phyte renounces his idols, proclaims the glad tidings to his brethren, and assembles around him a little church. Should he turn his steps towards the west, wishing to find some more ancient churches, he there beholds Christians divided into innumerable sects; to which shall he attach himself? According to what principles will he judge of them? Will it not be according to that Gospel with which he is already acquainted, and which he sees is recognised by all? And will be acknowledge, as a true church, that one, in which all is, as it were, reversed, merely because she lays claim to a more direct succession?

All this, sir, seems to me sufficient to satisfy any conscience; but as, probably, your priest will only judge according to the flesh, I will add a few arguments to suit his taste. If he clings so much to succession, let him know that we can boast of it equally with the church of Rome; for notwithstanding the abuses with which it is filled, this church had in the sixteenth century, as at present, preserved the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, original sin, salvation by the blood of Christ, God manifest in the flesh; she has preserved a few bright centers of truth, which is sufficiently proved by the real piety of many of her members. And the offices of bishops and priests, which are unquestionably legitimate, had this additional advantage, that those who were invested with such offices, were bound to preach the truth according to the scriptures. Now, it has often happened since the days of the Apostles, and especially in the sixteenth century, that pastors, enlightened by the word of God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit, have anxiously endeavoured to fulfil their engagements towards God, and to bring back their office and mode of teaching to the model of their first institution, in which they cannot be accused of acting without a commission. When an Arian or Nestorian pastor returned to the apostolic faith, they

were not re-ordained; neither, in the days of Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, &c., were those priests and Levites re-consecrated, who restored the true worship of God, which their idolatrous predecessors had either abolished or corrupted. They removed the mould and dust from the book of the Law, read it to the people, and conformed themselves to it. What more have our Reformers done? Had they started some new doctrine, as the Romanists pretended, a special mission would of course have been necessary, as in the case of Moses and Christ. But what novelties have they taught? They have raised the bushel that covered the candle; they have driven out of the temple the buyers and sellers; they have banished idols from the sanctuary, they have purified the holy place; they have placed in the hands of the people, that book of life which was written for all, and have, I again repeat, taught nothing but what is in exact conformity with it. What necessity then was there for a special mission?

'But it is waste of time to endeavour to justify ourselves in the eyes of the papists. It is we, rather, who have a right to demand from them the proofs of an express mission, to authorize the thousand and one novelties which they have introduced, and still are introducing; to authorize the abolition, the annihilation of those divine truths on the ruins of which they build their vain and impious traditions. Who has given them power to fill the temples with idols, contrary to all the commands of God? To place between God and man as many mediators as they please, while the Scriptures say, there is but One? To teach the doctrine of purgatory, of which not a word is to be found in the whole Bible, and which destroys all the value of the Saviour's blood? То offer prayers and sacrifices for the dead? To appoint feasts, penances, monastic vows, and other human inventions? To forbid marriage? To pretend to

offer, what they call the sacrifice of the mass, when we know that Jesus was offered once for all? To change the institution and intention of the Lord's Supper? To deny the cup to the laity ? &c.

'What is all this, but “another Gospel?" What authority can prove its truth, or make it binding? Were an angel, or even St. Paul himself to announce it, and work a thousand miracles in its support, could "the elect" suffer themselves to be deceived? And must not those who believe these "lying wonders" have received "a spirit of delusion?”

'Even were it possible that such doctrines could be rendered legitimate by the circumstance of a Divine mission, how does Rome prove her claims to such mission? Is it because she sits upon seven hills, and reigns, or has reigned over the kings of the earth? Is it because she is arrayed in purple and scarlet,decked with gold and precious stones, living delicately, in the midst of luxury, fine linen, gold, silver, silk, perfumes, ivory, and scented wood; saying, in her pride, “Behold I sit as a queen?" Is it because her chief ruler sits as God, in the temple of God; and exalts himself as God? Is it because, mistress of the tribes of the earth, she has compelled both small and great to receive her mark; so that none could buy or sell but those who had received her mark, and the number of her name? Is it because, in direct opposition to the Spirit of the Lamb, whose name and character she affects to arrogate to herself, she has made herself drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus? Is it because she has persecuted with the sword, those who would not bow the knee to her image, inventing punishments and tortures, inundating the world with innocent blood, and infamously destroying thousands of copies of the word of life? Oh, M. Laurent, ask me no more! Before you enter into her communion, think of the curses that hang over BABYLON?'

CHAPTER IX.

Valleys of Piedmont-Queyras and Dormilleuse.

We shall open this chapter by some intelligence from Piedmont, contained in a letter from Antoine Blanc, to his brother at Mens. Though not exactly connected with the life of Neff, yet he having in a great degree been the promoter of a better spirit among the Vaudois of Piedmont, the following extracts may not perhaps be ill-placed here.

Entreat all the brethren of your churches, our fellow-pilgrims in this world, to pray for their brethren, the Vaudois of these valleys, during their present trials. The Lord visits and tries us, to know whether the seed has fallen on good ground or in stony places.

The re-unions at the house of M. Meille, take place almost every evening; those of the Sunday afternoon are always well attended, which altogether gives great offence. My sister Mary Vinson, came to see us on New-year's day, and told us that her husband had lately met M in a large company, who said, ‘Beware of following the example of the inhabitants of Lucerne, where I understand Antoine Blanc is at the head of a sect; otherwise; as a member of the Table, I shall take active measures.'

The attendance at M. Meille's re-unions, however, daily increases; though it is true some come from curiosity, and some stay away from fear. All sorts of scandals are afloat; we are accused of an intention of changing our religion, of inventing new doctrines, of worshipping only the Son, and all but denying the Father, &c.

'The Scripture Catechisms, and selections of passages from the New Testament, which M. Neff left with us, are very useful.

'A short time ago, our friend Paul Gai was married. He invited no one to the wedding but his sisters, their friends, and M. M—, pastor of St. Giovannè, and he would have no dancing. In the evening, however, his father, unknown to him, sent for a violin, and in spite of him, a ball began. M. Mwho is seventy-three, wanted to dance with the bride; but she, following her husband's example, refused. This gave great offence to M. M—, who in the name of the Syndic, forbid M. Meille to hold any more re-unions in his house.

The following Sunday, he preached from Psalm 1. 13. "Call upon me in the time of trouble," &c. He told us that we were abandoning our father's faith, that we had broken our promises; that we failed in obedience and respect to our superiors. He compared us to monks, and especially to Jesuits, who under a fair outside had trampled on the Gospel, and bid defiance to morality.

'When M. le pasteur M., came down from the pulpit, M. Meille thanked him ironically for his comparisons. M. embraced him, and declared he had preached in that manner in obedience to the Syndic, who was present; the Syndic then himself strictly forbade the singing of any hymns not in general use. He added, that our ancestors were never accustomed to hold re-unions. M. Meille would have answered, but M. prevented him. M. Meille