that he had at length taken the steps which ought to have been taken before he penned such a composition, and gone to his own place. Still, the fact remains, that it was the beneficed Clergyman who wrote and published the book, and that so he continued to be till he himself terminated the connexion. For the Church itself, such a fact, especially when it is recollected that it is anything but a solitary one, and is but the development of widelyspread and greatly-dominant principles, is most ominous. Who can tell what the end shall be, if the progress be allowed to continue?

If we rightly understand the religious founders of the Anglican Church, they intended to prepare for the people of this country a Protestant Establishment. And in its great doctrines, as unmistakeably set forth, such it was. But, as we said at the beginning, an influence which they could not control, but which they bitterly lamented, not only prevented them from making it all that they desired, but succeeded in the introduction of many things which were the germs of errors to which they were utterly opposed. It is evident, especially from the Zurich letters lately published by the Parker Society, that not even the nonconforming Puritans were more grieved at this, than were the leading conformists. It is equally evident, too, that the Puritans were the more clear and far-seeing of the two parties. The Puritans adopted Principiis obsta as their rule. The conformists— from good principles, we believe, but we now see that they were carried to a mistaken extent-yielded, hoping that better times would come. But these better times never came. Power had been conceded to evil, and evil obtained an increasing preponderance, and times grew worse and worse, so that it at length appears as if, after long struggling, the principles of which the pious Reformers complained, had become, in the place of those which they introduced, the actual, reigning principles of the living Church. A century ago, by the general labours of John Wesley, and most particularly by the publication of his "Appeals," the Church was called back to the principles of the Reformation, the grand principles of the Gospel. But the call, solemn and providential as it was, was not obeyed. Methodism, so called, obtained, indeed, an introduction, and for a time the blessing of truth seemed to be with it. But another mistake was committed,-if we may judge from its most evident results, a mistake of no ordinary character. Whether from a wish to conciliate their opponents, and to show that they could be good Churchmen while they were decided evangelists, its professors gave the whole weight of their influence to the maintainers of that externalism that constitutes essential Popery. They said, in effect," Much as we value truth, we value exclusive Episcopacy still more; and by whomsoever that truth is held, if held unconnected with Episcopacy, we refuse to acknowledge them as brethren." High Churchism, therefore, received undivided support. The Popery of the Church was upheld equally by those who asserted it, and those who, in preaching, repudiated it; while evangelism was only supported by its own friends, their opponents receiving all concessions with haughty silence, sometimes not with that, and on no occasion, in no manner, reciprocating the aid which they received. The consequences might have been foreseen. Evangelism could not maintain its ground in such a position. Neither has it. They were deficient in loyalty to truth and love. They ministered a decided support to the evils which were preying on the vitals of the Establishment. And what are they now? Compare their situation and prospects a single generation ago, with their situation and prospects now. All this is matter of history; and it is now most undeniable matter of fact, that whatever be the external aspect of

strict Puseyism, the principles held by that party are now the principles of the living Church. Mr. Newman is gone to Rome, and Dr. Pusey may be regarded as impendent; but the Bishop of Exeter still remains. The poet Faber may have left; but the poet Lord John Manners is still a model of a good Churchman. The palmy days of Wilberforce and Legh Richmond are gone, and evangelism in the Church presents the painful appearance of the " sere and yellow leaf" of the days in which the chief character of autumn is that of the precursor of winter. "And what will ye do in the end thereof?"

Those who have defended the evangelism of the Church, and the Church as evangelical, and spoken highly of her services as understood and performed in an evangelical light and spirit, are, as we think, obligated to take a very different ground, now that the Popery left in the Church has become its overruling and characteristic power. They must speak of the Church, not as it appears to them, and as, in their very contracted limits, it may be, but as it is an instrument in the hands of others, moulded and employed by them for their own, and most anti-evangelical, purposes. Of the sincerity of their attachment we entertain no doubt. We can understand how a Wilberforce would profit by services, to which he brought his own enlightened piety, and how a Richmond or a Wilson (not to mention other honoured names) would speak from the pulpit under the influence of the truth which he took with him there. But to rest here is an evasion of the question. It is to argue from a small and only tolerated part, to a large, and opposite, and triumphing whole. They should view the case as history will view it, and speak of it as history will speak of it. What sort of instructions would be those of the author of Sir Lancelot? They are not soul-saving and yet, such as are of a different character are only the occasional exception. And if Protestantism be true, what is the opposing doctrine but poison, rank, dangerous poison? The highest allegiance is due to Christ, and to his truth; and if, by praising a mixed system, they bring others to confound together truth and error, and aid in strengthening and perpetuating the last, they may be sure, both that they have sinned against the Lord, and that their sin shall find them out. The light kindled by the martyred-yes; the martyred, not the mistakenly obstinate, and weakly vain-glorious-Ridleys and Latimers of a former age, shall indeed continue to burn, nor shall earth and hell, with all the craft and power of their combined efforts, be able to extinguish it. But on what candlestick? Or where? The golden candlestick is no fixed heir-loom. It may be removed out of his place. And such removal is one of the explicit threatenings of the living and Almighty Head of the church.

Even to attempt prognostication of the future is a task in which we dare not engage. It belongs to Him on whose shoulder is the government, to order his own kingdom, and to establish it with judgment and with justice. But he himself strongly censures all who are unobservant of the signs of the times. And these, undeniably, are alarmingly portentous. If among the masses there be much gross ignorance and profanity, among the wise, and the disputers of the world, there is much unbelieving latitudinarianism. And while such as these are to the utmost of their power promoting the secular and public influence of Popery, its essential principles are defended and urged in what ought to be Protestant pulpits. The enemy is coming in with a flood of such force, that by no ordinary methods can he be withstood: the Spirit of the Lord must lift up a standard against him. But ordinary methods must be employed with extraordinary diligence and zeal. The

whole counsel of God must be declared. Christian people must be warned of the danger of error, and be plainly and earnestly taught that they are under a solemn obligation to "cease to hear the instruction," by whomsoever delivered, "that causeth to err from the words of knowledge." Bigotry, indeed, is not to be combated by bigotry: and there are warnings that should be so delivered as to manifest that the painful duty is performed with sorrow, not with anger. But with all fidelity and distinctness should it be declared that "if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch;" and that therefore it is the bounden duty of professing Christians to "take heed wHAT they hear," and to "beware of false prophets." All churches should mark the history of the Anglican Church with holy fear. The evils from which she has now so much to dread, all issue from the same source. They would never have existed in any triumphant form, had the divine call to the ministry been practically maintained. The Holy Spirit, thus honoured, would have endued his servants with power, and existing defects would have been gradually supplied, existing evils gradually subdued and removed. If we may not say that, of all ecclesiastical questions, this is the primary one, at least we may say that it is an essential, indispensable portion of that which is so. The church is a multitude called forth, and thus collected. Its instrumental origin is this call; and this implies not only what is enunciated, that is, the truth, but also, that which enunciates, that is, the ministry. And Christ gives both. As essential to all church existence, therefore, analytically and historically speaking, we have a ministry constituted by the legislative will of Christ, and by the inward movement of the Holy Spirit, and the truth which by that ministry is declared, for the salvation of men. To this great first principle must we now recur, and judge of all churches, and of all church-movements, by its application. There must be, by a divinely-called ministry, a faithful delivery of that truth which certainly, but exclusively, the power of God unto salvation. Every professing church departing from this, departs from that essential church order which our Lord Christ has sovereignly established, and is to be considered as a church only in conventional courteousThere must be no hesitation, no want of explicitness, in declaring this. By nothing else can the torrent of Popery be rolled back. A merely professional ministry, under any regimen, Episcopal, or any other form, is a powerless one. Wherever it exists, there is a blight. So far from being an exclusive ministry, it is, Christianly speaking, no ministry at all. With holy jealousy must the practice be guarded, and with solemn fidelity must the doctrine be preached. In times like these, only in strict duty can safety be found.

ness.

And here is our comfort, amidst so much as there is to justify apprehension. The very terms of the warning (which, from its scriptural position, plainly belongs to the later ages of the visible Christian church) imply an encouraging promise to the obedient: "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Separation from real Popery is here imperatively commanded. Babylon is doomed; and as sure as the word of prophecy is true, so sure is it that all churches and nations, who choose, by the adoption of her principles, or by supporting her in that usurped dominion whereby she makes merchandise of the "souls of men," to be partakers of her sins, shall likewise receive of her plagues. But from these, her faithful opponents, by that same Providence which prepared Pella as a refuge for the disciples from the awful horrors of stormed and sacked Jerusalem, shall be mercifully exempted.

VOL. III.-FOURTH SERIES.

4 M

Only let them be wary as well as active. The traffickers in "souls of men" are not notorious for honest dealing. Like other "slavers," they carry with them flags of all sorts, and always hoist the one which seems most likely to secure the free prosecution of their voyage. But, on whatever pretext they ask for acknowledgment and aid, their object never varies, -the promotion of their own interests, and the establishment of their Church on the ruins of all others. Here, then, let us rest. "These shall make war upon the Lamb; but the Lamb shall overcome them, for he is King of kings, and Lord of lords; and they that are with Him"-here are the true notes of the true church-"are CALLED, AND CHOSEN, AND FAITHFUL."

THE HOUSEHOLDS OF SCOTLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.

Ar this period Ray found the houses of the common people in the country and villages in the south of Scotland to be pitiful cots, built of stone, and covered with turf, having but one room, many of them had no chimneys, and the windows were very small holes, not glazed. At Douglas there was scarce a house that could keep a man dry in a shower of rain; in the principal towns the fronts of the houses were made with fir-boards, nailed one over another, in which were round holes or windows to put out their heads. In the best houses, even in the King's palace, the windows were not glazed throughout, but the upper part only. The lower half had two wooden shuts or folds, to open at pleasure, and admit the fresh air. The noble and the very wealthy had tapestry and damask, and wainscot linings, though less costly perhaps than what were seen in the houses of persons of the same rank in England. The gentry hung their best rooms with damask, or with painted leather, ornamented with grotesque animals, flowers, and mottoes, stamped in gold or in Dutchfoil. In the habitations of the small gentry and stationary "merchants," the chamber of dais, which was always reserved for occasions of ceremony, was lined with this leather tapestry, or with a thin woollen stuff, woven in the country. This was also the hanging for the gudeman's bed-room, particularly if an "effeminate 99 townsman. Finishing the walls and ceilings with plaster and stucco was, although known, rarely used. In the most stately and fashionable houses in great towns, they ceiled the chambers with fir-boards, nailed on the under side of the joists. The furniture was scanty: chests and presses (or wardrobes), with a chair or two, and stools, low tables, and, in the best houses, window-curtains, and cushions on the bunkers or window-seats, were reckoned necessary. A chimney or grate for burning coal or peat, standing in a large hearth recess, under a flue of enormous width, was usually seen in the "best room," with very small bright tangs and poker and shool hanging by nails on the wall." Bellows were very rare. The room had sometimes a boarded floor, well sanded, and in country houses sprinkled with the leaves of the fir-tree; carpets were luxuries of the high-born. Beds, inclosed with boarded partitions, carried up to the ceiling, were very often placed at the two corners of the kitchen, and also in the gentleman's chamber of dais or dining-room, where space was to be economized. They had the appearance of a large cupboard, enclosed with two sliding-doors. Their warmth as sleeping-places was more considered perhaps than the sense of their being musty. In 1661 it was the manner, Ray tells us, in some places, to lie on one sheet only,

66

as large as two, turned up from the feet upwards. Warming-pans were as rare as bellows. At that period also, according to the same authority, the house-wives were not very cleanly, and he thought the men were lazy, because he saw them ploughing in their plaids. They, however, paid laudable attention to their portable climate; and the worthy patriarch of English botanists observes, with a spice of spleen, moreover, that "they lay out the most they are worth in clothes; and a fellow that hath scarce ten groats beside to help himself with, you will see come out of his smoky cottage clad like a gentleman."-Bernan's History and Art of Warming and Ventilation.

ERASMUS AND THE SHEPHERD.*

(To the Editor of the Wesleyan-Methodist Magazine.)

WHEN very young, I had the following relation from a learned man. When Erasmus was travelling on the Continent alone, and on foot, I think in some part of Switzerland, he happened to light on a shepherd, to whom he put some questions relative to the weather, the roads, and other indifferent things; and, finding him to be very intelligent and well-informed, he sat down with him on the grass, and, amongst other matters, the subject of religion was introduced. To find out his creed, Erasmus asked him various questions relative to different points of doctrine, on which he himself hesitated and was puzzled, as much as he had been on that of transubstantiation. One of these related to the Trinity, and especially to the infinite unity and equality of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; for while he saw that the Scriptures spoke of each as a distinct Being, he could not find it reconcileable to any just mode of interpreting the sacred oracles, nor to sober reason, that these Three were One and indivisible. The shepherd answered to the following effect :—“ I find no difficulty either to my faith or my reason in this subject; but in discussing it we should confine ourselves to a sameness of nature, equally and inseparably possessed by each of these divine Persons, so that one is not greater nor less than the other, nor before nor after another; one same and undivided nature being common to all the Three." Then, putting his hand to the ground, he plucked up a trefoil, and said, "This plant may illustrate the doctrine and remove the difficulty. You see here a root; from that springs a stem, from that a branch, and the branch itself is crowned with three leaves. That all these are of the same nature, because they constitute the same plant, requires no proof. The stem proceeds from the root, and is of one and the same nature the branch proceeds from the stem, and is its continuation, and also evidently of the same nature. The leaves, that crown and terminate the branch, are precisely of the same nature with all the others. Let us now analyze this plant. You will find that it has three grand constituent parts. 1. The woody fibre, variously ramified. 2. The pulpy or fleshy matter, that connects all the fibres, and fills up all the interstices. 3. The cortical or membranous covering spread over all the external parts. This last may be traced through all its extension, and be found the same substance everywhere, from the lowest filament in the root, to the very top of the highest leaf. The pulpy or fleshy substance under the cortical or mem

*The following account was written by the Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke, at the request of a friend, and is now placed in the hands of the Editors by SAMUEL DUNN, Nottingham, October 18th, 1847.