"these our misdoings; the remembrance of them is grievous "unto us; the burden of them is INTOLERABLE!"

These words describe a state of mind that really may and does exist, although in a civilized community we may hope its existence is rare; a state of mind in which the consciousness of foul and base guilt weighs down the soul into an abjectness that misbecomes a rational being under any other circumstances-but a state of mind that assuredly does not mark people out as fit to hold the rod of spiritual or of temporal authority, or to be in any other position than, were they Catholics, of devoting themselves to lives of solitary penance in order to wear out the heartoppressive sense of guilt, or in a country like this spending their days within the walls of a House of Correction, or presenting themselves as candidates for admission at the portals of a Penitentiary. Such men "fit to govern?" We can scarcely say they are "fit to live," unless it be in the earnest endeavour to wipe off some stain of that guilt by which their minds and consciences are so foully blotted, and to render some service to society-to advance if possible towards that balance which it is not likely they should ever reach between their future good and their past evil deeds. It is perfectly monstrous, if this account of their own souls be true, that in such a day of high solemnity, they should dare, or be allowed, to occupy the foremost place, and begirt the person of the Queen, the young, ingenuous, and virtuous Queen; they, in their rank and self-condemned pollutions!

I know we shall be told they are worthy, excellent, learned, and pious persons. Why then do they tell us, why do they tell the nation, why do they tell the Deity, to the contrary? Why should hypocrisy, which has been so often desired to assume a virtue though it had it not, assume a vice, a mass of viciousness, that does not exist? Is it right, is it fitting, that language should be severed from its meaning--that such expressions as these should

be employed in reference to any human beings except those unhappy few, if such there be, who are really conscious of being in the wretched state so emphatically described. Is it fitting that the language of guilt should thus be held up to glory-that vice should be sanctified in conventional language, and men taught to do honour to their God, by belying their own natures and consciences? I know such language is used from Sunday to Sunday throughout the different churches of the empire; it is part of that conventionalism by which the very heart and soul of religion have been eaten out--by which men have been taught to use words with no reference to the meaning of the words by which they have been familiarized with the grovelling notion that the Deity is to be propitiated and his favour gained by loading ourselves with accusations; while from the uttering of one-thousandth part of these imputations by a fellow-creature the individual would recoil with abhorrence, would spurn at the calumniator, and would think himself justified, however meek his spirit, by invoking the power of the law, to interpose its penalties for the protection of his character and for the rectification of the injury.

Religion can only exist in its pure and spiritual reality as its professed language bears the sacred stamp of truth; and here, if ever, throughout such a service as this, should the language of truth have been most anxiously preserved. Instead of that, we find truth all abroad. We find truth in the fairs and festivities that were held; the truth of honesthearted simple enjoyment. We find truth in the theatres that were thrown open; the truth of mirthful or of tearful personation. We find truth abroad in the streets; the truth of respectful loyalty, gazing at such portions of the pomp and show as passed in public, and testifying its sympathy with the occasion. It is only in what is called the "House of the Lord"- it is only in this professedly national and religious ceremony, that we find language stained with the characters of falsehood.

Long and happy and prosperous be the time before there will be any occasion for the repetition of the ceremony! amply and continuously realized be the benedictions that by millions have been poured out upon the head of its object! but nevertheless it is not to be passed over unregarded. The importance of truthfulness of language; of truth to opinion, feeling and conduct, in every concern, whether it be that of daily business or of rare solemnity, cannot be too frequently enforced: and it is needful to point attention to services of this description, in order to sustain that continuous moral criticism upon churches and governments and society in general, by which the improvement of institutions and of society will be best secured. It is important we should do so for the sake of the throne; the throne begirt as it often must be with sycophancy, selfishness, and falsehood; where it is difficult for truth to penetrate, or when it has penetrated to gain firm and enduring footing. There is little excuse for aggravating the temptations by which sovereignty is surrounded, and which deepen to intensity our interest in the safe passage of its individual possessor through the fierce and fiery ordeal created by its possession. We ought to throw the weight of our honestly avowed opinions into the scale of truth on an occasion like the present, from a regard to those classes, the few and the many, whose relative situation is entirely lost sight of in this ceremonial, where the few are made everything, and the many, the millions, nothing. We should declare that such is not the constitution of this country that the few exist for the many, and all institutions for the sake of raising the condition of those who constitute the body of the community. We should maintain our allegiance to truth for the sake of the church itself, that at length its ministers and prelates may be shamed out of superstitions that have become obsolete, and that if produced now for the first time would be met with ridicule and disgust: that if they will adopt rites and forms, they should have some harmony with the opinions

of the time and with feelings that belong to the common heart of humanity. We should raise our voices for the sake of society, too much infected by the taint of conventionalism, and too apt to tolerate the mere use of words as a substitute for realities. In each and all we should feel, that even an occasion which may not occur again in the lives of the great majority of us, ought not to be passed over without calling forth our fair estimate of what its merits are, and our just censure on sins of omission and of commission.

Oh if, while some of these many mummeries were passing; and while his own incessantly repeated name was ringing like a verbal charm at the end of every admonition, doxology, and prayer, the Invocation had been suddenly answered, and He, Christ, in bodily presence and celestial glory, had presented himself to that august and brilliant assembly-while the young object of the ceremony might have stood as erect and unabashed as any, how would coped and mitred prelates, and coroneted peers, in the midst of all their conventionalisms and worn, out forms and fallacies, have sunk in dismay and confusion as he repeated, "For this cause was I born, and to this end came I into the world, that I might bear witness to the Truth."

LECTURE III.

THE Sermon delivered, in the course of the Coronation Service, by the Bishop of London, has been published by royal command; and that command was most fitly issued, because the public must needs have a strong interest in knowing what doctrine, religious, moral, or political, was inculcated upon the mind of the Sovereign at a time so favourable for making a deep and permanent impression. It does indeed claim attention, to judge by internal evidence, on yet higher grounds; for the preacher speaks of the Archbishop as "God's minister," and of himself in this discourse as "Christ's ambassador:" and to those who are vested with such authority no attention can be too reverential. At the same time, as in the case of other Ministers and Ambassadors, whether attending this solemnity to add to its splendour by their presence, or whether engaged in the more ordinary exercise of their functions, we have surely a right to ask for their credentials from the powers by which they profess to be delegated. Whether we shall find these credentials in the obvious inspiration, or even in the obvious truth, of some of the sentiments which were then advanced, may, without much presumption, be regarded as very questionable. Mingled with many things that must command assent; some of them universally recognised truisms; others, propositions which have been established by the power of the human intellect, or to Christians by the authority of the Scriptures through many successive generations; there are in this Discourse others of a very different description; and four points in particular to which I would direct your notice as decidedly exceptionable. I think that it draws an unsound parallel between Jewish ceremonial duty and Christian virtue; that it misapplies religious principle to