Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

"suppressio veri," heightened by the more grievous sin, the "fictio falsi"? Now, unhappily, I do know of too many examples (and my readers would soon bring many more) of such want of candour; and is not this that follows a fair sample of the majority? Dissenters of various sects meet together to consult upon the establishment of a school. Its great principle is to be the absence of sectarian principle; and as Baptists and Unitarians combine, it would be difficult to define their real principle otherwise than "the absence of all Christian principle altogether." But a circular must be issued in the neighbour. hood; some influential names must grace its front, and an impressive statement must make the reader feel the crying want of instruction around about him. And the process of sending this circular is simple. The views concerning education (avowed to the full by the church herself) are laid down as truths peculiar to the scheme; the gross population of the place, including ALL RANKS AND CLASSES, is given in round numbers, and always to the very full; the number of children taught in the church schools is then stated, not as the result of legitimate inquiry, but of guess-work alone, and is stated below the mark; and the inference naturally is, that if so very small a portion of so very large a mass are educated, a school is required, and a school must be had.

Let not my readers imagine that I am overcharging the picture ; every one of these points can be verified. Now, assuredly it is not fair to give the gross population as the number of people requiring such education. Candour would give the number of children in the place whose parents are unable or scarcely able to pay for their education. Assuredly, then, appeal to the population returns would present an over-statement and ensure precise accuracy. Assuredly, access to the church school registers (access never denied by a clergyman) would yield that correct information concerning their numbers which the lover of truth would wish to peruse. I do not say that the result would be the refutation of the inference attempted to be drawn ; but I do say that a fair statement being thus given, fair conclusions would he arrived at by the unprejudiced man. And what else or less should the professor of truth covet? But if these mis-statements are put forth knowingly (and I must call it knowingly when the means of accuracy are at hand), it is a lamentable thing to be compelled to ask, How can men who do these things assume to themselves the exclusive possession of sound doctrines and a saving faith? How can this spirit be the spirit of truth? How can a cause so supported and promoted be blazoned forth as pre-eminently, if not solely, sound and holy and pure?

[ocr errors]

We will leave this matter, however, for another, scarcely less significant. Not a very long time since, an effort was made by dissenters to give returns, as well for the church as for dissent; and the object in so doing was to shew what accommodation is provided in the churches, what average congregations assemble in them, and what is the number of communicants in each church. Now this seems only a fair and legitimate subject for inquiry. But how were the returns made? Upon hearsay or imagination; and in almost every case

very far below the mark. I myself know one case which affords a specimen of this sort of return. A church could accommodate between eleven and twelve hundred: it was returned as capable of containing about eight hundred. The congregation assembling within its walls averages in the morning about seven hundred; in the evening the church is generally quite full: it was returned as being at the outside about six hundred. The communicants at the same place average sixty at the monthly sacraments, and at the festivals vary between a hundredand-thirty and a hundred-and-fifty: the return simply said that the communicants amounted to forty. And the cool assertion was made from this that the communicants alone were to be regarded as churchmen,—the others being placed as neutrals at the very highest. It is enough to remark that the real accommodation afforded by a church is easily ascertained by measurement; that the real numbers of a congregation can always be well known; and that by inspection of the accounts kept by the clergy, the precise number of attendants at each sacrament would have been seen, and the average thereby fairly drawn. Is this candour then? Is it even a faint attempt to avoid misrepresentation? Is it not to allow party feeling to rise to a height that puts Christian truth and charity to the blush ?*

At the same time may we not press upon those churchmen who neglect to partake of the sacrament the reflection that they thus lay themselves open to be reckoned by the adversaries of the church among those who are not churchmen at all? Sad as it is to see any professing Christians using such weapons against the church, is it not much more sad and saddening for the churchman to feel that the weapons have been shaped by his own cunning, and forged by his own arm?

I will return to the candour of dissenters on a future occasion.
F. E. T.

DISSENTERS SPEAKING OUT.

MR. EDITOR,-The times in which we live are such as loudly call for the immediate and united exertions of all the sincere friends of our venerable and apostolic church. The enemies of the established church are, at this moment, concentrating all their energies to effect its complete overthrow. The ambitious dissenter is anticipating civil elevations by means of her depression, and aggrandizement, through the sharing of her spoils; the scoffer and infidel the removal of the only barrier which opposes the universal spread of immorality, and the triumphs of a sanguinary infidelity. It is a melancholy fact, and a most appalling reflection, that the tendency of an aspiring and virulent sectarianism is, to blind the understanding to the most obvious truths, while it perverts the judgment, hurrying on its victims in a course which must inevitably involve them in ruin.

Materials are preparing for exposing the famous statement in the Congregational Magazine as to the 203 parishes.-ED.

These remarks have been prompted by reading an article in the Eclectic. Review for July, and my object in this communication is, to solicit your attention and that of your readers to a few extracts from this most bitter and revolutionary article. It should be borne in mind, that the Eclectic Review is the most respectable periodical circulating among dissenters, and, therefore, certainly conveys the real sentiments and feelings of the most influential body among them,-viz., the independents.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The first extract is from the "primary" address of the Congregational Union. These unionists are anxious to have it believed that the whole, affair is purely of a religious nature; but this attempt · to cover their real designs will delude no one, no, not even the Eclectic reviewer himself:

This great controversy is, with congregational Christians, purely and only an affair of religion. If, in its progress, or in any of its applications, it brings them into collision with any political institutions, interests, or powers, that is with them a circumstance altogether undesigned and incidental. They pursue a straight, and undeviating course in contending for the Christianity of the New Testament. The obstacles they meet with in their course were placed where they are by other hands, not) by theirs. But truth is sacred, most of all the truth as it is in Jesus. The duty for contending for it, in all its applications, is paramount to every other interest and obligation; we seek not to contend with any party, either in church or state, but we must not shun the conflict when truth cannot otherwise triumph and reign."

[ocr errors]

Observe, Mr. Editor, that these humble, meek, and pious followers of the lowly Saviour, (who taught that tribute was to be paid to Caesar, and wrought a miracle to furnish himself with the means of doing so, and thus gave an example, in his own conduct, of submission to the political institutions of his country,) seem conscious that, in the progress of their religious career, they may possibly come in contact with certain political institutions, interests, and powers; but, as these institutions "were placed" in their course by other hands,' they must be removed at all events, for "truth cannot otherwise triumph and reign." Now, the "obstacles" that are to be put out of the way are the monarchy, the House of Lords, and that trifling "obstacle," the British constitution. The House of Commons, it appears, may stand, being no "obstacle" in their way, but rather favourable to the advancement of the pure Christianity of the New Testament. Whatever glosses these men may attempt to put upon their real sentiments and fixed purposes, the naked truth is, that they perceive, in order to accomplish their designs, the constitution must be destroyed. The next extract will bring them out more fully to view, and lay open to the observations of all the grand object at which they aim 277 vi

"The Commons of England have taken the field, and a few campaigns will decide the question which we say, once more, lies not between churchmen and dissenters, but between those interested in a tory church monopoly, with its sinecures and proxycures, and the religious people of England."

This base piece of disingenuousness to shift off the dire consequences that must follow the overthrow of the national altar upon the shoulders of the House of Commons and the religious people VOL. VII.-Feb. 1835.

Y

of England, is worthy of dissenters.

Let them dream not for a

moment that any discerning and honest mind is to be thus deluded: the consequences of such an event, should it ever be effected, (which God forbid!) be they what they may, (and frightful they must be,) must rest upon their own heads.

They have joined with the infidel scoffer in railing against the established church, they have nerved the arm of the ungodly by their unrelenting attacks upon the established religion of the country, and, by all the influence they could command, have urged on the impious assault; and should they unhappily succeed in the desperate course, they will justly provoke the curse of a distracted and dismembered empire.

The next extract marks the unmixed hatred to the established church which these friends of religious liberty are careful to cherish in their own bosoms, and their anxiety to inspire with the same exalted feelings the people of England:

"The church has always been, as a corporation, at war with the spirit of the age, at variance with the Commons of England, and hostile to the liberties of the people."

Can anything more grossly false than this be conceived? This attempt to rouse the British people against the church, as their natural enemy, for purposes from which every loyal and Christian mind must revolt with indignation, is at once a most atrocious assault upon the sacred cause of piety and religious liberty, equalled only by its perfect destitution of truth, and of every feature that marks the character of the devout and upright Christian. My last extract will exhibit these men in a position from which it is the duty of every loyal and truly Christian subject to use his utmost efforts to dislodge them without delay :

"The Reform Bill was a revolution-the abolition of the Sacramental Test was a revolution—the abolition of the penal laws in Ireland was a revolution-Catholic Emancipation was a revolution-the church of Scotland has just undergone a revolution-every reformation is a revolution, and those who say we will have no revolution, mean we will have no reformation!"

Aware that the national altar and throne must stand or fall together, and conscious that the people of England are not prepared for such a change, which can only be effected by a revolution, they are attempting to prepare the minds of the people for such a catastrophe by familiarizing the public mind with the word revolution, making it not only a harmless but a beneficial thing, much to be desired. Now, mark the mischievous play upon the word revolution; there is more than many readers, at first sight, may apprehend couched in this word as here used. I have inquired of dissenters how a separation between church and state can be accomplished without a civil revolution, but I have never received a satisfactory answer to my question. They are convinced, that while the British constitution remains unimpaired in all its essential principles, they can never carry their point in subverting the church. Their fanaticism blinds them to the dangerous, iniquitous, and ruinous course they are running. Thus we find they do not scruple to declare that,

if in their course they meet with political institutions, interests, and powers, they must not shun the conflict, when truth cannot otherwise triumph and reign! Can the friends of piety, order, loyalty, and the constitution, any longer tamely allow these wanton and outrageous attacks to be made upon all that is dear to the heart of a Christian and an Englishman? Let not the dissenters say that wrong is done them in the determination we have formed in resolutely defending our rights, both as Englishmen and Christians, even to the death. They are the aggressors, and we must now either sit tamely by and see our dearest privileges wrested from us by the grasping hand of a selfish, heartless, and despotic democracy, or rise to the conflict like men, conscious of the paramount importance of our cause, which, by the grace of God, we are resolved to defend even with our lives. It is not impossible that we may soon discover more moderation, and more guarded and cautious conduct on the part of our adversaries, but let not this reduce us into a belief that the spirit and the designs of our opponents are at all changed. They begin to see that they have gone too far for the present temper of the times, and as more conservative measures may be expected to be pursued by the government, (and a check thus put upon the revolutionary movements which have been so rapidly advancing,) it will doubtless be deemed prudent by these persons to profess their veneration for the institutions of their country, and that they have no wish that the established church of the country should be destroyed. Whatever line of tactics they may pursue, the friends of the church will only have themselves to blame if the church fall. If, by any crafty and specious measures, which the enemies of the church may see it necessary to adopt, from the change which has taken place in the politics of the country, church men should be reduced into an opinion that dissent has undergone the least change in its virulent hostility to the church, and be thus thrown off their guard, and become less watchful and determined in adopting measures for its security, then will their conduct be that of infatuation, and their ruin the result of supineness. While, however, we are resolved, from a paramount sense of duty to our God and our country, to rise and arm ourselves in the defence of our venerable and apostolic church, the source of our nation's prosperity and glory, let us shew that we can contend "earnestly and firmly for the faith once delivered to the saints," in the full exercise of the most complete Christian charity.

It is a most remarkable and encouraging circumstance that, while the church has been furiously assaulted on all sides, her pious and talented sons are rising up in every direction, and, that intelligence and piety are occupying her pulpits, and, with unusual effect, are proclaiming the glad tidings of salvation to a dying world.

Thus is God with us; and let us be active, humble, and prayerful, and we have nothing to fear, and may adopt, without presumption, the language of the psalmist, as applicable to our church-"God is in the midst of her, she shall not be moved; God shall help her, and that right early. The Lord of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge.' OBSERVATOR.

« AnteriorContinuar »