These are followed by eight on the cardinal doctrine of justification by faith in its various bearings. Then follows a very admirable one' on the manner in which the Scriptures introduce the Divine purposes,' in which we are well pleased to find Mr. Russell expressing sentiments entirely in unison with the view we have lately had occasion to take of the doctrine of Election.

You are right,' he says, in thinking that many an inquirer has been exceedingly injured by being led to pry into the subject of election, instead of being occupied with the unrestricted calls and invitations of the Gospel. No man obtains the blessings of redemption, by believing that he is elected of God, or that Christ died for him, in distinction from others, but by believing the broad declaration of Scripture, that the Saviour "died for sinners," and "for the ungodly," and that his atonement is sufficient to cleanse from all sin. This blessed testimony every one is called to believe, in order to his salvation, without waiting till any preliminaries are settled, respect ing the decrees of the Almighty. Christians have obtained the blessings of mercy in the way of coming to the Saviour, not as persons chosen of God, but as poor, guilty, and helpless sinners, having no plea but what arises from his work, and from the promise of life through him.

I remarked in a former letter, that the change of mind which separates Christians from the world, is often expressed by their being said to be called and chosen of God, out of the kingdom of darkness into that of Christ. The terms elect and chosen, and words of similar import, are accordingly sometimes applied to the conversion of the soul in time, and not to the transactions of eternity. Thus, in Colossians iii. 12. Christians are called upon to act as elect persons; that is, as appears from the connection, as persons separated from the world by a change of state and of character, which change it behoved them to manifest by a corresponding spirit and deportment. Thus, too, we read of the faith of God's elect, that is, of those who had believed through grace. Accordingly, the term is used to express the excellence of the Christian character. Thus, by the elect sister, John means an excellent sister; and Paul sends his salutation to Rufus as one chosen in the Lord, that is, an excellent Christian. I mention this view of the subject, to show you the importance of being guided in the interpretation of Scripture, by the sense of every particular passage, and not by mere sound.

When the Scriptures speak of salvation, in connection with the choice and fore-appointment of God, they often refer to the general plan of redemption, as a plan, according to which men are saved, not in consequence of merit, or birth, or external privileges, as the unbelieving Jews imagined, but of free favour. The Jews, unhappily, considered the blessings of Messiah's kingdom as exclusively theirs, in virtue of their descent from Abraham, their privileges under the Mosaic law, and their observance of its rights. They allowed, indeed, that Gentiles might obtain some of the blessings of his kingVOL. XXIII. N.S.

28

dom, but only by becoming members of the Jewish commonwealth and the observance of their law. In opposition to these notions, the apostles, in many passages of their writings, teach that the plan of salvation was fixed before the division of men into Jews and Gentiles took place, yea, even before mankind existed.

The design of such passages is not to introduce discussions about the secret councils of heaven, and perplexing questions respecting individuals, but to teach, in opposition to those who confined the blessings of the kingdom of God to such as enjoyed the privileges, and walked in the observances of the Mosaic law, that the plan on which salvation and all heavenly blessings, were to be imparted, was fixed before that law was established, and entirely independent of it; that is, it was fixed to be of pure favour, and not by the works of any law whatever.' Vol. II. pp. 273—6.

At p. 306, Mr. Russell has done us the honour to introduce a citation from our pages, between inverted commas, but, we know not from what motive, without acknowledging the source from which he has obtained it. His last four letters are, on the maintenance of Christian confidence; on the Lord's Supper; on the contemplation of the heavenly temple; and on the heavenly sabbath. Some admirable remarks on the nature of faith, occur in the nineteenth letter, which we had intended to extract, but find them so remarkably in agreement with a passage cited in a preceding article, from Mr. Burder's Lectures, that they would appear only a repetition of the same sentiments. With the highest satisfaction, we observe that a purer and more scriptural theology is gaining ground among our brethren in the North; and we hail the appearance of such writers as Mr. Russell and his friend Mr. Erskine, as a circumstance of the happiest augury.

Art. XI. 1. A Letter to Charles Butler, Esq. of Lincoln's Inn, in Vindication of English Protestants from his Attack upon their Sincerity in the "Book of the Roman Catholic Church." By C. J. Blomfield, D.D. Bishop of Chester. Third Edition, to which is added, a Postscript in Reply to Mr. Butler's Letter to the Author. 8vo. pp. 36. London. 1825.

2. A Letter to the Right Reverend C. J. Blomfield, D.D. Bishop of Chester; from Charles Butler, Esq. in Vindication of a Passage in his "Book of the Roman Catholic Church," censured in a Letter, addressed to him by his Lordship. Second Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo. pp. 28. Price Is.

THE volume which has given occasion to this correspondence, together with the Book of the Church by the Poet Laureat, we have certainly no intention to pass over; but we

have hitherto been unable to spare the time which it will require to notice them in a manner satisfactory to ourselves. In the mean time, these Letters appear to us to claim the attention of our readers.

In a passage referred to by the Bishop of Chester, the Author of the Book of the Roman Catholic Church more than insinuates a charge against the great body of the present English clergy' and laity as disbelieving the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Divinity of Christ, and the Atonement.' In connexion with this charge, he accuses the clergy of subscribing to the Thirty-nine Articles with a sigh or a smile.' He represents an indifference to those articles as universal, or at least very general among those who profess themselves members of the Established Church;' and he infers that there must have existed, when the Reformation peered, and all these articles were universally believed, more spiritual 'wisdom in England, than exists in her, at this time, with her present scanty creed.'

Our readers will perceive that Mr. Butler has here indicted the Protestant clergy and laity of England on three very distinct counts; first, as being disbelievers in the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Atonement,-in a word, Socinians; secondly, as not sincerely believing in the Thirty-nine Articles, to which he intimates that they subscribe with reluctance and mental reservation; thirdly, as being indifferent to the Articles. It is not a little singular, that the Bishop of Chester should in the first instance have directed his chief attention to the second of these charges.

'You assume,' says his Lordship to Mr. Butler, as a matter of notoriety, that the great body of the English Clergy, ten or twelve thousand ministers of the Gospel, many of them not less learned and sagacious than yourself, are hypocrites and liars; that for the sake of preferment, no necessity compelling them, they set their solemn attestation to that which they do not believe to be true, and place their souls in jeopardy. I know not what answer can be given to such insinuations as these, except a positive and indignant denial.'

Mr.

Hypocrites and liars' are hard words, which Mr. Butler did not use, and it is a pity that the Bishop should have used. I have never said, and I do not believe,' he replies, that the English clergy are hypocrites, liars, or Socinians.' Butler then proceeds to explain away the charge of prevarication which he brought against the clergy, by saying, that he simply meant to describe the latitude of construction in which the Articles are generally signed, and

the different feelings to which the necessity of recurring to this latitude of construction unavoidably excites in the subscribers. I must admit,' he adds, that in my view. ⚫ both this latitude of construction and these consequential feelings are notorious.'

But, although Mr. Butler did not use the word Socinian, any more than he did either of the abusive epithets which he disclaims, we must beg to say that, if words have any meaning, he did impute to the great body of the English clergy and laity, the holding of Socinian tenets. That he did this ignorantly, we are willing to suppose; and if he means us to understand him as retracting this charge, when he says, I do not believe that the English clergy are Socinians,' it is well. But he did say it, and it would have become him, as a man of honour and veracity, not to content himself with so indistinct a retractation, if it be one, or to stoop to the meanness of equivocation. Here the Bishop has the complete advantage. Mr. Butler's words were: Are these doctrines' (the Trinity, &c.) 'seriously and sincerely believed by the great body of the present Eng⚫lish clergy? or by the great body of the present English laity ?'

You will hardly deny,' says his Lordship, that this question was intended to imply an answer in the negative. It was this implied negative which I requested you to re-consider and re-call; but, instead of retracting, or explaining, or apologizing for these offensive words, or of substantiating the insinuation they convey, you have passed them over in silence, and have confined your answer to an entirely different question,whether the thirty-nine Articles be not subscribed with a certain latitude of interpretation............ Positive disbelief of the great and fundamental doctrines of our faith, has nothing to do with the latitude of construction in which you suppose the Articles to be generally signed. You cannot be ignorant, that this supposed latitude refers chiefly to the doctrines involved in the quinquarticular controversy; and that those writers who have termed our Articles" articles of peace," have so termed them with reference to the points at issue between the Calvinistic and Arminian divines, who were the two parties to be reconciled; and not with the most distant allusion to those fundamental points of doctrine which are controverted by the followers of Socinus."

Upon these fundamental points, the Bishop most correctly states, and we wish that more stress were in general laid upon the fact here so unequivocally admitted, there is no difference ' of belief between us and the great body of Protestant Dissenters. Those who deny the doctrines in question, are, in point of numbers, when weighed against those who believe

them, as dust in the balance.' His Lordship remarks in a note, in refutation of the gross calumny vented by Dr. Milner, that the number of those Independent communities who have lapsed into Socinianism is, he believes, very small indeed. It is but justice,' he says, to add, that some very able defences of the doctrines (alluded to) have appeared of late years from the pens of Dissenters.'

• Once more then, let me speak for both Churchmen and Dissenters, and protest with all earnestness and sincerity against this most uncharitable and unwarranted insinuation. Yet, were it not from a regard to your own character, I could almost thank you for having vented it; for it affords a most clear and indubitable evidence, that there is something in the spirit of the Roman Catholic religion, which neither time nor experience can alter; which contains the germ of intolerance and persecution; which poisons the fountain of truth, obscures and blunts the most sagacious intellect, and represses the natural movements of a just and ingenuous mind.'

We honour the Bishop for thus speaking out, nor is the indignant rebuke which he administers uncalled for. It is not the first time that we have had occasion to animadvert on Mr. Butler's want of fairness, candour, and honourable dealing in matters affecting his religious prejudices.* And in imputing the strength and fatal operation of those prejudices to his religion, we are warranted by the pretensions as well as by the character of that religion, which is altogether built upon prejudice-a blind prejudice in favour of an undefined, mysterious, shadowy authority; and which binds on its votaries the duty of cherishing an intolerant prejudice against every other class of religionists. Mr. Butler has been held up as the very model of an enlightened and honourable Catholic; and yet, let the subject in question relate to religious parties or religious opinions, and he is found not trust-worthy.

Not less unfounded is his representation that there is a universal indifference to the Thirty-nine Articles. But, as we have already hinted, we think that the Bishop of Chester has committed an indiscretion in admitting, or seeming to admit, that the clergy who subscribe the Articles with a sigh,' must needs be set down as hypocrites and liars. Those are epithets which his Lordship would surely not venture to apply to many individuals who have contended for a latitude in subscription wholly indefensible. We believe that Paley's principle of interpretation is too generally adopted,-worthy of the Jesuiti

* See E. R. Sept. 1822. Art. Butler's Reminiscences.