sions; and they were so far influenced by their dread and hatred of heresy, and by the false principle of the lawfulness of inflicting capital punishment on those who were guilty of that crime, that too many instances are to be found of the execution of heretics. The cases of Servetus, Valentinus Gentilis, Campanus, Gruet, Crellius, Felix Mans, &c. are unhappily but too well known; not to speak of the imprisonment and banishment of a great number of others.

The truth is, that although some individuals in that age may have held principles which tended to the conclusion that every man was at liberty to hold whatever doctrine he pleased; that conclusion was not drawn ". The whole body of the Reformed held the directly contrary view. They were zealous for the Christian truth, and they exhibited that righteous and holy intolerance of falsehood and heresy which is one of the essential characteristics of Christianity, and which alone subjected it to the persecutions of heathenism in the first ages, as it may perhaps to those of infidelity in the last. They had at least "a zeal for God," even if it was not always "according to knowledge;" and their conduct could never have exposed them to the divine rebuke,

"I am happy to be enabled to confirm this position by the unsuspected and highly-important testimony of Mr. Hallam. "It is often said, that the essential principle of Protestantism, and that for which the struggle was made, was something different from all we have mentioned, a perpetual freedom from all authority in religious belief, or what goes by the name of the right of private judgment. But to look more nearly at what oc

curred, this permanent independence was not much asserted and still less acted upon," &c.-Literature of Europe, vol. i. p. 521.

0.66

Though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be anathema. As I said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be anathema."-Gal. i. 8, 9. See Chapter V. sections i. ii.

"I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will cast thee out of my mouth." Had the Reformation maintained the principle of an unbounded liberty of private judgment, so falsely and impudently attributed to it, there could be no occasion to enquire further into its merits. Such a system would bear so evidently the brand of infidelity upon it, that every Christian would turn from it with horror and detestation.

SECTION IV.

WHETHER THE LUTHERANS, ZUINGLIANS, AND CALVINISTS WERE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.

I have already shown that the reformed did not voluntarily separate themselves from the existing Church, but were ejected by an abuse of authority. Consequently they are exempt from the charge of schism as far as regards the separation. Under such circumstances they had no remedy, and were obliged to remain as a distinct community until God should see fit to restore them to union with the rest of the church. They were to be regarded as brethren separated indeed from the external communion of a large portion of the catholic church without their own fault, but not internally cut off from it, and consequently still in the way of salvation.

But while this is maintained, it by no means follows that these separated brethren constituted of themselves churches of Christ, properly speaking. Their position was extraordinary, temporary, and was only justifiable on the plea of necessity. The system of the church as it related to them, was disarranged and shattered, and they had to construct from the fragments a temporary

and provisional system adapted to the exigencies of their case. They were harshly driven from the bosom of the Christian family, where they had been within reach of all the means of grace, and were obliged to establish themselves elsewhere as best they could. Hence it is by no means necessary to the justification of these communities, to suppose that they really constituted churches, in the ordinary sense of the term, and were invested with all the graces and institutions of the catholic church. That the Lutheran and Calvinistic societies were not properly churches of Christ I argue thus.

First, these societies were deficient in the point of visible duration. Every church of Christ, as I have already observed, must be able to prove that it has perpetually existed as a Christian society from the apostolic times, or that when founded, it was derived peaceably from the apostolical churches, or was received and acknowledged as a church by such. Now this does not apply to the Lutheran and reformed societies, because they had no existence as societies prior to their separation from the ancient churches in communion with Rome. They were not the original Christian communities of their localities, but were unhappily cut off and separated from them. Nor does it appear that they were afterwards recognised as Christian churches, in the full sense of the term, by any apostolically-derived churches. Therefore there is a very great difficulty in supposing that they were really churches of Christ.

Secondly, it does not seem that they could offer any effectual opposition to schism. They acknowledged for some time that the Roman churches were true churches, while they themselves, cut off by the ordinary

authority of those churches, were unable to invoke its aid for the suppression of irregular and schismatical proceedings, and had properly no other mode of treating them but by discussion. It does not seem that their societies could claim any of that ordinary authority which would have imposed an obligation on individuals to acquiesce in their regulations, and hence we cannot wonder that divisions multiplied exceedingly among them. This was deeply to be lamented, but it was the almost inevitable consequence of the unhappy situation in which they were placed. Had they been invested with the ordinary authority of the church, they could not have been troubled to such a degree with schisms and contentions.

Thirdly, whether these societies maintained sufficiently the necessity of sanctification, is not very clear. Certain it is that Luther went so far in his opposition to the error of justification by our own merits, that he fell into a contrary error. His most ardent admirers are obliged to acknowledge that "he carried the doctrine of justification by faith to such an excessive length, as seemed, though perhaps contrary to his intention, to derogate not only from the necessity of good works, but even from their obligation and importance ";" and that "he not only removes the necessity of sacerdotal absolution, and satisfaction by external works, in order to the remission of sins, but relieves sinners in some measure from the necessity even of contrition." However, the reformers generally, after a time maintained the obligation of good works', and condemned Agricola,

Gerdesii Histor. Evang. tom.

r Maclaine's Translation of Mosheim, vol. iv. p. 308. Luther's i. p. 220. notions on justification can therefore be of very little weight.

r

"Præterea docent nostri, quod necesse sit bona opera fa

the founder of the Antinomian heresy. It were to be desired, however, that there had been no leaven of this error among the Lutherans and Calvinists.

Fourthly. These societies were deficient in the point of apostolical succession in their ministry. They could not prove their succession from the apostles by exhibiting the catalogue of their bishops descending from them. Far, very far be it from us to blame them for any deficiency which arose from necessity; or to assert that there was any sinful intrusion on the sacred office of the ministry, when, under such absolute necessity, they resorted to unusual methods to supply their wants. If they were placed in an extraordinary position, and deprived of the assistance of those to whom the power of calling and ordaining ministers of Christ was entrusted by the will of God, we could not blame them for having recourse to the best expedients within their reach. Under such circumstances, even popular election of ministers, or mere appointment by individuals of considerable authority, without any ordination, could not have been condemned; nor, of course, could there be any greater objection to ordinations performed by mere presbyters. Certainly not: absolute necessity would excuse and justify such proceedings however irregular. But it is a very different question whether these ordinations were valid; whether they really conveyed the apostolical commission? There is an extreme difficulty

cere."-Conf. August. pars i. c. XX. "Sunt enim facienda opera propter mandatum Dei, &c. propter has causas necessario debent bona opera fieri."-Apol. Conf. iii. de dilect. et impl. legis. The Formula Concordiæ, pars ii. art. iv. de bonis operibus, also affirms

VOL. I.

that good works are necessary, and quotes Luther, affirming that "it is impossible to separate good works from true faith." The obligation of performing good works, and the reward awaiting them, are also urged by the Helvetic Confession, c. 16

сс