absentee lay-property, less than two years ago, the few resident gentry had their houses garisoned, their windows bricked up, candles burning at noon-day, centinels posted at their doors; they could not so much as walk into their shrubberies unattended by armed protectors. In this very district, within a stone's cast of those garrisoned and barricadoed houses, during the disturbances of 1821 and 1822, resided the clergyman of the parish, a dignitary of the diocese; his house unguarded, his doors unprotected, his windows open, no arms, no unusual precaution, his rides and walks uninterruptedly continued,-and he suffered not the least violence, not the slightest insult; a twig of his property was not injured; he was as free from apprehension, as if his residence had been in Palace-yard. These facts I learned, I may say witnessed, on the spot; and on my giving the clergyman credit for his conduct, his modest reply was,- I cannot take credit to myself for any thing remarkable, I merely treated the people with common civility and kindness; and, when they were sick, was ready to give them a little wine.'

The fact is, that, in various instances, the protestant clergy by their influence kept away disturbance, or suppressed it when it had found entrance; or if, from causes too deeply-rooted in the frame of society, the evil had risen beyond their power of conciliation,-one exempt spot, one oasis in the desert, one place of refuge, one Zoar was to be seen athwart the burning plain ;-the glebe and the glebehouse of the protestant parish minister." pp. 96-98.

Now, when it is recollected that these statements are made under the consciousness of the greatest and most solemn responsibilities, in the presence of the collective wisdom and knowledge of the British nation, by a man who is acknowledged to be a most distinguished ornament of his order, not only for his abilities and learning, but for guileless integrity and almost ascetick piety; when all this is recollected, how we help feeling indignant at the wanton vituperation of the North American Reviewer? "A profligate hierarchy! An incubus!" Can the Reviewer have measured the force of his language? Nothing would justify such epithets, but the most overwhelming evidence of guilt and vileness.

The North American Review gave at its outset a pledge to the publick, that its pages should preserve a strict neutrality with regard to religion. This pledge, as it regards the Episcopal Church, it has not redeemed. In the review of Tudor's Letters on the Eastern States, it

indulged itself in a most gratuitous attack upon forms of prayer. And in several subsequent instances, in a manner less direct, and with a more cautious and covert aim, it has flung its gibes.

In the present instance, we may say of it as Bishop Jebb has said of English radicals in their printed libels upon English Episcopacy; "The warfare is now but transferred to Ireland: the principle, the motive, the object, are the same. In the present outcry, more is meant than meets the ear."" The present editor has distinguished himself as a Unitarian polemick, and particularly by his attack upon the American Protestant Episcopal Church. Such animosity is not

dead and cannot slumber. He cannot with any decency make the same attacks upon the Episcopal Church in this country which were made in the Christian Disciple or the Unitarian Miscellany, but he can so aim his shafts at the Protestant Episcopacy of England or Ireland, as to make them glance and wound the Protestant Episcopacy of America. It is a little curious to witness the combination in the present instance, of two polemicks, one a Roman Catholick, the other a Unitarian, in the unhallowed warfare against the Protestant establishment of Ireland. Herod and Pontius Pilate are this day made friends. And what has thus joined them together? Bishop Jebb has furnished us with a clue. It is, that from the influence of Protestant Episcopacy in Ireland, Unitarianism has not there dared to rear its head, and popery, though professed by the majority, is confined principally to the ignorant and least influential. Of the Irish divines of the present day, "I shall name," says the Bishop, "three: Dr. Hales, in learning and labour a man of other centuries, when, to use the language of our good old king, there were giants in the land; Dr. Graves, the defender of the Mosaick economy, and the assertor of apostolick truth and soberness; and Archbishop Magee, who gave a deadly wound to the heresy of Socinus, NOT IN IRELAND, FOR THERE IT HAS NOT DARED TO REAR ITS HEAD, but in this country: and the English clergy, and the English people will not readily forget, that to an Irish divine they are indebted for the best exposure extant of heretical practices upon the text of the sacred volume." p. 57.

So much for the influence of Protestant Episcopacy upon Unitarianism. As to its influence upon popery, the following remarks will show clearly the reason of Bishop England's hostility, and the hostility of every ultra-Romanist.

"It has, indeed, been argued, from the alleged precedent and example of Scotland, that the church establishment in Ireland should undergo a thorough alteration. But this is no example; it is no precedent. In Scotland, the main difference was in discipline and government; a difference, indeed, which, on many accounts, I hold to be of vast importance; but still, a difference between one mode, and another mode, of the reformed faith. But in Ireland, the question is of quite another kind; it is, whether we are to have a reformed church at all. Nor can this be accounted a trivial question, or one which concerns, (as some would studiously inculcate,) a mere handful of our population. IN PROPERTY, IN TALENT, AND IN KNOWLEDGE, THE PROTESTANTS OF IRELAND RANK VASTLY BEYOND THEIR NUMERICAL STRENGTH; but in numbers, they are generally much under-calculated. I will just advert to one statement, lately made in another house, that there are but thirteen, or fourteen hundred protestants, in the whole diocese of Waterford. Now, by a return for which I am indebted to the bishop of that diocese, I can affirm, that, in the city of Waterford, there are thirteen hundred communicants, and upwards. Reckoning, therefore, the proportion of the communicants, to the non-communicants, as one to six, we shall have, not in the diocese at large, but in the city alone, a population of above nine thousand souls, adhering to the Established

Church. The protestants throughout Ireland, including the presbyterians, have been computed by the honourable member for the county of Louth, at 1,840,000. And it ought to be known, that the presby terians in Ireland, unlike the dissenters of this country, are on most friendly terms with the Church; that they grow up under its shadow; frequently attend its worship; and not uncommonly train up their sons, not only as lay-members of it, but as clergymen." pp. 111, 112. In considering all questions relative to a church establishment in any other part of the world, the American reader ought to be very cautious how he argues upon abstract principles of right. The question whether religion can exist in this country without an establishment is, on the authority of the North American Reviewer himself, a question not yet decided. The experiment is still going on, and we are yet to see what will be the result. But if we assume that all church establishments are unlawful in themselves, though it may be a good reason why they should not be begun, it is no reason why they should suddenly be destroyed. Even our most rigid moralists reason thus with regard to the most tremendous evil that has ever visit. ed a nation-Negro slavery. Let us beware then, of attacking the established institutions of other countries; and especially let us beware of doing so, till we are qualified to throw the first stone. And with regard to the state of Ireland in particular, let it be remembered, that the question is not, whether all shall have equal religious rights, but whether popish or protestant Episcopacy shall be established, or whether the peasantry of the country shall pay a proportion of their rent to the church or to their lay-landlords. If the tithes are abolished, the peasantry will be no better off than they are at present; for they will have to pay a proportionate increase of rent to the landed proprietors, a great part of whom it will be recollected, are absentees. In fact, their condition would be worse, for of all landlords the ecclesiastical are confessedly the most indulgent. If, on the other hand, the tithes are not abolished, but paid to the Roman Catholick clergy, the peasantry would, in that case, pay part of their rent in kind, to support a church which a majority of the landed proprietors "believe," in the language of the Reviewer, "to be contrary to scripture and truth." Thus do these attempts at reform, shift, but not remove the evil. We had better, therefore, in this country, attend to our own concerns, instead of finding fault with those of our neighbours. Even the North American Reviewer would do well to be governed by this rule. He had better not meddle with what he considers the profligate hierarchy. It will be a much better employment if he endeavours to remove the incubus which rests upon his own bosom.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE.

I HAVE just returned, Mr. Editor, from the convention of this diocese, held in Portland, Maine. A few thoughts which occurred to me while there, I take the liberty of submitting for your inspection.

Should you deem them worthy of insertion in the Gospel Advocate, they are at your disposal.

By reason of unfavourable weather, only a small number of the inhabitants of the place attended the publick exercises; but those who were present of various religious denominations, bore ample testimony to the solemnity and good effect of our services. The united sacrifice, which was presented on the altar of the Lord, could not fail to remind them of the union of hearts and services, that will exist in a happier world. The members of our communion were animated and strengthened in their Christian course. They were renewedly impressed with the excellency of our institutions, and the devotional fervour of our liturgy. The presence and labours of our venerable Bishop powerfully engaged their feelings and warmed their hearts. The friends of Zion will ever rejoice to hear of the extension of the Church in that part of the Lord's vineyard.

The members of the Episcopal Church in this diocese have peculiar reasons for assembling annually in convention. They are scattered over a wide extent of territory, and, except in our most populous places, have, on other occasions, but little intercourse with each other. Liable as we are to repeated discouragements, the society of our brethren and friends is admirably calculated to inspire us with new vigour. We return to our respective places of residence with additional experience of the goodness of the Lord; we are prompted to more ardent and successful exertions. But salutary as has been the influence of our meetings; it may be doubted, whether all the advantages have resulted from them, which they are capable of producing. There can scarcely be a greater cause of regret, than that they should be attended by so few of the laity. We need the wisdom, talents, piety, and experience of those in different walks of life, to suggest and carry into effect the best measures for promoting the prosperity of the Church. Our lay brethren have evinced in many instances a laudable zeal and liberality in endowing churches and seminaries; but, with reference to their presence and advice in our publick councils, they may have been too fearful of letting their "light shine in the world." This inconvenience we desire to prevent; and venture to suggest, that a local habitation is desirable for our conventions. Let a place be selected where the greatest number can conveniently assemble, and a more punctual attendance may be secured. Our Church will assume a firmer and more commanding atti tude. There will be a rallying point where all her energies may be exerted. The strength of the whole body will be increased, by communicating the genial influence of a more healthful action to every member.

We would further suggest the expediency of forming a diocesan missionary society, to aid the weak and destitute churches in the diocese; whose directors should be appointed by the convention, and annually report to the same their proceedings. A discourse might be delivered during the sittings of each convention with particular reference to the objects of the society, and a collection taken to advance

the same benevolent purpose. An agent might be appointed to visit the churches, and invite their respective members to contribute of their substance to the promotion of so laudable an object. That other facilities might be afforded to such a society, let the parochial reports of all the churches in the diocese be made to the convention, and the reports from feeble and destitute churches state explicitly their situation as it respects their ability for supporting publick worship, their future prospects, and every circumstance which would aid the society in the distribution of its charities. We could by these means obtain a complete view of the relative state of our churches, and mingle together our joys and our sorrows. The different states which compose the convention would find in such a society a friend and patron. It would draw closer the bond of union between them, and be likely to excite a deeper interest in the prosperity of the Church.

Are the members of the Episcopal Church prepared to admit, that they have no important object to secure, no interest in extending those principles to which they have cordially yielded their assent, and which they believe to be of divine authority? The example of our dissenting brethren is eminently calculated to remind us, that we have a responsible duty to perform. Shall we permit them to distance us in the Christian race? Of what avail will be the excellence of our government, the solemnity of our worship, and the purity of our faith, if we are unmindful of the wants of those, who wish to enjoy the same blessings, but are destitute of the means? Charity begins at home;" but having warmed those in her immediate vicinity, she will not coldly say to those who are more remote, "Be ye warmed and filled." Her cheering influence will be extended to all who hold with us a common faith, and wish to be refreshed by the same ordinances.

66

L.

ADVERSARIA.

WHAT IS MAN? Man is a complex being, rgiueges vosaσis, a tripartite person or a compound creature made up of three distinct parts, viz. the body, which is the earthly or mortal part of him; the soul, which is the animal or sensitive part; and the spirit or mind, which is the rational and immortal part. This doctrine, I think, is established beyond all dispute, not only by experience, but by authority. It was received by almost all the ancient philosophers. The Pythagoreans; as we learn from Jamblicus, vid. Protrept. pp. 34, 35. The Platonists; as appears from Nemesus, Sallust, and Laertius, vid. Di Laertius, lib. 3, p. 219. The Stoicks; as appears from Antoninus, who saith expressly, "There are three things which belong to a man; the body, the soul, and the mind. And as to the properties of the division, sensation belongs the body, appetite to the soul, and reason to the mind," σωμα ψυχή, νες, σωματος αισθήσεις, ψυχης ορμαι να δογματα, lib. iii. § 16. lib. ii. § 2. lib. xii. § 3. It appears also to have been the