is necessary unto salvation,--That nevertheless the inward illumination of the Spirit of God is necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the word,―That in the Unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost,-That Adam being the root of all mankind, the guilt of his first sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, and That the Lord Jesus Christ by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father, and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto him." But all these fundamental truths of divine revelation, the persons who occupy the majority of the Presbyterian Chapels in England distinctly deny, and hold sentiments upon these subjects utterly subversive of the doctrines of the Confession of Faith. It is perfectly evident, therefore, that they have deserted the standards of the Presbyterian Church, and entertain Socinian tenets, inasmuch as they exalt human reason to a station of higher authority than God's word, in matters of religion; and inasmuch as they exclude from their creed the doctrines of original sin-of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ-of the atoning efficacy of his blood-and of the necessity of the Holy Spirit's influences to conversion and eternal life.

Proof of these charges of heresy scarcely seems needful, for it is believed that the people against whom they are adduced, would deem it a serious misfortune, if they could religiously credit any one of the doctrines which, it is here alleged, they deny. Yet in evidence of the allegations advanced, an appeal may be made to the facts of their having maintained the accuracy of the Socinian translation of the Scriptures, called the "Improved Version"—of their having avowed, in their sermons, publications, and conversations, the sentiments of Socinus and of their having a most elaborate judgment given against them by the vice-chancellor of England, in the recent case respecting Lady Hewley's charity,- a judgment supported by the clearest evidence, that the trustees of that charity and all who adhere to their views of religion, entertain tenets diametrically opposed to the principles of the old English Presbyterians.

Nor does it appear less certain that the Socinians or Unitarians have totally departed from the mode of church-polity

maintained by Presbyterians, as well as from the essential doctrines of Christianity. Where do we find, amongst that sect, even one of the several sorts of assemblies-congregagational, classical, and synodical-for which Presbyterians contend in the government of Christ's church? Apparently conscious that the slightest resemblance to Presbyterianism did not exist in that body, its leading ministers some months ago published a circular, recommending a General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in England, thus restoring the ecclesiastical councils, set forth by the form of church-government usually appended to the Westminster Confession of Faith. The attempt seems to have proved a failure; and it does not exceed the limits of charity to affirm, that, but for the movement made in regard to Lady Hewley's funds, the proposal would never have met the eye of the public. The Unitarians of England, then, being, in all respects, as essentially different from the old English Presbyterians, as darkness differs from light, and heathenism from pure christianity, it would be an honour to humanity, did justice compel them. to surrender the chapels and endowments which they unrigh`teously hold, it would be a pleasing exemplification of candour, of which they make a mighty boast, did they at once and for ever renounce the " Presbyterian name." To retain a designation totally incompatible with their avowed principles, and to promulgate their pernicious tenets under the banners of a church whose essential doctrines they despise, and whose ecclesiastical polity they practically contemn, seem quite irreconcileable with the character of honest men.

It being, then, beyond dispute, that the Arians and Unitarians in England, who assume the designation of " Presbyterians," have not a shred in common with the articles of the Westminster Assembly, they cannot be viewed as the legitimate offspring of the old English Presbyterians. Nevertheless that once flourishing church has not become totally annihilated. The branch of the Presbyterian Church in England, connected with the establishment of Scotland, retains the essential properties-adheres to all the articles designed for religious uniformity in the three kingdoms-and seeks to observe the outward forms, as well as to maintain the doctrines indispensably requisite to the faith and procedure of the Presbyterians anciently established in this section of the British empire. In support of these declarations, it may only be needful to allude to the efforts at present making by this denomination, to obtain a direct and vital connexion with the mother church in

Presbyterianism in England.

315

Scotland; to appeal to the fact of its ministers, with a few exceptions, being regularly formed into Presbyteries; and to adduce an extract from the formula which all its ministers and elders have solemnly to avow and to subscribe at their ordination :-"I do hereby declare, that I do sincerely own and believe the whole doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith. As likewise I do own the purity of worship presently authorised and practiced in this church; and also the Presbyterian government and discipline now so happily established therein which doctrine, worship, and church-government, I am persuaded, are founded upon the word of God, and agreeable thereto. And I promise that, through the grace of God, I shall firmly maintain and defend the said doctrine, worship, discipline, and government of this church, by Kirk-sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, and General Assemblies; and that I shall never endeavour, directly or indirectly, the prejudice or subversion of the same."

In this formula of the Church of Scotland which her ministers in England, as well as at home, have to subscribe, there is a distinct recognition of the four grand branches of religious uniformity agreed on by the Westminster Assembly, and ratified by Parliament. This point has been so well brought into view, in a circular lately published in Northumberland, in reference to Lady Hewley's fund, that a few sentences may be here fitly transcribed, making some slight alterations to suit the present discussion. "There is still a church in England, the ministers and members of which are children, according to the faith, and therefore the lineal ecclesiastical representatives of the old English Presbyterians. The Presbytery of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, whose records-and the earliest of them are lost-go back for nearly one hundred years; and the Presbyteries of Northumberland, and the North-West of England, together with other Presbyteries and a goodly number of churches, hold exactly the same standards of faith, and observe exactly the same forms of worship, discipline, and government, as did the old English Presbyterians. They believe that civil and legal establishments of Christianity are both expedient and scriptural, so did the old English Presbyterians. They are in communion with the Church of Scotland, and so were the old English Presbyterians. Many of them can trace back their history to the times of the old English Presbyterians; but though not one of them could, a church's descent is not to be reckoned by descent of blood, nor even by continuity of visible appearance, but by the pro

fession of the same doctrine, and observance of the form of worship, discipline, and government; and, therefore, though not one of the Presbyterian Churches in England could trace back its history to the times of the old English Presbyterians; though all of them had been planted but yesterday, and were every one of them composed of members who had been born in another kingdom, yet holding exactly the same standards, both doctrinal and disciplinary, which were framed and held by the old English Presbyterians, they are representatives, and are therefore entitled fairly to participate in those endowments which were made by the old English Presbyterians, for the support of what they considered the Gospel of salvation."

The contrast between the adverse and prosperous fortunes of the Presbyterian Church in England affords a deeplyaffecting view of the diminution of her numbers, the alienation of her property, and the gross perversion of her chapels, from the design for which they were intended, by the persons who erected them, and in many cases endowed them. This humble state of a once prosperous church calls loudly to the Presbyterians of England for strict adherence to the religious principles of their ancestors-for the regular observance of their excellent form of church-government-and for united and zealous efforts to regain possession of the charitable funds, for the maintenance of Gospel ministers. This distressing reverse of fortune, in spiritual matters, lifts a warning voice to the Presbyterians of Scotland and of Ireland to have their members thoroughly grounded in the principles of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, that they may withstand temptation to error, when assailed by it; and when they leave the land of their fathers, may not forsake, as many do, the principles of Christianity into which they have been baptized. This humiliating state of things calls, in fine, for earnest, importunate, and persevering prayer to the Almighty, through the only Mediator, Christ Jesus the Lord, that the efforts and poisonous heresies of unbelieving men may be counteracted by the faithful, zealous, and successful preaching of the Gospel every where.

Cumberland, 8th May, 1834.

R. E.

SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATED.

Mark vii. 1-13.

THE traditions of which we read here and elsewhere, in the New Testament, were of comparatively recent origin. According to the most authentic information, they were fabricated shortly after the time of Malachi. From the death of this prophet until the preaching of John the Baptist, no divinely inspired instructor appeared in Israel. During this interval of about four hundred years, corruptions sprung up-the Supreme Authority of the written word was gradually lowered -and a crowd of superstitious and unmeaning fables, under the name of the "Traditions of the Elders," were imposed upon the church. In the days of our Saviour the Jews gave the most fanciful history of the rise of these traditions. They alleged that they were as ancient as the age of Moses; that they were delivered by the Almighty from Mount Sinai, together with the written law; that they were then committed to the charge of the elders of Israel; and that by them they had been handed down from generation to generation. It is unnecessary to enter into a lengthened exposure of the falsehood of this ill-constructed tale. It may be sufficient to observe, that the Old Testament does not give it the slightest sanction; that in the whole range of Scripture, from Exodus to Malachi, we do not find any recognition of an unwritten code of divine enactments. The traditions of the elders were generally of a most absurd and trifling description. About one hundred and fifty years after Christ, a celebrated Jewish Rabbi collected them together, and thus formed what has been called their Mishnah. This Mishnah, or book of traditions, accompanied by the interpretations of some of their ancient men of learning, composes the present Jewish Talmud. The law of Moses required the Israelites, under particular circumstances, to wash their flesh in water, that they might thus be purified from ceremonial uncleanness. In this way God designed to remind them of the necessity of that sanctification of the Spirit which is an essential qualification of all his acceptable worshippers. The tradition of the elders, which the Pharisees were here so desirous to maintain, was an unauthorized addition to this sacred rite. They taught that the washing of the hands before meat was a religious duty. When they came from the market, or place of business, they also observed this practice, affirming that they might there have con