occupied with translations and reprints of biblical treatises, thus verifying both parts of its title. After three or four years, it began to assume more of the attributes of a theological and literary review, which character it has avowedly sustained for the last seventeen years.

To speak of the living contributors to this work might savour of indecorum; nor have we authority to intrude upon the privacy of those respected men whose labours we use. Among the dead, we may record, as ornaments of this publication, by essays and reviews of great merit, the following honoured and beloved names:-The Reverend Dr. John H. Rice, the Reverend Dr. Fisk, the Reverend Dr. John Breckinridge, President Marsh, Professor Patton, the Reverend Mr. Winchester, and the Reverend Professor Dod. In regard to the writings of the eminent man last-mentioned, it is proper to say, that the publishers have been restrained from incorporating his valuable contributions into this volume, by the welcome information that a separate edition of his remains is in preparation.

Ample materials still remain for a similar volume, in case that which is now respectfully offered should meet with the patronage which is expected.

New York, April 15, 1846.

ESSAY I.

THE RULE OF FAITH.*

THE recent publication in England of so many works on Tradition indicates a new and extended interest in the subject; and their republication in America shows that the interest is as great here as it is in England. It is not difficult to account for this. The rapid increase of Romanism in some parts of the world, the revival of zeal and confidence among the Papists, and the advocacy of the leading principles of the church of Rome by the Oxford Tracts, have rendered this and kindred points the prominent subjects of religious discussion in Great Britain, and consequently, to a great extent in this country. We question whether at any period since the Reformation, or, at least, since the days of Archbishop Laud and the non-jurors, the public mind has been as much turned to these subjects as it is at present. This is no doubt principally owing to the publication of the Oxford Tracts. It is enough to arouse a Protestant community, to hear the Reformation denounced as a schism, Protestantism decried as anti-christian, and all the most dangerous errors of Romanism espoused and defended by members of the leading Protestant university of Europe. It is no wonder that this movement excites the joy of Papists, and the indignation of Protestants. It is no wonder that the press teems with answers to the artful and subtle effusions of men, who, though sustained by a Protestant church, direct all their energies to obliterate her distinctive character and to undermine her doctrines. The wonder rather is that men, professing godliness, can pursue a course so obviously unfair; or that they are allowed to retain the stations which give them support and influence.

Originally published in 1842, in review of the following works:

1. The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice. By William Goode, M.A., of Trinity College, Cambridge.

2. A Treatise concerning the Right Use of the Fathers in the Decision of Controversies in Religion. By John Daillé, Minister of the Gospel in the Reformed Church at Paris.

3. Not Tradition, but Scripture. By Philip N. Shuttleworth, D.D., Warden of New College, Oxford (late Bishop of Chichester).

4. The Authority of Tradition in Matters of Religion. By George Holden, M.A.

5. Tradition Unveiled. By Baden Powell, of Oriel College, Oxford

It is certainly time, when not only the Romanists are redoubling their efforts for the extension of their errors, but when they find their most efficient allies in our own camp, that Protestants should rouse themselves to a sense of their danger, and renew their protest against the false doctrines of Rome, and their testimony in behalf of the truth of God. It is conceded that the turning point in these controversies is the Rule of Faith. Are the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments the only infallible rule of faith and practice? if so, Romanism and Puseyism are confessedly without any adequate foundation. We say confessedly, first because their advocates admit that the whole controversy turns upon the authority due to tradition; and secondly, because, in enumerating the doctrines which tradition is necessary to prove, they include the very doctrines by which they are distinguished from Protestants. "The complete rule of faith," says a distinguished Romanist, "is scripture joined with tradition, which if Protestants would admit all the other controversies between us and them would soon cease." "It may be proved," says Mr. Keble, " to the satisfaction of any reasonable mind, that not a few fragments yet remain, very precious and sacred fragments of the unwritten teaching of the first age of the church. The paramount authority, for example, of the successors of the apostles in church government; the three-fold order established from the beginning; the virtue of the blessed eucharist as a commemorative sacrifice; infant baptism; and above all, the Catholic doctrine of the most Holy Trinity, as contained in the Nicene creed. All these, however surely confirmed from scripture, are yet ascertainable parts of the primitive unwritten system of which we enjoy the benefit." "Without its aid [i. e. of primitive tradition] humanly speaking, I do not see how we could now retain either real inward communion with our Lord through his apostles, or the very outward face of God's church and kingdom among us. Not to dwell on disputable cases, how but by the tradition and the practice of the early church can we demonstrate the observance of Sunday as the holiest day, or the permanent separation of the clergy from the people as a distinct order? Or where, except in the primitive liturgies, a main branch of that tradition, can we find assurance, that in the holy eucharist, we consecrate as the apostles did, and consequently that the cup of blessing which we bless is the communion of the blood of Christ, and the bread which we break is the communion of the body of Christ ?" This, in the language of the sect, means, How but by tradition can we establish the doctrine of the real presence? Again the same writer says, "The points of Catholic consent, known by tradition, constitute the knots and ties of the whole system; being such as these: the canon of scripture, the full doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation, the oblation and consecra

See Goode, vol. i., p. 90.

† Keble, Sermon on Tradition, p. 32.

Ib., p. 38.