It is high time that such ex cathedra documents from the see of Rome should be looked out of countenance.

GOVERNMENT MEASURES FOR THE CONCILIATON OF IRELAND.

At the time this article is penned, we know nothing more of the new measures of Government, for the conciliation of Irish Catholics, than may be conjectured from the Premier's speech on occasion of the opening of parliament. We must, therefore, speak with caution and forbearance, till the ominous project is laid before the country. Still we dare not conceal our dread or our disapprobation of anything like the scantling of a new Establishment. We are not unfriendly to the social and political rights of Romanists, which have in too many instances been shamefully withheld from them. But we extremely deprecate the principle of compensating misrule and bad legislation, by taking Catholicism into the embrace of the state, and supporting its huge system of error at the public expense.

All our past steps in this direction have been wrong steps; and every new concession must aggravate the evil, and augment and perpetuate the injustice. We should have rejoiced to hear of Trinity College, with all its honours and emoluments, thrown open to Catholics and Dissenters, but new grants to Maynooth, and new colleges, with special privileges for Romanists, we regard with more than distrust,-with a deep seated conviction that legislation devoted to such purposes is opposed to religious liberty, political justice, national honour, and the growing intelligence of the age. What we would ask or accept for ourselves we would give to Romanists, but no more; -liberty to propagate opinion, and freedom from all social and political disqualification in the propagation of it. But we have no fancy for continuing the income-tax, which we hold to be a very oppressive impost, to enable the Government to pay 1 Romanists for propagating deadly error. We shall watch the new measures for Ireland, and we entreat all our friends to do the same.

A WORD TO THE NONCONFORMISTS ON
THEIR PRESENT DUTY.

We are Nonconformists, and therefore may take upon us to speak a word to our friends. We were a little amused lately in finding ourselves not ranked among Congregational, but general periodicals. When have we committed a strictly Congregational principle, in its New Testament phrase or bearing? We challenge the proof; and if

But we

convicted, will confess our sin. choose for ourselves a quiet course; and will endeavour to serve our denomination as we best can. Thankful are we to say, we have abundant reason to conclude that our humble efforts are not unappreciated; and that our attempts to become a link of communication between good men of different religious communions is not in vain in the Lord. In this course we hope to persevere, and see every day stronger reason for concluding that it is a right one. What we now wish to say to our Dissenting brethren is, that, in our firm conviction, the great duty devolving upon us, at the present crisis, is, to testify, with dignity, with earnestness, and with sleepless energy, against the attempt which is now being made over all England to supplant the great doctrines of the Reformation. This is common ground; ground which, if well occupied by us, will fix our reputation and our usefulness for ages to come. Thinking men will be able to appreciate a combined struggle in this open field; and in contesting it with a manly zeal, we shall gain vast advantages for the support of those simple and primitive principles upon which we believe our churches to be founded. "PRESENT TRUTH" is Reformation truth; just because it is openly and extensively assailed, and because the souls of our countrymen are in danger of being deluded by Popish errors, brought in under the guise of Anglicanism. A spirit has arisen favourable to the bold discussion of great truths; and the controversy is capable of being so handled as to make the saving doctrine of God's word prominent in all our exposures of prevailing heresy. Churchmen will come to the meeting-house to hear our defence of Reformation truth, and we may awaken a spirit of inquiry in the highest degree favourable to the ultimate triumph of those principles which we believe to be essentially involved in the kingdom of Christ, which is not of this world. Patriotism and religion alike require that Nonconformists should now be at their posts.

A FRIENDLY ADDRESS TO ALL REAL CHRISTIANS IN THE ESTABLISHMENT.

CHRISTIAN FRIENDS, For addressing you in the Evangelical Magazine, I have sufficient reasons. This is not exclusively a dissenting periodical, as some would, from ignorance, and others, from hostility, call it; and if it were, it is well known that members of the Establishment, not only read it from various motives, but occasionally present through this medium their thoughts to the public. The present address, though prompted by friendly feelings, would scarcely

be admitted into any of the organs of the national church. The writer, born in your communion, knows more of it than many with whom he is now in fellowship; and, being an old man, feels probably some of those yearnings towards the connections of his youth which naturally lead to efforts for their good.

It is now become notorious that what you so fondly call "our church," is in a serious, not to say alarming, crisis. I should, there- | fore, think little of that man's catholic Christianity who is not roused to pray earnestly that this may not subside and pass away without producing some beneficial change. Suffer me, then, to request your conscientious attention to two points, on which you ought to labour to effect a change. These are what would usually be called the priests and the laity.

First, you ought to set your hearts on banishing the word priest; for the sake of getting rid of the real heresy which will ever cleave to the term. I know that some of you, aware of the scriptural doctrine, apolo gise for the heretical word, by saying that it is a mere contraction for presbyter; and I am not sorry for it; because it opens to you a way of escape, by seeking to obtain the universal authoritative substitution of presbyter for priest.

But the well informed among you cannot conceal from themselves the fact, that pourpos and iptvg are distinguished in the New Testament, and that priest is the proper English translation of ispeve; while presbyter, or elder, is the proper version of the other word.

Of this the hostile party in your own church is so well aware, that they must call your defence a mere evasion. These men, who scarcely attempt to conceal that they are Popish priests in a Protestant establishment, make the priesthood their cheval de bataille; and be assured that, as long as the word remains authorized among you, it is a snake in the grass, ever ready to strike with its poisoned fang. Many ministers, who are not avowed Puseyites, are infatuated with the notion that they have been ordained priests, and the ignorant people, alas! "love to have it so." But it is the very virus of Popery, entering into the essence of the sacrifice of the altar, as Rome speaks, or, as we should say, of the mass. The whole Epistle to the Hebrews shows it to be a heresy. Paul, exhibiting Christ as that one Priest, who has superseded all others, remaining ، a priest for ever," while all the New Testament proves that the whole Christian church is alike a royal priesthood, to offer up the only sacrifices that now remain to be offered, -the spiritual sacrifices of prayer, praise, and benevolent works. Never will you secure the triumph of this

|

great scriptural truth, so essential to Christ's honour, while you suffer the ministers of the gospel to be called priests. To banish this brand of Popery from your church, would be worth any labours, any sufferings, any sacrifices to which you could submit. Now is your time to make the attempt.

The second object to which I would call your attention is, that which is termed the laity. This word, as well as clergy, is a perversion of Scripture, akin to that of priest. You may know that Xaoc, the origin of our laity, is applied to the whole church, as the people of God, and that xanpos, though translated clergy, means the lot, or inheritance of the Lord, which is his church; and the only instance in which it occurs applies it to the people in distinction from the ministers, who are commanded not to lord it over God's clergy or inheritance.

But my quarrel here is, not so much with a word as with a state of things. You cannot but be sensible that in your communion the laity, or people, have been reduced to nonentities; that, except in parliament, where the laity legislate for you, the people are made nothing, the priests everything. The very word church has been appropriated to the ministry, though in Scripture the body of the faithful are the church, in distinction from bishops and deacons. You cannot see how the New Testament treats the laity, or how they were regarded in the primitive church, and not say that you have degraded them. I ought, perhaps, to make an exception in behalf of one of the churchwardens, who has some shadow of the importance which belongs to the people of God.

But God is now teaching you with a strong hand. For if your communion is to be saved from a second apostacy to Popery, it is manifest that it will be saved by the laity, and saved from the clergy. Almost all the good sense and Christian principle that has been displayed in many places, has been that of the laity. The very documents that have appeared in the diocese of Exeter, would have led us to conclude that the laity had come from college and the bishop from the plough. To all the real Christians in the Establishment I would, therefore, say, Set your hearts on restoring to the laity the importance which Christ gave them in the original constitution of his church.

Two replies I anticipate. To my first exhortation it will be said, this would be an attempt to alter the church, which is neither lawful nor practicable. Your enemies do not argue thus. They set their hearts upon unprotestantising the church. Why should not you set yours on unpoperysing it ? You cannot read Mr. Ward's late appeal without hearing your conscience say, "He has too much truth on his side." It is mortifying to hear him utter such a defence.

"It is true I, in subscribing, am not quite an honest man; but who among us is?" But he is trying to become honest, by altering things to suit his own views. How is it that many better men laud everything in a system of inconsistencies? As to the impracticability of a change, the worst party has created not unfounded alarm, that they will create a change. It is a truth that I ought to tell, and that you ought to ponder, that the Popish party, with some unblushing displays of dishonesty which might exclude a man from respectable society, has, also, in other respects, shown more fearless regard to principle than their opponents. Fas est

et ab hoste doceri.

As to my second principle, that the laity of the Establishment should be raised from their unscriptural degradation, I am aware that many will be afraid to attempt it, lest, as they say, the clergy, like Dissenting ministers, should be the slaves, and the people the masters. As to the Dissenters, I leave them to defend themselves. My present object is the improvement of the present crisis for the benefit of the Establishment. The faithful servants of Christ in it, are called upon, by the voice of Providence, to seek to place both ministers and people just where the Saviour desired they should be, and where the apostles left them when these faithful men retired to their rest and to their reward. FIDELIS.

CORRESPONDENCE IN REFERENCE TO THE INFANT ORPHAN ASYLUM.

To the Editor of the Evangelical Magazine.

REV. SIR,-In the November number of the Evangelical Magazine, there appeared an article on the subject of the New Asylum for Infant Orphans, in which the conduct of the Committee of the Infant Orphan Asylum is very much misrepresented. They are charged with having last year resolved upon making a change in the constitution-with violating ancient understandings-and with malversation of understood trust, by resolving to instruct the children in the Asylum in the Church Catechism.

Now, sir, if such a resolution had been adopted, it would have been no change in the constitution, for the rules state that the purpose of the charity is to "board, clothe, nurse, and educate in accordance with the principles of the Church of England, infant orphans," &c. And it has been positively declared, by several gentlemen who took part in its proceedings from the commencemeut, that they never heard of any such understanding as is said to have been entered into for the exclusion of the Church

Catechism. And if its most active supporters did not know of this pretended understanding, with whom did it exist? But, the fact is, the Committee have never resolved that the children should be taught the Church Catechism, and therefore the whole of the argument, which rests upon the supposition that they had done so, falls to the ground, no such resolution having ever been proposed.

In consequence of the observations in your Magazine, I wrote to Dr. Reed, as the party most interested in the matter, requesting him, if it was in his power, to prove them to be true; but though I promised to subscribe to the New Asylum if he could do so, he has never taken any notice of my letter. I, therefore, conclude, that he is either unable or unwilling to furnish the proof requested. If he is unable, it is high time that a stop should be put to the unfounded assertions which are frequently made respecting the Infant Orphan Asylum; if unwilling, what can we think of his professed zeal in behalf of infant orphans, when he will not take the trouble to gain a contribution for their benefit when it is in his power? The Committee of the Infant Orphan Asylum are charged with having changed the constitution; if this is the case, I beg to ask why an appeal was not made to the subscribers? It was the duty of the minority to have done so-a duty which no consideration whatever should have prevented them from performing; and by not having done so, they have given a convincing proof that they felt in their own consciences that the majority were justified by the rules, and would have been approved by the subscribers.

:

Do not misunderstand my object, Sir, in thus addressing you. I have felt called upon to vindicate myself and my friends from misrepresentation; but I bear no ill-will to the New Asylum, though I deprecate the feelings with which it was originated; and I believe I speak the sentiments of the whole of the Committee of the Infant Orphan Asylum when I say, that I should rejoice in its success, if only its friends would abstain from misrepresenting what ought to be considered not as a rival, but a sister charity each will obtain contributions from many who would not under any circumstances contribute to the other. And there are abundance of objects to employ all the means which can be raised by both. Why, then, should there be any opposition between them? Why is not their rivalry confined to the endeavour to excel each other in doing the greatest amount of good?-not by misrepresenting one another, but by stirring up their respective friends to greater liberality. Cannot those who differ from the Church of England be stirred up to do

good without the excitement of the hateful spirit of party? I would fain hope better things, and that our contention may in future be only to provoke unto love and to good works. I am, Rev. Sir, yours faithfully, G. S.

Remarks.

We shall reply to our respected correspondent very briefly :

1. The Infant Orphan Asylum was mainly originated by a Dissenting Minister, who could never have contemplated the exclusion of Dissenters' children.

2. The introduction of the Church Catechism into the asylum was a virtual exclusion of Dissenters' children. How could they, who never had any godfathers and godmothers, answer the second question without uttering a revolting lie?

3. The practice of the asylum for sixteen years, and for some time after the alteration of the rule, proves that the Church Catechism was deemed inadmissible.

4. The correspondence between Dr. Reed and the Rev. Messrs. Fell and Staunton establishes the same fact. We recommend Dr. Reed to publish it forthwith.

5. Our correspondent states "that the Committee have never resolved that the children should be taught the Church Catechism;" but have they not committed the education of the children to one, who takes care that the Church Catechism is actually taught to them?

6. No individual knew of our remarks in November until they were published. We never had, at that time, a line of correspondence with Dr. Reed, or any of the Committee of the New Orphan Asylum; but, for the reasons above stated, we firmly believe that we neither misunderstood nor misrepresented the late painful changes in the Infant Orphan Asylum.-EDITOR.

ment to his person, and of gratitude for his arduous, faithful, and successful labours amongst them during a period of seven years.

A TESTIMONIAL.

The Rev. John Horlick, one of the few ministers now surviving who studied under the late Rev. Cornelius Winter, having preached the unsearchable riches of Christ in the Forest of Dean for nearly half a century, his friends, desirous to give him some token of their unabated attachment and gratitude, in the form of a testimonial, made up among themselves a little sum of money; to be presented to him early in the new year. It was agreed between Mr. Horlick and his friends that the 7th of January, 1845, should be set apart for the double purpose of returning thanks to Almighty God, for enabling them to wipe off the debt on the new school-room and the plot of burialground recently purchased, both together having cost a considerable sum of money, and to present the minister with the voluntary offering of his flock. The services of that day were as follows:-At eleven o'clock in the forenoon, a prayer-meeting was held in the new school-room, connected with the Independent chapel, Michaeldean, when several of the members of the church engaged in prayer. At half-past two in the afternoon, the venerable minister commenced the worship of God, by reading and prayer; and the Rev. T. Rees, of Chepstow, preached from 1 Pet. i. 8, 9; the services of the afternoon being closed by prayer, offered by Rev. Mr. Davis, (Baptist,) of Little London. About 150, or more, sat down in the schoolroom to tea. In the evening, at six, Rev. T. Gillman, of Newport, preached, from Psa. xlviii. 13. At the close of the discourse, a hymn being sung, composed for the occasion, the Rev. J. Horlick moved, and Rev. T. Gillman seconded, that Mr. Rees should take the chair. The chairman, after stating the object of the meeting, and congratulating the friends of the cause at Michaeldean, called on Mr. John Robinson to move the first resolution, who, at the close of a neat and appropriate speech, presented the Rev. John Horlick with a purse containing forty guineas, as a small token of gratitude and affection from the congregation, for his kindly behaviour and devoted labours among them for nearly half a century.

Mr. Horlick acknowledged the kindness of his friends in a speech breathing parental affection, mingled with a deep sense of gratitude. Rev. Messrs. Gillman, Jenkyn, and Davis, and Messrs. Bishop and Graham, took part in the services of the day. Thanks being voted to the chairman, which he acknowledged, the meeting separated, all highly delighted with the work of the day.