Is sonuthii)g lust, which I nhttll presently eudeiivor to
supply. Ill the ni»'un tlnie. 1 >vouUl Just ohsrrvu that in tlie above ex-
tracts, there Is not <niP)i'<ii\l nhoiit confmniDn lad I'rifst, norauy uUuslou
to such a cusloiii. There is first, a recojiiiltioii of ron/cssinn to (,'ud as
essential to forgiveness ; llipu there Is lucnllou of ^' nnothcr liind of
confession which is needful and necessary." IJut what is this? You
might suppose from the stress laid upon this, by prlutluji the words
nec.flf III on ft mrcssfinj \ii ci\p\lii\n, that Mr. Coster understood this to
refof to n)nft'» ion to u J'rtcxt ; but It has no .v«c7< rrfnrnrr. The Ilotni-
list is spoaliiiiLj of the hintnal co)ifi'f<.sion oniony Christians to each
other, wldeh the Apostle James recommends, and which the Homily
Immediately proceeds to distingtjish, In ntost emphatic terms, from
coiift'ssloii to H I'ricnt.

Mr. C^oster proceeds :

" lie thcMi jcoeH on to sliew tlmt thin text iift'oid.^ no support to tho Rnmunitits in
th«"ir doctrine of forced auricular sacrnniental confe.«sion : he sayn, that in alleging
tlii.-* text to suppiirt tliat doctrine, 'they arc jrrcatly dectiived tilenl.•'oirc^^, ;ind do
ehiuuofully tleceive otiiers.' To liii,'* he addfi. he nu therefore not led with con-
ficiencc thereof) lot us with fenr and tremhiinfr. and witli a true contrite heart, U8t9
that kin'l of confei<sion that (lod dotli cotnniand in His ^Vord:and then doul)tless
as lie is faithful and riK>it ous, he will torKive ns our t-'mi', ami make uh clear from
nil w ckeilnefB. I do no- say hut thai, it any do find thenif<t Ives truuhled in eon-
tioience they may repair to their learned curatf or pastor,' (,/(<*/ in i,ne mtnin itptiijieU
(•((*<• Diifii, but whenever < ccasion may reiiuiro,) ' or to some ot hor godly learned minis-
ter,' and "hhew the trouble and doubt of their conscience to them, that they may
receive at their hand the comtortable salve ol tJod's worti : hut it is ajfainst the true
Christian liberty. ///'»N(((i/ ;(((i;i «//(<((/(/ /y/- /<oi/H(/ to the numberint; ot his tins, as it
hath been u.^ed lieretofoie in time ol blindness and ignoianco.' "

Now what have we here that accords with the doctrine of the "Com-
panion?" Have wc any thinjj about conlestiion to a I'rlest as a means
of pardon, whether " good." " better," or "best?" The utiuost the
Homily says Is comprised In these negative terms, ^'Idonotso'j hut
thatiifanjdofindthcmsdi'o.stronhled in conscience, thnj may repair to
their I turned citrate or pantur, or to some other jodly learned minister, and
sheic the trouble and douht of their conscience to thou, that they may re-
ceive at their hands the comfortable salve of God's icord." which Is just the
doctrine oi the Prayer Book in the certain spccllled case I had alluded
to. But now, recurring to the term "found," which ends one of the
above extracts, and glancing onwards to the terms "being therefore
not led," &.C., which begin another, let us see irhat Mr. Coster has left
out between thnn. The passage, though long. Is too Important to be
lost. Referring to the text of St. James, the ilomily proceeds thus:

•' f* nd this is commanded both for him that complaiueth, and for him that hear-

iat tho one should shew his grief to the other. The true meaning of it is, that

'■.lithful ought t« acknowlei'ge their ollenccs. whereby some hatred, rancour«

Ige, or malice, have risen or (rrown among them one to another, that a broth-

reconcilirttion may be had. without the which, nothing that we do, can be ac-

. iptable unto iJod, a< our Saviour .Jesus Christ doth witness him.self, saying, when

thou offercst tliino oil' ring at iho altar, if thou rcm».mberest that thv brother hath

aught against th c, have there thine otiering and go and be reconciled: and when

thou art reconciled, ccmo and oiier thine otiering. Matt, v- It may also be thus

taken, that we ought to confess our weakness and intiruiities one to another, to the

end that, knowing each other's frailness, wc may the moie e;irnestly pray together

unto Almighty God, our heavenly Fatlier, that ho wilt vouchsafe to pardon us our

iutirmitics, for his Son Je.-<u8 Christ's sake, and not to impute them unto us, when

ho shall render to every man according to his works. And wurrkas the adversa-

hii-;a lio Miuur to wkkst mis plack, khr h* u vI.ntai> thxik aUuiculak cunkels-

8I0S WITHAl,, THKY aHK GRKaTLY I>i 'JKIVKII TH KMSKI.VKS ; AND Do &HA.MKFULLY DB-
OKIVS OTHKH.S: K(IR IF Tlllg TKX 1" ' UOHT T(» UK UNUKKSTO-.D I'K AUBICOLAri Co.VFKjl-
BIOS, TKKX TllK I'KIKSTS AHB AS MUCH BOU.ND TO CONFKSS THKMShLVKS UNTO THB
1.AY Fkui'LlI AS TUii; Lay I'KUVl.K ARE MuU.ND TO CONFh&S TUKMSKLVKS TO THEMt

OF THE COMPANION TO THE PRATER LOOK. 03

Ajf n IK TO PRAY IH TO ARSnr.VII, THi;S THK LAITT HT THIS PI.ACK HATH A8 C.RBAT Al-
THDHITV TO AH^OLTK THR PrIF.STS, AS THK PRIRHTS HAVK TO AIIHDI.VR THK l,*IT .

Thi" <liil .lohimne* Scotuf, othorwif^ o.iillr<l Diin.i, wi>ll pcri-oivo, wIid ti|><iii thi«<
I'lnce write»h on thin lunnnor : " Neither dittli it hooiu unto nio tlnit .liinic.t did (.-ivo
tbiit commnndincnt, or that hedid net it forth an boinK rev<'iTed of ("lirint. For llrsf.
iind torcniniit. whoiicc hud ho niiihority to bind tne whole Churrh, xitb thut ho
wan only hUhop of tiin Chiindi of .Iqrni<:ilnnt '.' Kxcopt thou wilt ifiiy timt thu Miiine
■hurch wiiM at the hoKinninir tho head chiirnh, and conKtxiitont v tloit he waK th«
head bi«ho|). whiuh thinu thf mop of Rome will novcr Ktaiit." •lohannt!' Sc«>tll^>, lib.
jr.. Sen. Distinct. J7, Quest. 1. The undordtanilinjf of it then, is «« in thcne wordf :
Coit./'emt iioiir hIhh ow t-i nnoflx r; a pcrHiiaHion to humility, whereby he wilii-lh us to
confoHH ouriielve!4 Kunorally unto our neichbourx, that wo ^re ^intiorp, a cording to
fhi.«« s'lvinif, " If we «uy we have no >iin. we deceive ournclv , and tlio truth i.-i not
in UK. And where that they do alle^o this Maylnij of our viour .feHus Chrl-t uiifo
the leper, to prove auricular oonfe.'scion to etand on (loilV uord, "(Jo thy way and
Khew thynelf unto the Priest." Matt, viii. Do they not hoo the Icpor wai« <*lonnKC>d
from his leprosy before he WiiH by Chrirtt «cnt unto the Prief't for to nhew hiniriolf
untohiin? Kv tiik s* vk rk*« v wk mi'-t hk clk^nhkk kkov ouk sriKiTfAi, !,k-

PROSY. I MKANorH RINK MI'ST IlK KOK'ilVKM irw, HRFORR TIHT WK COMR TO COVKFS-
8I0N. \\ H\T NKKU WK THKN TO TKU. KHRTH Ot'H «1NH INTi» THK K4R OK THK PRIKST.

.-•ITH THAT THuv BK Ai,RKAi)Y TAKifS AW »Y ? Therefore holy Ambrose, in his ot'oond
sermon \ipon the hundrod iind nimtfcnth Psalm, doth cay full w<'li, " (io ahcw
thyself unto the Priest. Who is the true Priest, but he whieh is tho Priest forever;
after tho order of Melchisedek '!'' Whereby this holy Father doth understand, that,
Loth the Priesthood and thu law being chanecd, wK ol'oht to ack.n«wi,ki «iP. nonr

OTHKR PhIKHT KUU DM,IVKRKNCK KRitM nUK St.Vfl, I'UT o(IR S A VUlIR JksV* ChRIBT.
WHO RKINO OTR SOVKRKKIN HlHHOP, DnTH WITH THB HAORIPtCK or» HIS BODY ANM>
BI.OOP. OKFKUKD OXIK I'OR KVK" UPO.t THK AhPAH OK THK nH.>8S, M08T KKKKCTUU-LY
CI.KANSK TKK SPIRIl'Al, LBPB08Y, AND WASH AWAY THK StVR OK Al.h THOSK THAT
WITH TRUK (■: 'NKK.SH10N OK THK SAMK DO FLKR I'NTO HIM. It IS IMOst evident and

plain, that t.Vis auricular confession hath not his warrant of flod's word, else it had
not been I: wful for Xoctarius, Uishop of Constantinople, upon a just occasion to
have put it down. Nectarius So/omen Kccles. Hist. lib. vii. cap. l"!. For when
anything ordained of God is by the lewdness of men nbused. tho al)u>ie ouKht to be
takrn away, and tho thing itself suft'ercd to remain. Moreover, tlunt ore St, AnpuH-
fiiu'H u'orilx; What havk I to ko with xikn, i«at thkv rhooi d hkar my (>>nkk.s-

PION, AS THOUGH THKV WKKK ABI.K TO HK \l, MV IMSKASKS? I.Ii;. X. CoSKKSSIOSTM,

Cap..'], a CUR10U8 sort op mkn to kvow anothkr man's i.wk, and hi.othkii. to

OORRKOT ANT AMKN D THKI R OW V. Wh V DO T!l K Y SKKK TO HKAK OK MK WHAT[a«,
•WHIC ( WILI, NOT HKAK OKTHkK WMAT THKY AKK? /AND HOW 0A\ THKY fKM , WHEN
THKY hkar by MK OK MTHKI.K, WHKTHKB I TKM, THKTKUIU OH NOT, SITU NO MORTAL
VAN kSOWKTH WHAT 11 IN' MAN, lUr THK S''IHIT OK MAN WHICH IS IN HIM? AfOUR-
TINR WOri.D NOT HAVR WRITTBN THUS, IF AURICULAR CONKKSSKiN HAD ItlfEN USED IS
HIS TIMK."

So speaks the Homily ia the passage Mr. Coster has ornlttod. What
stronger terms could be employed to denounce the doctrine of the
"Companion?" C, n Mr. Coster see nothing; here but the rejection of
the *^ sacrahiental confmsioH 0/ the liomanist?" Does he not perceive
that Augustine and Ambrose gave their decision against it hundreds
of years before this sacramental confession was in existence? The
latter was first authorized by the 4th Lateran Council, in 1215, whereas
the Fathers alluded to lived in the fourth Century, ei^ht hundred y«ars
before. The intelligent reader must see that the Homily recognizes
as of Divine authority only two kinds of confession, namely, confct^mni
to Ood, and mutual confcssio'i to each other among Christians ; and that
as to this confession to a Priest, as a necessary thine:, or as a means of
pardon, it utterly rejects it us contrary to true Christian liberty. Why
Mr. Coster should have referred lo this Homily, unless it was because
it happened to have the word "confession" mentioned in it, I cannot
tell; but this I do say, and say with confidence, that had he searched
the writings of Cranmer, Latimer, or Ridley, of Lutjier, Calviu,
or Zuingle, or even of the despised "Puritans of tlie 17th Cen-
tury," he could not have happened upon one that more fully,
forcibly, unequivocally and overpoweringly repudiates the hypo-
thesis which he professes to ground upon it, namely, "7/" theji
confession to a Priest is bidden ns in the Scriptures and the Word of God,
it is a pious custom, being the discharge of a duty xchich tee oice to God.

But I have not yet done with Mr. Coster'.s quotations. There follow
immediately a series of short extracts, .selected Irom sundry page^ of
the 4th Chapter of (he VI. Book of Hooker — five of them from the 7th,
and one from the 14th section. Tl:e object of these particular sec-
tions in Hooker, is to state the views of the Fathers, as well as of the
■CoDtinental Reformers, upon the subject of Confession ; aud it is not

fi »

24 ^\ REPLY TO THE KEY. I'. COSTKli'S 1)EFE> C J

a Hlile nirious to mark liovv tliise litt'e extracts of Mr. Coster are-
culk'd IVom the obisorvation" which Hooker makes npoti their smulry
opinions. The real tendency oftherie sections is decidedly aijainst the
doctrine of the '■ Co:;ip;iuion." In the course of them Hooker dis-
cusst's the meaning of the texts James v. 14—10, and 1 John i. 9, and
proves that they have no reference to confession to a Priest. He
shows tliat Tcrtullian and Cyprian were ro advoc-ates for it. lie says :

" I (lure boUlIy iilTinn. tliiit for laiiny liuntlrc 1 yeiirs iiftor ('lirisf, the I'lithcrs heM
no sucli oi)iiii*ni ; tlioy iliil not gutlier liy our Sjiviour's words iiny such nccps.^ity of
seeking liic l*ri«'st'.s abt'oluHon Iroin sin, by si'cri't imkI (n? they now term it.) siiicra-
inontiil coiil'cssioi) ; public cont'cff ion they tliougrht necessary by way of d'sciplinei
not i)riv!ite confession, ns in the n;Uure of n sjitraincnt, necess!(ry."

And after carefully examlniuj; the expressed opinions of the early
Avrilers, he winds up thus :

" To conchule, we ev ywhero find die u-e ( f confession, ospecially public, nllow-
ed of iiiid coninu'iidcd the Fathers; but tliat oxtrcmu and riiforous noce.-sify of
suiricula' and |)rivate confession, which is at this day so niij'htily upheld by the
<'iiurch of Koine wc li d not. It was not then the faith and d)ctnnc of tiod's
I'hurch, as ot the Papacy at this present, 1. Tliat the only remedy h •■ .-in after baj)-
fism is sacramental penitency, 2, That eonfo.ision in secret is an e.-!.<«ontial part
thereof, 3. That (joQ himself caimot now forgive .-'ins without tho Priest. 4, That
liec'ausc forKivcnes-" at tlic hands of die Priest must arise from confession n the of-
tenderi therefore lO confess unto him is ,i matter of such necessity as beins not cither
in detdi or at least in desire iierforined, excludeth uttur'y from all pardon, and
niust c.)nse(|ucntly in (Scripture be commanded, whero.>oever any promise of for-
givene.«s is made. No, no ; these opinion.' have youth in their countenance ; anti-
iiiiity knew them not; it never thought or dreamed of them."

It is to be regretted that Mr. Co.ster had not given us a better sum-
mary nf Hooker's reasonings upon this point, even as it regards the
opinions ol the early Fathers; but more especially, that when he had
gone so far as the 14th section of the Chapter from whence his selec-
tions are made, lie had not advanced one page further, and given what,
to us, one would suppose, mutt be far more interesting, viz., Hook-
er's views as to the doctrine of the Ciiuucii or Excjland upon the
subject, which are as follow :

"rio.l It standeth with us, in the Church of England, as touching pnhlir confes-
sion, thus:

First. Seeing day by (!ay we in our Church begin our pMblie ^)rayers to Almighty
God with puljlic acknowltdiynent of our sins, in which confe.«sion every mnn pros-
trate as it were befo e His gmrious Sliijesty, crioth guilty against himself; and the
Minister with one sentence pronounceth uuiversaily all clear, whoije aeknowl ig-
inentso made hath proceeded Irom a true penitent mind; what reason is tnere
eyry man should not under the general ti-rnis of confession represent to him-
self his own particulars whatsoever, and adjoining thereunto that affection
which a contrite spirit woikeih. embrace to as full effect tlio words of Divine
grace, as if the same were severally and particularly uttered with the addition
of prayers, imposition of hands, or all the ceremoiiii.s and solemnities that
might bo u.'ed for the strengthening of men's affiance in Hod's particular
mercy towards them? Such coiA-rHments are helps to support our weakness,
and NOT c.\i'SKS that sk vk to pkociue or puopurK, his (iiiT,'<. If with us
there bo " truth 'n the inward parts," as David speaketh, tho difference of general
and particular forms in confession and ab^olution is not to material, that any man's^
safety or ghostly good should depend upon it.

And for i>iic«ic confession and ai>8olution it standeth thus with us :

The Minister's pow-^r to .absolve is publicly taught and professed, the Church not
denied to have authority either of abridging or enlarging the use and exccise of that
power, upon the j)n )p/e n» mich iiecesnitji i m i>o>ird of i>iii:ii in^j the Ir frunsiircKKioui) nnt-,
.•lien, Ol if rcniixiiiiii o/nini otliern'iie in re intiioHHihle ; nciihor any such opinion h.id
of tho thing itsalf, as though it were either unlawful or unprofitable, saving only for
these inconveniences, which the world hath by experien'o observed in it heretofore.
And i;i rcri-ard thereof, the Church >>/ KnylnnJ hitli^rta ha^h thouaht it the mfi-r wnij
to rifir uiiii H hiifdvu vriiiiri iiitto (lod and thtuiix('lv<-<t onhi ; howbcit, Inot without
special caution for the admonition of such ns come to the holy sacrament, and for
the comfort of such as are ready to depart the world,"

Whoever carefully examines this latter paragraph in reference to
private confession, will perceive that the Cnuucii of Exolani>, in
Hooker's estimation, wposcs no noxesMtij upon her people, to open their
traitsi;rpssioHs to men ; and while she makes a special provision for the
comforts of those who are about to approach the sacrament, or are
drawing near to death, by permitting them, at their own earnest re-
quest, to luive the benefit of absolution and godly counsel, she deems it
*^ the safer ich)/,'' as h'T general rule, to r<fer men's hidden crimes unto

OF THE COMPANION TO THE PllAYKR BOOK.

irOif cnil (hchisdves ni)]>i. If nuy man can see in these sentinients the
doctrine of the *' Companion," Miat the " best means of obtaining: par-
don and amenUinij; onr lives is to confess our sins to a I'riest," ail I
can say is, that he possesses tliat species of second siy:lit, which is
adapted to tlie meridian of superstition, but wliich, by men of science,
is ri^hlly considered hu evidence of a disordered imajjination.
I proceed to tlie til'tli and last quotation from my letter.

"f'th. At page 1-3, it la saiil, " '/i/f H'lolii'r Khutitd lie rnr;iiy;l t'lmtiniii.^' " /' '"
./"'// the }i'ii><>nr of Hit hi'ih (I Kfiiriiniritt, thiit thr prcrlDUx boili/ n/ Clirinl ghnKh/ firnf
> ntir l>i\t'i,)-c unii I'tli' r meat." Aifiiin, tlio wiinl.-* of Cyril. !♦. 1'- i " A>Y fm-ii (,,i<: /»'
fiirr/ii/ lit fcfi/i it, fur irhiini,i;rpr '•(irelonfii lo«in nnii imrt nf it, liml bfttir h,m- n itnrt
of hi III Ki If" I:* not tht! iiiipliciitiou ill both these pa.-ssiitred. more in liarmouy wilL
the Church of Roiac, than with that of England?"

Upon this quotation Mr. Coster remarks :

'To make this extract a fair one, Dr. Gray shonl.l liave statod that tho first of the

two :)assiige3 are the worJs, not of the author of the

iiL'STI.NK "

Uompaniou," hat of rfr, Au-

Ilow such a statement as Mr. Coster here says I ought to have made,
could render my extract a " fair one," I do not understand, unless he
means it \>ould liave fu»-nished him witli a fair opportunity of passing
enconi'ums upon St. Augustine, which at present have rather the ap-
pearance of being forced into his composiiiou. The first extract 1
liave given, and which states the rule for us in this matter, does not
contain the words of St. Augustine, but of the author of the " Com-
panion ;" and the second, as it stands in the "Companion," and was
quoted therefrom, is strictly the language of the "Companion," though
it embodies in an altered form Augusiiue's words. The whole pas-
sage in the " Companion" is as follows :

"This Sacrnment fhouhl be received fasting. S<> was the practice of the Univer-
sal Cliureh.gaysSt. Augu:<tinc, which is authority em.ugh (in things of this nature,
namely, ciruuujstnncios of time, .\c.) to satisfy any that do not love contention. 1
Cor. xi. I'j. Yet it will not be amiss in a wiird to sliow tho reiwonableness of this
Catholic usage. And tlie first reason may be this ; because our minds are clearest,
onr devotion quicliest, and so we fittest to perform this inofit high service, when w»
are in our virgin spittle, . -IS Tertuliion piiissfji; it. A second is this: it is for the
honour of so high a Sacrament, that the pre>.iou8 Body of Christ should first enter
into the Christian's mouth before any other meat." , •

What St. Augustine is here represented as affirming is, that It was
the practice of the universal Church to taiie the oacrament in this way.
The " quod semper," however, cannot be designed to be included in
this testimony : for it is evident that, " from the first," it was not so.
If men feel that by going to the Sacrament " fasting," they can go ia
a mjre elevated frame of devotion, there is nothing in this practice to
be condemned : but it is a tldng entirely optional. What is to be con-
demned is, the laying down a rule for the members of the Church of
Kngland, that it ought so to be; and when this rule comes to be en-
forced upon us, by the authority of St. Augustine, while our Prayer
Books do not teach it, our Articles enjoin it, or our Homilies incul-
catei it; and when, at)ove all, we find tliat at the very first celebration
of the Lord's Supper, it was administered to the disciples by the bles-
sed Hedeemer, in immediate connexion with a FcaM instead of a Fast,
we must be permitted to say, we have a higher rule to guide us than that
ot the " Companion," or any Saints that lived in the 4th Century.

And when we look at the second reason assigned in the " Com-
panion" for the practice of which Augustine spealis, and which appears
to be expressed partly in his own words, namely, that " ?7 i.-^ for the
honour of so hiyh a Sacrament that the precious body of Chrisi should ^first
enter intu the Christian's mouth before nny other meat," we are strength-
ened in our conviction, that all the rules which can be ^jathered from
Councils and Fathers, however venerable the one, or holy the others,
arc only so far worthy of reception as they are based upon the infalli-
ble standard of Gods word. We are contented, in this instanc*^, to
render precisely the same honour to ■' the Sacrament" which our
Divine Master and His disciples did. We wish to descend no hirer;
we wish to rise no hvjher ; but when we find a book like the "Com-

26 A REPLY TO THE REV. F. COSFER'S DEFENCE

panlou" employing such teri^s as theso, ** it is for the honour of so hifjh
a Sacrament that the prechus body of Christ should first en er the Chris-
tian's mouth before any other meat;" and when -we compare this with
another passage on the preceding page, " It is not man that makith the
body and blood of Christ by consecrating the holy elements, but Christ that
icas crucified for vs;" we see enough to warn us that we may have safer
guides than the " Companion," to teach us the precise degree of hon-
our wliich we ought to attach to this Sacreraent. Mr. Coster attempts
to draw a parallel between this language and that of our Church,
where she direds the candidates for Baptism to picpare for it with
prayer and fasting ; but there is no parallel betneen thorn. The dif-
ference is at once obvious. The one is reconanended as a m* ans of
humiliation, to ass'st in acquiring moral qualifications; the other, as
an act of homage to the sacramental emblems, which the .luthor, in
common with the Church of Kome, appears to regard with supersti-
tious veneration. " We must load the Sacraments," is the well-known
maxim of men who belong to the Romanizing school, and he must be
wanting in discernment indeed who does not trace the principles of
that school In this anonymous production entitled '• The Companion
to the Prayer Book."

The extract from Cyril is of the same character. " Let every one be
-."areful to keep it, for lohosoever loses any part of it, had better lose a part of
himself." " I can sec nothing implied iti these words," says Mr. C'oster,
" beyond reverence in handling the symbol of Christ's blessed body." Yes,
there is more than reverence : there is alarm — there is terror — there
is superstition. Tell me that the symbol of my Saviour's blessed body
should be handled reverently, and you recall to my mind the sacred
object it represents. Tell me that if. Inadvertently, 1 drop a single
crumb of it, I incur a penalty worse than having a part of myself ex-
cluded, and you suggest a totally different train of thought. You lead
me to apprehend that it is not bread I am taking into my hands, that
it is something else, that some mysterious chaage had passed upon it;
you transfer my reverence from the Archetype to the type; you make
it more than reverence ; it amounts to superstitious drend; and for
this I can find nc '^auction in my Bible, no countenance In my Trayer
Book, and nothing parallel to it in the Rubrics which direct •' the min-
ister reverently to place what rcmaineth of the consecrated elements
upon the table, or thH people reverently to eat the same." Notwith-
standing then that the above extract contains the words of " Cyril," —
notwithstanding the Homily sty. .'s him " Cyrillus, an old and holy doc-
tor" — notwithstanding the Council at Ephesus anathemat'zed Ibas, for
questioning his orthodoxy — notwithstanding the learned author of the
"Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy" quotes him several times upon
other subjects ; yea, notwithstanding Mr. Coster should anathematize,
as a race of modern Puritaurf, all who will not bow to Cyril's infallibi-
lity, we n;ust beg to dissent from the sentiment expressed in the above
extract, as calculated to mislead the judgment, and convey a false im-
pression in regard to the sacred emblems to which it refers.

What now remains to be considered? Mr. Coster's concluding pa-
ragraph.

" Waving: thus shown how utterly groumlicss iil' of Dr. Gray's five objections real-
ly i, the two passaged being altere i in the way 1 have suggeste'l. I can safely
leore it to the members of the Church and the Church Society, to decide whether
tte teaching of this little book is of so objectionable n cliaraetor as to justify what
has been botli said aud done res: octiiig it.'*

My objections, it appears, are utterly groundless! How Is this
proved? '*Vhy, tico passages which I have objected to aic to be altered as
Mr. Coster has suggested, the necessity of the alteration proving the
groundlessness or my objections ! i And tlie other three are to be
proved groundlefiis, oy misrepresentations c ! the teaching of the Prayer
Book, of Hooker, and the Homilies. And why is this singular pro-
cess, by a sad misnomer called proving, to be resor'f^d to? Be-, '.use
Mr. Coster does not Ilk? to labour " under the imputation of being the
introducer ol Improper looks." Very natural. Thea .et him beware

OF THE COMPANION TO THE PRAYER BOOK. 27

how he Incurs it. If he imports such books, and places them, without
authority, iu the Depositories of the Church Society, he must bear tlje
imputation. He will never escape it by endeavouring to prove that
bad boolis are good ones, that error is trutli, that heresy is orthodoxy.
This is what Mr. Coster has attempted to do ou the present occasion,
and of all the documents of a polemical nature that ever met my ob-
servation, I never examined one so wanting in sound argtinient, and
accurate quotations as his " Defence of the Companion to the Prayer
Book." His motives I touch not. To his own Master he stands or
falls. But supposing his intentions right, he displays such a waiit of
acquainlance with tlie subject In debate, so glaring a misapprehension
ef the authors he quotes, that in any future publication he may Issue,
no man ought to feel the slightest reliance upon his statements, until
he has had Uie opportunity of testing their claims, by a careful exami-
nation of the authors to which he refers.

It has been my unpleasant task to detect and expose the fallacies of
his statements. My aim has been not personal oflVuce to Mr. Coster,
but to guard all whom I can influence, against the principles of the
books he defends. Those principles I regai is opposed to the teach-
ing of Scripture, contrary to the tenets of our Church, dishonourable
to God, and destructive to the souls of men Viewing theiL in this
light, I have no doubt as to its being my duty, be the conse(iuences
what they may, to reject them myself, and to warn others against
them— yes, and further still, to prevent as far as my efforts can do it,
our Church Society from being made the instrument of disseminating
them. It is, 1 conceive, a deplorable thing to see an Association bear-
ing a title which designates it as a representative of the Church of
England In this Colony, disseminating with one hand the doctrines of
that Church, and with the other, the tenets of the Church of Home.
It is deplorable, because the two systems cannot both be right. They
are upon many essential points diametrically opposed to each other.
The Society, therefore, that attempts to piopagate them both cannot
last long. " A house divided against itself cannot stand ;" and, wiilie
it lasts, it can do comparatively but little good. " If the trumpet give
an unceitain sound who shall prepare himself to the baule ?" And
why then paralyze the efforts of such a Society, when there is one sim-
ple process by which the whole difficulty might be obviated — wiien
there is a venerable Society (the Society for promoting Christian
Ifuowledge,) whose third jubilee we have lately celebrated, which
selects under careful revison, books upon every subject connected with
religion, and places them iu the bauds of subscribers in a belter form,
and at a cheaper rate than any other Society whatever ? Sh.e speaks
the voice of our Church. Why not be satisQed with her teaching ? If
these other publications iJijS\r from her, are they right? If thej ac-
cord with her, are they uecess nj ? Are they so necessary, that it is
w»rth while to keep the Church Soci»^ty in constant collision, and
hazard its very being, in order to make it the instrument of dissemi-
nating them, when every man in the Diocese is at liberty, if he chooses
it, to get them through other channels ? Men may speak of peace,
and profess to love it, but they mistake the road that leads to it, while
they pursue this course. They are endeavouring, iu a voluntary As-
sociatlan, to compel a large portion of its members to go beyond those
common principles upon which all are agreed, and thus lo be made the
yielding, temporizing, I may say, degraded instruments of disseminat-
ing tenets which tney abhor. The attempt Is a fruitless one. If my
efforts, and the efforts of those who thiak with me can prevent it, it
never will succeed: If tiiey fail, we shall retire from the arena, leaving,
not willingly, but of necessity, Mr. Coster to enjoy the satisfaction he
may be able to extract from the consciousness, that he has broken to
pieces a Society, which might have flourl3hed long, and tlourishing,
diffused on every hand, the blessings of the Gospel of Teacu.

NoTK,— The latter clause of M r. CoMtcr'» Inst imruvraph havinsr been placed on its
right footing by Dr. BajurU. X tiiink it uuBcoestiarr '>.o say a single word in reply to it«

A STATEMENT OF FACTS

As they occurred at the Annual Meeting of the Diocesan

Church Society, (1849)

^VITII A REPLY

To some Mis-statements and Expositions in the Rev. F,

Coster's Defence of the " Cc.npanion to the

Prayer Book."

BY ROBERT BAYARD, M. D., cSfcc.

A few (lays after the Meetinj^of the iViocesiin Church Society in this
City, held on the 18th January last, (1840,)I was called upon by a
gentlen}an f mi an adjoinino: Parisl', who informed me, that the
Lord Bishop of Fredericton ^'had wUhdraicyi his approval from the
'Companion to the Phayeii Book,' " against wliich objections
had been urged l>y myself and others, and liad stated ''that it aJiould
not h& re-iinporteO .'' I was authorised to pve publicity to Ihis state-
ment; and was permitted to see tiie paragraph declarative of it in a
letter from his Lordship. The Lord Bishop in p. letter addressed to
the Rev. Dr. W. Gray, reiterates tliis " disapp roval y His letter is
a reply to one from the Rector of this Parish, written in compliance
with the Bishop's request, respecting objectionable Books in the
Depository in St. Johi. These letters have been circulated in this
City by his Lordship's friends, prior to the receipt of his Lordship's
answer by Dr. Gray, to whom u was addressed. The Rector in his
letter made some extracts from the " Companio7i to the Prayer
Book,'''' and the following are his Lordship's remarks in refereijce to
it: " As I have ^Vl"l^HJ)liA^vy; my approbation, om grounds deemed
" sufficient 01} mc, I am at a loss to know why you urge the same ob-
" jcctio7is. The Book IS WITHDRAW. Cadii qunsstio." The ques-
tion ceases. Not so with the Rev. Mr. Coster, who, qtiestionem
rcsurgit — renews this question.

This assurance induced me to abstain from any further discussion
upon the subject, although I felt myself called upon to correct an
erroneous impi'ession published in the " Chronicle,'''' and " Cottricr,'''^
namely, that my inquiiy ought not to have been made at the A.iniver-
sary Meeting of the Society. I think £ shall satisfy every unpreju-
diced reader, that I was perfectly correct as to place, time and cir-
cumstance. This morning, I received a communication, entitled
"The Companion to iiie Pkayek Book defended against the un-
founded objcctiofis of the Rev. Dr. J. W. I). Gray, Hector of Trinity
Church, St. John,'''' and subscribed by *' F. Costek, Rector of Saint
George's, Carleton, St. John."' V/e have here in rapid succession
the disapproval of a book by the Right Rev. Lord Bishop of Frederic-
ton, and the apjroval and defence of the very same book by the
Rev. Rector of Carleton, who has by this publication placed his
Lordsliip in an awkward position, irrespective of hi^ disapproval,
to wliich I shall direct the reader's attention in a subsequent part
of the following statement, which the Rev. Mr. Costn* iuis dicited»

A STATIiMKNT OF FACTS. 09

by assc.rtinji;, in his liicon-'ilstrnt ilc/ciirc, that " J)r. Ii(C>/ai'd made liU
*' lU-(idcisci( atUidc upon some of the books, \vhi(^h !i:ul been importoil
" for the Diocesan Church Society."

We are hert tohl that the books were imported fur the Society.
It will appear hereafter that the 15islu>p, as Chairn:iii of tiic Anni-
versary Meeting of the I). C. Society, stated that llie books were
not on the shelves of the Depository; and Mr. Cost'jr further stated
that lie removed them from the slielves, when dir cted so to d) by
the r>ook Committee. If the books were '• imported for the D. ('.
Society," why were they not upon tlie shelves? And if the}' were
upon the shelves, why wino they removed from them ? The •• l>c-
fcncc " has thrown the Lord liishop and the Seci-etary upon the
horns of a dilemma, and it will reipiire some ino;enuity to reconcile
the incongruities, and tlu'reby extricate tlieso gentlemen from it. I
shall have occasion to a<lvert to this more fully iKireafter.

The Rev. Mr Costei- conlirms a statement which will be nindcj
wjien I detail the proceedings at the nie(;ting. that th(i "Compuniua
to the Praj'er l^ook" was thr book to which the lt(!v. Dr. (Jr.vy and
inyself dire(!ted the attention of the Lord liishoj). I wislith(! reader
to bear this in mind, ;uid contrast it with his Lorilsliii)'s ailih-ess to
the meeting, and rv^ference to theCliiefJasticoand William ^Vrig!lt,
Esq.

I may venture to assert that the Hector of St. John will expose the
weak parts of the Defence made b}' the Rector of Carleton as ^oon
as the correspondence now pending upon the sa.Mie sul>J<'ct ix'tween
the Lord Bishop and himself has terminated ; which, I pr'sume,
will in due time be published, as the circumstances airv;ady mk^d-
tioned now render it obligatory upon the Rev. Dr. (iniy tophi.-e the
entire correspondence bef<n'3 the Laity geneniUy for their informa-
mation. But I cannot refrain from noticing th(i pei;uliar way in
which the Hector of Caiieton endeavors to remove a " superlative "
objection." "The Companion to the Prayer Book " inmilcates p.
1.57, "To confess our sins to a Priest even in Iiealth is a pious and
"ancient custom, and not only a sign of repenttince, but the iiKsr
" means of obtaining par<Ion, and amending our liv(is " The author
of the Z)c/c?icc says, "The superlative, 'the best,'' an unguarded
" expression as it seems to mc, should have been altered by him
" (the author of the book) to the positive a good, or have been
" qualified by some such words as one of, or next to cotifession to God ."
We must 'ake the ?c"0/v/.v of the " Companion to the Prayer Book,"
as indicative of its doctrines, and not the icord'i wliich the Rev. ]\Ir.
Coster would willingly substitute for them, to exonerate it not only
from the Bishop's disappi-ovab but from the "well-founded olJ-
jeetions of the Rev. D:-. I. W. D. Gray."

The Rev. Mr. Coster, in pag" -i: of his Defence, confi's-t's that he
thinks '• it would have been JicUer t.rptxssril hail lie," lIk; author of
this " excellent little book," not used the supei'lative expression
" 6es^." By the saiiKJ parity of argument, any Tractarian may at-
tempt to reconcile the grossest att;u;k upon Protestantism'. As for
instance, Wahd, in his " Idkai.," &c., asserts that the Church of
England should sue on her knees for re-admission into Rome.
Now, to adopt the language of the Defi nre, " I think it would have;
been better expressed had Wm: I > introduced the monosyllable not
between the words * should ' and * suc.^ " Charity may put the best
construction upon positive expressions, but it has no right to alter,
erase or substitute terms. I must thorefo e protest against this
method of defence to substantiate the ill-advised ncs.-i of my att.ieh-.

The " superlative,''^ in the
p. sui)i;rlative difficulty.

Companion,'''' places the Defender of it in

30 A STATEMENT OF FACT?.

In the C( ncliision of Mr. Coster's defence, ho states in the most
nnqiialified manner, that Dr. (rray was the " originator, contriver,
** and manager of a most distressing discussion— to use the words of
" a friend of Ins own— or as it might, with great propriety, liave
" been called, a most disgraceful row." I feel myself called upon to
refute tills unfovmded accusation, and I may state most unequivo-
cally and unreservedly, that I had determined to submit the question
at the Anniversary Meeting of the Society, inconsequence of having
been informed by Dr. Botsford that he hatl purchaseil the book
"The Companion to the Prayer Hook," from the Depository; he
met me In the street, mentioned the book, and its objectionable
character, and I then and there told him I would originate an
inquiry respecting it at a full meeting of the Society. J)r. Gray
was not aware of my intention, until 1 cousuIUmI him respecting tiie
doctrines ol the Book, which was some time aftcn* my conversation
with Dr. Botsford; to whom I pledged my determination; and I bog
leave to assure the Rector of Carleton, that neither the Rev. Dr.
Gray nor any oiher Reverend should have diverted me from my
purpose: therefore, " Dr. Bayard" has not been "ill-advised," anil
he is willing to assume the entire res[)onsil)ility.

J n reference to iNir Coster's remark aljoiit the "di?tressing dis-
cussion," I can readily imngine that it diil diitrc'^i some i)ersons ; and
the sequel will prove that the '' (U.^gracnful roiv"" part of the story,
proceeded not from the originator and supporters of the inquir}-,
but h"om tiie oi)i)c>^ on-s of it.

I am aware that some persons will condemn any public exposi-
tion of the question at issue, asserting the expedience of privity iu
such matters. The liaity throughout the Province are interestcnl in
the inquiry, !Uid therefore the obj(!Ction is untenable, and t!ie adoption
of it would do irreparable mischief. Moreover, the Lord Bishop of
Fredericton has circulated a letter received by him from tiie Rev.
Dr. Graj', and his Reply to tlvat letter on the subject of these ob-
jectionable Books, prior to t!io receipt of the Reply by the Reverend
Gentleman, to uhom it was addressed. This transaction, — his
Lordship's expressions :it the meeting, which I sh.-ill quote in their
jiroper place, and Ihe Rev. Mr. Coster's defence of the Book which
his Lordship has condemned, and the improper assertions contained
in it, call for a public statement of the whole atfair.

It is well known that laymen, in dillerent piirts of this Province,
have complained of the circulation of books containing Tractarian
doctrines, which have been purchased from the funds of the D. C.
Society.

Non-resistfince, and the apathetic cry oi^^ peace,'''' favored the dif-
fu.sion of the Heterodoxy during and for some time after the publi-
cation of it in Oxford, until many of our Bishops, Clergymen, and
Laity, tlnougliout England, i)erceiving the dangerous rrror ot their
f»upinenc.<s, unitedly opi)OPed the " hinoi'alions " which, notwith-
standing, continue to disturb the ])eace of the Church in Great
Britain; and ])assing l^eyond the lioundary of their birthplace, have,
in their progress, divided our Church in this province. The question
of Tractarianism demands public investigation, when the doctrines
of the Oxford Tracts are publicly promulgated in books sold at the
Dopo-itory of a Church Society. Privacy, under such circumst;nice«
Avould be'delusivp and unsafe: and ^- peace,'''' without inquiry or
exposure, would be a compromise of principle. The expressed
opinions of some of the highest Dignitaries in our Church warn us
against this fal^e security.

It m:iy be aske<l, why h:is :i layman a-sumod the responsibility of
publishing ])roccediag"s which' involve dcctrinal discussions? I

A STATEMKNT OF FACTS. g J-

reply, because a Layman originated thein(|uiry, in proper time and
place, at the Annivers'uy Meeting of the Diocesan Church Society,
and because subsequent transactions have imperatively called for a
more public disclosure of facts. I shall detail the proceedings of
the Meeting, and ask a few questions arising from them. Tiie doc-
trinal and theological discussion is assumed by a gentleman full}'
competent to sustain it, nanuly, the llev. Dr. Gra}'.

The following extracts from the Articles of the Constitution prove
undeniably that the Anniversary Meeting of the Society convenes
expressly for business purposes. The ith article designates the
officers of the Society, " who, with the exception of the President and
Vice- Pre sidodfi, shall he anniially elected at the Anniversary Meet-
ingy The l;3th article provi<les jfor the meeting of Parish Com-
mittees ^'previous to tho Annivci'sary Meeting, aviiex the recomrncn-
'' dationto the General Committee of Sp&eial Ol>jccls shall be dctcr-
^' mined on.'^ The 18th irtiele concludes, th:it "no article of the
" Constitution of this Society shall be rescinded, altered, or amend-
" ed, except with the concurrence of two-thirds of the members
" present, at a c.enekal mep:tixg ; and notice of any motion shall
"be given at the gc7ic7'al mecii7iff provioxiH to the one at which
" sucli motion is to be made." And Air. Carman's notice, published
on the 17th page of the Twelfth, or last year's Keport, proves thw
intention of tho Constitution with regard to this meeting for the
transaction of business. And I may here remark, that the Lord
nishop assumed a prerogative not given by the Constitution, when
he invited, as he did on the preceding Sunday, non-subscribers to
attend this meeting.

I shall refer, in the course of the following statement, to the 8tlv
Article of the Constitution of the Society, and shall therefore tran-
scribe it for the reader's information. It provides " That the Society
" ^uill circ7ilate no books, luhich are not in the catalogue of the Society
'^ for promoting Christian Knowledge, cxec2^t such as the Bishop mc'y
" approve.'^''

The Lord Bishop of Fredericton preached in Trinity Church on
the Sunday preceding the Anniversary Meeting. At the time of
giving notices, he requested the attendance of the members, and
invited all persons frientlly to the objects of the Society to attend
the meeting. The spacious room was filled at the appointed hour
by a most respectable assemblage; and the Lord Bishop was
unanimously called to the Chair. He directed the Rector of tho
Parish to precede the business of the evening with prayer; after
this, he addi-essed the audience upon the objects and success of the
Society, ixnd observed " Uiat this meeting was the largest and most
" respectable which he had ever attended in the Province.'''' After the
conclusion of his address, his Lordship, as Chairman, called upon
several gentleman to move some platform resolutions, with which
they had been previously furnished. When these speeches Avero
encfed, the Chairman held up another resolution, remnrking at the
time, that the names of a mover and seconder were not inscribed
upon it, and intimating his wish that some gentleman would take it.
The Uev. Dr. Alley immediatel}' complied, and moved that the
thanks of the meeting be given to the members of the Executive
Committee, and Officers of the Society, and that they be requested
to continue in ofiice.

The resolution was opposed by several gentlemen, urging that it
should be divided into two distinct resolutions, and that the officers
should be individually nominated and elected. This amendment
was can-ied, after a warm discussion, and the election was delaved

A STATEMENT OF FACTS,

tho mean time I rose, and addres.sod

the

for an hour or two. In
Cljairniiin as follows:

*' My I^oui), — I l)eg leave most resijectfully to siihmit to your
" Lordsliij)'8 consideration, Jis the President of tljo Diocesan Society,
" and as Chairman of this meetinpf, and to the partieidar attention
'• of this laro^e and highly respectable iiudience, a few observations
" introductory to a resolution which 1 intend to brinj^ forward.

" J duly appreciate and respond to your Lordship's expression of
" hope in your openiii^j^ adilress that the proccicdin^^sof this meeting
•' should be charneterized by conduct worthy of its object, and I be^
" leave most explicitly to assure your Lordship that I will contine
^' mj' remarks within the pale of our laws, and i.fthat respect which
" is due to the exalted ollices which your Lordship holds as our
" Diocesan, and as Clinirman of this mectir^;^;. And as my resolu-
•*' tion will in all probability occasion some collision of o[)inion, I
" sincerely hope it will not create any (collision of courtesy among
" gent'emen discu-sing an important question.

*' Mr. Justice Street, in tho course of his addres, stated that the
*• Diocesan Church Scjciety was de(!ply rooted in the aftections and
^' confidence of the people throughout this Province ; and I rejoice
*' at it. But, my Lord, if the tree is so deeply rooted and esteemed,
*' we should be the more watchful, and remove an}' parasitical sucker
" that may vitiate its fruit. 1 hold in my hand a specimen of some
" books obtained from the Depository of the Society in this City,
" which, in my humble opinion, are calcidated to prejudice tlie
"" intercuts of this Society, and the cause of Protestanism in this Pro-
" vince, as they manifest inequivocally some of the distinctive char-
" acteristics of practices njid doctrines which have been condemned
" by a large mnjoritj' of Bishops in England — by a large majority
'* of eminent and tal(>nted clergyman — b^' a large majority of the laity
" — by the decided stand of the University of Oxford, where these
" doctrines first appeared in tlui * Tracts for the Tbncfi,'' — and lastly,
" and most conclusively, by our Ecclesiastical Courts

" Stimulated, mj' Lord, by a sense of duty, and encouraged by
" such high and commanding authority, 1 unhesitatingly come for-
" ward, as a Parent, a Vestryman, and as a Protestant, to resist the
" first systematic encroachment of Tractarianisra in this Parish; and
" accordingly 1 beg leave to ask the Chairman of the Book Com-
" mittee, through your Lordship, whether books, such as I now hold
'* in my hand, tlie ' Companion to the Prayer Book,' and * Ofiice of
" Chorister,' were introduced into the Depository, agreeably to the
" tenor and spirit of the 8th Article of the Constitution; and if not,
" which I must suppose was the case, by Avhom, and by what
" authority they came there? I also beg leave to ask the Chairman
" in his character as our Rector and Spiritual Instructor, whether
♦' these books meet with his approval; and whether he considers
" their doctrines in conformity Avith the Church of England? " " I
*' shall pause, my Lord, for a reply."

The Rev. Dr. Gray, the Chairman of the Book Committee, im-
mediately responded, stating that the books to which reference had
been made, were not admitted into the Depository with the sanction
of the Committee. — that he disapproved of them, — that he consid-
ered the " Office of Chorister" objectionable, principally for its ab-
.surdity, but that the "Companion to the Prayer liook' contains
doctrines decidedlv opposed to tho^e if the Church of England.

I then continued : " My I...ord, I came prepared with references to
" particular passages i^ the * Companion to the Prayer Book,' as
*' illustrations of its objectionable character, but the declaration of
"our Rector's sentiments supercedes the necessity of reading them.

A STATEMENT OF FACTS. -Vi

" .IS I cannot refer the audience to better evitlcncc : I shall, thore-
" fore, conclude my remarks, at present, by movinfr. ' That a nuni-
" ber of books have be(!n placed upon the shelves of the Depository,
'• in this city, without the sanction of the Book Committee, highly
"objectionable in their doctrines, and calculated to inju o the inter-
** ests of this Society, and of the Church jfenerally.'' "

This motion was seconded by Mr. J. Lawrence, v.ho sugp:o«teil
the addition of the followin^jj words, " and that the}- be immediately
*• removed from the Depository,*' which were accordinj^ly annexed
to theorin;i"al resolution. Mr. Lawrence supimrtod the niolion in
a comprehensive antl appropriate speech.

I subjoin the following observations, made by Mr. Lawrence, to
show th.atthe resolution was not brought forward and supported by
any language or appeal to the liishop for Ids scuitiments, authoriz-
ing the unguarded expressions, with which his Lordship insulted the
mover and supporters of it, ami to which I shall direct attention
hereafter.

** My Lord, — It is with deej) regret, that, in common with many
" present, I h.ive heard of the introduction into this Province,
** and into the Depository of the Society in this city, of a number of
*• books, the tendency of which is to sap the foundation of Frotcsl-
** autism, and to weaken our att.ichment to a Chnr<'h, winch has, in
•' the hand of the Ahviighty, produced manj' chami)ions f<jr truth,
"and which has proved herself, the gre.at bulw.'irk of Christianity.

" It must be apparent to every unprejudiced mind, tluit a great
*' injury has been done to tliis Society, inasmuch as the fourth sec-
"tion, of the 6th Article of the Constitution, has been violated, for,
" it expressly states, ' that .all books imported, sl»all be in strict .ac-
' cordance with the principles of tlie Church of England.' I appeal
"to j'ou, my Lord, Reverend Gentlamen, and Laity, if 1 am notcor-
•' rect when I .assert, thsit the book to which the mover of tlie reso-
'* lution h.as referred, .and which the Rector of the Parish lias con-
"demned, is not in accordance with her principles. Never let us
" forget, that it was in defence of the pure doctrines of our Church,
" that the Marty r-" bled and died, men whose mimes shine forth in
" the great constellation of Chnstian'ty, as luminaries to save us,
".and the generations to come, from shipwreck on those shoals of
"error in faith and doctrine, from which they were so providential-
"ly preserved. To circulate such books, is to do injury to the cha-
" ractcrs of men, of whom it may be truly said, the world was noi
" worthy. Who then, in this assembl}', will not, with me, exclaim,
"'from all false doctrine, heresy and schism, Cood Lord deliver
"us.»'

*' While the objects contemi)lated by this Society are v.aried, such
" as mission.ary visits, the founding oV divinity sciiol.irships, aid to
" Sunday .and other schools, the building of churches, tlie iuiportation
" of books, and assistance to widows and ori)hans of deceased cler-
"gymen; these are but auxiliaries to the accomplishnjewt of one
"grand object, the spread of the everlasting gos-jiel; a noble work,
" and worth)' of the best <'nergy of the miml. It becomes, then, my
" Lord, an important question a* to the best way of accomplishing
" this great work. Let the Church answer it, at the ordination of
"her mini-tors. The only instrument she places in her hand is the
"sword of the Spirit, which is the word of (iod, and we believe it
"to be the experience of the ministry in every sigo, that just in pro-
" portion as Ihcy have n-cd Ihat wcrjion. and lli:it c>ii"!y, li:is liccu
" their success in saving souls. Could we to-night tummon before
" us the general assembly of the church of the fivst-born, all those
" who have fought the good fight, and have fuiishcd their course,

g^ A ST ATOMKXT OF FAC fS.

♦' tlioy woiiUl bear united tostiiuony to the power of tlie liihlo, an the
"great in.stninicnt, in th(! hand of the S])irit, to sulduc the pride of
*' man, to enter the eitadel of the human heart, and compel snhmis-
" sion to the terms of the gospel ; while on the otlier hand we find
" that in those countries wliere the doctrines contained in otiier
" books opposed to it, have been preached for agen, the only fruit to
•' be found at the present day, is ' wrath, anger, malice, and all un-
" charitableness.'

•' Many of the clergy and Laity have read Traotarian books, and
" have become fascinated with the beauty of their language, with
"the dignity which they claim for our nature, and at last they have
" imbil)ed their sentiments, they have left the church of their fathers,
" and joined the church of Rome. While Ave regret the steps they
" have taken, we cannot but admire the consistency of their con-
"duct; for, after having forsaken her principles, it was but com-
•' mon honesty in them, to cease to minister at her altars, or to re-
" tain their membership.

" The tendency of the doctrines contained in such books, are well
*' understood in the mother country, for she who sways the sceptre
" of the British empire knows well, that the i)erpetuity of her throne
" and the peace of her subjects, are endangered by \hem ; for she
" has rewarded that Trelate who has proved himself the great cham-
" pion of Protestantism, in oi)position to Tractarian writers, with
♦' the highest ecclesiastical gift in her power, the See of Canterbury,
" over which Cuanmeu once presided.

•' Is it not imperative, then, upon every true friend of his Church,
*' whatever his rank or station in society maj- be. if he wishes to
" transmit her, in all her iniritu, strength and vigotir, to his chil-
*' dren's children, to stop the circulation of every book, which is not
" in accordance with her principles? And unless that is done, and
"done to-night, great will be the injury inflicted upon her, and
" greatly will the progress of this Society be retarded. Let us then
" as thetrue friends of the Church, imitate the spirit of the great
" Apostle when he said, • if meat make my In-other to olVend, I will
" eat no more while the world standeth ;' and say of such books as
" have been improperly placed in the Depository, we will remove
" them !tt once, and import no more forever.

"My Lord, — I cordially concur in the sentiments advanced by
"two of the previous speakers, in reference to the Society for Pro-
" moting Christian Knowledge. A century and a half has passed
"away, since the day of its formation, and from that period to the
" present, slie has been going on from strength to strength ; onward
"and upward has been her course, and on every hand she has scat-
" tered the glad tidings of peace; since then nations have arisen,
" and nations have passed away, but this venerable Institution still
" exists, possessing all the rigour of youth, with the wisdom of age,
" and why? because she is built upon the foundation of truth. The
*' highest compliment then, which we can bestow upon her, is to
" import her bowks, and her's only.

" My Lord, — It is a well-known truth, that the earth yieldeth her
'• increase just in proportion to the purity of the seed sown, and the
"extent of the labour bestowed upon it: Ami, as in the natural
" world, so in the moral. If we expect to behold an abundant har-
" vest to the Lord, of the jieaceable f uits of righteousnes?;, the trwe
"and genuine seed of the Word must be sown, for on that, and that
" alone, will the blessing of heaven descend. To the aceomjilish-
" ment of this great object we must be united ; and to eftect and ce-
" ment that union, we must be true to the principles of this Society ;
"And then, ere long, will the distant forest, on the Sabbath morn.

A STATKMENT OV FACTS. ^S^

••echo back tlit; souiul of t!io vill;i;ro boll, inviliu^ tlio liumblcMvoods-
•' man to the S.iiictuaiy, to worsbij) tlio (lod of bis f.ulMMs, in tlic?
"same matchless liLur^jjy in which they worshipped. 'I'iion may \vc
•• hope to behold the dawn of thai il.iy when tin' * wildtMiie.ss shall
•' blossom as the rose,' and the desert become the jjardon of our
"God."

This motion was opposed by some of the niovcrs of lie plntform
resolutions, who asserted, that no person could form :vn opinion up-
on the doctrines of a book, unless Ik; had read ii thn)M;:liout; and
before tlu! question (lould Ix; submitted to the meeting,', witli piopii-
ety, each member voting upon it, shouhl be thus qualilieil. The
Chairman exi)res>ed his t;nlire concurrence with these setitiuii'iits,
and added, that such discussions would convert the meeliu<^ into a
del)at inn; Theolo;^i(;al Society. The excitement increased, and the
Lord IJisliop, for^eltinj; his duty .as ( Iiairuian. :ind supportin;; the
opposers of the i-esolution, eutered wiLh miuh warmlh ;ind inip.-i-
tience into the discussion, lie became a deterniined partixan, .and
in the course of his .address to the audience, lie confnuul his remarks
cxduslvcli/ to the " ()Oi''C of Cliorldci','^ altbou<r;h repeatedly told by
the Rev. Dr Gray sind myself, that we objected to the " ('ouijuuiion
'o the rraijcr Boohy His Lordship, however, ])er.s(!ven(l in his ad-
herence to the " Chorister,'''' obseivino', that much h.ad been s:iid aI)out
this l)o(ik, but that he hinj.«elf had not seen anythinii: objecti()nai)l(3
in it. He said that he had submitted the l>ook to tli(! judrrim-nt of
three Lay gentlemen. niAv in the room, well qu.iliiied to j;ive an
opinion upon the subject, and tisking whetlnn" ho might !)ring for-
ward their n.an^es; .and being .'insw<'red in tlx; aftirmative, he men-
tioned the Chief Justice aiul \Villi:im Wright, Es(j., who expresstid
their assent. And here I would direct the attention of tlu^ rrader
to the statement in the llev. I\![r. Ccster's " Defence, ' confii'matory
of the assertion, that the " Companion to the Prayer Hook"' was the
objectionable irork.

I si 111! make some cixtracts from this IJook to illustr.ate its cliar-
acter, and tlu; ai)prov.al of In-* Lordship^s lliiferces. The Chairm.an
capped the climax of evasion by .assuring the audi(.'nce in tlu; most
unqualified manner, that ''the Book:-^ ake not in the J>i])ositori/.^'
This declaration drew forth shouts of appaient triumph from his
Lordship's party; sis it soon became demonstrable th-Ht theie was
sucli a party. 1 immediately told the Chairm.an th.it thel)ooks vr>c
in the L)«?j)ository and weic purchased from it, and the Rev. Dr.
(iray confirmed this assertion, and said, " My Lord, the books were
in the Depository, and were there up to a very recent i^eriod." His
Lordship asked iiim with petulance, " Do yon call all Mr. Chubb's
store the Depository?" " No, my Lord," replied Dr. Gray, " I limit
it to the shelves selected and set apart for the purrwse, and the ob-
jectionable books were within those limits, and otliers of a similar
ch.aracter were intermingled with the books of the Society." Dr.
Botsford also rose and stated, that he felt hiMiself called ujion to de-
clare, as one of the purchasers, of the books, that he procured them
from the shelves confessedly occ upied, then and now, by the Dejios-
itory Committee. The room resounded with pl.andits and exclama-
tions of "hear ! hear !" in approval of the manly and honest con-
duct of the Rector and Dr. Botsford. I sh.all have occasion to refer
to this interrogatory of the Lord BislKjp in a subsequent part of this
Statement of Facts, and therefore wish the reader to bear it iu
mind. Sever.il gentlemen who opposed the enquiiy, observed that
l>eople frequently difl'erod in opinion as to questions of doctrine, and
advocated the " Companion to the Prayer Book" upon this princi-
ple. And when his Lordship, in the course of his remarks upon the

>i 1

i...

«J(5 A ST \TEMiiNT OF FACM.

subject, stiiUuI, that it w.'it* liU miixiiu '* to lire anil let licr,''' iho iti-
fei'onco WHS irrosistihlo, tlirit lie untertiiiiu'd siinil.'u* vi(}w.s; urul that
tho *' cxceid,^^ in tlwi 8th Aitulo of the Constitution, h:i'l rondoroil tho
pruceclln^ i;liiiis«! of tlio law ti nullity. This inuxiiu will not apply
with safety to tlu; <iU(;stion at issuo. TIk? recognition of it in the
Helcction of Ixtoks, for the i)('i)ository of the Diocesan Church Soci-
ety, would lead to Latitudinarianisui. which must tlisuienibcr it.
Let us >uppose that a Ni-WJIAX, or a AVakd, shortly ht fore their de-
])art,iue from our Church, were nuMuhcu's of our Society; must we,
for their sakes, upon the principle of *'livc und ht lire,''' introduce
*♦ Ward's Ideal," '* et hoc omne ;j;eims?" His Lordship's "m/fjtim,"
if ad(,ptcd, must break down the j)artition wall of Protcjstantism ;
and if h(i rtially intended that it should receive the interpretation
which rirruuistiuircH and dssoiuiUion <^iive it, in such casr;, it will be
incumbent either to amend the 8th Article of tho Constitutiim, by
iU'asinij the cjurpliomthU: power given to the Bishop, or to effect an
improvem nt in the control ttUcT appropriation of th<! funds, or to
<lissolve the Society by vote; as I am inclin<'d to believe tliat an
ovtirwludming majority of its ununbers will not subscribe to his
Lordship\s accommodating '* mtuiia.^^ Let us (examine the working
of it in the prtisent instance. The Diocesan Church Society pri»-
fesses, among other laudable objects, enuuKiratcul in the 6th At tide
<)f the Constitution, to aid " Simday and other Schools, in which
" Church |)rinciples are taught; and to obtain tho suj)ply of books
"and tracts, in strict conformity with th(^ princi[)l<;s of tlio Estab-
'Mished Church." Hooks (tontaining doctrines, which the Hector of
the Parish has t;ondemned, are foiuul in the Depository of the Socie-
ty; tlnj-se do(!trines are said to be adverse to the principles of the
Established Churi;b; objections are urged against them at the Anni-
versary Meeting of the Society ; the Lord Hishop presides as Chair-
man ; som(! gentlemen advocate tlu; books upon the principle that
they may accord with thc! sentiments of other readers : his Lords'iilp
<loes not oppose t'»"ir p/opi-i ion, but conlirun it 'ith the dvjclara-
tiou of his "maxim" of '• live aM<l let live." T shall give extracts
from the " Comi)anion to the Prayer Book," to illustrate the doctrine,
and the reader can draw his own conclusion respetiting the safety
or danger ol" this liberalism. I wish him also to contrast the ex-
pressi<m of his Lordship's "maxim" in tlu; Meeting, with the ex-
pression of his disapproval of the book oat of it, as stjitcd in tho com-
mencement of this exposition. ** Live and let live' is a charitabh;
maxim; but there are cases to which it ought not to be extended,
and I may cite one of them, namely, Iih introduction of Tractarian
books into the Depository of a Prote-h nt Church Society. Let the;
Tractarian live and enjoy his opinio, s, l)Ut books supporting his i)e-
culiar dotttrines ought not to form p.\.rt of a Protestant Librarj*. Af-
ter several gentlemen, who supporte.l the Bishop's views, had spoken
upon the sidycct. Dr. Botsford rose and ende.avoui'ed to obtain per-
mission to rend some doctrinal extracts from the "Companion to
the Prayer Book," but he was interrupted by the opposing party
with clamourous < ries of " No extracts — read the whole book."
Nevertheless he continued firm, and repeatedly tricid to read, but
was as repeatedly interrupted by uproar, that woidd have charactt'i'-
ized Pdiulcntoniuiii; and now commenced the '* di^tijraecful row,''''
perpetratetl by those who tried to overwhelm Dr. Botsford's voict;
with the tumult of their throats, assisted by their feet. And, if the
Tli'V. yh'- C.\i>f<' lia« ;i c<>r'V}cl r»-ct.lici-lion uf Ibe pn^-eedings of tliu
.evening, he niu.'t acknowledge the truth of this statem<'nt. Dr.
Botsford, when he found tliat he could not obtain a hearing, said,
•** gentlemen, you are nuwlHiiig to hear the extracts, because you

A STATEMEXT OF FACTS. 37

'* nvci ashatncil oJ them," — ho th«n ropoatod sonio from mcMuory, viz :
••Confession to Priests, '• &(r. Diirin;^ the? nolso and intcniiption,
tho (/hairnum of tho ni«!otinjr never tUtcniplfMl to eomimuul or en-
force ordi.'r. The eun(hut of the Hishop .iiitl his supiM>rters sn;;;;estH
the (|ii('slion, why wvvt! they oppost^l to tho re;ulin<; of a few ex-
tracts? The jinswer is obvious.

Diirin;; Ih • disiMi-^Hion his I^ordsihip stated that he must assume
part of tl»e rc-iponsihility of injportin;^ the books, as a list wns sub-
mitted to hiiu, whirli he suppositd was eorri*et, whenMipon thn Ui*v.
Mr. Coster, Sccn'tarv to tlie Society, rose and fiuther stnted, tliat lie
had put the books upon tlie siielves and he mustconftrss tijat lie liad
acted indisen-etly. bii^ that h(5 icuiovcmI them, as soon as li(> was
directed to do so Ijy tlie Hook Cominitiee. If th(f preccMlin;; words
arc not identic'.'illy tlioso of his Lordslitp and tlio I'«!V. Mr. Coster,
th«)y are nevcrtlieloss, tho same in su!)stan(«?. 'llie Lord Hisliop
liere acknou'I('d;^es tliat lie imporltid tlie books; and tlu! .•ici-ounts in
tlie liand" of ihu present Stujnjtary, will sliow that his Lordship ])ur-
chased upwards of .xn'enty pounds worth h'oni Atarstcr.-^, suecijssor
to BruN.s, and others, in London; th- llev, Mr. (.'oster a('knowledf;:es
that they were upon the shelves, and tin; IJook Coniuiittco can con-
firm tliis statement. What must we th(;n infer from the IMshop'a
nnqualilied assertion to the audicnci;, viz , 'T/u' books wiv. nof on the
shelves 0/ (he IhiiosltorifV It induced some to sujjjtose thut tln'V never
had been there- This inference was dinuonstrat«Ml l)y the plaudits
of his party. I must r(!frain from any comment upon this pioceetl-
Jn^, and shall bii(*lly recapitulate tluj f:icts ol tho cas(% from which
the reader must draw his own conclusion. Tho Ilev. Mr. Coster
states in his ''Defence'' of his •'cxveUcnt UHlc book,'' that "tho
* Companion to the Prayer Hook,' was imjiorted for tho l)ioc(!saii
Church Society."" ])r. Gray asserted that it was on the .^ludves of
the Depository. 'I'ho liishop asked if he called nU of Mr. Chubb's*
store the Dcspository. lie subs'-quently assumes part of the respon-
sibility of importing!; it. Mr. Coster acknowhid^es that the book
with others was upon the slu'lves. IJr. Hotsford declares in the
mcGtinj;, that he purchascMl it from these shelves, and the I^ord
Bishop, without any rpi.'ilitication, or reference to tho j)a^t, asserts
tliat they, (the books mentioned,) <ire not in tho Depository. Tho
question did not rest upon the present tense. I ask(!(l, " whether
" l)ooks, such as I now hold in my hand, tho 'Companion to the
" Prayer Book,' end ' OHice of Chorister,' aveke introduced into the
" Depository agreeably to the tenor and spirit of the 8th ArticU^ of
•' the Constitution." The dechiration in the present tense it no reply
to the question, or refutation of the assertions tliat the books had
been there. It a.ssumed the character of an evasion, and excited
the astonishment of those who knew all the circumstances.

I leceived the followinj; communication from Dr. IJotsford, a
member of tho Executive Committee, upon tho subject of tin* Books,
which I submit to the reader, without note or eomnuMit: •* At tiie
*• meetino" of the Executive Committee on tlio d.iy followinji^ the
" Annual .Meeting of the ."Society, a discussion arose rospiicting the
" shelves ui)on which ebjectionablo books ii^cre then st-uiding.
" The Kev. Dr. Gray stated that they were still on the shelves belontr-
'* ing to the Depository, and that they had been .allowed to remain
" there out of respect to hi" Lordship, as tUe Committee had been
*' told by the Rev. Mr. Coster, that the Lord bishop had placed
*' them there with his own hands. The Bishop, after st ting that a
" list of books had been given to him on his vvay to England, which
" he had purchased, saici : I affirm, gentlemen, that I did not 7>/acc
" them on the shelves ivith tni/ own hands. The ll<iv. Air. Coster was
" silent, and did not deny the statement of either party."

In the course of the evcninj^, Jii'lj^o Parker oanio forward, ami
expressed ins sincere reo;retthat there were such olijectionahle books
in the Depository ; and iie'said, that th(^ subject demanded inquiry
and exDlanation. and hoped that Ids Lordsliip would promote it.

As his Lordship seemed unwilliufj to Rubinit my resolution to the
nieetinf?, and In consequence of the facts wlilch hail been elicited by
the discussion, I stepp«^d forward, and addressing the Chairman,
said, " My Lord, in t;onsequencn of your statement, and tlio acknow-
*' led;;ement of the Secretai'v, I withdraw my motion."

Before I proceed further, 1 must observe, that I did not solicit the
Lord Bishop to express /u'.^sentinKnits respcctinfj^any of the objection-
able books, nor upon any other subject. And 1 niay venture to assert
the same in behalf of aU the gentlemen who spoke m favor of my
inquiry. 1 mention this to repel unjust imputations in which his
Lordshii) indulged wlien Ik; sul)S(!quently addressed the meeting; and
it now becomes my painful duty to record expressions and a demon-
stration of feeling, which proved that he hail over-steppjd his duty
as Chairman, and had forgoten the respect due to his own exalted
ollice, and to tiic audience, which he grossly and causelessly insulted,
and which, in Ins open'ng address, he acknowledged to be the
*' largest and most respectable that he had ever seen in the Province.'"
lie said, amongst oOservations of a similar eliaracter, that he bad
left England, and all that was wortlj living for, to come to America,
but " that he had not come to submit to Lynch Lniv,'''' — "that ho
*' would not be forced to declari! his sentiments; but this much he
" would stale, that he abjured Popery as much as any man," — " that
*' Pope Self-Will was in tiie room."--" that he was an Englishman,
" and had the I)lood of an Englislunan in his veins," and would not
submit to a " packed party." His Lordship manifested this fe(;ling
Lhroughout his address, in which he made some remarks, reflecting
as tile llev. Dr. (xray imagined, upon his conduct, and which drew
from hi u the following reply : " My Tiord, — Although I have not,
*' like your Lordshij), tlie honor of Iiaving been born in England,
"still, I iiive English ficlings, and can answer a question in a
" straight-f rward mannia- when it is proposed to me," &c.

I assert, that the Lord Bishop of Fredtu-icton neglected at one
time, arid exceeded at jwiother, his duty as tlie Chairman of a Meet-
ing; ami T must here refer to his conduct and language, and con-
trast them with the sentiments and avowals of a noble minded
Chairman who presided at anim[)ortant meeting, where conflicting
opinions were advanced and discussed. This excellent chairman in
lus closing address to the meeting, observes : ** In truth, I have been
" a mere regulator oftime, and as it were, a ixMidulum vil)rating
" be ween the conllicting p.arties on the i-ight and left, and the only
" duty devolving on me seemed to b(! the care of regulating the
"vibrations with strict impartiality. Possibly it may l)e expected
" that I should now advert to the d'scu.ssion itself, and .attempt to
" lay before you a summ;u-y of the argunumts: but th's assuredly is
" xio part of m}' oflice. T depose the balance l)efore you. Examine
*' the scales yourselves; it is for you, and for the public, and not for
*' me to determine which scale prc^ponderates. Were ni}' private
" opinions of a ton, or a talent weiglit, or lighter even than a
*' feather, I should deem myself unwortiiy of the place I have oc-
** cuuied were I to cast that feather in the scale."

The questions propounded were these : Wore the books specified
by Dr, Bayard, in the Deposifoij'of this city? How canivj they iu
it? and by what authority? Did tlie Rector of this Parish approve
of them? These questions did not i nply the interference of the
Chairman. It implicated the Book Committee and the Secretary.
The Lord Bishop did not regulate ** the vil)rations of the pendulum

A STATEMENT OF FACTS. 39

with strict impartiality," He became an excited partizan, asking-
extra-official questions, insulting one party, oulo^'izing another, and
throwing his opinions into the balance on hi& left hniid. I submitt'd
my obvervations to his Lordship as President of the Society, and
Chairman of the meeting, merely as an introduction to the rosolutiovi
which followed them, tintl nut as an appeal for tlie expressioji of Ms
opinions. It was his duty to maintain order, hoar the discussion^,
propose the resolutions, and take the decision of the meeting. I call
upon his l^ordship to jKirticulai izo one act, or one expression commit-
ted or acivanced, either by myself, or by any gentleman supporting
my inquiry, sufficient to nutliorize his imputation that we were the
abetters of " Lynch Law." The Laws of the Society had beon
violated. His Lordship's disaj)proval of the "Companion to tlie
Trayer Book " proves it. We endeavored to maintain the integrity
of them, and I now ask, wliolms "' L>/ii>'hc(l^'' them? Wlio imported
the Ijook, from wliicli his Lordship has withdrawn his approval, and
expressed his determination that ''it shall not be rc-viqiorlcd 9^''
Who placed it upon the shelres of the Depository? and who origi-
nated, and who supported the inquiry, wliich has thus etl'ected the
exjjulsion of it?

I am at a loss to discover a cause for his Lordship's undignified
allusion to his " EnglUh blood,^'' at such a time, in sut'h ])lace, and
upon such an occasion, — before a meeting wliich he acknowhulgod
to be *' inosi rcspccUible.,'''' — in a building devoted to the cause of Pro-
testantism, and upon a question and inquiry, which his Lordship, as
the head of a Protestant church, should have promoted, and not-
opposed. Did he really iniagine that this declaration of the quality
of his blood, would convince the audience of liis irresistibilit3% and
prevent any further discussion upon the subject? If so, he has de-
ceived himself; he has over-rated its importance; and undervalued
the fe(^lings of an insulted majority of bis hearers in the ni'-cting.
And I now respectfully ask his Lordship to adduce proof suflicient
to warrant his assertion, that we were "a j^'tc/ccd pdrti/,'''' and the
imputation that we attempt(Hl to coerce him, by *• f.ynch Ijiir,"' to
declare his sentiments. The Lord Bishoj) of Fredericton has cau-
tiotisly avwided any expression (if his sentiments res])ectin<r Tracta-
rianism. Various circumstances, since his arrival in this Province,
have coiisjf.ired to excite the suspicion tiiat Ik; was not opjnxsed to
it; and his conduct on the evening of the 13th January, has not
removed them. On the contrary, it has confirmed tlie im])ression on
the minds of many. It is true, he said in the meeting, that he
" abjured Popcrij as much as an>f mau.'"' The authors ol the Oxford
Tracts do the same, throughout many of lh(;ir writings, in which
they artfully incidcatt; its doctrines. His Lordship must be aware
of the anxiety of his Laity upon this subject; ami it is cause of
sincere regret that he did not unequivocally avow Ids sentiments res-
pecting Tractananism spccijiadhj, and thus, quiet apin-ehension, or
confirm the prevailing oj)inion. '^'"his would have been candour.
But his Ijordship has mistaken liis own polic}', as well as the
'' trcnchciU'''' ii\\-<xv\x('Xvv oi owY '' Norlli American wit,"' whiih (in his
y'owy through the Province) '' he latuenls to say, is loo sharp for the
spiritual laborer-^"' and which I rejoice to say is not so dull as to bo
easily acted upon by the Tractarian innovator. T ask his Lordship
was his language, which I have already quoted, the language of
piety, the language of a Prelate, claiming Ajjostolic descent, the
language of a Bislio)) who felt any wish to conciliate tlu; respect and
atiection of the peoi)ie ? He spoke truly when ho said that '' Poj)f.
Self-will was i.i the rooin,^^ and the audience could easily distinguish
his Chair and prominent position, and his iinajinary infaUibility,
when he endeavored to force the continuance of a gentleman in

4Q A STATEMKXT OF FACTS.

olHce, without any appeal to the opinion and wishes of the members
who were the constituted persons to elect him.

The followin<^ extracts from tlie '* Companion to the Praj'^er Book,"
printed by J. IJurns & Marst<irs, London, will enable those who
have not seen the book, to form a tolerably correct opinion concern-
ing it."'

Defiaiiion of a Church. — Page 75.

" In accordance with St. Cyprian, the church is in tlie Bishop, and
" the Bishop in the church, and they that are not with the Bishop^
*' are not in the church."

If this is an Ecclesiastical Canon, "^Ae rcMcss a)ul inisrhicvous.
Tenant of the Sec of Exeter,"' must have a host of excommunicated
persons ''notivith'''' this arch-Tractarian.

Secret and Mistical Prayers. — Page 87.

" The reason of these Secreta, secret prayers said by the Piiejtr
" may be partly for variety to refresh the people; but chiefly, as I
" conceive, that by this course, the people might be taught to under-
" stand and reverence the oflice of I'riest, wliich is to make an
" atonement for the people, and to present their pra3'ers to God
" by that very oftering of them up, making them more acceptable to
" God, all which depends not upon the people's consent, or conlirma-
•' tion of his ollice, but upon God's alone appointment and institution
•' Avho hath set him apart to these ollices of ofl:ering gifts and sacri-
*' fices for the people; and therefore, as it was appointed by God,^
•• that when Aaron, 1)}' his priestly ollicc!, was to olfer for the people,
♦' and make atonement for them, none of the people were to be pre-
" sent. So the Church orders that at some times, when the Priest is
" making atonement for the people, and offering Tor then., and the
" acceptation of our prayers, the merits and passion of Christ, none
" should seem actually to assist, but the Priest should say it (inusti-
" Los) secretly and mystically."

The author of the " Companion to the Praj'er Book," wherever he
may be, either in England or New Brunswick, carries the ceremo-
liies of our church back to Mosaic customs.

The Sacruinent. — Page 122, &c.
" It is not man that makes the Body and Blood of Christ by con-
" secratin'ij the holy elements but Christ that was crucified for us."
After quoting St. Cyril about tae danger of losing any of the ele-
ments, the author continues : " It is to be given to the people kneel-
" ing, for a sin it is 7iot to adore whei; we receive this Sacrament, and
*' the old custom was to receive it after the manner of adoration.
" This Sacrament should be received fistuif/, because our minds are
" clearest, our devot'on quickest, anil so are w.) Attest to perforin
" this most high service, when v.'e are in our virgin spittle, ixa Ti;r-
" tuUian express it. It is for the honor of so higli a Sacrament that
" the precious Body of Christ shoidd first enter the Ciiristian's
" mouth, before any other meat.

Our Saviour gave no such command when ho gave the Tokens of
his JJeathtohis Disciples aftkk tliey had eaten the Passover.

Baptisin. — Page 13o.
'• Further, it is worth the while to explain to you wli^- you stand
" to th'j West wli^nyou say this: " (namely, renouncing the Devil,)
" The sun-set is the place of darkness, and the Devil is the Prince
" of D.irkness. and, therefore, in token of this, ye renounce the Prince
" of Darkness looking to the West. When you have renounced the
" Devil, then the Paradise of God is opened to you, which was
** planted in the East; and therefore, as a type of thisr you are turn-
•' cd from the West to the East, the region of light."

A STATEMENT' OF FACTS. ^ J

Visitation of the Sick-. — P:i<^o l.>7.

" The minister may not forofet to move the sick person, and that
'* most earnest!}', to liberality towards tlici)()<)r: Then we are •jiving
" up our account to God; and iherufore, then most necessary is it to
•' do the best we can to obtain a gracious al)sohition at tiie Day of
" Judgment : Now, jiothin;/ sccnis more powerful with God to procure
" tliat flian liberality to the poor."

The author of the "Companion" seems to have foi'gotten
" Though I liestow all my goods to AumI tlie poor, and have not
" charity, it prolitcth me notidng." This Scripture does not suit a
Tractarian translator, who thinks that " there is nothing more
j)o;^cvyWr' than money, to purchase absolution. The rich, in this
<.ase, have a decided advantage over the poor man.

Confcsiion to Priests, — Page 157.

" Lastly, the Priest must advise the sick man to confess those sins
*' which do mos? trouble his conscien(;e. I'o confess our sins to a
" Priest, even in hcalih, is a pious and ancient custom, and not only
" a sign of repentance, but the I'.f.st means of obtain in<j pardon, and
" for amending our lives, and is but too "much neglected." See
the llev. F. Coster's easy way of overcondng doctrinal difticidties of
•<x superlative character, in nis " Defence."

The Ordinal.

" The Priest's power to forgive sins is to be exercised in a three-
'• fold manner. 1. In the Sacrament of Holy P>aptism, which is
•' ordivined for the remission of sins. 2. in the Sacrament of the
" Holy J'2ucharist, and u. (jcnerally in the Rite of Absolution.''

T must refer all who feel interested in the Theological discussion
of these several extracts, to the correspondences of the Rev. Dr.
Gray, with the Lord IJisliop and the Rev. F. ('oster, which will
doubtlessly be published.

EXTUACTS FUOM TIIE

Ol'FICE or CHORISTER.'

Page '];j. — " It will not be irrelevant to give some account of the
" interesting cereiiiony of the Boy Bishop."

I may here briefly state, tint a boy was chosen from the band of
Choristers, who was installed as P;/y Bishop; jn'oached a sermon;
was robed pontifically ; had all tlie honors ofollice paid to him, and
if he died during tenure ofollice he was laid out in state with all his
robes upon him.

Page 58 — " We have little disposition to comment on the cxpe-
" diency and propriety of the custom here described, one thing only
*' we would fearlessly assert, viz., that there is no sufficient ground
" for the commonly received ojnnion of its absurdity and ]>rofa?iity.
" If it had been absurd, it world hardlv have prevailed simultane-
" ously in France, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, and every Diocese
•' in En.<^l'>!id. If it had been pr )fane, Queen Mary would not have
" roviveil it after 7/(??in/ the Eighth had sut)pressed it; nor would
" Dean Calet have ordered the boys of Ids school at St. Paul's every
" Chililermas day, to come to St. Paul's Church, and hear the Child
" Bishop's sermon, and after that be at the Jfiyh Mass, and each of
'• them olYer one penny to the Child Bishop."

The two following extracts show the dignity of the office: —

Page 61-2. — " Nor was their dress the only thing which marked
" the Choristers, as set apart from, and. >w^)e/vo7* to other lay members
" of ti)e congr, gjiliiw. The painting in St. Nicholas' Church, Ghent,
*• alrealy mentioned, rejircsents them with the Tonsure, the use of
" whien, both in the ordination of Ecclesiastical persons, and tlie
*' investiture of Knights, betokened a special and permanent conse-

42 A STATEMENT OF FACTS-

" cration to God's service. Tlio ancient statutes of Exeter cuthedral
"require that tlie Chorister should receive the T isuro."

Piifi^t 03. — A Bishoj) havinpc enjoined the prop.iety of catechising
the Choristers three times a year. —

'* IIow fartlie spirit of tliis has bee;, disregarded rnay bo inferred
'• from the fact, tiiat within the past year, the sclioolniaster of one of
*' our Choirs on commeneinj^ his task of catecliising tlie Choristers,
*' discovered that one of those on wliom lie was stri/in<2: to impr3ss
" the responsiV)ility of at'// //(/ o/" 6'o(Z, was actually niibaptiscd, and
" had sei-\'ed as a ininidcr of the church, for months before he was
•*• a mem'^er of it."

Those extracts are suflicicnt to prove the folly and worthlessuess
of the book, and the author''s own words confirm it, as it appears
from them, tliat it was commonly considered " dbsurd and profane.''''
JSIoreover, his reference to Queen Mary, and to the adoption of the
custom in the countries mentioned, show its anti-Protestant charac-
ter. Its utter absurdity renders it hai .nless : but, nevertheless, it
is purchased from the funds of the D. C. Society, placed in its De-
pository, advocrted by the Lord Bishop, and approved by his
referees. I ask these p;entlemen, if they can define its utility; if not,
why were the funds of tlu: Society misapplied, in purchasing such
disgusting non-sense?

It will not be irrclcant to give a brief extract from the " Tales
OF THE Towx, % 7/e ■. ''^^^affo^-d Jicllairs, Perpetual Curate of St.
Thoma!i\ SLoekport,'''' ¥i.i ; -ted by Jjts. Burns. This book is like-
wise Tractarianising uns . icting readers at Miramichi It con-
fessedly avows alleg'anceto tl^e '* Tracts for the Times," and a an
uncompromising adherent to their doctrin^j. It enjoins " C *;fc!?-
sions to Priests," '• Daily and weekly Communions," makes " Con-
tirmation a Sacrament," " Smooths over the difiicultiei3 between the
chur'ihes of England and Rome," — Endeavors to establish the ad-
vantages of unitv with Kome, and asks, " who can tell what evils
" we are suftering now, and wliat blessings we have forfeited for
" for our disunion'^ Where are the Saints of old? Have we now
" living, men holy as those, who were on earth, when the church
*' was less disunited tiian it now is ? Where are the Miracles wrought
"of old? Where are the Martyrs? W'lose is the fault?— Tis the
*' fault of both, I fear," that is, the English and Romish churches.

The extracts from the " Companion to the Pray-iv Book " and
" Chorister," must surely satisfy every unprejudiced reader that the
character of th'^m justified my appeal to the 1). C. Society, for their
expulsion. 'I'he first book, -gainst which all objection was urged,
has since been condemned by the liishop, thus proving the correcc-
ness of my i)rocceding, as to time, place and circumstance; and I
now ask his Lordship, if he can reconcile his very objectionable and
insulting language in the Society with these facts.

After the discussion respecting the books had terminated, the
Rev. Mr. Coster was again propostfd as Secretar}', and requested to
continue in oIKce. I moved an amendment to the resolution, viz. :
That tliere be two Secretin' 'e!-, CltM'ical ami Lay, and I nominated
gent.emen accordingly. The proposed amendment excited a long
and warm discussion, in wiiich the Lonl Bishop took a mo>^t deoide(l
part, throwing all his infiuence into th<! scale with the nominaiion in
favor of the Rev. Mr. Coster; .md manifesting a degree of intoler-
ance, equally incompatible with his exalted olVice as Bishoj), and in
direct violation of his duty as a Chairman of the meeting. The Rev.
F. Coster, in the course of the discussion, otlered to resign offiee, but
the Lord Bishop expn.ssed his unwillingness upon the subject, and
advised him not to submit to the opposition of a " packed party,"

A STATEMENT or FACTS. ^']

ami aecortlin^^ly tliu then Socretary con-^'cntod to remain in ofiice if
elected. Some of the opjwsers of my amendment argued in favour
of tlio '' (jood old irttijs of tlie Society,' and expressed their disappu-
val of* 'Diij i>i>iov<Ulo)is.'" I was really in hopes that the j^entleman
who spoke thus, intended to anathemtitize the iiDwcation.i of Trac-
tarianism ; but thi:-. hope was soon dissipated hy Ids determination
to support the motion for one Seenitary, and for the llev. Mr. Coster
as that oilicer. J addressed tlie Chairman, and asked, "If it was an
" innovation to conform to the Laws of the Society, which stated,
*' that tl.re might be one or inorc Scc.rrfarics"? — that, if this Law was
•' objectionable, the framers of it w»n-e in fault, — that the proceedings
" of the evening liad proved tlie good old irai/s of the Society to bo
" very bail old aui.us, inasmuch as books had l)een placed upon the
'* shelves of the Depositoiy, without the s;mctioh of the Committee,
"and the Secretarj' had acknowledged tlio irregularity.'' (to use no
liarsher t(um,) "of his conduct, and furthermore, as those books
were very exceptionaole in their doctrines.

Tlie d'scussi on upon the amendment continued sometime, as it was
obvious that the Bishop and his i)arty were a nynority : but Ids Lord-
ship could not conceal his feelings, which were frequently manifested
in the most unguarded expressions, equally otl'ensive to the Meeting,
and dervjgatory to his Lordship, as a Bishop, and a Chairman. In
the course of his remarks, he said, that it would bean actof inju-^tiee
to remove Mr. Costcn* from hisoflice as Secretary, — that he had been
a zealous and faithful servant for man}' years — that it was poor en-
couragement for gentlemen to act as Secretaries if they were to bo
repaid with ingratitude, — •A.n.\,for his part he irould advise aiuj gen-
tlctnan, w/io might be elected, to >jice himself little trouble conccrninij
the duties of his office. His L(jrdship made some additional remarks
in the same extraordinary strain.

Reader, if the preceding expressions are not the identical words
of his Lordship, they nevertheless convey the iilentical meaning of
the very words, which he may liave used. The inference from either
is preciseh- the same. I desire to direct attention to this circum-
stance, as his Lordship's sentiments excited just indignation, and
induced the Hon. Mr. Hazen to reply to them. Tlie llev. Mr. F.
Cosier a^ain arose, and addressing the Chairman, said, that he
would not submit any longer to such insult, and accoi .ingly ex-
pressed ids determination to resign oHice. Immediately afterward.
Judge Parker moved " that the Secretary's resignation be accepted,"
wdiicli was seconded, and very generally supported.

The Lord Bishop's unjustifiable and extra-ollicial remarks brought
the Honorable Mr. Hazen upon the floor; he told his Lordship that
he had acted very improi»erly as Chairman in making such extraor-
dinary obs(>rvations, — that the people of tliis Province would not sub-
mit to sucli tlictation, — that they had a lawful right to elect whom
they chose, and that they would exercise that right, — and that he
was astonished to hear a Christian P>ishop, and Chairman of the
Society, make the jivowal, that he would advise the gentleman avIio
might be elected as Secretary to neglect the duties of his ollice,
merely because the Rev. Mr. Ct)ster was not otmtinued in ollice.
The Chairman denied the charge, saying, that !Mr. Hazen had mis-
understood hini : but this gentleman re^JcaUKl his assert'ons. I was
standing beside Mr. Hazen, and near his Lordship, wliom I distinct-
ly told tliat such was the substance of his words, and such the only
inference that could be dedueed from them. Some, few persons, ap-
parently tlie advocates of Episcoj)al infallibility, have censured Mr.
Hiizen'sexpres 'ons of honest indignation. But the Bishop's ''impro-
pcr conduct, ' and I will add, exceedingly improper conduct, elicited
his very appropriate animadversion; and I believv. 1 declare the

A STATEMENT OF FACTS.

feeling of the infijority of the Luity in this Parish wlieu I suy, that
wc are indebted ito tliis Uononible gentleman for his manly resist-
ance against Priestly domination, and his timely co-operation in
asserting and defending the Rights of the Laity, as regards the dis-
cussion of questions involving a great Prhieiple, and the elective
franchise of the members of tlie Diocesan Church Society.

My resolution for two Secretaries was still betore the Meeting.
Shortly after the i I'signation of tiie late Secretary, several gentlemen
proposed the Rev. Mr. Ketchum, assigning as their reason that the
Reverend g(»ntleman whom I nominated could not conveniently at-
tend to the duties of the office, as he did not i-eside either in Saint
John or Fredericton ; and as he was not present in the room to give
information upon this subject, I miinediately concurred with the no-
mination, and the Rev. Mv. Ketchum was unanimously elected. The
motion for the two Secretaries was previously wi hdrawn, in com-
pliance with the wish of '</Z^)a/-/iVj.>>-, and in order that the Meeting
mi;'ht proceed with the election of the Executive Committee, which
was ace n'dingly donj*

After several gentlemen had been proposed as members of the
Executive Committee, I nominated Dr. IJotsfoid. Mr. Daniel Sco-
vil, and the Rev. Mr. Coster, from Gagetown, opposed the nomina-
tion, giving, as their reason, that Dr. Rotsford was rot eligible, in
consequence of the smallness of his subscription to the funds of the
Society, which requires a subscription of one pound, to qualify the
member for a seat in the Executive Committee. Dr. Rotsfoi '. was
dissiitisfied with the proceedings of the Society, and, in common with
many other gentlemen, confined his subscription to a very small
amount, sufficient to give him membership, and entitle him to vote
at the Anniversary meeting. Rut, early in tlie ev ning, and before
the commencement of business, he gave the Rector of the Parish one
pound incr<»ased subscription, as there was no other pei'son to whom
he could give it; the gentlemen who had the subscription papers
having given them to the Secretary. This rendered him perfectly
eligil)le as a member of the Committee. I may here observe, chat
the laws of the Society are such, that the moment a gentleman sub-
scribes, that moment he becomes a memb>n', and entitled to all the
privileges of the Soeiety, in proportion to the amount i)aid It soon
became apparent that the opposition aro^e from personal feelings
with some, and from a misconception of the subject with others;
and although Dr. Botsford, when the objections were first made, ex-
pi'essed his readiness to decline, I still maintained my nomination,
as it now became a question of right fcr,s?<,« pariy feeling, influencing
many of the op])ositionists. The question excited much warmth of
discussion ; the opjwsitionists denymg the eligibilty of Dr. Botsford.
I submitted the question to the Chairman, i equesting him to decide,
whether Dr. Rotsford was, or was not, a subscriber, under existing
circumstances, and to inform the meeting how long a time must
elapse between the payment of the subscription, and the eiigibity of
the subscriber, as the laws had not defined it. The Lo d Bishop replied
that such subscriptions were frequently made, and that he eonsid-
ei'ed Dr. Botsford eligible. The money was then paid by tlu; Rev.
Dr. Gray to the Secretary of the Society; and after some further
discussion, the question was taken, and the respective parties took
opposite sides of the room. Ilis Lordship was asked to give his
opinion as to the majority, and he gave it in favour of the '' Naijs.''''
This was immediately disputed, as it was obvious that the " Ayes'''
had a decided majority, whereupon the names were taken, anil it
Avas found that the ''Ai/cs'' amounted to GA, and the ^'Xay.r'' to 42.

In the course of the election of Executive members, a Rev, gentle-
man, who had nominated a friend, and who thought that he might

' S

A STATEMENT OF FACTS.

4.>

' s

not h;ive boetx inchuled in the list taken by the Sccirtiiy, in ronsn-
qiience of the confusion at the time, respectful 1}' requested his Lonl-
ship as Chairman, to read the list before it was sid>mittt!d to tlu!
voice of the Society, as he held it in his hand for this purpose. His
Lordship forfjetting that it was his duty to read tiie list of members
proposed, without being called upon, petulently oljserved, " Iloto
sitspicions ijoii arc ; Oo you think I intejtd to cheat i/o/i T' He then
read two or three i roes, threw the paper on the table, r.nd desired
the Secretary to vej. a it. The list of Executive meuibers was tiien
submitted and adopted.

The Chief Justice now proposed an adjournment. His Lordship
answered him laconicall}', and said he believed there was nothing
more before the Society; and asking if there was :iny furtlKr busi-
ness, and being vmswereil in the negative, he said, "I adjouifi t!ic
meeting.'' I was near the Chief Justice and his Loidship at the
time, and distinctly heard the adjournnusnt. Immediately after this
declaration, some gentleman called out and requested the Chief Jus-
tice to take the (ihair, as I Jiui informed, which was (lone, and a vote
of "Thanks to the Lord Bishop" was jiroposed and eairied. This
vote, I assert, was not mnde until after the Meeting; and therefore
it was not a vote of the Anniversary Diocesan Society. I nujiition
this, because I should have felt myself called upon to oppose the
motion, if it had been made before the adjournment, in consi-ijuenee
of the conduct and expressions of the Lord Bishop, wliiili I have al-
ready noticed. As soon as the Chairman adjouvned the meeting, I
left the room.

The result of this meeting must have convinced th(; Lord Bishop
of Fredericton, that the njajorit}' of the Laity in this city, are opposed
to Tractarian principles. Dr. Botsford was projiosed as a member
of the Executive Conmiittee, to obtain his services, and at the same
time to test the opinion of the majority ; for, although his Lordship
stated that we were a ''pwkcd jHtrti/,"' I tkink tliere would be no
difficulty in proving that the *' imclcd part if' pn.-occupled the i)lat-
form, inasmuch as many of the gentlemen acconi[)anied his Lord-
ship from Fredericton, took precedence in the addresses, and were
supplied beforehand, by his Lordship, with some *• packed"' resolu-
tions, the last of wliicli was unpacked by an overwhchning majority
of the members present, as it manifested the pre-determination of
the Bishop to have his own way in the election of ollicers.

The Lord Bishop of the Diocese, in both of his letters, to which 1
have already alluded, states " that he had with'traivn kis upprociii
'• from the 'Companion to the Prayer Book.' and that it should not
"here-imported;" Again, "as I \\x\.wq mithdrairu. utij ii.pj)rot>atliin,
"on grounds deemed sufficient l)y me. I am at a loss to knf)w whj'
" you urge the same objections. TIjc book is withdrawn. Cadit
" quaistio. His Lordship's i)hraseology suggests y.mm important
questions. If approval is /A'A7//'//vi^r«, it implies that approval pre-
existed; otherwise it could not have been withdr.iwn. His Lord-
ship has not assigned " the grounds deem«;d sulMcent by himself."
He sanctioned the imptntation of the bo(<k; and his own langu.age
authorises the conclusion, ihat he oiu'c approved of it. If the 1)ooK
\v.'3,s wortiiy of importation, it was sm-ely wortliy of a place in the
Depository, and of protection from the Bishop who approved of ii.
Why then lias it been withdrawn? Surely not to gratify a "■fac-
Uous" iWiX ^^ packed paiH'j y If the book contained nothing hostile
to the dortrines of l!io rhnv< 1» of Faigland, and \\as n; r \\QVi\iy of
approval, it was his Lordship's duty to protect it with conlinucd ap-
prob.-ition, and to defend it from " unfounded objections.'''' But if, on
the other liarid, the <loctrines contained in the book are adverse to
Protestantism, '' approval'^ continued, or " withdratcn,''' is out of the

^g A STATEMENT OF FACTS.

question. Its oxchiilon from tho Depo'.itory should bo basod upon
unequivocal condemnation. The ' (jrmoid.s" of ohjcctioudblc doc-
trines, would bo "deemed sufflcicnf," not only by liis Lordship, but
by the Laity. I ask his Lordship, wii}- he di(l not, in common can-
dour, accompany the expression of his «lisapproval, witli tho causes
of it ? Whatever may be his sentiments upon the subject, I assert
that, in justice to the Laity throughout tlie Province, he ought to
have given these " ground^y His Lordship's mode of cxjyrasmi luis
embarrassed the interpretation of it, and surrounded his disapproval
with ambiguity. The question involves a principle. If tlie bi)ok is
doctrinally objectionable, it should be niu^iuiroraUy condemned.
If it is doctrinall}' correct, it sliould be unequivocally defended.
Principle should preponderate in the scale against "factions,"'
" ]iacked parties," and e'xpedienee.

It was stated bv a gentleman in the late meeting of the Diocesan
Cluu'ch Society, tliat he foresaw, that the questions which have di-
vided theEpis(!opal Clmich in England, would, sooner or later, divide
the Church in this Proyinco; anil he regretted that the subject had
l)ecn brought before the met;ting of tlie Society to disturl* its peace
and harmony. I duly apprecnate the gcntlt man's love of peace, irre-
spective of its bearing upon the great f|uestion at issue. Trjictari-
anism, under the baneful patronage of the sophi>tical Bisliop of Ex-
eter, the wily advocate of its tortuous and ''fond novelties,'''' is still
distracting the Church of England, and most especially within liis
own Diocese, where, in the language of a Reviewer of his recent
acts of tyranny and persecution, " 7/c sUtndA (it this moment in an
*• asjiert of portentous and disgusting antipathy to the true interest^ of
"the Chureh ;'''' and, "in a recent scene of Episco2wl Judicature in
"Plymouth, giving to Dr. Pusey and his Sciolists, the advantage of
"escape, by a premature and ex parte vindication, and lending the
•'remnant of his sexagenarian respectabilitj' — if indeed a shred of it
" does remain, to bolster up a system of delusion, which, in liis earlier
"days, he would have scorned." As for instance, an institution of
the "Orphan's Home," at Morice Town, in Plymouth, patronized by
the (^ueen ])owager, until it was corrupted by the Bishop of Exeter,
and placed " ?^??'/'.'r the management of the Sisters of Meucy, im-
" ported by his Lordship fi-cm some untold wliereabout", and visited
"by Dr. Pusey, whom the Ladg Superior and her sisters designate
*' Fctther,'''' and '^ in wl/osc uamc or v-ritings,-' this Bishop of Exeter
" publicly declares. ' flierc ivas tiofhiiig but what any one might be
"proud of"''' Tractarianism lias lione and is still doing its work in
England, and it is to be hoped that the general indignation which it
has excited throughout the Laity, and which is now assuming a very
determined character, will induce the competent powers to arrest
its further progress within the pale of our Church. This scliism, as
I liave already stated has reached our Province, and has manifested
itself not only in characteristic symbols, but in the circulation of
books unequivocally Tractarian, imported in direct violation of tlie
Laws of the Diocesan Church Society, and sold from its Depositories.
The temporary disturbance of the peace and harmony of tlie Institu-
tion is of little consequence, compared with the unre'sis'.ed spread of
Tractarianism ; and if the Laity ofXew Brunswick were fully aware
of the mischief which it has created elsewhere, and which it will
create in this Province, if its progress is not opposed, they wouldirise.
with an overwhelming majority, and cheek it. If it should become
requisite, parallels of Tractarianism in England and New Bruns-
wick can be easily drawn, showing identity of principle and simi-
l.arity of practices, in the lengthened line of the former, and the
ghorter line of the latter.

I have authority for stating, that .'i number of aiHiient and influen-

A STATEMKNT OF FACTS. 4*7

tial gontloiucn in Uiis city, iv>{\ other parts of tho Province, hiivo ex-
pressed their full (hitermination to witlidraw tlioir aid from tho Dio-
cesan Church Society, in consequence of its importation ofTractarian
books; and to establish a Fund, for the assistance of those (-ler^y-
men who are opposed to Tractarianism.

As the Ileverend Mr. Coster has commenced this public discussion,
and may possible reply to this Statement of Fncts, he must allow mo
the privilege of a Rejoinder. T be^jj leave, however, most exi)licitly,
to disclaim all personal feelinj^s in the coutrovti'sy. If the prin-
ciples of the Episcopal Church of England are worth the amount an-
nually paid for the propagation of them, tiiey are surely worth in-
quiry and defence, ^yhen there is reason to believe they have been
assailed tvithiu ita pale. Such has been the case in England ; and
such, it must bo confessed, is the case in New Brunswick, if any in-
lerence is deducible. relative to doctrine, from the objectionable
Works already quoted, and from tho Lord Uishop's disupproval of
the " Comjjanion to the Prayer Ijook." The question is a general
cne, interet'ting equally to the Clergy smd Laity.

I may here briefly state, that T have confined my remarks, in the
preceding Statement, exclusiveiy to innovations iriihin ihr juilc of
the Episcopal Church of Englancl, and introduced in direct violation
of the Laws of the Diocesan Church Soeiety.

In conclusion, I may observe, that I have submitted this State-
ment, relative to the proceedings of the Anniversary fleeting » >f the
Diocosrin Church Society, to several Liiy Members, who were
present at it, and they confirmed the correctness of the Facts.
I made a memorandum of the occurrences immediately after the
meeting. It is possible, however, that there may be a slight difter-
enee, as to the order 0/ ti')nc, in some of tho proceedings.

1875.

[A^ supplying the connecting link between tho similar movements
of 1S49 and 1875 we reprint the following letter of a " rarishioner,"
addressed to the Congregation of Trinity Church, of this city, a few
weeks ago.]

To the Pew-hoMers of Trinity Church.

Among the books in oiu- Sunday School Teacher's Li])rary is one

called " The Church Teacher's Manual," from which the following

questions and answers are taken, treating of the Lord's Supper: —
Pago 3()S (10). " If then the Holy Eucharist be a commemoration

of the Lord's death, as the Jewish Sacrifices were prefigurements

of the same death, is it a Sacrifice?"'

Auswcv : ^' The Chuj-ch of Christ'has always held it to be a Sacrifice."
(17). "What reasons from Scriptiue has she foi- so doing? "
Answer : " First of all tlit^ Jewish Prophets in foretelling the pure

worshii) of the times of Christ, always apply to it language of a

Sacrificial nature."

(P.>). " Show how this applies to Christian worship ? "

Answer: " Christ never purified the literal sons of Levi to ofter

legal sacrifices ; ^)ut when He came, llo ordained a Ministry which,

iVom the first, has celebrated a service which the Church has always

held to be sacrificial."

(21). " Is this sacrificial language adopted bv our Lord and His

Apostles ? •'

Answer: "Yes; Our Blessed Saviour supposes that His followers

will bring their gifts to the]; Altar (Matt. V, 23) ; and St. Paul says

^g PARISHIONER'S LKTTER.

that *' wo hiivr an altar \>n»n'Oof tlioy liavo no light to oat who f^crve
the tnbcMiiach'."'

(24). *• Wliat <lo thoso jthicos takou togothor .-;h.)w ? "

Answer: '* Thev show tliat we arc hound to midorstand tlio words,
^' Do this in romonihranrf of mo,"' as toaohing tliat in tliom Our
Lord ordainod a piihHo sacrificial memorial, or a roi)rosontation of
His dcatli hoforo (Jod.''

(.U). " if IIo is a Priost must ho not have somowhat to oftor?"

Anxii'cr : ''Yes; and so ho ottois llimsolf in that body which is yot
marked with tho wounds IFo received (the Lamb as it had boon slain,
Kov. V. 0) ; and in ottering Ilimsult, He otl'ers his ("hurcli of which
he is tho liead."

(3.')). " r*an tho sacrificial momoiial in tho Eucharist bo disjoined
from this presentation of Himself by ( )ur Lord ?•''

Answi'v: " No; on the contrary it is insoperably joined with it.''

Pago 32S (4ll). '' Does (iod fulfil to us these promises in Holy Com-
munion ?■'

Anxwer : ''Yes; Our Lord offers to us His Flesh and Blood only
in Holy Communion."

(4!S). " What means did < )nr Lord ordain in order that we may re-
ceive His Body and His Blood ? "'

Anrn^er : "'('he Jloly Comnnniion.''

(49). '• Is this the only means? "'

AiiHwer : " It is the only moans mentioned in the Scri])tures."

(71). " "What must wo i-ecoivo from the second Adam?"

Answer: *MVe must receive life through i)artaking of His Flesh
and Blood.''

("<»). '* But cannot we eat this broad by merely reading 1 lis word ? "

Anxwer: "Christ says 'The bread I will give is My flesh,' and lie
has given to us in this Sacrament, the means of eating His Hesh."

Page l}34 (22). " But is it not enough to believe in Christ as our
atonement, or our righteousness.''

Answer : '* No ; Christ es))eciall3' offers Himself to us in tliis Sa<n'a-
ment as our " Living Bread,"' and we must come particularly believ-
ing in this if we would receive Him as our Living Bi'oad.''

Page 321 (22). " Is the Presence a Presence only in the heart of
the receiver? "

Answer: "No; the body and blood of Christ are ^j/icen,' as well as

■' taken an«l eaten ' (as our article says) all which things are done

that the Pi'<^sence of Christ may vUimatehj be in the faithful i-ecoiver."'

(29). " How are we sure of this ? "'

Answer : '* Because our Lor<l promises certain extraordinary bono-
•iits to those who oat His flesh and drink His blood ; and in ihe Holy
Eucharist alone does He ofi'er to us His body and His blood."

Page ir)3 (29).'^' Are there any outvvaril means for making over to
the penitent sinner, after Bai)tisni, the merits of Christ's death?"'

Answev. "■ jhor<' are two: Absolution and Holy Commimion.''

We conclude : 1st. That the idea of Sacrifice is correct according
to the " Manual." After quoting from Bisho])s Hall, Baxter, I)<jlling-
or, it (;loses with a quotation from "(lanlen of tlie Soul.

2nd. The presence is a real ])rcsence.
It is an imparted i)rosenco.
The Eucharist is a specific source of life.
It confers remission of sins.

It is the only means of eating the flesh and body of Clirist.
unnecessary to fjuote the )>assages beaj'ing upon Absohuion
and Baptism.

The teaching is at variance with thf't of former times and a sad
contrast to what is believe<l to be the t)uth by more than one

PAIIISHIOXER.

3rd.
4th.
0th.
<)th.
Jti'

til