English public. Living in London, and being well aware of the tricks resorted to by the Non-intrusionists to excite the sympathy of the English people, no man could be better qualified for the task than Mr. Cumming, Sure we are, too, that few men could have executed it with a more masterly hand, and, for proof of our view, we need only refer to the immediate reply of Dr. Candlish, who would not have attempted an answer had he not felt that Mr. Cumming's tract had inflicted a fatal wound on the cause of Non-intrusion in England.

The Witness assures us, that the fate of all church establishments is sealed by the recent acts of the government. On the contrary, we contend that the fate of the Church of Scotland had been sealed if the government had complied with the Papal requirements of the Non-intrusionists. We confess, as members of the Church of England, that we should have deeply regretted any such act on the part of the government. We should, in such a case, most certainly have considered it as the ruin of the Church of Scotland. We confess, too, that we should view any attack on the Scottish Church with the greatest alarm. When the Irish Church was in danger some few years ago, many of the Presbyterian clergy came forward and actually petitioned parliament on the subject; and we are happy in the reflection that the bishops of the Church of England have often, in parliament, pleaded the cause of the Church of Scotland. Should the matter ever be submitted to the House of Lords, we have no doubt whatever that the bench of bishops would express their sympathy with the Scottish Church and their dissent from the principles of the Non-intrusionists.

But we must have another word Iwith Mr. Hamilton. He tells us that he attended the convocation in Edinburgh-that assembly of which the party made so much-an assembly with which the first four general councils are not to be compared. What was Mr. Hamilton's business there is not explained; but so it was, the reverend gentleman was there. Let him, however, tell his own tale, after which we will again remind

him of a part of his duty, which, unless we are mistaken, he has not yet performed. He says, "Nearly 500 came together; and it was very plain that no ordinary call would have brought from the remotest headlands of a rugged land, such a company in the dead season of the year."-P. 13. He then gives an account of the meeting, the sermon, and the prayers. At length he soars and becomes quite eloquent. We extract the following from Mr. Hamilton's tract :

"And then, when we looked at the materials of the meeting and saw before us, with few exceptions, all the talent, and, with still fewer exceptions, all the piety of the Church of Scotland, we wished that those were present in whose power it lies to preserve to the Scottish establishment all this learning and this worth. There was the chairman, who might so easily have been the Adam Smith, the Leibnitz, or the Bossuet of the day; but who, having obtained a better part, has laid economics, and phi losophy, and eloquence on the altar which sanctified himself. There was Dr. Gordon, lofty in simplicity, whose vast conceptions and majestic emotions plough deeper the old channels of cus. tomary words, and make common phrases appear solemn and sublime after he has used them. There were Dr. Keith, whose labours in the prophecies have sent his fame through Europe, and are yearly bringing converts into the Church of Christ; and Mr. James Buchanan, whose deep-drawn sympathy, and rich Bible-lore, and Christian refinement, have made him a son of consolation to so many of the sons of sorrow. There were Dr. Welsh, the biographer and bosom friend of Thomas Brown; Dr. Forbes, among the most inventive of modern mathematicians; and Dr. Paterson, whose Manse Garden is read for the sake of its poetry, and wisdom, and Christian kindness, where there are no gardens, and will be read for the sake of other days when there are no manses. And there was Dr. Patrick M'Farlan, whose calm judgment is a sanction to any measure; and who, holding the richest benefice in Scotland, most appropriately moved the resolution, that rather than sacrifice their principles they should surrender their possessions. And not to mention names the poet must not speak,' there were in that assembly the men who are dearest of all to the godly throughout the land-the men whom the Lord hath delighted to honour -all the ministers in whose parishes have been great revivals, from the apostle

of the North, good old Mr. Macdonald, whose happy countenance is a signal for expectation and gladness in every congregation he visits; and Mr. Burns, of Kilsyth, whose affectionate counsels and prayers made the Convocation feel to. wards him as a father; down to those younger ministers of whom, but for our mutual friendship, I could speak more freely. When we looked at the whole, knowing something of all, we felt, first, such an assembly never met in Scotland before; secondly, it will depend on them, under God, whether Scotland can ever furnish such an assembly again; and, thirdly, what a blot on any reign, and what a guilt on any government, which casts forth such a company! And then, after some sadder musings, came in this thought,-yet, what a blessing to the world if they were scattered abroad, every where preaching the word!”

Among "the names the poet must not speak" we suppose Mr. Hamilton included his own. Still it is a pity he did not assign some high post to himself, distinguished as he is for learning and talent! Why, the English public will consider the list quite defective without a description of his own qualities. Never before was such an assembly in Scotland! Let the Scottish people hear this! They will, we think, revert to former assemblies and ask, what does Mr. Hamilton mean? But he was com forted by the thought of the good that would result from their dispersion. We should imagine from Mr. Hamilton, that the Non-intrusion gentry once intended to travel into heathen lands and preach the Gospel there, leaving the Church of Scotland in peaceful possession of their native country. If, however, such were once their views, as the close of the preceding extract would seem to indicate, the feeling was very shortlived, for, instead of being scattered abroad, they are building snug chapels at home.

But really and truly, we never, during the whole course of our experience, read a more bombastic paspassage. At the same time, it contains assertions which are not true; assertions, however, which it would be absurd in us gravely to answer. We merely cite, as an example, the assertion respecting the talent and the piety of Scotland.

We promised, however, to remind Mr. Hamilton of a point of duty.

We do this because it is evident that he has forgotten it. He went, as he himself tells us, to Edinburgh to join the convocationists; he gave his assent and consent to all their proceedings; he identified himself with them in every respect; but he has omitted to follow them in their subsequent course. This is the point of duty which Mr. Hamilton has evidently forgotten. The Convocationists in Scotland have quitted their churches; how is it that Mr. Hamilton has not quitted his chapel? Surely there must have been inconsistency somewhere! Why write a tract in favour of the Non-intrusionists unless he is prepared to act upon and carry out their principles? Really, Mr. Hamilton, you ought not to be separated from Dr. Candlish. Better, too, to do as the men of Scotland have done than to be ejected by the Presbytery, who, as the trust-deed of the chapel connects it with the Church of Scotland, must of necessity interfere.

In our opinion, the Non-intrusionists are pursuing a course which, while it will not affect the church of Scotland as a church, will, nevertheless, have a most injurious effect upon the public mind. It will lead the people to imagine that religion is an empty name that the ministers of religion are merely anxious to obtain worldly power and worldly aggrandisement. It will be asked, why have these clergymen of the Church of Scotland separated themselves from a body, to which they have been united for years? Why have they quitted the Church, while no change has been made in the views of the Church? The reasons which have induced these gentlemen to take a step of so much importance to themselves, we cannot state, since we are not able to gather them from their publications. At all events, the only reason which appears on the face of the thing is simply an unwillingness to obey the laws of the land and the laws of the Church. An indifferent person would not be able to gather any other reason. But though the reasons are beyond our comprehension, yet we can state that one point alone constituted the cause of their differences with the Church; and that point involves a doctrine which is essentially popish. On this subject we have already adduced a com.

petent witness in the editor of the Tablet. That gentleman, who cares neither for the Church of Scotland nor the Non-intrusionists, declares that the principle in itself is a sound one, and that it is the same for which Becket died on the steps of Canterbury Cathedral. The conduct also, and the speeches of the party are popish. They denounce all who disagree with them. In England none but the Voluntaries are admitted within the pale of Christianity, while the Church of Scotland is denounced as a secular body and an unchristian confederacy. This is the very course pursued by the Romish Church. She also denounces all who comply not with her requirements. Well, indeed, it is for Scotland, that these demagogues are not armed with the sword of authority, for no one who watches their proceedings can doubt that they would use it if they could. Surely, as they have obtained their utmost wishes in rescuing the Church from captivity, they might be content to permit what they are pleased to term the establishment, to remain in quiet and peaceable possession of its post in the land without railing at its ministers and denouncing them as members of a body to which the name of a Christian Church can by no means be applied. According to Mr. Hamilton the Church of Scotland is no Church at all. The free and protesting Church alone is entitled to the appellation; consequently, the Church is no longer in captivity. We have now done with the subject, and we are sure our readers are not sorry. We have exposed the inconsistency of the Non-intrusion party and the hollowness of their principles. To those who wish for further information we recommend Mr. Cumming's tract. But we cannot close without giving expression to our hope that the Church of Scotland may continue to be, as she has long been, a blessing to the land.

Since the preceding article was printed off, an able, though somewhat heavy, pamphlet from the pen of Sir William Hamilton, of Edinburgh, has been put into our hands. We wish that the learned author had taken less time to deliberate ere he sat down to the composition of his brochure; for it leaves the Non

intrusionists without a leg to stand upon. Never was mathematical demonstration more complete. Dr. Candlish and his friends say, that the principle for which they contend is fundamental and original in the constitution of their church. They claim for it a recognition in the mother Church of Geneva, whence their own is admitted to have derived its polity; and they affirm that the declaratory act passed at the time of the Union with England was not only a violation of the rights of the Scottish Church, but that it was vehemently protested against by the General Assembly. Sir William Hamilton has proved, that in all these several assertions they are in error. With great good taste, he refuses to go farther, by insinuating that the error could have been in any instance wilful. Yet he leaves one of the leaders of the party-namely, Dr. Cunningham in a position which, considering the Rev. gentleman's zeal in the cause of assumed truth, is not much to be envied. After quoting at length Beza's celebrated letter, addressed, as some believe, to Knox, as others imagine to Buchanan; besides making large extracts from the "The Ecclesiastical Ordinances of the Church of Geneva," compiled by Calvin himself in 1541, and subsequently reviewed in 1576, he, first of all, gives us the gist of the argument_compressed into nine sentences, and then makes reference in a note to the manner in which the Non-intrusionists have dealt with it. We subjoin these choice morsels of ratiocination:

"The sum of Beza's doctrine, like that of Calvin, therefore is

"1. That in ecclesiastical, as in every other polity, the end, not the means, should be the principal object of consi. deration.

"2. That in searching for a rule in Scripture, we should look mainly to the apostolic end, and not exclusively to the apostolic means.

"3. That the modes of election in the Apostolic Church were relative to the peculiar circumstances of that Church; and that under all circumstances to adopt these modes, simply because apostolic, is absurd.

"4. That to give the initiative in ecclesiastical elections to the people is preposterous.

5. That to concede to the congrega.

tions at large a power of decisive judg ment concerning their pastors is un. scriptural and pernicious.

6. That consent is supposed, where valid counter-reasons cannot be assigned.

7. That there is no intrusion where a pastor is set over a congregation by the judgment of the proper presbyterial body, be it consistory or classis.

"8. That intrusion is only committed when a pastor is inducted without, or against, the judgment of the presbyterial body; or by the presbyterial body, when it does not take into account the qualities of him whom they approve of or elect.

"9. That the imagination of a mea. sure like the Veto Law was a snare laid by Satan against the Church; that its enactment was a door thrown open for the devil to enter; and that the present turmoil within the sanctuary is the peculiar agitation of the anarch old.'"'

To this we append the learned baronet's note, trusting that Dr. Cunningham will lose no time in setting himself right before his Nonintrusion congregation. The note, be it observed, has reference to Beza's letter, which letter, as we have just said, Sir William has given at length :

"6 From what has now been adduced from Calvin and Beza, the reader may judge of what reliance is to be placed on Dr. Cunningham's statement-that these two divines held that the Christian people have, by God's appointment, a right to choose their own ministers; and that this right of election is substantially declared by setting forth the necessity of their consent and approbation.'-Defence, &c., p. 64. The only semblance of verisimilitude obtained for this assertion is by quoting scraps; by taking it for granted that these great men maintained the absurdity, that what could safely be done in the circumstances of the Apos tolic Church could safely be done in the circumstances of the modern world; and by giving a wholly different meaning to the terms approbation, consent, &c., from that given to them by their employers. There is also a misrepresentation to be noticed in regard to this last consilium. To be fully aware of its importance, that document must be read and considered as a whole. One sentence of it, as an ordinary letter, and that not the most striking, had been quoted by Lord Medwyn, and from him by Mr. Robertson, of Ellon. In extenuation thereof, Dr. Cunningham scruples not to

assert

that the letter has reference, not to the place or standing which the people

ought to possess in the appointment of their minister, but a much wider and more comprehensive one-viz. the whole power assigned to the people in ecclesiastical matters by Morellius and the Independents. No misrepresentation could be greater; and, to any one who reads the letter, none more manifest. The problem there mooted is limited exclusively to the share which the congregation at large ought to have in the election of pastors. All has reference to this single point alone; and the cursory allusion to Morelli (which of itself demonstrates that he and his opinions are only incidentally touched on) is merely an historical notice of the fact of his condemnation for an opinion under which the one here refuted was in a certain sort contained."

Besides turning against the schism the heavy artillery of Calvin, Beza, Melville, and Henderson, Sir William Hamilton shews that the sort of veto which the Separationists claim for the people has never been conceded or sought for in any state or Presbyterian Church whatever; that even among the French Calvinists, who formed their voluntary church after the model of that of Geneva, it was so completely modified as to have its nature and tendencies altogether changed. The Church of Bern, the Dutch Church, the Presbyterian Church of England, all repudiated the principle. The Church of Scotland, in the celebrated Westminster Assembly, went hand in hand with this latter body, receiving from it her confession of faith, and cordially subscribing to the views of ecclesiastical polity, which were there set forth. Read what the Assembly enacted in reference to the very question which has created so much of evil blood in our own day, and of which no man can as yet perceive the ultimate results :

ordained or admitted, shall have notice of it, and if they shew just cause of exception against him, he is not to be ordained or admitted. And in the meantime, till one be admitted, the Presbyterie shall pro vide for the supply of the congregation.'

"The congregation, if they conceive themselves wronged by any act of the Presbyterie, shall have libertie to appeal to the next Synode, which, upon hearing of the matter, shall judge as the cause shall require.'

"Form. That when any ruling elder is to be chosen, when an eldership is constituted, it is to be done by the eldership, with the consent and approba tion of the people of that congregation.'

That it shall be lawfull for the congregation respectively, or any other persons to exhibit exceptions against any persons elected as aforesaid, touching the right of his election, the qualification of the person before mentioned, or touching matter of ignorance or scandal hereafter mentioned, to such persons as are here. after appointed to receive the said excep. tions.'

"That in case no just exception, as aforesaid, shall be proved against any elder, and that the said elder shall approve himself as duly qualified for the said office unto the tryers, then the said tryers shall have power to approve the person so elected to be a congregational elder in the place where he is so elected, and the person so approved is hereby authorised to act with the minister and the rest of the congregational eldership, in the government of that congregation.' -P. 7.

After this it is scarcely worth while to refer to the sentiments of the French Calvinistic Church, as they were set forth in the celebrated synod of Orleans, where Beza presided and Morelli, the real father of the Non-intrusion heresy, was put upon his trial; yet as with these, not less than with Beza's letter, Dr. Cunningham appears to have taken some strange freedoms, the following quotation may not be without its weight:

L'Histoire Ecclésiastique, t. ii. p. 36. The synod commenced its sittings the 27th of May [1562], which the prince [of Condé] with the admiral [De Coligny] and other great lords, honoured by their attendance; as well to authorise by their presence as to listen to its holy and learned discourses and resolutions. Then, among other matters, there was taken into consideration the contents of a book of ecclesiastical discipline, com

posed by a certain Parisian called Morelli. He pretended, among other points, that the ecclesiastical elections ought to be left to the whole assembled people, each individual giving his vote, instead of (where the churches and consistories are already organised) the election being, after examination of life and doctrine, transacted apart by the ministers and elders, or by the colloquies, which election being afterwards notified to the people, it is free to consent, or to bring the said election for discussion before the consistory, or thereafter, if it be requi site, before the provincial or national synod, in order to avoid canvassing and all kinds of confusion. There were also other strange opinions touching the deci sion in regard to doctrine, excommunica. tion, and other points of ecclesiastical discipline contained in this book, which the author had very inconsiderately printed at Lyons, and dedicated to Master Peter Viret as approving of it; which was not the case. This book having been examined, along with the principal reasons in support of its doctrines, and the author himself having several times been heard, was finally condemned by the synod as pernicious; this condemnation being published from the pulpit in all the churches. And the author himself, having shewn a reluctance to acquiesce in this condemnation of his book, was, by the synod, debarred from the Lord's supper so long as he thus created a notorious schism in the church. It was likewise resolved that the Church of Geneva should be advertised in regard to this whole matter; inasmuch as Morelli had there established his family and obtained the right of citizenship, and there also, in part, composed his book."

This must do. We wish that Sir William Hamilton had been more prompt in delivering the blow which he seems to have for some time meditated, because we really do not see how the Non-intrusion folly could have stood up against it. Well may he assert that, "So far is the Nonintrusion principle from being an original and fundamental principle of the Church of Scotland, it was at no time, and in no form whatever recognised by that church as a principle prior to the 31st of May, 1834." But what then? Can he hope to bring the Seceders back now? Can

he flatter himself that even his rea soning will heal a breach which is already effected? We trow not. The evil is done, and both he and we must make the best of it.