mises on which it rests. It takes for granted that the minerals, earths, &c., were created in certain simple states, whence they have been changed to their present conditions; but who can prove this? We may well address the asserters of such a proposition in the sublime language of the most ancient author now extant,-"Where wast thou when God laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in search of the depths? Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare, if thou knowest it all. Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?" (Job xxxviii. 4, 16, 18, 21.)

No; we can only know what God has been pleased to tell us of those primæval days: and He has not informed us whether He created metals in the massive or the crystallized, the native or the acidulated state; nor whether the simple minerals were at first unmixed or compounded. We only know that there reigns throughout the works of Omnipotence a vast and harmonious analogy, and we may thence infer that the universal kingdom was produced at first in as great beauty and perfection as we know (upon express Divine authority,) that the vegetable and animal kingdom's were? Were the " green herbs," the grass, and the trees created as puny seedlings? No; they sprang up at once, "bearing seed," and "yielding fruit, each after his kind,” in their full maturity. Were the animals produced in the infant state? No; the original Hebrew gives the creative command thus-"Let the waters be alive with creeping things that have life, and let fowl fly in the open firmament of the heavens;" they started into life at once, swim

ming, creeping, flying, in their full strength. Was man created " an infant of days?" No; it has been universally admitted by all rational disputants, that the first man was created in the prime of life; if he had not been so, how could he have tilled, dressed, and kept the garden of Eden? an office to which he was immediately appointed. If, then, all other things were formed in a state at which they now arrive only after various periods of growth, why might not metals be at first created in their crystals, and minerals in their compound structure, as we now find them?

Before I quit the subject of creation, I must invite the attention of my readers to a curious passage from Eusebius (book 3, c. 11). He says, 'The Egyptians call the Creator by the name of Kneph, and relate that he sent forth an egg from his mouth; which in their symbolic language denotes that He produced the universe.' Now, among ancient nations, the egg was the emblem of the universe; which is supposed to have arisen from a corrupted tradition of the Creative Spirit moving (Heb. fluttering) over the deep, whence they imagined Him to have been in the form of a bird, and the production to have been an egg. Thus the Chippeway Indians say that originally the world was one vast and entire ocean, inhabited by no creature, except a mighty bird, whose eyes were fire, and whose glances were lightnings, and the clapping of whose wings was thunder. This bird flew down to the sea, when the earth rose out of the water, and remained stationary. (See Mackenzie's Travels.) But the Egyptian idea that this egg proceeded from the mouth of Kneph appears to me very striking, when we recollect the declaration of the Psalmist :"By the word of the Lord were the heavens made,

and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth."

Thus even the idolatrous figments of ancient Egypt, and the romances of the wild Indian, approach more nearly to the truth than the theories of some who call themselves Christians, and who have the word of God lying open within their reach.

Alas for modern wisdom and philosophy!

x. d.

IF you be one who passes current with the world for a good Christian of the average stamp, but no enthusiast,—one who has just religion enough to make a decent show, just as much as gives a zest to carnal enjoyments, but never disturbs the conscience,—one who is only a Sunday-worshipper and a festival communicant,-one who takes a glance at the cross of Christ on the Sabbath, and enjoys a surfeit of mammon during the rest of the week,-one whose religion is all of times and places, just such a religion as the devil most delights in,-if you be such an one, "suffer, I pray you, the word of exhortation." You are trying to make an union between Christ and Belial, but it will not do; you are endeavouring to effect that which is impossible; you cannot join the two-all hell can't do it!-Rev. T. Dale.

231

PETRARCH-A PROTESTANT.

DEAR MADAM,

As every testimony against the mystery of iniquity is valuable, I think it may prove beneficial to the good cause, to give insertion in your valuable Magazine to the following most apocalyptic sonnet, written in the fourteenth century, by the illustrious Florentine, Francesco Petrarca.

I remain, dear Madam,

Your faithful servant,

L. H. J. T.

SONETTO CVI.

(Edizione di Firenze, 1815.)

FONTANA di dolore, albergo d'ira,
Scola d'errori e tempio d'eresìa,
Già ROMA, or Babilonia falsa e ria,
Per cui tanto si piagne e si sospira ;
O fucina d'inganni, o prigion d'ira
Ove'l ben more, e 'l mal si nutre e cria;
Di vivi inferno; un gran miracol fia,
Se Christo teco al fine non s'adira.
Fondata in casta ed umil povertate,
Contra i tuoi fondatori alzi le corna,
Putta sfacciata; e dov' hai posto spene?
Negli adulteri tuoi, nelle mal nate

Ricchezze tante? or Constantin non torna,
Ma tolga il mondo tristo che 'l sostiene.

CHARITABLE SOCIETIES.

No. II.

WHEN the more charitable portion of a parish propose to found a benevolent society, they think and speak much of the wants of the poor, the necessity for assisting them, the pressure of the coming winter, or the dreadful sufferings to which they have been exposed during the last severe frost. The society is formed, and henceforth all will be well with the poor. None can be sick, without being relieved; none unemployed, without being idle; and if any beg from house to house it is a sure sign that they are not deserving persons.' Accordingly, a report is issued, containing the balance of accounts, a few interesting cases of distress, some just observations on the duty of Christian benevolence, and, in conclusion, probably an earnest exhortation to the friends of the society, not to encourage the system of begging, as prejudicial to the poor, and so inconvenient to themselves-an exhortation generally effectual.

Now it is manifest that a society, which thus puts itself between the poor man and the brotherly kindness of his wealthy neighbour, which claims to be the only channel of communication between the prosperous and the afflicted-which dries up every other stream or turns it into its own, is bound upon every