order. So that instead of fostering these sectaries, the truth is, that Presbytery actually fell a victim to their relentless hate. No would we trace these evils to their source, we must go back to the lordliness, profaneness and superstition, to the ceremonies, doctrine and worship, of the prelates.*

But we may meet this calumny by an appeal to facts. In France and Geneva a Presbytery was established, and there, so long as it was allowed to call forth into exercise its internal energies, there were neither sects nor schisms. These churches have since been corrupted only by the Erastian interference of the state, and the destruction of all ecclesiastical discipline. In Scotland Presbytery was established, and there dissenters are not as one to a hundred, compared with England.† In Ireland Presbytery was planted in the province of Ulster, and has it not acted as a purifying element in that land of spiritual corruption and death? In New England, so long as a system closely resembling the Presbyterian was strictly enforced, error, heresy, and immorality, were comparatively unknown. In Virginia Presbytery was planted, and did it not restore truth and piety to the church; impart vigor and energy to the state; uproot the system of state religion, and introduce that entire severance between religion and the civil power, which is now the glorious peculiarity of this land of freedom?

*See Prynne's Eng. Prel. II., 505.

"A few facts." says Mr. Lorimer, in his Manual of Presbytery, p. 192, 193, "may be noticed in this connection, not usually adverted to, but fitted to correct misapprehensions, and honor Presbytery. According to the late census, the population of Presbyterian Scotland is about one-sixth of that of Episcopalian England and Wales. Hence, if the countries were the same in point of religious divisions on church-government, Scotland should have a sixth of the parties which divide England. The result is widely different; much more creditable to the religious unity of Scotland, and the strength of Presbytery over a nation. The Congregationalists of England, and Wales are estimated to have 1600 congregations. If the same division of opinion on church-government prevailed in Scotland, proportionally, there should be nearly 270 Independent congregations. There are only 105, and 21 of these are reported as vacant.

The Baptists of England and Wales are rated at 1520. If the same proportion held in Scotland, there should be much the same number-270 congregations; instead of which, there are 58.

The Wesleyan Methodists have, in England and Wales, above 1100 preachers, and about 330,000 members. In the same proportion, in Scotland, there should have been about 200 preachers, and 55,000 members; instead of which, there are only 30 preachers, and 3700 members.

The Roman Catholics have 561 priests in England and Wales, and 18 convents. Were Scotland equally divided,, or did it equally favor the same soul-destroying system, it should have had 93 priests, and three convents. It has 80 of the one, and one of the other; and that, though old Popery has held some parts of the Highlands and islands as its ancient seat, undisturbed by the Reformation, and though near neighborhood to Popish Ireland has, in later days, given it superior facilities, which have not been unimproved, for invading the Scottish shores.

I have not been able precisely to ascertain the numbers of the Socinion body in England and Wales. Probably they may count 300 congregations. According to this proportion, Scotland should have 50; but so sound has Presbytery kept the country, that she has not five."

In fine, to apply to the Presbyterian party generally, what Milton says of the Long Parliament: "Having by a solemn protestation vowed themselves and the kingdom anew to God and his service, meeting next, as I may so resemble, with the second life of tyranny (for she was grown an ambiguous monster, and to be slain in two shapes) guarded with superstition, which hath no small power to captivate the minds of men otherwise most wise, they neither were taken with her mitred hypocrisy, nor terrified with the push of her bestial horns, but breaking them immediately, forced her to unbend the pontifical brow and recoil; which repulse only given to the prelates (that we may imagine how happy their removal would be) was the producement of such glorious effects and consequences in the church, that if I should compare them with those exploits of highest fame in poems and panegyricks of old, I am certain it would but diminish and impair their work, who are now my argument: for these ancient worthies delivered men from such tyrants as were content to enforce only an outward obedience, letting the mind be as free as it could; but these have freed us from a doctrine of tyranny, that offered violence and corruption even to the inward persuasion. They set at liberty nations and cities of men, good and bad mixed together; but these, opening the dungeons and prisons, called out of darkness and bonds the elect martyrs and witnesses of their Redeemer. They restored the body to ease and wealth; but these, the oppressed conscience to that freedom which is the chief prerogative of the gospel; taking off those cruel burdens imposed not by necessity, as other tyrants are wont, or the safeguard of their lives, but laid upon our necks by the strange wilfulness anl wantonness of a needless and jolly persecutor, called Indifference. Lastly, some of these ancient deliverers have had immortal praise for preserving some of their citizens from a famine of corn. But these, by this only repulse of an unholy hierarchy, almost in a moment replenished with saving knowledge their country, nigh famished for want of that which should feed their souls. All this being done while two armies in the field stood gazing on the one in reverence of such nobleness, quietly gave back and dislodged; the other, in spite of the unruliness and doubted fidelity in some regiments, was either persuaded or compelled to disband and retire home."

But we must here pause. Enough has been said to constitute a sufficient claim to our gratitude, and a justification of the wisdom of this commemoration. Romanists receive their missal almost as inspiration, and yet it is an inharmonious patchwork, compiled from materials drawn from every period of the church, like some old cathedral made up of buildings of

*See McCrie's Unity, p. 160, 161, 165--McCrie's Scott. Hist., p. 108, 106.

every order, variety, and age. Episcopalians are never weary of praising their liturgy, which is nevertheless all borrowed, and filled with endless repetitions. And both Romanists and Prelatists laud to the skies their articles and creeds, which admit the most contrary and latitudinarian interpretations,* and shall not Presbyterians honor and commemorate those men who have given to us original standards, drawn, not from the muddy streams of human authority, but from the pure and uncorrupted fountain of everlasting truth?

Americans annually celebrate the Declaration of Independence, and preserve the memory of its glorious signers? And shall not Presbyterians commemorate the fame of those men to whom that declaration and the spirit that gave it birth can be assuredly traced?

The Israelites observed an annual festival in grateful commemoration of their deliverance from the bondage of Egypt, and on different occasions contributed most liberally to the advancement of their ecclesiastical interests;-and shall we be found less zealous in the remembrance of our deliverance from the bondage of Romish and Prelatical tyranny, or less willing to communicate of our substance to carry on, to diffuse, and to establish those civil and religious blessings which have been achieved for us by blood?

This centennial celebration of the Westminster Assembly is most timely and auspicious. In the standards of that body there is a common and substantial basis, upon which all orthodox, non-episcopal communions can harmoniously unite. It is astonishing to find how very nearly the Presbyterians and Congregationalists in that body were agreed. In all that was essential they were as one. And wherever the doctrines of these standards are fully and cordially embraced, is there not still the same essential unity? There is, among all such, by whatever name they are called, and however in subordinate matters they may differ, "there is one body, and one spirit, even as we are called, in one hope of our calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of all." Are we not all brethren, and members together of the household of faith? We are. By all the marks of the true church of Jesus Christ, as laid down in the word of God; by all the principles which constitute the glorious gospel of the blessed God; by all the tests of piety and the evidences of Christian character; by all those hopes and aims and labors to which the Christian is called of God-we are one. This epoch is our common anniversary. We are alike interested in its glorous recollections and in its

*Witness the Oxford Tractarians, the Newmanites, and the Evangelical parties in England, and the respective interpretations of the Rev. Mr. Carey and Drs. Smith and Anthon in our own country.

forthcoming destinies. We feel on this occasion that, notwithstanding our differences in ecclesiastical arrangements, and baptismal forms, we are one. Like the members of a large family we have been scattered, and lived apart, and gathered around us new and separate interests. But we are on this occasion brought together. We revisit our old ancestral homestead. We read over the original deeds by which we became heirs to the same rich inheritance. The ties of blood draw our hearts together, and we embrace one another in the arms of spiritual affection.

This, brethren, is to me the happiest issue to which this commemoration leads. It will serve to promote other valuable ends. It will contribute to the establishment of the minds of our youth in the principles of our ecclesiastical polity, and thus prevent apostasy. It will tend to the greater elevation and usefulness of our Assembly's Board of Publication, by creating a demand for works of denominational instruction. But its adaptation to promote unity among the different branches of the church who hold the truth, is most auspicious. It has already given birth to overtures of union and friendly co-operation, on the common basis of Protestant evangelical truth, among all the orthodox, non-episcopal churches of Great Britain; and it will, we trust, eventuate in a solemn league and covenant among all such, for the defence of our common rights against our common enemies. Triumphing in our alienations, these enemies have come up in all their might against us. They are at our gates. We hear their loud bravado shouts of anticipated victory. But, thank God, our hearts are not daunted. God has given to us the spirit of courage and of confident hope. He has enkindled within us the feelings of Christian brotherhood and love. Against Popery, Prelacy in its high-church phrase, and heresy, we are one. And endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, we shall henceforth be found contending earnestly for our common principles, and for that faith which was once delivered to the saints, until God shall give us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. May God grant it, and to his name shall be all the praise.

APPENDIX.

THE ORJECTION FOUNDED UPON THE PERSECUTING PRINCIPLES AND CONDUCT OF PRESBYTERIANIANS, ANSWERED.

From the Author's Work on Ecclesiastical Republicanism.

But an overwhelming argument is brought to bear against all these claims to superior liberality, on the ground that the Presbyterian church has, in past days, cherished exclusive and persecuting principles, and manifested this spirit in her conduct; and that some Presbyterian bodies are still found willing to sanction these principles.* Now to the truth of both these facts, we grant our reluctant and most sorrowful confession. And while much might be said to palliate the guilt of such intolerance, and to show that in comparison with the course pursued by the Papacy and the Prelacy, it was fitful, temporary, and partial, while their intolerance has been constant, universal, and applied to opinions as well as to forms;—yet we take refuge in no apology.* We make no excuse. We are rather willing to join in the execration of such principles, and the condemnation of such acts, (so far as facts will show that they were cherished and carried out,) as utterly alien to the spirit of the gospel, and to the genius of Presbyterianism. And that a portion of the Covenanters should still maintain these views, is a fact inexplicable for its mystery, inexcusable for its absurdity, and unparalleled for its anomaly.

But what have we to do with the conduct of these brethren, with whom, although agreeing in most points, we differ in this matter toto coelo; with whom we have no ecclesiastical connection whatever; and for whose opinions on this subject we are no more responsible, than we are as Christians for the corruptions of all those who are called by that name. We now advocate the claims, and present the sentiments, of 'THE PRESBY

*Dr. How's Vind. of Prot. Ep. Ch. pp. 47, 48, 374, 375. This charge is not seldom also brought against us by Congregationalists, who stand in need of a common defence. But that, in former days, they made their views of the constituiton of a church an article of faith, appertaining to salvation, may be seen by numerous quotations in Paget's Def. of Presb. Ch. Gov. p. 33. As to the lengths to which they then proceeded, see Bastwick's Utter Routing, &c. Epistle to the Reader. See also the history of their proceedings in New England, as given in Clark's Hist. of Intolerance, vol. i. Pref., and in all other histories. Dr. Lang's Relig. and Educ. in America, p. 125. &c., where he shows that "Cromwell's own clergy," accepted sequestered benefices of the Church of England. See further, on this subject, from Mr. Lorimer, on p. 232.

This forms the whole strength of Bishop Hughes's argument in proof of the opposition of Presbyterianism to civil and religious liberty. See discussion.

*See Dr. Binney's Dissent not Schism, p. 74, though an Independent.