is imperfect, when all dissenting forms are chargeable with the same. There is, however, in the two cases a material difference. We do not pretend to approve of every thing contained in our hymn-books, or uttered by our ministers in public prayer, knowing them to be fallible and imperfect. But the clergy solemnly pledge their unfeigned assent and consent to every thing contained in the prayer-book; while the laity are supposed to be of the same mind, and to use it with implicit confidence. And though some dissenting congregations use the liturgy, they do not profess to approve the whole, but take the liberty to omit or modify such parts as may appear exceptionable. Besides, it should be rememdered that the disuse of liturgical forms in public worship is not a dissenting principle. While most dissenting congregations consider free prayer to be more edifying than a liturgy, and more consonant with apostolic usage, they do not dissent from the church of England merely on that ground, but would equally dissent from the Scottish church in which no liturgical forms are allowed. It is, moreover, the opinion of some, that instead of confining ourselves exclusively to free prayer or to a liturgy, we should prefer a system in which the advantages of both might be combined, and their respective disadvantages avoided. Yet, few of these can adopt the church liturgy, because they think its acknowledged excellencies are more than counterbalanced by its faults. Its principal services contain many vain repetitions, are too long to be edifying, admit of no variety, and by perpetual sameness produce formality. Some of its ceremonies are puerile and useless, the relics of heathenism, calculated to generate superstition rather than true piety. Many of its forms likewise symbolize with the popish mass-book, and in their most obvious sense sanction the semi-popery of the Puseyites. From the lofty terms in which the liturgy is spoken of, the ignorant and superstitious are led to regard it as no less sacred and imperative than the Bible, being to them its authorized interpreter, and the medium of their intercourse with God. And as people in general are more strongly impressed by what is plain and palpable than by what is recondite and refined; more readily pleased with

what is flattering and delusive than by what is searching and corrective; more disposed to rest in what is sensitive and ritual than rise to what is sublime and etherial in their religious forms; we are painfully apprehensive that the influence of the prayer-book, on the spiritual state of our population, is more frequently injurious and fatal than beneficial and saving. We therefore decline its use.

But in dissenting from the established church, and rejecting its liturgy, we do not pretend that our own forms and institutions are faultless; nor do we appeal to any of our communities as perfect models of the christian church, in its primitive or its millennial glory. We are aware of many things in every church which need amendment, and excite regret. But with all these, it is our full persuasion, that the constitution and discipline of dissenting churches are more conformable to the New Testament than the state church, and more conducive to the interests of pure christianity, the freedom of our country, and the salvation of the world. And having this conviction, however groundless, we cannot but espouse the dissenting cause. We do not impeach the integrity of churchmen, but simply assert our own, and claim for our churches the acknowledgement of their conscientiousness as the disciples of Christ, and parts of the church universal. But if this be denied, and our names are cast out as evil, and branded as schismatics, we shall still find a refuge in the sanctuary of an approving conscience, and appeal from the rash verdict of erring mortals to that judgment which is according to truth.

D

CHAPTER V.

On the Aversion of High-churchmen to Protestantism.

THE sufficiency of the holy scriptures to regulate our faith and practice, and the right and duty of all men to ascertain and follow their instructions, independently of human creeds and enactments, and to worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience, without molestation or restraint, are known to be the primary and most essential principles of Protestantism. The Reformers from popery were not so much distinguished for the novelty of their doctrinal opinions, or the revival of ancient orthodoxy, or the renunciation of some fatal heresy, some speculative error, which had overspread christendom and subverted the gospel, as for reasserting the authority of the bible, and the rights and liberties of the christian church, which had long been trampled under foot by spiritual despotism. The doctrines believed and insisted upon by the leading Reformers, in Britain and on the Continent, had been for the most part acknowledged by the papal church, were embodied in her creeds and symbols, and sometimes faithfully preached and defended by her sons. They professed, indeed, to divest these of all human additions, and to exhibit them in their native simplicity, as taught in scripture. And as the doctrine of merit, so flattering, antiscriptural, and delusive, had been sanctioned by the papacy, and applied to the most pernicious uses, it was boldly denounced by Luther and his coadjutors. They strenuously maintained that the noblest virtues and most useful works of fallen and guilty beings, after conversion as well as before, must be imperfect, and incapable of meriting anything from God; so that all

dependence upon them for justification, now or at the day of judgment, must be delusive and dangerous. They therefore brought forward more prominently, and with greater earnestness, the apostolic doctrine of justification by faith in Christ, which Luther very properly styled the article of a standing or falling church, as it is the very essence and glory of the gospel. This is accordingly reckoned one of the principal doctrines of the Reformation; while, on many points, the same diversity of opinion prevailed then as at the present day, or in former ages. But the principles pre-eminently maintained by the Reformers, were liberty of conscience, and the sufficiency of the written word, as opposed to the corruptions and spiritual tyranny of the papal see.

The popes of Rome, by a series of bold, crafty, and deceptive measures, during the long night of the middle ages, had deprived the church and the world of freedom, and established over the bodies and souls of men the most complete despotism ever known or imagined. The decay of science and learning, and of all intellectual energy, which accompanied and followed the decline and fall of the Roman empire; the spread of ignorance and barbarism, which supplanted the refinement and glory of a former age; the mental torpor and supineness which gradually pervaded all classes; the puerile and grovelling superstition which everywhere usurped the place of intelligent piety, till the christianity of Europe was nothing more than baptized paganism; the paralizing influence of these evils on the public mind, and the blind credulity and abject deference to the priesthood thence arising, had prepared the way for the full developement and final domination of popery. If his holiness the pope personally lost that title; if the priests abused their vows of celibacy, or the confidence of auricular confession; if the murmurs of restless spirits, or the remonstrance of some faithful monks, were now and then heard in the provinces or at Rome; they were soon awed into silence by the universal, seen and unseen power of that mysterious impersonation, called the church. The sacredness and infallibility of this mystic queen, whom credulity invested with divine attributes, at once atoned for the faults of her ministers, exercised a potency over the

thoughts and conscience of mankind, and bound them body and soul to the papal chair as by some irresistible spell or fiendish omnipotence.

But the invention of the art of printing, the revival of learning, the enlargement of trade and commerce, the spirit of enterprize and discovery, which marked the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, began to awaken the public mind to some consciousness of its bondage, and to some exertion of its dormant powers. A few individuals, in most parts of Europe, began to feel the irksomeness of the papal yoke, and claimed a right to burst forth from their imprisonment, and to breathe the air of freedom. The Waldenses, in the valleys of Piedmont, and in the south of France, made a noble stand against the tyranny of Rome, and restored thousands and tens of thousands to christian light and liberty. But the greater part of them were at last crushed and destroyed by the cruelties of the Inquisition, or by military crusades urged on by papal fanaticism and fury, which doomed those unoffending and faithful people to indiscriminate and ferocious slaughter. In England, however, appeared that apostolic man, John Wickliffe, justly styled the morning star of the reformation; and under royal patronage, he entered a faithful protest against the abominations and tyranny of Rome, and propagated the doctrines of scripture with eminent success. But by the martyrdom of Lord Cobham and other followers of Wickliffe, their efforts were unhappily suppressed, and the papal authority re-established. In the meantime also, Jerome and Huss having suffered at Constance, their disciples in Bohemia and other parts of Europe were scattered or disheartened.

But when Luther and his coadjutors, espousing the same cause, boldly denounced the tyranny and corruptions of the papal church, withdrew from her communion, committed the pope's decretals to the flames, and formed other churches upon the principles of protestantism, divine Providence favoured the enterprize with signal and permanent success. In former times the civil powers, almost without exception, had been the willing slaves of Rome, and, in obedience to her mandates, had committed many atrocious deeds. But several enlightened rulers