preached justification by faith instead of works; the majority of the clergy denouncing the doctrine of justification by faith as hostile to the interests of morality. In this shape, the dispute came down to the present century. Our clergy had nearly lost sight of the true Protestant Scriptural doctrine... The practice was not then common of using the language of Scripture and our own Articles, but of appropriating the justification, predicted in them, to baptism. . . The clergy very generally disclaimed altogether the doctrine of justification by faith, and earnestly [?] exhorted men to justify themselves by good living. They in fact adopted the Papists' second justification, losing sight of the first." Vol. 38, p. 496. Toplady, of the established Church, bears even stronger testimony of the general decline of religion in his times, or just before the American Revolution. "Where shall we stop? We have already forsook the good old paths trod by Christ and the Apostles: paths in which our Reformers also trod, our martyrs, our bishops, our universities, and the whole of this Protestant, i. e. of this once Calvinistic nation. Our Liturgy, our Articles and our Homilies, it is true, still keep possession of our Church walls: but we pray, we subscribe, we assent one way; we believe, we preach, we write another. In the desk, we are verbal Calvinists; but no sooner do we ascend a few steps above the desk, [into the pulpit] than we forget the grave character in which we appeared below, and tag the performance with a few minutes' entertainment compiled from the fragments bequeathed to us by Pelagius and Arminius; not to say by Arius, Socinus, and others still worse than they..... IS THERE A SINGLE HERESY, THAT EVER ANNOYED THE CHRISTIAN WORLD, WHICH HAS NOT ITS PRESENT PARTIZANS AMONG THOSE WHO PROFESS CONFORMITY TO THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND?" p. 275. Let us hear the testimony of the inmortal Wilberforce: "Towards the close of the last century [i. e. after the restoration and before 1700] the divines of the established church professed to make it their chief object, to inculcate the moral and practical precepts of Christianity, which they conceived before to have been too much neglected; but without sufficiently maintaining, often even without justly laying, the grand foundation of a sinner's acceptance with God, or pointing out how the practical precepts of Christianity grow out of her peculiar doctrines, and are inseparably connected with them. By this fatal error, the very genius and essential nature of Christianity was imperceptibly changed. She no longer retained her peculiar characters, or produced that appropriate frame of spirit by which her followers had been characterized. Facilis descensus. The example thus set was followed during the present century. Thus the peculiar doctrines of Christianity went more and more out of sight; and as might naturally have been expected, the moral system itself also, being robbed of that which should have supported it with life and nutriment, began to wither and decay. At length, in our own days [1797] these peculiar doctrines have almost altogether vanished from the view. Even in the greater number of our sermons, scarcely any traces of them are to be found. Pract. Chr., chap. 6. These testimonies are sufficiently strong and humiliating in regard to the practical variations from the Articles and Liturgy, which so generally prevailed throughout the Church. But we ought not to omit mentioning the petition of nearly two hundred and fifty of the The reader is requested to note these singular variations. First, Calvinism prevailed under Elizabeth and Edward VI. Secondly, High-Church Arminianism prevailed under Charles I and II. Thirdly, latitudinarian formalism, (one of the worst shades of Arminianism) prevailed under George I, II and III. In 9 established clergy, in 1772, presented to Parliament for relief in the terms of Church subscription. This movement seems to have origi. nated with the Socinians; but it was opposed in Parliament "entire. ly on political grounds." During the discussion, says Robert Hall, (in his Review of Lindsley's Memoirs) "there was not one member of Parliament who expressed his belief in the ARTICLES. Mr. H. Stanley opposed the petition, as it tended to disturb the peace of the country, which, in his opinion, "ought to be the subject of a fortieth Article, which would be well worth all the thirty-nine." With such levity and contempt (adds Hall) was the national Creed treated at that time. The fact is that, through the irreligion and secularity of the clergy, evangelical truth was nearly effaced from the minds of the members of the establishment in the higher ranks, and that an indolent acquiescence in established formularies had succeeded to the ardor, with which the great principles of religion were embraced at the Reformation." The revival of religion in the Church of England, which follow. ed these disastrous and evil days, was owing mainly, under God, to the instrumentality of Wilberforce, Hannah Moore and their associ. ates, who made the "Christian Observer" the organ of their sentiments. Very great progress was made in re-modelling the practical religion of the country. Indeed no period in the history of the established Church since the Reformation has probably witnessed more evangelical piety than the period commencing with the present century. Yet, lo! in the midst of these promises, the Oxford heresy bursts forth! Like the volcanoes near Rome, its rumblings, indistinct at first, have been followed by smoke and flame, and sulphureous agitation. This development at Oxford of Italian elements presages evil to the unfortunate, and as yet we fear unhumbled, Church of England. It demonstrates that vain is the wisdom of man, and futile all the forms of outward defence, unless the Lord overshadow the temple with his glory. On closing this brief view of the fallibility of liturgies as exemplified in the English Church, we do not deny that they may have exercised some beneficial influences. But we see nothing in them that is calculated to preserve religion, when the Spirit of God is not in the hearts of the clergy; nor do we see any thing in mere forms that is specially adapted to cherish spiritual influences. If the BIBLE fails to keep religion alive in the heart, man's inventions and Liturgies will accomplish nothing, except to make formalists more formal. And on the contrary, if the religion of the Bible prevails in any Church, the hearts of its members will care little for forms. To boast of forms is very natural in persons who entertain unscriptural other words, there was Calvinism for the house of Tudor-High-Church Arminianism for the house of Stuart-and latitudinarian formalism for the house of Hanover.-At intervals, it must be remembered, occurred the Popery of Mary, and of James II, and the semi-Popery of Laud, the latter succession being kept up through the Apostolic Sacheverell and the non-jurors, until it reached "the thoughtful heads and faithful hearts" of Oxford. and extravagant views of Church order and government; but the history of the Church of England shows that there is very little ground for such boasting there. Far better is it to follow the ad. vice of inspiration: "Let him that glorieth, glory in the Lord." We merely express an humble opinion in a matter of history, when we declare our conviction that the Presbyterian Churches both in this country and in Scotland, and also our Congregational Churches have, without Liturgies, possessed at least as much sound doctrine and true piety, during the last and present centuries, as were enjoyed in the Church of England, according to the statements of her own divines. It cannot be denied that the Episcopal Church in this country, previously to the American Revolution, was in regard to morals and evangelical truth, in a most humiliating and woful condition, notwithstanding her Articles and Liturgy. It also appears to us to be a fact in history that there has been, during the above period, at least as much looseness of doctrine, including Socinianism, in "the English Church, as in those American Churches, whose founders "it has been the fashion [according to truth] to call the Pilgrim Fathers.' Whatever may be our opinions as to the past, the Episcopal Church, both in England and America, is warned by her present agitations to refrain from boasting overmuch in regard to her "infallible Liturgies. It is impossible to boast of "ONE FAITH," in a Church, where, notwithstanding one Liturgy, there are at this very moment TWO GOSPELS. A higher agency is needed than that of Parliament (which established the Liturgy) to preserve Christianity in its divine simplicity and power. May the Episcopal Church find strength, equal to her day, where the Reformers found it; and may she purge off the vile fruit of Romanism, which has been "grafted in" by insidious hands! May the spirit of the Reformation, which framed her Articles again appear to carry them out with God's demonstration of their own glorious truth! Then shall Tridentine doctrine no more pollute the sanctuary of England, nor Gregory stand in triumph over the grave of Cranmer! 23. Tradition . . . Bishop Doane's singular views, 24. Apostolic Succession . . . High-Church Claims, &c., Unreasonable abuse of Luther and Calvin, APPENDIX. [The following brief history of St. Mary's Cross is taken from the Postscript to the first edition of this pamphlet.] A plan for improving the church, was adopted by the Vestry in 1834, a majority of them, however, not noticing a little Cross in the plan. When the building was finished-to their great surprise, as well as that of many in the community, of all "denominations"-lo! a Cross made quite a Catholic appearance on the apex of the pediment! Considerable opposition immediately manifested itself, both in the Vestry and out of it. Those members, who objected to the Cross, declared that they had never knowingly sanctioned it; but it was replied that, by voting to adopt the plan in general, they had sanctioned all the particulars. An adjournment having been carried without a direct vote, after a very warm meeting, one of the Vestry shortly after declared that unless the Cross was taken down very soon, it should be pulled down. This alarmed some of the more cautious, who thereupon employed a carpenter to take down Cross and acroterium in the night-without the knowledge of the Vestry. A very profound silence was observed for some time in regard to this most singular and mysterious disappearance. Even many members of the Vestry obtained no information whatever about it; and three of them informed me that it was only a few weeks since, that they became acquainted with the circumstances of the transaction. This "reserve in the communication of religious knowledge" may have been justifiable at the time; but in regard to that, I express no opinion. "A PRESBYTERIAN." It ought to be added, that on the first appearance of this pamphlet, the same Cross of St. M., which had been sawed down 8 years before, was replaced, in quite a mysterious manner, on the "apex of the pediment." The passer-by, as he looks up to the "additional restoration" on St. M.'s Church, beholds one of the "efficacious symbols" of Newmania. It is to be hoped, on one account, that the Cross will not be again removed; because this outward emblem of Popery, (which some of the wisest commentators, as Sir Isaac Newton, consider the "mark of the beast,") is a very consistent badge of the "Catholic" theology of Oxford. The two systems are as much alike as two Crosses. How important that the people should be instructed in regard to this new divinity, which in the language of Bishop M'Ilvaine, is "ANOTHER GOSPEL," and which aims at changes in the ecclesiastical edifice, both outward and spiritual, from corner-stone to pediment! Far different from Newmania, was the Episcopacy of the Reformers! If a Cross on the top of a Church be good, it is also good (so reason some) on the top of a house. But if good on the top of a house, it must be equally good, if not better, inside. And if good for one house, of course for all houses. Suppose, then, that all the houses in Burlington of Friends, Methodists, Baptists, Episcopalians and Presbyterians, had Greek and Latin Crosses upon and within them, would the aforesaid good people become better Christians? Let the Greeks and Latins answer! SKETCH OF THE SUPERSTITION OF THE OUTWARD CROSS. Having given a sketch of the rise and progress of St. Mary's Cross, it may be interesting to extend our inquiries to the origin of the general practice. The general history of the Cross will be found hardly more evangelical or dignified than that of St. Mary's in particular. The Cross, al ruptions of Ch now common mention these hot of nions regard to the mind, was in the first cor signs and crossings, such as are alian, A. D. 200, is the first to ys: "Every step that we take, |