a portion of which we have already extracted, and which staggered Bernard into an examination of the doctrine of the Church on this momentous head, he was fast descending into sheer evangelicalism. But this was not the only providential lock on the anxious curate's wheel: the Archdeacon's visitation comes round; and our old friend Mr. Flavel, like Dr. Faussett, fires off a sermon to 66 denounce certain doctrines which had lately arisen at Oxford, and were contained in a series of publications called, Tracts for the Times," p. 79. After dinner some one gets up, eulogizes the sermon, and requests that it may be printed; and our hero "found himself, from mere thoughtless impulse, joining in the request, and thumping the table as loudly as the rest of his brethren, though he had not read one of the Tracts, and was quite ignorant of their contents." It turns out, upon the inquiry of a sagacious Mr. Manwaring, that not one of the company, including the reverend condemner, had read the tracts: the knowledge of the latter, the most skilled of the party, amounting to but "certain extracts in a magazine." So the sermon is not printed; and the archdeacon prudently suggests the reading of the Tracts in question, as a means of the clergy finding themselves "in a fitter condition to pronounce an opinion upon them," p. 82.

Very likely this will be stigmatized as gross exaggeration; but we remember a case which occurred some years ago, when a large body of clergy, who meet annually in the neighbourhood of London, condemned the Oxford Tracts in mass, and this by a large majority: we are not sure that the meeting was not unanimous. How many of the censurers had read the Tracts which they that day denounced, we know not; but our informant, who was himself one of the condemning party, candidly owned that he had read but one of the publications in question-Dr. Pusey's tract on Fasting-and of this he entirely approved. Mr. Perceval seems to have fallen in with cases which confirm our personal experience.

"A case lately came under my knowledge, where one who, Sunday after Sunday, had been harassing the minds of his congregation by tirades against the Tracts, their doctrines, and their authors, and during the week-days had gone from house to house on the same mission, denouncing them as papists, was requested to read a publication of one of those whom he was reviling, which had been found in several cases very instrumental in defeating the popish emissaries; his ingenuous reply was, that it was against his conscience to read any of the works proceeding from any of the writers in question, as his doing so would be to run himself unnecessarily into the way of temptation. But this is a private instance; let me name a published one. One, whom I do not wish to name, in holding up to reproach the conduct of his brother clergymen, bases his accusation, in part, on a work of which he openly declares, 'I have not seen, nor do I wish to see it.' (See the Churchman for January, 1842, p. 43.)" - P. 5.

This incident makes a deep impression on Bernard Leslie's mind. He is led to read the Oxford Tracts, and reading, to profit by them. His new friend Mr. Manwaring removes the most obvious difficulties; and very interesting, though familiar and simple, disquisitions on the great subjects of tradition, church authority, the sacraments, repent

ance, justification, imputed righteousness and judgment according to works, the case of Dissenters, the threefold ministry, and the alleged tendency to Romanism of the later Tracts for the Times, follow each other in a desultory but very engaging manner. They arise naturally enough, from the history of a thinker's mind, during the last eventful ten years; and there are few of the clergy who take high views but may read their own progress towards catholicism mirrored, more or less, in Bernard Leslie's Autobiography. Mr. Gresley's powers are peculiar and rare: he handles the most difficult and abstruse theological subjects with surpassing naturalness, so to say, and ease; and yet he is never superficial. The tract called "The Case of the Dissenters" almost exhausts the subject, and is couched in an affectionate and inviting tone. We should like to see it in a separate form: Bernard writes and circulates it for the benefit of the parish to which he is preferred, and it suits the fictitious purpose so well that we would gladly give it a trial in real life.

Not that we agree with every position advanced by Mr. Gresley; or that we go with him in all his strictures, or explanations. For instance, we see no more difficulty in an objection made to the first number of the Oxford Tracts, when "wishing the bishops to receive the privileges of martyrdom" is thought to be inconsistent with the prayer-"that we, being hurt by no persecution," than we find in reconciling 1 Pet. iii. 14, or James i. 2, with "lead us not into temptation." Is it not obvious, that it is safe as a rule to pray against temptation, knowing, that in Satan's sore sifting the faith of even apostles might fail? and therefore, probably, that of any given individual? and yet, with all this, we may acknowledge that, when men receive grace to suffer persecution for the Lord's sake, they enjoy a very high privilege and gift. See Matt. vi. 11, 12; and the kindred passages for the sacredness of suffering. The heaviest cross which is cast upon us is the most blessed; and so martyrdom and the spoiling of our goods" the very highest to those "who endure to the end:" but while we acknowledge this, we may safely pray that the Church may "serve Him in peace and quietness;" for in such general persecutions many may be called to suffer who would sink under the fiery trial.*

66

Nor are we quite sure that we should have stated the doctrine of justification in a way quite so off-hand as Mr. Gresley has done. The only approach to a fault in his manner is, that it is almost too domestic, and intelligible, and easy, which no high doctrine is; and in our endeavours after clearness there is a tendency, -in our author it does not amount to more than this-towards carelessness in such very holy things: we must train the popular mind up, rather than bring Christian truth down to the level of

Compare the Collect for the fifth Sunday after Trinity with the Epistle for the same day; "Grant, that the course of this world may be so peaceably ordered that thy Church may joyfully serve thee in all godly quietness," &c. "But and if ye suffer for righteousness, happy are ye." 1 Pet. iii. 14.

every-day common-place thinkers. So, while we are on this branch. of the subject, we will mention two or three macula of the smallest magnitude, which will at least show how hard we are pressed for something to find fault with. Page 52, we hear of a charitysermon on the occasion of the Queen's Letter for the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge." There never was a Queen's Letter, or King's either, for this Society; the royal letters alluded to being for the Propagation of the Gospel Society, the Church-Building Society, and the National Society, successively. Page 130, speaking of the rites attendant upon the sacrament of baptism, Mr. Manwaring tells us, "our Church has declared that sprinkling with water may also be used." We are far from denying that it is valid baptism, when the person or child is only sprinkled; but our Church does not say a word about sprinkling; affusion is our rule; the water is to be poured, in the weakest child's case, as Wall proves in reply to Gale's clever objection: so in the second edition we shall be glad to find Mr. Manwaring speaking with his usual liturgical accuracy. At page 251, we think that we have detected a misprint of "physiological" for "psychological ;"-the phrase alluded to was Coleridge's; and at page 287, we find reference made to "Dr. Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of London," on the Metropolis Churches. As far as our memory serves us, Dr. Pusey's most affecting tract called "Churches in London" never appeared in the form of a letter; though Mr. Baptist Noel published one to the Bishop of London on the same subject. We might almost apologize to Mr. Gresley for the infinitesimal character of this criticism; but we should like to see this little book in its way perfect.

Our next objection is perhaps of a graver kind. We will own frankly that we could have spared the Rev. Theodosius O'Brien; not that the portrait of the Irish Curate" a crack preacher, and greatly admired by the unmarried ladies," who coolly proposes to Bernard Leslie to embark in a chapel speculation in London, by which they were to pocket 6007. a-picce the first year, and "preach the other clergymen all out of their pulpits in no time"-is not to the life; but if it has all the truth, it has also all the repulsiveness of a photograph. Besides, the tone of banter which runs through this fifth chapter is sure to offend; at the best, it will only make good churchmen laugh,-indeed, we caught ourselves laughing a great deal too much over it,-and in other cases, the levity will repel rather than persuade. We have no doubt that the irreverent phrases put into this gentleman's mouth are quite in keeping with such a character; but still one or two of them are very shocking, and ought not to have been repeated; though, in mitigation, it may be fairly urged, if this sort of character is far from uncommon, why should not the ignorance, profanity, and selfishness of these ecclesiastical adventurers-these free-traders in evangelicalism-be thoroughly exposed to which we can only reply, that we suppose it ought to be done, though it pains when it is done.

Once more, it seems to us-though we speak diffidently, because every body's own experience will teach him to look at this branch of the subject from his own position mainly-Mr. Gresley has made his hero's revival of Catholicism both at Somerton and High-Kirkstall, the two places where Bernard Leslie was curate and rector, rather too easy and successful, especially in the acceptance of ordinances, and the changes which with scarcely a murmur he is represented as having introduced. There is not a more trying practical question in these times, when we are left without directions from our spiritual fathers, to settle what to do, and what not to do, in entering upon a new ecclesiastical charge. Take a case far from rare: a clergyman of sound catholic views comes into a living, where every conceivable case of violation of propriety and church-order is permitted; an objectionable hymn-book appears in every pew; the Athanasian creed is never recited; the offertory and prayer for the Church militant seem as strange to "the clerk," as though the Menologium were about to be "read to the people ;" pulpit, reading-desk, clerk's desk, pew-opener's seat, and stove-a quinquarticular abominationas completely obscure the material altar, as the last incumbent's sermons; and his once-a-month administration of what he was wont to call "the sacrament" to a rail-full at once--to use the expressive phrase lately in vogue-veiled the Sacrifice Itself from the people: add to all this a distinct association of the Bible Society, Pastoral Aid ditto, Church Missionary ditto, with annual sermons for Moravian Missions, Reformation Societies, and all the other tag-rag-and-bobtail of Exeter Hall; what, we ask, is to be done? Is all this to be swept away in a week? because this is what Mr. Gresley seems to suggest, when he says, "that the best plan is, to take the Rubric for our guide, and act upon it as a matter of course from the beginning;" p. 214. We should like to see it tried. Or, is the draught of truth only to be sipped? is the congregation to be drugged into Church feelings by doses homeopathically minute? This is a grave question; and we sincerely believe that it requires more nerve to preach in the surplice, to abandon the psalm and prayer before the sermon, all which Mr. Leslie manages to effect as a matter of course, and to restore the offertory every Sunday,-and all which is quite right-than it does to revive the daily service; though in point of labour the one does not come up to the thousandth part of the other. And, which is the point we are now urging, it will be better for the sake of those who in their day are settling, or will have to settle, this knotty problem, not to represent the restitution of a right order of things in a parish as a very easy thing. It is a very hard matter; one which requires tact, temper, patience, long-suffering, faith, and firmness, much higher and more lasting than the thing seems to require on paper; and it is well that all, the young especially, should know that the way of the Cross is a sharp and trying one. There is rather too bright a tint of rose-colour in our friend Bernard's successes.

We cannot, however, part from him without another specimen;

and the following may serve, not only as a fair sample of Mr. Gresley's style, but as an admirable instance of his practical, common-sense, christian mode of dealing with hard questions. Besides, it will serve as the promised reply to our fair enemy, Mrs. Pierce, (see our last number,) who fancies that a clergyman can be scarcely respectable, unless he is married.

"The rules laid down by St. Paul, on the matter of marriage, apply equally to clergy and laymen. If a man has the gift of continence, and devotes his whole life, his soul and body, to God's service-if he has resolution to leave all the comforts and luxuries of life, and, like St. Paul, travel from place to place conveying the blessed word of truth to heathen nations -or if he is willing to devote himself to the noble endeavour to convey Gospel-light to our dense population at home,-that man is viewed with especial approval by God, and he takes a higher rank amongst the saints in heaven, and reaps an exceeding rich reward. If the whole priesthood of a country were of this description, truly the nation would have cause to rejoice; and there can be no doubt that in days of persecution, those are least likely to apostatize who have inured themselves to self-denying labours. It is amongst such men as these that the saints and martyrs are found.

"But all men have not this gift; neither does God require it of them. The word of God distinctly allows the clergy to marry, as well as others :'Marriage is honourable in all;'* If thou marry, thou hast not sinned; nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh.'t A bishop, it is expressly said, 'shall be the husband of (but) one wife.'t Experience seems to prove that they who, from high conscientious motives, can without damage abstain from marriage, are the exceptions from the general rule; and that for a country generally, in the present state of the world, a married is better than an unmarried priesthood.

"But, after all, where is the necessity of the comparison? Why not have the advantages of both? Might we not retain the present system of our clergy being family men? presenting in each parish the pattern of a respectable household; while the higher tone which is growing up in the Church shall render them more diligent and self-denying, so that they shall set their equals and superiors in station a wholesome example of denying themselves excessive luxuries. If a wealthy clergyman with a family contents himself with more moderate living, less costly furniture, less expensive equipage, than his means might seem to warrant, it is much to be hoped that some of his lay neighbours might be induced to do likewise; unless it be admitted, that though the clergy are to set an example, the laity are not to follow it. Surely the greatest possible good might be effected by a wellendowed married clergy, who were patterns of self-denial to their neighbours. Nor must we leave out of the account the important value of an active and devoted clergyman's wife, who shall aid her husband in his parochial duties, and render a variety of good offices to her poorer neighbours, which her husband might not have leisure or opportunity to perform.

"But, on the other hand, why should we not also have unmarried clergy, who shall devote themselves to God's service-unmarried bishops, who shall vie with the prelates of ancient times in their munificence and zeal for God's honour-unmarried priests and deacons, who shall dedicate their lives to reclaiming the waste places of the heathen? Nay, why should we not also have unmarried laymen, who shall

"Spurn delights, and live laborious days;"

Heb. xiii. 4.

+1 Cor. vii. 28.

Titus i. 6.