pens, (which I had thought might reasonably fall into the class of contributions,) upon matters of common interest, and quite different from replies or explana tions. 2. The editors or friends of the Eclectic Review do still maintain, that an unjust method has been resorted to, in selecting and disposing sentences or clauses, professed to be citations from that work. Of this they greatly complain, appealing to the original passages. 3. The quotation from your volume for 1836 (in the last Number, p. 511,) is not the passage to which I had alluded. Time is too precious to be spent in hunting for the clause which I quoted from recollection. But in Nov. 1836, p. 701, is a passage equal at least to it: The Dissenters asked for an atheistical Marriage Act; any thing short of this would not have pleased all parties : they now have it. Infidels will act upon it; religious men may superadd to it; but, nationally, it is atheistic.' "Permit some remarks. "(1.) The whole tone, as also that of some parts of the larger passage quoted last month from the Christian Observer of Oct. 1836, is, (permit me to say,) extremely unkind and substantially unjust. (2.) It is not true that the Dissenters asked for an atheistical Marriage Act. In numerous petitions and remonstrances, through a long course of years, they asked only the permission, enjoyed by the Society of Friends and by Jews, legally to solemnize marriages in their own places of worship, and according to their own views of religious propriety. "(3.) Yet I am not unprepared to vindicate the British Legislature for taking a more comprehensive course. Would you forbid infidels and ungodly people to marry? If not, is it not an awful prostitution of divine things to compel them to take words upon their lips, which you know to be in contradiction to their minds and hearts? Is not this a fearful aiding, yea, commanding such persons to lie, to utter hypocrisy, and to insult the Holy Majesty of Heaven? To the wicked, God saith, What hast thou to do, to declare my statutes; or that thou shouldst take my covenant in thy mouth?' "(4.) Have you a right to say thus positively, infidels will act upon it?' O that they may! What a relief this would be to many a pious clergyman, who is compelled, by the laws of conformity, to require, assist, and direct all persons who come to be married, according to the rubric, though he may be fully certain of their wicked character, (yea, they may be known blasphemers,-they may at the very time be intoxicated, or manifesting disgusting levity!) to take the most sacred words upon their tongues, and to pretend to join in PRAYER to the Omniscient and Holy One! O, Sir, let me speak for my brethren in the ministry and for myself; if you could give us the whole world, we would not do this! But I fear that few infidels will do as you assert. They are not distinguished for scrupulosity of conscience: and it is much more to be apprehended that they will continue to do as many like them have hitherto done, by having their marriages performed in the national church. "(5.) I humbly think that you, and all the pious members of the Church of England, ought to applaud and thank the Government for opening a way by which you may have some relief from a dreadful oppression; for rendering clandestine marriages impracticable, which, under the system of banns, they were not; and for insuring that the marriage of even atheists and profligates shall be legitimate and indissoluble, without inviting them to add bold hypocrisy to their other sins. "4. In an anticipative article, in the same volume, p. 191, you had said, 'We have little doubt but that cheap opposition marriage shops will spring up throughout the land; and that the respectable dissenters, as well as the clergy, will find that fees are cheapened down by commercial competition,' Now I am confident that you know enough of the manners of dissenters to have produced a reluctance to throw at them this gratuitous opprobrium. Fees are little known amongst us. Our ministers commonly solemnize baptisms and burials as a part of their regular duty to their congregations, without any fee or emolument whatever. Sometimes a present is made to the minister, by parties in opulent or easy circumstances, but this is by no means universal, and, in most places, it is unknown. I have no doubt but that a similar course is, and will be pursued with regard to marriages. So far as my personal knowledge goes, it is entirely so. However, at p. 639, you frankly show that both the poor man and the rich will save expense by being married in the national church, even though the minister may give his services gratuitously. 5. In the last Number of the Observer, p. 512, you have some very pungent remarks upon the working of the new Marriage Act. Allow me a few words. “(1.) To judge of the acceptableness and useful operation of this Act, from only the first six months of its existence, is not reasonable; especially when very powerful influence (your dehortations among the rest,) and long established habits have counteracted that operation. I confess that the number ascertained by Sir Robert Inglis's motion for a return, was much greater than, under all the circumstances, I could have expected. "(2.) But of the 453 register-office marriages,-will Dr. S. venture to assert that they are not atheistical? Surely, Sir, you must feel that here you have permitted your ardour to outrun your consideration; for, "a. In the case of infidel and impious persons, as I have endeavoured to show, it is better that they should appear in their true colours, than that sacred offices should be profaned by them. b. Neither you nor I can judge upon this matter, unless we were acquainted with the particular cases. Why may not the married persons return from the office of the registrar, to their own or their parents' dwelling, and there immediately have a religious service of the most solemn and affecting kind? I have no personal knowledge of these cases, but I cannot entertain a doubt, that either thus, or by exhortation, prayer, and the recognition of mutual vows in the register-office itself, the blessing of God is sought upon the marriage in many of the instances, and probably in the larger number. In Scotland, the celebration of marriage usually takes place in private houses; indeed I have been told always, except with episcopalians. "6. Cannot your reflecting readers discover a middle way between · no person' being able to tell how he will be married under the new system, any more than what the minister will pray for, or exhort;' and the new congregational convocation seizing the occasion to fetter its free brethren by recommending an appropriate formula?' There may be some circumstantial diversity, while there is an essential uniformity in the scripture reading, the prayers, and the exhortation upon these occasions; and, as for the mutual recognition, consisting of a sentence annexed to the form prescribed by law, my practice is to give it some time before, in writing, to each of the parties intending to be married. No uncertainty arises as to the order of proceeding, nor any embarrassment in acting upon it. "J. PYE SMITH." The Christian Observer declined to insert the preceding letter, assigning the following reasons: "There is nothing in Dr. Smith's letter which would prevent our inserting it, with some remarks in reply; but it is useless to keep up an interminable controversy. It is not likely that we shall agree about the Marriage Act, the conduct of Political Dissenters and Journalists, and so forth. He has his opinion, and we have ours."- Ch. Obs. Sept. p. 600. Dr. Smith having long maintained the courtesies of private friendship with the Editor of the Observer, resolved to avail himself of the privilege of his personal intimacy, and addressed that reverend gentleman as follows: "Homerton, Sept. 10, 1838. "REV. AND DEAR SIR, -All last week I have wished to write to you, but the having more to do than usual, in consequence of absence and the recommencement of academical duties, led me to delay. But I trust that this day of the month is not too late for obtaining my object. "The request which I respectfully and earnestly make is, that you would revoke your declining to insert my letter sent in the early part of August, and would give it a place in the next month's "Christian Observer." I cannot but think that you might so do, without any offence to your readers, or injury to yourself. You had made various assertions respecting the public acts of Protestant Dissenters; and you had drawn conclusions from them which must be severely wounding to men of any moral sensibility. "Those assertions are erroneous, and the conclusions from them are unjust. My letter (so far as I have any recollection of it,) did not much attempt discussion or argument, though your notice to correspondents would lead a reader to think that it did, but was almost confined to the statement of facts, in order to obviate those mistaken and deeply injurious impressions which the majority probably of your readers have received with implicit belief. It is my conviction that you are, by all the bonds of integrity and religion, under an indefeasible obligation to afford us the justice of inserting my letter. If I had done any thing resembling the previous conduct against you and your denomination of Christians, I feel assured that I should need no solicitation to give the redress desired, to the utmost in my power. The divine command would determine my obedience, Thou shalt do no unrighteousness in judgment.' "If it were a favour that I wished for, I would not give you this trouble; but regarding it as a claim of bare justice, I indulge the expectation that you will accede to my request. But if, contrary to my hope, your resolution be irreversible, I request the favour of your returning my former letter by an early post. "O that we may all feel the power of the heavenly principle enjoined in Eph. iv. 1-6! “I remain, my dear Sir, "The Rev. S. C. W." Nearly three weeks after the date of this letter, the following reply was received: "Hastings, Sept. 29, 1838. "MY DEAR SIR,--Your letter has followed me hither, and I have sent to London for your paper, which I had laid aside, several much esteemed friends concurring with me, that it is time to close this controversy, which, if continued, is more likely to minister to irritation than to utility. If any misrepresentation had been made of your sentiments, it should be corrected; but on the matters in question we are not likely to agree in opinion. "I am writing this to go to town by a friend's hand, and can only add, in haste, my kind regards to your daughter, with the best respects of, "Dear Sir, your's faithfully," "The Rev. J. P. Smith, D.D." "S. C. W." The pages of The Christian Observer being thus closed against all corrections of the injurious statements it had made, Dr. Smith hoped that his explanations might yet meet the eyes of pious members of the Church of England, through the columns of The Record; and accordingly he forwarded the communication he had addressed to the Observer, with the following letter, to the Editor of that newspaper : "To the Editor of the Record. "Homerton, Oct. 19, 1838. "SIR, It can scarcely be hoped that any communication, with the name which will be subscribed to this letter, will be agreeably received. Deeply is it to be lamented, that so many of our periodical publications, not content with the manly avowal and honourable defence of their own sentiments, are partial and unjust towards their opponents, eager to amass unfavourable representations, and little careful about their truth or the fairness of inferences drawn from them. This is a most injurious state of things. It poisons the streams of public knowledge: and, as few persons have the time or the means for reading the daily, weekly, and monthly writers on opposite sides, in many upright minds, the wrong impression remains fixed and irremoveable. But surely every true Christian must feel his indispensable obligation to do no unrighteousness in judgment.' "Upon this ground of 'calling for justice and pleading for truth' that equity may enter,' (Isaiah lix. 4. 14.) I solicit the favour of your admitting this letter, and its accompaniment, into your columns. I am sensible that it is the reverse of pleasing to request your admission of what involves a reflection upon another periodical work; but, as that work has committed that which I think to be a great wrong, and refuses to do the justice of correcting that wrong, I trust it is not improper to intreat your aid. "For the Editor of the CHRISTIAN OBSERVER I have always felt and hope ever to cherish, an affectionate regard. He thinks that, between himself and me there subsists merely a difference of opinion: whereas to me it appears to be essentially a question as to fucts. He has courteously declined the insertion of the accompanying letter, and has favoured me by returning it: but, after long deliberation, I think it my duty to request your giving it publicity, as the only probable mode left me of obtaining for it the attention of serious and upright persons who are members of the church establishment. Those who read the Christian Observer can easily refer to the passages which have obliged me to reply. Others will not be much at a loss to conjecture the objects of reference. As, however, it is a matter of some importance, I hope it is not improper to request your allowing me here to add a copy of the Mutual Recognition' alluded to at the close of my letter. "I remain, "Sir, your obedient Servant, 66 THE MUTUAL RECOGNITION. "J. PYE SMITH." "The bridegroom shall take the bride by the hand and say, 'I call upon these persons here present, to witness that I, A. B., do take thee, C. D., to be my lawful wedded wife; and, in the presence of the Most Holy GOD, I promise and covenant to be unto thee a faithful and affectionate husband, until God shall separate us by death.' "The Recognition by the bride is in the correspondent terms; only, in the latter part, reading a faithful, affectionate, and obedient wife-.' The part in Italics is the annexation to the form prescribed by the law." This request also was declined, and the papers were returned. We know not that it is necessary to add another word. Dr. Smith's letters, we conceive, very properly express the honest indignation which every upright mind will feel, in common with himself, on this painful exhibition of party injustice to a most candid and honourable opponent. Neither Dr. Smith nor any of his brethren deserves such treatment, and we take this opportunity to express a painful per N. S. VOL. III. E suasion, that the unhappy excitement which has so long existed will only be increased and perpetuated while Dissenters are exposed to fines and imprisonment from one party in the Church, and to misrepresentation and slander from the other. We are almost tempted to apply the language of the dying patriarch, "Simeon and Levi are brethren, instruments of cruelty," &c.; but we refrain from reproaches, and would rather say, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." ILLUSTRATIONS OF SCRIPTURE. "In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed."-GEN. xii. 3. How peculiarly interesting and instructive is the call of Abraham! Behold the devoted patriarch, the honoured friend of God. Preeminent in his father's house for his ardent piety and fervent devotion, he was both the joy of his parents and the glory of their family. Over it they fondly hoped he would happily preside for many years to come, when they should slumber in the dust. But God had destined him for another object; and therefore, when he approached his 75th year, the God of glory appeared unto him, and said unto him, "Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will show thee." Trying and severe as this command must have appeared, he instantly obeyed, and left brethren and sisters, kindred and friends, for the kingdom of heaven's sake; and verily he did in no wise lose his reward. His witness was in heaven, and his record was on high. Though he journeyed, unaccompanied by many whom he tenderly loved, he was not forsaken, for he was not alone. His Father in heaven, the God of Noah, of Enoch, and of Adam, whom he had wisely chosen and faithfully served, was now with him. For he who thus believed in God was ordained to be the father of the faithful, and an illustrious type of Him whose "name should endure for ever; whose name should be continued as long as the sun; and men shall be blessed in him; all nations shall call him blessed." His sojourn and settlement in Canaan were a solemn testimony to the nations around, that Jehovah was the only true God, and a gracious assurance, that from his seed should arise the "light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of his people Israel." What an honour is thus conferred on Abraham!" In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Greater honour than if raised to the throne of the whole earth! He becomes the friend of God, and the fountain of blessing to all nations. He probably did not, at first, fully comprehend the spiritual nature of the promise, but his eyes were soon enlightened, and he rejoiced to see Christ's day; and he saw it and was glad. He hailed his Son and his Lord. Thus the phrase "in thee" is subsequently explained as in thee and in thy seed; and lest any doubt should possibly remain, the apostle Paul thus interprets the words--" Now to Abraham and his seed was the promise |