A Letter To the Hon. and Rev. A. P. Perceval, B. C. L. •J^'^hf^Z^lxS-t
London, 1839 '^'<i^^% -"^j
W'^^t -^
YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

A LETTER

The Hon. and Rev. A. P. PERCEVAL, B.C.L.

LSic

A LETTER, &c.

reverend sir, London, October 1839.
Not long since I met with a small Volume
of your composition, relating to that much-con
troverted subject, commonly called Apostolical
Succession. From the number of Treatises relating thereto,
and the keenness with which the disputants on
both sides have supported their respective opinions,
I had arrived at two conclusions.
First, that nothing new could be advanced on
either side, every fact and every argument having
been hunted-out, both for and against the Epis
copal Theory.
Secondly, that if, after all which has been writ
ten, the question has not been set at rest, we can
not expect that it will ever be settled, so as for
one of the Parties to be able to refute the other.
Having after much reading and inquiry arrived at
the two conclusions above mentioned, I had deter
mined, until I saw your work advertised, not to
perplex myself any more with discussions upon a
matter which, if proved even to Demonstration,
could not benefit true religion in any way. The

6
main object. Sir, of that rehgion (which I presume
to be the one which you preach to the Congrega
tion) is the Salvation of Mankind hereafter. A
future state of BUss is offered as a reward for our
Faith and our Good Works whilst we are upon
earth : and, how the attainment of those ends can
be facilitated by the intervention of manual opera
tions performed by other persons, I do not find
stated any where in the Book from whence we
learn the Terms upon which Salvation hereafter is
offered to us.
But, Sir, besides the silence of the New Tes
tament thereupon, the inutility of this supposed
Apostolical Succession is shewn by experience.
For, First, we do not find that, after this supposed
divine communication of the Holy Ghost, the Re
cipient is one jot the wiser than He was before,
nor a more able Preacher of God's Word : effects
which appear to have always followed (more or
less) the Imposition of Hands, so long as we have
authority for believing that it was attended by any
advantages. — Secondly, it appears from Ecclesias
tical History, that Imposition of Hands is no safe
guard against Errors of any kind whatsoever ; not
excepting even those most heinous sins of Blas
phemy and Idolatry : because both of them, (as
weU as many others not necessary to be here spe
cified,) are charged daily upon the Church of
Rome. Now, as this Apocalyptical Beast, on
whose Heads was written "Blasphemy"  this

Great Red Dragon — this Serpent, the Devil, who
was cast out of Heaven, and is never again to
go. there: — as the Beast so described forms by
far the most considerable portion of the pedi
gree claimed for the Church to which you be
long, I cannot perceive the advantages which you
expect to derive from the Pedigree, could it be
shewn to be entire and unbroken. Popes Gre
gory VII., Sixtus IV., Alexander VL, and many
other personages' of that stamp, claiming to have
held the Keys of Heaven — the Monks, whose
Iniquities are trumpeted forth by Church of
Englandists as often as an opportunity of abus
ing them may occur — and the Priests, whose pre
tended Miracles and Deceptions your Ecclesiastical
Panegyrists are ever ready to condemn : — all these,
I say, belonged to your supposed apostolical and
divinely gifted Hierarchy. They belonged to it.
Sir, not merely as Collaterals who might be re
jected as Illegitimates, and unworthy to be num
bered in the Line of Descent, but as true and
genuine offsets of that Heavenly Tree, whose
Fruits we had been taught to suppose would be
pure, as well as beneficial to our Souls.
If such be the drift of the Theory which you
advocate, and that you can join hands so readily
with one of the two celebrated Apocalyptical
Beasts, I take for granted that you would not feel
displeased at being enrolled among those who
think that they can':fierceive in another Apocalyp-

8
tical Beast some of the distinguishing characteris
tics of the Church of England : she deriving her
Power, &c., &c., fi-om the first of those two re
markable Beasts (or Church of Rome) ; and cha
racterising herself voluntarily with the two Marks
so plainly alluded to in the 16th verse of the Thir
teenth Chapter of a Book which I need not men
tion by name. Within the last eleven or twelve
years Parliament has passed a couple of Statutes
for divesting those Apocalyptical Marks of the
Civil importance which had belonged to them pre
viously : yet, the cries and lamentations which
were then heard from the estabhshed Hierarchy
suffice to shew the great importance which they
attached to those intelligible and significant Marks ;
as though they feared that, without its peculiar
Apocalyptical Signs, the Church of England would
cease to be discernible among the rest of the
Christian world, and so be no longer qualified
to fulfil the very important parts in Scripture-
Prophecy, which seem to have been assigned to her
in particular. I can enter fuUy, Most Reverend Sir, into
those Clerical fears; and can appreciate equaUy
the pangs which the Clergy endured when the
changes above mentioned were made in the /Sta
tutes of the Land : because, if by a withdrawal oi
the Prophetic Marks there should be a withdrawal
also from that portion of Scripture-Prophecy, (and
so the Church of England be cast into the back-

9
ground for the time to come), that might be sup
posed to go far towards an extinguishment of the
Parliamentary as well as of the Apocalyptical cha
racter of the National Religion. There is, how
ever, one material difference between the Clergy
and Me respecting the consequences likely to
result from the withdrawal of our more than semi-
Parliamentary Church fi-om the Stage of Pro
phecy ; a difference resulting from the particular
branches of Prophecy which that Church may be
supposed to fulfil. For, according to the Predic
tions which may be selected by each of us respec
tively as applying to that Church in particular, so
will be our respective feelings as to the Purity
of that Church ; as well as our opinions of the
chances in its favour of being found among the
true witnesses of God's Word at the second advent
of his Son.
Having in the preceding Paragraph alluded to
the marks of the Second Beast so plainly discernible
in the Church of England, I may add also, that
the power assumed by that Church of bringing
down Fire from Heaven might be added to them.
It is mentioned in the Apocalypse as one of the
especial characteristics of the Second Beast. Unless
it be an idle and unmeaning Jargon, the Hymn
Veni Creator must be held to work its expected
effect ; whereby, not only will Fire be brought
down from Heaven, but, in addition, a Miracle
be performed also by the same operation ; which

10
working of Miracles was predicted likewise of the
same Beast. These several coincidences are very
striking, and well deserving the attention of all
persons who have the leisure to study them ; espe
cially those who set any value upon Apostolical
Succession : for perchance they may end by reject
ing the epithet Apostolical, when describing the
Succession for the time to come.
An uninterrupted transmission of the Holy
Ghost in the manner supposed by you, is nothing
short of a continued succession oi Miracles ; yet
differing in one respect from all the Miracles re
corded in the Sacred Writings. The latter when
performed were manifest to all the By-standers ;
whereas, these your Episcopal Miracles are as in
visible as the works of Darkness itself. Hence,
Sir, to believe in the performance of them, needs
a much larger draft upon human credulity than
was ever demanded, either of the ancient Israel
ites, or of the primitive Christians. But, admitting
that these Miraculous Gifts are reaUy imparted as
frequently as you suppose, what are Christian So
cieties to do, when no such Miraculously-gifted
Ministers are at hand ? Is Public Worship to be
neglected altogether ?— or, if a Layman be the
Spokesman in the Congregation, wiU the Prayers
be less efficient, and the Thanksgivings less pleas
ing to God, than if transmitted through an ordained
Minister ? I am not aware of any authority in the
New Testament for such suppositions ; yet must

11
the Church of England have gone even further
still, the Doctrine of Vicarious Praying being
allowed to circulate by Royal Authority in con
junction with the established Liturgy. I allude.
Sir, to the Introduction prefixed to his Editions of
the Common Prayer by the deceased King's Printer,
John Reeves. If the Doctrine alluded to had not
been in strict accordance with their own, the Bench
of Bishops would assuredly not have been so remiss
and negligent of their Duties, as to have allowed it
to be reprinted again and again. The French, Sir,
have a neat Saying or Phrase : " ce n'est que le
"premier pas qui coute" — and it comes in here
well. For, having once put restrictions upon the
very freedom of Prayer and Thanksgiving as incul
cated in the New Testament, the transition to Vica
rious Prayers is both easy and to be expected.
One single step only further, and how far. Sir,
shall we then be from a certain Vicarious Ofiice of
the Romish Church ? an Office condemned, it is
true, in the Church of England Articles ; yet, ap
parently, not so much at variance with the King's
Printer's Doctrine, as is that Doctrine at variance
with the New Testament itself.
In that Book we read that Christ said, " Where
" two or three should be gathered together in his
" name. He would be present with them ;" and one
of the Prayers in the Established Liturgy is founded
directly upon those words. But, according to the

12
Episcopal Hypothesis, for which you contend so
strenuously, the Evangelist must have been guilty
of an important omission when reporting his Mas
ter's Words : as his Master must have given his
hearers to understand, that He would only listen
to Prayers when addressed to Him through the
medium of some one upon whom Hands shall have
been imposed. If the Evangelist has been guilty
of misrepresenting his Master's meaning, you must
admit that He is deserving of a high degree of
blame : but, if He has reported the words as they
were spoken, then must the blame be transferred
from the Evangelist to the Persons who wish to
tack on an addition to those Words.
Such, Sir, are some among the inevitable con
sequences of restricting the Christian Ministry in
the manner for which you contend ; a restriction
which must lead also to another restriction : viz,
to a limitation of the Church of Christ to the
Ministers of Religion only, thereby rejecting the
Congregation from it. In practice you seem indeed
to have done so ; though clearly at variance with
the Definition given in one of the Church Articles :
but the delusion has been so far beneficial to the
Priesthood, as to have enabled them to lay claim
to the exclusive enjoyment of all the Income which
has been set apart forthe maintenance of Religion.
If such be a consequence of the System or Theory
which makes the Clergy into a distinct Caste or

13
Tribe, I must candidly admit that I can perceive
very influential motives for upholding it.
Another sprout from the System which you ad
vocate is a Doctrine that I have heard preached
from a Pulpit to a very large Congregation : that
the Laity are not to pretend to understand the
Scriptures ; but are to receive implicitly the expla
nations given by the authorised Ministers of Christ,
to whom the sacred Writings are supposed to have
been speciaUy committed for interpretation. The
above was uttered within the Diocese of Him to
whom your Book is inscribed : but his Grace being
usually a non-resident in his Diocese, it might never
have reached Him. On the other hand, if it did
reach Him, and that the Preacher was not reproved,
I may fairly infer that his Discourse was in accord
ance with the Doctrine of the established Church.
I hope. Sir, that you do not push your System (or
Hypothesis^ quite so far as did the Gentleman
whose Sermon I have noticed : because, according
to his doctrine, neither Mr. Locke, Sir Isaac New
ton, the learned Edward King, nor any other Lay
man, ought to have dared to give expositions of
Scripture ; and all which they have written should
be burnt forthwith, on the same grounds as was
ordered the destruction of the Alexandrian Library
by the Caliph Omar.
Allow Me here to ask a question of some im
portance. If none but Episcopally Ordained Teach
ers are to go forth, are the labours of Missionaries

14
such as Schwartz and Wilhams, as weU as those
of the well-known Fehx Nef, to be condemned ?
Or, are such Teachers to be regarded only as useful
Pioneers, to clear the way for the Episcopahans
who are to follow them ? I should infer the latter,
from the satisfaction experienced by Bishop Heber
when one of Schwartz's disciples came to Him for
Ordination, " that his Commission might be more
" Apostolical," Though Heber was in a Pagan
Land, Proselytism to his own peculiar Church con
stituted the whole of his Labours ; and to accom
plish it. He journeyed about in an Asiatic Region
until his death. Preaching his Master Christ to
unbelievers, seems to have been beneath his Lord
ship's attention. The Man, Wilhams, above men
tioned has done more real good among the South
Sea Islanders than have all the Church of England
Missionaries put together: yet is He to be regarded
as an Intruder and an Impostor, and as though a
Poacher upon the domains of others ! I !
This is a curious conclusion to arrive at ; yet it
seems to be a necessary consequence of your line
of Reasoning. The gift of the Holy Ghost to the Apostles and
their contemporaries appears to have been con
fined to Them alone. If you should be aware of
any evidence of its continuaiice after their days,
you would confer a benefit upon the Christian
World in general by producing it ; as thereby
much unnecessary as well as useless controversy

15
would be put an end to for the future. The pro
mise of Christ to be with his Followers " to the
end of the World," was one of quite another kind ;
and had been put forth in a different manner on a
former occasion, when his Disciples supposed that
He had forgotten Them. (Matt, vm. 25 and 26).
That promise may be still in active operation,
without having recourse to Apostolical Succession
as the sole and only means of fulfilling the Promise,
Christ never gave any explanation of the manner
in which He meant to fulfil his promise of being
always present in his Church : and yet you pre
tend to be in the secret of his meaning ! ! ! The Re
ductio ad absurdum is lawful even in Mathematical
Reasonings : consequently I may have recourse to
it when serviceable to my Argument,
Having made these preliminary observations,
just to shew to what strange and absurd con
clusions your favourite System will lead, I shall
now proceed to notice some of the various Matters
contained in your Publication, as it is not my wish
to trouble you with animadversions upon all of
them, I. The first thing which I shall notice is the
Office marked C. in page 122.
Our English Courts of Justice have adopted an
excellent Rule in matters of Evidence, which I
shall take the hberty of applying here : viz, that
when a Document of any kind is produced in evi-

16
dence, the whole of it must be read ; it being con
sidered unfair towards the opposing Party to give
Extracts only. Now, Sir, what do we find here ?
Why, not merely that which you desire to prove,
but much more besides; for we have here what
cannot be very palatable, either to your modern
Episcopal Brethren, or to her Majesty's Govern
ment in Downing-street; nor even to the Supreme
Head of the Church, whether such Head be of the
Masculine or the Feminine Gender. You will find
from this Office that, in addition to the Imposition
of Hands, the Congregation had a Veto upon the
appointment. Now, if Church of Englandists be
for ever chattering and prating about their ad
herence to primitive Practices, why has that portion
of the Ceremony been laid aside ? Is it that the
Royal Prerogative must be preferred to the wishes
and feehngs of the Congregation ? Without
doubt. Sir, Episcopacy is a very serviceable branch
of Patronage to the Sovereign and the Ministry,
In fact, I am satisfied that there would be felt as
great a disinclination to relinquish the power to
make Bishops, as there could have been in the
ancient Roman Governors of Judaea to have ceased
seUing by auction the office of High Priest at
Jerusalem. There may, indeed, be less ostensible
grossness in the modern Enghsh mode of doing the
Business, than in that of the Roman Proconsul :
but, when all things are duly considered, the
Enghsh practice will be found the most reprehen-

17
sible, inasmuch as the Enghsh deal vrith a Religion
which they hold to be true ; whereas the Roman
Governors dealt with one in which they had no
belief. The English practice too has the sanction
of the Head of the Church, in which those same
Bishops are to shew themselves as " The Ambas
sadors of Christ" if we can swallow as a Truth what
was uttered from the Pulpit by Him who preached
at the Coronation of the present Female Head of
the Church. An Ambassador, Sir, is considered
to have received his appointment from the person
who named him. Of the part which Christ had in
the nomination of the Bishop who used the lan
guage above mentioned, there can hardly be two
opinions ; and as his Lordship did not accompany
his strange assertion with any proof whatsoever, of
course we are not under any obligation of believing
Him. This may seem to be very bold Language towards
a Bishop, and one who styles himself an Ambassador
of the Messiah, a Successor of the Apostles, and a
Right Reverend Father in God ; but, if his Lord
ship can estabhsh his claims, I will promise to be
among the v^ry first to acknowledge them.
When making the above remarks upon the
modern mode of choosing Bishops, let me not be
understood as advocating their election by the
people ; for I offer no opinion about it. My only
concern -with your Record is to shew that, while a
B

18
part of it has a relation to modern Episcopacy, the
remainder makes against it.
II. Respecting the various ancient Forms of
Consecration which you have given, I would ob
serve that not one of them goes to the full extent
of the English Practice. The latter confers the
Holy Ghost in positive terms, and in a manner
which presupposes that the Holy Ghost is in the
keeping of the Church of England ; and as obedient
to the Sovereign and the Bishops, as were the sup
posed Genii to the holders of the Lamp and the
Ring in the Arabian Tale.
In the Services which you have printed I find
no trace of any such command, or of any such pre
tended authority over the Holy Ghost, They go
no further than to pray to God that the Heavenly
Gifts may be imparted ; leaving it however to God
to do so or not, as He shall see fit. Hence, in
them the Imposition of Hands is a mere ceremonial
act, not professing to transmit any thing. How,
then, can those ancient Services be authorities, for
the modern Service of your modern Church ?
Before I pass on to another Subject, I must
notice a dilemma which seems to result from the
Enghsh Doctrine about the uninterrupted trans
mission of the Holy Ghost. Imposition of Hands
is made into " an outward and visible Sign of an
inward and spiritual grace;" consequently, it
comes within the meaning of a Sacrament accord-

19
ing to the Church Catechism, though rejected from
the list of Sacraments in the Church Articles.
How these inconsistencies are to be reconciled
regards you more than it does me ; therefore, I
leave them wholly to your sober consideration.
III. I shall proceed next to make some remarks
upon the Ordination and Consecration Services of
the Estabhshed Church : and that I may not be
chargeable with handhng them by halves only, I
will take up the subject from the very beginning.
It is no uncommon thing to read in a News
paper that, on such a day, a Lord Bishop held an
Ordination, when the Gentlemen afterwards named
"were admitted to the order of Deacons." A
Newspaper Article so worded is passed by like any
other article of Intelligence which concerns none
but the persons to whom it relates. But, Sir, sup
pose that the Bishop's doings were to be expressed
in somewhat plainer terms, so as to be intelligible
to the Public in general, would the Article not
attract attention ? Suppose, Sir, the Information
to be communicated as follows : " On Sunday last
the Bishop of  held an Ordination, when the
following Gentlemen were admitted to the Order of
Deacon, having previously affirmed that they were
inwardly moved thereto by the Holy Ghost," If
such Articles were to appear in the Newspapers
from time to time, would they be passed over as
they are at present? How many readers would
be ready to exclaim as follows ? " What a lying

20
" rascal Tom Hickathrift must be ! He told the
" Bishop last Sunday morning that He took Orders
" at the instigation of the Holy Ghost ; when only
" two days before He was swearing at his old
" Uncle for forcing Him into the Church against his
" inclination. He told Me that the Army was his
" choice ; but his Uncle threatened to cut Him off
" with a Shilling if He did not qualify for the
" Family Living, it being much too valuable to be
" thrown away upon a Stranger ; whereas, if He
" would take Orders, He should have both the
" Living and the Castle Farm of 500 acres in the
" Parish besides." The Case here supposed occurs,
more or less, every year: and at this moment I
could name an Individual who preferred a Red
Coat to a Black one : but his Father was inexor
able ; and so to the Bishop He went, with the ac
customed untruth upon his lips.
There is, however, another branch of this
curious Ceremony to which I should like to draw
your attention. It being supposed that aU who
present themselves for Ordination have received a
CaU from the Holy Ghost, how comes it that the
Bishop never appears satisfied therewith ? Does
the Bishop distrust the selections made by the Holy
Ghost, supposing it more hkely to err than himself?
It should seem that such is the case, because the
Archdeacon's Certificate of Qualification is what
the Bishop rehes upon ; He taking no account of
the inward excitement by the Holy Ghost, although

21
the Candidate be questioned in due form about
it ! ! ! Is not this treating the Holy Ghost very
contemptuously ?
AUow Me to call your attention also to the
Thirty-third Church Canon ; in conformity with
which, and to save his own Pocket, a Bishop will
not admit any person as Deacon who shall not
be provided already with a suitable Ecclesiastical
Maintenance ; commonly styled " a Title for
Orders." Hence, to the majority of these new-
made Deacons are Congregations handed over,
though unable to perform all the necessary Minis
terial Offices for their Congregations. J presume.
Sir, that you join with your Brethren in condemn
ing the Romanists for withholding fi-om the Con
gregation one half of one of the Sacraments : but,
by the Regulation above mentioned, the Church of
England withholds both the halves (i. e. the whole)
of that same sacrament. How it is that a Man,
who receives from the Bishop a special License to
preach the Gospel, can be deemed incompetent "to
shew forth the Lord's Death," is beyond my com
prehension ; and that no such " half Parsons " (as
Dean Swift used to style them) are mentioned in the
New Testament, may be affirmed, without any fear
of contradiction. IV. In the Office for the making of Priests we
find Powers assumed by the Consecrators, for which
no authority can be drawn from the New Testa
ment: neither do I perceive that you have appealed

22
to any primitive authority in support of it. Indeed,
you fix A.D. 600 (misprinted 1600) as the most an
cient for that most extraordinary Hymn (or Invoca
tion) caUed " Veni Creator Spiritus ;" but the gifts
of the Holy Ghost and the Power to pardon Sins,
unaccompanied with the Invocation above men
tioned, you carry back three centuries earlier.
Without impeaching the accuracy of any thing
which the laborious Martene has put in print, and
allowing you to screw to the uttermost Letter what
you can out of his closely printed Folios, allow Me
to ask, on what authority, but a gift of Miracles
or of Inspiration, can a Human Being assume the
power to pardon Sins ? I had always considered
Matt. ix. 6. as decisive upon that point; but the
Church of England thinks otherwise ; or at least
pretends to do so ; for I can hardly credit its hold
ing that notion, or that the Bishops are serious
when using the long-accustomed Form of Words
alluded to.
However, be it so as the Bishop's Language has
it ; and then let the English Presbyters grant the
Absolution which they are empowered to grant, in
the Form given in the Visitation of the Sick : what
evidence can they have that the previous Confes
sions of Sins were sincere and complete? It was by
Inspiration only that St. Peter was enabled to
detect the Impostures of Ananias and his Wife ;
who would have deceived your entire Hierarchy,
Bishops and aU included, and would have been

23
commended instead of being struck dead on the
spot. So too is it that, through the want of In
spiration (or the power to look into a person's mind),
such deceptions are practised upon the Priests
in other Churches. A profligate Russian will ob
tain Absolution by concealing half his iniquities ;
and when a Romish Priest absolved a Musical
Composer, on condition that a certain Opera were
destroyed. He was not aware that the pretended
Penitent had a duphcate of it. However, Sir, as
you Presbyters are supposed to possess this Power,
and that a Service is appointed for it, why is it not
exercised? It must have been in active use so
lately as the seventeenth century, as a Canon of
James I. (Can. 113) relates expressly thereto.
Also, the Service passed Review after the Restor
ation, more than half a Century later.
Are the Clergy ashamed to claim such a Power
at the present day ? or, are they afraid of the con
sequences, were they to exert it ? However, if the
Power has been discarded, why do the Bishops
continue the Farce of conferring it ? and, if the
latter half of the Ordination Formula for a Presbyter
has become a dead Letter, why may not the former
half have become so likewise ?
When speaking of the Ordination of Deacons,
I remarked the probable consequences, should the
Public at large become acquainted with the true
nature of the Ceremony. The like may be said of
the Ordination of Priests. Let the Newspapers

24
report that a Bishop had conferred the Holy Ghost
and the power to pardon Sins upon some dozen of
persons, what might be expected to follow ? Some
would inquire when the next Ordination would
take place, that they might witness the performance
of the Miracle ; and others would run with all haste
to the new-made Priests, to ask for a remission of
their Sins. For the first few days after Consecra
tion these new-made Priests would need a Peace-
officer at their Doors ! I !
V. As the main support or life of these wonder
working Ceremonies must be derived from the
Consecrating Bishop, I think. Sir, that your Pen
would have been employed more beneficially, had
you endeavoured to remove the objections made to
their apparently arrogant claims, instead of figuring
out a specious Arithmetical Pedigree for the present
occupier of Lambeth Palace ; the Alpha and the
Omega of your Volume, for He is found at both ends
of it. The objections to the manner of making
Enghsh Bishops are of very long standing ; as old
as their institution, for they commenced in the
reign of Henry VIIL, and have remained unan
swered to the present day.
When we find that the Sovereign nominates a
Bishop as a matter of Right — that He might nomi
nate even a Layman — and that, whoever He shall
name, must be consecrated, under severe Penal
ties in case of Disobedience, is it any better than
Hypocrisy, to present the Sovereign's Nominee

25
for Consecration, on the sole ground of being " a
godly and learned Man ?" or, for the Consecrating
Bishop to say, that He trusts the person has been
called to the work by the Holy Ghost ? Better
would it be to discard the Holy Ghost altogether
from the Ceremony, than to bring it in where it is
known that it had no influence ; and, after what
we hear daily said, of the Savings, the Jobbings,
&c. &c. of sundry members of the Episcopal Bench,
better would it be to omit the extract from St.
Paul about the Duties of Bishops. The modern
Bishop has nothing about Him of the Bishop of
St. Paul's day, save the appellation given to Him
of Bishop. So completely. Sir, are these supposed succes
sors of the Apostles, and Ambassadors of Christ,
the Creatures of the Crown, that the Sovereign is
not compelled to appoint them : and so, by virtue
of the Royal Prerogative, might the entire Bench
be kept vacant. What, in that case, would be
come of the long Pedigrees upon which you set
such a value ? Why, there would be an end of
those Pedigrees, until the Sovereign should want
them again : when, of course. He and the two
Houses of Parliament together could set up an
Episcopal Line afresh. Laugh not. Reverend Sir,
at such, a supposition, however ridiculous it may
appear : for, if Parliament be competent to amend
a broken Pedigree, it must assuredly have the
authority to make an entirely new one. If Parlia-

26
ment can amend imperfect Episcopal Consecrations,
it must be able to make a Bishop. Should you
doubt this, you may easily satisfy yourself of the
correctness thereof by referring to the Statutes at
large for an Enactment, with which you appear to
have become acquainted at second hand only; hav
ing been satisfied with an extract from it given in
Gibson's Codex. On referring to the Statute-Book
(" that d — d Statute Book," as a celebrated Keeper
of the Sovereign's Conscience used to style it),
I find evidence of Parliament having assumed the
power to repair and amend Episcopal Consecra
tions, should they happen to have been incom
plete. That is, in other words. Parliament con
sidered itself competent to make entire any Epis
copal Pedigree which should have had a Gap in
it ! ! Strange as may seem to be what I have
asserted, it is no more than the Truth ; as will
be found by a reference to 8 Eliz. cap. 1. Whe
ther the Consecrations alluded to in that Statute
were complete or incomplete, matters nothing
to our argument. By pretending to render them
complete, should they have been incomplete, the
Power alluded to was assumed by the Legis-.
lature of that day. That the Consecrations were
felt to have been incomplete, I infer from the
Preamble of that very curious Statute; for, unless
the fact had been pretty clear, no attention would
have been given to the idle gossip of the day ;
described in the Statute as "overmuch Boldness

27
" of Speech and Talk amongst many of the com-
" mon sort of people being unlearned." When we
bear in recollection that the Star-Chamber and the
High Commission Court were then in existence,
the doubts about the Consecrations must have
arisen from causes far more important than the
idle rumours of the day ; or the Executive Power
would have silenced them very speedily.
Having touched here upon the authority of
Parliament in Spiritual concerns, I may notice in
support thereof the creation of an entire Church by
Legislative enactment. In Scotland there is no
Church, if the Theory of Apostolical Succession be
true ; and so thought the late learned Archbishop
Magee, who asserted that " Scotland had a Religion
without a Church." Nevertheless, Sir, has the
Enghsh Parliament (including twenty-six Bishops)
raised the Rehgion of Scotland to the Rank of a
Church ; as you wiU find by reading the Treaty of
Union, and other subsequent Enactments, Also,
one of the first official Acts done by the Head of
your Episcopal Church on ascending the Throne,
is to recognise as a Church the Ecclesiastical System
of Scotland. Now, if Parhament can give to Pres
byterians the rank and divine character of Episco
pahans, He must be a bold man who can deny to
Parliament the power to repair a broken Episcopal
Pedigree. And further. Sir, seeing what has been
done legitimately for Presbyterianism, it becomes
you very ill indeed to speak of it in the disrespect-

28
ful terms used in your Publication : for, as your
own Church is designated no otherwise than one
" as by Law established," the Presbyterian Church
of Scotland stands upon the same foundation in
every respect as does that of England.
VI. As you are ever ready to appeal to Scrip
ture for authorities, I will take the liberty to do
the same.
It appears from the New Testament that, as
far as its History comes down, there was a regular
Degradation as the Ordinations followed each other.
Those whom Christ appointed were inferior to Him,
and those whom the Apostles appointed were in
ferior to them. Here, then, in the very earliest
Consecrations were three Successions, each of which
was superior to that which followed it. Whether
this Third Class were superior, or only equal to
those whom they appointed to succeed them, we
are not informed for certain ; though probabihty is
in favour of a further degradation. The modern
Doctrine, however, is very different; for your
Church admits of no Degradation, each Consecrator
being held to make a new one fully equal to Him
self in every respect. Hence, in your Genealogical
Pedigree of the Archbishops of Canterbury, Herring
who stands at the top, and Howley who stands
last, are to be accounted equal ; and the same as
regards the several intermediates between them.
Such may be the fact, for any thing that you or I
can know to the contrary ; but what I find in the

29
New Testament would lead to a different conclusion.
Should your Book reach to a Second Edition, per
haps you wiU have the goodness to inform us from
whence is derived this apparently unscriptural
notion. If the reason for holding it be that, at the
present day, no visible change is operated by the
Imposition of Hands, assuredly you are right in
holding the Doctrine alluded to. But then. Sir,
if a Man after Consecration be nowise different
to what He was before Consecration, is not the
Ceremony an useless one ? — and if useless, is not
the continuance of it in its estabhshed Form a
solemn mockery of that which ought to be treated
with Respect?
I shall now conclude this Epistle, by requesting
your kind pardon for the great liberty of addressing
you which has been taken already by Me ; and
craving the same indulgence towards the further
liberty which I am about to take, by offering
a few Words of Advice. When Advice is unpa
latable, it is usually deemed offensive : but, what I
am going to say cannot be received otherwise than
favourably by a Writer so zealous in the support
of divine Truth as is He whom I have the honour
to address. Allow Me, then, to recommend to you, to
abandon altogether for the time to come the hope
of being able to uphold a falling Church by a Prop
so fragile as is Apostolical Succession : and instead
thereof, to join with others in a humble Petition

30
to the Head bf that same Church, to have the
goodness to loosen the Tongues of the Clergy, by
restoring to the Convocation the Privilege of
Speech. For more than a Century it has re
mained silent. Whether from the same influence
which caused the ancient Oracles to speak, or from
that which afterwards struck them dumb, I shall
not stop to inquire.
Think not. Sir, that there would be no Business
to occupy its attention ; for, rather than too little,
there would be ample employment for a consider
able time. Some things needing Correction have
been mentioned already ; and here are a few more.
A fresh Body of Canons has long been wanted ; one
half of the existing Canons being treated with con
tempt, although obedience to them be solemnly
sworn. How much, or how little. Perjury there
may be here ; and how much the Bishops may
deserve blame for conniving at such delinquency,
it is not for Me to determine. The Articles and
the Homilies are at variance upon very important
Points, and ought to be made to agree. The
former reject Matrimony from the list of Sacra
ments, and the Apocrypha from the Canonical
Books: whereas the latter style Matrimony a
Sacrament, and speak of the Apocrypha as a
production of the Holy Ghost. That the Church
Articles are but ill-understood, may be gathered
from the celebrated Tomb-stone case, decided in the
Court of Arches only last year : for the Judgment

31
of the Court shewed that the Prosecuting Clergy
were in ignorance respecting the sense of an im
portant portion of the Twenty-second Article of
Faith, To be bearded by an opponent is at all
times disagreeable ; but it is much more than dis
agreeable to be beaten upon one's own ground, in
•one's own Court, and before a Judge of one's own
appointment : and, however humiliating to Eccle
siastical Pride aU those things must have been, it
may be accounted a greater humiliation still, to
have been defeated upon a point of Doctrine by a
follower of a certain Scarlet Dame.
Here, then, is ample employment for the Con
vocation, whenever it shall be allowed to sit for the
despatch of Business ; and for the credit of our
National Rehgion, let us hope that a change is not
far distant ; for, if the Convocation remain a dumb
Body much longer, its continued Silence may be
fairly ascribed to the same cause which made the
Popes so backward in summoning the Council
which met afterwards at Trent. The Popes of
the Sixteenth Century dreaded an inquiry into
Doctrines and Church Discipline, Is the Church
of England in that same predicament ? Assuredly
she cannot be ; because, in her Twentieth Article,
she claims " authority in controversies of Faith ;"
meaning thereby, that she is a sure guide (i, e, in-
fallible) in points of Controversy. How, then, can
she be supposed to dread to have her Rites, her Doc
trines, and her Discipline, examined throughout.

32
and weighed in the Scales of Truth ? Would it not
be a gross Libel to charge Her with such Fear ?
But, Sir, should she delay any longer to look into
her affairs, will there not be good ground for
supposing, that the Charges brought against Her
by Non-Conformists are unanswerable 9 or, at least,
that she is afraid to meet them ?
I have the Honour to subscribe myself,
Reverend Sii-,
Your most obedient Servant,
A Reader of your Book.

THE end.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03720 0269

r-* ' • V-' ¦ -

Br *

#1 *

I' ' i 'i -" ' ' ' '
lv ' ¦«¦. -¦-
!¦' A *. -. i •
-"¦> f.'V ' , 'C.
5,& y -¦:. ¦ V,
^^J^,i.V, •.
-*
* •— lief S
L "¦ -. ," ¦• ¦•'