Both are firmly fixed, and both remain at the same distance from Rome as they were two centuries ago.-There are some still of the same way of thinking with those early Non-conformists of whom Fuller speaks, who "accounted every thing from Rome which was not from Geneva." If every jealousy of this kind must be satisfied, then her principle of reformation must be, not to establish what is rational and Scriptural, but what is opposite and most unlike to the Church of Rome. It will not be enough to separate effectually from that Church, and to stand on principles different and utterly irreconcilable with hers, but we must contrive to get at as great a distance as possible from it; and because Rome stands in one hemisphere, the Church of England must never think herself safe, never think she can sufficiently mark her aversion, never cease her flight, till she hath got to the Antipodes. She must generously abolish and disavow her two Sacraments, because Rome hath seven. Because Rome is superstitious, she must lay aside all regard to decency and order in her worship, Because Rome exercises an usurped authority, destructive of religious liberty, she must disclaim all authority, though necessary for the safeguard of liberty. Rome is a tyrant, therefore she must have no government. (Rotheram's Essay on Establishments.)

The design of keeping out Popery by the ruin of this Church, is like the preposterous way of securing the vineyard by pulling up of the fence; or of keeping out the enemy by the removal of our bulwark. Under that name this Church is commonly spoken of, and they do not flatter it who give it that title. Its constitution is Christian, and it is strong in its nature; and if such hath not ability (with God's assistance) to resist the assaults of Romish power, much less have they who dissent from it. (Bishop Tennison's Argument for Union.)

The following defence against the Romish Church itself, will not, it is presumed, be considered irrelevant to this part of the subject.

To their usual question, where was the Protestant Church or Religion before Luther? I answer, first, that it was there, where their whole religion cannot, as they grant, be found; to wit, in the Holy Scriptures. Secondly, it was, as Bishop Usher saith well, where their Church was, in the same place, though not in the same state and condition. The Reformation, or Protestantism did not make a new faith or Church, but reduced things to the primitive purity;-plucked not up the good seed, the Catholic faith or true worship, but the after sown tares of error, as Image worship, Purgatory

&c. which were ready to choak it. Did the Reformation in Hezekiah's, or Josiah's days, set up a new Church or religion different in essence from the old one?-Had it not been a ridiculous impertinency for one that knew Naaman before, while he stood by to ask, Where is Naaman? And being answered, this is he; for the inquirer to reply, it cannot be he, for Naaman was a leper, this man is clean: was not Naaman formerly a leper, and now cleansed, the same person? A field of wheat in part weeded, is the same it was as to ground, and seed, not another. In like manner, the true visible Christian Church, cleansed and unclean, reformed and unreformed, is, the same Church altered, not as to essence or substance, but quality or condition. (Preservative against Popery, Tit. X. 56.)

The subject may be concluded by the following address of a former Expositor of the Book of Common Prayer on Scriptural proofs.

To you, my brethren, who separate from our Communion, though you agree with us in all the great and fundamental articles of our faith, and are always objecting, that our Liturgy was at first taken out of the MassBook, if you will return no reply to the several answers that have been given you upon this head, viz. That among the compilers of the Common Prayer, two of them, Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Ridley, Bishop of London, were Martyrs; and two more, Taylor, first Dean, and then Bishop of Lincoln, and Cox, Dean of Christ Church in Oxford, Confessors for the Protestant cause ;-that we are not to measure the Protestant religion by any peevish opposition to Papists; nor to account every thing Popery that is practised in the Church of Rome ;-that the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and the Bible, are used among Papists, but are not evil notwithstanding that;—that our Reformation was no new religion, but only a necessary and discreet removal of some intolerable corruptions, and an establishing of the old Christianity taught us plainly in the Scriptures, and interpreted, where dubious, by the ancient fathers ;-and finally, that though some of our prayers are used in the Romish worship, yet they are not upon that account to be thought the composures of Popery, but of pure antiquity, most of them having been extent in the Western Church above a thousand years before the name of Popery, at least long before the present Mass-Book, had a being;-if you will return no reply, I say, to these answers, and if common sense, and common reason are of no force with you, when they are on our side of the question,-yet let Moses and the Prophets-let Christ and his

Apostles be attended to-though they happen to appear in defence of what you have been so very unjustly prejudiced against. And O! that God would let me see the time, when men will endeavour not to defend their own notions obstinately and perversely, but to do their utmost in a calm unprejudiced manner to find out truth, and to secure the peace of the Church and nation; and in a word, when they shall study not the interest of this or that party, but that of our common Christianity. (Veneer on the Common Prayer, Preface.)

On the subject of the difference between the Churches of England, and Rome-consult

Jewel's "Apology;" and his Defence against Harding.—Smith's Synopsis Papismi, or a General View of the Papistry."-White against Fisher. Stillingfleet's "Rational Account of the grounds of the Protestant "Religion."-Chillingworth's "Religion of Protestants a safe way to 66 salvation," particularly his "Reasons against Popery," 301.-Archbishop Sharpe's Sermons against Popery; and Appendix.-Gretton's "Vindication of the doctrines of the Church of England in opposition to "those of Rome."-Puller's " Moderation of the Church of England con"sidered."-Bennett's "Confutation of Popery," (particularly Part III.) and Bennett's "Paraphrase on the Common Prayer"-Appendix, No. Į. -The Bishop of Durham's "Grounds on which the Church of England separated from the Church of Rome."-The Bishop of St. David's "Protestant Retrospect; containing "A Protestant and Papist's Manual.”Marsh's "Comparative View of the Churches of England and Rome."Trapp's "Popery truly stated and briefly confuted."-Various Discourses, Charges, &c. contained in the 6th and 11th vols. of the Collection of Smaller Tracts published by " the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.” -Ditto in the second volume (Part IV. on Popery) of "The Churchman "armed against the Errors of the Time," published by "the Society for "the distribution of Tracts in defence of the United Church of England "and Ireland, as by law established."-" London Cases to recover Dis"senters," particularly the 13th and 14th, as to " the Church of England "symbolizing with the Church of Rome," by Fowler, Bishop of Gloucester. The 21st " An argument of Union," by Tennison, Bishop of Lincoln -and the 23rd "The Church of England free from the imputation of Popery," by Dr. Hooper, Dean of Canterbury.—And lastly, and chiefly, that elaborate, and valuable Collection of Treatises, in 3 vols. folio, intitled, "A Preservative against Popery," particularly Title I. page 105,

&c.-III. p. 107, &c. 191, &c. 230, &c.-V. p. 3, &c.-VI. p. 313-332. -VIII. throughout; with the Appendix.-IX. throughout, particularly pp. 46–48. 241–264, and the Appendix to Title XIII.-In this work the fundamental errors of the Church of Rome are pointed out systematically, and contrasted with the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures, and with the practice of the Church of England, at Title III. p. 75-77.-IX. p. 244264, 311-316.-And its opposition to itself, at Title III. p. 86-89.

There are, no doubt, many other authorities of equal, or superior weight, of which the Author is ignorant; as there are many which he neither possesses, nor has opportunity of referring to.

¶ (1) The Order how the Psalter(2) is appointed to be read.

THE Psalter shall be read through once every Month,(3) as it is there appointed, both for Morning and Evening Prayer. But in February it shall be read only to the twenty eighth or twenty ninth day of the Month.(4)

And, whereas January, March, May, July, August, October, and

(1) For the probable origin of this mark see post, p. 99, note (5.)

(2) The Psalms, in our English Liturgy, are according to the Translation set forth in the latter part of King Henry the Eighth's reign; after that Petrus Galatinus had brought in the pronouncing and writing the name Jehovah, never before used or heard of in any language: which is used in this our translation, Psalms xxxiii. 12, and lxxxiii. 18. Some have had a conceit, that this translation was out of the Septuagint, or (which is all one in effect) out of the Vulgar Latin. But the contrary is evident, and will appear to any man, that shall compare them but in any one Psalm. In one case, indeed, this translation may seem to follow the LXX. and Vulgar Latin, against the Hebrew, namely, in the addition of some words or clauses,-sometimes whole verses, not found in the Hebrew. But this case excepted, where it once agrees with the LXX. and Vulgar Latin, against the Hebrew, it forty times agrees with the Hebrew against them. (Sparrow's Rationale, p. 254, and see at p. 256,

&c. a list of the additions made.) (3) The present division and arrangement (whereby two separate portions are affixed to each day, and the whole read through in the month) is more commodious than any former method. The division into seven portions only, called Nocturns, which embraced the whole once a week (as practised in the Latin Church) was long and tedious: and into twenty portions, to be read over in so many days, (as in the Greek Church) is uncertain, every portion perpetually shifting its day. (Wheatly Com. Prayer, 136.)

Our Church being loath that her service should seem over prolix, alloteth to it one month or thirty days, the very term the Turks assign for their Alcoran; a wonder she hath not for that very reason been suspected as inclining to Mahometanism! (L'Estrange, 55.)

(4) Before the last alteration it was February shall borrow of either of "the months (of January and March) one day: and so the Psalter which "shall be read in February, must begin at the last day of January, and end "the first day of March."