In the first case, you would have crushed an establishment which has done more for the diffusion of CHRISTIANITY than has been effected in the same space of time in any age since the APOSTOLIC; which has in SEVEN YEARS been the means of preaching the Gospel in FIFTYFOUR LANGUAGES. This would indeed be putting out one of the eyes of Britain.

The other alternative would be to transfer to the body of DISSENTERS all the honor and influence of whatever has been done, and whatever may be done, by an institution, of which the dawn has been so glorious, but which is visibly rising into brighter day. Shall it be said that the DISSENTERS ALONE have carried the WORD OF GOD TO EVERY NATION UNDER HEAVEN? or shall the CHURCH OF ENGLAND continue to claim the leading part in this important work? And can the Church of England stand so secure upon a narrow and exclusive policy, as BY DESERVING THE BLESSINGS, AND UNITING THE PRAYERS, OF ALL PEOPLE NATIONS, AND LANGUAGES?

The evils of either alternative seem to me equally fatal and inevitable. I am far from undervaluing the efforts of the SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE: I am an old member of that Society, and am heartily disposed to lend any assistance in my power to its useful plans. But how little either that, or any other society now existing, would be competent to supply the place of the Bible Society, the experience of above a century has shown. Even supposing (what I think impossible) that it might be made, in some considerable degree, to answer the same purposes, I see superior advantages in the present constitution of the BIBLE SOCIETY. The co-operation of CHURCHMEN and DISSENTERS in religious matters, so far as they can conscientiously co-operate, seems to me one of the most efficacious means of lessening both the political and religious evils of dissent. It dispels prejudices, pro

motes candor and good-will, and must prepare the mind for the reception of that truth, which every one perceives to be no less the object of those who differ from him than his own. From such a communication, the Church of England has nothing to fear, and every thing to hope; as holding (in our judgments at least) that middle line of truth in which all opposite opinions have a natural tendency to coincide. And is that truth more likely to be acknowledged and embraced by minds embittered by mutual jealousy and aversion, or by such as have been previously softened by conciliation?

The existence of dissent will perhaps be inseparable from religious freedom, so long as the mind of man is liable to error; but it is not unreasonable to hope that hostility may cease where perfect agreement cannot be established. If we cannot RECONCILE ALL OPINIONS, let us endeavour to UNITE ALL HEARTS.

I ought, perhaps, to apologize for troubling you with arguments, which must probably have been already brought before you, as I know your opinions are not taken up hastily and lightly. But I have thought it necessary to state such as have chiefly induced me to consider my taking a part in the concerns of the Bible Society, not only as consistent with, but as a proof of the sincerity and warmth of my attachment to the Church of England; and which still, on reflection, seem to me to have so much weight, that, far from repenting of what I have done, I feel convinced I shall least of all repent of it, as I approach THAT STATE IN WHICH THE DISTINCTION OF CHURCHMAN AND DISSENTER SHALL BE NO MORE.

(Signed)

I am, &c.

Great George Street, 4th Dec. 1811.

N. VANSITTART.

Inquiry

INTO THE CONSEQUENCES

OF

NEGLECTING TO GIVE THE PRAYER BOOK WITH THE BIBLE.

AN INQUIRY, &c.

WHOEVER objects to the British and Foreign Bible Society is

invariably asked, Where is the harm of giving away a Bible? I will answer therefore by saying, None whatever. On the contrary, the more widely the Scriptures are disseminated, the greater in all respects must be the good produced.

Having answered this question, and, as I hope, to the satisfaction of every member in the society, I beg leave to ask in my turn; Where is the harm of giving away a Prayer Book? Of course I propose this question only to those members of the Society, who are also members of the Church. For I have explicitly declared, both in the Sermon at St. Paul's and in the Address to the Senate, that I have no desire to interfere, either with the religious opinions, or the religious conduct of the Dissenters. An attempt to impose the Liturgy on men, who from principle reject it, would be a violation of that religious liberty which I sincerely hope will ever be maintained in this country. 1 neither expect therefore, nor desire, unless it is their own voluntary act, that Dissenters should either give or receive our Book of Common Prayer. I am addressing myself to Churchmen in their intercourse with Churchmen, such as the Clergyman of a parish has with his parishioners. And, as the Liturgy is the Book which distinguishes Churchmen, I may certainly ask of them, Where can