to the doctrine;(m) and that there will always arise men speaking perverse things, to draw disciples

Christians throughout the universe, all conspiring to obey him as their head; though we see Christ investing him, and him only, with the keys, the emblems of authority, for the government of that Church of which he was declared to be the foundation upon earth, and over which he was appointed pastor, to feed both lambs and sheep, without limitation or restriction, in every portion of the wide world:-Seeing all this, dost thou not perceive it to be safe to swear that no successor of Peter hath, or ought to have any pre-eminence, jurisdiction, or authority over that part of the flock of Christ dwelling within these privileged realms? Does not thy bible tell thee that the king of England is the only lawful head of the Church, the only true protector and defender of the faith? that on him has at length devolved the office of Peter? that he is the inheritor of his credentials? that he and his Parliament are to regulate your faith, not, as heretofore, the bishops of the Christian world, whom the Holy Ghost had appointed to rule the Church of God? that their ministry is done, their authority annulled, their lineage extinct?" Such is the language of the church of England biblicals to those, who, like us, have fallen upon that interpretation of the sacred writings which makes us think as our ancestors thought before us, and as the great majority of Christians have always thought since those writings were first penned. If, on the other hand, as too frequently happens, the perverse searcher and knavish expounder should fancy that he discovers (m) Rom. xvi. 17.

away after them;") erring and driving into error.()

among the tropes and figures, and parables, and mystical expressions of the sacred volume, either the gross absurdities of the Ranters, the Jumpers, the Southcotians, or the more sober, but perhaps not less dangerous and erroneous tenets of the Quakers, the Wesleyans, the Anabaptists, or of any of those hundred sects, those protesters against Protestants, those dissenters from the dissenting church of England, which swarm around the parent-rebel of them all,-then again does she raise her voice, and exert her authority; then again, till lately, at least, did she call on the secular arm to protect her from such abominations, to expel such foolish interpretations from the mind, by that luminous expounder, and acute reasoner, civil disqualification. Then does she exclaim, "Does not your bible tell you that schism is a crime of the blackest dye; but that seceding from the Church of Rome, the primitive, parent church, which had subsisted for 1500 years, and before our name and nation was heard of, and separating yourselves from the acknowledged centre of unity, that that is no schism? does it not explain, in the clearest terms, that the guilt of schism is alone incurred in separating from the mother of all Christian Churches, the Church of Henry VIII., of Edward VI., of Elizabeth, of the Parliament of England?—This is the schism of the Bible, this is rebellion against the word of Scripture, this is treason before God and man." Such is the consistent reasoning of the bible distributors of the Church of England.

(n) Acts xx. 30.

(o) 2 Tim. iii. 13.-See Dr. Doyle's Defence, &c. p. 88.

With such facilities on the one hand, and with such difficulties and dangers on the other, is it not folly, is it not madness, to trust a Church which bears the insignia of error upon her forehead, and owns herself incapable of protecting us? If we disown her authority, which her principles well warrant us to do, and have recourse to private interpretation, do we not immediately fall into presumption, by searching, in the infirmity and inconstancy of own minds, for the discovery of that firm and steadfast faith, without which we shall be condemned? Is it not incomparably safer to rely upon the united wisdom, talents, virtue, and experience of the good and great in every age; upon a representative assembly of the universal Church, under the sacred guidance of the Holy Spirit? It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us,(P) are the remarkable and emphatic words used by the first council of the Church, in promulgating its decisions. Protestants, however, say that the Holy Ghost is no longer our guide; but, as if to silence their doubts, and compel their submission, our Saviour himself declares the contrary; he says, his Paraclete shall abide with his Church for ever, and lead her into all truth;(9) and, in consequence, he declares us no better than heathens or publicans, if we refuse to hear her. Still, Pro

(P) Acts xv. 28. (1) St. John xiv. 16,26. (St. Matt. xviii. 17.

testants say: We owe no obedience to the Church; let us follow the guidance of our own fancy, for the Almighty will not require our allegiance, where he has given no power to rule. But, as if again to confound their presumption, and to give a clear confirmation of his doctrine, our Saviour inspires his apostles thus to admonish and instruct the faithful: Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops, to rule the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. Such are the words of Scripture, and yet Protestants maintain that the Church has no authority; that the Hierarchy has no divine commission to rule the Church of Christ.

Again I repeat, that I cannot conform to Protestantism, because I cannot trust so important a concern as my religious creed, to a church which must necessarily be fickle and inconstant in her doctrine, and may, perhaps, altogether cease to exist. Because, as such, she can never lead me to any fixed and certain faith; since, as she "claims the twofold privilege of changing her tenets at will, and of being infallible at every change,"")

($) Acts xx. 28.

(t)" The right of private judgment, as allowed by the Established Church, was a sort of an apology for her own revolt, and a sacrifice made to the Baal of puritanism;

she can never answer the end proposed by the immutable God of Truth-that of pointing out his ways, and expounding his doctrine. During the period in which she is wedded to errors, she is evidently incapable of being the teacher of truth; and even in the season of her greatest purity, her liability to error must always disqualify her for that office for though she may teach truth to-day, we have no assurance that she will continue to do so to-morrow; and, under such circumstances, who shall pretend to say when truth fails, and falsehood begins,-who shall tell us when she is possessed with the spirit of error, and when with the spirit of Truth?")

but it is opposed to the letter and spirit of the church creed, as well as incompatible with the gospel, which foretels of heresies and schisms; for if the right of private judgment, in opposition to the declared decision of the Church, exist, it is utterly impossible that heresy should be damnable, or schism a crime. Every church, then, that excommunicates authors of heresy, that is, men who, exercising their right of private judgment, choose their own religion; or which casts out among the heathen the maintainers of conventicles, (all which the Established Church does,) is guilty, if guilt it be, of denying the right of private judgment, and of exercising, thereby, a dominion over conscience. Whether the church, doing so, claim infallibility or not, is nothing to the purpose; her judgment, and the effects of it to the excommunicated persons, are the same."-Reply to Dr. Magee.

(") St. John iv. 6.