But now, the question is, how can we possibly imagine that the HOLY GHOST can accredit _both_ these opposing systems, and the advocates of _both_, so essentially differing from each other? For, _either_ the whole system of the Protestant Reformation, and of our Church as Protestant, is one enormous, awful, and tremendous error; or Anglo-catholics are doubly dishonest, first to the Church of England, which they still subscribe to; and secondly to the TRUTH of GOD according to our confession of faith. The decision of the question may be suspended for a moment. _b_. The more we inquire into this subject, the wider will the difference appear to be. There is one most vital part of it, on which I will not say much; because it is so generally heard of, and amongst ourselves so easily understood. I mean the union, by the Anglo-catholics, of tradition with Holy Scripture as the Rule of Faith, {13a} in direct contradiction (as I think) to our sixth Article. It is contradictory also to testimony upon testimony from their own favourite Fathers and Divines, {13b} as well as the Reformers; and even to the plainest testimony of Holy Scripture itself. “From I child,” says the SPIRIT of GOD by St. Paul to Timothy, “thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee _wise unto salvation_ though faith which is in CHRIST JESUS. All Scripture is given by inspiration of GOD; and is profitable for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of GOD may be PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED unto all good works.” {14} Here, in particular, an opposition of sentiments appears upon a vital point, in which the HOLY GHOST, in the very nature of things, can only take one side. But they _want_ the tradition, and therefore they must have it. It supports superstitions, which Scripture will not. And the difficulty of explaining _ignota per ignotiora_ aggravates the importance of a present priesthood to explain both, as may seem good to them, without the possibility of popular private judgment being exercised on their interpretations and conclusions. _c_. Again; their doctrine of mystery in religion, putting, (by a strange mutation,) the most obvious things for the deepest, is made particularly to produce a comparative silence respecting the atonement of the LORD JESUS CHRIST. It is remarkable that they should choose for the example of this mysterious reserve, the very subject concerning which the Apostle St. Paul declares to the Corinthians, “I am determined not to know anything _among you_, save JESUS CHRIST, and Him crucified:” “We preach not ourselves, but CHRIST JESUS the LORD:” “We preach CHRIST _crucified_!” {15a} But then, _their_ Christ crucified, by a painful perversion, is shown to be _self_-crucified; tears, and penances, and mortifications constituting their substitution for sin, (atonement I cannot call it;) while CHRIST is kept back, chiefly for mere sacramental exhibition. {15b}