the scheme of Warburton is much to be preferred to any of those which have been noticed as deviations from the first established principles. The Civil Ruler, then, has this care and jurisdiction in his own right; it was the denying this as it applies to every dispensation of religion, and more especially to that which God hath furnished for the succour and salvation of mankind, in which the place for it is so evidently marked out by the plainest intimations of the word of God as well as by the rules of precedent in things neither local nor peculiar to the Jewish people-it was this denial, which led to the peculiarities of a scheme which rests on voluntary compacts, of which I will add no more, than, that if there were no other, better ground, as indeed there is, I should think that of Warburton sufficient, and much to be preferred to every other scheme which stands in opposition to the principles which have descended to a late age in our Church. If the Civil Ruler's Power in matters of religion be in any manner restrained, it is restrained by the word of God himself, not in matters of natural equity, but in such things as the positive and prescribed rules of Christ's kingdom and the covenant of grace require; nor does the Christian charter in providing and prescribing such things, set aside the sole Supremacy of the Civil Ruler in each State, or destroy his proper power to require obedience, for conscience sake, in all things lawful, and conducive to the common welfare both in Church and State. Of the received laws and liberties of the Church of Christ, contained in its public charter, the written word of God forms the perpetual rule and standard, with which whatever is provided in the Church under any form of its subsistence, must agree, or lose its binding power. In a word, the personal union which has been noticed where one people compose the several societies, does not destroy the natural and perpetual distinction of the two societies, or cancel those rights which have the warrant of divine prescription: nor yet does the independency of the Church in such respects, destroy the right of Sovereign Power in things relating to religion, within those limits which the word of God, and the known ends of government must always put. What is said by Mr. Hooker, that the Jewish people was not part of them the Commonwealth, and part of them the Church, but the self.same people whole and entire under one chief governor:' must not be construed, nor was it so intended by him, as if the two cases were exactly parallel when the comparison is made between the old Israel and the new. In the old Israel, it is true, the society was but one, under one law and charter; but this is not true of Christian States, in which the civil and ecclesiastical societies remain distinct in many eminent respects, though the same persons be members of both, and though all be subject to one Sovereign Power." P. 147.

From the testimonies of our own Divines, the archdeacon passes to those of foreign writers maintaining the same principles. In the fourth, fifth, and sixth sections, he gives the

opinions of Grotius, Puffendorf, Burlamaqui, and De Marca on the point. Without defending every one of the positions of Grotius, he shews that, in the main particulars, he has fully established those grounds which are here advanced; and chiefly that of the common right of Sovereign Powers, concerning which he says that "nothing is exempt from Sovereign controul."

When having argued rightly for the supremacy of the Sovereign Power in all states, he goes further, and makes all rule and government in things relating to religion to be an emanation from the civil authority; "this," says the Archdeacon, is "a march to the camp of Erastus in which we must be excused from following the learned Grotius; unless you will understand him of things which are given by the Civil Ruler, but do not belong to the pastoral commission." P. 156. And he proves, that these remarks are wholly inconsistent with his admissions respecting the inherent right of every society, and of the Church as such, to legislate for itself in things left free, and with a due conformity to the written word. Grotius indeed labours diligently to remove all substantial ground of Church authority; and the Archdeacon produces sufficient proofs of his ingenuity. But he further adds, and surely in language not too strong for the occasion, that there are so many hard "strains, so much awkward concession, and so much self contradiction, that the bare perusal must discover to us the subterfuges of a labouring cause." P. 161.

Puffendorf has been sometimes ranked with those who entirely separate the concerns of Christianity from those of the State: But in his work on "the nature and qualifications of religion in reference to civil society," he says what is abundantly sufficient to all the purposes of the civil supremacy on the grounds which our writers have maintained; though he gives "those testimonies rather as what could not be denied or avoided, and therefore his suffrage is the more to be esteemed." P. 178.

Burlamaqui, who has written, says the Archdeacon, with great clearness and simplicity on the subject, contends that, "if matters of religion have in several respects need of human regulation, the right of finally determining them can only belong to the Sovereign." P. 195. But that "the Sovereign cannot assume to himself an empire over consciences, as if it was in his power to impose the necessity of believing such or such an article in matters of religion. Nature itself, and the divine laws are equally contrary to this pretension." P. 198.

The name of De Marca, and the merits of his work appear to Archdeacon Pott to be so considerable, that he devotes an entire section to the developement of his opinions.

The work may be allowed to speak for itself; and its authority fortunately does not depend upon the character of its author, but upon the cogency of his arguments, and the correctness of his views. He does not perhaps deserve all the severity with which he has been spoken of by some but a man who could prevaricate, for that is the softest word which the Archdeacon can persuade himself to use, in order to obtain preferment; and could condescend to flatter and cajole the Pope by a seeming retractation of his opinions for the sake of securing a Bishoprick, at the same time that he had the art not to surrender their substance, was guilty of a double treachery which induces us to receive his testimony with distrust, and not to be very proud of his support. But, whatever may be our opinion of De Marca as a man, as a writer his learning and talents undoubtedly entitle him to respect. And we are much indebted to the venerable Archdeacon for having traced his opinions through a volume which few have within their reach, and fewer still will study with the diligence required to separate the sounder parts of his argument from the hay and stubble which the weakness of his character prompted him to mingle with more precious materials.

In the sixth section, the Archdeacon has given a series of extracts from the valuable work of Barrow; thus bringing together in a connected shape the several passages scattered throughout the treatise, and the discourse on the unity of the Church appended to it. To these he adds the evidence produced by Archbishops Usher, Brerewood, Bucer, and Hammond, respecting the Metropolitical government. On this point, Barrow had spoken with some hesitation; considering it rather as an introduction of human prudence, fol lowing considerations of public necessity or utility, than as an apostolical institution. When the evidence thus collected in its favour is carefully weighed, especially that of the learned Hammond, in his comprehensive treatise on Schism, as the Archdeacon justly calls it, probably the doubt suggested by the cautious language of Barrow will be removed. In the seventh and last section of his volume, the Archdeacon collects the sentiments of Leslie from his Letter to the Bishop of Meaux; and the remarks which that Prelate drew from Bishop Bull, in answer to the hope which he had expressed (whether politely or insidiously we will not determine) of "the conversion of that eminent divine to what he is pleased

to call the Church, with exclusive claims for that of Rome." The concluding extracts are from the pen of Bishop Stillingfleet," a Prelate," says the author, "not less eminent in every branch of learning, and distinguished equally by his wisdom, and his great and shining talents." P.327.

When we look back upon the mass of valuable evidence which the Archdeacon has accumulated, we can readily assent to his concluding observation, that "the labour has not been slight to trace this subject." It is a labour however which must not be appreciated merely by its severity, however great, but by its utility. And this no man will be disposed to undervalue, who considers the vital importance of that question which it is our lot to hear annually discussed by the Legislature; or has observed the strange want of correct information respecting the fundamental principles on which the whole fabrick of our Protestant Constitution in Church and State is built, exhibited in the progress of that discussion. If it be in truth a distinctive tenet of the Roman Church, that she is the mother and mistress of all Churches, and the source and centre of Catholic unity, as her best writers assent; and if that tenet is false, and the claim itself a mere usurpation, with no warrant of Scriptural or historical authority to support it; why should we re-forge the fetters which our Fathers broke, or from a vain wish of conciliation take that yoke upon us which they found so intolerable? We know we shall be told, that no such servitude is preparing for us by those who call for further concessions, or meditated by those who advocate them. Our answer is this: The Roman Catholic defines the Church to be an assembly of Christians united in the profession of the same faith, and the communion of the same sacraments, under the rule of lawful pastors, of whom the Pope of Rome is the first *. He believes, that out of this Church salvation is not to be hoped for, or obtained. He therefore considers himself bound by duty to the Church, and by charity to his brethren, to tolerate no other communion; and to bring all within that_pale to which, according to his belief, salvation is confined. Grant him power, and he will, nay conscientiously, according to his view of the case, he is bound to exert it for this end; and to bow our Protestant independent Church of England

* Ecclesia merito quidem a Catholicis definitur, Christianorum cœtus ejusdem fidei professione et eorumdem sacramentorum communione conjunctorum, sub regimine legitimorum pastorum, quorum primus est Romanus Pontifex. Tractatus de Eccles. Christi. L. D. Delahogue, p. 3.

+ Ista sola societas est ipsius (Christi) Ecclesia, extra quam non est speranda salus. Ibid. p. 4.

under the dominion of "the mother and mistress of all Churches." That the supremacy he thus claims for the Roman Church does not of right belong to her, is sufficiently proved by the host of witnesses which the Archdeacon of London has arrayed before us. That she will never forego her claim to it, never cease to assert it when she can, and as far as she is able, her whole history shews; nay all her proceedings throughout the lengthened struggle for restoration to political power which she has, and is still maintaining against us, render the fact indisputable. How then can it be consistently asserted, that such is not her object; that the chains are not forging for the limbs, and the yoke preparing for the necks of Protestants, while she thus proudly, pertinaciously, and vigorously pursues her road to dominion? As a Church, she has nothing to look for in this country but supremacy; nothing to wish for but the influence and emoluments which supremacy will confer. Place them then within her reach, by investing her with the rod of authority, and it is as clear as history and experience can make it, that she will not neglect the opportunity which the folly of some, and the carelessness of others have furnished. Among the protestant advocates for these dangerous claims are to be found many, who, upon all other political questions are fond of reverting to abstract principles. The Archdeacon has enabled them to discover the real principles on which our Protestant Establishment was formed, and that supremacy civil and ecclesiastical which they would wantonly invade, was, as our ancestors fondly boped, inseparably annexed, as its proudest jewel, to the British Crown. They have now no excuse for those mischievous misconceptions which have hitherto led them astray. And if they persevere, on them will be the shame and guilt of that fearful struggle which will be the too probable consequence of their success; a struggle of which no man can foresee the duration, or prophesy the event.

ART. VI. Classical Excursion from Rome to Arpino, by Charles Kelsall. Geneva. 8vo. pp. 256. 1820.

On his visit to Arpino Mr. Kelsall was very scurvily treated by "mine host of the garter" in that town. The apartment which he had in fancy secured for his own private comfort at