Page images

profound contempt. And men are not wont to exalt to honour, however adequate be their power, things which they heartily despise. So little hope can Dissenters safely cherish, of advancing their interests by the subversion of the Church, in the event of the spiritual affairs of the realm being administered by either papists or infidels.

And what better hope can the whole Dissenting body entertain, of deriving advantage from so deplorable an event, should that power be any one of its numerous sects? For that some party, either Infidel, Popish, or Protestant, would obtain the ascendant in matters of religion, and dictate to all the rest, if not tyrannically domineer over them, the history of this country, from the murder of Charles I. to the Restoration, affords melancholy and abundant proof.

The case of America is indeed often appealed to, to shew with what ease and advantage all forms of religion may be placed on the same footing. But then it is wholly forgotten, that what the circumstances of America might have required, and have afforded the means of accomplishing, may not be so necessary, nor be so readily achieved in England; that, in short, America is not a case in point. Not to speak of the inadequate provision made by the Americans to supply the spiritual wants of their population,-when, in the formation of their laws, they chose to place all religions, and all sects of the same religion, on a perfect equality, without giving political precedence to any, it ought to be remembered, that it was at the moment when they threw off their yoke as a colony, and started forth into existence as an independent nation. Not only did it appear politic to the American legislators of that day to beware, lest, by giving precedence to any one religious party among them, they should give umbrage to others, and have thus created bitter animosities among the people at the very outset of their career of independence; but the feeling which prevailed universally throughout the States at the victory they had achieved, which naturally enough predominated over every other, and swallowed up at the moment all thought of their religious differences, afforded their political leaders the opportunity of pursuing that seemingly liberal course with safety and ease. Far different was the condition of America at that time, to that in which England would be found, in the event of such a shock as should overturn her ecclesiastical establishment. The feeling of the nation would not resemble in the remotest degree, that which then pervaded the whole body of America. America was triumphing in what she deemed emancipation from British tyranny: England would be labouring under the bitter consequences of an internal convulsion. The spirit of lenity pervaded America: the spirit of discord would be let loose among us, scattering, in every direction, firebrands, arrows, and death. So far would our religious differences be from finding in the overthrow of the church a sepulchre from which they would rise no more, that they would assume a fiercer aspect, and rage with greater violence than ever. Every evil passion of the heart would then find food in abundance for its nourishment, and break forth with ten-fold virulence: in the subdued and ruined, that rage which a sense of gross injustice and wrong never fails to enkindle; in the triumphant, pride, insolence, and revenge, aggravated by the firm resolve to hold fast the ascendant in politics, religion, and

every public interest. I appeal to our religious history during the Commonwealth.

Vain, therefore, to absolute folly is the hope that, by the destruction of the Church, all our religious sects would instantly, as by enchantment, assume a more friendly aspect towards each other than they now bear; and, in respect of political privileges, be content to stand on the same footing. Before such a change can be effected, the religious prejudices which exist among them against each other, which are as violent on many points as those they all cherish against the Church, must be first rooted out and destroyed. This surely is not the work of a moment, though the ruin of our venerable Establishment be the measure resorted to with the view of hastening it. Generation after generation must pass away, before there can be a chance of accomplishing it; perhaps to candid and sober-thinking men, who do not suffer their minds to be disturbed by the present excitement, nor their judgment to be perverted by the shallow sophistry which now passes for sound reasoning, it may appear that in this country such perfect forbearance and concord in matters of religion can never exist. Should the trial be made, by dissevering the Church from the State and consigning her over to destruction, there will instantly follow a fierce contest for supreme authority in matters of religion; and whether it be between the enemies of the reformed faith and Dissenters, or be confined to the numberless sects, of which the latter are composed, long before the time such trial requires shall have elapsed, some one party will prevail, to which all others will be compelled to bow. Once more, therefore,-In what imaginable way can the subversion of the Church advance the interests of Protestant Dissenters? What advantage would they derive from her ruin, in wealth, in power, or in religious freedom? Sed hæc hactenus. the meantime, if, as we are now taught by the furious zealots of all parties arrayed against the Church, we must apply to republican America for our schemes of ecclesiastical polity, as well as look to revolutionary France for our maxims of civil government, then is the glory of England fast departing, and her tower of strength crumbling into ruin. Lifton.




JAMES, EARL OF MARLBOROUGH, who was killed in battle at sea on the coast of Holland, A. D. 1665, having a kind of presentiment of his own death, wrote to his friend, Sir Hugh Pollard, a letter, of which the following is an extract:-"I will not speak aught of the vanity of this world; your own age and experience will save that labour; but there is a certain thing that goeth up and down the world, called religion, dressed and pretended fantastically, and to purposes bad enough, which yet by such evil dealing loseth not its being. Moreover, God in his infinite mercy hath given us his holy word, in which, as there are many things hard to be understood, so there is enough plain and easy to quiet our minds, and direct us concerning our future being. I confess to God and you, I have been a

great neglector, and I fear, a despiser of it. God, of his infinite mercy, pardon me the dreadful fault. But when I retired myself from the noise and deceitful vanity of the world, I found no comfort in any other resolution than what I had from thence. I commend, from the bottom of my heart, the same to your happy use. Dear Sir Hugh, let us be more generous than to believe we die as the beasts that perish; but with a Christian, manly, brave resolution, look to what is eternal. I will not trouble you further. Show this letter to my friends, and to whom you please. The only great God, and holy God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, direct you to a happy end of your life, and send us a joyful resurrection. So prays your true friend,


WILLIAM LORD RUSSEL spoke just before his execution, in the strongest terms of faith and confidence. Besides many other things he said:"Neither my imprisonment nor fear of death have been able to discompose me in any degree. On the contrary, I have found the assurances of the love and mercy of God, in and through my blessed Redeemer, in whom I only trust. And I do not question but I am going to partake of that fulness of joy which is in his presence; the hopes of which do so wonderfully delight me, that I think this is the happiest day of my life, though others may look upon it as the saddest."

CHARLES THE FIFTH, Emperor of Germany, King of Spain, and Lord of the Netherlands, after having alarmed and agitated all Europe for near fifty years, retired from the world, and enjoyed more complete contentment in this situation than all his grandeur had ever yielded him. "I have tasted," said he," more satisfaction in my solitude, in one day, than in all the triumphs of my former reign; and I find that the sincere study, profession, and practice of the Christian religion, hath in it such joys and sweetness as courts are strangers to."

MONSIEUR CLAUDE was a very considerable man among the Protestants, who were driven out of France by Lewis the Fourteenth. When he was taken ill he sent for the senior pastor of the church, to whom, in the presence of all his family, he expressed himself thus ;"Sir, I was desirous to see you, and to make my dying declaration before you. I am a miserable sinner before God. I most heartily beseech him to show me mercy for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ. I hope he will hear my prayer."

After pausing awhile, he added, "I have carefully examined all religions. None appear to me worthy of the wisdom of God, and capable of leading man to happiness, but the Christian religion. I have diligently studied Popery and the Reformation. The Protestant religion, I think, is the only good religion. It is all found in the holy Scriptures, the word of God. From this, as from a fountain, all religions must be drawn. Scripture is the root, the Protestant religion is the trunk and branches of the tree. It becomes you all to keep steady to it."





KEMP V. WICKES.—(Continued from p. 568.)

It was proposed, then, to examine the history of the Law in order to see whether the Rubric, though it has not this exception in express terms, still by the general term "unbaptized," has this limited meaning, "not baptized according to the forms of the English Liturgy and by a lawful minister of the Church of England." Now, if the Church of England has recognized persons, though not baptized in its own forms and by its own ministers, yet as validly baptized; if it has recognized lay baptism to be, though irregular, yet valid, and so valid that the person who has been baptized by a Laic cannot properly be baptized again; it will necessarily follow, that it cannot mean to exclude from burial all persons who have not been baptized according to the forms of its Liturgy, that it can only mean to exclude those who have not been baptized at all by any form which can be recognized as an initiation—a legal and valid initiation, into the Christian Church.

This leads me into a very extensive question, namely, the validity of Lay baptism; but which the Court is, however reluctantly, compelled to examine, by the nature of the case, and the arguments which have been offered to its consideration.

The law of the Church of England, and its history, are to be deduced from the ancient general Canon Lawfrom the particular constitutions made in this country to regulate the English Church-from our own Canons-from the Rubric, and from any acts of Parliament that may have passed upon the subject; and the whole may be illustrated, also, by the writings of eminent persons.

Now if the first head be enquired into (the ancient Canon Law), it will appear that, from the earliest times, the use of water with the invocation of the name of the Father, of the Son,

and of the Holy Ghost, was held to be the essence of baptism; that baptism, so administered, even by a layman or a woman, was valid; and that a person, who had been so baptized, was not to be baptized again.

It may not be improper just to refer to the passages of Scripture, which have been referred to by the Church itself as the foundation of its law in this respect-they are these. First, the words of our Saviour: “Unless a man be born again of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Hence the Church, without presuming to decide whether a person unbaptized might not be saved through God's mercy, yet has held that baptism was so strongly enjoined as a matter of indispensable necessity, that rather than omit it altogether, the ceremony was to be performed even by a Layman. The words of our Saviour after his resurrection, "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," have been held to require the invocation of the Holy Trinity, as the essential form of words necessary to baptism. The passage in the Epistle to the Ephesians, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism," has been held by the Church to prohibit a second baptism; or, as the learned Hooker has expressed it, "Iteration of baptism once given has always been thought a manifest contempt of that ancient apostolic aphorism, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' It is here however to be observed, that the Court is not entering into any question of theological controversy; it is merely endeavouring to trace and to ascertain the fact, what has been held by the Church to be the law. The Court has only to administer the law, as it finds it; it is not to presume to enter into any speculations upon its propriety.

* We should have mentioned in our last Number, that a Reply to the above Judgment was made by Archdeacon Daubeny, and may be had of our Publishers.

Now, conformable to what has been already stated, will be found the text of the canon law. The passages in that law are almost innumerable. Many have been cited by the counsel. In the third part of the decree De Consecratione, and in the fourth distinction De Baptismi Sacramento, there are a great number of paragraphs to this effect: and it may be sufficient just to state the titles of the different paragraphs or sections of that distinction. For instance, the nineteenth paragraph states, nemo nisi sacerdos baptizare presumat; certainly directing that regular baptism is to be administered by the priest; or perhaps it may be more properly said, public baptism. The 21st section is, etiam laici necessitate cogente baptizare possunt; "in cases of urgency laymen may baptize." The 23d, non reiteratur baptisma quod a pagano ministratur; "if baptism has been adininistered by a Pagan, it is not to be iterated;" so cautious was the ancient Church that there should be no re-baptism. The 25th, sicut per bonum ita per malum ministrum æque baptisma ministratur. The character of the person who administered, therefore, was of no effect in the validity of baptism. The 26th is to the same effect, but rather more explanatory: Non merita ministrorum, sed virtus Christi, in baptismate operatur. The 28th, Non reiteratur baptisma quod in nomine Sanctæ Trinitatis ministratur: and it goes on to illustrate by an example, Si qui apud illos hæreticos baptizati sunt, qui in Sanctæ Trinitatis confessione baptizant, et veniant ad nos, recipiantur quidem ut baptizati, ne Sanctæ Trinitatis invocatio vel confessio annulletur. This, therefore, points out that the essence was the invocation of the Holy Trinity. The baptism of any Heretics (and the Church deemed all Dissenters to be of that description), that of any Dissenters, who made use of the name of the Holy Trinity in baptism, was to be received, lest the invocation of the Holy Trinity should be rendered and considered as of no effect. The 32d, Non reiteratur baptisma quod in fide Sanctæ Trinitatis ab Hæreticis præstatur: that, therefore, is to the same effect as the former section. The 36th is, Valet baptisma, etsi per laicos ministratur: and that section again explains the principle

upon which the Church acted, Sanctum est baptisma per seipsum quod datum est in nomine Patris, Filii, et Spiritûs Sancti. There are many other passages to the same effect, confirming all the foregoing; and it is perfectly clear that, according to the general canon law, though regular baptism was by a Bishop or Priest, yet, if administered by a Laic, or by a Heretic or Schismatic, it was valid baptism ; and so valid that it was not to be repeated.

The next branch of the Law of our Church, and which reached down to the time of the Reformation, was the law which is to be found in the legatine and provincial constitutions: the former being laws made in this country under the sanction of the Popes' Legates, Otho, Legate of Gregory the Ninth, and Othobou, Legate of Clement the Fourth. The latter, the provincial constitutions, were those made in convocation under several Archbishops. The whole of these have been collected by the very eminent English Canonist, Lyndwood, who has written a very learned commentary or gloss upon them, which is also of high authority in all courts administering the ecclesiastical law of this country. These constitutions are precisely to the same effect as the former. Regular baptism was to be administered by a priest, and in the church, and at certain stated times of the year: but in cases of urgency a layman might administer baptism in private houses, rather than it should not be administered at all. If a layman interposed without necessity in the office, he was punishable but still the baptism was valid, and by no means to be repeated.

In the constitution of Otho De Baptismo et forma Baptizandi, which will be found in Lyndwood, page 10 of the Legatine Constitutions, it is among other things directed, that Priests shall particularly instruct their parishioners in the form of baptizing: of course shewing that lay baptism was allowed: that it was recommended, rather than that no baptism at all should take place; otherwise it could not have been proper and necessary for the Priests to have instructed their parishioners in the form. The constitution of Othobon, to be found in Lyndwood, page 80, confirms and approves of

« PreviousContinue »