were Baptists, and concludes that the evidence is only probable. He shows, too, that Wickliffe was no Baptist, but that many of the Lallards were. This is the substance of the introduction. The five chapters which follow treat severally of the Tudor Dynasty generally, of the times of Henry 8th, Edward 6th, Mary and Elizabeth. The last chapter is devoted to the religious condition of England under James 1st. Much valuable information to Baptists is supplied under each chapter. In the 2nd he gives us a glimpse of the persecution of the Baptists by Wareham, and of the sufferings of many Dutch Baptists in this country. In the 3rd he adverts to the high character confessedly held by the Baptists during the brief reign of Edward 6th, and to the reluctance with which the young king signed the death warrant of Joan of Kent. Churchmen in those days evidently hated Baptists worse than traitors. In 1551 a general pardon was granted to all who had taken part in the previous rebellion, but from this amnesty Baptists alone were exempted. Nor did reformers show any greater favour to them. Calvin, according to Dr. Evans, was responsible for much of the fierce hostility which our brethren had to encounter. They do deserve,' says Calvin, to be well punished by the sword.' Baptists were in Edward's day numerous in Kent, and also a sect who called themselves FreeWillers; '-so that our American brethren wear an older name than many suppose. One of these men, Cole, of Maidstone, declared, that the doctrine of predestination was meeter for devils than for Christian men; and that children were not born in original sin.' Hart, also, who was their chief man, asserted, that there was no man so chosen but that he might damn himself; neither any man so reprobate but that he might keep God's commands, and be saved; that St. Paul might have damned himself if he listed,' &c. We wish Dr. Evans 6 had told us something more of these sturdy men. The reign of Mary is the subject of the fourth chapter. There is a good sketch in this of Gardiner, the man who never did what he aimed at, never aimed at what he intended, never intended what he said, and never said what he thought; who was to be traced like the fox, and read, like Hebrew, backward.' Of the Baptists that suffered under Bonner one was Robert Smith. The following extract from his examination is worth repeating: 'Bonner.-Why is God's order changed in baptism? In what point do we differ from the Word of God? Smith. In hallowing your water; in conjuring of the scenes; in baptizing children with anointing and spitting in their mouths, mingled with salt; and many other lewd ceremonies, of which not one point is able to be proved by God's order. most unshamefaced heretic that ever I Bonner. By the mass! this is the heard speak! Smith-Well sworn, my lord; ye keep a good watch. Bonner.-Well, Mr. Controller, ye catch me at my words; but I will watch thee as well, I warrant thee. By my troth, my lord," said Sir John Mordant, "I never heard the like in my life. But I pray you, my lord, mark well his answer for baptism. He and such other laudable ceremonies, disalloweth therein holy ointment, salt, which no Christian man will deny." Smith. That is a shameful blasphemy against Christ, so to use any minglemangle in baptizing young infants. Bonner.-I believe, I tell thee, that if they die before they be baptized they be damned. Smith.-Ye shall never be saved by that belief. But I pray you, my lord, show me, are we saved by water, or by Christ? Under Elizabeth Baptists became | objectionable is another phrase, increasingly numerous. Bishop none the less so because often on Aylmer's opinion of them may be the lips of certain preachers. Dr. learnt from his own words. Like Evans, after describing the ceaseless the rest of his brethren he classed vigilance with which Edward 6th them with infidels and atheists. was watched over in his infancy, 'In these latter daies,' said the adds, 'There was a needs - be Bishop of London, the old festered for this.' We are also told, in a sores newly broke out, as the Ana- sober narrative, that Queen Elizabaptists, the Free-willers, or rather beth'swore like a trooper.' We do the forward-willers, with infinite not deny the fact, yet we cannot in other swarms of God's enemies such a place commend the way of vgglie monsters, and brodes of the stating it. But surely the good devvil's brotherhood.' doctor rushes into the opposite extreme when he says, concerning some question under discussion'that it is not to be decided with : It is not, however, until the time of the Stuarts that our information of the Baptists in England becomes exact and full. Through the kind-positivity!' ness of Dr. Müller, of Amsterdam, Dr. Evans has been able to furnish much information about Smith and Helwys, the former of whom it is generally conceded was the pastor of the first church in England, holding views similar to the General Baptists. We have only glanced very hastily at some of the more prominent facts in Dr. Evans's volume. It would have been possible very greatly to extend our notice by referring to many names that we trust will henceforth be familiar to us as household words. There are a few blemishes in Dr. Evans's style that we have regretted to see, and some statements at which we confess ourselves not a little surprised. It may be colloquial to speak of the Fathers as the singular old gentleman called the fathers,' but it is not to our taste so to write of them. Incongruous images of odd people in drab, with breeches and gaiters to match, will be certain to start up before the eye of the young men and maidens,' (p. xi.) whose welfare in writing this book Dr. Evans has had in view; and incongruous images are not helps to every enquirer after truth. That the Fathers were 'singular' in their opinions may be perfectly true; but that they were either 'old' because they held those singular opinions, or were for the same reason gentlemen,' admits of considerable doubt. Equally But these are mere slips of the pen, and may soon be corrected. Our greatest regret arises from the mode in which Dr. Evans alludes to Arminius and his professed adherents. In both he forgets his professions of impartiality, and makes the most sweeping statements, without any qualifi cation, and on the slenderest possible foundation. Arminianism and Popery,' says Dr. Evans, 'were twins. The one always followed the other; and neither were compatible with the liberties of the nation.' It is not enough in support of this sweeping charge to give a quotation from a speech in Parlia ment of a bigotted Calvinist, who said, among other things, that 'an Arminian was the spawn of a Papist;' or to refer to the citation of Mainwaring before the Commons to ask pardon for his Arminian doctrines. Dr. Evans's charge is made as against the whole system of Arminius, and he ought therefore to show that the Dutch divine has laid down principles which were not only akin to Popery, but were equally subversive of freedom. He has done neither. Nor could he if he would. Calvin might teach that Ana-baptists should be 'well punished by the sword;' but Arminius was a man of another spirit. There is not a single line in the whole of the works of Arminius, as far as we remember, which Dr. Evans and Arminianism. justifies or advocates persecution for religious opinion, or inculcates despotism. It would be very easy to show that there were many declarations to the contrary. Arminius had suffered too much himself for the avowal of unpopular opinion ever to advocate the punishment of heretics. It is, then, manifestly unfair to say that because certain men professing to hold Arminian views were arbitrary, that therefore Arminianism and Popery were twins. It would be equally fair to charge all the errors in word or deed, of men holding Calvinistic views on Calvinism; to say, for example that they all think Servetus had his due when he was burnt at the stake, and that the best way of getting rid of bad kings is to behead them. Dr. Evans has quoted Mrs. Hutchinson to prove that, on the spread of Arminianism, men gave over preaching what she calls 'those great and necessary truths concerning God's decrees. Of course they did. But Dr. Evans should also have told us with what a howl of bigotry an Arminian was everywhere received, simply because certain archbishops chanced to be both arbitrary and Arminian. He should have told us, that for mere political purposes the cry was raised that Arminianism and Popery were twins. He should have told us that to such a pitch of virulence did the Calvinistic leaders whip up the masses of the people against Arminianism that, according to John Goodwin, if you called a man an Arminian, you called him constructively, yea eminently, thief, traitor, murderer, heretic, false prophet, and whatsoever soundeth infamy and reflected upon men.' But surely Dr. Evans can hardly think that it is displaying historical impartiality to rake up the slanders of that age and retail them in the present. Dr. Evans does Arminianism a further injustice. He denounces the doctrines of Arminius as 'shedding a withering influence on the religion of the country.' We are persuaded that Dr. Evans would 385 never have made such a statement if he had not been contented to accept a Calvinistic account of Arminianism. Is there anything in the following words from Arminius himself that, if fully believed and acted upon, would have produced a withering influence on religion?' In his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable of, and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections, and will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Spirit, that he may rightly understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform, whatever is truly good." And again; 'I ascribe to Divine grace the commencement, the continuation, and the consummation of all good; and to such an extent do I carry its influence, that a man though already regenerate, can neither conceive, will, nor do any good at all, nor resist any evil temptation, without this preventing and exciting, this following and cooperating grace.' So far indeed are Arminian doctrines from withering the religion of a nation that Wesley showed how, by their faithful promulgation, the decaying religion of a nation might be restored. The spread of Arminianism did break the hold upon the people of the Calvinistic theology: but we have yet to learn that religion and Calvinism are synonymous terms. Dr. Evans speaks contemptuously of Arminius as the Dutch heretic.' But was he a heretic, even from Dr. Evans's point of view? We think not. A careful perusal of his works has left the impression on our mind that Arminius was what would now be called 'a moderate Calvinist.' Indeed were the gentle and amiable Dutchman to propound his theory in some modern Baptist pulpits, his views would be thought much nearer to Calvin's than his own! So much for popular mistakes. It would be altogether carrying us beyond the limits assigned to this notice to substantiate all this by citations from the writings of Arminius. We regret this the less, however, because we hope before long to devote a much larger space both to the Dutch divine and his tenets. These defects notwithstanding, we very cordially commend the Early English Baptists to all who may be anxious to know something of their illustrious predecessors. Correspondence. THE STATISTICS OF THE CHURCHES. To the Editor of the General Baptist Magazine. DEAR SIR,-It is pleasing to see from the statistics that a greater number of churches have, during the past year, supported the Home Mission and College; but some of us are at a loss to discover why our esteemed friend should have specially mentioned Yorkshire as being in an unfavourable position. Could he find no blanks in any of the large town churches nearer home? There are about 150 churches in the denomination, forty-five (not onethird) have contributed to the Home Mission. In Yorkshire there are fifteen churches, and thirteen (more than two-thirds) have made contributions. Seventy-one churches (less than one-half) have contributed to the College. In Yorkshire, seven out of the fifteen have made collections. Putting the two collections together, we have in Yorkshire twentycollections forfifteen churches while in the whole body we have but 116 collections for 150 churches. So much for number, whether the amount given bears a just proportion to what should have been given is a question which can only be determined by Him who said of the poor widow, She hath cast more in than all they that have cast into the treasury. But perhaps J. E., by 'our brethren in Yorkshire,' designed to include those in Lancashire too. If so, we beg to inform him that those churches are chiefly composed of factory hands, and to ask whether in a season of great distress, they can be expected to do much for the institutions of the body? And now upon the subject, allow me to say, that if more is to be done by this district, appropriate means must be used. Contributions imply representation, but I do not find that we have been represented in committee at all since 1853-4, and I presume there are not many living who could mention the time when any minister from this district took any part in collegiate affairs. We have made inquiry, but have failed to meet with any one in York. shire who was invited to deliberate over any of the important business transacted during the past year. We went to the Association and there learnt for the first time, that such and such things had been done. We were hardly prepared to express or deliberate opinion. To sit still and listen to those that had come prepared to speak any number of times, was the only course open to us. Very similiar is our position as it respects the Foreign Mission. We are not represented on committee. Specially interesting services are not for us. Nor are we invited to take any part in them, however humble, nor are we uniformly represented at the Annual Meeting. It is not on personal, but public grounds, that we make these statements. We do not object to any one on committees; on the contrary, we rejoice that there are in the Midland Counties, a number of gentlemen so Correspondence-Cradley Heath. Why cannot each district be represented, and when important business is to be transacted why cannot the fare of the outlying members be paid? If that would be considered too much, might not the resolutions of committee be sent to some one in each district for the information of others? We repeat, then, that if more is to be done by this district we must be brought into closer union with the deliberations and active operations of these societies, or we must form a local association. Yours truly, R. HARDY. 387 The are respectable as to position, and so | stone, and the inhabitants are princiestimable as to character, who are pally miners, forgemen, nailers, willing to serve on them. The de- chainmakers, &c. The population nomination is under great obliga- in 1841, was 11,111; in 1851, 14,248; tions to them, and we pray that they and in 1861, 20,000, and upwards; may long live to render future since which it has greatly increased. service. What we complain of is, The increase in the population is the local and exclusive character chiefly in those parts of the neighwhich for some years past they have bourhood called the Town Ways and assumed. A certain number of Five Ways, Old Hill and Reddall persons have gone off and come on Hill, about the centre of which is by rotation. the General Baptist chapel. formed in 1833 or 4, and received church at the Town Ways was into the Connexion in 1835. It has had several pastors, and under the ministry of some of them prospered; but for several years the people have been as sheep without a shepherd, and scattered. It is now in a very low in consequence state, and the persons of whom it is composed are much perplexed though not in despair. Previous to visiting them, I corresponded with them, and arrangements were made for me to preach for them, which I did, on August 17th. The services on that day were very gratifying to me and fully convinced me that if the church at Cradley Heath is ever placed by a future historian of the Connexion in the list of 'dead churches' the record will be no credit to the Body. The debt on the chapel (which will seat 300) and amount more than £350 have been school room is £270, already paid in interest. In July on which last, there was one year's interest due, one half of which has been for half_was collected on the Lord'sa long time in arrears, the other day I was there. At the same time the friends entered into a subscription to paint the chapel, &c. They also expressed their determination to do all they could to carry on the cause. always find it possible to raise the Carry it on they may, and interest on the debt.' But they need help, and with help there might in a year or two be a church at Cradley Heath sustaining itself and contributing to aid the institutions of the Body. Send us, said one tried friend of the cause, a suitable minister, and CRADLEY HEATH. To the Editor of the General Baptist DEAR SIR,-Having in accordance with the appointment of the Association (see Minutes page 38) visited Cradley Heath, will you permit me through the medium of your pages to report the result of my visit, and likewise to make a few remarks respecting the place, the state of the church there, and what is necessary to its prosperity. Cradley Heath is in the black country,' or in what one has described, the land of fire, smoke, and chains, still it is not what a good friend of mine fancied it to be a Heath. Anything but that, But where is it? It is a hamlet in the parish of Rowley Regis, three miles south east of Dudley, and nine west of Birmingham. The parish abounds with coal and iron |