is reported that only one could read well."-Pp. 12, 13. The discourse was delivered in aid of the building of a new National School; and to this object the application of the subject is powerfully directed. Throughout, the argument is conducted with eloquent simplicity; and we sincerely trust that the appeal has not been made in vain. The Works of Jeremy Taylor, D.D.; with some Account of his Life, Summary of each Discourse, Notes, &c. By the Rev. T. S. HUGHES, B. D. London: Valpy. 2 vols. published. MR. VALPY has well merited the thanks of the literary world, and of the Church at large, by publishing, so early in his series, the works of Jeremy Taylor. We are rejoiced to find, by the title, that the project of a selection is abandoned, and the entire writings of that splendid and highly cultivated genius are to find their way into the hands of all whose education enables them to relish them, in the economical, succinct and elegant form of the "Divines of the Church of England." No writer could less afford the labours of the selector than Jeremy Taylor. His very dust is gold; every treatise, every sermon, almost every letter from the pen of that highly gifted Christian is a property which the scholar and theologian would not readily forego. Sherlock's polished and flowing oratory, Barrow's rugged, but severe, brilliant and logical declamation, often arrest the reader, when the material on which they are exerted has possibly been better wrought, and even by an inferior hand; but we cannot afford to spare one particle of Taylor's luxuriant fancy, profound reflection, devotional warmth, exuberant learning, not clumsily introduced for the sake of ostentation, but arising so naturally and beautifully from the subject, that the reader almost believes that the ancients must have been Christians. He was indeed a scribe, instructed unto the kingdom of heaven, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old. But we must not let our admiration of Taylor run us beyond our limits. Suffice it to say, that we are much pleased with this edition. Mr. Hughes's summaries are particularly valuable in the case of Taylor. The artificial character of the Bishop's compositions often conceals the thread of his argument, which is here rigidly traced. As a study for the young divine no analysis could be preferable. A sermon constructed on these outlines can scarcely fail to be useful in any congregation. The Crisis: or, The Signs of the Times with regard to the Church of England at the present moment. A Sermon preached in St. Luke's Church, Liverpool, on Sunday, June 5, 1831. By the Rev. JAMES ASPINALL, A.M. Minister of St. Luke's, and Domestic Chaplain to the Right Honourable Lord Clonbrock. Liverpool: Cruickshank. London: Rivingtons. 1831. 8vo. Pp. 20. IF this impudent tirade had been delivered in St. Luke's Hospital, London, instead of in St. Luke's Church, Liverpool, the scene of action would have been far more worthy both of the discourse and the preacher. Is the house of God to be desecrated by the crude and ill-digested attacks against the Church of persons who call themselves ministers of her communion; and are the worst of passions to be excited within the very walls of her holy places? Fearful indeed are the signs of the times, when young aspirants for popularity presume to declaim against their elders, rail against the powers that be, and trample on the most sacred institutions, for the sake of tickling the ears of the gaping multitude. At all events, "the bird that ;"-the proverb is somewhat musty, but let that pass. Setting aside, however, the ignorant, we will not believe them wilful, misrepresentations of this bedlamite harangue, we will recommend the preacher to become "lowly in his own eyes," and to divest himself of the spirit of "hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness," before he ventures to defile the temple of God by unfounded aspersions against his brethren. The Religion of Socrates. Dedicated to Sceptics and Sceptic-Makers. London: Fellowes. 1831. 8vo. Pp. 106. HERE is another precious packet of trash and trumpery, fresh from the Pottery of Oriel College, in the University of Oxford, and written withal by a Clergyman!!! of the Milkman School of the Church of England. We are glad to see that he is ashamed to publish with his name. In a word, this treatise is neither more nor less than an attempt, disguised under the garb of liberality and candour, to set the "religion of Socrates" upon the same footing with the religion of Christ. The "Sceptics," to whom the affair is dedicated, are those unhappy persons, we presume, who reject the divine authority of the Athenian sage; the "Sceptic-makers," it is very plain, are those conscientious members of the Church of England, who, if ministers, attribute some degree of obligation to their ordination vows; and, if part of the flock of Christ, look for "the comforts of the purest hope and the warnings of the purest fear," in the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, rather than in "unauthorised fables of mythology." Oxford Divine seems to be of a contrary way of thinking, and would fain save religion from contempt by divesting the sacred oracles of " mysticism and superstition." (p. 58.) By these terms we have reason to think that the sublimer doctrines of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Spiritual Influence, are intended; butwe are nauseated with the subject, and advise our readers to commit the volume, if they are unfortunate enough to possess it, to the flames. This Six The Farmers and the Clergy. Letters to the Farmers of England on Tithes and Church Property. London: Roake & Varty. Pp. 72. THIS pamphlet ought to be placed in the hands of every farmer throughout Great Britain; and the Clergy would do well to peruse it seriously and often, that they may be enabled to defend their order when assailed, as is too frequently the case, by ignorance and prejudice. Letter I. is upon the subject of paying Tithes; II. On the History of Tithes; III. On Bishops' Incomes; IV. On the amount of the Tithes and Fees; V. On the incomes and residence of the Clergy; VI. On the necessity of an Established Church. Upon all these points the author has displayed deep research and profound discrimination. He has cleared the character of the Priesthood from charges of rapacity; he has vindicated the Established Church against the groundless assumption that she is wallowing in wealth, and unmindful of the interests of the people committed to her charge; and proved not only that the Clergy are in themselves an efficient body, but that the farmer would not be benefited, whilst the poorer classes would be greatly injured by their de struction. Of the incalculable advantages derived from the Established Church let the Edinburgh Reviewer, at best a doubtful friend, speak; "It is no ordinary national benefit to have a number of well-educated men dispersed over every part of the kingdom, whose especial business it is to keep up and enforce the knowledge of those exalted truths which relate to the duties of man, and to his ultimate destiny; and who, besides, have a sort of general commission to promote the good of those among whom they are settled, in every possible manner; to relieve sickness and poverty, to comfort affliction, to counsel ignorance, to compose quarrels, to soften all violent and uncharitable feelings, and to reprove and discountenance vice." And again; "In retired parishes, the family of a clergyman is often a little centre of civilization, from which gleams of refinement of manners, of neatness, of taste, as well as of science and of general literature, are diffused through districts into which they would never otherwise penetrate." Surely this picture, drawn by such a hand, is calculated to make the rude spoiler hesitate in his work of devastation. Surely these are objects for which the permanency of a Religious Establishment ought to be secured. But the work before us is fortified by many such arguments; and from its intrinsic and original merits, as well as its valuable extracts, claims the gratitude of that Church which it so ably defends. A SERMON FOR THE TWELFTH SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY. (On the Forty-third Outline of the Rev. Henry Thompson's "Pastoralia.") 2 KINGS X. 30. The Lord said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel. IN studying the Scriptures, many difficulties occur which are to be differently explained, according to their nature. Some proceed from inadequacy of translation, the impossibility of giving clearly the same idea in different languages. These may be called grammatical or critical difficulties; and those whose leisure is not sufficient to allow them to study the originals, will, if they are sincere and candid inquirers, be content to adopt on this subject the opinions of competent persons. Other difficulties are historical; these depend for their explanation on a knowledge of the history of the time. Where we have means of acquiring this knowledge from other sources, the difficulties vanish; where we have not, we may fairly presume that the existence of such information would set our doubts at rest. There is another kind of scriptural difficulty in which no contradiction is apparent, but which is solely difficult from the greatness of its subject, and the imperfection of the human faculties. Difficulties of this nature we call mysteries; such are the unity of the Godhead in three persons; the existence of God from eternity; the relation of divine foreknowledge to human responsibility; and many other doctrines, some derivable from reason as well as revelation, which man, in his present condition, can never comprehend, but to which, if his mind be humble, he can never refuse his assent on the sole ground that they are incomprehensible. Difficulties of all these kinds then will be no stumbling-blocks to the pious, wise, sincere, and humble. But there is another kind of difficulty from which more danger is to be apprehended; this is, when any text of Scripture, taken by itself, appears to set the dealings of God against his declared distinctions between right and wrong; when God appears to be represented as the author or rewarder of evil. It is easy to an ingenious scoffer to select passages of this sort, and artfully to comment and embellish, till a weak or unlettered brother believes the God of the Scriptures no longer to be the God of nature, and resigns the sole safeguard of his practice, and the sole hope of his salvation. And even in the retirement of the closet, a text of this nature will disturb the serenity, and chill the faith, of the simple Christian; and the suggestions of the evil spirit will not be wanting, unless the aid of that Holy Being be sought, who alone can guide into all truth. But there is this advantage attendant on difficulties of this kind; they require mostly no great exercise of talent, no great advantages of education. A careful, patient, dispassionate examination of the whole subject to which they relate, is all that, in most cases, is necessary for making every thing perfectly clear; and if the Christian will only set about this examination with candour, seriousness, and prayer, it is scarcely possible he should not succeed. Nevertheless, it is the duty of those to whom has been committed the great and responsible charge of preparing the way of the Lord in the hearts of men, to clear that way of obstructions, by levelling every mountain and hill, and exalting every valley; and where such obstacles are immediately brought before us in the portions of Scripture which fall under the contemplation of the Church, explanation cannot be deemed unseasonable. The text, which occurs in the first lesson of the day, is one which has been employed in argument against the morality of the Bible; and I hope, in examining it by the light of Scripture generally, to shew that it has in reality no tendency to impeach the dispensations of God, but rather contains an important and profitable lesson. The difficulty which the passage contains, when stated in the strongest manner, stronger, indeed, than the words import, still, however, as it has been stated, is this: Jehu, from the moment of his accession, was a cruel and sanguinary prince. He began by the assassination of his sovereign, Jehoram; he proceeded to kill Ahaziah, the king of Judah, and Jezebel, the widow of the late king of Israel, whose seventy descendants (for such appears to be the meaning of the word sons in this passage, and so it is often used,) he afterwards put to death. The next victims were the sons of the late king of Judah; and afterwards the idolatrous priests of Baal were massacred by an act of insurpassable treachery. While the king's zeal against idolatry was thus signalized, he was himself paying worship to the two calves erected by his predecessor, Jeroboam. After this, say the objectors, we are so far from meeting with any thing like a condemnation of such conduct, that we find rather commendation, and the promise of a blessing—" The Lord said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel." Now if we attend carefully to the words of the text, we find nothing commended therein but Jehu's treatment of the family of Ahab. Therefore, we are not concerned to vindicate any other part of his character, which may easily be shewn to have been one of great cruelty and ferocity. And if we attend to what that is which constitutes the crime of murder, we shall see abundant cause to acquit him in this respect, as regards the family of Ahab. Man can have no right over the life of man, except so far as is given him by God; but God, who gave the vital breath, undoubtedly can recall it when he pleases, and is doing so every day. In the government of Israel there was a vast distinction from every other administration. There God was the temporal as well as the spiritual king; and every individual in the empire was liable to an express revelation from God, the authenticity of which neither was nor could be doubted. A prophet, whose miracles or predictions evinced the truth of his claims, declared authoritatively the will of the Lord, and the hearer in that case would be bound to comply. The family of Ahab had arrived at a great height of wickedness, and it pleased the counsels of Providence to destroy them. Jehu was the appointed instrument of their destruction; and he was no sooner acquainted with the mission with which God had intrusted him, than he had no choice on the mode of his conduct. The language of the prophet was explicit and impervertible" Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I have anointed thee king over the people of the Lord, even over Israel; and thou shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master, that I may avenge the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of the Lord at the hand of Jezebel." Jehu then would have been totally unjustifiable had he refused the commission with which God invested him; and his obedience, in this respect, was rewarded with a temporal blessing, as the performance of a civil commission in a state always is rewarded. Jehu is appointed by God to execute a political charge under him; that charge is executed, and he receives his reward for a political service, from the political head of the state. This is simply all that the text implies; it speaks not of the murder of the priests of Baal, nor of Jehu's idolatry; and that it was not intended to extend to those acts may readily be made appear. For, first, as respects the priests of Baal, the massacre of those persons was an act of treacherous cruelty. Their lives were, indeed, forfeit by the Mosaic law, and that for the best reasons; God being the temporal magistrate of Israel, the crime of idolatry was that of high treason, which, in all nations, is punished with death. Jehu might therefore have enforced the laws against all such idolaters as inhabited his kingdom, and it would have been, indeed, his duty so to have done; but there was no excuse for treacherous dissimulation. Very different was the conduct of Elijah, who defied all the prophets of Baal to a miraculous contest, and having attested, by their own admission, the authority of his office, executed on them the judgments with which he was commissioned. Jehu, perhaps, felt interested to secure the extirpation of the Baal worshippers, on account of their adherence to the late royal family, and was less intent on the means than on the end. But he certainly had no commission to act as he did; and although God may demand the life of one of his creatures at the hand of another, and thus make that lawful which is only unlawful for want of such permission, he could never command or approve an act of perfidious hypocrisy. Next, with respect to the idolatry of Jehu, it is only necessary to recite the verse in which mention of it occurs, in order to see instantly that it never was approved or rewarded by God, as the objectors absurdly insinuate"Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord God of Israel with all his heart; for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin." Here it is said that he "took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord;" and that "he departed not from sin; " expressions which directly and emphatically condemn his conduct. From these observations, I trust it has been made to appear that the blessing pronounced on Jehu in the text was not intended to |