ness, craft, and mystery of a kingdom of this world.

There is some reason to suspect that, in the present age, the frequent sacrifice of principle to inferior considerations, is the natural effect of a well-intended, but injudicious excitement of mental feeling, by means which threaten to become a substitute for divine operations upon the conscience. From our Lord's prayer for his disciples,-" Sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth," we learn with precision, what are the grand springs of "pure and undefiled religion," viz. the agency of the Holy Spirit by the influence of truth. Without mental illumination, productive of holy principles, no religion can be genuine, profitable, and permanent; and such is the force of divine truth, that, in its simplest form, when blessed by God, its energies are omnipotent. No artificial stimulants, whatever excitement they may produce, can really increase its native power, though their effects are often mistaken for those of the truth itself. God for bid that we should discourage any justifiable means of alluring souls to Christ; but let it be remembered that truth, when properly exhibited, and blessed of God, can and will make its own way, and that, without its influence, religion is only "as the sounding brass, and tinkling cymbal." Let us beware then of sacrificing principle to interest, fame, or any other consideration, lest we become accomplices in substituting the form of religion for its power. How weak, inconsistent, and impious is the attempt, to render a cause in which all the glorious perfections of Deity are combined, displayed, and exerted, subservient to the low designs of mercenary selfishness! legislators have made religion a state engine to accomplish political purposes; and it is

CONG, MAG. No. 66.

Thus

this which has produced such boundless mischiefs in national hierarchies, and exposed all establishments to the ridicule and opposition of infidels, which even the strong arm of power cannot suppress. To follow, though at a distance, such examples, is to forsake the pure principles of dissent, and the grand basis of the Reformation. Religion is a concern of such infinite moment, that to profess it on any other principles than those of conscience and disinterested regard to divine autho rity, is to degrade and vilify what is most holy, by opening the mouths of its enemies to blaspheme; -such conduct is the surest way to encourage and swell the ranks of infidelity. Those who prostitute religion to selfish ends, can never become ornaments to the Gospel of Christ, but are "clouds without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars." The flimsy veil, which covers their dark and unhallowed designs, though woven with consummate dexterity, cannot long hide the guilty secrets of their breast; which, when once known, will expose them to the disesteem of good men, and finally sink their religious names in oblivion.

W. M.

PLAGIARISMS. (To the Editors.) In my last, I pointed your readers to a few instances of plagiarism, which, however flagrant in themselves, yet, being of common occurrence, and amounting only to the transfer of a few gems from the recesses in which their lustre may have been unheeded, to situations where, doubtless, according to the wearer's anticipation, they would sparkle and cominand the admira2 P

66

tion of posterity, may seem to be pardonable at least, if not to aspire to a higher claim. Two of the facts I shall now bring forward are of a bolder and more adventurous flight, though the renown of complete originality can scarcely be awarded them; for GwYLIM, of heraldic notoriety, and GRAUNT, of political economy fame, had practised the same manœuvre before, the first by substituting his name for that of Dean BARKHAM, in the title page to the work on " Heraldry;" the second, by omitting to mention, that Sir WILLIAM PETTY was the real author of the "Observations on the Bills of Mortality." The facts I have now to mention have all the dishonesty, though none of the adroitness, of those to which I have alluded. Among the publications of 1684, was an octavo volume, entitled Anglorum Speculum," professedly written by G. S.; in the preface to which volume the pretended author very modestly informs the public, that "Dr. FULLER, in his large history in folio, (alluding to his" Worthies,") did go à great way in this matter." Perhaps we are to understand by this acknowledgment, though no such information is conveyed, that G. S. is in some degree indebted to Dr. FULLER for the contents of his publication. We certainly ought to feel exceedingly obliged to G. S. for the valuable information, that Dr. Fuller did write a book entitled "The Worthies," &c., and that he did go a great way in this matter; G. S. has, however, omitted to tell us, that all his volume, with a very few trifling exceptions, is taken verbatim from that work. Nor is this all; G. S. has executed his task in so bungling a manner, that he has left untouched those remarks of FULLER, which, being facts of private history, and related in the first person, are only applicable to him, and which show at once the unskilfulness, as well as the dis

We

honesty of this purloiner. shall subjoin, by way of specimen, some part of his account of SaltMARSH, the supralapsarian divine. "Jo. SALTMARSH, of an ancient but decayed family. He wrote against my sermon of Reformation, tasking me for many points of popery therein. I defended myself in a book called Truth Maintained, to which he answered not, being informed I was dead at Exeter." p. 903. It is evident, that these words can only be applicable to FULLER, and his known controversy with SALTMARSH. would be useless to particularizé, where the whole volume is an instance. Any one acquainted with Fuller's style, particularly with his unceasing puns, will immediately detect the imposture, and know the offspring by its likeness to its father. This volume is considered a great rarity among the London booksellers, and is marked at a high price in their catalogues. It is quoted as authority by some respectable biographies.

It

During the period of the Commonwealth, there was published a small piece, entitled, "The whole Duty of a Christian," &c. &c. The copy which I possess is the third edition, 8vo. 1661, and professes to be written by R. Y. of Roxwell, in Essex. From other copies I learn, that this person was RICHARD YOUNGE, and that under that name, with the additional cognomen Florilegus, he published many practical and polemical pieces in that age. appears from his writings, for I know of no particular account of him, to have been a layman of puritan principles, and after the ejection to have identified himself with the nonconformists. Though the little work to which I have made a particular reference cannot boast of any very original thoughts, or of a style of writing peculiarly polished, yet it certainly possesses beauties far above the average rate

He

of books of practical divinity, and may be justly considered as an excellent compendium of Christian duties. A similar opinion seems to have existed in the commencement of the next century to that in which RICHARD YOUNGE lived; a layman, and above all a lay Dissenter, must not be supposed the author of so good a treatise. In 1703, came forth under the pompous initials of A. H-. D.D., a piece, entitled "The whole Concern of a Christian," &c. 12mo. which, if your readers will compare with the work I have mentioned, they will find to be the same, word for word, with the addition only of a new preface; and the above-mentioned initials. A. H. I suppose, are intended for ANTHONY HORNECK, a celebrated Episcopalian divine of that day, and author of several religious pieces. D. D. sufficiently denotes the intention to rescue the piece from the pale of dissent, as there was no ejected Doctor of Divinity of those initials, and none of the new race of dissenting divines, had at that time received diplomas from Scotland. Anthony Horneck was besides a selling name. I am far from thinking that Dr. Horneck himself was engaged in this nefarious business, if, indeed, the initials were really intended to signify his name, and have only brought the fact forward, that the work may henceforth be restored to its real author.

I have in my possession a manuscript copy of a work, entitled "The Character of a Christian, in Paradoxes and seeming Contradictions," by HERBERT PALMER, a celebrated puritan divine. In the preface to the work are the following words. "Some few years since these paradoxes were republished by a dissenting minister, who very piously imposed them upon the world for the great Lord Bacon's. This same good man kept his flock watching and pray

ing all night, expecting the third earthquake, which a poor fanatic Life-guard-man foretold would happen." I once saw HERBERT PALMER'S "Paradoxes" in print, but neglected to compare them with this manuscript. Can any of your correspondents inform me, whether the circumstance alleged above be true, and if so, to whom it refers? I possess a copy of RALPH JENNING'S " Orthodox Paradoxes," 8vo. 1657, which, though they bear a very striking resemblance to HERBERT PALMER'S, and in fact, in many instances, are the same, yet, as they make no profession of being written by Lord Bacon, I am induced to be lieve are not those to which the manuscript refers.

Perhaps you will allow me here to ask your intelligent readers one or two queries. Did the author of Robinson Crusoe, "ever subscribe himself, in any of his productions, DANIEL DE FOE? It is well known that his real name was DANIEL FOE, and under the initials D. F., are most or all of his earlier productions published. I know several very ingenious persons have endeavoured to account for his taking the prefix De to his name, from his hatred to the English nation; they assert that he ever endeavoured to copy the French manners, rather than those of his native country, and they have supposed that his "True-born Englishman" is a sufficient proof of this predilection for foreigners. It is certain that in many contemporary publications he was satirized as a French Huguenot. I am almost inclined to doubt that he ever did sign his name with the prefix, or if he did, I should think it did not originate with him, but that his contemporaries, observing his pieces generally signed with the initials D. F. as his "Essay on Projects," and most of his smaller tracts, and they being ignorant of his first name, were so accustomed

to write and call him D. Foe, that eventually what was at first intended only as the initial of his first name, became to be understood as the prefix of his family name, and that if he ever did actually use the prefix, it was because he became generally known by it. In many of his opponents' tracts he is styled D. F. or D. Foe. I only propose this as a conjecture, and should be happy to see my opinion confuted, if it be groundless.

I should be much obliged by being informed of the name of the author of " Reflexions on Marriage, and the Poetick Discipline," 12mo. 1673. It is asserted in the preface to be by the author of "The Remarques on the Town." Ovinia Insulæ.

MILES.

tellectual inquirer after truth, it is speedily dismissed as void of interest.

In pursuing our inquiries on a subject thus oppositely contemplated, we think it important to keep in view the two classes of characters rendered so distinct by the diversity of their sentiments and feelings in reference to the subject; and while, to the one class, we shall be concerned to present it as a scriptural truth, and to press its paramount interest, whether they regard it as such or not; to the other class we shall study to offer such remarks as may be calculated to render more clear their conceptions, and to strengthen their regards in reference to a doctrine which they already know, and feel, and love.

It is very evident that the writers of inspired truth felt, in all its

WITH GOD.

PERHAPS there is not, in the whole range of religious truth, a topic which, when contemplated, excites more widely different feelings in the minds of two distinct and opposite classes of individuals, than that which now presents itself for our discussion. To the one class there is no subject to which the judicious instructor of religion could more readily, or more acceptably lead the attention, and to the other there is none which would be more uninviting.

Nor are we at any loss to account for this fact. The reason is found in the nature of the subject itself. Many of the doctrines of Scripture involve in them much of speculative interest. As intellectual truth they commend themselves to the attention of the curious and inquisitive mind. But this subject is an experimental one, and it supplies interest only as it is feelingly studied and understood. As a speculative topic it is both difficult and barren, and by the merely in

sarily belongs to the nature of their communication, namely, that of bringing down to the comprehension of the human mind the peculiar, and often sublime, doctrines of inspiration; every thing connected with the nature and attributes of the Divine Being, and the relation in which he stands to mankind, must necessarily involve in it much that is "hard to be understood." The terms which are employed, are likely, unless some care is taken, to lead us to misconceptions of the truth, from the disposition which there is in us to apply those terms, in their ordinary form, to the subject which they are intended to explain, when it is obvious that the purpose to which they are applied, demands of them a refined and spiritual modification. The terms 66 communion and fellowship," as generally employed, are easily understood. They signify common possession. The tradesman has communion or fellowship with his partner in the trade, inasmuch as he shares with him the engage

ments and result of his calling. An individual has fellowship with his friend when he enjoys the interchanges of thought, and has a sympathy with his sentiments and feelings.

Now this last definition may be legitimately applied to the subject under consideration. By fellowship with God, we understand a sympathy with the moral attributes of the Deity, a participation in the moral qualities of the divine mind. It is the prerogative of the Holy Spirit to restore to the soul, by his own peculiar workmanship, the lost image of its Maker. Those moral characteristics which belong to the divine nature, are communicated, a sympathy is produced, a complacency and delight in his moral attributes is felt, a willing and delightful surrender of all the faculties of the soul is experienced, and in return, a consciousness of reciprocal approbation is enjoyed. Hence arises, naturally and instinctively, the exercise of prayer, as the best medium of intercourse. The sentiments and feelings of the pious mind, which are strictly in harmony with those of the divine mind, are poured forth in fervent aspiration; and in proportion to the strength and prosperity of the holy principle implanted, in proportion to the degree of conformity to the divine image, will be the warmth of its prayers, and the closeness of its intercourse.

To the unsanctified heart, to those whose minds have never been under the discipline of sacred truth, and the transforming influences of the Holy Spirit, we do not wonder that a state of mind like this appears novel, mystical, and fanciful; but we can successfully appeal to the history of every renewed mind, for proofs of its existence and its value. Here, under the purifying influences of the sacred Spirit, the soul has been roused to the best exercise of its moral faculties; sensible

objects and earthly associations have sunk to their legitimate level; the great object of supreme regard, and the eternal source of exalted felicity, has fixed its contemplations, and a holy reverence, a rapturous admiration, and an ardent love, have raised the soul to heaven, and have supplied a large measure of that exalted felicity for which it was created, to which it ardently aspires, and towards which it is rapidly advancing.

Every view which we take of man, either of his nature or circumstances, abundantly proves that a state and character of mind like this, involves in it his highest interests. In the enjoyment of communion with his God, is found his most exalted felicity, and in the loss of that privilege he finds the consummation of his misery.

This proposition is proved from the natural constitution of the human mind. When God created man he made him in the likeness of his own image, that is, he invested him with the moral attributes of his own nature; and in the possession of these moral qualities, he was fitted to realize the same moral enjoyments. He was made like to God, and was thus formed for constant intercourse with him; and in that intercourse to experience felicity, different only in degree from that which was inherent in the divine nature. Man, however, by his fall has deranged his moral constitution, induced different tendencies of mind and of heart, and consequently has defeated the great designs of his existence, failed of the ends for which his moral constitution was adapted, and the result must necessarily be that which exists in fact; that in proportion to the extent of his apostacy, will be his distance from happiness. The present connexion of his immaterial substance with that which is material, the sympathy it feels with its animal passions, and the