word with power to many a heart. He has, through these and other means, in a great measure peculiar to our own age, directed the healing waters of the sanctuary into unwonted channels: and they are now found flowing, though still with far too scanty a stream, into nearly every department of society. The sanctifying effects of this are observable among the many who crowd our populous towns and villages, and were otherwise uncared for; and they are also observable in many of the dwellings of the wealthy and the families of the great. They have found their way even into seats of power, and may be seen mingling with the deliberations of Parliament. But the working of this sacred leaven is not to be measured by these partial and transient indications. Religion is a secret and operative principle, dwelling in the heart and manifesting itself in the closet, and coveting neither the gaudy attire of fashion nor the publicity of parliamentary pleading. Yet it is a cause of encouragement, that God has thus shewn himself to be present with us, and to be preparing a people to shew forth his glory. He, who sees the end from the beginning, does nothing in vain; and for what purpose, we may humbly presume to inquire, can He thus have been raising up and training a people to His glory, at the present crisis, but that they may stand in the breach, serving Him, and, if possible, saving their sinful but beloved country.

But we are not left, even here, to sum up the amount of our encouragement. The same cause which has opened a way of influence to some whose influence we have just cause for dreading, has given an influence to others in whose power we have a safeguard. Those classes of the community to which political power is especially given, no doubt contains many whose influence every Christian will dread and deprecate; but it is especially among those very classes, that is, the middle ranks of society, neither the highest nor the lowest, that God has been especially preparing a people to serve him. The middle classes are perhaps, more than any, within the reach both of reason and of scriptural influence. These then are the doings of the Lord; let us take encouragement from them, and let us learn from them our duty.

But we have encouragement brought us even nearer than this. When we recollect the circumstances which led to the appointment of the late National Fast, and the general manner of its observance, we may well learn not to despise the day of small things. The appointment too of a Committee of the House of Commons, to investigate the state of the observance of the Lord's-day, and the laws affecting it, and the important evidence thus brought to light, and the Report upon it, are farther causes of thankfulness. But these and similar events are grounds of encouragement to active duty, not to an indolent looking on and waiting for the result. Onward! ought to be the Christian's watchword at the present crisis, as assuredly it is that of the opposers of Divine truth.

But what, it may still be said, should every Christian do. In the first place, whatever be his station, he should feel that he has in regard to it a solemn duty to perform; for unless he keep in mind his responsibility, and that he is called upon to act by God himself, his efforts will be feeble, partial, and inefficient. Again, in his closet, in his family, in social prayer, and in the house of God, let him breathe forth the desires of his soul on behalf of his country, that God would be pleased to dwell in the midst of her, and do her good: and if, while thus praying, the fire of devotion burn within him, he needs not fear that the energies of Christian endeavour will be called for in vain. Further, let each Christian stir up his fellow to the same exercise, and the same concern; assured that in so doing he is serving the cause of God, and benefiting his country. Let him be active in disseminating right views of national privilege, and in stirring men up

to the discharge of political duty, on Christian principles; and let him set the example in his own person. The Christian legislator should thus act; the Christian magistrate should thus act; the Christian elector should thus act, each remembering that he is accountable to God for the exercise of every talent committed to his trust. In the present crisis, the friends of religion and good order require to be watchful and persevering in their endeavours thus to serve God. They need to be observant of the measures submitted from time to time to the legislature; and, when circumstances require, calmly and respectfully, but firmly and perseveringly, to lay their representations before both houses of Parliament, and, if need be, to carry them to the foot of the throne; feeling that this obligation is due to God and to their country. And finally, let them continue to seek, and to acknowledge God in every national event, a duty in which we may learn much from the pious example of our forefathers, and from the unerring testimony of the living God."

Daily desiring the blessing of God on these lands, where His Name has been for so many generations hallowed, and on those who are solicitous for the welfare of our country and the good of Zion.

I am, &c.

M.

ANOMALIES OF DISSENT.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

MUCH has been said in your pages upon church reform, and I perfectly concur with yourself and your correspondents as to its necessity; but it occurs to me, that the incessant discussion of this topic in our newspapers and magazines, in pamphlets and upon hustings, even though nothing should be affirmed but what is true, leads to a false impression, as if not only the Church of England needed a reformation of abuses, but as if all were purity without its walls and all corruption within them. It is not sufficiently considered that much of what is charged upon the administration of the Established Church, is but the effect of that frailty and sinfulness of our common nature from which no ecclesiastical communion is exempt; and that if the imperfections of any existing dissenting body had been sought out with equal scrutiny, it would perhaps, in proportion to its numbers and influence, have exhibited a spectacle that would have relieved the Established Church of that exclusive odium which has been of late attached to it in popular opinion. It should never be forgotten that though perfection is the standard to which we should aspire, it is not attainable in a corrupt world; and that hence, in estimating the character of any ecclesiastical communion, due allowance should be made for contingent evils; not indeed with a view to palliate them, or refusing to amend them; quite the contrary; but in order that while we amend one error we may not rush upon the opposite, or suppose that because one scheme proves defective the contrary is of necessity right.

I am inclined to fear that the cause of Dissent has gained much by some of the late discussions respecting the Church of England, even when conducted by its warmest friends. We hear it on every side echoed and reechoed, "Well, if this be the character of the national church, there is no class of seceders whose system is not to be preferred before it." But even if it were true that the facts are not exaggerated, would the inference follow ? And might we not, in avoiding ills we know, flee to others yet worse which we know not of? That the Church of England requires reform is no proof that Dissent requires it not, or that we should improve our condition by exchanging Episcopacy for Congregationalism.

It would be an ungracious task to bring together the many unpleasant

stories which are afloat respecting the actual working of the dissenting system; but it might not be useless to shew from the writings of eminent Dissenters themselves its anomalies; in order that those who think they discover weak points in the bulwarks of our national Zion may not hastily throw themselves into a citadel far less impregnable. Permit me, with a view to this object, to quote a few passages from a recent pamphlet, by the author who, under the signature of "Fiat Justitia," addressed Mr. Baptist Noel on the subject of the Bible Society. The writer is a most strenuous opposer of the Established Church; but when he comes to speak of the dissenting system, we soon discover that all is not perfection or consistency among our brethren. Thus he says:

"I question whether Congregationalists themselves, though impregnable in my opinion on the point of dissent from the Establishment, are either defensible or consistent in many of the parts and practices of their own system. It is the fault of the public advocates of all parties to push their principles and their theories too far. In listening to some of your brethren, when delivering an introductory discourse at the ordination of a minister, in which they have explained, by their theory, the nature and constitution of a Christian church, I have said to myself, How different, in many respects, you and your churches are, and how differently you really act, from the picture drawn and the principles defended.' Two or three classes of inconsistencies strike me at this moment; I will give a specimen or two under each. If time permitted, or if I were writing a dissertation, I dare say I could enlarge the list, and certainly I should pay more attention to the dress and disposition of my remarks.

"We are always directed, you know, in 'introductory discourses,' to the model, the New-Testament model. The principle of the Church of England, as episcopal and as established, and its customs or abuses in relation to pluralities, patronage, &c. are often pointedly exposed. The entire separation of the Church from the State; the impropriety of any aid or favour from government; the independence of each distinct Christian society; popular election of ministers; careful attention in every thing to primitive precedent, are advanced and maintained, and often with distinguished ability. Up to a certain point, both the opposition and the advocacy are undeniably just; but I have often thought that care should be taken, lest, when the man has done theorizing in the pulpit, and has come down to actual practice, he does not admit in principle, though not in name or degree, the very things against which his theory was directed.

"Now as to every thing being inadmissible but what is prescribed by the model, and every thing binding that it includes: is a college in the model? Are Highbury and Homerton provided for by primitive precedent? The first churches had a plurality of bishops; have yours? The Lord's Supper every Lord's-day, and mutual exhortation by the brethren, if able or disposed, are customs generally admitted to be primitive; where are they now? Ministers are represented by the theory, agreeably to original custom, as called to the office out of the church which they are chosen to serve; are yours so called? I have known, indeed, a young man go from a college, preach on probation, and be approved; then be dismissed from his original church, and become a member of that to which he had preached; and then be called or chosen, as a member of it, to the pastoral office over the rest of his brethren: all this I have known done to get fact and theory to coincide, that that might be attended to which was supposed to be the original custom, and which, as such, was further supposed to have the character of law. I admire the motive in the conduct described; but is it possible that the parties could impose upon themselves the belief that they attained their object, or that there was the least similarity

between their cumbrous contrivancies and the primitive proceeding which they attempted to imitate? All these, and similar discrepancies between us and what the New Testament describes; our doing in some cases too little, and in others too much; these, I know, are completely defensible, on the ground of general principles and allowable expediency; they are defensible only upon this ground; and therefore it really does not become us to talk so much about the beauty of the model, and the sin of expediency, when in practice we depart from the one and act upon the other.

"Again; with respect to the principle, that government is to do nothing for the church but to let it alone, and the jealousy of its interference in the minutest particular, let us see how the matter stands in fact. It seems to be admitted that a Christian government, as such-not as so many individuals, but as a government-may, and ought, to do something in relation to the Sabbath, that is, in relation to religion. The appointment of a Fastday, by the king in council, was on a recent occasion, not only submitted to by the great body of Dissenters, but was adopted in preference to one fixed by themselves. There were two or three ministers who objected to the change, and who acted on their objections: and this conduct was by far the most consistent with theoretical independency. Again; your ministers do not refuse every government or political indulgence; they accept of exemption from military duty, and from serving on inquests and juries; and they are right: it is of immense advantage that, free from such secular calls, they may give themselves entirely to the word of God and to prayer:' but where is the theory? strictly keeping to that, what business has the government to know them as ministers, or as any thing but Englishmen ? Laws, it seems then, may be made to confer special immunities upon ecclesiastics. Your chapels, too, under certain conditions, are exempt from taxation; nay, there is a parliamentary grant, formerly denominated the 'Regium Donum,' annually voted for the augmentation of the small livings of Dissenting ministers; this, though strongly objected to by some, is accepted by others; it is dispensed according to the individual discretion, I believe, of certain ministerial trustees, who have each a part at their disposal; and, I doubt not, it carries gladness to the habitation and the heart of many a worthy man. As to some other matters that strike me, the shortest way to describe them will be to quote a case in which most of them meet. I take that of a minister (whom I have in my mind at the moment) supported by a county-mission: he is appointed by that body he serves three churches—that is, in three distinct villages he has a small number of communicants, who form in each place a separate church; he is pastor of all; he acts as such in the government of each society; and he preaches at each place once every Sabbath. Now, let us see what we have here. Here is patronage or foreign appointment, perhaps lay-appointment, as the committee of the mission might consist at the time more of laymen than of ministers; here is episcopal superintendence and control, for, to the minister, the members of the said committee are in the place of an ecclesiastical superior; to them he is accountable, and by them he can be removed here is plurality, three churches under one bishop; or, if they are considered as one church, (which, in the case I am contemplating, they are not,) then we have a church consisting of persons who do not meet together in one place. Here is single duty; here is endowment,' in the form of an annual grant from a fund not raised by the people who are instructed; that is, there is such extra assistance afforded the minister, in addition to what is raised by the voluntary principle,-assistance so important, that if it were withdrawn, the man must remove, and the people perish. This instance shews that, however the theory may demand popular election to the pastoral office, support exclusively by voluntary offer

ings, the freedom of churches and ministers from foreign control, yet, there are cases in which the advocates of these principles depart from them all; yes, and their departure is sanctified by the circumstance, that a benevolent and a holy expediency demands it; that thus they can secure a sum of good which an adherence to system would sacrifice or prevent."

"Fiat Justitia" strengthens his own views by introducing the paper of "an intelligent and distinguished friend, who feels deeply attached to the cause of the Dissenters, and who has done much for it." A portion of this paper is so appropriate to the present question, that it may be well to introduce it. The writer says:

"Dissenters have been too much engrossed with their perpetual contest with the Church, to take an enlarged view of the adaptation of their scheme of polity to society at large and any person who should intimate a suspicion of the soundness of their principles, is considered at once as harbouring the treasonable intention of deserting to the enemy. The primary principles upon which Dissent is founded, I regard as incontrovertible. They are: 1. The sufficiency and exclusive authority of the Scriptures. 2. The consequent right of private judgment, as opposed to human authority in matters of faith. 3. Entire liberty of conscience, as regards the interference of the State. In reference to these three cardinal points, Dissent is but consistent Protestantism. But the scheme of Dissenting Polity, or Congregationalism, involves not merely these grand principles, but a certain set of opinions, which may perhaps be thus enumerated. "1. The purely democratic form of church government; the popular election of the pastor; the equality of all pastors; and the independence of every congregation.

"2. The existence of two officers only in the churches; the bishop, or pastor, and the deacons, who have charge of the temporal concerns.

"3. The distinction between the church, on the one hand, as a separate society or fellowship, consisting of persons willing to be subject to its rules and discipline; and, on the other, the bulk of the 'hearers' or worshippers composing the congregation; also, the restriction of the Lord's Supper to the select church.

"4. The system of voluntary contribution, and, generally speaking, the dependence of the minister for support upon such contributions.

5. Substantially, the doctrines of the Westminster Confession as the basis of communion; to which may be added, the exclusion of liturgical forms.

"Waving the question, how far these secondary principles (as I would term them, in contradistinction to the primary principles of Protestantism) are Scriptural or not, they cannot claim to be regarded as incontrovertible; and a Dissenter may be suffered to entertain doubts as to their absolute correctness, without forfeiting his character as a sound Protestant. As opposed to diocesan Episcopacy, they may be the more correct and safer scheme of the two, without being absolutely in accordance with the Scriptural model. The points to which I wish to draw attention, as affording matter for dispassionate inquiry are these.

"1. Can the churches of the Congregational Dissenters, as consisting of small select associations of pious persons, agreeing in sentiment among themselves, but existing in the midst of general society, more or less Christian, and comprising a large number of persons equally pious, but of differing sentiments; can such private voluntary associations be considered as bearing any analogy to the primitive Christian societies, which existed in the midst of heathenism, and included all the faithful in the place? Admitting the principle of voluntary association to be common to the primitive Churches and to modern Dissenting Churches, are not the circumCHRIST. OBSERV. No. 373.

E