.a^*'"'^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A i4. 4ss /A ^■^ 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 7^ ^^ -^ # f 1- # r Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WiST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ I m O \ % 4> 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. D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couieu; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D D n 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/ D 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 D Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) V 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 D Quality of pr-nt varies/ Qualit^ in^gale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire n D 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. D n 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. D 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 J 1 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. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 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. I 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 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% \ • li 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- 4 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 (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 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 '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 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-ey 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 "?/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 wy 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 cat only, but whenever occiusion may rcird : 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, /«,skad 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 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. s 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 Priour,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 i 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: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 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<s tonus that ' thin " ('Imri'li ' of EnKlaiid (/'<<■» not '>rd< r tlir I'riixi leiiil> 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, - 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.'> '' 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\ib 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 '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. Kemarkin^f upon tlie distiuciion betvveen tljo original and popular meaning of terms, Hooker says — '■ If jou ii.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 -ons of 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'rnHt oxd contiuiniivuiif, hut f'ji and those out (fit; iu other words, 'the faithful, wiiether living or niivi- OF TilK COMPANION TO THi: rilAYER BOOK. 19 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/ thi' f">///>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'.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 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(< 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 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. 21 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 it t;i!»t('. sliail noisily jiidfri' betwixt tin; "iviir liitti'iiu>-'< of ilio oin*. anti tho Hwoot xiivourinc.''-' of tiio oth 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 nint 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?S ; " .1 /mx ilmlx iln imsh n imii iin r mIiih : II II .!(/• (>//.;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 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.-n.'' " Tho frcontl oftlitin ir, un unffisriH •! confcK^ioii and iK"l i 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 '' fouiivouUl Just ohsrrvu that in tlie above ex- tracts, there Is not 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 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" ll pcri-oivo, wIid ti|>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 » pi 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<-, 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