SIR, MISCELLANIES. TO THE EDITOR. March 9, 1801. IT T was with furprise that I obferved in your laft Appendix, and in your Number for January, published at the fame time, fome animadverfions upon my letters inferted in your Mifcellaneous department, the year before laft. I have waited to see whether more would appear in the subsequent Number, that I might, in that cafe, have replied at once to the whole; as I do not wish to intrude upon the attention of your readers more frequently than it becomes neceffary. For a fimilar reafon I fhail confine my prefent remarks to those paffages in which your Correfpondents honour me with their particular notice. Verax (page 98 of your prefent volume) terms the notes, which you annexed to a letter from me, inferted in your feventeenth Number, fevere, but justly merited." I confefs, Sir, that they did not appear to me entitled to either of these epithets. I have never complained of the manner in which you have treated my communications; nor fhall I think myself authorifed to do fo, while you act with the fame fairness as hitherto, in allowing me to fubmit my own arguments to the judgement of your readers, whether or not you think it neceffary to oppose them. You know, Sir, that my first address to you tended folely to vindicate the practice of village-preaching from a charge of fedition. I have placed that vindication upon the ground that no instance has been, nor, I believe, can be, produced, in which that practice has been perverted to feditious purposes. In your annotations upon my letter, you had the candour to infert the Reverend Author's renunciation of the only direct attempt which had been made to fubflantiate fuch a charge. I remained therefore perfectly fatisfied that the argument fhould rest in that ftate; and as I was by no means offended at your declaration of fentinents contrary to my own, upon fome points in which it is impoffible that Churchmen and Diffenters can be of the fame mind, I thought it unneceffary to trouble you with a reply. On this fubject I fhall only add, that Verax may be affured of my having confulted no individual upon what I communicated to you; and that my reafon for ipeaking of Mr. Wollafton's fituation as a mortifying one, was because I should have felt it fo, if I had rafhly advanced against any one an acculation that was proved to be groundlefs; and more especially as the accufation was of lo heinous a nature. Verax fays, that my doctrine of "the divine Operation of the Holy Spirit," is" that unless a Minifter can tell the very intant he law or perceived the influence of the Holy Spirit, and was commanded by it to go forth and preach, he is not a true minifter of the Golpel of Chrift.” Why Thould Verax impute fuch an opinion to me? Has he a fhadow of ground for the imputation from any thing I have fent to you? If not, how does this palpable afperfion agree with his clofing declaration, that "his object is not controvely, but to give a plain ftatement. f fact?" On the contrary, Sir, the fact is, that I abhor fuch a doctrine, and effeem all who hold it to be rank enthufiafts. Let me add another fact, which is, that I have never yet met with a Diffenter who held the opinion that Verax attri butes to me. As no other part of Verax's letter applies to any thing I have written, I país on to that of W. A. in your Appendix, p. 413 (or 525), &c. The Nn3 only only inftance I have known of Calviniftic Diffenters joining with a democratic party in a book iociety, was at a time, when, upon the diffolution of fuch a fociety by a political ferment (occafioned by a democratic churchman and not by any of the diffenting members), the latter formed a new fociety, into which they would gladly have admitted the most loyal of the former members, but did not think it proper to exclude perfons of a contrary sentiment, if they did not intrude it upon the body. As to Diffenters "fupporting the democratic candidates at the laft general election," I apprehend that particular connections may have led to a variety of conduct in different counties and boroughs. In that county where I refide, both the members are elder branches of two noble families, friendly to the happy Conftitution which we enjoy, and perfectly alienated from democracy. A gentleman who formerly reprefented the county, and had acted with the minority, was advised to confult me, at the period of the general election before the laft, upon the question, whether he might expect the fupport of the Diffenters in the county; and, upon the opinion which was given him to the contrary, he judged it proper to decline the contest. W. A. propoles to me the question, whether the Evangelical Magazine does not contain an attack upon Epifcopacy! He fays, that he will not infult the "perfect knowledge" I profeffed to have of that publication, by pointing out the pages to which he alludes; but I must really give him that trouble, or else remain at a lofs, as I now am, to conjecture what paper, in any of the Numbers, he can charge with an attempt fo repugnant to the principle and general character of that Magazine. The fame Correfpondent has given me a task far beyond my ability to execute, when he requires me to explain how a perfon can confiftently hold the doctrine of the Divine Atonement, and yet reject that of the Trinity. I know that fome Arians profefs to do this; but I think them inconfiftent. However, W. A. must be mistaken in one part of the account he has given; as no perfon who rejects the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, can be a Calvinift. It is a contradiction of terms. He asks whether the principle, " that no civil magistrate can have any right, authority, or power, over the confciences and religion of men, has no relation to politics?" I think it has none; because I confider politics to be properly distinct from religion, "My kingdom," faid our Lord Jefus," is not of this world." I do not fee, otherwife, how the conduct of Daniel and his three brethren, in refifting the dectee of Nebuchadnezzar; or that of our Lord himself, and the Apostles; can be vindicated from political criminality. In reply to W. A.'s postscript, I have to say that I meant no evasion in afferting that the Calvinistic Diffenters have no connections in France. I verily believe that no Calviniftic Diffenter had any connection with persons in France; and W. A. muft permit me to retain this belief till he affords me the means of afcertaining what he states as a fact, by naming the Minister, and pointing out the place and time, he has alluded to. In like manner, I ftill profefs my belief that the important doctrines I mentioned, are univer fally maintained by perfons who hold religious affemblies in villages. I too much difapprove of W. A.'s infinuations against the fincerity of a perfonal ftranger, to imitate his conduct in this refpect. I do not impute to him intentional falsehood, as he has done to me; but it is my heart's defire that God may forgive him, and all who are laying to the charge of real Chriftians, crimes which they abhor; as Į am fully perfuaded that fuch calumniators know know not what they do. What I have attempted is, to vindicate persons, whom (as God knows my heart!), I believe to be innocent of what is imputed to them. If in doing this, I have fallen into any mistake, I fhall, as foon as convinced of my error, readily and openly retract it. Hitherto I have not seen occafion to relinquish a fingle statement that I have advanced : but I pledge myself to enquire into the truth of every affertion made by my opponents, if they will, either publicly or privately, communicate to me the neceffary means of investigation; and to lay the refult before your readers, whether it tends to fupport, or to overturn, the judgment I have formed. G. I SIR, STRICTURES ON SCHISMATICS. TO THE EDITOR. AM an inhabitant of a large and populous town, which has been remarkable for its uniform attachment to the eftablished religion; and which, excepting a small affembly of moderate diffenters, has never been difturbed by the herefies of ignorant fanatics; but within these few months a meeting has been established by a Mr. B.........., a man of confiderable property in Lincolnshire, from which I dread the most diftreffing confe quences. I muft obferve that this man was educated at Cambridge, and was remarkable, while there, only for his ftupidity and methodifm. It is true he is followed, at present, only by a few of the lowest and most ignorant of the people; but this is the clafs upon whom his blafphemous rant and extravagant nonfenfe, is likely to make moft impreffion. His property and connexions render him the more dangerous man. One of the moft fpecious arguments which he uses, and which is calculated to work upon the minds of the ignorant, is" that he does not come there to preach the Gofpel like hireling priefts." This is an argument as falfe in its conclu fion, as it is dangerous in its tendency-He might learn from that Gospel which he profeffes to teach that "the labourer is worthy his reward;" and if the church was to be fupplied only by fuch independant individuals as chose to volunteer their fervices, how would religion be fupported: befides, is it poffible that the doctrines of the Scriptures fhould be as well understood and explained by thofe who are preachers only from caprice or miftaken zeal, which they foolishly call infpiration, as by those who have by continual ftudy and "fearching the Scriptures" qualified themselves for the high and important office? All extravagant fhew of piety is fufpicious. The chriftian charity of this immaculate fect may be judged of by the following circumftance which occurred aft evening. During the preaching of Mr. B— a young woman who had been converted, by his endeavours, to falvation, from the fpirit of her enthufiafm, fainted in the barn. This was what rejoiced the holy man-he elevated his voice, he beat his breaft with double transport; and denying affiftance to this unfortunate girl fuffered no one to lift her from the ground; till fome of those at the door, whole curiofity had drawn them there, forced themselves into the place. I fhould obferve that, one of the most rigid of his followers has, fince his converfion, attempted a rape upon a girl of twelve years old. But what I want more immediately to enquire is, Mr. Editor, whether these itinerant bablers are justified in abufing the fervice of the churches, Nn 4 and and in their violent philippics, which they pour forth, against the regular clergy-For fo this dealer out of damnation, and abfolver of fins, (for he alfo grants abfolution,) endeavours, by difgracing the members of the eftablifhed religion, to draw his deluded hearers to his practice of devotion. The law of the land, I know, allows them the exercife of their religious tenets, but does it grant them the licence of decrying the established religion of the realm, and holding up its minifters to contempt. But, Sir, would not the exertions of the clergy crush this heretic fect; and should not their utmost endeavours be used to this end. It is not fufficient that they do merely their duty, while these men compass fea and land to make profelytes;" and while they delude the people from the service of the church by filling their minds with a mad enthufiaflic zeal which they mifcall devotion. In order to propagate their opinions, their meetings are held fix times in the week, when, perhaps, the divine fervice is per formed in the churches but once, or not more than twice. It will readily be allowed that, in a populous town, many would be found to attend a lecture on a Sunday evening, who have now no other alternative but fitting at home or going to these meetings; and I am of opinion that this practice would act a powerful antidote to the dangerous doctrines of these busy and ignorant zealots. Although probably this letter contains nothing new, I hope for some attention to it for the fincerity of my motives: mine are the fentiments of one zealous for the established religion of the country against the principles of ignorant enthufiafts and fchifmatics. Stamford. A LAYMAN. THE TEST ACTS. TO THE EDITOR. SIR, THE HE account you have given us of the measures intended by the late miniftry to have been taken, with respect to a most effential part of the British Conftitution, has greatly appalled, I fhould think, every loyal man that read it. It fhews us the inftability of human projects; and that we muft, reflecting on the mingled tiflue of events, look to fomething more ftable to give duration to the venerable fabric than the ingenuity of an individual, or the fincerity of courtiers. It is certain that kind of timid policy is by no means fingular, which leads men of weak minds to shrink at the outfet of their measures before trivial difficulties; or submit, at length, to a bluftering faction even fometimes at the very moment when it is reduced to its laft frantic exertions. It was fomething in this way we loft our colonies. The infant ftate was foolishly encouraged by the waverings of parental authority till it defpiled the rod, which, if exercised with firmnefs in due time, would have chaftifed it into immediate fubmiffion. I mean not to enter upon the queftion of right or wrong: but I argue that in all cafes, of opposition to a fyftematic confpiracy, the measures taken ought either to be fupported with the moft determined refolution from beginning to end, or never entered upon at all. When the die is once thrown in fuch cafes the oppofite to determined firmnels is fure to terminate in difafter. Mr. Pitt was. in Ireland, fuccessful only because his conduct was firm, and perfifted in; but if relying on political fineffe, he begins to talk of tampering with the faction in England he will ruin all. They will give him credit for no better principle than fear; will act upon their own hypothefis; and, in their future attacks, avail themselves of the advantage which he inadvertently gives them. Is the fame game to be played as in James the Second's time? I thought his policy had been completely out of date. Are the Catholics to be emancipated from the idea that their natural attachment to an abfolute monarchy will counteract the democratic tendency of the diffenters? The experiment has once been tried, and we ought to take warning from the refult. I hope the people of England are as firmly hoftile to the inroads of abfolute power as to democracy; unless the fac tion should abfolutely compell them to feek an afylum from the latter, in that laft fad refuge to all well difpofed peaceable fubjects. It is almoft certain that lefs wavering measures at the beginning of the conteft would have prevented the wickedness, and waste of human blood, which terminated in a much more arbitrary government than the monarchy, in the cafe of Charles the First and had it not been for undetermined meatures, the unfortunate Louis would have worn his crown to a later date. The truth of these affumptions is fully proved by matters of fact which have refulted from the laft melancholy instance. The most outrageous Jacobins, though numer ous as the heads of Hydra, are at this moment cringing under the tyranny of the Corfican adventurer, who poffeffes not a fingle claim, nor one requifite for his prefent exalted station, that we are acquainted with, but intrepidity; while a straggling horde of the fame defcription are actually attempting to bully the government of this nation, fupported, as I truft it is, by the confidence of the people, into measures deftructive of its very existence. Spectatum admiffi ufum teneatis amici ? The French, notwithstanding the general deformity of their measures, and crookedness of their policy, have afforded us fome hints how these matters may be much better adjusted than they have hitherto been with us. Fas eft ab hofte doceri And though heaven forbid that we fhould ever adopt their fummary baptifms and execution en mafie, much less their more brutal, and lingering cruelties; yet, I do acknowledge the wifh without referve, that the executive part of our government was intrufted with the powers to detect every active traitor in the kingdom; and when detected, to lend him, for any thing we need then fear, to recruit the armies of France. Nor do I think, that by meafures ftrong as thele, we should lofe a fingle man who is likely in his future life to be of lervice in any peaceable community. At all events, it is mercy to the world, when a member of fociety, in other refpects ufeful, becomes fo infatuated by party principle and ambition, as to be actually dangerous, to let him feck tome different fituation where there can be little or no fcope for his irritability and ambition. Waving for the prefent, however, all further confiderations of policy, what offence has a mild establishment, which has not only been a folid ornament to, but the firmeft colunin that lupports, the venerable fabric of our conftitution, committed, that the fhould, after a century of utility and respect, be configned in her old age to the merciless hands of rude, unfeeling innovators? Has her political power been an object of either envy or fear? Has the of late lo deeply imbrued her hands in "the blood of martyrs flain," that humanity turns away in ditgut from the fad relics of her narrow and inveterate bigotry? Or has the ever been remarkable for a deficiency |