brackets by the rationalists of Germany, and what would become of the rest of the Prayer Book, if it is to be read according to their varying judgment and conviction? Is uniformity to be enforced by the Bishop? What says Mr. Gresley with regard to the power of the Bishops, even in this country? The following is his testimony in the pamphlet before referred to, on the real danger of the Church of England, p. 14:

"The Bishop's authority, so far as the laity is concerned, is defunct."

Yet, says Mr. M'Neile, p. 93, concerning the repeal of the Act of Uniformity :

"I am increasingly impressed with the absolute necessity of some movement in this direction, for the preservation of our church."

Shall we, then, proceed upon the plan of the Evangelical Alliance? The main principle upon which these agree is Solifidianism, which has already been denounced by the high church party, as one of the most deadly heresies that ever infected Christendom.

Shall the principles of the German Catholic Church be adopted? These are purely negative, and allow the rejection of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the inspiration of the Scriptures. Whither, then, shall we turn for a remedy for the present state of things? Mr. Newman has answered ;-to the authority of the Church of Rome; and certainly, if authority is to be the remedy, she does not fail in claiming sufficient. For according to Mr. Newman's exposition of the doctrine of the Church of Rome, the rulers of the church, or the priests, are invested with an authority equal to that of our Lord in the days of his flesh. But when frail mortals are invested with this, it is natural enough that they should not be satisfied with it, but should claim even a greater, and assume the privilege of being arrayed with sanctions more awful. And how is it Mr. Newman attempts this proof? Our Saviour, says he, declared to his Apostles," I appoint unto you a kingdom as my Father hath appointed me, that ye may eat and drink at my table, in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." The Apostles also were to sit upon twelve thrones, even as Christ sat upon the throne of David. From which, and other passages, Mr. Newman concludes that their authority was equal to that of Him who appointed them. But this authority is not sufficient; for he adds :—

"Nay, it would seem as if their authority were even GREATER than that which it pleased our Lord to possess in the days of his flesh; for whereas he breathed on them

* The Christian Church an Imperial Power.-Newman's Sermons on the Subjects of the Day.

and said, 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost;' he had formerly said, 'Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world neither in the world to come." Thus the Apostles, the ministers of the kingdom, as being the organs of the Spirit, were arrayed in more awful sanctions even than the King himself during his abode upon earth, &c."

This authority, then, which is equal to that of our Lord in the days of his flesh; nay, this authority, which is GREATER; these sanctions, which are more awful, Mr. Newman proceeds to shew, were afterwards by Apostolical succession inherited by the church, by its rulers, ministers, and priests; whence he says, "They are charged with the custody of divine truth, and the nations are subject unto them;" and he concludes by saying that to the church so constituted belong

"Extended dominion, and that not only over its immediate subjects, but over the kings of other kingdoms; aggression and advance; a warfare against enemies; acts of judgment upon the proud; acts of triumph over the defeated; high imperial majesty toward the suppliant; clemency toward the repentant; parental care of the dutiful."

Such, my friends, is Church authority! Such is the one grand remedy for the present state of things, which is advanced by Mr. Newman on behalf of the Church of Rome!

But the trees that are the tallest the most attract the lightning, and in the midst of the storm are the most dangerous resort. In these days it has pleased God to rebuke these pretensions in a remarkable manner. Clergymen have been raised up in the Church of England itself who have denounced the system as a mere system of priestcraft. "My quarrel," says Dr. Arnold, "with Newman, and with the Romanists, and with the dominant party in the Church up to Cyprian, is, that they have put a false church in the place of the true." And again, "this false Church is the priesthood, to which are ascribed all the powers really belonging to the true Church, with others which do not and cannot belong to any human power." (Life of Dr. Arnold.-2. 241.) Dr. Arnold, moreover, in common with the late Mr. Coleridge, speaks of his wish for the restoration of Church discipline," which," says he, "never can, and never ought to be restored till the Church puts an end to the usurpation of her powers by the clergy." (vol. 1, 227.)

The most remarkable opposition, however, offered to these pretensions is by the very author himself, who has made them in behalf of the Church of Rome. For, in order to account for the doctrines and ceremonies introduced into that Church, he is obliged to have recourse to the principle of development, to make way for which, he rejects a rule which has always been one of the fixed, immoveable supports of the Church; namely, the rule of Vincentius, founded on universal consent, - Quod semper, quod

66

“True,” says Mr. Newman, as considered in the abstract, and

ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum est. this dictum of Vincentius must be possible as its application might be in his own age, when he might almost ask the primitive centuries for their testimony, it is hardly available now, or effective of any satisfactory result. The solution it offers is as difficult as the original problem.”

Thus, the doctrine of development is the doctrine of a movement; a movement of principles; and these, too, fundamental principles; in other words, a movement of the very foundation itself of the Church of Rome. In order to strengthen the walls of the Church, Mr. Newman has taken the stones out of the foundation. The Church is thus no longer fixed upon a rock, but is set floating down the stream of time. This is the opinion, we believe, of almost every Protestant periodical which has yet reviewed Mr. Newman's work.

There is yet one question which is of great importance. If the church be in the condition above described, what is the meaning of the expression, Church and State? Already a considerable party has arisen in the Church of England, who at first doubted the possibility of the continued union of the two; from doubt they have passed on to conviction; from conviction to a positive desire for their disunion. The church, as it now stands," says Dr. Arnold, i. 326, no human power can save; my fear is that, if we do not mind we shall come to the American fashion, and have no provision made for teaching Christianity at all." Again, in the very number of the Church and State Gazette which contains an article upon Swedenborg and his writings, there is a letter in which are remarks which my experience leads me to believe to be perfectly true in point of fact. Speaking of the connexion between Church and State,

"If every man who objects to the connexion between Church and State be a semiRomanist, then I fear Rome is stronger in the affections of the English people than either you or I would wish. Thousands object to it both in and out of the church, and upon a thousand different grounds, who have no sympathy whatever with the errors of Rome,-whose errors I may say lie in an opposite direction.....You cannot deny, sir, that the Church of England is at this moment held in bondage by the State; and so long as this bondage continues, how is she to free herself or her pulpits from Romish or Genevan errors? You will not, I am sure, advocate mere parliamentary interference, even in matters of ritual, much less of doctrine. I wish not to see the alliance dissolved: the church no doubt reaps benefits from its continuance, but those benefits are growing daily small by degrees and beautifully less, and even at the best do by no means countervail the damage which she suffers by being tyrannically hindered from managing her own affairs. It is sad to see her clergy arrayed one against another upon the most important questions both of doctrine and discipline, and each claiming her authority; and yet, she whose authority they claim is gagged,

and may not speak! Still sadder is it to see some who openly impugn her doctrines, and maintain that portions of those very formularies to which they have given their solemn assent are erroneous, and contrary to God's word. The dissolution of the alliance between church and state I should look upon as an evil; but I look upon the continuance of these scandals as a far greater evil; and if the alliance may only be continued at the cost of their continuance, it is a curse-a heavy and a grievous curse."

Such are the sentiments of this writer, and which I believe are echoed by thousands in the Established Church. The truth is, that things are come to such a pass, that the Church and the State are now 'mutually complaining of each other, each regarding the other as a burden upon itself. The cabinet have more than once declared in Parliament, that in many of their plans for education, and in general for the public good, they are worried and baffled by the conflicting doctrines and interests of the different religious parties; so that much might be done to benefit the nation which is not done, and which cannot be done in the present divided state of the religious world.

66

In 1831 it was remarked by Dr. Arnold, i. 311:

'The termination of the Jewish atov (age) in the first century, and of the Roman in the fifth and sixth, were each marked by the same concurrence of calamities, wars, tumults, pestilences, earthquakes, &c.; all marking the time of one of God's peculiar seasons of visitation. And society in Europe seems going on fast for a similar revolution, out of which Christ's Church will emerge in a new position, purified, I trust, and strengthened by the destruction of various earthly and evil mixtures that have corrupted it."

Again, in the same year, the same author thus writes:

"All in the moral and physical world appears so exactly to announce the coming of the great day of the Lord, i. e. a period of fearful visitation, to terminate the existing state of things (whether to terminate the whole existence of the human race neither man nor angel knows),—that no entireness of private happiness can possibly close my mind against the sense of it."

But even as late as 1844, Dr. Hook, the present Vicar of Leeds, in his preface to a sermon on the words "Take heed what ye hear," observes:

"Whatever divine work has once been destroyed by man, can never by man be reconstructed, and the restoration of unity in the Church we can hardly expect before the coming of our Lord."

After admitting that the apostacy predicted is almost universal, and referring the reader to Mr. Irving's Discourse upon the last days, Dr. Hook observes::

66

Such being the word of prophecy, and such the condition of the world, it seems, as I have said, more expedient for us of this generation to be putting our own house in order, than to be indulging in vain desires to put together again the broken fragments of the Church Universal!"

Now, this Missionary and Tract Society has existed for five and twenty

years. From the very first formation of this Society it announced the end of the existing Church—it declared the restoration of unity in the old Church to be an impossibility, because the fundamental truth of the Supreme Divinity of the Lord was denied-it declared that the Church destroyed by man, could not by man be reconstructed—its warning to the Old Church was, not to indulge in vain desires to put together again the broken fragments of the Church universal- by its tracts and missions it proclaimed the formation of a New Church, because the revelation of new principles, particularly that first and foremost, that there is one only God, and that only God is the Lord Jesus Christ, in the unity of whose person there is a Trinity. And now what do we find but, after five and twenty years' experience, a growing confirmation of every principle upon which this Society proceeded? You have seen the state of the old church; you have seen the remedies suggested! One proposes the diffusion of the Prayer Book; another the abolition of the Act of Uniformity; another the one grand doctrine of Solifidianism; another Rationalism; another Church Authority; not one of them seems to dream of a better interpretation of the Word of God. We have the Tractarian movement, and the Evangelical movement, and the Rationalistic movement, all of them professing for their object the renovation of the Church. But no; the institution of the Christian Church was a divine work, and whatever divine work has by man been destroyed, can never by man be reconstructed. There must, therefore, be a New Church, built by the Lord Himself. Any thing short of this will not meet the exigencies of the times-will end only in confusion and disappointment. Does not, then, the universal wreck of principles and parties in the present day demonstrate to us the extent of our responsibilities-the urgency of our duties? If we are slothful, or reluctant, or hesitating, we are not worthy of the privileges we enjoy; we are neither true to ourselves nor to the principles we profess. But, I cannot conclude without offering my best thanks to this Society for its increased exertions,-to the minister of this* chapel for his excellent pastoral instructions-to the Missionaries in general for their zealous endeavours, and to every member of the Church for his efforts, whatever they may be, believing that, amid the multiplication of errors which prevail, the Divine blessing cannot but attend the propagation of the truth—the promotion of the great and glorious cause of the New Jerusalem !

* Argyle Square.