The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-11-15 00:00:00

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF ENGLAND
v. SCHISM.

On Tuesday evening last, we were induced to visit a dis-
senting conventicle, known as the " Scotch Secession
Church," Mount Pleasant, to hear a sectarian teacher ad-
vocate the cause of the Voluntary [want of] Principle party.
For some days previously the walls had been placarded with
large bills announcing this evening's diversion, as well as
the " Soirée," on the Wednesday afternoon. in the name of
" The Young Men's Voluntary Church Society." The pre-
liminary portion of the service being ended, their champion,
who was dubbed " the Rer. Mr. Burnet, from Camberwell,"
ascended the pulpit, and read the third verse of the Epistle
of Jude as his text. "It was needful that I should write
unto you, and exhort you, that ye should earnestly contend
for the faith which was once delivered to the saints." Of
the text we heard nothing more ; for instead of a discourse
founded upon that scripture, (as we were naturally led to ex-
pect would, at least according to custom, be delivered,) Mr.
Burnet entertained his hearers with a lecture on Ecclesias-
tical Law, from Burn's work under that title.

The subject, which was announced in the placards, was
" a comparison between the Church of England and the
Church of Christ ;" and he begged that the congregation
would not be either alarmed or surprised at his stating that
the Church of England was not the Church of Christ, for
that was no new assertion for him to make. This statement
which was, according to the announcement, to be the
subject of discourse, was lost sight of, and taking hold
of the first volume of Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, he said
from that work he should prove-1. That the law had given
to the Church of England its existence as a national corpo-
ration. 2.—That the articles of its belief were derived from the
same source. 3.—That the law had appointed the officers of the
Church of England. 4.—That the law appoints the ministrations
of the officers of the church after it has appointed them. 5.
That the law administers the discipline of the church ofEngland.
6. That the law lodges the supreme power of the Church of
England in the crown. In what he called proving these pro-
positions, the lecturer occupied three quarters of an hour in
reading extracts from the abovementioned work ; and as the
result of his labour merely demonstrated what is admitted by
all—that the Catholic and Apostolic Church of England is
established by law. We have thus no argument to contro-
vert, though we might justly expose the jesuitical craft im-
plied in numi)ers of his assertions. One word, however, as
to his second position. We positively deny that the articles
of the church's belief were originally derived from the
statute law of the land, and we only need quote his own
words to falsify the assertion. " I believe most of the
Thirty-nine Articles, because I can find the foundation of
them in Scripture." That these articles are part of the
statute law of the land, and that they are also in accordance
therewith, we readily grant, but that they were originally de-
rived from that source we strenuously deny. It is not our
intention to bestow any notice on the slanderous assertions
which he uttered in the course of his lecture, for they were
of the most miserable piteable kind we ever heard emanate
from that disaffected party. Leaving this subject until a
more convenient season, we shall briefly glance at
THE " SOIREE."

On Wednesday evening, the same party and their friends,
to the number of about 700, took tea together in the Music-
hall, in Bold-street, at half-past five o'clock. There was,
however, something so old-fashioned, and so much like esta-
blished custom, in the phrase tea party, that they adopted
their own pet term, " soiree." The tables being cleared,
Mr. Thomas Blackburn took the chair, and commenced the
ostensible proceedings of the evening, by a violent speech.
for which we have not space, nor the inclination, if we had,
to insert it. He said the struggle was not one between two
parties, who were each striving for the ascendancy, but be-
tween one party, who already had the ascendancy, and another
party, who were seeking an equality ofprivileges. Very honest.
He next introduced a dissenting teacher, whom he styled
" the Rev. Mr. Kelly," who commenced his harangue by an
appeal to the meeting on behalf of his weak nerves, and re-
peated a previous request of the chairman, that they would
not make such a noise upon the floor with their feet, and
they would very much conduce to the composure of his feel-
ings. He complained of the intrusions of the civil power
upon such tender consciences as his own, and said he regard-
ed civil establishments of religion as at variance with the
Bible, and productive of the greatest evils : as the cause of
disturbances, and as ministering to infidelity, They had been
charged with leaguing with infidels and papists, to overthrow
the Christian religion ; but if any of the papists had adopted
their principles [read want of principles], it was because
they were compelled to yield to the justice of those princi-
ples. After condescending to abuse the Oxford divines, and
complimenting himself and friends on the purity (?) of their
motives, he said, if all parties would but unite with them,
infidels, papists, and schismatics, of all kinds, of course, in-
cluded, how sure they would be of a speedy triumph. He
concluded by expressing an ardent wish for another refor-
mation.

The Chairman then introduced the great gun of the evening,
in the person of the same dissenting teacher, who, on the preced-
ing evening, had delivered a lecture on ecclesiastical law—Mr.
Burnett. The latter gentleman then rose, and said he held in
his hand a declaration, which had been circulated by the
" Young Man's Established Church Society," on which he
should have no mercy, because it had no mercy on them.
The question on the part of their opponents was one of
money, but not on their part. He then read the first sen-
tence, the sentiments of which he fully concurred in, but
would exert himself in quite a different manner. • His next
attack was directed towards the Romish heresy, and ex-
pressed a wish, that as they had overturned that church,
they should also be able to overturn the catholic church of
England, which he designated as worse than the former.
Their object was to put down all ecclesiastical power, and
then they should get rid of coercion. He did not believe the
parties who put forth this declaration which spoke of " Pro-
testant institutions," meant to allude to more than one in-
stitution, but they had added the plural to make the bill of
fare look larger. He very much amused his audience by
attempting to cast ridicule on the fact that the church is the
bulwark of the constitution. Ordinations, he said, was re-
ceived from popery, and was an unscriptural custom. The
Church of England,he also said, admitted infidels to her com-
munion table,*. which they did not, and this he conceived to be a
serious religious question. How did they think christianity sur-
vived during the first 300 years; it was on the voluntary princi-
ple. The apostles left it dependant on the voluntary principle,
and it flourished until Constantine, seeing its immense in-
fluence, became a pretended convert, and declared it to be
the religion of his empire. But Constantine was not a
convert to religion he merely secularized it for political
purposes, and from that time until the Reformation the
church became a mighty tyrant. He did not mean to con-
ceal the fact that the reformers were favourable to establish-
ments, but he would say that they set up systems of their
own. They had not established Bible Societies, Missionary
Societies, or anything of the kind, and their systems worked
very tardily, until the Dissenters, by the voluntary principle,
introduced true religion. Henry the VIII. founded Pro-
testantism and good Queen Bess, who would never have
been suspected of entertaining the least respect for the
liberty of any of her subjects, supported it ! In the reign
of William the 111. they got the Toleration Act, for which
too that monarch was suspected of being no better than he
ought to be by the church. He eulogised the conduct of
vile James 11., who he said was right in principle, for he
promoted general toleration, and he imprisoned seven of his
bishops, who refused to read a declaration to that effect in
their churches. These seven bishops had been extolled for
patriotism, and the noble stand which they made against
tyranny on this occasion, but it was not a stand against
tyranny, it was against toleration. He then attempted in a
clumsy manner to amuse his hearers with some facetious
comparisons between the clergy of the church and a school-
master, and the repetition of several of the grossest false-
hoods to which he had previously given utterance, namely,
the Protestant Church was only 300 years old &c., and
concluded by complimenting himself and his party upon
the extensive liberality of their motives and feelings.
They then carried out the voluntary principle, by making a
collection, after which another nahib sectarian and would-be
reverend, called M`Kerrow, from Manchester, was presented
to the meeting. He spoke in very lofty terms in praise of
something which he called " dissenting churches," and ex-
pressed his indignation that he and his fellows were merely
tolerated in the propagation of their schismatical dogmas.
He made some peevish observations about what he was
pleased to term the arrogant claims of the Church," and
got quite in a rage with those dissenters that refused to pull
down the church without ceremony. He next attempted a
little bit of very ludicrous eloquence, which produced a great
disturbance in the room, and, after a little complimentary
abuse of the " tory scribes," and another desperate, but
clumsy, effort to do a little more eloquence, he resumed his
seat.

The Chairman then informed the meeting, that they had
made arrangements for seven gentlemen to address them ;
but the three who had already spoken having occupied the
whole of the time allotted to the seven, he would dissolve the
meeting for the present.
* It is only necessary that we should refer our readers for
the refutation of this palpable and wilful falsehood to the
rubric and canons of the church,
t This base calumny is, we think, too monstrously absurd
and glaring to need any comment.
-.1.* This piece of lying insolence, which this incorrigible
schismatic daringly also asserted on the evening before, in the
conventicle in which he held forth, we shall dispose of in our
next.

We understand that the gentleman who cuts the principal
figure in the above notice has been waited upon by the Rev.
Mr. Baylee, who wished to ascertain if Mr. Burnett was
ready to maintain, in public discussion, the statements which
he made from the pulpit ; but that was bringing the voluntary
champion to too close terms, and it was accordingly declined.