one.

this theological view is a very different thing from the Archdeacon's practical Sacramental Thus our readers may escape out of the Archdeacon's labyrinthine snare. Hooker is a dangerous witness for the Archdeacon to call into court. If he produces him, we may crossexamine him. We may ask him on what points he agrees with the Archdeacon. Does he consider that there is grace in the Sacraments? No, but only, as we have seen, in the heart and soul of worthy recipients. Does he regard Antiquity as entitled to contradict plain words in Scripture, or plain deductions from Scripture? No, he says: "Although ten "thousand General Councils would set down one and the same definitive sentence, concerning any point of Religion whatever, yet demonstrative reason alleged, or one "manifest testimony cited from the mouth of

66

66 one

"His Human Nature, can possibly be everywhere present." (Ib.)

What Sacramental union, then, can there exist, in Hooker's opinion, like the Archdeacon's? How can the doctrine of the Tepix&pnσis, or mutual inhabitation of the two natures, be fairly turned to his purpose? Can the whole weight of the Archdeacon's system rest on what is a mere protest against Nestorianism ?-"The Nature "which cannot have in itself universal presence, hath it after a sort, by being nowhere severed from that which is every"where present." (E. P. v. 55.)

66

"God himself, to the contrary, could not "choose but overweigh them all." (E. P. ii. 7.) Does he call Presbyters Priests, in the sense of iepei? No, he says: "Seeing that Sacrifice is now "no part of the Church-ministry, how should "the name of Priesthood be thereunto rightly applied?" (E. P. v. 78.) Does he by the Body Mystical of Christ mean the whole multitude of those who partake of the Sacraments? No, he means, with our Church, "the blessed company of all faithful people," (Communion Service.) He says: "That Church of Christ "which we properly term His Body mystical,

can be but one, neither can that one be "sensibly discerned by any man." "Whatso"ever we read in Scripture concerning the "endless love and the saving mercy which "God sheweth towards His Church, the only

proper subject thereof is this Church.” “And "as those everlasting promises of love, mercy, "and blessedness, belong to the Mystical

Church, even so, on the other side, when we "read of any duty which the Church of God "is bound unto, the Church whom this doth concern is a sensible known company."*

* Dr. Miller in his First Letter to Dr. Pusey, speaks strongly on the necessity of distinguishing between the Church Visible, and the Church Invisible which is within the Visible. See Appendix C.

(E. P. iii. 1.) Truly, we cannot but think that it would have been wiser in the Archdeacon never to have mentioned the name of Hooker.

We might exhibit the value of the Archdeacon's appeal to Dr. Jackson in the same way, by cross-examining that witness. Suffice it to say, that no one is more earnest in pressing the distinction between the Church Visible and the Church Invisible, than Dr. Jacksonthus virtually overthrowing the Archdeacon's System, because limiting Christ's promises of the Holy Ghost and His own continual presence to the latter; and that no one is a more strenuous asserter of the necessity of Faith as the instrumental cause of uniting us to Christ. "As many as are healed," he says, "from "their sins, whether by the Sacrament of Bap"tism or the Eucharist, are healed by Faith "relatively or instrumentally. Faith is as the "mouth or organ, by which we receive the medi"cine; but it is the virtual influence derived "from the body and blood of Christ, which properly or efficiently doth cure our souls, and "dissolve the work of Satan in us." (Works, vol. 9. book x. c. 56.) Who can object to such a temperate statement as this?

§ 14. THE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

Considering that the doctrine of an Apostolic Succession in the ministry is a vital one in the Archdeacon's system, we were amazed to find that all he says in proof of its existence and necessity is contained in less than a single page. Having spoken a few words on the fact alluded to in the Preface to our Ordination Services," that from the Apostles' time there "have been these orders of ministers in Christ's "Church, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons" (which is sufficient to shew the propriety of our retaining them, nothing hindering), the Archdeacon advances to the grand point.

66

"It is a further question, whether this Apostolic Succes"sion is essential, and whether any break in it would impair the validity of sacred rites. Such a question, however, seems as needless, as to ask whether the Church "could safely reverse the appointment of the Lord's "Day, or unsettle the observance of Infant Baptism." (p. 399.)

This is his whole argument. It cuts the knot, rather than unties it. If the whole question is to be settled by probability, and a calculation of safety, the Church of Scotland

*The Archdeacon has the following calculation, in the following page. "Since each Bishop has commission "from three of his Brethren, its effect if traced back a "few generations, is to identify his individual authority "with that of the whole Episcopate of the Church. "Were it not that the same parties repeatedly consecrate,

may be produced as a case in which one of the orders has been dispensed with for the space of two hundred years, and yet the Church exists, and is adorned from time to time, by such men as Chalmers. Who would compare the Church of Rome, for purity of faith and excellence of practice, with the Church of Scotland? To give so little proof, is virtually to abandon the cause.

§ 15. WHAT IS IDOLATRY.

There are

We must draw towards a close. many assertions of our Author which tempt us to notice them. We can but select a few.

Idolatry is generally associated in our thoughts with the external Church System exhibited in the Romish Communion. Archbishop Whateley does not hesitate to charge it upon that system, identifying the kind of their idolatry with that of the Israelites in their worship of the Golden Calves. But the Archdeacon is very adventurous, and is resolved to turn the charge of Idolatry on those who most sedulously avoid it.

Their avoiding it so

216 spiritual predecessors in We do not pretend to verify