Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

1

upon it. How these loom-men do political work, the country had a notable specimen at the late general election.

Now, Sir, in forwarding this daring and most pestilent project, our Critical Reviewers are zealous and distinguished co-operators. They enter fully into the Abbé's views, admire his efforts, reiterate his statements, and hope ardently for the success of his scheme. And, while their Monthly, and Annual, and other less intrepid coadjutors, are employed chiefly in mining and sapping, it is more particularly their province to attack the sacred edifice by storm. It is their province to show, that this long-admired structure is the work of dark and rude times, and a disgrace to the present highly enlightened age; that its materials are corrupt and worthless; that it is the harbour of ignorance, idleness, and fanaticism; like Babylon of old "the habitation of devils, the hold of every foul spirit ;" and, that it is the duty of every friend of his country and his species immediately to come out of it, and assist in its demolition. Arguing in favour of the change which they wish to effect in this kingdom, "It is time," they say, "to have done with autocrats and popes, with secular and with spiritual despots of every description, whether in ermine, in purple, or in lawn. The tragedy of temporal and of spiritual domination has been acted long enough; the hypocritical pageantry may have cheated the senses, but nothing but murder, cruelty, and injustice, have been perpetrated under the mask." They hope that our House of Commons will "abolish the inquisitorial powers of the Spiritual Court, and put a stop to the further progress of ecclesiastical domination." (Vol. 13, p. 33; 14, P. 414.) On a leading point connected with their statements, it may be remarked, by the way, that our critics are guilty, at once, of mistake and inconsistency. They argue on the absurd but too prevalent supposition, that Christianity, like philosophy, is capable of a progressive improvement, through the aid of time and new discoveries. Whereas, a Revelation of the Will of God is, doubtless, perfect at first; and the highest improvement of which it is capable by any future ages, is a perfect comprehension of what was at first delivered. Now the advantage with respect to this must decrease rather than increase, in proportion to our distance from the time of its origin. So these critics, when it suits their purpose, feel, and revere, "the immutability of truth:" then they assure us that "truth and falsehood are not conventional and fluctuating things;" but that" their differences are fixed, permanent, and eternal." (ibid.) Let us, however, further attend to their doctrines and procedure as they bear upon the Established Church. In regard then to the system which these gentlemen wish to have propagated, it is notoriously that worst substitute for Christianity, which includes only a few fragments of it, divested of its leading and characteristic doctrines. "Christ," they say, "never preached either the doctrine of original sin or of vicarious punishment; these are the contrivances of nien who understand not his great commandment, to do as we would be done by, and to love one another. This is the substance of that doctrine which Christ preached; all beside is vanity and strife." "The simple morality of the Gospel, enforced by the impressive sanction of a future life," they say, "comprises all the

religion that Christ taught." "All besides," with the doctrines of the "Trinity," "of incarnation, of the atonement, of hereditary depravity, of the moral incapacity of man, of justification by faith, &c. &c." expressly are, in these critics' estimate, "vain ceremonials and mysterious creeds," the "sluices of sectarian hostility," "a Babylonish jargon of theological contradictions," no better than the 66 superstitions" of "the Hindoos.” And the form of Subscription for teachers of religion which they would substitute for that now prescribed by the church of England is this: "I A. B. do with all iny heart and mind assent to this truth, that Jesus, the founder of Christianity, was a teacher sent from God to communicate his Will to mankind." (Vol. 12, p. 95, 205, 220, 321, 324; 11, 174– 182; 14, 431.)

66

[ocr errors]

In conformity with this system of doctrine is the selection of their favourites. "The protestant dissenters," they say, are the firm friends of knowledge and of liberty," and have all high "claims to civil and religious immunities; but "the presbyterian interest," it seems, merits peculiar attention. This interest we are informed "was most strenuously active, and most forcibly operative, in placing the present family on the throne, and has not for many years experienced much favour from the court." (Vol. 11, p. 299.) They speak too of "the wise and the upright body of UNITARIAN and RATIONAL Christians." (Vol. 14, P. 181.) On Mr. Evanson, whose Sermons, as these critics have informed us, were "preached in a congregation of Unitarian Dissenters" at Lympstone, and "who," as they have also told us, "HAS REASONED HIMSELF INTO DISBELIEF OF THE AUTHENTICITY OF SO GREAT A PART OF THE SACRED VOLUME;" who maintains that "three" out of our four Gopels are "forgeries," they bestow very high encomiums. The mind of Mr. Evanson," they remark, was a striking exception to the monotonous dulness of the clerical intellect, when fostered by emolument." The opportunities for research and improvement afforded to this gentleman by ecclesiastical preferment," he employed," it is said, to the best advantage." By this research, it seems he discovered "some very serious errors and unscriptural dogmas" in "the Articles and the Liturgy of the Establishment." And hence, after many ineffectual endeavours to procure a change in her unscriptural tenets and opinions," he determined to renounce a worship which he thought so strongly tinctured with idolatry and superstition." For all this, Mr. Evanson is extolled by our critics: those who would not suffer him with impunity to mangle our Divine Service at his pleasure, are charged with malice and bigotry:" and these critics, among other reasons, "for the love of truth which they breathe, and the useful instructions which they contain, wish, heartily wish, that his Sermons may obtain an extensive circulation!! (Vol. 7, P. 95; 12, P. 374-382:) ———— Of Mr. Fellowes, that Mr. Fellowes who has deluged the world with so much heresy in prose, and given it some such charming specimens of bad grammar, nonsense, and licentiousness in verse; that modest Mr. Fellowes, who not only denies many express doctrines of the Church of which he is a minister, but affirms of some of them, that they are glaring "absurdities," "a mere fiction, fit only for some

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

"but

canting fanatic to inculcate, or some superstitious old woman to embrace;" and that they "encourage personal depravity." Of this Mr. Fellowes they can scarcely speak but in raptures. (See his Cant without Religion, and his Love Songs.) Mr. Fellowes, these Reviewers say, "is among the few who have strenuously endeavoured to counteract the perilous mischief" of a flagitious doctrine, his honest labours never experienced an adequate encouragement!" The " publications of Mr. Fellowes," they add, "show the extent of his researches, the elegance of his taste, and those habits of exact and profound reflexion, which qualify him for giving new interest to common topics, and throwing new light upon the uncommon. With great and singular felicity he has united philosophical reasoning with scriptural doctrines.... His style is clear, copious, and animated. His principles will justify intelligent and impartial readers in ascribing to him the sagacity of a philosopher, the benevolence of a patriot, and the piety of a Christian." He is compared with, and represented as having improved, Butler and Barrow!!! &c. &c. &c. (Vol. 13. P. 182; 14, 113–125) ——— It cannot be, then, to adopt our reviewer's mode of reasoning in another instance, as it is so generally insinuated that Mr. Fellowes has here been his own reviewer * for we do not believe that any man since the days of Æneas ever had the impudence to praise himself so fulsomely." (See Vol. 13, P. 53.)

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

But the most notorious of our modern heresiarchs is the Rev. Francis Stone. This hoary Socinian has had the effrontery to attack the fundamental doctrines of the Church by which he was fed, in a Sermon preached before his Archdeacon and a Congregation of his Clerical Brethren. His impudent and blasphemous heresies have compelled even the mild and pious Bishop of London to inflict upon him legal chastisement. Yet, with the greatest possible zeal, the cause of Mr. Stone is advocated by our Critical Reviewers. They have devoted nearly thirty pages of their work to this object. They thought "him deserving of no small share of praise for the truly Christian frankness and intrepidity with which he announced" his opinions in his Sermon. "In that Sermon," they say, "we observed, and we applauded, an enlightened zeal in the detection of unscriptural error, and more than ordinary manliness of conduct in the vindication of revealed truth." "He is," they add, "our friend only because he is the friend of truth; for the sake of which he is undergoing persecution." They consider his vindication of himself, in his Letter to the Bishop of London, as " satisfactory and complete," in which, speaking of the Thirty-nine Articles, he says, "I have no more concern with them than with the reveries of the Koran, or with the fables of the Talmud." They support, with all their powers, through nineteen pages, his " Unitarian Christian Minister's Plea for Adherence to the Church of England." They characterise the proceedings against him, as "unjust, uncharitable,

* In several public companies the following introduction has been used: "This is Mr. Fellowes, Editor of the Critical Review." -Further deponent saith not.

-

and unscriptural;" as marked with "severity and unjustice;" "as "the exercise of ecclesiasticul intolerance;" as "a prosecution of which any papist would be ashamed;" and which strikes at the very root of all « religious liberty." And while Mr. Stone, and these Reviewers, with "the upright and the wise body of Unitarian and Rational Christians" are "roiling us gradually forward to a higher state of moral existence and of social bliss," their opponents are "the Agents of Tyranny" who would "push us back into the abyss of ignorance and barbarism;"" infuriated ecclesiastics;" the proprofaners" of holiness, of sincerity, and truth;" men who advocate the interests of intolerance, of error, and impiety;" and whose conduct is chargeable with "the utmost aggravation of absurdity." &c. &c. &c. (Vol. 11, P. 93; 13, P. 22-33; 14, 165-183.)

Such are this critic's encomiums on Unitarian ministers who subscribe a Trinitarian confession: such is his reprobation of those persons who think, that in matters relating to religion, at least not less than in the affairs of common life, respect is due to common honesty, and that men should adhere to their solemn engagements. Whether this behaviour of our critic displays more of "the utmost aggravation of absurdity," or of something still worse, the intelligent reader will judge. This inundation of abuse, he will know, is vented against those who simply think, that while men continue members of any society, and enjoy the benefits attached to such an association, they should not be permitted to violate and revile the laws of this society; but who yet leave them the most perfect liberty to relinquish it, and to form whatever other connexion they may like better. The clamour respecting the violation of religious liberty is groundless and disingenuous. All men, in this kingdom, have perfect liberty to worship God under whatever form they please. The uneasiness which is manifested does not arise from spiritual restraint, but from temporal ambition. This should be honestly avowed. But has not the national Church the privilege which is common to every other society of men, to make and enforce her own laws? And would she not be chargeable at ònce with the utmost aggravation of absurdity, and with the heinous guilt of suicide, to reward those who openly revile her ordinances, and lift up their hands against her?

With these opinions, however, and these favourites, in precisely the same style our critics treat the discussions on the Test Laws. These tests they represent as the "weak and crumbling fortifications of mystery and intolerance." The arguments for their immediate repeal, they consider as incontrovertible and unanswerable, while the measure is opposed only by half-formed sentences, and shuffling duplicity;" by "the anti-papistical Mr. Perceval and his pensioned coadjutors; by the sordid, narrow minded, and timeserving ministers of the establishment. "Buonaparte," they say, "has taught us, that an ecclesiastical establishment may be constituted both of papists and protestants without any collision of religious animosity, or any disturbance in the internal tranquillity of an empire." The prescriptions of these laws, they tell us, are as impolitic and absurd as it would be to enact, that no man

ན་

[ocr errors]

should be either barber, taylor, or shoemaker, who disbelieved in the existence of the antipodes." Their repeal, we are taught, is essential to the salvation of the empire. "The empire," these critics say, "is at present standing on the very brink of perdition, and nothing can long avert its fall, but the complete and unqualified emancipation of the Catholics, the repeal of the unnatural, unseason. able, and unscriptural tests against every sect of dissenters, and the restoration of the late Ministry" to their places! Nay, to continue these laws, is, they affirm, "to be guilty of high treason against God!" What monsters in wickedness as well as in folly, must the best and wisest of our forefathers have been! How odious do their best devised arrangements appear, when placed in the new and brilliant light of the Tuilleries! (Vol. 12, p. 100, 214, 215; 11, 297, 298, 439.)

In respect to some other Laws and Statutes relating to our Church, such, these reviewers maintain, are their extreme absurdity and intolerance, that they constitute "the Church of England not a Protestant but a Popish Church; but with this remarkable difference, that the Church of England acknowledges Thirty-nine Infallibles, while the Church of Rome is contented with only one;" that they give to an English Bishop" the authority of a Turkish Bashaw;" that under their foolish provisions, our clergy are "liable at the instigation of any malicious bigot, or any personal enemy," to be placed in such circumstances of vexation and hardship that " comparative mercy would appear in the torture of the Inquisition ;" and that it is absolutely necessary for Parliament to interfere," to "abolish the inquisitorial powers of the Spiritual Court, and put a stop to the further progress of Ecclesiastical Domination.” (Vol. 13, P. 32, 33; 14, 172, 179, 183.) Oh, that this tenderness for the established clergy extended to any of them except a few restless Socinians, who act in open defiance of their professional engagements, and betray the mother who feeds them! How unsufferable is this affection of friendship from those whose tender mercies are so cruel!

In reference to our Reformers, they speak of "the dogmatic affirmations of persons who lived in a period of ignorance and superstition." They are our "more credulous or more ignorant forefathers." (Vol. 13, P. 30, 32.)--Upon our Liturgy and authorised Confessions of Faith, they exhaust the vilest storehouses of abuse. "The Liturgy and Articles of the Church of England,” they say expressly, were composed in "a period of ignorance and superstition," and contain 66 many irrational, idolatrous, and unscriptural tenets;" many 66 unscriptural falsehoods, and irrational absurdities." They are vain ceremonials and mysterious creeds;" "the artificial systems, the metaphysical creeds, and hypocritical confessions of men ; "the relics of popery and superstition;" nscriptural dogmas and persecuting creeds;"" senseless and intole rant confessions of faith;" and "teach ingenuous and tenderhearted youth to imprecate damnation on all who do not think as they think." They are mingled with fables, and polytheism is worshipped within" the walls of our Church. It has been" demonstrated," these critics say, "with almost as much clearness as Euclid ever

66

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »