entitle its receivers to burial in the parochial ground." As you have told us the speech is not correctly printed, I suspect the accuracy of the reporter in this passage. And as the assertion seems likely to produce great inconvenience, I beg leave to offer one or two remarks upon it. Two questions of distinct consideration seem to be blended here; viz. the right to interment in the parochial ground; and the right to insist on the clergyman's reading the burial service. It is generally admitted, that a clergyman is not obliged to read the service at the interment of an unbaptized person. But the present inquiries do not refer to such cases; but to those of persons who have been baptized, though not by a minister of the incorporated sect. The right to interment in the parochial ground is a part of the common law of England. It is a right inherent in every inhabitant of a parish, not in those only who claim a legal settlement, but in every one who may reside there at the time of his death. The common law recognizes this right on behalf of every traveller who happens to die in the parish. Every foreigner, whatever may be his religion, whether Christian, Turk, or Pagan, has, by the common law of England, a right to be interred in the burial ground of the parish in which he happens to die. This right, therefore, I claim for all, whether baptised, or not. Nor is there any canon, or ecclesiastical law to the contrary. The denial of burial in pure sepulture is confined to suicides. For though the Bishop of Carlisle doubted whether the rebels, in 1745, who died after attainder, and before execution, ought to be admitted to christian burial, it was determined otherwise, and they were admitted accordingly. On the other inquiry, the obligation of the clergyman to read CONG, MAG. No. 68. the burial service at the interment of a person who had been baptised by a dissenting minister, the opinion given in Mr. W.'s speech is quite at variance, not only with the opinion generally entertained among dissenters, but is equally opposed to the uniform practice of the bishops, when they have been applied to in such cases, and to the recent solemn decision of Sir John Nichol. On the whole subject of burials, I am decidedly of opinion, that it would be much better if Dissenters had no burial grounds attached to their places of worship. It brings upon them a considerable expence; it leads to frequent altercations with the clergy; and it has destroyed that unity of feeling and of co-operation, which would otherwise prevail among them on the subject of burial. We do not need the reading of the clergy at the graves of our deceased friends. Let our ministers, if it be thought proper, attend at the house from which the corpse is to be borne, and there deliver such religious advice and consolation as the occasion may require, and then with a decent and impressive stillness, accompany the mourners to the grave of their deceased relatives. There is another passage in the printed copies of Mr. W.'s speech which calls for serious consideration, "one man who had been twice baptised was refused to be married, unless he would submit to a third baptism." We are told, indeed, the committee has been written to on this subject, but no information is given as to the result. This method of reporting matters is attended with extensive inconvenience. I have no doubt, that a clergyman who refuses to perform the marriage ceremonies on this account, is liable to an action at law, and in certain cases to very heavy damages. On the validity of the 3 G clergyman's objection, no opinion is given in the printed speech. If any doubt is entertained on the subject, it is desirable that some means should be immediately adopted, to secure the general interference of the Dissenters for a revision of the law. If the want of baptism by episcopally ordained ministers, be a legal bar to marriage, it will not be long before we are told, that all the marriages of such persons were illegal ab initio, and consequently all their children are illegitimate, and may be deprived of the property they have inherited from their parents. While I am speaking on the subject of marriage, will you indulge me, Mr. Editor, in a remark on the want of information, and especially of co-operation in respect to the late bill brought into Parliament on the marriage of Dissenters. Copies of the bill were indeed sent to a few ministers in the country, but I believe, not one minister in ten ever saw it. I am extremely happy that the bill did not pass, indeed it was impossible that it should pass. A more loose and undigested scheme has seldom been seen. Had it been passed into a law, it must necessarily have been repealed the next session, and in the interim it would have created infinite confusion. Let the form of a bill be drawn by some competent hand, and a copy of it sent to several ministers of the respective denominations in each county in England and Wales, accompanied with a request that it may be made the subject of careful discussion at an Association of Ministers in each county, and that the Secretary of each Association transmit the result of their deliberation to a Committee in London, on or before the 1st day of December next. The London Committee would then be prepared to form a bill for the consideration of Parliament in the following * session. The several denominations of Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, and Methodists should all be consulted on the occasion. All should be invited to give their advice, and, if need be, to unite in petitions to the legislature on the subject. A. B. ་་་་་་་་་་་ ON THE SIN OF PROMISE- AMONG the various occasions of The In attempting a particular description of this sin, it may be remarked that whatever is calculated to convey an idea to others, whether by legal instrument, by express oral declaration, or by evident and legitimate implication, that we mean to do something for them, which in their view is desirable, amounts to a promise; and to violate any such engagement, where no impossibility has subsequently intervened, is an act of the basest kind, and must involve in its very nature no inconsiderable degree of guilt. Promise, or covenant-breaking is highly sinful, inasmuch as it is calculated to do a very serious injury to those persons who are thus led to repose confidence in our professions of friendships. How many cases have occurred in which important steps have been taken in reliance upon promised aid; and, in which, the engagements having been disregarded, consequences of the most disastrous and painful nature have followed. Perhaps a train of difficulties has thus been introduced which, with regard to the injured individual, has run parallel with his mortal existence, and accelerated his progress to an untimely grave. With respect even to cases of the least aggravated nature, the following scripture declaration is quite appropriate : "Better is it that thou shouldst not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay."Ecc. v. 5. Again, promise, or covenantbreaking is highly sinful, inasmuch as it is an abuse of one of the most important faculties which God has communicated to man, or one of the most valuable acquisitions to which a kind Providence has been pleased to direct all civilized nations. The gift of speech, and the art of writing, were, no doubt, intended to promote the happiness and welfare of mankind, and not to deceive and afflict the unsuspecting with disappointment and misery. The guilt of promise-breaking is very seriously aggravated, as well as attended with more injurious consequences, where a profession of religion is made. It is an imperative obligation, resting upon all who profess the name of Christ, to adorn, in all things, the doctrines of God their Saviour, and to give no offence either to the Jew, or to the Gentile, or to the church of God. It is the duty of the Christian, by a strict attention to all that is honourable in the estimation of mankind, to endeavour to "put to silence the ignorance of foolish men," and thus, in connexion with all that "is lovely and of good report, to stop the mouths of gainsayers." Scarcely a greater injury can be done to the cause of Christ, than what is done through the forfeiture of engagements by those persons, who profess to regulate their conduct by his laws. If the word of a professor is not to be relied on, for what part of the christian character can we possibly give him credit, and how can such an individual expect to counteract the too prevalent conclusions of infidelity, that the religion of Jesus is nothing but a cunningly devised fable. "Lord, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not."-Psalm xv. 1 and 4. The converse of this declaration would, perhaps, be deemed harsh and uncharitable, though it is evidently implied. who feared that the spread of liberal sentiments, among the Quaker body, has been attended with a deterioration of religious character, and abandonment of an orthodox doctrine; that Socinianism, though not ostensibly avowed, has spread widely in secret among its members;" and though I was not ignorant of the evangelical tone and devotional feeling, which pervades the writings of Tuke and Allen, Murray and Barton, yet I could no more receive the sentiments of these excellent men, as_the_accredited opinions of "Friends" generally, than I could believe the sentiments of Fenelon and Van Ess to be those of the Roman Catholic Church. The Yearly Epistles, said I, are the only authentic documents by which to judge of the opinions of the society-and, the fact, that in the Yearly Epistle of 1819, they gave only a negative kind of testimony to the grand and vital doctrine of the atonement, rather strengthened my suspicions and fears. You may judge then of the .satisfaction I felt on reading "the Yearly Epistle" for 1823, when I found that some of the great subjects of faith and practice, in which I supposed them most deficient, are avowed and recommended in a firm, scriptural, and devotional manner, highly creditable to the best feelings of their hearts. Such a discovery has certainly subdued my prejudices, and though I have always respected them as enlightened, liberal, and philantrophic men, I shall now rejoice in the thought that, as a body, they are holding "the Head," to whom, I trust, I am united; and shall feel towards them that sympathy which ever pervades the living, healthy members of the same body. Without pledging myself to the approval of every sentence of the epistle, let me request you to insert it, as in the main I See the Religious Intelligence. think will promote the edification of your readers, while they will not fail to rejoice in it, as the public testimony of a large but hitherto questionable community, to the truth as it is in Jesus. Next to the explicit avowal of their belief, in the divinity and atonement of our Lord, your readers will rejoice to find that they urge in the epistle the observance of duties, which can only be practised and enjoyed by renewed minds, and this indicates the existence of spiritual religion amongst them to a delightful extent. At least, their commendation of scriptural meditation, secret prayer, and the cultivation of a humble dependent spirit, affords a pleasing presumption in favour of their unaffected piety. But what gives me the greatest satisfaction, because least of all expected, was the direct recognition of the duty of a devotional observance of the Lord's-day; a duty which I feared from an acquaintance with the conduct of some "accepted friends," was either imperfectly understood, or slightly practised amongst them, and that when released from attendance at the meeting, they occupied its remaining hours "in finding their own pleasure, and speaking their own words." This reproachful idea the Society has now wiped away, and I trust that it will be the anxious wish of every Friend to conform his conduct to the spirit of that meeting from which this epistle emanated, and which was so evidently assisted in its deliberations by "the spirit of Christ." Let me, in conclusion, request of your devout readers to offer prayer to the Father of lights, that He will be pleased to bless the perusal of this evangelical epistle to the society at large, and that all its members may ere long be as distinguished for spiritual religion as they have hitherto been for moral consistency and active benevolence. DANGERS OF CLASSICAL LEARNING, (ESPECIALLY AS APPLICABLE TO THE ENGLISH UNIVERSITIES.) Ir is much to be lamented, that while we are learning from the scholars of profane antiquity the beauties of imagery, the graces of diction, the arts of oratory, and the harmony of poetry, we are not better upon our guard against their principles, which steal upon us through the vehicles of poetry and oratory, till our taste is wholly vitiated, and the glorious realities of the Christian revelation become insipid and insignificant. Experience shows how difficult it is to dwell with delight upon the expressions of heathen writers, without embracing too many of their sentiments. Dr. Middleton confesses, in one of his letters, that his classical engagements had rendered him very squeamish in his theological studies; and I am well convinced that this has been the case with many others, who, from having their brains filled with heathen notions, and their affections touched with the vanity of conscious erudition, have contracted a nausea toward the Bible and its contents; first disrelishing, and at length deliberately opposing the Christian doctrines; perhaps without being sensible how their minds were originally debauched. If this experiment is fatal in so many instances, and dangerous in all, it is an alarming consideration, that the first ideas conceived by school boys are, for the most part, of the heathenish stamp; and I fear they are too seldom instructed in due season, concerning the infinite difference between the true God and the false. ASTROP. DR. WATTS. AMONG Dr. Watts's academical as sociates and personal friends, was the Reverend and Learned Samuel Say, who was for 18 years the minister of Lowestoff, in Suffolk, from whence he removed to succeed Dr. Calamy at Westminster. This gentleman was a complete master of the classics, and was a very considerable proficient in the art of poetical criticism, and therefore, when his young friend Watts first appeared before the public as a poet, he, in course, received a copy of his Horse Lyrica, as a memorial of early friendship, and a compliment to his own poetical talents. This "presentation copy" is now in the possession of a friend of mine, and contains the following note on a blank leaf, written in the Doctor's hand. “ To Mr. SAMUEL SAY. “ Dear Sir,-Accept of this first labour of the press, this ventr'ous Essay of Poesie in so nice and censorious an age: forgive as you read, peruse as a friend, design to be pleased and not to judge, and if you can (without too much abuse of your judgement), commend ,* you will help to free me from some obligations under wch ye Bookseller has putt ye Timorous Author, "Your Friend, Dec. 28, 1705. "I. WATTS." I trust this fragment will interest your readers, and if the trembling modesty which it displays reproves the obtrusive confidence which some of our young poetasters so offensively discover, the lasting reputation which the Doctor has obtained, may encourage the timid youth, who unites piety with poetic talent, to persevere in consecrating his muse to the service of Jehovah. B. *Two or three words are here obliterated. |