verily," &c.-Here then, not only do the authors of this formulary themselves advance this absurdity, but they compel the poor child, as they have hitherto compelled so many millions-compelled, during so many successive generations, the far greater part of the population of the whole kingdom, and done what depended upon them towards compelling all future generations to the end of time, -to pronounce his assent to it, and his approbation of it.

Now then, once more, if so it be, that it is in the power of any three persons, under the name of Sponsors, to take possession of a child-a new-born child-and bind it, force it, to believe this set of Articles-how should it not be equally in their power to force it to believe any other set of Articles !—to believe, for example, the direct reverse of these same Articles ?-If it be in their power, thus to force a child,―to force as many children as they please,—to believe a set of Articles which they call "the Christian faith,” how should it not be in their power to force it to believe a set of Articles, for example, of the Mahometan faith?

Here then is a notion, which strikes-(for does it not strike?)—at the root of all religion as well as all morality: and, forasmuch as, in giving utterance to this mass of absurdity, the child is forced to say that he believes it,—while, at his years, at any rate, to believe it is not possible,-thus it is that the duty and practice of lying forms part of every Church of England child's first lesson:-forms part?— Yes-forms a part, though but a part, of what he is taught, -but forms nearly the whole of what-let us hope at least-it is possible to him to learn from it.

Command, immediately following upon the fourth question-" Rehearse the Articles of thy Belief."

66

Answer." I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: And in "Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord, who was "conceived by the Holy Ghost (1), born of the Virgin Mary (2), suffered under Pontius Pi

66

66

late(3), was crucified, dead, and buried (4), He "descended into hell (5); the third day he rose "again from the dead, He ascended into heaven, "and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; From thence he shall come to judge "the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost (6); the holy Catholic Church (7); the "communion of Saints (8); the forgiveness of sins (9); the resurrection of the body, and the "life everlasting. Amen."

66

OBSERVATIONS.

Of the three declarations of persuasion, which, under the name of Creeds, are all adopted into, and make part of the Church of England Liturgy, this,-which by universal confession falsely (1), yet not the less universally, is called the Apostles' Creed,-is one.

In relation to this instrument, as here placed and employed, two questions naturally present themselves—

1. The set of opinions here stated as deduced from the text of holy writ, are they rightly deduced from holy writ? Do they in holy writ find a sufficient warrant ?

If yes, is it right and useful to take the whole of the instrument, as it stands,-and thus, at the tenderest age, force it into the mouths of children?

Of these questions, the first does not in any peculiar manner belong to this place: for the present at least it may therefore be dismissed.

In relation to the other question, a few observations may be not altogether without their use.

(1). [Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost.]—Not to dispute the matter of fact-the child-is it in the nature of the case that, of this conception, any conception at all should be entertained by the child, by whom the answer is lisped?

(2). [Born of the Virgin Mary.]—The like question to this clause.-Born of a Virgin?Yes: viz. of a woman who was once a virgin: but, if that be what is here to be understood, so was every man that was ever born. Born without prejudice to her virginity?-she remaining after the birth as entirely a virgin as she was before? Is this a matter, the conception of which is, to a pupil, at such an age, in the number of things possible?—at such an age— not to speak of any less early age. Admitting the possibility, the attempt to convey an idea such as this, can it in any way be of use?

(3). [Suffered under Pontius Pilate.]-To a child at such an age, the name of the Roman governor, under whose government the suffering took place-the remembrance of it, is it of any particular use?

(4). [Was crucified, dead and buried.] Crucifixion— burial-in neither of these two facts is there any thing but what, at a very early age, a child may be capable of comprehending without much difficulty.-But death? the death of whom?-the death of a God?-What? a God? a God of our own die?-Much about this time, perhaps a

с

little earlier, perhaps a little later, it may have happened to the child to hear of the Gods of the heathens-Gods in multitudes-not one of them subject to death. In such a case how inferior will this comparatively new God be apt to appear to him, in comparison of the least of these ancient ones? But if God the Son was thus mortal, what should preserve his Father from being mortal too? If it was the Son's turn to die at that time, may it not one of these days be the Father's turn? and then what is to become of the world, and all that live in it?

For the removal of this difficulty, what answer is left, but the doctrine of the two natures? Jesus (the child must be told) had two natures-the human and the divine: he was a man and a God, that is the God-for there is but one God-at the same time. It was the man only that was crucified, and, dying under the operation, was then buried. The God did not die: in the case of God, no such thing as death took place: it is not in the nature of God, that is to say, of the one God, to die. Well, then, while one of these persons, viz. the man, was dying, the other of them, the God, the one God, whereabouts was he? Have a care, child, what you say. Two persons? no such thing. Man one, God one: these one and one, which you in your ignorance take for two, are not two persons: they are but one.-How but one person? One man, is not that one person? and one God, is not that another person? One and one, do they not make two? -In answer to any such questions, nothing remains but to chide the poor child for his ignorance-to insist upon his understanding in this case the difference between a nature and a person, and thereupon to plague him till he declares himself satisfied, that though Jesus had two natures, he had but one person, and that, in that instance at least, so far as personality was concerned, a God—no, not a God,

but God-yes God, and man together, were one and the

same.

:

Now, to any practical purpose, whether this or any part of it be true or no, is not, to child or man, worth inquiry. How should it be? For to human conduct, take it in any of these ways, what difference does it make? But, in regard to all this, or any part of this, to force a child to declare to declare most solemnly and seriously, that he believes it believes it just as he believes in the existence of the person, by whose words and gestures the words are forced into his mouth; and this in a case, in which any such belief is as plainly impossible! In this lies the mischief:-and, so long as in a habit of falsehood and insincerity, and that a universal one, there is any thing mischievous, this mischief will be as real, as the pretended belief is false.

(5). [He descended into hell.]—Of the matter of fact here asserted, the truth being admitted—(though for the admitting it no warrant was ever so much as attempted to be found in any part of Scripture, that bears any relation to Jesus, and though as well might it have been asserted, that, while a visit was then paid to hell by Jesus, a visit was at the same time paid to heaven by the Devil)—still, on this, as on so many preceding and so many succeeding occasions, comes the question-supposing the fact ever so well established, to what possible good use force a child, as soon as it can speak, to say that it believes this, or so much as use any endeavours to cause it actually to believe any such thing?

When, against this proposition, the monstrous absurdity of it, coupled with its utter destituteness of all warrant from Scripture, is brought to view, the observation made by way of answer-and that probably enough a true one,