together. We regard both as spiritual acts; but, by the practice of the Church of England, the two are separated in point of time from each other; and as they look only upon the ordination as spiritual, this lays them open to such civil mandates and civil interdicts as we have never been accustomed to receive in the questions which arise on the subject of induction into parishes. But ask any English ecclesiastic whether the bishop would receive an order, from any civil court whatever, on the matter of ordination; and the instant, the universal reply is, that he would not. In other words, we should be degraded far beneath the level of the sister church if we remain in connection with the State, and submit to this new ordinance, or, if you will, to this new interpretation of their old ordinances." After quoting a case in point, in which a presentee in the Church of England had appealed, but in vain, to the royal authority against the prelate who refused to ordain him, Dr. Chalmers continued:—"To what position, then, are we brought if we give in to the opposite motion, and proceed in consequence to the ordination of Mr. Young? To such a position as the bishops of England, with all the Erastianism which has been charged, and to a great degree, I think, lalsely charged, upon that establishment, never, never would consent to occupy. Many of them would go to the prison and the death rather than submit to such an invasion on the functions of the sacred office. We read of an old imprisonment of bishops, which led to the greatest and most glorious political emancipation that ever took place in the history of England. Let us not be mistaken. Should the emancipation of our church require it, there is the same strength of high and holy determination in this our land. There are materials here, too, for upholding the contest between principle and power, and enough of the blood and spirit of the olden time for sustaining that holy warfare, where, as in former days, the inflictions of the one party were met with a patience and determination invincible in the sufferings of the other."
In consequence of the recommendation embodied in his motion, a committee was appointed for conferring with Government, of which Dr. Chalmers was convener. It was now resolved that they should repair to London upon their important mission, and thither he accompanied them in the beginning of July. After much negotiation with the leaders of the different parties, the members of committee returned to Edinburgh; and in the report which Dr. Chalmers gave of their proceedings, he expressed his opinion that matters looked more hopeful than ever. Important concessions were to be made to the church on the part of Government, and a measure was to be devised and drawn up to that effect. "With such helps and encouragements on our side," the report concluded, "let but the adherents of this cause remain firm and united in principle among themselves, and with the favour of an approving God, any further contest will be given up as unavailing; when, let us fondly hope, all the feelings of party, whether of triumph on one side, because of victory, or of humiliation on the other side, because of defeat, shall be merged and forgotten in the desires of a common patriotism, to the reassurance of all who are the friends of our Establishment, to the utter confusion of those enemies who watch for our halting, and would rejoice in our overthrow."
It was indeed full time that such a hope should dawn upon those who loved the real interests of our church. For the case of Auchterarder did not stand alone; on the contrary, it was only the first signal of a systematic warfare which patronage was about to wage against the rights of the people; and the example of appeal to the civil authority was but too readily followed in those
