as the Lutheran in a manner, the Swedish church, and our own,retained also the ancient mode of administering it; those who abandoned that doctrine, (i.e., such as followed the reformation of Zurich and Geneva,) abandoned and objected to that administration. This seems to imply some connexion between them. What this is may be supplied by the following words of Hooker, taken from his invaluable dissertation on the sacraments:*.

"Thus far accused, we answer briefly to the first, that, seeing God by sacraments doth apply in particular, unto every man's person, the grace which himself hath provided for the benefit of all mankind, there is no cause why, administering the sacraments, we should forbear to express that in our forms of speech which He by his word and gospel teacheth all to believe. In the one sacrament, I baptize thee' displeaseth them not; if eat thou' in the other offend them, their fancies are no rules for churches to follow." After some good observations on the true way of following the example of Christ in these things, he adds:-"The reason taken from the use of sacraments, in that they are instruments of grace unto each particular man, may, with good congruity, lead the church to frame accordingly her words in administration of the sacraments."

At the same time, while I would not charge any individuals with having imbibed the errors of Zuingli and Calvin on the holy sacraments, I cannot deny that I do think that their errors have been and are widely entertained in the church; nor do I see how it should be otherwise, so long as books infected with these errors form the principal reading of our clergy. Many who think that they obtain their notions from holy scripture, do, in fact, obtain them ultimately from Zuingli and Calvin, and that by a traditionary teaching, which adheres as rigidly to them as the teaching of the church catholic did to the teaching of the apostles. CANONICUS.

METROPOLITAN CHURCHES FUND.

MY DEAR FRIEND,-Your pages are already so overcrowded with matter of real importance, that I hardly like trespassing upon them in a mere personal affair. But after the reproof given me by name, by your anonymous correspondent (a member of the London Church Committee) in the last Number, I am bound, in justice to him and to myself, to request, that as you have admitted his rebuke, you will not refuse admission to my vindication. Under his favour, the "mistake" rests with him, and not with me; and that both in respect

* Eccl. Polit. b. 5, c. 68, § 2, ed. Keble. The work of the late Mr. Irvine on the sacraments is a striking instance of the great influence of Hooker, in that, through the study of him, Mr. Irvine rose to views on the sacraments decidedly above those of the body to which he belonged: a rare instance, since man's tendency is always to sink below them. O si sic omnia! Mr. Irvine prefixed, I think, Hooker's whole treatise, (Eccl. Pol. b. 5, c. 50-68,) at all events a large portion of it, to his work, professing his obligation to it. It were well that they who quote Hooker on the lay side would study it as a whole, not take traditionary extracts from it.

of my conduct and of my opinion; of the grounds of neither of which As to the first, the occasion of my does he seem to be aware. writing the "letter to the Standard newspaper," for which he reproves me, was this; namely, that my name had been publicly appended, without my consent, to a resolution, which, as I understood, and still understand it, is offensive to my principles. As what I conceived to be an injury (a most unintentional one, I am well assured,) had been offered to me through the medium of " the public journals," it was, I conceive, through the same medium that it behoved me to express my disapprobation. Thus much for my conduct. Next, as to my opinion of the resolution in question, which your correspondent seems to think would have been altered by "explanation" from some member of the committee." I am sorry to say, that if the only explanation" is that which he has offered in his letter, the offensive character of the resolution is not, to my mind, affected in the remotest degree. His explanation does not touch the ground of my objection. The resolution is as follows:-"That application be made to the proper authorities to endow, wholly or in part, the churches or chapels which may be built, or acquired, by means of this fund, out of such property belonging to the prebendal stalls of St. Paul's cathedral, as may become available to such purposes, and, where circumstances may admit, to provide sites."

66

If your correspondent had been prepared, on the part of the committee, to declare that, by "proper authorities," in this resolution, they meant the chapter of St. Paul's cathedral, who are the sworn trustees of the property belonging to it, and had been prepared, on their part, to disavow all interference with the chapter property without the consent of the chapter, he would have met my objection. But if-as, from the tenour of his letter is too clear,-by proper authorities is meant the ecclesiastical commissioners, and the London church committee are prepared to ask B to give them some of A's property, without his consent being had or asked, then I will venture to maintain my objection, and to repeat what I have said upon the subject-namely, that to every unsophisticated mind it must appear neither more nor less than a breach of the eighth commandment; and such a breach as Henry the Eighth, in all his reckless course, dared not sanction. He did not proceed to the suppression, or alienation, of the estates of the religious houses until the existing trustees surrendered them into his hands. If the chapters were competent to establish the existing distinctions between residentiaries and non-residentiaries, they must needs be competent to make any other arrangements in the duties of those who are members of their own body, and to assign what number of their body, and under what regulations, shall be at the disposal of the bishop of the diocese, as a corps de reserve, for parochial purposes, to be employed by him in such parts of his diocese as he shall judge most to be in need; and so shifted, according as permanent provision should be obtained, among those who should be awakened to a sense of religious wants, by the members of this primitive and unexceptionable Pastoral Aid Society; or to make any other arrangements which may better suit the exigencies of the case. VOL. XI.-Feb. 1837.

2 A

I beg leave to observe to your correspondent, that if it is free for him and his committee, without reproof, to make use of the public journals to disseminate their sanction of principles which I believe to be destructive of the endowments of the church, and of all rights of property, I will venture to claim for myself and those who think with me, the liberty also, without reproof, to make use of the same channels for disseminating our sanction of principles which we hope may, under God's blessing, prove conservative of both.

Lastly, I will request of your correspondent, that if he shall again think my name worthy his notice, he will do me so much courtesy as to write in his own. Believe me, my dear -, very sincerely yours, ARTHUR PERCEVAL.

East Horsley, Jan. 4, 1837.

ORDINATIONS.

SIR,-Will you permit me, by means of your periodical, to draw the attention of influential members of the church to the present mode of conducting ordinations? It appears to me that much of that feeling which too commonly prevails among the people towards their duly ordained pastor may be traced to this as its source. The majority of the people scarcely know what ordination means, and at best form very inadequate ideas of the high commission given to their minister. Now, if each clergyman were ordained in the midst of the congregation among whom he was about to minister, the relation between the pastor and his flock would be brought distinctly before the latter, and it might be expected that the solemn vows made by the former in the presence of his people would operate in a most salutary manner. The people would think more of authority thus publicly and solemnly conferred, and the careless and unfaithful minister would probably often be checked by the consciousness that he had pledged himself to diligence and fidelity before the face of his people. As it is, the feeling of most principally arises from those impressions which are made upon their minds by the person himself. If these are unfavourable, many, without even thinking of dissent, and therefore without any scruple, bend their steps to a neighbouring meeting. I need not appeal to my own observation, when that of so many others must accord with it. Ordination in the church of Scotland is performed in the church to which the pastor is appointed; and, having been present on one occasion, I can bear testimony to the interesting and impressive character it bore, both as it respects the minister and the people. I need not say how much more this would be true in the case of ordination according to the rites of the church of England. There would be a difficulty on account of the additional labour which would devolve upon the bishops; but is it insuperable? and would not the importance of the end repay some sacrifice? The whole would be obviated, if, according to the plan proposed by Mr. Newman, suffragans were appointed in each diocese, suppose one for each archdeaconry. Much of what has been said applies also to the rite of confirmation. The same provision would render it practicable to have confirmations held in each church, or at least in churches of those parishes only

which closely adjoined. Something has already been done, but you will be ready to confess that more is desirable, to prevent disorder, and to bring this ordinance of our church more generally and distinctly before the eyes of the people.

May I be allowed to add a word on the office of deacon? It seems desirable that the distinction between the orders of priest and deacon should be more manifest-not greater than our church intended, but more clearly marked in practice. The abolition of pluralities will, I think, greatly tend to promote this, since there will not be so many opportunities for deacons to have the sole care of a parish. Is it not desirable that this should never be the case? The excellent Bishop of Salisbury appears to view the matter in this light from the restriction he has laid upon them, not allowing a deacon to have the sole charge of a parish whose population exceeds four hundred-a restriction as great, perhaps, as present circumstances will admit. If the deacon were excluded from undertaking the charge of a parish, he would then be, according to the intention of his office, an assistant minister, under the direction of his presbyter. In this case it might be considered best that no one should be admitted to the order of priest. until he obtained an appointment to a living or incumbency. PRESBYTER S

SUBSTITUTION OF YEARS FOR DAYS.

MY DEAR SIR,-When I sent you a brief protest against its being assumed, as a matter of course, that the prophetic days are admitted on all hands to stand for years, I had no idea of asking for anything like the space which you offer, and your terms appear to me to be very far from hard. My only hesitation about accepting them at once is, that it is made to " two good champions," and the accepting it may seem to imply that I consider myself, and take it for granted that you will consider me, as a good champion; but, good or bad, I am always glad to defend my opinion on this point; and having done so publicly for many years, it might seem as if any hesitation now was mere evasion, under the pretence of modesty.

It appears to me that the best way will be for some one who maintains the mystical interpretation, to state the grounds on which he defends it. I will, if it please God, and you approve, answer him to the best of my ability. I say this because it seems to me to be obviously incumbent on him who, in any case, departs from the plain meaning of words, to assign his reason for so doing. As to my argument, without some such ground to work upon, far from exceeding your offered four pages, I should hardly know how to expand it through four lines. It would be simply this" day means day, and year means year, by the common rules of interpreting written language." If any man maintains that any given passage is not to be understood according to those rules, it is his place to tell us why; and I mention this the rather because it is a very invidious thing to give the argument of an opponent, and one in which, whatever candour may be exercised, it is almost impossible to satisfy him.

There are two other things which I will take the liberty to suggestfirst, that you, or any gentleman whom you may think proper and find willing, should act as moderator, and point out, by notes on each letter, anything which he may consider as irrelevant, and therefore not requiring any reply; any misconception of the opponent's meaning, which may be in that manner set right at once, without taking up room by explanations referring to a preceding number, which readers may not have at hand; any omission of reply to any question or argument; anything (as I do not know who may be my opponent, I may, perhaps, without offence add) unfair or uncivil; in short, you know better than I do what are the duties of a moderator in such a case; and if it be too much to ask you to take the burthen yourself, I think you will find among your extensive literary acquaintance some friend who will undertake it.

Secondly, that authorities for matters of fact, except such as are quite notorious, and references for all quotations, should be given strictly; that the writer shall state the source from whence he actually derives his information, and not borrow authorities and references from others.

Further, it seems to me that it would be a good thing, as giving more time for reply, (and perhaps it might conduce to brevity,) if each writer were to make two copies of his letter, and send one to his opponent when he sends the other to you. You will, perhaps, mention some day of the month by which each letter must be sent to you; and it is obvious that what I suggest will allow more time for reflection and condensation.

Gloucester.

I am, my dear Sir, yours very truly,

S. R. MAITLAND.

THE WORD "MERIT."-MR. BARTER.

SIR,-I have just seen, in your December number, a letter on the use of the word "Merit." The writer makes what he thinks an extract from my book, but which is nowhere to be found there: it is not surprising, then, that he has mistaken my meaning. I have never condemned any book on the lists of the Christian Knowledge Society, but some expressions in them; nor have I ever characterized the term, " our merits," in reference to eternal rewards, as a confused statement, but as an "expression," of which I wholly disapproved. I still believe the distinction between works and merits to be of vital importance to the cause of truth, as plainly stated in my observations.

W. B. BARTER.

QUESTIONS.

1. WHETHER a psalm or hymn can be sung at the commencement of the morning and evening prayers, consistently with the spirit of the service? I have sometimes heard hymns of triumph and joy sung on such occasions, which, if they were fitted for the use of the church militant at all, were certainly ill fitted to prepare the mind for an act of humiliation; and the transition from them to the sentences, exhortation, and confession, was painfully felt.

2. Whether the usual mode of reading the service for the churching of women, out of the desk, be according to its true spirit? In Ireland, the