Whose presence makes the tumult of this world
Pass like a fleeting breeze, and through the soul
Breathes the still ether of a loftier climate!

• Priest. Many sweet faces have I seen in death,
But never one like this. Death beautifies
Even the stern face of guilt, and I have seen
The troubled countenance of a sinful man
Breath'd over, soon as life had pass'd away,
With a soft delicate shade,-as from the wing
Of Innocence returning to shed tears
Over the being she had lov'd in youth.
But here lies perfect beauty! her meek face
Free as that child's from any touch of sin,

Yet shining with that loftier sanctity

That holds communion with the promis'd heavens.' p. 101, 102.

There is a little church-yard on the side
Of a low hill, that hangs o'er Rydal-lake,

Behind the house where Magdalene was born.
Most beautiful it is; a vernal glade

Enclos'd with wooded rocks! where a few graves
Lie shelter'd, sleeping in eternal calm.

Go thither when you will, and that green spot
Is bright with sunshine. There they hop'd to lie!
And there they often spoke to Magdalene
Of their own dying day. For death put on
The countenance of an angel in the place
Which he had sanctified. I see the spot
Which they had chosen for their sleep-but far,
O far away from that sweet sanctuary

They rest, and all its depth of sunny calm.

Methinks my Magdalene never dare return

To her native cottage.' p. 105.

We hope that our town-readers sometimes feel with Wilmot.

How sweetly have I felt the evening-calm

Come o'er the tumult of the busy day

In a great city! when the silent stars

Stole out so gladsome through the dark-blue heavens,

All undisturb'd by any restless noise

Sent from the domes and spires that lay beneath

Hush'd as the clouds of night.' p. 117.

One picture from the land of lakes and mountains, and we

close our quotations.

'Sweet Rydal lake!

Am I again to visit thee? to hear

Thy glad waves murmuring all around my soul?
'Isabel. Methinks I see us in a cheerful groupe
Walking along the margin of the bay

Where our lone summer-house

1

Sweet

mossy cell?

• Magd.
So cool-so shady-silent and compos'd!
A constant evening full of gentle dreams!
Where joy was felt like sadness, and our grief
A melancholy pleasant to be borne.

Hath the green linnet built her nest this spring
In her own rose-bush near the quiet door?
Bright solitary bird! she oft will miss

Her human friends: Our orchard now must be

A wilderness of sweets, by none belov❜d.

• Isabel. One blessed week would soon restore its beauty, Were we at home. Nature can work no wrong.

The very weeds how lovely! the confusion

Doth speak of breezes, sunshine, and the dew.

Magd. I hear the murmuring of a thousand bees

In that bright odorous honeysuckle wall

That once enclos'd the happiest family
That ever liv'd beneath the blessed skies.
Where is that family now? O Isabel,
I feel my soul descending to the grave,
And all these loveliest rural images

Fade, like waves breaking on a dreary shore.

• Isabel. Even now I see a stream of sunshine bathing The bright moss-roses round our parlour window!

Oh! were we sitting in that room once more!

'Magd. 'Twould seem inhuman to be happy there And both my parents dead. How could I walk

On what I used to call my father's walk,

He in his grave! or look upon that tree
Each year so full of blossoms or of fruit
Planted by my mother, and her holy name
Graven on its stem by mine own infant hands!

Isabel. It would be haunted, but most holy ground.' p. 76.. Mr. W.'s verse, is in general very sweet: there is, however, one circumstance, in regard to which his ear seems strangely defective. It was a custom of our old dramatic writers, which has been copied by those who have been called the Lake poets, to introduce superfluous short syllables into their verse;-learnedly speaking, introduce the anapest in lieu of the iambus. Thus Shakspeare:

to

O my poor brother! ănd so perchance may he be.'
My heart bleeds

To think o' the teen that I have turn'd you to.'

It did remain

'I' the midst o' the body, idle and inactive.'

And Southey:

'King Owen's name

• Shall live I' the after-world without a blot."

This produces a variety to our ears highly agreeable. Mr. Wilson, however, seems to us quite to mistake the matter, in introducing this foot continually in the second place, after a trochee in the first.

• Mingling i' the train of joy and happiness."

• Laughing mid the flowers. O many a slow-paced hearse
Waiting for the priest, then stretch'd within his shroud.'

To our ears these lines are neither more nor less than prose. Of the miscellaneous pieces in the volume we take no notice, as containing nothing very particular. They are, in general, too lengthy.

Mr. Wilson has fine powers. We wish he could find fitter subjects whereupon to exercise them, than the Isle of Palms, and the City of the Plague.

Art. VI. The Doctrine of the Church of England upon the Efficacy of Baptism vindicated from Misrepresentation. By Richard Laurence, LL.D. Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, &c. 8vo. pp. 176. Price 5s. Oxford, at the University Press, for the Author, 1816.

IF in our review of the pamphlets on the present controversy respecting the efficacy of Baptism, any pretence were afforded for charging us with unfairness in our statement of the question as matter of fact, we should conceive that the present publication would completely silence every such objection, and sweep away all hypothetical explanations of the language of the Church of England on the subject. Dr. Laurence commences his vindication, with the following preliminary remarks.

It may perhaps appear singular, that a controversy should still exist respecting the true sense of certain passages in the Baptismal Services of our Church, after a lapse of more than two centuries from the period of their original compilation; particularly as the language in which they are expressed seems to have been studiously adapted to popular comprehension and instruction. But this appearance of singularity ceases, when we recollect the natural anxiety of every writer upon the subject to prove, that the doctrine of the Church to which he professes attachment, and his own private opinion, perfectly coincide. Yet, ought this anxiety always to be indulged? Private opinion, it is indeed true, no man can control; but every man may control the public display of it: and surely when its conformity with the doctrine of the Church cannot be clearly and satisfactorily demonstrated, concealment is preferable to disclosure, and silence to justification. To support an ideal conformity by a line of argument evidently strained and distorted, may suit the obliquities of party spirit, but can never promote truth, and produce conviction."

Dr. Laurence deprecates dragging Scripture into the con'test.' 'The true question at issue,' he confesses, is

Not what Scripture, but what the Church of England, has inculcated upon the subject. Besides, to commence with ascertaining the precise sense of Scripture upon it is to commence with a bias on the mind, which must unavoidably influence subsequent investigation. I shall not, I am persuaded, be misrepresented as entertaining the slightest doubt respecting the conformity of the doctrine of our Church with Scripture; because it is evident, that I am only contending for the propriety of first deciding what the doctrine of our Church really is, before any attempt be made either to establish or refute that doctrine by the Word of God.'

This method we adopted; and it is utterly surprising that any insidious design should be charged on so natural and direct a manner of treating the subject. We really cannot help the coineidence of our testimony in support of the fact, with that of men from whom we differ very widely in doctrine. Suppose that an orthodox Protestant Dissenter, and a philosophical deist, were separately to urge a similar objection to some part of the constitution of the hierarchy, would it necessarily follow, that the objection proceeding from individuals of so different characters, must be unreasonable, or that there was any collusion between the parties? As Dissenters, we feel called upon to take every proper occasion of illustrating the reasonableness of our objections to the Established Church. Among these objections, that to which the present controversy has given accidental prominency, Mr. Scott and Mr. Bugg would allow to be valid, but if the basis on which it rests is disputed. Dr. Laurence on the other side establishes its truth, though he may not be disposed to concede its solidity. In any other case, the conclusion would be deemed obvious and irresistible.

Dr. Laurence considers the doctrine held by the Evangelical Clergy, upon the subject of Baptism, as founded upon Calvinistic principles, and he charges them with holding generally the tenets of Calvinism. Dr. Laurence, however, must know, that the doctrinal sentiments of that great Reformer, so far as respects the objectionable peculiarities of his system relative to Predestination, are not held by any modern Calvinists. The term Calvinistic is a very convenient weapon in controversial warfare, inasmuch as it can be made at once to assert a truth, and to convey a misrepresentation. Hence arises the difficulty of adjusting the dispute, whether the Articles of the Church of England are, or are not, Calvinistic. In the usual acceptation of the term they undoubtedly are Calvinistic, for they expressly teach the doctrines which Calvin held in common with the other Reformers, and they are we believe in no respect at variance with his opinions. But inasmuch as they maintain a guarded silence on other points of doctrine which belong to the Calvinistic system, they cannot with strict propriety be termed

by way of distinction, Calvinistic. That term, indeed, has usually been understood to imply a conformity to Calvin's authority, not merely in respect of doctrine, but also of ecclesiastical discipline. It is on this account that the name of Calvin has in this country been so unpopular with the champions of episcopacy; and nothing therefore can be more absurd, than to apply the term Calvinistic to the Evangelical Clergy, merely because they believe in the doctrine of the Articles of their own Church on the subject of Predestination. Is it not natural that they should prefer a general to a sectarian denomination,' when they know the offensive associations which are connected with the phrase? Is it fair, then, in a brother Episcopalian, to taunt them with borrowing their theological notions from a Presbyterian doctor? The fact is, that the Evangelical Clergy are for the most part disinclined to explore the depths of systematic theology; they are anxious to deduce their opinions from the Bible. Hence arises their unwillingness to admit of some of the doctrines of the Church of England.

6

Our Author goes the full length of our representation as to the importance of the present question, in its bearings on other doctrinal points: he considers it as involving the very nature and extent of Divine election. The Church of England, he conceives, teaches, that all baptized infants and all duly prepared 'adults are indiscriminately elected in Christ out of mankind,’— and that the Divine election is not an absolute but a condi'tional or contingent election.'

A restoration to Divine favour, comprehending the remission of sin and adoption into the number of the elect, is, I apprehend, uni, formly represented in our Liturgy, as the inseparable concomitant of Regeneration.' (id est, Baptism) p. 10.

An indiscriminate election,' a contingent choice, might seem to border too closely on contradiction, were it not obvious that the position the terms are designed to convey, is purely negative: the purpose for which they are employed, is, not to explain, but to explain away the doctrine of Scripture. Dr. Laurence would indeed find it difficult to prove that the Church of England teaches, totidem verbis, the doctrine of an indiscriminate and contingent election: but he is quite right if he means to assert that the Liturgy is constructed upon the supposition that all baptized infants and all duly prepared adults are of the number of the elect;' and that nothing short of this is necessarily implied in its language. The Church of England has only borrowed this phraseology from the Church of Rome, in which all the terms employed by the writers of the New Testament to express a spiritual change or a moral relation, are reduced to the deadness of the letter which killeth', or transmuted into a sense simply ecclesiastical or secular. Election is