dreary reign of their hoary and icebound winter of thought into this favoured isle, and the Christian world at large.

But we have not space for this minuteness of criticism, and must therefore seize upon the grand points of this important subject.

The difficulties of Scripture are paraded before us, when we speak of men judging: but unfortunately Scripture is plain when they would prove their Church; "hear the Church," say they, and "this is my body,"plain literal words appealing to our common sense; and then having taken our sense captive, immediately the word is very difficult, and common sense is set aside; thus do they throw down the bridge of reason and judgment, over which they have led us, in order that we may never

return.

The Scripture is plain when it points to the Church, the Scripture is difficult when the Church begins to interpret.-(True enough!)

So the clear and simple Scripture proves the authority of the priest, and then the priest proves that Scripture is not clear, our reason is good till we get to Rome, and then we are imbecile: undoubtedly! reason is rated to tell us, that the Church alone has reason, and that we have none at all our understandings are sufficient to convince us that all but priests are idiots.

Thus by the help of the Bible and private judgment, they prove the worthlessness of the Bible and the folly of judging.

Yet if human judgment be so worthless, the priests are only men, or hardly that, so their judgment is no better.

He that trusteth to his own heart is a fool, the Scriptures declare, and the priests quote it; we reply, he is a greater fool who trusts to the heart of another; but he is a wise man who trusts to the heart of Jesus. The oral teaching of the Apostles, was sufficient, but the Church is not the Apostles; we can now attend only to their writings.

We do not repudiate the help of teachers, we hail commentators and preachers, and all helps, but we repudiate all authority: the word is enough to furnish teachers, and call them forth to their work.

In sciences and all learning, masters and dictionaries, and lectures, are allowed, but this is not an infallible standard, each one judges of the help he uses; and so it is in religion. True, there are points which perhaps none can clear up, and Rome cannot help that, still the points of salvation are as plain as daylight, plainer than transubstantiation,-that whosoever believeth in him, might not perish but have everlasting life.

Dr. Milner quibbles about historical and critical questions, which he says the vulgar cannot understand: and in reply to the observation, that these things are not essential, he asks-"how we can distinguish in God's word, what part is to be left as not essential to salvation?" Certainly we can be saved without understanding all the hard names in the tenth of Nehemiah, or deciding on the size and plan of the ark; for the Bible itself tells us, which parts are essential; the Levitical law is for the Jews; the Christian law is for us;-believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved. Moses and Elias are taken away, and GOD says, THIS is my beloved Son, hear HIM; and we see no man save Jesus only; so God himself has passed by all other characters, and with his finger pointed out the Saviour, saying, ye are COMPLETE IN HIM; and are justified from

all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses'. Thus hath the Father distinguished the Son, and himself taught us what part is essential.

Therefore the choice is easy and our duty is plain; for whilst the priest says,-half-quoting and misapplying Scripture" hear the Church," and build on Popes; Christ says, he that heareth my words and doeth them, buildeth on a rock; and all else, such as the Pope, is sand.

The whole gospel is built on the principle of private judgment, and individual responsibility to God: the priest says hear us, we have to answer for you: Paul says, so then every one must give an account of himself to God.

The Redeemer preached not to the learned, who opposed him, but to the common people who heard him gladly, whilst PRIESTS CRUCIFIED him.

Philip said, understandest thou what thou readest, and the Eunuch required a teacher, because the Holy Ghost was not yet given to him; and he had read only Moses, and Philip took care that he should understand, by explaining THE BOOK and preaching Christ from the writings of the prophets. The Spirit led the Apostles into all the truth about Jesus, and we have all that truth in our hand; every man may have in his house, A TRUE CANONICAL COUNCIL, Christ and his twelve Apostles, and may learn all they have to teach, and despise all intermeddling priests, for God hath shewed it unto us.

St. Paul reasoned with men out of the Scriptures, and commended the Bereans as more noble, that is, more heretical than those of Thessalonica, which is Rome: and because they searched the Scriptures, THEREFORE many of them believed.

Our Lord commanded men to search the Scriptures, the priest says they cannot understand them; our Lord said, why even of your ownselves do ye not judge what is right, the priest says it is impossible, and judgment is blasphemy. Thus have they set aside the word of God, by their tradi tions. Christ says, he that hath ears to hear, let him hear; the priest says, our ears are useless; Christ says, their eyes they have closed lest they should see; the priest says, they should close their eyes, and have no right to open them.

Christ says, "let him that readeth, understand; the priest says, they need not read, and cannot understand.

Christ sent Paul, that the eyes of nien's understandings might be enlightened; the Pope sends priests that the eyes of their understandings may be darkened; Christ turns men from darkness to light; the Pope turns men from light to darkness.

The priests are thieves and robbers, who have claimed all the promises made to the Church, that is, to the PEOPLE of God to themselves.

They parade their learning and ask, what can the laity know?-Christ says, I thank thee O Father that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes; even so Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight. The priests say, Christ is with them, and they are the channel of the Holy Ghost: Christ says, if a man (i. e. layman, any one) love me and my words, I will come to him: and my word (not the priest's wafer) shall be in him a well of water springing

up unto everlasting life. The priests say the Holy Ghost is with councils, and Christ presides there: Christ says, wherever two or three laity meet in my name there am I. The priests say they have the Spirit: Christ says, our heavenly Father giveth his Holy Spirit to any that ask him.

The priests say, let the unlearned and unwise come to us: the Apostle says, if any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not.

The priests say the priests are the Church: God says the people are the Church, and the people are the priests as well; ye laity are a holy nation, a royal priesthood; and they shall be my people, and I will dwell in them; ye (laity) are builded together into a holy temple in the Lord for a habitation of God by his spirit. And a priest shall not say, know the Lord, for all shall know me-wise and simple-without priestly infallibility, for the knowledge of the Lord shall be common as daylight; general, as the waters cover the sea: the priests say, the people are to obey them; the Apostle says, try the spirits (the priests) whether they be of God; for though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than is here in the epistles, let him be anathema, and what Paul binds on earth, Christ will bind in heaven.

The priests say, Christianity is dark: Christ, the centre of Christianity, says he is the light of the world.

Christ is the true light, that is, the sun. Wiseman lights candles, as a sign that this sun has not risen on him; and by these candles they would light the laity. But he is the true light who, coming into the world enlighteneth every man. Isaiah says, to the law and the testimony: the priests say, to the Church and the Pope. What, then, shall we say of this vast system of delusion?

ye

It exposes its abettors to that threat of the Apostle,-take heed what build on this foundation; for if any man build wood, hay, straw, or stubble, the fire shall try every man's work. This is the passage on which the priests found purgatory, and the purgatory belongs to THEM; it is the work of the teacher that is thus to be tried; but as the priests, in their avarice for power, claim to themselves the promises that belong to the people, so they transfer to the people the threatenings that belong to faithless perverters of God's word and man's conscience. This threatening of trial by fire is for false priests, who build on Paul's foundation, viz., Jesus Christ, their own false doctrines: these priests are to go to this purgatory.

And now, in conclusion, if any think that in these inquiries we have used lightness of wit and satire, let them consider the monstrous absurdities, as well as deep spiritual wickedness, with which we have had to deal. Wit has not been employed to evade a difficulty, but only to point an argument, even burlesque, and the trials of Sham Peter and Church never forgot logic; nor are we ever more serious than when seemingly in jest on such momentous subjects. This way of putting things both relieves attention, which has been required in this instance; and is the feather on the arrow, that it may fly swift and sure to the true aim, the understandings and conscience of men.

The ancient thyrsus was a spear-head, hidden in a wreath of ivy and vine leaves; and this method we have resorted to, to give effect to in

struction, whilst we have not shunned to appeal to the true armoury of that word which is quick and powerful,-sharper than any two-edged sword.

God made man in his own image, that is, to have dominion; but he sunk under the slavery of sin and priestcraft: so that all things were not put under him; but we see Jesus, made after man's original, to lift man from under his slavery and degradation, that as he rises with Christ, all things may be under his feet. But the priests come to rob man of dignity and dominion, and frustrate the work of the Redeemer by hindering the emancipation of mankind; and they come with falsehood, in the name of that Peter who said, stand up, I am only a man; and they say, lie down; you are only slaves, and we are your masters.

To preserve their rule, they have reversed that saying, "the Word of God is not bound," for they have chained it to the chair of Peter, and made both Christ and his followers children. For, as in the cathedral in this town, we have a device of the Madonna and child, with St. George killing the dragon, so have they ever kept the Saviour in childhood, in his mother's arms, wrapped in swaddling-clothes, and presented these to the people; whilst the saints, and not Christ, have killed their dragons, forgetful that Christ left his mothers' arms, where they ever paint him, and has ascended to his Father's throne, to rule over his own freed men!

NOVELS: ARE THEY BENEFICIAL OR INJURIOUS
TO SOCIETY?

IN attempting to sustain the affirmation that novels, upon the whole, are rather injurious to society than otherwise, our greatest difficulty will be to make the shadow we oppose take some palpable shape, that you may perceive our adversary, and become spectators of the strife.

What, then, are Novels? Some are anxious to include under this title the whole range of fictitious literature, and so sail triumphantly under false colours. But we conceive there is a great deal of glorious fiction, constituting the wittiest and sublimest creations of the intellect, which does not come under this denomination. We do not call satires, plays in general-whether tragedy or comedy-Novels (though some Novels may be dramatized); nor do we consider Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress," or the "Parables of the Bible," or Milton's "Paradise Lost and Regained," to be Novels; some may, perhaps, be inclined to call these, and others like them, religious novels; but this seems to us a strange combination of words. The term novel, in its general use, is peculiarly sacred to secular purposes.

Novels, then, form a peculiar class of fictitious literature; they are a modern form into which exuberant fancy has shaped herself. The exact meaning of the word is learnt better from an acquaintance with books than from any definition. If we were asked why "Robinson Crusoe" is not a novel, we should scarcely be able to decide whether it really be one, or, if not, in what respect it falls short: perhaps it wants some catastrophe, that shall result from man's ambition, or from woman's love; but

it chiefly fails in the latter element, which we all know is nearly as essential for the due progress of novel events as for the real happiness of human life. Though, on consideration, this is to masculine an idea, for whilst no orthodox young man would read a novel in which there was no heroine, there is the same reason to suppose that the ladies would equally resent the absence of the hero. We must, however, admit that we are at a loss for a definition, and can only say, that by a novel, we mean what people generally mean by the same term; and that for any further explanation we must refer to the cases where the word is used. Nor is this difficulty more in_ the way of those who oppose, than of those who defend, these books. For if we are said not to know what we attack, they are equally ignorant as to what they support.

But it will not be pretended, that we can have no discussion, nor lay down any principle where a definition is impossible, for in the majority of practical cases a definition would be out of the question.

In all cases of" imperfect rights," there is this difficulty; but though we cannot tell to a scruple how much gratitude is becoming in certain cases, we can insist on its propriety, and censure its absence. Although there may be no laws to enforce generosity and courtesy, yet we may reason clearly about these things; and, indeed, we very often understand better those things which cannot be defined, than those which can. But who can say with the proverbial precision of an Act of Parliament what a heap is? And yet a man may be indicted for a nuisance, if he lay a heap at your door. On the same ground we indict these Novel-mongers. Nor shall we be turned aside from our sacred duty by any demands for definition, even though they should show demonstratively, that because you cannot name the genus and differentia,-that between them include and distinguish palaces and cottages,-that, therefore, a peasant is a king. If, however, gentlemen still insist on this preliminary, we invite them to look carefully at the subject of imperfect rights, and try the metal of their weapons on that shield.

We will not stay to ask for a definition of fictitious literature, or it would readily appear that even this is not very definite, since fiction must mingle largely with fact, even in real history; for the historian who has the readiest fancy always gives the most vivid portrait; but we proceed at once to the main question: are Novels beneficial or injurious to Society? There is one great mistake to which the advocates of novels are liable, in common with the advocates for the stage, namely, choosing the one great name of unquestioned lustre and worth, to decide the whole inquiry. You would think in the case of the theatres, that the influence of the stage meant the influence of Shakspeare; whereas everybody knows that he is, comparatively, seldom aeted; the stage requires grosser allurements. Shakspeare is too pure and too lofty for the generality of play-goers; an obscene dance would out-vote him any night. So with novels; one

But

would think the influence of novels means the influence of Scott. how many more are they who deal in the daintier productions of this modern intellectual froth!

Shakspeare and Scott are unique examples; to compare them with others, is like Tityrus comparing Rome with his own village. This, however, Tityrus confesses to be a misapprehension: the things differ not only in size, but in species.