tions, and intercourses, &c. &c., and the everlasting use of staunch for every purpose, and high-virtued, &c. &c. All these any one can introducethey are quite beneath Mr. Melvill. Let him write simply as he can, and lay aside all affected words and phrases, and get some friend to put out his blue lights, &c. &c., and he will be one of the first writers of the day.

Revelation and Science, &c. &c., a Sermon preached in 1829. With Remarks on the Bampton Lectures for 1833. By the Rev. Baden Powell. Oxford: Parker.

As there appears to be every symptom of the commencement of a pretty hot warfare, the Reviewer is far too wary to have any thing to say to it, and will leave Mr. Powell and Dr. Nolan to fight the battle out. Mr. Powell's sermon relates to the exceeding nonsense which has been talked on both sides (by philosophers who hate religion, and Christians who despise facts) about geology. But on one point the Reviewer wishes, for particular reasons, to ask Mr. Powell (for whom he has all imaginable respect and regard) one plain question. Mr.P., to prove that it is unjust to say that science is attracting too much attention, refers to the fact that classics are the chief things taught at schools, and other facts of the same kind. Now, the Reviewer does not dispute any one of Mr. P.'s facts, but he wishes simply to ask Mr. P., Does he really mean to say that classical literature and philology are in vogue and fashion, or even on the ascendant scale, and that science is not? If Mr. P. really does think this, the Reviewer can only conclude that there are 'spheres of life in England as utterly strange and unknown to one another as Kamschatka and Otaheite. If Mr. P. would be so kind as to tell the Reviewer where he can find a large society of friends of literature, not friends of science, the Reviewer will seriously consider it as an unspeakable obligation, as he would particularly wish to cultivate their acquaintance.

Two Sermons preached at Chillingham, Nov. 3, 1833, on resigning the Living. By the Rev. John Sandford.

Ir any one should by chance wish to know how much Mr. Sandford was beloved in his parish, and how kindly he thinks of his brethren,* and how very kindly he speaks of his Diocesan, and how much he wept and every one else wept when he went away from Chillingham, and how entirely he regrets its rural beauties, and how entirely he has taken Mr. Howell's chapel from a sense of duty, with all other particulars imaginable and not imaginable about Mr. S., he is strongly recommended to buy Mr. S.'s two Sermons. But after long consideration of all the reasons which Mr. Sandford gives in his preface of nine long pages for his leaving the rustic beauties of Chillingham, the reviewer imagined that his delicate and sensitive feelings had prevented him from assigning the true one. For in p. 40 (2nd sermon), he says, "When I turn me from the grave where I have resigned to corruption the object that had nestled in my heart's core (!), whose smile had solaced me in a thousand trials, and in whose love I had an asylum always open; or when I see the young bud which I had cherished and joyed over (rudely withered (rudely withered!) in its spring, am I to be told that the blow is a light one?" No one could read this fine passage and not feel both for Mr. Sandford on the loss of his wife and family, and not understand why he left Chillingham, where the fatal blow had been struck, and why he would not tell his grief

As a specimen-" Beneath many a sacerdotal vesture you would detect the lusts, and the pride, and the carnality of this earth."—P. 10.

in the Preface. But this theory is wrong nevertheless. For on turning to the back of Mr. S.'s sermons, one is comforted by an advertisement, shewing not only that Mrs. John Sandford still happily survives, but is actually publishing two, no doubt, very excellent and admirable works; so that the whole is as great a mystery as ever.

Mr. S.'s farewell passage deserves to be given. "May God bless you. You, my venerable friend, who have always been ready to counsel and assist me, and for whom, &c., &c.; you, my sisters in the Lord, whose presence in this sanctuary has always been a cordial to my heart, &c., &c.; you, my worthy friend, who, as churchwarden of this parish, have been always attentive, and kind, and painstaking; you,"-but no, one cannot go ou! It is too, too touching; after the painstaking churchwarden, (is there but one at poor, poor Chillingham ?) human nature can bear no more! The modest text of this farewell sermon-" For our light affliction," &c., was, indeed, too modest. It could be no light affliction to lose such a preacher. When will they again hear such sentences as these "An interest in Jesus will be the only patent of nobility"-"The day's man who has engaged for him, the elder brother, in the bundle of whose life (!) his own soul is bound up?" No, no! The only comfort the Chillingham people can have, must be in remembering that, as Mr. S. says, God has opened a wide door for him" in London. They will do as he desires them, no doubt, and not "believe any tales they may hear about his reasons for quitting them," (what on earth does all this mean?) but will answer Mr. S.'s question-"Why should I sacrifice all I have done in this place, my house, my garden, (his garden, too!) my kind friends, the spots which my wife and children (God bless them [!]) loved,” just as he would wish them.

"

Uncle Philip's Conversations with Children. London: Teggs. 1834. 12mo. Pp. 170.

THIS is a very sensible selection of some of the most curious and interesting of the wonders of Insects, &c., written in a style very plain and interesting for children, and on very good principles.

Christian Ethics, or Moral Philosophy, on the Principles of Divine Revelation. By Ralph Wardlaw, D.D. London: Jackson and Walford. 1833. pp. 416.

8vo.

THERE are very few Englishmen who could, and very few who would, write this book. The science of morals, like that of metaphysics, any science, indeed, which requires abstraction, is uncongenial to our national character. Mr. Penrose is almost the only living person of any eminence who has done anything on the subject. There are, indeed, precious fragments from Mr. Coleridge, but they are fragments only. This book will certainly not lower Dr. Wardlaw's high character for ability, thought, and learning.

Dr. Wardlaw sets out with pointing out the serious objections to be taken to every theory of morals on the ground that it does not recognise the fallen condition of man, but sets up parts of his nature as judges of morals which have shared in the general corruption of that nature. This part of the work is very able and true, though not entirely just to Butler. Dr. W. then goes on to set up his own system, and boldly and rightly declares, that if man lives under the government of God, he can have no other law than the will of God, if that

Qui s'excuse, s'accuse. Mr. S. may be assured that no one would have questioned his conduct or motives in quitting Chillingham, or, indeed, have inquired at all about what was entirely his own business, if he had not chosen to volunteer a long defence of himself, and make a mystery about a very common-place uninteresting matter. He must surely know mankind enough to be aware that he has taken the right way to excite discussion among the idle people who have nothing better to do than to talk about their neighbours. Was this his object?

VOL. V.-Jan. 1834.

L

will has been declared to him as it has in Revelation. Then he goes on to inquire why the will of God has declared such and such things to be respectively right and wrong. And this question he answers by saying, that the elements of moral rectitude were in the Infinite Mind from all eternity, as the necessary character of the necessarily existent Deity; and we can form no other idea of moral rectitude in the creature, than as he has voluntarily communicated to them the principles of his own all-perfect nature. He explains what he says as to this necessity in p. 210, by saying, that we cannot conceive of God's nature than that it must be what it is; that we cannot conceive it to be otherwise.

There are some most valuable chapters on the Identity of Morality and Religion, very original in some parts and very true. The reviewer only regrets that his limits do not allow him to go farther into a subject which is, to him, of unspeakable interest. But he will endeavour shortly to give, not a review so much as an analysis of this work. It is the first of a series of Lectures established by the Congregationalist Dissenters, and they may be assured that churchmen will always hail such works as this from them. They always view, with sincere pleasure, such efforts in the cause of truth. It is not from persons of education and learning that they ever fear the violence and rudeness of the Christian Advocate, or the revilings of the Ecclesiastical Knowledge Society.* The reviewer would only add, that though he goes along with very much in the book, yet Dr. Wardlaw's positive conviction that conscience is no peculiar faculty-his certainty that God could not have meant the world originally as a place of trial—or created man even so imperfect as to have required advancement in holiness-his unhesitating assumptions of the extraordinary insight possessed by man before the fall into the will of God (p. 168 and foll., and 190,) are all of them (and there are others) which require full and close investigation. He is, of course, anxious to shew, that conscience may be resolved into other common faculties, because the supposing a peculiar faculty of this sort which he thinks could not belong to an unfallen creature, would set up a guide independent of revelation. It is very hard, too, to make out Dr. W.'s opinion fully on some of these points. In connexion with what he says on conscience, he is considering St. Paul's declarations as to the heathen being a law to themselves. Dr. W. says, that their judgment was so miserably impaired by the fall, that though it might retain some traces of God's will, or what Dr. W. calls twice, natural convictions of right and wrong, it is of no good to them, for they wilfully act in opposition to it; that this knowledge leaves man accountable, but is still incompetent and unsatisfactory, and so on. But Dr. W. seems to forget that St. Paul expressly speaks of the Gentiles, not only doing the things contained in the law, but of their being judged accordingly; of glory, honour, and peace, being bestowed upon the Gentile for doing the things of the law by nature. Surely, too, Dr. W.'s bold statement that the contrast between those who are to perish with and without the law, shews that the difference in the Apostle's mind was very material, can hardly be maintained. It was not the Apostle's purpose, at least, to point out that difference there, but to shew that all alike would be condemned or rewarded according to their lives. Dr. W. is, on this and other kindred points, carrying a right theory too far. The evil of the Gentile world he makes a wilful hatred of God.

Second Travels of an Irish Gentleman. Not by the Editor of Captain Rock's Memoirs. Dublin: Milliken & Co. 1833. 2 vols. 12mo.

THIS book is from one of a class not very uncommon. The evidence for Christianity is too strong for them to resist; but the great point with them is to shew that they owe nothing of their conviction to any human

Is it possible, as is stated, that Dr. Wardlaw presided at a meeting, one object of which was to desire that the Bishops might be expelled from Parliament? Surely not! The writing such a work as this is an element far more congenial, one would think, to his nature.

being that they found it all out for themselves-that they are great philosophers-that all priests are rogues-that the church is always a mere combination for political ends-that mysteries are inventions of priests to hold power, &c. &c.

The present volumes are not very brilliant specimens of this sort of common-place, which always comes from the third or fourth rate class of mankind, and which now, like other common-places, is become very weary, dull, stale, flat, and unprofitable. As a specimen of the great powers of this gentleman to decide for himself on all deep questions, take the page in the second volume on which the reviewer first opened. The text says (in speaking of the expression, Kai Oɛòç ǹv ó λóyoç) that it leaves us at a loss or in great doubt as to which is the subject and which the predicate of the proposition; i. e., whether the intelligence (oyos) was God, or God was the intelligence; or whether the expression may be used in both senses? Not content with this grand display about the predicate and subject, which must surely have charmed all his readers, he goes blundering on in the most remorseless manner to convict himself of not understanding one word of the matter. Hear his magniloquent note. "Mr. Fitzgerald must have alluded to the Greek original (how happy it is to have such a Greek professor, to expose the priestcraft of the grammatical clergy!) of the passage to which his observation applies. Kai Oròç vỏ Xóyos admits grammatically (!) but probably not idiomatically (!) of two senses. Even the context would naturally lead to that which is unequivocally expressed in the established translation. Nevertheless, the expression is extremely obscure." This is a precious instance of the fruits of self-confidence. Here is a person who is resolved to decide every thing for himself in religion. In order to know it, he sets to work on his Greek Testament, and pronounces with the utmost confidence on points of grammar in passages involving great truths; and, unluckily, although one may suppose, in charity, that he has done all he can, that all is so little, that he makes not a small blunder, but actually directly contradicts the only and the notorious rule of grammar on the subject in question. The sentence, he most learnedly says, grammatically admits of two senses. This is just a blunder of the same sort as it would be to say that, grammatically, the nominative is not to agree with the verb; and this, be it remembered, is not on a matter which he never heard of, but no one which he has obviously been reading about so far as to have got hold of the usual terms predicate and subject, though it is clear enough that he does not know their meaning. But then he says, that, idiomatically, it may not admit two senses, though grammatically it does. What may be the meaning of this? One of his friends, the priests, could not contrive to talk more unintelligibly or mysteriously than this.

But the same page affords a specimen of his great candour as well as learning. The whole book is to shew that we are not to try to make systems out of Scripture, and to maintain the silly fallacy that, because, for convenience sake, certain terms (as Trinity, Substance, &c.) are used, therefore priests pretend to understand mysteries. In speaking of our Lord, and the Bible doctrines about him, he says (p. 65)," Let no one ask me theoretically" (another long word, by the way, used in the wrong sense) what meaning I attach to the words, one with God." Now, let him shew any priest's book which does not say this, too. Professor Hey's lectures on the articles are actually the nearest book to the writer at this moment, and what does he say? (Vol. ii. p. 273, edition 1797.) "When we say, the Father and the Son are one,' we have not comprehension enough of the meaning to found any reasoning upon." Then, in pp. 68 and 70, we find great objection made to the word substance. It"shocks" this gentleman, who cannot form a more abstract conception of it than a kind of receptacle for qualities, and, therefore, says that it is quite unworthy of God. The same Dr. Hey, on this very point, says that we ought to be as sparing of our arguments as possible, when we have not distinct ideas, that what is meant by an unity of substance is an intimacy of connexion beyond our defining. (Vol. ii. p. 331.) Let this same learned gentleman, before he

abuses priests and articles so much, just read Dr. Hey, and see whether (although there is all the possible difference between a learned and very modest, and an unlearned and very arrogant person) Dr. Hey does not distinctly point to the same sort of results as those to be gained from the study of articles, creeds, and mysteries, as he would himself wish.

As to any answer to Mr. Moore, or, rather, to the common Roman Catholic arguments, this book can afford none; because, while affecting to be especially rational, it lays down grounds for treating these subjects to which no reasonable person can submit.

MISCELLANEA.

BISHOP OF LIMERICK.

THE death of the Bishop of Limerick cannot be passed over in silence; yet nothing can be said which will do justice to him, or to the feelings of those who knew and loved him. The lofty, uncompromising, unswerving integrity which never trifled with principle in the veriest trifle, the noble contempt of every rule but the rule of principle, the generous disdain of every thing like meanness in the guise of prudence, the free expenditure of money (looked on only as a means of doing good) on every thing which became a man, a gentleman, and a Christian bishop, the holiness of the life, the affectionate kindness of the heart, its warm, earnest, true piety, its thorough devotion to the cause of Christ's church-who can tell these things as they ought to be told? These, however, were things that belonged to his whole life. Graces of another character adorned that part of it which might seem to a common observer to be clouded and melancholy. Happy, indeed, may they account themselves who had the privilege of seeing how such a Christian can suffer. For four or five years, under a paralytic affliction so severe as to deprive him nearly of the use of one side, no one approached him who did not find him— not uncomplaining and patient merely-but cheerful, industrious, active for himself and others, never without a pen or a book in his hand, and so speaking that you might fancy that the confinement and the employments to which his affliction condemned him were the natural and happy choice of his own free will. Who besides him, under such affliction, would have taught himself not only to write in the most exquisite and beautiful manner with the left hand, but to publish several volumes of his own expressly for the service of the gospel, and never slow at the call of friendship or distress, to correct the MSS. of friends, and to write the memoirs and publish the works of a deceased friend for the benefit of his family? It was a picture so peculiar, so beautiful, so impressive, that no one, who had the happiness of conversing with him for the last three or four years, will ever lose the remembrance of it, or their admiration and wonder at the man.

For him none can mourn. The righteous is taken from present evil, and from the evil to come. His whole life had been a preparation for eternity! Happy is he that the struggle is over, and the warfare accomplished, the body released from suffering, and the patient, holy, heavenly spirit in that haven where it would be.

CONSECRATION OF DR. GRIFFITHS,

(AS COADJUTOR ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF THE LONDON DISTRICT.)

(From the Catholic Magazine.)

"THE consecration of this Right Reverend Prelate took place at St. Edmund's College, on the 28th October, and was conducted, as is every religious rite at