that some are found possessed of that circumcision of the heart, (the peculiar gift of the Holy Ghost to the elect church) for want of which many circumcised will at the last day be refused admittance into the kingdom of God. (Rom. xxvi. 29.) But let none imagine from these remarks, that one of the obvious inferences to be deduced from them is this; that because an elect people may be saved, without any written word of God, and merely by the grace of the Spirit of Christ working in them, in connexion with the Law written in their hearts, and that measure of light which they have derived from the faithful traditions of the ancient Patriarchal church, that therefore the written word of God, and the clear revelation of the Gospel of Christ is unnecessary and without value to such persons; for such an inference cannot fairly be drawn from the afore-mentioned supposition, and would only betray the ignorance of those who should think to deduce it. For how evident it is, that to the elect church, the revelation of the mystery of their redemption in Christ from the power of the wicked one, is unspeakably precious. They are it may be, (and too surely are but for the Gospel) oppressed of the Devil. They are ignorantly worshipping God, whom they would fain serve, but know not how to honor Him acceptably. Impelled by the Holy Ghost they follow after truth and righteousness, but they possess only, in addition to the law written in their hearts, the fragmentary traditions of their fathers to aid them in their researches after truth; and how interwoven with error are their traditions! And are they not throughout their whole lives subject to bondage through the fear of death, entertaining it may be some hopes of the divine

mercy, but amidst much terror and anxiety of heart? This is certainly their case; and add to this, that for want of a clearer light of revealed truth, muchunrighteousness pervades their lives and conversation, and that they are as yet unconscious of the true nature of Christian holiness, although they sincerely desire to please God and to work righteousness. And how under such circumstances, shall any infer that the preaching of the Gospel is not necessary, or might as well be dispensed with? The elect church under the Law, desired to see the things which we see, and saw them not, and we who see the truths of the Gospel, Christ pronounced to be doubly blessed. Matt. xiii. 16, 17. We also know that God is glorified on earth in proportion as the kingdom of Christ is visibly as well as invisibly established in the world, and that consideration too, must make us ardently desire the extension of the Gospel of His grace. But why lavish words to prove what none but the unbeliever or nominal christian will be inclined to gainsay or resist? To the believer who calls to mind the days of his former ignorance, and how he worshipped, even in a Christian land, an unknown God, and who is also sensible, that with all his present clear gospel light, he only sees as through a glass darkly, to such an one it need not be said, that the word of God, and the unfolding of that word by teachers instructed by the Holy Ghost, is the choicest boon, which, next to Jesus and the gift of the Spirit, God can give to man; the most precious heritage of the church; her best possession upon earth; her only weapon of defence against the wicked one; her only sure and certain antidote amidst the varied sins and evils and trials of this mortal life.

SIR WILLIAM DUNBAR.

THE following" Reply" to an affectionate address forwarded to the Rev. Sir William Dunbar by the congregation of the Parish Church of Stoke-uponTrent, on the occasion of Bishop Skinner's unprecedented manifesto against that pious and estimable minister of the gospel, will serve to bring our readers better acquainted alike with the surviving spirit of the ancient nonjurors, and with the practical working of what we brought under their notice some months back, as “the Junior Mass-book." Such a proceeding as this speaks volumes as to what we may look for, if we guard not with jealous vigilance the Christian liberty inseparable from our Protestant integrity. The treatment to which Sir William has been subjected is a stain upon the Episcopal Church of Scotland, which we must hope they will persevere in wiping out. Steps have already been taken to that end, by some of the worthiest of her ministers; and we would desire the eyes of every pious episcopalian in these realms to be upon the parties concerned; their voices ready to utter a combined, and unequivocal note of remonstrance and condemnation, if this scandalous offence be not speedily removed. We honour Sir William Dunbar for the course that he has taken, and we hope he will maintain his ground.

MY DEAR FRIENDS,

Aberdeen, 7th October, 1843.

I HAVE been anxious, ever since your Address reached me, to convey my heartfelt acknowledgment of your kindness; but circumstances of great interest to the Congregation to whom I at present minister, as well as to myself, have prevented my writing sooner. This delay, however, will not, I am persuaded, be misinterpreted by any one of you.

It is impossible for me to give utterance to the feelings of my heart on reading your communication which carried my memory back to the period when we lived together in peace and unity. It brought vividly before me much that transpired during the time I officiated amongst you, and it has served to confirm me in the assurance that, when a bond of union has been suitably formed between a minister and a people, although circumstances may occur to separate the one from the other, yet the effects of that union will not fade away, but will, on the other hand, be found to manifest themselves in a manner most gratifying to both.

That your amazement should have been great, on reading the document to which you allude, was indeed most natural. My own surprise was considerable; for the whole business of the Synod was effected without my having any knowledge of their sitting. The Synod, it appears, when assembled, declared, upon what evidence I know not, that I am apart from Christ's mystical body, wherein the one Spirit is." I have committed no offence against them, unless having withdrawn my limited and qualified association with the Scottish Episcopal Church be

66

considered an offence; and I did this by adopting the very means which Bishop Skinner himself prescribed to me. Still, whatever imaginary or real offence this may have given, I have yet to be informed upon what authority the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, sitting with his Synod, presumes to declare a Presbyter of the Church of England to be apart from the mystical body of Christ. Would any Bishop of the Church of England condemn one of her Presbyters thus? Would any Bishop of the Church of England even censure one of her Presbyters unheard? But English Episcopacy, as established, is not Scottish Episcopacy. Scottish Episcopacy, wholly irrespective of the established laws of the country, by which the Church of England is regulated, assumes the power of making and abrogating Canons at option, without let or hindrance, as is set forth in Canon xxxiii.:

"A General Synod of the Church, duly and regularly summoned, has the undoubted power to alter, amend, and abrogate the Canons in force, and to make new Canons; and the said alterations, amendments, abrogations, and new Canons being in conformity with the recognized Constitution and acknowledged practice of this Church, shall not only oblige the minority in the said Synod, but all the absent members of the Church."

In 1811, a Code of Canons was adopted by the Scottish Episcopal Church; in 1828, these Canons were altered; in 1829, another alteration was made; in 1838, alterations were again made. Thus, since 1811, her Canons have undergone three alterations; and, subsequently to the Bishops of the Church of England concurring in the English-ordained Clergy