is it's purport." This passage of St. Hermas is the more remarkable, since he lays down the principle upon which more than one repentance after baptism would probably be very rare, if not altogether hopeless, coinciding with the known teaching of the Apostles, and with subsequent experience, although limiting very awfully, what their written teaching has left undefined."

After these specimens of the theology of some of the fathers, and of the writer who appeals to their authority, you will not be surprised to learn that throughout the entire disquisition upon sins after baptism there is not the slightest reference or allusion to the doctrine of justification by faith, as exhibited in the eleventh article, and as therein stated, and truly stated, to be "full of comfort" to the weary and heavy laden sinner. truth, the doctrine itself is virtually set aside.*

In

*The following extract from Archbishop Wake's preliminary discourse on the epistles of the Apostolical Fathers will enable the reader to perceive what degree of weight is to be attached to the opinions of Hermas. He will also see that even Cardinal Bellarmine accuses this Father of favouring the Novatian heresy. The learned prelate having stated the very high estimation in which Hermas was regarded by some, proceeds to say-" And yet after all this, we find this same book not only doubted of by others among the Ancient Fathers, but slighted even by some of those, who upon other occasions have spoken thus highly in its favour. Thus St. Jerome in his Comments exposes the folly of that Apocryphal Book, as he calls it, which in his Catalogue of Writers he had so highly applauded. Tertullian, who spake, if not honourably, yet calmly of it whilst a Catholic, being become a Montanist, rejected it, even with scorn, And most of the other Fathers who have spoken the highest of it themselves, yet plainly enough insinuate, that there were those who did not put the same value upon it. Thus Origen mentions some who not only denied, but despised its authority. And Cassan having made use of it in the point of free-will, Prosper without more ado rejected

Let us now compare the preceding statements with the following extracts from the homily on repentance.

66

Whereupon we do not without a just cause detest and abhor the damnable opinion of them, which do most wickedly go about to persuade the simple and ignorant people, that if we chance, after we be come to God, and grafted in his Son Jesus Christ, to fall into some horrible sin, repentance shall be unprofitable to us, there is no more hope of reconciliation, or to be received again into the mercy and favour of God. And that they may give the better colour unto their pestilent and pernicious error, they do commonly bring in the sixth and tenth chapters of the epistle to the Hebrews, and the second

it as a testimony of no value. And what the judgment of the latter ages was as to this matter, especially after Pope Gelasius had ranked it among the Apocryphal Books, may be seen at large in the observations of Antonius Augustinus upon that degree. How far this has influenced the learned men of our present times in their censures upon this work, is evident from what many on all sides have freely spoken concerning it; who not only deny it to have been written by Hermas the companion of St. Paul, but utterly cast it off, as a piece of no worth, but rather full of error and folly. Thus Baronius himself, though he delivers not his own judgment concerning it, yet plainly enough shews that he ran in with the severest censures of the Ancients against it; and in effect charges it with favouring the Arians, though upon a mistaken authority of St. Athanasius, which by no means proves any snch error to be in it. But Cardinal Bellarmine is more free; he tells us that it has many hurtful things in it, and particularly that it favours the Novatian heresy; which yet I think a very little equity in interpreting of some passages that look that way, by others that are directly contrary thereunto, would serve to acquit it of. Others are yet more severe; they censure it as full of heresies and fables; though this Labbe would be thought to excuse, by telling us that they have been foisted into it by some later interpolations; and ought not to be imputed to Hermas, the author of this book."-The Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers, &c. pp. 85, 86.

F

chapter of the second epistle of St. Peter ;* not considering that in those places the holy Apostles do not speak of the daily falls that we, as long as we carry about this body of sin, are subject unto; but of the final falling away from Christ and his gospel, which is a sin against the Holy Ghost, that shall never be forgiven, because that they do utterly forsake the known truth, do hate Christ and his word, they do crucify and mock him, (but to their utter destruction) and, therefore, fall into desperation, and cannot repent." "Now unto all them that will return unfeignedly unto the Lord their God, the favour and mercy of God unto forgiveness are liberally offered. Whereby it followeth necessarily, that although we do, after we be once come to God, and grafted in his Son Jesus Christ, fall into great sins, (for there is no righteous man upon the earth that sinneth not, and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us); yet, if we rise again by repentance, and, with a full purpose of amendment of life, do flee unto the mercy of God, taking sure hold thereupon, through faith in his Son Jesus Christ, there is an assured and infallible hope of pardon and remission of the same, and that we shall be received again into the favour of our heavenly Father."+

Such, my Reverend Brethren, are some of the baneful tenets (baneful, at least, as they appear to me)

*These three passages are each of them cited by the author of the tracts on baptism, viz. Heb. vi. 4. 5, 6., at p. 49., and Heb. x. 26, 27., 2 Peter ii. 20, 21., at p. 80.

Homilies p. p. 452, 453.

which are disseminated in the Oxford Tracts. These tracts, by a strange misnomer, are designated "Tracts for the Times." Can, however, those publications be regarded as adapted to the exigencies of the times, which when our combined and concentrated energies are wanted to repel our common foes, are calculated to sow the seeds of discord amongst ourselves, by reviving former controversies, and renewing the discussion of questions which may give rise to interminable strife? While popery-by the removal of those disabilities under which its adherents formerly laboured-by the encouragement which it has met with in high placesand by other adventitious circumstances, has regained an influence in this country, which it has never possessed since the work of the Reformation was consolidated in the reign of Queen Elizabeth-can it be seasonable to propagate opinions, which have a direct tendency to obliterate that broad and well defined line of demarcation which has been traced out by our Reformers between the doctrines of the Church of England, and those of the Church of Rome? Can it be seasonable to advance any thing in disparagement of that great and glorious work which they achieved with so much labour, and which some of them sealed with their blood? Or, lastly, when Dissenters and Infidels have entered into triple league with the abettors of popery,-each in the pursuit of their own sinister ends, and each aiming at the subversion of our Established Church,-can it be seasonable to exercise our charity towards the corrupt and apostate Church of Rome, in preference to our Sis

ter Establishment of the Church of Scotland, which, though she differs from us in some points of discipline, harmonises with us in the great essentials of Christianity ?*

But, while I can easily anticipate your answer to these questions, and while I would most earnestly deprecate the introduction into our University of many of the opinions promulgated in the Oxford Tracts, allow

* There probably has never been a more learned, strenuous, and efficient assertor of the claims of episcopacy than bishop Hall, yet even he does not scruple to designate those Reformed Churches abroad, which had adopted the presbyterian discipline, as Sister Churches. In answer to the following objection, viz. that "while we defend the Divine right of our episcopacy, we seem to cast a dangerous imputation upon those Reformed Churches, which want that government," he says, in reference to it, that it" is intended to raise envy against us, as the uncharitable censurers and condemners of those Reformed Churches abroad, which differ from our government; wherein, we do justly complain of a slanderous aspersion cast upon us. WE LOVE AND HONOUR THOSE SISTER CHURCHES, AS THE DEAR SPOUSE OF CHRIST. We bless God for them: and we do heartily wish them that happiness in the partnership of our administration, which I doubt not but they do no less heartily wish unto themselves.

Good words! you will perhaps say; but what is all this fair compliment if our act condemn them, if our very tenet exclude them? For if episcopacy stand by divine right, what becomes of those Churches that want it? Malice and ignorance are met together, in this unjust aggravation.

First, our position is only affirmation; implying the justifiableness and holiness of an episcopal calling, without any further implication.

Next, when we speak of Divine right, we mean not an express law of God requiring it upon the absolute necessity of the being of a Church, what hindrances soever may interpose; but a divine institution, warranting it where it is, and requiring it where it may be had." Bishop Hall's Works, vol. ix. p. 634.

The Churchmanship of the Rev. G. S. Faber is, I am inclined to think, as little to be suspected as that of Bishop Hall. In a note to p. 209 of his valuable treatise on the "Primitive Doctrine of Justification," he says,-" I subjoin the Westminster Confession; which I believe, is either received or sanctioned BY OUR VALUED SISTER IN CHRIST, THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH

OF SCOTLAND.