to speak with the voice of authority. Certain it is that such voice, whenever it speaks, will have the effect of separating from us some of those who hold views in opposition to each other, and who would not be content to submit their private judgment to the voice of the Church. This we may look for; but convinced as we are of the elements of life being still within us, we may humbly trust that God who has so far protected us will still overrule for good the time of the restoration of distinct speech, and the effect which it shall have.

We doubt not that, however diminished in numbers, we shall still exist. If, as we hope, we have hitherto, through great dangers and difficulties, been watched over by Divine Providence, and the seeds of truth kept alive within us, the touch of difficulty and persecution will cause them to grow and bring forth fruit. Low indeed had our sister Church of Scotland fallen, and a compromising spirit with the evil genius of Puritanism threatened her very existence, when the Almighty took away her wealth, and subjected her members to hard trials; and she came forth as gold from the fire, and remains to this day a pure and Catholic body. So may she be kept and preserved from all encroachment on her ancient inheritance of holy services.

For ourselves, a trial may arise sooner than we look for, and from a quarter which we are not guarding. We mean from the acts of the civil rulers in their administration of Church matters. We have but little confidence in the Churchmanship of the governing body which has unchurched itself by the admission to it of sectarians; we have but little confidence in the man whose temporizing policy caused his rejection from the object of his ambition, the representation of Oxford; and whose wound still rankles as if but newly received, and makes him look with little favour on the body which inflicted it. What is the real meaning and object of the Ecclesiastical Commission? We ever, from past and bitter experience, look with distrust at the tender mercies of the State towards the Church. Is this one bright exception, where, by the State's fostering care, the Church is to be protected and assisted? Let their acts give the answer. The time-honoured limits of ancient dioceses broken up, not for the purpose of subdivision, but in the vain attempt to bring a vastly multiplied population under the direction of the ancient number of bishops; inducements held out to curates to accept new churches under pledges of assistance from them, which are violated and their dupes left in difficulties; the appropriation, not of Government funds, but of the revenues of the Church itself, laid up, as this had been, against a time of need; and last, not least, the direct act of sacrilege committed in the operation necessary for the virtual extinction of the See of Rochester: the ancient residence of a bishop for 1100 years, with its consecrated

chapel still standing on its ancient site; and though now forming a part of the house, with its old walls still there, all this mercilessly sold to the highest bidder, a trafficking speculator. And not only the house and grounds, with all their dear memories, have been thus devoted to ruin, and no hand outstretched to save them; but with them has been sold the prospective advantage of the various leases; and the property of the See of Rochester thus for ever alienated from the Church. If this be not an act of plain and direct sacrilege, surely our fathers have strangely mistaken what constituted the sin. It is not alone in these higher matters that sacrilege, or what we esteem so, is at least attempted; but a short time ago a bequest of a small amount of property was made to a living: hardly had the fact become known, than a proposition was made that possession of the property should be transferred to one of the funds under the actual or possible control of Government, and the estimated net annual value charged on a neighbouring living. Now, in more than one respect, we seem to be following the example of the French nation. We have already seen colleges on the model of the infidel institutions of France attempted in Ireland. Have not we reason to fear that the Ecclesiastical Commission (innocently as far as many of the members of it are concerned) is but the beginning of a deep-laid scheme for getting possession of the whole revenues of the Church; and paying, and thus endeavouring to make subservient to the Government, the whole of the Clergy. Already, with one fell swoop, and without any violent opposition, have the revenues of the bishopricks and cathedrals been grasped; and instead of their ancient rights, the bishops are paid by quarterly sums from the Treasury. How long will it be before the same plan is at least attempted with the whole of the tithes, and other property, at present devoted to the maintenance of the inferior clergy? Let us not be caught unaware, and the enemy advance while we are sleeping. It may be that we can offer no resistance; it may be that God has decided thus to try our steadfastness; but come what may, and when it may, let us endeavour to be prepared with that which is the true strength of a Church; full of prayers, of good works, of holiness, steadfastly maintaining the truths committed to our guardianship, yet maintaining them, as far as may be, with meekness and peace to all, particularly to those who are of the household of faith, members of our own or any other branch of the Church Catholic. In Mr. Bennett's beautiful words, 'Let us gird up our loins afresh. As soldiers in a battle, who lose first one and then another of their chosen men, as brave soldiers, let us so much the rather draw in and collect the closer, so that our phalanx, though smaller, may yet present the same unwearied, steady, and determined face to the enemy. As seamen

:

in the storm which rudely blows around, we may indeed be compelled to part with some of the choicest part of the ship in which we sail the masts may go; the cabins; the instruments of warfare; much of our store, even our provisions, may be cast out; but if the hull remains, we may still be safe in the mercy of God, only if, as St. Paul's mariners, we abide in the ship. Therefore let us be of good cheer even yet. The more other men desert our holy Mother, so much rather let us cling in close affection round her; so much the rather let the tenacity of our hold be tightened, and our service to her, henceforward, be more faithful.'

Since the foregoing pages were in type, we have been requested to notice the following correspondence between the Rev. F. W. Faber and the Rev. Sir G. S. Robinson, Bart. Mr. Faber is as well known by the beauty of his fervid and elegant poetry, as he is universally esteemed and venerated for his deep and humble piety. We were ignorant of the existence of the Rev. Sir G. S. Robinson, Bart., until we read his name in the Morning Post of the 30th instant. Mr. Faber's letters are in every respect worthy of him, and we could not better express our approbation. The first, especially, is replete with Christian charity and heavenly zeal. All sincere friends of our Church must regret the loss of such a man as Mr. Faber: very few are there who can supply his place. We will only refer to one passage in the last letter of the Rev. Sir G. S. Robinson: he says, 'Subsequently to my letter to the Northampton Mercury, and in consequence of that letter, I received a communication from a person of high standing and character in the county, informing me of what was said to have occurred during your visit to Florence, and expressing a firm belief in the truth of the reports. I replied that I might perhaps make use of the information, if authenticated; but could not do so unless sanctioned by the parties on whom the truth of it depended, to give their names, if required. I was told, in answer, that "the authorities, if necessary, shall be forthcoming." Now, we beg leave to suggest to this 'person of high standing and character in the county' that the time has arrived when, if he wishes to preserve that 'character' untarnished, and not to disgrace his high standing,' he must give up the authority on which he uttered a malignant libel, which has been subsequently repeated on his bare assertion that this should be done if necessary.' We venture to say that it is necessary'-that the Rev. Šir G. S. Robinson is bound to require this at the hands of his informant-that he is bound to publish these 'authorities,' or, at

all events, supply their names to Mr. Faber. Mr. Faber, conscious of the utter falsehood of the report which was intended to injure his reputation, may be content, having given it the explicit denial which he has done. His word is a sufficient assurance of the truth of any statement he makes. But this will not satisfy us: the Rev. Sir G. S. Robinson must say a little more in ، self-justification,' or suffer by his silence.

The following is the correspondence referred to :

'St. Chad's, Birmingham, Dec. 9, 1845.

Rev. Sir,-A friend has forwarded to me a copy of a Northampton paper*, containing a letter from yourself, relative to my late secession from the English Church, and requesting me to answer it, which I declined to do. My friend Mr. Spencer has, however, begged me to write a few lines to yourself privately, speaking of you as one to whom silence might seem like a discourtesy, and that your character is such that he should be pained at even the appearance of it towards you. In compliance with this request, I venture upon what would otherwise seem an unwarrantable intrusion upon one of whose name even I was quite ignorant till yesterday. You will then, perhaps, allow me to state that it is not true, that all the seven who joined the Church with me were "in my pay," or had been under my "training," further than that, in some sense, all parishioners may be said to be under the training of their pastors. And further, one of those, who was in my

* The following is an extract from the Rev. Sir G. S. Robinson's letter to the Northampton Mercury :

'But what are the facts connected with the secession of Mr. Faber and his seven parishioners? Mr. Faber preached his farewell sermon at Elton, and went the next day to make his recantation of Protestantism, under Dr. Wareing's auspices, at Northampton. Is it credible-is it possible-that he not only fully resolved upon his Monday's errand when he was delivering his Sunday's message in the guise, or rather disguise, of a Minister of the Protestant Church of England? Nay, if the step which he has taken be the result (as I suppose he would have us believe) of calm and patient deliberation, of long forethought, of much and earnest prayer for Divine guidance, must he not have been for at least several weeks in a state of mind which totally disqualified him, as an upright man, for preaching the doctrines or administering the ordinances of the English Church? Will even the miserable Jesuitical shuffling of Tract 90, or Mr. Oakeley's disgraceful sophistry of subscribing to the Articles in a "non-natural sense," avail to justify his representing himself as a bonâ fide Minister of a Protestant Church up to the very moment of his becoming a member of the Church of Rome?

Then, again, as regards the "seven parishioners" said to have seceded with him. I confidently ask whether, in the judgment of common honesty, this fact, so triumphantly recorded by Dr. Wareing, does not stamp the whole transaction with a most suspicious character? Does it not prove beyond a doubt, what, indeed, his own conduct already referred to is sufficient evidence of, that he had made use of his assumed character as a clergyman, and of the opportunities for private instruction as well as public teaching which that character gave him, in order to betray her interests and draw away her members? The transaction, however, assumes a still more serious and censurable aspect when it is known who the converts alluded to were. A friend to whom I wrote to make particular inquiries for me respecting the truth of the current reports, says, "Those who have gone over with him (Mr. Faber) are his secretary, his footman and maid-servant, another young man, and two called boys, about sixteen or seventeen years old, all young people, who had been under his training and in his pay," "

pay, made a considerable pecuniary sacrifice to come and live with me, and so can hardly be supposed to have been actuated by pecuniary motives. On the whole, such a charge as that may now be best refuted by the six fresh converts from Elton, five of whom derived no assistance, pecuniary or other, from me, while three of them were vehemently opposed to Roman doctrine and to the other converts after I had left the parish and only came to me last Tuesday in consequence of Mr. Claughton, the new rector of Elton, stopping them from coming to bid me good bye in person, and desiring them to hear "the other side of the question." They heard his two sermons, and then said among themselves, as they described it to me, "Well, we have only heard one side, not both; Mr. Faber never told us anything about Roman doctrines, or gave us any reasons for his going." So they came, three in number, to see me at Benefield, and the result of the conference was their conversion. I do not adduce this for any further end than to show that it is hardly a kindly or merciful construction to put upon the act of my poor converts, that it was effected through mercenary considerations. Indeed, nearly all the thirteen involve themselves in no inconsiderable temporal unhappiness by their act. With regard to preaching a farewell sermon on Sunday, and seeking reconciliation with the Roman Church the next day, I am well aware that two very opposite judgments may be formed, neither am I at all sure that my way of viewing it was right. I can only say that the motives which actuated me to what I very much disliked were, not only a wish to do what was right, but a wish to do what would seem least cavalier to the community which I was leaving. That the doctrines I taught at Elton, which were what is vulgarly called Puseyism, were Roman, I entertain no doubt; but I was not aware of it myself. I acted bond fide, fully believing that what I taught was more in accordance with the Prayer-book than the opinions of any other Anglican party, and was for the good of the English Church, which I sincerely loved, and for which I worked to the best of my ability. I was certainly wrong. Other parties, who condemned Puseyism as Roman, were more clearsighted; but I do not think they could be more conscientious. When doubts came into my mind, it would appear from your letter that you think I ought to have given up ministering in the Church; but allow me respectfully to ask you whether that would not have been in effect settling the question? A change of religion is a grave matter; and one should be sure that a conviction is not an impulse before one acts. It would surely be monstrous to say that a man should back out of any sphere of duty because of an impulse which he has not yet ascertained to be a conviction of conscience. On this view the Evil One could shift all of us from our posts of duty at his wayward will. During this interval of doubt I preached almost exclusively old sermons written in the years 1837 and 1838, visited less sedulously in the parish, and to some who were in the habit of confessing to me, I openly stated my doubts, without, however, entering into reasons for them, and on the explicit ground of my having great influence over their minds, I suggested to them that they should confess to me no more. By so doing, I conceived that I was doing as much as I could to strip myself of influence over others without going so far as really to prejudge the