of a practice which has prevailed for centuries in every diocese, and given offence to no one? (Speech p. 31.) His Lordship's exalted rank may be a very sufficient excuse for his ignorance of the humble duties of Churchwardens and Sidesmen; but he ought to have contrived to keep his ignorance out of sight, while he was engaged in putting a new interpretation upon ecclesiastical laws, and presuming to controvert the decisions of a Sutton and a Marsh. It was under the sanction of this profound, master of civil and canonical jurisprudence, that Mr. Neville approached the house of Lords, and became guilty of as gross a breach of ecclesiastical subordination as has been witnessed since the restoration of King Charles. It is possible, and we are ready to be lieve that this was not his intention. He may have been the dupe of art. ful and factious men; or, like Mr. Green, he may be unprovided with canonical apprehension. But acquitting him of any improper motive or design, we hesitate not to pronounce his conduct unecclesiastical and unbecoming. His original opposition to his Bishop rested upon insufficient grounds, but if he had been persuaded to stop there, he might have been easily forgiven. His disregard of the Archbishop's opinion was a more aggravated offence, and we trust that it will not be repeated. But when from deference to unknown and irresponsible advisers he changed those sentiments which he had refused to surrender to the Archbishop, and admitted the Bishop's right to examine, his perseverance in a complaint of which the foundation was thus removed, which no peer, excepting Lord King, was found willing to advocate, and which every body knew that the House of Lords would nei ther redress nor entertain, this conduct was foolish or factious in the extreme. In short, if we were to sum up T the whole transaction in one sen.” tence, we should call it an attempt to silence Bishop Marsh by clamour. There was clamour about the constitution; there was clamour about a test; there was clamour about innovations; and in order that the panic might not be confined to the Clergy, there was clamour about the interests of lay patrons,' and of the crown itself, and this disgraceful appeal to the selfishness of the judges was inserted both in the correspondence, (P. 33, note) and in the petition. Bishop Marsh noticed this attempt to influence the decision of the House of Lords in the speech that he delivered on the occasion, but out of delicacy to the petitioner he has omitted to print these remarks. It is to be hoped that his example will not be altogether thrown away. And then we shall not witness a repetition of those scenes which have recently disgraced the Church. We are confident that we speak the sentiments of ninety-nine clergymen in a hundred when we say, that they are safe, and know themselves to be safe under the government of their Bishops and Archbishops, and have no desire to make that appeal to the mob of newspaper politicians, which is the real, and the only effect of a petition to Parliament. If such petitions were entertained, the necessary consequence would be that the committees for religion which overturned the Church in 1640, would again be appointed, and might again triumph for a season. But many years must elapse before Parliament can be so far radicalized as to treat petitions against Bishops in any other way than they have treated the recent petitions against Bishop Pelham and Bishop Marsh. The Peers who present such documents are well assured, that they will be rejected; and we are confident that they would not meddle with them' upon any other supposition. Certain speeches are to be delivered and to be duly reported; the party scrib blers for the newspapers are to subjoin note and comment;" and all the dissenters in the country chuckle or sneer. Is this a system which a Clergyman ought to encourage? We will put a much stronger case than that which can be urged in defence of Mr. Neville; we will suppose a Clergyman sincerely and unalterably convinced that his Diocesan and Primate are in error; we will suppose him encouraged and supported by several distinguished senators, who are accustomed to take a part in ecclesiastical affairs; we will suppose that the point in dispute has never before been discussed, and that law-books and termreports are silent upon the subject; and even then we have no doubt that a pious, reasonable and orthodox Minister ought to submit in silence to the decision of the Bishops. Mr. Neville cannot plead any one of these excuses. The law-books are full and express in favour of the right of examination. The Peers, who have read the canons, would not take charge of his petition. The Prelates against whom he appealed, are distinguished for their accuracy, and the petition admitted the proposition which the pamphlet had been written to refute. With the sentiments and character of Mr. Neville we are altogether un. acquainted we never heard his name until he started this controversy; and even now we have not heard or read one single word re specting him, expepting what we gather from his own distributed pamphlet, and the Bishop of Peter. borough's published speech. We request, therefore, to be distinctly understood as speaking of this transaction alone; and in this transaction we distinctly say, that he has not acted a becoming or a consistent part. If he were imitated by his brethren, or supported by the Legislature, the Church of Englaud would forfeit her Apostolic character; she would soon cease to enjoy a government by Bishops. The Dissenter's Apology, in a Let ter to the Rev. Samuel Wix, containing some Reasons why the orthodox Dissenters feel obliged in Conscience, not to comply with his Affectionate Address, intended to induce them to conform to the Church of England. By Samuel Newton. pp. 24. Longman and Co. 1820. If the pamphlets on which we are now to comment are compared with former works upon the same question, it is possible that neither would be considered of much importance; but if they are contrasted, as they ought to be, with each other, they have no ordinary claim to the attention of the public: for they may be regarded as short and popular statements of the grounds upon which the Church complains of the Dissenters, and the Dissenters justify their revolt from the Church. The substance of both might, without impropriety, be delivered in the shape of sermons to any common congregation; and nothing better could be desired by the clergy and their supporters, than that both should be heard and weighed by every congregation which hesitates upon the subject of communion with the Church.. The "Address" of Mr. Wix is a very temperate and judicious appeal to those Dissenters whom it is now the fashion to designate as orthodox. And he sets before them the Church's claims, and the evil consequences of neglecting those claims, in a perspicuous and convincing manner. We understand that he has produced a very considerable effect, and that Mr.Newton has consequently stepped forward with an answer, which is intended to confirm many wavering disciples, and to bring back some others who have forsaken their ancient teachers, and listened, not without improvement, to the lessons of Mr. Wix. Both the writers, therefore, are to be considered as practical men, bent upon the accomplishment of an important task, and discharging it with unpretending, but indisputable skill. And the proper result of the whole, is an insight into the merits of the controversy, when reduced, as in the present case, to the level of the common people. is Mr. Wix's principal arguments may be reduced into three headsthe apostolical and scriptural origin of our episcopal Church; the sufficiency, not to say the excellence, of our Liturgy; and the calamities which are unavoidably attendant upon schism, especially the encouragement which Protestant nonconformity in this country has afforded, and still affords, to Unita rianism. This chain of reasoning evidently as conclusive as it is simple. The Scriptures ordained our present form of Church government; the Apostles and their successors practised it; it is found amply sufficient for the purposes of Christian edification; and the effects of neglecting it have been heresy, lati tudinarianism, and unbelief. There is a positive institution; and that institution upon trial proves beneficial, and every deflection from it plunges us deeper and deeper into confusion. There can be no doubt, therefore, that Mr. Wix is fully justified in employing the strong language with which he closes his Address; nor can it be denied that the Dissenters are bound either to inva lidate his premises, or to admit his conclusion. REMEMBRANCER, No. 32. 1 « And now, I'again ask, can you, my Christian friends, think yourselves justified in dissenting from the Established Church, holds not the truth as it is in Christ Jesus, unless you are prepared to prove that she and that therefore salvation is not to be' had in her communion? Incalculable are the evils of a schismatic spirit, as it has prevailed among the different classes of dissenters. It has not only insensibly operated to a general violation of the apostolical precept of submission to those who' have the rule over them; but it has led to that infinite variety of opinion in religious matters, that has tended to confirm the Romanist in his delusions. It has been obstructive to the conversion of the Jew, and has been of fatal operation against the efforts of missionaries to promote the kingdom of Christ in foreign countries, Observing the heats and animosities with which opposite opinions, all of which cannot be right, have been pursued, the poor' Heathen has been puzzled to know on which side truth lay: he has, therefore, continued in his idolatry, and in all the wretched follies of those who have ad dressed their worship TO THE UNKNOWN GOD*. "I will conclude by earnestly exhorting all you, who profess yourselves to be orthodox dissenters, to consider very seriously the tendency of your not being in communion with your national Church, against which you can urge no solid objections, as the Church of England did against the Church of Rome, when she reformed her self from the errors of that corrupted branch of the Christian Church. I do most cordially admit that you mean well; but you seem to be unaware of the mischief which the example of your dissent is operat ing over the Christian world, in alienating many from that form of sound words which was once delivered to the saints, and, consequently, in injuring that pure morality which flows from a pure faith, and is a blessing in every relation, and in every even be condition of life. Should it granted, that some things might, as you think, be on a better footing than they are in the constitution of the Established Church, or in the language in which she professes her belief, you must still admit that her object is the advancement of all that is truly scriptural. Where do you find more spiritual notions inculcated of God? Where is your duty to God, your neighbour, or yourselves, better taught than in the Church Catechism? Where are 3 R *Acts xvii. 25. Christian love and sincerity, and all the stand that the Church of England has ever made against these impieties. Consider, sions, of the Romish creed; and, then, too, the follies, the novelties, the delabear in mind the courageous resistance, the resolute protestations of the Church of England, against those follies, those novelties, and those wretched delusions, which protestations the early Reformers nobly sealed with their blood! Reflect, then, on the other hand, how the Unitarian, the Socinian, how every opposer of Christrin doctrine and order, urges his apology in your dissent, the example of which, as has been observed, encourages the dissent of those who most widely, most fatally, differ from you." Affectionate Address, p. 13. bonds of religious friendship? Does it not become you, does it not become us all, to remember calmly, and in the spirit of meekness, that whatever is human, must, among persons of various tempers and powers of comprehension, be viewed in various lights; and that it will be thought that some particular might have been better contrived, or some doctrine better stated? But, if such be thought an argument for separation, where shall separation stop? Consider then the whole. Take a dispassionate view of every part of the great scheme of the Church, both in her constitution, and in her doctrine; then, balance the certain mischiefs of a spirit of dissent, operating, according to the differ. ence of men's opinions, a variety of doctrine, against the positive good of that meekness, of that docility of temper, of that teachableness of disposition, of that generous deference to constituted authorities, all which adorn the disciple of Jesus Christ and further his kingdom, more than "doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings.” (1 Tim. vi. 4.) Consider, with all the pungency of regret that becomes you as the disciples We now turn to the Apology of Mr. Samuel Newton; and though we think that he might have adhered more strictly to the example of forbearance set by Mr. Wix, we are still ready to do justice to his general moderation, and to rejoice that the "orthodox Dissenters" have not descended to that ribaldry which this controversy has called forth from a Socinian pamphleteer who is too contemptible to be noticed. But, apropos, to Socinians, there is an omission in Mr. Newton's Answer, at which the reader will be surprised. He does not say a single syllable respecting the Unitarianism has made in the Presravages which byterian fold, and thus suffers a full half of the Address to pass sub și lentio. Whether the subject was overlooked as unimportant, and trifling, or whether it really slipped Mr. Newton's memory, or he knows, as is probable, far more Or whether about the business than has ever reached the ears of Mr. Wix or his critics, the omission is at all events to be lamented. The following pas sage may be regarded as the openof Jesus Christ; yes, I would, in the filling of Mr. Newton's case. 1 power of argument, but with all the meek-f I write for myself, though I believe a ness of persuasion, urge you to consider most seriously, the alarming spread of the Socinian and Unitarian prejudices against the comfortable doctrine of atonement, and the no less comfortable assurance of divine grace, to assist the weakness of our fallen nature. Then consider the firm ང་ us, great part of that class of Dissenters, with a view to which I write, agree with me in opinion. We are sensible that our weigh hours are not disposed to think well of because of our dissent; we feel like other men the effects of disesteem and reproach; we are not dispored necillossly to expose ourselves to the accusation of being schis matics; we are losing by our dissent, the chance we might have of the emoluments and respectability of yous Church; we are liable to many extra expenses for sup porting our worship; and if we be in these circumstances, under the influence of false principles, and acting from a schismatical and confentions spirit, it must be admitted that both our folly and our sin are great. We are committing transgression, and we are receiving reproach. But, indeed, Sir, dissent is matter of conscience with us and if I cannot persuade you that we are right, I hope to convince you that we are not wilfully and obstinately wrong." Dissenter's Apology, p. 4. We are anxious to come as spee dily as possible to Mr. Newton's main arguments; but the introduc tion requires a few brief remarks. If it means any thing to the purpose, we suppose it means this; that Dis senters forego many temporal advantages, and are therefore entitled to credit for the purity of their motives. Where there is a bona fide surrender of temporal advantages, without reference to ambitious desires, or factious self-will; where, as in the case of the primitive and the reformation martyrs, every earthly thing is surrendered for a cause in which no earthly thing can be obtained, great respect ought to be paid to the motives from which such conduct proceeds. But what does Mr. Newton surrender for conscience sake? "Their neighbours are not disposed to think well of nothi them because of their dissent;" they are losing their chance of the emoluments and respectability of the Church," and "they have to defray the extra expences of their peculiar worship." Now Mr. Wix has not questioned, but admitted, admitted we should say y somewhat too broadly and incautiously, the purity of the Dissenters motives. And it would have been more prudent in Mr. Newton to accept the admis " sion, now more about the matter, than to offer disputable proofs of an undisputed fact. The neighbours by whom Mr. N. is disesteemed and reproached, are, of course, in communion >with the Church. And does not this very circumstance make e him" more teemed and admired out of the Church? Dissenters, if we believe themselves, are not a small nor an unconnected body. They love those who love them; and a decided and successful opposition to the Church is neither the road to disgrace nor to obscurity. What is lost therefore in one quarter, is more than supplied in another; and if Mr. Wix's admiss sions are rejected, and we come to argue the matter with strictness, it will be found that the petty consequence, and the party-triumphs of sectarianism more than counterbalance the reproaches of orthodoxy. This is especially the case among dissenting teachers; a vast propor tion of whom are, beyond all doubt, men of much greater importance and influence than a continuance in Church communion would ever have made them. And as to their chance of obtaining the emoluments and respectability of the Church, this we consider as a high though an indirect compliment to the Establishment. For as the dissenting teachers would never, of course, have consented to rise by the ladder of patronage or power, they could only have been preferred for their merits. And if meritorious clergymen have so good a chance of emoluments, as to make the sacrifice of that chance for conscience-sake highly meritorious, then the Church is not so completely at the mercy of the Crown as Mr. Newton would have us believe. He cannot escape from this dilemma. Either he and his brethren lose nothing, or success in the Church of England is open to humble merit. The third species of martyrdom now suffered by Dissenters, is, contributing to the expence of their separate worship; and as the last grievance was peculiarly clerical, this is peculiarly laic. For surely it can be no hardship upon the teacher to be paid by subscriptions instead of tithes. The latter |