with feelings of a most painful description. But to those unconnected with the systematic management of its concerns,-to those especially who, like myself, belong to the laity, and who feel therefore that their place is to follow, not to lead, in affairs intimately connected with the church, and in the management of which the prelates of that church are more prominently concerned, it is easier to contemplate and to deplore the evils which surround us, than to devise and to apply the suitable remedies. The remembrance of scenes which have been witnessed at our monthly meetings may be felt as sufficient to deter any one from ever originating a discussion within our walls; and the publicly addressing either the prelates-who may appear, in theory at least, to guide the society-or the members of the society at large, as if they, on the other hand, were to rule the prelates-would be objectionable

Looking on those who manage public journals as idealisms,—as not representing any particular class, rank, or station in the church, I may, I conceive, by soliciting your attention, Mr. Editor, in some measure avoid the charge of violating the due discipline of the church, by addressing, on the subject of the following remarks, an improper quarter.

I am not about to discuss any matters of minor importance. There is a grave subject, from the consideration of which, it appears to me, we may not longer shrink, without an abandonment of our duty to Him whom we all profess to serve-to Him, of whose holy institution, the church, we are the sworn-the privileged-servants and members. I am speaking, Mr. Editor, of things known to all-all, at least, who have any cognizance of our society's proceedings-when I refer to the design now entertained and openly avowed by a number of our members, of effecting a total change in the character and doctrines of our publications. I am most sincere in expressing my respect for those persons themselves, by whom the intention to which I allude has been admitted. I consider them, indeed, to be mistaken; but I believe them to have a zeal for God, though it be not, in my judgment, according to knowledge. I believe them conscientiously to intend his service. But these feelings-charitable may I call them ?-toward themselves, we are not, of course, justified in extending toward their opinions. If they now publicly and fearlessly express their anticipations of the successful accomplishment of the change of which I have spoken, we, the members of the society who yet strive to hold the fulness of the truth revealed, and who dare not refuse our assent to the most sublime doctrines of scripture on the ground of their mysteriousness, are, I need not say, bound as strenuously to exert ourselves in opposing that purpose as though those by whom it was entertained were men for whom we could entertain no personal respect.

In proceeding to set forth my case,-in citing for that purpose, as the representative of the tenets of those to whom I allude, and as the indicator of their views, an evening paper, which recent events have shewn to be connected with some, at least, among our members,— I may startle many, who are aware that the number of professed admirers of that paper among us is but small, and that the great VOL. IX.-Feb. 1836.

X

majority even of those whom it specially undertakes to represent; speak of it as-to use the language of the day-ultra in its tenets, and violent in its tone. I admit, Mr. Editor, all this. But this does not prevent its being an excellent guide and index to the opinions of perhaps a large body of persons of whose average tenets it would unquestionably afford an exaggerated representation. Generally speaking, when any new doctrine acquires weight, and thus becomes formidable, that weight is not directly derived from those who go all lengths, and who adopt and profess the fulness of the error. These are for the most part but few, and intrinsically weak; but they become strong in wielding the strength of numbers who go to a certain extent along with them,-who are partly, but not altogether, convinced by their arguments, or who feel the necessity of compromising, in some measure, with their views. And yet, numerous as this last section of a party may be, it is clearly the firstthat of the few who go the farthest-which stamps the character of the whole. And to this first section, therefore, to its speeches, publications, &c., we may fairly look for the real aim and tendency of any party, even though that aim and that tendency be,-as in the nature of things they will be,-unconsciously forwarded and imperfectly understood by the most apparently influential portion of that party itself. The tone of the extreme, in such cases, is but a representation of that which the bulk of the body is tending to assume; and will assume, when its character shall have reached its further and natural development.

In this sense, then, I regard the paper in question as the representative and organ of a considerable number of our members; and consider its declarations of systematic warfare against the present system and doctrines of our society as of an importance which, did we look simply to the direct and avowed influence of that paper over our members, might appear imaginary.

The paper in question contained, on the 26th of November, an animating address to its friends-an exhortation to them to "strain every nerve to purify the books and tracts of the society; not to rest till a great change shall have taken place in them." Toward this change, it is asserted, something has been done; but, comparatively speaking, it is trifling. Such as it is, however, it is hailed by the editor as "the first streak of the rising day."

The criticisms contained in the same article, on the tract of a Right Rev. Prelate, sufficiently shew in what a main part of this great and desired change is to consist. And the true member of our Holy Church, if ignorant of our late proceedings, will be startled to learn that it is to consist in obliteration from the tracts of our society, and, by consequence, from the popular creed of our country, of those views of the doctrine of the Christian sacraments which were held by our reformers. They, we know, defined the word sacrament as follows: "An outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof."

Now, the following passage from the tract just alluded to (which

contains precisely this doctrine of the reformers,) is, in the article before us, cited with condemnation, and as an illustration of the doctrines which it is intended to banish from among us:

"Q. Why may not persons refuse to partake in the sacraments?" "A. That they may not lose that inward and spiritual grace given "unto us by God, of which the sacraments are outward and visible "signs."

And the subsequent tenour of the article makes it sufficiently apparent that the doctrine objected to in this extract is, the regarding the holy sacraments as though they were something more than what the Socinian considers them, mere inoperative signs.

The above extract shews that both the sacraments of our church are, generally speaking, viewed by the writer of the article in question in the same light. But with respect to one of them, baptism, he unfolds his sentiments at greater length. I need not, however, transcribe this; the principle is that with which I am concerned, and that is the same in both cases.

That this should be the feeling entertained respecting the sacraments is, I confess, not wonderful to me. The fashionable religion of any age must of course be tainted with that age's principal characteristics. And a leading characteristic of ours is, undoubtedly, a shrinking from mystery, coupled with a too exclusive regard for things visible and tangible. In any age, as the minds of inen grew dull, and unfit for the contemplation of heavenly mysteries, the doctrines of the sacraments are probably those which, from their sublimity and mysteriousness, would fade the first, from the enfeebled powers of spiritual vision. It is, therefore, but too natural that we should, in this our day, be the witnesses of an attempt to erase those doctrines from our ereed, and to introduce in their place a system less spiritual, and more adapted, consequently, to a gross and self-seeking people.

Source

That the attempt of which I complain, in truth, arises from this -from a want of faith in things invisible, a reluctance to admit the reality of anything which is not the object of actual observationis strikingly shewn by a subsequent passage of the article which I am quoting. The writer's point is to prove that baptism is not, according to our church's meaning, a sacrament, because the writer's senses do not assure him that it is one. The phraseology is curious:"Mark how it (i. e. baptism) works. The child is baptized; in "other words, according to Dr. it is regenerated, or made a new "creature. Let this child be examined with the child of a baptist, and, except in peculiar circumstances, no difference of nature will be manifested. They will both be found of the earth, earthy; alive to "the world, and dead to God. Still the one, according to Dr. "has been made a new creature, and the other is in a state of nature. "But the difference between the two, in the state of their hearts, their "affections, or their conduct, it is acknowledged by all, is generally not perceptible; and accordingly it follows, as an unavoidable consequence, "that the change, which is called a new creation, being born again,

66

66

* Mant.

"being raised from the dead, is a very little matter, indeed, as it regards "the change effected in the nature of the individual, whatever it may "be as it respects the relation in which he stands to the gospel.

This reasoning, it will be seen, depends for all its weight upon the assumed admission, that visible or tangible evidence is to be required for everything, that things, even of a spiritual nature, which are "not perceptible" to our imperfect faculties, are not, upon the simple evidence of Revelation, to be believed to exist.

Where men have suffered themselves to be so far deluded as to avow, and to act upon, a principle like this, it need not surprise us to find them carrying that principle to the extreme; to find them speaking of that which the church has ever esteemed the holy sacrament of baptism, in terms like these

"Our readers are quite aware that we cordially subscribe to the practice of infant baptism, and consider it most valuable in many points of view."

But the fact that the corruption with which we are threatened↑ is one adapted to the tone and spirit of the world around us, does but increase our danger-does but increase, consequently, the necessity, among all right-minded members of our society, of active, of immediate, exertion. Are we, Mr. Editor, as Christians, as members of the holy church catholic, to remain longer quiescent, while such endeavours are avowed,-while such doctrines are assailed? Are we not, if we speak not now, virtually telling the world, that the holy doctrines of the sacraments are looked upon by us as open questions,as points respecting which men may hold opinions wide as the poles from each other, without compromising, in any important degree, the orthodoxy of their Christian creed? And, if so, what a position, to the reflecting mind, is ours! To what an end are we applying the influence, the incalculably-important influence, of our venerable society!

To me, Mr. Editor, this appears a most serious subject of consideration. Remembering how carefully the holy men of old-the rulers and examples of the church in former ages-were wont to cherish, as so many jewels committed to their charge, the several truths of Revelation, I should, I confess, see with pain those who profess to look up to them, and to follow in their steps, disposed to surrender any one of those great verities-nay, even to tender the admission that one of them is unimportant-to the worldly and compromising spirit of the age. It were surely better in itself-it were surely more reverential to the memory of those who have gone before us in the administration and support of our society-to dissolve that society at once, than to suffer its now widely-extended powers and influence to be wielded for purposes directly opposite to those for which it was originally established, and for which it has for more than a century been sustained.

I hope, however, Mr. Editor, that this is not our only alternative. I hope that prompt and decisive measures may yet, with the blessing

The reader will, perhaps, remember some remarks on this very argument in a former Number of this Magazine.

It ought to be mentioned that the "Record" is now calling for some plan of revision of all the tracts.-ED.

of Heaven, avert the menaced evil, and preserve the society, as an instructress of the truth,-as an instrument of good untold to our country. What those measures should be, I do not presume to say. My situation, as I have already informed you,-is that of a follower, not of a leader, in the church. I leave, therefore, the arrangement of details to the proper quarters. But I feel, Sir, that I should not, even as a lay member of our society, have stood clear in my own sight of the neglect of a solemn duty, had I not, by thus addressing you, striven to enter my humble protest against the fearful evil which threatens us, against the degradation of our Christian society from the holy employment of diffusing a knowledge of the truth throughout our land, to that of systematically obscuring the light of Revelation, and debasing our national creed. I remain, Mr. Editor, yours, &c. LAICUS LONDINENSIS.

SOCIETY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL.

SIR,-Being deeply interested in the welfare and efficiency of the venerable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, I read, with much pleasure, an article on that subject, in your Number for December last, signed "D." "D." Still I conceive your correspondent's plan is not capable of universal application, though excellent where it can be applied. Where there are but three or four agricultural parishioners, the remaining population consisting of the lower classes, it would not answer; though in a town, where there are many well-educated masters of families, it would. Being myself the vicar of a small country parish, and having made an experiment in favour of the society, I beg to furnish your readers with the result, hoping that others may be induced to adopt a similar plan. In 1834 a meeting was holden at Northampton, for the purpose of considering how the deficiency created by the withdrawal of the Parliamentary grant of 15,000l. per annum could be made up, on which occasion it was stated that the clergy and others interested in the society should induce respectable persons, in the middle class of life, resident in their parishes, to become annual subscribers of five shillings. This sugges tion I quickly acted upon, and four of my agricultural parishioners most cheerfully responded to my appeal and became subscribers. I did not feel satisfied, however, to rest here, being convinced that, by a little extra exertion, I might effect much more. After some little consideration, I determined on preaching a sermon, the object of which should be to impress it on the minds of my people, of all ranks, that where people are (as is the case in this country) eminently blessed with the means of grace, it becomes their positive duty to evince (to the extent of their powers) their gratitude to the giver of all good, by contributing a small portion of their worldly substance for the glorious purpose of extending those blessings to others as yet imperfectly supplied with them, or entirely destitute of them. I gave notice that I should call at every house in my parish in the course of the two or three succeeding days. This I did, and I suggested one penny per