The mutable winds are servants of a home And holy LOVE. I copy this from the margin where I pencilled it on my last perusal. I am fully prepared to hear that this passage gains nothing by its rhythmical dress over the musical periods of the original, to which my reply will be that I did not seek the numbers, "the numbers came." I will readily own too, that the sonorous old Greek loses much of its grace by transfusion into another tongue. Enough, however, has surely been done to prove that the elements of poetry and eloquence are here. I cannot conclude this paper more happily than by the elegant encomium of Wotton, which will show that I am not alone in a high appreciation of the Roman father, nor, but for one qualifying word, Origen quite alone in his indiscreet use of the word inspiration: "Illa vis et evepyeta divina ubique in eo (sc. Clemente) refulget, quæ suo fulgore percellit animum legentis; adeo ut, pene dicam, Spiritum Dei, non hominem in eo loquentem sentias." D. REVIEWS. Three Sermons on the Church, Preached in the Parish Church of St. James, Westminster, during Lent, 1842. By Charles James, Lord Bishop of London. Second Edition. Fellowes. THESE discourses have evidently been drawn up with no ordinary care; and we can easily conceive that the fashionable audience which listened to them at St. James's church, might feel astonished at the perverseness and ignorance, if not presumption, which could induce any person to deny or question the truth of doctrines so cautiously, and often with so much apparent candour, laid down by their learned diocesan. In fact, the Bishop of London is no ordinary man. He is a man of great industry, great judgment, great activity; he perfectly understands the position in which he stands as to power and influence: he is a bold as well as a cautious man, and will not flinch at difficulties if he thinks it practicable to overcome them. He is one who dares to look his opponents in the face, to read what they have written, and even to quote them; thus showing the confidence which he has in his own views. If, however, we could reach the ear, or the minds, of those who heard these discourses, we would earnestly entreat them to withhold their assent to many of the statements therein contained, till they had, deliberately, and with prayer for Divine guidance, compared them with the testimony of Scripture. We cannot but think that as a whole they would have been regarded by the apostle Paul, or any of the first Christian preachers and missionaries, as exhibiting a Gospel which, if not indeed absolutely "another," at least substituted other doctrines, other discipline, and another spirit, in most important respects, in place of some of those which are to be found in the New Testament. The first sermon of the three is on Acts ii. 47, The Lord added daily to the church such as should be saved. The following is the author's summary of this discourse:-" I endeavoured to show, that in order to salvation, it was necessary, generally speaking, to be added to the church by incorporation, or engrafting, through baptism: that the church itself is a spiritual society, founded by Jesus Christ, its Divine and perpetual Head, its frame and constitution being afterwards constructed and settled by his apostles, acting with his authority, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost; secondly, that its office is, to bring sin ners to Christ, by furnishing to those who are incorporated into it, the means of knowledge and holiness; and that it is not merely instramental as a teacher, bnt sacramental, as conveying and dispensing grace; thirdly, that it consists of all those, who, having been admitted into it by baptism, hold the faith as it is in Jesus, and who use, or do not obstinately refuse and reject, their spiritual privileges; and that all local churches, which can trace their apostolical descent, and teach the pure word of God, and duly administer the ordinances of Christ, are branches, more or less flourishing and faithful, of the one holy universal church. It was further observed, that the definition of the church given in our own articles, makes the essentials of a church to be purity of Scripture doctrine, and sacramental completeness, leaving it still open to inquiry, what the different features of that completeness are; but still it cannot be denied, that all things of necessity requisite to the due administration of the sacraments must be found in a church which justly claims to be a branch of the holy catholic church. The inquiry, what those things are, is intimately connected with the questions which I purpose to make the subject of this and the following discourse." The Bishop denies the right of those who dissent from episcopacy, wherever episcopacy is established, to all claim to be regarded as forming a part of the holy catholic church of Christ. But we must first state that we have carefully endeavoured to ascertain the sentiments of the Bishop of London on the momentous subject of regeneration, so far as they can be gathered from these discourses. He admits that it is not a certain consequence that all who are added to the "visible body of Christ by baptism are finally saved;" but he says, that by this incorporation they are "enabled to do that which, without such incorporation, would have been impracticable, to work out their own salvation." If the Bishop means that, now that the Christian dispensation has been revealed to men, there is no salvation without baptism, what would he say of the case of Cornelius? what must he say of many in our day who exemplify the Christian character in an eminent degree, in its most illustrious features, we allude to many who belong to the society of Friends? No doubt, however, the Bishop would deny the latter a place in the church of God on the ground of their rejection of episcopacy. In answering the question "What is the church?" we are properly told that "it denotes a company of persons believing in Jesus Christ," though in the text the word denotes "the general assembly of the faithful." "To this mystical body," the author proceeds to say, "those who are added are united by baptism; which, says Peter, doth also now save us, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. A new principle of life is infused into him; he is regenerate, born anew of water and of the Spirit, and placed in a new relation to God, as one of his own peculiar family and household," &c.—p. 8. - St. If this is not baptismal regeneration, with a pretty strong tincture of Puseyism, or in other words, Romanism, we know not what is. Nor can we justify the Bishop's quotation from Peter, garbled as it is by the omission of the exegetical clause, which must have effectually prevented the first Christians from understanding the passage almost, if not quite, literally. When a text of Scripture is quoted to support a theological opinion, it ought, in fairness, to be cited in such a way as that mistake as to its bearing should as much as possible be avoided, and that part of the verse ought to have been given to the audience at St. James's, in which the apostle expressly says, that salvation is connected not with mere baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God. Agreeably to this view of baptism, Dr. Blomfield proceeds to affirm, that "the church is the appointed medium, or instrumental means, in and through which individual sinners must appropriate to themselves the pardon which Christ has purchased for all." And here the preacher means something more, it will be seen, than that the Gospel of Christ is intrusted into the hands of the church, in order that the church may diffuse it abroad over the world. The church is, it would seem, a sacramental institution; for we are told, that sinners appropriate to themselves pardon, "first being admitted by baptism into the church, and so acquiring a title to its privileges, and grace to use them." The italics are our own; but this is coming to the point. We have said that these sermons are drawn up with evident caution; considerable pains, we think, appear to have been taken to avoid such statements as may render themselves liable to the charge of being extreme in their own way. Sometimes the Bishop's language is such as to be capable of being understood either in an evangelical, or an orthodox, (highchurch,) or Puseyite sense. But there can be no mistake when we are plainly told, that by baptism into the church, both a title is acquired to its privileges, and grace to use them. Let us see, then, what inference the Bishop draws from the doctrine, that grace to use churchprivileges is acquired by baptism, by which he must mean a pious, holy disposition to employ them aright; at least, if this be not meant by 66 grace to use them," we are absolutely at a loss what signification to attach to the words. The inference is, that "it is of very great importance to every one of us, to ascertain whether he be really a member of the church."" But then follows, as a necessary preliminary, the question, he would found it upon a rock, and that the gates of hell should not prevail against it; and since those who are to be saved must be added thereto, there cannot surely be wanting some distinguishing marks, wherein those who seek for refuge in that ark of safety may recognize the impress of its Divine origin and authority." The upshot of the affair is, that the episcopal church alone is the church-that church of "what that church is of which our Lord himself declared that Christ which thus by her ministers dispenses grace in baptism! that in the British isles the only church of Christ is what is called the "church of England," (the church of Rome, as being episcopal, of course excepted ;) the only institution which bears "the impress of its Divine origin and authority," is the church of England-that church, (0 ye ever-venerated shades of our Puritan and Nonconformist forefathers!) which, for conscience towards God, put your sensitive bodies to the torture, and the dungeon, and the pains of a martyr's death!-that church whose time-serving and double-dealing prelates, in hearty league with the treacherous and abandoned libertine who made them, and whom, by a most solemn mockery and prostitution of sacred words, they had the meanness and the impiety to pronounce in their public prayers, in the face of heaven and the nation, a "most religious king,” condemned you to silence, O ye confessors! Howe, Baxter, Flavel, Owen, Bates, and two thousand more like-minded, and for no other crime than that of being peaceably faithful to your conscientious religious convictions, and nobly daring to disavow the corrupt practices which remained in the Protestant church! The Bishop of London is an intelligent man; but it is quite possible that he may never have read the history of his own church but through the medium of the writings of the high-churchmen on whose authority he so often leans for support in these sermons. We have not much hope of his ever being a church reformer, (for, unhappily, there are counteracting influences preventing a second reformation, which are far more potent than all argument, however convincing in itself,) but we would strongly recommend his lordship to read the short account of the reasons why the Nonconformists were ejected, as given by the learned, candid, and moderate Dr. Calamy, in the introduction to Palmer's Memorial of the Nonconformists. We shall have more to say in the sequel on the claims of the episcopal church of England; we must now content ourselves with respectfully requesting the Bishop of London to point out the method in which the blood-stained tithe-campaigns in Ireland, and the church-rate incarcerations and seizures of property in England, the whole system of ecclesiastical-law rapacity, and the almost entire absence of real Christian discipline which the church of England exhibits, present "the impress of its Divine origin and authority," as distinguished from all other forms and professions of Christianity in this country? On proceeding with the perusal of the first discourse, we meet with further marks of essential Puseyism, or in fact, Romanism. What else but Puseyite or Romish views of the church are inculcated, when the Bishop says that "the church is not merely instrumental, as a teacher, but sacramental, as a medium of the believer's personal union with his Saviour, conveying and dispensing grace?" We can perceive a sense quite consistent with the analogy of faith, in which the church of Christ |