cautious of establishing a system, of which so ungracious a regulation formed a part. There is truth, worthy of grave attention, in the ludicrous verses of Cowper. Speaking of the tithing-time of his friend Unwin, he says,— "It is easy to perceive that the influence of that man's exhortations must be diminished, whose hearers listen with the reflection, that his advice is plaguy dear.' The reflection, too, is perfectly natural, and therefore cannot be helped. And when superadded to this, is the consideration that it is not only sold dear,' but that payment is enforced, material injury must be sustained, by the cause of religion. In this view, it may be remarked, that the support of a establishment by a general tax, would be preferable to the payment of each pastor by his own hearers. Nor is it unworthy of notice, that some persons will always think (whether with reason or without it), that compulsory maintenance is not right; and in whatever degree they do this, there is an increased cause of dissatisfaction or estrangement. "Again. The teacher who is independent of the congregationwho will enjoy all his emoluments whether they are satisfied with him or not, is under manifest temptations to remissness in his duty not perhaps to remissness in those particulars on which his superiors would animadvert-but on those which respect the unstipulated and undefinable, but very important duties of private care and of private labours. To mention this is sufficient.-No man who reflects on the human constitution, or who looks around him, will need arguments to prove, that they are likely to labour negligently, whose profits are not increased by assiduity and zeal. I know that the power of religion can and often does counteract this; but that is no argument for putting temptation in the way. So powerful, indeed, is this temptation, that with a very great number, it is acknowledged to prevail. Even if we do not assert, with a clergyman, that a great proportion of his brethren labour only so much for the religious benefit of their parishioners as will screen them from the arm of the law, there is other evidence that is unhappily conclusive. The desperate extent to which non-residence is practised, is infallible proof that a large proportion of the clergy are remiss, in the discharge of the duties of a Christian pastor. They do not discharge them con amore. And how should they? It was not the wish to do this, which prompted them to become clergymen at first. They were influenced by another object, and that they have obtained-they possess an income; and it is not to be expected, that when this is obtained, the mental desires should suddenly become elevated and purified, and that they who entered the church for the sake of its emoluments, should commonly labour in it for the sake of religion. "Although to many the motive for entering the church is the same as that for engaging in other professions, it is an unhappiness peculiar to the clerical profession, that it does not offer the same stimulus to subsequent exertion-that advancement does not usually depend on desert. The man who seeks for an income from surgery or the bar, is continually prompted to pay exemplary attention to its duties. Unless the surgeon is skilful and attentive, he knows that practice is not to be expected-unless the pleader devotes himself to statutes and reports, he knows that he is not to expect cases and briefs: But the clergyman, whether he study the Bible or not, whether he be diligent and zealous or not, still possesses his living. Nor would it be rational to expect, that where the ordinary stimulus to human exertion is wanting, the exertion itself should generally be found. "Upon the question of the comparative advantages of a legal provision and a voluntary remuneration, in securing the due discharge of the ministerial function, What is the evidence of facts? Are the ministers of established or of unestablished churches the more zealous, the more exemplary, the more laborious, the more devoted? Whether of the two are the most beloved by their hearers? Whether of the two lead the more exemplary and religious lives? Whether of the two are the more active in works of philanthropy? It is a question of facts-and the facts are before the world."-Dymond's Essays, vol. ii. Essay iii. Chap. 14. ISAAC TAYLOR. "A body of clergy at once exonerated of all solicitude, removed from all dependence, and at the same time sheltered from the salutary operation of public opinion, or, at least, so shielded as to save the inert and negligent from real alarms, such a body, we say, wants a stay to its virtue, which human nature may not safely dispense with. Ministers of religion so seated under the hedge, may look down upon others, beating the waves, and bless their happier lot; but all such boasting is vain; the congratulation of those who are at ease is often, and assuredly it is so in this instance, a fatal delusion. To rejoice that we are free from every invigorating excitement, and to be glad that we are not permitted to breathe the open fresh air, is the pitiable solace of a crazed hypochondriac."-Spiritual Despotism, p. 75. 8vo. Lond. 1835. These observations, weighty in themselves, derive additional importance from the consideration, that their accomplished author is a decided, but, as it appears to many of his admirers, an inconsistent enemy to the dissolution of the connexion between Church and State, though desirous that that connexion should be better regulated than it is. Like Dr Chalmers, whom in many points he resembles, especially in sometimes clothing a common-place thought in such gorgeous array as that we scarcely recognize our old acquaintance, he has great faith in the "machinery," if it were but thoroughly repaired and well worked. Like many other good men, he does not seem to see any thing wrong, in men's "setting their threshold by God's threshold, and their posts by his posts,' ,"* in his own spiritual temple-nor to hear the voice which ere long is likely to peal its thunders through the land, so as to arouse the most inattentive.-" Take away her battlements, for they are not the Lord's."+ Ezek. xliii. 8. + Jer. v. 10. NOTE X. THE PRINCIPLES OF VOLUNTARYISM STATED AND DEFENDED BY DISTINGUISHED CHURCHMEN. It is with great satisfaction that I grace the concluding pages of this "Farrago,"-libri, I suppose I must say, for the number of the page, if not the weariness of the reader, would proclaim the inappropriateness of the poet's diminutive "libelli,”—with the sentiments of three men, who have generally and justly been considered as among the "decora et tutamina" of the Scottish Establishment: The first, Principal GEORGE CAMPBELL, of Aberdeen (the most accomplished Biblical critic which our country has produced since the days of Cameron), who for half a century has been gathered to his fathers: The second, Dr ANDREW THOMSON, a man of strong intellect and ardent temperament, an acute disputant, a dexterous debater, an eloquent declaimer, who succeeded in making many devoted adherents and many keen opponents, and whose premature and sudden call into eternity, commanding general attention and exciting general regret, read a very solemn lesson to both: The third,-who lives, and long may he live, Dr CHALMERS, probably by all without the Church of Scotland, and by most within it, admitted to be not only among "the first thirty," but among "the first three" of her living worthies, if he be not the foremost of them all. DR GEORGE CAMPBELL. "The methods whereby, according to the command of our Lord, his religion was to be propagated, were no other than teaching, and the attractive influence of an exemplary life, Matth. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15; Matth. v. 16; Matth. x. 14-28. Of the whole armour of God to be employed in this warfare, the apostle has given us a catalogue, Eph. vi. 14, et seq. Behold the Christian's panoply! But for the use of other arms, offensive or defensive, in the battles of faith, I can find no warrant. "But though this suited the infancy of the church when she was yet feeble and tender, now that she is grown hardier and more robust, is it not reasonable that she should change her plan, and assume, in addressing her adversaries, a bolder note? Is there no permission given by our Lord to have recourse, when that should happen, to other weapons? Had his disciples no hint of the propriety, or rather necessity, of penal statutes, for adding weight to their teaching, for checking the encroachments of error, and chastising the insolence of those who should dare, in the maturity of the church, to controvert her judgment? Not the slightest suggestion of such an alteration. On the contrary, it appears inconsistent with the nature of the church, devised by our Saviour, and modelled by his apostles. Hear himself in that good confession, which he witnessed before Pontius Pilate, 'Jesus answered, my kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my kingdom not from hence.' Swords and spears, and all such instruments of hostility, are suited to the defence of secular and worldly kingdoms; but such weapons are preposterous, when employed in support of a dispensation, quite spiritual and heavenly. In regard to it, the order is, ' Put up again thy sword into his place; for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword;' Matth. xxvi. 52. "The maxims of the apostles we find entirely conformable to the lessons they had received from their Lord; 2 Cor. v. 11; x. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 24; Tit. iii. 10. "Is it not most natural to think that a cause will be best supported by the same means by which it was founded? To the dispensation of the Gospel, which is the dispensation of grace, mercy, and peace,' ought there not to be a suitableness in the methods employed to promote it? Shall we then think of any expedient for defending the cause of Christ different from those which he and his Apostles successfully employed? In the most unlovely spirit of Popery, and with the unhallowed arms of Popery, we would fight against Popery. It is not by such weapons that God hath promised to consume the Man of Sin, but it is with the breath of his mouth,' that is his word. As for us, though we be often loud enough in our pretensions to faith, our faith is not in his word. We have no faith now in weapons invisible and impalpable. Fire and steel suit us a great deal better. Christians in ancient times confided in the divine promises; we in these days confide in acts of Parliament. They trusted to the sword of the Spirit' for the defence of truth and the defeat of error; we trust to the sword of the magistrate. God's promises do well enough, when the legislature is their surety; but if ye destroy the hedges and the bulwarks which the laws have raised, we shall cry, Behold our bones are dried, our hope is lost: we are cut off for our part.' There is no more security for the true religion: Protestantism is gone! all is lost.' 'Woe to him,' saith the prophet,' that establish |