a ee “ 
 Te TB 2 Ws Ik 
 £ 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND BISHOP HOBART, 
 QCCASIONED BY THE 
 
 ._ STRICTURES ON BIBLE SOCIETIES, 
 
 "| CONTAINED IN 
 
 His Late Charge 
 
 THE CONVENTION OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 By A CHURCHMAN 
 ve GP or ae DIOCESS OF NEW-YORKE. 
 
 A 2? 
 x 
 
 SESS WW) phe a, aA [9 § 7-182 
 
 wt 5 
 f ips 
 Sip 
 
 The beginning of strife, is as when one letteth out water.—Proverbs, xvii. 14. 
 Mark them which cause divisions and offences.—-Rom. xvi. 17, 
 
 NEW-YORK : 
 
 PUBLISHED BY JOHN P. HAVEN, 
 _ ‘PHEOLOGICAL BOOKSELLER, 182 BROADWAY. 
 Gray & Bunce, Printers, 
 
 1823. 
 
» 
 
 ™~D 
 
 Pr ; 
 So 
 
 ae 
 er 
 gs 
 « 
 4 
 . 
 4 
 XN + 
 De 
 . 
 i 7 
 4 wv 
 ? i oe od ‘ 
 i) : fa 
 : gs L. dae 
 r * : 3 ‘ m te 
 ; : 5 igeett sry yas ee eee. 
 : } Bee : ame: 
 i yu , eR) & i r I 
 Re; Pamphlet Collection _ 
 Wear ro” ei x , swe 
 fi 
 
 ‘ Duke Divinity School “1 
 
LETTER, &c. 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND SIR, 
 
 However much, as a Churchman, [ may deplore the opposition 
 of my Bishop to the distribution of the uncommented Scriptures ; 
 yet as a friend to the American Bible Society, I cannot regret, 
 that you have thought proper to renew hostilities against that in- 
 stitution. You have engaged in a warfare, in which the cause of 
 the Bible, has been always crowned with victory, and in which 
 the mortification of defeat has ever been imbittered by the convic- 
 tion, that the power of the victor, has been confirmed and ex- 
 tended by the very endeavour to shake it. In such a warfare, no 
 friend of the Society can for a moment hesitate to engage, through 
 apprehension of the issue—nay, the very stripling whose youthful 
 limbs refuse the burthen of the coat of mail, and the sword of the 
 warrior, may fearlessly enter the field, trusting alone to that God, 
 in whose cause he combats; and with no armour but truth, and 
 no weapon but common sense, he will most assuredly vanquish 
 —— Goliath that may dare him to the fight. 
 
 2 only enemies the Bible Society has reason to fear, are in= 
 att ion to its claims, and ignorance of its proceedings. Whoever 
 subdues these foes: whoever brings home to the consideration, 
 and to the Christian sympathy of the community—the holy purpose 
 —thepure and sacred fellowship, the stupendous labours, and 
 the mighty triumphs of the Bible Society, ought to be enrolled 
 among its greatest benefactors; and few are more deserving of _ 
 this distinction than the Bishop of New-York. It is true, that 
 your late charge, having been delivered in the ordinary routine of 
 official duties, is not so well calculated to attract public notice, 
 and of course to advance the interests of the Society, as was the 
 
4 
 
 address which you inserted in the newsapers,* at the critical mo- 
 ment when the institution, in the feebleness of infancy, was strug- 
 gling for existence. The powerful patronage which immediately 
 poured in upon the Society, and the ardent zeal with which many 
 distinguished Episcopalians immediately espoused its cause, attest 
 the extent of the service which you rendered on that occasion. 
 But although your charge will not probably engage so large a share 
 of the public attention as was bestowed upon your address ; it 
 happily abounds in matter admirably adapted to awaken the reflec- 
 tions, and arrest the feelings of all who read it. A document in 
 which the name of a venerable Prelate, who may justly be styled 
 the father of the Bible Societies in the United States, is made use 
 of to sanction your opposition—a document in which the conduct of 
 Governor Jay and General Clarkson, is represented as erroneous 
 in principle, and injurious in its tendency to that church which it 
 is admitted they adorn; because in the evening of their days, 
 they are labouring to spread the knowledge of that Gospel which 
 has been the guide of their youth, and is now the consolation of 
 their old age—a document in which that mode of disseminating 
 religious truth which has been officially and earnestly recommend- 
 ed to the Episcopalians of the United States by their Bishops as- 
 sembled in Convention, is denounced as a departure from the 
 apostolic mode of propagating Christianity, as calculated to pro- 
 duce indifference to the essentials of Christianity, and to weaken. ee. 
 the zeal of Episcopalians for the ministry, the worship and the _ 
 
 ordinances of their Church—will not—cannot be read with in 
 ference. Episcopalians must inquire, are such men as Governoi 
 Jay and General Clarkson, and a host of others, whose pie by: 
 talents and rank, reflect lustre on our Church; are they § 
 her foundations ; are they violating their duty as Christians 
 Churchmen? Have our Bishops indeed betrayed thei 
 trust, and are they inviting us, by their example, by 
 and by their pastoral letters to a course of conduct € 
 principle, and dangerous in tendency? Is Bishop 
 only wise and faithful shepherd; and have White, Claggett, 
 Kemp, Moore, Griswold, Dehon, and Chase, been only blind 
 
 * See N. ¥. Evening Post of 13th May, 1816, two days after the for: 
 of the Society. 
 
a 
 
 when made, they must lead to investigation; and what the result 
 of that investigation will be, no friend of the Society can for a 
 moment doubt. 
 
 You have thought proper to introduce into your strictures on 
 Bible Societies, a long extract from a late charge by Bishop White, 
 and although you do not expressly inform us that the Bishop con- 
 curs with you in opinion respecting these associations, yet no 
 stranger to his sentiments would, for an instant, hesitate in believ- 
 ing this to be the case. You preface the extract, with remarking, 
 ** From my official station, I have so many opportunities of observ- 
 ‘* ing the powerful claims of destitute congregations upon the zeal- 
 ‘© ous exertions, and liberal contributions of their brethren, and 
 ‘their wants so often press upon my feelings, that I cannot cease 
 “to lament, that so large a portion of the bounty of Episcopalians, 
 ** flows in a channel over which their own church has no control, 
 ‘and from which, it derives no immediate advantage. One would 
 ** think it obvious, that it is the duty of Episcopalians consistently 
 ** and zealously to bend all their efforts to the advancement of their 
 “¢ own church, and to ‘ avoid all admixture of administrations,’ and 
 ** of exertions, ‘in what concerns the faith, the worship,’ and the 
 ** ministry of the church. On this subject, there is so much sound 
 * wisdom, of correct principle, and of decided and true policy, 
 ‘united with Christian meekness and benevolence, in the observa- 
 <¢ tions contained in a recent address of the Bishop of the Church 
 **in Pennsylvania to the convention of his diocess, that notwith- 
 ** standing their length, 1 am induced to lay them before you.” 
 
 Here let us pause to inquire, what is the precise subject, on 
 which Bishop White has displayed so much wisdom and policy. 
 Surely it must be the same which causes your ceaseless lamenta- 
 tion, and which ushers in the extract, viz. ‘‘that so large a por- 
 tion of the bounty of Episcopalians, flows in a channel over which 
 their own church has no control, and from which it derives, no 
 immediate advantage.’’ Being thus led to take it for granted, that 
 the subject of Bishop White’s observations, is the injudicious direc- 
 tion given by many Episcopalians to their bounty ; we are prepared 
 to apply every remark, as far as it can be applied, to the union of 
 Episcopalians in Bible Societies. 
 
 The Bishop commences with declaring in substance, that the 
 conduct becoming Episcopalians towards their fellow Christians of 
 
6 
 
 other denominations, is a subject on which he wishes to record his 
 opinion. He points out the inconveniences to be apprehended, 
 from ‘‘ an intermixture of administrations in what concerns the 
 faith, the worship, or the discipline of the church,’? “On some 
 occasions,”’ where this intermixture had been permitted, ‘he says, 
 ** our institutions have been treated with disrespect, and doctrines 
 unknown to them, taught within our walls.”” ‘To guard against the 
 imputation of bigotry, the Bishop deems it necessary to be more 
 particular in assigning his objections to this intermixture, and goes 
 on to show that our church differs essentially from others in her 
 government, worship, and doctrines, and that that liberality is to 
 be avoided, which would surrender any of these sacred posses- 
 sions. He concludes with declaring, that under a conviction of the 
 truth and importance of these sentiments, he has embodied them 
 in his charge, that they may remain recorded upon the apecis of 
 the convention. 
 
 Such is a brief, but faithfal summary of that part of the Bishop’s 
 address which you have seen fit to call to your assistance, in your 
 present attack upon the Bible Society. ‘A strict adherence to 
 these principles”? (the principles of Bishop White) ‘ must, in- 
 “deed,” you observe, “‘ be considered as required by the exigen- 
 ** cies, and even the existence of our church. The spirit of them 
 “*seems to me applicable to all associations for religious purposes, 
 “‘where Episcopalians unite with those severed from them by 
 ‘* diversity of worship, discipline, or by contrariety in points | 
 *< doctrine.”” You then proceed to apply these principles direc 
 to the union of Episcopalians in Bible Societies, which, you 
 clare, seem to vou to be “‘ erroneous in the principle on which 
 ‘‘ order to secure general co-operation, they are founded 
 
 ‘ paration of the Church from the Word of God—of the sacred 
 ‘* volume, from the ministry, the worship, and the ordina 
 “jt enjoins, as of divine institution, and the instrur 
 “* propagation, and preservation, of Gospel truth.” 
 
 Bishop Wurre’s principles are thus, so dovetailed with yo 
 
 that the Bishop himself, intended to apply his principles to the 
 “ intermixture”’ of Episcopalians in Bible Societies, with Christi: 
 of other denominations. Happily, however, the copy of the | 
 dress from which you quote, is not the only one that has reach 
 
7 
 
 New-York ; and, astonishing as it may seem, the following passage 
 precedes the extract you have made. 
 
 <* Although the Bible Society of this city (Philadelphia) is not 
 ‘‘ peculiarly attached to our communion, yet the object is not only 
 “of supreme importance, but that in which all denominations of 
 “* Christians agree ; and as it contributes its share to the great de- 
 ‘sign of publishing the glad tidings of salvation where they have 
 *¢ been hitherto unknown, and of depositing the record of them in 
 ** the hands of the destitute of all countries nominally Christian, it 
 *‘has been presented to the notice of the convention for many 
 *« years past; and under the continuance of the impression, there 
 *¢ is now declared a deep conviction of the importance of the sub- 
 aect.7 
 
 Not only had your eye glanced over this declaration, before it 
 fell upon the passages you have deemed it expedient to quote ; 
 
 ’ but at the moment you were transferring them to your own charge, 
 you could hardly avoid recollecting, that Bishop White was one of 
 the founders of the earliest Bible Society established in this coun- 
 try ; that he was placed at the head of this society, which place he 
 still holds, that he has frequently as in the present instance recom- 
 mended the Philadelphia society to the patronage of his clergy 
 and other Episcopalians in his convention charges ; that he has 
 caused sermons to be preached, and collections made for its bene- 
 fit in his churches ; that he was instrumental in forming a Female 
 Bible Society, and published an address vindicating the propriety 
 of such an association ; and that with a full knowledge of the ob- 
 jections of some Bishops in England, and of one in this country, he 
 still continues the firm and zealous supporter of the Bible cause. 
 Under these circumstances, while we fully appreciate your can- 
 dour in the use you fave made of the name of your ‘‘ venerable 
 father in the episcopacy,”’ and of the obligation you have conferred 
 ‘upon him, by attempting to show that his own principles, condemn 
 his conduct, suffer me to vindicate him, from this apparent incon- 
 sistency. 
 
 It is believed, that Bishop White’s remarks, respecting “an in- 
 termixture of administrations” arose from the circumstance of a 
 ‘Presbyterian Clergyman having preached from an Episcopal pul- 
 pit, shortly before the sitting'of the convention. Hence it is, that 
 the Bishop remarks, that from an indulgence in this improper 
 
8 
 
 *‘intermixture,’’ doctrines unknown to our church have been 
 taught within her walls, and he proves that we cannot permit this a 
 “‘intermixture,” without sacrificing at least for the time, our Epis- 
 copal government, our doctrines, and our forms of prayer; and 
 he very logically concludes, that “‘ we must, to be consistent, inter- 
 dict all other than an Episcopalian ministry within our bounds.” 
 The whole address relating to this subject is written with a spirit 
 of meekness, Christian charity and kindness, worthy of imitation in 
 other dioceses. In short, the substance of this excellent address 
 is simply this. ‘‘I exhort you my brethren to lend your counte- 
 nance and support to the Bible Society. From this association 
 with your fellow Christians, of other names, no danger or incon- 
 venience need be apprehended—no compromise of principle is 
 required, or expected. But it is also my duty, to caution you, not 
 to intrust your flocks even to the occasional care of other shep- 
 herds. Let no person who differs from us in doctrine, in the 
 forms of public worship, or in ecclesiastical government, minister 
 in holy things to the people committed to your charge, and for 
 whose souls, you must give account.” 
 
 Having thus, Sir, discovered, that this truly venerable Bishop, far 
 from being my opponent, is my firm, zealous and consistent ally, 
 
 I proceed with increased confidence in the goodness of my cause, 
 to consider the various objections you have urged against it. 
 
 You seem to think it obvious ‘‘ that it is the duty of Episcopa- 
 “‘lians, consistently and zealously, to bend ail their efforts, to the 
 “*advancement of their own Church.”’ The efforts to whi 
 allude, are I presume, efforts for the spiritual improvem 
 
 “‘ our Church.” Is it only the Church in this diocess 
 comprehend the “ Protestant Episcopal Church in 
 States ?”’ Or lastly, do you admit the right of doing good, on the 
 condition of advancing the interests of any Church governed by 
 Bishops, Priests and Deacons; thus presenting as theo 
 our zealous and consistent efforts, the Churches of Rome, 
 f Russia and others! Recollecting that you lately gave y 
 
9. 
 
 sanction to certain efforts made in this diocess to afford pecuniary 
 assistance to the Church in Ohio, I am bound to conclude that you 
 recognize a community of interests in all the American Churches. 
 Your opinion, then, as far as I can understand it, is that 7¢ es the 
 duty of the Episcopalians in the United States not to make any effort 
 for the spiritual welfare of others, unless such effort tend at the sume 
 time, to the advancement of the Episcopal Church in this country. 
 Of course I violate my duty, in making an effort to promote my 
 neighbour’s salvation unless by so doing I advance the interests of 
 my own Church in particular; otherwise, your remark totally 
 fails in its application to Bible Societies. 
 
 A higher authority than an Episcopal charge, while it urges us to 
 do good, especially to them who are of the household of faith; at the 
 same time enjoins it upon us, as we have opportunity, to do good 
 unto all men. Not only are we required by the same authority to love 
 our neighbours as ourselves, but also to do good tothem that hate us ; 
 and that difference in religious opinions, does not release us from this 
 obligation, is evident from the command to the Jews—“ the stranger 
 that dwelleth with you, shall be as one born among you, and thou 
 shalt love him as thyself.”? Had these diberal sentiments been ad- 
 vanced by an advocate for Bible Societies, I fear you would have re- 
 garded them as indicative of his “ indolent indifference” for “ the dis- 
 tinctive principles” of the Church. But suffer me to inquire in what 
 manner we are.to fulfil the spirit of these precepts, in conformity with 
 the qualification you would attach to them, in reference to the im- 
 mense multitude around us, who cannot, by any efforts of ours, be 
 made instrumental in advancing the Episcopal Church? We may, 
 indeed, say to them, be ye warmed and filled; but what will it profit? 
 
 A practical illustration of your doctrine, was some time since ex- 
 hibited in this city. Of all classes of society, that of seamen appeared 
 to be the most hopelessly destitute, of “ all that can bless the life that 
 now is, or shed a cheering radiance on that which is to come.” Con- 
 demned by their profession, to be the sport of the elements, and to 
 face death in its most appalling forms, they were with few exceptions, 
 ignorant of that Being who can control the one, and disarm the other 
 of its terrors. ‘To them the language of prayer and of thanksgiving, 
 were alike unknown. When the dangers of the sea were past, and 
 they found in port a short respite from their toils and perils, no tem- 
 ple witnessed their tribute of praise to Him, who holdeth the winds in 
 his fist—No ambassador of heaven seized the transient moment, to de- 
 
 2 
 
10 a 
 
 ive rto them his message of mercy. Equally unconscious of all the 
 sweet charities of domestic life, and of all the awful realities and trans- 
 cendent consolations of religious truth, they plunged ms haunts of 
 infamy and pollution, and squandered in brutal riot, the ails of their 
 labours and sufferings. When age or disease compelled them to aban- 
 
 don their profession, they were thrown wretched and forlorn upon the - 
 
 world; and frequently lingered out their miserable existence on fo- 
 reign shores, dependant for their daily sustenance on the bounty of. 
 strangers. As their conflict with their last enemy approached, no 
 friendly hand withdrew the dark veil which hid from their view, 
 another and a better world—No man cared for their souls; and as 
 they had lived without God, they died without hope. 
 
 At length, the Christian sympathy of some of our citizens was 
 awakened in their behalf; and on the 29th of May, 1818, at a meeting 
 of “merchants and others connected with the commerce of New- 
 York,” it was declared to be expedient to erect a house of worship 
 for the gratuitous accommodation of seamen, to be styled “ the Mari- 
 ners’ Church.” The congregation which it was expected would be 
 assembled in this Church, would of necessity be as fluctuating as the 
 waves themselves; and the preacher would seldom address the same 
 individuals more than once or twice. It was therefore futile to expect 
 that men whose home was on the deep, could generally be organized 
 into a regular church, and formally subjected, to the discipline of any 
 denomination in particular. Of course, it was not to be presumed 
 
 Mariners’ Church; and it was obvious that such a Church could o 
 be built by the joint contributions of the pious and liberal. Acco 
 ingly, a society was formed, without reference to sectarian distinctions 5 
 and an appeal was made to the religious public, for the means of er 
 ing a Church for the gratuitous and exclusive accommodatioi 
 sailors. The appeal was heard and answered, and a Mariners’ Chu 
 under the direction of the Society, and not of any ecclesiasti 
 dicatory, has been built, and through the blessing of Provide 
 been instrumental in doing great and extensive good. One would hi 
 thought that, the very proposal to build a temple, in which this ws most 
 
 that any denomination would singly assume the burthen of vi : 
 
 forlorn and neglected class of our fellow-citizens might be instructed i in 
 
 the things which belong to their eternal peace, “ addressed to the un 
 derstanding, an argument which could not be encountered; and 
 
 heart, an appeal, which its holiest emotions would rise up and ‘ 
 But no—a certain individual, fully impressed with a sense of the duty 
 
 * 
 
1] 
 
 of bending ai/ our efforts to the advancement of our own Church, 
 thought proper, three times* to exhort the Episcopalians of our city, 
 in the public newspapers, not to subscribe to the Mariners’. Church, 
 because it would not be under Episcopal “ superintendence ;” nor 
 would the prayer-book be used init. In short, we should not assist in 
 making sailors Christians, unless we can also make them Episco- 
 palians. Of course, it would, except on the condition of advancing our 
 Church, be equally sinful to assist in translating the scriptures, or in 
 giving them to persons of other countries and other communions ! 
 
 If, Sir, the doctrine that no money must be spent, no effort made, 
 no labour undertaken, to promote the spiritual welfare of others, 
 unless with an eye to the aggrandizement of the Church, should be 
 generally embraced by our Bishops and Clergy; might not our 
 enemies, with some appearance of justice, apply to our Church 
 the words of the Prophet, ‘‘ Her watchmen are all greedy dogs 
 ‘* which can never have enough ; they all look to their own way.” 
 
 Whatever may be thought of this argument of yours against Bi- 
 ble Societies, it cannot be denied the merit of originality. Itisa 
 weapon of American fabrication, and will be sought for in vain, 
 in the armory of the opponents of the British and Foreign Bi- 
 ble Society. Dr. Marsn, the ablest, and what is no mean 
 praise, one of the most decent of the assailants of that So- 
 ciety, thus expresses himself with respect to its foreign operations, 
 and unequivocally evinces his utter ignorance of the duty of bend- 
 ing all our efforts for the advancement of our own Church. “The 
 ** Liturgy of our Church has no concern with the distribution of 
 ‘* Bibles, where Christianity is professed under a different form. 
 “* Neither duty nor interest require us in this case to do more than 
 * distribute the Bible. For this purpose I would gladly offer the 
 ** right-hand of fellowship, not only to Protestants of every descrip- 
 ‘tion, but to Members of all oth r Churches, disper ed throughout 
 “the world. For this purpose we should all, as Christians, engage 
 **on equal terms, being concerned alike with the distribution of 
 the Scriptures; being alike desirous of promoting the general 
 “cause of Christianity, we should act ona principle which was 
 ** common to all.” 
 
 “ See N. Y. Evening-Post, 6th June and 12th December, 1818, and 13th 
 January, 1819. 
 
12 
 
 “In a Society composed of churchmen and dissenters, for the 
 * sole purpose of circulating the Scriptures in foreign countries, 
 “J would readily and heartily partake.” Inquiry into the conse- 
 guences of neglecting to give the Prayer-Book with the Bible.—pp. 
 29, 75. 
 
 The next striking position in your charge is, ‘“‘ that for the pro- 
 “‘pagation of the Christian faith, by whatever particular mode, 
 ‘* we should associate only among ourselves, and exclusively under 
 ‘¢ the guardianship and authority of our own Church.” The gene- 
 ral and unqualified terms in which you here express yourself, 
 would entitle me to apply this maxim to the union of Episcopalians 
 with others, in orphan asylums, in schools for the deaf and dumb, 
 in Magdalen hospitals, and various other benevolent establish- 
 ments in which the propagation of the Christian faith, or in other 
 words, the religious instruction of those who are the subjects of 
 the charity, forms a prominent object of the institution. I dm 
 _ willing, however, to understand your remark in the extensive sense 
 in which you probably used it; and here J cannot but congratu- 
 late myself, on being relieved from any further discussion on this 
 point, by the authority of so distinguished an Ultra in the Church 
 as the Bishop of Peterborough ; an authority which you, I am cer- 
 tain, will regard with the greatest deference. We have seen above, 
 that for the propagation of the Christian faith, or, as he expresses 
 it, the ‘‘ promoting the general cause of Christianity,’ by the dis- 
 tribution of the Scriptures in other countries, he is willing to asso- 
 ciate, not only with churchmen, not only with dissenters, but with 
 the members of any and every Church throughout the world. 
 Leaving, therefore, to so able and elevated an ally the task of yin- 
 dicating Episcopalians, for not associating ‘‘ exclusively” among 
 themselves, and under the authority of their own Church, for the 
 propagation of the Christian faith, I proceed to the consideration 
 of the heavy and momentous accusation adduced by re Sanit 
 Bible Societies. 
 
 You inform the Convention, that these Societies seem to you, 
 ‘* erroneous in the principle on which, in order to secure general 
 ‘* co-operation they are founded—the separation of the Church id 
 “« from the word of God—the sacred volume, from the nici 
 ‘“*the worship, and the ordinances which it enjoins, as of divine 
 “« stitution, and the instruments of the propagation and preserva-~ 
 
13 
 
 tion of Gospel truth.”’ Awful, indeed, Sir, must be the responsi- 
 bility of those, who with sacrilegious hands presume to separate 
 the Church from the word of God: but the persons upon whom 
 this crime is chargeable, are to be found not among the members | 
 but the enemies of Bible Societies. Our articles inform us, that 
 “6 the visible Church of Christ, is a congregation of faithful men,” 
 &c. Now the word ef God may be separated from this ‘“‘ congre- 
 gation,” or the individuals composing it, either directly, by inter- 
 dicting them its use; or indirectly, by representing it as not de- 
 signed by its divine Author for indiscriminate perusal—as far above 
 the comprehension of the illiterate, without the aid of a human 
 commentary ; or lastly, by recommending some other book, as 
 better ‘‘ calculated” for religious instruction ; and thus under- 
 valuing the importance, and discouraging the study, of the inspired 
 volume. 
 
 Our Homilies declare, that Satan, ‘* hath always stirred up ia 
 ‘* one place or other, cruel tyrants, sharp persecutors, and extreme 
 *‘enemies unto God and his infallible truth, to pull with violence, 
 ‘the Holy Bible out of the people’s hand.”” But although we have 
 no reason in the present age, and in Protestant countries, to ap- 
 prehend a violent separation of the word and the Church of God 
 by these instruments of Satan; yet it cannot be concealed that 
 there are persons who seem desirous to effect this purpose by the 
 indirect means I have mentioned. Itis to persons of this descrip- 
 tion, that our Homilies refer, when they speak of some who “ pre- 
 ‘tend that the difficulty to understand it” (the Bible) ‘ and the 
 ** hardness thereof, is so great, that it is meet to be read only by 
 ** clerks and learned men,” and again when they say, ‘‘ Not to know 
 “the Scriptures is to be ignorant of Christ, yet notwithstanding 
 ‘<< this, some there be, that think it not meet for all sorts of men to 
 “ yead the Scriptures, because they are, as they think, in sundry 
 “places, stumbling blocks to the unlearned.” In opposition to 
 such opinions they declare that “‘ the effect and virtue of God’s 
 “* word is to allwminate the ignorant ;”’ that “ there is no truth nor 
 “doctrine necessary for our salvation, but that is, or may be 
 ‘* drawn out of that fountain and well of truth.” 
 
 It would indeed be extraordinary, should the members of Bible 
 Societies, whose vocation it is to distribute Bibles, be found en- 
 deavouring to separate the word of God from his Church ; but no 
 
14 
 
 less extraordinary must it seem, that ministers of the Gospel,—. 
 dignitaries of Protestant Churches, should be engaged in such an 
 undertaking. Butalas, Sir, however extraordinary and humiliating 
 may be the fact, still it is but too true that such ministers and 
 such dignitaries are to be found; but I rejoice, that they will be 
 looked for in vain among the supporters of Bible Societies. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Edward Maltby, Prebendary of Lincoln, sometime 
 since published a work in opposition to the British and Foreign 
 Bible Society.* He objects to that institution because they dis- 
 tribute the whole Bible. ‘‘ The whole of the Bible” he contends is 
 neither ‘‘ necessary’ nor ‘‘could be intended for the use of all 
 “¢ classes of mankind.’’ ‘‘Some of these books”’ (of the Old and New 
 Testaments) “‘are,”’ he declares, ‘‘ exclusively fit for the medita- 
 “tion of the learned ; and others though comparatively forming a 
 “small portion are equally important to the vulgar, and to the well 
 “ informed.’’ ‘‘ Out of sixty-six books which form the contents of 
 ‘the Old and New Testaments, not above seven in the Old, nor 
 “* above eleven in the New, appear to be calculated for the study, 
 ‘* or comprehension of the unlearned.” ‘‘ Mankind ought no more 
 “* to expect to understand the prophecies of Ezekiel, or the epis- 
 “tles of St. Paul, than the tragedies of A\schylus, or the letters of 
 “¢ Cicero or Pliny !!” 
 
 Another of these enemies to our Church, who are trying to se- 
 parate from her the Word of God, is the Rey. Mr. O’Callaghan. 
 This gentleman asserts, that ‘‘the Bible, without note or co tf 
 ‘tis unfit for the perusal of the rude and illiterate ;” that it ey 
 ‘¢ of the most difficult books he ever read ; and that this charaeter 
 “* was applicable, though in different degrees, to every part of t, not 
 “ purely historical ;” and he is convinced “that God, for t sest 
 “ purposes, intended, that the book of our salvation should be dif- 
 ‘+ ficult in proportion to its value.” ‘* The natural effect on the 
 ‘¢ uncultivated mind, of reading the Bible without note or comment, 
 “oral or written, is enthusiasm, more or less sublimated according 
 ‘<to the temperament of the individual.”” The supposition that 
 “¢the contracted mind of an ignorant peasant” can “comprehend 
 ‘*in any tolerable degree the high import of these subli 
 
 * Thoughts on the utility and expediency of the plans pro 
 British and Foreign Bible Soicety. 
 
15 
 
 ‘*sacred books’’ he declares ‘‘ to be not only unfounded but mis- 
 ** chievous.’”** 
 
 This lrish clergyman, who through some blunder, has found his 
 way into the Established, instead of the Romish Church, far from 
 being a friend to Bible Societies, has attacked them with a malig- 
 nity and scurrility not unworthy a Norris. The supporters of 
 these institutions, are held up by this man, to public derision and 
 detestation as ‘‘saints’”—“ spiritual jacobins’’—more formidable 
 than “ the secret tribunal of Westphalia” —“ the illuminati of Ger- 
 many’’—‘‘ the jacobin club ;” and “ the Irish executive directory ;”’ 
 and he declares it to be ‘‘ the duty of the state, to dissolve the dan- 
 gerous confederacy.”’} Could any thing connected with such awful 
 heresies and blasphemies, provoke a smile, it would be the recom- 
 mendation of this Irish master of a college, to the state, to dissolve 
 a confederacy, embracing the king’s ministers, the royal family, - 
 and the heir apparent to the throne. 
 
 The Prebendary of Lincoln we have seen, admits that there are 
 eighteen of the sixty-six books of Scripture, equally important to 
 the learned and unlearned ; and for the sake of these, the poor and 
 ignorant might wish to have the Bible, although incumbered with 
 so much useless matter: and as Mr. O’Callaghan has not conde- 
 scended to point out to them any other book to which they can re- 
 sort, for the words of eternal life, they may still desire to possess 
 the sacred volume, trusting to their own diligence, and divine as- 
 sistance, to understand some little portion of it. One more effort, 
 therefore, was necessary, to effect the complete separation of the 
 Word and the Church of God. A substitute for the Bible, was to 
 be found, and this task, too hazardous for even Mr. O’Callaghan to 
 attempt, has been fearlessly executed by an American Bishop. 
 
 In a Pastoral letter condemning Bible Societies, which you, Sir, ad- 
 dressed to the Laity of our Church in this Diocess, on the 3d of April, 
 1815, I find the following. ‘In distributing the Book of Common- 
 ‘¢ Prayer, we circulate the most interesting and valuable passages of 
 “€Seripture, lucidly and appositely arranged, so as to present not a 
 
 * «Thoughts on the tendency of Bible Societies as affecting the established 
 religion, and Christianity, as a reasonable service”—by the Rev. A. O’Calla- 
 ghan, master of Kilkenny college. . 
 
 -4 “The Bible Society against the State and Church,” by the Rey. A, 0’Cal- 
 laghan. 
 
16 
 
 * perverted or imperfect view, of divine truth, but in simplicity and 
 force vhe fundamental principles and privileges of the great charter 
 “of ou. salvation. Itis not hazarding too much to assert, that he who 
 “ will read the portions of sacred writ contained in the Book of Com- 
 ¢¢ mon Prayer and in the offices usually connected with it, will be- 
 * come acquainted with every part of Scripture arranged in per- 
 * spicuous and impressive order, which can be necessary to form his 
 *« faith, to regulate his obedience, to inspire his hopes, and to guide his 
 “«devotions. We distribute then the Holy Scriptures in the manner 
 “* best calculated to diffuse a knowledge of their sacred contents, 
 <¢ when we distribute the Book of Common Prayer.” 
 
 I have diligently studied the passage now quoted ; and carefully 
 weighed each word and sentence, to extract from it, if possible, a 
 different meaning than that which it naturally bears ; but after ex- 
 amining it, with a most sincere desire to understand it, in no other 
 sense than you intended it to be understood; 1 amconstrained to in- 
 fer from it; that in your opinion, there is no part of Scripture, 
 which can be necessary to form a Christian’s faith, regulate his 
 obedience, inspire his hopes, or guide his devotions, which is not 
 contained. in the Prayer Book; and also, that the knowledge of 
 Scripture, will be more promoted by the distribution of the Prayer 
 Book, than of the Bible itself. Itis also I think intimated, although 
 not expressly asserted, that the Bible presents a perverted or im- 
 perfect view of divine truth ; because you tell us, that in the Prayer 
 Book, the extracts from the Bible are so arranged, as not to Proceu 
 such a view. 
 
 I had been led by high authority to believe, not only that ‘all 
 Scripture’? was given by inspiration of God, but that it was all 
 “ profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction 
 “in righteousness.”” But it now seems that you have detected much 
 unnecessary matter in the sacred volume. The quantity of this 
 matter, may he ascertained by comparing the extracts in the Prayer 
 Book, with the whole contents of the Bible. Such a comparison 
 carefully made, presents us with the following portions of Scripture, 
 not contained ‘‘in the Book of Common Prayer and in the offices 
 ** usually connected with it,” and of course according to the Pastoral 
 Letter not necessary to form our faith, regulate our obedience, in- 
 spire our hopes, or guide our devotions: consequently, having but 
 little influence on our conduct here, or our happiness hereafter. 
 viz. Inthe Old Testament—The book of Genesis, 39 chapters 
 
17 
 
 of Exodus, the books of Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, 
 Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, 
 Nehemiah, Esther, 40 chapters of Job, 30 chapters of Proverbs, 
 the books of Ecclesiastes and Canticles, 63 chapters of Isaiah, 51 
 chapters of Jeremiah, the book of Lamentations, 47 chapters of 
 Ezekiel, 11 chapters of Daniel, the book of Hosea, 2 chapters of 
 Joel, the books of Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, 2 chap- 
 ters of Habakkuk, the books of Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, 2 
 chapters of Malachi. 
 
 In the New Testament—7 chapters of St. Matthew, 11 chapters 
 of St. Mark, 5 chapters of St. Luke, 7 chapters of St. John, 17 
 chapters of Acts, 9 chapters of Romans, 9 chapters of 1 Corinthians, 
 6 chapters of 2 Corinthians, 2 clapters of Galatians, 1 chapter of 
 Ephesians, 2 chapters of Colossians, 4 chapters of 1 Thessalonians, 
 the whole of 2 Thessalonians, 3 chapters of 1 Timothy, 3 chapters. 
 of 2 Timothy, the whole of Titus and Philemon, 7 chapters of 
 Hebrews, 4 chapters of James, 2 chapters of 1 Peter, the whole of 
 2 Peter, 2 chapters of 1 John, the whole of 2 and 3 John, and 18 
 chapters of Revelation. 
 
 But let it not be supposed, that the Prayer Book contains all the 
 residue of Scripture. There cannot be found in it, with the ex- 
 ception of the Psalms, but six entire chapters,” and the remaining 
 extracts consist of detached passages and fragments of chapters. 
 _ In some instances, a single verse only is given from a whole book, 
 as is the case from Hab. Joel, and Proverbs. 
 
 Thus, Sir, we have seen, that the offence of separating the 
 Word and the Church of God, which you have thought proper to 
 charge upon Bible Societies, has been attempted by very different 
 instruments ; andshould you succeed in convincing Episcopalians, 
 that the Prayer Book contains all the Scripture that is necessary, 
 and that it is better calculated to convey a knowledge of Scriptural 
 truth, than the Bible itself, the attempt would in time be crowned 
 with complete success. Yes Sir, let the sufficiency of the Prayer 
 Book as a substitute for the Bible be generally believed, and the 
 latter would soon be consigned exclusively to the shelves of the 
 learned and curious ; and the poor and illiterate of our congrega- 
 tions would be told like the Catholics, that the command of the 
 
 * 1 Coy. xiii, tsaiah Ixiii. Mark xiv. Luke xxii. 1 John i. Rev. iv. 
 x 
 
18 
 
 Redeemer, ‘‘ Search the Scriptures,”’ did not apply to them; and 
 that the Church had kindly provided for their use, a litile Bible, 
 which although not the twentieth part of the size of that Bible 
 indited by inspiration, nevertheless contained all that was neces- 
 sary to form their faith, regulate their obedience, inspire their 
 hopes, and guide their devotions ! 
 
 I will not affect to believe, that the sense in which I have con- 
 sidered your expression, ‘‘ the separation of the Church from the 
 ** Word of God;’’ although the only one I am confident, which 
 it will rationally bear, is the one in which you used it. The mean- 
 ing which you attach to these words,and their application to Bible 
 Societies, will be examined in connexion with another part of your 
 charge. I will also postpone for the present, the consideration of 
 your assertion, that these institutions ‘ tend to weaken the zeal of 
 ‘¢ Episcopalians in favour of those distinguishing principles of their 
 “ Church, which eminently entitle her, to the appellation of apos- 
 ** tolic and primitive ;”? and hasten to your insinuation, that the 
 success which has attended Bible Societies is not to be regarded 
 ** as evidence of the favour ef Heaven,”’ because * Heretical and 
 **schismatical sects have at various times obtained great popula- 
 * rity,” &c. 
 
 I cannot but regard this remark as intended to rebut the argu- 
 ment of Governor Jay, in his late address to the American Bible 
 Society, that the peculiar circumstances under which Bible So- 
 cieties originated ; the wonderful extension which has been given ' 
 to them; the unanimity with which conflicting sects have support- 
 ed them; and the events which have occurred to facilitate the 
 distribution of the Scriptures, all unite to induce the belief, that 
 these institutions, together with the other means which are now 
 hastening the coming in of the Gentiles, are providential ; andu 
 der this persuasion he recommends to the opponents _ of "Bible 
 Societies, the counsel of Gamaliel. 
 
 No one, I believe, in the possession of his foul i 
 
 the divine approbation ; and he who labours to dispel so 
 opinion, is but as one who beateth the air. But when we obs 
 an institution established in the midst of war and desolation, 
 voted solely to the a of God, and the salvation of man: 1 
 
19 
 
 excellent of the earth, however much they may differ on other 
 points, lend it their unanimous sanction ; when expiring saints re- 
 joice that they have been permitted to labour in its service ; when 
 Christian nations, with the single exception of such as are involvy- 
 ed in the gloom of papal ignorance and superstition ; as if animat- 
 ed by one heart and one mind, are yielding to it, their treasures and 
 their exertions; and when in consequence of this institution, the 
 Gospel has free course and is glorified, in a degree unparalleled 
 since the days of the Apostles: surely, Sir, we may be permit- 
 ted to say, “‘ itis the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our 
 ‘eyes,’ without being classed with the most ignorant of fanatics. 
 
 ‘¢ Thirty-six most respectable men composed, in 1804, the com- 
 ** mittee of this infant association—and now, all the North of Eu- 
 “* rope, almost the whole of Germany, the vast empire of Russia, 
 ‘¢ the United States, the English Colonies in both worlds, the shores 
 “of Africa, and the remote isles of the East, are covered with 
 “Societies employed in distributing the sacred Manna! The 
 * tribes of the Esquimaux, the foliowers of Mahomet, the descend- 
 “ants of the ancient Hindoos, even the followers of Confucius, now 
 ** read the Holy Scriptures, and begin to do homage to the truth! 
 *¢ Surely if no enterprise, truly grand and glorious, can ever be 
 “* executed, if no good design can even be put into the heart, or ac- 
 “* complished by the hands of men, without assistance from on High, 
 ‘there is a case in which we may say, THIs Is THE FINGER OF Gop.”’* 
 
 Having exhausted the resources of argument, you finally call to 
 your aid, the authority, not of your own, but of a foreign church ; 
 and congratulate yourself, that in withholding your support from 
 Bible Societies, you are acting—not with the House of Bishops, of 
 which you are a member—but with the Lord Bishops of England 
 and Ireland. 
 
 Although the friends of these Societies, believe that in making 
 known to the poor and ignorant the unsearchable riches of Christ, 
 as revealed in the Scriptures, they are engaged in a work of faith, 
 and labour of love, and cannot, and ought not to abandon this work 
 through fear of incurring the frowns, even of those who occupy 
 “‘ the highest stations in the Church;’’ yet sincerely do they re- 
 
 * Preface to French translation of Owen’s History of B.& F. Bible Society, 
 by the Rev. Mr. Peschier, Pastor, and Professor of Belles Lettres, at Geneva. 
 
20 
 
 joice when they find themselves “‘ perfectly joined together in the 
 same mind, and the same judgment,” with those whose learning, 
 talents, and piety, give weight to their opinions, and influence to 
 their example. 
 
 But before we proceed to inquire whether you are, in fact, act- 
 ing as you seem to suppose, in unison with episcopal authority 
 abroad ; we may perhaps render a not unimportant service to the 
 younger clergy especially, by ascertaining what degree of submis- 
 sion is due from them to episcopal authority at home, when that 
 authority is exercised to deter them from uniting with their fellow 
 Christians in publishing, through the medium of the Scriptures, 
 the words of eternal life. This investigation will not be deemed 
 impertinent, when we recollect that many of your Presbyters have 
 unequivocally regretted and condemned the cause you have pur- 
 sued with regard to Bible Societies, while, at the same time, they 
 contended that the obedience they owed their Bishop, required 
 them to act in conformity with his recommendations, although con~ 
 
 trary to their own judgments. Accordingly there have been in- © 
 
 stances of clergymen, who, while they remained in this Diocess, 
 could not be persuaded to join Bible Societies ; on removing to 
 Pennsylvania and Maryland, immediately took an active part in 
 their management. It cannot therefore, be unimportant to inquire 
 whether a clergyman, who conscientiously believes that these in- 
 stitutions are calculated to advance the temporal and eternal wel- 
 fare of his fellow men, is in any case restrained by his ordination 
 vows, or by the respect he owes his Diocesan, from giving them 
 his support and countenance. 
 
 It will not be denied, that there can be no obligation to obey 
 where there is no right to command. A Bishop can derivea right 
 to forbid his clergy to unite in Bible Societies, only from Scripture, 
 or from the constitution and canons of the Church. It will not be 
 attempted to deduce his right from the former source; and, it 
 would be equally in vain to seek for it in the latter. The Bishop, 
 at his consecration, is indeed commanded ‘‘ diligently to exercise 
 discipline,’ and to ‘drive away from the Church all erroneous 
 and strange doctrine.”” But the discipline which he is to exercise 
 is such only ‘‘as by the authority of God’s word, and by the order 
 of the Church, is committed” to him; and the “‘ erroneous and 
 strange doctrine” is such only as is “‘ contrary to God’s word.” 
 
21 
 
 It is therefore obvious, that the right of exercising discipline, is 
 not an arbitrary and undefined right ; and that unless the discipline 
 of the Church, as established by her canons, or God’s word, for- 
 bids Episcopalians to unite in these associations, the Bishop cannot 
 derive a right to forbid them from the consecration service. It is 
 true that Priests and Deacons at their ordination, promise to obey 
 their Bishops, and other chief ministers, ‘‘ who, according to the 
 canons of the Church, have the charge and government over them ;” 
 and they also promise to follow, with a glad mind and will, * their 
 godly admonitions ;”’ but a much higher authority forbids them to 
 fear man rather than God, and of course, when they esteem the 
 admonitions of their Bishop to be ungodly, they are under the most 
 solemn obligations to disregard them. Such of your clergy Sir, 
 as are in this particular, disregarding your monitions, may share 
 with you “the satisfaction’’ of acting with those in high stations, 
 ‘in the Church from which we are descended.” 
 
 A charge against Bible Societies from his Diocesan, called forth 
 aletter from the able and justly celebrated pen of Mr. Gisborne, 
 addressed to the Bishop of Gloucester. ‘‘1I have hearda doubt ex- 
 ‘* pressed,”’ says this truly pious and respectable divine, ‘‘ whether 
 *¢a clergyman of the Church of England, having solemnly promised 
 ‘at his ordination, that he will reverently obey his ordinary and 
 “and other chief ministers unto whom is committed the charge 
 “‘and government over him; following with a glad mind and will 
 ‘their godly admonitions, and submitting himself to their godly 
 ‘judgments ;”’ is not by that engagement. bound to withdraw him- 
 self from the Bible Society, or ‘‘ to abstain from joining it, if duly 
 “apprized that his diocesan disapproves the society. I think it 
 ‘manifest, that in conformity with the general rules recognised in 
 “‘ the interpretation of enactments of the Legislature, the obedience 
 “required and promised in the ordination service, relates exclu- 
 *< sively to the office then to be conferred by the Bishop, and re- 
 ** ceived by the applicant for holy orders ; the office of a minister 
 *‘of the Church of England ; or in other words, to the discharge 
 ‘¢ of clerical duties publicly in the Church, or in private ministra- 
 ‘* tions, visits and parochial superintendence, and any other speci- 
 ‘fied points of conduct. As the supporting of Bible Societies is 
 “one of the points on which the promises made at the time of or- 
 
22 
 
 “ dination had no prospective bearing, the clergyman is at liberty to 
 “‘ act on that subjeet, whatever be the sentiments of his diocesan, as he 
 “judges most conducive to the glory of God: and in the sight of God, 
 ** he is bound so to act.” 
 
 Suffer me to adduce a still higher authority than Mr. Gisborne, — 
 the present Bishop .of Gloucester—This ‘prelate, when Dean of 
 Wells, was invited to co-operate in the formation of the Somerset 
 Auxiliary Bible Society, his diocesan having discountenanced the 
 measure. The invitation was promptly accepted, and in his letter 
 to the committee, the Dean, alluding to the opposition of his Bishop, 
 remarks, ‘‘ I must add, that I cannot but feel regret in differing on 
 ‘this occasion from the opinions, and declining to follow the exam- 
 “* ple of those for whom on every account I entertain so much re- 
 “gard, but I cannot (and should not I am sure be expected to) 
 < allow that regret to overcome the conviction of Se own judg- 
 ‘*ment and the dictate as I conceive of my conscience.’ 
 
 But to dissipate at once every doubt on the subject, I offer the 
 following disclaimer on the part of the Episcopate itself, of all do- 
 minion over the consciences of the clergy. The Bishop of Ely 
 in a charge to his clergy, after expressing his disapprobation of the 
 British and Foreign Bible Society, and giving his reasons why he 
 could not join it, adds, ‘* Although I have thus explained to you my 
 ** sentiments on the subject of the Bible Society, I by no means ex- 
 ‘pect that any implicit deference should be paid to my opinion. 
 ‘¢ This is a point on which good men have been much divided in 
 “their opinion, and every one must decide according to the dictate of 
 “his own conscience.” 
 
 I am far from imputing to you, Sir, the assumption of a right fo 
 dictate to your clergy, 1 am sure you regret with me, that any of 
 them should so far mistake their obligations as Christians and as 
 Churchmen, as to abstain from Bible Societies contrary to their 
 own judgment, solely from deference to your opinion. 
 
 I will now proceed to consider, how far your opposition to Bible 
 Societies, is sanctioned by Episcopal example. As I am about to 
 enter a wide field of investigation, a field which it is not my pur- 
 pose, lightly te examine, I must offer as an apology for the weari- 
 ness you will probably experience in keeping me company ¥ le 
 exploring it, the impesing exhibition presented in your charge, of 
 
23 
 
 forty-five right reverend Bishops drawn up in battle array against 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society, while only ten of these dig- 
 nified personages, are seen in the opposite ranks. 
 
 I was taught, Sir, in my childhood, that many objects which when 
 indistinctly seen at a distance, and through the medium of an 
 alarmed imagination, assume most terrific shapes, prove on near 
 inspection to be perfectly harmless. The truth of this precept of 
 the nursery, has been fully exemplified in the present instance ; 
 for on reconnoitering my supposed foes, my fears have gradually sub- 
 sided, till at last they have been exchanged for confidence ; and I 
 have discoveredin the English and Irish Episcopate, my firmest 
 and most efficient friends and allies. On taking a nearer view of 
 these forty-five Prelates, I observed, that they were not, as toa 
 superficial reader of your charge they would undoubtedly appear, 
 opponents of the British and Foreign Bible Society ; but that you had 
 merely stated, with a cautious selection of language, that their names 
 ‘¢ do not appear among the supporters” of that institution. On this, I 
 began to take courage. I recollected that it could not be a ne- 
 cessary consequence, that all who did not belong to a religious so- 
 ciety, were opposed to it; for in that case, it would seem that the 
 great body of Episcopalians in this city are opposed to the Bible 
 and Prayer Book Society ; as their late report informs us, their 
 patronage is extremely limited. I recollected also, that the En- 
 glish. Society for promoting Christfan Knowledge; a society of 
 ancient date, peculiarly connected with the established Church, 
 and to which it is not known, that any opposition whatever exists, 
 so late as 1812, numbered only 32 Episcopal patrons of the 49 
 bishops of the established Church ; and that comparatively, only 
 a few Bishops at this moment belong to the Prayer Book and Ho- 
 mily Society; the Church Missionary Society ; the Church of 
 England Tract Society ; or the Society for converting the Jews ; 
 although they are all under the exclusive control of members of 
 the established Church. It is believed that of the American Bi- 
 shops, the names of Bishops White and Kemp, are alone to be 
 found, among’the ‘‘ supporters” of the American Colonization So- 
 ciety, and yet I presume that neither you, nor the rest of your 
 brethren would be willing to admit, that this circumstance afforded 
 any proof of the hostility of the American Bishops to that institution. 
 tt likewise occurred to me, that there were certain reasons which 
 
24 
 
 might influence many of the English Prelates to decline a connex- 
 ion with the British and Foreign Bible Society,who at the same time, 
 were by no means opposed to the principles on which it is founded. 
 The Christian Knowledge Society, established long prior to the 
 Bible Society is, as | have already remarked, intimately connected 
 with the Established Church, and disseminates the Scriptures to a 
 very great extent, as well as Prayer Books and episcopal tracts. It 
 is therefore very possible, that some of the Bishops may think this 
 institution entitled to their exclusive patronage, who, had not this 
 Society existed, would cheerfully have given their countenance to 
 the Bible Society. This opinion is, in a great measure, confirmed 
 by acharge of the present Bishop of Gloucester, a warm and active 
 friend of the Bible Society ; in which, after recommending this So- 
 ciety to his Clergy, he tells them, that in case their circumstances 
 are so contracted, as not to permit them to subscribe to both So- 
 cieties, he thinks the Christian Knowledge Society entitled to their 
 single subscription. It is certaiuly fair then, to presume, that if 
 a Prelate so much attached to the Bible cause as the Bishop of 
 Gloucester, still admits, that when both cannot be patronised, the 
 Christian Knowledge Society ought to be preferred, thatmany other 
 Bishops may go a little further, and contend, that this Society ought 
 to be exclusively patronised by churchmen, without enter- 
 taining an unfriendly feeling towards the Bible Society, or dream- 
 ing that its members are separating ‘the Word and the Church 
 of God.” 
 
 But although there is no evidence that the forty-five Bishops 
 you have named, are opposed to Bible Societies ; yet it is a lamen- 
 table truth, that a few of the Bishops of the established Church, 
 have arrayed themselves against the British and Foreign Bible Soci- 
 ety. But here again my apprehensions have been wonderfully re- 
 lieved by aclose examination of the nature and extent of their 
 hostility. This institution was established in 1804, and after the 
 most diligent researches into its history, I cannot find, that a single 
 Bishop in the United Kingdoms uttered a syllable against it, till 
 1810. In that year the Bishop of London, I believe Dr. Randolph, 
 was invited to accept the presidency of an Auxiliary Society. The 
 invitation was declined on account of his objections to the Society ; 
 but not having seen his letter on the occasion, I am ignorant of 
 their nature. 
 
25 
 
 In 1812, a similar invitation was given to the late Bishop of 
 Gloucester, who likewise declined it, but instead of grounding his 
 refusal on the erroneous principles of the Society, he merely 
 stated, that there were already, the Society for promoting Christian 
 Knowledge, and that for propagating the Gospel in foreign parts, 
 and that in his opinion, ‘* these two Societies have claims on the 
 “* clergy of the Establishment, for all the pecuniary aid, and men- 
 << tal exertion which can possibly be contributed by them, in sup- 
 ** port of those ancient and chartered Societies.” 
 
 From this time to 1814, no Episcopal voice was raised in op- 
 position to the Society ; butin this year, the Bishop of Chester 
 delivered a charge in which, to the utter confusion of the 
 O’Callaghan’s, the Norrisses, et td genus-omne, who had calum- 
 niated the motives and designs of the friends of the Society, he 
 thus expresses himself: ‘‘ From my heart, I believe, that as a 
 ‘* body, they are actuated by no other incitement than a wish to 
 ‘* promote the present and eternal happiness of their fellow crea- 
 ** tures.”? The Bishop however, declares his disapprobation of 
 the Society, and concludes with assuring his clergy, ‘It is my de- 
 “‘cided conviction, that by joining the Bible Society, you may, 
 “though unintentionally, endanger the interests of the Church 
 “and State.’” The next year, the Bishop of Lincoln delivered a 
 charge, in which he is reported to have said, that the Bible Soci- 
 ety was ‘‘ dangerous to the established religion, and the orthodox 
 ** principles of those who attended its meetings, as it admits mem- 
 <¢ bers of any creed or no creed.” That it was, “ as absurd and 
 ** unaccountable for those who pray against false doctrine, heresy 
 ** and schism, to join in religious associations with those who avow 
 ** the falsest doctrines and most notorious heresies, and most de- 
 “termined schism, as to see loyal Britons joining themselves with, 
 “ and furnishing arms to the exciters of sedition, abettors of privy 
 “conspiracy, and promoters of sedition.”” You will observe 
 Sir, that I say the Bishop is reported to have uttered these extra- 
 ordinary sentiments ; for he had the good sense to refuse every 
 solicitation to print his charge. In 1816, the Bishop of Carlisle, 
 in a charge to his clergy, laboured to prove the principles of Bible 
 Societies to be erroneous, and declared that he did not think 
 “‘ they were calculated to promote our ecclesiastical establish- 
 *© ment, or the quiet of it.’’ 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 ‘he next insiance of episcopal opposition, was the temperate 
 and dignified charge of the Bishop of Ely, from which we have 
 already given an extract ; and the next, and as far as my informa- 
 tion extends, the last Bishop of the established Church, who has 
 opposed the British and Foreign Bible Society, is Dr. Marsh.* 
 This gentleman, when Bishop of Landaff, 1817, in a charge to his 
 clergy, speaking of the Christian Knowledge Society, observed, 
 ‘‘ Itis the most ancient Bible Society in this kingdom ; its title is 
 ‘* well adapted to its object, for Christian knowledge is unquestion- 
 “¢ ably promoted by the circulation of the Bible.” He then states 
 his preference for this Society, because it gives the Prayer Book, 
 and remarks, ‘‘ Though the use of the Bible makes us Chris- 
 “‘tians, it is the use of the Prayer Book also which makes us 
 * Churchmen.” 
 
 You will not I hope Sir, fromthe foregoing summary of the 
 Episcopal opposition in Great Britain, conclude that I am ignorant 
 of the recent occurrences in Ireland, connected with the Hibernian 
 Bible Society. Far from wishing to conceal them, | am anxious 
 they should be known, because they afford a salutary lesson to all 
 the conductors of Bible Societies. This institution till lately en- 
 joyed almost the unanimous patronage of the Irish Episcopate; and- 
 the recent loss of a portion of that patronage, is to be imputed not 
 to any dissatisfaction of the Irish prelates with the principles on 
 which it was founded, but to a slight deviation from those princi- 
 ples on the part of the Society itself. Two of the Irish Archbi- 
 shops, after having for years held offices in this Society, lately 
 withdrew from it, and some of the Bishops have followed their 
 example. It would indeed have been an awkward confession for 
 these Archbishops to have made, that they had for years been 
 guilty of separating ‘‘God’s Word and God’s Church.” It would 
 have added but little to their dignity, and the weight of their exam- 
 
 * J do not mean to assert, that no other than the Bishops I have named, have 
 opposed Bible Societies, because it is possible, that some instances have es- 
 caped my inquiries; but the foregoing cases are all I have been able to disco- 
 ver, after an industrious investigation of the first fifteen years of the history 
 of the Society by Owen, and of every document relating to the subject which 
 I have been able to procure. Neither do I mean to assert, that all the Bishops 
 approve of the Society, who have not opposed it; because it is very possible, 
 that some who disapprove of it, may be restrained by their respect for the opi- 
 nions of others, and their regard for the peace of the Church, from openly 
 condemning it. 
 
27 
 / . 
 
 ple, to have admitted, that it was not till long after their elevation 
 to the highest stations in the Church, that they had made the dis- 
 covery, that the Bible was unintelligible without the aid of human 
 commentaries, and that in giving to the destitute the words of eter- 
 nal life, they had sanctioned a ‘“ departure from the apostolic mode 
 of propagating Christianity.”” Nor do [ find that such extraordi- 
 nary and humiliating confessions have been made. 1 have before 
 me, the letter of the late Primate of Ireland, requiring his name 
 to be withdrawn from the Society ; and in this letter he declares 
 himself ‘‘a friend to the circulation of the Scriptures ;”’ and ex- 
 presses the reluctance and even pain he feels on leaving the Soci- 
 ety. He then assigns as his reasons, the change which he thinks 
 has been made in the constitution of the Society ; and the impro- 
 per topics and expressions introduced in the speeches delivered at 
 its public meetings. 
 
 What stronger evidence can we require than this very letter, of 
 the Primate’s approbation of the principles of Bible Societies ? 
 Are we not expressly given to understand, that had not the consti- 
 tution been changed, and had no improprieties occurred at the 
 public meetings, he would gladly have continued his patronage to 
 the Society. We have every reason for believing that the reasons 
 assigned by the Primate, are the same which influenced the other 
 Bishops who seceded from the Irish Society ; and yet their names 
 are included in the forty-five, who you inform us do not support 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
 From certain facts which have come to my knowledge, I am in- 
 clined to beiieve that there were some grounds for the Primate’s 
 complaints, although not to the exteat he seems to have supposed; 
 and that the Hibernian Society had been guilty of some indiscre- 
 tions, arising rather from that ardency of feeling so peculiar to the 
 Irish character, than from any intention to violate the fundamental 
 principles of the Society ; and I cannot but attribute to the same 
 ardency of feeling, the hasty step of the Primate in withdrawing 
 from the Society, without first interposing his authority and influ- 
 ence to correct the errors which offended him. Several of the 
 frish Bishops belong to the British and Foreign Bible Society, and 
 from that institution, it is not known that any Bishop has ever with- 
 drawn his name. 
 
 I have thus, Sir, candidly and honestly, stated every instance of 
 opposition to Bible Societies on the part of the English, Irish and 
 
28 
 
 Scotch Bishops, with which I am acquainted, from the period of 
 their first establishment to the present time. And now Sir, to 
 what a little insignificant band, is your formidable array of forty- 
 five Bishops reduced? Of fifty-five Bishops, we find two, (both 
 since deceased) who on being invited to accept offices in Auxiliary 
 Societies, decline the intended honour; and one of these, instead 
 of disapproving of the principles of the Bible Society contents him- 
 self with expressing his preference for those Societies which are 
 immediately connected with the establishment ; and we find five 
 who in their charges object to the Society and advise their clergy 
 not to join it. Of these, one refuses to print his charge—another 
 tells his clergy, that it is a question on which good men differ, and 
 that they must act according to the dictates of their own con- 
 sciences, and a third, the present Bishop of Peterborough, in ~ 
 pointed terms approves of the union of Christians for the diffusion 
 of the Scriptures, without note or comment, wherever Christiani- 
 ty is professed under a form different from the established Church ; 
 declaring that the circulation of the Bible unquestionably pro- 
 motes Christian knowledge, and that the use of it makes men 
 Christians. 
 
 We are now Sir, prepared to judge how far in opposing Bible 
 Societies, you are acting ‘‘ with those in the highest stations of the 
 Church from which we are descended ;” and how far the nature 
 of your hostility is sanctioned by their example. 
 
 Spontaneously, and without the slightest provocation, you have 
 attacked Bible Societies in the public newspapers, giving to your 
 accusations against them, the sanction of your name, and of the 
 sacred office you bear.* You have attacked Bible Societies, in a 
 pastoral letter, addressed to the laity of your Diocess.t You have 
 attacked Bible Societies, in an address before another institution,; 
 and you have now recently attacked them in your charge to the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 Indeed Sir, your opposition to Bible Societies, although always 
 free from offensive personalities, evinces nevertheless, an inve- 
 teracy, a restlessness, a perseverance, wholly unknown to the 
 Prelates with whom you suppose you are acting. gi 
 
 * See New-York Evening Post, May 13th, 1816. 
 + See Pastoral Letter of 3d April, 1815. 
 { Seeaddress before New-York Auxiliary Bible and Prayer-Book Society; de- 
 
 livered Sth March, 1816. 
 
29 
 
 Having thus Sir, reconnoitered our enemies, and having found 
 them far less formidable than your representations would lead us 
 to imagine ; it is now time to take an account of our friends and 
 allies; and I will accordingly proceed to number the Bishops of 
 the established Church, who have, within the period I haye been 
 eonsidering, borne their testimony in favour of Bible Societies. 
 It is obvious that the principles of these associations, whether cor- 
 rect or otherwise, can in no degree be affected by the names by | 
 which they are distinguished. If it be wrong in Episcopalians to | 
 support the British and Foreign Bible Society, it must be equally | 
 wrong io them to support the Naval and Military Society, or the Hi- |, 
 berian Society, since they are all founded upon the same principle | 
 of universal co-operation, for the distribution of the uncommented 
 Scriptures. It is this principle which you condemn ; and in sup- 
 port of your opinion, you give us the names of forty-five Bishops 
 who do-not belong to the British and Foreign Bible Society. . But | 
 if any of these Bishops belong to other Bible Societies, or have in 
 any manner whatever declared their approbation of the very prin- 
 ciple which you condemn, then Sir, you appeal to them in vain 
 to sanction your hostility. You have not, it is true, asserted that 
 these forty-five Bishops were opposed to Bible Societies, nor that 
 they do not support them; but merely that their names “ do not 
 appear among the supporters of the British and Foreign Bible So- 
 ciety.” Your prudence in selecting these precise terms is render- 
 ed peculiarly manifest, by the singular fact that the dignified name 
 which is placed at the head of your array of the non-supporters of 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society, will likewise be found at 
 the head of my list of the Episcopal patrons of Bible Societies. 
 You cannot Sir, be ignorant that the Primate of England, the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, has for years been, and still is, at the, 
 head of the Naval and Military Bible Society, which does not in, 
 the least degree differ in principle from the British and Foreign | 
 Bible Society, but only in the more limited sphere of its opera- 
 tions. You are also probably aware, that many of the Irish Bishops 
 were Satisfied with patronising the Bible Society of their own 
 country, and did not remit contributions to the British Society. 
 Their secession from the Hibernian Society has already been 
 noticed, and we have seen that it arose from the indiscretions of 
 the Society, and not from any disapprobation of the Bishops with 
 the principles on which it was professedly founded. Yet are the 
 
names of some of these Bishops, who have for years been sup- 
 porters of a Bible Society, included among the forty-five non-sup- 
 porters of the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
 As before remarked, the British and Foreign Bible Society was 
 established in 1804, and within the period which has since elapsed, 
 the following Prelates of the established Church, have united with 
 their fellow Christians in distributing the Scriptures without note 
 or comment ; thus incurring according to the doctrines of your 
 charge, the guilt of separating ‘“‘the Church from the word of 
 
 God.”’ 
 
 Patron of the Naval and Military Bible Society.* 
 The Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Members and Officers of the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 Bishop of Litchfield and 
 
 Archbishop of Cashel 
 
 Archbishop of Tuam Coventry 
 Bishop of Durham Kildare 
 St. David’s ———. Clogher 
 ——— Salisbury —— Derry 
 ——— Norwich —— Bristol 
 ——— Gloucester ——— Landaff 
 ——— Meath ——— London 
 ——— Chichester ——— Clonfert 
 ——-— Soda and Man Cloyne . 
 
 Members and Officers of the Hibernian Bible Society. . 
 
 Archbishop of Armagh, Pri- Bishop of Raphoe 
 mate of Ireland Limerick 
 Archbishop of Dublin —— Ferns 
 Bishop of Kilmore ——— Killaloe 
 Down -——— Dromore 
 Elphin —— Cork 
 ——— Killala i 
 
 To the above should be added, the name of Dr. Warren, Bi- 
 shop of Bangor,who, although he never, I believe, belonged to any 
 Bible Society, yet instructed the rural Deans throughout his Dio- 
 cess, to distribute the plans of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 
 
 = This institution was formed prior to the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
31 
 
 and to solicit contributions to its funds ; a pretty strong proof that itis 
 possible to refrain from joining a Society without being opposed to 
 it. ‘We thus find, that since 1804, thirty-two Bishops have openly 
 supported Bible Societies, and seven have openly expressed their 
 disapprobation of them. In 1815, a majority of the Bishops of the 
 Established Church belonged to Bible Societies ; but the death of 
 some, and the secession of others from the Hibernian Society, have 
 reduced their number to a minority. But possibly it may be 
 imagined, that the Bishops I have named have rather acquiesced in 
 Bible Societies, than cordially approved of them; and that their 
 patronage has been merely nominal— To correct’ $0 erroneous a 
 sentiment, if such be entertained, suffer me to call your attention 
 to some extracts from their speeches and writings, from which we 
 may learn their real opinions of the utility and propriety of these 
 associations. 
 
 I know not, that I can introduce to your notice, any Prelate 
 whose spotless character, and whose exalted piety and talents, 
 have reflected more lustre upon the Church of which he was a 
 member, than thé Right Rev. Dr. Porteus, late Bishop of London. 
 This estimable Prelate had the honour of being the first Episcopal 
 patron of the British and Foreign Bible Society ; and of that insti- 
 tution he thus expressed himself :—<“ It is rising uniformly in repu- 
 “* tation.and credit; gaining new accessions of strength and reve- 
 ‘¢nue; and attaching to itself more and more the approbation and 
 support of every real friend to the Church and to Religion.” (See 
 Hodgson’s life.) He also condescended to publish a pamphlet in 
 vindication of the Society’s operations in India, under the signa- 
 ture of “‘ A Member of the British and Foreign Bible Society.”’* 
 
 Tus Bisuor or Bristot, in 1810, addressed a circular letter to 
 his Clergy, recommending the formation of an Auxiliary Bible Se- 
 ciety in the city of Bristol. 
 
 Tue Bisuor or LeicHuin anp Ferns in a charge to his Clergy: . 
 in 1812, after recommending the formation of an Auxiliary Society, 
 says, “ in aid and assistance of which, I trust I shall ever be found 
 “‘ as forward as any of the Clergy can wish or expect; convinced 
 *« as I must be, that the object and views of these Societies are of 
 “* the highest import and concernment ; that they tend to the wel- 
 “fare of every individual, as well as the community in general ; 
 ** operating on the morals and well being of the rising generation, 
 
 * See Owen’s History. 
 
‘and extending to affect the eternal interests of all who saree 
 **in the benefit of them.” 
 
 Tue Bisuor or Kitpare delivered a speech before pe British 
 and Foreign Bible Society, at its annual meeting in 1812: 
 
 Tue Bisuor or Mearn likewise delivered a speech on the same 
 occasion, in which he jis represented to have ‘‘ expressed the 
 “* warmest satisfaction at witnessing so numerous a meeting united 
 “* thus cordially and ardently on an object of so much importance ; 
 ‘‘and assured them, that he should endeavour to impart a similar 
 ‘‘ impression to the Clergy of that Diocess which constituted the 
 ** sphere of his labours.” Ch. Observer, Vol. ii. 318. 
 
 Tue Bisnor or Cioyne, in 1813, attended at the formation of © 
 the North West London Auxiliary Society, and in his speech on 
 that occasion observed, ‘‘ That there should be learned and 
 ** respectable men, and such men I am afraid are to be found, who 
 ** object to our principle, and are alarmed at our progress, is to 
 ‘me matter of pure and simple astonishment.” In 1818, his 
 
 ‘Lordship attended the meeting of the British and Foreign Bible So- 
 eiety, and in addressing the assembly, exhorted them to persevere in 
 their labours, in the following terms: ‘‘ Proceed in your exertions, 
 ** Gentlemen ; God will prosper them ; and neither our enemies at 
 * home with all their pamphlets ; nor the Pope himself with all 
 “his Bulls; nor the great Enemy of Mankind, with all his arts, 
 ** will be able to prevail against us.’ 
 
 Tue Brsnor or Lanparr. “ It’ (the British and Foreign Bible 
 Society,) <‘ portends, I trust, the commencement of a new epoch 
 “ in the history of the human kind, when tbe Christian religion shall 
 ‘(be universally received, rightly understood, and conscientiously 
 <‘practised.”’ Letter to Lord Teignmouth, 12th Oct. 1814. 
 
 Tne Bisnor or Curtcnester. ‘1 confess myself extremely 
 < gratified with the contents of the Reports of the British and Fo- 
 ‘reign Bible Society and might have conceived (had I not heard 
 “«the contrary) that no wellwisher to an extensive dissemination of 
 ** the Gospel could fail of being so.” Letter to Remumitter of B. and 
 F. Bw S., Aug. 14th, 1815. 
 
 Tne Bisnor or St. Davin’s, in 1813, in a charge to his Clergy. 
 remarked, ‘‘ The Bible Society undertakes to distribute the Bible: 
 <* it confines itself to the Bible ; but it neither obstructs nor dis- 
 “* courages the circulation of the Common Prayer Book ; for every 
 ** member of the Society is at liberty fo give the Prayer Book with 
 
33 
 
 ‘«the Bible: butif the Society had refused to sell the Bible without 
 “the Prayer Book, it would certainly have obstructed the circu- 
 ** lation of the Bible.” 
 
 Tue Bisuor or GioucesTeR, in a speech delivered before the 
 British and Foreign Bible Society remarked, ‘* Opposition has been 
 ** revived, but it has been ably and decisively defeated. Indeed facts 
 <‘ begin now to speak. We find many examples of the practical results 
 ‘‘ of disseminating the pure word of God. The circulation of the 
 ** Prayer Book has not been lessened; it has on the contrary 
 *« greatly increased during the whole period since the formation of 
 ‘this Society. The other tendency which the friends of our So- 
 “« ciety thought to be most probable, begins to appear. The ef- 
 ** fects of the Bible are becoming daily more and more visible. 
 “¢ And what are these effects ? The drunkard becomes sober ; the 
 ** profligate chaste ; the swearerfears an oath. May the God of 
 ** the Bible grant that this tendency may increase year by year.” 
 
 Tue Bisnop or Norwicu. ‘ The duties of my diocess im- 
 ** periously call me to Norwich. Were it otherwise, old as I am, 
 ‘“] should feel strongly inclined to make a last effort to be present 
 ‘* at the anniversary of ‘our glorious and interesting meeting ; for 
 ** the purpose of bearing my dying testimony in favour of an in- 
 “* stitution, which I am firmly persuaded hath effected more spiri-— 
 << twal good to mankind, than hath been achieved in the same time since 
 “‘ the days of the Apostles.”? Letter to Lord Teignmouth, 2 May, 
 1820. 
 
 Tue Brsuor or Duruam. ‘‘ From the commencement of the 
 «institution to its present wonderfully advanced state, it has had 
 ““ my good wishes: they remain unaltered, and willso remain dur- 
 “ing the short continuance of my mortal existence.’’ Letter to 
 Lord Teignmouth, 30th April, 1822. 
 
 Tre Bissor or Sarissury took part in the proceedings of the 
 last meeting of the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
 Tae Arcusisnoe or Tuam, President of the Hibernian Bible 
 Society, presided at the annual meeting in April last ; after the se- 
 cession of the Primate, and delivered an address, from which the 
 following is extracted: ‘Could I bring myself to think, when I 
 ** see the successful exertions of this Society in the distribution of 
 “« the sacred word of God ; when I see the blessed change wrought 
 “in a large proportion of the population of Ireland by this means, 
 “which God has evidently pointed out to be his wilt ; could } bring 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 ‘‘ myself to think when I see the happy effects of this institution 
 ‘* in the glorious revival of the religion of Christ throughout the 
 ‘land; when I see the book of God in the hands of thousands 
 “ and tens of thousands of my poor fellow creatures, when but a 
 “< very few years ago, scarcely one copy of it was to be found ;* 
 “when I see the hearts of the disobedient, through the simple 
 “ reading of the Bible, put into their hands by this Society, turn- 
 ‘*ing to the wisdom of the just: When I see all this, I say, could 
 “1 be so infatuated as to bring myself to think that this Society 
 ‘* were thus casting out Devils by Beelzebub the Prince of the Devils, 
 “* yet would | not withdraw from them.” 
 
 «So far from apprehending danger to the established Church 
 “ from this Society, I do from my heart and soul believe it has 
 ‘been the means of securing many a wavering member of that 
 ** Church, and of interesting in its cause many sincere and pious 
 ‘* Christians dissenting from it.” 
 
 You are probably not aware Sir, that in represediid the Epis- 
 copate of the established Church as opposed to Bible Societies, 
 you are in fact representing it, as alienated from the affections, the- 
 confidence, the veneration of its own communion. If the forty-five 
 Prelates you have mentioned, be indeed hostile to the British and, 
 Foreign Bible Society, then are their opinions, their examples, their 
 exhortations contemned, rejected, and treated with contempt by 
 almost the whole nation—then are they arrayed in opposition to the 
 rank, the piety, and the intelligence of the kingdom. By whom 
 Sir, is this great association supported? By a few disaffected, fa- 
 natical dissenters? On the rolls of its patrons will be found the 
 names of the nephew of the Jate, and of the five brothers of the 
 reigning Sovereign, including the heir apparent to the throne ; 
 the efficient members of the present and former ministers; the 
 heads of each university, and a long train of nobles, patriots and 
 philanthropists. t 
 
 * In 1805, it was computed, that in the southern part of Ireland, two thirds 
 of the Protestant families were without Bibles ; and that among the Catholics, 
 not more than one family in 500, had a copy of the Scriptures. The Hiber- 
 nian Bible Society, has since that time, distributed 295,695 Bibles and Testa- 
 ments, : 
 
 t The following are or have been Presidents or Patrons of Auxiliary Socie- 
 ties; and I am not aware that a single individual mentioned below, has ever 
 
* 30 
 
 ~ Ifa house divided against itself cannot stand, what melancholy 
 auguries would you lead us to draw from the present state of the 
 established Church! Think not Sir, that the patronage to which 
 I allude, is silent and negative, confined to a trifling donation, or 
 the acceptance of a nominal office. If the members of this Society 
 are acting in opposition to the spiritual authority of the Church, 
 
 their opposition is open and vigorous. 
 
 The individual to whom 
 
 withdrawn his name from any Bible Society with which he has been connect- 
 
 ed, viz. 
 
 Members of the Reyal Family. 
 
 H.R. H. Duke of Gloucester 
 H.R. H. Duke of York 
 H. R. H. Duke of Kent 
 
 H.R H. Duke of Sussex 
 H. R. H. Duke of Cambridge 
 H.R. H. Duke of Cumberland 
 
 Duke of Bedford Earls. Earls. Lords. 
 Manchesier Harcourt Stamford Bolton 
 Grafton Craven Romney Dacre 
 
 — Wellington Radnor Guilford Milton 
 
 —— Roxburgh Darnley Rock Savage Strathaven 
 Beaufort Darthmouth Denbigh Stanley 
 Portlandt Liverpool Balcarres Holland 
 
 — — Buckingham Derby Breadalbane Gambier 
 
 Marquises. Mexborough Viscounts. Calthorpe 
 
 Tavistock Yarborough Bulkeley Ossutton 
 
 Winchester Gwydin Falmouth Grey 
 
 Bute Spencer Morpeth Grenville 
 
 Hastings Orford Barnard Guildford 
 
 Buckingham Egmont Middleton Glenberrie 
 
 Downshire Watterpark Hampden Middleton 
 
 Northampton De La War Dudley Colchester 
 
 Camden Hardwick Milton Foley 
 
 Cornwallis Fortescue Exmouth Vernon 
 
 Earls. Harrowby Ebrington Hautry 
 
 Waldegrave Morley Saudon Gray 
 
 Harewood Digby Lords. Fortescue 
 
 Uxbridge Coventry Nugent Gower 
 
 Cnslow Verulam Cavendish Lindsay 
 
 Rosslyn Asburnham Rivers Exmouth 
 
 Pomfret Egremont Braybrook Barham 
 
 Dysart Fitzwilliam Headly Middleton 
 
 Yarmouth » Grosvenor Howard Carrington 
 
 Cardigan Northesk Astown 
 
 To the above may be added the names of the three Prime Ministers, Mr. 
 Perceval, Lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Canning, besides various members of 
 the present cabinet. 
 
36 
 
 the nation looks as its future monarch, thinks it no derogation of 
 his rank to accept an office in even an auxiliary society; and they 
 to whom the destinies of the empire are commifted, are occasionally 
 found sharing in the deliberations of the Committee of the British 
 and Foreign Bible Society, and hesitate not to vindicate in public 
 the cause of the institution. The following extracts will show — 
 with what zeal and affection the Bible Society is cherished, by 
 those laymen of the established Church, whose birth and official 
 rank must give to their opinions a weight and influence most fatal 
 to the permanency of that Church, if it be true, that they are 
 acting in defiance of its Episcopate. 
 
 H.R. H. roe Duke or Guovcester. ‘* Gentlemen, I am sa- 
 ** tisfied I am speaking the sentiments of my illustrious relatives, as 
 ** well as my own, when I testify to you our gratitude for your kind- 
 “‘nesses to us; and express the greatest anxiety and readiness to 
 ‘“* render the warmest assistance—I say the warmest assistance to 
 is glorious cause.”’ Speech before British 
 and Foreign Bible Society, 1819. 
 
 Lorp Castiereacn. ‘‘I trust I feel as strongly attached as any 
 
 man to the particular merits of that religious system, which as an 
 ‘* individual I profess,—to the established religion of the govern-. 
 ‘‘ment under which we live; but I hope I shall not be suspected 
 ‘* of indifference to that religion, when I| reflect with gratitude and 
 ‘¢self-satisfaction, that amid those shades of difference which 
 ‘¢ divide Christians among themselves, at home we are all united 
 ‘‘under the same standard, which it is now our object to plant 
 “<to a still wider extent.” Speech before Westminster Bible Society, 
 1812. 
 
 Mr. Prereivar when Prime Minister, had made ah appointment 
 to attend, at the formation of the Northamptonshire Auxiliary So- 
 ciety, but was assassinated before the day of meeting. His suc- 
 cessor in office, Mr. Vansittart pronounced “him ‘“‘a steady and 
 firm supporter of the Bible Society.”’ Speech before London Aux- 
 thary Socrety, 1812. 
 
 Eart or Liverroot, First Lord of the Treasury. In an ad- 
 dress to the Cinque Ports Auxiliary Bible Society, of which he was 
 President, “he adverted to the high station which he had the 
 ‘honour of holding in the government of the country, and the - 
 *< consequent duty which devolved upon him to maintain inviolate 
 
37 
 
 ‘“‘the trust thus reposed in him by his sovereign. With this im- 
 “* pression, and with the firmest attachment which he had to the 
 “¢ established Church of England, he could not from asense of duty 
 “lend his support to any Society which stood opposed to it. In 
 “uniting with the Bible Society however, he conscientiously be- 
 ‘lieved he was supporting the interest of the established Church 
 “in particular, and of Christianity at large.” 
 
 Mr. Vansrrrart, Chancellor of the Exchequer. “I should asa 
 ““member of the Church, be very sorry to think, that the devout 
 “«study of the Scriptures, would lead to a disregard of our liturgy : 
 “©on the contrary, I should hope that it would produce a more 
 “‘ general acknowledgment of its excellency, as it originally at the 
 “reformation, led, through the blessing of Divine Providence, to 
 “its establishment.” ‘‘ But supposing, for the sake of argument, 
 “that there may be real danger from the preponderance of the 
 
 “dissenting interest, what is the remedy you propose ?—that all 
 **Churchmen should withdraw themselves from the Society, and 
 “leave it wholly in the hands of the dissenters. If any thing can 
 “* make the Society dangerous, this must do it, because there would 
 “then be no check to any sectarian spirit which might introduce 
 ‘itself, and which must be unavoidably irritated by so harsh, and 
 <*T think, so unjust an indication of jeaicusy.” Letter to Dr. 
 Marsh, 1811. 
 
 Lorp Harrowpsy, President of the Council. ‘I have not the 
 ‘happiness of being one of those who were early engaged in the 
 ‘ranks of this Society, -whether I was distracted by many other 
 “‘subjects, or whatever was the cause, such was the fact; and 
 “* what was it that first directed my attention to this subject? I¢ 
 ‘was the sounding of the trumpet of alarm.” ‘To argument on 
 “*the subject I paid every possible attention—I have read every 
 ‘* statement of facts on both sides the question, which was repre- 
 
 ‘**sented to me as worth reading ; and the deliberate result of that 
 
 “‘investigation has been a confirmation of the opinion which first 
 ‘* struck me, that so far from any danger existing to the establish- 
 “ment of which I ama member, the union of that Church with the 
 ‘* Society only adds to its credit, its dignity and its usefulness, and 
 ‘‘ therefore cannot but add to its strength.” Speech before British, 
 and Foreign Bible Society, 1818. . 
 
 Many more similar extracts might be given, from Laymen of 
 high rank, and extensive influence : but J forbear: enough I trust 
 
38 
 
 has been shown, to prove that the Clergy and Laity of this Diocess 
 who support Bible Societies, may appeal with equal confidence ° 
 with yourself, to the Established Church, for authority to sanction 
 their conduct. But Sir, I feel my affection for that pure and holy 
 Church in whose bosom | have been nurtured, glow with increased 
 ardour, when I recollect that it is unnecessary for me, to resort to 
 a forergn Church, to vindicate my endeavours to bless the poor and 
 ignorant with that Gospel which has brought life and immortality 
 to light. You tell us that it is to you “a source of painful regret,’ 
 to find yourself differing on the subject of Bible Societies ‘from 
 many of the Clergy and members of our communion.” I should 
 have supposed, that it would also have been a source of painful 
 regret to you, to find yourself acting in direct opposition to the 
 opinions of the Bishops of our communion, officially delivered. 
 The Prelates of other Churches have indeed in their individual 
 capacity patronised Bible Societies, but to the Bishops of the Ame- 
 rican Church, belongs the exclusive honour of having borne their 
 united testimony in their behalf. In 1814, the Bishops of our 
 Church, assembled in convention, addressed to the Episcopalians 
 of the United States, a Pastoral Letter, in which they thus express 
 themselves. 
 
 <* We avail ourselves of the opportunity of congratulating all the 
 ‘“* members of our Church, on what we conceive to be eminently 
 “<a cause of joy to the Christian world in general. The wonder- 
 << ful efforts which have been made within these few years, being 
 ‘begun principally by members of the parent Church, by a body 
 “« known under the name of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 
 <¢jmitated in various countries of the old world; and concurred in 
 ‘¢ with alacrity and zeal throughout the extent of the American 
 “¢ Union—to disperse the Bible in regions wherein it has been 
 <‘ hitherto unknown, and in those wherein the religion of it is pro- 
 “‘ fessed, to provide that none shall have reason to complain of 
 “their being necessarily destitute of this instructer, this guide, 
 “and this source of the highest consolations. We should conceive 
 ‘‘ ourselves as wanting, on this occasion, to the high duties of our 
 “¢ stations, were we to neglect to bear our testimony in favour of this 
 “* energetic effort for the disappointment of the wicked designs of 
 * infidelity, for the extending of the influence of pure and undefiled 
 «religion, and finally, for the carrying into effect of those gracious 
 “‘ promises of Heaven, which will not have been accomplished, 
 
39 
 
 ‘until the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earih as the 
 *¢ waters cover the sea.”’* 
 
 However painful I may feel it, to differ in opinion from you 
 Sir, for whose zeal and talents | cannot but entertain unfeigned 
 respect ; yet far more painful would it be, to concur with you 
 in believing that the course thus recommended by the most 
 reverend authority in our Church, was “‘ erroneous in principle,” 
 injurious in its tendency, and ‘“‘a departure from the apostolic 
 mode of propagating Christianity.” 
 
 Could it be necessary, after so solemn and deliberate a sanction 
 of Bible Societies by the House of Bishops, to adduce further proof 
 of their approbation, I might appeal to their succeeding pastoral 
 letter of 1817, in which, mentioning the indications of the growing 
 influence of religion, they incidentally allude to ‘‘ the vast increase 
 *< of editions of Bibles, as well those for sale, as those designed for 
 ** gratuitous distribution through the medium of the numerous So- 
 *€ cieties, who of late years have associated for conveying of that 
 *¢invaluable treasure to the houses and the bosoms of the most 
 *« destitute of the people.” We might also appeal to the offices in 
 Bible Societies which are now held by Bishops White, Moore, 
 Kemp, Griswold, and Chase. It is true, Sir, that some of our 
 Bishops are not subscribers to Bible Societies, but I am acquainted 
 with only one who has opposed them. If we turn to the laity of 
 our church, we find that those whom she ts most proud to number 
 among her sons, have yielded a ready obedience to the exhort- 
 ation of the House of Bishops, and have given to Bible Societies 
 their zealous and cordial support. 
 
 With the courtesy towards your opponents which you have 
 
 * Of this letter Bishop Hobart thus speaks, in his address to the New-York 
 Convention of 1814. “ This pastoral letter contains such spiritual counsel 
 *¢ as the situation of the Church seemed to require ; and will [ trust, evidence 
 * the solicitude of the Bishops, in their capacity as the spiritual guardians of the 
 « Church, to promote the diffusion of evangelical piety, as professed in her ar- 
 * ticles and liturgy; and, at the same time, to guard against all methods of 
 “ effecting this desirable end, which are not agreeable to the spirit of her apos- 
 “‘ tolic and primitive institutions.” 
 
 It is a little difficult to reconcile the concluding sentiment of this encomium 
 on the letter of the House of Bishops, with the intimation given in the Bishop’s 
 own pastoral letter of the succeeding year, (page 19,) that by joining those 
 very societies which the “ spiritual guardians of the Church” had so unequi- 
 vocally approved, we would “ put in jeopardy our apostolic ministry, and pri- 
 mitive and evangelical worship.” 
 
40 
 
 ever observed in this controversy, you speak of Governer Jay and 
 
 General Clarkson, the President and acting Vice President of the 
 American Bible Society as ‘‘ individuals who are not for a moment 
 “to be suspected of acting from any other principle, than a sense 
 
 **of duty, and whose pure and elevated characters adorn the 
 
 **Church of which they are members.’ But did it not occur to 
 you Sir, that in calling the public attention to the disregard with 
 which such churchmen as Governor Jay and General Clarkson 
 treat your advice and complaints, you were furnishing the Episco- 
 
 pal Laymen who support these institutions, with the most yenera- 
 
 ble and weighty precedents for their conduct. These two gentle- 
 
 men howeyer are not the only pure and elevated characters in our 
 Church, who concur in the sentiments of the House of Bishops. 
 The names of William Tilghman, Duncan Cameron, Francis S. Key, 
 Charles Goldsborough and Bushrod Washington are found among 
 the Vice Presidents of the American Bible Society. ‘‘ 1 was ar- 
 ‘* dent in my wishes and exertions,” says Judge Washington, writ- 
 ing to the Secretary of the National Society in 1820, ‘for its. 
 ‘establishment, and it has been conducted with so much judgment 
 “‘and zeal, as to exceed in its practical results, my most sanguine 
 “expectations. May that Being in whose service the Society is 
 ‘* engaged to spread throughout his dominions upon earth a know- 
 ‘‘Jedge of the Word of Divine Life, smile upon and give eflect to 
 
 ‘¢ their exertions.” 
 
 ‘** The apostles,’ says Governor Jay in his late address, ‘* were 
 *‘ opposed in preaching the Gospel, but they nevertheless persist- 
 “* ed—we are opposed in dispersing the Scriptures, which convey 
 “the knowledge of it—and let us follow their example. An emi- 
 ‘nent ancient counsellor gave excellent advice to their adversa- 
 ‘ries, and his reasoning affords salutary admonition to owr oppo- 
 ‘nents. That advice merits attention and was concluded in the 
 “following memorable words. ‘ Refrain from these men and let 
 ‘‘them alone,—for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will 
 “*come to naught, but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it,— 
 “lest haply ye be found to fight against God.” 
 
 It thus appears Sir, that you are unhappily found differing, not 
 only from many of the Clergy of *‘ our communion,” net only from 
 your ‘‘ venerable father in the Episcopate,” but from the official 
 declarations of the assembled Bishops of our Church, and from her 
 most distinguished Laymen ; from the pure and elevated charac- 
 
41 
 
 ters ot your ewn Diocess—nay, of your own congregation ; and on 
 referring to the Established Church of Great Britain, we have 
 found the voice of her Prelates and Laity raised in opposition to 
 the sentiments of your charge. 
 
 There are other Churches Sir, whose government is equally 
 Scriptural and apostolic with our own, and whose Prelates are 
 equally responsible for the exercise of that influence which their 
 exalted stations confer on their example and advice. You have 
 informed us* that the Greek Church, and the Churches of Sweden 
 and Denmark are Episcopal in substance, as well as form, and con- 
 sequently the opinions of the spiritual guardians of these Churches 
 on the subject of Bible Societies cannot be unimportant. I have 
 no evidence that a single Prelate of these Churches, has ever di- 
 rectly or indirectly opposed these institutions. But this it may be 
 gaid, is only negative testimony ; suffer me then to add, that which 
 is positivet and let it be borne in mind that the Societies alluded to 
 in the following extracts from speeches and letters, are established 
 on precisely the same principle as the American Bible Society,— 
 
 * An apology for Apostolic Order—page 100. 
 + In the proceedings of the Russian, Swedish and Danish Bible Societies, I 
 find the names of the following Prelates, numbered among their members and 
 
 supporters, viz. : 
 
 OF THE RUSSIAN B. S, Bishops. Bishops. 
 Archbishops. Tula Carlstadt 
 Moscow Voronez Hernosand , 
 Jaroslaff Orel Lund 
 Tchernegoft Archangel Norway 
 Polotsk Pultawa Skarce 
 Moghiley Volhynia Wexio 
 Minsk Borg Linkoping 
 Pskoft WNovogorod Calma 
 Kief Kaluga OF THE DANISA B. S. 
 Astrakar Kursk Bishops. 
 Irkutsk Kharkon Zealand 
 Abzhasia . Finland Ieeland 
 Pleskoff OF THE SWEDISH B.S. Odensee 
 Polotski Archbishop of Upsula, Tuhven 
 Twer Primate of Sweden’ Ripen 
 St. Petersburgh Bishops Aarhuus 
 Kasan West Mania Viborg 
 Bishops. Gothland _ Aalborg 
 Perma Gothenburg Ribe 
 Dimitrief Seania 
 Stara Russa Christiana 
 
 6 
 
42 
 
 the distribution of the Scriptures, without note or comment, by the 
 combined exertions of Christians of every name. 
 
 Arcnersnor or Moscow.—‘‘ How sacred, how salutary, how 
 ‘¢ pleasing to God, must this institution be !—And God himself hath 
 *¢ borne witness to this ; for he blesseth it, in a remarkable manner.” 
 *« Coldness towards the Bible Society, cannot be without a mixture 
 ‘¢ of coldness towards the Bible itself; that is, towards true Chris- 
 *¢ tianity which the Bible propagates.” 
 
 ArcHBIsHoP oF Pototsr. ‘‘I consider it my sacred duty, to 
 ** second with all my strength, the intentions of the most honour- 
 ** able Society.” * 
 
 ArcupisHor or Kier. ‘ Verily it may be said, that every sin- 
 ** cere receiver of the Word of God, after reading the report of the 
 ** Moscow Bible Society, and beholding the success and the won- 
 “ derful powers of the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, manifested 
 *¢in this work, cannot but feel the sweetest joy and consolation, 
 “‘ and give glory to the gracious Providence of our Heavenly Fa- 
 ‘Ss ther,’? 
 
 Bisoor or Stara Russa. ‘‘ Oh that the Father of all goodness, 
 ‘““ who has raised, honoured and blessed Russia above all the na- 
 ‘tions of the earth, may grant his blessing on the labours of the 
 ** Committee of the Russian Bible Society.” 
 
 ArcueisHor oF Upsuta, Primate of Sweden,—In a pastoral let- 
 ter to his Clergy, urging them to join the Bible Society, says “‘ the 
 ‘¢ door is opened, my Brethren, to promote the increase of Christ’s 
 *¢ kingdom ; and who ought to have this more at heart than our- 
 *¢ selves, who are called to spread the Saving Knowledge of God, and 
 «< Jesus Christ whom he hath sent.” , 
 
 Bisnor or GotHensure. ‘‘ Love to our neighbour, ought to 
 ‘¢ knit into one brotherly band, every rank of men in Bible So- 
 “¢ cieties.”” The Bishops of Skara, Wexio and Hernosand, each ad- 
 dressed a Pastoral Letter to their respective Clergy, recommend- 
 ing the Bible Society. . 
 
 Bisnor or Zeatanp. “In our sphere of action, a voice is now 
 ‘¢ and then heard to rise in opposition to the Bible Society, but its 
 ‘© effects have proved favourable to the good cause, as the apolo- 
 *€ gies to which it has given birth, have by the force of truth, 
 ‘¢ gained over many to espouse the Scriptures and their dissemi- 
 “ation.”? ‘The opposition to Bible Societies is too feeble to 
 *s cause the shipwreck, or even a retrograde movement of an un- 
 
43 
 
 “ dertaking which every circumstance declares to be favoured by Pro- 
 “ vidence, as a means of diffusing the light of Christianity, and that, 
 “* spiritual rule and hope which are the richest sources of happi- 
 “ness to mankind.” 
 
 I have thus Sir, brought to a conclusion, my promised, and I 
 fear tedious examination of the episcopal patronage enjoyed by Bi- 
 ble Societies ; and to you Sir, am I indebted for the discovery I 
 have made, of the extreme feebleness of the opposition in England, 
 and of the abundant and almost unanimous support they have re- 
 ceived from the Bishops of every Christian Church, with the ex- 
 ception of that of Rome. Had you not marshalled the Prelates 
 whom you supposed hostile to these Societies, it would not pro- 
 bably have occurred to me to array their friends in the opposite 
 rank ; but 
 
 Fas est, ab hoste doceri. 
 
 But Sir, the question of Bible Societies is presented in your charge, 
 as one, not merely of expediency, but of ‘‘ principle ;”” you deny 
 not only their utility, but their lawfulness. These Societies in 
 your opinion cause the separation of the Word and the Church of 
 God; they sanction « departure from the apostolic mode of propa- 
 gating Christianity, and their success it seems, is not to be con- 
 sidered as evidence of the favour of Heaven. And does it not 
 awaken Sir, some mistrust of the correctness of your opinions, to 
 find yourself at issue on a point of Christian duty, with every Pro- 
 testant Church in Christendom? No sect, however wild its doc- 
 trines ; no Church, however loose its discipline and practice, but 
 still confesses the mighty truth, that the Scriptures are able to 
 make us wise unto salvation, and therefore professes both its obli- 
 gation and its willingness to disseminate them. 
 
 With your opinion of the unlawfulness of these associations, how 
 painful to you must be those efforts of the Sovereigns of Europe. 
 to bless their subjects with the word of life, which are viewed by 
 other Christians with devout gratulation. Suffer me Sir, to call 
 your attention to these efforts, not for the purpose of adding to 
 your apprehensions, but of exhibiting farther instances of that 
 wonderful excitement in the cause of the Bible, which is now filling 
 the world with the knowledge of the Lord, and which I cannot re- 
 frain, however fanatical you may deem me, from attributing to 
 another, than a human origin. The following marks of national 
 patronage bestowed upon Bible Societies, will also prove, that the 
 
44 
 
 dangers to civil society, which some of their opponents and par~ 
 ticularly the Bishop of Chester, apprehend from them, are wholly. 
 overlooked by those, who are most interested in ganding against 
 them. 
 
 Russia. The Bibles as well as letters of the Russian Bible 
 Society, are transported throughout this vast empire, at the pub- 
 lic expense. The Emperor presented the Society with a spacious 
 edifice for the transaction of its business; gave 25,000 rubles to 
 its funds, and desired to be considered a member, with an annual 
 subscription of 10,000 rubles. 
 
 Prussia. The King has exempted the letters of the Prussian 
 Bible Society, and of its Auxiliaries from postage. 
 
 Swepen. The King ordered a collection to be made once a 
 year in all the Churches of the Diocess of Gottenburgh, for the 
 Gottenburgh Bible Society. He accepted the office of Patron of 
 the Swedish Bible Society, and has exempted its letters and parcels 
 from postage, He likewise ordered a collection to be made in 
 every Church in the kingdom, for the purpose of supplying the 
 poor with Bibles. oA 
 
 Denmark. The King gave $4000 to the Danish Bible Society, 
 and reduced the postage on Bibles. 
 
 Saxony. The government granted to the Saxon Bible Society 
 the privilege of receiving letters and parcels free of postage. 
 
 Wvetemsurc. The King officially announced his approbation 
 of the Wurtemburg Bible Society, and made a donation to its funds. 
 
 France. The Government allowed the Paris Bible Society to 
 ' import Bibles free of duty. The Duke D’Angouleme, with the 
 concurrence of the King, addressed a letter to the Society, ex- 
 pressing his approbation of its designs. The Duke de Cazes, at 
 the time Prime Minister, gave 1000 livres to the Society. 
 
 Great Briraiy. The Government invariably remits the du- 
 ties on the books imported by the British and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
 Well indeed did the Chancellor of the Exchequer of Great 
 Britain exclaim; ‘“‘ The Kings of the earth have indeed stood 
 ‘“up, and its rulers have taken counsel together; but it has 
 ‘* not been against the Lord and his Anointed—it has not been to’ 
 ‘* extinguish the light of the Gospel in the blood of its professors 
 *« but to acknowledge its authority and extend its influence.”* 
 
 * Speech before the British and Foreign Bible Society, #816. 
 
45 
 
 But do not, Sir understand me, as intending to represent the 
 cause of Bible Societies, as universally triumphant. 1 acknow- 
 ledge that it has numerous, powerful and implacable foes ; and 
 truth demands the admission, that both in withholding your sup- 
 port from these associations, and in maintaining their mischievous 
 and unscriptural character, you are ‘“acting with those in the 
 highest stations” of an ancient and widely extended Church. 
 
 The following extracts from the Bull of Pius VII. to the Pri- 
 mate of Poland, issued 29th June, 1816, show that the Sovereign 
 Pontiff was not less zealous than yourself in reprobating these So- 
 cieties. 
 
 “< We have been truly shocked at this most crafty device” (Bible 
 Societies) ‘‘ by which the very foundations of religion are under- 
 “‘ mined.’’ ‘* We have deliberated upon the measures proper to 
 “* be adopted by our pontifical authority, in order to remedy and 
 ‘« abolish this pestilence as far as possible.’ ‘‘ This defilement of 
 “ the faith so imminently dangerous to souls.’”’ ‘‘ It becomes an 
 *¢ episcopal duty, that you first of all expose the wickedness of this 
 “‘ nefarious scheme.’ ‘lt is evident from experience, that the 
 “« Holy Scriptures, when circulated in the vulgar tongue, have 
 * through the temerity of men, produced more harm than bene- 
 << fit.” «* Warn the people intrusted to your care, that they fall 
 ‘* not into the snares prepared for their everlasting ruin.” ‘* The 
 “* deep sorrow we feel on account of this new species of tares, 
 “* which an adversary has so abundantly sown.” 
 
 In a pastoral charge delivered by the Roman Catholic Bishop 
 Milner, of Ireland, in 1813, on the subject of Bible Societies, we 
 find the following ; alluding to the efforts of Protestants to distribute 
 the Scriptures, he says, ‘‘ in acting thus, they act conformably to 
 ‘‘the fundamental principles of their religion, which teach the 
 *< Bible contains all things necessary for salvation, and that it is easy 
 “‘ to be understood by any person of common sense.”’ He then 
 goes on much in the manner of Mr. O’Callaghan and Dr. Maltby, 
 to prove how very unintelligible the sacred volume is. and declares 
 ‘*a plain Catholic peasant, who is well grounded in the knowledge 
 ** of his Catechism, really knows more of the Word of God, as to 
 *‘ the sense and substance of it, than a Methodist preacher who can 
 ‘* repeat the words of the whole Bible by heart.” We may there- 
 fore, Fthink, conclude that, in Bishop Milner’s opinion, ‘‘ we dis- 
 ** tribute the Scriptures in the manner best calculated to promote a 
 
46 
 
 ‘‘ knowledge of their sacred contents, when we distribute” the 
 Roman Catholic Catechism ; and that he who will read this Cate- 
 chism, will become acquainted with all ‘* which can be necessary 
 “to form his faith, to regulate his obedience, to inspire his hopes, 
 “and to guide his devotions.” 
 
 The deference I might feel for the authority of the Pope, is [ 
 confess, not a little lessened by the character given of him in your 
 writings,* where we are assured that the Reformers denounced 
 him as “* Antichrist,’’ the ‘‘ Man of Sin,” the ‘‘ Son of Perdition.’? 
 and the assertion of our Homily, that ‘ they” (the Popes and Pre- 
 lates of the Church of Rome) “ are worthily accounted among the 
 number of false prophets, and false Christs, which deceived the 
 world a long time ;” forbids me to pay the slightest regard to 
 Bishop Milner’s admonitions. 
 
 To your Episcopal allies whom I have named, is still to be 
 added a layman, not unknown to fame, and who may be regarded 
 as the representative of a very large portion of the foes whom Bi- 
 ble Societies are compelled te encounter; Mr. Copserr thus ex- 
 presses himself on the subject of distributing the Bible without 
 note or comment, but his reasoning is so similar to what I have 
 met with in other quarters, that I can scarcely acquit him of pla- 
 glarism. 
 
 ‘Reading the Scriptures if universal can lead to nothing but 
 “¢ schism, which at present is prevented only by the want of what 
 «is called study in reading them. Is it possible for those who can 
 “- hardly read words, to derive real benefit from the perusal of 
 “such abook? No, it is from the expositions and applications of 
 “¢ the contents of the Bible, by learned men, or by others who use 
 “‘ their expositions and applications, that the people are to profit.” 
 
 Mr. Cobbett’s advice on religious subjects cannot but be received 
 with some hesitation, by those who recollect the devotion he has 
 evinced to the memory of the author of the Age of Reason, in re- 
 moving his remains to his native island. 
 
 There is still Sir, one more personage, who I believe is to be 
 found in the ranks of opposition; and that I may not be deemed 
 guilty of personal disrespect towards yourself, I beg you to re- 
 member that I place him there, on the authority of the Lord,Bishop 
 of Cloyne. In the passage from the speech of this Prelate, alrea- 
 
 * Apology for the Apostolic Order —Page 90. 
 
47 
 
 dy quoted, he numbers ‘‘the great enemy of our race’ with the 
 opposers of Bible Societies. But if the character you give of these 
 Societies be correct, then must this enemy of our race, be one of 
 their most zealous and active supporters. If these institutions 
 *¢ put in jeopardy our apostolic ministry, and primitive and evan- 
 gelical worship ;”’ if only in distributing the Bible with the Prayer- 
 Book, we follow the scriptural plan of evangelizing the world; if 
 they be “‘ erroneous in principle ;’’ if they cause ‘‘ the separation of 
 ‘* the Church from the Word of God ;”’ if ‘‘ a due regard to principle, 
 ‘* to sound policy, and even Christian harmony” requires you to 
 oppose them; can we conceive it possible that He who worketh in 
 the children of disobedience, and who can transform himself into 
 an angel of light, should neglect so fair an opportunity to counter- 
 act the Scriptural plan of evangelizing the world; by beguiling 
 Christians, under the idea of promoting Christianity, to establish 
 and extend institutions sa erroneous in principle, and so injurious 
 in their tendency. You will not therefore be surprised, if I feel 
 anxious to disown so unwelceme an auxiliary ; and if, since his cha- 
 racter forbids the supposition of his neutrality in a contest of so 
 much moment, I prefer seeing him in the ranks of my opponents: 
 and I confess Sir, that when I find it declared in Scripture, that 
 Satan ‘‘ taketh the word out of their hearts,’’ I cannot be per- 
 suaded that he is instrumental in putting it into their hands. 
 
 But although I concur with the Bishop of Cloyne, in believing 
 that the Prince of this world is among the opponents of Bible Soci- 
 eties, God forbid, that I should impute to them, the motives by 
 which he himself is unquestionably actuated. Good intentions 
 however, do not invariably lead to judicious conduct ; and although 
 Tam very far from impeaching the sincerity with which you dis- 
 claim “‘ the imputation of being unfriendly to the distribution of 
 the Oracles of truth,” yet I must be permitted to contend, however 
 “unjust, injurious or unkind’’ you may deem me, that you are 
 in fact although unintentionally pursuing the very conduct you 
 disavow. 
 
 *t Vou take from me my life, 
 “ When you do take the means, whereby [ live :’’ 
 
 And surely Sir, in endeavouring to destroy the only instruments 
 whereby the distribution of the Oracles of Truth can be effected ; 
 you are labouring to prevent the distribution of those Oracles 
 themselves. That we may more fully appreciate the efficiency of 
 
48 
 
 these instruments, let us take a retrospect of their Humber, and 
 results. In 1804, the British and Foreign Bible Society was esta- 
 blished, and since that period, through its kind and fostering care, 
 kindred institutions have been planted in every land where the 
 Bible is regarded as the rule of faith, and where the civil power is 
 not in abject subserviency to the Church of Rome. Two thousand 
 ' five hundred Bible Societies, embracing Christians of every name 
 and rank, from the monarch to the humblest peasant, are now act- 
 ively and zealously engaged in making known to their fellow-men, 
 the revelation of Jehovah, and the Gospel of his Son. In Great 
 Britain, we find the parent Society aided by 716 Auxiliaries, and 
 enjoying the magnificent income of $460,880. Scarcely a parish 
 in the United Kingdoms, that is not included within the bounds of 
 a Bible Society. 
 
 The Cantons of Switzerland have established similar institu- 
 tions. The Sleswick Holstein Society numbers 118 Auxiliaries. 
 In the kingdom of Wurtemburg, exists a National Society with 44 
 branches ; another in Hanover with 23 Auxiliaries, and in every 
 part of Protestant Germany these associations have been formed, 
 without distinction of sect. In Prussia, the National Society, pa- 
 tronised by the monarch, has 38 Auxiliaries. The Bible Societies 
 of Russia, are now supplying that vast empire with the Bread of 
 Life, and encouraged by imperial countenance, and the prayers of 
 the Prelates of the Established Church, are now printing the Scrip- 
 tures in twenty-six languages. Two hundred Auxiliaries pour into 
 the treasury of the Russian Bible Society the gifts of the pious 
 from the shores of the Baltic, to those of the Euxine and the Cas- 
 pian. Sweden, Norway and Denmark have joined the holy union, 
 and have established great and efficient institutions, assisted by 
 numerous Auxiliaries. The Netherlands Society, counts upwards 
 of 50 Auxiliaries, and in that kingdom, in which but a few years 
 since, death was proclaimed to be an eternal sleep, a Bible Society 
 assisted by 40 Auxiliaries is now diffusing the knowledge of Him, 
 who is the resurrection and the life ; and in that city in which so 
 many edicts have been published against the religion of the Gospel, 
 and the happiness of mankind, are now issued the monthly “ Bul- 
 letins de la Soctété Biblique Protestante de Paris.” In Iceland, in 
 Malta, in the Islands of the fonian Sea, and even on that spot, 
 where the apostle of the Gentiles once preached to his polished 
 and philosophic hearers, their unknown God, Bible Societies are 
 now publishing the unsearchable riches of Christ. 
 
49 
 
 Do we turn our eyes to Asia, wherever the docirines of the 
 Cross are taught distinct from papal superstition, we find Bible So- 
 cieties engaged in making known the way of the Lord to the nu- 
 merous nations of that vast continent. From one extremity of 
 Hindoostan to the other, from Bombay to Calcutta, from Madras 
 to Columbo, from New-Holland to Amboyna, are Protestants of 
 every name, knit together in this sacred fraternity. 
 
 Even in Africa ; in that region and shadow of death, a great light 
 js sprung up, and the African Bible Society at the Cape of Good 
 Hope, in conjunction with those of Sierra Leone, Caledon, Mau- 
 ritius and Bourbon, are now conferring upon Africa a blessing 
 which infinitely outweighs all her wrongs, even the blessing of the 
 Gospel of peace. 
 
 In North America, we behold a chain of these institutions ex- 
 tending from Hudson’s Bay to the Gulf of Mexico, and from the 
 Missouri to the Atlantic. In the United States alone, more than 
 300 Societies are enrolled among the Auxiliaries of the National 
 Ynstitution ; while in the British dominions, both on the continent 
 and in the West Indies, are found numerous Societies connected 
 with the parent Society in England. Truly indeed has it been 
 said of the British and Foreign Bible Society, that she has taken 
 her stand, upon that fulcrum which Archimedes ‘never found, and 
 has moved the world. And what Sir, has been effected by this 
 splendid and extensive machinery ? The Bible has been translated 
 and circulated, whole or in part, in 139 languages and dialects, of 
 which 43 are reprints, 8 retranslations, and 88 entirely new transla- 
 tions into languages in whieh the Scriptures had never been printed 
 before the establishment of Buble Societies. The British and Foreign 
 Bible Society, has expended in this great work $4,438,000, and 
 has, together with the continental Societies, issued the almost in- 
 credible number of Six Miztions anv Frrry-six THousanp Bistes 
 awp Testaments. These Societies have opposed to infidelity a 
 host of influential witnesses, proclaiming their belief in the Holy 
 Scriptures—they have introduced the Bible into the dwellings of 
 the poor, thus furnishing the most effectual antidote to irreligious 
 and licentious writings: they ‘‘ have roused the attention of a 
 thoughtless world to the momentous concerns of eternity, and to 
 the study of that world which reveals the only way to peace and 
 salvation ;’’ and they have bound together in the bonds of Christian 
 amity and sympathy, the most distant nations, and the most discord- 
 ant sects; and directed their resources and their energies to the 
 
 ~ 
 f 
 
a0 
 
 dissemination of the Oracles of the one living and trueGod. And 
 you Sir, are now exerting your talents and your influence to lock up 
 *¢ this floodgate of mercy ;”’ to quench this ‘‘ sun which has arisen 
 unexpectedly and gloriously, to illuminate the dark horizon of a 
 fallen world ;” and yet, strange to tell, you deem the insinuation, 
 that you are unfriendly to the distribution of the oracles of truth 
 * unjust, injurious, and unkind.” Alas Sir! your anxiety for the 
 circulation of the Bible, is most assuredly 
 
 * Amabilis insania, et mentis gratissimus error.” 
 
 As you have pointed out to us a Book, which will answer the 
 purposes of the Bible, so you have directed our attention to a sub- 
 stitute for Bible Societies, and this substitute I will now proceed 
 to examine. In order fully to understand the nature and design 
 of Bible and Prayer Book Societies, it will be necessary to revert 
 to the period of their first establishment. Bible Societies had al- 
 ready been organized in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Connecti- 
 cut; and the citizens of New-York resolved to follow the exam- 
 ple oftheir brethren, and made preparations for establishing a si- 
 milar Society. Notice of these preparations, was given to the then 
 Bishop of New-York, and the co-operation of Episcopalians so- 
 licited. But after this notice had been given, and before these 
 preparations were completed, the New-York Bible and Prayer 
 Book Society was ushered into being, an antidote to the spreading 
 influence of Bible Societies. Within afew weeks after this event, 
 the New-York Bible Society was formed, and after the lapse of 
 seven years, not one episcopal Clergyman, and only three episco- 
 pal laymen, were numbered among its members. Is it unchari- 
 table to believe, that this effect was foreseen and intended by the 
 founders of the Bible and Prayer Book Society? Itisa painful 
 truth, that these associations have evinced a deliberate, inveterate 
 and systematic hostility to Bible Societies, and have laboured te 
 convince Episcopalians, that they were dangerous to the Church, 
 and repugnant to the will of God. It is far from my intention to 
 impute to all the subscribers to Bible and Prayer Book Societies, 
 the sentiments avowed in their printed reports, and in the addresses 
 of their patrons; for these sentiments the founders, and active 
 agents and patrons of these Societies, are alone responsible. 
 A brief examination of the writings of these persons, will abun- 
 dantly substantiate the charge of their hostility to Bible Societies. 
 
5I 
 
 The Report of the New-York Bible and Prayer Book Society 
 for 1811, says ‘‘ The Bible and Common Prayer Book should be 
 constantly united by the members of the Church.” In their Re- 
 port for 1818, they inform us ‘“‘ The Church as a visible Society 
 * should ever be recognised, her enlargement and due organization 
 ** should be sought, as one with the promotion of the religion of the 
 ** Gospel ; it was this evangelical principle that gave birth to the 
 ** Society whose concerns we are now called to report.”” Hence 
 it follows, that their members cannot without violating the funda- 
 mental principle of their association, unite in Bible Societies, 
 which, although they greatly promote the religion of the Gospel, 
 do not expressly seek the enlargement and due organization of the 
 Church. On turning to the first report of the New-York Auxilia- 
 ry Bible and Prayer Book Society, we find the following ‘‘ The 
 **same duty that animates us to distribute the Bible, impels us to 
 “accompany the blessing with the Book of Common Prayer.”’ 
 This extraordinary sentiment is reiterated in the second Report ; 
 ‘* Should we not,” say the managers, ‘‘ as Protestant Episcopalians, 
 ** throw away the precious fruits of the Reformation, did we not 
 *¢ stand with the Bible in one hand, and the Book of Common 
 ** Prayer in the other?” The Report proceeds : ‘“‘ To leave men 
 “*in uncertainty as to what they should believe or disbelieve, is to 
 ** bewilder their minds, and subject them to the probable danger of 
 ** embracing no creed at all. The true religion has been preserved 
 “« from the beginning by the Church of Christ, and it will continue 
 “to preserve it. It was upon these principles that the Society to 
 “‘ which this is auxiliary was founded.”? That is, the revelation 
 which an all-wise God has seen fit to make of his will, to his erring 
 and accountable creatures, is in the opinion of these gentlemen, 
 likely to leave them in uncertainty as to what they should believe ; 
 and the Prayer Book is to complete what the Almighty left im- 
 perfect. 
 
 In the Report of the Johnstown Bible and Prayer Book Society 
 for 1820, they observe, ‘‘ However much we might honour the ex- 
 ‘* ertions of those engaged in the great work of distributing the 
 «¢ Bible without note or comment, we in conscience believed their 
 * system to be defective, and departing from the true and primi~ 
 * tive method of propagating the knowledge of God.” 
 
 ** You have undoubtedly discovered,”’ said the managers of the 
 Connecticut Bible and Prayer Book Society, in their address ta 
 
J2 
 
 Episcopalians, ‘sufficient to satisfy you, that in these objects you 
 * as Episcopalians ought to act distinctly and independently of those 
 “denominations of Christians, whose ideas of the ministry and 
 ‘‘worship of the Church, are totally different from your own. 
 ‘« Were we confined to the single object of distributing the Bible, 
 **the general interests of Christianity could not be promoted by 
 “ uniting with them,” 
 
 In your address Sir, before the New-York Auxiliary Bible and 
 Prayer-Book Society, you remark, ‘In translating and publishing 
 *‘ the Liturgy in conjunction with the Bible, and distributing them 
 ** throughout the world, we follow the Scriptural plan of evange- 
 *‘Jizing it. We present to them God’s Word and God’s Church.” 
 Again: ‘ Never lose sight of its cardinal principle, the combined 
 ** distribution of the Bible and Book of Common Prayer. Let no 
 ** solicitations, and no assaults, direct or indirect, induce you to 
 ** deviate from this principle.”” We have however Sir seen, that 
 our Bishops have used “ solicitations’’ to induce us to deviate from 
 this principle, and to unite ourselves with Societies which present 
 God’s Word, without his Church. Let us now listen to Dr. How. 
 In his address before the same Society, he says, ‘“‘ The members 
 “‘ of the Society thought it their duty to proceed in their efforts to 
 “« diffuse the light of religious truth, upon the Scriptural plan of 
 * uniting the Word and the Church of God.” Again: “ Let us then 
 ‘«my brethren direct our efforts to the general establishment of 
 ** Bible and Prayer Book Societies, among the members of our 
 ** Church, thus pursuing the divine method of spreading religious 
 “truth, by holding out the Church of God in connexion with his 
 ‘*Word.”? Of course Bible Societies reject the plan of spreading 
 religious truth, which God himself ordained. 
 
 The Rey. Mr. Bayard, in his address before the Female Bible 
 and Prayer Book Society of New-Ark, asks the following very 
 pertinent question, ‘‘ Why not form distinct Societies for the dis- 
 “‘ tribution of the Bible, and others, for the gift of the Book of 
 ** Common Prayer ?—Why not unite in Bible Societies, and form 
 ** Prayer Book Societies among ourselves ?”” To this he replies, 
 “* Episcopalians consider religion and the Church as indissolubly 
 ‘* united by divine authority ;”’ that is, if there be any meaning in 
 the passage—to separate the Bible and Prayer Book is to separate 
 what God has joined! Alas, we shall presently see that our Serzp- 
 tural Societies have been guilty of effecting this impious divorcee, 
 
Pt.) 
 o wv 
 
 by sending abroad vast numbers of Prayer Books, unattended by 
 their divine companion. 
 
 In your Pastoral Letter of 1815, in urging the establishment of 
 Bible and Prayer Book Societies, you argue, that it is no objec- 
 tion to them that they ‘‘ would prevent Episcopalians from asso- 
 ** cjating with other denominations of Christians in Bible Soci- 
 ** eties,” and in your celebrated Newspaper Address, against the 
 American Bible Society, you observe, ‘* By encouraging these in- 
 ** stitutions,’ (Bible and Prayer Book Societies) ‘* and by not con- 
 ** necting yourselves with the proposed Bible Society, you will 
 ** avoid the hazard to say the least, of occasioning serious injury 
 ** to the interests of the Church in this Diocess, of interrupting 
 “her harmony, and arresting the spirit of zeal for her principles 
 ** which is now leading her to prosperity.” 
 
 Let us now inquire into the principles on which the hostility of 
 these Societies to Bible Societies is founded. They seem to re- 
 gard the importance of the Prayer Book to the salvation of man- 
 kind, as equal if not superior to that of the Bible itself. The New- 
 York Auxiliary Bible and Prayer Book Society, as we have seen, 
 intimates that to distribute the Bible alone, ts ‘‘ to leave men in 
 “uncertainty as to what they are to believe or disbelieve,” and 
 the New-York Bible and Prayer Book Society authoritatively de- 
 clares that ‘‘ Episcopalians, in their charitable efforts to diffuse 
 ‘¢ Christianity, should unite the Book of Common Prayer with the 
 “« Bible.” We have already seen that in your opinion we “ dis- 
 *« tribute the Holy Scriptures 2 the manner best calculated to diffuse 
 **a knowledge of their sacred contents, when we distribute the 
 *« Book of Common Prayer,” and in your address to the New- 
 York Auxiliary Bible and Prayer Book Society, you say ‘“‘ The 
 ** Bible and the Book of Common Prayer—let this be your sacred 
 ** motto. The distribution of these, by God’s blessing, will be 
 ** the means of shedding celestial light on a world dark and igno- 
 ‘rant; of bringing to a world disconsolate and dreary, the com- 
 ‘* forts of Heaven.”’ You likewise remark, ‘* This”’ (the union 
 of the Bible and Prayer Book) “ is also the course which common 
 ** sense points out. In presenting to an individual an instrument 
 * of greatlength, of great variety of matter, written by different 
 ** persons, in different styles, at a remote period, would not 
 ** common sense dictate that a summary of its contents sanctioned 
 *‘ by the judgment of wise and Jearned men, through a long course 
 
54 
 
 ‘* of ages, should also be presented.” Thus we are given to un- 
 derstand, that the Scriptures are so obscure, that it is folly, a 
 violation of common sense, to distribute them, unless we also 
 give the Prayer Book, as a key to unlock their hidden treasures. 
 Alas Sir, the judicious Hooker did not think it necessary, thus 
 to undervalue the Scriptures, in order to exalt the Church. 
 *«* Surely the power of the Word of God,” says this distinguished 
 Churchman, *‘ even without the help of interpreters in God’s church, 
 ‘¢worketh mightily, not only to their confirmation alone which 
 ‘* are already converted, but also to their conversion which are 
 * not.’ ‘* Scripture is not so hard, but that the only reading there- 
 ** of may give life to willing hearers.” Ecc. Pol. 22, Book V. Sect. 
 
 Hooker’s zeal for the Church was accompanied with a thorough 
 knowledge of her spirit and doctrines. In maintaining the life- 
 giving efficacy of the Scriptures, unaided by human commentaries, 
 he only spoke the sentiments of the Church herself. ‘* Whatso- 
 ever is required to the salvation of Man,” says our first Homily, “ is 
 fully contained in the Scripture of God—He that is ignorant, may 
 there learn and have knowledge.” <‘‘ They’ (the Scriptures) 
 ** have power to turn through God’s promise, and they be effectual 
 through God’s assistance.” 
 
 Another most extraordinary principle maintained by these So- 
 eieties and their active patrons, is, that the Scriptures require a 
 combined and simultaneous distribution of the Bible and Prayer 
 Book, or in their own strange phraseology, of ‘‘ the Word, and the 
 Church of God.” Although this sentiment is reiterated again and 
 again in their reports and addresses ; yet I am not ignorant that in 
 a note to your address before the New-York Auxiliary Bible and 
 Prayer Book Society, with singular inconsistency you remark, 
 “¢ Bibles and Prayer Books should be distributed together where 
 *¢ they are both wanted and will be received, and in other cases, 
 ‘* separately, as expediency may dictate.”’ And if expediency may 
 justify Bible and Prayer Book Societies in separating the Word 
 and the Church of God,—in departing from the apostolic mode of 
 propagating Christianity ; why Sir, will you not allow Bible So- 
 cieties to avail themselves of the same plea? But Sir, the language 
 of your address, and of the Reports of the Societies, is greatly at 
 variance with that of your note. 
 
 You declare in your address, that ‘‘in translating and pub- 
 ‘ishing the Liturgy in conjunction with the Bible, and dis- 
 
BH) 
 
 ‘“ tributing them throughout the world, we follow the Scriptural 
 **plan of evangelizing it—we present God’s Word, and God’s 
 ** Church.” Surely Sir, we had aright to expect from the Pro- 
 fessor of Pastoral Theology in the Theological Seminary of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church, language less vague and unintelligible 
 than this. Are the students in your seminary to be taught, that the 
 “« Liturgy” constitutes the Church of God? or that all that is ne- 
 cessary to evangelize the world, is to scatter Bibles and Liturgies 
 throughout its population? What Sir, is the Christian ministry 
 and the ordinances of the Gospel, of no avail in evangelizing the 
 World? Has the command “ preach the Gospel to every crea- 
 ture’ been revoked? Truly Sir, you do indeed separate the 
 Word and the Church of God, to a most alarming extent; and I 
 would cheerfully concur with you in charging this same offence 
 upon the members of Bible Societies, were they to maintain, that 
 all that was necessary to evangelize the world, was to distribute 
 the Bible. We know indeed, that the study of the Scriptures is 
 one of the means of grace, and that it has often proved without ex- 
 traneous aid, the power of God unto salvation. But we also know, 
 that the Author of our religion has established a visible Church, 
 and has provided for that Church certain ordinances which are 
 also means of grace, and has constituted a ministry by whom those 
 ordinances are to be administered, and by whom the people may 
 be more immediately called to faith and repentance. He therefore 
 who should aim at the conversion of the world by distributing the 
 Bible alone, or even with the Prayer Book under the same cover, 
 and should use no other means, would certainly not ‘* follow the 
 Scriptural plan of evangelizing it.” But you will not deny, I pre- 
 sume, that the Gospel will never be generally and effectually 
 preached, where it is not also distributed, and that a Church with- 
 out the Bible, is a body without a soul, a corrupt and loathsome 
 corpse. Ifthen the distribution of the Bible is not only one of 
 the means of converting the world, but if it be absolutely indis- 
 pensable to the establishment and extension of the Christian 
 Church, with what justice can those who use the most effectual 
 means ever devised for spreading the Scriptures, and are thus pre- 
 paring the way for Missionaries, Churches, and Christian ordi- 
 nances, be accused of separating the Word and the Church of God? 
 I admit Sir, that if the members of Bible Societies use no other 
 means to evangelize the world than circulating the Scriptures ; if 
 
56 
 
 they send no Missionaries—if they build no Churches—if they in- 
 struct no children—if they supply the destitute with none of the 
 ordinances of the Gospel ; they are guilty of the charge you bring 
 against them ; but I beg that in your next publication against Bible 
 Societies, you will demonstrate that the great exertions which are 
 now making in Europe and America to evangelize the world by 
 the preaching of Christian ministers are confined solely to the 
 opponents of these institutions. 
 
 But you may ask me Sir, if I acknowledge the obligation of ex- 
 tending the Church of Christ, as well as of diffusing his Word ; 
 and if [ admit as I most cheerfully do, that the Prayer Book is cal- 
 culated to extend that Church, why I object to Societies which 
 distribute both books? This isa fair, but by no means, an embar- 
 rassing inquiry. The object of Bible and Prayer Book Societies 
 abstractedly considered, is in the highest degree laudable,’and had 
 they like the Christian Knowledge Society in England, been esta- 
 blished before, and not in opposition to Bible Societies, and did they 
 maintain no heretical doctrines, no friend to the Church or the 
 Scriptures, could reasonably object to them, and accordingly before 
 their tendency and designs were fully developed, they received 
 the almost unanimous support of Episcopalians in this city. But 
 when they represent as dangerous and unscriptural, the only 
 means which can prove effectual in supplying the world with the 
 Book of Life—when the most gross and flagrant inconsistency is 
 discovered between their professions and their actions— when they 
 tend to introduce schism and parties into the Church, and loudly 
 and perseveringly condemn the very associations which the assem- 
 bled Bishops of the Church recommended to the patronage of their 
 flocks, it becomes in my opinion the duty of every friend of the 
 Bible, of every sincere and zealous Episcopalian, to discountenance 
 them. To deny that these Societies have done good, would be to 
 call in question the excellency of the Bible and Prayer Book ; but 
 the question is, not whether they have done some good, but whe- 
 ther they have not prevented greater good. The first obvious 
 consequence of these institutions, zs the division of effort in the Bi- 
 ble cause. Common sense and daily experience prove the superi- 
 or efficacy of united funds and concentrated labours, over the same 
 funds and labours directed into different channels, and applied to 
 distinct although similar objects. But do these Societies, by their 
 own exertions, endeavour to counteract the injury resulting from 
 
57 
 
 this division of effort, and agreeably to their solemn and oft repeat- 
 ed professions, circulate the Bible in conjunction with the Prayer 
 Book? Alas, Sir, they have thoroughly imbibed the spirit of your 
 maxim, ‘‘ we distribute the Holy Scriptures inthe manner best cal- 
 culated to promote a knowledge of their sacred contents, when we 
 distribute the Book of Common Prayer.” 
 
 On turning to the last Report of the New-York Auxiliary Bible 
 and Prayer Book Society, we find that the total amount of their 
 issues for the preceding year was ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND 
 SEVENTEEN Prayer Books and ninety-two Bibles!! And these are 
 the young gentlemen, who in their own opinion would throw away 
 the precious fruits of the reformation, did they not stand with the 
 Bible in one hand, and the Book of Common Prayer in the other! 
 No wonder they are compelled to make the following mortifying 
 confession. <‘So far from being supported by increasing liberality, 
 “‘a large portion of our members when called upon for their sub- 
 ‘* scription, have withdrawn their names, and while our resources 
 ‘‘ are thus continually decreasing, very few subscribers are added 
 **to our list.”** Yet these gentlemen, thus frowned upon by their 
 own Church, read iectures to their brether churchmen on their 
 “‘ excursive charity”’ and “‘ erratic liberality’’ and have the modes- 
 ty to ask Clergymen belonging to Bible Societies, to distribute these 
 censures upon themselves, among their own parishioners. This 
 same Society, which declares “‘ that the same duty which animates 
 ‘< them to distribute the Bible, impels them to accompany the bless- 
 ‘ing with the Book of Common Prayer,” with admirable consist- 
 ency, give notice that they will supply for gratuitous distribution 
 any number of Bibles and Prayer Books, Bibles at 85 cents, and 
 Prayer Books at 30 cents. Hence if they can but get their price, 
 they are ready to separate the Word and the Church of God, to 
 any extent. 
 
 Six years after the organization of the Albany Bible and Prayer 
 Book Society, they had not purchased one Bible for distribution, 
 and the few they gave away, were a present from the British and 
 Foreign Bible Society ; their funds being appropriated to the pur- 
 chase of Prayer Booksonly! _ 
 
 The conscientious members of the Johnstown Bible and Prayer 
 Book Society, who in their ‘“ conscience”’ believe Bible Societies 
 
 * Seventh Report. 
 8 
 
28 
 
 to be a departure ‘‘ from the primitive method of propagating 
 ** Christianity,’ distributed, as appears by their report for 1820, 
 twenty Bibles_and one HUNDRED AnD Firty Prayer Books! 
 
 But the Central Bible and Prayer Book Society, embracing 
 within its bounds six of our western counties, is that which above 
 all others you delight to honour, as it is the only one you deemed 
 proper to introduce to the notice of the last Convention, and you 
 speak of it in your charge, as “‘ distinguished for its zealous exer- 
 tions.” Wonderful as it may seem, this Society which is so 
 high in your favour, has disregarded the cardinal principle, “* the 
 combined distribution of the Bible and Book ef Common Prayer,”’ 
 and has violated the Scriptural plan of evangelizing the world, 
 for we are informed in the Christian Journal for 1822, page 368, 
 ** In consequence of the general distribution of the Bible by the 
 ** Jaudable exertions of others, and the pressing demands for the 
 ‘* Book of Common Prayer, the attention of the Society since its 
 ** commencement, has been turned to the distribution of that invalu- 
 ‘* able manual of devotion.”” That is, this Bible and Prayer Book 
 Society has appropriated all its funds to the distribution of Prayer 
 Books, and has never owned a single Bible. 
 
 These facts ill accord with the opinions we have seen expressed, 
 respecting the Scriptural plan of presenting in conjunction the 
 Word and the Church of God. To distribute Bibles without 
 Prayer Books, is unscriptural,—is throwing away the precious 
 fruits of the reformation—is hazarding our apostolic ministry, &c. 
 &c. But to distribute Prayer Books without Bibles, does no in- 
 jury to the Church, and offers no violence to the consciences of 
 these orthodox and consistent Churchmen. These Societies 
 while circulating Prayer Books,” are careful to retain the word 
 *€ Bible” in their title, and thus 
 
 *¢ They keep the word of promise to our ear, 
 ** And break it to our hope.” 
 
 These institutions not only damp in Episcopalians that zeal for 
 the diffusion of the Scriptures, which is the most remarkable 
 characteristic of the present day ; but they prevent the adoption 
 of the most efficient means for putting the Liturgy of our Church 
 into the hands of her indigent members. By their avowed oppo- 
 sition to Bible; Societies they lose the patronage of many Episco- 
 palians whose conduct in jsupporting them, these Societies think 
 
a] 
 
 proper to condemn ; and although most of their funds are expend- 
 ed in printing and circulating Prayer Books, yet it is found neces- 
 sary in order to save appearances, to appropriate some portion of 
 them to the distribution of the Scriptures.* Whereas, were Prayer 
 Book Societies established in their room, they would receive the 
 patronage of all Churchmen, and might devote their undivided re- 
 sources to the dissemination of our ‘own invaluable Liturgy and 
 Articles. 
 
 Another most serious objection to these Societies, is the schism 
 they produce and the parties they form in our Church—We have 
 seen that they denounce Bible Societies as unscriptural, because 
 they do not present the Church of God in conjunction with his 
 Word, and declare that they ‘in conscience believe”’ the very as- 
 sociations recommended by the House of Bishops, to be a departure 
 ‘‘ from the true and primitive method of propagating Christianity.” 
 You Sir, warn your flock that in joining Bible Societies, they 
 “‘put in jeopardy their apostolic ministry and primitive and 
 “ evangelical worship,” while your “‘ venerable father in the Epis- 
 
 * As the Stereotype edition of the Bible printed by the New-York Auxiliary 
 Bible and Prayer Book Society, may be regarded as invalidating in some de- 
 gree the statements I have made, it may not be amiss to give afew facts rela- 
 tive to this subject. The expense of the plates was not defrayed out of the 
 funds of the Society, for the managers in their third Report, inform us that 
 “ they did not feel authorized to withdraw any part of the money then employ- 
 “ ed in circulating the Book of Common Prayer.’ The Managers therefore 
 made an appeal to the public for this specific object, and they state (8rd Re- 
 port) “the result has fully justified the appeal,” and they give notice that 
 “ the list of subscribers to this work of Christian charity, will be published as 
 “ soon as the subscriptions are completed.”’ In their 5th Report, they incau- 
 tiously disclose their object in printing an edition. ‘‘ Your Managers did not 
 “fear to publish an edition of the Bible, even though the state of the funds 
 © would not allow of immediate payment for it—we were confident of being 
 “€ able to dispose of the books at a profil to the Society.” It would seem however 
 that this speculation has not been successful, since it does not appear, that the 
 lastyear they have sold a single copy. Let it be recollected that the Ameri- 
 can Bible Society had for sale, and would have sold to this Society at cosi 
 price, well executed Stereotype Bibles of three different sizes, and that 
 Bible Societies throughout the union find it their interest to purchase these Bi- 
 bles. The New-York Auxiliary Bible and Prayer Book Society was not there- 
 fore induced to procure these plates from any difficulty they experienced in 
 purchasing Bibles; but it seems they sagaciously imagined, that could they 
 procure the plates free of expense, they would be able to sell Bibles at a pro- 
 fit, and thus the sale of the Scriptures would augment the distribution of the 
 
 Prayer Book. 
 
60 
 
 *eopacy” assures us, that with the plan of Bible Societies, as 
 adopted in England and America, “ there can be no dissatisfaction 
 on account of interfering opinions or modes of worship.” Bishop 
 White considers Bible Societies ‘‘ as being one of the happiest ex- 
 “‘ pedients ever devised for spreading the knowledge of Christ.” 
 You, on the other hand, regard the Prayer Book as a still more 
 happy expedient, since ‘‘ we distribute the holy Scriptures in the 
 manner best calculated,’’ &c. 
 
 On turning to other dioceses, we find the members of our Church 
 generally uniting with their fellow Christians in distributing the 
 Scriptures, and among themselves, in distributing the Prayer Book, 
 Homilies, and Tracts. The Episcopalians of Pennsylvania, as if 
 totally ignorant of the sin of separating ‘* the Word and the Church 
 of God,” have formed ‘‘ the Common Prayer Book Society of 
 Pennsylvania ;” and in their first Report they make the following 
 bold avowal ‘‘in the exercise of Christian charity we will unite 
 ‘with our brethren of other denominations in the great and pious 
 ** work of distributing the Scriptures.”” The Episcopalians of the 
 the eastern diocess anxious to disseminate the doctrines of their 
 Church, have established ‘the Prayer Book and Tract Society 
 of the eastern diocess.”” The convention of Virginia, disregarding 
 ‘¢the cardinal principle,”’ have by a formal vote established “ the 
 Common Prayer Book and Tract Society of Virginia,” and the 
 convention of North Carolina have by a vote recorded on their 
 journals, recommended to the clergy of that diocess “ the organi- 
 zation of Prayer Book Societies in their respective congrega- 
 tions,” little imagining that they were thus advising their clergy to 
 “throw away ihe precious fruits of the reformation.” In Mary- 
 land also we find a Prayer Book and Homily Society under the pre- 
 sidency of the bishop. 
 
 Thus we see sir, that in no less than five dioceses the divine 
 method of spreading religious truth by holding out the Church of 
 God in connexion with his Word, through the means of Bible and 
 Prayer Book Societies, as recommended by Dr. How and your- 
 self, is utterly disregarded. Can it be denied that these Societies 
 in declaring Bible Societies to be unscriptural and dangerous, and 
 their own plan to be that alone which is sanctioned by divine au- 
 thority, are acting in direct opposition to the sentiments of an im- 
 mense majority in the Church; that they are interrupting her 
 peace, bringing her authority into contempt, and forming parties 
 
61 
 
 among her members ? You inform us Sir, in your “* Catechism for 
 Confirmation,” page 25, ““ We also commit the sin of schism when 
 ‘* we promote parties and divisions in the Church, or in any way 
 ** disturb its peace.’? “ The apostles regarded even the lowest 
 *« degree of schism, making parties in the Church, a carnal sin.” 
 And if on the subject of Bible Societies, there be now “‘ parties and 
 divisions” in the Church, and if her peace be disturbed, to whom 
 will attach the carnal sin of creating the schism? To the House 
 of Bishops who recommended them, or to the single Bishop who 
 has denounced them ? : 
 
 It is now time, that agreeably to my promise, I should consider 
 your assertion that Bible Societies “tend to weaken the zeal of 
 *« Episcopalians in favour of those distinguishing principles which 
 “* eminently entitle her to the appellation of apostolic and primitive.” 
 Passing over the remarkable circumstance, that the House of Bi- 
 shops should have been so weak and short sighted as to recommend 
 institutions exerting such disastrous influence upon Episcopalians, 
 I will apply to our Church, the words of the celebrated Dr. Clark 
 of Cambridge, ‘‘ So soon as it shall be proved that the distribution 
 “< of the Bible alone is hostile to the interests of the established 
 ‘“* Church, then, and then only, be that Church subverted.” 
 
 Bible Societies have now been in operation in this country for 
 fourteen years, and it is to be regretted, that you do not favour us 
 with some of the facts on which you found your assertion. If the 
 zeal of Episcopalians for their Church, were to be determined 
 solely by their professions, I should be compelled I admit, to yield 
 the precedency to the opponents of Bible Societies; but it is to 
 actions and not professions to which I appeal to repel your injurious 
 insinuation. If we turn to England we find those great institutions, 
 the Church Missionary Society, the Church of England Tract So- 
 ciety, the Seciety for the conversion of the Jews, and the Prayer 
 Book and Homily Society, all of them identified with the interests 
 of the established Church, supported almost exclusively, by the 
 Episcopal members of the Bible Society. Let us Sir, inquire par- 
 ticularly into the operations of the Church Missionary Society, and 
 the Prayer Book and Homily Society, since it is admitted that 
 these institutions are supported by the Episcopal friends of the 
 British and Foreign Bible Society, and are on that account sub- 
 jected to the frowns and abuse of its opponents. The income of 
 
62 
 
 the Church Missionary Society amounted last year to $146,000. 
 It employs as missionaries, schoolmasters, &c., 200 persons. It 
 is educating not less than 10,500 heathen children, and has mission- 
 ary stations in the four quarters of the globe. It placed $22,000 
 at the disposal of the Bishop of Calcutta, for the use of the Mis- 
 sionary College established by his Lordship; and it supports a 
 College at Cotym for the improvement of the Syrian Church. in 
 which there are now twenty-one students, who are intended for 
 the ministry; and is thus preparing the way for a union between 
 the Church of England and this ancient and apostolic, but long 
 persecuted Church. The Prayer Book and Homily Society have 
 in nine years distributed 60,000 Prayer Books, and about half a 
 million of Homilies, Articles, and Ordination Services in tracts. 
 They have published the Liturgy in Irish, Welch, Modern Greek, 
 Chinese, Hindoostanee, and also for the use of the Syrian Chris- 
 tians, in Tamul and Malayalim. They have published Homilies 
 in English, Manks, Welch, French, Italian, Spanish, and German. 
 All this it must be confessed, does not look as if the British and 
 Foreign Bible Society had paralyzed the zeal of its Episcopal 
 members, for their own Church; nor do the numerous Prayer 
 Book and Tract Societies I have already mentioned, in the other 
 Dioceses at home, favour your theory that Bible Societies tend 
 to weaken the zeal of Episcopalians “in favour of the distinguish- 
 ing principles of their Church.”’ Let it be recollected that the 
 President of the Pennsylvania Prayer Book Society, the Hon. 
 William Tilghman, is one of the Vice Presidents of the American 
 Bible Society. The following extract from the Report of a Prayer 
 Book Society in your own Diocess, established in the congregation 
 to which the President of the National Bible Society belongs, in- 
 dicates, it must be admitted, no want of attachment to the Church. 
 
 «‘ The most diffusive Christian charity, is perfectly consistent 
 ‘¢ with a zealous attachment to the particular denomination of 
 ‘“‘ which we are members. With our fellow Christians of every 
 “ name, we are ready to unite in spreading abroad the records of 
 “our common salvation; and with the Apostle, we pray, that 
 “‘ grace may be with all who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sin- 
 “‘cerity. But we turn with fond and peculiar regard to that 
 ** Church in whose bosom we were nurtured, and in whose words 
 “« our infant lips were taught to utter the accents of prayer and 
 “‘ praise. May peace be within her walls, and prosperity within 
 
63 
 
 *« her palaces; may her priests be clothed with salvation, and her 
 ‘saints shout aloud for joy.”’* 
 
 If you really doubt the attachment of the Episcopal members of 
 Bible Societies to the liturgy and doctrines of the Church, give 
 them an opportunity of evincing it. Let one of the two Bible and 
 Prayer Book Societies in this city, drop the word ‘ Bible’’ in its 
 title, and let it no longer pretend that it is a sin to give Bibles with- 
 out Prayer Books, and I pledge myself, that in one year, its issues 
 of Prayer Books will be double the present number. 
 
 It has been sometimes maintained that Bible Societies tended to 
 contract the circulation of the Prayer Book. The following ad- 
 mission of the New-York Auxiliary Bible and Prayer Book Society 
 relieves me from the labour of disproving so idle a suggestion. 
 ‘* With the multiplied and growing facilities of obtaining the Bible, 
 “is the demand for the Book of Common Prayer increased.” 
 Third Report. 
 
 Although in your opinion the distribution of the Bible and Prayer 
 Book in conjunction, will be the means “of bringing to a world 
 disconsolate and dreary, the comforts of Heaven ;’ I must be per- 
 mitted, with great deference to doubt, whether the comforts of 
 Heaven will ever be brought generally and effectually to the world, 
 except through the preaching of the Gospel, by a Christian Minis- 
 try. The general Convention of our Church, sensible of the duty 
 of Christians, to extend the comforts of their religion to their fel- 
 low men, of every name and nation, have established the Domestic 
 and Foreign Missionary Society. At the head of this institution, 
 we find the Bishop of Pennsylvania, the able and zealous advocate 
 of Bible Societies. In his address, in behalf of the Society, he 
 urges the duty and importance of foreign missions, and exclaims ; 
 «¢ Who can calculate the effects of this new plan for the evange- 
 *lizing of the world? And who can tell whether it may not be the 
 ‘* expedient in the counsels of divine wisdom, for the fulfilment of 
 “‘ the promise to the Messiah, of giving him the heathen for his in- 
 “‘heritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for his possession 2” 
 This Society has received the cordial support of the Episcopal 
 members of Bible Societies, and the President of the American Bi- 
 ble Society, is numbered among its patrons, and liberal benefactors. 
 One of the means devised by the General Convention, for pro- 
 
 * Report of Bedford Prayer-Book Society.— Wash. Theo. Repertory, Vol. IV. 
 pugze 31. 
 
fae ‘ he 
 wind Sy > Songs 
 be? " r i » 
 
 v4 
 
 viding funds for this Society, is the establishment of Auxiliary So- 
 cieties, and such Societies are now rapidly forming in Pennsylvania, 
 and elsewhere. And is there an Episcopalian to be found, who 
 objects to these associations,—associations recommended by the 
 great council of his Church, and intended to extend that Church, 
 both at home and abroad? I know of but one individual who ob- 
 jects to the formation of Auxiliary Societies, and his zeal has not 
 been weakened by connexion with Bible Societies. In your late 
 charge, after giving a freezing recommendation of the Domestic 
 and Foreign Missionary Society, ‘‘so far as may be compatible 
 *¢ with the claims of this Diocess, where there is so extensive a 
 *¢ field for missionary exertions.” You proceed: “ f should much 
 ‘* fear however, that any plan of constant and permanent operation, 
 << such as the constituting of Auxiliary Societies, would essentially 
 ‘‘interfere with the missionary system of this Diocess, which has 
 ** been so successful in its operation, and to which we are indebted 
 ‘‘for the organization of many new congregations, and for thé re- 
 ‘ suscitation of some which were nearly extinct.’’ And will the 
 Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society interfere with the mis- 
 sionary system of this Diocess in its efforts for the conversion of 
 the heathen? In what spot Sir, out of the bounds of this Diocess, 
 does the New-York Episcopal Missionary, proclaim the glad tidings 
 of salvation? Alas Sir, the missionary system of which you speak, 
 is but another illustration of your maxim, that it is the duty of 
 Episcopalians “to bend all their efforts for the advancement of 
 «their own Church.” 
 
 It is not now my object, to question the utility or propriety of 
 our missionary system; but still | must be permitted to believe, 
 that the command of the ascending Redeemer ; ‘“‘ Go ye into all 
 <¢ the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature,” has not 
 been revoked ; and that no Church, which systematically refuses 
 obedience to this command, will permanently flourish. Those 
 sects among us, which are increasing most rapidly at home, are 
 those which make the greatest exertions abroad. If we postpone 
 our endeavours for the conversion of the heathen, till there shall 
 be no nonepiscopalians in New-York, the great day of account 
 will find the duty unperformed. Other Dioceses have also their 
 missionary systems, but no other Bishop has to my knowledge ob- 
 jected to the formation of Auxiliary Societies. 
 
 We have thus seen that Bible Societies have not weakened the 
 
65 
 
 zeal of Episcopalians generally in the distribution of their liturgy, 
 or in missionary endeavours to extend their Church, either in 
 Great Britain or America. 
 
 Let us now inquire whether those Clergymen of our Church, 
 who in opposition to your advice have supported Bible Societies 
 have been less zealous and faithful in the discharge of their paro- 
 chial duties, than their brethren who have bowed submissively to 
 your authority? On the establishment of the American Bible 
 Society, you intimated in the newspapers, in an address under your 
 own signature, that connexion with Bible Societies hada tendency 
 to produce in Episcopalians ‘‘an indolent indifference” towards 
 the principles of the Church, and you anticipated ‘‘ serious injury 
 to the Church in this Diocess”’ from the union of Churchmen in the 
 National Society. After the experience of six years, you now again 
 advance similar sentiments ; and solemnly declare in your charge, 
 that Bible Societies have a tendency to lessen the zeal of Episco- 
 palians in favour of the distinguishing principles of their Church. 
 It is to be presumed that an assertion, so seriously affecting the cha- 
 racters and conduct of no small portion of your flock, is founded up- 
 on facts within your own observation, and it is to be regretted, that 
 you have not thought proper to specify them. Now it is all im- 
 portant to such of your Clergy as have incurred the responsibility 
 of joining Bible Societies, to prove that their zeal has not been pa- 
 ralyzed; and this can only be done by a comparison of the result 
 of their ministerial labours, with those of their brethren. Sucha 
 comparison however invidious and painful, is now rendered ne- 
 cessary to the defence of their own characters; and surely he 
 ought not to be deemed guilty of cruelty or unkindness, who in 
 warding off the blows which are aimed at himself, should happen 
 to wound his assailant. In this investigation, it is evident that we 
 must look for our facts at home; and suffer me to offer the three 
 Episcopal Rectors in this city, who are connected with the Ameri- 
 can Bible Society, as the representatives of their associates through- 
 out the Diocess. The influence of this institution in weakening 
 the zeal of Episcopalians, has in this city, had a fair and thorough 
 experiment. It is here, that it is carrying on its operations in all 
 their imposing grandeur and magnificence; here are held the 
 monthly meetings of its managers, including its clerical members; 
 and here are celebrated its anniversaries at which, the three Cler- 
 gymen alluded to, have mingled their notes of gratulation and en- 
 
 9 
 
66 
 
 couragement, with those of their fellow Christians. If the zeal 
 of these gentlemen has passed unhurt through this fiery trial—nay, 
 if it be still as active and ardent as that of any of their brethren, 
 then surely Sir, your fears have been groundless, and you will be 
 almost induced to welcome the Society as an Auxiliary to the 
 Church. 
 
 On the 28th of January, 1817, Dr. How, in an address delivered 
 in St. Paul’s Church, recommended the organization of Sunday 
 Schools in the Episcopal Churches in New-York. At the mo- 
 ment this address was delivered, there were 53 Sunday Schools in 
 full and successful operation in this city, embracing about 6000 
 scholars. And did the Episcopal Churches Sir, deserve the re- 
 proach implied in Dr. How’s monition? Had our pastors so long 
 delayed to establish these nurseries of the Church? Had they 
 been so long indifferent to the spiritual sustenance of the lambs 
 of their flocks, while the Pastors of other Churches were train- 
 ing up 6000 children to virtue and piety in Sunday Schools? 
 However humiliating the confession, it is nevertheless required by 
 truth and justice, that at the period of Dr. How’s address, no Sun- 
 day School was established in any Episcopal Congregation in the 
 city, whose Rector did not belong to the American Bible Society ; 
 and it is equally true, that at the same time, there were flourishing 
 Sunday Schools in every Episcopal Congregation in the city whose 
 Rector did belong to that Society ; viz.—in St. Michael’s, St.George’s, 
 and Christ Church. We may, therefore, safely conclude that Bi- 
 ble Societies do not weaken the zeal of our Clergy, for the spi- 
 ritual instruction of the young, and the indigent. 
 
 I shall adduce but one more instance to disprove your opinion 
 of the benumbing influence of Bible Societies upon the zeal of Epis- 
 copalians, and it will I trust be conclusive. J can imagine no surer 
 touchstone of ministerial zeal and faithfulness, than the number of 
 those who are brought to kneel at the Altar of their Saviour; and 
 in receiving the symbols and pledges of his love, to acknowledge 
 Him before men. By this test, I am willing that the zeal of the 
 clerical members of Bible Societies should be tried, confident that 
 in every instance, ceteris paribus, those Clergymen who support 
 these associations, will be found more successful in their parochial 
 labours than their less Catholic Brethren. The opposition to Bible 
 Societies in this Diocess, has proceeded almost exclusively from 
 the Pastors of Trinity Church and her associated Chapels; it will 
 
o7 
 
 therefore not be irrelevant to our subject, to inquire whether they 
 have been instrumental in adding a greater number to the com- 
 munion of our Church, than their Brethren in the city, whose con- 
 nexion with Bible Societies, they think proper to condemn. Our 
 Church in one of her Canons* makes it the duty of every Minister 
 to “‘ keep a register of the names of the communicants within his 
 cure ;”’ justly esteeming him a careless shepherd, who either does 
 not know his sheep, or omits to take their number. For four suc- 
 cessive years commencing with 1804, the communicants of Trinity 
 Church are stated at or about “1000.” In 1808, the Chapel of St. 
 John’s was added, and yet for four more successive years, we are 
 still presented with the same unvarying report of “about 1000.” 
 Sometimes we are informed, that this number is ascertained ‘‘ by 
 estimation.” In 1812, the Chapel of St. George’s was erected 
 into an independent Church, and we learn from the report in that 
 year, of the officiating Minister, that its communicants amounted to 
 between 60 and 80, thus leaving to Trinity, St. Paul’s and St. 
 John’s, more than 900 communicants, or an average of upwards of 
 300. Is it not wonderful Sir, that the same sermons which in Tri- 
 nity, St. Paul’s and St. John’s, had drawn such crowds to the Altar 
 should at St. George’s, one of the largest and oldest Churches in 
 eur city, have been heard with so little effect. After the sepa- 
 ration of St. George’s, the total amount remaining in the three 
 Churches, is stated at 700, and the deduction of 300 from the usual 
 ** 1000” is ascribed to the separation of St. George’s, and the 
 establishment of new congregations in the city. We have seen 
 that St. George’s only took off 80 communicants, leaving 220 who 
 had joined the newcongregations. This sudden secession to new 
 Churches, is the more surprising when we recollect, that the 
 erection of Grace Church, only separated from the yard of Tri- 
 nity by a narrow street, made no deduction from, nor the annex- 
 ation of the new Church of St. John’s, any addition to, the un- 
 varying ‘‘ 1000.” We are not informed what new congregations 
 they were, which had deprived Trinity of so large a portion of her 
 communicants, and I have looked in vain in the journal of the con- 
 vention, for the year in which the fact is announced, to find a no- 
 tice of the formation of one new congregation in the city. The 
 communicants of Trinity after sustaining this heavy loss, were for 
 
 * 4th Canon, 1796. 
 
68 
 
 several years reported at 700 ; at last they rose to “ between 700 
 and 800,” and in this middle station they have remained for the 
 last five years. Let us now Sir trace the progress of that unfortu- 
 nate Chapel, which, on separating from Trinity, beheld her own 
 altar nearly deserted, while it appeared from the parochial reports, 
 that those of her late associates were thronged. The first report 
 from this Church in 1812, as we have seen, states the communi- 
 cants at between 60 and 80. We have no report again till 1816, 
 when Dr. Milnor, the present Rector and the Secretary of the 
 American Bible Society, being called to its Rectorship, reported 
 that he found 130 communicants. His last report, states the num- 
 ber at 432, more than belong to any other episcopal Church in the 
 city, and the particulars of his statement, viz.—‘* added within the 
 year 58, died 11—removed 29,” look as if the number was given, 
 not “ by estimation,” but from ‘‘ the Register,” required by the 
 Canon. The communicants of Christ Church are reported at 
 250, and those of St. Michael’s at 400, thus making a total of 1082 
 for the three Churches, whose Rectors are members of the Ameri- 
 can Bible Society. And do these facts Sir, confirm you in your 
 opinion, that these Rectors by joining that Society, ran the hazard 
 of occasioning very serious injury to the Church in this ** Diocess ?”” 
 They may indeed have been the unwilling cause of “ wounding 
 the feelings and diminishing the influence” of one whose station 
 and character alike entitle him to their respect ; but recollect Sir, 
 that they could not have avoided these consequences, without 
 wounding their own consciences ; and recollect also Sir, that their 
 feelings and their influence, have not always been consulted by 
 their opponents. 
 
 I trust I have now shown, that connexion with Bible Societies, 
 does not necessarily weaken the zeal of Episcopalians, nor endan- 
 ger the Church. Suffer me now toask you, whether continued 
 opposition will not probably be instrumental in “* occasioning very 
 serious injury” to our Church; in “ interrupting her harmony— 
 “* arresting the spirit of zeal for her principles which is now lead- 
 *‘ ing her to prosperity,’ and in ‘* wounding the feelings and di- 
 ‘* minishing the influence of those intrusted with the management 
 ‘¢ of her concerns 2” 
 
 We have already seen. that some of our opponents have de- 
 clared, that in their conscience they believe that very system so 
 strenuously recommended by the House of Bishops. to be ‘ a de- 
 
69 
 
 ‘¢ parture from the true and primitive method of propagating the 
 *‘ knowledge of God.”? And can the authority and Christian pru- 
 dence of our Bishops be thus questioned, without ‘* hurting their 
 ‘* feelings, and diminishing their influence??? Can parties be en- 
 gendered in the very bosom of the Church, without interrupting 
 her harmony, and occasioning very serious injury to her interests. 
 Acerrima proximorum odia. Parties cannot long exist, without 
 their distinctive names ; and if our clergy are unhappily beginning 
 to be known as evangelical or otherwise, the distinction is to be 
 attributed in no small degree to the opposition made by a party in 
 the Church, to Bible Societies. New proofs of the disastrous in- 
 fluence which this party exercises on the rising prosperity of our 
 Church, are constantly occurring. 
 
 The establishment of a general Theological Seminary was long 
 an object of devout anticipation and endeavour on the part of the 
 pious members of our Church. The superior advantages which 
 would necessarily flow from a concentration of funds, and the 
 consequent establishment of an extensive library and the liberal 
 endowment of professorships, compared with the crippled re-~ 
 sources and feeble efforts of local institutions, were so obvious, 
 that not a murmur of disapprobation to the plan was heard through- 
 out our Church ; except in the Diocess of New-York. The op- 
 position in New-York ceased, the moment the general Seminary 
 was virtually placed under her own control; and almost immedi- 
 ately it breaks out in various sections of the Church. Virginia 
 has established her Seminary, and invited North Carolina to unite 
 with her. Maryland has just establisked her Seminary. The Bi- 
 shop of the Eastern Diocess, as appears from his late charge, 
 withholds his countenance, and all hope of a general, vigorous, 
 and systematic support of the Theological Seminary by the Church 
 at large, is now at an end. And can we attribute this sudden 
 change in the sentiments of large portions of our Church, to any 
 other cause than a fear that those peculiar principles which are 
 maintained with so much earnestness in this Diocess, and which 
 have led to an unwearied opposition to Bible Societies, would be 
 inculcated in the general Seminary. These same principles we 
 have seen produce in this Diocess, a lukewarmness almost amount- 
 ing to hostility, towards the designs of the Domestic and Foreign 
 Missionary Society ; the only instrument devised by the Episco- 
 palians of America for the conversion of the Heathen world. 
 
70 
 
 Another evil arising from this opposition, is the diminished re- 
 verence for the Word of God to which it naturally leads ; and the 
 inducement it offers to the rash attempt of elevating the Liturgy 
 into competition with the sacred volume. To these consequences 
 is still to be added the unkind and unchristian feelings which it en- 
 genders, towards those who adopt different opinions, and pursue a 
 different conduct. This last remark, cannot certainly, Sir, be ap- 
 plied in its full force to you. While you have not scrupled frank- 
 ly, and publicly to impute to Bible Societies, an unscriptural cha- 
 racter, and dangerous tendency ; you have refrained from impeach- 
 ing the motives of their supporters ; and have uniformly conduct- 
 ed the controversy with the forbearance of a Christian, and the 
 urbanity of a gentleman. But unfortunately Sir, your associates 
 on the other side of the Atlantic, have defended your principles, 
 ina manner which reflects disgrace, both upon themselves, and 
 the Church of which they are members, and which cannot but 
 wound the interests of religion itself. The asperity and malig- 
 nancy which now mark the hostility in England, afford a salutary 
 lesson to us, and teach us that we cannot long oppose the diffusion 
 of the oracles of truth, without finding their influence on our 
 hearts and dispositions gradually weakened, and without being 
 driven to seek for arguments to support our cause, on the very 
 confines of infidelity. Do you accuse me, Sir, of exaggeration or 
 unkindness? I appeal to the following passage of the Ist report of 
 a district committee of the Society for promoting Christian Know- 
 ledge for the Deanery of Henly, in Oxfordshire, dated in 1820. 
 After declaring that they do not think it “ altogether safe to com- 
 mit the inspired writings into the hands of the illiterate’’ without 
 interpretations, &c. and drawing a comparison between their own 
 plan and that of the Bible Society, they proceed: “It is indeed 
 “a singular coincidence, that the daring advance of blasphemy 
 ‘* has been commensurate with the accelerated progress of scrip- 
 “* tural knowledge ; and never did infidelity appear abroad with 
 “ such bold and disgusting effrontery as we now behold it, since the 
 ** Bible has been indiscriminately put into the hands of the people 
 “* without note or comment.’’ Within the period here alluded to, 
 the Prayer Book, and Church of England Tracts, have been cir- 
 culated to an extent unparalleled in the history of the established 
 Church ; and yet, instead of imputing the advance of blasphemy 
 and infidelity to these productions of fallible men: or of ascribing 
 
va 
 
 it to the demoralizing influence of a protracted war, to an increas- 
 ed population, or to extensive pecuniary embarrassments ; these 
 gentlemen in their rage against Bible Societies, can see no other 
 agent in the production of the general profligacy, than that volume 
 which has God for its author, truth for its matter, and salvation 
 for its end! Speaking of Bible associations, the British Critic for 
 1815, exclaims, ‘‘ Fer what honest, for what good, and for what 
 ‘¢ Christian purpose, are the poor of this country to be taxed a 
 *< penny a week in support of a Society whose income exceeds its 
 “* expenditures? To deduct such asum from a poor family, is a 
 “ cruel, a wicked, an unchristian act.’ And yet this cruelty and 
 wickedness were chargeable upon a majority of the Bishops of the 
 establishment, for at this time more than half the Bishops patron- 
 ised Bible Societies. 
 
 But amid all the calumniators of the British and Foreign Bible 
 Society, the name of Norris stands pre-eminent. 
 
 *¢ Aw’d by no shame, by no respect controll’d, 
 ‘¢ In scandal busy, in reproaches bold,” 
 
 This modern Thersites, even while ministering at the altar of 
 his God, scruples not to load his most devoted servants, with the 
 foulest obloquy ; and labours with the malignity of an infidel, to 
 prove the corrupting influence of the Holy Scriptures, upon the 
 public morals. 
 
 * From such apostles, O ye mitred heads ! 
 *¢ Preserve the Church.” 
 
 In the year 1814, this man first obtruded himself on the public 
 notice, as the author of “A practical exposition of the tendency 
 and proceedings of the British and Foreign Bible Society.’ Of 
 the bitterness of that work, the following sample will suffice. 
 ‘‘ Those who so loudly proclaim the cause of the Bible Society to 
 “‘be the cause of God: who cry out to the deluded people, why 
 “‘come ye not up to the help of the Lord against the mighty, are 
 ‘the legitimate descendants of those notable incendiaries, who ne- 
 «‘ ver ceased to curse Meroz and neutrality, until in the language 
 ‘¢ of Walker, they had brought God’s curse upon the land ; and put 
 *¢ Church and Commonwealth into a flame.’’—p. 285. 
 
 Of this same work, the Bishop of St. Davids, thus speaks in his 
 tract, “‘ The Bible, and the Bible alone, the religion of Protest- 
 
72 
 “ants.” ‘itis so destitute of the demonstration which it pro- 
 *< fesses to give : so defective in its premises : so inconclusive in 
 *¢ its inferences ; and so reprehensible in its calwmnies respecting 
 ‘“<the Church members of the Society,”’ that it may be left * to its 
 *< own refutation.” 
 
 Is it not Sir astonishing, that a man thus degrading his holy call- 
 ing, should find in this country a correspondent in the person of 
 ‘¢ a distinguished American ?” A correspondent who mourns with 
 him over the progress of the everlasting Gospel, and bewails every 
 new instance of patronage bestowed on institutions whose only ob- 
 ject, is to furnish his fellow men, with the records of salvation !! 
 On the first page of this man’s recent letter to Lord Liverpool, 
 after pointing out the mischievous effects of his Lordship’s speech 
 in favour of the Bible Society he proceeds, ‘‘ but our own shores 
 “¢ are not the limits of its injurious operation, for I have before me 
 <*a communication from a distinguished American, who bewails the 
 “accession of popularity, that Societies there, hostile to that 
 “* Church have derived from inferences, which we happily know 
 “to be false, of a disposition in the English ministry to patronise 
 ‘*‘Sectarism, drawn from this speech, which is most studiously 
 ‘¢ propagated by the American newspapers, throughout the United 
 *¢ States.” 
 
 It thus appears that it was not till after this distinguished Ameri- 
 can, had condescended to complain to Mr. Norris of Lord Liverpool’s 
 speech, that Mr. Norris resolved to write his letter; and it is 
 therefore to this distinguished personage that the community are 
 probably indebted for this indecent pamphlet ; and perhaps to the 
 same agency, for its republication in this country as an auxiliary to 
 your charge. These considerations give to the letter of Norris, 
 a degree of importance to which it would not be otherwise entitled. 
 It is interesting to know something of the foreign correspondents 
 of distinguished Americans ; and it is curious and useful to observe, 
 how a mistaken zeal, vitiates the moral appetite, and renders palata- 
 ble the most nauseous ribaldries, if uttered by a partisan. 
 
 Permit me Sir, to call your attention to the following extracts, 
 as exhibiting the character of a work sold by your bookseller, and 
 the republication of which on this side of the Atlantic, was unques- 
 tionably intended, to give full effect to the blow aimed in your 
 charge, at the American Bible Society. 
 
 Of the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Hackney Curate 
 
73 
 
 thus speaks. ‘‘1 protest solemnly to your Lordship, appealing 
 ** to the Searcher of all hearts for the sincerity of my protesta- 
 ** tion, that in my conscience I believe, that quietness, peace, and 
 ‘‘love, have rarely been assailed by a confederacy from which 
 ‘‘ all Christian people have more to dread, than is threatened by tbis 
 ** institution.””. Of the members of this Society, he gives the fol- 
 lowing character and comparison. ‘1 know from long experience 
 * with Bible Society propagandists, their talent at misrepresenta- 
 *‘tion.” ‘* Even in the first age of the Gospel, my Lord, when 
 ** inspired Apostles promoted Christianity, there was an unaccount- 
 “‘able propensity amongst Christians, to subject themselves to de- 
 *‘ ceitful workers in religious matters. These, as we see St. Paul 
 “* complaining to the Corinthians (2 Cor. xi. 20) might bring them 
 ‘‘into bondage, devour them, smite them on the face, i. e. palm 
 ** any vain conceit, fleece them of their substance to any extent, or 
 ‘* practise any degree of spiritual tyranny upon them, and be suf- 
 *« fered gladly in all this craft and exaction.” The gentlemen of 
 the Parent Society who occasionally assist at the meetings of the 
 Auxiliaries, are thus likened to certain well known atheists and 
 jacobins. “Its travelling agitators are such complete adepts in 
 *‘ getting up these encenia, that there would be as effectual secu- 
 “‘ rity taken to keep down every expression, look, or gesture, 
 ‘* which could excite a moment’s jealousy in your Lordship’s mind, 
 “as the German illumines were wont to take in their exoteric ex- 
 ** hibitions, to repress whatever might give umbrage to their noble 
 ‘‘and royal patrons.” 
 
 {n allusion.to Auxiliary Societies, and Bible Associations, he ob- 
 serves, ‘In the very highest degrees of the order, viz. the Illu- 
 “mines, there were modified mysteries for those who by their 
 ** rank were to serve for a protection to its plots, without knowing 
 ** their tendency.” 
 
 - A late ‘excellent work on the practical details of Bible Institu- 
 tutions, by a gentleman of the name of Dudley; is “‘ Bible Society 
 ** Craft, made easy to the meanest capacity.” Of the agency of 
 females in soliciting subscriptions, and in forming associations for 
 the diffusion of the Scriptures, he thus expresses himself: ‘‘ The 
 ‘delicate office of extortioners to the Society, is assigned over 
 ** to the ladies, who are for this purpose embodied in asub-society, 
 ‘* a male counsellor or two being charged with the duty of regular 
 
 ‘* attendance upon their meetings ; to act as a sort of safety valve to 
 10 
 
74. 
 
 “a machine containing highly effervescent ingredients.” ‘ In that 
 ‘* horrid letter from Baron Distfurt, under the tlluminized designa- 
 ** tion of Minos, to Sebastian, another conspirator, suggesting the plan 
 ‘ of a Female Illumine Association, which is recorded by Professor 
 “‘ Robinson in his proofs of a conspiracy ; the same male oversight 
 “ to give the proper tone to the proceedings, is laid down as in- 
 ‘dispensable! Ptolemy’s wife must direct them, and she will be 
 ‘‘instructed by Ptolemy, and my step-daughter will consult with 
 ‘«me. We must always be at hand to prevent the introduction of 
 *‘ improper questions. We must prepare themes for their discus- 
 ‘sion, thus we shall confess them, and inspire them with our sen- 
 ** timents.”? 
 
 “ The progress of female demoralization, amongst that portion of 
 ‘the sex which has fallen a prey to Bible Society beguilements, 
 ** might be traced by one who had the daily registers of the period 
 *¢ within his reach, and sufficient command of time for investigation: 
 “that it has been progressive, is well known to those who have 
 **been observers of the Bible Society’s plans.’’ After quoting 
 some well meant, but perhaps rather injudicious encomiums on the 
 participation of females in the great work of diffusing the Scrip- 
 tures, he adds, “If females can be induced to give a hearing to such 
 *‘rapsodies as these, the result must be what we now experience. 
 ‘St. Paul in his second Epistle to Timothy, has set down both 
 ‘* their character and their condemnation—they must be led cap- 
 ** tive at the will of those to whom they so disreputably listen ; 
 “ and be driven to any lengths to which these men may urge them 
 ** on in the furtherance of their destgns.”’ 
 
 It is thought most adviseabile in the management of Ladies’ Bible 
 Societies in England, that the subscriptions of their members 
 should be collected by persons of their own sex ; and their by-laws 
 frequently require, that ‘‘ each district where convenient, shall 
 ** have two or more members of the Committee, attached to it as 
 ** Collectors, and thatin all practicable cases, amatronand ayounger 
 ‘* Jady shall be colleagues.” This rule is declared by our Curate, 
 to be an ‘‘ obviously wicked device of sending forth in couples a 
 ‘* young lady and her duenna to give her confidence, to tutor her 
 “in playing off her winning airs and to cover her retreat in case 
 “of an unwelcome reception.’? Another common regulation it 
 seems is, that every young lady, who obtains six or more weekly 
 contributors, shall have the privilege of attending the meetings of 
 
75 
 
 the ladies who are the managers of the Society, and this regulation 
 is denounced as “ equally demoralizing ;”’ and the author invokes 
 upon the British and Foreign Bible Society “the indignation of 
 ‘‘every man who knows what genuine domestic happiness is, and 
 ** desires to transmit that blessing to his posterity.” 
 
 Mr. C. 8S. Dudley, a member of the Society of Friends, whose 
 indefatigable exertions in the cause of the Bible, entitle him to the 
 gratitude of every friend to virtue and religion, is the ‘* the Socie- 
 “‘ty’s Sergeant Major in the female department,” and is compared 
 to a noted apostle of infidelity. ‘German dlluminism it appears, 
 “had in Baron Knigge, a propagandist of equal energy: he is 
 “stated to have been next to Weishaupt, the most serviceable man 
 ‘*in the order, and procured the greatest number of members.” 
 
 Two more extracts, and I have done. ‘In the face of all the 
 ‘Bible Anecdotes, tricked out in such diversified particularity, I 
 “* have no hesitation in denying it to have been any where practi- 
 ‘cally demonstrated, that the Bible Society’s labours have ge- 
 ** nerally promoted Christianity, or in disputing the theory of this 
 ** proposition, that there is any tendency in those labours, to pro- 
 ‘mote it throughout the world.” ‘I appeal to your Lordship 
 “ whether, notwithstanding the greatly increased exertion of the 
 ** Church during the period, infidelity and blasphemy have not been 
 ** gathering confidence, and spreading their contagion almost in equal 
 ** ratio with the Buble Society's progression ?”’ <* When the contempt 
 “* brought upon the Scriptures by the Society’s method of distributing 
 “them is considered—when moreover its terms of communion are 
 «* added to the account, that the faith shall be held in diversity, in- 
 “stead of the unity of the Spirit, and propagated in discordance, 
 ‘¢ instead of in the bond of peace, what other issue is to be ex- 
 *“ pected, than that righteousness of life, shall be also cast away and 
 *< the utmost licentiousness, both in opinion and practice be established.” 
 
 Think not Sir, that I have selected these passages for the pur- 
 pose of exposing their falsehoods, and dispr ving their atrocious 
 insinuations ; this task, however easy, I have no intention to as- 
 sume. It cannot be the duty of the friends of the Bible Society, 
 to enter into discussion with every blackguard, who chooses to 
 slander her; and her interests by no means demand such conde- 
 scension, on the part of her advocates. This vile pamphlet, may, 
 in the language of the Bishop of St. David’s, applied to another 
 work by the same author, be left “to its own refutation.” My 
 
76 
 
 . » 
 object in noticing this publication, is to exhibit the true character 
 of an Auxiliary, which you Sir, have at least tacitly acknowledged, 
 and which, unless common fame and the assertions of your friends 
 do you injustice, you have yourself been instrumental in introduc- 
 ing to the American public. “«¥ 
 
 It is with grateful feelings of attachment for my own Church, 
 that I can turn from the disgusting insults heaped upon the matron- 
 ry of Great Britain* by this Hackney Curate to the following ex- 
 tracts from a vindication of Female Bible Societies, by the truly 
 venerable Bishop of Pennsylvania. “If there should press on 
 “the minds of any of you, the apprehension of exceeding the 
 **bounds which the modesty of your sex’ prescribes, it does not - 
 ‘‘ appear to me, that there is the least ground for such reproach, 
 ‘*so long as the association is within yourselves. As to the cir- 
 ‘* cumstance, that some of you will be called upon to act in certain 
 ‘ official characters, necessary for the conducting of business, if 
 “we look beyond names, there is nothing in the subject itself but 
 ‘« what would apply with equal force against the presiding at a 
 *¢ dinner, or at a tea table ; unless indeed it could be alleged, that 
 ‘this is less alien from the female character, than the gathering 
 ‘* and dispensing of alms.’” ‘ Can it be out of the sphere of your 
 ** sex to be activ: ly engaged in disseminating a system of truth and 
 ‘¢ morality, which has so excellent a bearing immediately on your 
 ‘interests ; and through you, on whatever contributes to the 
 “‘ rectitude, to the decorum, and to all the rational enjoyments of 
 ‘* gocial life ?”” 
 
 ‘«- Contemplating the recent institution of Bible Societies, begun 
 *« in England, and extending rapidly throughout the world, as a pro- 
 ** digious effort for raising of a mound against the threatened inun- 
 ‘¢ dation of infidelity ; as being one of the happiest expedients which 
 ‘‘ have been devised, for spreading the knowledge of the Gospel of 
 
 * Some idea may be formed of the class of females who are the subjects of 
 Norris’s*malignant aspersions, from the following names, selected from the 
 officers of a Ladies’ Bible Society in Ireland, viz. 
 
 Viscountess Lorton Countess of Leitrim Lady M. Knox 
 Lady E. Littlehales Viscountess Lifford Lady Lucy Barry — 
 Countess of Meath Lady C. Crofton Lady H. Bernard 
 Lady Castlecoot Hon. Mrs. Hewitt 
 
 Of the Ladies Societies in England it is sufficient to say, that their Royai 
 Highnesses, the Princess.Augusta, and Dutchesses of Kent and Gloucester 
 pelong to them. 
 
7 
 
 ** Christ ; and as tending directly to the accomplishment of the 
 ‘assurances given, that his kingdom will be at last coextensive 
 «with the world ; I will not suffer myself to believe that your sex, 
 ‘* any more than ours, are debarred from promoting these blessed 
 ‘ends in your distinctive character.”  1ddress to Philadelphia 
 Female Bible Society. 
 
 I have now Sir, brought to a conclusion, my review of your 
 strictures on Bible Societies, and have freely but I trust not dis- 
 respectfully examined the grounds, on which you rest your objec- 
 tions to the co-operationof Episcopalians, with others, in distribut- 
 ing the Holy Scriptures. I have not the vanity to believe, that I 
 have effected any change in your opinions ; but I cannot refrain 
 from humbly beseeching you, to reflect on the consequences to 
 the peace and prosperity of the Church, which must result from 
 your continued opposition to Bible Societies. A sense of duty no 
 doubt prompted you, to endeavour to prevent the union of Epis- 
 copalians in these institutions ; and the zeal and perseverance with 
 which you have made the attempt, are surely sufficient to satisfy 
 the most scrupulous conscience. Is it not now time to pause, and 
 to inquire whether duty requires, and the welfare of the Church 
 will sanction, a farther continuance of this unavailing hostility. 
 The history of Bible Societies, proves that opposition invariably 
 strengthens and extends their influence. The British and Foreign 
 Bible Society is becoming more and more deeply rooted in the 
 affections of the British nation ; and the last Report declares, that 
 the preceding year, was ‘‘ one of the most prosperous which has 
 occurred since its institution.” The loss of a portion of its Epis- 
 copal patronage, seems to have given new life and energy to the 
 Hibernian Bible Society ; for during the past year, it has added 
 twenty-five, to the list of its Auxiliaries, and an excess of £1,437 
 beyond the amount of the contributions of the preceding year, at- 
 test the happy influence which opposition, has exercised over its 
 funds. The last Report of the American Bible Society also boasts, 
 of an augmented income. On the establishment of this last Socie- 
 ty, you attacked it in the newspapers, under your own signature ; 
 you represented it as a Presbyterian institution ; you laboured to 
 excite against it the jealousies of other denominations, and you 
 prophesied, that it would be in ‘its spirit and management, the 
 Bible Society of the particular city or district where it was esta- 
 plished ;:” that it could not, ‘‘in any sense be a National Society:”* 
 
4 
 
 78 + y 
 and that its “ spirit and influence, and credit,” would eventually 
 be that, of the «‘ Presbyterian denomination.” The truth of pre- 
 dictions, can only be determined by time, and the confidence due 
 to him who utters them, must be ascertained by the Scriptural 
 rule, ‘*‘ If the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing, 
 ** which the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet hath spoken it 
 ** presumptuously : thou shalt not be afraid of him.” * 
 
 The aid which the American Bible Society has afforded, in the 
 publication of the Scriptures, both in France and in India—the 
 268,177 volumes it has issued—its income of $36,000—its 
 301 Auxiliaries, established in every state of the union, andin the — 
 territories of Michigan and Florida, and in the District of Colum- 
 bia—its numerous and powerful patrons, including the President, 
 Vice President of the United States, and the heads of the several 
 departments of the general government—its Episcopal President— 
 its six Episcopal Vice Presidents—its two Episcopal Secretaries— 
 _ together with the nomination of every Committee in its Board of 
 Directors, by its acting Episcopal Vice President—all give u Pie 
 think, some reason, to question the accuracy of your predictions. 
 The Bishopof Peterborough, wearied with defeat, at length 
 threw down his arms, and confessed that to oppose the Bible So- 
 ciety was like attempting to oppose a torrent of burning laya, that 
 issues from Etna, or Vesuvius ; and think you Sir, that with all 
 your newspaper publications, and your pastoral letters, and your 
 addresses, and your Convention charges, you can stem that pure 
 river of the water of life, proceeding out of the throne of God 
 and the Lamb, which is now refreshing and fertilizing the waste 
 places of the earth, and causing the wilderness to rejoice and 
 blossom as the rose ? 
 
 Be assured Sir, every blow you aim at Bible Societies, will 
 recoil upon our own Church. Schism, unkindness, mutual re- 
 proaches, and unholy passions must inevitably result from a repe- 
 tition of your attacks upon your fellow Churchmen, for support- 
 ing institutions, recommended to their patronage, by their assem- 
 bled Bishops. The republication of Norris’s pamphlet, and the 
 applauses bestowed upon that malignant production by certain 
 clergymen in New-York, indicate the growth of feelings as hos- 
 tile to Christian charity, as they are to the harmony and prosperity 
 of the Church. 
 
 There is Sir, a period approaching, when the friends and ene- 
 
79 
 
 mies of Bible Societies will be alike compelled to relinquish their 
 support and their hostility. In that hour of dissolving nature, 
 when our distinctions, our triumphs and our defeats will all appear 
 to us as less than the dust of the balance, and altogether vanity ; 
 when the remembrance of no act of our lives will impart to us a 
 ray of hope or consolation, farther than it affords an evidence of 
 our faith inthe Redeemer, and our love for his cause ; at that aw- 
 ful moment, when about to appear before that tribunal from whose 
 judgment there is no appeal ; will our burthened consciences find 
 comfort in the reflection, that we have laboured to destroy the 
 only instrument by which the glad tidings of salvation could be 
 conveyed to millions, who were ready to perish. The venerable 
 Scott*, on his dying bedcould exhorthis friend, to persevere in his 
 support of Bible Societies. The sainted Owen, sinking under the 
 fatigue he had endured in the service of the British Society, and 
 in full view of his approaching dissolution, could exclaim, ‘* how 
 sweet to have toiled in this work !”’ 
 
 But I have yet to learn, that asingle individual has expired, re- 
 joicing in the opposition he had made to the.circulation of the sa- 
 cred volume, and anticipating for his efforts, the approving smile 
 of his Maker. Many are the prayers to which I have listened, 
 for the divine blessing on the cause I am defending ; but I doubt 
 not, that my hardiest opponent, would shrink from imploring the 
 assistance of Heaven, in his labours to crush the very institutions, 
 which he hesitates not to denounce, as dangerous and unscrip- 
 tural, 
 
 It is with pain Sir, that I find myself compelled to differ with 
 you, on any subject, and especially on one involving not only the 
 character and welfare of our Church, but the dearest interests of 
 the human family. But [ trust you will find in the very im- 
 portance of the subject, a sufficient apology for my adherence to 
 that course of conduct which I believe to be correct; and that you 
 will extend to me, the same indulgence you claim yourself, for an 
 independent compliance with a sense of duty. Although your 
 sentiments with respect to Bible Societies will probably remain 
 unaltered, yet I flatter myself, the hope is not presumptuous, that 
 you will not deem it your duty to prolong this unhappy contro- 
 versy ; and if new provocations must arise, that they will not again 
 
 * Author of the Commentaries. 
 
"boundaries of the visible ‘Chureb, | but 
 
 saws 
 £< 
 
 those who shall inherit that Kingdom which F 
 them that love him ; and that you may re 
 mised to them ns turn omy to righte 
 peace of i 
 
 $F, Vi Tala oS 
 ahh Witt aAns r 
 ro be eer Mil? 
 Ma ig i Nae, ; 
 | New-York, — 1828. 
 ry 
 ERRATUM. 
 
 For “ St. Miciacl’s,” PS anil it oceurs, read Si. Sie; 
 
 % 
 
 LET Hy MLE ee ee ao) 
 
 2s 
 
 bor 
 (ie Es