rians is, that every one who loves the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, and maintains a holy life, whatever may be the mistakes into which he may fall, or the prejudices against particular parts of evangelical truth and order which he may entertain; whatever the disadvantages under which he may labour, with respect to his ecclesiastical connexions; or even if he were placed in circumstances in which he never saw a place of public worship, a minister of the gospel, or a church officer of any kind, in his life; that every such person is in covenant with God, and has that title to salvation which is given by the promise of a faithful God to every sincere believer. How much error, how much infirmity, how much deviation from the external order which God hath appointed in his house, is consistent with true faith, we know not, nor has any Presbyterian, with whose person or writings I am acquainted, ever attempted to decide. But that every one who has sincere faith in Christ, is in covenant with God, they, with one voice, proclaim and teach*."

In Letter VII. Dr. Miller defends the character of the venerable Calvin in a very satisfactory manner. No man has suffered more abuse from the enemies of evangelical truth and order, than that great and pious Reformer. He has even been forced by his persecutors to give testimony in favour of prelacy. The injustice of this procedure Dr. Miller has fully exposed in this Letter. We quote a part of the third Letter referring to the same subject.

"This is not the only instance in which Dr. Bowden entirely perverts the language of Calvin, and represents him as delivering opinions directly opposite to those which he really does deliver. Of this, more in a future letter, in which the writings of Calvin, so far as they relate to Episcopacy, will be particularly considered. In the mean time, I cannot forbear to notice a single specimen, so gross and remarkable, that I could scarcely credit the testimony of my own senses, when I found it advanc ed by both my opponents, not only with confidence, but even with sarcastic and reproachful exultation, as a great concession from the reformer of Geneva in their favour.

"In his Commentary on Titus i. 5. Calvin speaks largely of the mission of that Evangelist to the Churches of Crete. Dr. Bowden and Mr. How wish to persuade their readers, that, in in these remarks, he fairly gives up the point that Titus was a • Pages 56-60.

Diocesan Bishop, or Prelate. Accordingly they both represent him as saying- Hence we learn, that there was not any equality among the ministers of the Church, but that one was placed over the rest in authority and counsel.' On this pretended quotation from Calvin, Mr. How observes, Here the divine institution of superior and inferior grades of ministers, is asserted in unqualified terms,' p. 63. Dr. Bowden quotes the passage from Calvin, exactly in the same manner, and makes precisely the same use of it with Mr. How.

"You will, no doubt, be filled with astonishment, my brethren, to find that the passage from which these gentlemen profess to make this quotation, is in fact as follows: 'Presbyters, or Elders, it is well known, are not so denominated on account of their age, since young men are sometimes chosen to this office, as for instance, Timothy; but it has ever been customary, in all languages, to apply this title, as a term of honour, to all Rulers. And, as we gather from the first Epistle to Timothy, that there were two kinds of Elders; so here the context shows that no other than teaching Elders are to be understood; that is, those who were ordained to teach; because the same persons are presently called Bishops. It may be objected, that too much power seems to be given to Titus, when the Apostle commands him to appoint ministers over all the Churches. This, it may be said, is little less than kingly power; for, on this plan, the right of choice is taken away from the particular Churches, and the right of judging in the case from the College of Pastors; and this would be to profane the whole of the sacred discipline of the Church. But the answer is easy. Every thing was not intrusted to the will of Titus as an individual, nor was he allowed to impose such Bishops on the Churches, as he pleased: but he was commanded to preside in the elections as Moderator, as it is necessary for some one to do. This is a mode of speaking exceedingly common. Thus a Consul, or Regent, or Dictator, is said to create Consuls, because he convenes assemblies for the purpose of making choice of them. So also Luke uses the same mode of speaking concerning Paul and Barnabas in the Acts of the Apostles; not that they alone authoritatively appointed Pastors over the Churches, without their being tried or approved; but they ordained suitable men, who had been elected or chosen by the people. We learn also from this place, that there was not then such an equality among the ministers of the Church, but that some one might preside in authority and counsel. This, however, was nothing like the tyrannical and

anscriptural Prelacy which reigns in the Papacy. The plan of the Apostles was extremely different.'

"Here is not only a passage taken out of its connexion, and interpreted in a sense diametrically opposite to the whole scope and strain of the writer; but, what is much worse, the passage itself is mistranslated, and made to speak a language essentially different from the original. Mr. How may possi bly plead that he never saw the original; that he quoted entirely on the authority of some other person. But Dr. Bowden cannot make the same plea. He inserts in the margin the very words which he mistranslates and perverts! What are we to think of such a fact? Is Dr. B. unable to translate a plain piece of Latin? or did he design to deceive? He may choose which alternative he pleasest."

We entirely approve of the determination expressed by Dr. Miller in the concluding Letter.

"I have now, my brethren, completed my examination of such parts of Dr. Bowden's and Mr. How's Letters as I deem worthy of notice. It was my intention, after the example of the former of these gentlemen, to collect and present in one view, a catalogue of the misrepresentations,' 'unfounded assertions,'' mistakes,' and 'omissions,' with which their pages abound. But finding these misrepresentations,' &c. to be so numerous, that a mere list of them, without comment, would fill another long letter; and many of them of so disreputable and offensive a character as not to be contemplated, even by opponents, without much commisseration for their authors; I have determined to spare myself the pain of writing, and you of reading such a Letter; and here to take a final leave of the subject. I engaged in this controversy, without the least expectation of convincing Episcopalians, or of bringing over to my own opinion an individual of that communion; but solely for the purpose of satisfying and confirming Presbyterians. My object, I have the pleasure to know, is attained; and perceiving no further advantage in prolonging the controversy, I now lay down the pen; nor can I foresee any event that will ever tempt me to resume it on this subject.

"I take for granted that all the gentlemen who have already appeared as my opponents, will again come before the public in reply to these Letters; and will endeavour to persuade their readers that I have again misrepresented them and their cause, and again laid myself open to the heaviest charges

• "Here Calvin not only represents Prelacy as a tyrannical and unscriptural system, but evidently considers it as a part of the corruptions of Popery." Page 112-115.

and the severest reproach. All this and more I deliberately expect from gentlemen who have generally manifested a wish to have the last word. Should my expectation be realized, it will give me no uneasiness; nor shall I ever, (according to my present views,) take the least public notice of any thing that they may say. If, indeed, I should hereafter discover any important errors in the foregoing pages, (trivial ones, which do not affect the main question, will probably be discovered and pointed out,) I shall consider it as a duty which I owe to you to correct them. But with the controversy, as such, it is my firm resolution to have nothing more to do. This resolution is formed and expressed, not out of any disrespect to the gentlemen in question; but from a deliberate conviction that enough has been said on the Presbyterian side of the argument; and that my time and pen may be hereafter devoted to objects more agreeable to myself, and more useful to others*."

A defence rarely proves as interesting to the public as an original work. It requires an examination of objections under all the circumstances in which they are offered, and necessarily leads to personalities. Dr. Miller has, however, conducted his defence, in such a manner as to render it no less valuable for the illustration and support of the Presbyterian order, than for the conclusive manner in which he refutes his opponents.

We owe it, however, to the public, and to the author himself, to state a mistake into which he has fallen in his criticisms on Mr. How↑.

Dr. Miller accuses Mr. How of altering a passage of the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church, in his quotation; and he contrasts the quotation with the words of the 10th chapter of the Confession. The very words, however, used by Mr. How, are to be found in the Larger Catechism, answer to question 60, and ought to have been as much respected, by Dr. Miller, as the words of that chapter in the Confession which treats of the same subject. They are both of equal authority in Page 430, 431. t p. 64.

the church; and the import of both passages is precisely the same. As this mistake does not in the least degree affect either the principles or the argument of Dr. Miller, we attribute it entirely to inadvertency. We confess that we were surprised to find even this mistake, however, in a writer of such remarkable accuracy.

We consider this work as a valuable acquisition to the literature of the Christian church. It is an able defence of the Christian ministry against Prelatical usurpation. It ought to be in the hands of every one who possesses the work of which it is a Continuation and Defence; and, indeed, of every one who is anxious to become an intelligent Christian upon subjects connected with church order. It must deservedly occupy a high rank among the controversial writings of the age; and if it be any honour to the author to have vanquished his antagonists, this work shall always be considered by competent judges as entitling him to a triumph.