In invention, as well as in composition, Titian is rather economical of figures, resembling in this respect the greatest painters ancient and modern. Nothing is forced, nothing stiff in either; you would think you were contemplating ancient bas-relievos, where all is elegance, grace, and perfection. If he is less ingenious than Paul Veronese, he charms by his simplicity: if he has less movement than Tintoretto, he has more judgement, and when he paints battles or bacchanals, he is as fertile and as bold as those two great masters of his school. As to expression, particularly in portraits, he is not surpassed by Raffaelle.' Vol. II. pp. 82-84.

To these criticisms, we must add a slight one of our own, respecting that important branch of the art, in which Titian is allowed to have excelled. Although colours, as an imitation of nature, may be said to have been brought by this artist to perfection, still, the harmony which results from a judicious choice of colours, was not well understood in the Venetian school. They seem, however, to have paid a due attention to reds, which are the most striking of colours, and which they generally distributed with great judgement, either near the middle, or in equal proportions through the whole extent of the canvas. Greens and blues were but little used, and only to relieve the others; yellows and browns seldom. Hence, the active colours preponderated, and gave a general warmth to the painting; but the eye is not relieved by the harmonious assemblage of all. The Venetian masters also employed with the most scrupulous care, unmixed colours in the draperies, in order to relieve more effectually the mixed tints of the skin; and Titian introduced the artifice of a white linen drapery between the skin and coloured drapery. But in the carnation tints, they were never equalled.

The last chapter of Count Orloff's book conducts us to the actual state of Painting in Italy. Cammucini, born in 1773, is confessedly at the head of the modern school. His most celebrated picture is the Presentation in the Temple, for a church in Placentia. The heroic subjects of Roman history, however, are those which he has most affected. He has been accused of not being a good colourist; but he has certainly surpassed all his contemporaries in design. Raffaelle, Dominichino, and Andrea del Sarto seem to be his great models. Connoisseurs have compared his cartoons to Raffaelle's. He is still in the vigour of life, and in all probability, his career may be yet protracted for many years. Landi is classed among the first artists of Rome: his picture of Jesus meeting the women on Calvary, is admired for the variety and expression of the countenances. At first sight, his colouring is apt to strike, but, upon a more attentive examination, his drawing is found

incorrect, and his tint unnatural. His Venuses and his banditti have the same rose tints. He is said to invent his compositions by means of models in clay, placed in the attitudes and groupes which he intends to paint. Count Orloff speaks in terms of high panegyric of young Agricola, a rising artist not yet twenty. He is devoted to the study of the antique, and to the manner of Raffaelle. His drawing is correct; his colouring is in the style of Sanzio; his chiaroscuro is admirable, and his flesh equals that of the best masters. If this young artist perseveres with the same ardour in the career he has begun, and is not misled into false taste or want of exertion by extravagant praise, he will in all probability attain the highest rank in the art. A long list of names succeeds, which illustrates the assiduity and industry with which the art is still pursued at Rome; but we agree with Count Orloff, that the existing school languishes in a state of almost hopeless mediocrity. If, however, the regeneration of Art in Italy be a rational expectation, that happy result must be looked for almost exclusively in Florence, where, for the last twenty years, the art has been philosophically taught and laboriously studied. Her academy, instituted on the most liberal principles, has produced, and is still producing, students fitted to tread the higher walks of painting, and to emulate their predecessors in the best ages of the Art.

Art VIII. Plurality of Offices in the Church of Scotland Examined, with a particular Reference to the Case of the very reverend Dr. Mc Farlane, Principal of the University of Glasgow. By the Rev. Robert Burns, Minister of St. George's Church, Paisley. 12mo. pp. 298. Price 3s. 6d, Glasgow. 1824.

THER

HE case of Principal Mc Farlane, to which we have more than once had occasion to advert, will come on before the General Assembly in the course of the ensuing month; and three things will be determined by the issue: first, whether patronage in the Church of Scotland is subject to any ecclesiastical control; next, whether Presbyteries are possessed substantially of any power or independence in matters nominally subject to their cognizance; and thirdly, what is the real strength of the evangelical party in the Church of Scotland. Neither the jus divinum nor the expediency of Presbyterianism has ever been made apparent to our dim perceptions;. but even if we could bring ourselves to look upon the pres-. byterian discipline as scriptural, so far as regards the constitution of presbyteries, or could go a step further, and acquiesce in the expediency of synods,--this said General

A

Assembly, with its Lord High Commissioner, would be more than we could possibly digest; we could as soon swallow the whole bench of bishops, or the Pope himself. If the King, cor his Commissioner, is at last to be the head of the Church, whether that Church be episcopal or presbyterian in its forms, becomes a matter of comparatively little moment to us; it is "of this world,"-its spiritual character is nullified.

The present work appears to be the result of very extensive and acute research. It imbodies a mass of information bearing on the general subject of pluralities in the Church of Scotland, which lay scattered over voluminous and antiquated tomes of ecclesiastical history and statute law. As an historical and legal argument, it does the Author great credit, and will not cease to be a valuable document when the question at issue is disposed of. The part of the work which alone concerns Christian ministers at large, is that which treats of the nature and extent of pastoral obligation on general grounds, and of the compatibility of academical charges with the pas toral office. This is a subject of wide extent and considerable delicacy. We cannot say that we are altogether satisfied with the manner in which Mr. Burns has treated it, but we are not sorry to have it brought into discussion. According to the view here taken of pastoral obligation, all secular engagements are a sort of pluralities,-a union of offices or of callings being not less at variance than a plurality of benefices with the principle contended for. Our readers will perceive that Dissenting practices are here as much implicated as the. practice of the Established Church. Both are identified in the following passage.

The circumstance of St. Paul having occasionally employed himself, for particular reasons, in a mechanical occupation, has been commonly adduced, by certain classes of religious professors, as an argument to prove, that there ought to be no distinct order of pastors; that any member, whom the rest may think competent, may be set apart to the duties of preaching elder; and that as the ordinary business of life is supposed to be carried on at the same time, maintenance is allowed, except in cases where that business does not yield a comptency. It was not till of late, that the advocates of pluralities in the church made common cause with these sectaries, The reply we have given will suit the reasoning of both; and if the votaries of pluralities are not satisfied with our reply, but still cling to the example of the great Apostle as favourable to their views, we make them welcome to the benefit of that example, with this understanding, that they shall imitate it also in its spirit and leading prinsi ciples, as well as in its outward actings. Paul wrought as a tented maker because "necessity" sometimes required, it. Are they pre pared to assign the same reasons? Paul did so that he might preach the Gospel freely and without charge to the Gentiles. Are they

prepared to say that this is their motive? Paul was either offered no stipend from the people, or, for proper reasons, he declined accepting any. Can they plead the same thing, or are they prepared to copy his example? In fine, Paul was a Missionary, perpetually travelling from place to place; and it was not to be expected that he could obtain a competent maintenance from any particular class among whom he might occasionally minister. But are they prepared to sanction the "Ministerium Vagum," and to devolve every minister of the church on "his own resources," or on the voluntary donations of the people?' pp. 23, 24.

Mr. Burns has here, inadvertently, we doubt not, confounded things that essentially differ. Between the anti-Scriptural tenet, that there ought to be no distinct order of pastors,' and the general practice of Congregational Dissenters which de'volves every minister on the voluntary donations of the peo ple,' he would find it difficult to establish the slightest connexion. We cannot suppose our Author so ill informed as not to know, that, with the former sentiment, Protestant Dissenters in this country are not chargeable; and though in Scotland, such a notion may have been broached, he must be aware that his neighbours, Dr. Wardlaw and Mr. Ewing, who may be considered as tolerably representing the sentiments of Scotch Congregationalists, maintain a very opposite opinion. Our colleges and academies are designed for the education of a distinct order of pastors, and it is seldom by choice that any other calling is united with the pastoral charge by Dissenting ministers. It is undeniable, however, that a numerous class of those who "preach the Gospel" are unable to "live of the "Gospel ;" and it seems hard to brand with the name of pluralists, all those who find themselves compelled to open a school -the usual resource-or even, like St. Paul, to labour with their own hands, in order to provide all things honest in the sight of men, and to minister to the necessities of a growing family. Mr. Burns, however, might disclaim any imputation of blame in such cases of unhappy necessity; but he would perhaps say, See the effect of devolving the minister on the voluntary donations of the people! He might say this, but with what grace or reason would best appear from comparing the condition of ministers dependent on the voluntary support of their people, with that of a large proportion of the ministers of endowed establishments. Are there no pastors in the Established Church of Scotland, who are obliged to labour with their own hands to make up for the narrowness of their stipends, and to whom the voluntary contributions of many a Dissenting congregation would be rich promotion in comparison? If not, we can tell him that, in the South, we can match against every poor Dissenting pastor VOL. XXI. N.S.

2 M

a half-starved curate, and that not even Lord Harrowby's bill, which the Episcopal Bench were ill pleased with, can protect the poor ecclesiastical labourer from injustice in the bargain with his beneficed employer. The fact seems to be, that no mode of providing for the support of the Christian ministry, can altogether preclude there being a class of labourers whose stipend shall be inadequate to their maintenance. For even were the salary rigidly proportioned to the duty, in small parishes or small congregations, it would inevitably fall below what is required for the support of a minister with a large family. It does not always follow, that the poorest minister is the most inadequately paid by his people, the number of the congregation, and the extent of the demands made upon his time, being taken into the account. It is obvious too, that, as to the compatibility of other engagements with the pastoral office, much must depend upon the specific nature of the particular charge. A congregation of 300 hearers cannot demand the same exclusive and unremitting attention that will be requisite in the case of a charge embracing 1500 or 2000 souls. A school, a small farm, or a professorship might possibly leave the pastor, in the former case, at leisure to devote as much attention to the oversight of his little flock, as they could expect to receive from the pastor of a large parish or a crowded congregation.

But let us not be misunderstood. We are no advocates for mixing up such avocations with the pastoral function. The Apostolic rule is in all respects the most equitable, and the best for both minister and people, that they who preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel;'-that is, to adopt our Author's gloss, that the churches should provide a competent maintenance for their pastors,' and that they should be understood to dedicate their talents and their time exclusively to the work for which they thus receive a remuneration.' It is, we admit, an unhappy necessity, that renders it impossible to. adhere invariably to this wise rule; and pluralities, properly so called, which involve a compromise of pastoral duty, if not of the pastoral character, whether consisting in a union of distinct charges, or of distinct professions, are condemned alike by every Scriptural principle, and by the melancholy records of experience. In many of Mr. Burns's remarks we fully concur; his reasoning in the case of Principal M Farlane, appears to us conclusive: we only regret that he has mixed up with the main, argument, what appears to us irrelevant and questionable matter, and that he has not paid sufficient attention to the obvious exceptions which must be made to the general principle.