stitution of his nature, he rather looks from than at you-but what then? A man's heart may look one way, whilst his eyes turn another; and I beg you to take it for granted, that he is thinking very much about you, notwithstanding the imperfection of his bodily frame impedes his treating you with a full stare. If you please, you may fancy him in the pulpit, and that your pew happens to be rather on one side of him, which will fully account for his looking straight forward; as imagining that his admonitions and reproofs are less wanted in the pew on his right hand, than in many other parts of the church. It may, indeed, seem somewhat strange that any one, who has renounced (or at least, as a parson ought to be supposed to have renounced) all dealings with the black art, should send a black gentleman, as an ambassador and representative. But strange, or not strange, so it is; and here he comes, and begs leave to say, that he is generally considered as bearing a strong resemblance to his master; upon the strength of which plea, he chiefly hopes for a favourable reception at your hands."

The following lines were written on the occasion of the loss of a young midshipman and nine sailors, belonging to his majesty's ship, Leviathan, who were unfortunately drowned, not far from his residence, in the Isle of Wight, in the year 1804:

Hark to a voice that sounds from ocean's caves,

Ye mortals, who in fancied safety sleep!
They that in ships o'erpass the stormy waves,
See and declare God's wonders in the deep.

Warn'd by our sudden fate, learn heaven to prize;
Earth's pleasures fade, her riches quickly flee:
Death in one awful moment clos'd our eyes,

Thou know'st not but the next may summon thee.

We add some further specimens of his poetical efforts :

A BIRTH-DAY THOUGHT.

My birth-day of nature I've oftentimes kept,

And rejoic'd in the revels of youth;

Yet 'twas all but a dream, for I slumber'd and slept,

Quite a stranger to God and his truth.

But he pitied my soul, I awoke from my sleep,

And he saved me in infinite love:

A new birth-day my Saviour then taught me keep,
For again I was born from above.

And now I believe that the God of all peace
Will be mine till with age I am hoary;

But if angels rejoiced at my birth-day of grace,
How they'll sing on my birth-day of glory!

"No cloud can overshadow a true Christian, but his faith will discern a rainbow in it."— Bp. Horne.

By a reference to the Diary, it will be seen that an allusion was made to Mr. Richmond's review of the late Archdeacon Daubeny's Vindicia Ecclesiæ Anglicana.* This critique, written in the year 1804, and inserted in the Christian Observer, claims a just title to distinction among productions of this class; whether we consider the ability and conclusiveness of its reasoning, the extensive acquaintance that it manifests with the writings of the Reformers, and with the genuine principles and doctrines of the Church of England, or the conciliatory spirit in which it is written. Controversy is here stripped of the acrimonious spirit which too often disgraces its pages; and truth is pursued without violating the law of charity. By a writer in the Critical Review for June, 1805, this critique is called "the most respectable" work which has yet come before him. "In delivering this opinion," he declares himself to have been "influenced by a regard to the author's experience and learning on 'the matters in dispute, to the soundness of his principles, to his talents as a reasoner, and to the moderation and good temwith which he expresses himself." He adds, that the author "has manifested a considerable acquaintance with the writings of the Reformers, and the history of the religious opinions of their day; and that he has successfully exposed some errors of Mr. Daubeny, and has thrown out several remarks, which may well deserve the attention of that gentleman." That the reader may be fully in possession of the circumstances of this controversy, it is necessary to state that the Rev. Mr. Overton had written a work, entitled, "the True Churchman Ascertained," in which he undertakes to vindicate that portion of the clergy, usually designated Evangelical, from the charges and insinua

per

**See p. 39.

tions of their opponents; and to prove the priority of their claim to the title of true churchmen, from their stricter adherence to the real doctrines of the church. In the prosecution of this object, the real sense of the articles and doctrines of the Reformers is investigated and appealed to; and the conclusion then drawn is, that, by a reference to this standard, a very serious defection will be found to have taken place, among many of the clergy, from the doctrines of their own church, and from the principles established at the Reformation. A man bold enough to advance a charge like this, must naturally have expected to create a host of adversaries, and must have looked for support, under such a conflict, to the sincerity of his motives, and the supposed authority of his facts and evidence. It is impossible, however, to peruse this book, and not to acknowledge the great research, the acuteness of argument, the able exposition of the doctrines and principles of the Church of England, and the methodical arrangement manifested by the author, in the execution of his work; which, if properly revised, and purified from some of the defects imputed to it, might still be made highly instrumental to the removal of many doctrinal errors in the present day. Many living authors were specified by name on this occasion, and extracts quoted from their writings, as furnishing undeniable testimony of a departure from sound doctrine. Mr. Daubeny being classed, and in some respects rather unjustly, with others, whose sentiments were more reprehensible than those he professed, came forward on his own behalf, and on that of a large body of the clergy, to vindicate himself and them from the charge of being corrupters of sound doctrine, and produced his "Vindicia Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ," in reply. It is this last work which gave rise to the critique of Mr. Richmond. Without entering at large into the subject, we shall confine ourselves to the selection of those portions of it, where the interests of sound faith and vital religion seem to be most at issue.

Though Mr. Daubeny seems in some places to distinguish between baptismal and spiritual regeneration, there are other passages, where he appears to consider them contemporaneous and inseparable, and declared to be so in the judgment of our own church. On this subject, Mr. Richmond remarks-" as to the expressions which Mr. Daubeny brings forward, as proofs that the church considers baptism and regeneration to be synonymous; we would observe, that the church is usually made to speak in the name and in the character of that part of it, which truly believes and partakes of her saving privileges; and when assertions are made as to the efficacy of the sacraments, the

blessing of church communion, the state of the departed, and other important articles of Christian hope and belief, whether it be in the form of public prayer, homilies, articles, apologies, or catechisms, it is presumed that all who unite in the use of her forms of worship, and are not, by open and known delinquency, worthy of excommunication, are really such as we hope and pray they should be. There is clearly a very wide distinction between the expression of a general hope, and a determination as to each individual case. Without the former, no public forms can be drawn up; but we cannot hazard the latter, without wholly mistaking the nature of the Christian covenant.

"The Church of England, in her office of infant baptism, certainly presumes on the regeneration of every baptized child. But she does the same, in the office for those of riper years, respecting every adult who is baptized. In the latter case, however, it is clearly a charitable presumption; and the exact parallelism of the two forms furnishes good ground for supposing that it is the same in the former. If regeneration is to be considered as always accompanying the rite of baptism, we shall be brought to the dilemma of admitting that an insincere adult, who, though he professes, yet does not possess the requisites of faith and repentance, must, nevertheless, be regenerated without either; contrary to the express doctrine of scripture and of the church."

This explanation, if rightly considered, would solve the difficulty on this much agitated subject. It is the principle which pervades all our services; nor can they be understood, or defended, on any other supposition. They are framed throughout on the presumption that all her worshippers are sincere, and as such, she addresses them in terms appropriate to true believers. If we examine the construction of the services of the church, and study their design and import, we shall see that whether it be in the rite of baptism-of confirmation-of the sacrament of the Lord's supper--in the solemnization of matrimony--in the visitation of the sick--or in the final close of all earthly offices, the burial of the dead;—the language of devotional feeling is indiscriminately put into the mouth of the living; that of faith and hope, is expressive of her sentiments for the dead. If truth seem to be somewhat violated by this arrangement, because it is impossible to suppose that all are partakers of the character and privileges ascribed to them, we should bear in mind that the defect, if it be right to employ such a term, is in fact a defect of discipline, rather than an imperfection in the constitution and design of the church. Nor can the formularies of public wor

ship be correctly modelled on any other principle than that now apparent in them. The outward profession is the testimony to the church, and the warrant for all her declarations: the inward experience is left to the eye and judgment of God; and thus presuming that her worshippers mean what their presence and profession are supposed to imply, she charitably appropriates to each the language of promise and privilege; leaving to every man's conscience to perform the faithful office of an approving or condemning monitor. There are, however, beacons held out to guard against the consequences of self-delusion. In the administration of the Lord's supper, a possibility is admitted of the communicant being an unworthy partaker, so as to forfeit the promised blessing, and to incur the threatened guilt. Why then is the blessing to be considered revocable in the one sacrament, and irrevocable in the other; and not, rather, in both instances, dependent on the quo animo of the receiver, and on the sincerity and taith by which he is actuated in the performance of the duty? That such is the supposition, is evident from the language used in the twenty-seventh Article, wherein baptism is called "the sign of regeneration, or new birth, whereby they that receive baptism rightly, are grafted into the church." The promise is here applied and limited, not to the right administration, but to the right reception of baptism. In the case of children dying in infancy, and perhaps in many other cases, that baptism and regeneration may be contemporaneous, we will readily admit; that they are so, under all circumstances, is as unsupported by fact as by Scripture; for how can we suppose a principle to have been communicated, where we can discover none of its evidences and effects? Or, how can the rite be deemed inseparable from the blessing, when the instance of Simon Magus is a recorded proof to the contrary?

The following authorities, adduced by Mr. Richmond, are very conclusive in proving how untenable is the position that the grace of the sacrament is inseparable from its administration. "Grace sometimes goes before a sacrament, sometimes follows it, and sometimes does not follow it.'*-Theodoret.

"St. Augustin, commenting on the passage, they all drank the same spiritual drink, but with some of them God was not well pleased,' makes the following remark: Though all the sacraments were common to all, yet the grace, which is the virtue of the sacraments, was not common to all. As it is also now, under a dispensation which was not then known, the laver

* "Gratia sacramentum aliquando præcedit, aliquando sequitur, aliquando nec sequitur."