rally true. On the contrary, we acknowledge their truth con amore; and for one, I am ready to confess that there is no part of the Bible more plainly stamped with the seal of divine inspiration.

CHAL. "It is bad policy in those who contend for the truth of revealed religion to extend their lines of defense to a greater length than necessity demands. By such conduct, we may give countenance to the notion that we are weak, when, in point of fact, we dwell in an impregnable fortress. I am of opinion, that in the first two verses of the book of Genesis there is ample room for all the discoveries, and even for the speculations of geology-'In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.' Such was the state of things when 'the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,'-and then began the first day's work. 'God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.' There appears to me to be nothing in these verses which necessarily indicates that the original creation of the heaven and the earth formed a part of the first day's work. The first day's work was the creation or revelation of light. If we ascribe to that day this single operation, it maintains its balance with the

days which follow, on each of which there was a proportionate exertion of the divine Power. On the second day, the firmament was created. On the third, the dry land was separated from the sea, and clothed with the vegetable tribes. I conclude, therefore, that the original fiat of the Almighty, which called into being the heaven and the earth, was anterior to the first day—at what distance of time, it were idle to conjecture."

Bishop Patrick gave a similar explanation of this passage, long before geology had revealed her fossil dragons; and I remember hearing the same sentiments uttered by that sober Christian philosopher, Professor Farish.

CHAL. "There is a collateral argument, which confirms my conclusions on this subject. We have reason to believe, as Granville Penn has taught us, that in original creation, all things came forth from the hand of God in a condition of maturity and perfection. Now it appears to be at variance with this analogy, to suppose that when God created the heaven and the earth, the earth was without form and void-a dark, confused, chaotic mass! May we not rather infer, that our planet was created perfect, and that before she became 'without form and void,' she had undergone some signal catastrophe or possibly a series of revolutions. Here the geologist may apply his systems, and expatiate as he pleases. He shall inflict no injury on the Christian's faith." I observed, that the only difficulty which appeared to arise in the way of this conclusion was, the

28

politics than exactly becomes a minister of the gospel and a bishop; and lastly, that his amiability and liberality at times so far exceed, as insensibly to overflow the exact line of a nice and scrutinizing principle. I regret all these things sincerely. Nevertheless, I apprehend, that many who find eager fault with him for subscribing to the building of some popish chapel, or for giving too gracious a reception to some Socinian address, are immeasurably behind him in the breadth and beauty of the Christian character. The reports which I have sometimes heard of his not believing in the doctrine of the divinity of Christ are, to my knowledge, unfounded; for we have often conversed on the subject, and he has assured me, that he should consider it utterly unprincipled in any man, who entertained Unitarian views, to continue to wear a mitre in the Church of England. He was kind enough carefully to peruse my Essays on Christianity, which include a long defence of the Deity of our Lord, previously to their publication, and I received the assurance of his entire accordance of sentiment with me, both on this and all the other essential points in religion, to which the work relates. He again read the book after its publication, and from no one of my friends had I the pleasure of receiving more cordial expressions respecting it, of accordance and encouragement.

The Bishop of Norwich is the survivor of thirty-six children by one father and two mothers. When a young man, he acted in the capacity of private secretary to the

first Earl Bathurst, the celebrated friend of Alexander Pope. At his house he was accustomed to meet the most eminent characters among the Tories of that period-for example, David Hume-and his store of anecdotes respecting them is rich and varied. His memory is peculiarly retentive—so much so, that when a boy at Winchester school, he could repeat memoriter the whole of Homer's Iliad in the original Greek. Even now, in his old age, his occasional and often large quotations from Sophocles, Homer, Tacitus, Cicero, &c., and even from such authors as Erasmus and Grotius, not to mention the best English poets, are truly surprising. One day I was astonished at his suddenly repeating to me a long passage out of Calvin's Institutes! His mind is indeed richly stored with ancient and modern literature-and an hour of tête-à tête conversation with him has often been to me an hour of intellectual luxury. His great qualities are integrity and charity. His views on the subject of Roman Catholic emancipation are well known, and from an intimate knowledge of his mind on the subject, I am able to assert that they were founded not on any party feeling, but on comprehensive views of justice and Christian liberality. He may possibly underrate the evils of popery; yet no man, in spirit and conduct, is less a papist than himself. He has the very pith of Protestantism in him, because he would have the Bible distributed amongst all men, and all men form their own judgment of its contents. He would lay no bonds on the con

science, and impose no restrictions on the inquiries after truth of any man living. The honest boldness with which for so many successive years he broke the line of the episcopal phalanx, in declaring his sentiments on this great national question, must always entitle him to unfeigned respect; and truly he lived to be rewarded. It is very remarkable, that after so long a term of unsuccessful warfare, he should live to see many of his mitred brethren rallying round the standard which he had so long upheld, and assisting him to complete the triumph of those views to which he had nobly sacrificed all his own hopes of further advancement. There is no doubt, that on the score of his talents, his character, and his connexions, he might, by renouncing those views, have commanded the highest ecclesiastical prizes. But he happily preferred a moderate income, and a clear conscience. His integrity of mind has also been manifested by the cordial and uncompromising manner in which he has always supported the Bible Society. His mind is far too wide to permit him to harbor those nice and (as I think) sophistical distinctions, by which some persons persuade themselves that they cannot in conscience join the universal church in distributing the unmixed records of inspiration to the whole family of man. The charity of the bishop displays itself in a most remarkable absence of evil thoughts about any man, (see 1 Cor. xiii.,) in the allowance which he makes for the opinions of others,in the triumph of his mind over all merely sectarian