"brother" with violating "the principles and practices of his whole life," when he had only carried out those principles to their legitimate results. After all, it appears from a "P. S." to his letter, which, by the way, Mr. Kip does not give, that the great distress of Charles arose from an apprehension that the "poor Methodists" in America had not the men among them whose disinterestedness and wisdom would carry them safe through the crisis. "After my brother's death," says he, "which is now so very near, what will be their end? They will lose all their influence and importance; they will turn aside to vain janglings; they will settle down upon their lees, and, like other sects of dissenters, come to nothing." We need scarcely say that these fears were wholly groundless. Another point in the letter is the confidence he expresses in the success of Bishop Seabury in his plan to import "the succession" from the nonjurors of Scotland. This part of the letter is always referred to by Churchmen with emphasis. They must put the sentences, "his ordination would indeed be genuine, valid, and episcopal," and "A REAL PRIMITIVE BISHOP," in italics and capitals. In this Mr. Kip follows the fashion; just as though the world did not know that in all this Mr. Charles Wesley was wholly misled. Bishop Seabury was not even permitted to constitute the third man in establishing "the succession." When they had the canonical number without him, they did, indeed, permit him to lay on hands in the ordination of bishops, perhaps merely by way of "consent." But this letter must be kept stirring. We doubt if there is a file of Church papers in the land of any considerable extent that does not contain it, and some there are in which, if we are not mistaken, it can be found more than once. The next important fact he presents is, that "Dr. Coke himself felt his ordination to be invalid, and often by his acts admitted it.' This we roundly deny. But let us attend to the proof adduced. He proposed to Bishops White and Seabury, for their consideration, the union of the Protestant Episcopal and the Methodist Episcopal Churches, and offered to submit to a reimposition of hands. And just before he left England for India, he proposed to Mr. Wilberforce to receive episcopal consecration from his grace of Canterbury, and go upon that mission under the auspices of the Church of England. Now the facts are not denied, but we contend that they do not prove the position. Dr. Coke did not consider ordination "an indelible imprint upon the soul," nor a commission from Jesus Christ: but a mere recognition of his divine call and solemn designation to the work, by a branch of the Church, whose authority is merely human, and only extends to those within its own pale. And consequently he did not suppose that submitting to a reimposition of hands was conceding that his former ordination was "invalid." This he fully and explicitly declared with regard to his proposition to Bishop White, and the same must be presumed to have been his view in the proposition he made to Mr. Wilberforce. But the doctor mistook his course, and it is now quite obvious that he mistook his men. He was simple-hearted and confiding; but his ardor often led him into errors which he found it necessary afterward to retract. But what should be thought of the man's head or heart who can exhibit these instances of inconsistency in a good but sometimes mistaken man, as evidence of base hypocrisy? Mr. Kip closes the account in these remarkable words : "Failing in this, he was obliged to settle down for life with the conviction that his office was a pretence, and his episcopal shield deformed by the bend sinister."-P. 139. It would be well for the Church and the world if no man's "episcopal shield" had ever been more "deformed by the bend sinister" than that of Dr. Coke. But we must forbear. We have no pleasure in animadverting upon such hasty, mistaken, uncatholic, and unjust censures as this, especially upon the dead. After all, we are willing to leave the question for a candid world to determine, which is presented in the most advantageous position before posterity, the good but mistaken Dr. Coke, or those who have abused his confidence by publishing to the world his confidential communications, contrary to his expectations and requests.* We marvel not at all, after all this array of proof, that our author makes up this grave conclusion: "Such, then, is Methodism in this country-without a Church or a ministry." Here then we are, and here I suppose we shall continue to be, "without a Church or a ministry," until we can be won over by the reasoning, courtesy, and kindness of such high-Church teachers as the author of "the Double Witness." The fourth lecture is upon the "Antiquity of the Forms of Prayer." The gentleman's authorities do not serve his purpose. Bingham, upon whom he relies for proof of his main positions, admits that "every bishop," originally, "had liberty to frame the liturgy of his own church,"--and that "in after ages-about the year 506 The reader will find this whole matter fully discussed and explained in Bishop Emory's Defence of our Fathers, Dr. Bangs' History of the Methodist E. Church, and Mr. Jackson's Letter to Dr. Pusey-all of which are on sale at the Methodist Book Room, 200 Mulberry-street. efforts were made to reduce the liturgies to uniformity." And that "those liturgies which were certainly compiled in books in the earlier ages, are now in a great measure lost by the injuries of time." And of "the old Gallican, Spanish, African, and Roman liturgies," this learned Churchman says "there is nothing but fragments and dismembered parcels now remaining."* Still Mr. Kip, following Mr. Palmer, tries to prove that these "primitive liturgies" now remain in all their integrity, and that "it is difficult to assign their origin to a lower period than the apostolic age." All this Du Pin proves most conclusively to be totally groundless.† Against such authorities Mr. Kip, and even his friend Mr. Palmer, are of but little weight. The want of space forbids our following the author through in regular order. We had marked many passages, good, bad, and indifferent, which we intended to notice. We also designed to sketch out the Church system, and give our objections to it, but this we must waive until another opportunity shall occur. A few gleanings is all we can now add. We might give several specimens of the horror with which the author regards the Reformation. One must suffice: "The reformers indeed have given a mournful illustration of that declaration made by Irenæus, with regard to the heretics of his time— 'No correction can be made by them so great, as is the mischief of schism.'"-P. 128. So the blasphemies of Leo X., the licentiousness of the monks, the impudent sale of indulgences by Tetzel, the acknowledged heresies of the Council of Trent, the gross idolatry of the Romish worship, and the shameless wickedness of the great body of the clergy, all together constituted a less evil than the simple separation of the reformers from the communion of the Romish Church! Such is the Protestantism of the author of "the Double Witness !" A minister, indeed, he is, in "the Protestant Episcopal Church;" and though he doubtless loves her much, there is no slight indication here that he "loves Rome more." It is quite amusing to find our author so deluded with the notion that "her wonderful increase" is the cause of concerted opposition to "the Church"-that for this reason "now there is on every side a rallying to stop her progress!" Such has been this "wonderful increase," that at this moment, if we are correctly advised, the whole number of her communicants do not amount to more than Origines Ecclesiasticæ, book xiii, chap. v, sec. 1, 2, 3. + See Eccl. Hist., vol. i, pp. 8, 9. one half the number of the net increase of the Methodist Episcopal Church during the last year! Our author talks about "carping;" "ignorance and fanaticism;" and "renouncing for a time all dependence on reason, and suffering the imagination to be awakened to a perfect delirium," and of "a mixed multitude,' which encircle the camp of the true Israel as it journeys through the wilderness." All this is so connected as to show his great self-complacency, and utter contempt for "the different denominations." But we find in a note a passage from the quaint old writer, Thomas Fuller, which affected us quite pleasantly. Small as our space is, we must give the passage : "What may be the cause why so much cloth so soon changeth color? It is because it was never wet wadded, which giveth the fixation to a color, and setteth it in the cloth. What may be the reason why so many, now-a-days, are carried about with every wind of doctrine, even to scour every point in the compass round about? Surely it is because they were never well catechised in the principles of religion.”—P. 284. There is a world of good sense here, which Mr. Kip did not fail to perceive. He had undoubtedly often noticed that many of those who come into "the Church" from "the denominations" give sad proof that they were never "wet wadded." And it is generally only by delivering lectures upon "Church principles," and publishing books, pamphlets, &c., that they can give the requisite proof of that "fixation" which is absolutely necessary to a Churchman. Hence it comes to pass that some of the most violent assaults which "the different denominations" receive from Churchmen, in these days, come from those who were baptized within their pale, and whose fathers, mothers, and friends still live in their communion. Much good may these " never wet wadded" children do their step-mothers! "the different denominations" can do without them. We have now done with "the Double Witness." Notwithstanding the criticisms which we have thought called for, we would say, there are some clever passages in the work. There is, indeed, little that may be properly called evangelical truth. Still there is displayed, in many portions of the work, no little effort at representing religion in a lovely and winning form. In all this, however, there is too much Oxford sentimentality. A beautiful drapery will never remedy the radical defects of a false system. We must in justice to the publishers finally say, that this book, whatever we think of the matter, is a beautiful specimen of the art. ART. VIII.-CRITICAL NOTICES. 1. A Treatise on Infant Baptism. By REV. F. G. HIBBARD, of the Genesee Conference. 12mo., pp. 328. New-York: G. Lane & P. P. Sandford. 1843. THE work now before us is designed as the second part of a complete work on the subject of baptism; the part upon the mode having been previously published. The whole, in our opinion, constitutes the best work upon the subject extant. The author has brought into requisition an amount of learning, judgment, and perseverance not very common in these times. His research into the historical evidence has been thorough, and the results, especially to those who have not access to Dr. Wall, and other authorities, to which he refers, are peculiarly important. The author has gone upon the principle that the argument is cumulative, and consequently that a great variety of facts and considerations which abstractly would have but little weight, in connection with each other, and as parts of a whole, are really important. He has not only discussed the subject with reference to the system of our Baptist brethren, but also as it is affected by the views of high-Churchmen. We commend this instructive work to all who wish to enter into a thorough investigation of the subject. The two parts, bound together, make a book of respectable size, and should be found in the library of every Methodist preacher. 2. History of the Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church. By REV. ROBERT EMORY. 12mo., pp. 350. New-York: G. Lane & P. P. Sandford. 1844. WE have here what has for years been a desideratum. Our Discipline is an anomaly. It has come into existence piecemeal, and every four years it undergoes a revision, and the preceding edition is superseded. The history of the book is now personally known to but few. And as the history of many of the regulations of the Discipline sheds much light upon their meaning and design, that history has been increasing in importance with the multiplication of questions with regard to them, and of changes proposed to be effected in their provisions. The author has certainly been exceedingly fortunate in obtaining his materials, and has arranged and adjusted them most happily. His industry and zeal in perfecting a work of so much difficulty and delicacy are truly commendable. Though from the nature of the work it cannot be what is sometimes called a readable book, and furnishes the author little opportunity for speaking or being seen himself, yet he, merely to serve the interests of the church, and especially to meet a pressing emergency, has delved through the whole course of investigation with a patience and perseverance by no means common. We heartily thank our learned and worthy brother Emory for this timely and necessary production. We hope it will be carefully studied, especially by those whose situation will require all the light upon the past history of |