« PoprzedniaDalej »
“ The soul that on Jesus hath fled for repose,
He will not, He will not, desert to his foes," &c. My object in writing, dear sir, is threefold; first, that your heart may be encouraged in your work and labour of love; secondly, that you may come and speak a word to the bereaved widow; and, thirdly, that you may bring this solemn case again before the people. The bereaved one wished me to ascertain, if you were at home, that you might bury the dear departed one. I told her I know you would comply with her wishes, had you been at home; as she was disappointed in this, she said she should like something to be said from the pulpit: as like cases had been blessed to her, this solemn event might be made a blessing to others.
I have had some conversation with the bereaved one, and trust that the root of the matter is in her. She says the Lord has been very good to her, and wonderfully supported her under this painful trial. Many Scriptures and hymns have been brought to her mind, and she has found great comfort therefrom, I remain, Yours in Christ,
THE NEW CHURCH OF ST. DAVID'S, WESTBOURNE ROAD,
To the Editor of the Gospel Magazine. MY DEAR COUSIN, -I am really ashamed of my negligence in not having ere this acknowledged your kindness in sending me the Old Jonathan and GOSPEL MAGAZINE,
in both of which you had so kindly and graphically attended to my wishes; although I did not expect that in the GOSPEL MAGAZINE you would have literally put in my own words. However, I am encouraged to think that the notice in the GOSPEL MAGAZINE has had some effect, as we have observed several strangers at St. David's on the two last Sundays, making inquiries about the place, services, &c. I think, if agreeable to yourself, it would be well to continue the notice for another month or two, as the first may escape the observation of some of the readers. I can assure you I feel it no small responsibility to have joined oneself to such a very needy cause as this is, with but small and limited means at our disposal. I am longing in some way to put forth a strong appeal to the “not many rich and noble who are called,” &c.
Last Sunday, referring to the pressure which lay upon him, with regard to the heavy debt upon the church, Mr. ORMISTON said he had been advised to call the attention of the ladies of the congregation to make a combined effort to assist in the work, and requested that as many as could would attend in the school-room, on Tuesday evening, to consult together as to what could be done, and how. Accordingly about twenty attended, and a very nice little meeting it was; I can only hope some good results will follow. By the 16th of August next he is legally bound to pay off the debt, and I think he said he had not above £5 in hand to meet it.
He is most laborious in his work, both in season and out of season. fear he will wear himself out, and yet he is always cheerful, or at least seems so, and particularly helped in the pulpit.
He is going to have a little circular printed for the use of the ladies' committee, a copy of which I will send you when it is out, and I trust it will be deeply laid upon your heart to join with us in spreading the case before the Lord, to incline the hearts of those who are able to help in this
time of need. I was very much pleased with that sweet and simple testimony in the Magazine which was addressed to you on your birthday.
I hope that your own health is improving, and that you are favoured with much of the divine presence both in public and in private.
Believe me as ever,
L. S. Have you
heard that dear old Mr. Kershaw is in dying circumstance if not already departed ? I saw a very nice letter his wife sent to
brother last evening. The dear old man is in the enjoyment of a sweet quiet calm
“Mark the perfect man,” &c. [We have no personal knowledge of Mr. ORMISTON, but, from what we have heard of him through various friends, we believe him to be engaged in a great and important work; and, knowing well what is involved in the being called to labour in a poor and populous parish, without any resident men of means, we can the more readily sympathize with a parochial minister in Mr. ORMISTON's position. Our own health is materially affected by a ten years' labour in a parish of nearly 9,000 souls, without even the aid of a curate. Often we have thought we must resign the charge; and we have to pray earnestly for strength for the labours of each day. Never was this the case with us to the same extent as it is now. Hence we the more deeply feel for Mr. ORMISTON in his position; and earnestly do we hope and pray that he may speedily be freed from this, at least, pecuniary responsibility. The claims of a parish are quite heavy enough without this additional weight. We hope, therefore, that God may
incline the hearts of those who have the means to come forward at this juncture. Doubtless our dear brother knows what it is to plead with Him, as we have done for years and years, that His is the silver and the gold, as well as the cattle upon a thousand hills; and that He has all hearts in His hands.-ED.]
To the Editor of the Gospel Magazine. SIR, -In your notice of Mr. Grant's book, “The Religious Tendencies of the Times,” in your last month's number, you quote from the work a statement that a Congregational Church had been opened at Halifax, in the trust deed of which “the minister was to be allowed to preach or not to preach, just as he pleased, the doctrine of eternal misery in a future state as the doom of those dying in their sins.”
The statement evidently refers to Park Congregational Church, and I beg to say is not correct.
In the trust-deed of this building the belief the minister for the time being is to hold and preach on the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, is stated as follows:
"The immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment, when the wicked shall go away into everlasting punishments, but the righteous into life eternal."
Without entering upon the controversy involved in Mr. Grant's work, I have no doubt you will think it due to truth to insert this in your next number, and
Oblige, sir, yours respectfully,
A TRUSTEE Halifax, June 22, 1869.
The Protestant Beacon.
[The following letter (which we copy from the Rock) speaks for itself. Nothing can more plainly show how the present Government is anxious in every possible way to pander to the Papacy. Indeed, it is presumed by not a few that Mr. GLADSTONE is in reality a Papist, though acting, for policy's sake, under Protestant name. This, of course, is not sin in the sight of Rome, whose tenet is, “The end justifies the means.”—Ed.] THE GOVERNMENT GAG ON PROTESTANT FREEDOM OF
To the Editor of the Rock. SIR,—The country is deeply indebted to you for the way in which you have brought forward and advocated the question of Liberty of Speech. The necessity of such advocacy has been brought about by what must be considered by all right-minded Englishmen, the unwarrantable interference of Papists, and the unconstitutional interference of the authorities. That the importance of the subject has not been overrated, and that the interference referred to has not been owing to any rashness or intemperance on the part of any individual lecturer-as is frequently urged hy those who would rob us of our dear-bought privileges
may be seen from the following fact brought to my knowledge to-day: A friend of mine from Gosport being in town last week, I asked him to take, on his return, the St. George's Hall, Portsea, for a course of lectures on the Nature and Designs of Popery. But imagine my astonishment this morning when I received from him the following reply .
Portsea, June 1, 1869. “I went to Mr. Atkins yesterday about the hall, but he said he could not let it for lectures against Popery, as he had received instructions from Government that meetings of that sort were forbidden, under a penalty of £100 for the proprietor and £20 for every person found there, so that unless the subject was something else he must decline."
This fact ought to speak for itself. I am a thorough Liberal, but I cannot sacrifice my Protestant principles to any party. What English Liberal could have conceived that the accession of the Liberals to power would have resulted in such tyranny! Our politics must now be-The QUEEN OF ENGLAND, OR THE POPE OF ROME.
MR. GEORGE MULLER ON THE PRESENT RELIGIOUS CRISIS.—On Sunday morning last, Mr. George Müller, of the Orphanages on Ashley-down, addressed the church and congregation meeting at Salem, of which he is the pastor, and in the course of his remarks said that he felt constrained to allude to the now-absorbing topic: the policy of the Government with reference to the Irish Church. Speaking of the liberty now enjoyed by the various Christian denominations, he stated as his most serious conviction, that, as events were now tending, liberty would be of but short duration. In alluding to the results of the Catholic emancipation, Mr. Müler expressed his belief that the measure in question had been the means of increasing Roman Catholicism in this country fifty-fold, and the legislation of the present time had been the fruits of the legislation in 1829. The end would be that Romanism would come in upon us to the full. It is seldom that Mr. Müller alludes to any matter stirring the political world,
but the very serious and emphatic manner in which he referred to this subject seemed deeply to impress his hearers.—Bristol Times and Mirror.
We would call special attention to the testimony of Nonconformist ministers to the all-engrossing subject of the present day, when the minds of such appear to be imbued with a solemn sense of the gravity of the great question now before the public. When we think of such men as the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Oxford, vacillating as they do, between truth and error, we sigh for such men as a John Knox and a MARTIN LUTHER. Would they (with the access to Her Majesty these prelates have), scruple to set before her the real nature of her position, and the impossibility of sanctioning the passing of the Irish Church bill, without violating her coronation oath, and thus committing herself to perjury? May God, in His great mercy, stand by our beloved Queen at this most critical juncture, and give her grace to follow in the footsteps of her sainted ancestor, George the Third, who expressed his willingness to abdicate his throne, or lay his head upon a block, rather than break his coronation oath. The Lord, in mercy, open the eyes of Her Majesty to see that she is encompassed with men in league with Rome, whose tenet is, that “the end justifies the means;" and hence, they will put a gloss upon the most diabolical of doings, if so be those doings do but further their pernicious and ungodly ends. Verily, not merely the Church is in danger, but the throne and the Protestant constitution is at this moment in imminent peril.—ED.
Passing Ebents.—1 Montbly Note
THE Irish Church Bill has been read a second time in the House of Lords. This has occasioned considerable surprise, for it was confidently conjectured that it would have been summarily rejected; but perhaps, after all
, the wisest course has been adopted, for now there will be an opportunity of amending it in committee, and rendering it, comparatively speaking, harmless; whereas, if it had been altogether thrown out, its advocates would probably have raised such a storm, that grievous consequences might have ensued. The debate which took place was in many respects a most remarkable one. Almost every argument which could be brought forward for and against the bill was brought forward, and carefully taken into consideration; and the whole debate was conducted with such calmness and dignity, with such logical accuracy, and with such persuasive force and eloquence, that it is said that it is unsurpassed in modern times. The speech of the Bishop of Peterborough was especially powerful; it so surprised and electrified the
House by its eloquent pleading, that it seemed as if a second Sheridan or Demosthenes had suddenly sprung into exist
One fact was perfectly clear throughout the whole course of the debate, that the majority of the Lords cordially dislike the bill, and are fully conscious of its unjust and revolutionary tendencies. The only point of disagreement between them was, whether it was wiser to throw the bill out immediately, or to read it a second time and amend it in committee. We are very thankful for this, and we venture to hope by the overruling power of the Most High, this unhappy and ill-omened measure may even yet be so transformed as to become comparatively
innocuous, if not ultimately beneficial; but very much is still at stake, and a hard struggle has still to be maintained. The aspect of affairs is changed, and the scene of contest is changed, but, nevertheless, the contest must be vigorously carried on by all the friends of Protestant truth. As the Standard rightly observes, “It is no longer a question whether Protestantism shall prevail in Ireland, but whether it shall be tolerated ; not whether we shall allow equality to the Roman Catholics, but whether we shall subject the Protestants to disadvantages which must end in establishing the ascendancy of Rome. And if at this moment the Protestants of Ireland, the Conservatives of Lancashire, the friends of the Church generally, fail to appreciate the value of what remains to them, and the significance of the struggle for its retention, their children's children will have reason to regret their indifference and shortsightedness at this crisis of their Church's fortunes.” To this we may add, that every person may do something in furtherance of this important cause, by diffusing information,—nothing has favoured the designs of our enemies in this matter so much as ignorance,—by circulating pamphlets and periodicals, which set the case forth in its true light; and by signing petitions to the House of Lords to encourage them in their present determination.
We are glad to see that a reaction is at last extensively taking place, and that a strong feeling of indignation has been aroused in various parts of the country. The Scotch people, we imagine, would not now so readily return the supporters of Mr. Gladstone, if another election were to take place, for they evidently begin to see that they have been deceived; and that whilst voting for justice to Ireland, as they supposed, and for religious equality, in reality they were voting for the spoliation of their fellow-Protestants, and the supremacy of Romanism. The assembly of the Church of Scotland has condemned the measure by a majority of 136 votes to 37, and resolved to petition Parliament against it. Immense meetings also continue to be held in various parts of England and Ireland, protesting against it. In Manchester a meeting numbered, it was calculated, upwards of 200,000 persons; Belfast, 100,000; Liverpool, 30,000; and one in Dublin, 25,000.
Dr. Manning and the Romish hierarchy both at home and abroad are greatly exulting. They seem to imagine that the favour with which Mr. Gladstone's bill has been received by a large portion of the English nation, and by the House of Commons, betokens a disposition to yield all their demands and to grant all their wishes. They speak, indeed, of England, as being already won. But this exultation, we trust, is pre
, mature. We are thankful to notice that, according to their own confession, if they are gaining ground in some respects, they are losing ground in others. The Tablet, in discussing the question of Romish “ loss and gain ” in England, acknowledges that those of its co-religionists who maintain that for every convert of intellect and station, Rome is “ losing, spite of priests and nuns and schools, ten Catholic poor,”' are not entirely without reasons to urge in support of their view. A large proportion of this loss is traced to the indifference of parents—no great compliment to the Romish Church, which is supposed to be the best teacher of parents as well as children; and the cure which the Tablet suggests is to take the children clean away from their homes. Another source of loss is the small number of middle-class Romanists. The child of Romanist parents “goes to service in a Protestant house, or to the factory under careless Protestant employers, amidst scores of Protestant