religious truth with which God has furnished us in the Holy Scriptures. In that most wondrous of all books, the Bible, all essential truths are so clearly revealed, that none who bow to its Divine authority can fail to recognize them. At the same time, many things not essential to salvation, although still not without importance, are taught or referred to therein with more or less indistinctness. Broad principles are often laid down in the Scriptures, and each disciple is left to deduce therefrom the lessons of truth and duty to which they naturally give birth; and, in so doing, his honesty and conscientiousness, as well as his understanding, are tested and exercised. Too many are contented to take their religious opinions upon trust; and in many important matters, upon which Christians differ, they are too careless, too busy, or too indolent, to enter upon an earnest and impartial examination. Concern ing these things, they are thus generally led to adopt the opinions in which they have been educated, or which best suit their taste or their convenience; and often they hold such opinions with as much tenacity as theirs are held whose convictions are the result of patient investigation and unfeigned faith. Matters of this nature, chiefly, about which Christians might well agree to differ, have been, in all ages, the subjects of the fiercest party contests. An undue and indiscriminate zeal for mere opinions, for unscriptural dogmas, or for unimportant rites; and a vainglorious desire, on the part of bigoted rulers and lordly ecclesiastics, to impose their own creed upon all within the reach of their power and influence, has ever led to schism and persecution, in their most virulent forms. A similar spirit, restrained and modified in its developments by circumstances, has too much prevailed, even down to our own day, and has proved Satan's most successful agent to set brother against brother, and to stir up strife, animosity, and prejudice, wholly unbecoming the professed followers of Christ. A Now, when these disputed points, whether relating to doctrine or practice, whether essential or non-essential, began to be enforced by human power and authority, then began Dissent. careless, ignorant, or dishonest mind may be expected, under such circumstances, tamely to yield assent; a proud, conceited, or obstinate mind will probably spurn such control, and be driven still further in an opposite direction; while the upright mind, the enlightened conscience, remains firm and unmoved. Coercion here can only, on the one hand, make hypocrites, and, on the other, confirm the sincere in their present convictions. Hence the folly and the danger of any attempt to establish uniformity of opinion or of practice in matters of religion. In these matters man is accountable, not to his fellow-man, but to God alone. One standard of truth and duty God has given us in the Bible, and that is sufficient. Anything added by man to his words, claiming our belief or obedience, under pains or penalties, is clearly a presumptuous interference with his prerogative. It is what he has expressly forbidden, Prov. xxx. 6; Rev. xxii. 18. It is therefore impious, as well as impolitic and useless. No creed of man's devising, however ancient, can justly claim our implicit faith. It is evidently in this sense that our Lord forbids his disciples to call any man "father," or "master," Matt. xxiii. 9, 10. To adopt the words of John Milton, "We want no creed, so long as we want not the Scriptures." But although Dissent existed in individual minds as soon as religion became established, and in outward observance enforced, by human law, it did not, and obviously could not, assume anything like its present shape in this country, until, in the progress of events, knowledge had increased, and civil and religious liberty had so far advanced, as to give rise to the Toleration Act. The Act of Uniformity of a preceding reign, designed to crush Dissent, vastly increased its prevalence and power, under the name of Nonconformity. But it was the Act of Toleration that gave to it, under its present designation, its full embodiment, and that effectual impulse which, with a steady progression, has impelled it onward to this hour, and which will not cease thus to operate until human authority shall intermeddle no more at all with religion. Toleration, then, will be a term inapplicable to religious matters; and Dissent, necessarily terminating with the cause which produced it, will exist no longer. II. THE PRINCIPLES OF PROTESTANT DISSENTERS. The term "Protestant" arose from the famous protest in which Luther and his coadjutors, together with several of the German princes, united, against the corruptions and errors of the Papacy. The term "Dissenter" is applied to all those who conscientiously differ, either in doctrine or in modes of worship and church-government, from the established form of religion. As Protestant Dissenters, we consider it to be our duty, not only to stand aloof from the grosser errors of Popery (which we regard with horror and intense aversion), but also from those modified yet scarcely less dangerous tenets and practices--the relics of Popery-which are taught and enjoined in the Book of Common Prayer; such as baptismal regeneration, sacramental efficacy, priestly absolution, and the like. We seriously object, likewise, to all those prescribed ceremonies, foreign to Scripture, which are of mere human origin, and rest solely upon human authority-such as confirmation, consecration, bowing at the name of Jesus, together with the ob servance of saints' days, the repetition of prayers a certain number of times, and on particular days, ever in uniform order, and the use of creeds. Some of these observances might not be deemed very objectionable, were it not that their use is made imperative. Bowing at the name of Jesus, for instance, would not generally be deemed wrong, were it the spontaneous expression of a deep inward feeling of reverence, and not confined, as it is, to one Divine name. We further deprecate and abhor, as anti-Christian and Popish in the extreme, the acknowledgment of any other than Christ himself as head of the Church, the assumption of priestly authority and lordly titles by professed ministers of Christ, and the employment of force and compulsion, in any form or degree, for religious purposes. In all these respects we feel it to be our duty and our honour to bear witness for the truth, believing that it was concerning such like things that our Saviour said, "In vain do ye worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men ;" and, "Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up," Matt. XV. 9, 13. Earnestly do we entreat all serious and candid members of the Established Church in this country, as well as all sincere inquirers after truth, to ponder these matters in their hearts, and to "search the Scriptures daily, whether these things are so," Acts xvii. 11. "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good," 1 Thess. v. 21. were the sole or even the chief grounds of Dissent, such an expectation would be quite natural. It is, however, far otherwise. We purpose, therefore, briefly to show upon what grounds we rest our conviction, that Dissent is a positive duty. Passing over, for the sake of brevity, many other reasons which might be urged, we at once revert to the great fact, that Christ is the sole lawgiver and ruler in his Church; and, in the New Testament, he has given us the only and sufficient standard of truth, and rule of faith and worship. Whatever other rule or standard, therefore, is proposed, as authoritative or binding on our consciences, it must be our duty, without hesitation, to reject, come from whencesoever it may. Suppose the formularies of the Church of England III. DISSENT A PRESENT DUTY. Some persons are Dissenters from mere accident. They were brought up amongst Dissenters, or it was amongst them that they first heard and received the Gospel; therefore they continue with them. Or, it may be, they have been so disgusted with the incompetency or erroneous doctrine of the non-purified from the pernicious errors they evangelical clergy, or possibly with their worldly or mercenary spirit, that they have sought the truth of the Gospel elsewhere. They are not Dissenters from principle, but rather by a sort of necessity. They are but imperfectly acquainted with the reasons of Dissent they have not inquired into them, nor thought much about the matter. They like to hear a good sermon anywhere; and when an evangelical preacher, in connection with the Establishment, is announced, they are soon numbered amongst his hearers; and they are ready to concur in the opinion so often expressed, and most forward to proclaim it, that if all the established clergy were like such a preacher, there would be very few Dissenters. Now, it is freely admitted, that i the character or the preaching o the ministers of the Church of England contain, as adverted to under the preceding head; and suppose them to be rendered, in our view, otherwise unobjectionable; still, their imposition by human authority would of itself constitute a sufficient ground of Dissent. The unscriptural rites and practices before referred to would also, in our judgment, prove an insuperable bar to conformity. In short, so long as any human writing, whether denominated articles of faith, creed, or catechism, is set up side by side with the Holy Scriptures, and appealed to as a standard of religious belief; so long as ceremonies or modes of worship, of human origin, are not only observed, but their observance enforced by human authority, the allegiance we owe to Christ forbids conformity. Hence, it is obvious we rest the duty of Dissent upon far higher grounds than many are apt to suppose. It is necessarily produces alienation and separation of interests on the other. When, among several distinct religious communities, one is found arrogating to itself the title of the Church, and especially if, at the same time, it pos not the preaching of the clergy, it is not the use of a liturgy; these we may or may not approve. It is not even the dangerous errors taught in some of the formularies of the Church; these may possibly admit of alteration. Nor is it the Popish observances still re-sesses, through the patronage of the tained in the Establishment, that constitute our chief objection against it; these, however forlorn the hope, may yet be laid aside. Nor is it the obnoxious and indefensible imposts of tithes and Church-rates; these may one day be abolished. But, were all these desirable objects at once accomplished, our former objection would remain in full force, and Dissent would still be, in our view, an imperative duty. IV. HOW DISSENT MAY BE ABOLISHED. Although Dissent be a present duty, it is not a thing to be desired or cherished for its own sake; and we look forward with confident satisfaction to a coming day, when the necessity for it which now exists shall exist no longer. As union and co-operation among Christians are much to be commended and desired, so separation and Dissent, whenever unnecessary, are no less earnestly to be deprecated and avoided. If, therefore, Dissent can be quietly and consistently got rid of, and mutual co-operation between members of the Episcopal Church and the various other religious bodies promoted, it cannot fail to be a great national good. There is one way, and only one, in which this may be effected; that is, by the abolition of the union of Church and State. It is perfectly cvident that the assumption of superiority, and the exercise of authority, on the one part, 1 State, exclusive privileges, the other As long as Romanism exists, so long will Protestantism continue as its antagonist. In like manner, and for the same reason, as long as the connection between Church and State shall last, so long will Dissent be a duty. Let, however, this unholy and unscriptural alliance be abolished, and the evils which have been adverted to will at once cease, and the necessity and duty of Dissent will terminate with them. The Episcopal Church of England, no longer established as the dominant sect, nor properly to be termed national, may still retain all its present edifices, together with all the property to which it has a just claim, and may multiply at pleasure the buildings improperly called churches; this being done, however, only by means of its own resources Re and the voluntary aid of others. duced, in this respect, to the level of other denominations of Christians, there will no longer be room for jealousy on the one hand, or opportunity for oppression on the other. Religious equality will thus terminate Dissent: for while all parties will differ, in opinion and in modes of worship, it may be, as widely as they do now, they will then agree to differ. All will be at liberty to exercise their undoubted right to think and judge for themselves, and to propagate their own opinions; but, while they do this, none will be able to claim precedence or usurp authority over the rest, or to aggrandize or enrich their own party at the expense of others. Let the State cease to meddle with religion, so long as its peaceable profession infringes not on the civil rights and liberties of any portion of the community; then truth and righteousness, peace and concord, will flourish on every hand, and Dissent, so long and violently denounced by many Churchmen as an enormous evil, will be heard of no more, except as an affair of history. Essex. J. B. PROOFS OF LOVE TO OUR FEL LOW-MEN. As I lay awake the other night, I began to think how I might do some good to my fellow-creatures; and this led me to inquire whether, in reality, I possessed any love for mankind. The result of my thoughts was the following meditation: Genuine love to men exists in different degrees; and, according to its strength, may lead one to do the following things for those who are beloved : We think of They are much 1. To think of them. those whom we love. in our mind: we cannot keep them out of our thoughts. Whereas, in regard to those whom we do not care much for, the proverb is true," Out of sight, out of mind." Tell me what a man thinks about, and I will tell you what he loves. If a man loves his fellow-Christians, they will often rise before his mental eye; if he loves his church, he will muse on it; if he loves the poor, he will frequently be meditating on their wants. How often does the doting mother, whose only son is at sea, imagine him tossed by the tempest. 2. To pray for them. This is a higher degree. It is a great thing to have an interest in the prayers of a good man, and to be on the list of those for whom he intercedes. Good Mr. Romaine, of London, used to employ two afternoons of the week in praying for his friends. Perhaps there are some for whom this is all that we can do; but it is not a little, if done in faith. The prayers of God's poor are a great treasury for the beneficent. The Lord Jesus Christ shows his love to men by continually making intercession for them. 3. To speak To them. Surely we do not love the man to whom we will not speak. The favour is small, yet it is worth something; especially if we speak a word of caution, counsel, or consolation. 4. To speak of them. Beloved names will be on our lips. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. By frequently naming those whom we love, we indicate our respect and affection: hence believers love to "speak good of the Lord." 5. To speak FOR them. To defend |