sentiment is expressed by Dr. H. We would not, upon slight grounds, charge any man with being the advocate of such absurdity; and we are confident that our readers will not readily admit, that any respectable man, in this age, would give the sanction of his name to pretensions, as ridiculous as they are extravagant. The only difficulty, however, which we anticipate in producing testimony, is, that any other man may, with equal facility, prove, from the Doctor's own writings, that he also thinks otherwise. So crude are the theological notions of this divine, and so devoid of precision his phraseology, epithets, and metaphors dancing with all the glittering irregularity of atoms in a sun-beam, that it is no difficult task to convict him of maintaining self-contradictory opinions--an error, into which any one may fall who writes without taking pains to understand. proceed to the proof.

We

Dr. Hobart maintains that predestination is theeternal purpose of Jehovah to make some men members of the Episcopal Church; and that it secures nothing more than this to the elect.

In this proposition are involved three assertions, each of which is confidently maintained by Dr. H.

Predestination is God's eternal purpose respecting some only of mankind-the object of it is to make these persons members of the Church-that Church is exclusively the Episcopal Church.

1. It is God's eternal decree respecting some of mankind. Dr. Hobart approves, and quotes, as containing this sentiment, the 17th article; and holds. it up to view as a part of the "excellence of the Church*."

"Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose "of God, whereby, before the foundations of the "world were laid, he hath constantly decreed by his

Pages 13-15.

66

counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and "damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ "out of mankind*."

2. The end of predestination or election is to make Church-members. The words" to life,"--" deliver from curse and damnation," &c. are mere expletives, or only employed to deceive the simple. To such lofty intellects as Dr. H.'s they convey no meaning. His words aret," It maintains on a just con"struction, the only election declared in Scripture, "the election of Christians as a collective body to "the privileges of the Gospel. In like manner, all "Christians are now the chosen, the "elect" of God.

They are all by baptism taken out of the world, "and placed in God's holy Church; received into "Covenant with him." These words are sufficiently explicit. The elect of God are all who by baptism become Church-members. And we shall now see,

3. That these are, exclusively, the Episcopalians; for Dr. H. admits not the existence of any other baptism, or any other Church in covenant with God, than that which is Episcopal. He will not deny this. It appears to be that doctrine, to the support of which he has devoted his life. It is not only contained in all his writings, but it is the soul of every thing which he has published. In this discourse, "the Church" is uniformly employed as synonymous with Episcopal Church; and "Churchman"as synonymous with Episcopalian. Dr. H. quotes with approbation the following words from an English prelate: "And "therefore, to speak modestly," (reader, what modesty!)" they must needs run a very great hazard "who cut themselves off from ours, and, by consequence, from the Catholic Churcht." But we shall introduce Dr. H. in propria persona, to express himself on this subject. Adhere to the government of

* Article 17.

† Page 15.

+ Page 34.

"the Church by Bishops, Priests and Deacons, by "which government the visible Church of Christ is "known. The benefits of Church-communion, "(are) forfeited, when we separate from the priest"hood which was instituted by Christ as the essen "tial characteristic of his Church. The uniform testimony of all the apostolic and primitive wri"ters establishes the general conclusion, that who

ever was in communion with the Bishop-was in "communion with Christ; and whoever was not in "communion with the Bishop was thereby cut off "from communion with Christ; and that sacraments "not administered by the Bishop or those commis"sioned by him, were not only ineffectual to the par"ties, but, moreover, like the offerings of Korah, "provocations against the Lordt. The only mode

We

through which we can be admitted into covenant "with God; the only mode by which we can obtain "a title to those blessings and privileges which "Christ has purchased for his mystical body the "Church, is the sacrament of Baptism." might multiply quotations. But enough. No invisible Church the visible Church, the mystical body of Christ-the Episcopal, the only Church in covenant with God-Episcopal baptism, the only possible method of becoming members of Christ's mystical body--Episcopalians are the elect. Such is the "excellent" system supported by this Doctor of theology. But wherefore all these magnificent arrangements, of eternal predestination, mystical union with Christ, regeneration, &c. &c.? To prepare men for heaven? to deliver them from curse and damna

• The weible Church too is, according to Dr. Hobart, the only Church. As if resolutely determined to oppose, under every form, the religion of the "inward man," and to transform the Church of Christ into a mere worldly sanctuary," adapted to his own views of election, he declares, in the Churchman's Magazine, Vol. VII. p. 240. that the invisisible Church is no more than a Calvinistic phantasie.

Fest, & Fast, pages 59, 60.

Comp. Altar, page 189.

tion? Oh! no. Presbyterians may have respect to those things which are not seen. They and the articles of the Church of England may teach that predestination is really to eternal salvation; but Dr. H. has a much greater end in view. What is it? Why, reader, it is to be Episcopalians. This is the end of all these arrangements. You have Dr. H.'s word for it. "This brief investigation of the scriptural meaning of the terms, elected, predestinated, and "others of a similar import, was necessary to prove "that the application to Christians is compatible with "the forfeiture of the privileges which these terms "denote. The Church supposes that the "elect," "those chosen in Christ, might forfeit the everlasting felicity to which they were predestinated. She only admits, that when we fall into sin we may arise again, directly implying that we may not rise again, "and may finally perish*."

The non-elect, ignorant Presbyterians, Pagans and Savages, without ever becoming members of Christ's mystical body, without any share in the election of grace or interest in the covenant of promise; these may all be saved, if we believe this teacher; and yet the elect Episcopalians, may perish for ever; communion with the Bishop notwithstanding.

We do not pursue the argument through the other "theoretical opinions." Nor do we dissent from the conclusion which Dr. H. labours in his Anti-calvinistic zeal to establish-that "the elect," in his sense of the word, may perish for ever. If predestination and grace be understood in the Arminian sense, we have no controversy with any man upon the subject of perseverance in grace. By the grace of God wherein Christians stand, we mean quite a different thing.

66

The Ministry," and

The "Ordinances of Worship,"

Pages 16, 17. 20.

We also leave with the "Church," in all the lustre of superior "excellence :" and shall conclude our review with a remark upon the preacher's assertions respecting the Liturgy." In the Liturgy which she

enjoys, the Church justly glories, as the legacy of "the martyrs, who were her founders; who receiv "ed it, as in great part, the legacy of defenders of the faith yet more primitive." "The authority of her "Saviour, the practice of the Jewish Church, the

usage of the primitive Church, sanction, in her "judgment, the prescription of a form*." We do not blame Dr. H. nor impeach his veracity for penning this sentence. Some one may have persuaded him that this is the fact. But we shall show from faithful history, what was "the authority” which prescribed this form to the Church of England; and who the "martyred defenders of the faith yet more primitive," from whom flowed this "pure liturgy," in which the Church justly glories; and to which, the preacher ascribes celestial origin"the authority of her Saviour."

It was in the year 1533, that Henry VIII. who had previously received from the Pope the title of "Defender of the Faith," having quarrelled with his Holiness, procured an act of Parliament, declaring himself and his successors, SUPREME HEAD of the Church of Englandt. In 1545, the Popish forms of worship were first altered, and the litany appointed for the use of the Churches, by the King's authority. The act establishing the litany, was shortly afterwards followed by one, prohibiting to the Churches the the use of the English Bible. The English clergy were at this time sunk in profound ignorance. Many of them could not even read, and very few of them could preach. In the reign of Edward it was found necessary to compose homilies, for their use. An act was passed in the second year of Edward, pro

35. Hen. VIII. C. 1. † Page 26. # 26. Hen. VIII. C. 1.