he resolved to return home. He passed through Dort, where the president, and others of the synod, took a solemn leave of him. He was also visited by the deputies of the states; and a gold medal was afterwards presented to him, containing a representation of the synod, which he generally wore suspended by a riband from his neck.

Though his own views were unquestionably Calvinistic, his moderation may be gathered from his "Via Media," written soon after. It had been well for the cause of sound religion had all the deputies assembled at the synod breathed the same Christian spirit. No one can defend the proceedings of the synod. Persecution, under any circumstances, is bad; for it is diametrically opposed to the principles and precepts of the Gospel; its malignity and heinousness are infinitely increased when its object is to punish others for maintaining those views which they firmly believe to be in accordance with God's revealed word. The Church of Rome is not the only Church that must plead guilty in this particular.

Dr. Hall was offered the bishopric of Gloucester in 1624, and earnestly pressed to accept it; but he resolately declined. On the 29th of January, 1625, he preached a thanksgiving sermon before the king at Whitehall, on the cessation of the plague in London. In 1627, he was raised to the see of Exeter, and consecrated December 3d, holding, at the same time, the rectory of St. Brook, in Cornwall, in commendam.

"Some

But though thus raised in rank, he does not seem to have gained an increase of happiness. On entering on this new sphere of labour he met with very much to dispirit and to annoy him. "I entered upon that place," he says, "not without much prejudice and suspicion on some hands; for some who sat at the stern of the Church had me in great jealousy for too much favour of puritanism. I soon had intelligence who were set over me for spies: my ways were curiously observed and scanned." For a time matters went on very smoothly; but at length opposition was shewn to his plans for the more effectual instruction of his diocese, by those who were culpably negligent in the discharge of their parochial duties. persons of note in the clergy, finding me ever ready to encourage those whom I found conscionably forward and painful in their places, and willingly giving way to orthodox and peaceable lectures, in several parts of my diocese, opened their mouths against me, both obliquely in the pulpits, and directly at the court, complaining of my too much indulgence to persons disaffected, and my too much liberty of frequent lecturings within my charge. The billows went so high, that I was three several times upon my knees to his majesty to answer these great criminations; and what contestation I had with some great lords concerning these particulars, it would be too long to report: only this, under how dark a cloud I was hereupon, I was so sensible, that I plainly told the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury [Laud], that rather than I would be obnoxious to these slanderous tongues of his misinformers, I would cast off my rochet. I knew I went

Tia Media, the way of peace in the five busy articles, commonly known by the name of Arminian, wherein is laid forth * fair an accommodation of the different opinions as may contut both parts, and procure happy accord.

right ways, and would not endure to live under undeserved suspicions."

The archbishop was vehemently opposed to puritanism. He watched, with the most scrupulous alarm, every innovation which appeared in the most remote degree to favour its growth. A society was formed for the endowment of preacherships in various dark and destitute parishes; but by Archbishop Laud's interference its promoters were called into the Starchamber, and compelled to abandon their plan. Bishop Hall was, moreover, grieved while he held the see of Exeter by the revival of the "Book of Sports," with additions, and which was patronised by Laud. Many of the clergy were opposed to the circulation of the work, and were consequently deprived of their livings, though no instance of such removal took place in the diocese of Exeter. It is painful to reflect that such open desecration of the Lord's-day should have been countenanced by the highest authority in the land; and that even those who held the highest offices in the Church should have sanctioned such a desecration. The Sabbath, indeed, was made for man, for the refreshment of his body, and also for the refreshment of his soul; and any laxity as to its observance as a day of holy rest consecrated to the service of Jehovah, is a lamentable evidence of the non-existence of vitality of religion in the soul. It is necessary to consider this in reference to the present subject, because this same Book of Sports is not unfrequently appealed to by the ungodly at the present day as a proof that the law of the land at least, whatever the law of God may do, permits, nay, even recommends, recreations, the tendency of which is to dissipate all serious thoughts, and to render the Sabbath void as a gracious means for religious improvement.

Bishop Hall is not the only prelate against whom the charge of a leaning to puritanism has been brought, because he was more than usually active and energetic in his high and holy calling, and because he was a stanch defender of the doctrines of the Established Church as set forth in its articles, liturgy, and homilies. At the time he filled the see of Exeter there was unquestionably no small departure from the simplicity of the Gospel in many of those who filled places of high rank and trust in the Church; and it can scarcely excite wonder that he was regarded with no very favourable eye, that spies were employed to watch his proceedings, and, if possible, bring such an accusation against him as might afford a plea for removing him from his office, and supplying his place with a prelate who would be more subservient to the pleasure of the primate.

Though the good bishop, however, was looked upon as a puritan, and not over-much attached to the Episcopal Church, yet, at the very commencement of those troubles which ended in the great rebellion, he wrote most energetically in defence of episcopacy. His treatises on the subject were: 1. " Episcopacie by divine right asserted" (London, 1610, 4to). The treatise, dedicated to the king, was occasioned by Graham, bishop of Orkney, renouncing his episcopal function before the whole body of the clergy assembled at Edinburgh, and craving pardon for having accepted it, as if by so doing he had committed some heinous offence; an uncouth act," as the bishop terms it,

"more than enough to inflame any dutiful son of the Church." This treatise commences in the following strong and energetic language:-" Good God! what is this that I have lived to hear? that a bishop, in a Christian assembly, should renounce his episcopal function, and cry mercy for his now abandoned calling? Brother that was (whoever you be), I must have leave awhile to contest seriously with you: the act was yours the concernment the whole Church's; you could not think so foul a deed could escape unpunished. The world never heard of such a penance; you cannot blame us if we receive it both with wonder and expostulation, and tell you it had been much better to have been unborn than to live to give so heinous a scandal to God's Church, and so deep a wound to his holy truth and ordinance. If Tweed that runs betwixt us were an ocean, it could not either drown, or wash off, our interest or your offence: however you may be applauded for the time by some ignorant and partial abettor, wiser posterity shall blush for you, and censure you too justly for some kind of apostasy.... How weary should I be of this rochet if you can shew me that episcopacy is less than Divine institution." Surely such forcible language is an index of the true state of the bishop's view with respect to episcopacy. He published, 2dly, "An humble Remonstrance to the High Court of Parliament, by a dutiful Son of the Church" (London, 1640, 4to), in behalf of the liturgy and episcopacy.

To this Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstow, jointly wrote an answer, under the name of "Smectymnus," composed of the initials of their own; which they called, "An Answer to a book intitled, An humble Remonstrance:' in which the original of Liturgy and Episcopacy is discussed; and queries propounded concerning both," &c. (London, 1641, 4to). Whereupon Bishop Hall wrote, 3. “ A Defence of the Humble Remonstrance,' against the frivolous and false exceptions of Smectymnus: wherein the right of Liturgy and Episcopacy is clearly vindicated from the vain cavils and challenges of the Answerers," &c. (London, 1641). Smectymnus replying in "A Vindication of the Answer to the Humble Remonstrance' from the unjust imputations of frivolousness and falsehood: wherein the cause of the Liturgy and Episcopacy is further debated" (London, 1641, 4to). Bishop Hall concluded the dispute with, 4. "A short Answer to the tedious Vindication' of Smectymnus, by the Author of the Humble Remonstrance'" (London, 1641, 4to).

In November 1641, Bishop Hall was translated to the see of Norwich. 0.

of God; to hold forth to sinful man a sure mode of reconciliation to his Maker; and to teach the way of advancing his soul to the highest perfection of its nature. The Church which cherishes these principles cannot be erroneous; the Church which counteracts them cannot be a true one.

The Church of England, knowing the darkness and inefficiency of unassisted human nature, readily assents to the assertion, "that we must be all taught of God." So mysterious in nature, and so surpassing all finite intellect, is this eternal Being, that to attempt the knowledge of him is a dangerous essay for the feeble brain of man. This Zophar indicated to his friend Job in the question, "Canst thou by searching find out the Almighty?" To know him may be life, and to mention his name may be joy; but our soundest knowledge is, that naturally we know him not as he is; and our safest eloquence concerning him is silence. With this view our Church attempts not to portray him and his attributes but according to the revealed word of God. In accordance with that, she teaches that he is the only God, "who in the beginning created the heavens and the earth;" "who formed the worlds visible and invisible;" and that it is "he who upholdeth all things by the word of his power." We are continually under his providence and inspection: "he compasseth our path and our lying down, and is acquainted with all our ways:" he observes all our for the righteous; verily he is a God that judgeth the actions: so that we may say, " Verily there is a reward earth." We are to "worship him in the beauty of holiness." Our Church, like the prophet of old, laughs to scorn the idea of including Omnipotence in an worship by idols: she justly also discards the carnal image made by man. She abhors the pagan mode of

mode of Jewish worship; being convinced that "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." She teaches her children "to renounce such idols and vanities, and to serve the living God."

A second characteristic of the Gospel of Christ isto hold forth to sinful man a sure mode of reconciliation to his Maker. That sin is an indignity done to God, and therefore deserving of punishment, very naturally entered into the sense of all mankind. To appease the anger of a justly offended Deity conworship. The purpose of their adoration was correct, stituted an essential part of pagan as well as Jewish but their mode of application was erroneous and defective. In this respect our Church scrupulously adheres to this truth" that sin cannot be expiated by any service man can do." Yet how hopeless must be the case of sinners of every generation, if " they had not been taught of God." The heathen wandered blindly amidst the errors and filth of their polytheism; and the Jews, though blessed with the principles of a true religion, are to this day employed in a false profession of it. The mystery of the reconciliation of religion. Our Church builds the hopes of her followers sinners to God is the proper character of the Christian

upon this foundation, this surest character of a true religion. She teaches how God can shew his justice in punishing sin, and yet be so merciful as to pardon the sinner. The justice of God demanded some compensation for his broken law, and an adequate recompense for the dishonour done to him. With this truth in view, sinful man must have at once seen the hopelessness of his case, and the necessity of a Mediator. "Yet to whom should he flee for help?" the love of God alone originated the redemption of man. He appointed his own Son to undertake the work; yet the Son himself, being immortal, could not undergo the penalties of the law without becoming incarnate. He assumed our nature, and thus "he that knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

In

It is thus the great Ruler of the world received

worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." But what are we to think of the purity and truth of that Church which permits and directs the knee to be bowed, and adoration to be made, before an image made by man? In vain does it attempt to palliate such impiety, by pleading, that the image is set up, not for worshipping, but for exciting the senses and the imagination. However men of higher faculties might avoid the impiety, it constitutes a snare to the generality and vulgar, who will be ready to think that God is like to the image they fall down before. This form of adoration is, however, contrary both to the Divine essence and command. What would you, as Englishmen, think, if the lowest of earthly creation, a toad or a worm, were to be set forth as the image of your king; and that your civil reverence was ordered to be paid thereto? As English Christians, you must be sensible that a greater indignity is done to the Divine nature, by worshipping God under the form of an image. The essence of God is incomprehensible and invisible to us.

"He hath no shape or figure."

Such image-worship is contrary to the Divine precept, that "no graven image, nor the likeness, should be made to be worshipped." The Church of Rome has, indeed, omitted this precept in her version of the decalogue; but she has failed of her purpose, for the Bible furnishes us with other and ample testimony to God's displeasure at this kind of worship. By the mouth of the evangelical prophet Isaiah he hath said, "My glory will I not give to another; neither my praise to graven images." The Church which does this cannot be a true Christian Church.

In another point of view we shall perceive the erroneous teaching of the Church of Rome, viz., in shewing to sinful man the mode of reconciliation to his Maker. When the sinner conceives the wish to break from his sins, and to enter upon a life of holiness, ample encouragement is afforded him by the certainty that his sins may be forgiven, and heavenly aid supplied for his future struggles. Such assurance is held out in the Gospel by the blood of Christ, and the assistance of his Holy Spirit. It is to this the obnoxious sinner is directed by our Church to apply. This she points out to him as the only mode of returning to God and happiness. "If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins." But how does the Church of Rome derogate from this office of Christ, by associating with him in such work created beings, saints, angels, and the Virgin Mary! Shall we, for whom he suffered, rob him so sacrilegiously of his honour, and bestow it on those who are our fellow-servants?

Again, we read in the Gospel of truth, that the expiation of sin was fully and alone made by the sacrifice of that Lamb of God" who became sin for us, and bare our sins in his own body." What indignity, then, does the Church of Rome offer to this suffering love, when she sets the merits and works of men on an equality with the blood of Jesus? It is a favourite doctrine with this misguided Church, that the inherent holiness of good men is a thing of its own nature so perfect, that, upon the account of it, God is bound to esteem them just, and to justify them. Our better teaching asserts, "that should the Lord mark iniquities, no one could stand before him." We believe that he is pleased with the inward reformation he sees in good men in whom his grace dwells; we believe that he approves and accepts their sincerity: still, there is such an imperfection in it, that his acceptance of it must be deemed an act of mercy and grace. The very best of men must acknowledge himself a sinner; and, would he be saved, he must cast himself at the foot of the cross, and say, "God be merciful to me, a miserable sinner." Such is Christian penitence, such is Gospel faith. Of what a different texture from this is the confession used by the Church of Rome, which is

the act of disburdening the conscience to a priest, and the doing of which is termed a satisfaction! The true notion of religion is, that it is a system of many truths, which are of such efficacy, that, if we receive them into our minds, and are governed by them, they will, through grace, rectify our thoughts and purify our natures. By making us like God here, they will put us in a sure way to enjoy him eternally hereafter. Sorrow for past sins, and all reflections upon them, are enjoined us as means to make the sense of them penetrate so deep into our minds, as to free us from all those bad habits that sin leaves in us, and from those evil inclinations that are in our nature. If we set up, therefore, a sorrowing for sin as a merchandise with God-by so many acts of one kind to take off the acts of another-the true design of our sorrow is turned into a mere trafficking. And, however priests may gain by this, religion will certainly lose in its main design, which is planting a new nature in us, and the making us become like God. True Gospel repentance imports a renovation of the inner man, and a purity of No repentance, then, can be esteemed true, but as we perceive it has purified the heart, and changed the course of life. This touchstone will prove the fallacy of Romish confession and absolution; for there the priest, having enjoined the penance, without waiting for proof of obedience, lays his hand on the head, and pronounces absolution! These deformities in the Romish Church manifestly indicate its discordance with the spirit and truth of the Christian religion, and derogate from the honour due to Jesus, the " only

life.

Mediator of the new covenant."

We come now to the third character of a true Church that it teaches the way of advancing our We souls to the highest perfection of their natures. have already seen how erroneous, in one instance, for this purpose, is the teaching of the Church of Rome. The penance enjoined to her sinning followers tends only to nourish the life of sin in them, when they see a trade set up with which they can buy themselves off from the wrath of God. The Gospel of Christ unites the soul of man to God by the graces of faith, hope, and charity. But how is the purity of Christian faith debased by Romish image-worship and idolatry of saints! How is the Christian's hope of future blessedness damped by the Romish doctrine of purgatory! And how does their hatred and opposition to all who differ from them counteract the charity of the Gospel! In the teaching of holy Paul, charity is shewn to be a principle of love to God and good-will to men. suffereth long, and is kind: it envieth not, vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up." It is a grace which is never lost, but goes with us into another world, and is exercised there. It cannot be that heaven-born feeling which St. Paul taught, that would expose a fellowmortal to horrid tortures and death by burning. Such is not the way to perfect, but to debase, human

nature.

"It

Whenever impositions are placed more than are allowed by the Gospel of Christ, Christian liberty is infringed, and a grievous yoke is attempted to be laid. It is this sore burden of the Romish Church which we refuse to bear, and on account of which our wise forefathers withdrew from her communion. We believe

that " holy Scripture containeth all things necessary

to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation" (Art. 6).

The Church which would make additions to what is in holy Scripture must be erroneous, and is tyrannical in exacting belief and obedience thereto. We believe that God is "to be worshipped in spirit and in truth ;” but we cannot agree with the Church of Rome in worshipping him by images and sensible figures. We believe that Christ is the Mediator between God and

not of a like nature, and cannot be viewed in the same light as baptism and the Lord's supper. Apostolical ceremonies some of them are, but not one of them was ordained by Christ himself, as a means of grace, or a pledge to assure us thereof.

It is not without pain that we have traced the errors of a Church professing itself to be Christian. It is with sorrow that we read of temples, at first raised to worship God in spirit and in truth, become the habitations of idols and graven images, whereby God is provoked to jealousy. We trust, however, there is sufficient reason for holding up for avoidance the errors of a Church which hath not only "fallen from her first love" and purity, but hath, in essential points, corrupted our holy faith.

CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP:
A Sermon,

BY THE REV. R. P. BLAKE, M.A.
Curate of Stoke, near Guildford.

1 Joux, i. 6, 7. "If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth: but if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

THE message we are charged to deliver to you is that of the Gospel of the Son of God. It is a rich provision of mercy for otherwise condemned persons; it is a method of bringing out from a guilty world, by the power of the Holy Spirit, a company of immortal beings to hold a blessed communion with each other and with God-a company of sinners rescued and called to be saints, advancing in godliness, and heirs of eternal glory.

The message is by many despised; by some misunderstood; and by comparatively few (though, taken together, they are a multitude which no man can number) it is received in faith, and with thankfulness. To warn and invite sinners to listen to this gracious message; to prevent misunderstanding thereof; to build up believers in their most holy faith, are the objects of the Christian ministry and in this way I would endeavour now, by the blessing of God, to exercise it.

Our Saviour appointed the Lord's supper as a special remembrance of the only way of salvation, and as a means of communion and an effectual channel of grace among them that believe. To that sacrament such of you as are religiously and devoutly disposed are invited this day. In the text, then, it appears to me, that while our thoughts are directed to the most proper object of contemplation-the great sacrifice we commemo

in Christian communion-we are, at the same time, warned against expecting to enjoy them, or even to share the salvation which is in Christ, except in the exercise of that true and manifested by godliness. lively "faith which worketh by love," and is

That which is mentioned last in the text I propose to bring first before you, for it is the foundation of the Christian's hope, and should be the very frequent subject of his thoughtsthe atonement by Christ. "The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." I would endeavour to impress you with a sense of the value and importance of this statement, chiefly by a reference to Scripture, the sure and unfailing testimony of truth.

First, I would point out how dreadful a thing is sin, from which the blood of Jesus cleanses those that believe in him.

If we inquire what is sin? the Bible answers, "all unrighteousness is sin"-" sin is the transgression of the law." Whose law? The law of God. It is the disobeying, the insulting the good Being who made us, who loved us, and sent his Son to save us. How black and horrid is the guilt of this, though sinners little think so! But is it asked, What is the consequence of sin? The Bible tells us it is just what we might have expected from its very wickedness. "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men." "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them ;"-" the wages of sin is death ;”—“ the wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the people that forget God."

All this renders it so sad to know the prevalence of sin; its commonness, as testified both by Scripture and by conscience and experience, that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God;" that "there is none righteous, no, not one;" that "by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, and that so death passed upon all men." I do not recite these texts to give you any comfort in sin from the fact that all are sinners, because that can never afford you a hope of escape; but I recite them to induce each to look into his own heart; to remind such as already know it of what has been, if it be not now, their state; and to convince any who are puffed up with vain and false estimation of themselves, of their share in the general condemnation. To forget God is sin; to live in carelessness of our souls is sin; to be high in our own esteem, and proud of our freedom from gross vice, is sin. Sin, in some form or other, hath polluted every one of us, because we were "born in sin;" and the consequence is, that by nature we are "children of wrath."