and none and power of THE LORD OUR HEALER, that he never begins a cure which he does not perfect. To believe in him, is to put ourselves under his management, to exercise implicit confidence in his wisdom, and to render an unreserved subjection to his authority. To this confidence and subjection he is on every account entitled; ever trusted him and were confounded; for "he is able to save to the uttermost." There is no malady so inveterate which he cannot subdue; no constitution so impaired, which he cannot restore and invigorate; and no wretchedness, superinduced by the power or the consciousness of disease, which he cannot alleviate and remove. "Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift." How delightful is the feeling of returning health, after a long period of sickness and depression; and how different our emotions under the langour and feebleness of disease, compared with the vigour and activity of convalescence. The spirits resume their tone of elasticity-the mind rises from its temporary prostrationand our youth is renewed like the eagle's." But this contrast is a feeble illustration of the altered state of the man who, under the consciousness of his sinful and wretched condition, feels unutterable depression and anxiety, and, at length, is directed to that gracious Physician "who healeth all manner of diseases." Oh! the joy of that renewed and happy spirit, to whom the divine Redeemer addresses the language of consolation," thy faith hath made thee whole, go in peace!" This is the emancipation of the soul from the vassalage of Satan; this is the dawn of the morning, after the darkness and the storm of a dreary and tempestuous night; this is the prelude and the preparation for glory, honour, and immortality." What are the decisive indications of bodily health? Appetite, en 66 joyment, activity. These are the effects of a sanative process, when it is successful; and for the results of which we feel ardently grateful, though the medical treatment may have been tedious and painful. If we have been led to the Divine Physician, and obtained spiritual healing, we shall evince it by corresponding indications. We shall relish divine things. The "bread of life" will be our aliment, and we shall feed upon the hidden manna." There will be a "hungering and thirsting after righteousness," and our spiritual taste will prove that we are "renewed in the spirit of our mind." It will be our "meat to do the will of God." Devotion will have all the power, and regularity, and constancy of an appetite; and our daily exercises and holy activity will prove that we are "strong in the Lord and the power of his might.". "The joy of the Lord will be our strength," and we shall be "steadfast, and unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord." We are prone Alas! the most vigorous and healthy are in continual need of a renewed and habitual application to this gracious Physician. We live in a polluted atmosphere. There are constant tendencies to disease within us. to neglect the prescribed means of cure; and by our forgetfulness, impatience, and self-will, we often aggravate the symptoms of our various maladies, and render severer discipline necessary. But what an unspeakable mercy that our heavenly Healer" knows our frame"-bears with us amidst our infirmities-permits and encourages us to renew our application to himself-and possesses inexhaustible resources for our benefit! The life of faith is an habitual recurrence to the care, and tenderness, and fidelity of our best friend. In the present state, we are like invalids and valetu dinarians in an hospital; and HE who presides in this "house of mercy," superintends every case, knows the minutest symptom, regards each patient with incessant attention, tenderly sympathizes with the sufferers, graciously provides for the weak, gently admonishes the strong, mercifully bears with the froward and impetuous, and in due time prepares all for perfect convalescence. He will not sign the discharge for their release from their present state, till they are fitted for that world, where disease shall never enfeeble, nor sin pollute, and the days of mourning shall be ended for ever! A PATIENT. ON LISTS OF CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES. (To the Editors.) GENTLEMEN-Several denominations of Christians have their respective Magazines, in which, besides the articles of general instruction and intelligence, they insert such information as is particularly interesting to the churches of their own communion. This they find both pleasing and useful. Among other communications of this kind, is a list of their churches in England and Wales. These lists appear annually, or at such times as are thought proper. But no such lists of the Indepen be printed annually in the Supplemental number of the Congregational Magazine.-(2.) That to secure attention to the subject, and the requisite regularity, the resident Minister in each county town, be respectfully requested to make out a list for the County in which he resides, and to forward it to the Editors of the Congregational Magazine, before the first day of October next.-(3.) That the lists specify the names of the places and Ministers, distinguishing by an asterisk those Ministers who are not stated pastors, and leaving a blank space opposite to such churches as have no resident Minister. Such a list, published annually, would greatly facilitate the correspondence of the Secretaries of different Societies in London, besides answering some other useful purposes. May I take liberty, Gentlemen, to suggest, that it would be very convenient to Ministers and gentlemen residing in the country, if your Supplement gave an account of the times and places at which the Directors or Committees of the Independent Board, the Missionary, Tract, Protestant, and other Societies hold their monthly, or other meetings. Your obedient servant, J. G. dent or Congregational Churches INQUIRY RESPECTING COWARD'S is published. In a company of ministers and other persons, lately held in one of the northern counties, this became a matter of conversation, and the writer was requested to address the Editors of the Congregational Magazine on the subject. Without pretending to dictate, but wishing to put the matter in`a plain and easy form of accomplishment may I be allowed to suggest-(1.) That a list of the Independent or Congregational Churches in England and Wales, LECTURE. (To the Editors.) GENTLEMEN-In Wilson's History of Dissenting Churches, Vol. I. p. 174, article Weigh House, is the following account. "In the year 1726, a weekly lecture on a Friday morning was founded at the meeting-house in Little St. Helen's, by the well known William Coward, Esq. of Walthamstow. It was opened by the excellent Mr. Matthew Clarke, of Miles's Lane, and was conducted originally by six ministers. Mr. Clarke's first coadjutors were Mr. Hubbard, of Stepney, Mr. Godwin, of St. Helen's, Mr. Hall, of Moorfields, Mr. Gibbs, of Hackney, and Mr. Wood, of the Weigh House." This lecture is but little known, and, as I learn, badly attended: it is now carried on by four ministers, at Haberdashers' Hall. An account of the lecture, and its different ministers, would be a desideratum, and if any of your Correspondents would supply it, would be esteemed a favour; perhaps the new Trustee of Coward's trust, now his labour of editing Owen's works is at an end, would favour the public with some information upon the subject. I cannot conclude without expressing my deep regret, that the apathy and neglect of the public should have prevented the author I have quoted from concluding his interesting work, by giving to the world the history of the different dissenting churches in the vicinity of the metropolis. I will hope, however, that the spirit your Magazine is exciting, will produce this much-needed publication. AN ENQUIRER. AUTUMN. POETRY. These smiling seasons passed away, Declines, and terminates the day, For now attain'd to riper years, How frequent was express'd The sigh that told of growing cares, Which pained thy heaving breast. Maturer grown, our fates in one Were twined with mutual voice; Oft have I seen the rising bliss And oft hast thou, at even tide, Then I the care disclosed to thee, But safely wafted o'er the tide J. S. REVIEW OF BOOKS. Some additional Remarks on Dr. Henderson's Appeal to the Bible Society, in Reply to a Pamphlet, entitled The Turkish New Testament incapable of Defence," &c. To which is added an Appendix, noticing the Statements of certain Reviewers on the same Subject. By the Rev. S. Lee, M. A. Professor of Arabic in the University of Cambridge. Cambridge, 1826, pp. 143. 8vo. WE are glad to have arrived at the last pamphlet likely to be produced in this controversy, and would cheerfully have left it to make its own impression on the public mind, had courtesy to Professor Lee allowed. But as it appears from his preface, that our review of Dr. Henderson's last work was the chief cause of the present publication, and as the Professor has honoured us with particular notice in his appendix, we cannot do less than return the compliment. Towards the learned Professor, we beg leave to say, that we bear no feelings but those of the most friendly and respectful nature. We should be extremely sorry to say or do any thing likely to injure him in the public estimation, and can assure him, whatever he has insinuated to the contrary, that we had no motives for engaging in the controversy, but regard to the interests of that cause, which we have no doubt Professor Lee sincerely desires to serve. We felt persuaded, and retain that persuasion as strongly as ever, that Dr. Henderson had made out a strong case against the Turkish Version, as originally edited by Professor Kieffer. We considered the new edition, under the same editorship, in which all the objectionable matter of the former ediNEW SERIES, No. 21. tion is altered, and the whole rendered substantially agreeable to the principles for which Dr. Henderson had contended, as the best possible evidence on which side the truth lay. It now appears, that between Professor Lee and Dr. Henderson, there is no difference of importance respecting the great principles of biblical translation; and yet Professor Lee persists in his defence of the violations of those principles in the Turkish Version, on account of which this controversy originated, and which rendered an extensive revision absolutely necessary. He scarcely admits, that there was any thing wrong in it; and perseveres in a line of argument, and style of writing, that we cannot but regard as most injurious to his own reputation, and which has been, as he must now be aware, very injurious to the Society in whose service he has been engaged. Instead of entering ourselves into the merits of the pamphlet now on our table, we take the liberty of introducing a paper on the subject, with which we have been furnished, unsolicited, by a respectable Turkish scholar, who had previously taken no part in the controversy. "To the Editors of the Congrega tional Magazine. "Gentlemen,-I am one of a number of individuals who, from peculiar circumstances, have felt themselves particularly interested in the controversy which has of late been agitated betwixt two very learned individuals, relative to the merits of the Turkish Version of the New Testament-A controversy which will, I doubt not, be greatly subservient to the important object of promoting a 3 P. more vigilant attention to the nature of those Versions, which are published at the expense, and under the patronage, of the British and Foreign Bible Society. Having perused, with very considerable interest, Dr. Henderson's last work, entitled The Turkish New Testament incapable of Defence,' and having understood, that the learned Professor, to whose Remarks' this work formed a professed reply, still intended to prolong the controversy, I was naturally very anxious to learn what new arguments he could adduce in support of his position, that Ali Bey's Version was not such as Dr. H. had represented it to be;-for, to my mind, at least, all his former arguments had been completely met and satisfactorily refuted. This anxiety has been fully allayed by the perusal of Professor Lee's Additional Remarks,' and, had any thing been wanting to satisfy me as to the untenable nature of the grounds on which the Professor rested his defence of the Version in question, these remarks would have been more than sufficient for the purpose. We may now, I think, consider the controversy as brought to a conclusion1st, Because, Professor Lee at length agrees with Dr. Henderson, as to his canons of translation, Appendix, 143. 2dly, Because, though he still differs from his opponent, relative to the etymological meaning of several words and phrases-he repeatedly reminds his readers, that he does not intend to found on his criticisms any principle of translation. And 3dly, because his work abounds with such gross misrepresentations of Dr. H.'s statements and reasoning, that every one must rise from the perusal of it with the conviction, that Professor Lee could not have met Dr. H.'s arguments had he fairly stated them. Dr. H. may now consider himself as completely exonerated from the task of prosecuting a dis pute, in which he has most assuredly gained (if sich, as Dr. Lee not unfrequently insinuates, was his main object) a decisive victory. If the following observations, which have occurred to me while perusing the Professor's pamphlet, are just, I have doubt your readers will coincide with me in the opinion which I have now expressed. no "Passing over Dr. L.'s preliminary observations, relative to those points which are not now at issue, viz. the Committee's inattention to Dr. H.'s remonstrances-the necessity of entirely suppressing Ali Bey's Version, and the character and religion of Ali Bey himself(questions which the Professor considers as completely set at rest'-in what way his readers are left to determine for themselves)we come to page the third, where he very uncandidly represents Dr. H. as affirming, that the French orientalists were unqualified for the task which they had undertaken; not only because they are deficient in learning, but because they do not read their Bibles.' Dr. H. says no such thing. He expressly allows that these gentlemen are 'skilled in the Oriental languages,' which, as it regards some of them, at least, was perhaps conceding too much. For certainly, if we judge from the manner in which the majority have acquitted themselves in their letters to the Society, we are not entitled to give them credit for any uncommon depth of oriental erudition. What is to be said, for example, of one who thinks himself qualified to pronounce an authoritative verdict on the merits of a Version, after having compared only two or three historical passages with the original? learning is not generally associated with such a gross dereliction of modesty and candour. Or of another, who calmly and dispassionately reports the false asseveration Great |