told of the late Rev. Rowland Hill.

Late on one

evening he ordered his carriage, and bade his coachman drive him to Drury-Lane Theatre. The man stared, hesitated, thought his master mad; but "To the theatre!" was the authoritative command. Down he was set at the theatre, and to his coachman's utter bewilderment, purchased a ticket, and walked in. Rowland Hill entered a box, fixed his eyes sternly on its occupant, exclaiming, "Oh, you are there are you!" and abruptly quitting the theatre, drove home. The poor and almost petrified occupant was a preacher at his own chapel, who had been reported to him as a frequenter of the theatre, but which report he would not credit, until "seeing was believing" to him.

That the rebuker should have clean hands is an important consideration in the value of a rebuke. In the above case we may imagine it was indeed withering! But a story is told in a hunting county, in which a clergyman delivered himself by his ready wit. A venerable archdeacon, who had heard of this clergyman's hunting propensities, sent for him to lecture him on the subject. Soundly did he administer his rebuke, long was he about it, while his poor victim spake not a word in his defence. Suddenly the archdeacon, perceiving a smile on the culprit's countenance, said, "Ah! I see my admonition has little effect upon you: alas! you too much resemble Gallio in the Scriptures, who cared not for these things." Now was the climax-and the expected penitent, drawing himself up to his full height, and fixing a wickedly merry eye on his reverend elder, replied, "Mr. Archdeacon, I have heard you with

patience: you may have rebuked me rightly, and I may be a Gallio; but this I have to say, that if I am a Gallio, your son Richard is a Tally-ho; and so, Mr. Archdeacon, I wish you a very good morning." The son Richard was a noted clerical fox-hunter!

Nevertheless, a sporting parson is an abomination, and, let us hope, nearly an extinct one. Let a clergyman be given to sporting, or let his "talk be of bullocks," and every one feels that he is out of his proper element for to him, with what propriety may

"The master of the pack

Cry-Well done, saint!' and clap him on the back.”*

No sermons that he may preach, no amount of alms that he may give, no moral rectitude in temporal things, will ever lead the people (however they may partially disguise it in his presence) to look upon him with reverence, or to regard and love him in their hearts as a pastor that is doing his duty to the Church, and is sufficiently not minding earthly things. If such a one would considerately listen to the poorer members of the flock honestly and reasonably speaking their minds in this matter, he would neither mount the hunter nor carry the gun for one hour more; for, if he had a heart, such comments would subdue its love of that which prevents his spiritual visitings of the sick, the ignorant, and the afflicted, and makes more dissenters from the Apostolic Church than any other cause. Bishop Mant, and many other prelates, have loudly spoken against it; and all may ask, With what propriety can a clergyman enter a cottage to pray with its afflicted inhabitant,

and leave his gun and dogs at the door, or stop in the exciting career of a fox-hunting chase? It is perfectly true, there is no sin in either of these amusements, if the sin of cruelty can be separated from them; but as Bishop Gibson observes, "The laws of the Church have in all ages restrained clergymen from many freedoms and diversions, which in others are accounted allowable and innocent; being such exercises as are too eager and violent, and therefore unagrecable to that sedateness and gravity which becomes our functions," &c. Johnson used to say, that the reason a man found pleasure in hunting was, because he "feels his own vacuity less in action than when at rest;" but surely a well disciplined and cultivated mind never knows what vacuity is, and would least of all resort, for its cure, to violent locomotion of the body. Sir Joshua Reynolds observed, that "the real character of a man was found out by his amusements." Boswell makes a good remark, to the effect, that if the clergy knew how much an indiscriminate mixing in the pleasures of society "lessens them in the eyes of those whom they think to please by it, they would feel themselves much mortified.”

Dr. Johnson always thought that a due solemnity and propriety of manner was to be expected from Bishops, and a corresponding respect paid to their office and venerable character.* It would not be immoral in

*

How truly does the celebrated Cheshire Petition, presented by Sir Thomas Ashton in the House of Lords, commence: "When we consider that Bishops were instituted in the times of the Apostles; that they were the great lights of the Church in all the first General Councils; that so many of them sowed the seeds of religion in their blood, and rescued Christianity from utter extirpation in the primitive heathen G 3

a Bishop, he said, "to whip a top in Grosvenor-square; but, if he did, I hope the boys would fall upon him, and apply the whip to him. There are gradations in conduct; there is morality-decency-propriety. None of these should be violated by a Bishop." He also disapproved of Bishops giving dinners during Passionweek, or going to routs; at least, of their staying at these latter longer than their presence commanded respect. In talking on this point, Boswell happily observed,-"When a Bishop places himself in a situation where he has no distinct character, and is of no consequence, he degrades the dignity of his order" on which Johnson remarked to Mrs. Thrale,-" Mr. Boswell, Madam, has said it as correctly as it could be." Not only in the dignitaries of the Church, but in the clergy generally, Dr. Johnson looked for a particular decorum and delicacy of behaviour, with more seriousness than others of mankind, and a suitable composure of manners. At the same time, it must be told to the laity, that there is not a higher standard laid down in the Scriptures for the clergy than for themselves; and the good pattern of ministers is not one which they are to look upon and admire only, but to follow.

persecutions; that to them we owe the redemption of the purity of the Gospel we now profess from Romish corruption; that many of them, for the propagation of the truth, became such glorious martyrs,” &c. &c.; "to pray the present removal of them we cannot conceive to relish of justice or charity, nor can we join with them."-Nalson, vol. ii. p. 7 9 From Southey's Common Place Book, p. 39.

The petitioners go on to state, that in lieu of twenty-six Ordinaries, easily responsible to parliaments," they fear to become exposed to the "mere arbitrary government of a numerous Presbytery, who, together with their Ruling Elders, will arise to nearly forty thousand Church governors."

CHAPTER IX.

HIS CHURCHMANSHIP.

OTHER points in Dr. Johnson's churchmanship demand our attention. It is certain, that the Scriptures invest places erected for the worship of the Supreme Being with a peculiar sacredness. No one can read the eighth chapter of the first Book of Kings, and also think of the Shechinah, and not acknowledge this. It is proper, too, that our Churches should be built after a peculiar pattern in architecture, and manifest by their outward and inward appearance that they are set apart for the duties of religion only. They should also be made more comfortable, so that the cold and dampness may not be inconvenient to the body when engaged in devotion, especially to feeble or aged persons. Perhaps it would be highly advantageous, if popular prejudice would so far relax as to allow pictures to reappear on the walls of our Churches; we have them in the windows, why not on the walls? Great instruction is derived from pictures; we teach children by them; we can in many things more readily give an adult an idea of a building, a man, a scene, by showing him a picture, than by using thousands of words. We have sacred pictures in our houses, and we worship them not; can it for a moment be imagined that they