eight o'clock in the morning. I imputed no blame to the muchesteemed prelate who then presided over the diocese of London, and who probably only followed the custom of the see; and whose beautiful simplicity of character, and shrinking retirement from any thing that might be thought to involve ostentatious or unnecessary publicity, would not lead him, without he considered it a matter of duty, to change that custom.

Happily the custom has been changed in London and some other dioceses, and with excellent effect. The people in numerous instances have had an opportunity of witnessing this impressive rite, and the candidates have had the benefit of the prayers of the assembled church.

But the consecration of bishops is still conducted almost in private, and is scarcely heard of except by two or three ex-post-facto lines announcing it in the newspapers. How different the policy, to use no loftier word, of the Romanists and the Protestant Dissenters. Their solemnities are not performed in a corner; and when anything remarkable occurs, the utmost possible effect is given to them. I would not that the Church of England should court vain popularity; but it would be right and wise to use all her offices in the most impressive manner; and what spectacle could be more solemn, more scriptural, more edifying, than the consecration of a bishop, in his own cathedral, surrounded by a multitude of presbyters and deacons, and the joyful throngs of the faithful, listening with awe to the weighty exhortations and stipulations of that thrilling service, and uniting in earnest prayer that God would abundantly pour forth His holy Spirit upon His servant, on the portion of Christ's vineyard committed to his charge, and on the universal church.

CLERICUS.

LAY INTERFERENCE IN CHURCH MATTERS:- ACT OF

UNIFORMITY.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

I THANK you for the entertainment and instruction conveyed by your notice of, and extracts from, Dr. Wolff's journals. The account of the Greek martyr, in your December Number, p. 755, was particularly interesting to me, from the striking manner in which the young martyr confessed the divinity of our Lord in connexion with His resurrection from the dead, this topic having lately engaged the attention of some clerical friends in considering that important passage of Scripture, Rom: i. 4.

I remember dining with Dr. Wolff in a College Hall in Cambridge some twenty years ago, and have ever since taken an interest in his proceedings, and watched his somewhat erratic course as a lay teacher. But it seems he has lately acquired a peculiar sensitiveness as to lay interference in church matters. I am truly glad to welcome him as a regularly ordained minister of our church; but I cannot participate altogether in his jealousy of laymen. Perhaps some of his Oxford Tract friends have put into his hands a "Translation of Vincentius of Lerins," with an introduction taken from Bishop Beveridge, in which the good bishop tells us, p. xi., that, "in speaking of the consent of the Universal Church, it is not necessary that we regard the opinions CHRIST, OBSERV. No, 27.

Y

of the people also, or laity; for they have never been admitted to deliver their judgment on the doctrine or discipline of the church." And again, p. xvi., "when about to discuss ecclesiastical matters, the Church hath rarely suffered the people to be present; never to deliver an opinion, or to vote." The bishop speaks very positively; and not more so, I dare say, than the Oxford Tract men, who have used his name and authority, would have him. But I venture to advise Dr. Wolff, and especially the younger clergy, not at once to believe, without candid examination for themselves, what is said even by those who seem most worthy of confidence For as to this entire exclusion of laymen even from giving an opinion on ecclesiastical matters, we learn from Eusebius, (in Vita Constantini, p. 235,) that in the most famous of all the councils, the first at Nice A.D. 325, one of the most effective speakers, and that on the doctrine of the Trinity, was an unlettered layman. I take my reference from Grier's Epitome of the Councils, p. 48.

Against Bishop Beveridge's statement appeal may also be made to an authority to which high churchmen ought to yield-to Cyprian the martyr, bishop of Carthage. In the matter of restoring those to the Church who had fallen from the faith in the time of persecution, Cyprian expresses a desire to remit its decision to the public synods of his church, and says he will take no step "without the desire and consent of the people," "sine petitu et conscientia plebis.” (Ep. 64.) To the same effect, in Ep. 14, he says, "From the beginning of my episcopate I have determined to do nothing on my own private opinion without your advice, and the consent of the people." Once more, in Ep. 19," For this agrees with the discipline of us all, that the bishops assembling with the clergy, the people being present, and assisting, to whom also due honour is to be given, we can arrange every thing under the sanction of common agreement." I quote from Coneybeare's Bampton Lectures, p. 413.

I will go a step higher, and show from infallible authority, that the laity are not to be despised or overlooked in settling church matters. In the 15th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles we find that when the Apostles and Elders came together to consider an important matter of church discipline, the laity were not excluded or their opinion disregarded; but that “all the multitude" were there, and “gave audience,” v. 12. They also joined in the decision that was come to; for we read, v. 22, "Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men, &c." Yea, they are joined with the Apostles and Elders in the letters that were sent round to the churches, v. 23; "And they wrote letters after this manner: The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting,' &c. It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you," &c., v. 25. "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you nò greater burden," &c.

Surely this is enough to shew that the Nicene Council, and Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, understood Apostolic practice better than Bishop Beveridge, or those who have made use of his name and works in publishing their translation of Vincentius.

My object however is not to discuss the propriety, or exact degree, of lay interference in church matters, (I think it has been a great evil to our church that the clergy have called too little for the co-operation of the laity,) but to give a friendly warning to my younger brethren

not to be led away by positive statements, unless accompanied by plain proofs.

Another illustration of this want of accuracy in sentiment occurs to me in thinking of Dr. Wolff's present intimacy with Dr. Hook of Leeds. Dr. Hook is looked up to by many as of great authority in all matters connected with our own church and its history. That, however, he is not always right, even when most confident, is plain from a note in the appendix to his "Call to Union." Alluding to the ejection of 2000 ministers by the Act of Uniformity, and the manner in which Dissenters talk on the subject, he says—

"A violent and popular outcry has often been raised against the Church, because, at the Restoration, those of the clergy who refused to conform were ejected from their benefices. But it will be well to see how the case really stands. Seven thousand English clergymen, having refused to take the covenant at the great rebellion, were ejected from their livings, their places being supplied by dissenting teachers. This most honourable testimony to the clergy of the Church of England at that period ought never to be forgotten. At the Restoration it was required that all those persons who had thus become possessed of the property of the English Church should either conform to the regulations of the Church, or resign. Of all the Puritan clergy then in possession, only two thousand thought fit to resign rather than comply. And these two thousand were ejected-from what? From their rights? No, but from their usurpations. Five thousand conformed, and still retained possession of the church property; so that many of the previously ejected clergy of the Church of England, who hoped, at the Restoration, to be restored to their own, were sorely disappointed and cruelly used."

Surely before Dr. Hook spoke so confidently, he ought to have known the facts of the case better. Soon after the king's restoration in 1660, all the Episcopal clergy then surviving were restored to their livings, and the intruders justly put out. This may be learnt from any good history of the times. Walker himself, who wrote of the sufferings of the Episcopal clergy, repeatedly mentions their happy restoration to their livings. Take one instance out of many, part ii. 227 : "Mr. Collier outlived all his miseries, and, September 18, 1660, was restored to his parsonage." The Act of Uniformity did not come into force till St. Bartholomew's Day, August 24, 1662. Of the clergy then ejected there is no reason to doubt that most were legally possessed of their livings; nor ought we to doubt that many of them were thoroughly good men. When the Dissenters talk much of the cruelty of ejecting these two thousand nonconformists, it is fair to tell them of the much greater number more cruelly and violently ejected in the preceding times of trouble and disorder; but when we come to speak positively about the "facts of the case," we ought to be sure that we keep to facts.

A. B. K.

WEEKLY DIVISION OF TIME.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

THE origin of the division of time into weeks is not, as a correspondent in your Number for last month supposes, arbitrary; it obviously has an astronomical reference to the four changes of the moon during the lunar months; which in early times must have been observed and found convenient. The Scripture tells us expressly, that the moon was appointed, among other uses, to mark time; but whether the Almighty selected a weekly division in conformity with His creation, or arranged the lunar period in conformity with some mysterious

moral principle, or the nature of man, we cannot tell. The fact is alluded to by Mrs. Summerville, and in an incautious manner likely to leave a bad impression. Homer alludes to the week.

E. F. B.

*** We are not aware what passage in Mrs. Somerville our correspondent alludes to. We remember the following in her "Connexion of the Sciences," (Ed. iv., p. 99,) but we cannot tell whether he means this. The common origin of nations is a scripturally revealed truth.

"The division of the year into months is very old and almost universal. But the period of seven days, by far the most permanent division of time, and the most ancient monument of astronomical knowledge, was used by the Brahmins in India with the same denominations employed by us; and was alike found in the calendars of the Jews, Egyptians, Arabs, and Assyrians. It has survived the fall of empires, and has existed among all successive generations, a proof of their common origin.'

REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS

WORKS ON REGENERATION, JUSTIFICATION, &c.

1. The Primitive Doctrine of Regeneration sought for in Holy Scripture, and investigated through the medium of the written documents of Ecclesiastical Antiquity. By G. S. FABER, B.D. 1840.

2. The Primitive Doctrine of Justification. By the same. Second Edition; with an Appendix [now first added] containing a Notice of Mr. Newman on Justification; and two articles, the one touching Prayers for the Dead; the other Reserve in communicating Religious Knowledge, as inculcated upon the clergy in the eightieth Tract for the Times. 1839.

3. Eternal Life in Jesus Christ; a Sermon preached at the consecration of St. Luke's Church, Cheetham Hill. By (the Right Rev.) JOHN BIRD, Lord Bishop of Chester. Second Edition. 1840.

4. The Lord our Righteousness; a Sermon preached before the University of Oxford, on the Sunday before Advent, 1839. By the Rev. R. D. HAMPDEN, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity. 1839.

5. The Ministry of Reconciliation; a Sermon preached in the Chapel of Farnham Castle, at the General Ordination held by the Lord Bishop of Winchester Dec. 15, 1839. By SAMUEL WILBERFORCE, Archdeacon of Surrey. 1840.

6. A recent Tract upon Reserve in communicating Religious Knowledge compared with Scripture. By the Rev. H. LE MESURIER, M.A: 1839.

7. The Oxford Tract System considered with reference to the principle of reserve in preaching. By the Rev. C. S. BIRD, M.A. 1838.

ONE of the most practically injurious tenets of the Oxford Tract school is that the characteristic features of the Gospel, including even the divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the atone

ment, are not plainly revealed in the Scriptures; so that the most conscientious inquirer, earnestly seeking for the guidance of the Holy Spirit,could not discern them, had they not been first pointed