merely says, that "they came where there was some water, (or "a water," rò vowp,) in the road from Jerusalem towards Ethiopia. 2. But, in the next place, even supposing that "immersion" was the universal practice, except in clinical baptism, or when otherwise impracticable, (as in prison, &c.,) still, in such a matter, we should not only not be tied down hereby to this mode of administration, but snould be bound to discard it, and substitute affusion or sprinkling, at least in cold climates, both according to the rule of our Lord above mentioned, ("I will have mercy and not sacrifice,") and also in obedience to St. Paul's injunction, which bears directly on the indelicacy of "immersion" and its concomitant circumstances. For, 1. it is not only consonant with the truths of medical science, founded upon the laws of the human body and its physical health, but it has been proved, by the experience of" immersion" baptists, to be a fact unavoidable in practice, that serious illness, and sometimes premature death, is the natural consequence of "baptism by immersion," even in the case of adults, and especially of females; what, then, is it but "mercy" instead of "sacrifice" which our church, with our Lord, prefers, when she directs her minister not to "dip" little infants-in a cold church, and perhaps far from home-unless the sponsors "certify that they may well endure" such killing treatment, and when she, even then, still requires that (if "dipped" at all) it must be done "discreetly and warily" by him? I can speak the more feelingly on this subject, since I have had myself the affliction of losing my first child, (as far as human judgment and medical opinion may decide,) chiefly in consequence of a cold caught by even too profuse a sprinkling applied to its face at its baptism. But let "Catholicus" ask any medical man's opinion and judgment, or search the annals of any (so called) " Baptist" congregation, if he has the least doubt remaining of the applicability of this our blessed Saviour's maxim to this subject. 2. Again, the general rule (or rubric) of St. Paul, is directly applicable to "immersion," when he sums up his directions on public worship in the words, let all things be done decently [evoxnμóvws, with a regard to outward decorum,'] and in order." Whatever "Catholicus" may say, when viewing the question philosophically and abstractedly, even he himself confesses that his inclinations are against the practice of "immersion," which appears to me a tacit but full admission on his part, that, at the present day, and with our present ideas of decorum," immer. sion" and its accompaniments are either indelicate in themselves, or have "the appearance of" this "evil" in the views of modern society in general in either case, the practice not being an essential part of the sacramental ceremony, ought to be discountenanced, and (as far as scrupulous consciences will admit,) entirely discontinued in the church. Thus the inhumanity in all cases, and the indelicacy superadded in the cases of young people and adults, ought now to banish "immersion" as universally from the church in cold climates as it is said to have been universally practised in the primitive ages of Christianity.

In conclusion, I cordially agree with "Catholicus" in condemning those departures from the rubric and the spirit of the whole baptismal service, which he supposes to have arisen from the same or similar

causes with those of sprinkling or affusion; but I must confess that I cannot understand how "immersion," in any moral or sacramental sense, (with which alone we are now concerned,) must necessarily be considered as a "different act" from affusion or sprinkling. Every act is correctly designated only according to the intention or view with which it is performed, and does not depend upon the movements of the body or external things for either its essence or its difference from any other act. If, therefore, I apply "water," no matter how, unless the mode be prescribed by authority, for "the mystical washing away of sin," in obedience to Christ's ordinance, and with faith in his promises, I do the act of baptizing, and that act cannot be made a different one without a want-1. of a lawful ministry; 2. of witnesses; or lastly, of the prescribed formula, "In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost."

Hoping, sir, that nothing I have said may be found in the least derogatory from the authority of canonical or rubrical directions, strict adherence to which I consider the imperative duty of every member of our church, as well as the most likely means of avoiding that restlessness and dissatisfaction of mind which is the daily food and sustenance of dissent in religion and turbulence in politics,

I remain, very respectfully, yours, Þiλokávov.

CAMBRIDGE PETITION OF 1641 AGAINST THE ABOLITION OF DEANS AND CHAPTERS.

MR. EDITOR,-As the petition of the University of Oxford, in the year 1641, against the abolition of deans and chapters, has been inserted in your Magazine, I send that presented to the House of Commons in the same year by the University of Cambridge.

Yours most respectfully,

X.

"To the Honourable the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, of the House of Commons, assembled in Parliament.

“The humble Petition of the University of Cambridge,

"Sheweth, "THAT your petitioners having heard of divers suggestions offered to this honourable court, by way of remonstrance, tending to the subversion of cathedral churches, and alienation of those lands by which they are supported, being the ancient inheritance of the church, founded and bestowed by the religious bounty of many famous and renowned kings and princes of this land, and other benefactors, both of the clergy and laity, and established and confirmed unto them by the laws of this kingdom, and so accordingly have been employed to the advancement of learning, the encouragement of students, and preferment of learned men, besides many other pious and charitable uses,

"May it please this honourable court, out of their great wisdom and tender care for the cherishing of learning and furtherance of the studies and pains of those who have and do devote themselves to the service of the church, graciously to protect and secure those religious foundations from ruin and alienation, and withal to take order that they may be reduced to the due observation of their statutes; and that all innovations and abuses which have by some men's miscarriages crept in, may be reformed; that so the students of our university, which by the present fears are discouraged, may be the better invited to pursue their studies with alacrity, and the places themselves disposed to the most serviceable and deserving men, according to their first institution.

"And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, &c." [Dated, May 12, 1641.]

VOL. XI.-May, 1837.

3 z

CONCURRENCE OF FESTIVALS.

DEAR SIR,-Your correspondent who signs himself "A Lover of Ancient Customs" has deduced from the rubric of the Roman missal, relative to duplex festivals, a rule for regulating the concurrence of festivals in our own church service.

With respect to the principle from which he has derived this rule, I would remark, that I think your correspondent will find himself wrong in supposing the Roman missal to have been at any time the service book of our church. This error, it must be admitted, is of no consequence to his argument, because he might have drawn the same inference from the missals of Salisbury and of York.

There is, however, another objection to his rule; he tells us, that if the Conversion of St. Paul should fall on Septuagesima or Sexagesima Sunday, the service of the Sunday ought to take precedence. I ask him, what lessons he would in this case read? there are no proper second lessons appointed for either of those Sundays, and there are no ordinary second lessons in the calendar for the 25th of January. He is therefore compelled, of necessity, to have recourse to the lessons appointed for the festival; and does not this seem to indicate that it must have been the intention of the church, that all such festivals, at least for which both first and second lessons are appointed, should take precedence of all Sundays, unless perhaps such Sundays as have also both first and second proper lessons assigned to them? This rule will, I think, solve a great part of the difficulty; and it accounts for there having been no provision made for the case of concurrent festivals, because no necessity for such a provision was felt until the feasts of the church began to be neglected, and Sunday came to be regarded as the only day on which we are called upon to assemble for public worship. The calendar and table of lessons itself determine what service is to be used; for there is surely no authority for mixing two services, as is sometimes done; and the only service that can, in the cases alluded to, be used, whole and exactly as it is appointed, is the service of the festival.

The Sundays which have double proper lessons in our service book are the following:-Palm Sunday, Easter Day, Whit Sunday, and Trinity Sunday. These Sundays, therefore, should take precedence of all festivals. A result which coincides with that obtained by your correspondent, except that he gives the same privilege to Quadragesima and Advent Sundays. This difference, however, is more apparent than real, for Advent Sunday can never happen on a festival except on St. Andrew's day, and the only feast with which Quadragesima can interfere is that of St. Matthias, neither of which feasts have proper second lessons, and therefore (though I by no means say ought to) may yield to the Sunday.

The holidays for which we have double proper lessons are the following:-Christmas Day, St. Stephen, St. John, Circumcision, Epiphany, Conversion of St. Paul, the Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday in Passion week, Monday and Tuesday in Easter week, St. Philip and St. James, Ascension Day, Monday and Tuesday in

Whitsun week, St. Barnabas, St. John the Baptist, St. Peter, St. Michael, and All Saints' Day.

Such of these holidays as can fall upon a Sunday, must, I think, necessarily supersede the ordinary Sunday service, except Michaelmas Day, for which, by a strange oversight, which a friend has just pointed out to me, there are both ordinary and proper second lessons. I cannot see how the Sunday service can be performed on these days without either mixing the lessons of the Sunday and holiday, or else declaring from the reading-desk, as a clergyman of this city is reported to have done, "There is no second lesson appointed for this day's service."

Of Christmas Day there can be no question, because, whether it falls on Sunday or not, there is plainly no service but that of the festival. Nor do the other holidays of this class present any difficulty, except when two of them coincide, which can, I believe, only happen when Ascension Day falls on the feast of St. Philip and St. James, (a case where there could not, I suppose, be any question as to the preference to be given to the former, or when St. Barnabas' day happens on Whitsun Monday or Tuesday, a case in which the minister appears to be left to his own discretion, or to the decision of his ordinary. With respect to such festivals as have no proper second lessons, I confess I am not prepared to say that they should, in every case, give way to Sunday; on the contrary, I am rather disposed to hold that, in general, the service of the festival should be read, except when it falls on one of the four Sundays already specified. And in this opinion I am confirmed by observing, that the Athanasian Creed' is appointed to be used on the feasts of St. Matthias, St. James, St. Bartholomew, St. Matthew, St. Simon and St. Jude, and St. Andrew, none of which have proper second lessons; I think it will be admitted, that when any of these feasts fall on Sunday, the Athanasian Creed ought to be said, and therefore all the other parts of the service appointed for the festival.

The observation of your correspondent upon the case where the Annunciation happens on the Monday or Tuesday in Passion week, appears to me to be an additional argument for my view of this subject; because, in that case also, a mixture of services is unavoidable, unless the festival be exclusively observed.

These remarks are founded upon the principle, that there is no authority in our Prayer Book for reading a part of two different services together; and since this cannot possibly be avoided, except by the rule which I propose, I would conclude that, at the time when our calendar and table of lessons were last revised, it was the practice of the church to observe, in all ordinary cases, the holiday in preference of the Sunday.

"A Lover of Ancient Customs" is wrong in his assertions, that the Annunciation always falls between Septuagesima and Easter, and the feast of St. Andrew always in Advent; for Easter may happen on the 22nd of March, three days before the Annunciation, and Advent Sunday may be the nearest Sunday after, as well as before, the feast of St. Andrew.

On the whole, however, I think the rule laid down by "A Lover of Ancient Customs" is a good and sound one; although, for the reasons I have assigned, I do not think it was the rule which our church intended to be observed; and the want of some explicit direction on the case of concurrent festivals must be confessed to be one of the few oversights with which the compilers and revisers of our liturgy are chargeable.

I agree also with your correspondent in wishing that there might be always a commemoration of the festival, even in the case where it is superseded; but I cannot perceive that this is authorized by the rubric. J. H. T.

MR. W. CROTTY.

SIR,I have read with much interest, in your number for this month, the account of the proceedings at Birr. I had long wished for accurate knowledge upon the subject, and your Magazine has afforded it. The Messieurs Crotty deserve high commendation for the fearless manner in which they have cast off so much that was sinful in the forms of worship to which we may suppose they were, by many strong prejudices, attached. I cannot, however, avoid saying, (I hope I do it from no wrong motive,) that they are not, or at least one of them is not, a very consistent churchman. I cannot but mourn over an unhappy mistake into which Mr. W. Crotty was some time ago led. It is, indeed, many months since, and might perhaps be allowed to pass without reproof; but as I am not aware that he has in any way retracted his error, I feel it my duty to make you acquainted with it, lest you should seem in any way to countenance it, by what you have published in his praise.

That to which I allude is a charge which Mr. W. Crotty published, last July, against the episcopal succession of the church of England. I will extract the passage from the sheet tract (price one penny) in which it appeared:

"The doctrine of succession, as held by the church, is what impeded the progress and obscured the glory of the English Reformation. Queen Elizabeth's commissioners maintained against the nonconformists that the church of Rome was a true church, though corrupt and erroneous in many points of doctrine, and that the Roman pontiff, though chargeable with temerity and arrogance, in assuming to himself the title and jurisdiction of head of the church, was nevertheless a true and lawful bishop; and all this for the purpose of claiming a lineal succession from the apostles through the most profligate and abominable of the popes of Rome. Now this doctrine is evidently a delusion, and has no warranty whatever in the word of God; there are two kinds of succession-a true and a false succession—a carnal succession of men, and a spiritual succession of doctrine. My doctrine is not mine,' says the Saviour, but his that sent me; if any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself.' (John, vii. 16, 17.) Here we find the Saviour of mankind, instead of referring to his succession from Aaron or Moses, (!) appealing simply to the truth of the doctrine he preached as a proof of his divine mission."

Now, Sir, I know that you will agree with me in thinking this monstrous. But what are we to think of clergymen of the church of England actively circulating such a precious document among the