alteration in the state of the question. You talk, p. 40, of offence, and say, if a single expression shall be justly decried as giving needless offence, I regret it and I recall it.' I am, I assure you, Sir, not easily offended. In fair and honourable controversy, though I was never before engaged in a public controversy of any kind, I think I could bear a great deal, and take my open and honourable revenge if I could, or yield if I could not; which in my estimate is the most honourable revenge, and the greatest victory in fair controversy, when truth is the compelling power. But, Sir, I appeal reverently to the bishops; I appeal respectfully to the clergy; I appeal earnestly to the laity of our communion who have entered on either part into our dispute. I am confident that they must decide, nay, you yourself, Sir, when you are cool and collected, must acknowledge that you have done me wrong, not by a vehement expression, not by an angry word, not by an offensive sentence or sentiment-all this I would account as nothing-you have done me wrong by the whole ground and substance on which your Remonstrance proceeds, the mere creature of your own brain, with which I have no more concern than I have with the impostures of the Alcoran. You tell me, p. 40, It has been my prayerful study to avoid any such expression (of needless offence) or feeling.' Now, Sir, I will not denominate this cant, for I am still willing to suppose that you may be serious and sincere ; but your whole paper, from beginning to end, so far as I am concerned, fully entitles me to tell you, that you cannot possibly have prayed, in this instance, in the proper spirit of a Christian, or the result of your prayers, if this be their result, would, beyond all doubt, have been very different, both as it respects yourself and as it respects me."-Pp. 20, 21.

We need not repeat, that the doctrine which Mr. Walker illustrates in his Sermon, is the sound and orthodox faith maintained by the Church of England, and, at the same time, as he has proved, in the first of his notes, the uniform belief of the whole Protestant world, whether Episcopal or Presbyterian-whether Calvinistic or Arminian. It is, nevertheless, well known, that a small party amongst ourselves hold very unsettled and inconsistent notions respecting the ordinance of Baptism; admitting it, in one breath, to be extremely important and the appointed means of salvation, both to infants and adults; while, in the next, they describe it as a mere work of man upon the body," and, consequently, of little spiritual avail or obligation. They even go so far as to garble holy scripture, in order to make St. Paul thank God that he had abstained from exercising this part of the ministerial office among the Corinthians; omitting to add the important reason on which the apostle grounded his observation, and, of course, endeavouring to impress on the minds of their readers a feeling of indifference or contempt for one of the most solemn ordinances of Christ's religion.

66

Mr. Craig, we perceive, belongs to this school, and uses, at secondhand, the dogmas of the Rev. Thomas Scott on the doctrine of baptism.

He has, we also discover, lately taken up his abode at Edinburgh, being admitted a clerical member of the Scottish Episcopal church; and, in return for this reception, he has undertaken to lay before the eyes of the world the most convincing proof that the said church is corrupt in her faith, and teaches, through her professor of divinity, a fearfully unsound and dangerous doctrine-a doctrine not according to godliness, but leading decidedly to fatalism of the worst kind.

With great solemnity this "comparative stranger," as Mr. Walker calls him, announces to his brethren in the north, that "for one great object I have been taught to labour and to pray; and that is, that men may be turned from darkness to light, from sin to holiness, and from hell to heaven." Now, it is to be inferred, we presume, that the other Episcopal ministers in Edinburgh have either not been taught to do all these things, or that they are in the habit of neglecting their lesson on these important heads; else what reason could there be for the distinction which is thus claimed for himself by Mr. Craig? But he goes on in his usual style of Christian meekness, modesty, and charity, to assure all whom it may concern that "Over the progress of this great work I must watch with jealousy; and on this ground, I DO

MOST SOLEMNLY PROTEST AGAINST THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ERROR

AMONGST US!!!" Upon this part of his opponent's conduct, Mr. Walker thus cloquently expresses himself:

"Christian Fathers, and Brethren, and People,-Let me entreat you all most earnestly to read my Sermon with attention and with candour; and tell me, I beseech you, what this jealous watchman, this self-constituted warder, means. In our humble Zion he is comparatively a stranger; and here, with something of the tone of a master, he solemnly PROTESTS against the introduction amongst us of something which he calls an error. The protest is levelled at the doctrine which he says is inculcated in my Sermon; a doctrine which, as it is maintained by me, I have been taught from my cradle, and which I believe that you, 'Venerable Fathers and Brethren (as well as your predecessors for generations before you) have ever taught in this church. If we are exposed at this time to the introduction of any dangerous novelty, you must look, I suspect, not to me, but to this jealous watchman. Let me entreat your most serious attention to his Remonstrance, and especially to the tone and character of this most singular protest at the close of that notable performance; and if you shall find that the obnoxious doctrine which, with such unparalleled boldness, he has attached to my name, is confuted by the whole tenor of my discourse, and in terms the most express, in numerous particular passages which I have herein quoted and referred to,-Then let me hope that we shall each of us also, Fathers and Brethren, stand up in our respective posts, as watchmen and as warders, united for common defence against a spirit which I will not venture to characterize."-P. 31.

He next turns round to his antagonist and says

"If, indeed, the cause of God, and the influence of genuine piety,

are to be promoted by such means, and by such misrepresentations as you have been taught on this occasion to employ, and as I have now exposed in your Remonstrance, you will thereby furnish me with a most portentous novelty in the history of religion; though you cannot wonder, in the meantime, if I wait for better proof of the fact than your bare assertion, with all the prayerful pretensions with which you have sought to adorn it.

"It is with extreme pain, Sir, that I have written in this style; but your most marvellous injustice has compelled me. Could I induce the most partial of your friends to compare with candour my Sermon with your understandings and accusations, I would seek no other answer to your Remonstrance, and, in such a case, would not have interrupted important duties to write this Expostulation. Most earnestly, Sir, do I pray, in all the fervour of Christian charity, not for my own sake, but for yours, that you may feel this to me inexplicable piece of injustice as you ought, (and as some day, Sir, you must feel it;) in which case the accommodation on my part will be easy, as my feeling, now, is compassionate and Christian. But bear in mind, Sir, however you shall feel, that I will have no more controversy with you. You are not fitted for controversy. You affect smoothness indeed, but it covers something which I hold to be inconsistent with the spirit of Christian controversy,-which, when it is most forcible in language, is never intentionally unjust in sentiment. You want reading, or you despise it; and you seem incapable of understanding even that which you rashly undertake to answer. At all events, Sir, beware, I most earnestly beseech you, how you again attach my name to understandings and accusations so groundless and so gross as I have here exposed. If you have a single cool and dispassionate friend, he will, I trust, be able to convince you, that, by attempting to prove too much, you have proved nothing, except your own utter unfitness for the task which, with such unnecessary rashness, you have undertaken. I bid you farewell, not as an enemy, though you have unjustly treated and injured me, but as a Christian, and with that principle of Christian charity which I pray God that you may justly appreciate and learn effectually to cultivate."-Pp. 32, 33.

There is a good deal of animated writing in this Expostulation; more, perhaps, than some persons will think perfectly consistent with the forbearance which is usually exercised towards mere ignorance and vanity. But the Professor does not seem disposed to allow to Mr. Craig the miserable credit of being simply ignorant and vain, and that, of course, his mistakes may have been innocent and unintentional: on the contrary, he accuses him of downright dishonesty, as a controversialist; as being guilty of the grossest perversions, both in respect to words and opinions; and of misrepresentations, in short, which no person could innocently make, who was not "utterly ignorant of his catechism and of the simplest language of religion." But we are inclined to attribute much more than the Professor would admit, to sheer ignorance on the part of Mr. Craig; who, above all other persons whose

342 Expediency of Public Meetings on behalf of Church Societies.

works have ever fallen into our hands, seems entitled to a special verdict inscientiæ causa, that is, on account of an absolute want of knowledge, as to the history and import of the doctrine on which he has written. Besides, there are many men in the world who perplex themselves and annoy others, not so much from bad feelings, as from a certain native absurdity of disposition; qui ne sont absolument fous, as Voltaire expressed it, "Mais dont la raison est tres particuliere:" and this being the case, we would tax our charity with a little invention, and endeavour to find out a cause for the intellectual floundering of our friends, more amiable than a direct, absolute, determined, and premeditated violation of logical truth and controversial honesty.

MISCELLANEOUS.

ON THE EXPEDIENCY OF HOLDING PUBLIC MEETINGS ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH SOCIETIES.

MR. EDITOR,-It is with much pleasure that I observe the question as to the expediency of holding public meetings on behalf of Church societies, brought under the consideration of your readers, by a letter in the last number of your miscellany. It is time that the attention of the public should be called to this subject, and its merits fully discussed; if for no other reason, yet with the view of satisfying every member of the two societies more immediately referred to, that good and sufficient reasons exist, (if such indeed be the fact) why the example of more recent institutions as to this point should not be adopted by them. It cannot be dissembled that a charge of lukewarmness has been brought against the two venerable societies connected with our Church; which (in whatever degree it may be disproved) has at least this for its foundation, that the public are so little acquainted with their proceedings-are so little called upon to connect themselves with the operations, or to take an interest in the extension of either of those societies, that they may well imagine that their individual exertions are neither valued nor can be available.

To know that an impression in any degree prevails unfavourable to the claims of societies so far identified in public estimation with the Church of England, cannot but excite, among many of their respective members, a desire that the cause and proceedings of those societies should be brought more immediately before the public, that an opportunity should be afforded of evincing that, though venerable for years, the societies are not destitute of the vigour of youth; they may be anxious to prove that, if they themselves have not thought fit to join the ranks of other institutions professing the same grand objects, they feel a lively interest in the "Promotion of Christian Knowledge" among all classes of their fellow-creatures, and in the "Propagation of the Gospel" of our Lord and Saviour in every portion of the globe

Expediency of Public Meetings on behalf of Church Societies. 343

to which our influence as Britons, and our zeal as Christians, may gain

us access.

The objections, or rather, (as I do not consider him decidedly hostile to the measure) I would say, the doubts and scruples of your correspondent, A. B. may be considered under two heads:

1stly, That the benefit arising from public meetings is not so great as has been imagined; and

2dly, Granting all that may be assumed in favour of public meetings, the constitution and character of the elder Church Societies does not admit of their adoption by them. Taking these questions in the order as above stated, I am ready to admit that many other causes have contributed to the success of the more modern institutions besides public meetings;-but these, I contend, in opposition to A. B. have been, not, indeed, the originating source, (which, so far as their aims are pure and holy, must be ascribed to a higher power) but the impulsive spring of all that "complicated machinery" to which your correspondent alludes. Where was the adoption first suggested of any of those measures which have engaged so many zealous friends in their cause, and so many active agents in the work of benevolence? was it not at a public meeting? In what way have the subordinate and minute details of those societies been kept in active operation, but by the constant aid and effective stimulus of a general or local public meeting? It is in such a situation that we are enabled to rise above the feelings of hopeless discouragement attending individual effort, and learn our power and resources as beings formed for society. What can my humble contribution or endeavours avail towards an object of such magnitude, is a thought which damps many an ardent wish, and which extinguishes in many a breast the latent spark of Christian zeal.

But let us look at the question in a practical way. What course do we pursue when any measures of public interest are to be adopted? Putting aside political objects, let our view be restricted to plans of benevolence: what was the object, for instance, of convening, but the other day, a public meeting to consider the distressed state of our manufacturers, if that were not felt to be the readiest and most effective method of engaging the support of the public?-Let us suppose, that the resolutions which were then adopted had been merely published in the newspapers; or that the more awakening details of actual misery had been embodied in a "report," and circulated to any conceivable extent; can any of your readers imagine for a moment that the result would have been so honourable to British feeling, or the relief to the poor sufferers so considerable?

To return, however, to the objection of your correspondent-" Information, he suggests, is not the main object of those who attend public meetings"-and if not, then, so much the greater (I would almost say) is their utility and importance: for, information is communicated; and with whatever motives persons may have gone to such a meeting, they can hardly come away as ignorant, nor, I would hope, as indifferent, in any instance, to the moral necessities of their fellowcreatures, as they went there. The spiritual darkness and moral degradation of a large proportion of the human race is brought, as it