doing so, an indifference to the sin of Schism, or rather an approbation of that division amongst christians which the New Testament condemns, will be evident from the following extracts. "Separation between different christian bodies, which agree in holding the head, but do not accord in lesser matters, is an affair of expediency. Within certain limits it seems really conducive to edification. In a country such as this, where every one almost may find some society of christians with which he agrees even on minor points, it is generally for the advantage, both of an individual and of a Church, that where there is any considerable difference of sentiment they should not unite."

"From them (that is congregational Churches) any member or number of members is at liberty to withdraw, whenever they think it their duty, without incurring any censure, or provoking any resentment. Peaceable and christian separation, when separation becomes inevitable or expedient, is the maxim of the congregational system, and it has always been found to be, not only a sufficient safety valve, for the occasional disturbances of the Churches; but the means of rendering those very disturbances conducive to the extension of Christianity."-Library of Ecclesiastical Knowledge, Vol. II. on Creeds, rage 118.-The Congregational System, page 167.

Ordination. The following quotation from a letter in the Baptist Magazine, March, 1838, signed J. H. Hinton, leads one to apprehend that the time is not far distant when a standing ministry will scarcely be thought necessary to be contended for by modern Dissenters; at any rate, that there may be, in the minds of some of them, a lurking suspicion, that, after all," ex nihilo nihil fit."

"On the subject of ordination great differences prevail among non-conformists: many of our ministers have scarcely a definite idea about it of any kind—and it has of late been all but abandoned, to an almost hopeless obscurity. According to some of us, it is ready to vanish away, amidst the affectionate greetings of a public recognition."

3rd. Objects of Dissent.

It is not a railing accusation which we bring against Dissenters

when we attribute to them the design of bringing our Church into similar circumstances with their own communities: as the following quotations will abundantly prove.

"Were the forms of the Church all we could wish them to be, were its higher clergy as scriptural as they are dignified, as laborious as they are wealthy, had we nothing to object either to its public services, or to the orders of its ministry, we should yet find, in the first principles of its constitution, insuperable objections to it. We regard the incorporation of the Church with the State as utterly unscriptural... . As we value religion, as we desire the extension of its genuine influences, we feel constrained to resist a policy which tends to weaken and destroy it."-Library of Ecclesiastical Knowledge, Vol. III. page 19.

It is the duty of all christians to separate from established Churches, and to seek their abolition."—Ibid, page 253.

"He who continues in communion with a corrupt Church, becomes, in some measure, guilty of the errors which it propagates, and the extensive injuries which it inflicts. In the instance of the Church of England these are numerous and fearful." Ibid page 263.

"He who continues in the Church of England, in the hope of its reformation, indulges a vain hope; for it can never be adequately reformed. . . . The mind of the country is roused, and a general opinion has been expressed, that the Church needs reform, which must be applied with an unsparing hand. . . . A reform of the Church is impossible.-It must be totally dissolved, and become, in fact, what dissenting Churches now are." Ibid, page 267. 269.

...

"Dissenters have not generally discharged those duties which their dissent imposes on them. . . . The time is now come at which forbearance should have its limit. . . It is the duty of dissenters to seek the abolition of the establishment in England. . . . The time is come for the dissenters throughout the kingdom to make a simultaneous effort, and nothing can resist their power.... The time is come; the political and religious aspect of the age is inviting. . . . Dissenters of England. . . . do your duty... be not wanting in this eventful crisis.-The axe is laid to the root of the

...

tree the blow cannot much longer be retarded. . . . The established Church of this kingdom shall be soon numbered among the shadowy things of former generations."—Ibid. page 278. 282.

NOTE (D.) Page 19.

Use of Antiquity.

"That the Church of England has a very particular regard to Antiquity may sufficiently appear from a canon set forth in the same year, when our articles were first perfected and authorized by Act of Parliament, namely, in the year 1571. By that canon it is provided "that preachers shall not presume to deliver any thing from the pulpit, as of moment, to be religiously observed and believed by the people, but that which is agreeable to the doctrine of the old and new Testaments, and collected out of the same doctrine by the Catholic Fathers, and the Bishops of the ancient Church" a wise regulation, founded with exquisite judgment, and worded with the exactest caution. The canon does not order, that they shall teach whatever had been taught by Fathers; no, that would have been setting up a new rule of faith: neither does it say that they shall teach whatsoever the Fathers had collected from Scripture; no, that would have been making them infallible interpreters or infallible reasoners; the doctrine must be found first in Scripture; only, to be more secure that we have found it there, the Fathers are to be called in, to be, as it were, constant checks upon the presumption or wantonness of private interpretation. But then, again, as to private interpretation, there is liberty enough allowed to it. Preachers are not forbidden to interpret this or that text, or hundreds of texts, differently from what the Fathers have done; provided still they keep within the analogy of faith, and presume not to raise any new doctrine; neither are they altogether restrained from teaching any thing new, provided it be offered as opinion only, or as an inferior truth, and not pressed as necessary upon the people. For it was thought that there could

*The Canon here referred to is one of those which were sanctioned by the Bishops only, and not, as some have asserted, by the Convocation. See Strype's Life of Archbishops Parker and Grindal, An. 1571.

be no necessary article of faith or doctrine now drawn from Scripture, but what the ancients had drawn out before, from the same Scripture: to say otherwise would imply that the ancients had failed universally in necessaries, which is morally absurd." -Waterland's works, Vol. V. page 317.

The exclusive authority of Scripture as a rule of faith is ably advocated in the" Bampton Lectures for 1839, (just published,) by Rev. W. D. Conybeare, on the character, value, and just application of the writings of the Christian Fathers."

"The true line taken by our Church appears to be this. She knows nothing of tradition as an independent rule of faith; but genuine and primitive tradition she anxiously seeks to discover, and, when found, she honours, not indeed as a rival mistress, but as the faithful handmaid of Scripture." "After every subsidiary means of interpretation, the Bible itself is still the one original source and the sole authoritative test of the whole and every part of christian truth."-Lect. I. page 7. 25.

"If the parties who would wish to inculcate a high respect for the cherished remains of the primitive Church, should injudiciously and irreverently appear to assert, that without appealing to these, it were impossible to discern the truth of God by the light of his own revelation; or, if on the other hand, a just jealousy for the supremacy of scriptural authority, should induce any of us to throw aside with contempt the strongly corroborative evidences which may be deduced from the diligent study of christian anti quity; the results will be, in either case, such as must afflict the best friends of truth, and can afford gratification only to our common adversaries."-Lect. VIII. page 457.

66

Comparison with the spirit of the Bible will at once shew how far we may safely depend on them, (the records of antiquity) and how far human infirmity may, even at an early period, have introduced any seeds of error and corruption. With respectful reverence, but not with indiscriminate submission, would we listen to such authorities: we would give our best attention to the doctrines they propound, but entirely refer the decision of every point to an

higher and more competent tribunal; we would gratefully accept their very valuable subsidiary aid in illustrating, explaining, and corroborating the rule of our faith, but never for a moment so mistake their nature and station, as to place them on the same level with that rule, or concede to them any independent or coordinate jurisdiction."-Ibid, Page 505.

The words of our own venerated Church declare her judgment and practice, in a passage cited by Mr. C. "Altho our Saviour Christ taketh not and needeth not any testimonies of men: and that which is once confirmed by the certainty of his eternal truth, hath no more need of the confirmation of man's doctrine and writings, than the bright sun at noontide hath need of the light of a little candle, to put away darkness, and to increase light; yet. for your further contentation, it shall be declared, that this truth taken out of the holy Scriptures was believed and taught of the old holy Fathers, and most ancient learned Doctors, and received in the old primitive Church."-Part II. Homily against Idolatry.

NOTE (E.) see Page 24.
Episcopacy.

From a valuable work by one of the Bishops of the American Episcopal Church entitled "Episcopacy tested by Scripture" published in New York, I extract the following Note:

"The great petitio principii of our opponents is, that the whole apostolic function, as distinguished from that of Presbyters, was transient. For this supposition, there is neither proof nor hint in Scripture. Inspiration was transient; but in no other respect can the apostleship be shown to have lost its original completeness. Timothy, Andronicus, and Junia, are called Apostles, but there is no evidence that they were inspired; and though Silvanus, also denominated an Apostle, was a "prophet" (Acts xv. 32.) it will be allowed, we presume, that this does not imply that he possessed the higher inspiration of the more eminent apostolic fraternity.