a spotless being was necessary, to reconcile sinners to God." The idea of the endless punishment of sinners he held to be horrible, and altogether to be rejected. Thus he fully embraced Mr. Maurice's system. But then he carried it to its legitimate results. He utterly rejected the Bible. For, he said, "Although I cannot for a moment admit the idea of a propitiatory sacrifice, or of eternal punishments, I cannot deny that both of these doctrines, or facts, are plainly asserted in the Bible;—and therefore, I will have nothing to do with the Bible. I believe that it gives us a false idea of the character of God."

And, speaking of Mr. Maurice himself, he expressed his wonder, that a man who saw things so clearly, could continue a minister of the Church of England. "I cannot account for it,” he said, "to say the least, it is very inconsistent."

We have here simply narrated facts of very recent occurrence; and we leave Mr. Clark to draw his own inferences from them. Again: a friend of ours, who had a curacy vacant in the neighbourhood of London, was waited upon one forenoon by three young clergymen in succession: they all of them rejected the inspiration of the Bible; they smiled contemptuously as they spoke of the myths and fables of the Old Testament history; one of them avowed that if he found doctrines which did not commend themselves to his judgment, clearly laid down in St. Paul's writings, he should still say that Paul was mistaken, and that he himself was right; in fact, he had been preaching in a country parish for some time in this style; the minds of the people, it was true, were a little disturbed at present; but that was of no consequence; in a short time, he had no doubt, ninety-nine out of every hundred would quite agree with him. We have a certain kind of satisfaction in adding, that one of the three has since become a Unitarian minister. In the presence of such facts as these, we leave it to our readers to consider whether we show too much warmth in our treatment of the Maurician heresy; or much jealousy in watching its movements and those of its abettors.

RURAL DEANS.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

SIR, I should like to see, discussed in your pages, the amount of authority possessed by Rural Deans. When I promised at my ordination to "obey my ordinary and other chief ministers of the church, and them to whom the charge and government over her is committed, following with a glad mind and with their godly admonitions,"-did I bind myself to obey the injunctions of my Rural Dean? I believe not, and yet there are many who seem to think that such obedience is obligatory: it is time to set the matter at rest. The

tone in which many rural deans address their brother clergy has an assumption of authority in it. I have known a rural dean talk of my clergy." I have known a country vicar snubbed by his rural dean for daring to set a-going a clerical meeting without consulting him, and reproved for disrespect of his bishop for such misconduct. There are, I believe ruri-decanal meetings summoned to discuss subjects selected by the bishop of the diocese, the result of such discussions being reported to him, together with the names of all the clergy who venture to be so refractory as not to attend. Certain religious societies follow the division of the country into rural deaneries in organizing their operations, and thereby push into notice the rural deanery system; and a new society just forming has taken a step further;-I mean, "the Church Institution," which professes for its object to combine the clergy and laity in defence of the church, and which lays down laws for "ruri-decanal chapters" to follow; while many consent to be leagued under this institution. The archbishop of Canterbury, in his faint praise of the institution, demurs to the phrase "meet in chapter," and observes that" chapter meetings are commonly confined to cathedrals." I can imagine a great deal of mischief likely to arise, if a rural dean, surrounded by a few clergy of his own opinions, reports their conclusions as those of the clergy "met in chapter," and if all the clergy who do not choose to recognize such chapters be held responsible for what emanates from their rural deanery.

You must have perceived that recently the bishop of London has introduced rural deans, four in number, in the metropolis. It seems high time, then, to have it settled, "what is the authority of a rural dean ?"-Is it true, as I have heard it said, that the original office of a rural dean was to collect Peter's pence? Has a rural dean any more authority, because nominated to such office by a bishop, than a district visitor has, when nominated by an incumbent,-authority to offer his services as an adviser or a helper to his neighbour, who may choose to accept such services?

I do not at all mean to say that the system might not be productive of much good, if judiciously carried out. But it may produce much evil too; and I am not sure that it is consistent with the genius of the church of England. Much of the high position of the church of England I believe to be due to the fact, that each incumbent is unfettered by his neighbours in the management of his own parish; and if this independence be infringed by a quasi-representative of the bishop having authority to intermeddle with his brethren, there must be a different race of clergy from those which now occupy the parishes of England.

Let me beg your attention to the subject, Mr. Editor.

W. S. D.

THE SCHOOL OF THE ESSAYISTS, AND THE
CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

It is a grievous injury to the church of England that some of her ordained ministers deny the inspiration of the holy scriptures, and boldly and contemptuously repudiate the atonement, scorn

its functions, we begin with the requirements which preceded the solemn act of his ordination.

In the presence of the bishop, he was required to subscribe the following declaration :—

"I, A. B., do willingly, and from my heart, subscribe to the Thirty-nine Articles of religion of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to the three Articles in the Thirty-sixth Canon, and to all things therein contained."

Could anything be stronger than this thorough and cordial acceptance of the Thirty-nine Articles, as exponents of the principles and judgment of him who signs it? Willingly, and from the heart! Such a form of words could never have been prepared or proposed in the sense of the person being just able, by mere ingenious straining of the expressions away from their natural meaning, to persuade his conscience to consent to his taking the pen and recording his name thereto.

But with the same willingness and heartiness every clergyman once professed to subscribe to the three "Articles," as they are called, in the 36th canon, and to all things therein contained. The first of these Articles is an acknowledgment of the royal supremacy, with which, in this paper, we are not concerned. The second relates to the Prayer Book; and the third to the Thirty-nine Articles. We shall take the latter first, as being a sort of supplement to the declaration already noticed.

It seems, at first sight, remarkable that, after such a declaration, another word on the same subject should be added. We can only attribute it to the importance attached to the soundness in the faith of him who is to be admitted to the office of teaching, and premonishing, and otherwise ministering in the congregation. The Thirty-nine Articles were agreed upon, in the only recognized council of the church, for the express purpose of avoiding diversities of opinion, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion. Hence unusual precautions might naturally be taken to shut out those who do not truly accept and agree with them; and therefore every one who is admitted into the ministry of the church of England, has previously declared that he "will" "and from his heart, subscribes "all things" contai follow 1) Article

and then notice the ground of their reception, that they are agreeable to the word of God.

An attempt has been made to weaken the force of this Article by torturing the word "alloweth" into something equivalent to a mere toleration. It is hardly worth while to waste ink upon such a plea, in the face of (1) the words, "willingly and from my heart," already noticed as subscribed at the same time; (2) the obvious use of this word of old in a stronger sense than that which it now bears: Ye ALLOW the deeds of your fathers (Luke xi. 48); That which I do I ALLOW not (Rom. vii. 15); and (3) the subject, He alloweth the Book of Articles, &c., and acknowledgeth all and every the articles therein contained' to be agreeable to the word of God. Let any one take the word "alloweth" in what sense he will, he cannot really weaken the force of the whole sentence, as a complete acknowledgment that the Thirty-nine Articles rest on the most conclusive authority, that of God's own word.

...

Such is one of the preliminary engagements into which every candidate for holy orders must enter, as a condition of his being admitted to that sacred and responsible office. It is good for clergymen of all schools to keep it constantly in mind that such are the obligations which they laid upon themselves when they were on the threshold of ordination, and without which they could not have been ordained. Whatever latitude there may be must be found within the range of these Articles; and no man can be justified in speaking of himself as a "true churchman," a "real churchman," or, in any proper sense, a "high churchman," whose mind is not in thorough harmony with the Articles which, if he professed truly, he willingly and from his heart subscribed, because his mind entirely agreed with them.

So far, our attention has been fixed on one only of the conditions of admission to holy orders. Another is contained in the second of the Articles in the canon, and is as follows :—

"2. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of God, and that it may lawfully be so used, and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed, in public prayer, or administration of the sacraments, and none other."

As the stipulation hereby made relates to practice and not to doctrine, it does not immediately concern our present inquiry. We only say, that it is as much a condition of admission into holy orders as is the former part, to which our observations are at present to be more immediately directed. The expressions are peculiar: nothing contrary to the word of God; and that it may lawfully be so used. Here is nothing to interfere with those who think that improvements could be made, and who may desire to have them carried into effect; but