pel is not preached, and upon the supposition that what you call the Gospel is the Gospel, there certainly are many places where your services are much more needed." "Yes," said he, "but you know our principles are not preached here." "O," said I, " that is it, is it? now I understand what you mean by the Gospel. The Gospel, it seems, are the principles of dissent, which are nowhere to be found in the Bible; for just allow me to ask you-Is not the whole system of congregational independency dependant upon this one point-the election of ministers by the congregation? because, if the congregation have no scriptural right to elect their ministers, those ministers must be appointed by some power independent of the congregation, and then what becomes of its independency?" He admitted that such was the case, but contended that it was scriptural for the people to choose their ministers. I then asked him to point me out a single instance from the Word of God where it is said that a congregation elected its own minister? I kept him to the point, and he was at last silent. I then asked him what had become of his whole system of dissent, and departed quite satisfied with the result of my call, having ascertained that, with these Home Missionary gentry, the word Gospel has two distinct meanings, and that they take care to use it in just that sense which may best suit their purposes for the time being. When they want to get money out of the pockets of the people, they then mean, by the term Gospel, a certain set of opinions; but, on other occasions, it is used to signify the principles of dissent in general, and I am almost ashamed to say that they succeed but too well, even with some who profess to be churchmen; for they boastingly say-and I fear with too much truth-that several churchmen subscribe handsomely to the Home Missionary Society. Surely, they might find some better use for their money!

I have been led to the above remarks chiefly by reading " a Case," in the Home Missionary Magazine for May last. It is thus introduced-" Urgent Case. The Case of Hingham, county of Norfolk." The writer of this "Case"-this "Urgent Case"-proceeds as follows:

"The Gospel of Christ, which bringeth salvation, has been preached in a hired room in Hingham for several years, by the agents of the Home Missionary Society, aided by the occasional labours of neighbouring ministers of the Independent denomination. Every previous effort to obtain a place for the establishment of Christian instruction, upon a permanent footing, has been counteracted, and eventually failed; and should it have pleased God to have removed the owner of the cottage occupied for divine [dissenting?] worship, a population of 1550 souls would have been deprived of the means of spiritual consolation.'

Now, to shew that this is a "Case" fraught with shameless falsehood, it is only necessary to state that there is a fine church standing quite in the town, and that the beautiful service of the church of England is regularly performed therein. Nor is it a new church, but an old parish church, which has been standing there for these hundreds of years. What, then, are we to think of men who can sit down and deliberately state that, but for the labours of the dissenting home missionaries, "a population of 1550 souls," the whole population of Hingham, would be left destitute "of the means of spiritual con

solation?" But the " Case" writer speaks also of the previous efforts of the home missionary agents "to obtain a place for the establishment of Christian instruction;" thus evidently implying that before those agents delivered their preachments in the town, no" Christian instruction," was afforded to the people. And further on, in his " Case," he says, "the Gospel is not regularly preached here by any other denomination;" and be it known also that this very "Urgent Case" is signed, and "most cordially and earnestly recommended to the liberality of the Christian public," by four neighbouring dissenting ministers, of the Independent denomination, who, I will add, knew perfectly well at the time they signed it that it contained the most unblushing falsehoods, for they all live within nine miles of the place. It was, however, requisite-as is their regular practice-to represent the spiritual state of the town as most deplorable, in order that money might be drawn out of the pockets of those who are too easily excited by such "Cases," and duped by such designing characters. And the case of Hingham is not a solitary one, for into whatever town or village the home missionary agents enter, for the establishment of what they falsely call the Gospel, their first object is to "creep into houses," and to insinuate that the gospel is not preached by the clergy. Thus the very first movements of these men are directed to the creation of schisms and discord between the clergy and their parishioners; and when they have succeeded in obtaining a footing in a town, there is then too frequently a lasting source of opposition to the church, and of intermeddling in parochial affairs. A party is raised up in the place, and its peace ever after disturbed. On all political subjects too, in which the "dissenting interest" is at all concerned, there is no lack of agitation. Petitions for political purposes are got up by the dissenting teacher and a few of his associates, and signed by all the discontented and disaffected in the town, and the little knot whom he may gather around him ever after figure away as "a church and congregation ;" but I do not hesitate to say that it is my firm belief that the main object of the leaders of the dissenting interest, in starting and keeping in existence the Home Missionary Society, is of a political nature-their scheming and movements ought therefore to be strictly watched, and attempts made to counteract them.

But what right dissenting teachers, whether they belong to the Home Missionary Society or not, have (upon their own principles) to enter into towns and villages to preach and give spiritual instruction I cannot guess. They profess that no man has a right to take upon himself the office of spiritually instructing another until he is chosen for that purpose by those whom he is to teach; in other words, that the people have a right to choose their own teachers, and that no man has a right to teach them until they have given him "a call." What right then, I ask, have dissenting teachers to go into towns and villages to preach, before the people have chosen them, or given them a call" for that purpose? They pretend to act on the "voluntary system," but, whenever it suits their purpose, they very soon abandon their principles. Their sole object is to destroy the church, and they

66

will adopt just any proceedings whatever, in order to accomplish it, regardless of their own avowed principles. I do humbly conceive that something should be immediately done with a view of counteracting the opposition now manifested to the church by papists and the various kinds of dissenters. Every sect of dissenters, whether popish or protestant, has its regiment of " spiritual militia," distributed over the country, and busily employed. Considering the number of Jesuits, disguised and otherwise, and the agents of the Home Missionary Societies, and the various tribes of self-called and self-sent teachers who infest the country, cordially uniting in their implacable opposition to the church, it seems not so strange that the bad feeling towards her should be so extensive and so deeply rooted.

I am, Rev. Sir, most respectfully yours, NORFOLCIENSIS.

WYCLIFFE.-TRACT SOCIETY.

SIR,-Your correspondent, T., in his letters respecting Wickliff, has spoken of the extracts from the writings of the British Reformers, published by the Tract Society, in a manner calculated to convey an erroneous impression of the nature of that work. The design of that selection was expressly stated to be "to render a part of the writings of the British Reformers accessible to readers in general, so that the great mass of the population of England might become acquainted with works, which, under the Divine blessing, produced inestimable benefits to our forefathers." That publication never aspired to give reprints interesting to the antiquarian, or intended for the student who is able to enter fully into the study of the writings of the Reformers.

With respect to Wickliff, in particular, there was no attempt to offer an edition of his works. Only 240 pages of an unpretending duodecimo volume are occupied by the specimens of his writings, including a sketch of his life, which occupies nearly a fifth part of the whole, including some account of his writings, professedly drawn from Lewis, Baber and Vaughan, with a few additions from the personal inspection of a part of his manuscripts by the compiler, who says

"It is deeply to be regretted, that a complete edition of Wickliff's writings never has been printed. Such a monument is due to the illustrious individual to whom we perhaps are indebted more than to any other, for the gospel light and religious liberty we enjoy. Milton says, 'A good book is the precious life-blood of a master spirit, embalmed and treasured up on purpose to a life beyond life.' Surely the writings of Wickliff ought not to be suffered to perish. A much smaller sum than in many instances has been vainly expended in monumental attempts to preserve the remembrance of persons whose names in a few short years have been almost entirely forgotten, would suffice to complete a national memorial record of our great reformer, 'more lasting than brass.' But, blessed be the Most High, when we look around, in every circumstance which endears to us the Protestant faith of our land, we are reminded of JOHN WICKLIFF."

Your correspondent, however, has spoken of this work as if it assumed to be an exact reprint from the originals, and yet contained many alterations, and numerous places in which the sense of the original has been altogether lost, as well as frequent omissions. It

therefore will be but fair to give the following extract, which states the plan on which this selection from Wickliff's writings was edited :—

“A specimen of Wickliff's writings, in their original orthography, will be found in two extracts from his version of the Old Testament in the following pages. At first they will appear hardly intelligible to the reader unaccustomed to the writings of that day. But on closer examination, it will be found that if the Saxon terminations, expletives, and peculiar words are removed, the language is, as it has been well characterized, "undefiled English;" in fact, very similar to the language of our rural districts at the present day. To have printed Wickliff's tracts in the precise form in which they were written, would have rendered them useless for the purposes of the present collection. It was therefore necessary to remove the peculiarities just adverted to, but farther the Editor had no wish to proceed; and he felt the necessity of retaining the precise words of the original, wherever they would convey the meaning of the reformer to the general reader. How far the attempt has been successful, it is for those to say who may compare the present edition with the original manuscripts; he will only add that it was not an easy task, from the labour and the responsibility incurred."

Against the extracts from the tract respecting the office of curates, your correspondent has made a distinct charge, in your Magazine for May, pp. 535 and 536. In reference to this it is desirable to give the following note from the British Reformers, prefixed to the tract in question :-

"Wickliff composed three pieces, entitled,Of Prelates, For the order of Priesthood, and How the office of Curates is ordained of God.' His design was to shew, from the authority of Scripture, the duties of the clergy, to expose the errors and wicked practices then so general, and to point out the evil consequences both to the people and themselves. His language in these pieces is bold and uncompromising, and exhibits a painful picture of the state of the Romish priesthood at that day. The latter tract appears the most suitable for the present collection, but in copying it for the press it was not thought desirable to transcribe the whole. What is here given will be a sufficient testimony respecting many evils prevalent in the days of Wickliff, to which a large portion of his writings refer."

It may be desirable farther to remark, that on collating the Dublin and Cambridge copies of this tract, it is very probable that considerable variations will be found. Having occasionally examined many of the early reprints and manuscripts of our Reformers, I can say that such discrepancies are very frequent, and to a very considerable extent. Your correspondent, the Rev.T. P. Pantin, experienced this in preparing his reprint of Wickliff's Wicket, and I believe that every one who has had occasion to examine many of these early writings of our church, will confirm this statement. These variations indeed often are such as to affect the sense of the passage, though never such as to affect the doctrines taught by the Fathers of our church.

In your number for June, p. 690, T. states that there are omissions in the reprint of the tract on Prayer. He should have added, that this was fully stated in the reprint itself. This will appear from the following extracts :

CHAPTER III.

“[Wickliff here shews 'how strict is man's law against sinful man's prayer,' and refers at considerable length to the various laws and ordinances made against unchaste, and even against married priests, commanding the people not to listen to their prayers or saying of Divine service. He then proceeds]—

66

[Wickliff then condemns simony, and says, in strong terms]

"Whoever cometh to this order or benefice (of the Christian ministry) must by

VOL. VIII.-Sept. 1835.

2 R

meekness seek God's worship, and help of Christian souls, and for devotion to live in holiness and give good example. But he that comes to this order to live in pride and lusts of the flesh, as idleness, gluttony, drunkenness, and lechery, comes not in by Christ, but by the fiend, and is a traitor to God, and a heretic, till he amend this intent, and do well this spiritual office, as Christ taught. And full few are holy to pray for the people, for the greatness of their own sins enter here, and evil countenance and maintenance, and excusing of their sin, and other men's sin, for money and worldly praise, against God in his righteous judgment, and for hard enduring in their sins."

Allow me to say that my object in requesting the insertion of this paper, is not to depreciate the labours of T. with respect to the Wickliff manuscripts in Trinity College; nor do I wish to enter upon the field of controversy which appears to be opened by his remarks upon the publication of Mr. Vaughan. My design is, to explain the nature of the brief republication in the British Reformers, as assuming a literary value to which it never laid claim, and that it may not be condemned for not presenting the writings of Wickliff in a form which would have rendered them useless to the great mass of the people. The specimens of Wickliff's translation of the Bible, see p. 45 of the British Reformers, accurately represent what a precise reprint would

have been.

May I call the attention of your correspondent, T., to Wickliff's treatise De Veritate Scripturæ, of which the following brief account is given in the British Reformers:

"Wickliff's treatise 'Of the Truth of Scripture' is a very valuable performance. It is in Latin, only two manuscript copies are known to exist; one in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, the other at Trinity College, Dublin. The latter is the preferable copy, and is described as containing two hundred and forty-four large doublecolumned pages, of nearly a thousand words in a page. It would therefore be equal in contents to a common octavo of more than seven hundred pages. It abounds in contractions, but is fairly and legibly written. Fox, the martyrologist, possessed a copy which he intended to translate and print. Vaughan describes this work as embodying almost every sentiment peculiar to the reformer. James made considerable use of its contents in his apology for Wickliff, but it was neglected by Lewis. An accurate reprint, with a translation, would be exceedingly valuable."

I would express a hope that T. will direct his attention to this work, and undertake to present a literal and faithful edition to the public. He evidently possesses the leisure and abilities required for such a work, and though I would not speak lightly even of merely critical attention to the writings of this great reformer, they must be of far less importance than the editing a work which, from the extracts given by Dr. James, appears to contain the deliberate opinions of Wickliff on the whole range of subjects which then engaged public

attention.

Although I make this communication without any reference to the committee or officers of the Tract Society, and although it has no official connexion with that institution, I will venture to say that if T. is inclined to offer any private suggestions to the Secretaries of the Society, addressed to 56, Paternoster Row, London, he will find them received with attention.

June 8, 1835.

X.