party.) Some said he was a Wesleyan minister from Stalybridge, others that he was a clergyman, and some that he was a Mormonite. In fact nobody could give a definite answer, but what one said another contradicted. Now then does this not look like an 'infidel dodge'? Had this gentleman been indeed a minister, he would have shown himself to the minister in Hyde of the sect to which he belonged. But he did no such thing, for he came and departed the same 'unknown.' If he had come from any town or city near Hyde, he would most certainly have been known. Now if he came from a great distance I ask, 1. How would he know that Mr. Barker was lecturing at Hyde. 2. If he had known, what induced him to come so long a way, merely to meet a "braggart"? I told you that all he had said was "moonshine" and I tell you so again. This old gentleman was so good as to contradict himself no less than five times in his first speech, so you see he gave Mr Barker every advantage. "But at the close of the old gentleman's speech Mr Barker asked the chairman who he was.' Granted that he did, that does not alter my belief that if any one knew who he was, Mr. B. did. But the chairman will perhaps say that would be dissimulation So it would, but Joseph is used to it. Did he not when a "Methodist preacher, repeatedly give to Conference a solemn confession of faith in doctrines" which he afterwards tells us he did not at that time believe? If he would deceive then, I cannot trust him now. But Willis Knowles appears to be quite incensed that I did not give my "real name and proper address." Does imagine that every body is as fond of notoriety as himself? If he does he is simply mistaken. He appears to be afraid the people wont know it is he that has written to the "Defender" and so he signs his full name. Does Mr. Barker always sign his real name to what he writes ? Did he not write six anonymous letters in praise of himself to the Rev. W. Cooke in which he declared that "if there was in the wide universe of souls, a man who had acted more guilelessly, and more disinterestedly than Mr. B. had done, he hoped God would grant him the unutterable bliss to see that man?" This piece of egotism was signed A Christian' (i.e. J. Barker). If witholding my real name be a 'dodge,' will the chairman please to tell me what he calls the case of Joseph Barker just narrated?

I remain,

April, 1855.

Yours Respectfully,

FAIRPLAY.

NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.

Received. Willis Knowles; Observer, Liverpool; J. B., Hyde.

Meagreness of Infidel Argument, Note to "Mons" on the Atonement, and "Is Christianity a religion of Fear" unavoidably left to our next.

The real names and addresses of correspondents required, though not for publication. The Editor does not undertake to return rejected communications.

Our correspondents in different places will do us service by giving us prompt information of what goes on in their localities.

Communications and works for review to be addressed to the Editor, 50, Grainger Street, Newcastle-on-Tyne, either direct, or through the publishers.

London: HOULSTON & STONEMAN, 65, Paternoster Row.

AND ALL BOOKSELLERS.

Hunter & Co., Printers, Grainger Street, Newcastle-on-Tyne.

THE DEFENDER :

a Weekly Magazine,

OF CHRISTIAN EXPOSITION AND ADVOCACY.

Who knows not that truth is strong, next to the Almighty; she needs no policies, nor stratagems, nor licensings to make her victorious, those are the shifts and the defences that error uses against her power.-MILTON.

Before proceeding more fully to the proof of our position that "Christianity is a religion of love;" with hope of affording a little instruction to our opponents, we shall notice some of the other passages which "James quotes to prove that Christianity is not what we represent it. He says, In the New Testament the warm palaces of hell are used as much to alarm the reader, as the cooler and pleasanter ones of heaven to allure him.” Had he written the whole truth, he would have said that while there are threatenings to alarm, and hopes to allure, there are found, far more abundantly, revelations of pure, disinterested, matchless love, fitted to melt and to win.

To prove that Christians are not, even in the New Testament, regarded as brethren and equals, he says that "saints" then plentifully abounded and are referred to in every epistle. Now this is either a slip of the pen, or it shows deplorable ignorance. It is true that saints are spoken of in every epistle; but who are the saints? Not a peculiar class of people in the church, exercising authority over others, but the members of the church themselves. Though used by many now as a term of reproach, the word "saint," means a sanctified, that is, a holy, loving, moral, true, and godkę, person. "Bishops are mentioned," he says. Yes; but he ought to

No. 17, Vol. 1.

know that the Greek word rendered "bishop means overseer, and he should have quoted the passages where their duties are stated, and especially, 1 Pet. 5. 2:-"Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock." But "John in his second epistle calls himself an elder." What then? Does that prove that he was a spiritual despot? "Paul speaks of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers being appointed by Christ." Well; and were they not necessary, and useful, in their respective spheres, for the establishment and growth of the church. And is any evidence adduced to prove that they were authorized to assume a supremacy over the conscience which is the prerogative of heaven alone. "Paul speaks of his authority." What then? If he had authority, and proved that he had authority from God in the establishment of the church, why should he not say it? Does such a claim prove that he did not cherish the true spirit of brotherhood? Do secularist advocates, delegates, and presidents never seek, never possess any authority? And why should not Paul, in appealing to the Corinthian Church, remind them that in earnest and self-denying labour he was not behind any of his brethren? The statement of such a fact in a proper spirit, and with a proper motive, was not "bragging." Are the helpers and benefactors of our race worthy of no respect? But, then, the case of Titus :-" And his inward affection is more abundant toward you, whilst he remembered the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him." Now our secularist friend, "James," should have read the context and studied the facts. Grievous sin had been permitted in the Corinthian Church, which Paul felt it his duty faithfully and solemnly to rebuke. Titus had gone to see that the church had been brought to a state of true and deep contrition, and of obedience to God, in removing from among them the person that had done wrong. It must have been a matter of rejoicing to every rightthinking, honourable, and pure man that the people received Titus not with self-complacent pride, or with haughty indifference, but with fear and trembling, on account of their moral offence, and with a readiness to do right; and if secularists were the friends of morality, they too would rejoice as well as Paul. In none of these passages, then, do we find anything inconsistent with the sentiment that Christianity gives no sanction to priestly arrogance, but everywhere breathes the spirit of real brotherhood and true equality.

But our critic goes on, "There is something of the priest and the superiors in passages like these:-'If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema Maranatha.' As we have said before, sc say I now again, if any man preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.'" How often will it be necessary to tell our secular friends that the anathema was just the form of Jewish excommunication, and to ask what reason they have to complain that Christian' churches were not allowed to sanction the presence and teaching among them of persons who denied the very bases and fundamentals of Christianity, and who were so destitute of all right feeling as to regard with no real affection, the Benefactor and Saviour of the world. For ourselves, we

do not envy the moral taste and spiritual perception of the man, who can read the history of Jesus of Nazareth without having his sympathies stirred, and his gratitude awakened. A want of love to the meek, loving, noble, Divine Redeemer of the world we cannot but regard as an unmoral condition of soul, and moral accursedness must therefore rest upon it.

Then follows the oft-quoted passage from James-"The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much," and context, to prove that the elder took precedence of doctors, and that prayer was deemed more potent than medicine when any one was sick. But means had to be used for the restoration of the sick;-" anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord;" and although our critic tells us that the passage plainly affirms that prayer had to save the sick, he does not and cannot prove that it teaches, that prayer without the use of appropriate means would restore him to health. Prayer without effort, where effort can be put forth for the attainment of the end desired, is only presumption. "The service of humanity," our critic says, 66 can receive little or no attention from those who take no anxious thought for the morrow." The service of humanity has always received most attention from the men who have been least anxious about their own comfort, ease, and aggrandisement; and whom solicitude about their future has not crushed. The man who is ever trembling about the future will never do much for his race.

HEATHENISM AT HOME.

Continued from p. 253.

The lowest shade of society is penetrated but by a very few. We consequently prize high those records which the few give us, of their experience and observation. The work now before us lifts up the veil, and reveals the blight spots upon our highly lauded English society. We have heathenism at our very doors.

66

“It has been a favourite phrase with some minds, to term the Established "Church, the church of the poor, and with others to speak of Methodism as "the poor man's religion, but the fact is-Heathenism is the poor "man's religion, in the metropolis." Intro. p. 14. As a natural consequence to absence of the religion, we find an absence of all that adorns humanity, and the place supplied with misery, wretchedness, and woe. Many of our readers are no doubt familiar, with the densely-peopled dirty, confused, hudded locality which stretches around the Middlesex Sessions "House. Many of them have, we doubt not, been bewildered amid the dingy, swarming alleys, crowded with tattered, sodden-looking women, and hulking, unwashed men, clustering around the doors of low-browed public "houses, or seated by dingy unwindowed shops, frowsy with piles of dusty ricketty rubbish, or reeking with the odour of coarse food; lumps "of carrion-like meat simmering in greasy pans, and brown crusty-looking "morsels of fish, still gluey with the oil in which they have been fried." "-In Clerkenwell there is grovelling, staring poverty. In Clerkenwell broods "the darkness of utter ignorance. In its lanes and alleys the lowest debauch "the coarsest enjoyment, the most infuriate passions, the most unrestrained vice, 66 roar, and riot."-p. 2. It was in this district that Mr. Vanderkiste spent his labours. Continually in the midst of fever and infectious disorders, breathing an atmosphere of filth and dirt, and at the time of the dreaded cholera

66

nearly falling a victim to that disease, he was sustained by the good hand of his God upon him for six long years." p. 3.

66

66

We have heard and felt much of late of heroic deeds of valour which have been performed by our countrymen on a foreign shore, but we hold that the heroism of the battle field, with all its excitements, is not to be compared with the brave spirit that will encounter these obstacles, out of pure love to the souls and bodies of the outcast. Relinquishing more remunerative occupation, our narrator states that "he has never for one moment regretted the undertaking." p. 4. The seed of the kingdom sown in such an unpromising field, was not all sown in vain. Very many were brought to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ as their Redeemer, and experienced the blessedness which accrues to all who receive the gladsome story of mercy. Passing over the chapter descriptive of the Roman Catholic population, we pause to make an extract or two from the chapter upon "the professedly infidel population." Speaking of the better educated portion, he states :-" Very little credit for sincerity can be 'given, I apprehend-and I speak from actual observation-to such infidels as possessing secular knowledge, have really enquired into the Evidences of Christianity. I believe such professed infidelity to be generally a mask-but "to continue the figure of speech, this mask, this iron mask, we remember may "be worn until the features are moulded into its form. The fearful denuncia"tion in 2 Thes., ii. 10, 11, is then fulfilled." p. 89. At the same time Mr. V. believes there is much infidelity among the working classes. "It lurks in the heart a canker worm, that pursues noiselessly the destruction of all right principle and virtue." One Sunday morning after speaking in the open air in Victoria Park, Mr. V. commenced distributing tracts, and presented one to a young man who had been listening. "He was dirty, unwashed, "unshaven, and looked very dissipated and miserable. I made some remark on the importance of religion, on which his eyes became moistened with "I feel," said he, "in a dreadful state of mind. I came out of "the 'Blind Beggar' pointing to a public house hard by, when they turned out "for Church time, and I stopped to listen to you, and now I feel wretched and miserable. I was not always," said he, pointing to his dirty and dissipated appearance, as you see me on the Sabbath Day."-p. 95. The young man had been formerly a member of the Wesleyan Chapel, but fell into temptation through companionship with sceptical individuals, and gradually relapsed into the lost and degraded condition described. A year passed on, and Mr. V. had not seen his hearer again, "when one week evening, being in the east of London, I stepped into the place of worship where the party who forms the subject of this anecdote had informed me he was once a member. After the service, on rising to leave, I observed a well dressed young person making his way towards me, who was perfectly unknown to me, but who shook me heartily by the hand, and appeared much pleased, when he reminded me of our meeting at Mile End Gate, I at once recognized him-but how changed! In the welldressed, neatly trimmed, happy, and healthy-looking person who stood before me, I might well be excused for not remembering the besmeared sot, pipe in hand, unshaved, dirty, and haggard, almost in tatters, issuing from a publichouse, on the Sabbath Day, surrounded by vile and debauched companionsbut so it was. God had thrown him in my path, and applied the Scriptures with power to his heart. He had found his way back that very evening to that ancient sanctuary,-to the seat where his mother had sat before him, and the Lord Jesus there spoke forgiveness to the heart of this troubled wanderer from his fold." There is also an instance given of the conversion of a member of the head families of the Gipsies, who had long professed infidel principles. Although totally uneducated, he possessed considerable shrewdness, and I sometimes was somewhat startled by his addressing me thus: 'Have you seen

"tears.

66