MA . TER NEGA TIVE NO. 92 I ifT/^ ROFIU^ED 1993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW Y as part of the "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. On€j of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduction is not to be "used for any rpose otr er ihan private study, scholarship, or pu research, a a user makes a request for, or later photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess use," that user may be liable for copyright infringe •■V 5-.^ %^ ^W If a fair %^ ', This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law. AUTE CHALMERS, REV. THOMAS TITLE: A/HAT? AN D WHO SAYS IT? PLACE: DA TE : 1837 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET Master Negative # Restrictions on Use: Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record omas„1280dS4._7- /^ I iWhat ? and who saua it^? _,. _ positioY-i oP the. staiaman{ thai tha esiab - ■lianad church desirous mora souls th It savaa... sdiled Lu John Search. .. Worcester 1837. AO. 6+66 ■^ an ax-; isn 7^70 (Ju. o + ^,p. Af« 1 4f/ u vol, J/ pa//i^pn,ctfi^. TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA REDUCTION RATIO:__7/X. FILM SIZE: __3S}r)jy^ IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA mAJ IB IIB DATE FILMED: ^rA3ir5_3_ INITIALS____\j!!^_ FILMED BY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOODBRIDGE. CT V •.- THAT THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH " DESTROYS MORE SOULS THAN IT SAVES." RY THE REV. THOiMAS CHALMERS, D. D. •V* Professor of Theology in the Univerjflty of Edinburj^h ; I'HK RHiHT HJ:V. THK HISH0I> OK fALfMTTTA; THK REV. SAMUEL CHARLKS WILKS ; THK RRV. HENRY BUDIJ ; THE REV. CHARLES BRIDGES; THE REV. HENRY MELVILLE; THE EDITOR OF THE RECORD ; THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN OBSERVER; AND OTHERS. IV A LETTER TO "ONE OF THE CLERGY WHO SIGNED THE LATE REQUISITION TO THE ARCHDEACON OF WORCESTER." KDITEO BY JOHN SEARCH. " They are commonly aptest to pass a judg-ment upon other men, who have least studied the matter ■ * * * liberally to bestow their censures and reproaches ; and to conclude that they cannot but have some base design, who in anything presume to differ from them, especially if the advantage, in any temporal respect, happen to lie on that side//ow which they dissejit." — Howe. WORCESTER : W. RIDGE, NEAR THE GUILDHALL ; AND J. H. D'EGVILLE, 72, HIGH STREET; SOLD ALSO BY T. WARD & CO. 27, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON. MDCCCXXXVII. rr.'^ '. \ \ ..1 i/ STEVENS AND PARDON, PRINTERS, BFLI. YARD, TEMPTF BAR. '\\ cv/ C i ADVERTISEMENT. The following extract from the second of two letters on Church Rates, published in reply to those of the Clergyman to whom the following pages are addressed, will give the distant reader (if they obtain such) some idea of their local origin. " It now only remains for me to vindicate myself from the implied charge of falsifying the fact relative to Mr. Binney's words, which our requisitionist professed to quote. He stated, that Mr. B. in his opening Sbrmo^ preached at the Chapel of ivhich he is the Minister, affirmed that the Church of England has destroyed more souls than she has saved, and her destruction is devoutly to he wished hy every wise and good man. In his last letter, however, instructed by me, he quotes Mr. B.'s words correctly a5/«r as he goes, but should have added the following, to give a fair view of the whole passage : — '* Right or wrong, this is my belief And I should not feel the slightest offence, if a Chiircliman were to express D ^ O 2. A. IV himself to me in precisely the same words with respect to Dissent. We know very well, that we do thus actually differ in opi7iion ; and it would be very foolish for either to be offended because the other expresses it, &c." Now the two points between our clerical friend and myself are these : 1st, he stated that Mr. B. preached the above ; 1 contradicted him : he was ingenious enough to discover, that 1 was right, and he wrong, but not ingenuous enough to con- fess it. 2ndly, I denied that Mr. B. had ever affirmed any such thing— ever made any such assertion. I adhere to my statement. It rests upon the distinction between opinion. and affirmation. Mr. B. expressly states, over and over auain, that it is only his opinion— belief— conviction ; and cle-cjrlv admits, that lie may be either " right or wrong ;" but he is unfairly dealt with, wlicn he is represented as affirming it to be actually and positively so, when he r-an- didlv admits it may be tzTo//^ # # * * I therefore say, Mr. B. has stated an opinion, derived from/rtc^5 and reason- ings, but admitting explicitly that he may be right or he may be wrong ; but he has made no such assertion as that attri- buted to him. The following pages are an attempt to supply what may be supposed to be ^' the facts and reasonings" referred to above. The writer, a Dissenter, though not an Independent, holds certain great principles which are common to the members of the Independent, Baptist, and other Evangelical denomi- nation^. Connected with the county of Worcester, he had -* I V / 1 } an opportunity of hearing Mr. B. preach one part of the day which he recently spent in the city of Worcester, and, in common with many others, felt grieved that a Christian minister could not visit the place for a benevolent purpose, without being assailed and misrepresented. It was not, however, till after the controversy on Church Rates was closed, that he decided on going into the '' statement" that had been mixed up with it, — which, indeed, Churchmen are incessantly mixing up with every thing, every where, with as much confidence as if they had examined it, or, in the words of Howe, had *' studied the matter'' This will partly account for the late appearance of this pamphlet. That, however, has been principally occasioned by the author's having altered his original intention, which was a brief reply in the same local print which had admitted the pre- vious letters ; and by the difficulty of obtaining in the country some papers and periodicals which it was necessary to refer to. He has contented himself indeed, as sufficient for his purpose, with such extracts as most readily occurred to his recollection, which he had last noticed, or were the most accessible. He is not aware of any thing in his spirit or manner indefensible or unbecoming ; but of this he is aware, that he has met, in preparing these pages, with language of which before he was ignorant ; and that, if he had attempted to speak of Churchmen as they have spoken of Dissenters (especially of '' the gentleman whose name was announced as about to preach in this city") the vocabulary of Newgate, or of Sydney itself, would have failed to furnish him with parallel expressions. Shunning, however, this ▼I example, he has aimed to keep his own object steadily in view ; nor w ill he have wTitten in vain, if he help to remove a preva- lent misconception respecting the ** political " character and *' base designs" of the Dissenters; or if he teach con- troversialists the justice of ascertaining what their opponents say before they " profess to quote," and what they mean before they condemn ; and the wisdom of remembering what they themselves have both said and mcant — before they do either. -I fl TO " ONE OF THE CLERGY WHO SIGNED THE LATE REQUISITION TO THE ARCHDEACON OF WORCESTER." Reverend Sir, In your late letters on Church Rates, you have referred to a subject on which I beg to submit to you a few remarks. It is not my object to enter into the controversy between you and your opponent ; nor to commence another myself on the general question of establishments ; nor, I might add, to engage directly in the modern ecclesiastical warfare. I am a looker-on, though I have also my interests and my partialities, some of which it would be very foolish to affect to conceal. In addressing you, however, I desire to do so rather as the interpreter and expounder of the real opinions of certain parties on both sides, who do not, or will not, understand each othef. In your first letter you introduced an allusion, not very essential to your argument, to Mr. Binney, " the gentle- man," to use your own words, " whose name was announced in last week's paper, as about to preach in this d^y,"— indi- cating, as I suppose, by the italic character, your surprise, regret, or indignation at the circumstance. You have been led to refer to him again, and to the *' celebrated sentence" B for which he has acquired such unenviable distinction. It is in relation to this, and to the remark you append to it, that I now address you. After quoting tlie words in which the Dissenter embodies his *' conviction," that the Establishment "destroys more souls than it saves," you add, " hut he does not favour us with detailing the steps hy which he has arrived at this con- viction:' It is just at this point I should like to be allowed to step in to your assistance. As a Dissenter, acquainted with dissenting views and dissenting publications, I thhik I can furnish you with statements and extracts, from which you yourself may infer the " steps" by which the dissenting "conviction" is arrived at; and, as one attentive to the passing conflict of great principles, and acquainted in some measure with the views and publications of those opposed to Dissenters, I purpose furnishing you also with extracts from Mm, sanctioning, in my judgment, the first class, botli in respect to sentiment and language. This is my object ; and I do not despair of your full and honest attention to it. Your first reference to the words of the irentleman '* whose name was announced to preach in this city," was obviously msde in utter ignorance of what Ihey were :— no singular culpability this ; nothing but the common crime of hundreds of your order. I judge, however, from your second reference, that you have had the good sense to send for Mr. Binney's publication, and, having read it, while you are still shocked at the author's ** conviction," and regard it, very naturally, as "a bigoted sentiment," *'the dictate of unfounded prejudice and party feeling," yet you have the manliness to admit that " there is a calmness and candour about his tone and spirit, which his defender would do well to imitate." Whether his defender deserved this censure, I shall not stay to enquire, it is enough for me to remark, that your admission is such a proof of " candour" in yourself, that 1 am led to hope you will with ** calmness'' weigh what I shall produce. Having done so, 1 say not that I expect you to conclude respecting the Dissenter's *• conviction," in the admirable phrase of Butler, that, after all, ** it is not so clear a case that there is nothing in it ;" but I do expect you to admit, and this is all I aim at, that, whether right or wrong, it is nothing but what Churchmen have said, only, to use your own words, " concentrated into a quintessence," and that, however *' blasphemous" it may at first sight appear, it may yet be held, not only without impiety, but as the direct result of deep and decided, though perhaps mistaken, religious feeling. I shall not trouble you, I trust, with any very extended observations of my own, though I must of course supply a string to connect together the observations of others. My letter will principally consist of" extracts," some of which, I humbly think, will be worth your attention, and that of ** the clergy of the diocese of Worcester," as *' one" of whom I address you. I think it right to commence by giving the entire pass- age in wliich Mr. B.'s sentence occurs, that, from the manner in which it is fenced and guarded, it may at least be observed what he does not mean. " These pages contain statements of some of the prin- ciples and proceedings of a Dissenting Church, and state- ments against the principle and operation of a religious establishment. There is nothing improper in this. Church- men and Dissenters have an equal right to advocate what they respectively approve, and to expose and condemn what they respectively reject. For one sermon or tract published by Dissenters in support of Dissent, a dozen may be found published by Churchmen in support of the Church ; published by individuals, voluntarily, or in con- sequence of episcopal and archidiaconal visitations, and by 4 the * Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge' — these latter in hundreds and thousands. I have no fault to find with this. I think it right for every man, and every body of men, to endeavour, by all possible means, universally to establish those principles of ecclesiastical polity, which they consider to be intimately connected with the purity of the church and the welfare of the world ; only let the society just mentioned be careful that its portraitures of Methodism and Dissent display something like ' Christian knowledge,* and not downright heathenish ignorance.''^ Truth cannot be in- jured by fair and full discussion, and by open and uncompro- mising statements. I have no hesitation about saying, that I am an enemy to the Establishment ; and I do not see that a Churchman need hesitate to say that he is an enemy to Dissent. Neither of us would mean the persons of Church- men or Dissenters, nor the episcopal or other poi^tions of the universal Church ; but the principle of the national religious establishment, which we should respectively regard as de- serving, universally, opposition or support. It is with me, I confess, a matter of deep, serious, religious conviction, that the Established Church is a great national evil ; that it is an obstacle to the progress of truth and godliness in the land ; that it destroys more souls than it saves ; and that, therefore, its end is most devoutly to be wished by every lover of God and man. Right or wrong, this is my belief; and I should feel not the sliglitest offence if a Churchman were to express himself to me in precisely the same words with respect to Dissent. We know very well that we do thus actually differ in opinion, and it would be very foolish for either to be offended because the other expresses it. We are bound, each of us, to adopt those principles which we * A tract by Dr. Gray, Bishop of Bristol, entitled " A Dialogue between a Churchman and a Methodist," is so grossly inaccurate that its expulsion has been moved for at Bartlett's Buildings ; I fear without success. conscientiously consider to be true, and we are equally bound, in proportion to our ability, to defend and diffuse them. " It is at present universally felt, that the time is at hand when the Establishment must undergo a thorough sifting ; the abstract principle on which it rests be discussed in Par- liament ; and the absolute separation of church and state sought, and— perhaps obtained. Dissent and the Establish- ment will then die together— die on the same day. The terms and things are relative ; the end of one will be the termination of botli. The day that witnesses this, will be a bright and blessed one. Episcopalians, Presbyterians, In- dependents, Methodists, maj/ remain ; but Churchmen'and Dissenters will exist no more. All denominations, placed on a perfect equality, with a thousand sources of jealousy and animosity removed, each possessed of the power of advancing towards and admitting the approaches of the rest —such movements would ultimately be seen ; the spirit of peace, and love, and unity, would return ; the real 'commu- nion of saints' would be practised; and God himself, on the throne of his glory, would rejoice over his once divided and broken, but then happy and harmonising * household/" Very few of the clergy of the diocese of Worcester, I imagine, besides yourself, have ever seen the above passage, though they have heard so often, and have shuddered sj much, at one of its sentences. Some of them will be surprised, I think, to find how carefully it distinguishes between systems and men ;~ho^Y it separates the political Establishment from the Episcopal Church ;— and how ob- viously the writer rejoices in anticipating even the " end" of Dissent itself!— all proving that it cannot be the Church, as a religious community, or spiritual body, that he or his brethren wish to see destroyed. Nor is it to be overlooked, how studiously everything is put hypothetically ; " opinion,'' '' conviction," '' belief, that may be right or wrong." No- thing is affirmed as known. The writer's mental persuasion is asserted, but the thing of which he is persuaded is not,^' * It does not come within my province to notice the misrepresentations and perversions of Mr. Binne/s words, by which alone the jmblic mis- conception respecting them has been created and sustained ; in one of the books, however, from which some of the extracts in this letter are collected, I met with the following instance of misrepresentation and inconsistency combined, which strikes me as so gross and incredible, that if I had not really stumbled upon it myself, I could not have be- lieved it within the power of a Christian to perpetrate. Let the reader compare the letter and spirit of what is given above, with the letter and spirit of what follows, particularly remembering that the writer of the annexed distinctly states that he had Mr. Binney's ** Address" lyinr/ before him. ** You will swing us off on the hinge of an abstract principle, and in the words of good (?) Mr. Binney will tell us — * I am an enemy to the Establishment.' * The Estabhshed Church is a great national evil ; it is an obstacle to the progress of truth and godliness in the land; it destroys more souls than it saves ; and its end is most devoutly to be wished by every lover of God and man." Upon the rashness of a mortal man daring to pretend to read the inscrutable book of the Divine councils, and to assert * without if or but/ that fewer souls are saved than would be if the Church of England did not exist, it is not necessary for us to descant. If Mr. Binney can really prove what he has asserted, there is an end of discussion. We depone, and we have endeavoured, and we believe satisfactorily, to prove, that a Church Establishment may be, and is, * a means of grace ;* but if Mr. Binney has had a miraculous insight into the Lamb's Book of Life, and actually knows — not asserts or suspects, but knows — that our Church ' destroys more souls than it saves,' then all other arguments must bend to one of such palpable fact." The italics in the above extract are the reviewer's — they derive their force entirely from his omissions, which so change the sense of the sen- tences as to leave them no longer " the words of Mr. Binney." After something more, in which occur such terms as " prescience," '* pre- sumption," " foreknowledge," he puts several questions to Dissenters, among which is the following poser: — " Are you perfectly sure that the voluntary principle, as it is called, would furnish a full sup})ly of reli- gious ordinances, either in remote and scattered, or in poor and populous neighbourhoods ?" Now, just connect the above comment and question with the following passage from the very same article. " As a system, we believe Dissent to be an evil greater than we can express ; and if car- ried to the extent of the subversion of the national churches of England and Scotland, to say nothing of other Protestant countries, nothing but a I i .1 It is not my purpose, liowever, to indulge in comments of this kind, nor indeed in general inferences at all. 1 leave the above passage, therefore, to make its own impression, and proceed to furnish you with materials, by which you may construct for yourself a theory explanatory of the Dissenter's *' conviction" as above expressed, and of the *' steps by which he arrived at it." I begin by quoting two passages from Mr. Binney him- self, which I think will afford you some assistance. The first is from a sermon on the unity of the church, founded on our blessed Lord's beautiful prayer for his disciples, " that they all might be one, &c." the fulfilment of which is re- presented as being " the ultimate object of the Evangelical Dissenters" in their opposition to establishments. Such a statement will, I doubt not, sound to you, strange and astounding,— but so it is. My purpose, in this letter, does not require me to discuss or explain it. I simply state it as a fact, that Evangelical Dissenters say that this is their object,— and they have a right to be believed. The means by which they think to attain this may seem absurd and direct special miracle, which we have no right to look for, more especially when we set aside the obvious means of grace, could prevent the ultimate extirpation of Christianity from the earth." Now, what can be thought of the above ? It seems to me as if the most fertile ingenuity could not have produced a more instructive specimen of inconsistency, modesty, and misrepresentation. It is not, however, as I said, within my pro- vince to notice such things. I give the above, because I was struck with its grossness as appearing in a " Christian Observer ;" (February, 1834 ;) as a specimen of the manner in which the religious public may be abused by gross perversions of an author's language and meaning— as a specimen, too, of the coolness with which men will use, on their o^vn side, the very words which they will take another by the throat for using on his ; and lastly, because the two things of which I have just said the above are specimens, continue still to be repeated and repeated in relation to the " celebrated sentence" in question— of the first of which, the occasion of this pamphlet is a proof; and of the second of which, I shall give some startling demonstrations before I have done with it. I think I shall call them — " rose-buds rescued." 8 foolish, but the moral sincerity and the religious feeling of the men may be admitted, though you may not be able to admit the intellectual sanity of their judgment. In dis- cussing the above-mentioned subject, the author first states some things in which the unity of the Church does not consist, in the course of which he attacks the pretensions of the " Man of sin ;" for, in common with all other Dis- senters, and as the necessary result of dissenting principles^ he is strongly opposed to Popery ; — he then comes to point out in what it does^ and his^r^^ observation is thus advanced and illustrated : — " Its foundation must be laid in an agreement as to the reception and profession of fundamental truth. That there are some things fundamental to Christianity, few% we suppose, will have the hardihood to deny ; and that these consist in its moral injunctions, still fewer, we imagine, will have the folly to assert. Whatever is fundamental, if found any where, must be found among the doctrinal dis- coveries peculiar to the system. For myself, I confess that I always endeavour to reduce these to the fewest possible points that Scripture, in my view of it, will permit. And I do this, because, in proportion as we lessen the number of essential doctrines, we enlarge the sphere of Christian cha- rity, and widen the ground of Christian comprehension. The smaller the number of those things which the gospel will warrant us to regard as requisite to the Christia^iity of churches and men, the more of both can we conscientiously embrace with the feelings of cordial and uncompromising brotherhood. I am accustomed, in meditating upon this mat- ter, to take my stand where, as it seems to my apprehension, the Apostle Paul took his. Paul, who, for the sake of use- fulness or the promotion of peace, could become all things to all men ; who could be a Jew with the Jew, or a Gentile with the Gentile ; who could appear and act either as under the law or as free from it ; who could shave his head, and V** ^^ circumcise Timothy, and keep fasts, and yet write against * the weak and the beggarly elements/ denouncing their weight and their imposition as a bondage :— Paul, who could do all this— who, in fellowship and affection, was the yield- ing universalis! where prejudice rather than principle was in question ;— he, with all his accommodating versatility— with all his looks and with all his language of love, was as firm as a rock, and as terrible as thunder, when an important principle itself was assailed. If ever he referred to what is to be considered fundamental, lie referred to it when he said, * though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him he accursed. As we said before, so say I now again. If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him he accursed: Whatever that gospel was, to which the apostle thus solemnly referred, it IS obvious that no man, and no church that rejects it, can properly be Christian. On a subject, involving conse- quences so momentous, it would be presumptuous to speak but with caution and candour. Honesty and faithfulness, however, equally demand that what we do think should be declared with explicitness. It is very possible that our opinion upon this subject, in connexion with our view of its bearing on the business of the discourse, would be branded by opposite parties, as chargeable at once with vagueness and bigotry— with illiberality and with latitudinarianism. * It is a small matter to be judged o^ them or of mens judg- ment.' ' To the law and to the testimony ;' guided, we trust by that, we do not hesitate to say, that we consider the apostle to refer, as the whole tenor of the epistle shows, to the doctrine o^ justification, — ^justification on the exclusive ground of faith in the atoning sacrifice of the Son of God. The whole argument of the apostle is directed, wo^, perhaps, against a verhal and actual, but against an implied and vir- tual, denial of this doctrine, by a primitive perversion of it G il 10 which seduced the Galatlans from the simplicity of Christ; and this circumstance imparts an additional importance to the truth itself, and additional force to the apostolic ana- thema. * By the works of the law shall no flesh be justi- fied/ * Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.' Whoever, therefore, denies this doctrine, and seeks, in tvhole or in part, to be justified by law, ' Christ can profit him nothing.' He preaches or believes * another gospel, which is not another,' and, in the language of the apostle, * Christ,' in regard to that man, * has died in vain,' The awful consequence inevitably results — awful to contemplate — awful to express — that, whatever else he may believe or disbelieve, he is not united to ' the Head of the body,' and therefore he cannot be included in the unity of that body itself. If a society denies this doc- trine, whatever may be its external form, — whatever it may have, or whatever it may not have, as to other things, — how- ever simple, or however splendid its ritual and ceremonies, — it, also, has abandoned the faith for ' another gospel,' and has put itself in a position, in which it is impossible to recog- nise it as an integral part of the Christian community. This grand fundamental doctrine involves in it, as it seems to us, the divinity of Christ, and the necessity of renewal and sanctification by the Spirit ; but, it does not involve either of the classes of opinion which distinguish Calvinists and Arminians ; nor has it any thing to do with a particular form of church government. It may be held in connexion witli great variety of sentiment on subordinate points ; and it may be preached, as fully and as scripturally, by the ennobled episcopal bishop of a place, as by the plain congregational bishop of a people, " We lay the basis, then, of the unity of the church in the unity of the faith; and that faith we find in the reception of the atoning sacrifice and the sanctifying Spirit. Whatever individual has this faith, experimentally J 11 and spiritually— whatever else he has, or whatever else he has not — is one with Christ as a vital member of his mysti- cal body ; whatever individual clearly and credibly professes this faith — whatever else he professes or denies — is a proper subject for admission into any particular church ; and what- ever churcli explicitly retains and teaches this faith, without corrupting and destroying it hy superadded perversions — is a true church, and ought to be recognised as a part of the visible Christian community. This faith may consist with every possible form of discipline and order, and therefore no particular form of order and discipline, in connexion with which it does exist, can be properly considered as subversive of a character derived from something distinct from both, and superior to either." It appears from this passage, you will observe, that the doctrine of justification by faith, — that, denominated by Luther the doctrine of a standing or falling church — is held in high estimation, and with a tenacious hand, by Evangeli- cal Dissenters ; that they identify the distinct, scriptural statement of it, with the preaching of the gospel ; and that they regard the denial, attenuation, or perversion of this mighty truth, as pregnant with danger to the souls of men. Now, connect with the above, the following passage from Mr. Binney's '* Address " itself, in the "Appendix" to which his " celebrated sentence" occurs. " All churches are necessarily exposed to the inroads of error. In spite of acts of parliament, creeds, and subscrip- tion, the Church of England is the most discordant and divided Christian denomination in the land. The most opposite and conflicting opinions are professed and incul- cated by her sons — by men who have solemnly signed the very same identical declarations. And these differences of opinion are not confined to minor and insignificant matters, but, upon the showing, and according to the current language S/' 12 of some of the clergy themselves, enter into the very essentials and fundamentals of the faith. Hence it is customary for them to speak of large tracts of the country, in which there is only here and there a solitary clergyman who ' preaches the gospel ;' and this man is often represented as despised by his brethren and persecuted by his neighbours, for his adherence to the truth. Hence, too, we hear of the ' gospel,* (the gospel observe) being '• introduced ' into a place in which it had not been declared for thirty, or fifty, or a hundred years. By such facts, incessantly obtruded on our atten- tion, we are given to understand that ' anti-evangelicaV clers^ymen are an overwhelming majority.'* Now, if this be the case, or if it was the case in times that are past — on which, however, I do not give an opinion, although I shall presently quote Episcopalians who do — then, on the principles of Dissenters — with the view that they take of the great evangelical doctrine of justification — whether they be right or wrong in giving it the prominence they do, is not at present the question — but simply on the fact that thus and thus they estimate and regard it — the inference is obvious and inevitable, that an immense sum of injury must have been done to the souls of men, in your church, by " instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge ;" by " another gospel, which is not another," but a concealment or a mutilation of the exclusive and the true. So much, then, from Mr. B.'s own writings, in relation to what we may consider as one *' step" towards his " con- viction." I again intimate, what I wish you to keep in view, that I do not enter into the question of the truth and accuracy either of Mr. B.'s notions of the gospel, or of his views of the state of the Establishment ; I have only to point out to you what they are, and to leave you to mark, how, when put together, they necessarily lead to the result he has expressed. % 13 I have now, however, to request your attention to a cor- roboration of the Dissenter's views and " convictions " by Churchmen ; — to statements, by advocates of the Establish- ment, which fully sustain what he has advanced, and the ver}' phraseology of which is coincident with his. From an article which appeared in the " Record" news- paper of April 14, 1834, in reference to a discussion which had just taken place at a meeting of " the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge," I extract the following passages. " Our readers would observe that Dr. Spry said it was necessary to put down this attempt to introduce the ele- ments of discord into the Standing Committee. But we ask this reverend divine if these elements be not already intro- duced ? If the light he not even in that invisible conclave struggling with the darkness ? If great debate is not now carried on in that formerly still and peaceful dormitory? * # * * Such as is the theology in Mr. Beresford's sermon on death, still lower and darker is the theology of the Rev. Dr. Spry. It is indeed ' darkness visible.' "* '* We should here gladly close our remarks on the meeting, but a sense of duty forces us to proceed to offer what we consider the far most important observations which it suggests. And when we mention that we find the ground for these observations in the speech of Mr. Hill, for whose character and objects we entertain the most unfeigned re- spect, we prove that we do not offer them lightly, and that a regard to the vital interests of the church and o/ truth calls them forth. [Very well. This introduction prepares us for something of grave and awful moment — something not to be dis- regarded. Even if the writer should be mistaken in his views, his "deep, serious, religious conviction" of their * The words marked thus ♦ are the italics and capitals of the " Record '* itself. 14 " truth " and " importance " demands that their expression, " forced " from him " by a sense of duty," should be listened to with respect. Let us listen.] " With the important exception which we shall imme- diately n.ention, we consider Mr. Hill's speech to have been admirable in spirit, in manner, and m matter. The statement to which we object is contained in the followmg sentences :— ' He contended that as the society at large consisted of members of the church, who agreed in the pro- fession of her holy faith, and yielded obedience to the requirements of her discipline, though they differed among themselves on minor points ; » so ought the Standing Com- mittee fairly to represent the body of the society. He referred to the state of the church, when not long since heart-burnings and jealousies existed, which were but the hideous progeny of prejudice and evil report* and when those who were brethren in the church manifested a sectarian spirit to each other: * " Now according to our judgment, Mr. Hill, as he unfolds his sentiments in the above sentences, misconceives the matter ; and the consequence of the misconception is, that he follows a number of excellent men in making a state- ment-perfectly deceptive-opposed to truth-and calcu- lated to perpetuate vital and destructive erroe. lo some who see the delusion conveyed in the above sentences, it may still appear to them expedient* from various con- siderations, to make such statements. In such views we cannot coincide. To depart from truth* is never expedient. It frequently appears so to sense, but never to faith^ «' We consider ourselves bound to say that the differences subsisting between different bodies of clergymen in that society, and between different clergymen present last Tuesday in that room, are not minor,* hxit fundamental *-so much so, that the preaching of one class is raising their hearers to the gates of heaven, and that of the other leading ! 15 THEM DOWN TO THE CHAMBERS OP DEATH. We USC great plainness of speecli. The more momentous the truth which is declared, the more paramount the duty to avoid circum- locution, which might darken the meaning we intend to convey ."t- " We do not wish to be personal, but we shall most easily and distinctly explain our meaning by simply saying, that the men who approved of the circulation of such a ser- mon as that of the Rev. Mr. Beresford ' on death," which we lately quoted from in these columns, and also, after its character has been brought home to them, can calmly fur- ther Its circulation among the flock of Christ under the covering wings of the society, have no conception of the nature, sanctions, and requirements of the gospel of our salvation; and that they are equally ignorant of the gospel —know It not themselves, and, therefore, cannot* preach It to others, and are, in the language of Scripture, ' blind leaders of the blind,'— who pertinaciously adhere to such tracts of the Society as those which have been recently de- nounced in this and other publications ;-in which we anew DECLARE the Gospel of Christ is either not preached at all, or is so blended and encrusted with error, as to rob it of all its freeness, clearness and glory, so that the unhappy readers are led away by their instrumentality to ' another Gospel which is not another: This being the deliberate and well-considered CONVICTION of our hearts, we are bound in faithfulness, and from a regard to the interests of truth, to declare it." " Having given expression to it, we leave it. We are disposed to work for the clearing away of evil doctrine from the Society-not, however, by promulgating that it is minor* or shght,* but tliat it is so momentous and fundamental as more than to justify all our warmth and all our efforts. t ReaUy these gentlemen ought to feel very much obliged to one who has .'concentrated" for them "into the quintessence" „f a ille sentence, what they strive so laboriously to e.tpress. IC Not by insinuating to the men who are sinfully circulating error that we consider their offence venial, or their state before God safe ; on the contrary, while we earnestly desire for them all heavenly light and every spiritual blessing, we shall not hesitate to express our conviction, derived, as we verily believe, directly from the word of God, that their present spiritual condition, as unfolded in this pertinacious adherence to fundamental error, is highly critical and dan- gerous." I know not, sir, what you may think of this extract ; but there it is, studded with sentences, which, had they been written by a Dissenter, might have become as " celebrated," and have called forth as much virulent execration, as Mr. Binney's itself. There it is ; and if you look at it in con- nexion with the following facts, you will see how Church- men contrive, in their differences with each other, to advance what confirms and countenances the dissenting *' convic- tion." The "Christian Remembrancer," for May, 1834,refer- ring to the very discussion which *' forced " from the Record the above solemn declaration of its views, says, exultingly, *' the REFRACTORIES wcrc outvoted on Mr. HilVs motion, by ten to oner In various articles, indeed, which appeared about that time in this periodical, the agitation then carrying on in the society, in which agitation the Record rejoices, is spoken of as that of a '^ knot of zealots," aiming at the " evangelical purgation " of books, constituting a " reposi- tory of sound religious instruction," '' a standard of doc- trine," " to which the clergy may resort with confidence," furnished by a society said to be " the best bulwark of the Church of England." The *' knot of zealots,"— the one of the Record's ''bodies of clergymen' are spoken of as *' a party carrying on an insidious warfare," while those op- posed to them, the other of the *' bodies of clergymen" is shown to be " an overwhelming majority,"' firm in their adherence to the good old books, and deprecating funda- I ' 17 mental changes in the principles of the society.— For any thing T know, the conductors of the Remembrancer are just as conscientious as those of the Record. It is their "con- viction " that the books are sound, and the ministers who agree with them properly evangelical . The two statements, however, put together, on the principles of the Record, amount to this,— that by far the larger " body of clergy- men," in a great national society, comprehending the mass of the whole order, are " ignorant of the gospel}' ''cannot preach it," distinguished for " their pertinacious adherence to fundamental err or "—to books " in which the gospel of Christ is either not contained, or so encrusted ivith error that the unhappy readers are led away to another gospel which is not another," and whose preaching "leads their hearers down to the chambers of death! "—This is the amount and meaning of the testimony of these two epis- copal witnesses, interpreted by the solemn " declaration " and "conviction " of one of them, and it is certainly quite as bad, if not worse, than any thing that can fairly be un- derstood by what was uttered by the Dissenter. The thing IS as plain as any question in proportion. Remember, I have no more to do with the correctness or incorrectness of the Record's notions of the gospel, or the Remembrancer's belief of the comparative size of "different bodies of clergymen," than I have with Mr. Binney's view of these matters. I am only showing, that, whether right or wrong in their opinions and facts, the two former contrive between them to sustain most triumphantly the '' conviction '' of the latter. There is a perfect coincidence, in fact, in some of their phraseology. You might almost ima- gine there was some secret understanding amongst them. This, however, could not be ; for the pens of the two wit- nesses, at the very time when they were furnishing their tes- timony, were employed against " the person," whom unwit- tingly they united to defend. If it should be said, " but it D 18 19 is lono- since the Record u«etl this ^trono- language ; why refer to what is so old?" It is enough to reply, Mr. Binney's sentence is older; «and you, sir, know how that continues to be (juoted. But you shall have sometliing more recent. Listen again, "Shortly after coming to London in 1800, 1 purchased the twelve volumes of the Christian Knowledge Society, for the purpose of perusing them for circulation ; and must honestly confess, that 1 found them so unlit, in my judgment, for this purpose, that I stndiously concealed them from the eyes of my family, as unsound and delusory state- ments of the truth of the gospel ; nor would tliey probably have ever been drawn from their concealment, but for a pur- pose which will be adverted to in the following narrative." What an acknowledgment ! And yet such is the acknow- ledgment of the Rev. H. Budd, in the Christian Observer for November last year. The whole twelve volumes of a society, composed of the great mass of the clergy, and exercising an incalculable influence on the spiritual condi- tion and destiny of the people— «// so marked throughout with what was " unsound " and " delusory, "' as to be deemed by an enlightened and conscientious man, '' unlit for circula- tion, "and '' studiously concealed from the eyes of his family ;" and never intended, forthe?f5eofanybody,to be ''drawn from that concealment." Nor is this a solitary instance. Similar statements have repeatedly been made in the publications from which 1 have quoted — publications conducted and patronised by Churchmen. I shall close this part of my letter, in which I have referred to the existence and ten- dency of a certain kind of preaching, and a certain class of publications, identified with the Establishment,— most "dano-erous," ''delusive," and "destructive," according to the showing of its own advocates — as two of the " steps, or two aspects of the same step, by which the Dissenter " arrives at his conviction"— I shall close, I say, this part of ,- i my letter, by the following extract, in which both the things just mentioned are referred to: it is from a pamphlet entitled '* Modern High Church Principles examined ;" consisting of articles which appeared in the " Record," and which are thought worthy of reappearing in a more permanent form. " What a minute seed was the gospel, preached in simpli- city, in this country, in the early days of Romaine, Venn, Milner, Berridge, and other such worthies. How were their names cast out as evil, and their principles received as utterly fanatical and visionary ! What a change even, since the Rev. Mr. Simeon was repeatedly black-balled in the Bartlett's Buildings Society, as utterly unworthy of a place in that centre of orthodoxy ; and now, that men of his prin- ciples are freely admitted by hundreds, and the light of divine truth which they promulgate, is contending, even in that sphere, against the darkness of error.'' '' Barhness of error r~whldi means, interpreted by the language already quoted from the " Record," " darkness visible," — " vital and destructive error,"— error respecting what is "not minor, but fundamentar'—'' not slight, but motnentous "—which robs the truth of all its freeness, clear- ness, and glory, so that the unhappy readers are led away to " another gospel which is not another," and the preaching of which " leads the hearers down to the chambers of deaths And all this, observe, had been loiig in full and unchecked operation, till a " jninute seed " made its appearance at a time comparatively recent, and the men with whose opposition it has to contend in its growth, say that they are still "an overwhelming majority." I leave the inference from these statements to you, and pass on to another particular. You have seen how it is, that, by Evangelical Dissenters, injury is conceived to be done to the souls of men through the medium of your church ; the extracts I now proceed to introduce, will assist you in understanding how it comes to !i 20 pass, that they attribute this to the inHuence which the Establishment exerts upon it. You uiay not be accustomed, perhaps, to distinctions like these, but Dissenters are : they distinguish both between the Church and the Establishment, and between a particular church (the English Episcopal, for instance) and the church of Christ. You will see, as I pro- ceed, the nature of the first of these distinctions. It may be a j ust distinction or not : with that I have nothing to do. I merely profess to lay before you what Dissenters think, from which you mayi«/«r the grounds of a " conviction" you thought bigoted and baseless, and the sense in which it is to be i.nderstood. I shall pursue the same plan as before, beginning with the statement by Dissenters of their own views, and supporting these by the testimony of the advocates of Establishments. I begin, also, as before, with Mr. Binney himself. The following passage from his sermon, entitled " Dissent not Schism," is not without meaning, though rather implied than expressed. After giving certain .piotations from Episcopalian writers, in which tliey assert that there is little or no safety for any beyond the pale of Episcopacy. he observes: — " It is admitted, indeed, that ' some Dissenters may pos- sibly belong to the invisible Church ; ' but the charge against them is incessantly repeated that, as a body, they, ' by their schism,' in rejecting Episcopacy, expose themselves to the eternal malediction of heaven. If this be schism, well may it be thought, as to its nature and consequences, to be a sin 'greater than that of drunkenness;' for it destroys not merely the debauched and the dissolute, but the (apparently) most moral and religious portion of the people : it destroys not some merely of these, but the mass and the multitude- sweeping them to ' eternal ' 'wrath ' by thousands and tens of thousands, except possibly here and tl.ere a solitary indi- vii < ►' be tlie subjects of this most extraordinary combination of attributes — candid and charitable in character, although they differ in opinion from his lordsliip ! Waving, however, this general reasoning, I only remark, that here you have the testimony in question— testimony, the value of which has been publicly stated by so high an authority as your Mitred Metropolitan; and what does it do? Do! it not merely ado])ts, but it aggravates and amplifies what Mr. Binney had advanced. It re-states and defends it. And yet, in spite of this, and of many similar proofs of Mr. B.'s opinion being notliingbut that of the Dissenters generally, and especially of the more pious and spiritual among them, it continues to be stigmatized as something unique — " monstrous," " pro- fane," "political," "blasphemous,"— the offspring and the proof of Satanic possession ! But I go on with my extracts. The above passages indi- cate tliat patronage— R thing, in the estimation of the Dis- senter (whetlier justly or not, concerns not me) " sacrilegi- ous and impious," is at least one of the grounds on which he rests his " belief" of injury and ruin resulting to the souls of men from a political establishment. It introduces, he thinks, into the sacred office many, whose ministry must destroy rather than save. That the Dissenter is not desti- tute of e])iscopalian sympathy in this opinion, and that he has its sanction for the very language in which he states it, is a simple matter of fact. There is no denying it. Men may rage and rail against him, but they cannot help them- selves—they might be willing, in one sense, to eat their own words, and thus to get rid of them, but they cannot eat the printed books in which they are contained. It is a/acif, for instance, that the following language, and a great deal more of similar import, is to be found in the number of the Chris- tian Observer for March, 1834, pp. 174 and 179.— Before transcribing it, permit me to remark, that I have nothing E f.-: 26 to do with the reasonings of the writer, in the article from which I quote, nor the opinions which he holds respecting what is to be done for the correction of the evil of which he complains. Whether he or the Dissenters have the best notions of the remedy, I know not, and I care not, in this argument. I merely cite him for the fact of his testimony to the reality, the nature, and the extent of an evil, the ex- istence of which affords to nonconformists, in their opinion, a " step" toward the " conviction " which they are known to cherish. *' With respect to the evils resulting from the present ad- ministration of patronage, it is impossible to speak in terms of too great regret. We quoted in our last number some remarks of Mr. Southey, which in principle apply as much to the state of the Church now as ever they did. It is not even pretended I's ninety-nine cases out of a hundred that either a private or an official patron seriously sets himself to look out for the pei'son best qualified for an appointment ; it is quite sufficient that the friend whom he wishes to oblige is not legally or scandalously incompetent. Mr. Simeon, we know, and a few other individuals, have been accused of the atrocious crime of expending large sums of money in pur- chasing advowsons for the sole object of nominating to the incumbency the best men they could find, without any tie of relationship, or private interest, or friendship. But no one pretends that such crimes are common. The auctioneers who DAILY knock dozen advowsons to the best bidder^ never suspect that they are bought upon such Utopian principles. It is enough that the purchaser has a son, a nephew, a friend, whom he wishes to provide for, and who is not disqualified for holding the preferment. And so also in the case of PUBLIC AND OFFICIAL PATRONS." The extract which follows contains the writer's account of the consequences to the souls of men of this " daily" work- i 27 ing of a machinery which infiuences(Ae says, not I,) **ninety- nine out of a hundred" of one class of the actings of the Establishment on the church. " We have not a shadow of doubt that the system which he (Lord Eldon) and others like minded pursued, was most mischievous to the cause of true piety, and the spiritual inter- ests of the Church of England. His lordship, it is said, never failed to enquire very carefully whether the party recom- mended to him had the misfortune to be a Calvinist or Methodist or any other strange animal ; but did his lordship and others always ask, all other things being to their mind, whether he was a careless shepherd, a clerical sportsman, a non-resident pluralist, or perhaps a man of no theological information whatever, except so far as to compose or copy a tirade against bible societies and evangelicals. We wish that ecclesiastical patrons of all classes could be better in- structed than too many of them are, not only respectim;)- the duty of acting conscientiously, but also ofguiding their con- science by a scripturally enlightened understanding. We have so often urged this subject in detail, and particularly in reviewing the chapters No. v. and vi. of Di-. Clialmers' Christian and Civic Economy, in our volume for 1821, that we forbear dwelling upon it at present ; but we earnestly wish that all patrons, especially official patrons, would peruse those admirable chapters of Dr. Chalmers' work ; more especially as the high esteem which that pious, zea- lous, and eloquent writer, at this moment enjoys in the Church of England, on account of his Defence of National ecclesiastical Establishments, may perhaps honey the ed^es of a cup which contains to many a somewhat bitter draught : for the object of the dissertation is to show that the doctrines which it has been for a century past the practice of too many persons of influence to denounce as irrational, fana- tical, anti-church, anti-moral, anti-scholarlike, and most ungentlemanly, are the doctrines of holy writ, and are pre- 28 eminently suited to the wants of mankind, and calculated to promote the spiritual welfare of individuals and the best interests of nations. Dr. Chalmers clearly shews that official patrons in particular, have acted most ruinously, not only as concerns the cause of true religion, and the sal- vation OF THE SOULS OF MEN, but in reference also to the peace and order of the land, and the external interests of the Established Church. "=^ I am not, you will remember, discussing the theory of a National Ecclesiastical establishment: I do not enquire, therefore, whether "official patronage'' be not, in one form or other, inseparable from the thing ; or, if it be not, whether it might not yet be so exercised as to be a good • These extracts are from the very same article of " the Christian Observer," quoted in a former note, only continued in the succeeding number. The following questions which occur in it immediately after its comment on Mr. Binney^s " conviction" and addressed to Dissenters, may be advantageously compared with what is given in the text.— "And are you, Christian Brethren, convinced by assertions\(k^ the above? [see ante, p. 0, belief changed into hiowledye, and opinions into assertions^ Do you really beheve that all the churches, the ministers; the reading of God's word, of which such large portions are inter^voven m all our services ; the administration of sacraments ; and the oflfering up of solemn prayer and thanksgiving from sabbath to sabbath in so many thousands of places of divine worship in every corner of the land, so far from being means of grace and salvation are only instruments of spiritual destruc- tion ? Do you really believe that the affectionate labours of a faithful ser- vant of Christ are actually converted into poison by being employed with- in the precincts of a national church ^ " No, sir, we don't,-nor Mr. Binney either, and you knorv it. We neither say that " all the churches and ministers" are ^ instruments of spiritual destruction,'' nor dare you say that «// the latter ^x^^ faithful servants of Christ," and all the former free from what is " ruinous as concerns the salvation of the souls of men. — Look at your own words as given above. You know that our objections to an Establishment spring from our belief of its tendency, as a system to introduce into the ministry of the purest church faithless men, and that they do " mischief;" but as to " the aff-ectionate labours of a faithful servant of Christ," whether within a national church or out of it, ask your conscience our opinion upon that :-you know it as well as oui- selves. -^ rf 1 -^ •T. Wardlaw's Sermon on Establishments : — * I beg that it may be distinctly observed, how the above is put. Since it was written, I have been led to see the necessity for this request while drawing u]) a former note. The dissenting opinion, then, is not that the preaching of the gospel itself, and the "affectionate labours of n. faithful ser- vant of Christ " " are actually converted into poison," from the mere fact of their being within the precincts of an establishment ; nor is it, that " congregations of faithful men," or societies of real believers, become " synagogues of Satan," from the same circumstance : but it is this — that the tendency of the system is, to recognise and treat as Christians and Christian congregations, those who are not faithful men, and thus to de- ceive them, (according to the false analogy, as they deem it, of Hooker, adopted and advocated by the Rev. S. C. Wilks, in his tract on Establish- ments, " that our state, the English people, like the Jewish, is not part of them the commonwealth and part of them the church of God, but the self -some people whole and entire — both ;") and to introduce into the ministry those who will not be faithful servants of Christ, but who, being " bhnd," " not preaching the gospel," advocating vital and fundamental error, &c., will thus injure and destroy : they think, the tendency 66 ''The idea of a nation of Christians in the sense in which the phrase is now used, is one which has no exemplar in the New Testament. Mij firm conviction is, (and I speak it, of an Establishment is to produce these effects, even though the articles of a church should be the most evangelical, and that thus there might be ** the form of sound words " without the inculcation of " sound doctrine." If, however, an Establishment existed, in which these two things were universal, Dissenters beheve that such an institution could do nothing but unmixed good. ITiis explanation ^vill show the mistake under which Churchmen labour, when they speak to Dissenters thus — (Christian Observer, Feb. 1834) — " You admit the fact that our church has greatly- improved in its practical administration ; you will spare the proofs ; you will give us all, and far more than we ask for; you will even concede, for argument sake, that our orders, our services, our clergy, our institutions, were perfection itself, and then, with all this accumulation of practical piety and actual benefit to the souls of men, you will swing us off on the hinge of an abstract principle, and, in the words of Mr. Binney, say, * I am an enemy to the Establishment — it destroys more souls than it saves,' "&c. No, sir; Dissenters say no such thing, nor has Mr. B. said it. I have proved in the course of this letter, that Dissenters ground their '* convic- tion " not on " the hinge of an abstract principle " in relation to an establishment, after conceding "ser\'ices, clergy, &c., to be perfection itself," but on the assumed fact of the tendency of " the principle and opera- tion" of an Establishment to produce the opposite of all this, even though it should begin with it ; and on the belief, that, after admitting the English Establishment to have " greatly improved " in its practical administration, there is still an immense portion of its machinery that, " as a system," works " most mischievously to the cause of true piety," and " most ruin- ously as concerns the salvation of the souls of men." " What is the mere moral preaching," says the Rev. C. Bridges, in his admirable work on the Christian Ministry', " that obtains so widely among us, but a refined species of this cursed (Antinomian) leaven ? ♦ * *— How frightful to think of the deluded souls sliding into eternity in this golden dream ! " After reading these explanatory' statements, I can imagine a candid and serious Churchman saying, '* Why, this is very different from what I had always imagined Dissenters to mean : there is nothing here, but what our serious, good men are always lamenting as too true, and what I believe myself; — if these be the views of * pohtical Dissenters,' I wish I had known it sooner." So do we. We fear, however, that there are some, who have known this long enough, but who don't wish you to know it ; and there are many more, who talk and write very eloquently, who are as innocent as lambs of all acquaintance with the character and opinions, or real ** ultimate object " of Dissenters. I 4. 57 not in the heat and haste of controversial discussion, but with calm deliberation and intense regret) that national Chris- tianity, in which is necessarily involved the admission to Christian privileges of multitudes whose Christianity consists of nothing but the name, and their accidental residence in a Christian land — is chargeable with a more extensive de- struction of souls than any other extraneous cause whatever which it is possible to specify. I say again, that I know not one thing that, in a country like ours, operates with a greater latitude of ruin, than the prevalence of nominal Christianity." This extract is remarkable for its singular coincidence in phraseology with the celebrated passage which has been thought by many to be so unique and unparalleled ; and also for its stating the one " step'' by which its author arrives at his *' conviction." I have shown, however, that the English Dissenter may have taken three or four in *' arriving" at his. Bare and bald, however, as the above passage is, and as the opinion itself of Dissenters which I am now referring to may be, in relation to an establishment simply considered as such — even this is authorised by the manner in which Churchmen, evangelical Churchmen, speak concerning Dissent as such. Witness the following, quoted before for another purpose. " As a system, we believe Dissent to be an evil greater than 7ve can express ; and if carried to the extent of the subversion of the national churches of England and Scotland, to say nothing of other Protestant countries, nothing but a direct, special miracle, which we have no right to look for, more es- pecially when we have set aside the obvious means of grace, could prevent the ultimate extirpation of Christianity from the earth." — Christian Observer, March, 1834. I make no remark on this. There it is. Every man has a right to his opinion : my object is answered by showing that they who thus talk — who " believe Dissent as a system \ 58 69 to be an evil greater tlian they can express," really ought not to quarrel with Dissenters if they, with equal conscien- tiousness, believe an Establishment, "as a system," to be ^^ ^ great evil" — a thing which they can express, and not " the obvious means of grace !"* The last extracts with which I shall trouble you are the following. They are intended to show, that others, besides modern " political Dissenters " liave thought the secular patronage of Christianity — which began at the commence- ment of the fourth century, when the Church ceased to stand on the principle of " Dissent as a system " — has been any thing but *' the obvious means of grace ;" they are intended also to show, that the dissenting opinion, before stated, of the probable operation of a National Establishment on tlie character of the priesthood, is neither novel nor singular ; and lastly, they are given to demonstrate, that the language for which Mr. Rinney has been so condemned, is suavity itself compared with that in which others have induloed : — some, indeed, of what follows, is so coarse and repulsive, so terrible and strong, that I shrink as I transcribe it. " I have been long convinced from the wliole tenor of ancient history, that this very event, Constantine's calling himself a Christian, and pouring that flood of wealth and * Or put it in another form ; what would be thought of the Dissenter %\ ho should thus write :~" as a system, we beheve the establishment to be an ei-il greater than we can express ; and if carried to the extent of the subversion of the Voluntary Churches of England and Scotland, to say nothing of America and other Protestant countries, nothing but a direct special miracle, which we have no right to look for, more especially when we have set aside the obvious means of grace, could prevent the ultimate ex- tirpation of Christianity from the earth ?" And why should not the dissen- ter write thus ? yet if he were, it would be " a presumptuous party esti- mate," and pious horror would be expressed for his pretending to " know'* the future ; and much would be said about " the rashness of a mortal man daring to read the inscrutable book of the divine councils," and ** be- ing i)erfectly sure," or " not having the shadow of a doubt" of what he " affirmed," '* asserted," and so on! ■r 4- honour on the Cliristian Church, the clergy in particular, was productive of more evil to tlie church than all the ten persecutions together. From the time that power, riches, and honour of all kinds were heaped upon the Christians, vice of all kinds came in like a flood, both in the clergy and the laity. From the time that the Church and State, the kingdom of Christ and of the world, were so strangely and unnaturally Mended together, Christianity and Heathenism were so thoroughly incorporated with each other, that they will hardly ever be divided till Clirist comes to reign on the earth. So that, instead of fancying that the glory of the New Jerusalem covered the eartli at that period, we liave the terrilde proof that it was then, and has ever since been, covered with the smoke of the bottomless pit.'* " Wliere is it written that we are bound to obey any minister, because we live in what is called his parish ? Yes, vou say, we are bound to obey every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake. True, in all things indifl'erent : but this is not so ; it is exceedingly far from it. It is far from being a thing indifferent to me wlio is the guide of my soul. I dare not receive one as my guide to heaven who is himself in the high road to hell. Such are many parochial ministers at this day." *'To speak the naked truth, not with anger or contempt, as too many have done, I acknowledge that many, if not most, of those that were appointed to minister in holy things, with whom it has been my lot to converse, in almost every part of England or Ireland, for forty or fifty years last past, have not been eminent either for knowledge or piety, it has been loudly affirmed, that most of the persons now in connexion with me, who believe it their duty to call sin- ners to repentance, having been taken immediately from low trades, tailors, shoemakers, and the like, are a set of ])Oor, stupid, illiterate men, that scarce know their right hand from their left : yet, I cannot but say, that 1 would 60 sooner cut off my right hand, than suffer one of them to speak a word in any of our chapels, if I had not reasonable proof that he had more knowledge in the Holy Scriptures, more knoivledge of himself more knoioledge of God and the things of God than nine in ten of the clergymen I have conversed ivith, either at the universities or elsevjhereJ^ "Insolent clergymen, pleasure-taking clergymen, money- loving clergymen, praise-loving clergymen, preferment- seeking clergymen ; these are the wretches that cause the order in general to be contemned. These are the pests of the Christian world, — the grand nuisance of mankindy — a stink in the nostrils of God,^' " I see those running whom God hath not sent, destroying their own souls, and those that hear them ; perverting the right ways of the Lord, and blaspheming the truth as it is in Jesus. I see the blind leading the blind, and ])oth falling into the ditch. Unless 1 warn in all ways I can these perishing souls of their danger, am I clear of the blood of these men? SOUL-DAMNING CLERGYMEN lay me under more difficulties than soul-saving laymen." This w terrible. You yourself attribute " calmness and candour " to Mr. Binnev ; but what have we here ? — And who could dare to speak thus? What low, vulgar, foul-mouthed fanatic — what *' bitter," *' blasphemous," ''political" Dis- senter, — could so insult common decency, so violate public decorum, so degrade the nature and the name of man, as to indulfre in Billinosoate like this ? — who ? — John Wesley ! — The man whom your church formerly trampled beneath her feet — whom she now finds it politic to praise, and whose followers, hated and hunted once, now, in the liour of her need, she would willingly conciliate or cajole.* But I must close, and I close here. I have done what I proposed. I have laid before you a few materials for refiec- ♦ The above passages, with distinct refereuceSy may be found, where I found them, in the '* Patriot" of October 24th, 1836. \- X \i :, ._«l9l i 61 tion ; — data from which you may yourself deduce what you appear anxious to know. I will not conceal that I write with an object beyond that of affording you, individually, either employment or satisfaction ; and while I thus frankly speak of the objects I have, let none he imputed to me which I have not. My object, then, in this letter has not been to discuss the right or wrong of Establishments ; — nor the right or wrong of Episcopacy — or Presbyterianism — or any form of church order ; nor the truth or falsehood of what is called evangelical religion ; nor the correctness or incor- rectness of any opinions respecting the theological character of the English clergy, or the real import of the book they use ; — all I have attempted has been this, to state what Dissenters think on most of these matters ; to show that, thus thinking, whether rightly or not, they cannot hut " arrive" at the " conviction" complained of; and that, in thinking as they do, on the nature of the Gospel, and the state of the Establishment, and in having, and expressing, the "conviction" referred to, and as expressed, they are countenanced and authorised by the avowed principles, statements, assertions, and phraseology of members and ministers of your own church, and other advocates of similar institutions. This is what I have attempted, and nothing hut this. The points themselves, on which most Dis- senters and many Churchmen think and speak so strongly, I leave open to discussion, as, in my conscience, I think several of them are. But granting the Dissenter what he holds as important truth, and what he takes for undisputed fact, I ask you the following questions :— if you are a high, orthodox Churchman, I put them to your reason and judg- ment, your principle and honour, as a gentleman, and as a man of common candour and common sense. I ask you, granting to the Dissenters their peculiar views — narrow, bigoted, methodistical as you may deem them,— but granting to them the sincere belief only of their awful importance, \ 62 could they, consistently with this, mul with the helief they have of what is still the state of the Establishment, " arrive " at any other *' conviction " than tlie conviction in question? I ask you, whether you cannot conceive that they may liohl this opinion, not because they are profane and im- pious, but just in consequence of the reality and depth of their religious feelings, though these feelings may flow from an erroneous judgment? I ask you, whether you can- not perceive that it is quite possible for persons to have a strong repugnance to establishments on account of their belief that they must necessarily affect the purity and pro- mulgation of their favourite though fanatical notions, not only without })eing political Dissenters, but exactly in pro- portion as they are not political but religious men ? I ask you, whether it is not possible for you to imagine that they may entertain this repugnance against Establishments, and yet have not the slightest feeling against Episcopacy, or the Episcopal church, as such, seeing that with them the mere forms of diti'erent churches, however relatively important compared with each other, are all nothing, but as *' the small dust of the balance," compared witli tliat *' si/stem, of doctrine which regenerates the people for heaven V I ask you, whether I have not proved^ by distinct citations, " which it is neither possible to gainsay nor resist," that, supposing the Dissenters to speak in Mr. Binney, they say and think nothing but what has been thought and said again and again, and is being thought and said con- tinually, by your own brethren ? If, however, you are an evangelical clergyman, then, sir, in addition to these ques- tions to your understanding and judgment, I beg to close with the following to your conscience. T ask you, in the presence, so to speak, of the rest of the clergy, and of all the inliabitants of the diocese of Worcester, did you not know these things? Do you not know them ? Were you not aware that the person, " whose name was advertised 63 to preach in this city," and who did preach, (calamitous visitation!) had incurred the displeasure, if not the hatred, of your brethren, by giving utterance to nothing but the legitimate inference from their own principles and state- ments, and that, too, in language taught him by them- selves? If you did not know this before, I ask you, can you deny it now? Dare you, with this letter before the public, pretend to say, that the organs of the evangelical clergy are guiltless of the Dissenter's offence? If you do, will any one believe you who can read and think for himself? Is it not palpable that, whether right or wrong in their opinions, Mr. B. and many Churchmen stand precisely on the same ground ; but that he, as a Dissenter, has consistency for his companion ? But I have done. You began by misrepre- senting Mr. Binney through ignorance ; you proceeded to do him partial justice after partial examination; I hereby present you with the means of completing your work. I really have confidence in your candour. You appear to me to have shown that you are open to conviction. You seem -willing to read, and to admit what you read. Read this. See here what clergymen have said, and what they have admired and praised others for saying. Listen to the lamentations they have* uttered, as encouraged by the countenance and shielded by the shadow of the Colossus of the North — the eloquent advocate of Evangelicism and Establishments ! Mark what is pouring incessantly from the periodical press by one class of Churchmen asfainst another, and cease to wonder that Dissenters should learn something from such instructors. Again I caution yo.u to observe my aim. For any thing I am concerned with, in my present argument, Dr. Chalmers' notions of the gospel may be, as they are thought by some, drivelling and visionary ; he, Evangelical Churchmen, and Evangelical Dissenters, may, in the elegant language of the Oxford Tracts, be *' a mob of tiptops, gapes, and yawns" altogether; the Church offices may be as much inspired as 64 the Bible ; Episcopacy may not only be apostolical, but in itself the safeguard of salvation ; an Establishment may be absolutely necessary " to prevent the ultimate extirpation of Christianity from the earth ;" and ours, in its constitution and working, may be the purest and most perfect in the world : all these things may be for any thing I aim at ; but, as a defence of the " conviction " of Dissenters, showing, that it is not only consistent with religious feeling, but may actually flow from it — that it may be the result not of " political " partizanship, but of spiritual adherence to fun- damental truth, — and that it may be entertained in relation to a system without the slightest particle of animosity to- wards men : and, as an argumentum ad hominem addressed to Evangelical Churchmen, sliowing, that, on their own prin- ciples, Dissenters may be right in their conviction, and that, by their own example, they are perfectly authorized in their mode of expressing it ; viewed in this light, and in relation to these objects, I calmly and confidently defy any man — lay or clerical — of the Diocese of Worcester, or any other, to answer this book. I am. Reverend Sir, Yours, (fee. JOHN SEARCH. Stevens and Pardon, Printers, Bell Yard, Temple Bar. 6b P. S. My object hitherto has only required me to state dissenting opinions without defending them. I affirmed, for instance, that Dissenters take that view of the meaning of the Offices of the Church which coincides with the principles of the Oxford Tracts, and there I left it. I once thought, however, of attempting, in this place, to show that they are right, and that the explanations of the baptismal service by the Christian Observer, and the author of '' Modern High Church Principles Examined," are unsatisfactory. The latter also frequently refers to the canons : it would be import- ant to know how far they are binding, or how far they are believed. Evangelical Churchmen often quote this one and that, — will they admit others that we could quote ? If not, what is meant by their subscription to the thirty-sixth, taken in connection with his words whom, in that, they acknowledge as their head, — those,! mean, by wliicli the whole are preceded and followed ? They talk of produc- ing, in Exeter Hall, the canons of the Church of Rome, that the pubhc may judge of i^ by them ; will they abide by the same test ? Shall they and their Church be judged by her's ?— Certain things, too, very different, are sadly confounded in popular controversy, so that some, on both sides, seem fighting with shadows. Dissent is identified with Independency ; Episcopacy with the Establishment ; and both the latter with the Church, the only Church — at least in this realm. Then again, feelings in theological antagonists, havijig reference to similarity of political condition, are spoken of as if they sprang from religious sympathy ; while other feehngs, originating merely in cZissimilarity of political condition, are mistaken for oppo- sition to a false creed ; though they coexist with adherence to the principle of many of its errors. There may be seen, also, passing between the advocates of different establishments, the interchange of such books and language, as to shew that, because they agree in the principle of such political institutions, they would willingly, if they could, hold visible church-communion in services and sacra- ments — which communion was never longed for between some of them, when they only knew each other as agreeing in the faith !— which would involve, if it took place, communion between many who do 7iot ! and which is deprecated and denounced as regards others, admitted to hold, most tenaciously, the essentials of the gospel, because they differ on a point of political expediency. 66 Then there is the voluntary principle. What is that? By many it is said to be selfishness ; it is described as a desire to be free from all moral and political obligation ; their own whim, humour, caprice, covetousness, is held forth as the only law which its advocates love— as if they acknowledged no exercise, in any sphere, of either human compulsion or divine ! Nay, by some it is identified with certain modes of church government!! Further, with respect to the diffusion of the gospel throughout " all na- tions,"— the grand object for which the church should live, which should be dear to every Christian and to every community, and which forms a test for the trial both of systems and men- there are " facts and reasonings," perhaps, which go far to prove that the principle of a National Establishment is opposed to it, and the principle of some non-conformist systems inadequate ; and that the adherents of both have most blessed the world, when they have practically done homage to what they have deemed the errors, but in reahty the excellencies, of each other.— To all these matters, and many more, I had intended to advert, in a course of observations, different in kind, indeed, from the preceding argument, but perfectly consistent with it ; and it would afford me more pleasure to aid in removing mutual misconceptions, and thus to inspire re- ciprocal respect, than merely to '' put to silence" the clamorous "ignorance of foohsh men." As, however, space does not permit, nor necessity demand my present attention to these matters, I content myself with what I have attempted. I have sought to expose the Establishment, but I regard the Church as likely to become one of God's most distinguislied instruments for blessing mankind. I have defended that body of Dissenters who are principally attacked in modern controversy, but I have my own views as to the wisdom, the working, and the probable prevalence of some of theirs. I wish different churches could be persuaded to acknowledge and com- bine the portions of truth which they respectively hold ; but, aUis ! how can this occur, while each thinks every pin of its own taber- nacle apostolic, and the whole building of its neighbours a blunder? Extreme views on either side are wrong ; the candid and cathohc ofboth parties think more alike than they sus|)ect, or more than they avo/6'— some being fettered hv the dead and some by the living. \\ S ' ; f I \ 66 Tlien there is the voluntary principle. What is that? By many it is said to be selfishness ; it is described as a desire to be free from all moral and political obligation ; their own whim, humour, caprice, covetousness, is held forth as the only law which its advocates love— as if they acknowledged no exercise, in any sphere, of either human compulsion or divine ! Nay, by some it is identified with certain modes of church government ! ! Further, with respect to the diffusion of the gospel throughout " all na- tions,"— the grand object for which the church should live, which sliould be dear to every Christian and to every community, and which forms a test for the trial both of systems and men- there are " facts and reasonings," perhaps, which go far to prove that the principle of a National Establishment is opposed to it, and the principle of some non-conformist systems inadequate ; and that the adherents of both have most blessed the world, when they have practically done homage to what they have deemed the errors, but in reality the excellencies, of each other.— To all these matters, and many more, I had intended to advert, in a course of observations, different in kind, indeed, from the preceding argument, but perfectly consistent with it ; and it would afford me more pleasure to aid in removing mutual misconceptions, and thus to inspire re- ciprocal respect, than merely to '' put to silence" the clamorous " ignorance of foolish men." As, however, space does not permit, nor necessity demand my present attention to these matters, I content myself with what I have attempted. I have sought to expose the Establishment, but I regard the Church as likely to become one of God's most distinguished instruments for blessing mankind. I have defended that body of Dissenters who are principally attacked in modern controversy, but I have my own views as to the wisdom, tlie working, and the probable prevalence of some of theirs. I wish different churches could be persuaded to acknowledge and com- bine the portions of truth which they respectively hold ; but, alas ! liow can this occur, while each thinks every pin of its own taber- nacle apostolic, and the whole building of its neighbours a blunder? Extreme views on either side are wrong ; the candid and catholic of both parties think more alike than they suspect, or more than they avoiv—somc being fettered by tlie dead and some by the living. V 1 t