the duty, and the privilege, of studying this prophecy,—he makes its study, by his interpretation, a matter of no more interest to men now living, than the chronicles of the days of Nimrod. The remoteness of the whole history, from our own times and affairs, necessarily reduces the whole to a mere theory.

But how does all this consist with a literal interpretation? For, if there be any one thing in the whole book of the Revelation which is made quite clear, it is this, that the prophecy was not of things distant two thousand years, but of events then shortly to appear upon the stage.

It is quite evident that this one point must be of the greatest interest in any prophecy. For, of what use could a prediction be, of which it was left in doubt, whether it concerned our own times, or the men of a thousand years hence? But the Divine Giver of these predictions is not thus unreasonable. He does not leave these matters in doubt. When he shews to Daniel events far distant, he plainly says, "The thing is true, but the time appointed "is long" -"the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end." Here was a clear warning against expecting any speedy fulfilment.

Now still more distinct and positive is the language of the Apocalypse. The very error into which Dr. Todd has fallen, of postponing the fulfilment two thousand years, is so carefully guarded against, that the Doctor really has no excuse. Again and again is the assurance given, that the events predicted are shortly to begin to appear.

At the very opening, the purpose of the book is expressly stated: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to "shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass." (ver. 1.)

66

Again, immediately after :-" Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things "that are written therein, for the time is at hand." (ver. 3.)

A sketch of the then present state of the Church is next given, and then the Voice says to the Apostle ;-" Come up hither, and "I will shew thee things which must be hereafter,"-or, as it may be correctly rendered," the things which must be after these "things." (Chap. iv. ver. 1.)

Thus does the book open. Is it possible, that the Apostle, after these warnings, could have believed, that he was about to learn, not what should happen shortly,-but, what should begin to occur two thousand years after?

But the prophecy at last draws to a close. And here again, a

fresh caution is given, against the error of Dr. Todd. Again the reader is warned, that the time is not distant, but at hand.

"The Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew "unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. Be"hold! I come quickly." (Chap. xxii. 6, 7.)

A second time is the assurance given,

"Seal not up the sayings of the prophecy of this book," (as those of Daniel were sealed, being distant)" for the time is at hand." "Behold, I come quickly." (Verses 10, 12.)

And a third time, in the very last words written, is the warning repeated,

"He that testifieth these things saith, SURELY, I come QUICKLY." (Verse 20.)

How is it possible, then, for Dr. Todd's system to be admitted, in the face of all these plain, positive, and repeated injunctions? He argues long and vehemently, in favour of receiving the Apostle's words in their literal sense. Therefore the sun, moon, and stars are to be literally understood, and to suffer a literal one-third eclipse. Literal locusts and earthquakes are to visit the earth, and it is not quite clear whether we are not to expect a literal beast with ten horns, or if not, why this passage is to be made an exception! And yet, when the Apostle speaks in the plainest and most direct terms, using no symbol whatever, but declaring that he is about to declare "things which must shortly come to pass, ," "events which are at hand,"-Dr. Todd, with all his fondness for the literal meaning, is of opinion that events hand" may mean, events more than a thousand years distant! and "things which must shortly come to pass,"-things separated from the Apostle by more than twenty centuries!

at

We have no fear of this system. It is too plain and palpable a violation of every canon of Biblical interpretation, and too irreverent in its mode of dealing with the word of God, to have any chance of acceptance with the humble-minded and sincere enquirer into the intent of Prophecy.

CORRESPONDENCE.

ON MR. GRESLEY'S RECENT PAMPHLETS.

Sir,-THE gross Jesuitism of the Ninetieth Tract for the Times, and the concurrent defence of a subscription of the Articles in a non-natural sense, have, reasonably enough, excited an universal feeling of disgust and indignation against a Party, which could thus unblushingly advocate rank dishonesty.

I. Somewhat on the principle of a Tu quoque, Mr. Gresley has recently stepped forward to assail those, whom, in the way of scornful vituperation, he thinks fit to denominate Evangelicals or Puritans: the former of these two diligently conjoined appellations, being apparently expressive of the intense hatred of the Doctrines of Grace which characterise the writings of the Tractarian Party; the latter of them, avowedly indicating (with what measure of truth, he seems little to reck) that the so-called Evangelicals (Mr. Gresley and his associates, by the very use of the term, not very creditably proclaiming themselves to be Unevangelicals) symbolise, in principle and design, with those who once pulled down the Church and the Monarchy.

1. Here, in the judgment of Mr. Gresley, lies The Real danger of the Church of England.

An advocacy of the Ninetieth Tract and of Subscription in a non-natural sense, let the advocates become as numerous and as clamorous as the frogs of the second plague, can never, he judges, do the Church any harm. But "the Evangelical or Puritan or AntiChurch Party" (Mr. Gresley, indifferently or conjointly, distinguishes them by all these names) ought to be specially distrusted of all honest men and true, inasmuch as they constitute a wellorganised conspiracy to revive the calamities of the great Rebellion in the seventeenth century.

2. On this statement of Mr. Gresley, it is obvious to remark, that, even if it were well founded, it would afford but a sorry exculpation of his own Party. It simply amounts to the retort courteous: If we are dishonest members of the English Church, you are equally so if we would unprotestantise the Church by a jesuitical introduction of Popery, you would equally endanger it, or more than endanger it, by a regularly concocted plan to pull it down altogether.

The Real Danger of the Church of England, p. 49.

In such an argument of Mr. Gresley, we have, by its very construction, an acknowledgment of guilt. Habemus confitentem reum. He no where, so far as I can find, repudiates either the Ninetieth Tract or the Non-Natural Sense: he acknowledges, that, "to a certain extent and before the principles of each were fully "understood," those of the Party who have apostatised to Popery, and those who with whatever honest consistency remain nominal members of the Church of England, "have acted and sympa"thised together:" and this "certain extent," as the mischievousness of chronology determines, comprehends the morality both of the Ninetieth Tract and of the Non-Natural Sense. But still he assures us, that the Real Danger of the Church arises from " the "Evangelical or Puritan or Anti-Church Party," who, like the Puritans of the seventeenth century, are bent upon pulling it down even to the very ground.

The charge is serious, if true. It is deficient only in one not quite unimportant point: its total want of substantiation.

II. If, however, the charge cannot be distinctly substantiated by any tangible evidence (a charge, be it observed, which is nevertheless rendered highly credible by its including two notorious ringleaders, the Bishops of Chester and Calcutta): it may be fairly established by inductive reasoning.

The Party, with the two Bishops at their head, aided and abetted in the plot by Mr. Chancellor Raikes, the sworn friend and ally of the faitour Prelate of Chester, have, if we may credit the discoveries of Mr. Gresley, brought even "a mass of heresy" into the sorely endangered Church: and we need but open our eyes to see, "not only the extreme bitterness, but also the undisguised heresy, "of the Party, by which our most valued institutions are thus in "danger of being destroyed."-(pp. 26, 47.)

Such grandiloquence is not a little appalling: and we tremblingly ask, what is the damnable heresy which is to effect these wonders of demolition?

The fearful heresy, which lies at the root of the only Real Danger of the Church, is, as Mr. Gresley assures us, A DENIAL OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION.

Its simple dishonesty is shewn by an adduction of the Office for Infant Baptism: but, since, in this respect, it is a mere species of the genus Dishonesty, while the tractarian advocacy of Tract Ninety and the Non-Natural Sense is another mere species; we must further view it, inasmuch as it affects the whole current of theological instruction, as clearly indicating a traitorous design to pull down both Church and Monarchy after the most approved model of Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton.-(p. 50.)

That we unfortunately have Prynnes, Bastwicks, and Burtons, in the present day, may be true enough: but this is no very distinct proof of their identity with those, whom it pleases Mr. Gresley to revile under the conjoined names of Evangelicals or Puritans or Antichurchmen.

III. Mr. Gresley is far too practical a man to point out the Real Danger of the Church without suggesting its remedy. The bane and antidote are both before us: and the antidote, it must be confessed, is valuable from its very simplicity.

Let Bishops cease to "take little or no heed of such as hold "dissenting doctrines:" and let them at once refuse ordination to all, who may, in this respect, be deemed offenders. For want of this wholesome measure, many excellent men," Mr. Gresley assures us, 66 are much disheartened:" insomuch that "some are even disposed to doubt, whether a Communion, in "which Truth is discouraged and Heresy tolerated and suffered to "proceed unrebuked, can be guided by the Spirit of God."

If we seek an explanation, Mr. Gresley readily affords it.

Men," says he, "who, once or twice in their lives, sign the "Articles in a Non-Natural Sense, are stigmatised as disingenuous, "and pointed at as Jesuits: while those, who, week after week, "administer the sacrament of Holy Baptism and teach the Cate"chism in a non-natural sense, remain unblamed."—(p. 52.)

The explanation is remarkable, no less for its pregnant morality than for its logical closeness of reasoning.

:

We Clerics, I believe, only subscribe the Articles when we receive preferment: and, as the acquisition of preferment is not of quite so frequent recurrence as the administration of Baptism, Mr. Gresley very truly describes subscription as taking place only "once or twice" in a person's life. Hence he draws the plain conclusion that a Cleric, who only "once or twice" in his whole life subscribes the entire body of the Articles in a non-natural or tractarian sense, while, so far from repenting of his misdeeds, he is ready to subscribe them a third time in the same non-natural sense if he can only get any better preferment, ought in no wise to be "stigmatised as disingenuous and pointed at as a Jesuit;" inasmuch as, in the scale of moral turpitude, he is not to be mentioned in the same day, with the atrocious heretic, who perpetrates the single doctrinal crime of administering, week after week, the sacrament of Holy Baptism, being guilty of what Mr. Gresley calls A Denial of Baptismal Regeneration.

The superstratum of this is equally plain.

Lest "many excellent men should continue to be much discou"raged," the Bishops, if they have the Real Danger of the Church