Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

tuted (as I fear it is by many) in the place of the only proper test, conformity to Scripture.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

Q. F.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THE observations, by Mr. James, on the Anti-Jacobin Reviewers, which were inserted in your last number, are perfectly just. Mr. James, however, has not taken a complete view of the subject. There is one bearing of it, which is extremely important, but which has entirely escaped him. I presume, Sir, to supply his omis

sion.

When the Anti-Jacobin Reviewers published the proposal for the abolition of subscription to the 39 Articles, they must have known, that such abolition cannot be accomplished without the concurrence of the king, as head of the Church, and as one of the three estates of the realm. But is the king at liberty to accede to their proposal? What is the substance of the coronation oath? The following short extract will shew-" After the demise of her Majesty Queen Anne, the sovereign next succeeding, and so for ever afterwards every king or queen succeeding and coming to the royal government of the kingdom of Great Britain, at his or her coronation, shall, in the presence of all persons, who shall be attending, assisting, or otherwise then or there present, Take and subscribe an OATH to maintain and preserve INVIOLABLY the SETTLEMENT of the Church of England, and the DOCTRINE, worship, discipline, and government thereof, AS BY LAW ESTABLISHED within the kingdoms of England and Ireland, the dominion of Wales, and town of Berwick upon Tweed, and the territories thereunto belonging."

The Anti-Jacobin Reviewers could not be ignorant of the terms of the coronation oath, for they not long since made it the ground of a philippic against the ex-minister; whose proposal of emancipating the Catholics was considered by them as tending to an infraction of that solemn engagement. But have they not, by yielding their sanction to the proposal of the anonymous author of the pamphlet, called "Observations on the State of Religion," &c. &c. exposed themselves to at least an equal degree of blame?

OXONIENSIS.

In the Anti-Jacobin Review for February last (p. 188), there is a letter from Dr. Croft, entitled, "Croft's Remarks on Overton's true Churchmen falsely so called," which appears to me to call for some very serious animadversion. I by no means wish, Mr. Editor, to render your work a scene of doctrinal controversy. I am aware of the prejudice which has been done to religion by making it to consist too much in a talent for theological combat, and by forgetting the mild and benevolent character of him, whom we all profess to acknowledge as our master. The complaint, therefore, which I am disposed to urge against Dr. Croft, is chiefly that of his lamentably failing in the temper of a Christian. I would carefully guard my own spirit while I make this accusation, but I prefer it without any doubt of its being just ; and I think that every one of your readers will agree with me, when I shall have quoted some of the passages of the letter of Dr. Croft to which I allude.

After some defence of himself against the charge of non-residence, a point on which I feel very incompetent to pronounce in the present instance, he alludes to the case of the six young men who were expelled from Edmund-Hall. In speaking of them he says, "The fanatics were very severe against the younger members of the university in general, and I drew the comparison between curable and incurable evils. The voice of mankind has, in all ages and places, made aliowances for the sallies of youth; and the Saviour of the world draws more than once a comparison between a repenting profligate and a deliberate hypocrite."

On this passage I would observe, that it surely becomes not a minister of the Church of England, whatever may be his judgment on the conduct of the university in this case, to apply the charge both of fanaticism and deliberate hypocrisy to the young men in question, unless he knows, that by their subsequent life they have given ground for such a strong accusation. Now, Sir, I am much mistaken if the lives of some, if not all, of these six men, have not been such as completely to repel the charge at least of deliberate hypocrisy. I am not entering

into their general defence, for I do not feel sufficiently informed to do so; but it is plain that Dr. Croft's insinuation is wholly unsupported by proof. The Church, Sir, gains nothing by these personal attacks, even of individuals who may have receded from it. Let us blame their irregularities, eccentricities, or other faults; but let it not be said, that we deal in uncharitable abuse.

Dr. Croft then enters into some personal observations to the prejudice of the present principal of Edmund Hall, a gentleman, as I understand, of very respectable character, and of the mildest manners, "by whose contrivance," he states "that the hall is still the receptacle of fanatics:"he also speaks of him as "contemptible," on account of his being "misled by his wife." I again ask, whether this is language befitting the pen of one Christian Minister speaking of another, and whether also the AntiJacobin Review does itself much credit in the eyes of sober and serious Christians, by being the vehicle of this species of personality?

Dr. Croft proceeds to make some observations, which, in my opinion, are not altogether unjust, respecting the difference between the doctrines of the reformers, and those of some who, in later times, have professed to tread in their steps. I will readily admit, that an unscriptural and somewhat enthusiastic mode of asserting some doctrinal truths has prevailed in modern days, and has been countenanced by some popular teachers*. I object, however, to the very indiscriminate and uncharitable mode in which Dr. Croft has imputed this enthusiasm to all who have obtained the name of evangelical ministers, He afterwards observes, "I do not deny original sin, but I reprobate the coarse, vulgar expressions of enthusiasts concerning it." I admit, to a certain degree, the truth of this remark, but Dr. Croft expresses himself as if all men who use vulgar language in speaking of their sins, were "enthusiasts." I apprehend, Sir, that "the religion of the vulgar," to use the words of an eminent modern writer, "will be, in some degree, vulgar." It will almost necessarily be so, though it will not necessarily be enthusiastic.

I particularly allude to Whitfield and Wesley.

To assume enthusiasm, wherever vulgarity is found, an assumption which Dr. Croft seems too much disposed to make, is, therefore, another breach of charity. I agree, however, with Dr. Croft, that the introduction of vulgarity into the pulpit is a great evil, and permit me here to express the satisfaction which I have felt in finding, that the Christian Observer does not seem disposed to spare this fault in whatever quarter it may happen to be found. That man would deserve well of the community, who, with Christian meekness, should point out the mischievous consequences which have resulted from the want of proper, dignity in the teachers of religion: but in the examples produced for the sake of more fully explaining himself, or of more effectually guarding against the evil in question, he ought to refer to some better authority than mere hearsay, which seems to be the main ground of Dr. Croft's illustrations. Dr. Croft gives, indeed, a quotation from Mr. Milner's writings, but without any reference by which it may be found; and a friend, well acquainted with that writer, tells me, that he has not been able to trace it in his works.

In other parts of Dr. Croft's letter, I find much personal reflection on a variety of characters, very unworthy of a Christian divine; and a slight intimation is also given in a note by the Anti-Jacobin Reviewer, that you, Sir, the Editor of the Christian Observer, are of that fraternity of vulgar persons who are censured in the text.

But enough has been already said to shew the temper in which Dr. Croft's letter is written. I shall now advert to some other points contained in it.

"Inward experience," Dr. Croft affirms, is not to be found in our articles as conveying evidence of our being elect. But what says the seventeenth article concerning the elect?

[ocr errors]

They through grace obey the calling; they be made like the image of Christ they walk religiously in good works; they FEEL IN THEMSELVES the working of the spirit of Christ mortifying the works of the flesh, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things," &c.

With respect to the import of the seventeenth article, I was much surprized to find Dr. Croft at perfect agreement with those, whose opinions he supposes himself to be controverting; for after explicitly declaring,

[ocr errors]

that he means not to deny the doctrine of predestination, he observes, exactly in the language which a rigid Calvinist would employ, "God who fore-ordained the means of salvation, of course fore-ordained the end, consequently he fore-ordained that certain persons should be everlastingly happy. Now, Sir, any one who is acquainted with the existing controversies on theological subjects, will at once perceive, that this sentence contains, as in a nut-shell, the substance of Calvinism; a circumstance which furnishes a striking proof of the advantage to be derived from mutual explanation; for no one would have imagined that Dr. Croft only wanted a fair hearing to prove, that he has been unjustly maligned as an opposer of Calvinism. I have often thought that some of the most vehement disputants on predestination quarrel in the dark, and that there is frequently more want of patience than difference of opinion on this point. Never was I more strongly confirmed in this sentiment than at the moment of reading the passage last quoted. Dr. Croft, the chief object of whose letter is to expose the Calvinists, has given a dedeclaration of his own faith, which is Calvinism itself.

in good works, who feel in themselves the working of the spirit of Christ mortifying the works of the flesh, and drawing up their minds to high and heavenly things, &c.; but none of them, as I conceive, go farther.

He thinks, indeed, that he has completely obviated the imputation of Calvinism by adding, that although certain persons are thus fore-ordained to be everlastingly happy, yet God "will not suffer us to be acquainted wish the especial objects of his mercy or his justice." This qualification, however, will be of no avail in removing the stigma of Calvinism; for in this sentiment also all sober Calvinists will cordially concur. Not only Mr. Overton, but all his friends, without exception, and they are the objects of Dr. Croft's imputation, will agree with Dr. Croft in maintaining that it is not allowable to enquire concerning the number of those who shall be saved;" and that it is utterly unscriptural to pretend "to be acquainted with the especial objects of his (God's) mercy or his justice." They, doubtless, think themselves authorized to declare, on the authority of the Bible no less than of the articles, that the wicked and impenitent have no ground on which to believe themselves elect; and that those only are elect, who be made like the image of Christ, who walk religiously

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Speaking with a reference to some clergymen of Mr. Overton's acquaintance, Dr. Croft observes, that "welleducated persons of both sexes, weary of the trash which they hear in their own parish Churches, have very properly gone themselves, and carried their servants to other Churches, where they could hear something rational and consistent;" and yet it is added, "we are not so much at variance with these clergymen in points of doctrine," as we are in the mode of instruction." The AntiJacobin Reviewers, if they are consistent, must deem this to be a very schismatical proceeding. They have, on several occasions, strongly reprobated the practice of leaving the Parish Church for another. A private Christian, they hold with Mr. Sykes, ought no more to leave his appointed pastor than a child ought to leave its parent; the plea of edification being, in all cases, a senseless plea, indicating a zeal for God, which is not according to knowledge, and converting the Church from a visible to an invisible body*. What then must these reviewers think of Dr. Croft's well-educated friends, who leave their own and go to other Churches, merely, as it would appear, because "the mode of instruction" happens not to accord with their notions of propriety.

I would not, however, have Dr. Croft, or the Anti-Jacobin Reviewers, to suppose, that I mean particularly to blame the conduct of the persons in question; far from it. I think that as Protestants they have a fair right, if they chuse to exercise it, to go in quest of rational and consistent discourses in some other Church, when they can hear nothing but what deserves the name of trash in their own. But I doubt whether Dr. Croft and the Anti-Jacobin Reviewers would admit the extension of the principle to any case, which did not perfectly accord with their prejudices. Persons, quitting the Parish Church of Mr. Overton, or of any of his friends, whose sermons, in Dr.

*See Review of a Dialogue between a Minister, &c. in the Anti-Jacobin Review for January and February, 1802.

C.'s estimation are trash, and whose mode of preaching is disgusting, may be deemed to act "very properly:" but if the people of the parish bordering on Mr. Overton's, or on that of one of his friends, dissatisfied not with the manner merely, but with the matter of the sermons of their parish minister, should repair to the neighbouring Church for edification, would they not at once be accounted Schismatics? But is this fair or candid? "As ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye to them, for this is the law and the prophets.'

[ocr errors]

The following passage in the letter of Dr. Croft, appears to me peculiar ly dangerous in its tendency, "I am supposed," he says, "the advocate of licentious manners, because I have said, that with ingenuous minds, the irregularities of youth are their own remedy." By the irregularities of youth, the licentiousness of youth must be assumed to be here intended. Is it then true, that the licentiousness of youth is its own remedy? Is this a doctrine which becomes the pen of an instructor of the rising generation? I admit that Dr. Croft guards the observation by confining it to persons of "ingenuous minds;" but what is it that a young man will understand to be meant by this ingenuousness? Let us imagine a youth entering into life, surrounded, as too many are, by others who are open in their licentiousness. These take credit that at least they are no fanatics; that they resemble not those praying, canting hypocrites, to whom Dr. Croft, in their opinion, has so properly applied the lash of his censure. They admit that they are given to gallantry: this they scruple not fairly to avow, for they are of a nature too frank, open, and ingenuous to deny it. Does any one charge them with sinning against God by their vices? they retort the charge of fanaticism on their accusers. The pious parent trembles lest his child should catch the spirit of that sort of society, which has been just described. He foresees the dreadful calamities and dangers which follow in the train of a youth of licentious indulgence. Ile warns, exhorts, and rebukes. He takes religion to his aid. He suggests to his son, that he should use earnest prayer for deliverance from this main temptation of his early years. He points to those sacred Scriptures, which represent true wis

[ocr errors]

dom as "delivering the youth from the strange woman, even from the woman which flattereth with her lips; which forsaketh the guide of her youth, and forgetteth the covenant of her God; whose house inclineth unto death, and her paths unto the dead. None that go in unto her return again, neither lay they hold of the paths of life." How many a young man is there who is exactly in this manner drawn in one direction by his parents, and in the contrary by a set of youthful companions. Does it then become the Christian divine to interpose, and say to the young man, beware above all things of puritanism, but know that with ingenuous minds the irregularities of youth are their own remedy?" Let it be admitted, that the words of Solomon, which speak as if there were no escape for the young man who is entered on a licentious course are not to be taken very literally, still is not the language of solemn warning that of the truest charity? "Dearly beloved," said the Apostle, "I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul." "The irregularities of youth are their own remedy," replies the divine. Is not this to contradict the apostolic declaration, that they war against the soul? But they are their own remedy, it is said, only in the case of those minds which are ingenuous. Did St. Paul make this general exception in favour of ingenuous minds. By what authority then does any minister make it?

Pardon me, Mr. Editor, if I have carried this observation too far. Being myself a parent, I have been led to see, in a very strong light, the danger of which I have spoken. I by no means accuse Dr. Croft of intending this mischief. I speak of the tendency of his remark, not of his motive in making it. Let him remember, however, that with young men the danger is on the side, not of puritanism, but of immorality; and that an unguarded zeal against the former will probably encourage the latter, which is certainly also the greater evil.

I cannot conclude my remarks without noticing the impropriety of introducing that passage from Pope, which Dr. Croft has inserted in his letter. I blame the quotation, because there is something very like a profane oath in it. Profaneness, Sir, in my opi

nion, is the worst species of heterodoxy; and a clergyman of the Church of England cannot too carefully guard against it. The light and profane mention of that evil spirit, against whose wiles the Scriptures warn us, was very properly noticed in one of your former numbers. God and religion are dishonoured in Great Britain at this time, not so much by vulgarity, as by profaneness; not so much by smaller doctrinal inaccuracies as by sin, and among the number of sins let none of us forget that one is a want of charity in our judgments.

Before I lay down my pen, give me leave to submit a few questions to Dr. Croft, which I trust he will consider with the attention they seem to me to deserve.

1. Is contempt a Christian feeling, and will its indulgence admit of a justification on Christian principles?

2. Is it compatible with literary refinement, or clerical sobriety, to compile for publication, the vague and vulgar rumours which malice may have invented, and irreligious levity may have propagated, in order to ridicule the devout?

3. Ought not he who reproves others for vulgarity and buffoonery, to take especial care to avoid these evils himself?

4. Is it by opprobrious epithets (which, it is well known, proves nothing except against the person who employs them), or by representing his brethren as fools, that a clergyman should endeavour to establish his own claim to wisdom? S. P.

LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL INTELLIGENCE,

&c. &c.

GREAT BRITAIN. In the Press, the third volume of KING'S Monumenta Antiqua.—A very elegant edition of BOSSUET's Works, by M. PELTIER, in four volumes.-Advice to Mothers, on the subject of their own health, and on the means of promoting the health, strength, and beauty of their offspring; by Dr. BuCHAN. In one large volume 8vo, with a selection of the most useful maps, carefully copied from those in the 4to edition, An Abridgement of PINKERTON's Modern Geography, and Professor Vince's Astronomical Introduction.-A History of the last War, by Mr. STEPHENS. And a Work on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening, with many plates; by Mr. REPTON.

Speedily will be published, in one large volume 8vo. illustrated with maps by Arrowsmith, A geographical Dictionary of Asia, by A. HAMILTON, Esq. and L. D. CAMPBELL, Esq. The information respecting Hindustan and the Western Countries of Asia will be principally derived from Sanscrit, Persic, and Arabic Manuscripts; and the accounts of the other Countries will be drawn from original sources, and from a careful collection of the most authentic European Geographers and Travellers.

A large work on the Manners, Customs, and Amusements of the Russians, with coloured Plates, from Drawings made in Russia, is preparing by Messrs. ATKINSON and WALKER.

A splendid work on Indian Fishes, by Dr. RUSSEL, whose publication on Indian

Serpents is in high estimation, may soon be expected, under the same patronage of the East India Company.

Mr. ALEXANDER, the artist who accompanied Lord Macartney to China, is employed in drawing designs of the monuments brought from Egypt, from which engravings will be published.

From the late important and striking experiments in GALVANISM, it appears, 1. That, taking the cessation of excitability to the Galvauic stimulus as the criterion of life, the heart is not the ultimum, but the primum moriens; for, while the muscles of the limbs were excited to strong contractions, for even several hours after apparent death, the heart was utterly incapable of being excited to action.-2. That the lungs were equally inexcitable as the heart.-3. Not only were the muscles, but the skin and cellular membrane, excited by the Galvanic stimulus.-4. The contractions of the muscles were excited by the metallic air, applied to the nerves supplying the muscles; but the nerves themselves were not affected.-5. The raising up of the arm was produced, as if by volition, by the Galvanic stimulus.-6. A milky or coagulated matter was formed by repeated contractions of the muscle in contact with the copper wire.-7. When the parts ceased to give out motion, the motion was renewed with augmented force, by wetting them with a solution of sal-ammoniac.

Mr. CUTHBERTON has constructed an instrument by which the GALVANIC fluid may be applied effectually, for any length of time, without manual assistance, and

« ElőzőTovább »