he feels his foothold firm upon it. His expository lectures are a beautiful example of a mind sincerely loving truth, and strict with itself, searching deep into the oracles of God. Such a man could not be a latitudinarian. Hence while there is a blithe familiarity with his subject, and a joyousness of spirit in the treatment of his topics, which would appear to spring from a ready responsiveness to good every where recognized under some form, there comes, occasionally, across the expression of his sentiments a peculiar shade of solemnity, indicative of a profoundly religious feeling of the responsibility attached to the alter native of truth, or error, which is well expressed by the sacred motto, selected by himself and subscribed with his autograph, which accompanies our engraving of his likeness: "Wir sehen jetzt durch einen Spiegel in einem dunkeln Worte,-dann aber von Angesicht zu Angesicht," i. e. "We see now through a glass darkly, but then face to face." In the preface to his history of the apostolic age, he says, his "endeavors have been confined to representing primitive Christianity according to its principal models of doctrine, in its historical development," and he shows in what sense he speaks of dogmatics as having a relation to church history, in the following sentences, which we can not forbear to quote. "Without renouncing our subjectivity, without giving up our own way of think ing, (a thing utterly impossible,) to those of others, or rendering it a

slave to the dogmas of any school, which the petty arrogance of man would set on the throne of the living God, (for this would be to forfeit the freedom won for us by Christ,) our efforts must be directed to the con stant purification and elevation of our thinking, (otherwise subject to sin and error,) by the spirit of truth. Free inquiry belongs to the goods of humanity, but it presupposes the true freedom of the whole man, which commences in the disposition, which has its seat in the heart, and we know where this freedom is alone to be found."

With these hasty reflections on the character of Neander, we commend his writings on ecclesiastical history, to the special attention of our readers. His style is one of the most difficult to render into English, but both the translations which we have before us, seem to convey the whole sense of the original, though Mr. Ryland sometimes goes so far as to sacrifice good English usage to the preservation of the very tone of the German, while Mr. Rose prefers apparently, in all cases, to maintain the integrity of his mother tongue. The "Planting and Training of the Church," is translated from the third edition of the German; the other work from the first of the original, which began to appear in 1826. This the author is now republishing, in a second edition, which is said to be quite written over again. We can not but wish to see the whole of the larger history, and the latest form of it, in a good English dress.

Ir is a remarkable feature in the history of certain religious opinions that they never die. Theories of philosophy are examined, and when once proved to be false are abandoned, and never have a resurrection. But not so with the religious errors that have "their origin in human nature." From generation to generation, there are those who revive that which is ancient and condemned, and thrust it forward with all confidence and self-satisfaction. Some of these doctrines, after being thoroughly examined and shown to be untenable, quietly slumber for ages; but others are more restless, and more frequently force themselves into notice. Of this latter class, is the doctrine and claim of apostolical succession. It seems to be established that this question must be rediscussed as often as once in about thirty years. Many remember the time when this and kindred topics were thoroughly examined by Dr. John M. Mason and Bishop Hobart of New York; many more in another part of the country remember a similar discussion by Dr. John H. Rice of Virginia and Bishop Ravenscroft of North Carolina. Recently, however, the same unchurching claims are put forth with increased arrogance. Another generation has come upon the stage; and time must be spent to fight this battle over again, and again to de

An Essay on Apostolical Succession; being a defense of a genuine Protestant Ministry against the exclusive and intolerant schemes of Papists and High-Churchmen; and supplying a general antidote to Popery. Also a critique on the Apology for Apostolical Succession, by the Hon. and Rev. A. P. Perceval, B. C. L., Chaplain in ordinary to the Queen, and a Review of Dr. W. F. Hook's sermon on

"Hear the Church," preached before the Queen, June 17, 1838-By Thomas Powell, Wesleyan minister. New York: 1842. 12mo, pp. 354. Vol. II.

35

monstrate how perfectly groundless are the assumptions of high-church Episcopalians.

It is, obviously, with reference to the recently revived zeal with which the claim to apostolical succession is now urged in this country, that our Methodist friends, who, though their church government is Episcopal, are far enough from Episcopalianism,-have issued from their publishing establishment an American edition of the zealous, popular, and pungent "Essay on Apostolical Succession," by their English brother, Mr. Powell. We can not but regret that the circulation of such a work is confined to the channels by which Methodist books are conveyed to Methodist readers. And we hope that the gentlemen who superintend at the "Conference Office, 200 Mulberry Street," will allow us to say, that when they publish such books, they may do much good by availing themselves of the ordinary channels of circulation, and making it the interest of "the trade" to be their agents.

What are the claims of the pretenders to apostolical succession, we will state in words of their own choosing. The religious newspaper called THE CHURCHMAN, edited by Rev. Dr. Seabury, is commended by Bishop Onderdonk of New York to the confidence and patronage of all Episcopalians. In this paper we find the following strong presentation of the claims and position of the Episcopal church.

"A ministry of the apostolical succession empowered to act as Christ's embassadors and representing him on earth; the divinely appointed limitation of the blessings of salvation and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, to communion with this ministry in the sacraments, word and ordinances of the church; regenera

tion in baptism; salvation suspended on faith and works; the supreme authority of Scripture as explained and interpreted by the church ;these are the principles which are plainly written in our Prayer-book, and on these we stand; and these we are resolved, by God's grace, to maintain both in life and in death." This is plain and manly; we can not but respect so frank a declaration. All can understand from this short but comprehensive statement, precisely what the Episcopalians in these United States claim for them selves.

Before proceeding to the examination of the great foundation principle on which the whole superstructure is reared, it may be well to set forth distinctly, the various particulars included in this statement of the Churchman.

These then are the CLAIMS OF EPISCOPALIANS.

1. That their ministers exclusively are the successors of the apostles "a ministry of apostolical succession." It is upon this ground that they denounce all non-prelatic sects as having no church, no ministers but impostors, no baptism, and no valid ordinances.

2. That their ministers alone are empowered to act as Christ's embassadors. If this is true, then all others are indeed "impostors," and deserve the severest condemnation, for presuming to act in the name and by the authority of Jesus Christ in administering the affairs of his church on the earth.

3. That salvation is limited to that and kindred prelatic churches. The language of the Churchman is too plain to admit of any doubt here. The divinely appointed limitation of the blessings of salvation and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, to communion with this ministry in the sacraments, word, and ordinances of the church." The meaning is obvious; it is that God has limited, restricted, confined, "the blessings

of salvation and the gifts of the Holy Spirit," to communion with the ministers of the Episcopal church. This is no new position, but one maintained for many years. Says Dr. Sherlock, in his continuation and vindication of the defense of Dr. Stillingfleet, (page 389,) “Whoever separates himself from the church of England, cuts himself off from the catholic church, and puts himself out of a state of sal vation. Separation from the church of England is a schism, and a schism is as damning a sin as idolatry, drunkenness, or adultery."

So Bishop Taylor, when speaking of the necessity of the succession of bishops to make ordination valid says "Without this, no priest, no ordination, no consecration of the sacrament, no absolution, no rite or sacrament, legitimately can be performed."

66

Says Dodwell in his work "One Altar and one Priesthood," "NONE but the bishop can unite us to the Father and the Son. Whence it will further follow, that whosoever are disunited from the visible com. munion of the church on earth, and particularly from that visible com. munion of the bishop, must consequently be disunited from the whole catholic church on earth; and not only so, but from the invisible com munion of the holy angels and saints in heaven; and, which is yet more, from CHRIST AND GOD HIMSELF. It is one of the most dreadful aggra vations of the condition of the DAMNED, that they are banished from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power. The SAME is their condition also who are dis united from Christ by being disunited from his visible representa tive," viz. the bishop. This is amiable, and illustrates how the advo cates of apostolical succession grow in humility, and charity, and every lovely grace.

But there are more recent authorities on this point. Dr. Hook tells

us, "Unless Christ be spiritually present with the ministers of religion in their services, those services will be vain. But the ONLY ministrations to which he has PROMISED his presence is to those of the BISHOPS who are successors of the first commissioned apostles, and the other clergy acting under their sanction, and by their authority."

If there is any force in language, these extracts assert, that God himself has rendered salvation impracticable except in the Episcopal church. The unblushing audacity with which all this exclusiveness and unchurching is laid upon God, is worthy of the men who thus magnify their own importance. Because "the divinely appointed limitation" has confined salvation within the pale of the Episcopal church, therefore it is that her bishops and inferior ministers tell us, yea tell all the reformed churches of Christendom, on whom God has largely poured out the blessings of his Spirit, that we are left for our hope of salvation to "the uncovenanted mercies of God." The covenant of redemption, they say, is with them, and if any man desires salvation he must come into the Episcopal church. This is cool, complacent, and we doubt not they think it is meek, humble, and charitable.

4. That salvation is obtained from their ministers in the reception of the sacraments. "Divinely appointed limitation, &c. to communion with this ministry in the sacraments, word and ordinances of the church." There can be no mistake here. The Churchman teaches that men are saved, not by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, as was the penitent and be lieving thief on the cross, but through the church, by grace which God has committed to the keeping of her ministers. So that whenever the sinner will come to her ministers for baptism, for confirmation, for the Lord's Supper, then he will receive the blessings of salvation

and the gifts of the Holy Spirit." In the Oxford tracts, No. 35, we have the following: "A person NOT

COMMISSIONED FROM THE BISHOP

may use the words of baptism, and sprinkle or bathe with the water on earth, but there is no promise from Christ that such a man shall admit souls to the kingdom of heaven. A person not commissioned may break bread, and pour out wine, and PreTEND to give the Lord's Supper, but it can afford no comfort to any to receive it at his hands, because there is no warrant from Christ to lead communicants to suppose that while he does so here on earth, they will be partakers of the Savior's heavenly body and blood. And as for the person himself, who takes upon himself without warrant to minister in holy things, he is all the while treading in the footsteps of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, whose AWFUL PUNISHMENT you read in the book of Numbers. Compare Numbers 16 with Jude 2."

5. That baptism administered by their clergy is regeneration. "Regeneration in baptism." Dr. Seabury stands not alone in this position. Says another, even a bishop, "Let them be assured, that those who are sacramentally baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, become by that act, not in name only, but in deed and in truth, members of Christ, children of God, and heirs of the kingdom of heaven." So the standards of the Episcopal church teach. In the form prescribed for the public baptism of infants, this prayer occurs, which the minister is required to offer after the baptism. "We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into thy holy church." The same prayer must be used in the private baptism of children. There can be

but one legitimate interpretation put upon this language; it is that which the great body of the bishops and inferior clergy of the Episcopal church hold, viz. that by baptism the child is regenerated or born again-is changed from an heir of wrath to a child of God and an heir of glory; for the change is said expressly to be effected by the Holy Spirit. This great change is secured by the official act of the minister, as Christ's embassador and representative on the earth. And so certainly is this regeneration thus effected, that according to the 26th of her articles, the personal wickedness of the minister does not vitiate the act. From this article it appears that it is just as certain to produce regeneration if performed by a drunkard, an adulterer, or a liar, as by the holiest man. We are much of the same opinion, but for very different reasons, as the reader may judge.

That the Prayer-book represents spiritual regeneration as taking place in baptism, can not be seriously called in question; since all the other services of this church proceed on that supposition. The direction given to the sponsors after the baptism is as follows: "Ye are to take care that this child be brought to the bishop to be confirmed by him as soon as he can say the creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the ten commandments, and is sufficiently instructed in the other parts of the Church Catechism set forth for that purpose. The Cate chism carries forward the same sup. position. "Quest. What is your name? Ans. N. or M. Quest. Who gave you this name? Ans. My sponsors in baptism; wherein I was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven." Again, in reference to confirmation it is required" So soon as children are come to a competent age, and can say the creed, the Lord's prayer,

and the ten commandments, and can answer to the other questions of this short catechism, they shall be brought to the bishop." But for what purpose? It is that they may be confirmed that they may "in the presence of God and the congrega. tion, renew the solemn promise and Vow made in their name at their baptism, ratifying and confirming the same.'

The first prayer which

the bishop must offer, is in these words: "Almighty and everlasting God, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given unto them forgiveness of all their sins, strengthen them," &c. Here is a distinct recognition, that they are converted, regenerate persons,

regenerated by water and the Holy Ghost, and that all their sins are forgiven. But when were they regenerated? Between their baptism and their confirmation, all that is required of them is that they learn to repeat the creed, the Lord's prayer, the ten commandments, and the twenty two answers to the short catechism. All this can be done as an act of mere memory, without any grace of God, without any other conversion, or any other evidence of conversion, than the mere fact of baptism. The act of confirmation does not regard them as furnishing any evidence of conversion or spir itual renovation subsequent to infancy; it goes back and regards the time of baptism as the time of regeneration. It takes it for granted that then, and by that act, the child became a regenerate person, and it proceeds accordingly.

The next step is to the communion table, where candidates are received on the strength of their having been regularly baptized and confirmed, and thus made members of the church of Christ. So to the very last, this same doctrine of 66 REGENERATION IN BAPTISM" is maintained. The burial service is not to be used for any unbaptized