that he said, unless we could "effectually reject from us, as a Church, the glaring imposition, our candlestick will be removed out of its place.'* I admit that this language of the Bishop, as well as that of my own, is strong-very strong; but not stronger than the case requires; neither is it stronger than that adopted by another authority, and that by one of the best and ablest champions of the Church of England-and this, too, while he proves to demonstration the truth of his remark. His words are as follow:-"As for the Tractarians, they are mere Papists under a different name, dishonestly holding English preferment, when they can get it, with Romish doctrines." Such is the testimony of the Rev. George Stanley Faber, in his Letters on Tractarian Secession to Popery. Again, I add the testimony of the Bishop of Llandaff, which is to the same effect. His Lordship says,

"These rash teachers seem to think it enough, here and there to protest against certain popish corruptions; but they love to lead their disciples to the very confines of that treacherous ground - they encourage a taste and liking for the prospect-they study to make its boundaries less distinct and perceptible, and they seem intent upon smoothing the way and affording facilities for pass

*See Sermon preached before the Church Missionary Society in 1846, containing a faithful testimony against Tractarianism.

ing on from our own side to the other. If this be not dangerous to the purity of our Church, and of the faith which has been established among us by the blood of martyrs, it is hard to say what is; and if it be reconcileable with that allegiance to which all her ministers have over and over pledged themselves, then have we cleansed our sanctuary in vain.” *

It might seem almost superfluous to occupy your time, by producing sentiments to the same effect from other sources, to corroborate the truth of these statements; but the subject is of too painful an interest, and fraught with too deep an importance to our Church, to render any apology necessary for thus taxing your attention; and, especially, at a time when the pernicious tendency, nay, the very effects of these treacherous doctrines, are absolutely leading hundreds, it may be thousands, of our too confiding and unsuspecting brethren to apostatize from our communion. For the benefit, then, of those individuals who have not had the opportunity of ascertaining the opinions of the various Bishops and others upon this destructive and anti-Christian system, I will bespeak your attention, while I bring before you

*This quotation will explain to Mr. Bennett the origin, or at least the confirmation, of Mr. Chirol's tendency to Rome. And believing this to have been the case, in the present instance, I cannot forbear expressing my opinion, that Mr. Bennett's sermon on Apostacy is most severe. It is also illogical; and, as far as it professes to be an exhibition of gospel truth, a libel upon the Church of England.

such quotations as will at once convince you, not merely of the imminent danger to which the Church of England is exposed, but the cause of truth itself. I have already, by the quotation of one sentence, given you no vague and undefined notion of the Bishop of Calcutta's views upon this lamentable delusion, which is now endangering our Church. And, bearing in mind that the sermon preached before the Church Missionary Society, in 1846, was the last occasion when this excellent Bishop raised his voice against the dangers of Tractarianism; and, as he himself considered that it was the last testimony he should ever bear to the truth in his native land, I hope that these circumstances will give to his parting, I had almost said to his dying, injunctions, a corresponding weight and importance. His farewell exhortation was couched in these affecting terms:

"Receive, I pray you, in love, this my last testimony to the blood of the Lamb. I shall see you no more at our anniversaries. But we shall be assembled before the judgment-seat of Christ. Let each one of us see to it, that we meet there on safe ground."

I now add the following, in further proof of his opinions :

"It is to me, I confess, a matter of surprise and shame, that in the nineteenth century we should really have the fundamental position of the whole system of Popery virtually reasserted in the bosom of that very

Church which was reformed so determinately three centuries since from this self-same evil, by the doctrine and labours and martyrdom of Cranmer and his noble fellowsufferers." (Charge, 1838.)

Again he observes,

"You will expect me to say something concerning India. "I am full of fear; everything is at stake. There seems to be something judicial in the rapid spread of these opinions. If they should come over here, and pervade the teaching of our chaplains, the views and proceedings of our missionaries, our friendly relations with other bodies of Christians, and our position amongst the Hindoos and Mahometans, Ichabod, the glory is departed, may be inscribed on our Church in India. All real advances in the conversion of the heathen will stop. Our scattered Christian flocks will miss the sound and wholesome nourishment of their souls,-Our converts will quickly dwindle away to a nominal profession,—Our native catechists and missionaries will be bewildered. A scheme which substitutes self and form and authority of office, for weight of doctrine and activity of love, will be eagerly imbibed. The spirituality of our missions will be gone. And nothing in the whole world is so graceless, as the eminent Gérické once observed, as a mission without the spirit of Christ. . . . . In my own diocese, till I receive particular directions, I shall proceed, as I ought, cautiously but firmly, so far as my influence and mild authority as a Protestant Bishop extend. I have made up my mind. I take a very different view of the case now from what I did three years since. I then addressed a few cautionary reinarks to my reverend brethren in my public charge on the question as it then lay

I

before me I did not conceal, even at that early period, my fears of the tendencies of the traditional school. But I leaned to the side of charity. I hoped the leaders would have retracted, or cease to repeat their errors. hoped the character of those errors would have been so acknowledged, when the novelty had passed; but I was mistaken. I now look on the progress of these doctrines in a very different light. I am an alarmist. I believe our Church was never in the danger she now is, except perhaps immediately before the great Rebellion. Not the High Church party, of which Archbishop Laud was then the head, nor the Non-Jurors who condemned the glorious Revolution of 1688, carried out so many of the main principles of the Church of Rome, and professed them so formally, fully, and systematically within the Church of England as is now openly done." (Ordination Sermon, 1841.)

More might be adduced, but this may suffice, as our first authority.

Let me now request your attention to the Bishop of Chester's estimate of these destructive principles. His Lordship thus writes:

66

Many subjects present themselves towards which I might be tempted to direct your thoughts,-one more especially concerns the Church at present; because it is daily assuming a more serious and alarming aspect, and threatens a revival of the worst evils of the

Romish system. Under the specious pretence of deference to antiquity, and respect for primitive models, the foundations of our Protestant Church are undermined by men who dwell within her walls;