among the corruptions, or innovations of the papacy;" that "they all recognized it as an institution primitive and apostolic; " acknowledging without reserve, their obligation to conform it ?" And what must we think of Dr. Bowden, (from whom better information and more caution might have been expected,) when he fully concurs with Dr. Hobart and Mr. How, in this language of bold and unqualified assertion? How gentlemen who have any accurate knowledge of the rise and progress of the reformation; or who have attended to the history and the contents of public confessions, could write thus, is, indeed, unaccountable! I am lost in astonishment when I think of the fact !

It only remains that we notice, for a moment, the assertion of Dr. Bowden and Mr. How, that in the Lutheran churches of Sweden and Denmark, prelacy, both in fact and name, is received. If these gentlemen mean, that there are ministers in Sweden and Denmark, who bear the titles of bishop and archbishop, their assertion is undoubtedly correct; and this is no more than I explicit ly stated in my former letters. But if they mean, that the Swedish and Danish churches believe in the divine right of prelacy; that they consider episcopal ordination as necessary to constitute the Christian ministry; or that they do, in fact, always insist upon such ordination-they are unquestionably in a gross error; and have given their readers a most delusive view of the subject.

With respect to Sweden, it is well known, that those who planted the reformation, and ordained the first protestant ministers in that country, were mere presbyters. And although, from the influence of habit, they chose to retain the names and some of the functions of bishops and archbishops; yet it is equally certain, that the first persons who bore these titles, were set apart to their office by presbyters; and, of course, received themselves, and were enabled to communicate to others, no other than Presbyterian ordination. As to the point of light in which this subject is regarded by the church of Sweden, I am happy in being able to produce the testimony of the Rev. Dr. Collin, pastor of the Swedish church in Philadelphia, a gentleman whose acquaintance with the ecclesiastical system of his native country cannot be doubted; and whose character is a sufficient guarantee for the accuracy of his statements. He assures me, in a letter, written at my request, that all the Swedish divines, and particularly those who themselves

enjoy the episcopal dignity, consider episcopacy merely as a human regulation; that this is the doctrine of all their standard books; that accordingly, in the absence of those who are styled bishops, ordinations are performed by ordinary clergymen ; and that even bishops and archbishops, may be set apart to their office by presbyters. In support of these facts, Dr. Collin produces the most decisive testimony from Swedish writers of the highest authority; and declares, that there is but one opinion among them on the subject. He adds," The Danes agree with us in this matter. "Vandalin, Primarius Professor of Theology in Copenhagen, in

a much esteemed work published in the year 1727, has the fol"lowing passage, p. 354. An jure divino Episcopi a Presby"teris distincti sunt? Negatur, contra Pontificios et quosdam "Anglos." i. e. "Are bishops and presbyters distinct orders by divine right? We deny it; in opposition to the papists, and to certain persons of the church of England." He then goes on to establish his opinion by reference to a number of passages of scripture, which are precisely those which Presbyterians usually quote.

The result of all the testimony exhibited in the present Letter, is this. That the Waldenses, the Bohemian Brethren, and all the great individual witnesses for the truth, prior to the time of Luther, were, almost without exception, decidedly anti-prelatical in their sentiments. That at the period of the reformation, the Presbyterian form of church government was established in all the reformed churches in Germany, Scotland, France, Geneva, and Holland; and its establishment in all these countries, accompanied with public and solemn declarations that they considered this as having been the apostolic and primitive form. And, that, although in the Lutheran churches of Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and other parts of Europe, some ministers were invested with pre-eminent powers, under different titles; yet that they all, with one voice, declared, that in the apostolic church, ministerial parity prevailed; and acknowledged, that the order of Bishops was brought in by human authority, and was a regulation of expediency alone. Such was the doctrine maintained by those churches, at that interesting period; and the same doctrine has been maintained by them uniformly to the present hour. It follows, then, agreeably to my declaration in a former letter, that the church of England stands

absolutely ALONE, in the whole protestant world, in asserting the divine institution of prelacy (if indeed, she, as a church, does assert it, which many of her own most respectable sons have denied); that every other protestant church on earth has formally disclaimed this doctrine, and pronounced the distinction between bishops and Presbyters to be a mere human invention; and, consequently, that the doctrine of the jure divino prelatists, is so far from being the general doctrine of the reformed churches, that it never has been, and is not now, received, by more than a very small portiona mere handful of the Protestant world.

I repeat once more-the Bible is the statute book of the church of Christ; and by this book alone, must the question before us be finally decided. But, so far as human opinion, fortified by all the considerations of talents, learning and piety, is of any value, the doctrine of Presbyterian parity stands on the most elevated and triumphant ground.

LETTER VII.

THE TESTIMONY OF CALVIN.

CHRISTIAN BRETHREN,

Ir has fallen to the lot of few individuals to be more mistaken and misrepresented than the venerable Calvin. His great talents, his profound learning, his fervent piety, his stupendous labours, his astonishing self-denial, and his sublime disinterestedness, have all been insufficient to protect him from the grossest abuse. His personal character, his theological opinions, and the form of ecclesiastical government which he preferred, have each, in turn, been the objects of accusation and slander. Had these unfair statements been either always the same, or consistent with themselves, it would not have been wonderful to find them making some impression on persons who had no access to sources of correct information. But when scarecly any two of these statements can be reconciled with each other; and when the most of them are expressly contradicted by authentic documents, it is truly a matter of wonder that they should be favourably received by any who have the least claim to the character of learning or impartiality. This wonder, however, exists. We can hardly open a controversial work from the pen of any of our episcopal brethren, without finding more or less obloquy directed against the illustrious Reformer of Geneva.

Dr. Bowden and Mr. How have indulged themselves in this obloquy in a manner, and to an extent, which appears to me to demand animadversion. And as they lay so much stress on the supposed concessions of Calvin in favour of episcopacy; and, at

the same time, appear to enter with such hearty good will into every attempt, by whomsoever made, to load his character with reproach, I have resolved to devote the whole of the present letter to a view of the writings, the opinions, and the general character of that celebrated man.

66

Had these gentlemen been contented with exhibiting Calvin, as a man of a fierce," ,"" turbulent," and "intolerant spirit ;" had they spoken only of his "characteristic violence," of his " playing the tyrant," and of his malignant disposition to crush all who opposed him; to such charges I should have thought it unnecessary to reply. To refute them, completely and triumphantly, as applicable in any peculiar or pre-eminent degree to that apostolic man, nothing more is requisite than a tolerable acquaintance with the history of his life and time. When so many of the greatest and best prelates that ever adorned the church of England; men really learned, and breathing in an extraordinary degree the spirit of the Gospel, have delighted to dwell on the praises of Calvin ; when they have almost exhausted every epithet of respect in eulogizing his talents, his learning, his piety, his judgment, and the usefulness of his labours;-his memory surely needs no defence against the attacks of Dr. Bowden and Mr. How. But when these gentlemen bring forward allegations and extracts which are calculated to mislead even their intelligent readers, and to set the declarations and the practice of the pious reformer at variance; I deem it my duty to make a few remarks, and to state a few facts, in vindication of what I consider as the cause of primitive truth and order.

Dr. Bowden and Mr. How represent Presbyterianism as having originated with Calvin. Now it happens that Presbyterianism, (to say nothing of its apostolic origin,) was introduced into Geneva, before Calvin ever saw that city, when he was about nineteen years of age, and while he was yet in the communion of the church of Rome. The following quotation from Dr. Heylin, a high-toned Episcopalian, and a favourite authority of Dr. Bowden, will be considered by him as decisive. "In this condition it (Geneva) " continued till the year 1528, when those of Berne, after a public "disputation held, had made an alteration in religion, defacing "images, and innovating all things in the church on the Zuinglian "principles. Viretus and Farellus, two men exceeding studious