spirit which marks all their works both as regards doctrine and Ritual. It is a wonder that they were able to preserve what they did; and it would be most unfair to appeal from their mature judgment to what may chance to have survived in a diocese or parish under a succession of uninstructed and unbelieving incumbents. Great allowances should be made for the operation of this state of things in the troublous times which ensued upon the Reformation in this country.

2. And then again the Rubrics, as well as all parts of the Prayer Book, require to be interpreted according to the meaning which words and things bore universally in earlier ages. So all such terms as Priest, Regeneration, Confirmation, &c., north side of altar, do not admit of dispute in respect of their meanings.

The Rule that we have given, so qualified, seems to us to be not only in itself intelligible, but also such as people would be willing to accept, whereas they not unnaturally shrink from anything so vague as the principle which Mr. Bennett advocates, under cover of which they have apprehension that almost anything might come in. To the minds of many it is as bad as the old et cætera oath, of famous memory.

In looking at the list of usages which Mr. Bennett thinks to sanction by the other rule; there are four only concerning which it is doubtful if they would not equally be authorized on the principle which we have advocated. They are the mixed chalice, chrism, incense, and the anointing of the sick. The first, however, may fairly claim to stand upon the fact of the original Institution having been so done; and the last must appeal for its validity to Edward's First Book. The use of chrism, which, in so far as we remember, is now for the first time advocated, cannot be considered of much importance; and the advocates of incense usually contend that there is Post-Reformation authority for its employment in the service of the Church. At all events, it seems to us a great matter to have an alternative proposition, and not to allow the question to be decided as though we had only one arrow in our quiver. In some places (as at p. 92,) Mr. Bennett seems disposed to set aside rubrics altogether. We trust that he will modify this view upon reflection, because we cannot think that it is tenable, and all overstatements have a tendency to produce a recoil.

In the last chapter he is very strong against the Act of Uniformity and all efforts to repress variations of ritual, and pleads eloquently for "toleration."

We will conclude with an extract designed to show the contrast which the Continental Church presents to ourselves in the matter, only premising, that although the picture which Mr. Bennett draws is true as regards the past, it is gradually ceasing to be true, as an unbending Ultramontanism is sweeping away all nationalities, and destroying all "liberties." Nevertheless, the argument is not without weight.

Throughout the countries of Europe, Italy, Spain, France, Germany, Belgium; there are hardly any two Metropolitan dioceses in which there is identity of religious ceremonies. Even in the Mass itself, save only in the Canon, where by the rules of the Church no variation can occur, the ritual is hardly ever the same. Tracing up from Sicily and Naples northward, there are many deviations from the ritual of Rome. Florence and Milan have ceremonies peculiar to themselves. Venice, again, and Vienna are quite dissimilar, while those of the Gallican Church, e.g. Lyons and Paris, have many rites and customs never seen or heard of on the other side of the Alps. In the different monastic orders scattered through the communion of Rome, Religion breathing throughout, with the spirit of self-denial and good works, takes different aspects for its manifestation in divine worship. According as the founders of the various orders were moved to the ends which they had in view, so is the tone of their religious services, so their ritual, so the form and order of their devotions. Enter a church of the Jesuits, you will find it a very different thing from one of the Oratorians, a certain similarity forming, of course, the foundation of its character, but its details varying."-Pp. 100, 101.

"And even further still. Taking a wider view even than the confines of Europe, the Communion of Rome receives many within her bosom whose ritual and ceremonies are totally distinct from her own. A certain portion of the Greek Church acknowledges the Papal Supremacy, and in return is acknowledged by Rome. But because of that, the rites and ceremonies of the Greeks, which are very peculiar and altogether different from any other Church, are not abandoned. Greek Bishops assist in the functions of the Roman rite, and in the heart of the city of Rome a Greek Bishop with his Priests and Deacons are free to perform their religious devotions after the Greek rite. The two mix together in the unity of the Spirit, but their ritual is most distinctly and remarkably at variance. Then, moreover, throughout the whole of the churches on the continent there is nothing so observable as the variety of their forms of prayer. Short services for the poor, simple ones for the unlearned, litanies of every kind, benedictions, triduos, novenas, devotions for the Quarant'ore, each parish church its own peculiar saint, with festas appertaining, not known anywhere else -in fact, all sorts of worship, of every type and form, varying in the churches not only of the same diocese, but in the same town. This forms the most striking part of the Catholic worship in foreign countries. Uniformity is eschewed. Variation is its most conspicuous feature. Of course unity of doctrine is closely watched, but unity of doctrine may easily be clothed in variety of dress, and this variety of dress suited to each class, retains all. There are a thousand ways of worship, but one Church. And yet here in England we are contending with each other because we must needs be all alike. But why should we be all alike? The flowers are not alike; the forms of animals are not alike; the shapes of the hills are not alike; the plumage of birds is not alike; the stars are not alike; one star differeth from another star in glory. In fact, variety is the essence of nature. Why, then, should there not be in every large town, growing up as circumstances unfolded them, different forms of worship without disturbing unity? Here a church noted for its austere simplicity, there another with an elaborate

·

ritual. Preaching might be the main work of some, sacramental worship the great attraction in others. Blank prayers read out of a desk might be allowed if it so suited the congregation, choral psalmody and elaborate music if on the contrary the congregation desired to have it. Preaching in a black gown need not of necessity exasperate one who used the surplice, nor need one who had been used to consecrate the Blessed Sacrament in a vestment refuse to communicate with one who merely wore a surplice. An introit sung at entering need not anger one who preferred to begin with the LORD's Prayer, nor need a bare offertory sentence read without music frighten away one who delighted in hymns and sequences. This surely would be wisdom, and being allembracing in its object would draw many to CHRIST. It is a narrow and contracted mind that seeks after uniformity. A Catholic mind allows for a variation. Rome follows this plan, and has no schism. England avoids it, and clothing its churches as it would a regiment of soldiers, is split into endless factions.”—Pp. 102-104.

THE PRIESTLY LIFE.

Life-at-Ease Incumbents. By MARK PARSONS. London: Masters. 1867.

THERE are few tasks less grateful to the reverent mind than that of censuring those in authority, and more especially is the work a painful one when the authority comes to us armed with spiritual power, when we have to lift our voice against the rusting of swords whose edge has been sharpened in heaven to keep our Eden against the spirits of evil. Submission and obedience to those set over us in the LORD is a virtue whose praise can scarcely be exaggerated, and it is held, we perceive, in most high estimation by men who call it forth mainly in its negative form of enduring injuries. If one thing strike one as especially inconsistent among the uniform inconsistencies of the lay-clerical element among the clergy it is the rigid spiritual despotism which characterizes their government of the flock committed to them. Their appreciation of that Counsel of Perfection which consists in entire submission of will and of judgment, is a remarkable feature in their estimate of things spiritual. To hunger and thirst after righteousness has been pronounced blessed by the lips of our Divine LORD; but woe to that presumptuous man or woman who in the wilderness of weekly prayers and quarterly "Sacrament Sundays" hungers and thirsts. for a more frequent approach to GOD, who dares to grieve over a church closed from Sunday to Sunday, who longs to pour out the burden of sins and doubts and difficulties to some "" discreet and learned minister." Such an one is told (if indeed any notice is taken of his soul's desire) that he must be "content with such

things as he has," that he must not dictate to those who are set over him, that he is displaying a restless, self-pleasing spirit.

Men who live in the midst of spiritual plenty know, or at any rate realize, little of the sufferings of religious people whose lot is cast amid dearth and lukewarmness. How many a soul, holding barely on and using to the full the crumbs which fall from the rich table of CHRIST's love, will win a high place in His kingdom, only the Great Day will declare. How many, alas, with the capabilities of saintliness, have yet fallen away under the discouragement of neglect and starvation, that day will also bring to light; and none can doubt that it will show many and many an one whose faith has been destroyed by those who should have built it up into a perfect building.

Truth and honesty are especially prized by Englishmen. Their honour is a proverb through all the world, and therefore any want of integrity jars upon the national mind more than another sin would. And, alas that we should have to write it! this sin is especially displayed by men holding benefices in our Church.

We remember the story of a thorough Scotch laird, who, speaking to the minister of his village, said, "A poor clergy makes a pure clergy' sir, I should like that to be written in letters of gold in every kirk in Scotland." To which the unmoved cleric made answer, "The gold would soon be picked off I'm thinking," and we fear his sentiment would find an echo in many a heart, if not on the lips, of his brethren in England.

"Ye seek Me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled." Who can doubt that thus men look upon going into the Church?" Our newspapers advertising sales of livings, our ordinary conversation and literature, the tone of the clergy themselves-all witness to the same sad truth.

"Stancross was a large country parish with a population of something more than a thousand, and the value of the living was £1,080. The Rector was wont to say that his people stood him at about £1 per head,' and there were those who wondered whether he set any value upon their souls.”—P. 4.

This is no uncommon picture of those of our shepherds who are highly esteemed because they give the bishops no trouble. No fear of their people complaining of undue ritualism, of being disturbed by the church bell, of being urged to confess their sins, of seeing constantly before their eyes the Cross of CHRIST. The Cross of CHRIST is no such pleasant sight to the pastors, who in deed deny it. They are only too glad to hide it away, and to decry it as a superstition. And those among their people who are religious take one of three courses. Some (the few) hold on to CHRIST'S Church, and in the midst of discouragement and scarce

ness in privileges, win a high crown of holiness; some spend the zeal and fervour, which might have glorified CHRIST in His Church, in a schismatic worship; some, witnessing the living dishonesty of their parish priest, lose faith in human and then, alas, in Divine truth, and end in a miserable infidelity. They see a priest who denies his own priesthood, giving up his whole energy to some intellectual pursuit, or to worldly pleasure; a "steward of the mysteries of CHRIST" keeping his people back from participation in His grace; a leader in the Church Militant neglecting every written command, and despising those of his brethren who have any conscience about the discharge of their duties.

The little book before us is fiction, which falls, unhappily, short of the shameful scandals which blacken every diocese in England. Vice unrebuked, sorrowful spirits unconsoled, sinners unabsolvedsuch is the account which too many of our priests must give of their stewardship. Instances of gross immorality may be rare, but the general tone of the clergy is fearfully low; and now, we fear, when croquet and cricket-not to mention balls and other public entertainments are so much in the ascendant, it is not rising.

The stories in the book are three in number, "The Squire Incumbent," "The Invalid Incumbent," and "The Fisherman Incumbent," and of course there are but too many specimens of each kind that will occur to the recollection of any observant person. We have not space to give extracts, and extracts do not prove much; in justice to the author, however, we quote a conversation, which shows that he (or she) is not unacquainted with the Northern dialect. It is between a farmer and the curate of the Invalid Incumbent.

6

"I have heerd,' said Mrs. Chamberlain, (the wife of the farmer) who had a slight tendency to sympathise with the Wesleyans, that John Wesley has been a varra' deal thought o' by mony o' t' Church folk.' "Very inconsistently so,' replied Mr. Rivers. It is rather the fashion to uphold him as having filled up a gap caused by the Church's neglect, or at any rate to excuse his grievous schism on that score. But I have always looked upon John Wesley as an ardent, ill-governed, restless spirit, who (monstrous as the notion would seem to his followers) really lacked faith-had no real belief in our LORD's power to guide and uphold His Church. How could it be real love for the LORD he professed to serve, when he not only disobeyed His most earnest commands,--not only rent that Sacred Body himself,-but led others into the same sin? And all under cover of love for souls! How could he be other than a presumptuous man, who should dare to set up his standard against the only banner under which true Christians fight?'

666

Weel,' said the farmer, 'I'm noa scholar; I nivver read owt o' this John Wesley. But if he started them Wesleys and Methodys, I'll be bound to say they've followed up their leader weel; an' they be as like t' Pharisees o' t'auld times, as if they'd sat for t' likeness.'