Mr. Perowne denounces the application which I have made of the passage of Scripture, which I quoted for the purpose of illustration. “I did not before know,” says he, “that ‘forms of ecclesiastical government,’ and ‘meat and drink’ were synonimous terms.” And what of that? There are many things which Mr. Perowne does not know. He does not know, for instance, how to spell _synonymous_, and until he has learned that, I shall not undertake to instruct him in higher matters. Several of the extracts which I have made, from the observations in this wretched pamphlet, place the writer of them in a most unfortunate predicament. He either believes that his interpretations of my language are the true meaning, or he does not so believe. In the former case, his “Observations” manifest a want of sense; in the latter case, a want of honesty. It is impossible to go through his pamphlet without lamenting over the condition of a church which is compelled to submit to such incompetent or unprincipled instructors. What must be the follies or fanaticism of disciples who are taught to explain passages of Scripture on the principles on which “this true son of the church” has explained my Letter. This, however, is a subject on which we are not left to mere conjecture. In the volume which contains some of the “Sermons” with which Mr. Perowne has edified his flock, he teaches that Jesus Christ is shortly coming in person to reign in Jerusalem—that the saints will be raised from the dead, at least a thousand years before the general resurrection, for the purpose of reigning together with Christ—that Jerusalem will be to them “what Windsor castle is to our king and his family”—and that they will have “various enjoyments through the medium of the senses,” “meat and drink” included. He also declares, “I have said nothing of the new division of the Holy land, of the rebuilding of the Temple, or of the re-institution of the Temple service; THOUGH ALL THIS WILL CERTAINLY TAKE PLACE!!” There now. Let any Irvingite or Swedenborgian beat that if he can. And let all Dissenters take joyfully the abuse which Mr. Perowne has heaped upon them, so long as the law tolerates them in leaving St. John’s Maddermarket, in order to be instructed by those who “understand what they say, and whereof they affirm.” I have now done with “The Reverend John Perowne, Rector of St. John’s Maddermarket, Norwich.” I have examined his reasonings. I have corrected his mistakes. I have exposed his misrepresentations. In so doing I have endeavoured to comply with the motto which he has inserted in his title page, and to “MARK them which cause divisions and offences;” and I now retire from the study of his “Observations,” deeply impressed with the conviction, that fallen indeed must that cause be, which either needs, or accepts such a defender. * * * * * THE END. * * * * *