enough that such treason against the majesty of the people must bring on civil war.

The causes which Mr. James ascribes to the people I hope to state in another letter; and, in the mean time,

I am, Sir, &c.

LETTER XLII.

MEMBERS, AND

RELATIVE SITUATION OF CHURCH

CAUSES OF DIVISION, CONTINUED.

SIR,-Having stated those causes of strife and division, which Mr. James assigns to the ministers under the Voluntary System, let us proceed to those which he considers as arising among the people. He says ;

"1. A very large proportion of our schisms arise at the time of choosing a minister." He had before said, in speaking of the choice of a minister, that it "always brings on a crisis in the history of the church," and that,

66

no event that could happen, can place the interests of the society in greater peril. Distraction and division have so frequently resulted from this circumstance, so many churches have been rent by it, that an argument has been founded upon it, if not against the right of popular election to the pastoral office, yet against the expediency of using it." Of this let us take one or two illustrations from Wilson's History:- "His election was

followed by a large breach in the society, the major part leaving him and setting up at Coachmakers' Hall'." (III. 322.) "Mr. John Hughes, a worthy minister among the Baptists, was chosen his successor, which occasioned a division in the society. Those persons who withdrew, invited our young preacher to officiate to them for a few Sundays; and after due consideration" [but apparently without waiting till he was out of his apprenticeship to a packer] "solicited him to undertake the office of pastor." (III. 224.) " Though he had been the assistant of the late minister, the church declined calling him to the pastoral office; and a warm dispute

The reader may, perhaps, have observed that this is the third instance, among the few cases which I have quoted, in which the majority gave way. Should he be surprised to find this in societies which are voluntary, and profess to be equal, I must remind him (and, should he doubt, this may help to convince him) that the equality exists only in theory. In fact the matter is very fairly put by the Evangelical Magazine; for most people will see that an intimacy" which is to be of a purely "religious kind," will not be very operative in church-government; and that "worldly distinctions" will produce pretty nearly the same distinctions," which they do in "worldly" elections.

66

"The treatment of the poorer members of a religious community is not always such as proceeds from love. It is far from necessary or desirable that the rich and the poor should mingle in the same general society, or that a constant intimacy (save of a religious kind) should be held between them; but in no case are the poor to be despised; it is unchristian to disrespect them. Whatever may be their worldly distinctions, in religious matters they should be one. In Christ the rich and the poor meet together, and none has authority to boast of being greater or more honourable than his neighbour.

"In the choice of his associates the man of wealth steals often very far away from the spot to which Christian love would lead him. He takes not the devoted Christian, but the man of wealth and honour, though an enemy of the Gospel, as his friend. We cannot advocate too much general connexion between the richer and poorer members of any society; but we do advise that professors of religion shun the wicked." (1835. 399.)

ensuing, he was dismissed from the situation of teacher." (III. 458.) He "was invited to preach as a candidate .... but a difference of opinion arising in the society as to the propriety of electing him to that situation, a division ensued." (IV. 212.) "Upon his settlement an unhappy division took place, and part of the people left him in consequence of one Mr. Langdon, from the West of England, having preached to them as a candidate. But he soon appearing to be an Arian was rejected by the majority, and Mr. Matthews elected in his room. Although the separation that followed operated unfavourably at first, yet it proved but shortlived; for Mr. Langdon, in a little time, quitted the ministry and became a Custom-House officer, and a member with Mr. Henry Read, at St. Thomas's: upon which his people dispersed." (IV. 339.) "Several persons were dissatisfied with the choice, which occasioned a melancholy breach in the church on the charge of a defect in Mr. Jollie's orthodoxy. It was first promoted by a few persons who had more zeal for the interests of a party than for the cause of real godliness, and what made the case more lamentable was that they were at first countenanced by several ministers of reputation; who, however, had reason afterwards to bewail their conduct." (I. 493.) And again, in the history of the same church, "not agreeing upon the choice of a successor, and the society being greatly reduced, they thought it best to dissolve their church-state." (I. 469.)

Perhaps, however, enough has been said on this point; but on one closely connected with it, which,

though not mentioned by Mr. James, has been naturally -I might say necessarily-a cause of division, I must add a word or two. I mean the relation existing between the minister and a co-pastor or assistant. It is almost sufficient to suggest the idea, to lead every one to see how inevitably it must lead to contention. It is obvious that there is nothing to hinder the young aspirant from forming a party, and every temptation to do it. That it has been a fruitful cause of division might easily be shown by numerous examples; but it may be enough, on so plain a point, to give one or two extracts. One can easily imagine that "the introduction of a person to be his colleague whom he could not approve" naturally" occasioned very unpleasant disputes." (1806. 102.) And we may gather much from such statements as these,

"To relieve Mr. S. from the exercise of ministerial duty, a person had for some time been appointed by the society to preach occasionally. This circumstance, in the year 1772, was the means of creating a contention which much disturbed the peace of the church, and nearly determined Mr. S. to withdraw himself from the work of the ministry." (1797. 315.)

"After some time, in consequence of a difference, occasioned, it is said, by his desire to be chosen co-pastor, he left Swallow-street, together with a considerable part of the congregation, whom he had formed into a separate church." (IV. 50.)

"An attempt was made to introduce Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Amory to the congregation, in quality of assistant, and he preached for a short time with that view, but was opposed both by the pastor and the majority of the people, on account of the supposed heterodoxy of his sentiments. This occasioned a division in the church, when Mr. Amory's friends withdrew, and built another place." (IV. 311.)

But to proceed with Mr. James's statement:

"2. A hasty choice of an unsuitable person to fill the pastoral office has frequently ended in great uneasiness. The people have discovered their error, when its rectification was sure to cause much trouble to the society. Upon our system of church government, it is not easy to displace an unsuitable individual, and therefore great caution should be observed in choosing him. Few men will venture to remain in opposition to the wishes of a whole society, but how rarely does it happen that an individual has no party in his favour." What! an unsuitable individual, and of whatever nature the unsuitableness may be? But I am afraid it is too true, that the hasty choice of an unsuitable person has caused much mischief. Yet what is a church to do that is tired out with disappointments? Take, as a specimen, Mr. Wilson's History of the Church in Jewin-streethow they were a long time destitute, occasioned principally by an order they had among themselves that no person should be deemed duly chosen pastor till he had the voices of two-thirds of the electors, the subscribers as well as members of the church being allowed to vote. The first person fixed upon was Mr. John Warren, of Coventry, but he would not remove. Strong attempts were made to bring Dr. Wright from Blackfriars, and it was twice nearly effected, he having forty votes out of sixty-three. The church at length being tired out with disappointments, unanimously chose Mr. Thomas Leavesley, upon once hearing him at Dr. Harris's meeting-house." Mr. Wilson, however, informs us (and the two words have in such a case a great

66