As to many of the anecdotes contained in this publication, many are garbled and distorted, and some of them are, in many of their particulars, palpable falsehoods. The very quotations from the writings of his opponents--though it must be conceded that at this period of great excitement many unguarded expressions have been used by some individuals--are, some of them, so garbled and mangled as scarcely to bear any resemblance to the original, and calculated to convey a meaning very different from what was intended by the writer. Not to dwell any longer on these statements, which occupy a considerable portion of the book, in the chapters on _the Authority of the Church_, and _the Ordination of Christian Ministers_, much will be found so extravagant in its assumptions, as to throw the pretensions of the church of Rome into the shades (within whose pale, if he had any regard for consistency, he ought certainly to have been), and calculated to undermine and overthrow the grounds of the Protestant succession. They are indeed so full of absurdity as to amuse rather than offend, and exhibit in the clearest light the inability of L. S. E. to form a correct judgment, either as to matters of faith or practice. With all the consequence and arrogance which assumed infallibility can induce, he maintains that none ought to be teachers of religion but those who are _authorized_, or otherwise _specially inspired_ of God. According to his definition, an _authorized_ minister is one who has passed through the ordeal of episcopal ordination, and what constitutes that authority is, the _regular succession_ from the times of the apostles to the present period. In order to make this most important discovery of a regular succession, on which, in his estimation, so much depends, I have been employing myself for some time, in rummaging the different volumes of ecclesiastical history within my reach, and endeavouring to trace the succession, from the time of Peter downwards; and upwards from the time of the Reformation. In the former case, there is great confusion in the catalogue of bishops. Few of these are alike; some names of persons are given, who, there is reason to believe, never existed; there are many periods entirely without names; and it is well known, that for some time there were rival popes, each claiming exclusive authority. In tracing these tainted and impure currents, where shall we discover, either before or after the Saxon invasion, the perennial stream which will alone confer sanctity on the priestly office?