in the day); in the first watch of the night he sung a hundred psalms, (which few persons who know anything of music will deem much short of a miracle in itself,) and knelt two hundred times upon the ground; and at cock-crow he stood in water, until he had said his prayers; we have a portraiture and ideal of the practical piety which Mr. Newman's party are presenting to the public for the benefit of most erring and most unfortunate England. Truly, the miracles and the piety are worthy of each other; and if men believe that such piety can be acceptable to their Creator, it is no wonder, that they should see nothing extraordinary or incongruous in the miracles by which its acceptance is said to have been signified to the world.

But some will ask, why persist in making Mr. Newman responsible for the follies and impieties of these pernicious books? To this the writer need give no other answer than that which has already been given in the January number of this magazine:

"Every word of the articles on Hagiology was written, as these lines are, under a full and conscientious belief that for these Lives of the English Saints Mr. Newman, and Mr. Newman alone, is responsible. There may be anonymous persons, whose responsibility is devolved on him; but this is done by his permission, and with a full consciousness on his part, that while he thus voluntarily places himself between them and the public, all the praise or blame is exclusively his own.

Nor is the writer aware of any doctrine advocated in these books, which may not be fully justified by passages to be found in works to which Mr. Newman has put his name, to say nothing of the articles in the British Critic, which he has recommended to the public. And, on this point, of primary and eternal moment, the right these authors claim of trifling with truth, the words already quoted, from Mr. Newman's sermon on Development, are a distinct avowal, that he considers the use of falsehood in religion may be justified by circumstances. The words are here again quoted, lest any one should think Mr. Newman's meaning misrepresented:

"It is not more than an hyperbole to say that, in certain cases a lie is the nearest approach to truth. This seems the meaning for instance of St. Clement, when he says He [the Christian] both thinks and speaks the truth, unless when at any time, in the way of treatment, as a physician towards his patients, so for the welfare of the sick he will be false, or will tell a falsehood, as the sophists speak. For instance, the noble apostle circumcised Timothy, yet cried out and wrote 'circumcision availed not, &c.'-Strom. vii. 9. We are told that God is not the son of man that he should repent,' yet, It repented the Lord that he had made man."-Univ. Sermons, p. 343.

This is Mr. Newman's own statement of his views regarding the lawfulness of tampering with truth. And, with regard also to the particular species of falsehood which forms the subject of consideration at present, namely, the falsification of history, and the manufacturing of legends and miracles to serve a pious purpose, Mr. Newman has thus expressed himself in this same Sermon on Development :

"Mythical representations, at least in their better form, may be considered facts or narratives, untrue, but like the truth, intended to bring out the action of some principle, point of character, and the like. For instance, the tradition that St. Ignatius was the child whom our Lord took in his arms, may be unfounded; but it realizes to us His special relation to Christ and His apostles, with a keenness peculiar to itself. The same remark may be made upon certain narratives of martyrdoms, or of the details of such narratives, or of certain alleged miracles, or heroic acts, or speeches, all which are the spontaneous produce of religious feeling under imperfect knowledge. If the alleged facts did not occur, they ought to have occurred, (if I

may so speak); they are such as might have occurred, and would have occurred, under circumstances; and they belong to the parties to whom they are attributed, potentially, if not actually; or the like of them did occur; or occur to others similarly circumstanced, though not to those very persons.”—p. 345.

These are Mr. Newman's avowed opinions, and how they can be distinguished from the principles and maxims of the Jesuits, it is not easy to discover. And if this be lawful now, it was just as lawful eighteen hundred years ago; and those who wrote the gospels, with reverence be it spoken, were just as much at liberty to construct "mythical representations," and call them history, as any others can be unless truth itself also admits of development. Mr. Newman has here expressly mentioned "miracles" among the matters which may be ascribed to the hero of a legend, though they had no foundation in fact, because, " if the alleged facts did not occur, they ought to have occurred;" but, how can any one say a miracle ought to have occurred, without implying that the Almighty ought to have worked it?—and to relate a miracle as matter of fact, merely to embellish a narrative, and give dignity to a hero, is to state, that the Almighty has done a certain act, without having any reason for believing that he has-and whether such liberties can be taken with that sacred name without profaneness in him who does it, and without undermining his own belief and the belief of others, in the truths of Christianity, and even of the existence of a deity, is a matter deserv ing of rather more serious consideration than Mr. Newman or his party seem yet to have given it. But, be this as it may, it is saying what is untrue, and why any one should wish to claim a right to use falsehood for the promotion of piety, is not very apparent. In the second number of these Lives of the Saints-the very number in the advertisement to which Mr. Newman states, that these lives are portions of the series promised under his editorship-is a preface written by himself, and signed with his initials, in which he says, speaking of the preposterous and goblin-like miracles of St. Walburga, who, the reader is probably aware, is a sort of ecclesiastical Robin Good-fellow among the German peasantry

"The question will naturally suggest itself to the reader, whether the miracles recorded in these narratives, especially those contained in the Life of St. Walburga, are to be received as matters of fact; and in this day, and under our present circumstances we can only reply, that there is no reason why they should not be. They are the kind of facts proper to ecclesiastical history, just as instances of sagacity and daring, personal prowess or crime, are the facts proper to secular history."

So that this notion, that it is lawful to ascribe miracles to the saints, on any, the slightest foundation, or on none whatever, merely because they are the kind of facts proper to ecclesiastical history," and if they "did not occur, yet they ought to have occurred," and "belong to the parties to whom they are attributed, potentially, if not actually," this notion, as destructive to piety and religion, as it is incompatible with correct notions of truth and falsehood, has been distinctly avowed and justified by Mr. Newman himself, and that, not only in his Sermon preached before the University, but in the prefatory matter which he has prefixed to one of the volumes of this series of the Lives of the English Saints. It is Mr. Newman himself, therefore, that has made himself responsible for these errors and impieties, and not the writer of these papers, or any other person whatever.

211

SOME NOTICES OF THE EARLY COLONIAL CHURCH.

(Continued from p. 135.)
PENSILVANIA.

THE Rev. William Beckett was sent as missionary to Pensilvania, in 1721. Lewes, a large and handsome town on the bank of the river Delaware, which forms the harbour, was his residence; but his mission comprised the whole county of Sussex, fifty miles in length by twenty in breadth. In the discharge of his duty he was compelled to travel seventy or eighty miles every week; but "grudged no labour while he was serving God and his generation." The effect of his ministrations soon became visible in the moral improvement of the people, especially as regarded the vices of "swearing and drunkenness, which for some years had been epidemical there." And so remarkable was this reformation, that the magistrates and gentlemen of the county presented their thanks to Mr. Beckett for his great exertions. A subscription for the erection of a church at Lewes was at once commenced, and two others were built in different parts of the county.

Mr. Beckett thus speaks of what had been done: "We have now three churches in this county, yet none of them will contain the hearers that would constantly attend divine service. The people at the good time of the year make nothing of riding twenty miles to church-a thing very common in this part of America; which is sufficient to shew that our people have a great value for the favour of the Society, and that our labour is not lost in this part of the world."*

As the government of the province was in the hands of the Quakers, no public grants were made for the erection of churches, or the stipends of clergymen. Yet as early as 1721, fifteen "very decent" churches had been built, and many valuable bequests made for the use of the church and her ministers. But besides this, parsonagehouses had also been provided; and in many places liberal contributions were made for the maintenance of the clergyman.

At the same date the Society had distributed among the poorer classes of the province above two thousand volumes of bound books, and about 300l. worth of small tracts.+

It would be tedious to trace the useful labours of this conscientious missionary from year to year. In 1729, he reported that the church. in Sussex county was generally in "a growing state; and that a fourth church had been built by the inhabitants in the middle of the forest."

In 1741, Lewes was visited by Mr. Whitfield, who preached four or five times from a balcony to a multitude of about 1500 of " all sorts." But the next year the enthusiasm, which had for a season been so violent, abated, and Mr. Whitfield's proselytes recanted their errors, "the most considerable in print." "The truth is," says Mr.

*Humphreys' Historical Account, p. 178.
Original Letters, iii. 95.

† Humphreys, p. 179.
VOL. XXVII.-March, 1845.

S

Beckett, "your missionaries have conquered and convinced them, not so much by opposition as by patience; and by studying to be quiet and to mind their own business."

In this, which is one of his last letters, and dated September 26th, 1742, he was enabled to assure the Society that his four churches were filled on Sundays and holydays; and that in summer time, as they were unable to hold the congregations, he was "often obliged to preach under the green trees for room, for shade, and for fresh air." He had now been more than twenty years in his mission, and was still compelled to travel very considerable distances to visit unprovided churches, as there was no clergyman resident within fifty or sixty miles. He adds, " You will please to observe, Sir, that there is a great distinction between ecclesia constituta' and 'ecclesia constituenda.'

The Rev. Hugh Neill, who had for many years been minister to a congregation of Presbyterians in New Jersey, having, after careful examination, convinced himself of the duty of conforming to the church of England, came over to this country, with satisfactory testimonials, in the year 1749, and having been ordained by the Bishop of London, was nominated by the Society to the mission of Dover.†

In a letter written soon after his arrival, he speaks of many signs of improvement among the people of his parish, and, what is most worthy of record, mentions having baptized 109 adult negroes, after having fully grounded them in the doctrines of Revelation. To this unfortunate race he paid special attention, and was in the habit of catechizing a class of one hundred every Sunday evening. In 1758, he was removed to Oxford, the inhabitants of which he thus classified: about 150 professed members of the church in the congregation at Oxford; and about the same number of attendants, at Whitemarsh church, of whom, however, not more than thirty were church members, while the rest were either Dissenters, or young Dutch people, who had acquired a knowledge of the English. "As to the number of Dissenters, they are almost innumerable; Quakers, Presbyterians, Old and New Lights, Baptists, both Seventh-day and First-day, Moravians, Menonists, Dumplers, and Pietists, with many other sorts; but these have all stated places of worship, besides the Dutch Calvinists, and Lutherans." But, amid so many and such various adversaries, it is some consolation to learn, that "the utmost love, union, and harmony subsisted" between him and his churches; and that "the majority of his people endeavoured to excel the Dissenters as much by the piety of their lives as by the purity of their doctrine." +

The next year, however, he expressed great fears lest this unanimity should be disturbed, as Mr. Whitfield had again come to the province, and instead of being opposed by the clergy of Philadelphia, as in former years, was now followed by them, (says Mr. Neill,) "from the church to the meeting-house, and thence to the church again, with a greater degree of veneration (I really believe) than if His Grace of Canterbury was to condescend to pay them a visit." §

Original Letters, i. 126.
Pensilvania Letters, June 5, 1762.

† Journal, xi. 205.
§ Ibid. Oct. 17, 1763.

Many causes combined to make Mr. Neill a warm advocate for a resident American Episcopate. His own education among the Presbyterians must have shewn him the practical defects of their form of church government-the numerous sects and denominations of Christians in both the missions which he had served, must have convinced him how greatly a visible centre of unity was needed—while the irregularities of the clergy themselves-as for instance, in encouraging the schismatical teaching of Whitfield, demanded the exercise of some superior authority. But another circumstance occurring about this time added irresistible weight to his argument. His nephew, Mr. Wilson, whom he had educated at his own charge, for the ministry of the church, and sent to England for ordination, was, on his return, with his companion the Rev. Mr. Giles, shipwrecked, and drowned. within sight of shore. This sad disaster occurred on the 5th April, 1766, and the following are the reflections which he makes upon it: :"Such, alas! are the misfortunes, and, I may say, persecutions, that attend the poor distressed Church of England in America-that whilst the Dissenters can send out an innumerable tribe of teachers of all sorts, without any inquiries, we must send three thousand miles across the Atlantic Ocean, at the expense of all we are worth, sometimes, and as much more as we have credit for, as well as the risk of our lives, before we can have an ordination. This is a difficulty, that has, and always will, prevent the growth of the church in America. Few Englishmen, that can live at home, will undertake the mission-the great expenses and dangers of the seas that the Americans must encounter with before they can obtain an ordination, damps their spirits, and forces many of them (who have strong inclinations to the church) to join the Dissenters and become teachers among them. Thus, when a vacancy happens among them, it can be filled in an instant, when a vacancy among us, it is some considerable time before they [we] can have a minister. All this time the Dissentersare making such havoc among the church people, that when a missionary comes to one of these destitute places, he has all the work to begin again, and many years [must elapse] before he can collect his scattered sheep.

"The Dissenters very well know, that the sending a bishop to America would contribute more to the encouragement of the church here, than all the money that has been raised by the honourable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Alas! we see and feel the power of our enemies, and weakness of our friends, and can only mourn in secret and pray for better times.

“The Rev. Dr. Allison, vice-provost of the College of Philadelphia, and who is at the head of the Presbyterians in this province, assured me the other day, in a conversation upon this subject, that they had no objection to what he called primitive Episcopacy, that is, Episcopacy without any civil power annexed to it, as he explained himself; and that he would be well contented if there was a bishop of this sort in every province in America.

"I hope the venerable Society will excuse my freedom in thus writing about sending a bishop here, and only remember, that had a bishop been in America, my nephew would not have come to such an