nicated ipso facto, and not restored but only by the Archbishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of this his wicked errors." There is not a sect of Dissenters in the kingdom by whom the above assertion is not made; yet all are entitled to burial according to the forms of the established church.

4." Whoever shall hereafter affirm, that the form of God's worship in the Church of England, established by law, and contained in the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, is a corrupt superstition, or unlawful worship of God, or containeth anything in it that is repugnant to the scriptures, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored, but by the Bishop of the place, or Archbishop, after his repentance and public revocation of such his wicked errors."

body of the last. But the Baptist may die before he has been dipped the case, indeed, occurs daily. May the clergyman refuse to say of him, that he "rests in sure and certain hope of the resurrection of eternal life," that "God hath taken unto himself the soul of his dear brother ?" &c. &c. He may refuse, no doubt, if he be so disposed, but the certain reward of his refusal will be, not the thanks of the Bishops and the praise of his brethren, but the penalty of a premunire. What must an inquiring age like the present think of all this? But we have not yet done with the burial-service, as it connects itself with the canons and other formularies of the English Church. Let our readers bear in mind, that one of the penalties of excommunication is the denial of Christian burial to the body of the excommunicated person. Let them farther bear in mind, that every clergyman of the English Church takes a solemn oath, at his ordination, that he will act in obedience to the laws or canons of the Church, into whose ministry he has entered. Let them keep this in mind, and then read the following extracts from the book of canons, enacted by convocation, sanctioned by the King, and still in force. should apologise for the length of our extracts, did we not feel that the matter ought to be looked at connectedly or not at all.

We

2. "Whoever shall hereafter affirm, that the King's Majesty has not the same authority in causes ecclesiastical, that the godly kings had amongst the Jews and Christian Emperors of the primitive Church, or impeach any part of his regal supremacy in the said causes restored to the crown, and by the laws of this realm therein established, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored but only by the Archbishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of those his wicked errors." Is there a Roman Catholic in the empire who does not deny all this and may a Clergyman of the Church of England refuse to read over him the burial-service? The laws of the land say no.

3." Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, that the Church of England, by law established under the King's Majesty is not a true and apostolic Church, teaching and maintaining the doctrine of the apostles, let him be excommuVOL. XIX.

5. "Whoever shall hereafter affirm, that any of the nine-and-thirty articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both provinces, and the whole Clergy, in the conyocation holden at London, in the year of our Lord one thousand five hundred and sixtytwo, for avoiding diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion, are in any part superstitious or erroneous, or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe unto, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored, but only by the Archbishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of such his wicked errors."

6. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, that the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, by law established, are wicked, anti-Christian, or superstitious, or such as, being commanded by lawful authority, men who are zealously and godly affected may not with any good conscience approve them, use them, or, as occasion requireth, subscribe unto them, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored until he repent, and publicly revoke such his wicked errors."

7. "Whoever shall hereafter affirm, that the government of the Church of England under his Majesty, by Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, Archdeacons, and the rest that bear office in the same, is anti-Christian and repugnant to the word of God, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and so continue until he repent, and publicly revoke such his wicked errors." F

8. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm or teach, that the form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, containeth anything in it that is repugnant to the word of God, or that they who are made Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, in that form, are not lawfully made, nor ought to be accounted, either by themselves or others, to be truly either Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, until they have some other calling to those divine offices, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, not to be restored until he repent and publicly revoke such his wicked errors.

9. "Whoever shall hereafter separate themselves from the communion of saints, as it is approved by the Apostles' rules in the Church of England, and combine themselves together in a new brotherhood, accounting the Christians who are conformable to the doctrine, government, rites, and ceremonies of the Church of England, to be profane and unmeet for them to join with in Christian profession, let them be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored, but by the Archbishop, after their repentance, and public revocation of such their wicked errors."

10. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, that such ministers as refuse to subscribe to the form and manner of God's worship in the Church of England, prescribed in the CommunionBook, and their adherents, may truly take unto them the name of another church, not established by law, and dare presume to publish it, that this their pretended church hath of long time groaned under the burthen of certain grievances imposed upon it or by the members thereof before-mentioned, by the Church of England, and the orders and constitutions therein by law established, let them be excommunicated, and not restored, until they repent and publicly revoke such their wicked errors."

11. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm or maintain, that there are within this realm other meetings, assemblies, or congregations of the King's born subjects, than such as by the laws of this land are held and allowed, which may rightly challenge to themselves the name of true and lawful churches; let him be excommunicated, and not restored but by the Archbishop, after

his repentance and public revocation of such his wicked errors."

12. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, that it is lawful for any sort of ministers and lay-persons, or of either of them, to join together and make rules, orders, or constitutions in causes ecclesiastical, without the King's authority, and shall submit themselves to be ruled and governed by them, let them be excommunicated ipso facto, and not be restored until they repent, and publicly revoke those their wicked and anabaptistical errors."

Such are eleven out of the twelve first or leading canons of the English Church. We have not transcribed them without great pain to ourselves, and we venture to say that their perusal will cause great pain to our readers, at least to that portion of them who, like ourselves, wish well to the religion of their fathers. It will be seen, that they are so framed as to place under the ban of excommunication every sect and denomination of persons except such as continue within the pale of the established Church; for an excommunication ipso facto needs not a formal pronunciation to render it effective. Of this Archbishop Wake, in his "Appeal in behalf of the King's Supremacy," has distinctly assured us, where it is plainly declared, that "there is no need, in this case, of any admonition, as where the judge is to give sentence; but every one is to take notice of the law at his peril, and to see that he be not overtaken by it. And, secondly, that there is no need of any sentence to be pronounced which the canon itself hath passed, and which is, by that means, already promulged upon every one as soon as he comes within the obligation of it. In other cases, a man may do things worthy of censure, and yet behave himself so warily as to escape the punishment of the Church, for want of legal evidence to convict him. But excommunicatio canonis, ligat etiam occulta delicta. Where the canon gives sentence, there is no escaping; but the conscience of every man becomes obliged by it, as soon as ever he is sensible that he has done that which was forbidden, under the pain of such an excommunication."

The Church of England has been severely censured for ever giving her sanction to enactments so dogmatical

or uncharitable. It is not on this ground that we are disposed to take the matter up. No doubt, the canons breathe a spirit very little in accordance with the liberal temper of the present times; but of the liberality of the present times we are no admirers. In nine cases out of ten, it expends itself in mere words; and in the tenth case it runs wild into licentiousness. The matter to which we are desirous of drawing the attention of the public is the positive contrariety-the downright hostility-between the ecclesiastical and common law of the land. The Church has declared all sectaries and dissenters, whether Popish or Protestant, excommunicate, and accordingly unfit to receive Christian burial. The ministers of the Church swear to pay attention to that order. Then comes the common law, which declares, that unless they disregard the rules of their body, and violate their own oaths, they shall be liable to heavy penalties. God help poor Church in a struggle so unequal !

All this is very bad; but the subject of which we are now going to treat is a thousand degrees worse. At the period when the struggle between the Reformed and Popish Churches was at its height, or rather just after the former had gained the ascendancy in these realms, it occurred to the heads of the nation, that the best means of preserving that ascendancy would be to exclude from all share in the government, and indeed from all public and responsible offices, such persons as were not willing to conform to the religion established by law. In its principle the resolution was a wise one. It is sheer folly to talk of the natural right of every man to enjoy places of temporal power and influence, without respect being had to his religious opinions. There is no separating a man's religious from his political principles; and he who owns a foreign master in spiritual affairs, will find it a hard matter to persuade us that he denies to his spiritual master the right of interference in affairs temporal. The soul and the body are not more closely linked together than a man's religious and political prejudices. Of the resolution itself, then, we think very highly; but of the test appliedof the method adopted for determining whether or not the applicant for honour came within the privileged

class, no serious person can think without horror.

Every man, without exception, who wished to qualify, as it is termed, for the situation of a member of Parliament, a magistrate, or other responsible trust, was originally required to receive the sacrament in a parish church, and at the hands of an established minister, at least twice within the six months preceding his appointment. Among members of Parliament this proceeding is now abolished, an act of indemnity passing every session

in plain language, the test-law being every session repealed; but we are mistaken if the force of that repeal extend to county magistrates. Be this, however, as it may, any person, no matter what his character may be, who desires to hold a public situation, may present himself before the altar, and demand the sacrament. By canon 26, however, it is enacted, and most properly enacted, that "no minister shall in anywise admit to the receiving of the holy communion any of his cure or flock which he openly knows to live in sin notorious, without repentance." Nay, so far does the canon go, that even persons having a quarrel with other persons are excluded, till after such difference shall have been composed. Can the clergymen obey the canon? We fear not. much afraid, that he who should refuse to comply with the request of the applicant, applying for the political purpose above referred to, would find no shelter in the scandalous behaviour of him. whom he had rejected. By such rejection the state might lose an able officer, and what is the respectability of the Church when put in competition with such a misfortune? Nothing at all. The terrors of a premunire hang over the priest's head, and to avoid these he must set the canon at defiance.

We are

We are the last persons in the world who would desire to stir up animosity between the civil and ecclesiastical governments of the country; we should be extremely sorry to see the two branches of the constitution separated, or the Church made entirely independent of the state. Long may the King of these Islands be "in all causes, and over all persons, ecclesiastical as well as temporal, supreme." But the state of utter slavery into which the Church has fallen cannot be kept se

cret from the eyes of the world; and we take it upon us to affirm, that not all the faults of the clergy, their carelessness their non-residence-their lukewarmness and even their dissensions with one another,-not all these things combined, had they been ten times greater than they have been, have wrought the Church one-half the mischief which has been wrought by her too ready compliance with the aggressions of her ally. The alliance, indeed, of which Warburton wrote, has long ceased to exist; and in its room has come the connexion between master and servant.

In common with the whole nation, we have rejoiced in the increased and increasing zeal manifested by the bishops; in their wise and just regulations touching the due performance of divine service in the churches; and in the vigilance with which they seem determined to watch over the conduct of their clergy. We have seen, too, with great satisfaction, that one, at least, has resolved to subject every candidate for holy orders to an examination, not only on points of divinity, but on the much neglected, but most necessary, qualification of reading and delivery. In these days, it is past dispute, that a good voice, and an impressive manner, tend a thousand times more to draw people together, than the most profound knowledge of polemics, and the most rigid orthodoxy of principle. We have observed, likewise, in the Charges of two of our bishops, the Bishops of Gloucester and Chester, several excellent hints, of which it is our intention, on some future occasion, to speak more at large. All these matters we have seen with pleasure, because they come upon us as indications of a reviving spirit of zeal, from which much good may be expected ultimately to arise. But of this we are quite convinced, that their Lordships attribute more to petty abuses than they merit, and that they have not gone to the root of the evil. They seem to think that our parish churches are deserted, and the meeting-houses filled, chiefly because the parochial clergy have been neglectful of their duty. We know better. Thirty or forty years ago, it might be said that within the Church of England there were many careless stewards; at present, we confidently assert that there are few indeed. Yet thirty or

forty years ago, Dissent bore not, by one-fifth part, the proportion which it now bears to the Establishment. Dissent has kept pace with the increasing exertions of the clergy: Whence arises this ? We are at no loss for an

answer.

This is, or at least it is pleased to call itself, an enlightened age. All men read now-a-days- some even think-and many pretend to reason. A dissenting minister who should attack the Church through the sides of her individual clergy, would hardly be listened to with patience. We ourselves know one case, in which a respectable minister of the Established Church was accused of illiberality, and otherwise vilified by his dissenting rival; and what was the consequence? That many members of the congregation which listened to the philippic deserted the meeting, because they would not hear an individual pulled to pieces from the pulpit. Our readers may take our word for it, that a very different and a more successful course is pursued by the propagators of Dissent, than to discourse and dwell upon the errors of the Established clergy. They strike at principles and things, and not at men. They ask their people, whether Christ be or be not the only head of his Church? whether he have, or have not, left with it, rather than with the civil magistrate, the power of determining all points which refer to matters purely spiritual? whether it be lawful in the sight of God to prostitute the holy sacrament, by making it the pledge of a man's political sentiments! with many other questions of the same import. They ask, moreover, whether it be not blasphemy in one man to declare, that he absolves another from his sins? whether it be not the next thing to blasphemy to assert, that the thief cut down from the gallows, the derider of his Maker and his Redeemer, and the pious Christian, all die in equally "sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life?" To these questions they add the power of ridicule and the force of contrast: "What kind of a church is that," they say, "which first declares us to be cut off as rotten members from the communion of saints; and yet, because the civil magistrate enjoins it, pronounces us dear brethren at our graves? What can

we think of a society, which in one formulary declares baptism to be 'generally necessary to salvation,' and in another pronounces the reverse? and of what respect is a spiritual body worthy, which thunders forth its anathemas and excommunications, knowing all the while, that it possesses no power to enforce the penalties incur red by its sentence?" These, we do assure the Heads of the Church, are the arguments employed by the Dissenters; and what can the clergy urge against them? Absolutely nothing. The mouths of the clergy are shut, and so Dissent increases.

We mistake the matter much, if there be not on the Episcopal bench, at the present moment, more than one enlightened prelate who feels the truth of all that we have been saying. To name names is, we are aware, invidious; but " one we would select from that proud throng," because he is, as he deserves to be, one of the most popular and influential bishops whom modern times have seen. We call upon Dr Bloomfield to come forward at the present crisis, and to fight the Church's battles in a field where she stands even more in need of his aid than against the Roman Catholics. Against Catholicism a whole host of able champions are enrolled. We have the Chancellor and Lord Liverpool among the Peers; Mr Peel and many others in the Commons; whilst out of doors, not the members of the Church only, but all classes of Dissenters, Socinians alone excepted, are with us. But who is there to stand up for the Church? Who, except ourselves, has ventured to speak the truth, or to declare the reason

why the Church has lost ground, and the Dissenters gained it? No one. Timidity, or a worse principle, has hitherto kept men silent: We trust it shall not be always so.

What, then, do we desire? In the first place, to see the Convocation once more established in a state of as perfect independence as may be compatible with the political welfare of the empire. Secondly, to behold all the canons, formularies, creeds, and ceremonies of the Church, subjected to a close scrutiny, and made suitable to the times in which we live. Is it not a standing reproach against the Church, that she continues to this hour under the dominion of the spirit of the dark ages? Are we not told, on all hands, that the temper of the Church is to persecute those without her pale, and that she is prevented from indulging that humour, only by the humane interference of the civil government? It is in vain for us to answer, that the canons quoted a few pages ago have all become obsolete; and that they are virtually abrogated, or, at least, that the feelings which dictated their compilation have changed with the change of times. Prejudiced men either do not, or will not, believe us; and hence a thousand things are alleged concerning us, of which we know ourselves to be innocent, but in the matter of which we find it utterly impossible to prove our innocence, for our laws are quoted against us; and what can we say in reply to them!

We have not yet half exhausted our subject; but fearful lest we exhaust the patience of any of our readers, we lay it down till next month.