it must be particularly gratifying to learn that, as to the main end of their association, their labour has not been "in vain in the Lord."

Some advice is also given to the Wesleyans; and in substance it will be found, upon examination, to consist in "this very principle of lay influence, lay control, lay appeal, lay supremacy in spiritual matters." It is argued that, "if Congregationalism admits the influence, and works by the means, of the church at large, the members and their officers; if Presbyterianism, also, thus rests upon the broad basis of a mixed government, clerical and lay; the Established Episcopal Church does so much more;" (p. 265;) and we are left to infer that Wesleyanism ought to conform to these examples. We, however, do not perceive how this conclusion flows from the preceding statement; nor discern the logical connexion between the fact that Methodism has been "owned of God, for the good of men, to an extent that has no parallel," and the inference that, forthwith, her external polity ought to be made to harmonise with that of other communities. It seems like sending the American yacht, which, in a recent contest, had "no parallel," to be altered, and made exactly like her slow, lagging, and inferior competitors.

One opinion, stated in the book in many places, and under various forms, is, that Methodism, though an “institute, was not, and is not, a church." (P. 75.) It is admitted, indeed, to be "not a horrible Vandalism; but the most emphatic recognition that has ever been made of the very core of church-principles, namely, that Christianity cannot subsist, does not develop its genuine powers, (longer than for a moment,) apart from an ecclesiastical organization; and this seems to mean nothing less than a well-compacted hierarchical system :" but still it is not a church. This book does not contain any statements of the precise difference between the Wesleyan institute and a church; and, although it is certainly assumed that the accession of "laysupremacy in spiritual matters" would advance our community from the one state to the other; yet how such a cause would produce such an effect, or that it could produce it at all, are points left unexplained and unproved.

Nor is it certain that such a consummation, when attained, would be any gain to mankind; for we are told, p. 219, apparently with approbation, that Wesley "perfectly felt"-"that an apostolic church —although right to a pin-which did not subserve its main purposethe spread of the Gospel, and the conversion of the ungodly, must be regarded as an absurdity and a hinderance to the truth." We know what Wesleyanism has been for the last hundred years: what it might become after our self-styled Reformers, with the help of this writer, had made it "right to a pin," belongs to the "Methodism of the future," upon which theorisers may speculate, without mistaking the past or damaging the present.

Christianity is a Divine revelation intended for mankind. It follows, that the framer of an "ecclesiastical organization," which is to

be of any use, should be well acquainted, at once, with the teaching of Scripture, and with that human nature to which it is to be applied. All the world knows that John Wesley was an accomplished scholar and divine, and that, by his peculiar mode of life, and his habit of submitting all his principles to the test of human experience, he acquired an almost unexampled knowledge of "what is in man;" and therefore we candidly confess that, if he has left any serious defects in that "institute," or "organization," which bears his name, we despair of ever seeing these satisfactorily supplied by a mere recluse, whose theories, by himself, have never been tried even on the smallest scale, and, according to his own account, when tried by others, have comparatively failed; so that we choose to retain "Methodism as it is," rather than exchange it for an ideal something, recommended to us by an amiable man, without seemingly being understood by himself.

While the system of Wesleyanism receives limited praise, and its adherents, generally, are advised, a portion of them are taunted by a reference to points on which they are supposed to be peculiarly vulnerable. Those commonly called "the people" are, in p. 260, reminded of their own ecclesiastical nothingness, as furnishing a proof in itself that the "pride-born doctrine” they have heard and embraced is "not of Christ," but "of Satan." "The ingenuous reader of the New Testament, without putting his finger upon single texts, will have seen and felt, and will be ready to acknowledge, (let the inference be what it may,) that the doctrine which makes the Clergy everything in the church, and the people nothing-or nothing but its raw material-that this doctrine is not of Christ."

These words, being found in a book on "Wesleyan Methodism," are, of course, intended to describe a prominent feature in the system, the merits of which the author has undertaken to discuss. It is notorious as the shining of the sun at noon-day, that Methodism, as an ecclesiastical system, is a purely voluntary institution. It has scarcely any endowments created by charitable bequests, no regium donum, nor any Parliamentary grants, except for the partial support of its daily schools, which, after all, are a very heavy expense to the community. Its public funds, however ample, are not hoarded, but annually expended in doing good, and not unfrequently anticipated. In a word, "the people," and "the people" alone, from year to year, find all the funds which are necessary to support our ministry, to erect and conserve our chapels, to conduct our extended foreign Missions, to help our poor, and do a hundred things beside.

Possibly it will be replied, "There! that is just what we have always said, the people are to pay, pay, pay, while the Ministers exercise all the power; and, in fact, in Methodism, the Priests are everything, and the people are nothing." In this case we may properly "move the previous question," and ask, Was there ever in this world a proper paymaster without power? Can a reasonable being

freely find the funds necessary to carry on any earthly business, and not have something to do with its management? Agents may be employed; but whoever finds the money will cause his influence to be felt. In any manufactory under heaven where “ raw material" holds the purse, it will be a partner, if not the principal, in the firm. In some Dissenting churches there is an individual or two whose money is the support of that particular "interest." Are these, in general, the slaves of all the rest? Are they not likely to impose chains, rather than to wear them? In Great Britain the House of Commons votes the "supplies;" and is that estate of the realm enslaved by the other two? Many parties, styled Wesleyan Reformers, voluntarily “stopped the supplies," but had to be expelled from the Society. What is the principle involved in these two classes of facts? Obviously this,—that the contribution of money and the exercise of power are inseparable. They would not do the one, and therefore could not do the other. And they fill the land with complaints, not because they have saved their pence, but because they have lost their power.

In a large community there may be individual instances of misconduct, on both sides, under any system of rules. We hear much of what are called the "concessions" of 1795 and 1797, wrung, it is said, from the Conference by the prowess of the Delegates; and of some subsequent regulations, as affording a wonderful security to the private members of Society; just as if it were possible for a ministry, entirely dependent upon the people for its daily bread, ever to become so infatuated as to treat them otherwise than with courtesy, kindness, and respect. Should anything ever generally prevail in Methodism which deserves the name of "slavery" and "oppression," it will be, as to its authors and victims, the reverse of what is at present the subject of popular clamour.

There is, however, no ground of alarm, nor for serious dissatisfaction. Let but the Ministers act in the spirit of their "Divine call,” and study to please Christ, their Master, and He will take care of them as His servants. As to the people, with the purse in their hands, so far as their Ministers are concerned, they will always be in a position to take care of themselves. In a community like that of Methodism, to talk of the laity being ignored by the ministry, the "Priests" everything, and the "people" nothing, is to utter that which, in principle, contradicts the experience of all mankind, and which, when analysed, is no better than self-convicted nonsense.

Private members of the Wesleyan Society are further taunted with a supposed" servile submission to priestly arrogance;" (p. 260;) and the position and function of the Conference are assumed to be so utterly indefensible, that it is quite an act of condescension even to hear a word in their defence. "Whether it be good and safe, for poses of government, of discipline, and of financial management, to leave uncontrolled power in the hands of the Ministers of religion, may well be questioned; and, indeed, it is conceding much to those

pur

who would defend such a system, to grant any space at all for a question on that ground." (P. 222.)

There can be no mistake about the reference in these words, as that must be, not to fictions, but to facts; and these to be found in "Wesleyan Methodism," the subject of the book. We may, however, remind our friends, that this is not a complete view of the Conferencequestion; and, before adopting any desperate conclusion, it may be as well to hear what the writer himself can say on the other side.

Often, and in various terms, is the sentiment reiterated, part of which we have already quoted, namely, that the Methodism which Wesley "framed was an invasive encampment upon the field of the world: it never was, in his view or purpose, a church." This is undoubtedly true, if by a "church" be meant something inconsistent with the character of an "invasive encampment upon the field of the world;" for he assuredly meant his institute to prosecute the "holy war," with continued success, until the "kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and of His Christ." Now, we are informed in this book, "The Wesleyan Conference, as framed by Wesley himself, was well constituted for this purpose." (P. 225.) "When purposes of evangelic aggression only are in view, much may be said, with reason, in behalf of a purely clerical conclave, or deliberative assembly, which shall be exclusive of laymen." (P. 222.)

"It is a work which demands a high and sustained tone pervading a select body of men, and which would almost certainly be lowered or abated by the stated presence and the official intervention of laymen.' (P. 223.) At present the world is far, very far, from being thoroughly evangelized; and if it be true that "a purely clerical conclave," without the "official intervention of laymen," is likely more effectively to hasten this glorious consummation, (and in favour of this notion there is the authority of this book, corroborated by the facts of our denominational history,) we hope therefore our friends will not be led by these taunts to regard with suspicion and distrust their own agents in the work of universal evangelization, since it now appears to be probable in theory, as well as true in fact, that Mr. Wesley knew what he was doing, when he first said, "The world is my parish," and then proceeded to the constitution of his Conference. Surely they will have the Christian magnanimity to say," It is very desirable that the world should be evangelized; and these men profess to be seeking that end. Ours is the land of religious toleration. These Conference men have met alone now for more than a hundred years, and no serious evil has arisen out of their assemblies and doings. They possess no power of taxation; and, however vast their schemes, they can only expend the money which people choose to give them. Since, therefore, they contemplate the Christianisation of mankind, in the Lord's name let them deliberate and do the best they can; and may His pleasure prosper in their hands!"

Private Wesleyans are also taunted with what is called their bondage to the Rules of the Society. "Saving the civil liberty not to enter it, and the same liberty to depart at pleasure, everything within the Wesleyan enclosure is strictly compulsory, or is the very opposite of voluntary." (P. 273.)

One would think that a man who could enter the Society, and then leave it again whenever he chose, was sufficiently free; but still something must be said to make people believe that Wesleyans are slaves. Indeed, it may be conceded that for the simple purpose of personal salvation we may have more Rules than are strictly necessary; and many doubtless become wise and good in this world, and are finally saved in the next, without submitting to any of them. But Wesley taught people to look beyond themselves, saying,—

"Extend the arms of mighty prayer,

In grasping all mankind."

His Methodism was an "invasive encampment," constituted with an express reference to battle and to victory. He knew that discipline gave rise to force, and force led on to conquest. Hence he advised all who wished to take a part in the subjugation of the world to Christ to bind themselves by rules to Jesus, and to each other; and then,

"In mighty phalanx join'd,

To battle all proceed."

He had in the following words said himself, believed there were others like-minded, and invited them to follow his example,

"Now, O God, Thine own I am;

Now I give Thee back Thine own;
Freedom, friends, and health, and fame,
Consecrate to Thee alone."

Those who thought this too large an offering were at liberty to decline it, like the young man in the Gospel: such as became weary of this "yoke," might return to the "freedom" they had left. Anybody may gain liberty by leaving the world in its wickedness, forsaking Christ, and resigning the hope of a crown of life. All such taunts and insinuations have, at least, a sinister aspect, as they very much resemble the counsel which Balaam gave to Midian; and the Prince who is expecting defeat, will probably attempt, in various ways, to persuade the army of his adversary that its discipline is too strict, and ought to be relaxed.

Advice and taunts like these, preceded by praise, and followed by an objection to class-meetings, which bespeaks a total ignorance of their character; and by a recommendation to alter the mode of settling our chapel-property, to get rid of the Poll Deed, and substitute for Wesley's four volumes of "Sermons" the improvements and discoveries of German neology, much of which is the very worst form of infidelity; will, of course, suggest to our friends a lesson of caution, and tend to put them on their guard.