in sincerity, may give our firm, constant, and unflinching protest against all those peculiar principles of popery which are developed in the decrees and canons of the council of Trent, in the creed annexed to it, in the Trent Catechism, and in the Roman Missal. May we protest against them as opposed to the pure doctrines of the word of God, so clearly stated in the confessions of faith made at the Reformation. May we protest against them as anti-christian and idolatrous, and manifesting that the Pope and the church of Rome is that apostate and fallen church, set forth in the scriptures as the Man of Sin, and Babylon the Mother of Harlots. May we also have grace to protest against that falling away from the principles of our Protestant Reformers, which has been too manifest in the Protestant churches, and by which they too have so largely returned to the false principles of popery, more or less maintaining justi

fication by the works of man, and denying the grace of Christ: (Rom. xi. 6:) a falling away which leaves only a nominal Protestantism, but really the first principle and main root of popery. May we have grace distinctly to avow our conviction of the unutterable magnitude and importance, as it concerns the glory of the great God and the salvation of our fellow men,-of maintaining, in purity, simplicity and prominence, those blessed truths that there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved, but the name of Jesus,

that other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ,

that we are complete in him,—who is made of God unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. And may the Lord whom we thus confess before men, in the day of his appearing, confess us before his Father which is in heaven.

AMID those deep and retired thoughts, -which with every man Christianly instructed ought to be most frequent-of God, and of his miraculous ways and works amongst men, and of our religion, and works to be performed to him; after the story of our Saviour Christ suffering to the lowest bent of weakness in the flesh, and presently triumphing to the highest pitch of glory in the spirit, which drew up his body also-till we in both be united to him in the revelation of his kingdom; I do not know of any thing more worthy to take up the whole passion of pity on the one side, and joy on the other, than to consider, first, the foul and sudden corruption, and then, after many a tedious age, the long-deferred but much more wonderful and happy reformation of the church in these latter days. Sad is it to think how that doctrine of the gospel, planted by teachers divine inspired, and by them winnowed and sifted from the chaff of over-dated ceremonies, and

refined to such a spiritual height and temper of purity, and knowledge of the Creator, that the body, with all the circumstances of time and place, were purified by the affections of the regenerate soul, and nothing left impure but sin; faith needing not the weak and fallible office of the senses to be either the ushers or interpreters of heavenly mysteries, save where our Lord himself, in his sacraments, ordained,—that such a doctrine should, through the grossness and blindness of her professors, and the fraud of deceivable traditions, drag so downwards, as to backslide one way into Jewish beggary of old cast rudiments, and stumble forward another way into the new-vomited paganism of sensual idolatry, attributing purity or impurity to things indifferent, that they might bring the inward acts of the spirit to the outward and customary eye-service of the body, as if they could make God earthly and fleshly, because they could not make

themselves heavenly and spiritual. They began to draw down all the divine intercourse betwixt God and the soul; yea, the very shape of God himself into an exterior and bodily form, urgently pretending a necessity and obligement of joining the body in a formal reverence, and worship circumscribed; they hallowed it, they fumed it, they sprinkled it, they bedecked it, not in robes of pure innocency, but of pure linen, with other deformed and fantastic dresses, in palls, and mitres, gold and gewgaws fetched from Aaron's old wardrobe, or the Flamin's vestry. Then was the priest set to con his motions and his postures, his liturgies and his lurries, till the soul, by this means of overbodying herself, given up justly to fleshly delights, bated her wing apace downward; and finding the ease she had from her visible and sensuous colleague, the body, in performance of religious duties, her pinions now broken and flagging, shifted off from herself the labour of high soaring any more, forgot her heavenly flight, and left the dull and droiling carcass to plod on in the old road, and drudging trade of outward conformity.

And here, out of question, from her perverse conceiting of God and holy things she had fallen to believe no God at all, had not custom and the worm of conscience nipped her incredulity. Hence, to all the duties of evangelical grace, instead of the adoptive and cheerful boldness which our new alliance with God requires, came servile and thrall-like, fear; for in very deed the superstitious man, by his good will, is an atheist; but being scared from thence by the pangs and gripes of a boiling conscience, all in a pudder, shuffles up to himself such a God and such a worship as is most agreeable to remedy his fear; which fear of his, as is also his hope, fixed only upon the flesh, renders likewise the whole faculty of his apprehension carnal; and all the inward acts of worship, issuing from the native strength of the soul, run out lavishly to the upper skin, and there harden into a crust of formality. Hence men came to scan the scriptures by the letter, and in the covenant of our redemption magnified the external signs

more than the quickening power of the Spirit; and yet, looking on them through their own guiltiness with a servile fear, and finding as little comfort, or rather terror, from them again, they knew not how to hide their slavish approach to God's behests, by them not understood nor worthily received, but by cloaking their servile crouching to all religious presentiments, sometimes lawful, sometimes idolatrous, under the name of humility, and terming the piebald frippery and ostentation of ceremonies decency..... But, to dwell no longer in characterizing the depravities of the church, and how they sprung, and how they took increase; when I recall to my mind, at last, after so many dark ages, wherein the huge overshadowing train of error had almost swept all the stars out of the firmament of the church, how the bright and blissful Reformation (by divine power) struck through the black and settled night of ignorance and anti-Christian tyranny, methinks a sovereign and reviving joy must needs rush into the bosom of him that reads or hears, and the sweet odour of the returning gospel imbathe his soul with the fragrancy of heaven. Then was the sacred Bible sought out of the dusty corners, where profane falsehood and neglect had thrown it; the schools opened; divine and human learning raked out of the embers of forgotten tongues; the princes and cities trooping apace to the new-erected banner of salvation; the martyrs, with the irresistible might of weakness, shaking the powers of darkness, and scorning the fiery rage of the old red dragon."

So spake, not Mr. Froude, neither any of his publishers or admirers, but a man whose estimate of the necessity and nature of the Reformation, and of the character of the Reformers, may well console us under the heavy tidings that any of the students of Oxford have become less and less the children of the Reformation; thus spake JOHN MILTON,* distinguishing truly between formalism and spirituality, and having no fear of the charge of ultraProtestantism before his eyes.

On Reformation in England, pp. 1-4. In thus quoting Milton's general estimate of the Reformation, I feel in no way pledged to the adoption of the detail of his views.

The truth is necessarily Protestant. Since the fall of man, and the successful usurpations of Satan, which have entitled him to the name of "the God of this world," it has been so; and until the second coming of the Son of Man, who will effectually bruise Satan under his and his church's feet, it must be so.

Jesus Christ is the truth; and concerning him at his first coming it is written, that the light shone in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. The treatment which he received affords a most striking proof of the fallen condition of the world, fallen from all conformity to, or congeniality with God. He was of God-the image of the invisible God God manifest in the flesh. He came among men; and instead of being received as a benefactor, with gratitude, and love, and joy, he was despised and rejected; his life was a life of hardship; he had not where to lay his head; his ministry was a ministry of controversy, perpetually in collision with, and protesting against, Pharisee, or Sadducee, or Herodian; his death was a death of violence, nailed to the accursed tree. All this is placed in a still stronger light by considering to whom among men he came. Not to some savage tribe, whose untamed ferocity might account for their peculiar hostility to such a character; not to the polished idolaters of Greece or Rome, whose prejudices in favour of a gorgeous and long-cherished polytheism might be pleaded in extenuation of their resistance against an intruding reformer. No; the circumstances of the case will not supply any such evasive excuses for human nature. He came to the only people upon earth who were in possession of the blessings of revealed religion, the consecrated nation, "the witness and keeper of holy writ;" he came to his own, and his own received him not.

This general statement is not intended to exclude exceptions. There were a few who received him; and to his confiding friends, such friends as Martha, and Mary, and Lazarus-he was a kind instructor and sympathizing comforter. But he did not confine himself to such

friendly intercourse. He was not only a teacher of truth, but also a protester against error. He came not only to manifest and commend the works of God, but also "to destroy the works of the Devil." He loved the world, and sought the salvation of men at the expense of incurring their present resentment. His faithfulness in word and deed forced unwilling conviction on their minds, and roused the unwelcome reproaches of their consciences. They would gladly have excused the probing process; they were anxious to hide from themselves, if possible, the extent to which the ministry of Jesus was laying naked their corrupt hearts. Hence their endeavours to entangle him in his talk, to wrest his words, to misrepresent him, in the hope that by fastening some accusation upon him, they might justify, or seem to justify, their opposition against him.

Well has Milton characterized the great apostasy of the human heart-"Attributing purity or impurity to things indifferent; striving to bring the inward acts of the spirit to the outward and customary eye-service of the body; as if they could make God earthly and fleshly, because they could not make themselves heavenly and spiritual." Against this our Lord Jesus Christ was a perpetual protestant. One main object which he kept constantly and prominently in view was, to impress the great truth, that "God is a Spirit, and that they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth."

For this purpose he appears to have made opportunities for withdrawing the minds of his disciples from many outward and visible practices, and fixing their attention upon the inward, invisible purity of the heart. One of the practices in question was the scrupulous washing of hands before meat. This, however agreeable, and even useful it may be, as a matter of cleanliness and comfort, has nothing religious in it; neither is it irreligious in any man to omit it. The Pharisees, however, and after them the Jewish nation generally, following certain human traditions, represented practical religion as in a great measure consisting of such observances. When they saw Jesus and his disciples violating this tra

dition, and disregarding this practice, they found fault, and opened a controversy. "For the Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups and pots, brazen vessels, and tables, or beds." (St. Mark, vii. 3, 4.)

It is most valuable to us, who are to profit by the example of Jesus, to find him brought into controversy with the votaries of such superstitions; and we do indeed derive most important and practical information from the manner in which he conducted those controversies. To one point especially our attention is called; I mean his constant appeal to the written word of God. He was come from the fountain-head of truth, and spake with the same infallible authority which had dictated the Old Testament Scriptures. Moreover, all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, both in the natural world and in the human heart, were open to him. Yet he appeals to the Holy Scriptures. We do indeed find him occasionally, as God manifest in the flesh, appealing to his own well-attested authority, and manifesting his unerring knowledge; but most frequently we find him, as a member of the church among men, showing us an example that we should follow his steps, and honouring his Father's word-the written, fixed, unerring word of God.

He pays no attention to the objection which might have been urged then, as it is now, that such an appeal to Scripture was a mere matter of unauthorized private judgment; that every heretic so appealed; that the Sadducees, who denied both angels and spirits, appealed to the Scriptures; and the Pharisees, who confessed both, appealed to the Scriptures; and that as it thus became evident that the Scriptures could never decide the controversy, it became necessary, for the sake of unity, to have recourse to the practice of the church-the generally received Catholic practice-as supplying the only satisfactory interpretation of Holy Scripture. No; our Lord knew

that to unwilling minds and unsanctified hearts nothing could decide the controversy; and that to persons of a different tone of character, whom the Lord had in mercy converted to the love of the truth, nothing could be decisive but God's own word.

As to visible unity among fallen men, nothing short of a constantly and miraculously interposing theocracy could maintain it. Even under such a theocracy in the camp of Moses, it was difficult, and required not only the infallible tribunal of reference for instruction, but also the yawning pit, which, at the bidding of God's servant, swallowed up and hid for ever the contentious heretics.

66

Why," said the Scribes and Pharisees to Jesus, "why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread."

Our Lord must not merely have sanctioned such conduct in his disciples, he must have actually inculcated it; for otherwise his disciples, being Jews, would naturally have continued to conform to the usual habits of their nation.

The practice in question was catholic. St. Mark ascribes it to the Pharisees and all the Jews. It was ancient-derived not indeed from the inspired writers, but from the elders of the church and nation. It was as truly conformed as any practice could be to the celebrated canon of Vincentius Lerinensis, quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus. All this, however, did not screen it from the reprobation of the Lord Jesus. In itself it was scarcely worth notice, pro or con; but Christ seeing the superstition attached to it, became himself a practical protester against it, and encouraged his disciples to follow his Protestant practice.

This was a crime in the eyes of the Pharisees. Had the disciples neglected only the weightier matters of the law of God,-judgment, and justice, and truth,

they might have been friends with the Pharisees. This is proved by the instance of Judas, who was hailed by them as a coadjutor, and taken into friendly co-operation, while he was in the active exercise of ingratitude, treachery, and base covetousness. This was merely breaking the commandments of God;

but to disregard the traditions of the elders, to rebel against the will-worship, the superstitious observances, and mock humility of the priests, and to appeal to the written word as the umpire in the controversy, this was not to be endured. What! reject a practice commended by antiquity, by catholicism, and by what is even more endearing to "the natural man"-namely, that it invested an odour of sanctity, an outward observance, within his power to perform and reiterate! The Pharisees assailed our Saviour as an ultra Protestant." But Jesus answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?.... Ye hypocrites! well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (St. Matt. xv. 1-20.)

For doctrines! This leads to an important distinction. The commandments of men may be taught for local and orderly arrangements; and "every particular or national church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the church ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying." (Art. xxxiv.) And when such things are ordained in any particular or national church, no member of that church can without grave offence deviate from the order so prescribed. But if such things be elevated into the place of doctrines to be identified with Christianity and enforced as necessary to salvation then, the word of God which proclaims salvation without such accompaniments is frustrated by the commandments of men. For "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whosoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." (Art. vi.)

Say we not well, that the truth is essentially Protestant? that revelation has from the beginning been not only direct in the announcement of truth, but also

indirect in the exposure of falsehood. Abraham was not only a witness for the true and living God, but also a witness against idolatry. Moses was not only the inspired advocate of the deliverance of the children of Israel out of bondage, but also the inspired denouncer of the tyranny and oppression of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. The Jewish prophets were were not only ministers of righteousness, and equity, and truth, and judgment, but also sharp rebukers of the temporizing policy of unfaithful rulers, and the plausible, daubing flatteries of those who counselled peace, peace, when there was no peace. John Baptist was not only a messenger, crying, Behold the Lamb of God; but also so pungent and personal a protester against sin, even in the case of the king, that he lost his head for his service of his God.

We have seen the position occupied by the WORD made flesh, the wisdom of God, the measure and manifestation of divine love to a fallen world. He was not only a faithful teacher, but also and consequently (inevitably so) a Protestant controversialist. The apostles, in like manner, were not only preachers of the gospel, directly proclaiming the revealed mind of God, but also indefatigable controversialists, against the Jew who required a sign, and the Greek who sought after man's wisdom. They were not only shepherds standing to feed the flock of God with bread from heaven, but also watchmen warning the church, and crying, "Beware, lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men-after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." These things are written for our 'learning; and since these things, since the apostles have fallen asleep, the great principles involved remain the same. Every true evangelist becomes inevitably a controversialist also. Why is this the case? or, in other words, what are the principles involved? The answer is-true religion is not natural to fallen man; but falsehood, in some one or more of its deceitful aspects, is natural to man. True religion meets with not only an indisposed, but a pre-occupied soil: and he who would cultivate it has not only to plant what is right, but to root out and pluck up what is wrong.