tion of assent to the xxxix Articles, and pray for the King and Royal Family, as directed in the Liturgy of the Church of England. By the same Bill, however, it was enacted, that no clergyman should be permitted to officiate in England, except he had been ordained by some Bishop of the Church of England or Ireland.[1] This restriction is now removed, and any Scottish Clergyman is permitted to officiate in England, under a License from the Archbishops or Bishops in their respective dioceses. In 1804 it was agreed that the xxxix Articles should be adopted as the standard of the religious principles of the Church of Scotland: so that, from this time all candidates for Holy Orders were required to make the same subscription as in England.[2] All the right-minded clergymen of English ordination, who had been officiating in Scotland, gave in their adhesion to the Scottish Bishops. The plea of necessity no longer existed: and they were glad to give evidence of the soundness of their principles as Churchmen. Some clergymen there were, who, like the present schismatics in Scotland, continued in a state of separation: but their refusal arose, not from the love, but from the dislike of Episcopacy, since they could scarcely be deemed Episcopalians, when they were under no subjection to Bishops. The use of a portion of the Liturgy does not constitute a man or congregation Episcopalian: otherwise the Wesleyan methodists and Lady Huntingdon's party are such. Horsley expressed his opinion pointedly and strongly to a gentleman, who published a pamphlet in favour of the separation, which he sent to the Bishop: and his remarks are
Page:History of the Nonjurors.djvu/501
History of the Nonjurors.
483
