Oxford writers,) with arguments drawn from the holy Fathers, of which they have just undertaken a new translation in English. These gentlemen labor to restore the ancient Catholic liturgy, the breviary (which many of them recite daily) fasting, the monastic life, and many other religious practices. Moreover, they teach the insufficiency of the Bible as a rule of faith-the necessi ty of tradition and of ecclesiastical authority-the real presence -prayers for the dead-the use of images-the priests power of absolution the sacrifices of the mass-devotion to the Virgin; and many other Catholic doctrines in such sort as to leave but little difference between their opinion and the true faith, and which becomes less and less every day. Faithful, redouble your prayers that this happy disposition may be increased." Here we have the opinion from head quarters, as to the Romanism of these efforts. It is, enough, I think, to show, that their authors have fallen into the awful gulf of Papacy. The testimony of Dr. Fisk, written at Oxford while these tracts were being issued, will be interesting to many. After commenting upon the doctrine of "succession" as now advocated by the Oxford divines, he adds "Indeed, the arrogancy of the Church of England in these matters cannot be tolerated. It is subversive of some of those best principles on which Protestants, in general, depend for the spread of the gospel, and promotive of the most arrogant and exclusive claims of the Church of Rome. I cannot conceive how the premises of the successionists in the Church can be granted, without leading directly to the Romish Church, as the one most unquestionably entitled to the character of the true Church. I met, in Italy, a clerical gentleman from Natchez, United States, who had given up his charge as a (Protestant) Episcopal minister, and, with his wife and two children, had gone on a pilgrimage to Rome to find the true Church; and on Palm-Sunday he formally renounced his Protestantism, and took upon him the Roman yoke. The reasons he assigned to me for this, for I had many long and faithful dialogues with him on the subject were precisely those which the high Church clergy in England and America assign for claiming to be the exclusive Church of Christ; if the succession of the priesthood and the line of bishops from the Apostles be the only criterion of the true Church, then truly, the Church of Rome has the strongest claims, and all who dissent from her are schismatics and heretics."-(Travels in Europe, p. 576.)

These Oxford tracts upon which we have commented, have been republished in this country, circulated by the leading clergy of the Protestant E. Church, defended by the New-York Review, the accredited organ of the high Church interest here, and the New-York Churchman, established at the instance of the bishop of the Diocese, in all their most offensive features; and their au

thors eulogized by the Rector of St. James' Church, Batavia, N. Y. Have I not then shown, from the tracts themselves, from the testimony of Prelates and Laymen in the Church of England, and the Protestant Episcopal Church, and from Rome herself, that Oxford Tractarians and their coadjutors were the desseminators and advocates of more than semi-popery? The reader will now judge, with what truth Mr. Bolles has published me to the world as having applied to these gentlemen, “undeserved, unworthy and reproachful epithets;" and that too, purely ad movendam invidiam, to inflame the minds of the people; to "excite prejudice and arouse the indignation of community against THE Church." Is not the opposite of this statement true, that he has brought the charge, purely ad movendam invidiam against me? Have I said any more, yea as much, as the tracts will warrant; as much as his holiness, the Pope; as much as a large class of his own clergy, his own prelates, his own papers, have said? Verily, if I am justly charged with using reproachful names, I am in honorable company; and with such a man as bishop Mcllvane, so far in my advance, I shall but little fear the anathemas that have or may be thundered forth from the Rector of St. James'! In charging me with using "reproachful names," has he not brought his own prelates and clergy under the same condemnation? This, however, is nothing strange or new with the successionists, where excommunication and murder have been the common means resorted to, to jostle the incumbent out of the line, from St. Peter and make room for his rival in prelatical supremacy. Mr. B. must settle this attack upon his own ministers in his own way, as he would not thank a "dissenter" to interfere in adjusting their family broils and schisms. Even a "pretender," while reading the soft words and mild acts of these apostolic successors-these monopolizers of God's mercies, can but smile at their constant prating about the perfect peace, and unity that exists in this "one visible Church of Christ." Surely their leading periodicals have for a few of the past years added some choice specimens of brotherly kindness and love to those that before ornamented the succession road of prelatical domination.

And now I leave it with the reader to judge, whether in this issue, made by Mr. B., I am guilty or not, of using "reproachful terms"; and whether the public have not some reason to fear that the Rector "has fallen (or is falling) into the horrible pit of Romanism"?*

Is it true, what I hear, that the Agent of Mr. Bolles in making sale, in a neighboring city, of the work I am now reviewing, presented it to the Papists of that place as a Roman Catholic work, written with a view to put down these schismatics, who are so much in the way of the Church in this country? Is it true, that the Romish priest of that city, pronounced the position Mr. B. had taken against the Methodists, and the arguments he employed to sustain

66

We are now prepared to consider Mr. Bolles' assertion, that this Oxford effort is very similar in its nature and circumstances" to that of Mr. Wesley. I shall not go extensively into a comparison of these two efforts, put forth at Oxford; as the idea is so ludicrous as scarcely to warrant a serious consideration. Nothing but the fact, that it is here presented by a grave minister to sustain a charge against another, will justify a notice of it. What is the work in which the Oxford divines are now engaged? Some part of it is thus described in Blackwood's Magazine:"The questions in debate now are, whether men shall turn their heads to the east, or to some other quarter of the compass, during the reading of the creeds? Whether the clergy shall wear little crosses on the tips of their scarfs? Whether they shall put the bread and wine on the table, in the chancel, with their own hands or by the hands of the Church Warden? Whether they shall put them primarily on a little table, apart, or on a recess in the wall? Whether they shall make a bow to them as they advance to the table, or omit that piece of politeness? The Rev. Mr. Townsend it seems, had said cursorily, that all these tricks savored of Popery. Dr. Pusey, for it is no less than the Hebrew professor and canon of Christ's Church who feels aggrieved, proceeds, formally, to vindicate the orthodoxy of these prodigiously childish persons, who think they are thus restoring the purity of the church. Hume, in his history observes with due and keen contempt, that 'the most furious quarrels of the sectaries were about surplices, rails to the communion table, the position of the reading desk, and such other trivialities.' And are we to have all this nonsense renewed; and solemn men, in doctors hoods, think that they are not committing the most arrant foolery, by scribbling, either for or against them; and all this frippery; when the very existence of the Church is at hazard? When a rabble of legislators, in the streets, are howling for her plunder. Let Oxford leave pompous trifles of their obscure squabbles and add something manly, honest and rational to the defense of christianity." Says Dr. Fisk, "Mr. Hill and his coadjutors have engaged in writing and publishing tracts of late, some of which fell into my hands-and what, kind reader, do you think is the object of these zealous tract distributors?-not to get unbelieving sinners converted-not to teach the important experimental and practical doctrines of the Gospel, but to impress the common people with the danger and heresy of going to the meetings of the dissenters. Whatever may be the character of the Parish Cler

it, to be similar to that taken by the Church of Rome at the Reformation, and the arguments she used against the Reformers? Whether the Agent, whom Mr. B. says has been baptized in the Church, and confirmed in the Church," exceeded or not, the instructions he had received from his employer, I am not able to say.

gyman, his is the true ministry; the dissenter is a schismatic, and must not be countenanced. This is the great work of the party at Oxford. This is a leading feature in the great reform that is said to be going on among the clergy of the establishment. With this spirit and doctrine, what, after all, can be hoped from such a Church for the conversion of the world.”—(Travels in Europe.) The Oxford divines are laboring to show, that the bread and wine are tran or consubstantiated; so that in burning that bread in a fire, or pouring out that wine upon a consecrated pavement, the body of Christ is burned and the blood of Christ poured out.-(Dr. Hook.) That, the minister should first turn his back to the people in prayer, bowing to the altar; that stoles, scarfs, etc. with crosses upon them, should be introduced, (and, as Dr. Pusey says, gradually lest the people resist it.) That purgatory, merit of good works, prayers for the dead, celibacy of the clergy defended. That, the clergy should return to the cassock as their ordinary dress, which say they, "can be made of silk or of cloth or of any other appropriate material according to the taste of the wearer. Cloth or stuff, cassocks about the length of a top coat, and open behind, would be suitable for walking, riding and general morning wear. A longer cassock of silk or of cloth and not open behind, would form the full or evening dress. In all cases, the sash should be of silk, about two yards long, fastened on the left side by a simple knot, and the ends hanging down." And, this latter subject is noticed by "the Banner of the Cross," (a paper Mr. B. is much interested in circulating) as exciting much interest "among the more sober and pious minded clergy and laity" of the Church of England. Such, then, is the object of these Oxford tractators, in their present effort: and so "strikingly similar in its nature to that of Mr. Wesley"! A reformation of the English Church to the observance of these Roman fooleries, from which, by heretical reformers Cranmer, Ridley, and others, it had wickedly departed! These, doctors, in looking over the national establishment, saw it had become too protestant in its faith and practice; had departed too far from Rome, and, hence, felt themselves moved to restore, if possible, the ornaments of this "Papal frippery" lost in the reformation, and thus become worthy of being called the eldest daughter, of what her organizers denominated "the mother of harlots." This is to be effected by scattering broad cast, over the land, tracts in which Rome is held up as having claims upon our gratitude and deference the reformers and the reformation, the prayer-book, and the thirty-nine articles denounced, as "the production of an uncatholic age. Tradition, succession, sacraments, invocation of saints, sign of the cross, clerical celibacy, Pope's supremacy, etc., held up as the essentials to union with Christ here and hereafter!

What was the object of Mr. Wesley? "In the latter end of the year 1739, eight or ten persons came to Mr. Wesley, in London, who appeared to be deeply convinced of sin, and earnestly groaning for redemption, they desired-as did two or three more the next day-that he would spend some time with them in prayer, and advise them how to flee from the wrath to come, which they saw continually hanging over their heads. That he might have more time for this great work, he appointed a day when they might all come together, which, from thence forward, they did every week; namely, on Thursday, in the evening. To these and as many more as desired to join with them, (for their number increased daily) he gave those advices, from time to time, which he judged most needful for them; and they always concluded their meeting with prayer suited to their several necessities." They claimed to be "a company of men having the form and seeking the power of godliness."-(General Rules.) Mr, Wesley saw the defect of experimental and practical religion in the clergy and laity of the English Church, and he sought to remove this defect-to restore the blessings of primitive christianty-to spread scriptural holiness through that land and through the world; not by a "uniform habit, open or not open behind," not by a restoration of Popish mummeries; but, by arousing the people to seek the power of godliness. This was the object of his studies and labors. He laboured, not to turn men to Romanism; but to God! He referred men, not to the tradition of the fathers; but to the scriptures, as the rule, and all sufficient rule,. both of faith and practice. He taught, that men must be regenerated; not by an outward reformation merely, nor the change in the state and relation of a child at its baptism, but the renewal of the heart in righteousness and true holiness, by the power of the Holy Spirit—a renewal preceded by repentance and faith, and the forgiveness of sins, and accompanied by unutterablepeace and joy, and followed by a life of purity and' uprightness.. With love and holy, active zeal, he went forth preaching the gos pel in the open air, in private houses, under the shade of a tree, in neglected villages, and hamlets; enduring the pinchings of hunger and want, and the bitter persecution of a wicked, foxhunting, gambling, swearing, drunken, priesthood! Preaching, not that inen should turn their heads to the east or any other quarter of the compass,, but, that they should turn their hearts to God! Not that the clergy should wear little crosses on the tips of their scarfs; but that men should cross the carnal nature, should bear that cross which a denial of all ungodliness and wordly lust imposes. Not that they should make a bow to the bread and wine as they advance to the table; but that they should bow their hearts to God! He preached, not about "surplices and rails to the communion table, the position of the reading desk, or any