The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-09-12 00:00:00

DR. PUSEY'S CITATIONS

[We believe that any impression produced by the publi-
cation of Dr. Pusey's recent memorable sermon was not
occasioned so much by any thing advanced by that learned
divine himself, as by the " host of witnesses" whose
names were brought forward as apparently supporting his
erroneous opinions. We anticipate that this impression
will be entirely removed by a candid perusal of the follow.
ing article, which we extract from the Churchman's
Monthly Review for the present month, a publication
which we again take the opportunity of recommending in
the strongest possible manner upon the attention of the
Protestant public. Such a catalogue of perverted quotations
was never to our knowledge given to the world. Turn
such a compiler into the British Museum or the Bodleian
Library, and give him liberty to cull four lines from
Bishop A.'s sermons, and half a sentence from Dr. B.'s
treatise, and what heresy is there that he will not be able
to maintain
" Such is the doctrine which Dr. Pusey says he has
learnt of our great divines,' and he then cites Ridley,
Hooker, Andrewes, Jackson, and a crowd of inferior
names, in an appendix of authorities.
The question, then, is, has be fairly cited them ? And
that he has not done so, we shall show, by remarking, in
three or four instances, his very singular and unfortunate
omissions.

Bishop Ridley, who died at the stake rather than con-
cede to the doctrine of transubstantiation, is the first wit-
ness cited by Dr. Pusey. And we cannot but regard it
as a most disengenuous act, to refuse, as Dr. Pusey did,
—to aid in raising the Martyrs' Memorial,—to refuse also
to subscribe to the Parker Society, from an avowed con-
viction, that Ridley and Latimer died in serious error;
and yet to cite Ridley himself as teaching a doctrine which
Dr. Pusey well knows he held in detestation.
The passages cited in Dr. P.'s appendix, are taken from
pages 201 and 202 of the Parker Society's edition of Rid-
ley. Now on the very leaf immediately preceding, in that
same volume, stands this passage, of which Dr. Pusey
therefore, cannot plead ignorance, but which could not
conveniently be cited.

"This carnal presence is contrary to the word of God, as ap.
peareth thus I tell you the truth. It is profitable to you that
I go as.Tay ; for if I go not away, the Comforter shall not come
unto you.' Whom the heavens must receive until the time of
restoring of all things which God hath spoken.' The children
of the bridegroom cannot mourn so long as the bridegroom is
with them : but now is the time of mourning.' But I will see
you again, and your hearts shall rejoice.' I will come again
and take you to myself.' If they shall say unto you, Behold
here is Christ, or there is Christ, believe them not for where-
soever the dead carcase is, thither the eagles will resort.'
•' it varieth trom the articles of the faith : ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father, from
whence (and not from any other place, saith St. Augustine), he
shall come to judge both the quick and the dead.'
" It destroyeth and taketh away the institution of the Lord's
supper, which was commanded only to be used and continued
until the Lord himself should crme. If, therefore, he be now
really present in the body of his flesh, then must the supper
cease: for the remembrance is not of a thing present, but of a
thing past and absent. And there is a difference between re-
membrance and presence, and, as one of the fathers saith, A
figure is in vain where the thing figured is present.'
" It maketh precious things common to profane and ungodly
persons, and constraineth men to confess many absurdities.
For it affirmeth, that whoremongers and murderers, yea, and
(as some of them hold opinion) the wicked and faithless, mice,
rats, and dogs also, may receive the very real and corporal body
of the Lord, wherein the fulness of the Spirit of light and grace
dwelleth : contrary to the manifest words of Christ in six places
and sentences of John vi."—(hidley's Works, pp. 199. 199.)
Such is the first witness cited by Dr. Pusey, and such
is the candour displayed in citing him !
But Hooker is even yet more unfairly represented. We
crave the reader's attention to this instance of the mode
in which an Oxford Calena is often made up.
Dr. Pusey quotes from the Ecclesiastical Polity (to give
his own references) " Book v. chap. lxvii. §4, 5." He
then quotes " Book v. chap. lxvii. § 7, 8." To a cautious
reader this singular passing over § 6, would naturally
cause some suspicion. But what is this § 6? We will
give it to our headers entire.

" [6.] The real presence of Christ's most blessed body and
filood is NOT therefore to be sought for in the sacrament, but in
the worthy receiver of the sacrament.
" And with this the very order of our Saviour's words agreeth.
First take and eat ;' then ' this is my body which was broken
for you :' first drink ye all of this ;' then followeth this is my
blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the re-
mission of sins.' I see not which way it would be gathered by
the words of Christ, when and where the bread is His body or
the cup His blood, hut only in the very heart and soul of him
which receiveth them. As for the sacraments, they really ex-
hibit, but for aught we can gather out of that which is written
of them, they are not really nor do really contain in themselves,
that grace which with them or by them it pleaseth God to be-
stow.

" If on all sides it be confessed that the grace of baptism is
plured into the soul of man, that by water we receive it althongh
it be neither seated in the water nor the water changed into it,
what should induce men to think that the grace of the Eucharist
must needs be in the Eucharist before it can be in us that re-
ceive it.

" The fruit of the Eucharist is the participation of the body
and blood of Christ. There is no sentence of Holy Scripture
which saith that we cannot by this sacrament be made partakers
or his body and blood except they be first contained in the sa-
crament, or the sacrament converted into them. ` This is my
body,' and ' this is my blood.' being words of promise, sith we
all agree that by the sacrament Christ doth really and truly in
us perform his promise, why do we vainly trouble ourselves with
so fierce contentions whether by consubstantiation, or else by
transubstantiation the sacrament itself be first possessed with
Christ, or no ? A thing which can no way either further or
hinder us howsoever it stand, because our participation of Christ
in this sacrament dependeth on the co operation of his omnipo-
tent power which maketh it his body and blood to us, whether
with change or without alteration of the element such as they
imagine we need not greatly to care nor inquire.—(Works,
(Oxon. 1841,) vol. ii. p. 352, 353.)

Such is the passage which Dr. Pusey and his assisting
friend have chosen to leave out from between two pas-
sages which they have cited. They have printed, p. 351
and a half of p. 352,—and pp. 354, 355 ;—but the latter
part of p. 352, and all p. 353 they pass over. The reason
for the omission is obvious. This § 6, at once sets Hooker
in direct opposition to Dr. Pusey's scheme. Words can-
not more distinctly condemn the whole of Dr. Pusey's
system, than do those of Hooker;—" I see not which way
it should be gathered by the words of Christ, when and
where the bread is his body or the cup his blood, but only
in the very heart and soul of him which receiveth them."
But what shall we say to the honesty which can thus ad-
duce select passages from Ridley, and Hooker, and others,
to cause it to be believed that Dr. Pusey had been con-
demned for preaching merely what Ridley and Hooker
preached, when they knew well, all the time, that if they
had but fairly cited these writers, it would have been seen
that they opposed, not supported, the semi-Romish theory
which Dr. Pusey espouses.
The third witness cited, of any note, is Bishop An-
drewes. And he is similarly misused. From Sermon xv.
on the resurrection, a passage is taken, which is broken
off, likc that from Hooker, rather too soon. Here is the
rest of it, conveniently omitted in Dr. Pusey's Appendix !

- - -
" Do but ask the Church of Rome : even with them it is not
the bodily touch in the sacrament that doth the good. Wicked
men, very reprobates, have that touch, and remain reprobates
as before. Nay. I will go farther; it is not that toncheth
Christ at all. Example, " the multitude that thronged and
thrust Him," yet for all that. as if none of them all had touched
Him, He asks, Quis Me titigit? So that one may rudely thrust
Him, and not touch Him though. not to any pnrpose so.
" Christ resolves the point in that very place. The flesh, the
touching, the eating it, profits nothing. The words he spake
were spirit ;" so the touching, the eating, to he spiritual. And
t. Thomas and Mary Magdalene, or whosoever touched Him
here on earth, nisi feelicius fide quam manu tetigissent ; 'if they
had not been more happy to touch Him with their faith than
with their fingers' end,' they had had no part in Him; no good
by it all. It was found better with it to " touch the hem of His
garment," than without it to touch any part of His body.
"Now, if faith be to touch, that will touch Him no less in
Heaven than here; one that is in heaven may be touched so.
No ascending can hinder that touch. Faith will elevate itself,
that ascending in spirit we shall touch Him, and take hold of
Him. Mitte fidem et tenuisti—it is St. Augustine.. It is a touch
to which there is never a noli, fear it not.
" So do we then ; send up our faith, and that shall touch
Him, and there will virtue come from him; and it shall take
such hold on Him, as it shall raise us up to where He is; bring
us to the end of the verse, and to the end of all our desires; to
Ascendo ad Patrem, a joyful ascension to our Father and His,
and to himself, and to the unity of the Blessed Spirit. To whom,
in the Trinity of Persons, &c."

The next is Dr. Donne; who is handled after a like
fashion. A piece is taken from his fourth Sermon on the
Nativity, in which Dr. Doune appears to use exceedingly
high language" in speaking of the sacrament. But almost
immediately before the few sentences which Dr. Pusey
extracts, there appear these words :

"That bread which thou seest after the consecration is not
the same bread which it was before ; not that it is transubstan-
tiated into another substance, for it is bread still,"—" hut that
it is severed and appropriated by God in that ordinance to
another use. It is other bread ; so as a judge is another man
upon the bench, than he is at home in his own house."

And the very next words which follow Dr. Pusey's ci-
tation are these :

"You would have said, at noon. this light is the sun, and you
will say now. this light is the candle; that light was not the
sun ; this light is not the candle. but it Is that portion of the air
which the sun did then, and the candle cloth now, enlighten.
We say the sacramental bread is the body of Christ, because
God hath shed his ordinance upon it, and made it of another na-
ture in the use, though not the substance." (Serm. iv. P. 75.)

• Thus, Dr. Donne advocates the use of the expression,
This is Christ's body, and then explains that he uses the
words in the same way as when he speaks of light as being
the sun when it is not really and truly the sun. Dr.
Pusey considers it honest to quote the " high language"!
which answers his purpose, and to omit the exp &nation
Dr. Jackson is the next authority cited; and he is
quoted with equal dishonesty. A passage is taken from
his works, vol. iii. pp 333, 334; but the Catena-compiler
stops short in the middle. Here is the close of the pas-
sage, which gives Dr. Pusey's interpretation of John vi.
56, a direct denial.

" So then a man by eating Christ's body merely sacramentally
may be hardened—may be excluded from his gracious presence.
But no man bath Christ dwelling in him, by this manner of
eating his flesh and drinking his blood, unless withal he eat the
one and drink the other spiritually. The eating, then, of
Christ's body, and drinking his blood merely sacramentally, is
not the eating and drinking here meant." (John vi.

We pass over a crowd of people like " Bishop Forbes,"
Sutton, White, Thorndike, &c. &c. who, if they yet lived,
would stare to find themselves ranked among "our Great
Divines of the English Church,"—and pass on to Bishop
Beveridge. Here the Catena-maker advances in suds-
city,—venturing even to the mutilation of sentences, to
suit his purpose. From the Bishop's tract On Frequent
Communion, he gives this citation :

" When we hear the words of consecration repeated as they
came from our Lord's own mouth, ' This is My B dy which:is
given for you" and This is My Blood which was shed for you
and for many for the remission of sins ;* we are then steadfastly
to believe, that although the substance of the Bread and Wi e
still
remain. yet now it is not common Gread and wine, as to its
use i but the Body and Blood of Christ in that Sacramental
sense wherein be spake the words."

Aye, but Bishop Beveridge did not thus end the sen-
tence. Re thus continued :

insomuch, that whosoever duly receives these his
creatures of bread and wine according to Christ's holy institu-
tion, in remembrance of his death and passion, are partaken of

his most precious body and blood, as it is expressed in the
prayer of consecration."

Again, from the next page of the same tract, the fol-
lowing passage is given by Dr. Pusey

" When it comes to our turn to receive it, then we are to lay
aside all thoughts of bread and wine, and the minister and every
thing else that is or can he seen, and fix our faith, as it is ' the
evidence of things not seen,' who!ly and solely upon our blessed
Saviour, as offering us His own Body and Blood to preserve our
bodies and sou s to everlasting life. which we are therefore to
receive by faith, as it is the substances of things hoped for,'
steadfastly believing it to be, as our Saviour said, ' His Body
and blood.' which our Church teacheth us are verily and indeed
taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper."

But this was not the close of the Bishop's sentence. He
went on to say,—
" by which means, whatsoever it is to others, it will be
to us who receive it with such a faith, the body and blood of
Christ onr Saviour, the very ' substance of all things hoped for.'
upon the account of his body that was broken, and his blood
that was shed, for us." I

Now these are not unimportant suppressions. Dr.
Pusey's doctrine is, that " It (the body) is there, inde-
pendently of our faith." The teaching of Bishop Bever-
idge is, that only to faith is there any presence or recep-
tion of Christ's body at all. Yet the Bishop is cited as
supporting Dr. Pusey's doctrine !
We shall give but one more instance, and it is that of
an Archbishop. whose name, remembering the moderation
of his views, we were not a little astonished to see in Dr.
Pusey's Catena. We will give the citation entire :
"Archbishop Wake."

"The bread which we break. i;-, not only in figure and simi-
litude, but by a real spiritual Communion, His Body. The Cup
of Blessing which we bless is, by the same Communion, His
Blood." 2

There was something very suspicious in the look of this
citation, standing, as it does, 'without reference to any
chapter or page, or even work, from whence it was taken.
However, we took the trouble to seek for the passage,
and we found it at p. 165 of the " Archbishop's Commen-
tary on the Catechism, sixth edition." But at page 163,
of the same volume, we found these plain declarations :

" Q. Are the body and blood of Christ really distributed to
every Communicant. in this Sacrament?

" A. No, they are not ; for then every Communicant, whether
prepared or not for it, would alike receive Christ's body and
blood there. That which is g yen by the priest to the Commu.
nicant is, as to its nature, the same after consecration that it
was before, viz., bread and wine : only altered as to its use and
signification.

" Q. If the body and blood of Christ be not really given and
distributed by the priest, how can they be verily and indeed
taken and received by the faithful Communicant?
" A. That which is given by the priest is. as to its substance,
bread and wine : as to its sacramental nature and signification,
it is the figure, or representation, of Christ's body and blood,
which was t,roken and shed for us. The very body and blood of
Christ, as yet it is not. But being with faith and piety received
by the Communicant, it becomes to him, by the blessing of God,
and the grace of the Holy Spirit, the very body and blood of
Christ."

Here, then, again, we have Dr. Pusey's false doctrine
eschewed and condemned in the plainest and most distinct
manner. That which he holds, the Archbishop flatly de-
nies : that which the Archbishop teaches, he condemns.

1 Bishop Beveridge's Works, 1824, vol. i. p. 603, 604
2 Dr. Pusey's Sermon: Appendix, p. 78.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE BISHOP OF OSSORY'S CHARGE AND
" THE TRACTS" (RESERVE).

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

forbear noticing the earlier parts of this admi-
rable charge, not that they are deficient in interest or less
ably dealt with, but by reason of their being more in the
ordinary routine of similar publications—and come at
once to the subject of Reserve, being one of those on
which the bishop feels it necessary " to correct or deter-
mine the views of others, and even beyond what that pur-
pose requires, to make known his own" (p. 5).
But first we must bear in mind the extreme reverence
with which the disciples of the tract school affect to treat
the opinions of a bishop. Mr. Newman, in his letter to
the Bishop of Oxford, 1841, repeats the sentiment he had
uttered three years before to the archdeacon—A bishop's
lightest word, ex cathedra", is heavy. His judgment on
a book cannot be light. It is a rare occurrence." Dr.
Pusey, also, in his letter to Dr. Jelf, of the same date,
writes in the same strain. It is to be feared, however,
that this professed respect for the sentence of a bishop
is to be received with considerable limitation, and holds
valid only when his feelings are in unison with those of
the party • else what is to be said of Dr. Pusey's stric-
tures on die bishops, conveyed in the blandest terms ima-
ginable in his letter (1842) to his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury, "on the present crisis on the English
church ;" or still more, of that vaunt (cited in the
Churchman's Monthly Review, January, 1842) lately
issued from the lips of a tractarian, that "steps must
shortly be taken to bring the refractory bishops to their
senses."

The learned prelate, whose charge is now before me,
after pressing upon his assembled clergy the obligation to
a patient, prayerful and reverent study of the whole sa-
cred volume, that they may be enabled rightly to divide
and to declare the whole counsel and truth of God, is led
to grapple with those tracts especially in which an oppo-
site doctrine is taught and defended. Both tracts 80 and
87 are entitled " on Reserve in Communicating Religious
Knowledge;" but the bishop confines himself to the re-
serve recommended in communicating the great doctrine
of the atonement. We have large quotations from the
tracts in question, in order (as he says—p_ 43) "to fu
beyond any reasonable doubt their true object as regards
this doctrine." Against No. 80 it had been urged, that
it discountenanced the preaching of the atonement to im-
penitent sinners to bring them to repentance, and to pe-
nitent sinners to confirm them in holiness—that it con-
demned any preaching which makes this truth the
foundation of offers of mercy to sinners, the source of
Christian morals to holiness, which makes it the instru-
ment of converting and reforming, of drawing men to
Christ, and after Christ. After a lapse of nearly three
years No. 87 appears, in which the writer gives what
seems to be a disavowal of the object imputed to the pre-
ceding tract on the same subject, but what really leaves
the full weight of the charge upon him still ; for he dis-
claims having ever recommended that " it (the doctrine
of the atonement) should be intentionally and designedly
withdrawn from all public mention" (Tract 87—p. 52).
He is not charged with having condemned all public
mention of that doctrine, and his disclaimer goes not a
whit further; while multiplied passages from the tracts in
question leave it beyond doubt that the charge, already
given in substance, is well founded, and which after all is
not inconsistent with the literal truth of his disclaimer.
A " mass of sophistry and misrepresentation and con-
fusion," " arguments scattered without much regard to
order," through "these very long, very rambling and
very misty treatises," philosophy and natural instinct,
Scripture and tradition, are all made to combine in en-
forcing the duty of Reserve for which the writer pleads.
And if the writer's statements left his purpose in any re-
spect doubtful, the course of the reasoning by which they
are sustained must make it perfectly clear." Such are
the sentiments and such the expressions of Dr. O'Brien
with reference to these tracts : and to every one acquainted
with the mind and manner of that amiable and eminent
Christian and prelate, they will convey a more than ordi-
nary weight of deliberate censure upon " that series of
publications which (as he observes elsewhere) have ac-
quired such unhappy celebrity."

Instead of enteri4 into a detailed examination of all the
arguments in these tracts, the bishop confines himself to a
single division, choosing (as he says) the arguments which
have been drawn from the example of the teaching of our
blessed Lord in the course of his earthly ministry. " I
select those arguments (adds his lordship) because, while
they are in their own nature the most important, they
seem to have been most relied on in the tract, and they
certainly have contributed more to the impression which
it has made than any other which it contains ; and, more-
over, they furnish a fair specimen of the general character
of the reasoning employed in the divisions which I am
obliged to omit." (p. 46.)
Before entering, however, on this examination, his lord-
ship finds it necessary, by way of safeguard against the
insidious poison of these tracts, to forewarn his clergy of
the equivocal use of the principal term that obtains almost
universally throughout them. Reserve is not merely used
for holding back certain truths, and keeping silence about
them, but also for caution, and for discretion, and for
reverence in treating them. And all that the author can
find in support of the duty of reserve in any of the latter
senses, is taken by him, apparently without any doubt, as
of no less force to prove it to be a duty in a former sense ;
and when pressed with arguments against his rule of re-
serve in one of the senses of the word, he is able to retreat
into one of the other senses, in which he is safe from all
disturbance." (p. 47). _

This letter bas already so far exceeded the limits I in-
tended for it, that 1 must reserve for a further communi-
cation the bishop's exposure of " the wonderful careless-
ness of the tract writers in dealing with Holy Scripture,"
the arbitrary violence with which they treat it, making it
prove and disprove what they like, and seeing in it what
they want, and nothing else," not merely misrepresenting
and perverting Holy Scripture, but even attempting to
maintain their point against its positive and express testi-
mony." (p.p. 224-5).
I cannot conclude better than by extracting the note
(p. 21) in the last charge of our own revered Bishop of
Chester : " The divinity of the Oxford tracts has been as
completely refuted in all its parts as any erroneous opinions
can ever be refuted ; and it is a sign of the discretion, if
not of the candour of the writers, to treat these answers
generally as if they had never been written. If this con-
tinue to be the case after the recent publication of Mr.
Goode's elaborate " Rule of Faith and Practice," it must
be considered as a tacit acknowledgment of complete refu-
tation."

It has continued to be the case, (since the puny drivel-
ling in this instance of the British Critic, having neither
grappled with a single fact, nor disproved a single argu-
ment, cannot be considered as an answer)—it still con-
tinues, and is likely so to remain, for reasons best known
to those discreet gentlemen themselves, notwithstanding
the publication of the charge now under our conside-
ration. Mr. Williams, the defeated candidate for the
Professorship of Poetry, the author of the tracts in ques-
tion, is more likely to imitate the flippant assumption of
his leader, Mr. Newman, (coolly gettirg rid of Dr.
O'Brien's masterly work on " Justification by Faith only"
as undeserving of notice, because only setting forth. b
Mr. N.'s account, the old Lutheran view of the subject,)
than fairly to canvass the statements put forward by the
learned prelate, and candidly to admit the convincing
power of the truth they contain.

I am, Sir,
Your's, &c.

Liverpool, September 9th, 1843.

A. M.

THE IRISH CHIJRC

--- , sTOTAISI#
TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOk- ~ of,
upon
eprnyn
obtaining C il
livings ch of
inR
Stn,—Having fallen in with the last nuttwi'n.ltstlss
contemporary, the Mail, 1 cannot help exprees."rticle °Di
prise and sorrow at the tone of the leadingd~lergf'~lr
writer charges the Irish Chnrch with
reference to the Irish University, Church,anF', typo
opoliati° tin 4
L 0 the neg quer'
the Irishnall ,Ilif
with sending forth a body of clergir vain are inctor",m
bounden duty at home ; and hence infers tbet!itio the
~
Church_ as the means of spiritual improventlee`.., ,- ,4
ple. This charge is of too gross a character, rs, Os
from such a source, and at such a time, t.°l/ ;lt:
protest, inasmuch as it is without fountian°,4,
trary to fact. The testimony of Phelan, in Pinot, A,
the Church of Rome in Ireland, of BieboP.c 070
Dean Murray, in their histories of the, I,r: Onto
prove, that anterior to the twelfth cenln:';tlol ilitO
clEmneg, I aarni dd,
no acknowledgment of the Pang power leoefortalt
of the 11* 0 her vi 4
try : and again, that at the period forerroneoWit'
under Elizabeth no spoliation took pinee'
eleven
were unmolested by the PaPni J 10111,61; 0'
years, and received without opPne"gyfri4
body of the Roman Catholics. The lailer".-itos
quented the churches : multitudes of the Priests i!joi
tile proscribed charges, and continued to oinciateS, f,
proscribed cures : and the majority of the,Prieleirsre;tol
or following the popular opinion, retaineu . atop
exercised their functions according to thee,ol,o' ,htr
(Leland, Cox, Ware, quoted by Phelan,„, hit X
The Irish church alter the reformation "Irre.;),
poverished and enfeebled ; its progress w..8.,,5h...h1,700'
qie refusal to translate the liturgy into tr„l'nirelty
lishing men in the dignities and beneficeanobintos4_,
gers to the language, and bad no syrnliatuf„ot dela' tor
pie ; so that the wonder is, not that it has not VW
in promoting the spiritual welfare of tbe 02400,0
it has done even so much. The opinion of t:;e virile'
as late as 1735 is, that it was not safe tn, ",-,,,ii0,' tef,
two Irishmen at the same time bishops in ' or'ilw
A lee ll or
brings me - Ivo 0 kit-
porary, that the Irish clergy are more deg 1 104
in this country than of labouring at lit°e'os I er
thtbeoiLooi
Mail take up the clergy list, and instance
who hold livings i❑ England? land ? It may guete.oter" coll.
men who hold laboriousg cura ies and distil oleo
but I know of only one living ein this tldePeol,soll
ferred on an Irishman • and this broughV,oo ei et i
attack of the local ' - tbe-e'
newspapers upon and t is to
the appointment. It is quite right fiApietlaidt
the Mail and his party, to advance &OAP -cos
abrishopricks and bishopricks in Ireland, 70 tbe ►.
0 _e_deemed unworthy of the lowest place°, letial,oet
fEngland. Is it not a fact that the
ilitl„8 01..40.;
of bishop
Magee was actually appointed to lcuersict
f Oxford, but that the bigotry of that r: ter nfhictil'il
his country, led to a request from the tn'e;s inf.-dtber4
that he would relinquish the appointtoen"ortai;stelli
meek,, prelate quietly acquiesced. The inrnford----rod
naThe Atonement," was rejected by ‘,s,, bosPdien
r me, a greater work, a greater man thili7,ogo,fdelloit
fiisobm them since ; a name that will live Ow these ncli
church and nation will last, When dill
ANesc
whipsters "the ;1; e P , sc.n..stso. the _ uselan-ie t, e•''
.
the especial favourites of the Mail, at Pre" :1008.' rer
" Be forgotten as fools, or remembered ' ented Ippliel
Again, when the death of this Pen frotygendoehry
bleft a vacancy in the see of Dublin, the 9 'B-Cl. "J
°f:4
y the principal of St Alb , _. , 02, for „ao , r
an s nail the ra tbs. fef
object to the . present Archbishop on . for 0 0 )10
country or university, but we do think it ct, th in t 0
unworthy notice should' be f the 8 (1"
taken n Cie C. r
Irishmen have been appointed to cura the no , 0
country. It should be ' a that tole 40.1
remembere cals kap „rip
" the
United
Church (not churches) of .1-' • he rirtOP
eit 10
land," and ~
that in the Gospel, thereisn,butt of
Scythian, bond or free, (English or Irish!) otod
is all and hi all." A
jotete°l4o
It is equally
unsust • dby fact that the le !rise
aine. OP% il'
the Irishclergy ' amongst the Rom the te 00 to
of
fith the spirit of angry controversY: t,„, to til,itteor
impui,- 0-coo
them at home, what it boldly
and equally without foundation. Vire shall the er
an eot•„o
proof. The enormity of these charges die OA,'
ness with which they are advanced lea ''gips in' n
Protest, to which I hope you will kinalY ot, c, Y.
I am, Sir, your- obedient serla 11.
„,

Liverpool, Sept.ll,lB
Passing Pet
ts,
n+ PO
how tor ego to
A RETORT PROFESSIONAL.---A 1:-'nnott rs° -e.
stonemason's, bawled out to him ,'-'•h- yolgi gilpPrj 05
W—Hard at work, I see. You fit"sn-,ait,;,;11141;e0o1r:
as far as 'ln memory of,' and then Irv. yeo,iiet, IV'
see who wants a monument ?" "II "'kis rea. the°
old man, resting for a moment on .ta and ,tD
somebody is sick, and you doctering his
' Cr
0 tbtjir
right on !"
abaldwspinserefi
hcoevndreii:it,cnoenighfixmershiani
tetltomaohynnolveltpuieysolmn pointiogfh
tay
socfene s devotionalinterest,ofa n tilidgaetuuelitrayeri, ei a 3
oi
tin
00
.r 0 i ~,e,
refaiferievetiO;cie•driol.istrr,o4o;:itioti;iipt.::
PALESTINE.—Of all places on thenhtialattlisto°S
this charming portion unquestionahlYog al tlf elf it%
ence which is due to hoary age• It 1;001. e`4o,t :0(1,;'5
ed to inspire the traveller with a ra- DO,: ' 18 tuie
truth be considered " the glory of B,ivete ar'urea 'red `i
quarter the Most High plaed revelation were, 04
the Jews,. it was here that'ef traliesetiost
here, churct:
the prophets; those sublime oracles d roirsc ifets ort
ow
cated which shall endure for ever ; aSousl9,lly the 4
Again, the most glorious and stoPee tishe' 400, o,li
so deeply
nished
mslwotaiantrughtesssptoraaopriety exclaim
sufferings, death, the blood•sheddlan!.,:i,tea tv 0, 00,
svonder,„,oolo" .1 1),,
, 0 importantearth 1,, Rt to
el olvreirissoo7l
fh7otteadhhfssoeedepmvaptlerroarinisynnntteecefs:sedtmst:r
oiinikntfrdhitsalnoeei
tgfilieleory:snoi,talsshebtcpo.eceefo: nuert,,vpviiisesrecateci3ceericio!rtoeileicoeeirwro;oo:ioii,t
e eh"
Land. little 0 s i,er,
I take s,. 'UP° sat.oo'
THE FISH THE AGGRESSOR.-- floe. • rosoo
rOa tA' 15 be
feather, and tying it in a particular tong/ 1 liceli,iver t
make an imitation of a fly ; then ' with a the .0, 00
and let it sweep round the stream° At), for „coo ,0,
‘,9
rintral;eo do,,'"to 06
This I have an undoubted right t
_T, whato'as jee is
oPit
mdmaeosahnnsadtrtomumysyfrflliisethntldew;
Aibtnhudt bre! o.olasjentedvcddeeeirtttilistta;ctotaP)iiire:lo
aggressor, not I ; his intention I, _attiogi d 1111'1'410d
amimnbytuooruidltoeorik.n,
execution.Hewvah ri
various
which
es;
cdutiogi
ranheyttcietninirgid
nt
hsvhs
ees
nahectnotfio lnyo
tlyn,i g
:51
:t
:iiyi:ci
0:01600:11)tt.54 a
ittio
that the fly, which he hoped to make naturs l'b. 0 006
is much stronger than himself. t _ ole. _4O
_,l o he
regain this fly, unjustly withheld frot"., to a`_,', sli",t t!ti
tired and weak in his lawless endeav ";'i onap Ireo
it. I take advantage of his vvealtnete're onfetieisesa Ort;
him, somewhat loath, to the shore':ant• ) # titbit°.
hack of the head ends him in anhiadies. 0 bin
I find his stomach distented no
0-is roar oft:
then, what a wretch a fish is ; no ogr ~, tl,
is. 1 if it 9
—Scrone an Salmon Fishing. ,r,41511,401e f fel ~r
- Tnoneg - the .`.e o', f,,,
:e
ivelabtienal: :eerier!
~,,Ae fie
MODE OF TRANSPORTING •••-• stall, will', tri'
dry and aridplains of Upper Ilin the cony A 8
~ite.tif
for so.-• 00° or-
animal chiefly used by troops , ,_„age, , A ~_,O
1„0.
the the lighter descriptions of '''''..osottot 0,.00,,1V 'co,
ofse constitute the average "1;4,0), 'l,' Orial'lrt of
establishment ; but in Bengal' Oa i..„ted oat' 0 eof
and humid character, it is neitherdwr )
the ill, ,easit., 00 tood
elephants (for those who can affore
...s of tr
_do ciff
.lae.
and hackeries, form the usual !Toe CA t,e..g 0
slippery ground is more unsuitedc webang t arp
_l,, pitf,
other quadruped of burden, l
rret'ain Orel° tlo,7gro",
sandy soil, and whilst his legs no soone,entre,oo ri°,olo;
he displays astonishing owers,,,t_,, the 'id !' 011Pfitili,
the right and left, and diverge
at,riost, I:, is lo
_es co,
~
than power over them is usu "Lad, an,„hro,°,,, what I;
the unfortunate beast to the Heeling
.avet rice; op.!
bility ruined for ever; the r
projeetbecon't 014‘006‘
legs are torn, the unwieldy limbsrthe earl l' sPli le° f' °I4
like the oars from a boat, arn term t,. a° o°lo°
there coarsely, but expressive ,
to the sir„dioflo:Oe4tije 00(
is left to die by inches, a fixtured. At! reseriar heors to,
naturedly knocked on the 11..ett_ Toren_ Tart, tr0.,00 4
even a single regiment, on the march_ sorou..inpa_o,l4o!,
nearly the migration, en rnasseli”"htly.o!eu:btafrioslsial"
patriarchal tribe, than the
_b_e_cattle 10, sis,../P
Europe. Flocks, herds, hagg'asnd 0( : ins ° ill'
,ee,',ea
11 the l'''' Oat
ole elr (0
amnedn ,
motleywonien ,
disorder,
lev st 'se l'e (6
Journal. k iraP dila° 0,e(1 flied
NT• —Mar •an it ti° t•
jfii
A NEW S ETTLEME • ....„ pow ,
...,
ieB • to . ,
children,stwilettOOS, moo,
for his companion was stlieleePriec:er.,:f
twhi)ee's:betetlweliaicie;deo,o,,,,:::i
s Oen 0 iii ,fie
0
were not above a score of cabin ro
longoti I`aolvie..
these appeared untenanted;B
_i_', feriort°.k, eat it, 11 11;3
The most tottering, abject, in' hah c
ty, ..- Bar, a-°,,er'o; Se
himself
dseolofrb,ytowoakshaitrloguignh sury
a, '.'__ in t
was called, with great pror (;_eble prooP„ tece isa,,g.oo
Credit Office. It had some
.v.r, Past ;eor ti, ant
yf,alleTnhrloeegso'rlong'le° Oa; ).
eicelit,
settling deep down in the ratarde tired'' op , 01 sig'io,
burnt trer tell, hr sa,
stumps and ashes of e nor ace th ste 010,
corn was growing. in somn-,_r, iota, 010 _ 06 oje
,be
andsom etthheirneg, ahnheeffsoflrteihdadhdeeiene_ie:os,riiitasnsntityoncsiry,eiibacreoli,lol
fence had been begun, but i ,n_if hielneee dogs" 1#,„0,,,,
70-„r rola Pig ;se re 011 A
mpleotneidLiannsdatoihse
in
I:i:from the
r, hottie;e 11,0 V:
nearly naked, gazing a.tA. ferid OPT' frOng at'Prth °trete
living things he saw• rose Up his 1° a•
for,rl,o vo
ovewxseydinwtioththheunwg:o2 satnee ..ch of t° tots
.0o sil,
00
as the breath of an oveno;ind • as e btartest.
e,re(l 100
into the marshy.grounq• "A was they t, ori _t
them out. Their own lan.
lose that sveeitas lii‘e #4",
hung on everything it._ black
mocezte fo.ree,,,,aflorce,tippitoii
another out of their p 8
rtie„, la
essure,reo t th i 0 i
had grown so thick 80d
cees, and tbnegaishdend tilectigioibl
cl from mg of ' oti • et,' th ull
The best were stunte ,
the ate-- der've ,lt°g es( pa ot
room ; and high abount, frowzy uttiogied
caithert. the ic io
grass, dank weeds, a n,40, but with erried ° 14
into their seperate
-1 kraal d3ri'f'tterr f°: tion„,:theirt;eo/
shapes of strange disto the pr, 41, ,• .no her or
water beep;
,n,,eennoftrid mit,
ht Pu • wo hp g JO% 655,41,
their ° tbeY —Mfrs, t° 1A 011 jel, eo ot
offal of the two, and lace where sorb -non 00.• „e• a l'of
down to the landingPi Le fond
,qldy erL,,1100., and
oi
last night ; and there "
ok at, hut ther:edPe ' aleft, 11,4 V
wan and forlorn to 10 thew sepal Ora le ty 10
, Carry ofo we 0
who helped him to caking ewh
The)
tbe.,ettef
shook their heads in all Thos The) orb rfeio w 1:0%
away, bad all
.cle
_she are°,fairgootheeo tod,
ti t,
ata itjsunrogolets
no comfort to give hun.rted it• ade' of t' lice, 'of' i,
going
lost their wives, their vet:notes. had igife,,,;oool
and suffered much Lth Too thelafirl or
11"
then • none were toe
89....0ce0e to
frankly' offered their a
.. 1
575 1 1 P
him for that time, wen'
—Martin Chuzsewit•

IL
1014
441°1:4. ie
„

IPrk
t!ltg,s° to
tat

rye ipt'q

Si.`l)
etae,"
°Ol
NN 4:tl
,^5.:410

)44144
18444 hi;

Nezot;!
t`iF

ktt\

-*ll-