PREFACE.

SINCE the decision of the Council of Trent, that "traditions should be received as of equal authority with the Scriptures," the subject of the present work has been one of animated, and often of angry controversy. The great labour of the Romish party has been to show the deficiency of the Scriptures as a rule of faith, and the perfect adaptation of the traditions of the church to supply that deficiency. On the other hand, Protestants have laboured to prove the suitableness and sufficiency of the Scriptures to teach men the way of salvation, and the utter worthlessness of tradition as an infallible guide in matters of faith.

This question constituted an important portion of the battle-ground of the Reformation. Upon the one side were the " Catholics," and on the other the great champions of truth-Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Beza, Knox, Cranmer, Peter Martyr, and Jewel. Though the defenders of the. Reformation often appealed to antiquity, they did not make this

appeal as to an infallible record, or a recognised supreme judge of controversy. But finding the Romish dogmas unsupported by the purest and best of the fathers, they met their opponents upon their own ground, and successfully fought them with their own weapons. No one carried on the war with the Romanists upon patristical ground more successfully than Bishop Jewel. The defenders of tradition, in our own time, have not a little exulted in this, as though the learned bishop had sanctioned an appeal to tradition as an authoritative rule in controversies. This conclusion is, however, gratuitous without the least foundation in fact. I have endeavoured to meet traditionists in the same way in this work; but I hope the fact will not be supposed to imply that I have no faith in the principles for which I contend from the opening to the close of the volume, namely, that the Bible is the divine rule of faith and practice, and that what is called tradition is totally without authority, any further than it harmonizes with, and is built upon, the Holy Scriptures.

I do not, however, fully endorse all that the reformers have left upon record, upon the authority and right use of the fathers, and the power of the church, to determine controversies. Sometimes they concede too much, and at others they do

not allow enough. They were often driven by circumstances to see how much they could admit without sacrificing the truth, and sometimes went further in their concessions than was quite consistent with their fundamental principles. At other times, in the heat of controversy, they took positions, and let fall statements, which were taken up by fanatics and pushed out to extremes which they never contemplated, and which they were the first to rebuke. The reformers, in the main, fought the battle well, and we should venerate their memory and their precious remains. They were, however, menuninspired men-and their decisions are to be measured and tried, the same as all other merely human compositions, by the undeviating standard of truth.

The late revival of the Romish controversy, both by the professed adherents of the pope, and real Romanists under the name and style of "Anglican Catholics," has brought back the old elements of discord-dug up, from the rubbish of former centuries, the Popish armoury which the mighty champions of the glorious Reformation had broken to pieces, and which the world had reason to suppose would only be resumed by the faithful servants of his holiness in their last effort to recover their former glory.

From this cause we are brought under the necessity of fighting over again the battles of the sixteenth century. Instead of improving all our time and strength in pressing our aggressions against paganism, infidelity, and wickedness in its various forms, we must pause to demolish a corrupt form of Christianity, which throws itself up, like a brazen mountain, between us and our wonted field of labour.

The circulation of the Oxford Tracts and kindred publications, in this country, together with the progress which their doctrines have made in certain quarters, has awakened great interest among the churches. And such is the bold front of the Pusey party, such their extravagant assumptions, and such their lofty pretensions, that "the sects," as they are scornfully denominated, have naturally been aroused to a new and thorough investigation of the grounds of their faith.

The question of the supremacy of the Scriptures alone as the rule of faith and practice is the Thermopyla of the great controversy between Romanists and Tractarians on the one hand, and the different evangelical Protestant churches on the other. It is consequently of great importance that the whole question should be well understood.

I have endeavoured, in the present work, to pre

sent all the essential features and phases of the traditionary system, and to show the circumstances of their development and application. In many instances the mere unmasking of an error is its refutation. This is the case with many parts of the system I here oppose, and indeed the same may be said of the system as a whole. I have accordingly drawn it out as set forth in acknowledged authorities, and endeavoured to show its practical bearings upon the great system of faith and practice set forth in the Scriptures.

This, however, in such a controversy, is not sufficient. The arguments presented in support of the heresy must be met and refuted, and those which bear against it presented clearly and forcibly. I have endeavoured to imbody in this volume all that is essential to the question, though very much that is appropriate, and has more or less weight, is necessarily excluded. have intended to make the argument, as a whole, a perfect one, and to look fairly in the face every thing of importance presented by the supporters of the traditionary theory.

I

It will be seen that I make frequent reference to the learned and able work of Mr. Goode. This powerful champion of true Protestantism has rendered great service to the church by his inge