Church of England, she explicitly declares. She is distinct and precise as to the method to be pursued, both • that these orders may be continued,' and that they may be reverently used and esteemed in the Church of England.. And all this definite and unreserved declaration of what she accounted right for herself, renders the contrast so much the more marked, when her statements concerning the Church,' and concerning ‘ministering in the congregation, and the unworthiness of ministers,' are so framed and cautiously guarded, that, excluding indeed the ministry of self-appointed teachers (which would be destructive of all order, and overthrow the very nature of a Christian society), they apply to any church, and the ministry of any church-nay, might even apply to congregations or separatists who had conscientious grounds for their separation. And this we are wont to ascribe, perhaps, to the great charity and moderation of the Church of England. Yet would it really deserve these excellent names had the great and good men to whom we owe her articles and her polity, been indeed convinced that her orders were essential to Christianity, and episcopacy necessary to the very efficacy of the blessed sacraments? Rather let us say, that they did not declare this doctrine, because they did not believe it to be true; or, at the least, that they could not declare this doctrine, because they had no scriptural warrant for asserting its truth. Christ's gospel is not a ceremonial law;' that was a position clearly before the minds of our reformers. But, even had the gospel been a law of ceremonies, or so far as it has any ritual or ceremonial, or any other positive institution, still, before we may assert that any positive institution is essential, we must have some clear warrant of revelation for our assertion. This appears to be the true reason why the necessity of any apostolical succession cannot be maintained. If it be admitted that the whole doctrine of the succession relates not to an eternal truth, but to a positive institution, in its own nature alterable, nothing less than the clearly declared will of its founder can make it unalterable and essential. But we look in vain to holy writ for any clear warrant for this doctrine. “ As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.” “ Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Were the doctrine clearly warranted by the inspired scriptures, would divines rely upon texts like these to prove it? As if, because our Lord undoubtedly sent forth his apostles as the Father had sent him, therefore he gave them a commission altogether like bis own, and a similar transmission, and no other, of the same authority must be continued for ever; or as if, because it is justly argued that the abiding presence of Christ is not promised only to his apostles, but to the church through them, therefore it is promised only through those who should succeed in one, and one only, way to a portion of the apostolic office. Until some authority from holy writ shall be produced, far more express and clear, not merely to prove the use or the need of a Christian ministry (which is not the present question), but declaring that an episcopal succession is essential to a true Christian ministry, and a ministry essential to the efficacy of the blessed sacraments, it is not for us, I apprehend, to be more peremptory in our assertions than the scriptures themselves, nor must we call that essential or unalterable which has not been de. clared to be so by our Lord or his apostles.

We lament, accordingly, that any diversity of judgment, or any necessity, real or supposed, should have occurred to mar the symmetry of Christian churches and interrupt their unity. What was good and right under the apostles, nay, as all must admit, was best for the then condition of the church, must be good and right still, unless altered circumstances demand a change. Therefore theirs is no light responsibility who introduce a change: the burden of proof that such a change was requisite must rest with them. But this is widely different from denying the validity of their orders, or doubting the efficacy of their sacraments. Nay, as to the efficacy of the Christian sacraments, although no reasonable person questions the propriety, I had almost said the necessity, of restricting their administration to persons duly appointed ; yet we have no warrant to ascribe their efficacy in any way to the office of the administrator. The Church of England has, indeed, been sometimes supposed to hold a different language. But, whilst she has said, and reasonably said, that we may use the ministry'even of unworthy ministers, both in bearing the word of God, and in receiving of the sacraments,' because they minister not in their own name, but in Christ's,' and by his commission and authority,' nevertheless she has not ascribed the effect of Christ's ordinance’ to their commission, but has stated expressly that the sacraments are « effectual because of Christ's institution and promise, though ministered by evil men.

The Church of England, in a word, has not ruled a point of faith beyond the scriptures ; and the scriptures maintain upon the subject an expressive and instructive silence.

ON PRAYER FOR TEMPORAL MERCIES.

The following pages were the result of a conversation with a friend

who doubted whether prayer for temporal mercies should be offered to God. His doubts were mainly founded on the necessity and uniformity of operation of the laws by which the world is governed.

I felt the apparent force of the argument, and resolved to examine · the grounds for my own belief in its sophistry,.-or in other words, what the Bible taught on this subject. I am well aware, that the height of this great argument is not done justice to; but still imperfect as these pages are, they may assist some in their search after truth ; and my prayer is, that by the blessing of God, they may not have been written or read in vain.

The source from which all forms of false religious worship spring, is that instinctive yearning of the mind and heart of man for the support of some more powerful being than himself, to whom he may fly for refuge in the hour of trouble, and so the belief even in an imaginary God may lessen the pain, and increase the pleasures of this world. But man, left to his own wisdom, soon falls into such low and absurd notions of this superior being, that the baneful weeds of superstition, though having their roots in good soil, quickly draw from it all its healthy and purifying effect, and spread far and wide the deadly vapours of vice and wickedness.

Such has always been the ultimate effect of a belief in false gods, although for a time some goodly fruit may bave been produced, as in Greece, yet soon they prove to be but as the famed apples on the shores of the Dead Sea, but painted coverings of dust and ashes.

God however in his wisdom and mercy, hath not even left the world to grope amid the darkness, misled and blinded by their own evil inclinations, but from time to time revealed some clearer notions of his own being and attributes. Yet have not these revelations always produced the same effect, and throughout the history of Israel and of the Christian world, we find that misery and wickedness have increased or diminished just in proportion to the adequateness or inadequateness of the views held by men with reference to the character and attributes of God. Hence time can never be considered as mispent, which is employed in an endeavour to shew more clearly any one of those attributes, even though a belief in it may be almost universal. This is a sufficient reason for the following pages, even if there were not some grounds for thinking, that the particular opinion, the truth of which I have endeavoured to shew, is by no means universally believed.

That prayer to God through Jesus Christ, should be made always, in faith, must be the belief of every Christian, yet there are many well-meaning persons who differ as to the objects of such prayer, and who shrink from offering up direct petitions for temporal good, either for themselves or others, while they still with joy and gladness hold spiritual communion with their spiritual Father, and pray for daily strength to withstand temptation.

Many too who do not actually think such petitions improper, feel at times doubts as to their propriety, and they who do believe them in no way improper, may not always have considered on what their belief is founded. To such persons then I would venture to hope, that these few pages may afford some aid, either in building up the edifice of their faith, or in examining the foundations and supporting the superstructure, which is already raised.

The notion that prayer for temporal benefits is not to be offered to the Almighty and All-wise God, by his creatures, seems to arise from two sources :

1. From a mistaken inference derived from the unchangeableness of God.

2. From too great a contempt of mere earthly good.

It will be well to consider both these errors, and the means of disproving them.

As to the first then. Men obtain by the force of their intellect an idea of one Being, the ground and cause of the universe, and of this philosophical abstraction they must by a mere logical conclusion, think that he is both eternal and unchangeable.* And it must at once be allowed, that if our intellect alone may be trusted, then we cannot ward off the conclusion, that petitionary prayer is improper, or at least useless ; for what must be, must, is the inevitable conclusion on the premises afforded by mere human intellect. But the history of past ages, above all, the history of the Greeks, that nation who carried the cultivation of the intellect to the highest point, holds out a beacon to all who would follow this ignus fatuus wherever it would lead. If the mind of man is of itself sufficient for these things, then how did the sages of old, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, fail to discover the true attributes of God ? Nay more-what need was there of any revelation at all ?

When the question is fairly put to such objectors—Can a man find out God ? few we think would be hardy enough to answer in the affirmative. And when it is allowed, however reluctantly, that he cannot, then comes the next question, Where else but in the Bible, the revelation from God to man, can we find the attributes of God? And if, as is most true, nowhere, - then, must it not be granted, that such a revelation must be believed, whether it be contrary or not to our preconceived notions, drawn from and founded on that intellect, which cannot by itself find out God?

To answer this objection then, we must refer to the revealed word of God, and that alone is sufficient to prove its truth or falsehood; without that revealed word, we cannot answer it;—that with it we can, is the main object of the following pages to prove. Before however proceeding to the proofs afforded by the Bible, we must make a few remarks on the second ground of the notion, that prayer for temporal good is improper. To expose the hollowness of the first cause of this erroneous notion, we were obliged to throw aside all arguments drawn from premises not contained in the Bible ; but the second may be attacked with other arguments besides those drawn from the great storehouse of all truth.

We said, that too great a contempt for this world's blessings, was the reason why some did not approve of petitionary prayers, and their argument would be stated thus : Wealth, honours, friends, the powers of body and mind, do not singly or conjointly either make a man happy in this world, or fit him for the happiness of the next. Each and all of these are possessed as often by the bad as by the good. The real substantial happiness of every man depends on his heart; if that is filled with evil passions, envy, hatred, malice, or is bent on the mere gratification of the appetites, the object of life is not fulfilled, and the individual will be unhappy. Riches, more especially, render the path to heaven more difficult, the cares of this world tend to choke up and strangle the good seed before it brings forth fruit, and Christ himself hath said, that all is to be forsaken for him. Further, that as all these temporal benefits may only widen our distance from God, and as we cannot foresee what the effect of the possession of them migbt be, whether good or evil, and must therefore be ever liable to err in asking for that which will injure, or neglecting to ask for that which will benefit us, we should not presume to petition an omniscient God for such things, the absence of which can in no degree make us less Christian, nor the possession add to our fitness for the world to come. This is plausible, and, if man were born for himself alone, if he was from the time of his birth to the day

of his death, an isolated being, whose only duty it was to conquer the evil within his own heart, without ever casting a thought on the interests, temporal or eternal, of those living around him, would be much more true than it is, although even then there would be room to doubt whether man as an individual, solitary being, would not be justified in making such petitions even without the examples held out to him in the Bible.

But, man is not born for himself alone. Even Paradise itself filled not his heart whilst he felt himself alone. · Man is a social being. Every hour of his existence he is called upon to exercise the kindly affections which are perhaps the most truthful evidence of his bigh origin, the last fragment of that pure and holy image in which he was created. Can a man then fulfil his duty by living as if these affections were not ? And can he not but wish for the possession of the things, which though they cannot supply the place of God and religion, and which must ever be held as talents of which we are to give an account ; yet they can enable him to weaken the power of the twin-sisters misery and vice, to extend the influence of truth and vir. tue, to benefit both the bodies and the souls of his fellow men ; in short, to imitate his great pattern and example-Christ, “ who went about doing good.” All that is perishable may and must be made subservient to that which is eternal; but it is not to be thrown aside as bad, because forsooth it is not the greatest good. And do not wealth, honours, friends, and intellect enable us to do good, if they are not good in themselves. They are the arteries which convey to every nook and corner of the body of society, the healthful life-blood that issues from the pure heart. A light that is set upon a hill cannot be hid, but if hidden in a corner how few will benefit thereby.

If then we believe in a merciful God and Father, there is nothing contrary to reason or feeling that we should ask him for such gifts as these, if we do so, in a proper spirit. And we shall not be surprised if we find that this conclusion of our mind and heart is strengthened and firmly fixed by the lessons given us in the scriptures, to wbich we appeal here as well as before, as the authority which alone can bind.

We will proceed then to the proofs of the propriety of such petitions, and our object will perhaps best be answered by putting down the passages of scripture, with a kind of running commentary on them.

Commencing with the historical instances of the Old Testament.

Gen. xviii. 23–33.-The well known account of Abraham's intercession in behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose sin was very grievous, shows at least that Abraham looked on prayer as a means of obtaining present temporal good, and so a furtber opportunity for repentance; and the manner in which the prayer was received by God, shows that there was nothing improper or inconsistent with the relation between God and his creature in such a prayer, and still stronger is the saving of Zoar at the prayer of Lot. Gen. xix.

Gen. xx. 17; and xxv. 21.-In each of these cases there is a prayer offered for a temporal blessing, and that blessing granted. Abraham prayed for Abimelech and his house, and Isaac that he might be blessed with children ; and the answer is thus recorded :