ON THE FOLLY OF FLEADING HABIT AS AN ages. But the supposition that at each Extracts from the Common-Place Book of a of these places, there resided a man Country Clergyman. with apostolic authority over the other Presbyters, gives a force and propriety to the whole passage. It is, however, easy to observe, that in the unsettled state of the Primitive Church, apostolical men were not often stationary. They were the angels, the messengers, the apostles of the churches; and by the peculiar complexion of the times, were frequently called upon to travel and to remove. How soon they settled for any length of time in one individual place, is uncertain; but that there were from the beginning superiors and inferiors, governors and governed, among the ministers of Christ, is a fact which appears in the most clear and distinct manner to many readers of the New Testament. This paper shall be closed with the following inferences: 1. That the Apostles governed the Christian Church during their life, and that when the charge became too burdensome, they appointed others with apostolic authority to assist, who were afterwards called bishops, for the reason mentioned by Theodoret. 2. That there were some ecclesiastical offices which common pastors were not allowed to perform. The Apostles, or an apostolical man, must preside at every ordination. Philip, the Deacon, went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. (Acts viii. 5.) But the Apostles, who were at Jerusalem, sent Peter and John, to perform other offices for that people. (ver. 14.) 3. That there were, therefore, three orders of ministers in the Primitive Church-Apostles, Presbyters, and Deacons. Had the governors of the Church always retained the original name of apostles, or apostolical men, the whole controversy respecting the identity of Bishops and Presbyters would have been avoided; for it is, in truth, a mere strife of words. The writer is by no means desirous to bring forward unprofitable controversies; but no man ought to be offended with a plain declaration of those sentiments which are adopted by many of the readers of this MiscelJany. WAYRING. WHAT is power over any vicious habit, but the aversion of the will from it, ceasing to love it? Consequently, what is the power which such a habit bas over any man, but another expression for the strong inclination of the person towards it? and the stronger the habit the stronger the inclination is proved to be. To say, for instance, that drunkenness has power over a man, is to say, that he loves that vice; to say, that the power of the habit is irresistible,(though often pleaded by the poor unhappy wretch in extenuation of his conduct,) is only to say, that he loves it in the highest possible degree. But who, that has not completely drowned his reason in his cups, will think of pleading that in excuse of drunkenness, in which its criminality consists? The crime lies in the love of and inclination to such a practice: for a man made drunk against his will, by a mistake or by force, would be guilty of no crime. The absurdity would be manifest if a man were to say, Why, really I hope I am not to blame for getting drunk, because I have a great inclination and love for the practice, and cannot make myself happy in any other way. And yet in truth it is but the same thing said in other words, when he pleads, that he has no power and cannot help it: only here the sound of the words deceive him. Every body knows, that a man cannot be blamed for not doing what it is out of his power to do (as to walk, for instance, and go about his business, if his leg be broken) and few are sufficiently aware of the difference, (however palpable in itself,) between an inability natural and involuntary, and that want of power which results wholly from moral depravity. ON THE UNIVERSALITY OF HUMAN GUILT. WOULD men compare themselves with God's law instead of comparing themselves with their neighbours, they would make a very different estimate of their religious character from what they fre quently do. There is a wide distinction, we grant, between the man who has only indulged hatred or impure de. sire in his heart, and the murderer or the adulterer; yet is the crime of the same nature-equally a breach of the divine law, indicating a bad moral state of the soul, and shewing an awful contrariety to the benevolence and purity of the divine nature. But where lives the man who hath not thus offended, and who hath not, therefore, in himself, a proof of his depravity, and an evidence of guilt, which should forcibly dictate to his lips the Publican's prayer, "God, be merciful to me a sinner?” To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THE following Queries are submitted to you in, I hope, a spirit of candour and meekness, from the desire of elucidating a point of extreme importance, and of engaging wise and good men to inquire more seriously into their own meaning in the phrases they use, that by understanding it better themselves, they may be less liable, in expressing it, to be misunderstood by others. 1. Are not justification, absolution from guilt, forgiveness of sins, and being accounted righteous, synonymous terms for the same blessing? 2. Does not this justification attach solely to true conversion? 3. Does not true conversion include in its essence, faith, repentance supreme regard to God, and therein a disposition of heart to every good word and work? And if so, 4. Why continually recur to the ambiguous phrase of being justified by faith only, which may be well meant, and ill understood, since no true convert is possessed of faith only, and none but a true convert is justified? C. C. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. In your address concerning the Christian Observer, you say that you "will endeavour to explain and enforce the pious tendency of the rites, ceremonies, and Liturgy of the Established Church.” I beg the favour of you, therefore, to give an explanation of the following question in the Ordination Service for Christ. Observ. No. 9. Deacons orders: Do you think that you are truly called, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the due order of this realm, to the ministry of the Church?" I wish to know, Gentlemen, what is that "TRUE CALL?" What it is to be "truly called according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ?" What it is to be "truly called" according to the "due order of this realm?" And how may a person so called free himself from all scruples of conscience as to the certainty of this "true call?" A Candidate for Holy Orders. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. YOUR Correspondent C. L. (No. VIII. p.502) is informed, that the Prayer, concerning which he inquires, is contained originally in the Misna, title Joma, or the Day of Expiation; and likewise in the abridgment of the two Talmuds by Maimonides, called the Strong Hand, under the title, Avodath Jom Haccipurim, or Service of the Day of Expiation. It may be found, together with some vice of that solemn day, in the first interesting observations upon the sernote of Clavering upon a tract concerning Penitence, which he translat ed from the same work of Maimonides. In Ainsworth's Annotations on the Pentateuch, Lev. xvi. the abovementioned works are frequently referred to; and in his explanation of ver. 6 and 11, the particular passages are produced, to which the prayer of our Lord, recorded in John xvii. is supposed to In the note bear some resemblance. upon ver. 11. he writes from Maimonides, that three confessions were made by the High Priest on the day of expiation; "one which he made for himself at the first; a second which he made for himself with the other priests, and both these were upon the bullock of sinoffering, which was for himself; and the third confession was for all Israel, upon the scape goat." Witsius has observed the resemblance between these Jewish forms and the prayer of our Lord. Referring particularly to the passage which has been cited, he says, "We find that Christ observed the same order, John xvii. praying first for himself, ver. 1-5; then for the Apostles, who were peculiarly related to him, and did, 4 E as it were, constitute his family, ver. 5. Ex. Sac. in Symbolum, &c. Ex. x. -20; lastly, for the whole people, and § xxii. and xxviii. all who should believe, ver. 20. & seq." MISCELLANEOUS. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THE following account of the Death of Voltaire, the great apostle of infidelity, is extracted from the Abbe Baruel's History of Jacobinism. Should you think proper to insert it, such of your readers as may not have had access to that work will have an opportunity of contemplating the end of a man whose life was unremittingly employed in endeavours to crush Christ and his cause. S. L. It was during Voltaire's last visit to Paris, when his triumph was complete, and he had even feared that he should die with glory, amidst the acclamations of an infatuated theatre, that he was struck by the hand of Providence, and fated to make a very different termination of his career. In the midst of his triumphs a violent hemorrhage raised apprehensions for his life. D'Alembert, Diderot, and Marmontel, hastened to support his resolution in his last moments, but were only witnesses to their mutual ignominy, as well as to his own. Here let not the historian fear exaggeration. Rage, remorse, reproach, and blasphemy, all accompany and characterize the long agony of the dying atheist. His death, the most terrible that is ever recorded to have stricken the impious man, will not be denyed by his companions in impiety. Their silence, however much they may wish to deny it, is the least of those corroborative proofs which could be adduced. Not one of the sophisters has ever dared to mention any sign given of resolution or tranquillity by the premier chief, during the space of three months, which elapsed from the time he was crowned in the theatre, until his decease. Such a silence expresses, how great their humiliation was in his death! It was in his return from the theatre, and in the midst of the toils he was re . J. M.. suming, in order to acquire fresh applause, that Voltaire was warned, that the long career of his impiety was drawing to an end. In spite of all the sophisters flocking around him in the first days of illness, he gave signs of wishing to return to the God whom he had so often blasphemed. He called for the priests who ministered to him whom he had sworn to crush under the appellation of the wreich.* His danger increasing, he wrote the following note to the Abbé Gaultier: "You had promised me, Sir, to come and hear me, I intreat you would take the trouble of calling as soon as possible. (Signed) VOLTAIRE." Paris, 26 Feb. 1771. A few days after, he wrote the following declaration, in presence of the same Abbé Gaultier, the Abbé Mignot, and the Marquis de Villevieille, copied from the minutes deposited with M. Moinet, Notary, at Paris. "I, the underwritten, declare, that for these four days past, having been afflicted with a vomiting of blood, at the age of eighty-four, and not having been able to drag myself to the church, the Reverend the Rector of St. Sulpice having been pleased to add to his good works that of sending to me the Abbé Gaultier, a priest, I confessed to him; and, if it pleases God to dispose of me, I die in the Holy Catholic Church in which I was born; hoping that the "divine mercy will deign to pardon all my faults. If ever I have scandalized the Church, I ask pardon of God and of the Church. (Signed) VOLTAIRE. March 2, 1778. It is well known that Voltaire had been accustomed, for many years, to call our blessed Saviour The Wretch, l'Infame whom he vowed to crush. The conclusion of many of his letters is in these words-Ecrasez l'Infame-Crush the wretch, In presence of the Abbé Mignot, my nephew; and the Marquis de Villevieille, my friend." After the two witnesses had signed this declaration, Voltaire added these words, copied from the same minutes. "The Abbé Gaultier, my confessor, having apprized me that it was said anong a certain set of people, 'I should protest against every thing that I did at my death;' I declare that I never made such a speech, and that it is an old jest, attributed long since to many of the learned, more enlightened than I am." Was this declaration a fresh instance of his former hypocrisy for he had the mean hypocrisy, even in the midst of his efforts against Christianity, to receive the sacrament regularly, and to do other acts of religion, merely to be able to deny his infidelity, if accused of it. After the explanations we have unfortunately seen him give of his exterior acts of religion, might there not be room for doubt.? Be that as it may, there is a public homage paid to that religion in which he declared he meant to die, notwithstanding his having perpetually conspired against it during his life. This declaration is also signed by that same friend and adept, the Marquis de Villevieille, to whom, eleven years ago, Voltaire was wont to write, "Conceal your march from the enemy, in your endeavours to crush the Wretch !" Voltaire had permitted this declaration to be carried to the Rector of St. Sulpice, and to the Archbishop of Paris, to know whether it would be sufficient. When the Abbé Gaultier returned with the answer, it was impossible for him to gain admittance to the patient. The conspirators had strained every nerve to hinder the chief from consummating his recantation, and every avenue was shut to the priest, whom Voltaire himself had sent for. The demons haunted every access; rage succeeded to fury, and fury to rage again, during the remainder of his life. Then it was that D'Alembert, Diderot, and about twenty others of the conspirators, who had beset his apartment, never approached him, but to witness their own ignominy. He would often curse them, and exclaim, "Retire! It is you that have brought me to my present state! Begone! I could have done without you all; but you could not exist without me! And what a wretched glory have you produced me?" Then would succeed the horrid re membrance of his conspiracy. They could hear him, the prey of anguish and dread, alternately supplicating or blaspheming that God whom he had conspired against, and in plaintive accents would he cry out, "Oh Christ! Oh Jesus Christ!" and then complain that he was abandoned by God and man. The hand which had traced in ancient writ the sentence of an impious and reviling king, seemed to trace before his eyes, Crush then, do crush the Wretch. In vain he turned his head away; the time was coming apace when he was to appear before the tribunal of him whom he had blasphemed; and his physicians, particularly M. Tronchin, calling in to administer relief, thunderstruck, retire, declaring the death of the impious man to be terrible indeed. The pride of the conspirators would willingly have suppressed these declarations, but it was in vain. The Mareschal of Richelieu flies from the bedside, declaring it to be a sight too terrible to be sustained; and M. Tronchin, that the furies of Orestes could give but a faint idea of those of Voltaire. For the Christian Observer. MR. SWINBURNE, in his travels through the Two Sicilies, vol. ii. p. 67, speaking of the ancient palace of the Kings of Naples, makes the following remarks: "One room is set apart for the draw. ing of the lottery; an institution of great emolument to the King, but of still more essential detriment to the morals and fortunes of his subjects. Necessity is the plea for establishing so pernicious an allurement to gambling; because the lotteries (it is said) set up at Genoa, and elsewhere, would infallibly draw a great deal of money out of the country, if no such thing existed at Naples; and if the Neapolitans now are dupes, at least their own exchequer benefits by their folly. But this is fal lacious reasoning. For the daily labourer, the artizan, and the menial servant, could not squander away their pittance at a lottery-office out of the kingdom: the distance and absence of the temptation from their eyes would eradicate the vice." Such are the reflections of a writer, who has shewn by passages in his book that, at the time when he composed it, he was by no means an over rigid moralist; nor even disposed to admit that all the practical principles which Christianity inculcates are either connected or consistent with national prosperity. I believe that England is under obligations to her present Prime Minister, for having studied to lessen the evils resulting from a national lottery. I sincerely wish, that within no long period, she may become far more indebted to him for abolishing so pernicious a mode of replenishing the public cof fers. The mischiefs attached to a lot tery are inseparable from it. Guard a lottery as you may, to retain it is to act on the maxim Rem:-quocunque modo rem Quærenda pecunia primum: Virtus post nummos. Who that knowingly barters morality for gain, can conscientiously denominate himself a Christian? To affirm, that the crimes and the distresses which characterise the institution of a lottery, would not be removed from the British Isles by the extinction of our lotteries, is an assertion which it is difficult to re gard as serious. The distance of temp tation in a foreign lottery; the suspicion and doubt which in the apprehension of numbers, would hang over its promised advantages; and the enaction of heavy penalties against all in the British dominions who should shew themselves, under any shape, as its agents, would obviously rescue us from the enormous evil. G. T. SIR, To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I AM an orderly man, of middle age, and during the latter months of the summer have been travelling with my family through the North of England, partly for the improvement of our health, partly for the purpose of contemplating the grand and beautiful features which characterize the region which we visited. The objects of our expedition having been happily attained we pursued our course homewards without molestation, until we reached the confines of Lancashire. There, Mr. Editor, being by nature perhaps of a somewhat wary cast, and being now, as I have observed, of middle age, I began to forebode that our quiet might be disturbed, and our progress impeded, by our entrance within the sphere of Preston Guild. As you, Sir, are, I doubt not, a venerable philosopher bordering on seventy, and have passed your days in the solitude of an attic in Fleet Street, apart from the vanities of the world, you may wish for a little explanation of this Guild. The term itself is variously interpreted. Many persons ascribe it to the same stock whence the metropolis deduces its Guildhall; and are of opinion, that the two representatives of Preston, whom you will find indebted to the Guild for their seats in parliament, are no other than the substitutes of Gog and Magog. seem, however to be chronological difficulties in the way of this solution. Some etymologists, looking to the good cheer which is a prominent feature in the Guild, trace the term to the Latin noun gula ; others for a similar reason, fix upon the English substantive, gills; others, again, dazzled by the splendid parade of the festivity, and calling to mind the memorable champ du drap d'or, derive the name from the verb to gild. For my own part, having long concurred in sentiment with the wise writer, whose definition of etymology is eruditio ad libitum, I regard these interpretations but as ingenious conjectures. Names, however, are only shadows, and their origin is of trifling moment, when the substance which they designate is manifest. The Guild is discriminated by marks sufficiently strong. It is an assemblage of eating, and drinking, and dancing, and acting, and cocking, and racing, and processioning, and There |