"Now, Sir, I ask your permission to contradict the falsehoods which are here asserted on the authority of Mr. J. E. Giles, he asserts a falsehood when he says that I have ever poured wine, whether consecrated or unconsecrated, down a sink in my church. He asserts a falsehood when he says that I "stuffed down bread to such an amount, that the spout was choked up." I have never put any bread, consecrated or unconsecrated, into a spout. He asserts a ridiculous falsehood when he asserts that "the solid stone work" was removed "that the spout might be relieved" from the bread thus asserted to be stuffed down; for who ever heard before of bread becoming so hard as to render this necessary? He asserts a falsehood when he says that I would not think of profaning the consecrated wine by giving it to the poor; and a falsehood, if possible, more wicked thau the others, since the object is to alienate the affections of the poor from the church. I always give, as every clergyman does, what remains of the consecrated elements to the poor communicants; it can seldom be much, as you are well aware. 66 Now, these are the falsehoods which Mr. J. E. Giles is reported either to have wickedly invented or carelessly propagated. And I will now proceed to state what the foundation is upon which this superstructure of falsehood has been built. "It is a fact that the excellent architect of our church, Mr. Chantrill, erected a piscina in the chancel. And it is true that this piscina was found to be stuffed up by some malicious person, not with bread, but with lime. And it is true that, not the bread, but the lime, was removed from it. In both these instances, I may add, Mr. Chantrill acted upon his own responsibility, and without any directions from me. "The first assertion made by Mr. J. E. Giles relates to a transaction which occurred four or five years ago, when I refused to give the wine to a dissenting churchwarden, who is now, I believe, residing in America or Australia; of which an exaggerated, and therefore false report, was circulated; and which I explained in the British Magazine at the time. Perhaps, therefore, Mr. J. E. Giles is more censurable in this assertion than in any other. "Mr. J. E. Giles having stated that I have done what I never did, I desire to record my contradiction in the pages of the British Magazine. But I shall decline any controversy with Mr. J. E. Giles; nor shall I notice any explanation he may give of his conduct, unless he again makes false statements relating to my conduct. The irreverences and levity of mind exhibited in the quotation I have given from the speech of Mr. J. E. Giles are sufficient to justify me in declining a controversy with him upon any religious subject whatever. "I am, Sir, your faithful servant, "W. F. Hook, D.D. "Vicar of Leeds." LAUGHTER AND LONG So much for Anti-corn-law-religious Brother Giles and the "LOUD CONTINUED CHEERS" of his religious! auditors. We do not know what grounds he had to lament that he could not "find his tongue;" but if any one else finds it, it is hoped he will be shy of using it. 66 TO THE REV. EDITORS OF COMMON SENSE," GENTLEMEN, If you think the following Letter worthy of a place in your useful miscellany it may be productive of some benefit to those who are now hesitating between their adhesion to the Church and Dissent. They will see how a good man in former times thought and acted, and following his laudable example they will be led to separate themselves altogether from modern systems of Religion, and become dutiful and consistent members of Christ's Holy Catholic Church. "Oldham, June 8. 1693. My Lord, Z. Before I dare bee so confident as to plead in behalf of my ffriend 'tis absolutely necessary I should most humbly beg pardon for my presumption in writing now. In confidence that you will pardon me I will adventure to represent my ffriend's case. Mr. Lawton hath been educated in the Presbyterian way, hath had Classical Ordination more than 30 years since, but discontinued preaching a considerable time, and became Licensed Schoolmaster at Oldham. He hath at present a Congregation att Marple in Stockport parish where he is very much courted to continue. But this satisfies not unless he may receive Episcopal orders (I mean that of Deacon) att your Lordshipp's hands and for his true and thorough Conformity I suppose Dr. Wroe*hath satisfied your Lordship, as he hath been pleased to intimate to me. Hee hath conquered all the prejudices of Education and Interest and cleared his Judgment of all the mistakes that clouded it before (a Rare and Great Work) and now most humbly begs to be received by your Lordship as your Son, which I am confident your Lordship will not deny. I have had personall acquaintance with him these ten years and have been an Instrument to bring it thus far, and do really assure you he will answer every character of his Testimonials to the full. You will find him very humble and modest and that will begge your encouragement. I humbly desire your Lordshipp's blessing, and that you will pardon this trouble and give me leave to assure you that I am my Lord your most obedient Son and Servant For the Rev. Father in God my lord Bishopp of Chester this present. June 7. 1693. These are to Certify the Right Revd. Father in God my Lord Bishop of Chester that if he pleases to admit Mr. James Lawton into the Order of Deacon I approve of him to be my Curate att Milnerow. Witness my hand, Mr Lawton's Henry Pigot, Vic. of Rachdale. Nomination. We whose names are hereunto signed know Mr. James Lawton Schoolmaster of Oldham to be a man of Orthodox and Loyall principles and of sober life and conversation. Attested by us— Isaac Harpur, Minr. of Oldham Tho. Ellison M.A. Rectofor Ashton under Lyne." At that time Warden of Manchester. 66 When it is considered that this individual dissolved his connection with a Congregation with whom he was very much courted to continue," after having been ordained according to the Presbyterian mode thirty years, it may be imagined by the Dissenters of our day that an interest in some considerable portion of the "overgrown wealth" of the Church, (or the prospect of obtaining some fat Rectory or rich Vicarage) had been the moving cause of his conduct. But such was not the case. He was appointed by the Vicar of Rochdale to a Living worth at that time £10 per annum, being about the average value of all the other Livings in the Parish, with the exception of the Mother Church the income of which was less than £300 a year. There seems to be reasonable evidence for concluding that Mr. L. being convinced of the evils of Dissent and of the divine origin of Episcopacy, promptly followed the dictates of an enlightened mind and sound judgment and withdrew himself from a system of religion which he could no longer regard as of Apostolic origin. Nor was the sacrifice which he made either small or unimportant. He had established himself in the estimation of a flock which regarded him very highly in love doubtless for his own as well as for his works' sake; and however slender the support might be which he received from his old Congregation it could hardly be less than he obtained in his new sphere of labour.* At this period we must confess with sorrow that the Church was not occupying the high and holy station for which she was designed by her Lord and Master. The gross hypocrisy of the fanatical and blood-stained leaders of the Great Rebellion, and the bold attempts of an infatuated monarch to reintroduce the galling yoke of Popery had passed away and a season of inactivity followed. But if such was the state of things in the Church it cannot be denied that a worse state of things existed without. Dissenting Meeting houses were built and endowed, in the same manner as our Churches, by the voluntary piety of individuals, but the plague of Arianism and Socinianism soon gained admittance, and at the early part of the next Century began to spread with fearful rapidity, especially amongst the Presbyterians and General Baptists. Here were no Creeds nor Articles of faith to call the people to the first principles of the Oracles of God, and therefore, says Dr. Bogue, an unexceptionable testimony. error was the destroying angel of Dissenting Congregations." Bogue and Bennet, Vol. III., p. 318.-Even such men as Watts, and Jennings, and Doddrige, and others of equal. 66 *It is gratifying to name that Mr. Lawton was admitted to the Order of Deacon by the Bishop of Chester, in 1693, and in the following year, having "purchased to himself a good degree," he was ordained Priest. He remained some years at Milnrow, I doubt not usefully discharging his important duties. He was succeeded in 1699, by James Halliwell, B.A., Fellow of Brazennose College, Oxford, and afterwards Incumbent of Oldham, second son of John Halliwell, of Pike House, Esquire. piety did not escape the scourge of "the destroying angel" as some of their writings amply and painfully disclose. It might have been thought that if ever the Voluntary System, of which we have heard and read so much that probably we shall not suffer the infliction of a hearing or reading much more, was imperiously demanded in all its vigour and efficiency, it was at this time. And the Voluntary System had adherents then, as it has had both in the Church and in the World at all times. But it was suffering then from the general palsy, and indeed had become so crippled by its own natural helplessness that its inertness was quite marvellous. We have reason, as a nation, to bless God that during this lethargic period of our religious history, the Church kept His holy Word constantly before the People, and the Prayer Book was the Evangelical expositor of that Word. The members of the Church could never greatly err so long as they joined week by week in the devout spiritual prayers of their holy Mother. And we know that this was in a great degree the case. When the Nation was aroused from its spiritual slumber, the first symptoms of life and energy were not found amongst the Dissenting body but in the Church. The men who had been baptized and reared in the bosom of the Church first re-called attention to the doctrines of the Cross; and, by a short-sighted policy which I neither extenuate nor excuse, were discountenanced in high quarters. They reluctantly quitted the Church, and the consequence was that an advantage was given to the Voluntary System by the folly of its enemies which could never have been secured to it by any power or sagacity of its friends. Yet notwithstanding this how much more extensive has been the propagation of Religion through the instrumentality of the Church both in this Country, in our own Colonies, and in our Missionary Stations, than in any of those communions based upon Dissent. But although these remarks may not be altogether foreign to the case to which I have called your attention I would say a few words about Episcopacy, which led Mr. Lawton to disentangle himself from the trammels of dissent. I am quite aware that it is the common method with persons who have not calmly and attentively considered the arguments to be advanced in favour of this important subject to dismiss it by saying it is a Puseyite doctrine-an intolerant opinion-a Popish relic, and sundry other things which are all foreign to the point in question. That question is, Can we prove Episcopacy to be an Order in the Church in the times of the Apostles? There is no question, I believe, as to the existence of that Order from the conclusion of the First Century down to the present day. Dissenters continually tell us they read nothing in the New Testament about Diocesan Episcopacy, and the recognized organ of one section of Dissent-the Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society, has issued the most dishonest statements and scurrilous tirades on this and other subjects connected |