Page images
PDF
EPUB

timohy to the effential inherent divinity of the bleffed Jefus, and his confubftantiality and co-equality with the Father. Thus was this verse understood and interpreted by fome of the ancient writers of the church.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

All the writers of the three first centuries underftand the text in the ufual fenfe; and the learned and orthodox bishops, Pearfon and Bull, exprefsly acknowlege thefe, words, the only true God,' to be meant of the Father only, by way of fupreme eminence, in contradiftinction to the Son, who was fent by him-But the point will fcarcely admit any debate ; and we are furprised, that our learned author fhould introduce this forced and unnatural interpretation into his difcourse. The reason why we ought to know Jesus Christ, is, what he himself plainly fignifies, his being fent to make. known unto us all things, which he heard of his Father, ch. xv. 15.

The gospel covenant, fays the author, was attended with fuch prodigious and astonishing operations, as fully attested its author and finifher to be God. In his own perfon he is defcribed to be God, manifeft in the flesh...What less than the Son of God manifefted could fo effectually destroy the works of the devil ?'

No inference in favour of our Saviour's confubftantiality and coequality with the Father, can be derived from these premifes. The fuperintending providence of God, which is mentioned above, is able to produce the greatest effects. The learned reader will obferve, that our author has here impli citly adopted that very questionable text, God manifested in

the flesh.'

The third difcourfe exhibits the comparative excellency of the Christian morality.

Here we have many obfervations calculated to fhew, how far Christianity is fuperior to all the difcoveries of natural religion; a point which, in general, will be readily granted. But we are forry to fee this learned writer injuring nature, for the purpose of magnifying the riches of divine grace; and depreciating the labours of thofe, who have attempted to investigate the principles of natural religion. Many ingenious romances, he says, have been published in fupport of what the writers have been pleased to style the Religion of Nature.'

[ocr errors]

This ftroke of fatire is, we fuppofe, chiefly aimed at Wollaston: a writer, who has done honour to humanity, and an effential fervice to the caufe of Chriftianity, by fhewing us,

• Pearson on the Creed, p. 40. Bull. Def.. fe&t. 4. cap. 1. § 2. See Clarke's Reply, P. 59.

R 2

that

that revelation and nature unite in proclaiming the fame great and effential truths of morality.

Our author himself acknowleges fomething to this effect, in the prefent difcourfe, when he speaks of the heathen philofophers. They have, he fays, defcanted nobly on thefe virtues [justice and fortitude], and have given such rules concerning them, as have done honour to themselves and to human nature. But fo far is this from detracting from the fuperior excellency of Christianity, that it is a confirmation of its merit. It fhews, that what our bleffed Saviour taught, is agreeable to the more exalted, rectified understandings of men of the most enlightened capacities; that it falls in with the powers of natural confcience, and adds new life and vigour to it.'

This, if we mistake not, is a material conceffion in favour of human reafon, but not confiftent with other paffages, where the impotency of nature is strongly afferted and maintained.

In the fame difcourfe, our author throws the following fevere reflection on Cicero:

The first duty, fays this great reasoner, of justice, is, that no man hurt another, except he be provoked by an injury. Is this a doctrine fit to be named with the Christian law? Shall be presume to direct us in our duty to one another, who allows us the liberty of revenge, when irritated by an injury?

.. The words of Cicero are thefe:1 Juftitiæ primum manus eft, ut ne cui quis noceat, nifi laceffitus injuriâ.' De Offic. lib. i. cap. 7. To juftify the foregoing reflection, our author gives an unfavourable turn to his tranflation. But the objection will difappear, if we only tranflate the paffage, more agreeably to the original, in this manner : that no man hurt another, unless he be injuriously attacked.' There is nothing in this, but what felf-defence, and the laws of every Christian country allow in all cafes, wherein it may be expedient to reftrain violence and outrage, to maintain private: right and property, and to fecure to the honeft and peaceable the advantages of civil life. It is plain from what follows, that Cicero did not allow revenge, or any other private paffion, to take place. For, treating of injustice, he says: Qui injuftè impetum in quempiam facit, aut irâ, aut aliquâ perturbatione incitatus, is quafi manus adferre videtur focio. And he adds with a noble spirit of benevolence: Qui non defendit, nec obftitit, fi poteft, injuriæ, tam eft in vitio, quàm fi parentes, aut amicos, aut patriam deferat.'He that injuriously falls upon another, whether prompted

[ocr errors]

by

by rage, or other violent paffion, does, as it were, leap at the throat of his companion; and he that refufes to help him when injured, and to ward off the wrong, if it lies in his power, is as plainly guilty of baseness and injuftice, as if he had deferted his father, his friends, or his native country.' Cockman's Traní.

If our author were to be attacked by a highwayman, and in danger of lofing his moiety of the Bampton estate, he would think it no breach of Chriftianity to comply with Cicero's maxim, and use his pistol, ut noceat latroni,' in order to deter the ruffian from his purpose, or to fhoot him.

The fourth difcourfe points out the pre-eminence of the Christian over the Mofaical law. The fifth contains obfervations on the time and place of Chrift's nativity, and the dignity and excellency of his perfon. The fixth is calculated. to fhew, that difhonouring Chrift is dishonouring God.' John v. 23.

[ocr errors]

6

Chrift, he fays, may be difhonoured, if his divinity be denied. This fort of dishonour is what we may prefume the apoftle chiefly aimed at in the text.'

[ocr errors]

The text has not the least tendency to prove the doctrine, which the author endeavours to maintain in this difcourfe, viz. our Saviour's unity of effence, and equality in power, glory, and dignity with the Father.' The following words, in point of argument, would have been as much to the purpofe: He that receiveth you, receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that fent me.' In this paffage no unity of effence either is or can be implied; why therefore fhould it be implied in the other -The lecturer however grounds the doctrine itself on other proofs; among which are the following:

Can we allow ourselves to fuppofe, that the Saviour of mankind, who came into the world, as well to promote the honour of God, as the happinefs of men, would upon any account, and without any refervation, have " made himself equal with God," and pronounced, that he and his Father are one," if he was abfolutely nothing more than a finite creature, exifting in time, and had no fuch equality with the Father, and no communication or participation of the deity with him??

[ocr errors]

In the same strain of reafoning a papift may ask, why did our Saviour exprefsly fay, this is my body,' if he did not intend to affert the doctrine of tranfubftantiation? One anfwer will ferve for both thefe queftions: men pervert the fcriptures by their falfe interpretations.

R 3

With

[ocr errors]

With refpect to the former of these texts,

he made him. felf equal with God,' our author takes a calumny of the Jews for an affertion of our Lord himfelf. To their accufation of his making himself equal with God, our Saviour replies, not by reprefenting himself as coeffential with the Father, but by referring all his works to Him, and fhewing, that he really was, what he pretended to be, the promised Meffiah, the Son of God, fent forth by him, and invested with his power and authority: The fon, fays he, can do nothing of himself, but what he feeth the father do.' v. 19.

[ocr errors]

As to the fecond text, for which he refers us to John xvii. 22. if he had considered the verse with any degree of impartiality and attention, he would have perceived, that it is no proof of the doctrine he maintains. Let the reader judge.

The glory which thou gaveft me, I have given them, that they may be ev one, even as we are Ev one.' This indifputably fhews, that the Father and the Son are one in the fame fenfe às Christians are one with Chrift, and with one another; not by a union or famenefs of effence, but of affection, agreement, and defign.

The fubject of the feventh lecture is the neceffity of inward faith and outward confeffion.

Treating of herefy and fchifm he fays: If different fects are formed and encouraged upon principles of fpeculation and absolute indifference, we are authorized by St. Paul to give fuch diffenfions the appellation of fchifms and herefies.'

'The words heretic and fchifmatic are opprobrious appellations. Infpired apostles, who could not be deceived in any article of the Christian religion, would undoubtedly apply these terms with ftrict propriety. But for us, who can pretend to no fupernatural light, nor any degree of reafon, but what our author and others have treated with contempt, it must be absolute prefumption to call thofe heretics, who receive the fcripture's with all poffible veneration, and only peaceably and quietly, to the best of their judgment, explain them in a sense different from ours. This is not, what fome infolently call it, ⚫ being wife above what is written,' or denying the words of revelation; but only a difference of fentiment, with refpect to the meaning of the facred writers, in points, wherein the greatest men have formed a variety of opinions.

In the last fermon our author enquires into the causes of the inefficacy of the word and faith.

[ocr errors]

The remarks, which we have here made on thefe difcourfes, have not been fuggefted by heretical pravity, or any spirit of oppofition; but with a fincere defire to promote the facred Gaufe of Chriftianity, and recommend a defence of our holy

faith

faith by arguments, which are not infignificant, and foreign. from the purpofé, but pertinent and conclufive. This writer, throughout the whole feries of his lectures, appears to be a perfon of unquestionable abilities; and has undoubtedly made a number of useful observations. But he fhould have been more cautious and critical in the felection of his arguments. He should have imitated the fishermen, mentioned in the gofpel, who fat down, and gathered the good into veffels; but caft the bad away.'

[ocr errors]

Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica. No II. Part I.

Contain

ing Reliquie Galeanæ, or, Mifcellaneous Pieces by the late learned Brothers Roger and Samuel Gale. 4to. 2s. 6d. fewed. Nichols.

[ocr errors]

T HERE are few writers of eminence, who do not leave at their death, fome sketches of projected works, fome curious tracts, or fragments, which have never been publifhed. These pieces frequently fall into the hands of careless or ignorant perfons, and in a fhort time perhaps are either mutilated or destroyed. With a design to prevent in fome degree such loffes as thefe, in one department of literature, British Topography, the editors of the Bibliotheca Topographica have undertaken to publish fome valuable pieces. on that subject, now in their poffeffion; and fuch others as fhall hereafter be communicated to them, and found to contain any useful information.

The first publication, which has appeared on this plan, is the History and Antiquities of Tunftal in Kent, by the late Mr. Mores; the Reliquie Galeanæ now before us is the fecond.

Thefe Reliques are accompanied with Memoirs of the family of Gale.

The most celebrated person of this family was Dr. Thomas Gale, born at Scruton, in Yorkshire, in 1636, mafter of St. Paul's fchool from 1672 to 1697, and afterwards dean of York, till his death, which happened at his deanery house, in 1702, in the 67th year of his age.

The following books, which he published, are illuftrious teftimonies of his industry and learning.

[ocr errors]

1. Opufcula Mythologica, Ethica, & Phyfica, Gr. & Lat. Cantab. 1671. 8vo. This collection contains Palæphatus, Heraclitus, & Anonymus, de Incredibilibus; Phurnutus de Naturâ Deorum; Salluftius Phil. de Diis & Mundo; Ocellus Lucanus; Timæus Locrus de Animâ Mundi; Demophili,

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »