:

virtually to overthrow the theological statements concerning the Deity which occur in our creeds and confessions. He will not allow us to say more than that there is a mystery in the Scripture notices of God, not to put into words what that mystery is. What that mystery is it matters not, according to him; as all man wants is an object of worship, for he is a religious being, and his reason tells him that polytheism is absurd. "Doubtless there is a mystery," says Dr. H., in those "sacred facts of Divine Providence which we comprehensively denote by the doctrine of a Trinity in Unity;" but "there is also a mystery attached to the subject which is not a mystery of God." "One fact" alone "is clear, that there is some extraordinary communication concerning the Divine Being in the Scriptural notices of God which have called forth the curiosity of thinking men in all ages." Such is the sole idea which Dr. Hampden would give us of the Godhead as if we were bid to offer "ignorant worship" to an "unknown God." If this is the sole idea, what are we to think of the language which our church adopts when she declares that "the Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin of her substance, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and manhood, were joined together in one person, whereof is one Christ, very God and very man?” This indeed is to speak as if the Son of God were indeed come, and had given us an understanding that we may know him that is true: as if, when the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, we had indeed beheld the glory of the only-begotten of the Father, the "express image" of Deity. With Dr. Hampden, however, it is all scholastic theory for "who can pretend," he says, "to that exactness of thought on the subject on which our technical language is based ?" But if Dr. Hampden leave us with a vague and dim idea of the Godhead, he leaves us equally in the dark respecting the manhood of our blessed Lord. He speaks of it as the scholastic "theory of the Incarnation," that our Lord is described as assuming to his Divinity, not any human being in particular, but manhood,-human nature itself." In short, instead of the full and lucid doctrine of our second article, we are left with these scriptural "facts" (which "form part of the great history of mankind, and therefore cannot be denied without involving ourselves in universal scepticism,") that "there can be no rational doubt that man is in a degraded, disadvantageous conditionthat Jesus Christ came into the world, by the mercy of God, to produce a restoration of man-that he brought life and immortality to light-that he died on the cross for our sins, and rose again for our justification." "Upon these facts," Dr. Hampden declares "infinite theories may be raised; but these theories leave the facts where they were; and there is enough in these facts to warm and comfort the heart."

But, in the next place, what was this "restoration of man " which "Jesus Christ came into the world to produce?"-in what sense is he said to have "died on the cross for our sins"?" to reconcile his Father unto us," says our church, "and to be a sacrifice, not only for

original guilt, but also for actual sins of men." "Not so," says Dr. Hampden, "Christ is said to be our atonement, not that we may attribute to God any change of purpose towards man by what Christ has done, but that we may know that we have passed from death unto life, and that our own hearts may not condemn us." It is not, then, God's anger against sin, but man's unhappiness and dissatisfaction with himself, that makes some declaration of peace necessary. Man is offended with himself, and his own conscience needs something to appease it! "It is of little purpose to urge the natural placability of the Divine Being, his mercy, his willingness to receive the penitent. "God, no doubt, is abundantly placable, merciful, and forgiving. Still the fact remains. The offender is guilty: his crime may be forgiven, but his criminality is upon him. The remorse which he feels, the wounds of his conscience, are no fallacious things. He is sensible of them even whilst the gospel tells him, Thy sins be forgiven thee;''Go, and sin no more.' The heart seeks for reparation and satisfaction; its longings are, that its sins may be no more remembered, that the characters in which it is written may be blotted out. Hence the congeniality to its feelings of the notion of atonement. It is no speculative thought which suggests the theory: speculation rather prompts to the rejection of it. But the fact is, that we cannot be at peace without some consciousness of atonement made. The word atonement, in its true, practical sense, expresses this indisputable fact. Objections may hold against the explanations of the term; they are irrelevant to the thing itself denoted by the term. Turn over the records of human crime; and, whether under the forms of superstition or the enactments of civil government, the fact itself constantly emerges to the view. All concur in shewing that, whilst God is gracious and merciful, repenting him of evil, the human heart is inexorable against itself. It may hope-tremblingly hope-that God may forgive it, but it cannot forgive itself." Now I doubt not many a reader will ask whether all this is not very true and pious? It is pious according to the piety of the day; nay, it is (with some exceptions) true, but it is not the whole truth. This is the age of philosophical systems. The gospel, it seems, must be made philosophically adapted to the wants of human nature; and, when it has been shewn visibly to satisfy these wants, what is over and above must be pared away, as the rough stone according to the design of the architect. Let me ask, then, where do we learn the "natural placability," and "mercy," and "forgiveness" of God? Where do we learn that his wrath does not visit the sinner?-that he needs no atonement? Where do we learn that man has naturally a morbid consciousness of sin? Remorse and self-abhorrence doubtless he feels, as Dr. Hampden describes: he longs for innocence-he wishes he had never fallen into moral degradation - his pride is incurably wounded. The gospel offers forgiveness; but this, as Dr. Hampden tells us, is not enough to satisfy him. The notion of atonement is the only remedy for his wounded peace: the "fact" expressed in "the word atonement in its true, practical sense."

But, further, what, after all, is this "fact" of which Dr. Hampden speaks? That man is now really innocent, and may look upon him

self with satisfaction? But how? What is the "parallel fact" with which "the scripture revelation has met this material and invincible difficulty?" Dr. Hampden will tell us it is the exhibition of Christ to us which soothes the mind, whatever becomes of the ulterior question of an expiation in the sight of God. "It has said, we have no hope in ourselves; that, looking to ourselves, we cannot expect happiness; and, at the same time, has fixed our attention to a Holy One who did no sin, whose perfect righteousness it has connected with our unrighteousness, and whose strength it has brought to the evil of our weakness. Thus Christ is emphatically said to be our atonement." But I ask with what emphasis? What is there in this exhibition to soothe us? What fact has the guilty heart, after all, to set against the fact of its own guiltiness? We, indeed, should say, the doctrine of God having given his only begotten Son in our flesh; but not so Dr. Hampden. He says, merely the fact of a Jesus Christ (whoever he is) having lived on earth a holy life, and exhibited a "perfect righteousness." But what is that to us? Shall not his holiness and righteousness rather condemn by the comparison our unholiness and unrighteousness? And anything more than this is rejected by Dr. H. The idea that he assumed "our human nature itself" has been already rejected as a scholastic theory! What does it avail that our attention has been fixed to him? It has been fixed already to other righteous and holy men, and we have turned to our own pollution with the deeper self-loathing and despair. It is painful indeed thus to speak or to think of Him who was lifted up from the earth that he might draw all men unto him. It is an imperative duty for charity to "unstable souls" to sift to the bottom these vague, yet spacious, generalities to which a "voluntary humility" has brought an apparently pious author. But, it seems, scripture has, in some way, "connected the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ with our unrighteousness." There are texts, indeed, ordinarily quoted from scripture to shew in what way; but "texts, as texts, prove nothing; texts establish divine truths only as indices to real facts in the history of Providence!"

Thus, Dr. H.-I have already stated the "real fact" in the history of Providence that does truly meet the "fact" of our guiltiness. In the words of the church, the "One Christ, very God and very man, truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father unto us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men." This may be called "Realism." We may be told that the idea of "satisfaction" is derived from the scholastic theory of justice; that it is a mere "philosophy of expiation," the "bane" of which was, that "it depressed the power of man too low;" that "it was no invigoration of the mind, no cheering of the heart to masculine exertion in working out the great work of salvation;" that "it checked the aspirings of the heart and of the intellect." This is, alas! Sir, but a small specimen of the application of the principles of interpretation which are now afloat to the great doctrines of Christianity; nay, but a small specimen from this author. I have confined myself to a single article of our apostolical church-" ex uno disce omnes." "Little children, keep yourselves from idols;" and, when the "great mystery of godliness, God manifest in the flesh," is

spoken lightly of, remember that there is also "a mystery of iniquity," the end of which is the revelation of "that man of sin, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God and that is worshipped, so that he, as god, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is god;" and, when we find "a scheme of human agency," "the true secret of our power," and "the benevolent exertion of God for our good," where before was "the redemption of the world by the death and passion of our Saviour Christ, both God and man, who did humble himself even to the death upon the cross for us, miserable sinners, who lay in darkness and the shadow of death, that he might make us the children of God, and exalt us to everlasting life," it is time for us to awake out of sleep, and beware lest any man spoil us "through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." I am, Sir,

0.

ON THE TWENTY-NINTH CANON, AND CHURCH DISCIPLINE

IN GENERAL.

MY DEAR I am unable to throw any additional light upon the subject on which "A London Rector," in the November number, asks for information; and think it possible that the prohibition in question had its origin as he supposes. But be that as it may, the regulation does afford an additional security, and adds to the solemnity of an office, which there seems too general a tendency to treat lightly.

My object, however, in writing is not to express an opinion upon the expediency, or otherwise, of retaining the prohibition, (should our church, by God's blessing, ever regain her liberty, and be allowed to regulate her own discipline,) but to ask the "London Rector," what he would gain by the withdrawal of it, so long as the other part of the canon, which prohibits all who are not communicants from being sponsors, remains unaltered? And, if any regard is to be paid to discipline, or to the reason of the case, none, I suppose, will advocate the abolition of this part of the canon on principle, however much, in the extreme laxity of the times, the clergy, in practice, may have ceased to observe it.

I am anxious also to give to your readers the result of ten years' experience in strictly observing both parts of the canon, being able to assure them that I find no greater difficulty (nor so great) in procuring canonical sponsors than my predecessors did in obtaining uncanonical

"If a man will not let me pray to and praise my Saviour, he destroys the exercise of my faith altogether; but I am no way injured by his praying to him as a glorified man, while I pray to him as God." Such are actually the words of Dr. Arnold in his postscript on church reform! Is not this to make the church the temple of religious liberty, where the worshipper is the god, whose rights and honour are to be jealously guarded by a watchful priesthood? I must not be interfered with; the Son of God may be treated as a mere man, but " I am in no way injured" by that! [The theory of Dr. Hampden here noticed is a simple revival of that of Abelard. It will be found in St. Bernard's long letter to Innocent II. on Abelard's heresies, made out just in Dr. Hampden's way. Dr. H.'s doctrine is therefore scholastic.-ED.]

ones; at least, if I may judge from the circumstance that the parish clerk is not called upon to stand so often now as he was before. I never, but in one instance, found much objection raised to my being "so particular;" but, on the contrary, for the most part, the people have readily acquiesced in the reason of the arrangement-all the respectable part are pleased; and what with this, and the celebration of baptism always after the second lesson, in the face of the people, I have reason to hope and believe that a far greater value is set upon both sacraments, and a greater reverence paid to them than there was previously. The number of communicants has been trebled.

Let me also suggest to the younger part of your readers, especially, the advantage of keeping a register of sponsors, who, if they be such as the church contemplates, will be found of great service in assisting to guide the young sheep, and in throwing in a word of advice or remonstrance both to the children and their parents in support of the pastor's admonitions.

This, with a parochial register of communicants, and a parochial or diocesan one for those who are admitted to confirmation, will be indispensable to the re-establishment of discipline, and, if generally adopted, would materially pave the way for it, and put us in a condition for resuming it whenever it shall seem good to the Chief Pastor, under God's guidance, to set their hand to such a work.

Nor will the difficulty of accomplishing the restoration of discipline, if it be set about with straightforward and open earnestness, as well as calm discretion, be found, in reality and practice, what it seems to be in imagination and theory. It is not the way of human nature in religious, any more than in civil and military affairs, to respect a man for failing to maintain his authority. Let us be sure that we have a reason, and be ready to make it known, if required, for every step of discipline which is put in force, and we shall find our hands strengthened, instead of weakened, by that attempt. The sincere Christians will rejoice and applaud; the insincere will be abashed and silenced, and all will respect. ALPHA.

OFFICE OF PRIVATE BAPTISM.

MR. EDITOR,-Allow me to preface the subject of my communication with observing that the Office of the "Ministration of Private Baptism" in our books of Common Prayer, is somewhat erroneously so called. It is true, it commences with instructing us, in the rubric, what prayers are to be used in private baptism in houses, and adds the usual prayer of Thanksgiving. The rubric then proceeds" And let them not doubt, but that the child so baptized is lawfully and sufficiently baptized; and ought not to be baptized again. Yet nevertheless, if the child which is after this sort baptized, do afterwards live, it is expedient that it be brought into the church, to the intent that. the congregation may be certified of the true form of baptism, by him privately before used: In which case he shall say thus:" From this place the service is no longer a service of private baptism: it is