mission? But not to press him on the point of external authority, let us examine his position by the declared law of the Church of England. The baptism of the church of Rome must be lawful baptism in the eyes of the Church of England, on the principle of its having been administered by a duly commissioned priest.' Now this proposition goes the length of declaring, that any person, episcopally ordained, is a lawful minister of the sacraments, in the contemplation of the Church of England; that his living in a state of open schism, receiving his commission from schismaticks, belonging to a schismatical congregation, disclaiming our articles, and abhorring our communion, does not affect the lawfulness of his ministry. Such is the doctrine of The Guide to the Church,' of an author, who, daring steadfastly to maintain the constitution of the Church,' in spite of clerical indifference and sectarian encroachment,'' must expect,' for his honest zeal,' to be branded with opprobrious and uncharitable epithets.' What epithets may have been applied to him, it is no part of our business to inquire: but the enemies of the Church of England must be unjust, rather than uncharitable, if they fail to appreciate properly the concession which is here made to them. Happily the friends of the Church may appeal from Dr. Daubeney to the articles and canons of the Church itself. They will there find, that it is not lawful for any man to take upon him to minister the sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called and sent; and that those only are lawfully called and sent, who be called and chosen by men who have publick authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard.' Unless, therefore, the Romish bishops have this publick authority in the Church of England, our Church does not consider the priests, ordained by them, as lawful ministers, nor on any sound principles as duly commissioned.' It is true, that if such persons leave their schism, and are reconciled to our Church, they may be accounted and taken to be lawful ministers,' (provided they comply with such other requisites as the Church has enjoined,) without being re-ordained. But, meanwhile, in the eyes of the Church of England, they are just as much schismaticks, they have been as little 'duly commissioned,' as any Presbyterian or Independent teacher. To speak of them, as the archdeacon does, is going a great way towards pronouncing their congregations true and lawful churches;' in which case the 11th canon would denounce the sentence of excommunication, and cut off the learned author himself from all right to burial on much clearer grounds than affect the infant in question.

But we turn to another position of the archdeacon. In page 108, he speaks of those who have been baptized into the Church of England;' and the argument, with which this phrase is connected, shows that he really meant, that baptism, according to the form of our Church, baptizes into the Church of England, as contradistinguished from baptism into other particular churches. This, we will venture to say, is a notion never before entertained of the

6

Christian sacrament of baptism. The language of the Gospel, is, that we are baptized into Christ;' and again, that we are bapti zed into one body;' but to be baptized into the Church of England, is to be baptized into one member of that body. Now we contend, that they, who have received Christian baptism at all, have been baptized either into none, or into every one, of the members of the body of Christ; that to make a distinction of baptizing into this or that particular church, is to multiply that Christian bap tism, which by the Apostle is so emphatically pronounced one." We contend further, that, in any country, they who are baptized into Christ at all, are, on the one hand, bound, as they would avoid the guilt of schism, to communicate with the particular church planted there; and that, on the other hand, they have a right to claim from that church a participation in all acts of its communion, until they are cut off by a judicial sentence, or have cut off themselves, from Christ's body. And this brings us to a consideration decisive, in our apprehension, of the question relative to the word 'unbaptized.' It is the law and the practice of the Church of England, to acknowledge those who are baptized by schismaticks, as baptized, as made by their baptism members of the Christian church; for it considers them as under church discipline, and sentences them to excommunication if they offend against its laws. Thus then they are recognised by the Church of England, as baptized into the body of Christ; else it would be worse than nugatory, to cut them off from that body to which they never belonged.

To conclude on this main part of the dispute: we are clearly of opinion, that the meaning ascribed by Sir John Nicholl, to the word 'unbaptized' in the rubrick before the office of burial, is fully established by him; that the exceptions, taken against it, rest on no solid ground; and that every additional light thrown on the subject, tends only to confirm the learned judge's interpretation. When therefore we consider that it was solely because the deceased had been baptized by a schismatical hand, that the refusal of burial was defended, and that such baptism appears on the fullest inquiry to have been uniformly recognised by the Church of England as Christian baptism, admitting the subject of it into communion with the catholick church, we cannot but acquiesce in the judgment pronounced by the Court of Arches.

It is not without surprise and regret that we have witnessed the ferment which Sir John Nicholl's decision has excited. Consequences the most tragical have been anticipated from it: the utter relaxation of ecclesiastical discipline, the destruction of every barrier against the inroads of schism, and the speedy downfall of the Church itself, have been gravely deplored by bishops and archdeacons, as the almost necessary result of acquiescence in the judgment of the Arches Court of Canterbury! Strange too as it may appear, the main point, decided by that judgment, is one which Hooker, Whitgift, and Bancroft successfully laboured to maintain against the Cartwrights and Rainolds's of their time. In all the

dreams of triumph in which the puritans of Elizabeth's and James's days ventured to indulge, they could hardly have looked forward to a time when high churchmen would flock to their standard, and join them in crying down the popish corruption of acknowledging But extremes, on almost every baptism by a not lawful minister. subject, have some points of union and assimilation: among other marks of resemblance is the loudness of their clamour, when any favourite prejudice is assailed. Happily, in this country of sound sense and well-attempered zeal, the effects of such a clamour seldom long survive the occasion which gives rise to it. We should, therefore, have been content to leave this controversy to that great peacemaker, Time, had we not perceived, in the present age, a more than ordinary disposition among some of the friends of the Church and its establishment, to pervert every manifestation of harmony with dissenters into a fresh occasion of alarm. Bound, as we are, to that church, by the strongest ties of gratitude and duty, yielding to its doctrines the firmest assent of our understanding, and cherishing for its constitution and its discipline a force of attachment which is approved to us by our reason, and has long been confirmed in us by habit, we cannot behold without deep concern any symptoms of that jealous and captious spirit, which stimulates the exertions of the adversary, while it disgusts every temperate friend; and which exhausts, in its demands for imaginary dangers, much of that affection and sympathy which the real exigencies of the Church would otherwise never fail to excite. Dr. Daubeney, (judging him only by the book before us,) we see a specimen of this preposterous zeal in its wildest form: it is on this account, that we have felt it our duty to treat him with more severity than we could ever willingly use towards a writer whose intentions are doubtless praise-worthy, and whose talents, if well directed, might be useful in promoting the interests of a cause, which, in the present instance, they have served only to betray.

In

SELECTED POETRY.

THE LORD'S PRAYER.

FATHER of all thy saints below,
Whose mercies still thy love proclaim:
Let all the world thy glory show,
And join to bless thy sacred name.
Thy gracious purpose, Lord, fulfil,
And let us soon thy kingdom share;
That sons of earth may do thy will,

Like those who breathe celestial air.
Our wants with ev'ry morning grow;
With daily food these wants supply;
And on our souls that bread bestow,
Which whoso eats shall never die.
To sinners guilt and shame belong!
Yet grant us, Lord, thy grace to prove,
As we forgive our brother's wrong,
And trespasses repay with love.

And in the dark and dreary day,
Fraught with temptation, pain, and wo,
Oh! guide us on our doubtful way,
Oh! save us from our *watchful foe!

For thou alone art GoD most high;

The kingdom and the power are thine;
Thy glory fills both earth and sky,
And through eternity shall shine.

απο το πονηρες

VERSES BY THE REV. DR. RANDOLPH,

ON RECEIVING A PRINT OF MR. COWPER, ENGRAVED FROM A SKETCH PAINTED BY LAWRENCE.

SWEET BARD! whose mind thus pictured in thy face,

O'er every feature spreads a nobler grace:

Whose keen, yet soften'd eye, appears to dart
A look of pity through the human heart,
To search the secrets of man's inward frame,
To weep with sorrow o'er his guilt and shame:
Sweet bard! with whom, in sympathy of choice,
I oft have left the world at nature's voice,
To join the song that all her creatures raise,
To carol forth the great Creator's praise;
Or, wrapt in visions of eternal day,
Have gaz'd on truth in Zion's heavenly way:
Sweet bard! may this thine image, all I know,
Or ever may, of Cowper here below,
Teach one who views it with a Christian's love,'
To seek and find thee in the realms above!

WHO! hapless, helpless being, who

Shall strew a flower upon thy grave?
Or who, from "mute oblivion's power,"
Thy disregarded name shall save?

Honour, and wealth, and learning's store,
The votive urn remembers long;
And ev'n "the annals of the poor,"
Live in their bard's immortal song.

But a blank stone best stories thee,

Whom sense, nor weaith, nor fame could find: Poorer than aught beside we see,

A human form without a mind.

A casket gemless!-yet for thee
Pity suspends the tender wail;
For reason shall a moral see,

While mem'ry paints the simple tale.
Yes, it shall paint thy humble form,
Clad decent in its russet weed,
Happy in harmless wandering's charm,
And pleas'd thy father's flock to feed.-

With vacant, reckless smile she bore,
Patient, the scorner's cruel jest;
With unfix'd gaze could pass it o'er,
And turn it pointless from her breast.

Her tongue, unable to display

The unform'd chaos of her mind! No sense its rude sounds could convey, But to parental instinct kind.

Yet, close to every human form

Clings imitation's mimick power, And she was fond and proud to own The school-time's regulated hour:

And o'er the mutilated page

Mutter'd the mimick lesson's tone;
And ere the scholar's task was said,
Brought ever and anon her own:
And many a truant boy would seek,
And drag reluctant to his place;
And ev❜n the master's solemn rule,
Would mock with grave and apt grimace.

Each heart humane could freely love

A nature so estrang'd from wrong;

And even infants would protect

Her from the passing traveller's tongue!

But her prime joy was still to be,

Where holy congregations bow;

Rapt in wild transports when they sung,

And when they pray'd, would bend her low.--