character of a bishop? The spiritual character of a bishop, and his particular local jurisdiction, have been, at different times and under different circumstances, separated from each other, without the consequent destruction of either. A man, at least as to all the spiritual part of his character, the only part that our argument calls on us now to consider, may be a true bishop; whether he has or has not any particular district, over which he is authorised to preside. Such, in a theological sense, I conceive the nonjuring bishops were, and Popish bishops in this country actually are. The latter being also what is called titular bishops, may, if you please, be an absurdity; but certainly it does not invalidate their episcopal function, regarded as their personal office; although, when considered in their connexion with this country, it furnishes them with no warrant, as constitutional bishops, for the discharge of it. It should at the same time be remembered, Sir, that to claim, and to prove a right to the thing claimed, are two very different things: nor can you argue so illogically as to infer, that because several different claims to the same bishopric are set up, therefore no true claim can be established.

To proceed: It has been observed, that to judge from what you and I have written on the subject of the Church, it should appear, that we have two very different subjects in view. My book professes to treat of the Church, as a visible society, subject to human government. Your definitions of the Church chiefly belong to it as an invisible society. Our premises, therefore, being different, it is not to be

expected that our conclusions should age. is one definition, however, to which we jou scribe; namely, that which in page 2 vot me taken from the nineteenth Article; wherE WE TH "that the visible Church of Christ is a tion of faithful people, in which the pure wim of God is preached, and the sacraments in aus ministered, according to Christ's ordinates.” catechism teaches, that these sacrabens 14 qu rally necessary to salvation. How then it my je asked, can these so necessary sacraments be my administered, but by persons authorised to niminister them, by a commission regularly deve from their Divine Institutor? It might indest be supposed, that the history of Philip the deser (who, though full of the Holy Ghost, after having converted and baptised the inhabitants of Samera, left their confirmation, as an act which excretal the limits of his office, to be performed by those superior ministers to whom it belonged;) compared with the cases of Nadab and Abihu,* of Kerah, Dathan, and Abiram,† of Saul,‡ of Uzza,] and of the sons of Sceva,§ should prevent every man from presuming to act as a minister of God, without being lawfully ordained thereto; and if so ordained, from exceeding the limits of his office.

I pass on to the quotation, made in page 27, from Lord Bacon, with the view of giving the reader what you call his lordship's "definitive description of the true Church." "There is (says his Lordship) an universal Catholic Church of God, dis+ Numbers xvi. § Acts xix.

*Levit. x.

1 Sam. xiii.

1 Chron. xiii.

persed over the face of the earth, which is Christ's spouse, and Christ's body; being gathered of the fathers of the whole world, of the Church of the Jews, of the spirits of the faithful dissolved, and of the spirits of the faithful militant, and of the names yet to be born, which are already written in the book of life." These are certainly Lord Bacon's words: but to put the reader in possession of his Lordship's full sentiments upon the general subject of the Church, what immediately follows should have been added. "That there is also a visible Church, distinguished by the outward works of God's covenant, and the receiving of the holy doctrine, with the use of the mysteries of God, and the invocation and sanctification of his holy name. That there is also a holy succession in the prophets of the New Testament, and fathers of the Church, from the time of the Apostles and Disciples, which saw our Saviour in the flesh, unto the consummation of the work of the ministry; which persons are called from God by gift, or inward anointing, and the vocation of God, followed by an outward calling, and ordination of the Church."

From the whole of the foregoing extract taken together, his Lordship appears to have entertained a distinct idea upon the subject of the Church, both as an invisible and visible society: you have made use of his Lordship's authority, so far as it applies to the invisible Church, leaving the reader to conclude, that such was the only idea entertained by him on this subject. This is indeed not * Lord Bacon's Confession of Faith.

marantían, ME s vhat nav be called ur Et ́s the truth. ut not the chole truth.

that fullstence, vien ugnt ta le gren a The court of efters

In our second etter t s observed, that I have mistaken fr. Verforce in his idea about wIHE The obiection made in IV JOOK

ve not so muen o Mr. Wilberforce's dea, of what Bath & for on hat head fatter avse here was in reality no difference of opinion between 19, int to his manner of describing that idea, as calculated. ne judice, to lead some readers 30 4 conclusion, which Mr. Wilberforce himself couid not mean should be drawn from his premises. To Mr. Witherforce's mode of expressing himself on this delicate wbject, in some parts of his valuable publication, I still object; as calculated to promote what I give that gentleman credit for not wishing to promote, the cause of enthusiasm, rather than that of Evangelical wrath: at the same time I feel myself bound to do justice to some other parts of his work, which seem purposely designed to guard against mich abuse. But you go on to say, that Mr. Wilberforce, when speaking of fuith, (as weil as the Church of England) always means, that “it is the first radical grace of the Holy Spirit, which takes place in the heart of a sinner, and which brings with it pardon, reconciliation, and repentance, and never can exist, without producing the radical fruits of holiness."* The Church of England no where, that I know of, speaks the language that you make her and Mr. Wilberforce speak, in the passage before us. She no where describes faith * Page 45.

(abstractedly taken) as never existing, without producing the Evangelical fruits of holiness. In our Liturgy, repentance, faith, and obedience, are represented as distinct things; and consequently not so necessarily connected, that one may not exist, in some degree, without the other. In our Church catechism, repentance and faith are separately described; the one implying "the forsaking of sin; the other, the stedfast belief of the promises of God made in the sacrament of baptism." But to these preliminaries of man's salvation, if they may be so called, must be also added the fruits of obedience to the holy will and commandments of God; which Christians are enabled to bring forth by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, on the proper use of the means of grace appointed for that purpose. In page 44, you have brought two quotations, one from St. Augustine, the other from Bishop Beveridge, to prove in your sense, what I venture to say those great men never meant should be proved from them, namely, that good works are the effect of justification, and not the qualification for it. It is unnecessary to detain you on this beaten ground, because, I trust, it has already been made appear, that good works are to be seen in both lights; as the effect of justification, and the qualification for it; as both following after justification in one sense, and going before it in another. Good works follow after man's first justification, because man can do no good works, before he is brought acquainted with the principle, upon which alone good works can be done: in that sense, they may be considered as an effect, proceeding from