CONSIDERATIONS,

&.c.

In addressing the public on Civil Establishments of religion, it is unnecessary, at the present crisis, to shew the importance belonging to the subject of inquiry. It is difficult, indeed, to arrest the attention of the community generally to any subject not very palpably connected with their individual interests, or not associated with incidents that stir the public mind; but by all who have seriously directed their minds to this subject—by the active friends of religious Establishments of the empire on the one side, and by the opponents of these Establishments on the other-there seems to be perfect harmony in this at least, that the question is one of the most important to which the attention of this excited country is at this moment turned. I do not speak of those abettors of our Establishments who cling to them for wealth, and distinction, and influence only, or whose attachments have no higher origin than educational influence, or common usage, and fashion; the former connecting with this question the interest with which cupidity and ambition invest their favourite objects, the latter that which powerful prejudice inspires; nor do I refer to those among the dissenting bodies whose hostility to Civil Establishments may originate in causes not less reprehensible. I know that there are excellent men in our endowed Churches, both Episcopalian and Presbyterian, who honestly believe that with these Establishments the cause of religion, of morality, of social order and happiness is inseparably linked; that the fall of these institutions, that is, the removal of their legal Establishment, would be the fall of this country; and who have enlisted in their defence, not only their earliest and

B

most pleasing recollections, but likewise their most ardent religious and patriotic feelings. On the other hand, there are many, whom I at least reckon equal (I lay no claims to superiority,) in whatever most adorns the character of the man and of the Christian, and who cordially coincide with the former in all their leading views of Christian doctrine and morals, who regard the establishment of Christianity by civil legislation as a great evil, which the genius of this religion, and the authority of Christ proscribe; the tendency and the effects of which they believe to be most injurious to the interests of that very religion which it ostensibly befriends; and the removal of which, they would gladly hail as the dawn of a brighter day than Christianity has ever seen, since she bent from her native dignity and independence, and crouched to the protection of imperial Rome.

But while the importance of the question is extensively conceded, and considerable attention has already been drawn to it, much still remains to be done to promote inquiry, and to help forward the public mind to an enlightened and satisfactory decision. Able and learned treatises have appeared on both sides of the question, and pamphlets, and articles in public journals have been very profuse, distinguished by various degrees of ability, in which the question has been considered in nearly all its aspects. Public meetings have been numerous, and much has been ably said and strongly felt, on these scenes of high and often useful excitement. It is undoubted, however, that the merits of the subject are still but very partially appreciated; that deliberate and dispassionate inquiry has not yet extended to the great mass of the reading part of the community, or to the larger proportion of any order of society; that misconceptions are very extensively abroad, and feelings are up, not the most creditable in themselves, nor the most favourable for candid examination; and, above all, that a compendious view of the question, within manageable limits, and unaccompanied with personal invective, or acrimonious feeling, is still, perhaps, a desideratum. How far the following pages are fitted to supply this latter deficiency must be left to others to decide. The author can sincerely affirm that they have been undertaken from a deep conviction of the solemn

importance of the subject in itself, and also from the present condition of our national affairs; and that, though reluctant to step into the arena of controversy, he should have been wanting to his sense of duty, had he hesitated to do the little he has it in his power to accomplish, to forward a cause in which he believes not only the civil rights of dissenters, now constituting a large majority of the church-going population of the British empire, and the peace and happiness of our common country, but also the interests of scriptural religion and holiness are essentially involved.

SECTION I.

COMMON FALLACIES.

BEFORE proceeding to the examination of the question itself, it will be of advantage to bring together the leading mistakes, by which, it appears to me, the minds of many are misled in this inquiry; mistakes which have been often presented, often exposed, but which, I apprehend, run through many defences of religious Establishments, and operate, perhaps insensibly, on the minds of many, as if they were satisfactory arguments in their favour.

I. Opposition to Civil Establishments of religion is confounded with opposition to the Church of Christ; and the purpose of attempting the removal of the former is represented as equally directed to the destruction of the latter.

If this has not been the policy, it has been the practice at least, of the defenders of these institutions, in former periods as well as at this day. To the candour of the friends of Establishments I may confidently appeal, whether this representation of the efforts and the designs of their opponents be not all but universal. In the common nomenclature of charges, sermons, tracts, and larger works, the friends and defenders of Establishments are the friends and defenders of the Church-their opponents

are enemies of the Church-if the number of the latter seems to multiply, and if their efforts are apparently taking effect, the Church is in danger-and to meet and repel the combinations of horrid conspirators against the Church, her defenders are summoned to rally, and are encouraged by the assurance that the Church is founded on a rock, and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against her. I might fill full many a page with quotations to this effect from writers both old and recent; and I might easily portray the horror with which these statements tend to inspire the well-intentioned against these unholy men, and their sacrilegious efforts, who combine to destroy the Church.

But is not all this fallacious? Let us explain. The religious Establishments are not synonymous, are not coextensive with the Church of Christ. The Church consists of the followers of Christ; his followers are found in those religious bodies which are without the pale of the Establishments, as truly as those who are within; the disunion, the dispersion, the annihilation as societies, of the dissenting bodies, would not be the destruction of the Church of Christ, neither would the occurrence of these calamities to the Established Churches be the destruction of Christ's Church. In the former case, the Church would subsist within the Establishment; in the latter, among the dissenters; in neither would it be destroyed.

But what tendency has the removal of the establishment of the endowed Churches to destroy those Churches, to destroy that portion of Christ's Church which the British laws establish? If opposition to the civil establishment of the Church meant, that the arm of the state should be employed to deprive the endowed Churches of their ministers, or their places of worship, to disperse their assemblies, and prohibit their worship, then it would merit the application of the terms which have been applied to it. Or, if it were essential to the existence of these Churches that they be upheld by the power, and nourished by the resources of the state; if the Church be considered as a legal corporation, to which certain secular privileges belong by law, and if the removal of these privileges would be the downfal of the Church, then the opponents of the Establishments do seek her downfal.

Suppose, however, that the establishment of the endowed Churches were withdrawn, what would follow? Would their functionaries quit their posts? Would their administrations cease? Would their flocks be dispersed? Would their creed or their usages be altered? The same persons would assemble in the same places; and the same religious services would be conducted. There would be the change of the name, the Established Church; but the body so denominated would not be changed. There would be a change of the source of pecuniary support, for every thing necessary for the temporal maintenance of the institution; now the state supplies it-then the members of the Church would perform this office; but the institution itself would remain what it now is. In a word, the Churches now subsisting by public endowments would be upheld as the Christian Church was for three hundred years; and as, in so many of her sections, she subsists at this day.

Let it be remembered then, that the whole question, practically considered, is not, whether the Church or any division of it shall be upheld or put down?-but whether it shall be provided for by the state, or by its own members?

II. The Established Churches, it is said, have done much good; they have numbered among their members, and their ministers, many excellent and illustrious men; they are as active at this day as in any former period for their own improvement, and for the benefit of the country, and it is therefore, unwise, and unkind, to do any thing hostile to their interests.

Laudatory statements to this effect meet us every where; nor must we think it strange that considerable exaggeration should result from the unwitting fondness of excuseable partiality-that the picture, executed by the hand of a friend, should present the more pleasing objects in a strong light, and with much prominence, and should throw the more unsightly into the shade.

But what dissenter ever insinuated a doubt, that incalculable good has been done, through the instrumentality of good men in the Established Churches? After as large deductions as truth will admit of evil resulting from