generation with an awful control over the spiritual privileges of the succeeding, has annexed subsequent perplexity as a punishment for the admission of each new error. This is seen in the history of His Church, as well as of individuals. It is very remarkable to trace from how early a date much interpretation of the Scripture is derived; and that, where such interpretation has not been at all obvious, and so has probably been inherited: and, again, how, when any innovation has been introduced, it also acquires an authority from the personal character or talents of its author, and from authority, prescription; so that, henceforth, (unless the error be speedily suppressed) two systems are perpetuated in the Church, equally traditionary, but the one of late origin, the other ancient, and, until of late, universal. Thus, with regard to the main texts relating to Baptism, until the unhappy innovation of Zuingli, in the 16th century, the whole Church knew but of one sense belonging to them. The whole Church of God, from India to Britain, as expressing itself by the Fathers or its Liturgies, for fifteen centuries, took in one sense the words of our Redeemer, "Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit." But when a man arose, to whom circumstances, and talents, and zeal against error, gave extensive influence, and with a new theory of the Sacraments, introduced a new exposition of our Redeemer's words, thenceforth, a new path was formed; and this too having been tracked by men of great name, and trodden by others of deep piety, those who are ignorant of antiquity, or of the value of its universal agreement, are perplexed which to choose. They have now to decide between two beaten tracks, instead of following simply the footsteps of their fathers.
Under these circumstances, mere controversy, for the most part, does harm. Each party is persuaded of the truth of that system or exposition, which he has inherited, because he has inherited it, or because it has come to him from
