take the holy soul again, and will purify it in hell, and it shall come again to its first place, the throne of glory, and thus I shall lose nothing." It is unnecessary to remind the reader that man is here furnished with a plausible apology for all his misdoings, and taught that his piety is peculiarly meritorious. In explaining the meaning of the words, "God blessed the Sabbathday," it is said "God blessed the Sabbath, in order that the people should honour it with good eating, and then God will make them rich. Rabbi Chiia, son of Abba, says, I was once invited home by a householder in the city of Lodkia. A silver table, carried by sixteen men, was brought in before us, and on it was placed some of every thing that was created in the six days of creation, and in the middle of this sat a child, who cried out, The earth is the Lord's, and all that therein is, the world, and they that dwell therein;' and this was done that the householder should not think too much of himself. Hereupon I asked him, What merit is it wherewith thou hast deserved to be the possessor of such wealth? To which he replied, that he had formerly been a butcher, and whenever he got a good beast, he kept it for Sabbath, even from Sunday to Sabbath. To which I said, I am well aware that for this God gives luck and blessing and in like manner, every one that honestly keeps the holidays with good eating, God gives him a good reward in this world, and makes him rich. And thus, in the book Rabbathi, Rabbi Tanchuma relates a story, how on the eve of the day of atonement a prince sent his servant to buy fish. The servant came to the fishmonger, but at the same time came a Jewish tailor, and offered a higher price, and at last bought the fish for twelve florins, and took it home. The prince was very angry with his servant for returning without the fish. The servant said, A Jewish tailor got the fish from me by offering the higher price of twelve florins. The prince sent for the tailor, and asked him, Why did you outbid me, and get the fish? The Jew replied, Why should I not buy the fish, and all sorts of good food? To-morrow we have a wonderful day, on which God forgives all the sins that we have committed in the whole year; why then should I not be joyful? The prince replied, You are quite right. So the tailor went home, and on splitting open the fish he found a pearl, the sale of which supplied him with good food all his life long, and delivered him from the necessity of being a tailor." Thus the book goes on, page after page, except that it is not always so harmless. It is a complete encyclopædia of Rabbinism,-legendary, doctrinal, and judicial; may be read with ease by any one who understands German and a little Hebrew, and will take the trouble of learning the Jewish-German character; and is really worth a more extended review than can here be given to it. Only one specimen more can now be given, and that is, the account of the death of Moses, which is, on several accounts, worthy of attention. It is added to the prayer of Moses, to be allowed to enter the promised land. (Deut. iii. 23.) "Moses prayed that God would allow him to enter the land of Israel, for Moses thought, Inasmuch as I have conquered Sihon and Og, the oath which God sware, that I should not enter the land of Israel, is null and void. As I have begun to take possession of the land of Sihon and Og, I shall go on to possess the land of Israel. Let it suffice thee' (Deut. iii. 26), God said to Moses, The first Adam brought death into the world, therefore all men must die. To this Moses replied, O Lord of the world, the first Adam was guilty of transgression. God said, Abraham was obliged to die, though he allowed himself to be cast into the fiery furnace for my sake.* Moses answered, Abraham was the father of a wicked son, Ishmael. God said, Isaac stretched out his neck to be slaughtered, and yet he was The Jews have a tradition that Abraham, rather than commit idolatry, suffered himself to be cast into a fiery furnace. God obliged to die. Moses answered, Isaac was the father of the wicked Esau. said, Jacob had twelve sons, all righteous men, and yet he was obliged to die. Moses answered, But Jacob did not ascend into heaven, neither did he receive the law, as I have done. Moses said, also, Israel is in number six hundred thousand, and they have often committed transgressions, and thou hast pardoned them, and yet thou wilt not pardon me. God replied, One does a great deal more for the sake of a whole congregation than for an individual. Moses said, Punish me with afflictions in my body, but do not give me into the hand of the angel of death, so will I declare thy praise in the whole world, as it is written (in the 118th Psalm), 'I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord.' God replied, There is a gate into which the righteous must enter, as it is written (in a following verse), This is the gate of the Lord, the righteous shall enter therein.' When Moses saw that he could effect nothing, he went to the heaven and the earth, and said, Make intercession for me. They replied, We have got to pray for ourselves, for in due time we also must perish, as it is written (Isaiah, 1. 1-6), 'The heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment.' Moses then went to the stars, and to the sun, and the moon, and the high mountains: they all answered, We have enough to do for ourselves. He then went to the sea, but the sea said to him, Moses, what is the matter with thee? Thou smotest me with thy rod, and I divided, and the Schechinah used to stand always at thy right hand. As soon as Moses heard that the sea recounted the wonders which he had done in his youth, he ran away, and cried and wept before the highest angel, and said, Intercede for me. The angel answered, I have heard that thy prayer will not avail. Moses cried and wept, whereupon God said, I have sworn two oaths. If thou live, Israel must be lost (which may God avert). But if Israel continues to live, thou must die. Moses said, Let me and my thousands perish, rather than that one soul of Israel should be lost. God said, If thy fear of death be so great, I will give the angel of death into thy hand. Moses answered, How will my mother Jochebed mourn? She has already buried two children, and now she must bury the third. God said, The time is come for Joshua to be king over Israel, therefore thou must die. Moses said, If that be the reason why I must die, I am willing to become Joshua's disciple, and let him be the Rabbi. God said, If thou art willing to do that, it is well. Immediately Moses went very early to the tent of Joshua, and stood at the door, and Joshua was expounding the law to Israel, but did not see Moses, for Moses bowed himself down, that the people should not see him, and held his hand over his face, that he might not be recognised. The people went to the tent of Moses, but at last they find him at the tent of Joshua, and Moses was standing, but Joshua was sitting. All the people cried, Joshua, what is the meaning of this, that thou sittest and Moses thy master stands? As soon as Joshua saw that Moses was standing, he rent his garments and wept, and said, Rabbi, Rabbi, my Lord, what doest thou there? All Israel cried out to Moses, Teach us the law. Moses replied, I dare not. Whereupon they said, We will not suffer thee to remain there. Then the daughter of a voice came forth from heaven, and said, Learn the law from Joshua. Immediately they began to learn the law from Joshua -and Moses sat at his right hand, and Eleazar at his left, and Joshua expounded the law in the presence of Moses. But when all Israel went forth from the house of study, they came to Moses, and said, Teach us, and give decision as to what Joshua has taught us. Moses said, I cannot. In the same hour Moses said, Lord of the world, it is time for me to die. An answer was given, It is now one hour to thy death. Moses said, Wait a little, I will bless Israel first. Thereupon Moses began to bless Israel separately, but when he saw the time was short, he blessed all Israel together. It was then told to Moses, It is half an hour to thy death, whereupon he began to beg pardon of Israel, and said, I have often vexed you when I was expounding the law, forgive me. They said also, Forgive us, for we have often provoked thee to anger. Moses was then told, It is one minute to thy death. Whereupon he said, Blessed be His Name, He that liveth and abideth for ever and ever.* He said also to Israel, When ye are come into the land of Israel remember me. They said, How could we forget thee, who hast done us so much good? Moses was then told, It is half a minute to thy death. Whereupon Moses laid both his hands upon his heart, and said to Israel, These two hands which received the law, shall be buried in the earth. Immediately his soul went forth, and neither man nor angel buried him, but God himself. He died on the seventh day of the month Adar, the same day on which he was born. God reckons the days of the righteous." (Fol. 219.) VOL. XIII.-May, 1838. 3 Q To the Such is the account of the death of Moses with which the Jewesses are edified, and which they receive as matter of fact. Christian reader it must appear as very profane and presumptuous thus to add to the Word of God, and exhibits a state of mind, in the author of this fable, which is almost inexplicable. And yet there is with all its absurdity a pathos and solemnity about it, which shews that the author was himself in a solemn frame of mind, and that his object was to impress upon the reader the awfulness and the certainty of death. Moses feared death-Moses was compelled to die; how fearful, then, and how certain is death to us. It shews very strikingly how little Judaism can do for those who profess it, and may serve as a commentary to the apostle's words, "Who through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage." (Heb. ii. 15.) From all these extracts the reader may form an idea of the social and religious condition of the Rabbinical Jewess. In life she ranks with slaves and children. Death is held up to her as an object of terror even to Moses; and after death her utmost hope is, that the wanderings of her soul may not be protracted, and that the fires of hell may prepare it for Paradise, one of the joys of which is to feast upon salted Leviathan. REPLY TO THE ARTICLE IN THE LAST NUMBER OF THE "EDINBURGH REVIEW" ON CHURCH RATES. (Concluded from p. 374.) "Having [proceeds the reviewer] justified, as we conceive, satisfactorily, the author of the 'Historical Remarks,' for the use he has made of Archbishop Hubert's decree, we shall not press the argument he has drawn from the acts of the council of Oxford in 1222. We admit that the words, onera ecclesiæ,' charges or burdens of the church, are not sufficiently explicit, and may refer, either to the repair of the church, or to other burdens or services attached to it."-(p. 312.) On this point, therefore, I shall only remark, that had the reviewer been better acquainted with the subject, or even referred to Lyndwood's commentary on this passage, he would not merely have admitted that the words were not "sufficiently explicit," but that the reference to them was altogether a blunder. Their inapplicability also arises, not, as he seems to suppose, from their being referable "either to the repair of the church or to other burdens," but from this-that, though they refer to both, they can throw no light upon the question, what the extent of the "onus ecclesiæ," in respect of repair, was; which is the question at issue. "But [he adds] we cannot help remarking, that among the decrees of that very council there is one which implies that the expense of ornaments and of other things necessary for religious worship (no small articles in our modern church-rates), continued still to be defrayed by the parson. The archdeacon is directed to make an inventory of the ornaments, utensils, vestments, and books belonging to every church in his district; to examine every year if they are in good condition; to see what additions have been made to them by the parson; and to notice the injuries they had received from malice or from neglect." The partial and slippery way in which almost every authority referred to in this article is quoted is quite extraordinary. Why is not this canon given as it stands, and not with alterations introduced favourable to the views of the reviewer? The canon does not say, "What additions have been made to them by the parson," but "what additions have been made to them through the diligence of the parsons" (quæ fuerint adjecta per diligentiam personarum.)* The difference is considerable, because, though the expense of these things was to be borne by the parishioners, it was the duty of the rectors at that time (there being no churchwardens) to see that they were provided; as we learn from a note of John Acton (or John de Atho, as he is sometimes called) upon a Constitution of Othobon, where, after observing that the duty of church-repair devolves by custom upon the parishioners, he adds, "Although the rector is by custom exempted from paying the expenses, yet he is not exempted from the bestowal of his care and diligence. Moreover, this concerns the rector, not only as it respects the decency of the church, but also because the rector ought to render an account of such reparation to the bishop, whom it mediately concerns, every year, if required."+ Nay, we have the express testimony of Lyndwood himself, (whom the attorney-general allows to be "the highest authority on ecclesiastical law,") in his comment on this very passage, that we are not to understand by the expressions here used that the rectors had to supply these articles, for that "that interpretation would not be agreeable to the intention of him who made the enactment, because that burthen-viz., the burthen of providing the ornaments, vessels, books, and such things-belongs not to the rector, but to the parishioners." His next reference is to "a synod held between 1217 and 1226 by Richard de Marisco, bishop of Durham," in which he says, "An order was made, that if the rector of any church died, leaving his church without a competent provision of sacerdotal vestments, or without books, or deficient in both, or if he left the buildings of his church in a decayed or ruinous state, so much should be taken from his ecclesiastical effects as would be required to repair the buildings, and supply what was wanting in THE OTHER necessaries for the celebration of worship." Where did this candid reviewer find the words, "THE OTHER necessaries for the celebration of worship"? The words, as given by his own referee, Wilkins, are as follow: "Si rector alicujus ecclesiæ decesserit, ecclesia sua relicta sine indumentis sacerdotalibus competentibus, vel sine libris, vel sine utrisque, vel si forte domos ecclesiæ reliquerit dirutas vel ruinosas, de bonis ejus ecclesiasticis tanta portio deducatur quæ sufficiat ad emendum et comparandum hæc et ad defectus ecclesiæ supplendos." (Wilk. i. 580.) Now, whatever he may choose to consider to be implied by the words "defectus ecclesiæ," he should at least have had the candour to give his reader an impartial translation of them. So far from these words meaning "THE OTHER necessaries for the celebration of worship," they are translated by Johnson, more than 100 years ago, when there could be no motive for a partial translation, in a similar canon of Archbishop * Wilk. i. 589. Hist. of Church Rates, pp. 63–65. Jo. Act. in Const. Othob. Improbam, p. 113. Hist. of Church Rates, p. 66. Edmund, by "these defects of the church"-i. e., those which have been just mentioned. The phrase, indeed, is less general than that which occurs in the canon of the synod of Exeter in 1287 upon this subject, which we have quoted above, where the words are, "ecclesiarum suarum defectus tam in ornamentis quam in domibus," a phrase which is as general as could be used, but which, as it appears from the 12th Constitution of the same synod, referred only to the very few ornaments which the rector was bound to supply. Nor were the clergy at all fearful of this general phrase, as if it could be thought to imply that they were responsible for all the ornaments. The constitution of R. de Kellow, bishop of Durham, in 1312, gives us, as we have already seen, another instance of it. The same explanation will of course apply to the similar constitution of Archbishop Edmund in 1236. I proceed to his next authority, which is thus given : "At a still later period, in a synod held in 1246 by Richard de la Wich, bishop of Chichester, directions were given, that churches should be decently roofed, and chalices, books, and other articles for religious worship, provided in sufficient number and becoming condition, out of the goods of deceased ecclesiastics who had neglected when alive to preserve and decorate their churches in a competent manner." (p. 312.) The original of the passage thus translated (and which, wonderful to say, the reviewer gives in a note) stands thus, according to Wilkins : "Ecclesiæ vero honeste cooperiantur; calices et libri et omnia ornamenta ecclesiastica sufficientia sint et honesta, et de bonis clericorum decedentium, secundum quod cautum fuerit, suppleantur, nisi in vita sua ecclesias ornaverint competenter," (Wilk. i. 691.) What, then, has become, in the reviewer's translation, of the words, "secundum quod cautum fuerit"? Why this suppression of an important part of the canon? Simply because a literal translation would have shewn the reader that there was a limitation introduced which makes the passage worse than useless for the purpose for which it is adduced by the reviewer. Where, moreover, is his authority in the original for the words, "preserve and decorate;" and for his translation, that "churches should be roofed and chalices. . . provided . . . . out of the goods of deceased ecclesiastics," as if the original required that churches should be roofed out of those goods? "Let churches (says the canon) be decently roofed; let there be chalices, and books, and all the ornaments required for a church, in sufficient number and of good quality, and let them be supplied from the goods of the clergy at their decease, according to that which shall have been appointed, unless they shall have duly supplied their churches with ornaments in their life-time." All that this canon prescribes, then, with respect to the clergy, is, that if they have neglected to supply their churches with ornaments duly in their life-time, ornaments such as they shall have been appointed to provide shall be supplied out of their property after their decease. The limitation expressed by secundum quod cautum fuerit, omitted by the reviewer, makes the passage tell against rather than for him. It is not, indeed, easy to determine to what appointment or provision the word cautum referred. If it be the correct reading, I suppose it may refer to the provisions of the endowment, or |