Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

Art. 26

Statements relating to the Measures adopted during the present War for the Augmentation of the Military Force of the Country, previous to the Introduction of the System of recruiting for Service 'during a Term of Years. 8vo. 18. Hatchard. 1808.

The statements contained in this short pamphlet are founded on authentic information, and chiefly on official documents presented to the House of Commons; they are made with every appearance of candour and impartiality; and they are therefore well adapted for correcting any errors and misconceptions, that may have arisen either from a want of general information on the subject, or from the misrepresentations of parties. By bringing into a narrow compass the several facts relating to the effects of the measures, that were adopted under the administrations of Mr. Addington and Mr. Pitt, for augmenting the military force of the country, the author has enabled any person, who reads his pamphlet attentively, to judge for himself respecting their relative degrees of efficiency.

We find that the effective strength of the army, when Mr. Addington succeeded Mr. Pitt in 1801, was 211,190; that on the first of January 1802, previously to the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace, it was 230,864; that on the first of January 1804, about seven months after the commencement of the present war, it was 220,418; and that on the first of July 1804, at the termination of Mr. Addington's administration, it was 232,380. It also appears that, during the last administration of Mr. Pitt, instead of an increase in the effective strength of the British army, and notwithstanding the acts for raising an additional force, a considerable diminution would have occurred without the several aids afforded by the continued operation of the measures of his immediate predecessor.

We must repeat that the military force of this country is sufficiently large for the purposes of national defence, if a proper application of it be made, and were it ten times as great, it would, without such an application, only increase our danger and our calamities.

RELIGIOUS.

Art. 27. An Unitarian Christian Minister's Plea for Adherence to the Church of England: including a Narrative of the unsuccessful Fate of the celebrated Clerical Parliamentary Petition and Bill, and its Consequences; with the Proposal of a practicable Plan of Church Reform, on a Scriptural Basis. By Francis Stone, M.A. F.S.A. 8vo. 18. 6d. Eaton.

Is the Church of England constructed on an Unitarian basis If it is not, but rather on the most explicit and unequivocal principles of Trinitarianism, how can any rational plea be urged by a professed Unitarian for his adherence to it? A man who carefully conceals his real sentiments may, without any violation of mere decorum, appear to belong to a communion of which the tenets are not in accordance with his own: but, as soon as he has thrown down the gauntlet, and declared war against that system of faith, how can he boast of his attachment to it? Though, therefore, we much respect Mr. Stone's ingenuous and fearless avowal of his opinions respecting the proper humanity of Christ, we cannot think that the declaration of

that

that humanity in an Establishment-pulpit is an evidence of his adherence to the Church of England; for, though he may quote the 5th article, and his engagement with the Bishop at his ordination, as affording him the fullest power to inculcate his own views of scripture on the people, he has no right to alter one iota of the Liturgy; and the liberty, which he apprehends to be given to him by the 6th article, is completely taken away by the statute, as he has found alas! to his cost.

The whole system must, if we argue fairly, be taken into con sideration, and not isolated portions of it; and if Unitarianism cannot be reconciled with the general tenor of the Church doctrine and service, an Unitarian cannot conscientiously officiate as a minister of the Established Church: for he must read the Liturgy, and by first reading and afterward preaching against the doctrines which it contains, he plays a very inconsistent part. We sincerely pity Mr. Stone, but we do not admit his plea for adherence. He is a Dissen

ter, and as a Dissenter he must be classed.

Our opinion of the expediency of a reform of the Liturgy has been unvaried but, till this amelioration takes place, an Unitarian cannot be a true churchman. Mr. S. will tell us that others have no right to interfere in a matter which concerns only his God and his own conscience:' but when he appeals to the public, stating the merits of his case, the public will judge of his consistency. The plan which is here proposed, of leaving it to the choice of clergymen to use either the present trinitarian or an unitarian liturgy, would probably be acceptable to many: but we apprehend that the times are not propitious to innovation, and that we are more likely to see the law enforced against than altered in favour of ministers who stand in the predicament of Mr. Stone.

Art. 28. Seventy Sermons on the Doctrines and Duties of Christianity, consisting partly of Discourses altered and abridged from the Works of eminent Divines. By William Toy Young, M.A. &c. 8vo. 2 Vols. pp. 420 in each Vol. 125. Boards. Longman and Co. 1907.

The divines, to whom Mr. Young has been indebted, are stated in the preface to be Barrow, Jeremy Taylor, Beveridge, Smallridge, and Fiddes: but he has not discriminated his original compositions from those which are constructed with materials professedly borrow. ed. From their uniformity of style, we must consider the author as indebted to the old divines for thoughts only, which he has clothed in his own language. Seventy-one sermons are included in these volumes, and they have the merit of being plain, practical, and short.

Art. 29. Sermons on various Subjects, by the Rev. Joseph Townsend, M.A. Rector of Pewsey, Wilts. 8vo. PP. 384. 88.

Boards, Mawman.

This respectable writer is already known to the world by dif ferent publications, and particularly by his Travels in Spain, &c.

See M. Review, New Series, Vol. v. p. 121.
Y 3

Concerning

Concerning the sermons before us, we are informed that it was his in. tention not to have given them to the world until he was himself removed from it: but (he adds) lamenting to see that the progress of infidelity and the morals of the age are such as call for the zealous exertions of religion and virtue, he has resolved to lose no time in committing his thoughts and admonitions to the press.' The advancement of the interests of Christian piety, benevolence, and virtue, is the tendency of these discourses, which are fifteen in number, on the following subjects: Being of a God, Moral Law, on which there are two; Gospel, also two ;-Temptation, on which we find not fewer than eight-Leaven of the Sadducees ;— Leaven of the Pharisees.

These Discourses are unequal, but they display the qualities of a serious and intelligent mind, are generally accurate and clear in their style, and are also convincing and impressive. The second and third sermons might, perhaps, at first view and to some readers, appear not quite to harmonize with the passage of Scripture placed at their head,' I was alive without the law; but they will be found strictly to agree.

We have seen (says the writer,) that rejecting this superior law (religion or the law of God) the human race can have nothing to guide their conduct, but their own will and inclination, nothing but instinct, prejudice, or passion. Now supposing that you who pour contempt on religion and live without the law, that you could vin dicate your freedom from restraint; would not all mankind partake of the same privilege and claim a similar exemption? What then would be the condition of the world? Should the planets forsake their orbits and the elements forget the laws impressed on them when the foundations of the world were laid, and should the pristine chaos be restored; we should have only a faint or most imperfect image of that confusion, which must reign for ever in the moral world, if the wild passions of mankind were set at liberty from the obligations of religion, and suffered to rage without the restraint or fear of those future punishments which are threatened by a just and most holy law.'

In some instances, Mr. Townsend may be considered as too clas. sical and philosophical. What have common assemblies to do with the names of Democritus, Plato, Zeno, Cleanthes, &c. or with the perpendicular lines or curvatures of Epicurus, or with the sects of Stoics, Academics, or Peripatetics? Yet some propriety may be discerned in all this, when regarded as illustrating that reply which was made by Peter to his Divine Master, John, vi, 68.) “ Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of Eternal Life* .". Though it may not be requisite to introduce these allusions so particu Tarly in discourses of this kind, a general notice is surely not imper. tinent.-Concerning the sermons on Temptation, we shall observe that each of them, separately considered, is fitted to the purposes of moral correction but that the eight taken together display repetitions which do not add to their beauty.

* See Sermon IV. in this vol., also Sermon V. from Col. ii. 8.

Art.

Art. 30. Sermons on the Existence of the Deity, the Immortality of the Soul, Authenticity of the Bible, and other important Subjects. By the Rev. John Adams, A. M. Master of the Academy at Putney, and Author of several much-approved Historical Publica-' tions. 8vo. 78. 6d. Boards. Longman and Co.

Vanity, it has been often remarked, is the sin which most easily besets authors; and Mr. Adams, in this publication, affords a ludicrous case in point. He calculates that his much approved historical compilations have fallen into the hands of at least one hundred and thirty thousand persons; and he presumes that many of these 130,0co readers of his historical epitomes will be induced to peruse his sermons, even though they should have no novelty to recommend them. We hope, however, for his sake, that he has not acted to the extent of this conceit, and prepared a copy for each of these 130,000.—The writers, whom Mr. A. professes to have consulted for materials, are Stillingfleet, Abernethy, Addison, Butler, Bryant, Clarke, King, Pearson, Tillotson, Scott, Sharp, Baxter, Swift, Sherlock, Porteus, Paley, Seed, Langhorn, Sterne, Mason, Grant, Burnet, Barrow, Sherlock, West, Ray, Derham, Atterbury, Blair, and Leland. To these celebrated authors, who are not chronologically arranged, he should have added the names of several of our poets, from whose works he has liberally sprinkled his pages with quotations. As the discourses rest on such authorities, it is not probable that we should have any thing to object to the sentiments which pervade them; and as compilations they display considerable energy and animation.

Art. 31. A Letter to a Barrister, in answer to "Hints to the Public and the Legislature on the Nature and effects of Evangelical Preaching." By Robert Hawker, D.D. Vicar of Charles, Plymouth. 8vo. Is. 6d. Williams and Smith.

Surely Dr. Hawker cannot consider this letter in the light of an answer to the "Hints on Evangelical Preaching, by a Barrister " (Mr. Sedgwick). Can he seriously think that his moral character has been attacked, and that it is necessary to summon a jury to clear, it? We are persuaded that the Barrister had no more intention of questioning the correctness of Dr. Hawker's moral conduct, than we have; he only meant, as we do, to lead the present letter-writer and others, who have assumed to themselves the title of Evangelical Preachers, to a close examination of the accuracy and tendency of those doctrines which they promulgate as the sum and substance of the Gospel. Now this close examination Dr. H avoids; substituting a repetition of favourite expressions, in the place of critical inquiry into their strict import. He forgets that, in his warfare with. the Barrister, declamation and rant will be of no avail. He must de fine terms, settle preliminary propositions, and agree on certain data, before he can bring the controversy to termination. In our opinion, it is necessary to determine in the first place what is meant by righteousness and unrighteousness: whether righteousnes can have the properties of unrighteousness, so that righteousness can be filthy; if righteousness be synonimous with virtue or the performance of duty, and unrighteousness be synonimous with vice, whether these qualities are not in the very nature of things untransferable; and

Y 4

and lastly whether it is possible for any person to have any virtue or merit to transfer. When these points are settled, and it is found as impossible for a man to have any other righteousness than that which properly belongs to his character, as it is impossible for God to lie" or to be what he is not, all men will be forced to agree in opinion on those expressions of scripture which would seem to indicate the transfer of moral qualities; but which, from the utter impossibility of the fact, cannot strictly have any such meaning.

Dr. H. appears to have a very confused and undefined idea of righteousness, for he remarks that there is a wide distinction between his views of moral rectitude and those of the Barrister, in the comparative statements of human life as they relate to man with man, and as that rectitude appears in the divine eye :' but, as to the matter in dispute, we see no room for the distinction. God appreciates the nature of our conduct as it respects both himself and our fellow creatures; if there be any rectitude in the latter, he must register it as such; and if man in any point of view be competent to rectitude, he cannot be represented as naturally incapable of thinking or performing any thing that is good.

The distinction made in the next page between two passages in the Psalms, viz. Judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, c. and Enter not into judgment with thy servant, &c. is equally unwarranted. In both texts, the appeal is made to the Lord; and David meant in one place to assert his innocency, and in the other to confess his guilt, or to represent himself as a compound of good and evil.

We conceive that the Barrister will say that he is misrepresented, when Dr H. exhibits him as contending that the doctrine of grace leads to licentiousness.' He may complain of what he deems the erroneous views of the doctrine of Grace, but not of the doctrine itself; since it is the very principle for which he is so strenuous, that the mercy of God in Christ has for its objeet the production of holiness, and excludes every notion of our being saved in our sins.

Dr. H. and the Barrister have both the same end in view: according to the interpretation of the latter, virtue is produced in the first instance, according to the Dr.'s system, it is a subordinate consequence. He would call a change from vice to virtue, regeneration, or a New Birth; while Dr. H. regards this Regeneration, or New Birth, as a certain change operated in the soul by the grace of God, from which good works flow as a sort of consequence. Is the former, however, less hostile to morality than the latter?

Moral preaching says Dr. H) may propose precepts, but possesseth no power to enforce them' Is not this also the predicament of evangelical preaching? If the human mind be incompetent to any good act, it is as absurd to exhort men to faith, as it is to call them to virtue or repentance, since faith, as a pure exercise of the mind, cannot be discriminated from virtue at its source, and is no otherwise distinguished from holiness than the principle is from the act. All, therefore, that has been said of the reception of virtue, by means of faith, can only signify the reception of one virtue through another; which in this view may be very good sense, that one virtue attracts and prepares the heart for another; and it can never denote

the

« ПредишнаНапред »