not yourselves to be deceived by them. For such men surely are not true Christians, neither as yet have they learned the first article of the Creed, which teacheth that God is almighty, which ye, good children, have already perfectly learned. Wherefore, eschew such erroneous opinions, and believe the words of our Lord Jesus, that you eat and drink His very Body and Blood, although man's reason cannot comprehend how and after what manner the same is there present. For the wisdom of reason must be subdued to the obedience of Christ, as the Apostle Paul teacheth."

The Tractarians are charged with inculcating the necessity of dispensing religious truth with caution, not throwing it promiscuously before minds ill-suited to receive it. What Oxford teaches may be presented, in a few words, from Dr. Pusey's Letter to the Lord Chancellor :

"In brief, then, my Lord, the meaning of our Church, (as we conceive,) in these Articles, is, that the Scripture is the sole authoritative source of the Faith, i. e. of 'things to be believed in order to salvation;' the Church is the medium, through which that knowledge is conveyed to individuals; she, under her responsibility to God, and in subjection to His Scripture, and with the guidance of His Spirit, testifies to her children, what truths are necessary to be believed in order to salvation; expounds Scripture to them; determines, when controversies arise; and this, not in the character of a judge, but as a witness, to what she herself received."

And in this view of the meaning of the Church, we are further confirmed by the Canon of the Convocation of 1571, the same Convocation which enforced subscription to the Articles.

"The preachers shall in the first place be careful never to teach any thing from the pulpit, to be religiously held and believed by the people, but what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old or New Testament, and collected out of that very Doctrine by the Catholic Fathers and ancient Bishops.

"So have we ever wished to teach, 'what is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Old or New Testament:' and, as the test of its being thus agreeable, we would take, not our own private and individual judgments, but that of the Universal Church, as attested by the Catholic Fathers and Ancient Bishops. "

Nor do we, in this, nor did they, approximate to Romanism but rather they herein took the strongest and the only unassailable position against it. Rome and ourselves have alike appealed to the authority of "the Church;" but, in the mouth of a Romanist, the Church means so much of the Church as is in communion with herself, in other words, it means herself: with us, it means the Universal Church, to which Rome, as a particular Church, is subject, and ought to yield obedience. With Rome, it matters not whether the decision be of the Apostolic times, or of yesterday; whether against the teachers of the early Church, or with it; whether the whole Church universal throughout the world agree in it, or only a section, which holds communion with herself: she, as well as Calvin, makes much of the authority of the Fathers, when she thinks that they make for her; but she, equally with the founder of the Ultra-Protestants, sets at naught their authority, so soon as they tell against her: she unscrupulously sets aside the judgment of all the Ancient Doctors of the Church, unhesitatingly dismisses the necessity of agreement even of the whole Church at this day, and proudly taking to herself the exclusive title of Catholic, sits alone, a Queen in the midst of the earth, and dispenses her decrees from herself. No, my lord! they ill understand the character of Rome, or their own strength, who think that she would really commit herself, as Cranmer did, to Christian Antiquity, or who would not gladly bring her to that test! What need has she of Antiquity who is herself infallible, except to allure mankind to be lieve her so?

So much for Tractarianism by a Tractarian

REFORMED PRESBYTERIANS, OR COVENANTERS, THIS denomination of Christians take their name from the fact that "Covenanting" has been a prominent event and characteristic of their past history. They derive their origin from the Reformed Church of Scotland; their members having united with others in signing the "National Covenant of Scotland," and subsequently the "Solemn League and Covenant," which Protestants in England, Scotland, and Ireland framed and signed in 1643, which exerted an important influence in overturning the throne of the Stuarts, and in bringing about the execution of Charles I.

During the eighteenth century a few members of this sect emigrated from time to time from Scotland to this country. At length in 1752, Rev. Mr. Cuthbertson was sent by the Reformed Presbytery of Scotland to visit these scattered members, and to ascertain their religious and social condition. He traveled and preached throughout the colonies with great zeal during twenty years; and in 1774, Messrs. Linn and Dobbin were sent to assist him. These three clergymen, and their ruling elders, organized themselves into a regular presbytery. With the progress of time the members of the sect increased, and additional ministers were sent over to supply their spiritual wants. In 1799 a constitution was adopted, and various measures were taken to give organization and solidity to the denomination. Amongst other things, they took hold of the subject of slavery at an early period, and in 1800 ordained that no person having any connection whatever with that "peculiar institution," should be allowed to have communion or membership with them, under any circumstances.

In May, 1809, at a meeting of the Presbytery which was held in Philadelphia, it was resolved to establish a Synod, in consequence of the increase of members and preachers; and the Rev. William Gibson, being the senior minister, officiated in organizing and recognizing the "Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Ame

rica." Several years previous to this step, the Presbytery had issued a document termed the "Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States," which set forth their doctrines and opinions at length.

The most remarkable peculiarity of this denomination is that they refuse to support the Constitution and Government of the United States, and condemn them as opposed to religion, as impious and detestable. They contend that no Christian ought to countenance any government which does not recognize the supreme authority of Jesus Christ, and acknowledge allegiance to him. They hold that the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitutions of the several States, ought directly and distinctly to introduce this topic, and to admit this principle-else in default thereof, they do not deserve the support or approval of Christians. To our blind and dumb vision this seems a most absurd doctrine, for this reason: Men should consider what the intention of such a thing as a political constitution is. If it be to proclaim religious truth, it is proper that due prominence should be given to that, and to the claims of Christianity and its founder. If its intention, however, be to assert and define the various political rights, duties, relations, and obligations of men, it has nothing whatever to do with religious principles. This sect might just as reasonably require that the declaration which the National Convention of Dentists annually puts forth, should contain a recognition of the truths of Christianity, and other religious dogmas, in order to secure the approval of Christians, as they have to require the same thing in a political document, issued by an assemblage of politicians, convened for a purely secular and political purpose.

The Covenanters, or Reformed Presbyterians, wholly condemn the Constitution and Government of the United States, on a variety of grounds. They begin by laying down a principle which is true; but they deduce from it (what we regard as) unjustifiable conclusions. That principle is that, when immorality and impiety are made

essential to any political system, the whole system should be unconditionally condemned. Yet this premise involves an error; because, according to it, the whole Jewish system of doctrine and belief, as contained in the Old Testament, should be condemned and utterly repudiated, because that system contained some essential features which were wrong and censurable, and which Christ himself subsequently abrogated.

Reformed Presbyterians proceed to denounce the Federal Constitution of the United States on the following grounds: They condemn the preamble, because it does not recognize the glory of God as the great end in the establishment of civil governments; and because it does not propose to secure alike liberty to all the inhabitants of the land. They condemn the first article, because it makes a distinction between persons called "free" and "all other persons;" because, as they think, it legalizes the slave trade; because, among the qualifications required for public officers, no notice is taken of religious merits, of the piety and moral excellence of the applicants. They object to the second article, because the mode prescribed for inducting persons into office is not adapted to give glory to God, inasmuch as they swear or affirm, without any allusion to God's law and authority. They also condemn the pardoning power, as applied to murderers, allowed by this article; and the fourth article they denounce, as calculated to make them partakers of other men's sins, or at least encouraging and favoring them. They also object to restoring fugitive servants or slaves, and to making any human law the "supreme" law of the land. This they regard as impious in the extreme, an offence for which there is and can be no excuse.

These are the chief grounds on which the Reformed Presbyterians refuse to acknowledge the authority of the Federal Constitution, and even of the State Governments. They hold no political offices on this account, and the emotion of patriotism seems to be extinct within them. The "stars and stripes" and the most glorious reminis