pressions at will (and what great matter would that be in what might be almost called unmeaning expressions?) we need never be on our guard against each other." Our Traveller, in quoting this passage, has omitted the words in italics, and thus conveyed to his readers the impression, that, in the opinion of Dr. Hey, a profession of belief in natural religion and the obligations of morality was sufficient to render a man admissible as a member of a Christian community. It is not, however, only by omitting the words in italics that our Traveller has misrepresented Dr. Hey. In the passage quoted, the professor is not speaking in his own, but in an assumed character. He is considering the objections of those who assert that it is needless to require an assent to articles of religion. He says that it is useful to inquire what the suppositions are on which such an assent would be needless, in order to shew that none of them can be expected to be realized in the present state of things. He makes a supposition, which he states to be an improbable one, but which he endeavours to place in the most striking point of view; and while he is doing this, he uses the expressions misquoted by our Traveller. We know his own opinion to have been, that articles of religion are necessary.

It appears from various parts of our Traveller's works that he has read Dr. Hey's Lectures. I must, however, do him the justice to express my belief that, in the present instance, he is not chargeable with bad faith, but with carelessness. He has quoted at second hand. The passage had been previously produced, with the same omission, by the late Mr. Charles Butler, of whom, as he is now no more, I will only observe, that it is never safe to take his quotations upon

trust.

*

One word more. Our Traveller, towards the conclusion of his work, speaking of "the strange and startling discovery, upon which criticism in its prying course has lately lighted that the three first gospels are but transcriptions from some older documents, and not the works of the writers whose names they bear'-says that it is calculated to strike consternation into protestants. It certainly struck no consternation into a protestant bishop, a living ornament of our church, who was, I believe, the first to introduce it to the notice of theological inquirers in England. But our Traveller is not altogether consistent with himself. He forgets that het had previously quoted, with approbation, a remark of an able writer in the British Critic in condemnation of the daring speculations of the German divines on this subject.

For my own part, I must confess that, with respect to the origin of the first three gospels, I adhere to the old Mumpsimus of tradition. It is certain that before the middle of the second century those gospels existed substantially in their present form, and were attributed to the Evangelists whose names they bear. It is certain, too, that Eusebius, who carefully distinguished between those books of the New Testament which were universally recognized as genuine in the church, and

Either in his book of the Roman Catholic Church, or in his answer to Bishop Blomfield's Letter.

↑ Tom. ii. p. 191, note.

those which were of doubtful authority, believed Matthew, Mark, and Luke, to be the authors of the gospels severally ascribed to them. But, after the lapse of centuries, rise up certain learned divines, who think that the verbal coincidences observable in the gospels cannot be satisfactorily accounted for on the supposition that they were the works of authors who wrote independently of each other. Mark must have copied from Matthew, and Luke from both, or they must have transcribed some common document; or they must have proceeded according to some one of the numerous hypotheses which have flowed in rapid succession from the pens of German theologians, each discovering some defect in the schemes of those who have gone before him, and proposing a new scheme, which has, in its turn, been pronounced equally defective.

"Critics I saw, that other names deface,

And fix their own, with labour, in the place;
Their own, like others, soon their place resigned,
Or disappeared, and left the first behind."

Men will at last become convinced, that it is hopeless to look for a satisfactory solution of all the difficulties which ingenious minds can raise respecting works of so great antiquity as the gospels; and that, if an uninterrupted chain of tradition, extending through seventeen centuries, is not sufficient to establish their genuineness, no ancient work whatever can prefer a claim to be deemed genuine.

But whatever consternation this discovery may strike into protestants, it leaves, according to our Traveller, the Romish church. secure. "The lamp of tradition, delivered down by the apostles, at which the light of the Scriptures themselves was kindled, still burns with saving lustre in her hands." What then? Will the character of the Romish church, as the guardian of apostolic tradition, sustain no injury, if she has proved so careless of her charge, as to allow works, of which the authors are unknown, to be palmed upon the Christian world for seventeen hundred years, as the writings of the divinelyinspired evangelists? Protestants have charged the church of Rome with inserting apocryphal books in the canon of the Old Testament; our Traveller quietly admits that she has inserted apocryphal gospels in the canon of the New. She may love the zeal, but she will, in this instance, scarcely applaud the discretion of her new advocate. He can, however, on some occasions, exercise a sound discretion. He has, if I mistake not, avoided all allusion to the refusal of the cup to the laity, and to the compulsory celibacy of the clergy-ordinances of the Romish church, which the lamp of tradition would not enable him to discover in the first ages of Christianity.

I now take my leave of our Traveller. He had in his former works shewn that he possessed, in an eminent degree, the talent of making the worse appear the better reason; the present, in this respect, will not detract from his well earned reputation. After the solemn declaration of implicit submission to the authority of the Romish church, with which he closes his volume, it is impossible to question the sincerity of his belief; notwithstanding the occurrence of VOL. IV.-Dec. 1833.

4 R

many passages which might reasonably give rise to awkward suspicions. These, however, will either be overlooked, or regarded with a lenient eye, by the dutiful sons of the church of Rome, in consideration of the abuse which he has cast upon protestantism. They are not wont to be over scrupulous about the principles or the opinions of their defenders. They have caused Mr. Cobbett's History of the Reformation to be translated into Italian; and they will not surely hesitate to confer a similar honour on the Travels of the Irish Gentleman.

"Like are their merits, like rewards they share."

I am, &c.

PHILALETHES CANTABRIGIENSIS.

POSTHUMOUS CHARITY AND FANTASY.

SIR,-The following curious illustration of the perversities of human nature has lately fallen in my way, and I have thought that you may possibly judge it worth inserting for the mixed reflection and amusement of your readers. It is difficult to read it without both a sigh and a smile. I have suppressed all mention of names and places, for obvious reasons; but you may be fully assured of the authenticity of the extracts. They are taken from the will of a dissenter, made some thirty years ago. After having declared himself, with somewhat more than common emphasis, to be "in perfect health, and of sound memory and understanding, praised be God for the same," he directs his "body to be decently interred in the vault belonging to his estate in the chancel of- — church, ," and then continues, " And I do request or any other dissenting minister do sing, and pray, and preach extempore over my corpse, in the chancel of the said church, and at my said vault, at the time of my burial; and for so doing of which I give and bequeath to the said Mr. such other dissenting minister as shall comply with my said request, the sum of two guineas; and it is my particular desire, that the Rev. vicar of the said parish church of

that the Rev. Mr.

attend my funeral."

or

do not

Then come the main worldly provisions of the will, indicating (I regret to say) the too sure truth of a clear recollection; after which the testator returns to religious topics, as follows:

"Also I give and bequeath to the minister or pastor for the time being of the society or congregation of protestant dissenters at

in the county of

the yearly sum of two guineas, upon condition that such minister or pastor do preach a sermon for the repose of my soul, on the sabbath day next after the old style, in every year, and on that day if it happen to be a sabbath day; and also a funeral sermon once a-year on the next Sunday following the anniversary of the day of my death; and for so doing I give to the said minister the further sum of two guineas a-year more while they pray and preach extempore, but not otherwise."

The least that can be said of these pious provisions is, that they are

very curious. The will, I am given to understand, was disputed, but confirmed. From some cause or other the last named bequest has never taken effect; but attempts to realize it are believed to have been made very lately, on the part of the congregation named in it! I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

PHYLAX.

SUNDAY SCHOOLS.

SIR,-Will you kindly allow H. H. to acknowledge, through your Magazine, the "stripes" inflicted upon his "back by Sacerdos et Tutor? (See your Number for August, 1833, p. 185.) H. H. has "amused himself" with reading the remarks of Sacerdos et Tutor on his letter in the British Magazine for May, 1833, p. 567. These remarks discover to him, that he has not expressed himself so as to be understood; but whether the fault be in the writer or the reader he presumes not to say. But he begs leave to observe, that "theorist" as he is said to be, he makes on those remarks some practical reflections. As first, that it would be a comfort to some writers if their readers had curiosity enough to lead them to inquire what the writer has in view, and just to take the trouble to weigh his expressions, so far as to judge whether or no he makes out the point proposed. Secondly, that there appear to be some clergymen, and others engaged in education, who, for want of time, or of habits of attention to such little things, do not readily distinguish between a mere monitor in a Sunday school, and a finished scholar at the head, at once, of a parish and of an academy; nor do they seem to consider that while the monitor has only to mind and work his class, the other may be distracted with variety, and obliged to put his cane under his arm, and fight his way amongst his parishioners and his boys,-terrify those who are susceptible of fear, educate those who have the grace to yield to instruction, and leave the rest to their obstinacy and impenitence. Thirdly, that every body does not readily judge of the difference between the simple working of a class of infants for half an hour on a Sunday in a Sunday school, and the government of a parish school, of a grammar school, of the curate's boarders, or of the royal schools of Eton and Westminster. Fourthly, that to guard against misapprehension by careless readers, H. H. night have given notice that his assertion," I expect them (the children before me) " to know and keep their place and attend to all I say. If I cannot accomplish this by moderately quick degrees, and without holding a cane, or using any threatening or harsh_language, I have no business in any school, except as a learner in schools where teachers are trained,"-applies exclusively to the class already so clearly defined, and has nothing to do in any government but that of such a class under the express circumstances supposed. Fifthly, that even such learned readers as Sacerdos et Tutor may overlook the legitimate meaning and practical import and extent of such a clear expression as "the constant firmness and precision with which it is necessary for me to conduct myself in the whole of my intercourse

with the children." Sixthly, that the same sort of readers are unprepared to comprehend how it is possible that he who may be able to manage a few children of ten years of age in a Sunday school for half an hour without a cudgel or a curse, may still keep a rod in pickle, and have manliness enough not only to avow its existence, but to use it also so far as may be neceseary to repress all the common pertness, perversity, and sauciness of youth at school, as well as to make the idle move, and the careless attentive. And all this without alarming any but the simplest parents, or offending any but those whose countenance is no credit to any one in the capacity of a schoolmaster. Other reflections of a practical nature suggest themselves, but let them pass.

H. H. now begs soberly to ask his friend Sacerdos et Tutor, where the article he censures "purports to be an answer to Philomathes"? Why he perplexes us, the humble monitors of the lowest class in a Sunday school, with untranslated Latin quotations ?-Why overpower us with involved high-toned classical language and dazzling allusions? Why confuse the subject with entitling his article “ Parish and other schools," when the article he holds up to censure bears the specific title," Sunday schools"? Could there possibly be any design in thus diverting the minds of cursory readers from the young class, and from that particular point in respect to the children in it to which the observations of H. H. were designed to be confined,—namely, to the conveying to them on a Sunday ideas concerning the Almighty God? Or, has the philosophical, classical Sacerdos et Tutor yet to learn, that the very appearance, countenance, and manner of an adult who knows how to conduct himself with "gravity" and judgment may have more power in the government of the infant mind than harsh and threatening language, supported even by the flourishing of a cane. If H. H. knows any thing of himself, his constitution is pretty clear of those sickly sensibilities which lead people to talk of managing the self-will and the peevish passions of children by "persuasion without restraint," and he abjures the cant of treating scintillations of pride and fits of perverseness and obstinacy with soothing accents. He can assure Sacerdos et Tutor that he has paid some attention to the maxims and examples of holy writ; and so far as he understands them, and can apply them to his subject, with him they are decisive. He delights in the Proverbs, and is not totally unimpressed with an habitual feeling of the want of that influence and guidance in the use and application of the maxims and examples which were afforded in the composition of the writings in which they are given.

H. H. has theories, as had Euclid and other authors, with which Sacerdos et Tutor evinces no familiarity, and every intelligent and practical man must have; but he is no theorist. He has so much confidence in his own practical ability in managing a class, that he should most dearly like to have the drilling of Sacerdos et Tutor, with half a dozen more beginners in education, in a class for a couple of half-hours a day for the next month or six weeks. By that time, probably, he might get them to know and keep their place, and mind a little what is said. They might also find that he deals more