desire to use it to the glory of God, and the good of souls. Having some little experience in the ministry, and knowing a good deal of the character and circumstances of the people, both religious and irreligious, in this neighbourhood, I may sometimes have it in my power to suggest hints, and communicate information, that may be useful and satisfactory to you. But above all, pray fervently to God for a blessing on yourself, your preaching, your people, on the church of God, and last, though not least, on

"Your unworthy friend and brother, "LEGH RICHMOND."

the

This letter will prepare reader for the following account of some of Mr. Richmond's plans for promoting the religious improvement of the parish.

"On the Sabbath-day, there were two regular full services; and in the evening a lecture, more especially designed for the young. His weekly labours commenced with what he called his Tuesday night cottage lecture, from its being held successively in the cottages of the poor, whom he assembled for the purpose of more familiar and interior instruction than could be usefully or suitably delivered in public. On Friday evening, a lecture was delivered in the church, the prayers for the evening service being previously read; and once a month he met the communicants on the Saturday preceding the sacrament. He had also a weekly service at the workhouse. But his labours were not confined to public instructions: like his divine Master, "he went about doing good." At the cottages of the poor he was a frequent visitor; fulfilling the apostolical injunction, of going from house to house,' and scattering the precious seed, making himself acquainted with their spiritual state, and gathering from their answers, useful hints and reflections for the service of the succeeding Sabbath.

A Sunday School had been established at Turvey for many years, endowed by Charles Higgins, Esq., who bequeathed £300. in support of the charity. John Higgins, Esq., of Turvey Abbey, his nephew and successor, has generously paid an interest for the bequest, of £20. a-year. The school, though well attended before, had its numbers considerably increased, and its regulations greatly improved by the new rector. He appointed a master of real piety, justly considering that on the principles and character of the teacher, the efficiency and usefulness

of these institutions materially depend. Mr. Richmond was accustomed to visit the school previous to divine service; and, for the children's benefit chiefly, he engaged in a third service in the church, on the Sunday evening. Here the firstfruits of his ministry appeared. The conversion of two young people, who afterwards died in the faith, followed his introductory address to children. Mr. Richmond, indeed, was peculiarly successful on these occasions, and no part of his labours was attended with more striking effects. It is remarkable that both at Turvey and at Brading, the first memorials of his usefulness occurred in the instance of children."-pp. 114–116.

We have quoted largely, and somewhat irregularly, from this interesting volume; and yet we feel that we could go on to a much greater length than our limits will allow. As Mr. Richmond lived, so he died. We must make room for his daughter's account of the closing scene.

"He had a great dislike to keep his bed; and I cannot but acknowledge the goodness of God, that it was not necessary. He rose every day to the last, and sat as usual in his study: only getting up a little later, and going to bed earlier, as his strength gradually failed him. The last fortnight he was very silent, and appeared constantly in prayer and meditation, waiting his dismissal, and the end of his earthly pilgrimage. At this time, nothing seemed to disturb him; and he appeared to realize the full import of that blessed promise, 'Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee.' I have often thought he exemplified the faith his favourite Leighton commends-'Let thy soul roll itself on God, and adventure there all its weight.' It was indeed an unspeakable delight to us to observe the unruffled calm of his soul; and it confirmed our minds in the truth and value of the doctrines he had taught for thirty years. We had seen our beloved father prostrate in soul before God, under a consciousness of indwelling sin; we had heard him bemoaning himself, after a long life of usefulness, as an unprofitable servant, renouncing again and again all hope of salvation by his own goodness, and fleeing to Jesus as his only refuge. To use his words to C. H "It is only

by coming to Christ as a little child, and as for the first time, that I can get peace.' Yet, though for a time per

plexed, he was not forsaken. We saw him comforted of God, and proving what he had often said to me- Christ has firm hold of you, however feeble your grasp of him;' and now we saw him strong in faith, and in the last hour of dissolving nature, rejoice in the sure and certain hope of the glory of God. He did indeed find, to use the dying words of my beloved brother, 'the rest that Christ gives is sweet.' He was silent, but it was a most expressive silence, and revealed emotions of joy and praise not to be described. Many touching circumstances occurred, which shewed both the man and the Christian; but they are of too delicate a nature to be communicated beyond the circle of his own family. "Two days before his death, he received a letter, mentioning the conversion of two persons (one of whom was a clergyman), by the perusal of his tract, The Dairyman's Daughter.' When the letter was given him, he seemed too feeble to open it himself, and desired Henry to read it to him. The contents deeply interested him. He raised himself in his chair, lifted up his hand, and then let it fall down again, while he repeatedly shook his head. His manner spoke the greatest humility, as if he would say "How unworthy of such honour!' For a few moments it seemed to administer a cordial to his fainting spirit, and led our minds, in reference to our dear father, to contemplate the near fulfilment of that promise, They that turn many to righteousness, shall shine as the stars for ever and ever.'

"On Tuesday, the 8th of May, he rose later than usual; I think it was twelve before he got into the study; and he was so weak, that he had great difficulty in walking there from his bed-room. His breath was short, and he looked very pale, but he said he felt no pain. He sat on his reading chair, with his head resting on a pillow: his countenance and manner was calm and peaceful. In the afternoon he could scarcely support himself; and I kneeled on a chair behind him, and he laid his head on my shoulder. Once he seemed to be fainting, but he soon revived; and, looking calmly at me, he said, 'Better now, love.'

"Mamma could no longer stay in the room, and I was left alone with him till five. He still said nothing, except to assure me he felt no pain. To the very last, it appeared to be his great desire to spare our feelings. We now persuaded him to go to bed, but we little thought death was so near. He could not walk, and we were going to ring for a servant, to assist him; but he said, I should like Henry to carry me.' He was wasted to

a skeleton: Henry took him up with great ease, and we all followed. I shall never forget this most affecting moment: it was a moment of anguish to me, more than the last scene. He seemed to know that he was leaving the study, never to return to it: his look told me that he knew it. This was his favourite room, where for more than twenty years he had constantly carried on his pursuits. There he had written his books-studied his sermons--instructed his children-conversed with his flock, and offered daily sacrifice of praise and prayer. I watched him, as Henry carried him out: his countenance preserved the same look of fixed composure. He raised his head, and gave one searching look round the room, on his books his table-his chair -his wife-his children;-and then the door closed on him for ever! He gave the same look round the gallery, through which we passed, as if he was bidding farewell to every thing. There was a peculiar expression in his countenance, which I cannot describe; it seemed to say, 'Behold, I die, but God will be with you!" Henry seated him in a chair; and he sat to be undressed, like a little dependent child, in deep silence, but without the ruffling of a feature.

"About nine, he seemed rather wandering; and made an effort to speak, but we could not make out his meaning: only we perceived he was thinking of his church, for we heard him say several times, 'It will be all confusion!' Mamma asked him what would be confusion. The church! There will be such confusion in my church!'

"About ten o'clock, he signified to Mamma, in the gentlest whisper, that he wished to be left alone-to send us all away, and draw the curtains round him.

"About half-past ten, Mrs. G., the kind and faithful nurse of Willy, tapped at my door. I was reading the Bible, and had just reached that verse, 'That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.' I have thought the coincidence remarkable, at least, I trust it will ever give a quickening influence to that passage, when I read it. She told me to come and look at my father. She said she could hardly tell whether there was any change or not. I hurried to him. He raised his eyes to heaven, and then closed them. I put my cheek upon his; and I believe at that instant I felt, for I could not hear, his dying sigh. I thought he was sleeping, and continued looking at him, till Hannah said, 'Your dear Papa is in heaven.' I did not think him dead; and I rubbed his still warm hands, and kissed his pale

cheek, and entreated him to speak one word to me: but I soon found it was the silence of death. All turned to poor Mamma, who was insensible; and I was thus left alone with my dear father, kneeling beside him, with his hand in mine. The same holy calm sat on his countenance, and seemed to say 'Thanks be to God, who has given me the victory!"—pp. 620-625.

Surely every reader of this account will exclaim, "Let me die the death of the righteous; and let my latter end be like his! The reference to the state of his church, in Mr. Richmond's wanderings, was not without reason or meaning. He knew what would probably be the effect of his death. Another Gospel was sent into the parish. The people, we believe, have left the church in a body, and a dissenting congregation has been the result of Mr. Richmond's

labours. For this, in fact, the people were prepared, though not intentionally, by the labours of their deceased minister. His spirit, his preaching, his plans, his prayer meetings were all calculated to attach the people to the Gospel; but not to a church without the Gospel.Churchmen will deplore this, and consider it only another proof of the tendency of evangelicalism. We rejoice in it, not as Dissenters, but as Christians; though we consider it one of many proofs that we have nothing to fear from the progress of religion in the Church. Our principles and interests are safe, so long as pure and undefiled religion is fully and faithfully propagated, and men are at liberty to follow the conviction of their consciences respecting it.

THE Controversy which has been agitated from the commencement of the Reformation, respecting the testimony of the heavenly witnesses, in the fifth chapter of the First Epistle of John, whether considered in a theological, a critical, or a literary point of view, is of the highest importance. It involves one of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, embraces some of the nicest points in biblical criticism, and has brought into the field men of the most distinguished talents and learning. Happily the subject may now be examined dispassionately; as it has been admitted both by the opposers and supporters of the disputed passage, that whichever conclusion is come to, the doctrine of the Trinity remains unaffected.

N. S. No. 49.

It is the object of this historical sketch to present a brief view of the progress of this interesting discussion. It is not the intention of the author to bring forward all that has been said on both sides, for that would require volumes; but to notice the principal points in the debate, the parties who have engaged in it, the subjects into which the controversy has diverged, and the state in which the matter now appears to stand.

The learned reader does not require to be informed; but for the sake of those who do, and to prevent mistakes, it is necessary to state, that the whole controversy is, whether the words in Greek and English, enclosed within brackets, in the following passage, are a genuine part of the original text.

C

“Οτὶ τρεῖς εἰςιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες [ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατὴρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνευμα και οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἓν εἰσι. Και τρεῖς εἰσιν οι μαρτυρούντες εν τῇ γῇ.] τὸ πνέυμα, και το ύδωρ, καὶ τὸ αἷμα. και οι τρεῖς εις το εν είσιν.”

"For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth,] the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and these three agree in one."

The words in dispute were omitted by Erasmus in the first and second editions of the New Testament, published by him in 1516 and 1519. This occasioned a dispute with Lee, an Englishman, who was afterwards made Archbishop of York, by Henry VIII., and also with Stunica, one of the divines employed on the Complutensian Polyglot; in the course of which Erasmus promised, that if the passage were found in a single Greek manuscript, he would insert it into his next edition. An account of this controversy with Lee and Stunica will be found in Burigni's Life of Erasmus; Paris, 1757, vol. i. p. 372, vol. ii. p. 163. Stunica's attack, and the defence of Erasmus will be found in the ninth vol. of the Critici Sacri. The dispute with these individuals, it should be observed, was not restricted to the passage in John. Both of them attacked the editorial labours and learning of Erasmus generally, which it was their great object to vilify. That learned person was not backward to reply in his own defence.

The Complutensian Edition of the New Testament was printed in 1517, though not published till 1522. In this edition the passage is inserted, whether from

some Greek MS., or translated from the Latin into Greek, has been matter of dispute. At the same time Erasmus was informed of a MS. in England, which contained the passage. This MS. has at length been found in Trinity College, Dublin, and is now known by the name of the Codex Monfortianus. Michaelis asserts, that this MS. was written after the year 1500, and is therefore of no critical authority. Mill thinks it is very modern; Wetstein ascribes it to the sixteenth century; Greisbach dates it in the fifteenth or sixteenth; and Dr. Adam Clark, who examined it very particularly, thinks it cannot be older than the thirteenth century. In consequence of these things, he inserted in his next, and two following editions, published in 1522, 1527, and 1535, the words under dispute. While, in consequence of his promise, he inserted the passage, he took care to record his opinion of the MS. in the following words:-" Ex hoc Codice Anglicano reposuimus, quod in nostris dicebatur deesse, non sit causa calumniandi, tametsai suspicor codicem illum ad nostros esse correctum.”

Colinæus, in his edition of 1534, omitted the verse from want of MS. authority. It is also omitted in editions published at Hagenau in 1521, and at Strazburg in 1524. R. Stephens, in his edition of 1550, inserted the passage; but marked the words év r ovpave, as wanting in seven MSS. Beza, suspecting no mistake, and supposing that these MSS. contained the remaining words, inserted the whole passage in his editions. The Elezevir editors, following these authorities, admitted the passage into their editions, and thus it finally became a part of the received text.

In all the ancient versions it is

wanting. In the Old Syriac, or Peshito, made in the second or third century; in the Philoxenian Syriac, made in the beginning of the sixth century; in the Coptic and Sahidic Versions, made between the fourth and sixth centuries; in the Ethiopic Version, which boasts a very high antiquity; in the Arabic MSS. and most of the printed editions; and though inserted in the printed editions of the Armenian, does not exist in the best MSS. of that translation. The same remark is applicable to the Slavonian, the oldest editions of which do not contain it. It is to be found in the printed text of the Latin Vulgate; but some of the oldest Latin MSS. want it, and in others it is interlined, or added in the margin. No satisfactory proof has been afforded, that it is quoted by any of the Greek fathers; and even the adduced evidence of the Latin writers is defective or unsatisfactory.

From all the editions of the German translation of the New Testament by Luther, which were published by himself, it was excluded; a conclusive proof that the Reformer wanted faith in its authority. After his death, it was inserted in his translation by some of the editors, and rejected by others, till at last its insertion became general. The modern European Versions, for the most part contain the passage. In the greater number of the editions of the English translation, from Tindal to the Bishops' Bible in 1568, the passage is printed either in a different character from the text, or enclosed in brackets, to intimate that it was found in the Latin Vulgate, but not in the Greek text. Calvin, Leo de Juda, Castalio, all speak of it, and treat it as doubtful.

In Father Simon's Critical History of the New Testament, which appeared in English in 1689, the genuineness of the passage is attacked at some length.* Simon examined very diligently the King's library at Paris, and likewise the Colbertine, containing many valuable Greek MSS.; but none of them contained the disputed passage. He found it also wanting in some of the oldest MSS. of the Latin Vulgate which he examined. His opinion is decidedly unfavourable to its genuineness; as even in regard to the Latin MSS. which contain it, he expresses his belief, that it was originally written on the margin, as a doctrinal point, and afterwards introduced into the text by some of the transcribers.

Our learned countryman, Dr. Thomas Smith, in his Latin "Miscellanea;" the second edition of which appeared in 1690, has a dissertation in support of the received reading of this text, in opposition to the views of Simon; and as Simon remarked on him, he defended himself in a second dissertation, inserted in the same volume. Smith was a very considerable scholar, who had travelled much, and was well acquainted with Greek and Oriental MSS.; but as "that which is wanting cannot be numbered," he necessarily failed in his attempt to maintain the argument which he espoused.

Ketner, a German writer, replied to Father Simon in three publications, in which he produced most of the arguments usually alleged on his side, but mixed with many absurd and trifling

observations. For instance, he reckons in the second century, twenty-seven; in the

*Part I. chap. xxiii.; Part II. chap. ix.