has many advantages. How often have the thoughts-It was but the other day I relieved a case—I cannot be always giving-I shall impoverish myself and injure my family, paralyzed, as it were, the arm about to be stretched out, to relieve a fellow-creature in distress? Whereas if this method had been previously adopted, the recollection that the fund was not exhausted, would have immediately converted the duty into a privilege, gladdening our own spirits as it caused the "widow's heart to sing for joy." A few years ago a worthy Rector said in the hearing of the writer of this tract, I was induced to lay by a portion of my income for charitable purposes, from this circumstance: Many of my parishioners were, as they still are, very poor. And I had so great a number of applications for relief, that I seemed to be always giving, and thought, I ought, in justice to my family, to set bounds to my liberality. I therefore resolved to set apart a certain portion of my income for that specific object. I did so: and, as the year drew to a close, was greatly surprised to find my charity fund was not wholly exhausted; though the applications, as far as one could judge, had been as numerous, as urgent, and as liberally attended to. The fact is, before I adopted my present method, I had given, as cases presented themselves, without keeping a memorandum; and my memory being rather treacherous, the intervals appeared shorter than they were, and I seemed to be giving far oftener, consequently more in the year, than I really did.' -May it

not be thus with many? Time flies very rapidly. To those who have many engagements, as well as to those who have treacherous memories, some of the circumstances of a preceding year, often seem to have occurred, but as the other day. Is it not probable then, that many welldisposed persons may seem to themselves, to be often giving, who, in reality give so seldom, that were

the several items for the year brought together, the amount would be so small, they would blush to own the sum ?

'It is not easy to determine, what portion of our income should be ap propriated to charitable uses. Some have thought, Jacob's example affords a scriptural precedent for setting apart one tenth. Where the income is small, this may be sufficient; but wealthy Christians can hardly be said to follow the Patriarch's example, unless they set apart a much larger portion. Jacob possessed little more than his staff, or shepherd's crook, when he made his vow, Gen. xxxii. 10. He desired no more than bread to eat, and raiment to put on, Gen. xxviii. 20. To have given one-tenth from this, must have required far more self. denial than those who have immense property, would subject themselves to, were they to lay by one half, or two thirds of their income for the same good purposes. Jacob gave, not grudgingly nor of necessity. his case, love to God was the principle-its fruits liberality and benevolence.

In

Poverty, alas! is sometimes pleaded as an excuse by those who have money enough to purchase costly apparel, to pamper their appetites, to feast their rich neighbours, and to gratify their love of vanity. Poverty is not the cause: it is a want of Christian benevolence, a want of love to God, a want of tender sympathy for those who are in need and necessity. They can give liberally, in presents, to their rich neighbours or relatives, or for the hackneyed services of those who nourish their indolence, and gratify their pride; but to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to minister comfort to the sick, or to send the word of life to those who are sitting in the region and shadow of death, they have little or nothing to spare. Would not a little frugality in their expenditure, furnish such with a fund for charitable uses?

It is

'Some make their families an excuse: they have, or think they have, as many reasons for withholding an alms as they have children. unquestionably the duty of parents, if they have it in their power, to make some provision for their children, but it cannot safely be done in direct opposition to the divine command. Liberality to the poor is enjoined, by precept upon precept; and temporal blessings are promised as a gracious reward of obedience. See Deut. xv. 7-11. Parents are commanded to give as well as others. It is, therefore, contrary to their duty, to lay up that for their families which God hath commanded them to give to the poor. To exhibit, in our own conduct, before our children, an example of disobedience to a positive precept, merely for the sake of enriching them, is highly improper. It is like building a wall to keep them out of heaven, or a tank in which they may be drowned. How few are the cases in which large property hoarded for children has either been well spent, or rendered them happy. The more ardently we love them, the more diligent we should be in observing and obeying the divine precepts,

that our example may, under the divine blessing, have a happy effect upon our offspring. Those parents sadly mistake, who, because it is their duty to make some provision for their children, think themselves bound to lay up for them all they can scrape together, without appropriating any considerable portion of it to charitable purposes. It is an awful thing to prefer hoarding of wealth to obeying the command of God-to prefer our children's temporal, to our own spiritual and eternal welfare-to hazard the salvation of our own souls, for nothing better than the aggrandizement of our families in this perishable and perishing world! Is it not far better to trust in Providence for ourselves, and for our children, than to withhold from the poor more than is meet, in direct opposition to a positive command? He that giveth to the poor shall not lack, Prov. xxviii. 27. He shall have at least what is needful. Nay, this promise is a far better security against future want than the largest possessions can be. Riches make to themselves wings, and flee away; but this faithful promise of a faithful God secures him from want, who, from the principle of love to God, and in obedience to his commands, hath dispersed abroad, and given to the poor.

Having secured a fund, some attention should be paid to the disposing of it. Public charities have a claim upon it, but they must not be allowed to swallow the whole of it. To give so largely to one object, from the mere impulse of the moment, as to have little or nothing for others of equal or more importance, is inconsiderate, and justly blameable. But indolence in almsgiving is equally so, To give indiscriminately to every applicant without investigating his case, and from a mere unwillingness to refuse relief, is downright indolence, and tends vastly to increase the number of impostors. It is the duty of a Christian to husband well

his charitable fund, and vigilantly to guard against imposition. Persons of respectability and industry, who have been unfortunate, have a claim on our sympathy, and are entitled to our assistance; but persons who spend all their scanty earnings in apeing the gentleman, disdaining to stoop to a rigid system of economy, though their chief support is drawn from the benevolent and humane, have no just claim on a fund for charity. Theirs is a system of genteel pauperism: it needs correcting, and should meet with a repulse. Sturdy beggars, who are strong to labour, and will not work, are an other class, to whom we should think it no want of compassion to refuse relief. This we commanded you, saith the apostle, (2 Thess. ii. 10,) that if any would not work, neither should he eat. To such, good advice, accompanied with affectionate reproof, and an endeavour to procure work for them, is our duty; but they must have nothing from our charity fund, unless work cannot be had for them. The humble trades. man, struggling hard with difficulties and denying himself a sufficiency of food, that he may honestly render to every man his due; who sighs in secret over the half-satisfied wants of his children, and is unwilling to obtrude himself on the attention of the benevolent and humane, lest he should obtain for himself that which might otherwise be bestowed on a still more distressed case, is an object peculiarly deserving our attention, and should be sought out with diligence. To such an one, relief should be administered with the greatest promptitude, and in the most delicate manner. If our funds will admit of it, a loan without interest, to be repaid when it may best suit his convenience, accompanied with the kindest assurance that he shall be most welcome to it, if it

should never be in his power to repay it, may answer far better than a gift. The righteous is ever merciful and lendeth, and his seed is blessed, Psalm xxxvii. 26. The poor and destitute the sick and afflicted-the widow and orphan, and the unfortunate prisoner in his dungeon, are those also whom the Christian is called upon to visit and relieve-yes, to visit as well as to relieve. I was sick, saith the Saviour, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me, Matt. xxv. 36.

In these works of charity, the established Christian will guard alike against an ostentatious parade, the fruit of pride and vain glory; and an over-scrupulous regard to secrecy, the natural offspring of misconception, endeavouring to conceal from the left hand what the right hand is doing. He will aim at all the secrecy of which the several cases will admit, but will also "let his light so shine before men, that they may see his good works, and glorify his Father which is in hea

ven.

Happy is that man, who is ready and willing from love to Christ, to do any thing at his word; to pity at his word; to relieve at his word; to give, lend, feed, clothe, and refresh the bowels of the needy, at his word; who from his heart can say, Lord, at thy word I will do it. Here is my bread, my meat, and my money; command what thou wilt of it, and I will not say thee, nay. Thou hast given me a goodly portion, and every one of thy servants, whom thou appointest to receive it, shall have his part-for thy sake he shall have it. Thine I am, and thine is all I have. Show me thy pleasure, how much, and how often; where, and on whom I shall bestow it, and through thy grace there it shall go.'

R. J.

A Summary of Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern; to which is added a continuation of the Particular History of the Church, to the year 1819; and a concise account of the principal Missionary and Bible Societies.

By the Rev. Charles Trelawney Collins, M. A. Fellow of Baliol College. 2 Vols. 8vo. Pp. xxxvi. and 437. and viii. and 568. Cadell.

A Short History of the Church of Christ, from the close of the Sacred Narrative to our own times. By the Rev. John Fry, B. A. Pp. xii. and 614. Duncan.

THE value and the importance of an acquaintance with ecclesiastical history is too obvious to admit of any argument; and it is therefore the more surprising, that so little has been done to facilitate its attainment. We have abridgements, and compendiums, and introductions, to Ancient, and Grecian, and Roman, and English History, of various magnitude and merit; but very little appears to have been attempted with reference to the history of the Church. This has very probably arisen from the circumstance, that almost all the ecclesiastical historians, prior to the time of Milner, were occupied more in describing the errors, heresies, and corruptions, of ungodly men-the scandal and disgrace of the Church, than in pointing out the nature and the progress of pure and undefiled Christianity. Hence ecclesiastical history has assumed somewhat of a repulsive form; and while the memoirs of particular Fathers and Reformers have been brought forward, it has been practically deemed expedient to reserve the general history of the Church to the period of mature age; and, in consequence, the majority of professing Christians are far less intimately acquainted with the sub

ject, than its importance and utility demand.

To remove this comparative ignorance appears to be the object of the works before us. Mr Fry, indeed, expressly states, that his volume is designed for the use of Schools, or of those persons to whom the size of the Church History of the late Mr. Milner, should that valuable work ever be completed, would be an objection: * and Mr. Collins appears similar motives, though we think to have been actuated by somewhat he has been unfortunate in taking Mosheim as his model. The objections before alluded to apply very strongly to Mosheim's History. It is a description of heresies and sects, rather than a narrative of true Christianity. The original work is therefore, to the majority of readers, dry and heavy, and Mr. C.'s abridgement, though faithfully executed, is little calculated to instruct or interest, being principally a record of names and dates. Had Mr. Collins relied upon his own powers, and forming a plan for himself, written a brief but original history, he would, we apprehend, have met with far greater success; and we say this the rather because his own continuation appears to us far more interesting than the abridgement of Mosheim.

Mr. Fry's History is in general accordance with our own sentiments. We agree indeed with Mr. Milner rather than Mr. Fry, on the subject of particular redemption, &c. but are happy to observe that Mr. F. has cautiously and wisely abstained, in this elementary

* We are happy in being able to state, that the continuation of Mr. Milner's History is in progress; or at least, that the sequel of Luther's life is very far advanced and we hope the writer will receive sufficient encouragement to induce him to persevere in his arduous undertaking.

work, from dwelling on controverted points. The volume appears, however, to have been rather hastily written, and we cannot but hope, that in a new edition greater correctness and precision of style may be cultivated. This is of great importance in works intended for schools, and young persons in general; and it may therefore not be inexpedient to illustrate our meaning by the following extracts:

Though the reading of the Scriptures was not as yet prohibited to the laity, or viewed by the Romish Clergy with such jealousy as it was afterwards, yet the sacred writings were fallen much into disuse, the acts of the saints having been deemed more instructive, and translations of them from the Latin, which had long ceased to be understood by the common people, were in all probability become extremely scarce.-Fry, p. 237.

Miles Coverdale, afterwards the first protestant bishop of Exeter, assisted Tindal in these labours abroad. He, for some time, occupied the office of chaplain to the English merchants at Antwerp, till at length, by the procurement of the Popish prelates in England, he was seized by the emperor's authority; and after lying some time in prison, in virtue of the decree of the diet of Augsburg, this eminent servant of Christ was strangled at the stake, and his body afterwards consumed with fire. When led to execution, he prayed aloud: Lord, open the eyes of the king of England!”—Fry, pp. 365, 366.

The first of these passages conveys the idea that translations of the acts

of the saints had become extremely scarce: whereas Mr. Fry doubtless meant to intimate the scarcity of translations of the sacred writings. In like manner, from the second extract many would infer, that Miles Coverdale was seized, strangled, and burnt by decree of the diet of Augsburg, whereas the learned and holy William Tindal was the martyr on that occasion.

From these general remarks we proceed with pleasure to insert the following extracts, which may enable our readers to form for them

selves a comparative estimate of the value of the works before us. The following are their respective accounts of Diocletian's persecution :

In the beginning of this century, the Roman Empire was governed by four chiefs, two of whom Diocletian and Maximian Herculeus, were of superior dignity, and bore the distinguishing title of Augustus;' while the other two, viz. Constantius Chlorus and Maximinus Galerius, were of an inferior order, and were honoured with the appellation of 'Cæsar.'

Under these emperors the church enjoyed a great degree of peace. Constantius Chlorus, having abandoned the absurdities of Polytheism, treated Christians with so much kindness, that the pagan priests, taking_alarm, preferred their complaints to Diocletian; who, for some time, remained unmoved by them. They then addressed themselves to Maximinus Galerius; whose savage disposition was so well inclined to listen to their prayers, that at last, A. D. 303, he persuaded Diocletian, who was then at Nicomedia, to issue an order for destroying all the Christian churches, burning their books, abolishing their privileges, and for humbling them in every way. None were, however, yet put to death, except those who refused to deliver up their books; and such as did surrender them, were called by the ignominious name of Traditors. Soon after this edict was published, the palace of Nicomedia, where Galerius and Diocletian lived, was burnt down.* At the same time, many tumults arose in Armenia and Syria. These events were industriously made use of by the pagan priesthood, as accusations against the Christians, and produced, from the Emperor, a new edict, commanding all the

bishops and ministers of the church to

be imprisoned. A third edict authorised the application of torments and torture to such as would not renounce their faith. In the second year of this persecution, A. D. 304, Diocletian issued a fourth edict, commanding the magistrates to force every Christian to sacrifice to the gods. This order was executed with the most barbarous exactness.

The ambitious Galerius, having obliged Diocletian and Maximian Herculeus to

*The learned Lactantius declares, that Galerius himself ordered his palace to be burnt down, in order to have a pretext for the bloody persecution which followed.