The Sun.
London, England, 1820-11-11 00:00:00

islo'

Linsi
the
ea

ing-
:elf
,yal
ite-

FOR THE SUN.
HOLY ORDERS.—(No. W.).* ,
The next point in answer to the
,Parnithlet
11'°n Episcopal Innovation, &c. is that which relates to JO-
tpation, upon which there arc no less than three of our
Articles; and this term the Author maintains, and seems to
rest his cause chiefly upon, to be the same, in all its hear-
Ings, with everlasting salvation. This term, hoWever, as the
t 6°P says, the very first homily in .the very exordium, dis•
"N,Puishes, by the use of. the conjunctive particle " justifica-
linn and everlasting salvation," which would have been tau-
t°l4gY, if they were of similar import, and the disjunctive
must hare been used. At this distinction, clear as it is, his
nPponent takes the alarm, and fears that the Church is in
danger, though, with the sane breath, he asserts that the
articles are to be taken in their literalwaint grammatical sense-
? Caw, What would become of zraminar, if two such different
particles are to be contounded, or what of common sense, if
tnsinnetion and conjunction are to mean the same ?.
~ These two terms have been understood, by the best divines
in our 'Church, ever since a controversy has been held about
Meru, as quite distinct and separate—Justification, when ap-
plied to Christians, is Confined to this world—Everlasting
salvation to the next. The very passages which are, quoted,
art
h• quite enough to prove a distinction which they are
rnaglit forward to refute. In the very 17th Article, whichis
"cited, " They be justified freely—they walk religiously in
g:°:1, works ; and finally, by God's mercy, they attain to ever-
lasting felicity," we meet with this very same invidious con-
uncrive particle, 'which, as long as it is there, must for ever
keep them in :1 state of separation. That there may not be
a Ptissihility• of- confusion—that' we are here justified.; &c.
but
6n rlly we . attain everlasting felieity—which last surely
catinut he attained till this life is past, as the former can
"IY take place in the life is.
The same conjunctive particle performs its proper office in
froth his own quotations from the Catechism and the Bap,
tisraal Office, anti in the Homilies, especially Ihe last, which
rune
rn the same current with the quotation from the 17th
A rticle---" We obtain justifiCation through faith in his blood,
a-
i:cied ll
tleavrefivally, or eater this life, and all its effects are over,
p into everlasting glory."—One of the Homilies,
however, is particularly insisted upon with an air of triumph
as a most " remarkable phenomenon"—hecause it is refereed
uin this Article. But, in the first place, we have no such
.tl
fi'ilY by that title; and the only one which is supposed 'to
a'lntleto the Homily of Salvation, which- he himself quotes,
Zeilitates directly against his position, as now the disjunctive
"rrtiele is used, " Baptised or,Jtastified," as if Baptism anti
ification meant the'same, which, therefore, can never be
lYnonimons with everlasting Salvation. •
But not to confine our argument to these minute points,
the Articles themselves, which treat of Justification, make it
a, distinct from everlasting Salvation as this life is from the
I:'4t'—'''According to Art.l.2, as the Bishop says, " Good works
4`)ll°w after Justification," and, according to Art 13, "we are
incapable of doing good works before we are justified;" and
y the most undeniable consequence, Justification takes place
*n
the present world; and how then can it he confounded with
""lasting Salvation, or the happiness of the World to
come ?

Indeed if we consider the 3d Section of this Chapter, which
for Brevity's sake will betaken before the 2d, we shall be con-
'lltei,l in the Bishop's opinion—when he proves under this
lead °fJostification, in reference to the time,,that it " is our
41°'is$ion to the Christian Covenant, and therefore only the
e4Mmeticement (as.he says under the former head,) of that of
%Mich everlasting Salvation is the end."
When we. are justified, me we not (by Art. I I.) ac-
c°l4°' .righteous before God ? And when so accounted for
the merits of our Lord, are we not then admitted to the
Christian Covenant ? Is not, therefore, our justification our
"Mission to the Christian Covenant ?"
hi two firsfQ,uestiMts are answered in the affirmative by
11-°Pponent; and vet he withholds his assent to the last,
*hi .1
so immediately; follows by all the Rules of sound logic
fro the other, and in order to satisfy himself, he resorts to
a tteductio ad absurdum.
'Pr,oirk one of the Bishop's Questions (he says), " the free
lift
,"roe upon all men to Justification ;"—another Question
-:"'es Faith essential, and this considers admission to the
Christian Covenant; that is—Baptism, necessary to Justifica-
tion. 2 Who then are admitted to the Christian Covenant ?
"suppose, onlythey who have been baptized according to
the
Rites of the Church, viz. the Church of England. " How
'''`'digious is Universal Justification reduced now!"
But when it is said the "free gift came'upen all" men, and
to this
ery term are comprehended not only Chriitians but
all
—"," from thefoundation of the world—the greater part
" whom could never have been baptized, and therefore never
have been justified in this sense, but as admitted into
a" with God—by making a proper use of their faculties
v" 1" he hail given them, this Grace extends even to them
~,t,
1:"° tired before the coming of his Son, whose merits reach-
acitward as well as forward, to all, without respect of per
I°l4, that are in this sense justified.
Bu`tstill, as applied to Christians, Justification is the same
%)
—aPti'm—which is the Christian admission into. God's
c tenantr or into his favour, but which ceremony could not
have
been necessary in those ages before it was enjoined ;
11-" Whatever may be the application of his opponent, the
itah°P never thinks of applying this terns, or of inculcating
porntee,e"i.lY ollOn'any but Christians, who have had the op-
'l'lY afforded them of such admission to the Cht istian
The
. same mode 'of argnment will apply to the 2d Section
° is Chapter, which considers' " Justification in reference
thti:o
its
tcause." Here the Bishop implies, that we are " jug•
ke
he a by Faith only," says his Opponent, and yet elsewhere,
p.a th it Christ died for all men, but all'have nut
h--How then can all be justified ?
Faith is used in several senses—with regard to them 'vete()
lived
before the coining of Christ, they were "a Law unto
themselves," and they might be said to hare the Faith who
complied with that Law, to approve themselves in the sight
God but, as in the former l'nstanee, their Faith would be
Cst,-who
:no avail if
,their IVorks were .not justified by the merits of
" for all men;"-not only for those who
iivhri
since his coming, hut for all—for whom the Lamb was
slaLi/ front the foundation of the World.
The same word is used in different senses, even when re-
fe Trill to Christians, as Calvin himself allows ; sometime,
it
abets
lxcludes obedience, and then itis regarded as nothing; and
it includes it, as every thing, through the merits of
chris t ; these merits are the cause; and a true and lively
I), which includes both, are the means and condition of
Clue condition onlY, will he of no avail; both

"i 3 Article refers to Chapter IV, Section 1. See TliE
of yesterday.

•
intrst meet titgether, for :vvittioat Faith, including- obedience,
we cannot please God.

Neither Faith nor Works; nor both together, can reflect
the least degree of merit, which must be a term entirely
without meaning; from the creature to the Creator, hut they
are both conditions, complying with which we may trust,
through the merits of Christ, to obtain salvation. " The
Lord is our Righteousness," having none of our own.—" All
the world is guilty before God," and we are justified, or only
accounted righteous through him—but yet we shall never be

so accounted, unless we comply with the terms expressly en-
joined, not only of faith but of sincere obedience.—lt was
for him to enjoin the terms, it is for us who receive the free
gift only to comply with them, and if we du not comply, it is
not for us to complain if that gift which was freely offered to

us is finally withheld.
In short, this I lth Article was more immediately addressed
to the Romanists, who held the arrogant doctrine of inherent
righteousness and human merit, and consequently the Re-
formers naturally insisted with the greater force upon the
corruption Of fallen man, and his absolute demerit in the sight
of One, too pare to behold iniquity—they therefore dwelt
more upon Faith than Works, as the means of salvation.
If the heresy to which they were oppo4ed had been the
doctrine of Antinomianism, they would have insisted more
upon the efficacy of Works, but they adapted their anti-
dote to the poison which they would expel front the bosom
of the Church—juit as the Apostles in the first age of
Christianity• accommodated their doctrine to the correc-
tion of the errors into which their converts had fal-
len.—Saint Paul anti Saint James, addressing their fol-

lowers in different circumstances, the one expatiates more
largely upon the necessity for Faith, and the other for good
Works ; not meaning to exclude either, as is evident from
the rations passages in other parts of their Epistles, which so
clearly demonstrate the necessity for both.

I have not the space to prove this, nor can it be at all ne-
cessary, as it has been so often proved—and is so obvious to
any that will take the pains to examine them.
That our own Articles never meant to disparage either
Faith or good Works, as a necessary condition of salvAon,
is sufficiently manifest from the 12th Article, which seems to

have been written on purpose to correct any Antinomian
error, which might spring from too rigid
.an interpretation
of the former Article—but, as this may be the subject of fu.
tore consideration, and I have trespassed already too long on
your indulgence—for the present I must forbear.

A. M.

Lord SOMERS, who. has occasionally spoken
during the late investigation of the conduct of the
QUEEN, in her disgraceful and indefensible in-
timacy with a menial' servant of her household,
is the descendant of that learned and admirable
Statesman► and Lawyer, JOHN Lord SOMERS, who,
in the reign of King C►tARLES the Second, was
one of the great supporters of the liberties of the
country against the arbitrary proceedings of that
Monarch. In his thirty-sixth year he pre-emi=
nently distinguished,himself, as Counsel for the
seven Bishops who were tried for opposing the
dispensing power of King JAMES the Second.
His conduct on that occasion, and indeed in
every other instance of his practice, was as uni-
formly respectful to the Court in which he ap-
peared, as it was creditable to the profession, of
which he was so great an ornament, and honour-
able to himself. It forms a marked and decided
contrast to the conduct of three modern Lawyers
and a Civilian in a recent lamentable case. The
present Lord SOMERS may be most truly consider-
ed as an independent, intelligent, and patriotic
Member of the Peerage—not generally supporting
the Ministers—but frequently in opposition to
them. In the late investigation he has fearlessly
and conscientiously expressed his hOnest opinion
of the QUEEN'S misconduct, which cannot fail to
produce on the public mind that conviction,
which the " quiet good sense of the country"
will always feel, when left to its own operation
and reflections. Lord SOMERS, above lending
himself to party influence, must expect to share
for a while a little of the obloquy, which the
miserable remnant of the Whigs are now attempt-
ing to throw on his Lordship and those other
illustrious and respectable individuals who have
had' courage to act honestly and explicitly during
the late unfortunate investigation.

It is generally understood that the present
LORD Mayon is determined to shew every de-,
gree of submission to the Whigs, and that he wil!
never permit any measures to be agitated in the
City which may .tend to lessen their influence in
the House of Commons, or to destroy THEIR do-
minion in Close Boroughs. As evidence of
this belief, the usual patriotic sentiment of
"Parliamentary Reform" was not given on Thurs-
day at the dinner at Guildhall ; and the refusal
of the New Sheriffs to call a County Meeting on
the'subjectbecause the formalities of Lord CAS-
TLEREAGII'S Act were not, it is said, complied
with----strengthens the supposition, that in order
to REINSTATE the Whigs in power, at the present
moment, Messrs. NVAITHM AN, WILLIAMS, FA-
YELL, THORPE, HURCOMBE, and Company, will
abandon, during their own lives, all attempts to
relieve the people and to reform 'the Commons
House of Parliament.
PATRIARCHAL SIMPLICITY:—III
,the recluse
vales of Cumberland, live an independent or-
der of men, who are called, STATESMEN. They
transmit from father to son, with little va-
riation, their original family property .; and
their wealth consists chiefly in large flocks of
sheep. Their manners are simple, and their
hospitality is such as to present a resemblance of
the. Patriarchs described by MOSES, and the He-
roes of HOMER. " I recommend you," said one of
these Statesmen to a traveller, whom he had enter-
tained in his house for some days, " to go to the
valley that lies on the other side of that blue
mountain ; there you will find the house of my
neighbour ; tell him: you come from me : I know
him not ; but fear not a hearty welcome, for our
sheep mingle on the mountains."
A report having been circulated that the pro-
secutions against Cuchi, Sacchi, Majocchi, &c.
for perjury, have been dropped in consequence
of the Queen's victory over her enemies, we have
made inquiry, and are glad to find that there is
no foundation Whatever for such a rumour. The
prosecution .of these wretches is absolutely ne-
cessary, as a warning to the guilty, and as a pro-
tection for the innocent.—(Tiznes.)