Could this letter-writer of Bratton (whether it is an indi vidual or a gang of them) be ignorant that all Dissenters are liable to tithes, &c. as well as Churchmen, that every Church is open gratis; does W. W. W. conceive, that any one knows not that they (the Dissenters all of them) regularly subscribe, collect, and pay their Ministers. Before, in the same page, it is said Mr. Cook is now a Vicar, then he was a Curate." The writer must have known that Mr. Cook was still the Curate, but this falsehood, I presume, was specious to the vulgar, and plausible to introduce that which followed."

For hypocrisy take the following:-"Those who kill. time in card-parties are not to be found among the Evangelical Dissenting Ministers. Those who drink to excess, who swear vehemently, who openly break the Sabbathday, and who riot in the deeds of darkness! are not considered by us, Ministers of the Gospel:-and it is no reproach to the Dissenting Churches to say, that sometimes one of their body thus acts, because as soon as his vices are discovered, he is shunned, discarded, and disowned. But it is notorious on the other hand, that numberless persons in your Church, honoured with the title of Ambassadors, from God to man, and who have sworn that they were moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon them the office of Ministers of Christ, exemplify all the vices I have enumerated, being avowed infidels,-profane to an excess, and licentious to a proverb."

Does this savour of the Pharisee's prayer? or is there any malice in this and the following? "And I may refer you to the public newspapers only, to remind you of the scandalous lives of many of your brethren." Need 1 give a particular specimen of pride. "The men who made these creeds were good men, they were men of eminence in their own times; but it is no disrespect to their memory to say, that they would most probably be obscured by the brilliancy of many of the dissenters, who have since shone in the diversified departments of literature, and especially Theology." Again-" among those whom you condemn, is included nearly all the moral worth in your vicarage."

The scraps I have given you, Mr. Editor, from this schismatic Brattonian, are verbatim, and the whole farrago is just the same; and when I consider that the foundation of the whole is false, and the person to whom they are addressed a quiet peaceable man, (speaking of whom the

wretched

1

wretched calumniator himself says) "a considerable part of whose life has been spent in friendly intercourse with 'the Dissenters," whose religious principles and moral conduct are most exemplary, when I hear (as the letterwriter asserts) that there are seven congregations of Dissenters in Mr. Cook's parish, I think that the unchristian-like spirit which dictated the letter, however contemptible the individual or the cabal who wrote it, ought to be publicly exposed.

That the old adage is here verified, "Give a dog rope enough, and he'll hang himself," in this W. W. W. Brattonus, I should think that no man of Westbury will dispute, and that the seven Dissenting chapels, unlike the seven cities of Greece, which contended for the birth of Homer, would each of them deny any fellowship with this son of Schism, I should from the purest principles of Christian charity most humbly hope. I have written, Mr. Editor, these lines, currente calamo, the subject as far as it relates to W. W. W. is unworthy the least notice; but if you wish for any particulars, or a more systematic arrangement, or any reference, you will favour me by saying so in your next number.

THE following Extract from Lord Lyttleton's Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul, contains so conclusive an argument, in proof that St. Paul was no favourer of those doctrines, which have since been promulgated, as if upon his authority, by Calvin and his followers, that I trust you will allow it a place in your truly orthodox Miscellany.

418 False Accusation brought by the Christian Observer.

cerning Justification by Faith or by Works, let him read Mr. Locke's excellent Comment upon the Epistles of the latter; or let him only consider these words in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, c. 9. v. 27. But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a cast-away.

If St. Paul had believed or taught, that Faith without Works was sufficient to save a Disciple of Christ, to what purpose did he keep under his body, since his salvation was not to depend upon that, being subject to the power of his reason, but merely upon the Faith he professed? His faith was firm, and so strongly founded upon the most certain conviction, that he had no reason to doubt its continuance; how could he then think it possible, that while he retained that saving faith, he might nevertheless be a cast-away? Or if he had supposed that his election and calling was of such a nature, as that it irresistibly impelled him to good, and restrained him from evil, how could he express any fear, lest the lust of his body should prevent his salvation? Can such an appréhension be made to agree with the notions of absolute predestination ascribed by some to St. Paul? He could have no doubt that the Grace of God had been given to him in the most extraordinary manner; yet we see that he thought his election was not certain, but that he might fall from it again through the natural prevalence of bodily appetites, if not duly restrained by his own voluntary care. This single passage is a full answer out of the mouth of St. Paul himself, to all the mistakes that have been made of his meaning in some obscure expressions concerning grace, election, and justification,

A FALSE ACCUSATION BROUGHT BY THE CHRISTIAN OBSERVER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE,

SIR,

THE

HE Christian Observer, and the Rev, Mr. Warner, of Bath, in the preface to his volume of Sermons, directly and openly accuse the Rev. Charles Daubeny, (now the worthy Archdeacon of Sarum) with publicly

and

-and knowingly omitting the prayer for Unity in the Fast Service of 1803, at the Free Church at Bath. Now the - simple fact is this, that the Rev. Charles Daubeny did not read prayers on that day, therefore he did not omit the prayer in question. It would be well if the clerical and lay editors of the Christian Observer, and the publisher of Sermons, were to make a little enquiry, before they bring a railing accusation against a brother, when that accusation has no foundation in fact. I do not now stay to enquire in what sense the prayer in question was understood; or for what reasons it was omitted by the highest authority in the last Fast Service: probably it was misunderstood, or had not been fully considered. At least the omission of it is singular, and the fact is, whether right or wrong, that it did not give all that satisfaction among the Clergy, that the pious composer undoubtedly wished to do. Occasional forins may be composed in haste: they may have temporary allusions which are not always generally understood; the prayer in question might plead the merit of good intention, but prayer is the last thing in the world which should excite controversy, or leave the mind at large among doubtful opinions. I admire the modesty of those in high authority, whether the prayer proceeded from the Cabinet Council, or from any other quarter, who could then readily omit what was misunderstood, or give up what was deemed doubtful. Prayer, as well as truth, must not be forced; the acceptable service must be a free service. No composition of man can be perfect; witness the corrections and alterations made by authority in the second Collect for the last Fast.

A.

ANCIENT MARRIAGE AND BURIAL CEREMONIES AMONG THE MALTESE.

(EXTRACTED FROM WILKINSON'S HISTORY OF MALTA.)

THE

HE fathers concluded the marriages, according to their own interests and convenience, without consulting the inclination of their children. When the contract was settled, and the dowry stipulated, the young man sent to his intended a present of fish covered with garlands of ribbands, and a gold ing in the mouth of that which was the most highly esteemed They then

'settled

.

settled the day of interview, which was to be in the presence of the parents and common friends, who were regaled with refreshments. A moment before the interview, the two mothers retired to prepare a composition of anise, aromatic plants, salt, and honey, with which they rubbed the lips of the bride, that her words might be sweet, sage, and prudent. She was then introduced to the bridegroom, who offered her a ring, on which were engraven two hands joined in token of fidelity, bracelets, necklace, and a gold chain; she presented in her turn a handkerchief edged with lace and knots of ribbands. On the wedding-day, the most respectable of the bridegroom's relations placed on the head of the intended, a very fine white veil; she was dressed on that day in a velvet gown; others of the relations made holes in the gown, and put in little gold shells. They then went to church. Musicians and singers celebrated in couplets the praises of the happy pair: the musicians were preceded by three men, one of whom carried on his head a bason, full of fresh cheese-cakes, on the largest of which were placed two small figs; he wore a scarf, from which hung a round cake called Collora. The second carried a basket full of sugar plumbs, which one of the relations distributed to his acquaintance as he met them; in the middle was a handkerchief folded up in the form of a pyramid, and ornamented with an image of the Virgin and Child, and St. Joseph. The third carried burning incense. The happy couple marched the last, under a canopy of crimson damask in festoons, carried by the four principal persons, and the parents closed the suite. The ringing of bells announced the arrival of the wedding; the priest received a bason containing a cake, a handkerchief, and two bottles of wine: after the benediction, they left the church in the same order they came. The whole ceremony generally lasted four hours. A servant placed at one of the windows of the house threw on the heads of the new married couple, on their return, some handfulls of grain, and small money. The prejudice of the Maltese at that time was, that if the wife on her return first put her foot on the threshold of the door, she would rule; we may suppose from that there were very few so polite as to let their wives go first. At the nuptial feast the wife eat in a separate apartment, or in a corner of the guest's room, surrounded by cloths to conceal her; after the repast she came and sat near I her husband, and drank out of the same cup. In the casals