Let us not be promised one thing, and then put off with another.

The object, we are told, is, 'to recall the minds, especially of the clergy, to the old standard divinity of their church.' Now if this were honestly meant, should we not have heard, before now, of the preparation of new Oxford editions of the lights of the Reformation, not only of Cranmer and Jewel, but of Latimer also, and Bradford; of Philpot, and Hooper, and Becon, and Bale? Why should not Legh Richmond's admirable outline, of 'the Fathers of the English church,' be traced anew, and filled up by those whose peculiar position gives them peculiar advantages? What a blessing would a good and moderately-priced collection of this kind be, to the English clergy! But we see no trace of even a desire or a disposition to do any thing of the kind. They talk of the old standard divinity of the church; but when we come to name the authors, they can think of none but Laud, and Heylin, and Leslie, and Bull! Now we deny that these have the least title to be considered our 'old standard divines.' We want the works of those who founded and built up our church; but they offer us those only who tried their utmost, and partly succeeded, in pulling it down!

But further, we are to have the treasures of theological knowledge which exist in the ancient fathers of the church,' 'brought to light,' and 'the study of

ecclesiastical history revived;' (as if it had

ever been suffered to fall into disuse.) Now here, again, the question returns, as to what is meant by these expressions. They talk of 'the old standard divinity of the church,' and mean thereby the writings of the Lauds and Heylins of a semipopish and degenerate age! What, then, is included under this general designation, -'The Ancient Fathers of the Church ?' If we were to understand by this expression, merely the writers of the apostolic age, or even of the first two centuries, we should have little exception to take, or objection to offer, save that the language applied, the treasures of theological knowledge,' is rather extravagant and hyperbolical. But we apprehend that the application of the term is not meant to be so limited. We have quoted the opinion of one of their leading writers, that 'three centuries and more were necessary for the infant church to attain her mature and perfect form, and due stature. Athanasius, Basil, and Ambrose, are the fully instructed doctors of her doctrine, morals, and discipline.'

The treasures,' then, which are so lauded by these writers, are to be found in the fourth and following centuries. We may take a sample, which will at the same time apprize us, what sort of ecclesiastical history' it is proposed to' revive.'

The author then proceeds to illustrate these treasures by the account of the invention of the cross as recorded in Socrates. The extract is too long for our insertion, but the following note may convey some idea of the absurdities so gravely commended to notice.

Socrates' History, 1. 1. c. 13. According to this story, the Queen finds three crosses, all wonderfully preserved during three hundred years after the crucifixion. Nay, the very writing of Pilate had been strangely kept, unobliterated, for three centuries, under ground. The Romans, during the siege of Jerusalem, had so covered the ground with crosses, that space was not left for any more; yet just these three were found; And they were all found in a grave; although why a cross should have been interred, or why all three should be interred together, nobody can tell. And this is the trash which, we are to take from an inquiring, diligent, and candid historian,' a man of 'plain good sense.'

The Oxford heresies are however, not only ably answered by the writers already noticed, but are powerfully refuted by anticipation, by the statements of sound principle contained in many of the other pamphlets at the head of this article. Thus the very able and eloquent sermon delivered at the consecration of the Bishop of Hereford by Archdeacon Robinson, destroys at once the exaggerated and preposterous claims of authority with which the ministers of religion are by the Tract writers endowed. The text is St. John xx. 21. "As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you,' from which the Archdeacon shews the true nature and dignity of the episcopal office, by considering the mission of the apostles and their successors as analogous to the Saviour's own in its objects, and in the resources provided for its execution. The objects of the Saviour's mission were to publish the counsels of the divine will for the recovery and redemption of the world. In the execution of his ministry, he added nothing to that roll of divine truth written by his

own hand in the counsels of eternity; and when the days of his earthly ministry were ended, this part of his commission was transferred to the apostles-to declare to others with the fidelity of witnesses, the mind and will of God, as revealed to them by the Spirit. And in addition to this, the Saviour's ministry contemplated the formation and government of his church as a distinct and perpetual society even to the end of time, and thus the apostles directed all the resources of their ministry to cherish and mature the infant churches they had planted, that their spiritual children might thus in theirturn become the fathers of other nations. He ordained therefore twelve, that they should be with him, that he might send them forth to preach. He encouraged them to go forth at his ascension with the assurance of his own universal sovereignty and perpetual presence; and they accordingly made known to others the message entrusted to them, transmitting the charge and the weapons of their warfare to other hands, and with similar assurance of the constant and unfailing support of the same almighty spirit.

The office therefore of the minister of Christ is to testify the gospel of the grace of God; to make known, explain, enforce the message contained in the word of God. He is not a sacrificing Priest; and Clement, the earliest of the Fathers, cautiously avoids applying the terms of the Levitical priesthood to the Christian pastor or presbyter; and we must look to the writers of a later age for any countenance to those claims which the Laudian school advance with reference to the sacraments, and which, if once conceded, would afford a sanction to some of the most pernicious doctrines of Popery.

Mr. Calthrop's Sermon at the consecration of the Bishop of

Sodor and Man, (an event which, both as to the preservation of a most primitive diocese and the promotion of a most suitable individual, calls for our gratitude to Almighty God,) does not enter immediately on modern controversy, but attempts more especially to stir up the pure mind by way of remembrance. The text is 2 Tim. ii. 15. "Study to shew thyself approved of God." From which the preacher observes that a bishop of Christ's church will take especial heed to set the example of Christ continually before his eyes, to maintain purity of mind and loveliness of temper and character, that he will be a man of prayer, of disinterested benevolence, and diffusive philanthrophy; that he will be deeply versed in the knowledge of God's word, and faithful in ordaining others, and sending them forth to feed the flock of Christ, and will also form a high estimate of the dignity of his office

regarding that dignity more especially in a spiritual point of view, and improving it for the welfare of the church and people of God.

Mr. Carus's ordination sermon, from 2 Cor. iv. 7. “We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us," refers more especially to the inferior clergy. Mr. C. points out-The preciousness of the heavenly treasure, as displaying the attributes of God, and graciously satisfying all the necessities of man,-the infirmity of the earthen vessel-and the excellency of the divine power. He then improves the subject by calling upon his hearers to seek to be enriched themselves by this treasure and to be faithful in dispensing it to others; to reflect seriously and often upon the infirmity of the earthen vessel, and let the excellency of the divine power which accompanies our ministration impress us with the dignity

while it sustains us in the duties of our vocation.

Mr. Langshaw's Visitation Sermon on the daily ministration of the clergy forms an appropriate sequel to Mr. Carus's discourse. The text is Acts v. 42. "and daily in the temple and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ; " which the preacher contemplates as furnishing an answer to the threefold questionWhen should we preach? Where should we preach? and What should we preach? The preaching of the Gospel should be a daily, continuous, unceasing work, which must occupy us wholly and to which we should be entirely devoted; there should be a continued visiting from house to house, if not in all cases a daily public service; we should urge upon our people daily family prayer, visit the sick, relieve the suffering, and comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak, be patient toward all men. We are especially to preach Jesus Christ, as the way, the truth, and the life, the propitiation for our sins, the pattern of perfect holiness; and by daily prayer for the Holy Spirit's grace grow up unto him in all things, and run the way of his commandments with an enlarged heart.

Mr. Dalton's Sermon, entitled the Watchman on his Tower in perilous times,' enters as might be expected, more fully into the present danger of the church. The text is Hab. ii. 1. "I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved." From this Mr. D. observes-1. We are threatened by great and impending dangers.-2. God expects us to occupy our watch tower in accordance with his directions; and-3. The important results of a faithful or faithless ministry. Our dangers he observes, are of a personal, pastoral

and national character. Our national dangers are from popery, liberalism, false brethren. We are to guard against them by earnest zeal, diligent preaching, attention to our schools, people in health, and lastly, the sick. We are to cultivate self-denial, spiritual mindedness; faithfulness in preaching the Gospel of salvation through a crucified Redeemer, by these means we may expect to glorify God in the salvation of souls, and beat back the enemy from the camp, while the faithless watchman will lose his own soul and the souls of those committed to his charge.

Mr. Mandell's Four Sermons before the University, are entitled, Christ the Hope of Glory,' from Col. i. 27, 28. Christ the succour of his tempted servants,' from Heb. ii. 18, • Christ the author of reconciliation between God and man,' 2 Cor. v. 18-21, and

Christ ever present with his church.' Matt. xxviii. 20. Like all Mr. M.'s discourses, they are powerful, judicious, and scriptural. They have all of them a direct bearing on the Laudian errors, though the modern heretical publications are only slightly alluded to. The foundation, however, of these errors and heresies, is completely swept away by Mr. M.'s able argumentation, while his reasonings do not excite any of those painful feelings with which controversy and discussion are generally attended, We strongly recommend these discourses to the perusal of young ministers and students for the ministry; for though written and preached while the author was seriously indisposed, they display none of that mental infirmity which frequently accompanies bodily suffering.

Mr. Mortimer's discourse is entitled, An attempt to promote the Peace and Edification of the Church, by uniting the admirers of Leighton and Laud.' But to us

it appears an almost hopeless attempt.

The utmost that charity can conĉeive, in common to these two prelates, is the hope that they were both building on the same foundation,even Christ Jesus and him crucified; but while Archbishop Leighton was building on that foundation gold, silver, precious stones, Archbishop Laud was occupied with heaping together hay, straw, and stubble. The results are as might have been anticipated, Leighton's work stands; his holy example, his seraphic piety, his enlarged and fervent charity, his devout expositions and meditations remain for the edification of the church, in each succeeding age. Neither the preaching, the writings, the conversation, the example of Laud, can be defended without serious very tions; and though his execution was unjust and iniquitous, yet few impartial students can contemplate his proceedings without feeling that he deserved some punishment, and provoked his own destruction, and that of his far less culpable

master.

excep

The contrast indeed between Laud and Leighton is most painful. Leighton was pre-eminent in humility, meekness, forbearance, conciliation, diligent cultivation of spirituality of mind, clearness of communion with God, and every thing which marks and distinguishes the renewed soul. Laud was proud, overbearing, harsh, severe, if not cruel in his punishments, exalting outward rites and ceremonies, and leading the Church of England back as far as he could to Popish rites and ceremonies. There is therefore no common ground on which union can be established. Sure we are that Mr. Mortimer would not wish the spirituality of Leighton to be diminished, or that he or his followers

should be innoculated with the worldly-mindedness of Laud. Most glad should we be to diminish the asperities of controversy, but at the same time we must deprecate any and every attempt to recommend the example of Laud. Prior to the commencement of his trials, he evinced no signs of spirituality of mind, and was far, very far, from what a minister of Christ ought to be. We hope and trust that his afflictions were sanctified, and his closing scene was exemplary; but he did more to overturn the Church of England, than any divine of his own day; and the Laudian sect are at this moment more really dangerous than either the Papists, the Infidels, or the Dissenters.

The four last discourses at the head of this article, relate to the insidious attempts now making to deprive the rising generation of the pure waters of scriptural truth. We do not admire Dr. Dillon's alliterative title, Christianize Education, or crush it; but his discourse depicts in striking terms, the mischievous results of the New national system. Mr. Hughes's protest is also an able discourse; while Mr. Prickett powerfully argues the duty and importance of Christian Education, and of taking care that the foundation of all knowledge be deeply laid in the knowledge of God our Redeemer. The most full developement, however; of the importance of Scriptural knowledge, and the evils of the proposed national system_appears in the Sermon of the Rev. Mr. Baxter of Kidderminster, and the extensive notes with which it is accompanied. We regret that it is not in our power to extract largely from this valuable production to which we hope on some future occasion to recur.