sition, both with respect to the present and the past, is equally inconsistent with facts. I shall be pointed, on the one hand, to a hundred narratives and anecdotes of the sufferings and persecutions of individuals during the last century; and shall, on the other, be triumphantly informed of the universal liberty which persons of all persuasions at present so happily enjoy. But, sir, all this proves nothing to the purpose, unless it can be shewn that these persecutions were entirely "for righteousness sake;" and that the absence of them, at the present moment, arises solely from the increased regard to true religion: neither of which I conceive to be strictly true. I should, perhaps, have expressed my meaning most clearly if I had said that, amongst clergymen of equal piety, some will meet with more and some with less opposition now than in former times. The man who mixes up a considerable portion of justly offensive matter with his religion, will find his condition in society more tolerable now than in the last century; whilst another of equal piety, combined with moderation and good sense and urbanity and a freedom from all peculiarities of manner and of language, will be relatively worse. It is true, that the former will still meet with more positive odium than the latter, but comparatively the quantity will be less. The reason of each of these effects is evident. The dislike to the actual piety of each class, remains much the same as it was before; but the superadded dislike attached to the exceptionable peculiarities of the one, is too often uncandidly divided between both, and thus the former balance is destroyed. The hot or eccentric partizan is less assailed now than formerly ;partly, because the diffusion of religion amongst a large class of the community has disposed them to forgive and even encourage individuals who, with all their faults, are still right at heart, and are ace tively concerned for the salvation of men; and partly because those who have no conscientious feeling of this kind, are legally prevented from interfering in a hostile man ner on the subject;-to which it might be added, that the more fre quent recurrence of the fact prevents its exciting that degree of notice which is necessary to public opposition. But, on the contrary, the humble, faithful, unostentatious, peaceful minister of Christ usually meets with a degree of suspicion from the world which, in former times, would not have fallen to his lot. He has to bear, not only the natural dislike which multitudes always feel towards genuine piety, even when accompanied with the most pleasing and amiable associations, but also the peculiar oppro brium which has been accidentally or malignantly connected with it. He is punished for the faults of others as well as his own. An as sociated feeling in the public mind has sophisticated the judgment, and raised suspicions, where there was not the least ground for their entertainment. Methodism, so called, being considered by a large party as the great object to be avoided, the first fear excited at the entrance of a young minister into a parish is, lest he should prove to be a person of that description. Even impiety is sometimes, I fear, considered as a good exchange for Methodism. I really, sir, dislike exceptionable peculiarities in a theologian as much as you or any other man can do; but, in the present day, and amongst a certain class of persons, one knows not what may or may not be construed into Methodism. I never could have suspected à priori, that to distribute the Scrip- & tures without note or comment was.. methodistic, yet, such I now find6 to be considered the fact.. I have known a clergyman suspected for as Methodist because he made a residen mark in public company which any conscientious Deist would have been ready to admit. A lady of my acquaintance was advised to refrain from attending the daily public prayers of a neighbouring church, because such a proceeding might procure her the appellation of a Methodist. On reading several of the titles to the tracts of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge to different persons, I have been instantly and promptly told they were methodistic; and upon explaining the respectable source from which they were derived, have received for answer-" Things are now altered: churchmen must not nse the same language now which they did formerly, because the people are disposed to Methodism." Half a century ago, an earnest and affectionate sermon procured approbation even where it was not followed by conviction and amendment. Men took for granted that the minister was right and orthodox in making the appeal, even though they might not feel inclined to attend to it. In such cases, they did not suspect their clergyman, but themselves. But now it is consider ed, especially in the upper classes, a respectable way of silencing one's conscience, to charge the bearer of all ungrateful tidings of a religious kind with being a Sectary or Methodist, and every thing uttered from the pulpit, that is calculated to arouse and affect the hearers, as being methodistic. The drift, sir, of these remarks, you will perceive, is to prove, that the offence of the Cross has by no means ceased; and that, consequently, there is still as much need as ever to guard the young diviue against the fear of man in the ordinary acceptation of the term. But having urged this, we must not forget that there is also, as beforementioned, a danger from another class of persons; so that the advice, in order to be effectual for his guidance, ought to assume the most extensive range. It is not in one case only, but in every case, that "the fear of man bringeth a snare." A minister must neither be, too high in doctrine because his friends are too high, nor too low because they are too low; but acting from a humble sense of duty, and a dependence upon the Divine protection and instruction, must firmly persist in living above either the frowns or smiles of man, remembering that " one is our Master, even Christ." To the Editor of the Christian Observer. WHEN I wrote the Note on Acts viii. 15-17, quoted by your cor respondent, OLD CHURCH, (No. for January, p. 7), I most decidedly thought, that the Samaritans spoken of were regenerated before they were baptized, and not at their baptism: and after all that has been since written on the subject, I still think so; because the profession made or implied in baptism, was such, that unregenerate persons could not make it with sincerity; they could not "have the answer of a good conscience towards God" in this important transaction. I suppose that Philip administered baptism as rightly to Simon Magus as to the other Samaritans: did he then, as a believer, partake of the regenerating, and sanctifying, and comforting influences of the Holy Spirit? Even Hooker allows, that " sacraments contain in themselves no vital force or efficacy: they are not physical but moral instruments of salvation, duties of service and worship, which unless we perform as the Author of Grace requireth, they are unprofitable." (5 B. Sect. 57. Ecc. Polity.) Bishop Burnet also says; "We look on all sacramental actions as acceptable to God, only with regard to the temper and the inward acts of the person to whom they are applied, and cannot consider them as medicines or charms, which work by a virtue of their own, whe ther the person to whom they are To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I HAVE been a member of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge about eight years, but my occupation has not enabled me to do more than give it my pecuniary aid. I have recently been disturbed by reading, in the Commen、 tary upon the Bible, now publishing under the authority of the Society, the following passage: "Our translation of this passage (Eph. xi. 8.), For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, is a little ambiguous and many people have unhappily concluded from it that faith is the gift of God; a gift, I mean, in some peculiar sense; such a gift as is not vouchsafed to mankind in general, like the gift of reason, or any other common blessing." This "unhappy" conclusion, which the Society's Commentary laments, I was led into by the kind care of a tender mother, who early taught me the Catechism of our church; and the part that convin ced me that faith and every spiritual blessing were gifts was this: "My good child, know this, that thou art not able to do these things of thyself, nor to walk in the commandments of God, and to serve him without his special grace, which thou must learn at all times to call for by diligent prayer." Since my childhood, I learnt in our Prayer-book, that "the condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works, to faith and calling upon God." Besides which, I find the Liturgy full of this doctrine-prayer after prayer being plain petitions for Divine assistance. "Grant that by thy holy inspiration we may think those things that be good, &c." "Grant that they may both perceive and know what things they ought to do, and may have grace and power faithfully to fulfil the same, &c." "Give us grace that we may receive that his inestimable benefit (the sacrifice for sin), &c." "Give unto us increase of faith, &c." "That it may please thee to give us true repentance." "Grant us so perfectly to believe in thy Son Jesus Christ." "Grant us perfectly to know thy Son Jesus Christ, to be the way, the truth, &c." "We give thee humble thanks for that thou hast vouchsafed to call us to the knowledge of thy grace and faith in thee." I must copy a great part of the Liturgy, to insert all the passages bearing on this point. I am not now labouring to shew that the doctrine sanctioned by the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge is unscriptural and a false inference from the text: if it is shewn to be subversive of the doctrine of the Established Church, I conceive it to be the duty of our spiritual rulers to step forward and save it from the heretical views now sent forth into the world, under the sanction (doubtless unwittingly) of this Society. That it is unscriptural is plain to the meanest capacity who studies his Bible, and who, instead of the fallible opinions of mortals, seeks (as directed by our Catechism) the "special grace" of God to direct him into the knowledge and belief of the truth. I hope the "unhappy conclusion," (viz. that faith is the gift of God a special gift to be called for earnestly by prayer) will never be expunged from the Liturgy: join what I conceive to be the true while it stands there, the Prayer version. ויקרא אברהם שם המקום ההוא יהוה book will be an excellent antidote יראה אשר יאמר היום בהר יהוה יראה. to the opinions expressed in the commentary in question; and I would humbly suggest that, from a regard to the Established Church, at least this Bible shall not be circulated without the Book of Common Prayer. A LAYMAN. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. EVERY attentive reader of the Old Testament, must have been struck with the obscurity of the 14th verse of the 22d chapter of Genesis. As the passage has attracted considerable notice, and no satisfactory solution of the difficulties attending it has yet appeared, at least as far as my limited reading extends, I shall make no apology for troubling you with a few remarks upon it. My object is to shew that our authorised version of the passage is incorrect, and to propose in its stead one more intelligible. The passage is as follows:- "And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh; as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen." Now, sir, I would ask, what consistent meaning is it possible to extract from these expressions? What shall be seen in the mount of the Lord? When the transactions of the day were ended, uothing more remained to be either done or seen, and therefore it seems improbable that a name should have been give to the place, from the expectation of any future event. I would also observe, that the word of the original is translated in a manner altogether unwarranted: must always mean "this day," or to-day;" and if the author of the Book of Genesis had intended to say "To this day," 66 would have written e I shall first quote the whole pas. sage in the Hebrew, and then sub "And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah jireh; because, said he, this day in the mountain the Lord hath provided.” In this version, sir, you will observe that I have given to the future verb the signification of a preterite; which I conceive to be fully justified, in the first instance of its occurrence, by the vau which stands at the beginning of the sentence, and in the second instance, by the word w going before it, which has the same power as the vau to convert the future tense into a preterite. The advantage of this version above the authorised one must, I think, be obvious. Of the transactions which took place on that day (on the mountain of Moriah), the most interesting to the feelings of the Patriarch must undoubtedly have been, that at the moment, when he was about to become the executioner of his beloved and only son, the Lord interfered, and provided a ram to be offered up in his stead. It was therefore most natural that he should give to the place a name connected with so touching a recollection. As a parallel instance, I might adduce that of Leah, at the latter end of the 29th chapter, giving to her three sons in succession, names suggested by the circumstances of their birth, and intended to commemorate the gracious interposition of Heaven to soften her sorrows. The word 7 occurs in the sense of providing in the 8th verse of the same chapter (22d), and seems to point out its true meaning in the 14th. The Septuagint version of the passage in question, seems singularly loose and inconsistent. In one place they translate Jehovahjirel κύριος είδεν, in another κύριος wpty. The latter interpretation is To the Editor of the ChristianObserver. Of all the afflictions by which it pleases the all-wise Parent of the universe to try the faith of his people, none perhaps, to a mind that has ever known the pleasure of vigorous intellectual pursuit, or of active employment, is more difficult to endure than lingering and hopeless indisposition. Violent illness enters not into comparison with it: the shock, the pain, the danger, and the anxiety these create, engross the mind and sustain the spirits. But we get used to see others suffer: when the case is remediless, and no immediate apprehension of danger exists, in terest ceases: we even wonder that privations and restrictions to which we are become accustomed, the necessity of which is so obvious, should continue to be felt; and attention flags at the time when it is most needed. Nor is the idea correct, that spiritual joy is usually the accompaniment of ill-health: the reverse is more frequently the case; and disqualified, in a great degree, for spiritual or intellectual employments-unable to attend to those duties, or make those exertions, which in depression of spirits unattended with bodily disease, though painful, are commonly salutary, the mind is left to aggravate its calamity by poring upon it. It perceives its faculties weakened, the "spirits prompt to undertake, and not soon spent, though in an arduous task, the powers of fancy and strong thought' lost; its ability for giving, almost for receiving pleasure, vanished; it feels itself a burden rather endured, than desired in society. A mistaken pride suppresses, as far as possible, every indication of what is suffered. What escapes is attributed to ima CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 183. gmation or peevishness, and, illunderstood or misconstrued, meets perhaps with little attention. The mind dwells exclusively on what it considers unkindness, but which is in reality nothing more than ignorance or inconsideration: it becomes tumultuated; spiritual considerations are unregarded; "all men are liars" is the feeling towards our fellow mortals; and, " is it good unto thee that thou shouldest oppress, that thou shouldest despise the work of thine hands?" towards God. O what may not the voice of friendship and compassion, in this morbid and unjustifiable, but pitiable state, effect!" A good word maketh the heart glad ;" and in such a situation it will be deeply felt: deep sinks the shower into the softened earth. None but they who have experienced it;-they who for sad weeks, and months, and years have known what it is to feel the depression arising from wearing and continued sickness-the painful sense of uselessness and dependence-one melancholy day succeeding another-no capability of cheering, invigorating exertion to change the current of thought, or quicken the flow of ideas;-can be aware how much and for how long a time, a kind wish, a cheering expression will be felt; nor the chilling depressing effect of neg lect on the part of those to whom the mind has turned with the fond hope of sympathy and consolation. This confirms every gloomy idea before entertained: it brings conviction to the mind, that it is no longer able to fulfil its part in the social compact-that what is granted, is granted solely on the score of compassion. Painful couclusions, slowly and reluctantly admitted! Ruminations upon the neglect of others, however, can have no other effect than that of embittering aud agitating the mind. Relief can be obtained only by rising completely above this worldby faith in that reviving declaration, "The sufferings of this present U |