The New Burials Act.

THANKS to the intrepidity and perseverance of MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS, and the Liberation Society, the new Burials Act is already at work, and, on the whole, at work satisfactorily. One of our ministers writes for an explanation of the working of the measure. We therefore append a few words; but do this briefly, because the LIBERATION SOCIETY will, we believe, shortly supply the fullest information to every Nonconformist minister in the kingdom.

I. AS TO THE GROUND.-The Act embraces all Churchyards now in use, and the consecrated part of Cemeteries.

II. OFFICIATING PERSONS.-A "Local Preacher" asked the other day if he might conduct a funeral service under the Act. The answer is that anybody may have free access to the churchyard or graveyard, and " any person or persons who shall be thereunto invited, or be authorised by the person having the charge of or being responsible for such burial may conduct such service or take part in any religious act thereat." The provision is without restrictions as to the persons who may officiate. Moreover clergymen may officiate in our unconsecrated ground, where they might lawfully do so in consecrated ground. But they may not read the present service over the unbaptized, or suicides: they may, however, read another one, prescribed by the bishop, and taken only from the Scriptures and Prayer Book.

III. THE FORM OF SERVICE must be "Christian and orderly;" and there must be no address which "which is not part of, or incidental to a religious service;" and the service may be that used by any denomination of Christians whatever, or by any person professing to be Christian." Nothing may be done to bring obloquy on the Christian religion.

VI. CONDITIONS.-(1.) Forty-eight hours notice of an intention to bury must be given to the Clergyman, or to the Cemetery Chaplain (who officiates in the consecrated part). (2.) The time fixed for interment must be stated in the notice. This may be objected to; but if it is not the course is clear. (3.) If objection is taken to the time fixed, the objection, to be valid, must rest on one or other of the following grounds: (a) the time is pre-engaged for a church-service, or churchyard service; and in this case the objector must find another hour of the same day, within twenty-four hours of receiving the notice. (b) Or the time is unusual; (c) or it is Good Friday, or Christmas-day, or Sunday: but the objection to Sunday does not hold good for cemeteries; and in churchyards the incumbent must forthwith fix another time in the Monday following. (4.) When the service is over the person in charge of the burial must send a certificate of the fact to the clergyman, or cemetery official, either on the day of burial or the day after

We are sure that nothing but good will issue from this act of justice, and that our friends will not be wanting in the Christian courtesy and kindness necessary to make this measure work in the most satisfactory manner.

A Poacher Burning his Nets.

MR. G. GREEN, the Evangelist, has been conducting a series of services in our chapel at Wolvey, Warwickshire. Mr. Green's manner of speaking is very attractive, and all classes come to hear him. On Tuesday, June 22, William Bolton, of Wolvey Heath, a returned convict, and a great poacher, who had been convinced of sin under Mr. Green's preaching, brought his nets and other poaching gear out, and burned them in the presence of a great number of people. “The things,” said he, “I am putting out of sight have been my ruin for many years. I have killed my ferret, and there it lies dead; and here I sacrifice to the flames before you all I possess. Here are fifty-four nets; the new one here, just made, is sixty yards long; here is a lot of string bought for the purpose of making more, my needles, shackles, and my coat I wore to take away my booty in, I sacrifice the whole." The farmers in the neighbourhood appreciate the effect of gospel preaching in a higher degree than formerly now the daring poacher has renounced his calling. The conversion of a poacher, and the burnt sacrifice of his nets upon the altar of consecration to Christ, is a strong proof in their eyes of the truth and power of Christianity.

LEICESTER has had the privilege and pleasure of entertaining the Church Congress. We use the words privilege and pleasure honestly and in their true meaning, for in addition to the social intercourse which has been a source of so much pleasure, we have been instructed by the masterly papers which have been read, and the eloquent addresses to which we have listened, in which the readers and speakers, with very few exceptions, leaped the boundaries of the National Church, and embraced in genuine brotherly fashion all who love the "Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity." At the same time some of the anomalies of the establishment were very conspicuous, and not a little saddening. As we marked some of the high school dressed like Romish monks, and remembered that they were State recognized teachers of the people, we could not help saying, "Alas for the boasted bulwark of Protestantism!" The unity of the so-called National Church was rather curiously illustrated, too, by the various placards which adorned the walls of the town. Some as large as a house door, signed by the redoubtable Archdeacon Denison, summoned us to a side meeting, whose object was to resist the law of the land in relation to burials. Another bill invited the people to a meeting to consider the desirability of turning the Bishops out of the House of Lords. Another sought to rally the friends of the "Church Reform Union." A large uninhabited house in the centre of the town was marked off by large bills as the rendezvous of the "Church Union," where, of course, no evangelical need apply. As we walked the streets and saw these signs of the times, the words leaped to our lips, "How good and how pleasant a thing it is for brethren to dwell together in unity," and at the same time a vision passed before our mind of a surpliced choir singing very sweetly, "We are not divided,

All one body we,
One in hope and doctrine,
One in charity."

Alas for the difference between the ideal and the actual.

Similar impressions were made upon our minds by the able papers of the Bishop of Durham, Dr. Boultbee, and J. C. Talbot, Esq., M.P., on the "Internal unity of the Church: the influence of the three great schools of thought in the Church of England upon each other and upon the Church." We presume that these three gentlemen may be considered as representatives of the "three great schools of thought" (not parties). If we are right in this conjecture, then they were chosen with consummate skill-probably on the ground of their wellknown ability for making things pleasant all round. The conclusion arrived at, so far as we could gather, was that the three parties (we beg pardon-schools of thought, we should have said,) have acted and reacted upon each other for good, and so the well-being of the Church, as a whole, has been promoted. But this is surely a strange conclusion if we bear in mind the open and deadly hostility with which each school fights the other two. If "bitterness, wrath, anger, clamour, and evil-speaking," can be helpful to any Church, then the English Episcopal Church ought to thrive, for never in any Christian community were these helpful influences in more vigorous exercise. The conclusion arrived at is more strange and unaccountable still when placed beside the fact that three of the meetings we attended were opened by a prayer, in which the Congress asked for grace "seriously to lay to heart the great danger" the Church is in through her "unhappy divisions." In view of the good which the Church so divided has wrought for all within its pale, we hardly see the desirability of bemoaning the divisions and praying for their healing. We rather think that as the "three great schools" joined in that prayer, each meant something different from the others. In one case it would mean that High and Broad might become Evangelical; in another that "Evangelical" and "Broad" might become " High;" and in the third case it would mean that "High" and Evangelical might rush into the open arms of the "Broad school." One thing is certain, namely, that these schools hold doctrines in direct antagonism the one to the other, not "complements of the same truths"-doctrines between which there can be no compromise-so that however plausibly and hopefully men may talk and write about the internal unity of the Church, the plain fact of the case is that it is not united, and never can be while it contains such diverse and

THE CHURCH CONGRESS IN LEICESTER.

425

opposing elements, though bound together by the bonds of State pay, State patronage, and State control.

The most interesting meeting to us belonging to the Congress proper was that in which the subject of "Church and Dissent" was dealt with. Professor Plumtre, we fancy, astonished many of his own friends. He reminded the Congress that the relation of the Church to Dissent was in one respect like that between England and Ireland. In both cases it was desirable to bring about a better feeling, and in doing this it would have to be born in mind that in both cases grievous wrongs had been done. He reminded his hearers that Dissenters had suffered, in years gone by, the grossest injustice at the hands of Churchmen. The Congress was wholesomely reminded of the "Act of Uniformity," the "Conventicle Act," the "Five Mile Act," the "Test and Corporations Act," &c. "True," said he, "these things have passed away, but the pernicious influence has not entirely passed away, and this must be taken into account in any effort the Church make toward bringing about a reconciliation, especially as Dissenters owe no great thanks to the Church for the removal of the injustice from which they had suffered. Bishop Ryle, in his paper, among other things, ventured the opinion that the majority of Dissenters were such, not from conviction, "but from sheer ignorance." He was, however, soon set right by one of his brethren, who said he agreed with the Bishop that Dissent had its origin in ignorance, but he was not quite sure whether it was the ignorance of Dissenters or Churchmen. Can it be that, in such a united assembly, this reply was a High Church rap on the knuckles for the "Low Church" Bishop? In any case let us hope it may teach him a lesson.

an

An auxiliary meeting, which, according to a writer in Church Bells, was attempt to incite the clergy to disobedience against the law," was in one aspect of it most amusing, and in another most saddening. Archdeacon Denison, who was voted to the chair, first read a paper, the character of which may be judged by a single sentence, in which, when speaking of the registration of funerals taking place under the recent Act, he says, "I cannot do it, or allow it to be done under my authority." In a short address after the paper he recommended the clergy not to notice or recognize in any way any notice of interment which might be sent to them, except it might be to "shy it into the fire," and then of course they could not register the burial of something or somebody whom they knew nothing about. He also intimated that as no funeral could take place during "divine service," they might have "twenty services in a week," all of course with a view to frustrate the "Burials Act." Canon Trevor, in supporting his chief, said, among other equally silly things, that Churchmen might certainly expect the holding of revival services in the churchyard, carried on into the night; and, he added in an undertone, "accompanied by the gross immoralities which usually characterize such services." This he said was a "dark insinuation." We think so too. The Canon was evidently drawing on his imagination, which is fertile enough, but none too pure; and we should strongly recommend him to pay more heed to the words which hitherto he has seemed to use in vain-" Cleanse Thou the secret thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of Thy Holy Spirit." He might, also, with evident profit, cultivate a little more of that charity that "thinketh no evil."

The opinion expressed by one speaker, that the Bishops who voted for the “Burials Act” deserve to be buried under its provisions, was rather popular; and the Canon went so far as to say that if the Archbishop of Canterbury happened to die in his (the Canon's) diocese he would be inclined to give His grace a taste of it. "A Christian and a gentleman in every village" to disseminate "sweetness and light"-who will not rejoice? A young man, seconding a resolution, said he had come all the way from Carlisle on purpose to attend that meeting. He was very anxious that the clergy should know what laymen thought about the matter in hand. He supported all that had been said; and ventured to recommend in addition that the clergy should forbid the parish sexton to dig a Dissenter's grave, and if possible keep a piece of the graveyard for Dissenters only. "But," he added, "do what we will, we must be prepared to have our feelings outraged in many ways, for everybody knows that nine Dissenters out of every ten have not the slightest sense of taste or decency."

All this, and more of the same sort, was received with rapturous applause; and all attempts at modifying the tone of the meeting (and some brave attempts were made) were immediately put down by the Chairman and the majority of the meeting. The Chairman complimented the meeting by saying that it was the most disorderly that he had attended, and that clergymen were, of all men, most difficult to manage. No benediction, of course, followed, nor was needed, after that. This meeting was not largely attended, though it professed to be largely representative.

Be this as it may, of this we are assured, namely, that this side meeting did not represent the Congress. Its tone was higher and more hopeful, and we believe that in hundreds of cases those who, through the mists of suspicion and prejudice, had regarded each other as little better than monsters, have found out that they are brothers in one great family. Nor will the address of the Nonconformist ministers be without good effect. Pleasant memories, at least, of genuine brotherly greeting, will linger in the minds of the Nonconformists of the town, which may help to deprive future controversies of some of their bitterness; while one good result upon Churchmen will be of a similar character, as expressed in the closing words of the Bishop's reply, when he said, "We Churchmen shall go away from Leicester (I am not going far, but I speak for the members of the Congress,) with one added memory to the pleasant memories that have clustered around our stay here; that this singular and remarkable incident has graced the gathering of the Leicester Church Congress ; that our Nonconformist brethren spontaneously, heartily, lovingly, and kindly have come here to-night to give us a fraternal greeting, which we cannot forget, which we do not wish to forget, and which we heartily return you in the name of the Lord." W. EVANS.

A Vital Question.

D. W. H., a valuable and beloved servant of God, asks-" Why does not more success arise from the preaching of the gospel ?"

This important question has often been propounded in the minds of many sincere and earnest Christians, when they have seen what small results have arisen from the numerous and often talented sermons delivered.

The Apostle of the Gentiles said, "The gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." So it was in the Apostle's days. Sinners were converted, "were turned from idols to serve the living and true God." Wherever the Apostles went God honoured their preaching with great success. Many churches were formed, comprising numerous converts, some of them in a very short time.

Has the gospel now lost its power, that so few sinners are converted by the preaching of it? Our preachers were never more learned than they are now; our places of worship were never so commodious and adapted for the comfort of worshippers as they are now, and were never better fitted up with organs, &c., and choirs of singers, to make the worship attractive; yet we fail to draw the multitude to our places of worship to hear our ministers preach the gospel of salvation.

It must also be confessed that, with all our efforts and attractive arrangements, we even fail to retain our own. What becomes of our young men and our young women who have been brought up in our Sunday schools? Are they retained as hearers? Do we see them at our evening services? and do they become members of our churches? I bless God that some of them do. Yes, perhaps more come from this source to fill up our congregations and our churches than from all other sources. But still the most part, especially of our young men, are lost to the place where they were brought up as Sunday scholars.

It is true that the number of our members in the Connexion has increased a few hundreds during the past year, while some larger bodies of Christians have declined in numbers. But the increase is so small compared with what we ought to expect, that it should cause deep searchings of heart" to ascertain the reason. Surely the means possessed by all the churches of the Connexion

66

HELEN'S LIGHT READING.

427

are sufficient to encourage the hope that thousands, rather than hundreds, of additions should be made every year. Surely there must be a reason or reasons why so little success is realized, and the cause, whatever it may be, appears to apply to all or most of the denominations of Christians. Is the great Head of the church displeased with something that is done or left undone, that He cannot bless the efforts made to promote His cause in the measure which is desirable?

If some of your able correspondents would take up this subject, and state what may be the reasons why the Holy Spirit does not bless the preaching of the gospel in larger measure, it might be of great advantage to our churches.

Helen's Light Reading.

FOR THE YOUNG.

Ir was in a college for both sexes in Iowa, and a great revival was in progress.

Dear, sweet, noble Mrs. Roberts, the preceptress, had gone from student to student, urging all to an interest in Christ. The Christians were aroused; and from a Sunday morning meeting in her recitation-room, there had grown to be two or three daily, and the interest was at white heat. Timid girls dared to plead for Jesus; scholarly professors told, with tears, the story of the cross; scoffers listened and believed; and the number of Christians grew daily.

It was pleasant at any time to visit my college home, but coming as I did that winter from the world without, into such an atmosphere, it seemed like paradise. Coming out of a prayer-meeting, sweet with the influence of the Spirit, one evening Mrs. Roberts said to me, "Mary, do you remember Helen Andrews?" "Oh, yes, I do, certainly. A nice bright girl, too."

"She is one of my anxieties now. I wish you would go down to her room and talk to her about the salvation of her soul. I have tried in every way to arouse her interest, but in vain; and it may be that another might reach her when I could not."

I consented to do so, and we tapped at Helen's door. After a little Mrs. Roberts excused herself, telling me to come to her room soon. The burden of a soul was upon me, and in all the warmth and tenderness which I had brought from the prayermeeting, I urged her to come to Christ. I might as well have talked to the wall. There was a listless apathy about her which defied all effects to arouse her.

I closed my call in a little while, and went up to Mrs. Roberts' room, where I found Addie Raynor, who shared our anxiety about Helen; and when I told them of my poor success,

"Addie," said Mrs. Roberts, "what is the matter with Helen Andrews? I cannot understand her. She is neither hard nor defiant; she is generous and sweet; she is an orphan, and alone in the world. I surely thought that she of all girls would have been readiest to accept the Saviour. Why is it?

"I have thought lately," said Addie, “that it must be those books." "Those books!" repeated Mrs. Roberts, "what books?"

"Why, she borrows every novel she can, and every spare moment she has she reads and reads. Not bad books, you know, but just interesting and exciting. I've thought about it, and it seems to me that they take all her interest."

"That explains it all," said Mrs. Roberts sadly. "That is the reason that the influences which have stirred us all so deeply, have taken no hold upon her. Girls, girls," she said with a cry of anguish in her voice, “pray for Helen Andrews. She has stupefied her soul with that reading, as surely as she would her body if she took opium. I will try to arouse her to her danger, but I confess I am disheartened. Oh, I wish girls knew what they do when they drown themselves in light reading.”

I left the place the next day, and never afterwards learned whether Helen became a Christian; but the memory of that visit never comes to me without a sad thought of the girl student who drugged her soul to sleep with novels.-American Messenger.