1 our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment." To the Romans, in regard to the conduct of others, his language is still more strong. "Mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them: for they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." In the Epistle to Timothy, the same course of withdrawal from such teachers is enforced by the same inspired writer. "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not unto wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing; but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth; supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself; but godliness with contentment, is great gain." "Be ye all of one mind," urges St. Peter. I might multiply quotations without number, from the writings of the Apostles, on the sin of schism, both in those who cause it, as well as in those who are guilty of it. But as the time presses, 4 I shall content myself by closing my remarks on this head with the testimony of one of the Fathers of our Church. "Nothing," said the venerable Chrysostom," so grieves the spirit of God as the causing divisions in the Church, not even the blood of martyrdom can atone for this crime." If St. Paul, when writing to Timothy, predicted of the newly established Church of Ephesus, that "the time would come when some within its pale would not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and that they should turn away their ears from the truth, and be turned into fables," s-who but must see a fulfilment of the like defection in those who come not with us "into this house of God," and whose "feet stand" not "within" the "gates" of our "Jerusalem?" That merciful God, who for wise, and to us inscrutable purposes, has permitted this state of things, best knows how it may be averted; but we have, my brethren, as ministers and hearers, as "members one of another;" 6 as parents and children; above all, as in communion with the "Church of God which Christ hath purchased with his own blood." We have a duty to perform, to stem the disaffection and want of union which so unfortunately prevail among us. We should "pray for the peace of our Jerusalem," deavouring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace;" we should pray for her; for she teaches a doctrine which equally concerns us all as fallen creatures; that there is one body and one spirit, even as "we" are called in one "hope of our calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all." Careful to maintain inviolate this doctrine, our Church, in her incomparable Litany, especially directs her children to pray, "from all false doctrine, heresy, and schism, good Lord deliver us," as evils destructive of her peace. David instructs us to pray for our " Jerusalem," and suggests for our guidance two motives, the love of our brethren, and a regard for the institutions of God, independently of the prosperity that attends those who, from love to God's service, are in communion with her. "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; they shall prosper that love thee; peace be within thy walls, and prosperity within thy palaces. For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, peace be within thee. Because of the house of the Lord our God, I will seek thy good." 8 31 Timothy, vi. 3—6. с en 112 Shall our hearts, too, not glow with that flame of affection for our brethren and companions' sakes," as kindled in his Divine breast, who was "not ashamed to call" us "brethren," and who in his intercessory prayer "for us men and for our salvation," addressed his heavenly Father in language such as never man spake? "Holy Father, keep through thine own name, those whom thou hast given me, that they may be ONE, as we are. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be ONE, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be ONE in us.' As fellow travellers through this world's wilderness; as partakers of the same fallen nature with them; and as expectants, through the same one great Mediator, of a happy immortality, our prayers likewise shall ascend to the throne of grace, for our brethren and companions' sakes; in David's words, our supplications also shall arise in behalf of that Church, our Jerusalem, which enfolds in her bosom all we love; "Peace be within her walls, and prosperity within her palaces!" Such " peace as they have which love God's law;" such prosperity to our sovereign, and all who rule under her, in Church and state, as belongs to that "nation only which righteousness exalts, and to whose people sin is a reproach." But above all, we will "seek the good of our Jerusalem, because of the house of the Lord;" for the means of grace vouchsafed to us on earth; the Sabbaths, the word of God, the sacraments, and the prayers of the congregation, and for the hopes of glory, which by faith open to our longing eyes in that " holy Jerusalem," of which the Gospel Church on earth is but a faint representative; in which heavenly Jerusalem we shall see "no temple; for the Lord God Almighty, and the Lamb are the temple of it; which has no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it; for the glory of the Lord doth lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof; in which light the Redeemer shall walk, and to which the kings of the earth shall bring their glory and honour; the gates of which city shall not be shut at all by day, for there shall be no night there." 3 CORRESPONDENCE. DANDY PARSONS. SIR, I was, like yourself, rather amused at reading a letter in your last, from "No Dandy Parson," and think your remarks such as they should have been. You are engaged in a most important work, and to my taste conduct it admirably. The public are greatly indebted to you for the excellent collection of divines, contained in your last two volumes. Were you to deprive the reverend gentlemen of their shirt collars, and twist their hair differently from what they feel disposed to turn it, they would not be likenesses; and that of Mr. Stowell would just as well represent Mr. M'Neille, as the former. If we are to have portraits, let them be in character, not caricatures, and for myself, I sincerely thank you for those received. I have been a subscriber from the first Number of the Churchman in 1835, and was never better pleased than now, though I fancy I see the same powerful hand, that once wielded that little publication. If I were allowed to give advice, it should be this:-Go on your own way, and keep the" old man and his ass" before your eyes. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, December 16, 1840. [The advive of our Correspondent has been hitherto acted upon by us, and will continue to be so, at the same time we willingly allow all the latitude we can to our Correspondents, even though we are sometimes blamed for being too liberal. At all events in this instance, the blame should be laid upon those who wear their hair in a dandified way, and not on us for copying them as they really are.-ED.] 'Heb. ii. 11. Prov. xiv. 34. 2 John xii. 11, 20, 21. 3 Psalm cxix. 165. SUSSEX BIBLE SOCIETY. SIR,-The following names afford a specimen of those who compose the Bible Society of Horsham, intelligible without further comment. We suppose the Unitarian teacher drew up the Report, from the studied concealment of our Saviour's divinity, and the studied introduction of his name as the Son of Man, page 5. The names of two Churchmen are on the Committee, indeed, but I venture to predict they will never appear there again. They knew not what they did. President, Robert Henry Hurst, Esq. M.P., radical, as radical as can be; Vice-President, the Rev. I. M. Cholmely, the only inconsistent Clergyman within a circumference of eleven miles, and the only one who could be persuaded to become a member! Treasurer, Mr. George Bax Holmes, a violent political radical Quaker! Secretaries, () Mr. T. Honeywood; (2) Mr. R. Cragg, junior; (3) Mr. T. R. Warner. Committee, Rev. R. Ashdowne, Socinian Teacher; Mr. H. Michell, liberal Churchman; Mr. W. Aldridge, Mr. W. Loxley, Mr. J. Honeywood, Independents; Mr. Pennyfeather, Mr. J. Stanford, Independent; Mr. Pollard, Quaker; Mr. D. C. Stott, Independent; Mr. J. Clarke, Rehobothite; Mr. T. Moon, in search of a religion; Mr. T. Killick, a nondescript; Rev. J. Chapman, Billingshurst, Missionary Preacher of the Gospel of certainly of J. Chapman! Yours faithfully, CATHOLICUS. ON LAY BAPTISM. SIR, So the validity or invalidity of lay baptism is again to be tried in a court of justice, in the nineteenth century! This is passing strange. Can the decision of such a court make the baptism administered by lay persons either valid or invalid? I beg leave to think not, and to express my cordial assent to what you published in page 138 of your Magazine for May 1840. Baptism is an institution entirely divine, and therefore one would naturally suppose, that the only source from which any correct information can be drawn concerning it is the Holy Scriptures. In that storehouse of divine truth, we learn that God (even from the beginning as it were) appointed ministers to perform the offices of religion, and by that act evidently excluded all others from ministering therein. He also frequently punished such as dared to interfere in those offices without having been appointed according to his command. Christ, in like manner, appointed ministers to perform the offices of religion he came to establish, and commanded those ministers, and them only, to go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and gave them a promise that he would be with them, in the execution of his work, even unto the end of the world. And he not only sent them forth to preach his Gospel, but he also gave them authority to add to their number as often as circumstances rendered it necessary. This authority they, soon after his departure, exercised. They added another to their number, and Christ was pleased to confirm the act by sending the Holy Ghost upon the person so appointed. Now for what end could all this be done, if not to exclude every person from ministering in his service who had not been appointed according to his holy command? Why all this care, if any or every unauthorised person may perform the offices of religion, and the most holy of these offices so performed still be fruitful and valid? Christ never promised to be with them who obtrude themselves into the ministry, but only with those whom he sent, and therefore we have no proof that their counterfeit acts will ever be stamped with the impress of his divine approbation. St. Paul, when speaking of the priest's office, says, “And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." And again, "How shall they preach, except they be sent ?" Now we know that the Almighty sent Aaron, his sons, and the Levites, to set forth his law to the people. We know that he appointed and sent prophets to preach in his name, and that he sent John the Baptist to preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. We know also that the same Almighty sent his Son to reveal his will and to preach it; and that his Son sent apostles to preach the Gospel in his name, and commissioned them to send others to preach it to all nations under heaven. But who sent " ELISHA (1) A political Independent, the leader of the Antichurch Dissenters. (3) An Independent, one of the clique, a hatter. BALLEY?" Verily, we know not. We believe he is one of those of whom Cranmer spake when he said, "Beware of false and privy preachers, which privily creep into cities and preach in corners, having none authority, not being called to the office. For Christ is not present with such preachers; but their word is without fruit or profit, and they do great hurt in commonwealths. Dec. 10th, 1840. HERESY-SCHISM-A POSTACY. J. G. B. 66 SIR,-Your late numbers have contained much on the subject of Heresy and Schism; a subject which cannot be too frequently brought before the minds of both Churchmen and the enemies of the Church at the present day. It strikes me, however, that much misunderstanding is often prevented, and much good accomplished, by defining the meaning of the words we use before we denounce the things they express. Many of your readers may not exactly know what Heresy and Schism mean. I am not about to give you any definition of my own; that master in Israel, Hooker (would that his sound-sober-deep thinking-holy spirit were more imbibed by the sons of the Church!) shall supply it. In Sermon the First, on Jude xvii. 21 (a sermon well calculated to expose the errors that everywhere surround us), he says, separate themselves either by heresy, schism, or apostacy. 1. If they lose the bond of faith, which then they are justly supposed to do when they frowardly oppugn any principal point of Christian doctrine, that is to separate themselves by heresy. 2. If they break the bond of unity, whereby the body of the Church is coupled and knit in one, as they do which wilfully forsake all external communion with saints in holy exercises, purely and orderly established in the Church, that is to separate themselves by schism. 3. If they willingly cast off, and utterly forsake both profession of Christ and communion with Christians, taking their leave of all religion, that is to separate themselves by apostacy." Oxford Edition, vol. ii. 600. men do This definition seems to me at once concise and clear. I hope it may be practically valuable to many of your readers. The spurious liberality of the present day keeps back many from calling things by their right names, and we have suffered for it. If the name of Heretic and Schismatic were ordinarily applied where the more undefined and undefinable term "Dissenter" is used, it might at least,lead people to inquire into the proper standing of these enemies of the truth and Church of God. I have often been at a loss to account for the anomaly that sometimes presents itself in the practice of nominal Churchmen. I mean to say, I have often been puzzled by the simple problem, how can Churchmen pray on Sunday to be delivered from "all false doctrine, heresy and schism," and on Monday give their countenance and money to help forward the very sins from which they pray for deliverance? The truth is, Mr. Editor, we want a little more intolerance in the present day; such intolerance I mean, as the Church of Ephesus was commended for, "thou hast tried them which say they are apostles and are not, and hast found them liars." Rev. ii. 2. It is too much forgotten that truth is intolerant of error. Light will not coalesce or identify with darkness. Let us, therefore, in love to the souls who are drifted about by the new fangled theories and home-spun fancies of those false apostles of dissent, remind them that in following them they must be guilty of heresy and schism; and they may be guilty of total apostacy. Yours, C. DISSENTING MATTERS. SIR,-In your number for November, you gave some striking evidences, from their own writing, of the bitterly malignant spirit which the dissenters delight to cherish against the Church. Out of the abundance of their heart they both speak and writeby their fruits ye shall know them; and it is not difficult to discover, that the prince of this world, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience, holds supreme control over the dispositions of men who could pen what you have quoted. The following extract from a dissenting publication, now lying before me, entitled "The Soldiers' and Sailors' Magazine," gives-what must be a very satisfactory statement to all true churchmen-the following account of the "progress" of these same liberal, enlightened, and charitable upholders of dissent. The article from which I am about to make an extract is thus headed-" Church Extension and Chapel Extinction." • Cranmer's Sermon on the Apostolic Succession. "In conversation," says the Editor, "with a Baptist minister, I was looking round this neighbourhood, and said, let us now examine Lambeth and the borough of Southwark, and inquire what are the scenes exhibited here of the blessing of God upon the violent proceedings of dissenters. First-Holland Chapel, Brixton. Here Dr. Styles preached. Dr. S. has been removed, and the chapel is now taken and occupied by the Church of England. Second—Vauxhall Chapel; Rev. Mr. Moor. Here I have preached many times; but alas! this also has been deserted, and is now advertised as St. Paul's Episcopal Chapel. Third-Kennington Chapel; Rev. Mr. Hunt. This is also given up by dissenters, and has now exhibited in its front, as you come from Kennington Common, Episcopal Chapel.' Fourth-London-Road Chapel; Rev. Mr. Harper. This is now belonging to the Church of England. Fifth-Verulam Chapel, near Bethlehem Hospital, built by Rev. Mr. Lacy, has been set apart for the Church by the Bishop of Winchester, and will be shortly opened for the Establishment. Besides this, the Temperance Hall, near the Elephant and Castle, was a dissenting chapel. Seventh-Lant-Street Chapel has been converted into a broker's warehouse and shop for furniture. And besides these, Dr. Rippon's large chapel, Carter Lane, Tooley Street, and Dean-Street Chapel, Tooley Street, are both pulled down for the railway, and they have no substitute in their places. I say nothing of the north side of the Thames, where I could write chapel extinction also to a great extent; but I have confined my attention to Lambeth, chiefly within a few minutes walk from this place, where the Church of England has possession of five dissenting chapels." Thus, Mr. Editor, nine meeting-houses, within a small district, have been lost to the "dissenting interest." It is pleasant to know that their power and numbers are decreasing; and one cannot but hope that the time is rapidly approaching when dissent shall be extinct—an event devoutly to be prayed for by every true Christian. I am myself acquainted with many meeting-houses in the dioceses of York, Ripon, and Chester, which have been converted into churches.—I am, Mr. Editor, yours, etc. Ebor, Dec. 5, 1840. INVESTIGATOR. ON THE ANCIENT INDEPENDENCE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. DEAR SIR,-It has occurred to me that a series of papers on the Ancient Independence of the Anglican Church, as evinced by the opposition which has been displayed from time to time against the encroachments and usurpations of the see of Rome, might prove neither entirely devoid of interest to your general readers, nor of instruction to the younger portion of them. The Romanist may object that resistance may, and often has been offered to the legitimate exercise of power.-This is true, but the question between ourselves and Rome, so far as English history is concerned, is this: has the papal chair possessed supreme ecclesiastical jurisdiction in this nation from the earliest ages? And nothing but an accumulation of historical facts can decide the matter. The first instance of such opposition which I have chosen, is the reply of the Abbot of Bangor, to the well known demands of Augustine. It is but fair, perhaps, to mention that the genuineness of the document has been called in question; but Sir Henry Spelman, who I believe first published it, says that he copied it verbatim from a MS, which he considered as ancient, and transcribed from another yet older; and Wilkins, who reprinted it, in his edition of the Councils, says that he took it from two MSS. in the Cottonian library. But the original independence of the English Church does not rest on the authenticity of this instrument, for Bede, whose testimony in such a case is beyond suspicion, asserts that the British Clergy refused subjection to Augustine, whose power they could not have disputed if they had acknowledged the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, as he claimed his authority by virtue of a commission from him. And Augustine's demand that the British Churches should be subject to him as legate of the Pope, together with the abbot's refusal on behalf of those churches, is mentioned in an ancient Norman chronicle, quoted by Spelman. I remain, dear Sir, your humble servant, Hampstead, Dec. 14, 1840. A. L., LL.B. REPLY OF THE ABBOT OF BANGOR TO AUGUSTINE WHEN HE DEMANDED SUBJECTION TO THE CHURCH OF ROME. "Be it known without doubt unto you, that all and every one of us are obedient and subject to the Church of God, and to the Pope of Rome, and to every godly Christian, |