Reform? or Dissent? my full admission to the duties of a friar. The circumstances were these. Every three years a fresh provincial is elected. The man who was about to retire from the post in the province of U-,and become once more a simple friar, was advanced in life, of great stature, great beard, great learning, and great ambition. He could not be reelected, but he was anxious still to retain some portion of power by securing the post for one of his most pliable friends. He at once began to canvass for votes. Now he cajoled, now he threatened, now he promised. Here is the man, said he, who will redress all your wrongs, win for your order an unheard-of distinction, and yet himself meek, humble, and selfdenying. The plot was discovered by over-doing his part. The young friars took alarm, and presently the whole province, numbering sixty convents, was divided into two factions, the juniors against the seniors. By a most impious and perverted application of terms, the first was called the New Testament party,' and the second, the 331 Old Testament party,' I kept aloof from both. After much intriguing, the old party triumphed. It is impossible to describe the confusion that followed. The superiors lost all control. The choir was neglected at night. Monastic discipline was relaxed. Small groups were constantly assembled, talking, murmuring, and fanning the flames of discord. The only duty implicitly performed was, assembling in the refectory at meal-times. I saw SO much irreligion, by. pocrisy, corrupt passion intensified by restraint, and sheerest worldlimindedness exhibited by the Capuchins during the struggle, that I at once determined to separate myself from them. I offered myself to the Romish Missionary Society, called the Propaganda Fide, for as yet I had not seen the errors of the system itself to which I was attached. My request was granted. I passed my examination under the bishop in Universam Theologia, and was sent to my first station. An old sneer against clergymen says, they first subscribe and then examine. Now, whatever odium may belong to those who thus flagrantly violate the reasonable order of things, it is surely everyway a better course than theirs who never take the trouble to examine at all. The productions of two men lie before us, whose conduct justifies the popular taunt. Their examination has, however, led to very different issues. One holds by the thirty-nine articles, and the church as by law established, whilst crying aloud for reform in her catechism, her prayer book, and her services. The other has renounced all the ties of birth, of influence, and of association, and declared himself a Baptist! The first states his views in a pamphlet styled, The "Assent and Consent.”’* He is an Irish beneficed clergyman, and his reason for describing his own feelings or opinions is, that they are those of many of his brethren. But for this, he tells us, he would not have drawn attention to his own position. He is careful to state at the beginning, how many times, and how solemnly he declared 'his unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in the Book intituled the "Book of Common Prayer and administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremouies of the Church according to the use of the United Church of England and Ireland.' But after much study and thought he now feels dissatisfied with some things in them all. First, there is service for the baptism ⚫ Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, Fleet-street. hope that it has pleased Him to answer the prayer, and grant the requests thus made, and that you love God, and try, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to please Him; and that you love your Saviour, who shed His blood for you, and depend on Him, and what He did and suffered for your salvation. You have been taught to say, "My baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven." This is a mode of speech which you are not to understand as if it meant that absolutely and necessarily such was the case; according as you are able to understand, I will point out to you the manner in which these words may he explained, and have been explained. Suffice it to you to know, that God is willing to receive, through His dear Son Jesus Christ, all that come to Him, and that he was earnestly entreated to receive you, when you, an unconscious babe, received the sign of that new birth, which is not necessarily connected with the new birth, that sign which may be regarded us a seal and pledge of spiritual blessings only in the case of those who are indeed "born anew."' Can it be credited that any Christian man would adopt such a specious mode of teaching? And yet our author says, and says with evident pain, that while he might not use exactly these words, practically an intelligent child or young person would derive from my teaching such like views; that he would at length perceive that his teacher was not satisfied with the formulary; and that such a state of things is not desirable.' of infants. I do not think it well,' he says, that the minister should be obliged to say, respecting every child brought to him to be baptized, "Seeing, now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate ;" and afterwards on his bended knees return thanks in such words as these: We yield Thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased Thee to regenerate this infant with Thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for Thine own child by adoption, and to incorporate him into Thy holy church;"' and he does not think it well, since there is no scriptural warrant whatever for it, and no amount of ingenuity can make the words mean anything else than baptismal regeneration, in which, as a Calvinist, he does not believe. I do not think it advantageous, he proceeds, 'that every child should be taught, and required to say, in the words of the catechism, My baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven." Nor do I believe it to conduce to the interests of truth, of Christian sincerity, and godly simplicity, to address a congregation, composed of persons so baptized and so catechized, in the accents of importunate entreaty, imploring of them not to take for granted, though they have been baptized, that they are members of Christ, or children of God; and yet is not this the practice ?' To both these statements our readers will at once give their assent. But how does the Irish clergyman get over the difficulty? He shall speak for himself. I cannot allow the lambs of my flock, whom Christ hath commanded me, if I love him, to feed, to Then, as to confirmation, he boldly run any risk of being ill-ted, or by states that there is no scriptural authority mistake imbibing anything that might for it; that the order for the visita be injurious to their soul's health, and tion of the sick,' no sincere Protestant so, while I must teach them, and all of can use; that with the address of the them, the catechism, (according to my Bishop, when conferring Priest's orders, promise when made a deacon, accord--with the declaration and limitation ing to the rules of the church, as a necessary preparation for confirmation,) I must say to each of them, "My dear child, or young person, in your unconscious infancy you were dedicated to Christ, and earnest prayer was offered up for you, that God would be pleased to make you his child, and regenerate you with His Holy Spirit: I earnestly implied in the dogmatic statement, 'it is certain, by God's word, that children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved,'-with the damnatory clauses of the Athanasian creed,-with the assertion that it is evident unto all men diligently reading the Holy Scriptures, and ancient authors, that from the Which shall it be? apostles' times, there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's churchbishops, priests, and deacons'-with the law that requires the reading of the Apocrypha on certain days,-and with some things in the prayer book—he is not satisfied. It will at once be asked, how, under these circumstances, this gentleman can any longer remain in the Established Church? He anticipates the question, and replies, Either I have or have I not a right, not only legally, but in foro conscientiæ, to openly avow this dissatisfaction. If I have not this liberty, (as I cannot disguise, or consent to restrain the free and open expression of opinions connected with any religious matter,) I have no business to remain in the ministry of the united Church of England and Ireland; no right to occupy the post which should be filled by another; or to eat the bread of the Establishment. My course as au honourable man is plain, if by remaining a clergyman of the church, I practically deny the existence of the internal dissatisfaction to which I have referred.' He then goes on to show that he has this right, since he has made other declarations, taken other vows, and bound himself by other obligations. In fact, he has declared his 'assent and consent' to the thirty-nine articles, in their literal and grammatical sense, as containing the true doctrine of the Church of England, agreeable to God's word; and if two statements in that book which embodies the formularies and articles of the church should be irreconcileable, he is not compelled to acquiesce in both, however painful it may be to admit that the volume does contain these contradictions. In plain words, he stands by the Calvinistic articles against the Popish liturgy. To this ignoble condition, as he painfully feels it, is he at length reduced. What remedies does he propose? Repeal the Act of Uniformity; alter the terms of subscription; revise the prayerbook. You will then ease his conscience, and that of many others, and relieve the minds of Nonconformists who know and love them, and are offended at their use of phraseology which both think hinders the spread of the simple gospel. | 333 Pity it is that this clergyman, having gone thus far, should have suddenly halted. A further examination of the only Protestant rule of faith, the Scriptures, might have led him to renounce the headship of the sovereign over the church, the pay of the state, and indeed all the anomolies of state churchism. Nor are we without hope, that before long be will come to this. His bold declaration that he values truth more than uniformity,' warrants us in expecting his avowal of dissent at no very distant period. The other pamphlet is entitled 'A Blow at the Root of Puseyism. The writer was born and educated in the Establishment, and was for many years one of its ministers, The Gorham controversy, and the famous decision thereon, led him to iustitute a searching enquiry and careful analysis on the subject of baptism. Nearly five years were thus spent. A determined battle during this time was fought against the truth. The work was laid aside again and again; but at length truth proved mightier than error. He found that the doctrine of baptismal regeneration underlay the whole system of the faith, devotion, and practice of the English church; that the expositions of the Bishop of Exeter and his party were right, and that Mr. Gorham might be a good Christian, but was an unsound Churchman.' He found that Bishop Jeremy Taylor, and Dr. Hammond, both divines of the English church, admitted that infant baptism could not be proved by Holy Scripture, but rested on tradition alone. He acknowledges that he discovered that the Baptists had the best of the argument;' but the enquiry came-how did infant baptism originate? This led him to discover its rise in the priestly assumptions of the corrupt church of the third and fourth centuries, and to see in their true character all the hallucinations of the so-styled sacramental system. Scripture testimony had taught him that only believers should partake of the Lord's-supper, and yet in the English church he saw men of all creeds, and no creed, or addicted to every hateful vice, approaching the Lord's-table with H. T. Tresidder, Paternoster-row. 334 Scripture Illustrated.-The Herods of the New Testament. out fear. The reading of the burial | held out to rekindle his waning love for service over every person, no matter what his moral character, became an intolerable yoke. The errors of the prayer-book could no longer be ignored. The whole system of state-churchism began to appear unholy because unscriptural. What was he to do? He could not cry out, like the Irish clergyman, Repeal; alter; revise!' for he had already gone much further. Do all that the other wished, and there would yet be left untouched the unholy marriage of church and state. He felt that conformity was no longer possible for him. He resolved to dissent. Here came a hard struggle. He must give up old prejudices, old associations, old friends. He must pass by unmoved, all the tempting lures the Establishment. He must bear uo- Scripture Illustrated. THE HERODS OF THE NEW This man is known in history as Herod TESTAMENT. FOUR Herods are mentioned in the New Testament. A reference to the events with which each one is associated, will help us to distinguish them. Herod the Great, also called Antipater, the first Herod of the name, and the founder of the Herodian family, decreed the massacre of the babes in Bethlehem. Matthew styles him' Herod the king.' The murder of his wife Mariamne, and of his two sons Alexander and Aristobulus, place him in the foremost rank of those tyrants whose names blacken the page of history. As a vain attempt to set aside the purposes of God, the massacre at Bethlehem affords a startling instance of the awful follies to which the acutest and most politic rulers may be tempted by the love of empire. The second Herod beheaded John the Baptist. He is called 'the tetrarch' by the Evangelists Matthew and Luke; and was the man who formed an unholy alliance with Herodias, his brother Philip's wife; aroused the ire of his father-in-law Antipas, and was the son of Herod the ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA. Aretas; and ended bis days in exile. THE terror of Ananias is a specimen Wayside Gleanings.-Sympathy of Christ. of the terror wherewith the ungodly shall be struck in the judgment, without being bereft of life, as he was. You may ask why so heavy a punishment and so sudden a death was inflicted at this time of the New Testament which was so full of grace? Compare John ix. 55, where Jesus rebukes John for desiring fire from beaven, 'The Son of man is come not to destroy men's lives, but to save them. The answer is: (1) The disciples of their own accord had demanded fire to fall on the Samaritans ; whereas in this case the Holy Spirit directs Peter. (2) Jesus, in his then existing state of humiliation, had been unknown to the Samaritans, and was afterwards to be preached unto them: Ananias and Sapphira had most evidently known the glory of Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit, and bad had most abundant means of salvation afforded them. (3) Ananias and Sapphira sinned most heinously, most unscrupulously, and by mutual consent, and suddenly filled up the measure of their sin. (4) At the beginning of that dispensation, a salutary example was given in their cases to many, and fear was the result of it. (5) What was added to the severity of the punishment in respect to the body, may have been taken off from it in respect to the soul.-Bengel. MOSES ON PISGAH. THE general account leaves no doubt, says Stanley, that the place described as the top of Nebo is some elevation immediately over the last stage of the Jordan. Northward, his eye turned to 'all the land of Gilead,' containing the same eastern barrier as that on which 335 he himself stood, till it ended, far beyond his sight, in Dan. Westward, there were on the northern horizon, the distant hills of all Naphtali.' Coming nearer, was the land of Ephraim and Manasseh.' Immediately opposite, was all the land of Judah;' beyond which, though unseen, lay the utmost sea' and the desert of the south'— Jerusalem itself, in all probability, distinctly visible through the opening of the descent to Jericho. These were the four great masses of the future inheritance of the people, on which the narrative fixes our attention. mediately below him was the 'round' Imof the plain of Jericho, with its oasis of palm trees, and far away on his left, though hardly visible, the last inhabited spot before the great desertZoar. It was a view, doubtless, which in its full extent was to be imagined rather than actually seen. respect the Pisgah prospect is a striking In this illustration of all the prophetic visions of the sacred writings. The foreground of the picture alone was clearly discernible; its dim distances were to be supplied by what was beyond, though suggested by what was within, the actual prospect of the seer. But between him and that 'good land' the deep valley of the Jordan intervened. So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord.' In language less simple, but hardly less touching, the Jewish historian adds'As he was bidding farewell to Eleazer and Joshua, whilst he was talking with them, a cloud suddenly stood over him, and he vanished in a ravine,' (Josephus Antiq. iv. viii. 49) He died in the mount whither he had gone up, and he his brother had died on mount Hor, was gathered unto his people, as Aaron and was gathered to his people.' ་ the nerves run into the brain. The head is the centre of the nervous system. Beneath that palatial dome the soul dwells; and by the nerves which run out from that centre she |