other; for the Christian is required to perform all his duties as unto God, and not unto man.

To represent public prayer as not so edifying as private prayer, seems to me an unnecessary and unscriptural disparagement of this great duty. I would not institute any comparison between the importance of two essential means of grace. And before the writer of the remarks in question had promulgated his opinion, he should have reflected, that, when two or three agree in prayer, Christ is in the midst of them, and has graciously promised that his Father will fulfil their requests. Now, as the benefit of prayer to individuals results, not from any virtue inherent in the act of prayer itself, but from the blessing of God on his own ordinance; as that ordinance is the great outward means by which the unity of church-membership is consolidated; and as the establishment and preservation of church-membership necessarily involve the growth of love, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, and goodness, which are emphatically "fruits of the Spirit," and therefore most "efficacious to individuals "I arrive at the conclusion that solitary prayer is not more beneficial to the individual than joint prayer; and must regard the position as utterly untenable. It has been affirmed, but I think very unjustly, that the Evangelical clergy are disposed to think lightly of public and appointed prayers; to esteem them as a mere peg on which to hang the sermon: and I should greatly regret to find any ground furnished for such an imputation.

Perhaps the implication was made to weaken an answer, of the force of which the writer must have been conscious, That, by the admirable constitution of our services, the most valuable part of preaching has been secured to the people: so that, unless in extreme, and I be lieve very rare, cases, all must hear

the pure word of God, unmingled with the alloy of imperfection and error to which the best sermon is liable. The reading the Scriptures forms the largest portion of what are called the public prayers. But further: every sentence of the prayers themselves is also preaching; second in authority and power to the Scriptures alone. Our Liturgy comprehends all the doctrines which, from the primitive ages, the church has received, and maintained, and transmitted; and urges them in a simple, yet most persuasive manner. Let it not be stigmatized as special pleading, when I assert that the appointed services are preaching. The writer whose remarks I am considering has compelled me to take this ground: he has placed in contrast public prayer and preaching: his argument implies, that the lady can hear preaching only_by forsaking her parish-church. The charge of special pleading would fall much more justly on a distinction which classes the Psalms, the Lessons, the Commandments, the Epistle and Gospel, the Creeds, and the authoritative declarations of the Absolution, under the head of prayer, merely because they are read in a surplice and arranged in the servicebook (as, indeed, is the sermon itself) amidst the "forms of prayer." The common periphrasis for the duties of preacher and hearer gives a more correct notion: it is, to preach and hear the word of God. The expression is just; for it intimates, that what exalts preaching into the rank of a means of grace is its faithful statement of Scripture truths, its repetition of Scripture arguments, and its narrative of Scripture examples. It were, then, highly unreasonable, if all which constitutes the excellence of our otherwise worthless discourses were absolutely dismissed from our defi nition of that preaching which a woman is bound to attend in spite of the displeasure of husband or father, under pain of the "woe "

denounced against her "if she hear not the Gospel," p. 394.*

I acknowledge that the statement given of the "fundamental doctrines of Christianity" is orthodox, temperate, and judicious; and I cannot but deeply lament, when I read that ministers of our church are "far" from preaching them. I hope that the accusation has been taken up on the testimony of some enemy of our Zion: for it must be recollected that the writer is himself busily employed in his sacred office; he has, therefore, few or no opportunities of frequenting churches whose ministers labour under this heavy accusation, and of judging for himself. If, however, he is convinced that the lady is placed in * There is a silent and most efficacious preacher, to whom, if we can read, we may have access almost at any hour: I mean, the written word of God; and, in subordination to it, the writings of pious and sound judging Christians. In enumerating the means of grace, reading the word is, with great propriety, distinguished from hearing it; for, by the constitution of our nature, the mind is very differently affected by these two modes of addressing it. One of them, therefore, ought not to supercede the other: we are diligently to attend to both, as opportunity is ministered. But still both are preaching; both of them instruct and persuade; and in the due use of one alone, where the other is denied, salvation may be attained. But salvation is unattainable if men are ex

cluded from both for "how shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"(Rom. x. 14.) Indisputably, the Apostles considered themselves as preaching when they wrote, as much as when they spoke: St. Peter uses a like expression respecting the remembrance which he had prepared for his flock after his decease, as he employs for his personal labours before he put off his earthly tabernacle (2 Pet. i. 12-15. St. Paul could not preach more argumentatively or more persuasively than he wrote. In his Episties, he, being dead, yet speaketh; and so do all those burning lights who in successive generations have been the glory and the guide of the Christian pilgrim. Much, then, worthy to be dignified with the title of preaching, may be read, as well as heard, by every member of the Church of Eng land, even under the most unfavourable circumstances for edification.

this unhappy predicament, the advice should have been special and private. Many females who read it will infer that the clergy of the Establishment are divided by a broad line, distinguishable by every oneinto those who preach the Gospel, and those who preach it not. They will, without hesitation, determine for themselves respecting their parish minister: many non-essentials will be pressed into the accountsuch as want of eloquence in language or elegance of manner, inability to preach extempore, a sparing use of favourite theological expressions, a short sermon, or a sermon without formal divisions or pointed application. I am not discussing the fitness or unfitness of such particulars; but I believe that numbers will rashly decide from these obvious but not essential distinctions, who are incapable of judging soundly as to the doctrine of the preacher; and will determine that they are in conscience bound to desert him, and to adhere to some other of acknowledged celebrity. It should never be forgotten, that the clergy of the Establishment are bound to preach all the doctrines enumerated in the document under

review, by the most solemn engagements, and that very few will deny this obligation: but that, in consequence of the vast difference which the Creator has been pleased to establish between the abilities and opportunities of men, between their tempers and dispositions, between their manner of apprehending truth, and also of declaring it to others, the fundamental doctrines of our religion must always be brought forward, by men of equal orthodoxy and piety, with very various degrees of excellence. Happy they who have the privilege of listening every Sunday to him whom an enlightened judgment most approves! I do not envy his well-earned and useful popularity: I demur only to the supposed necessity that all should crowd to his church.

The illustration from the case of

the Apostles, which is thought an indisputable proof, wants the main feature of resemblance. Without urging that their mission was, from the necessity of the case, unlimited and universal-embracing especially the Jews and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem-I would point out, that the difference between them and their opponents was of a nature which no one could misunderstand or misrepresent, and is in this particular essentially different from the case under consideration. They maintained that Jesus was the Son of God and the promised Christ: the high priests staked their character and credit on the assertion that this same blessed Jesus was an impostor and a traitor, who deserved the ignominious death which he had recently suffered. It is not, I am sure, intended to draw any parallel between this opposition of light and darkness, of God and Satan, and those differences which unhappily split into parties the ministers of the Church of England. There is room enough for illustrating the importance of those differences without an insinuation so uncharitable and unjust. But if no such insinuation be meant, the introduction of the Apostles' case simply proves that God is to be obeyed rather than man; a position to which every Christian will, without a text, heartily assent.

The "concessions to legitimate authority," recommended at the close of the paper, are smooth in sound: discretion and delicacy are enjoined. But what are the concessions specified? Absolutely none. The opposition of the daughter must be unbending: the manner of conducting it, indeed, must be kind, respectful, conciliating, dispassionate. This is good advice, so far as it goes; but it is not concession. The case of the wife is obscurely worded. A "conflict" is spoken of, "terminating in a painful struggle." The conflict and the struggle appear to me the same thing: but I criticise substance, rather than shadow;

things, not words. This expression might imply that the wife submits: but, no; "even in this case the command of God is the paramount obligation." I believe that I do not misrepresent these conclusions, when I put them into definite language. The command of God, which binds on daughters and wives the duty of being subject to their respective parents and husbands in all things, must be violated, in obedience to a still higher duty, if in the woman's judgment the sermons of her parish minister are not sufficiently evangelical, and permission to attend the ministry of a clergyman unconnected with her parish be refused.

Possibly some special case of glaring tyranny at home, and irreligion in the church, may exist, which justifies the overthrow of domestic peace here demanded under the fearful penalty of woe from God. Such instances, however, are so extremely rare, that the writer himself says "in almost every case" the sad necessity of disobedience may be escaped. Is it not, then, unwise to provide before-hand these plausible generalities for vindicating the weaker party in the adoption of it?

It is an alarming symptom of the prevalent notions respecting ecclesiastical discipline, that not even a hint of the relation of curate and people-which the division of England into parishes, and the exclusive committal of the cure of souls to one individual, create-is to be found throughout the paper. The minister is the minister of Christians in general, of as many as will come to hear him; and all, it seems, are bound to hear him, if he preach the Gospel. We country clergymen are grieved to contemplate such a radical change of sentiment among any of our brethren of the same church. We are aware that it must be traced principally to the enormous increase of population in large towns, particularly in London. The only adequate remedy for the confusion which thus makes men, orthodox in,

HAVING been a constant reader of and subscriber to your work for twenty-eight years, and hoping that I may date my taste for such subjects as sanctify its pages almost from the same period, I feel encouraged to address you with the following suggestions.

As I advance in years, it strikes me there is one assistance in life more than any other which Christians want. It is not doctrine; it is not criticism; it is not enlarged knowledge and discrimination: all these are valuable; but we have, surely, an ample supply of them. Is it not practical directions for the various circumstances of private and social life, on Christian principles, which we chiefly want? And here, surely, all may benefit by mutual experience: and might not that experience be well communicated through the pages of the Christian Observer? Many of those who began at your beginning, are, alas! unable to profit us here, though they are doubtless glorifying God above: but some remain; and I could wish that those among them whom we justly revere would give us the advantage of their twentyeight years' experience.

As your correspondents may not quite understand the nature of my request, I will mention one or two subjects on which I think mutual experience might assist Christian practice. What, for example, have been found the most efficacious means of instructing and regulating the minds of servants?-reading

with them, or talking to them? laying down many rules, or speaking often in a familiar manner? In any case where the heart of a servant has been brought from sin to holiness, what have been the special means which God has blessed?

What books do experienced Christians recommend for persons in various states of mind-for the very ignorant, for the careless, for the young, the middle-aged, the old? A list of these, according to what has been adequately tried and found useful, would be very valuable. So, again, suggestions relative to the best way of conducting ourselves towards children, friends, tradesmen, and others. I merely mention these as examples: but I would say, let all advice be grounded on experience, rather than theory. Perhaps I may hope that in some manner you will bring the subject before your readers; and if this feeble suggestion should tend to the growth of Christian practice and holiness in our families and in our favoured land, I shall be thank ful.

In this day of increasing Gospel light it seems a most important point that the Christian life, in its every-day concerns, should partake of this illuminating process. If it does not, there must be something delusive in the brilliancy of the flame.

QUINQUAGESIMA.

USEFULNESS OF ANALOGY.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

As all our ideas are borrowed from sensible objects; and our most complex as well as most sublimated ideas have been all originated by what we have seen, heard, or felt; it is impossible to give any clear illustration of subjects which relate exclusively to mind and unseen realitics, except by way of analogy. I need not say how profoundly and successfully Bishop Butler has employed analogical reasoning in de

:

monstration of religious truth: and we have the very highest authority for adopting this method of instruction in our blessed Saviour himself, who constantly explained his doctrines by a reference to sensible objects and familiar occurrences; and made large use of the kingdom of nature to illustrate the kingdom of grace. From the subtile nature of mind, and the impalpable basis of abstract thought, no truth purely spiritual can be clearly and permanently fixed in the understanding, without having recourse to analogy. The sublime but difficult doctrine of supernatural agency co-existing and co-operating with the freedom of the human will, was never better illustrated than by reference to the labours of the husbandman; who ploughs his ground and sows his seed, but who only expects to reap by the influence of the sun and rain; if that be withheld, his labours are useless at the same time he is certain that if he neglect to prepare his ground he never can reap at all. Just so, the man who neglects the diligent use of the means appointed for his salvation, and waits for Divine illumination and guidance, will wait in vain; while, on the other hand, no diligence on his part without that Divine aid would be of any avail. The inferences are such as these: That the whole system of providence, as well as the entire economy of grace, is designed to keep man humble and dependant, but at the same time to incite him to activity and gratitude: that a proud, self-sufficient, indolent, or thankless temper of mind, is an insuperable bar to the influence of true religion, and to all spiritual improvement whatever : and, that it cannot be too frequently urged upon the consideration of Christians, that "the tree is known by its fruit ;" that profession is nothing, if it con

sist with indulgence in any known sin, or in the habitual neglect of any known duty, or be destitute of the fruits of holiness in the heart and life. J. C.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATIONS.

For the Christian Observer.

DR. Walsh gives us the following Biblical illustrations in his "Journey from Constantinople."

"First the chouash, who acted as master of the feast, took a soft loaf, called a flap of bread, for it folded up like a cloth, and breaking, or rather tearing it asunder, he threw the pieces to each of the guests: then a metal bowl of soup was set before us, which was soon dispatched with wooden spoons: this was removed, and a large savoury dish of meat, with pultaceous sauce, was laid on. Every hand dipped in the dish, with a bit of bread between the finger and thumb; the thumb was then expanded, and a portion of the contents of the dish enclosed between it and the bread, and then conveyed to the mouth. This mode of eating is another proof of the immutability of Oriental customs: it was thus the disciples supped when Christ broke the bread' and gave it to them; and Judas was designated by the circumstance.

Mustapha had early in the morning asserted that it would rain before night. I asked him, why? He replied, that the wind was changing to the west. This is a more sure indication of rain in the East than in our uncertain climate, and recalls the decided expression of the Gospel, When you see a cloud rise out of the west, you say there cometh a shower, and so it is.' His anticipation was justified; the rain now fell in torrents."