Christ "hath loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests to God and his Father."-(Rev. i. 5.) And Peter, alluding to the very passage abused by Korah, Dathan, and Abiram; says, "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation.”—(1 Pet. ii. 9.) And he that despiseth Apostles will not stick to despise also Him that sent them, who defended his disciples for plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath, by claiming for all in communion with Himself, the dignity of the priests who in the temple profaned the Sabbath and were blameless.

Thus the priest's malice recoils upon himself. In the pit which he hath digged is his own foot taken. His charitable endeavour to fasten upon his more honest neighbours the guilt of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, ends in his being convicted of it himself. By shouting "stop thief" rather too zealously, the ingenious pickpocket at last succeeds in turning towards his own felon countenance the inconvenient suspicions of the crowd. It is the priest who imitates the ancient heresiarchs, by jumbling together two different dispensations, and shifting so cunningly the point of view to suit his sinister ambition or base hankering after lucre. It is he, who just as in days of old, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram revolted against Moses the faithful servant over God's house, and Aaron the typical priest; so now amidst the glare of gospel times stirs up rebellion against the Son over his own House, and Him who is called of God an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek. For who is it that grudges Christ the glory of being the sole prophet in his Church, and who bat-like would supplement his sun-bright teaching by the flickering taper of tradition, if not the priest? Who is it that eyes with devilish lust the honours of the One Mediator between God and men, if not the priest? Who is it in fine but the priest that will treasonably pluck at the blood-bought crown-rights of the Redeemer, and will pawn them to the Cæsar if, perchance (so shocked are the ungodly themselves at the unseemliness of the assumption,) he cannot have his way in wearing them as pope, on his own sodden brow. None, if not priests, have ever loved the wages of unrighteousness. None, if not they, have ever trodden in the steps of the first murderer, and run in danger of hell-fire for breaking the sixth commandment, as we learn it from the lips of our Lord, by calling their Christian brethren fools, unfit to have a voice in the affairs of God's kingdom. For they rob the whole laity of that hallowed life in Christ's Church which, to any but an Esau ought to be deemed far more precious than mere animal existence. And none, if not priests, impugn Christ's prophetical, priestly, and kingly dignity in his Church, thus aggravating to gigantic proportions the comparatively venial sin of those who "envied Moses in the camp, and Aaron the saint of the Lord." It is their concern therefore to look to the words of Jude, "Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Korah!"

III.

STATESMEN'S RELIGION.

"EVERY PLANT WHICH MY HEAVENLY FATHER HATH NOT PLANTED, SHALL BE ROOTED UP."-(Matt. xv. 13.)

In those who think a national Church right, dissent is a sin; in those who think it wrong, silence is a shame.

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN;

OR,

THE HANDWRITING over against the candlestick, IN THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE.

IN TIMES of change, commotion, or uncertainty, it is naturally expected that they who are on the high places and watch-towers of Church and State, shall see far and wide, look before and after, and become the beacon-lights of those over whom they officially preside. This is the meaning and purport of, or pretext for, their office itself. right of any Government arises from the usefulness of it. God institutes, he renders available; as everything which plainly adapted to some useful end.

The divine That which he creates is

There is no member of our bodies which we could lose without disadvantage; and so it is with any organization, truly called the body of Christ, his Church. If therefore, episcopacy or pre-eminence termed prelacy be of divine institution, its use will be its proof and defence. The loss of it would be the maiming of the Church; the possession of it would be a manifest blessing.

Where then is the blessedness they boast of, where the security and guidance of this episcopal oversight?

Do our Most Reverend and Right Reverend Prelates, the Lord Archbishops and Lord Bishops of the Church of England, (placed in honour and wealth by the secular Government) prove themselves to be any signal blessing to the clergy and laity of their communion, in the present crisis? This is a question of fact which plain men may understand what is the precise benefit resulting to the people of England from the lofty titles, Îegislative functions, spiritual duties, and wealthy estates conferred by the secular power on the English bishops?

Do they stand forth as the lights of the age, shining in a dark place; can each one of them say-"I was eyes to the blind, and feet was I to the lame?"-(Job. xxix. 15.)

Have these bishops any peculiar insight into truth, are they not bound

down to licensed formularies,-truths or falsehoods ready found for them? Must they not say with BALAAM, (changing only one word,) "HAVE I NOW ANY POWER AT ALL TO SAY ANYTHING? The word that GoVERNMENT putteth in my mouth, THAT shall I speak.-(Num. xxii. 38.) Only Balaam must speak the word that GOD put into his mouth; and hence Balak with true royal supremacy, as the head of his national Church, was angry with Balaam, and said,-" Therefore, now flee thou to thy place: I thought to promote thee unto great honour; but lo THE LORD THY GOD HATH KEPT THEE BACK FROM HONOUR."-(Num. χείν. 11.)

The author of the gospel likewise kept back his followers from such promotion, they were to be rewarded by him whose word they declared and followed. "His servants ye are to whom ye obey," and to him you must look for your wages.

Thus doth the Lord our God keep us back from much honour, as we are to follow our conscience illuminated by the light of his gospel; whilst those who will barter it for worldly dignities, get promoted to high places of spiritual obedience to Government, under the pretence of a spiritual oversight of their dioceses.

The bishops are consequently servants, not rulers; they have a prescribed set of duties, defined by the laws, to which laws they are amenable; the supremacy of the crown is the subserviency of the bishops. Should they exercise any discretionary power, or even a jurisdiction supported by the letter of the Church's law, the Privy Council can open a door into any diocese, by means of a latitude of construction.

The true episcopate is therefore the secular Government, which presides over the bishops. Any person who can read, and write, and spell, could go blamelessly through the mechanical duties of a bishopric; they require neither piety, learning, genius, nor extraordinary discretion.

The highest offices and largest salaries in England, require only the qualifications of the commonest clerkship; and might be fulfilled by a decent errand boy.*

The rule of another profession, would be an infallible guide in this :"and let those that play your clowns, speak no more than is set down for them." (Hamlet.)

This is plain and easy sailing. Accordingly we find the archbishops and bishops of the provinces of Canterbury and York, issuing directions to the clergy of England, to keep the mean between the ritual of the Church and the canon of actual usage,-as the way to compose difference and right the crazy vessel in which they are embarked. Never was a more complete specimen of timidity, narrowness, and inanity, than in the address issued by these dignitaries on the third (instead of the first) day of April, 1851.

Declining to grapple with any great questions of religions truth or national policy, these men advise a free nation respecting the man-millinery of clerical costumes, the trimming of the ecclesiastical beard, the posi

* Some will perhaps object that at least the legislative functions of the bishops require a greater amount of ability: we are not sure of this; since they have only to say content," and "non-content," which being uttered alternately, without reference to the nature of the bill, would equal episcopal performances.

tion and number of footlights in this spiritual theatre; that by ecclesiastical architecture and decorations they may "edify the body of Christ." Their grand panacea for all evils, is to prove their fitness as "stewards of the mysteries of God," by their exactness of concord in the mummeries of men.

This tame and waterish production, the condensed wisdom of four-and twenty bishops, is here presented to our readers; and their eyes are better than ours if they can discern in it either spirit, or wisdom, or eloquence; any one quality indicative of manly earnestness or Christian principle; -anything beyond the logic of a pettyfogging special pleader, engaged in episcopal trimming to "strengthen the side of order" (not of truth,) "by avoiding all unnecessary (!) deviation from the Church's rule." Not the rule of Christ, but the rule of a figment called the Church; which Church, the Church is called upon to obey!

"We the undersigned Archbishops and Bishops of the provinces of Canterbury and York, do most earnestly and affectionately commend the following address to the serious consideration of the clergy of our respective dioceses :

"BELOVED BRETHREN,-We have viewed with the deepest anxiety the troubles, suspicions, and discontents which have of late, in some parishes, accompanied the introduction of ritual observances, exceeding those in common use amongst us.

"We long indulged the hope that, under the influence of charity, forbearance, and a calm estimate of the small importance of such external forms, compared with the blessing of united action in the great spiritual work which is before our Church, these heats and jealousies might by mutnal concessions be allayed. But since the evil still exists, and in one most important feature has assumed a new and more dangerous character, we feel that it is our duty to try whether an earnest and united address on our part may tend, under the blessing of God, to promote the restoration of peace and harmony in the Church.

"The principal point in dispute is this-whether, where the letter of the Rubric seems to warrant a measure of ritual observance, which yet, by long and possibly by unbroken practice, has not been carried out, the clergy are either in conscience required, or absolutely at liberty, to act each upon his own view of the letter of the precept rather than by the rule of common practice. Now, as to this question we would urge upon you the following considerations :-First, that any change of usages with which the religious feelings of a congregation have become associated, is in itself so likely to do harm that it is not to be introduced without the greatest caution; secondly, that beyond this, any change which makes it difficult for the congregation at large to join in the service is still more to be avoided; thirdly, that any change which suggests the fear of still further alterations is most injurious; and fourthly, that according to the rule laid down in the Book of Common Prayer, where anything is doubted or diversely taken 'concerning the manner how to understand, do, and execute the things contained in that book, the parties that so doubt, or diversely take anything, shall alway resort to the Bishop of the diocese, who by his discretion shall take order for the quieting and appeasing of the same, so that the same order be not contrary to anything contained in that book.

"The fair application of these principles would, we believe, solve most of the difficulties which have arisen. It would prevent all sudden and startling alterations; and it woufd facilitate the reception of any change which was really lawful and desirable. We would, therefore, first urge upon our reverend brethren with affectionate earnestness the adoption of such a rule of conduct. We would beseech all who, whether by excess or defect, have broken in upon the uniformity and contributed to relax the authority of our ritual observances, to consider the importance of unity and order, and by common consent to avoid whatever might tend to violate them. In recommending this course as the best under present circumstances, we do not shut our eyes to the evil of even the appearance of any discrepancy existing between the written law and the practice of the Church. But there are many cases where the law may be variously interpreted; and we believe that we are best carrying out her own principles in urging you to have recourse, in all such cases, to the advice of her Chief Pastors.

"But beyond mere attempts to restore an unusual strictness of ritual observance, we have to deal with a distinct and serious evil. A principle has of late been avowed and acted on which, if admitted, would justify far greater and more uncertain changes. It is this-that as the Church of England is the ancient Catholic Church settled in this land before the Reformation, and was then reformed only by the casting away of certain strictly defined corruptions; therefore, whatever form or usage existed in the Church before its reformation may now be freely introduced and observed, unless there can be alleged against it the distinct letter of some formal prohibition.

"Now, against any such inference from the undoubted identity of the Church before and after the Reformation, we feel bound to enter our clear and unhesitating protest. We believe that at the Reformation the English Church not only rejected certain corruptions but also, without in any degree severing her connection with the ancient Catholic Church, intended to establish one uniform ritual, according to which her public services should be conducted. But it is manifest that a license such as is contended for is wholly incompatible with any uniformity of worship whatsoever, and at varience with the universal practice of the Catholic Church, which has never given to the officiating ministers of separate congregations any such large discretion in the selection of ritual observances.

"We therefore beseech any one who may have proposed to themselves the restoration of what, under sanction of this principle, they deemed a lawful system, to consider the dangers which it involves; to see it in its true light, and to take a more just and sober view of the real position of our Church; whilst, with equal earnestness, we beseech others, who, either by intentional omission, or by neglect and laxity, may have disturbed the uniformity and weakened the authority of our prescribed ritual, to strengthen the side of order by avoiding all unnecessary deviation trom the Church's rule.

6

"Such harmony of action we are persuaded would, under GOD's blessing, go far towards restoring the peace of the Church. This happy result would more clearly exhibit her spiritual character. The mutual relations of her various members would be more distinctly perceived; and our lay brethren would more readily acknowledge the special trust committed to us, as stewards of the mysteries of GOD, ' for the edifying of the Body of CHRIST.' They would join with us in asserting, and, if need be, defending for themselves, as much as for us, the true spiritual freedom of the Church. They would unite with us in a more trustful spirit, and therefore with a more read will, in enlarging her means and strengthening her powers for the great work she has to do amongst the swarming multitudes of our great towns at home, and of our vast dominions abroad; and that Church which has so long received from the hands of GOD such unequalled blessings, might continue to be, yea, and become more and more 'a praise in the earth.""

Will this then remove all disquietudes, cast new light on perplexed questions, settle the creed of the nation, and give stability to the Church? Are the wants of the age so very slight, as to be sufficiently supplied by covering men with these ecclesiastical rags? Surely this production is more worthy an advertisement of Hyam's Pantechnetheca, than an assembly of most Reverend, and Right Reverend Fathers in God.

"The principal point in dispute is, whether the letter of the Rubric or common practice, is binding on the conscience of the clergy, or whether each is at liberty to act upon his own views" of ritual observances. And