"The following totals will suffice to show which party is making at the present time the most powerful efforts to evangelize the world.

"Leaving a balance of £40,662 18 4

in favour of the missionary efforts of the voluntary churches for the last year."

Section II. General Character of Dissenters.

Dissenters misrepresented-Their character by Dr. J. P. Smith-Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel's testimony-His appeal for the admission of Dissenting ministers to the pulpits of the Church of England-Testimony of Rev. J. Riland-Dissenting writers-Dr. A. Clarke's Commentary on the Bible-Dr. Boothroyd's new Translation of the Bible, and Commentary.-Dr. Morrison-Dr. Carey.

DISSENTERS from the hierarchy are not generally known according to their genuine principles and character. Both are almost universally represented by high churchmen, in a most unfavourable light. This is manifest from their writings, already referred to, especially from Bishop Gray's "Address to Seceders and Sectarists." Charity and truth are equally violated by this dishonourable policy; while many of the evangelical clergy mourn that such slanders are thus perpetuated against their Christian brethren, especially by a Society, under

the direct influence of all the prelates and a large majority of the clergy of the Church of England.

Dissenters' principles are doubtless best understood by themselves; but respecting their general character, those from whom they differ shall furnish the principal testimony.

:

Dr. J. P. Smith, in his "Reply to Dr. Lee, Regius Hebrew Professor at Cambridge," says, "Protestant Dissent is nothing more than the PROTESTANT REFORMATION from Popery, carried out, not to the extravagant lengths by which hot and weak heads often degrade true principles, but only so far as is required by consistency and sincerity in obedience to the Scriptures."-"The orthodox Protestant Dissenters of England and Wales consist principally of the middling and the working classes the proportion among them of wealthy families is small, and from the communal aristocracy and the nobility of the land we have scarcely a slender twig belonging to us; what offerings we can bring to the altar of sacred beneficence come mostly from hard earnings; and our power is not a little cramped by the pressure (in ways which appear to us mean, as well as flagrantly unjust) of your rich hierarchy. Yet, observe what I say, and let it sink into your profoundest meditation;—your church does not supply the half of the scriptural, evangelical, and effective instruction which is dispensed to the English population ; but more than the half is the offspring of VOLUNTARY contributions and actions from Dissenters and Nonconforming Methodists *

The Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel, regarded by many of all classes as the most popular, and one of the most devoted and exemplary of the episcopal clergy in London, in his recent work on Church Reform, denouncing the exclusive bigotry which prevails in his own communion, says, Almost the only Protestant Church who have retained the episcopal form, are we, in this nineteenth century, to exhibit to the world the odious intolerance which would unchurch almost all the churches of Christendom, except that which has long been defaced by inveterate corruptions, and stained with the blood

* A Letter to the Rev. Samuel Lee, D.D., & &c. p. 41-73.

of the saints? Never again, I hope, will any one who calls himself a minister of Christ in the Church of England, so offend against Christ through his people, as to deny his commission to the great and good men who laboured with Luther, Zuingle, Calvin, and Knox, to establish the profession of the Gospel in Germany, Switzerland, and Scotland.-But if we fraternize with the churches of the continent, we are equally bound to recognize the churches of America, and the Dissenters of England. Their orders are the same-their discipline little differs. What reason is there for allowing the Presbyterian orders of Geneva, and denying the Congregational orders of New England? And if the Congregational orders of New England be allowed, why should we disallow those of Bristol, of Birmingham, or of London? - Why must the Scotch Presbyterians alone have the benefit of the instructions of Dr. Chalmers in London, when every pulpit of the Establishment ought to welcome him? Why must Dr. Cooke betake himself to Surrey Chapel? Why must the Dissenters alone listen to Dr. Wardlaw or Mr. Jay?—On the whole, it is the writer's sorrowful conviction, that even now, a fur smaller proportion of the established clergy, than of dissenting ministers, are sound theologians and serious men and that it were inuch safer for an orthodox minister at a watering-place, or at any place of large resort, as, for instance, the exemplary vicar of Cheltenham, without previous knowledge or inquiry, to admit an Independent minister into his pulpit than a minister of the Establishment, supposing him to be equally unacquainted with both. From the one he would hear the doctrines of Heury and Doddridge, of Robert Hall and Fuller; from the other, too probably, those of Whitby or of Tomline *."

Rev. John Riland says, "I am no Dissenter myself; neither have I the honour nor disgrace-an opponent may take his choice of the term-of numbering five Nonconformists among my personal acquaintance. It may procure me a more favourable hearing with their enemies, if I state, that I am a clergyman myself, lineally descended, for nearly two centuries, from clerical ancestors; some of whom were, in a degree, confes

* Fundamental Reform of the Church Establishment, p. 44-51.

sors for the Church of England, during the ascendancy of Cromwell, and the reign of James II. But, as a member and minister of the universal Church of Christ, I dare not be so ungrateful to the Dissenting body, as to forget their past and present services to the general cause of Christianity. Many of their community have shone, in their respective æras, as the light and glory of the Catholic Church. As composers of what Dr. Johnson calls 'Hortatory Theology,' their claims to our gratitude may be equalled, but never have been surpassed, by episcopalian writers. No library can make any pretensions to completeness, in the department of practical divinity, unless it be enriched by the works of Howe, Owen, Edwards, Baxter, Henry, Doddridge, Watts, and many others of scarcely less inferior name. Of our most useful and popular commentaries on the entire Scriptures, the greater number have proceeded from the pens of Nonconformists. In theological science, the names of Lardner, Chandler, Campbell, Mac Knight, Leland, and Jeremiah Jones, appear among our standard divines. Of living writers, it is sufficient to enumerate Ewing, Townley, Watson, Douglas, Adam Clarke, Wardlaw, Fletcher, Boothroyd, Foster, and Chalmers. Let it further be considered, that the doctrinal system of their practical writers is . substantially the same with the formularies of our Church. In truth, the leading divines in both communities, have, for centuries, made common cause against the direct enemies or perverters of the Gospel. They have fought in the same ranks, and partaken of the same conquests. And it is but an act of grateful acknowledgment to Dr. J. P. Smith, to re· mark, that his recent work on the Scripture Testimony to the Messiah, in reply to Mr. Belsham, is, as a competent judge (Mr. Hartwell Horne) has pronounced it to be, 'one of those biblical works of which the student will never regret the purchase, and unquestionably the most elaborate defence and proof of the Deity of Jesus Christ extant in our language.' From my own acquaintance with the writings of Dissenters, I gather that they are quite as good judges as ourselves of the nature and obligations of Christianity, and of the order and discipline of the Christian Church. They have access to the same means of information; and of these they have availed

This

themselves with extraordinary assiduity and success. circumstance deserves the more honourable mention, as they are necessarily excluded from the privileged seats of learning. It will, however, be recollected, that Bishop Warburton, the greatest master of human learning that in modern times has adorned the English episcopacy, went to uo university. The author of the Divine Legation of Moses began life as an attorney's clerk, and continued in the legal profession till he was twenty-five years of age! In this place it may be advisable to remind such as need the information, that two of our most eminent prelates, Archbishop Secker, and that unequalled analogist, Bishop Butler, were severally the offspring of Dissenters, and by Dissenters were they baptized! They were also educated, together with Archbishop Horte, by a Nonconformist minister, whose investigation of the canon of the New Testament is the established work on that subject; and, as such, has been republished at the Clarendon press *."

Honourable as are the foregoing testimonies to the learning and labours of Dis. A. Clarke and Boothroyd, it would be unjust to them and to the Dissenters generally, to omit in this place a reference to their imperishable writings; and not less so, to pass over those of the venerable missionaries, Dr. Morrison and Dr. Carey.

Dr. A. Clarke's Commentary on the Bible is a splendid proof of his general and extensive learning, in which, it is believed, that few, if any one, surpassed him.

Dr. Boothroyd's edition of the Hebrew Scriptures, with notes and critical apparatus for biblical scholars, and his new Translation and Commentary on the Bible, on which he expended a laborious life, form a noble monument of his profound biblical learning, in which it is believed that he had scarcely an equal, and no superior.

Dr. Morrison's translation of the whole Bible into the Chinese language, and also that of the Church Liturgy, and

* Reflections on Recent Occurrences at Lichfield; including an Illustration of the Opinions of Samuel Johnson, L.L.D., on Slavery, and the General Distribution of the Scriptures; addressed to the Rev. T. Gisborne, M.A., Prebendary of Durham. Hatchard and Son, 1826.