« VorigeDoorgaan »
tioned; and therefore they acquit him, and he is hereby acquitted accordingly."
Here we have fomething like fenfe and meaning; but with refpe&t to the President's complimentary addrefs to Sir Hugh, on delivering him his fword (as it ftands in the trial printed for Mr. Murray), the difference between that and the Portsmouth account cannot here be adjusted, for the Judge-Advocate has not faid one word relative to that circumstance.-Note, there is a fourth copy of these proceed. ings, taken by Mr. Blandemor; but this is not yet come to our hands.
Art. 52. A Friendly Addrefs to the Jews in general. In a Series of Letters. 12mo. I s. 6 d. Brown. 1779.
Thefe letters, we are given to understand, were written for the benefit of a Jewish family of the Author's acquaintance, who advised with him about religion. How far the friendly intention of the Writer was answered, is not faid; but as in one paffage, he addreffes his correfpondent as almoft perfuaded to be a Chriftian, we may fuppofe he had the fatisfaction of completing the work. These letters confift of plain exhortations; but we cannot think they apply to or reach those objections that might be started by a fenfible jew not previously difpofed to liften to Christian doctrines.
RELIGIOUS and CONTROVERSIA L. Art. 53. The Nature and Extent of Intellectual Liberty, in a Letter to Sir George Saville, Bart. occafioned by an Error on a fundamental principle of Legiflation, fupported by his Credit and Eloquence in the Debate on the Diffenting Bill, March 17, 1779. By the Rev. David Williams. 8vo. Dodfley,
As it is impoffible, within our narrow limits, to do complete juftice to the arguments used by the feveral late writers on the nice, difficult, and important fubject of Intellectual Liberty, we fhall only give the titles of the controverfial tracts which have been occafioned by the Diffenters Bill juft paffed, together with a flight intimation of the leading principle of each author.
The firft of thefe, in the order of publication, is the abovementioned letter to Sir G. S. in which Mr. W. fays many ftriking, and fome extravagant things. He decides abfolutely against the bill; which he confiders as injurious and dangerous to truth and liberty. This Gentleman carries the argument higher than any other advocate on the fame fide of the question; for he contends for a full and free toleration of all opinions and doctrines. He fays, I do not fee why thieves fhould not be allowed to preach the principles of theft; murderers of murder; feducers of feduction; adulterers of adultery; and traitors of treafon :' adding, 'If any man be fo weak as to think, that advantages would arife to iniquity from it, he cannot be benefited by any reafoning which can be offered him.'
Mr. W. foars on long pinions indeed;-and he feems to apprehend no danger of their being clipped,-notwithstanding his fears for the confequences of the prefent limited toleration.
The error on a fundamental principle' which procured Sir G. the honour of this epiftle, was his admitting that "there were fome opinions
Opinions and thoughts which could not be tolerated;" inftancing those of a right to murder or to plunder." What the fpirited letter-writer fays in oppofition to Sir G.'s notion is curious at least, if not convincing.
Art. 54. Confiderations on the Diffenters' Bill; or, the Propriety of Proteftant diffenting Minifters acceding to a Declaration of their Belief in the Holy Scriptures, annexed to Bill now depending in Parliament, for the farther Enlargement of religious Liberty. 8vo. 6d. Robfon, &c. 1779.
This candid and judicious advocate for the bill, as it has paffed, fince the appearance of thefe Confiderations, with the Declaration annexed, fets out with ftating, in general terms, the diffenters' plea for the right of private judgment, and the free exercife of his religton; and then proceeds to enquire whether, on the different grounds of confcience and of expedience, a diffenting minifter may accede to the , propofed declaration? This queftion, in both refpects, but especially in the latter, he determines in the affirmative; and every moderate reader, we apprehend, will approve his reafoning; which extends to every important point and argument involved in this great and comprehenfive fubject of inveftigation. With refpect, however, to an acknowledgment of the magiftrate's right to demand of any man a declaration of his faith, there are, among the diffenters, many rational and worthy minifters, who entertain fentiments different from those of our Author. Of this number, is the writer of the tract which is the subject of the following article.
Art. 55. Free Thoughts on the Inconfiftency of conforming to any religious Teft, as a Condition of Toleration, with the true Principle of Proteftant Diffent. By John Palmer, Minister to a Society of Proteftant Diffenters in New Broad-street. 8vo. Is. Johnson. Thefe free thoughts feem to have been chiefly intended as an anfwer to the preceding confiderations. The writer does not enter Targely into the general queftion concerning the juft limits of the civil power. The particular point to which his remarks chiefly bear reference, is the interference of the magiftrate in requiring of proteftant diffenting minifters, tutors, and fchoolmasters, a declaration of faith in the fcriptures, as the condition of their enjoying a legal toleration to exercife their refpective functions: and his leading confideration is, whether fuch a requifition can be complied with, in confiftence with the true principle of proteftant diffent?" This is, indeed, the main object of the prefent debate; and our fenfible Author, who appears to be a ftaunch diffsenter on principle, decides totally against the bill:-fo true is the remark of good Sir Roger De Coverly (which we may apply to almost every controverfy), "that much may be faid on both fides."
*There are fome other publications on this interefting fubject; but we must defer them to our next Month's Review.
Art. 56. A feasonable Caution against the Abominations of the Church of Rome. By C. De Coetlogon, M. A. Izmo. 6 d. Keith. 1779.
Candor and moderation toward perfons of every religious denomination, we must wish to be encouraged; but the history of the whole Chriftian world, fo clearly proves the ill tendency of popith
principles and ufurpations on the rights and confciences of men, that we cannot be too much guarded against them. This Author gives on the whole a proper view of his fubject. He intends his book for the common people, believing that the youth of this nation, efpecially of the poorer fort, are in danger of being educated in the horrid principles of the church of Rome; thousands, he fays, having been invited, and many received into Popifa feminaries in feveral parts of Great Britain.' At the fame time he admonishes his readers, that it is his defign not to attack perfons but things, to ftorm that kind of error, which in its nature is fatal to the civil and religious liberties of Englishmen.' We do not intirely approve of one or two of his terms, fuch as diabolical council, hypocritical zeal, because there are no doubt fincere and worthy perfons in this party of Chriftians, as well as in others. His account of articles of faith necefary to falvation discovers, perhaps, a mind much too narrow; and poffibly, on enquiry, he may find it favours a little of that fpirit of papery which inculcates that out of their church there is no falvation. We join, however, with him in his concluding paragraph: The ftate of the nation is alarming; the ftate of religion is much more fo; therefore, as men, as citizens, as chriftians, BEWARE.'
Art. 57. A Defence of the Clergy of the Church of Scotland, who have appeared in Oppofition to the Intention or an unlimited Repeal of the Penal Laws againft. Roman Catholics. By John M'Farlan, D. D. one of the Minifters of Canongate. Edinburgh. 8d. Dickfon, Edinburgh.
Whether Dr. M Farlan's apprehenfions of the bad confequences to be dreaded from an unlimited repeal of the penal laws against papists are, or are not, well-grounded, we fhall not take upon us to determine. We are bound in charity to believe, that the Doctor, and fuch of his brethren as agree with him upon this fubject, are men of integrity, and act from principle. On this fuppofition, the Defence before us does them honour, both as Chriftians and as Pro
Art. 58. Confiderations on the Spirit of Popery, and the intended Bill for the Relief of Papills in Scotland. By John Erskine, D. D. one of the Minifters of Edinburgh. 8vo. 6d. Printed at Edinburgh.
In regard to thefe Confiderations, we can only repeat what we faid in the preceding article, viz. that, whatever ground there may, or may not be, for apprehending danger from Roman Catholics, Dr. Erfkine's zeal in a caufe, wherein he thinks the lives, liberties, and religion of proteftants are intimately concerned, merits commenda
Art. 59. Popery diffećted: or, a Speech against the Popish To
leration Bill: intended to have been delivered in the Pantheon [Edinburgh], Nov. 12, 1778. Now greatly enlarged. By W. Dryfdale, Teacher of Languages, &c. Edinburgh. 8vo. Is. Edinburgh. 1779. Sold by Fielding and Walker, London.
Full of zeal, and learning, and bad English. The last mentioned circomitance is rather unfortunate in a publication fet forth by a teacher of languages. For this Mr. Dryfdale may apologize, perhaps, as did the learned Mr. of Newington, who advertised to cure
defects in the organs of fpeech." When Dr. -, who flammered rather too much for a preacher, applied to the advertifer, he was greatly furprised to find the gentleman ftammering worse than himfelf, and objected accordingly ;--" Oh! S-i-ir," faid the quack, my b-b-bufin-e-fs is to cu-cu-re other pe-pe-ple, not myfe-fe elf: for who will p-p-pay me for th-th at?
Art. 60. A Scripture Catechifm, hiftorical, doctrinal, and practical: in which the Anfwers are expreffed in the Words of the Bible only. With Prayers for Children, molly in Scripture language. 12mo. 4 d. Buckland. 1777.
We cannot eafily fay by what means this little performance has escaped an earlier notice. It appears to us to merit attention both from the nature of its defign, and from its execution. We cannot give our Readers a better view of it than by reciting a paffage or two from the preface. After having obferved that adding to the number of catechifms already published may need an apology, it is faid, The only apology which the Author has to offer is, that a catechifm in Scripture words feemed to him, on the whole, preferable to any other, particularly in the following views: It is calculated moft easily and effectually to promote the knowledge of Scripture, as well as cherish in the minds of children a high veneration for it. It muft, one would imagine, afford a greater fatisfaction to inftructors of youth, to have only the pure word of God to explain, than the words of fallible men, however excellent: And thofe points which have been long matter of warm debate in the Chriftian church cannot be fo well expreffed, or fo fafely taught, in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, as in those which the Holy Ghost teacheth. It is not pretended that divine truth cannot, or ought not to be expreffed in human words, or that it may not be ufeful thus to exprefs it firft, and afterward prove it from Scripture. But to affert divine truth, in divine words, is both the fafer and the eafier method, as it carries its proof along with it. To teach children immediately from the Scriptures, is leading them to the fountain-head, where they will find the water pure.' In another part of the preface, it is obferved; It is not pretended that the defign here puifued is new, or the execution of it intirely the Author's own. He thinks it a much better recommendation of it to fay, that fomething of this kind has been attempted many years ago by persons of far fuperior judgment and note in the church. A Scripture catechifm was published by Mr. Henry Jefje, and another by Mr. Owen Stockton, both of them ejected minilers of great eminence. Another was printed above fifty years ago, which has been commonly afcribed to Mr. James Peirce. It was from this laft (though in fome views exceptionable) that the first hint of the prefent work was taken; and it has fince been improved by comparing it with a fimilar work published by Mr. Benjamin Stinton in the year 1719, as well as other collections of Scripture-texts. It was at first privately printed for the ufe of the Author's catechumens; but a few friends having had the fight of it, and recommended it to others, there has been a greater demand for it than could be conveniently answered in a private way. This determined him to publifh it, after having made fuch alterations in it as were fuggefted by the remarks of fome judicious friends.'
We have only to add farther concerning this publication, that if any profit fhould arife from its fale, we are informed in a note, it will be applied folely to the ufe of the children for whom it was drawn up.'
Art. 61. The Importance of Truth and the Danger of Moderation, particularly with refpect to the Doctrine of the Trinity: Inveftigated in three Conferences between an orthodox Christian and a moderate Man. Infcribed to the Rev. Sir Harry Trelawny, Bart. and occafioned by his late Sermon at the Exeter Affembly. 8vo. Is. Exeter, printed. London, fold by Buckland, &c.
From the title of this work, which is we fuppofe intentionally ambiguous, the Reader may perhaps conclude that he is to find what is termed orthodoxy of fentiment warmly and highly exalted, while moderation is depreffed and trampled under foot. But a perufal of the pamphlet will produce a conclufion intirely different. The work is liberal and candid, pleading for the rights of private judgment and the fole authority of Scripture in oppofition to human explications and decifions. While it has this direction, it does not, as hath been too often the case, tend to deftroy or weaken that piety which is the true fource of other good difpofitions, and of good conduct.
I. The Principles and Duty of Proteftant Diffenters confidered-At the Ordination of the Rev. John Prior Eftlin, at Lewin's Mead, Briftol, Aug. 5, 1778, by the Rev. William Enfield, LL. D. With an Addrefs on the Defign of Ordination, by the Rev Thomas Wright; Mr. Eftlin's Anfwers to the Questions proposed to him; and a Charge by the Rev. Nathaniel White. 8vo. .1 s. 6 d.
Dr. Enfield fhews that Proteftant Diffenters have two grand objects of attention, viz. the fupport of the right of private judgment, and. the advancement of moral and religious knowledge in the world. Amidst all the diverfity of their opinions on fubjects of fpeculation, thefe important objects, he says, ought to form an infeparable bond of union amongst them, and engage them to a zealous attention to their common interefts, and a warm attachment to each other as bre thren. His fentiments on the fubject are candid and judicious ;—the Addrefs, the Anfwers to the Queftions, and the Charge, breathe a liberal and manly fpirit.
II. Unity and Charity recommended-Before the Friendly Society at Cockermouth, Cumberland; at their Anniversary Meeting, Jan. 1, 1779. By Jofeph Gilbank, junior, Minifter of the Gospel at Cockermouth. 4to. 6d. Ware, &c. Whitehaven.
A plain, fenfible discourse, from, "We are members one of another." After fhewing in what refpects we are members one of another, and pointing out the duties which we owe to each other, as fellow-crea tures and fellow-chriftians, the Preacher concludes with an addrefs to the Society-a Society inftituted for the exprefs purposes of benevolence ;-benevolence in one of its moft neceffary and utefti branches; the relief of the honest and industrious artificer, when la bouring under the double weight of poverty and fickness.