mentioned. Her daughter Mrs. E. who lived with Mrs. L., and had, some years before, renounced Protestantism, immediately, for the first time, sent for the Roman Catholic priest, the Rev. Mr. F., to visit her mother. Being himself in a weak state of health, he was conveyed in a sedan-chair, and arrived at eight o'clock in the evening. What passed in the interval we have not been able to ascertain, except that before twelve o'clock the same night, the priest had administered to her the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, Penance, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction! She was proclaimed a convert to the Catholic Church and received into their Communion. Her eternal safety, also, was pronounced to be beyond doubt!

Contrary to expectation, Mrs. L. did partially recover and survived a year and a half. During the first three months of her illness, she seemed speechless, and was unable to express herself intelligibly to her relatives who came to see her. The very next day after her alarming fit of illness, the Rev. Mr. F. being ill and unable to continue his visits, another Roman Catholic priest-the Rev. Mr.from S. was sent for in a chaise, and remained under their roof a fortnight with Mrs. L. and her daughter Mrs. E. Great care was taken to exclude Protestants, and when the Rev. D. S., the vicar, called at the house, he was refused admittance, as Mrs. L. they said, had embraced the Catholic faith.

Time, however, passed on and in its flight revealed many secrets. When her reason and speech returned, some of her friends who knew too well her former unenlightened state on religious subjects, called and endeavoured, as opportunities occurred, to ascertain her state of mind. This was no easy matter, as she was not permitted to be in the room alone with a Protestant. She always, on such occasions, appeared very averse to religious topics. Though she would talk with great animation on secular matters, when the conversation turned towards religion, she shewed much disinclination. Her niece, Mrs. S., on one occasion ventured to express the hope that she was looking to Jesus, as the only Mediator; whereupon Mrs. E. with evident displeasure immediately checked her, pulling her by the sleeve, and saying, 'You must desist, it will not do for you to shake my mother's faith: she is as yet weak in the faith.'

On one occasion, however, the aged invalid broke from her apparent reserve. Her two nieces, Mrs. S. and Mrs. L. D., went early one morning to pay her an unexpected visit, when the rest of the family were at the Roman Catholic Chapel. To their surprise she was much delighted with their call. She burst through her past restraints and eagerly grasping Mrs. S. by the hand, said, 'I am so glad you are come. I am no Catholic. I suffer their remarks to pass for quietness' sake.' She constantly whispered the same remarks to the servants and others, and appeared to be under the influence of much fear when divulging this statement. Mrs. E. used to take persons aside, after such remarks, and say, they were to take no notice of her mother's words, as her mind was weak, and in the opinion of the priest she was not responsible.' Her general expression on such occasions was, 'My mother is in the communion of the church, and therefore safe.' The priest continued to pay her frequent visits; but on her partial recovery she would never willingly receive him. The confident belief was however, encouraged, that her eternal interests were secure.

How far it was possible consistently to cherish such a confident hope, will perhaps be seen from the sequel. Her niece, Mrs. S. on one occasion exhorted her to read the bible diligently for guidance, during the remaining period of her journey from life to death. She seemed astonished at this advice being given, saying, 'that it was very well for the wicked to read the bible, but there was no necessity for her to read it, as she had never been a sinner; and besides, she had read it diligently in former times and knew enough of it.'

Such a state of spiritual ignorance may perhaps appear to some scarcely credible in one, who had so liberally received the sacramental gifts of the Romish Church. They may imagine that common prudence, if not common honesty, would have put an end to such reiterated assertions of her true conversion and safe repose in the Catholic Church. I must, however, deprecate such an incredulity, having been myself well acquainted with her state of mind about this time. About six months after her first alarming illness and reception into the Romish communion, I visited Mrs. L. accompanied by Mrs. S. The suddenness of the visit seemed to take the family by surprise: and before sufficient time had elapsed for the faint permission of an interview to change into a decided refusal, I was ushered into the room, where the aged lady was sitting on a sofa. I was introduced as a friend of Mrs. S. who, with Mrs. E., accompanied me. I endeavoured as soon as possible to draw her attention to religion, and exhorted her to examine well the ground of her hope. I dwelt especially on the necessity of repentance, when she interrupted me, saying, 'She had never committed any sins to repent of, that all was right, and the work had been done for her.' 'What,' said I, 'can you still say you are not a sinner?' She then proceeded to enumerate a few of her good deeds, which I may observe, were nearly all of a negative kind. What,' continued I, are you better than David ? And yet he confessed, "Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Are you better than St. John? and yet he says, "If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Are you better than St. James? and yet he says, "In many things we all offend.”

was

6

She reluctantly confessed that perhaps she was a sinner in one sense; that she was not perfect, but, she continued, I have received the Sacraments, and it is all right. I endeavoured to shew her that without faith it was impossible to please God, &c. Her remarks and objections were sometimes ingenious and rather shrewd. For half an hour I tried to probe her conscience and to bring her to acknowledge her sinfulness, as well as the restraint imposed on me by the presence of the daughter would permit. At last, amid the evident annoyance of the latter, she burst into tears, embraced me, and said with convulsive weeping, I never had any one to speak to me about my sins before. No, I never was spoken to about my soul in this strain before.' She seemed for some time penitent and humble. In proportion as these feelings existed, I am informed, her prejudices against the Roman Catholic religion were strengthened.

Oh,

To Mrs. S. in the presence of Mrs. E. she would ever afterwards openly speak her sentiments on this subject, frequently repeating the words with much emphasis 'I am no Roman Catholic.'

On my leaving the room with feelings of mingled sorrow and disgust

at such a palpable instance of the poisonous delusions instilled, by a corrupt form of Christianity, into the minds of its followers, I was accompanied by Mrs. E. who, with a large black cross dangling on her bosom, spoke to me with an air of affected seriousness. She explained to me that her mother had been duly received into communion with the Catholic Church-that she had received from the priest the sacraments of the church-that he was quite satisfied with her state of mind when they were administered-and that he gave it as his opinion that any thing she might say, which appeared contrary, was not to be regarded, as she was no longer responsible and therefore safe!' I listened with as much patience as I could command, to this heartless recital, till the mention of her not being responsible. I asked Mrs. E. with much earnestness, what she and the priest deemed needful to constitute responsibility? I reminded her that her mother had at that time the use of her reasoning faculties, her memory, and her senses,—and inquired what could she want more to constitute a responsible being? I received no reply, and took my departure, having experienced, what it is only just for me to acknowledge, a very fair and courteous reception.

Of the subsequent course of Mrs. L., I know but little, except of her unabated prejudice against the Roman Catholic priest, which was (it is said) equalled by his horror of my presumption in attempting to draw away a sheep from the fold. Mrs. S., accompanied by two other friends-Mrs. J. S. and Miss M. J. S.-paid her a visit a few days before her death. She frequently spoke to them with much kindness and gratitude of my conversation with her. She never afterwards expressed any opinion on religious subjects, and afforded little encouragement for hope. The impression on her conscience, seemed to be but brief and transient, and her apparent indifference continued (as far as can be ascertained) to her last hour.

Towards the end, her mind seemed to grow more weak, and her language was often incoherent. She was buried according to the rites of the Church of England, without any admixture of popish ceremonies, at C church, beside her husband.

It was at first proposed that she should previously be taken to the Roman Catholic Chapel. But on the remonstrance of one present, on the ground of her openly avowed renunciation of Romanism, the attempt was abandoned.

This simple narrative of facts is given without exaggeration or embellishments. I leave it to the judgment of the candid and impartial reader. Let it be remembered, that we live in days of peculiar excitement and novelty. Popery is doubly aggressive in its character, and insidious in its advances. We have seen also a growing inclination, on the part of some, unduly to exalt the mere externals of religion, to insist on the necessity of a visible union of the Church of Christ, and to magnify the evils of what they are pleased to call Ultra-Protestantism. The minds of many have been unsettled by unscriptural definitions of the church; and the disposition has been encouraged to sacrifice some of the dearest principles of Protestantism on the shrine of external conformity, and the specious theories of Anglo-Catholicism.

In proportion as these opinions have been cherished, a secret leaning towards Rome, as the beau idéal of the Anglo-Catholic theory, has been observable. Let such persons as are imperceptibly carried away with 1844.

E

this stream of error, ponder on the scenes before related, and, ere they are swallowed up in the vortex of evil, mark the real spirit and character of Popery; the anxiety to proselytize mingled with a recklessness in holy things; the systematic exaltation of the symbols of religion to the exclusion of inward piety-the dangerous peace encouraged in the minds of its votaries, and the total absence of the lowly, contrite, and believing spirit, as a preparative for the right reception of the ordinances of their Church. Let them say, whether they would consider such a system, prevalent amongst us, many degrees raised above some of the superstitions and puerilities of paganism?-whether Rome as she now is, and must ever continue to be, till she waive her arrogant pretensions to infallibility, is not indeed drunk with the blood of those whose souls perish by her delusions, as well as of the saints, who have borne testimony against her corruptions?

I would also offer a word, in conclusion, on the double caution, necessary in these days, in guarding against the surreptitious advances of rubrical formalism. The individual who has been the principal subject of this statement, has now entered on those scenes where the grand solemnities of God, the soul, eternity, are fully realized. We would not be guilty of the presumption of hazarding an opinion on her eternal destiny. Even at the eleventh hour, the Holy Spirit may have completed the work in her soul, and she may have to sing throughout eternity the goodness of God in awakening her from the depths of spiritual slumber, when yet the morning of eternity was about to dawn on the night of time.

We may also learn from her case, how possible it is to pay a decent attention to the formalities of religion, to partake of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, to preserve the semblance of religious worship at home, to read the daily services of our church-with punctilious regularityand yet to be destitute of repentance towards God and faith in the Saviour.

I would ask my brethren in the ministry, whether the revival of daily services in our churches (even if practicable) is calculated, in itself, to promote a spirit of diffused piety, without the equally important pastoral duties of private instruction, of secret exhortation and friendly admonition?

No: genuine Christian piety is ever found to thrive in the secrecy of retirement; it is cherished in the quietude of the closet; it is strengthened by spiritual communion with a risen Saviour. Unobtrusive in its character, pure in its motives, and fervent in its devotion, it seeks not "the praise of man," but "the praise of God.”

G. S.

Review of Books.

I. A CHARGE delivered to the Clergy of the three Dioceses of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, at the primary Metropolitical Visitation in the autumn of the year 1842, and the spring of 1843. By DANIEL, BISHOP OF CALCUTTA, and Metropolitan of India. 8vo. pp. xxiii. and 132. London. Seeleys. 1843.

II. THE CHIEF DANGER OF THE CHURCH IN THESE TIMES. A CHARGE delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Ohio, at the twentysixth annual convention of the same, in Rose Chapel, Gambier, September 8th, 1843. By CHARLES PETTIT M'ILVAINE, D.D., Bishop of the Diocese. 8vo. pp. 48. London. Seeleys, 1843.

Ir gives us great pleasure to bring before our readers, in one point of view, two Charges delivered by eminent living prelates, in the same year, and in two portions of the globe, so distant from each other, as well as from our own beloved country. Under the present circumstances of the Church of Christ as planted not only in England, but in India and America, we need scarcely observe, that the two Charges before us bear, to a very considerable extent, on the same subject. The all-absorbing topic which seems well nigh to engross the attention of the Bishops, Clergy and Laity of our Church at home, appears to possess equal interest for the same classes in our oriental territories, as well as for the Episcopal branch, at least, of the American Church. These Charges may emphatically be styled, a voice from the east, and a voice from the west.' We rejoice to say that the trumpet thus blown in either quarter of the globe, gives no discordant or uncertain sound. However widely separated in person, Bishops Wilson and M'Ilvaine are in spirit entirely united. The same hallowed strain of Evangelical simplicity breathes throughout both their Charges; the same consecrated ardour in upholding "the truth as it is in Jesus; the same unflinching adherence to Scripture principles; the same uncompromising denunciation of Popish and Tractarian errors. Thoroughly acquainted with the now openly professed tenets of that mournfully erratic school of theology, and perfectly clear as to its inevitable tendencies; they seem to be troubled with none of those qualms of semi-approbation, which have alas! to so considerable an extent, unnerved the arm of some at least of our Bishops at home, as they strung their bow, and caused the arrow to pierce so superficially, if not wholly to fall short of its destined mark.

The shallow objection of ignorance of the system attacked, so frequently made use of to avert the force of the blow aimed, can scarcely be ventured upon, even by the most unscrupulous Puseyites, with reference to either of these learned and excellent prelates. Bishop Wilson, who declares himself carefully to have perused upward of an hundred publications of these misguided divines, can hardly be supposed, in his acquaintance with the system, to fall far short of the American Prelate, who has already done such eminent service to the christian public by his profound and copious treatise on what may be termed the fundamental internal error of the whole system. This error, we need hardly remind our readers, consists in the attempt to substitute the popish dogma of justification by infused instead of imputed righteousness; thus hopelessly