lengthened indisposition a far brighter realization of the comfort of gospel hope, than he has ventured to propose, through his clergy, to the children of sin and want and sorrow.

There is another aspect in which this letter appears to us not quite satisfactory. A physical evil is on the wing. Creeping along the line, probably of magnetic influence, it gradually, though not insidiously, approaches our shores. But when it comes, it is a physical evil only; and its direct tendency is to make man better rather than worse. Yet while it comes not, while we are yet intact, the watchful father of the flock is awake and alive, and gives the salutary note of warning that we be not found unprepared. There is, however, an evil abroad of truly insidious and deceitful character, which is far more dreadful than any physical infliction can be, and which has been gradually, like the frogs of Egypt, creeping into our temples, our houses, and our palaces. It is that bastard Romanism, which from its nondescript, anomalous, and insincere character is called, for want of a more distinctive name, Tractarianism, coming as it did through Tracts which, while they professed to defend the Church of England, were meant to destroy it. This evil is spreading in the country and in the diocese, and it brings death, not to the body, but to the soul! It is opposed to those doctrines of the Reformation, which have been so ably deduced by our martyr Reformers from the Holy Scriptures. It is opposed, in fact, to the tenor of the worthy prelate's public teaching: yet, spread where it will, and make what havoc it will, there is no pastoral letter issued to call the attention of the clergy to the spreading plague. There are churches in the metropolis itself, where all that is possible of direct Romanism has been introduced; and where the effect is, that successively curates and people have been caught in the snare, and been transferred to the Roman communion. The Bishop of the diocese has been repeatedly entreated to take cognizance of these alluring superstitions: he has been warned of what the evil result was likely to be: he has been entreated, after the expected result has taken place, to apply some corrective remedy, and to deal, at least in the way of reproof and discouragement, with the authors of these seductive innovations. But his pen and his crosier have alike laid inactive by him, (with the single exception of a quadrennial Charge, and that somewhat too nicely balanced,) and the spreading sore remains unchecked, and will do so, unless more active measures are taken, till it become a confirmed leprosy, requiring that "the house be taken down." Doubtless, an undrained district is a serious evil; so is the putrescent effluvia that rises from it, with typhus and every form of wasting fever upon its wings: but the pestilential breath of

Tractarianism is worse, for it brings with it the cloud of Romish incense to envelope and conceal its dread miasma-the damning fever of the soul. And shall no warning cry against this evil come forth from the seat of power? Shall the eddy of preferment indicate plainly which is the easiest way to steer, till one promising young man after another is lured, quite as much by his calculating anticipations, as by his convictions, into the snare; and, excepting an occasional sermon or charge, shall the whole tide of influence flow in the channel of encouragement to this deadly plague? If so, we do most truly fear, that the time will come when this active prelate will regret that any semblance of countenance was ever given by himself to the abettors of this miserable systemof superstition; and that the want of that vigilance which saw the threatening cholera on the eastern border of Europe, and heard even there the hissing warning of its approximation, was not awake to the chaunt and the intonation, and the insidious approaches of a spreading error, as it breathed through the churches, winged with a more deadly poison than cholera ever knew. Much as we respect the motive which sent forth this missive to the clergy on the present occasion, we fear that, in its zeal for a better sewerage in the metropolis, it has left untouched the great moral and spiritual pestilence of our time.

CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHURCHMAN'S MONTHLY REVIEW.

REPLY TO MR. ELLIOTT'S FOURTH LETTER.

SIR, The last letter of Mr. Elliott contains so many charges against me of misrepresentation, that I feel bound in replying, to commence by saying, that never in one single instance was it my intention or desire so to do. I have uniformly done my best to give, and to reply to, what I deemed to be Mr. Elliott's real view; entering upon the subject without a partisan spirit, why should I desire to make him speak what he did not intend?-If I have failed fairly thus to represent him, I can only attribute it to that obscurity of his style, which has made it many times a work of great labour to gather his meaning at all;-and, in the instances he alludes to, an unsuccessful labour likewise. But that I have, in one instance, intentionally made him say, what did not appear upon the face of his work, my conscience acquits me of altogether. This letter opens with an instance in point. At page 55 of my pamphlet, I gave a synopsis of Mr. Elliott's view of the 12th of Revelation-a synopsis, which had Mr. Elliott himself made, and prefixed to the head of each of his Chapters, it would have saved myself and all his readers, many a misunderstanding; for, scattered as his interpretations are over his many pages, and intermingled with his arguments, they need to be thus clearly drawn out, to be visible to the eye, that we may know what he intends to prove. But in this synopsis, it appears I have been inaccurate. In the letter the charge stands against me at full; and, unless a patient reader glances to the note at the foot, he will not be aware how venial my inaccuracies are. I had said that Mr. Elliott makes this vision an ecclesiastical representation of that which the Seals and Trumpets represented politically.-In the Horæ, vol. iii. p. 3, Mr. Elliott has said this; but at page 5, he has added, chiefly, not wholly." And, because I have not put this "chiefly" in my synopsis, he says I am inaccurate. In the second particular in the note, the man-child caught up to God's throne,"the elevation of Christianity to the Christian throne-represented by Christian emperors"-is substantially the same as I have stated; for I say, "the child caught up to God's thronethe triumph of the Christian emperors." The third particular, "the woman's flying into the wilderness," I had represented as

66

the persecution of the true Church by the Arians-and the Horæ iii. 31—38, dwells so much upon the Arian heresy, as the cause of her flight and obscuration, that a synopsis might be forgiven, for not adding also, "other heresies;" which is the sole head and front of my offending. I have founded no objection on these alleged differences; and the charge of inaccuracy, resting ona mere want of fulness, is rather too much, when it is remembered, that I was only giving a Synopsis. But we come to graver

matter next.

The Man-child ruling with a rod of iron. On this I remarked, that the facts of History were against Mr. Elliott's interpretation, because the Pagans were not oppressed by the early Christian emperors. Hereupon Mr. E. exclaims, "Contrary to the facts o History?"—and follows it with a string of assertions of the persecutions of Constantine; and asks that I will tell him, if these be not persecutions, what are ?-Now, in the Horæ, Mr. Elliott quotes Gibbon, as usual, to prove his point; but I have learned the necessity of turning to the Author himself, if I would gain a true view of his real opinion. Extracts that are made for an espe cial purpose, seldom convey the real opinion of the Author. In the Horæ, i. 216, Mr. E. simply says, that Constantine issued edicts for the suppression of Pagan sacrifices, the destruction o their temples, and the toleration of no other form of public worship but the Christian. Mr. Elliott's note on this passage is, of itself, sufficient to indicate, that Constantine never "ruled the Pagans with a rod of iron." He used indeed his influence against Paganism, during the latter years of his life, but his acts never amounted to persecution, though they did to prohibition. If the State will not allow Tom Paine's works to be circulated, it does not therefore persecute Tom Paine. Again, in Horæ iii. 20, Mr. Elliott says, "At first, indeed, equal toleration was accorded by Constantine, to Pagans as to Christians. But the exact balance of the two religions continued but a moment.' As he grew older, his discountenance of them became more marked." The middle clause of this sentence is from Gibbon; and would not every one reading this, occurring as it does, suppose that Gibbon shewed, that Constantine became very soon a persecutor of the Pagans? What then must we think, when we turn to Gibbon, and read the whole sentence, as follows; "The exact balance of the two religions continued but a moment; and the piercing eye of ambition and avarice soon discovered, that the profession of Christianity might contribute to the interest of the present as well as of a futur life." Instead therefore of persecution destroying the balance o the two religions, it was merely the self-interest of each individua

who thought he might gain worldly good by the change. Is this then a fair quotation?

The next passage Mr. E. alludes to, is in the Horæ iii. 43, 44, and concerns Theodosius. Now, I am quite prepared to admit, that under Theodosius, Paganism, as a separate religion, came to nought-and that Theodosius enacted many penal laws, that had a strong tendency to produce this; but these were uttered, rather with a view to prevent the injury that Christianity would sustain, than from a spirit of hatred to the Pagans. So Gibbon, a few lines after the quotation Mr. Elliott gives, says, apologizing for his edict, that the temples should be destroyed, "It was the duty of a benevolent prince to remove from his subjects the dangerous temptation, of offending against the laws which he had enacted." Again, it would appear that it was not the emperors, but the ecclesiastics that were persecutors. "The laws of the emperors exhibit some symptoms of a milder disposition; but their cold and languid efforts were insufficient to stem the torrent of enthusiasm and rapine, which was conducted, or rather impelled, by the rulers of the Church." Moreover, Gibbon clearly shows, that it never was necessary to use violence against the persons or property of the Pagans. Mr. Elliott, at page 109, vol. iii. of the Horæ, quotes in a note the following from Gibbon :-"The violent and repeated strokes of the orthodox princes were broken by the soft and yielding substance against which they were directed; and the ready obedience of the Pagans protected them from the pains and penalties of the Theodosian code." Mr. E. adds, "These were strokes by the sword of civil justice." Does he mean a literal, or symbolical sword? Surely the latter only; yet his words are in danger of being taken in the other sense. Now the context of this passage in Gibbon shows, that the Pagans wanted zeal and spirit to resist; so that they yielded their religion, without making persecution necessary. Again: judge how much a spirit of toleration reigned even then, when in the following page we read, "The profession of Christianity was not made an essential qualification for the enjoyment of the civil rights of society, nor were any peculiar hardships imposed on the sectaries, who credulously believed the fables of Ovid, and obstinately rejected the miracles of the Gospel." Again:-"Theodosius distinguished his liberal regard for virtue and genius, by the consular dignity which he bestowed on Symmachus, and by the personal friendship which he expressed to Libanius; and the two eloquent apologists of Paganism were never required either to change or to dissemble their religious opinions." If this was not toleration, what is?

Now then, in answer to Mr. Elliott's questions, I say, Paganism