frail mortal examples, the Divine Saviour himself to the Scribes and Pharisees. In modern history also, instances may be found of similar decision of conduct. Latimer, in his rebukes to the unpreaching prelates, is a prominent example. Many of the reformers exhibited this undaunted courage in opposing the evil measures and conduct of rulers, both civil and ecclesiastical. Luther and Knox are marked characters in this respect. Indeed, this species of hazardous fidelity seems necessary to the character of a Reformer: a superiority to the fear of man cannot be separated from the qualifications of one who undertakes to rectify triumphant errors, and correct daring abuses; and there is not a little in the circumstances of public agitation, and the oppressions which usually contribute to generate a spirit of reform, to cherish and foster this feeling. Perhaps, therefore, instances of its operation in the more quiet and undisturbed scenes of life, are equally, if not more, deserving of attention, particularly when they display a magnanimous resistance to the power of evil, clothed with those outward splendours which are but too well calculated to dazzle the eye that would detect, and to unnerve the tongue that would reprove, the lordly vice. In this light, the conduct of a curate, in the reign of Louis XIV., merits high respect and commendation. It is related in the Memoirs of Madame de Maintenon, that one day Madame de Montespan, the mistress of Louis, requested to receive the sacrament from the minister of a village in which she was residing but this excellent man refused her request, addressing her in these energetic words; "What, Madam! you who are a scandal ⚫ to all France! Go, Madam, and first renounce your guilty habits, and then come to this holy rite!" Madame de Montespan went away in a state of furious indignation, and vented her complaints to the king, who consulted on the subject Bos

suct and Montauzier; the former of whom he respected for his learning, as much as he esteemed the latter for his virtuous inflexibility. Bossuet, however, did not hesitate to commend the curate, for a courage which most probably he would not have dared to exercise himself; although, it is true, he did remonstrate occasionally with his royal master; and Montauzier remarked pointedly, that Madame de Montespan should have thanked the curate for having spared her the responsibility and peril of sacrilege.

H.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

IN the account of the blind man's cure (John ix.), it is said, that "He SPAT on the ground and made clay of the spittle; and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay." (verse 6.) And again, in the cure of the deaf and dumb person (Mark vii. 33), "He SPIT, and touched his tongue." A circumstance remarkably similar in the nature of the application is related by Tacitus, Hist. iv. 81. Whilst Vespasian, says the historian, was at Alexandria, awaiting the favourable season for sailing to Italy, a man, whose sight had been destroyed by a defluxion of the eyes, directed, as he asserted, by the god Serapis, applied to the emperor for relief; begging him "ut genas et oculorum orbes dignaretur respergere ORIS EXCREMENTO;" "to moisten his cheeks and eyeballs with SPITTLE." The result of the operation, where a prince was the Thaumaturgus, it is needless to add. To this incidental notice of the practice by the Roman annalist may be subjoined the testimony to its frequency, of Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis, in the fourth century. This father, in a treatise Kara Zapfawr, informs us, that ó oλos rwV πTVσμά, rov was reckoned amongst the standard materia MIRACULOSA of his day.

My object in adducing these passages is to shew, that those very

isolated and apparently insignificant facts in the sacred Scriptures, which the scoffer delights to fasten on, and to ridicule, may always be most satisfactorily explained. The spittle and the clay, it appears, neither were primarily nor arbitrarily adopt ed by our Saviour for the purpose in question. He found a prevalent belief in their efficacy amongst the people, whose diseases he healed, and whose infirmities he removed; and, in condescension to their notions and customs, he deigned to employ them as connecting signs, where otherwise a touch, a word, a look, would have sufficed; and, in his hand, the idle charms of vulgar superstition became in truth the media of restoring power.

Ούτις.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. THE well-known passage in the Epistle of St. James, chap. ii. 14, as it stands in our authorised English version, bears an apparent repugnance to the doctrine delivered by St. Paul; but a slight correction of the received translation, as has been observed by many critics and commentators, strips it of the difficulty, and exhibits the harmony of the sacred writings.

"What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?" In this translation, the article before music is wholly omitted; whereas it is clearly intended to be emphatic: "Can this faith save him?" Can a faith, of which we only hear, but of which we see and know nothing by its fruits, a faith inoperative and counterfeit, save him? "Can such a faith," says Doddridge in his Paraphrase, as may be separated from good works, save him?" So Beza, in his translation: "Num potest fides illa eum servare." Again, Macknight, and many others, "Can this faith save him?" Poole justly remarks, thats fidem non quamlibet designat, sed illam quam postea

66

mortuam vocat. Articulus enim habet vim pronominis demonstrativi. Emphasis quoque hic est in voce dicendi. Non dicit. Si quis fidem habet, sed si dicat se habere." Faith, taken generally, may be supposed to mean either a true or a false faith, and has been understood in each of these ways: but music signifies that particular kind of faith which is described in the former part of the verse, which St. James, further on in the chapter, denominates "a dead faith," and which it is most certain, on Scripture authority, is incompetent to the office of justifying or saving.

I should not have ventured so trite a criticism upon your pages, but that to many readers the English version only is known, while some scholars who have only to open their Greek Testament to disprove their error to their own conviction, are not ashamed to quote the rendering in our translation, in support of a doctrine as clearly opposed to the sentiments of St. James as of St. Paul. Had Luther and some of his incautious followers duly considered this subject, they would not have irreverently spoken of St. James as either uncanonical or "strawy."

CLERICUS.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

This passage

OUR Lord says, Matt. v. 43, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." is sometimes commented upon, as if our Lord meant that private revenge was inculcated, or at least allowed, under the Mosaic Law. But is this the fact? Does the Old Testament any where enjoin or permit hatred to enemies? Did our Lord intend to intimate that it did? Was it not indeed his express object to shew that this and the other laxities and immoralities mentioned in this discourse, were corrupt innovations, the glosses of scribes, pharisees, and hypocrites; and not

the appointed or permitted regulations of the Jewish code? Still it will be allowed, that in the Old Testament the love of enemies is not inculcated with the same clearness as in the New; and the language and conduct of some of the most eminent men under that economy, seem to indicate that there were circumstances under which hatred was considered lawful. I humbly submit, therefore, to your learned biblical correspondents, the following queries:-What was the general character or spirit of the Law of Moses, as respected the allowance of hatred or revenge? Did our Lord add to, take from, or otherwise modify this law? and if so, in what respects? What also was the allowed or common practice, as well as the specific law under each dispensation? A judicious review of these points would disclose much important truth, applicable to all ages and states of the church, and would also exhibit the harmony of the Old Testament with the New, as well as the general character of the additions made in the latter to the former.

R. S.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

THE interest of late excited in Great Britain, in favour of that hitherto small, and scarcely known, but, I trust, truly apostolical and rapidly rising branch of the Church of Christ, the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, induces me to communicate the following particulars respecting the qualifications for admission to holy orders in that communion. The statement will, I hope, have the effect of increasing the respect and affection of every reader for that hopeful scion of the Anglican Church, by shewing the care and precaution employed in selecting those who shall be called to the sacred office of administering the word and sacraments among its members.

Every person wishing to receive holy orders in the American Protestant Episcopal Church, must be admitted a candidate for orders, by the bishop, or by such body as the church in the diocese or state in which he intends to apply may appoint, at least one year before his ordination. In order to his being thus admitted, he must lay before the bishop or body aforesaid, a certificate from the standing committee of the diocese, that from personal knowledge, or testimonials laid before them, they believe that he has lived piously, soberly, and honestly; that he is attached to the doctrines, discipline, and worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church; and that he possesses such qualifications as may render him apt and meet to exercise the ministry to the glory of God, and the edifying of the church. The canon does not say by whom the above testimonials are to be signed. They must be such, however, as to satisfy the committee. The standing committee of New-York have published a resolution that they prefer having the testimonial signed by the minister and vestry of the parish where the applicant resides; and will expect the signatures of at least one minister, and three respectable laymen of the Protestant Episcopal Church.

The applicant must also, in order to being recommended by the standing committee for admission as a candidate, produce to the committee a satisfactory diploma, or certificate, from the instructors of some approved literary institution, or a certificate of two presbyters appointed by the bishop or ecclesiastical authority to examine him, of his possessing such academical learning as will enable him to enter advantageously on a course of theology.

But when a person applies for holy orders, the canons allow the bishop, with the advice and consent of all the clerical members of the standing committee of his diocese, to dispense with the Latin and

Greek, and other branches of learning not strictly ecclesiastical, in consideration of certain other qualifications in the candidate, peculiarly fitting him for the ministry of the Gospel. If a person wishing to become a candidate, intends to apply, at the time of his ordination, for this dispensation, he must, before he can be admitted as a candidate, lay before the standing committee a testimonial, signed by at least two presbyters of the church, stating that in their opinion he possesses extraordinary strength of natural understanding, a peculiar aptitude to teach, and a large share of prudence. The above directions relate solely to a person's being received as a candidate for orders.

When he applies for deacon's orders, he must produce to the standing committee testimonials of his piety, good morals, and orderly conduct, for three years last past; and that he has not, so far as the subscribers know and believe, written, taught, or held, any thing contrary to the doctrine or discipline of the Protestant Episcopal Church. This testimonial must be signed by the minister and vestry of the parish where the candidate resides; or by the vestry alone, if the parish be vacant; or, if there be no vestry, by at least twelve respectable persons of the Protestant Episcopal Church. It is not necessary that the signers of this testimonial be personally acquainted with the candidate. Information respecting him from any source which is satisfactory to them is a sufficient warrant for their signatures. The candidate, however, must produce testimonials

to the same effect, signed by at least one respectable clergyman of the Protestant Episcopal Church, from his personal knowledge of the candidate for at least one year. The above testimonials are to be handed to the standing committee, who may proceed, thereupon, to recommend him to the bishop for orders. If they do so, the candidate must present their recommendation to the bishop.

When a deacon applies for priest's orders, the same process must be gone through, except that his testimonials need embrace only the period since his ordination as deacon; his letters of deacon's orders being sufficient testimonials for the three years immediately preceding that event; unless some circumstance should have occurred that tends to invalidate the force of this evidence.

It is further provided, that no person shall be ordained priest, unless he shall produce a satisfactory certificate from some church, parish, or congregation, that he is engaged with them, and that they will receive him as their minister, and allow him a reasonable support; or unless he be engaged as a professor, tutor, or instructor of youth, in some college, academy, or general seminary of learning, duly incorporated; or unless the standing committee of the church, in the State for which he is to be ordained, shall certify to the bishop their full belief and expectation that he will be received and settled as a pastor by some one of the vacant churches in that State.

PASTOR.

NEGRO SLAVERY.-No. X.

DRIVING SYSTEM.

THE Rev. G. W. Bridges has attacked Mr. Wilberforce as guilty of

gross misrepresentation, for having asserted, that the Negroes " are worked like cattle under the whip, are strangers to the institution of marriage, and to all the blessed

truths of Christianity;" and he affirms that he has proved this accusation to be "totally unfounded." (p. 35.)

With how little truth he has denied Mr. Wilberforce's charge, as it relates to the instruction of the slaves in the blessed truths of Christianity, has been fully shewn in the last Number. That Mr. Wilberforce was equally correct in asserting that the Negroes generally were "strangers to the institution of marriage," has already been proved by the most convincing and irrefragable testimony. Returns from the West Indies to the end of 1822, laid before Parliament in the last session, leave not a doubt remaining on this subject. We shall content ourselves with briefly recapitulating the substance of these returns. Throughout the whole of the West Indies, with the exception of Jamaica, the number of legal marriages of slaves returned as having been celebrated in the fourteen preceding years, among a population of nearly 400,000, had been four, exclusive of sixty marriages celebrated by a Catholic priest. Jamaica, containing 340,000 slaves, is divided into twenty-one parishes. From seventeen of these parishes, containing an aggregate of 280,000 slaves, the return is 130 marriages in fourteen years, or less than at the rate of one marriage in every two years for each parish. The remaining four parishes furnish a less unfavourable return. St. David returns 102; St. Andrews 405; St. Thomas in the East 1612; and Kingston 1648, in fourteen years: so that these four parishes, to use the language of Sir George Rose, look like a temple of Hymen as compared with the rest of the West Indies. With respect, however, to these 3760 marriages, it still remains to be seen whether they are legal marriages, celebrated by clergymen of the Church of England, or only Methodist marriages, which in Jamaica can have no legal validity in any way. And CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 270.

this question is naturally suggested by the circumstance that these marriages have all been celebrated precisely in those parishes where the Methodists have their establishments. And even if it should appear that they have been celebrated by clergymen, yet what connubial rights do they confer? By what law of Jamaica have the marriages of slaves been rendered valid or indissoluble? In some of the other islands the clergymen expressly affirm, that the marriage of slaves is not legal; and whether legal or not, most of them represent it as a thing unheard of. A few years ago, when a clergyman of Nevis attempted to marry a couple of slaves by banns, the circumstance caused a great commotion in that island, and he was obliged to abandon his purpose. And in the year 1816, the AttorneyGeneral of the Bahamas delivered the following opinion upon the subject:" Marriages are considered in our laws as merely civil contracts. To make any contract valid, the party contracting must be of sufficient legal ability. But from the very nature of slavery it is evident that no slave can enter into a valid contract. It follows, that a marriage between a slave and a free person" (that was the point immediately at issue, but the argument of course applies equally, if not more strongly, to the case of slaves) "is a mere nullity. But the consent of the owner would materially alter the case; and, if sufficiently evidenced, may probably be considered as amounting to an emancipation." The law officers of the Crown at home differed from the AttorneyGeneral of the Bahamas; it being their opinion, "that slaves were not to be excluded from marriage, either with free persons or slaves; and that their owner's claim to their services would not be affected thereby." We do not understand, however, that this opinion has led to any practical result. On the contrary, the latest returns from the

3 A