versy with the mass of mankind was, not so much that it had failed in the discharge of spiritual as of ceremonial and moral duty, not so much that it had failed in love, as in obedience to the law written on the conscience. "The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose :" and God opened the windows of heaven, and broke up the fountains of the great deep, to quench those unholy fires of unbridled lust which the fear of God could not chill. But in these latter days, when Christ lifted up draws all men unto him-all who have the hearts and deserve the name of men; when the Gospel has brought down God to a level with the sympathies of man, and exhibited Him in all the meek and lowly attributes of the Redeemer; when it declares to us that "God is a Spirit," and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth-that "God is Love," and calls upon us to "love him because he first loved us:" now God's controversy with the world will not be that it has failed in ceremonial observances and moral duties, but that it has held back the deep affections of the heart from Him who bled and suffered that He might win them. And when, through the abounding of iniquity, the love of many waxes cold, the flames of retributive justice will dissolve and dissipate that icebound heart which the gentle warmth of Divine love could not melt, which it could not recast in the Gospel mould to the image of Christ, and in which it could not enkindle one spark of immortal life.

All such declarations then as this, "God is merciful, for he rewardeth every man according to his works," viewed in connection with His promises that "our sins and iniquities he will remember no more ;" that he "will cast them behind him into the depths of the sea;" that "Israel's sin shall be sought for, and not found;"-all imply regeneration, or a total change of nature. God, who is truth, must, as I have already said, see things as they are. But He sees or remembers "no iniquity in His people." And why? Because they are not identical with those who commit it. Full penitence casts off the slough of the old man, and exhibits its subject as a new creature, arrayed in his beautiful garments, "all glorious within, and his clothing of wrought gold." But reserved penitence, self-justification, any attempt at making a case, identifies us with just so much of the old man as we are anxious to defend, by proving us so far sensitive to his interests. The body, physicians say, changes its identity every seven years. The soul does so whenever it is sanctified wholly. Then past sins, which must otherwise embitter the cup of everlasting felicity, both from their intrinsic character of baseness and ingratitude, and also from their injurious effects upon others, do not allay, but-if it be heard with great and solemn caution, we might almost venture to say-rather, as do past sufferings, enhance its blessedness.

They may do so, in the first place, by furnishing the grounds, not indeed of a stronger, but of a more strongly felt, appeal to gratitude and love.

To a creature prone to evil, as man is in his natural state, the grace which restrains from sin is not a less blessing than the grace which pardons it. But that the latter is generally more deeply felt, and gratefully acknowledged, is matter of daily experience. Past sins, then, may enhance our blessedness by deepening the flow of love. I will not guard this assertion by saying, Let none boldly speculate, or impiously dare to act, upon this principle. Let none presume to "continue in sin that grace may abound." The very necessity which this principle

assumes of Divine grace to pardon and deliver, may well teach them to fear lest they grieve and quench the Spirit of grace. That man were mad indeed who would fling himself from a precipice into a tempestuous midnight ocean, or rush upon any other imminent peril, that he might enjoy, if rescued, the luxury of deliverance. But I will say, that we are by no means to infer, as the argument might seem to prove, that "the greater the sinner, the greater, if reclaimed, the saint," the more full of Divine love, and consequently the happier in eternity. This in some instances may, in others may not, be the case. The principle before us does not necessarily infer it. We know not fully how far uninterrupted habits of holiness may capacitate the soul for happiness, and counterbalance the increase of love-or, it may be, the specific character of love-which certainly must result from an increased sense of obligation. And though assuredly he to whom much is forgiven-or, if I may dare to add a word in explanation, who feels that to him much has been forgiven the same loveth much; yet we know not how far Divine grace may interiorly humble the man who has been sanctified from his mother's womb, and who, trained in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, has grown in grace as in stature-how it may teach even him to loathe himself, and repent in dust and ashes, but to feel, still more than the vilest reprobate that sovereign Grace ever pardoned, that he is that man to whom much indeed has been forgiven. We know not how deeper views of the length and breadth and depth and height of the holiness and spirituality of the Divine Law may cause him, as he repeats that "true saying, and worthy of all men to be received, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners," to add in full sincerity of feeling, "of whom I am chief." And thus, in the very way of which we speak, may he drink more deeply than others from the fountain of that love with which Christ loved us, and while we were yet sinners, enemies, and ungodly, gave Himself for us.

But past sins may enhance our blessedness in this way also, if, as the texts which I have quoted imply, when we wake upon the resurrection morning, we discover to our delighted surprise that, thoroughly regenerated and renewed, any link of sympathy, and hence of identity, with the old man has been severed, and that we have not, in a certain sense, been parties to them. The dreaming man, who thinks that he has committed some foul sin which his soul abhors, is in agony at the thought that he has perpetrated the act, and drawn down upon himself, and others also, the fatal consequences: that, under he knows not what transforming delusion, or maddened impulse, he has embrued his hands in blood, or embruited his soul in sensuality-that a deed has been done, and never can be recalled, which lays his honour in the dust, and brands him with the mark of villain, hypocrite, apostate: and, however God may look with pity on the agonies of his repentance, that he has sinned a sin unto the death of all his hopes and happiness on this side of eternity: that his one act has wounded mortally the life, or the affections, of his heart's idol: that it has quenched the sun from which all his earthly hopes radiated: that it has burst the tender bonds which bound him to the centre of all his earthly happiness; and inextricably entangled him in strange connexions at which his heart sickens, and which his soul abhors. Who has not experienced all this? And who has not enjoyed the ecstatic feeling with which, on waking, he perceives that the act has not been perpetrated: that the position of all

around him is unchanged: that all his terrors were but dreamy imaginations; the phantom creatures of a troubled sleep?

J. M. H.

THE DUTIES OF BISHOPS.

(Continued from p. 155.)

For the Christian Observer.

WE resume our remarks on the Duties of Bishops, subject to the prefatory statement in our last Number. Twenty-two years having elapsed since they were penned; many of the suggestions contained in them are, in whole or in part, superseded; some by legislation, and others by the extensive revival of scriptural doctrine and practical godliness in our Church and nation. See, for example, the remarks upon tithes, pluralities, pastoral residence, church discipline, training for holy orders, testimonials, the examination of candidates, official patronage, reform of abuses, and church-wardens' presentments.

6. By encouraging learning, piety, and Church principles among their Clergy. Nor is it of less moment for our bishops to encourage, by every possible means, learning, piety, and church principles among their clergy. The various methods which may be employed for this purpose it would be needless to attempt to specify; for in fact almost every word and action of those who are stationed in posts of such commanding influence may be made either to promote or to impede the great objects under contemplation. The most indirect reproof, or the slightest encouragement, from such a quarter, will often weigh more than the strongest arguments and appeals conveyed through less venerated channels.

But there are two instruments which our bishops possess for encouraging learning, piety, and church principles, of such direct and powerful efficacy, that they ought not to be passed over even in this cursory enumeration.

The first is their official patronage.—It would be to betray a complete ignorance of human nature, or to represent the English clergy as more than men, not to allow that the official patronage of a diocesan has a powerful effect on his clergy; directly upon those by whom he is immediately surrounded, or who have reason to hope for his favour, and remotely, through their influence, upon the body at large. How necessary then is it that this patronage should be conscientiously devoted to the responsible ends for which it was bestowed! As was remarked on a similar topic in a former section, official patronage differs materially from patronage gained by purchase or inheritance. It is gratuitously and confidentially bestowed; no valua ble consideration was given, and no fortune was sunk by the patron or his friends, as often happens in private patronage, for its procurement. The public lends, not gives it; and lends it exclusively for public ends. It would be a very small and insignificant advantage resulting from the system of patronage, as it at present prevails in this country, that it prevents those parochial litigations which are witnessed where the election is made by popular suffrage, or that it tends to bring into the church individuals from among the higher classes of society, and thus to preserve its balance, and to connect it more firmly with the state, if it be not also conscientiously employed for higher purposes,-to promote true religion, to encourage professional ability in the clergy, and to add stability to the foundations of the Established Church by measures calculated to draw down the blessing of God and to minister to the eternal welfare of mankind. "Persons ecclesiastical," says Hooker, "are God's stewards, not only for that he hath set them over his family as the ministers of ghostly food, but even for this very cause also, that they are to receive and dispose his temporal revenues, the gifts and oblations which men bring him." How that eminent man thought on the point under consideration may be learned from the following remarks in the Seventh Book of his Polity. "Shall we look," says he in addressing bishops, "for care in admitting whom others present, if that which some of yourselves confer be at any time corruptly bestowed? A foul and an ugly kind of deformity it hath, if a man do but think what it is for a bishop to draw commodity and gain from those things whereof he is left a free bestower, and that in trust, without any other obligation than his sacred order only,

and that religious integrity which hath been presumed on in him. Simoniacal corruption I may not for honour's sake suspect to be amongst men of so great place. So often they do not, I trust, offend by sale as by unadvised gift of such preferments, wherein that ancient canon should specially be remembered, which forbiddeth a bishop to be led by human affection, in bestowing the things of God."-The "sale" of patronage, at which Hooker hints, is a crime now utterly unknown, and which detraction herself has never ventured to whisper against any member of the episcopal body in the present day; and not a few instances might be cited also in which "human affection" has been as little concerned. Still many virtuous sacrifices remain to be made, before patronage, either episcopal or otherwise, will be rendered so great a blessing to the Church, as it is capable of becoming when exercised under high feelings of Christian duty and responsibility.

The second means alluded to, by which our bishops may promote learning, piety, and church principles among the clergy, was the conscientious exercise of the power of ordination. This is a bishop's highest prerogative and most arduous duty; and in the wise and pious discharge of so peculiarly responsible and sacred a function, must, at all times, rest the brightest hope of a Christian church. But how painful oftentimes must be the exercise of this discretion! The nation must be supplied with pastors: the vacant cures must be filled up. How then is a bishop to act, if the average standard of the candidates who come before him is habitually below the point which he fixes in his own mind as the just criterion of what a clergyman may and ought to be? Doubtless Bishop Burnet is not the only member of the Episcopal body who has felt that the Ember Weeks are "the burden of his life;" and though the qualifications of candidates are at present much higher, at least in a literary point of view, than they were in the days of that prelate, yet who can tell how often they fall below the mark which a bishop who is anxious for the souls of men may think in his conscience to be the lowest standard of what is desirable, yet without falling so low as to constrain him to see it clearly his duty to reject the applicant.

The fact is, and it ought not to be overlooked, that various parties are to blame before a case can come to this last resort: the parents or guardians were probably to blame for not having used sufficient diligence in bringing up the candidate in the ways of religion, and in habits of diligent attention to study the preceptor and friends also may have been to blame: the youth himself, it is obvious, deserves blame; but the parties usually most in fault are those who sign the testimonials, and who ought not, on any consideration, to have done so for an incompetent, and much less for an immoral, candidate. Nor must we exempt our universities themselves from censure, where such a candidate comes with a college testimonial, since in a high state of academical discipline no intended applicant for holy orders would be allowed to receive the necessary credentials, unless he really appeared qualified, morally and religiously, as well as intellectually, to undertake the sacred office. The bishops must eventually either receive what the universities send, or leave our churches unsupplied. Besides, our prelates are not omniscient; and where a candidate for orders comes armed with the solemn testimonials which are required on such occasions, the presumption is strongly in his favour; so that it is only in very decisive cases that a bishop will feel satisfied in setting aside, on his own responsibility, such weighty recommendations, coming as they do from those who profess to have known the candidate long and intimately, while the examining bishop has probably nothing to decide upon but the short-lived, and necessarily constrained, acquaintance of a few hours. Truly does the present venerable Bishop of Durham (Dr. Barrington) call it a "cruel situation" to which a bishop is sometimes thus reduced. The clergy feel "a delicacy," we are told, in refusing testimonials; but must not a bishop feel a delicacy also in withholding ordination? Is it right that the whole weight and odium should fall on him, and him alone? that all the other parties concerned should neglect their duty, and yet expect the bishop to discharge his; especially too after they have rendered the task doubly painful by their own neglect, or falsely-termed good nature ?

But we pass by these topics for the present, as some of them may recur in considering the professional education and duties of the clergy. One thing, however, is clear, that painful as may be the obligation of rejecting unfit candidates, it is one which a conscientious prelate will not dare to shrink from discharging. The interests of religion, and the prosperity of the church, depend in an extensive degree upon his faithful and disinterested conduct; for in vain shall we look for the extension of scriptural devotion, or the perpetuity of our Ecclesiastical Establishment, if those who are admitted to administer at our altars are not men of

piety, activity, and professional information; in a word, "men of God," and faithful "servants of Jesus Christ."

The present juncture is one of peculiar responsibility in the exercise of ordination; for the pressure of the times and the dearth of other employments have crowded our universities with students to an excess never before witnessed; and numbers of young men are eagerly rushing towards the church as the only avenue open to a respectable livelihood. How strong a check, then, will be necessary to prevent unhallowed intrusion; and how imperative the duty of those who give titles, or sign testimonials, to select amidst the variety of candidates such only as seem likely to do real service to the church of Christ, and to prove a "crown of rejoicing to those who shall be the instruments of admitting them into the sacred office!

The wide diffusion of piety and scriptural information, to which must be added the improved discipline of our universities, and the increased attention paid of late years to theological studies both within and without their precincts, will, it is trusted, soon render well-qualified candidates more easy to be procured than was once the case. We shall have occasion to shew in a future page, that far more might be accomplished by the universities towards effecting this result than has hitherto been attempted; but, in the mean time, our prelates have themselves the power (and some of them have exerted it with good effect) of considerably raising the average of character and qualifications in their candidades for ordination, by the silent but efficacious expedient of rendering their standard of examination sufficiently elevated to exclude the more incompetent classes of applicants.

But even this last measure, important as it is, cannot secure all that the exigences of the case require; for a candidate may prove himself a respectable proficient in classical and theological knowledge, and yet be totally unqualified for the pastoral office by the absence of a devotional spirit, and of all interest in the religious welfare of those about to be committed to his charge. A bishop necessarily relies in a great measure upon the testimonials of candidates for proof of their moral and spiritual qualifications: his own inquisition is directed, in most instances, principally to their doctrinal sentiments, their theological information, and their literary competency. But a young man may pass this ordeal in a manner the most creditable, and yet have no taste for the duties of the sacred office; and, indeed, no sense of personal piety. He may be vain, worldly, proud, thoughtless, ambitious, absorbed in secular pursuits, engrossed by merely literary studies, or "a lover of pleasure more than a lover of God." And yet, in the present state of church discipline, it seems very difficult, indeed impossible, to suggest an adequate remedy for the evil. If a young man come before a bishop with the usual credentials, and be further qualified by a respectable share of classical and theological attainment, it would be thought by the world a very harsh proceeding to reject him because he did not appear to possess a spirit of devotion." Yet without such a spirit all his other attainments, and even the highest measure of "zeal for the honour, stability, and influence of the Established Church," are nothing. For the knowledge which is not accompanied by devotion, the zeal which is not influenced by personal piety, can never effect the high purposes of the Christian ministry, either in "turning men from darkness unto light, and from the power of Satan unto God," or in building up the sincere believer in his most holy faith.

The difficulty, as respects the bishop, seems to lie in this, that according to the modern usages of society, and in a mass of population which utterly forbids the same degree of personal knowledge and supervision which existed in the early churches, when the largest towns and cities were not equal to many of our country villages, the office of a bishop in ordination is almost entirely of a judicial and not of an elective kind: he is at his post to receive candidates, and can exercise the power of rejection, at least in the more glaring class of cases; but he cannot undertake, of his own knowledge, to fill the church with suitable ministers: he may indeed occasionally advise an individual to apply for holy orders whom he thinks peculiarly qualified for the sacred function, but, in the majority of instances, he can deliberate only upon the cases which come before him in the usual way: the demand is pressing clergymen are wanted in every parish; candidates apply; they are qualified in the current estimation of the term; if they are refused, not only must their own hopes and those of their families be blighted, but our churches must be shut up and our cures remain unsupplied. How then is a bishop, whatever may be his desire to ordain no candidates but such as evidence "a spirit of devotion," to avoid the painful alternative to which he is exposed?

It is remarked by Walton, in his life of Dr. Donne, that "In the first and most