down of wages in the market for labour, large numbers of the people find themselves constrained to toil, bodily or mentally, or both, beyond the limits of salutary endurance; and if Lord John Manners can find some legislative remedy for this, he will deserve a golden statue to his memory; or, far better, the gratitude and the prayers of every patriot, philanthropist, and Christian. But Sir Andrew Agnew began at least at the right end. Let us secure, said he, annually fifty-two days of rest to the poor man; these God has given, and nothing can compensate for the loss of them-not to add the impiety of desecrating them. God also gave to the Jews other days of sacred rest and holy worship. We may profit by this example, as the Church of England has done; but under the New Testament dispensation there is no Divine specification of such days; whereas God himself, knowing what is in man, and what is conducive to his own glory, has expressly enjoined, as a perpetual ordinance, that one day in seven shall be set apart for rest from secular labour both bodily and mental; and this divinely enjoined repose, if duly enjoyed and appreciated, is no mean boon; nor are we prepared to say, where the hours of labour are moderate, so as daily to allow of reasonable domestic and social intercourse, or of innocent recreations, that many other "holidays" are ordinarily indispensable for health or happiness. We do not grudge them--if well used:-and opportunities are often found for obtaining them even among our busiest mechanics; more often than, considering the manner in which they are too frequently abused, is always good either for soul or body. But all that we mean is, that, be these things as they may, there is an essential difference between the Lord's Day and Church holidays; unpro and that much of the revived zeal which is shewn for the latter is suspicious; its real object now, as its avowed object was in the days of Charles the First, being to depreciate God's day to the level of a merely ecclesiastical appointment; for the purpose of " testantising" the nation, and, in the words of the Declaration of Sunday Sports so approvingly reprinted by Lord John Manners, "to rebuke some Puritans and precise people" who would prohibit "our good people using their lawful recreations and honest exercises "-such as dancing either men or women,' "May-games, Whitsun-ales, Morris-dancing, and the setting up of May-poles, and other sports therewith used" (a conveniently large category) "upon Sundays and other holidays." We purposely "harp upon "the words of this Proclamation; because it is frivolous -to use no harsher term-for Mr. Paget, or Lord John Manners, or any other writer, after holding up this edict to public admiration, to hope to avoid inconvenient identification by declining to decide whether the Sunday part of the ordinance was perfectly judicious. Dr. Heylin found himself and his archiepiscopal patron strong enough to speak without any such " serve;" and as despotic edicts upon parchment could not break down the fortresses of British law, or deter Anglican Protestants from the Puritanism of remembering the Sabbath-day to keep it holy, energetic deeds were added; and Laud, after "nearly choking" judge Richardson "with a pair of lawnsleeves," for standing up for the glory of God and the rights of the king's subjects, set himself to "harry" those who would not dance round the May-pole on Sunday, in the cruel manner which we have so frequently described. We do not know what cheap amusement for the poor after church and sacra re ment Lord John Manners proposes to substitute for horse-racing, the "excellence" of which has done so much to moralize and refine "the higher orders;" but whether it be donkey-racing, which seems the most germane representative, or biped racing in a sack, "by women or men,' "for a red plush waistcoat for the gentlemen, or some useful article of female apparel for the ladies; too probable it is, that recusant "Puritans, Methodists, and Evangelicals," who declined such blessed sports on week-days, and shuddered at them on Sundays, would be exposed, if not to legal penalties, as in the days of Laud, yet to the rough Lynch law of what Baxter calls "a vulgar rabble;" such as abused his venerable father, a consistent and attached churchman, as a “Puritan, Precisian, and hypocrite," "only for reading the Scripture, when the rest were dancing, on the Lord's Day; and for praying by a form out of the end of the CommonPrayer Book, and for reproving drunkards and swearers," and suchlike enormities. Whether, when such scenes shall be revived, these demure people would be duly protected by their Tractarian patrician neighbours, can only be guessed by the pages of "the old almanac;" but we shrewdly suspect that Mr. Paget would as much "enjoy the fun of seeing the Methodists pelted," as did certain "justices of the peace," not to mention some laughter-loving clerics, in the days of Mr. Wesley. We respectfully invite Lord John Manners to throw off the modest coyness which induces him, being only a layman, to refrain from stating his mind respecting the right or the wrong of King Charles's Proclamation for the violation of the Lord's Day. Why should he be less communicative (except that he has not a Laud at Lambeth to appeal to as an autho some rity) than Dr. Heylin, who boldly declares that the Declaration of Sunday Sports, now reprinted for public edification by his Lordship, was a "pious and princely act, nothing inferior unto that of Constantine, or any other Christian king or emperor," (Hist. of Sabbath, Part. ii. C. 8.); an act "of tender care for the Church's safety" (Ibid. Preface); "to restrain those men who have so long dreamt of a Sabbath-day, that now they will not be persuaded that it is a dream;" including, alas! not only ignorant laics, but, adds Heylin, with deep sorrow, who should have been examples to their flocks," but who unhappily did not rightly appreciate his Majesty's "most Christian purpose," being 66 so settled in the opinion of a Sabbath-day," "that they chose rather to deprive the Church of their pains and ministry [being sequestered and silenced] than yield unto his Majesty's most just commands." We covet a little of this plain speaking. Froude was the man for us. He wished his friends "to speak out;" he hated their pedetentim measures, their feeling the public pulse, and cautiously protruding their antennæ to know how far they might safely venture. We will only ask Lord John Manners, in conclusion, what, after all, does he mean by Saints' Days and Holidays? Does he, for instance, include St. Thomas à Becket's Day among Saints' Days? He speaks very highly, and without any drawback, of the "British Critic;" he quotes "its nervous language," and "recommends the whole article on pews to attentive consideration." Does he also approve of its declaration that Thomas à Becket is one of the most blessed saints and martyrs of the Most High God? Does he agree with this "unprotestantising" Critic, that Becket and Innocent iii, were "the lights of the Church in the middle ages;" and also Hildebrand, concerning whom our Homilies ask, "Shall we say that he had God's Holy Spirit within him, and not rather the spirit of the devil?" We ought to know who are the saints whose festivals are to be celebrated in church and on the village-green; for though at present only those in the Angliean calendar may be supposed by BISHOPS OF CHESTER AND LLANDAFF, AND THE DEAN OF SALISBURY. 1. A Practical Exposition of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, and the first to the Corinthians, in the form of Lectures; intended to assist the practice of domestic instruction and devotion. By J. B. SUMNER, D.D., Lord Bishop of Chester. 1843. 2. A Charge to the Clergy of Llandaff. By EDWARD, Lord Bishop of Llandaff. 1842. 3. A Charge to the Clergy of the Deanery of Sarum. By HUGH PEARSON, D.D., Dean of Salisbury. 1842. We take up these three publications for the sake, chiefly, of those parts of them which bear upon the Tractarian system. The subject does not diminish in importance like those errors which spread for a moment, but have no tenacity of life, and are best left to die away in silence. Tractarianism-though checked by the extravagancies of its incautious defenders, by the counter inculcation of sound doctrine, and by the reaction caused by the perversion of some of its disciples to Popery-still "maketh winged speed" among the unstable and unwary; and new facts are not wanting to keep it prominently before the public; though, as we have repeatedly declared, none of these new facts were necessary to shew its real character; for the essentials of the whole system were to be found in the early Tracts, as Pusey, to our more recent remarks Reserve," or upon Mr. Wordsworth's discourse upon Penance. There is, we said, a coherence in other systems, re speak as decidedly in our reply to Mr. Newman six years ago, as we do now; though then we were accounted traducers by some, false alarmists by many, tors by most, because we pointed and exaggeraout the legitimate and necessary, though then unavowed, tendencies of the system. Among the "new facts," one has been strongly authenticated to us, which bears out what we from the first anticipated in regard to the legitimate tendency of Dr. Pusey's statements respecting sin after baptism. In nothing have we been more vehemently accused of wanting candour, and making out a case merely for effect, bility, than in what we have so and without any shadow of probaoften' stated upon this subject, from our early arguments with Mr. Newman, Mr. Keble, and Dr. much as in those on "" in Number 90, or in the "British specting the sinner's justification; but in Dr. Pusey's system there is no coherence, without supplying, what was at first attempted to be veiled in specious generalities, namely, a third sacrament, and that sacrament one of expiation by bodily inflictions, as much as in the case of a Hindoo devotee. The Evangelical system-the system of the Bible and that adopted by our Own Church-is coherent. It makes justification to be the gift of God, through the redemption that is in Christ, received by faith, and not in whole or in part by man's works or deservings; notwithstanding that good works do necessarily spring from justifying faith, as a tree is known by its fruits. The remedial system also-the system vindicated by Bishop Bull, and which was in effect that of what were called the "orthodox" or "moral" clergy-is complete, though not Scriptural. It makes justification to be through faith and works conjointly; the merits of Christ compensating for our defects, and sincerity being accepted for perfect obedience. The system of Popery also is rotund; it justifies us by the sacrament of Baptism; it continues justification by the sacrament of the altar and good works; and it restores lost justification by a third sacrament, that of Penance. The Tractarians from the first adopted the first two heads, but were at first shy of expressing the third; especially as the Church to which they profess to belong denies that penance is a sacrament. We indeed said that they must inevitably come to this; but Dr. Pusey and other early Tractarians warded off the conclusion as long as they could. Dr. Pusey said that what constitutes "that grievous sin after baptism which involves the falling from grace; what the distinction between venial and mortal sins;" is "a very distressing question, which I would gladly answer if I could or dared." But it must be answered upon his system, as it is by every Romanist priest in the confession-box; and it is useless to speak in vague generals of "the baptism of tears;" for to complete a system in which "sacraments, not faith, are the instruments of justification," there must be a sacrament of penance to remedy the loss of baptismal grace, and the consequent non-application of the Saviour's atonement; and the due measure of bodily infliction must be clearly prescribed, taking especial care that the suffering be not too little to be sufficiently meritorious; whereas, if it superabounds, the merit will be cumulative. In some cases a hair-shirt may suffice; in others, crawling over flint stones on bare knees may be requisite ; in others, one or more scourgings are indispensable; and the infliction of bodily pain by fire may in grievous cases be resorted to. a fel Do we romance? The subject is too serious for trifling. The facts which have transpired respecting the penitential bodily inflictions of some of the pupils of the Tractarians, prove that physical torture is regarded by them as expiatory of sin and pleasing to Heaven. We said that we would mention a recent fact, well authenticated to us. It is this. A clergyman, the Reverend low of a college in Oxford, and having souls committed to his charge -not one of your "lank undergraduates," Mr. Paget, "vain blockheads," and “ geese;" but a graduate, a fellow of a college, and a clergyman, one of the choicest full-fledged produce of the ninety eggs-has inflicted upon himself severe macerations, so as to shock the feelings of all who know him; and especially has mutilated two or three of his fingers by burning, and also one of his feet; because he was conscious that he had lost his baptismal purity; and having read Dr. Pusey's Tracts on Baptism, he was convinced that there is no other means of being restored to grace but by such acts of bodily penance. Is such a fact incredible? From the information given to us we believe it to be truth; but even if it were not, it is truth-like. We anticipated such occurrences from the first; in proof of which we will quote a portion of what we wrote in our Volume for 1837, in reply to the letters which Mr. Newman addressed to us in defence of Dr. Pusey and his colleagues, and their publications. It is consoling to us, that, though we were thought by many to carry the matter too far, we endeavoured to give a faithful warning. Our notes, we admit, were so long and heavy, that we fear they were not generally perused; so that in quoting a passage from them (1837, p. 329334) we run no great risk of troubling our readers with what is in their recollection. "There was no doctrine of Popery which our venerable Reformers more frequently and severely denounced, than its unscriptural classification of sins into mortal and venial, baptismal and post-baptismal; and the apparatus therewith connected, of penance and purgatory. It would take many pages to unfold at length the Papal figments; the Scriptural doctrine, as revived by our Reformers; and the points in which the Oxford Tracts follow the former, and dissent from the latter. Our settled belief, upon a careful review of these publications, is, that they are essentially Romanist in their spirit, as regards the whole question relating to man's justification and salvation; and especially in their unscriptural notions relative to the condition of baptized and unbaptized persons.-There is a large class of texts which speak such language as the following: "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted of the good word of God, and the powers of the World to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh.' 'If after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning; for it had been better for them not to have after they have known it, to turn from known the way of righteousness, than, the holy commandment delivered unto them.' If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.' Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of his grace?' 'When &c., then goeth he and taketh unto him the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, seven other spirits, more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first.' He will speak peace unto his people and to his saints; but let them not turn again to folly.' "Now in none of these, and scores of similar texts, is there any mention of ante-baptismal and post-baptismal sin. If a person revelled in transgression, offending against Scriptural light, and the checks of conscience, and of the Spirit of God remonstrating in his soul, his sins would be fearfully aggravated, even though he had never been baptized. His having enjoyed the privilege of baptism, whether in infancy or adult years, would of course add largely to his guilt; it would be another mercy slighted, a high privilege unimproved; but there is nothing in Scripture that places the two classes of sins, as the Papists do, in wholly distinct ranks. There is nothing that countenances the tissue of fictions, that, however aggravated may have been a man's offences up to the very moment of baptism, every stain is washed out by that sacrament; justification, till then suspended, notwithstanding there was true faith, is then conferred; that a new nature is given, in the strength of which the baptized person may henceforth live in sinless obedience, so as to work out his salvation by his good deeds, being 'entitled,' says Dr. Pusey, to the strivings of God's Spirit;' but that after that ordinance there is, in case of sin, no such plenary application of the blood of Christ; that there remains only the baptism of tears, doubt's galling chain, |