Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

under the sanction of our own Synod, and without the Paraphrases. The Psalter would then stand alone in its preeminence and honour. Since a hymn-book is thought advisable or necessary, let it be a separate volume, and not stand alongside of the more ancient and sacred poetry. Perhaps it would be well to keep the hymn-book to the desk, and not raise it to the pulpit, where the appearance of the Word of God alone is one of the striking points of true Protestant witnessbearing. But we have said enough at present to shew how much out of place are the apprehensions entertained by some as to the introduction of a hymnbook. It is not to interfere with the Psalter, but to supersede the present collection of hymns and paraphrases. We trust that the Committee appointed by the Synod have made considerable progress with their labour.

THE PSALTER.

It would be well to have an authorized Psalter for the use of our Presbyterian congregations, containing portions of the psalms, arranged, and set to appropriate tunes. We all know that certain psalms, and portions of psalms are in perpetual use, and we also know how good it is to have fixed tunes associated with particular words, such as the old 100th Psalm. Could a selection and arrangement of psalms, with particular tunes, be made with judgment and taste, we are confident that it would soon come into general use, and greatly tend to the improvement of our congregational psalmody.

LADY HEWLEY'S CHARITIES. APPEAL TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR.

SIR Lancelot Shadwell, V. C. of England, pronounced a decree in this suit, which decree in effect was as follows:"First, that the words 'godly preachers, for the time being, of Christ's holy Gospel,' contained in the deeds of the 12th and 13th January, 1704, and the 25th and 26th April, 1707, described in general those who, at the time of Lady Hewley's death, were, and those who thereafter should be, Orthodox English Dissenting Ministers of Dissenting Churches or Congregations, essentially and substantially in doctrine and discipline of the same sort as the Orthodox Dissenting Churches

or Congregations which existed in England in the years 1704 and 1707; and therefore, that Orthodox English Dissenting Ministers of Baptist Churches, of Congregational or Independent Churches, and of Presbyterian Churches in England, which are not in connexion with, or under the jurisdiction of, the Kirk of Scotland, or the Secession Church, alone, are entitled to take the benefits provided by those deeds for godly preachers of Christ's holy Gospel. Secondly, that the words, in the same deeds, 'godly widows,' describe the widows of those Orthodox English Dissenting Ministers. Thirdly, that the words, in the same deed, the preaching of Christ's holy Gospel,' describe the preaching of such Orthodox English Dissenting Ministers. Fourthly, that the words, in the same deeds, the ministry of Christ's holy Gospel,' describe the ministry exercised by such Orthodox English Dissenting Ministers. Fifthly, that the words, in the same deeds, 'godly persons,' describe the individual members of such Baptist, Congregational, or Independent, or Presbyterian Churches. And, lastly, that the poor people to be placed in the hospitals must be poor members of such Churches."

The general effect of this decree will be the exclusion of the ministers of the Presbyterian Congregations (represented in this suit by the trustees and subtrustees removed by the decree) and their widows from all participation in the charity funds. And the exclusion of all members of such congregations from taking any part in the administration of the said funds, which will probably fall entirely under the control of the Independents.

Messrs. Barbour, Lonsdale, Finlay, and Ross, the trustees removed by the said decree, are gentlemen who personally lie beyond the reach of imputation, and, as trustees, they had never acted. They are, moreover, with the exception of Mr. Barbour, all of them Englishmen by birth.

The grounds on which a reversal of the decree on appeal is confidently expected, are such as the following:

That Lady Hewley was a Presbyterian : that all her original trustees, whose opinions can now be ascertained, were also Presbyterians: that there is the strongest presumption that all those original trustees, whose opinions cannot be ascertained, were also Presbyterians: and therefore that the present trustees

and sub-trustees have been improperly removed by the Vice Chancellor.

That a portion of the congregations represented by the appellants, originated in the time of Lady Hewley: that they formed part of the Presbyterian body with which she was connected, and maintain the Presbyterian doctrine and discipline-as distinguishable from Independency-to the present day: and that the other congregations of subsequent erection, hold, in every respect, the same characteristic principles.

That there was the closest connexion possible between the English Presbyterians of Lady Hewley's time and the Church of Scotland: that Lady Hewley's charity was employed by the original trustees in sending young men to be educated for the English Presbyterian ministry to Scotch universities, as it was the custom at the period for English Presbyterian ministers and others to send their sons to Scotch universities; that parties then educated in Scotland, and moreover that parties who had been born, educated, licensed, or ordained, in Scotland, became ministers of English Presbyterian chapels in Lady Hewley's time: that these ministers (whatever their relation while in Scotland to the Scotch Church) were by law English Dissenters while domiciled in England, and were so recognised by the other Dissenters, as they were regarded by themselves.

That the English Presbyterians of Lady Hewley's time professed the same faith with the Church of Scotland: that they in theory held the same form of church government, although from the then state of affairs they could not so fully carry it out in practice. And that their ministers were ordained according to the "Presbyterian form" or "directory " of the Westminster Assembly, as were also the ministers represented by the present appellants.

That the parties represented in this suit by Messrs. Barbour and Lonsdale are, neither ministers nor people, all Scotch on the contrary, a very large proportion-probably a majority-are English and Irish; that while- as was the case with the English Presbyterians of Lady Hewley's time-they are in amity with all Churches that adhere to the Westminster standards, they are as free from extrinsic jurisdiction, whether Scotch or otherwise, as the English Presbyterians of any former period. And that the parties represented by Messrs.

Finlay and Ross, are, in like manner, a large proportion of them natives of England: that their position as English Presbyterian Dissenters is in no degree affected by their ecclesiastical relationship to the United Presbyterian Church (of which the Secession Church was a part) -a Church whose organization accords with that prescribed by the English Presbyterians of the Westminster Assembly, and which has nothing in its name, or constitution, or jurisdiction, to distinguish it as Scotch.

That at the time of Lady Hewley, the old traditionary antagonism between the Presbyterians and the Independents continued to exist.

That each of the parties had its denominational funds, of which none of the other party was allowed to participate.

That while Lady Hewley notoriously contributed to the support of the Presbyterians, it has never been known that she aided the Independents.

From these facts it seems apparent, that to place this charity in the hands of Independent trustees, is inconsistent with Lady Hewley's intention, and a depararture from the object of her charity.

I MUST PRAY DIFFERENTLY.

"Ye ask and receive not, because ye ask amiss."— James iv. 3.

SOME time ago, I felt strongly the necessity of praying more; and now I feel that I must not only pray more, but differently: and that my praying more will not answer any good purpose, unless I pray differently. I find that quality is to be considered in praying, as well as quantity; and, indeed, the former more than the latter. We learn from Isaiah i. that it is possible to make many prayers, or to multiply prayer, as it is in the margin, and not be heard. The Scribes and Pharisees made long prayers; but their much praying availed them nothing: while the single, short petition of the publican was effectual to change his entire prospects for eternity. It was because it was a prayer of the right kind. It is a great error to suppose that we shall be heard for our much speaking. Let me, however, say, that while length is not by itself any recommendation of prayer, yet we have the highest and best authority for continuing a long time in prayer. We know who it was, that "rising up a great while before day, departed into a solitary

place, and there prayed;" and of whom it is recorded in another place, that he "continued all night in prayer to God." Certainly they should spend a great deal of time in prayer, who are instructed to "pray without ceasing." It is in the social and public worship of God that long prayers are out of place.

But to return from this digression. I must pray differently; and I will tell you one thing which has led me to think so. I find that I do not pray effectually. It may be the experience of others as well as of myself. I do not always obtain what I ask; and that, though I ask for the right sort of things. If I asked for temporal good, and did not receive it, I should know how to account for it. I should conclude that it was denied in mercy; and that my prayer, though not answered in kind, was answered in better kind. But I pray for spiritual blessings —for what is inherently and under all circumstances good, and do not obtain it. How is this? There is no fault in the Hearer of prayer-no unfaithfulness in God. The fault must be in the offerer. I do not pray aright. And since there is no use in asking, without obtaining, the conclusion is, that I must pray differently.

I find, moreover, that I do not pray as they in old time, whose prayers were so signally answered. When I compare my prayers with those of the patriarchs, especially with those of Jacob, and with the prayers of the prophets, those for instance, of Elijah and Daniel-when I compare my manner of making suit to the Saviour with the appeals made to him by the blind men, and by the woman of Canaan-and, above all, when I lay my prayers alongside of His who "offered up prayers and supplications, with strong crying and tears, I perceive such dissimilarity, that I thence conclude I must pray differently.

I am

I find also, that I do not urge my suits to God, as I do those which I have sometimes occasion to make to men. wiser as a child of this world, than I am as one of the children of light. When I want to carry a point with a human power, I find that I take more pains, and am more intent upon it, and use greater vigilance and effort than when I want to gain something of God. It is clear, then, that I must alter and reform my prayers. I must pray differently.

But in what respects? How differently?

1. I must not speak to God at a distance. I must draw near to him. Nor that alone. I must stir myself up to take hold of him. (Isaiah lxvi. 7.) Yea, I must take hold of his strength, that I may make my peace with him. (Isaiah xxvii. 5.) I have been satisfied in approaching God. I must, as it were, apprehend him.

2. I must not only take hold of God in prayer, but I must hold fast to him, and not let him go, except he bless me. So Jacob did. There were two important ingredients in this prayer-faith and perseverance. By the one, he took hold of God. By the other, he held fast to him till the blessing was obtained.

[ocr errors]

3. I must be more affected by the subjects about which I pray. I must join tears to my prayers. Prayers and tears used to go together much more than they do now. Hosea says, that Jacob " wept and made supplications." Hannah wept while she prayed. So did Nehemiah, and David, and Hezekiah: and God in granting the request of the last mentioned uses this language; "I have heard thy prayers, I have seen thy tears." But a greater than all these is here. Jesus offered up prayers, "with strong crying and tears. Some think it unmanly to weep. I do not know how that may be. But I know it is not unchristian. It is thought by some that men must have been more addicted to tears then than they are now; but it is my opinion that they felt more, and that is the reason that they wept more. Now, I must feel so as to weep; not by constraint, but in spite of myself. I must be so affected, that God shall see my tears, as well as hear my voice-and in order to being so affected, I must meditate. It was while David mused, that the fire burned; and then he spake with his tongue in the language of prayer. And we know that that which melted his heart affected his eye; for in the same Psalm (39th) he says, "Hold not thy peace at my tears."

4. There are other accompaniments of prayer which I must not omit. Nehemiah not only wept and prayed, but also mourned, and fasted, and made confession. Why should not I do the same?

5. I must plead as well as pray. My prayers must be more of the nature of arguments: and I must make greater use than I have ever done of certain pleas. There is one derived from the character

of God. "Have mercy on me according to thy lovingkindness." Another is de

rived from the promises of God. "Hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" Another is drawn from the past doings of God. "I will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High. I will remember the works of the Lord; surely I will remember thy wonders of old." I must also plead Christ more in my prayers. The argument is drawn out to our hands by Paul: "He that spared not his own Son ... how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?"

6. But again, I must cry unto the Lord. Crying expresses more than praying. It expresses earnest, fervent prayer. This is what they all used to do. They cried to God. The Psalmist says, "I cried with my whole heart."

Yea, I must search for him with all my heart. I must even pour out my heart before him, as the Psalmist on one occasion exhorts. I must "keep not

66

silence, and give him no rest," as Isaiah directs; night and day praying exceedingly," as Paul says he did. And I must pray in the Holy Ghost, as Jude exhorts. We need the Spirit to help our infirmities, and to make intercession for us. Nor should we be satisfied with any prayer, in which we have not seemed to have his help.

Oh, if Christians prayed differently as well as more, what heavenly places our closets would be! What revivals of religion we should have! What a multitude of souls would be converted!

And because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth, the offering of a different kind of prayer for the Spirit would do more to put down error than all other means which can be resorted to. The preachers of truth cannot put it down without the aid of the Spirit of truth.

Mark xi. 24, 25; 1 John iii. 22; Psalm lxvi. 18; Isaiah iv. 3; John xv. 7.

NOTES OF A TOUR IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

BY THE REV. W. CHALMERS, MARYLEBONE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.

(Continued from page 355.)

Hudson-Steamers-New York. It was by night that I first sailed down the river Hudson, and so I saw nothing, at this time, of the exquisite scenery upon its banks. That pleasure, however, I enjoyed some time after, when returning to Albany from the West. But neither on this, nor on any subsequent voyage, did I encounter the Flying Dutchman, though said to haunt this river! That well-known legend of the phantom-ship, the terror of sailors in other days, there is ground to believe, had its origin in the history and fate of the distinguished navigator, who discovered and gave his name to this noble stream. In the last of his eventful voyages, and that which led to the most important discoveries, Hendrick Hudson, in searching for the north-west passage to India, had penetrated into the very heart of the Polar seas. The expedition was entirely the fruit of private adventure. His only vessel was a little craft of fifty-five tons, and his crew, a set of cravens; yet he had pushed his way, through the straits that bear his name, into the vast sheet of

water, now so well known as Hudson's Bay. The wide expanse of sea that here presented itself he supposed to be a portion of the mighty Pacific; and concluding that his highest hopes were about to be fulfilled, and the long-sought for passage found, he abandoned all thoughts of returning. Continuing to sail along the coast which he imagined to be the western boundary of America, he hoped doubtless, ere the winter set in, to reach a milder climate in the south, where he might find safe shelter, and revive the drooping spirits of his men during the winter. But after three months of much effort, difficulty, and suffering, from the dangers of an unknown shore, the rigor of the climate, and the failure of supplies, his faint-hearted followers, terrified at his proposal to winter in such a gloomy region, rose in mutiny. They seized and bound their commander, hurried him overboard into a little skiff, drove into it along with him all the sick and infirm of the crew, and those who had continued faithful to their chief, and flinging them some powder and shot, cut the rope, sent

to the wind, set off, fleeing, as from an enemy.

them all adrift, and, spreading their sails | contained I cannot tell; mine was numbered 203. On a subsequent voyage I ascended the Hudson in what was then the finest boat upon the river, a splendid vessel, "The Empire," of Troy. It was 330 feet in length (i. e., 10 feet longer than the Great Britain, or one-sixteenth of a mile), and 60 feet in breadth, propelled by two engines of 300-horses power each, and capable of going with the tide, between eighteen and twenty miles an hour. It took me ninety steps to pace from one end of the principal saloon to the other. There were upwards of 500 passengers on board, and yet her draught of water was less than five feet, while she was rated at 1,040 tons burden.

Hudson, thus abandoned, was never heard of more; and even the greater part of the mutineers, after dreadful suffering, perished on the homeward voyage. But the impression produced on the popular mind, by the knowledge of their infamous deed, manifested itself in the legend of the "Flying Dutchman," a shadowy vessel, that was long believed to haunt the river Hudson and the American seas; now hanging in the horizon like a mist, now appearing in the height of the tempest, under a press of sail, careering onward right against the wind, with the steadiness and grandeur with which a cloud is seen to sail across the sky.

"For still, where the river Hudson finds Bold passage to the sea, Tho' cities have sprung, where his eye beheld The waves of the forest tree; "And still round the coasts of the icy north, In that chill abyss of storms, The seaman beholds 'mid the dim sea mists, A barque and phantom forms." These, according to some, were the spirits of the great navigator and his deserted crew, who had by night and day pursued, and still continue in search of the vessel which abandoned them. According to others, they were the guilty men who abandoned him, and were doomed to this penalty for their crime. The shadowy ship, the Flying Dutchman, presaged disaster and death to all by whom it was seen.

"The demon crew are these villains' souls,

Its light is the hurricane's gloom; Till judgment shall summon us all to account, They shall dree their terrible doom. But woe to the ship that shall cross their track, As to judgment they hurry on; For none eye that freight of unshriven sin, But are doomed to be undone." With the exception of the ferry-boats, which are mere moving bridges, the steamer in which I now embarked, was the first I had seen of American build. Its name was the "Knickerbocker," and certainly it was a singular structure, admirably adapted for its work, but as unlike anything of the kind to be seen in this country as can be imagined. It resembled a floating house with many windows, much more than a ship, to be driven through the water by the power of steam, at the rate of fifteen miles an hour. The Knickerbocker was 300 feet long, and 50 broad. How many beds it

The construction of these boats is quite peculiar. To draw as little water as possible, they are made nearly flatbottomed, and built of the lightest materials. To secure great speed they are very long and narrow; the hull, or part of the vessel in the water, being ten times as long as it is broad. Thus the Empire, which has a keel of 330 feet, has a beam or breadth but of 30 feet, i. e., only an eleventh part of her length. The hull, however, bears a very small proportion to the rest of the structure. It serves but to buoy up and carry along the huge edifice reared upon it. Like a cart loaded with hay, it is itself almost concealed from view by the superincumbent and overhanging mass. For, in order to gain space, and to prevent the steamer from being crank, and from rolling over, the deck is extended from the hull, immediately above the water line, and overhangs it, at least twelve or fifteen feet on either side, in the centre of the vessel, but of course narrowing to the ends. This doubles her beam, without increasing her resistance to the water, and secures at once steadiness and room. The decks are three in number, though the uppermost serves more as a roof over all. In the hull or hold of the vessel is the eating apartment and a portion of the passengers' berths. Above this is the first deck, by which you enter the ship, at large openings behind the paddle-wheels, and one can walk forward upon it under cover all the way to the bow. There, there is a large open space like the forecastle of our steamers, affording abundance of standing room. In bad weather the folding-doors opening out upon the forecastle are closed; but as these vessels run only in summer, the Hudson being frozen up in winter, and as the boilers

« ElőzőTovább »