Mr. Lewellin.—"It appears, from the tone and style of your Prayer-book, that the persons, when receiving the mysterious efficacy of your sacraments, are just as passive, in one sense, as a piece of marble is under the chisel of the sculptor. They stand still, as the block of marble stands still, doing nothing; they may be dozing. The clergy, like the sculptor, do all that is to be done, and the sacraments they administer are to take effect on these passive beings by virtue of their inherent power, when properly administered by a bishop, or a priest who has received Episcopal ordination from a bishop, who is in the regular line of succession from the apostles. Now this Tractarian theory is in direct contradiction to the Word of God, which makes it obligatory on every sinner to work out his own salvation with fear and trembling; to believe and to trust in Christ that he may be saved; to receive the truth in the love of it, which is to effect his spiritual freedom; to yield himself to God as made alive from the dead; to purify himself, and to walk in newness of life; and even the first great action of Divine grace, in his renewal and renovation, is making him willing to do what is essential for his present happiness and safety, and his final salvation. Thus, according to the Scripture theory, the sacraments have no self-acting power, nor have the agents who administer them any self-sufficient power; the regenerating and sanctifying power is in the Lord alone, and to him, and him alone, is a sinner indebted for his salvation, which is an act of sovereign and unmerited grace." See Ephes. ii. 8, 9, 10.
Rev. Mr. Ingleby.—"I deeply regret that we have in our Prayer-book so many objectionable services and ceremonies, and more especially as they bring us into so close a conformity with the Papal Church of Rome. Any impartial person, who looks at the two churches through the medium of these prominent services and ceremonies, would pronounce us twin sisters, or ours a daughter bearing a very strong resemblance to her mother; and it is only by turning to our articles that we can point out any essential difference between them. Our articles are Protestant and scriptural; our ceremonies are derived from the Papacy, and are antiscriptural. Hence we account for the existence of the two orders of clergy who officiate at our altars—the evangelical and the Tractarian. We are a kingdom divided against itself, and what the final issue of the contest will be no human foresight can decide. You are for reforming the Prayer-book by expunging that which savours so strongly of the Papacy; and if this could be done, then Tractarianism would disappear from amongst us, and we should hold the unity of the faith in the bonds of peace. But who will undertake this herculean labour? Will our clergy? They have no power, even if they had an inclination. Will our bishops? No. They have gained the prize, and are contented; they live in affluence and in ease, and care but little about the strife and contentions which prevail amongst their subordinates, with whom they hold but a very formal and distant intercourse. The laity, at least the more enlightened, and the pious, I know, are restless for a change; but I see not how any change can be effected unless there be a breaking up of the Establishment, for it to undergo a remodelling; and if such a great crisis as this should come, there is no conjecturing, from the present aspect of the times, whether the Prayer-book would receive a more scriptural or a more Papal cast and complexion. We ought not to forget that it is the civil power which appoints our bishops, sits in judgment on the conflicting opinions which divide the clergy, and rules the destiny of our church; and we know, from very painful experience, that the civil power, whether embodied in a Whig or a Tory administration, has uniformly evinced a stronger liking for ceremonial pomp and display, than for the beautiful simplicity of the church of the New Testament. Hence, I believe that reformation is hopeless, as Cæsar disdains to admit the supremacy of Jesus of Nazareth."
Mr. Lewellin.—"That, Sir, is my decided opinion."
Mr. Stevens.—"I am not sanguine in my hopes. The buyers and sellers are again in the temple, but the Son of God is not now in the form of the Son of man, or they would soon be driven out."
Mr. Roscoe.—"Then, Sir, Tractarianism will spread more widely and rapidly amongst us, and if an open and a positive junction be not formed between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, there will be a tacit one; and the reign of ecclesiastical delusion and despotism will be established in Britain; and the English, like the Irish and the Italians, will be, at least to a certain extent, a priest-ridden people."
Mr. Lewellin.—"You should all do as I have done, and then you may breathe freely and without fear, and laugh to scorn all attempts, open or insidious, to beguile you to Rome. Our principles render us invulnerable; yours, constitute your danger."
Mr. Stevens.—"Mr. Lewellin means we should all turn Dissenters, and acknowledge no legislative dictation or authority in matters of religion but that of the New Testament."
Mr. Lewellin.—"You have often rallied me on my Dissenting principles, but the time is fast coming when the problem will be solved, that dissent from human authority in matters of the Christian faith is the only invincible barrier against the encroachments of the Papal power."
Mr. Roscoe.—"I have no desire to forsake the church of my fathers—the church of my early and long-cherished veneration and attachment—but I will not remain in her communion if she form an alliance with Papal Rome, or become semi-Papal herself. No! I am a Protestant Christian, which is another designation for a Bible Christian; the Bible is my infallible rule, which forbids absolute yielding and subserviency to any human authority; and if Protestantism be driven from the Church of England, or if she gives that submission to priestly dictation which should be given exclusively to the Word of the Lord, I will immediately leave her, as I would leave my own mansion if I felt its foundation giving way, preferring the woodside cottage as more safe, though less elegant and imposing."