St.-Philip's, Somerset; and Rector of Great Chalfield, Wilts. With an Introduction and Notes. pp. xii. 66. Bath: Cruttwell, London: Longman and Co. The Nature and Tendency of Apo stolical Preaching considered: a Sermon preached in the Parish Church of St. Michael, Bath, on Sunday June the 8th, 1817, for the Benefit of the Bath Infirmary and Dispensary. By WILLIAM DEALTRY, B. D. F.R.S. Rector of Clapham, late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. pp. iv. 38. 8vo. London: Hatchard. 1817. LE Sage, when insisting upon a point respecting which he found great difficulty in carrying conviction to the minds of his readersnamely, the unparalleled shortness of his own memory-gives us several curious histories of persons labouring under this unhappy malady. To these instances many others might be added. Dr. Priestley states that he wrote a treatise on light twice over, with an utter forgetfulness of his first essay: and we even remember reading of an unfortunate person who retained a faint recollection of having been present at some remarkable siege, but could not possibly recollect whether he was of the number of the beseigers, or of the besieged. " But of the various phenomena of this kind, we do not remember to have seen distinctly noticed that very large class of "forgetters,' who from day to day continue to urge the very same arguments in the very same spirit and the very same words with their predecessors, in complete inattention to the fact that these arguments have been confuted by every writer upon the subject; and that those who advance them have been challenged again and again, and have shrunk from the challenge, to establish them by a single fact. The sermon of Mr. Warner, for instance, is pointed at what are called the "Evangelical Clergy." He even names one or two individuals as attached to that body, and brings a host of formidable charges against their opinions. Now the request has more than once been urged, and fair disputants ought to listen to it, that the objectors to the sentiments of these individuals should produce passages from their numerous writings, establishing the charges. But Mr. Warner, though in a far better spirit than many of his fellow-soldiers in this singular campaign, forgets every past skir mish and defeat, and returns to the attack, as though no arrow had ever been shot by the enemies, or repelled by the friends, of the class of persons on whom the assault is made. In this state of things we really could scarcely have summoned resolution to enter anew upon this endless contest, and to restate what appears to have been stated a thousand times before with so little effect, but for the singular coincidence presented to us by the publication of the two sermons which we have chosen for the subject of our present criticism. Mr. Warner is a clergyman who would wish to be understood as not to belong to that body of persons called, for the sake of distinction, Evangelical. Mr. Dealtry is also a clergyman who has been very generally considered as associated with that body. These two gentlemen have both written and published sermons on the very same text. That of Mr. Waruer was preached on Monday the 2d of last June; that of Mr. Dealtry, on Sanday the 8th of June. The sermon of the one evidently could not be, and we have particular reason to believe was not, designed as an answer to the other: and yet, had an answer been specifically intended, the sermon of Mr. Dealtry could scarcely have been better adapted to the purpose. Not the smallest indication appears of his having heard of Mr. Warner's attack, and much less of his intend ing to reply to it; and yet the line of argument incidentally carries with it a sort of refutation, of which the public mind will at once discover and acknowledge the force. Thus happily supplied with a new kind of defence, we resume our ancient task with new alacrity, designing freely to avail ourselves of our valuable associate, and occasionally to throw our own darts from behind his protecting shield. The sermon of Mr. Warner (as well as that of Mr Dealtry) is on the text "This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profita ble unto men."—To the sermon of Mr. Warner is prefixed a pretty long preface, which we shall first notice. It sets out with a declaration very honourable to the writer, and which we trust will be considered, by those who think in other respects with Mr. Warner, as a suf ficient reply to the thousand calumnies of some of those minor disputants who now and then think it right to break a lance in this controversy. manners: and I esteem them for their very WORK's sake;' for their being so zealously affected' towards the poor, the sick, and the miserable; and for that devotion of their thoughts, talents, duties of their important and responsible and time, to the performance of the calling, which they almost universally display." Warner, pp. i, ii. Mr. Warner next proceeds to state some of his objections to this body of clergy; and he states them, able manner. "But, as the Apostle said of the church of Ephesus, though I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, that are evil, nevertheless I have somewhat against thee: so, they who think with myself will still find deep matter of regret in reflecting, that all these labours are directed to the diffusion of a religious system, which does not appear and how thou caust not bear with them to harmonize with the tenor of the Gospel, nor with the principles of the Established Church; or to promise the improvement of the morals, or the promotion of the happiness, of mankind; and will, consequently, consider themselves as bound, by fuir argument and temperate discussion, to unveil its defects, and oppose its growth. I say, by fair argument and temperate discussion; because, the character of those with whom we differ, and the sacredness of the point in question, demand thus much of us; because, no approach can be made to the truth except through the path of candour and good-will; and more than all, because, as the immortal Hooker justly remarks, there will come a time, when three words uttered with charitie and meeknesse, shall receive a farre more blessed reward, than three thousand volumes written with disdainfulle sharpnesse of wit.'" Warner, pp. ii, iii. "I am exceedingly anxious that the spirit in which the following sermon was written, may be neither misconceived nor misrepresented. It was such, I trust, as becomes a Christian; a minister of the Gospel of peace; and a fellow-labourer in the vineyard, with those whose religious views it takes the liberty of discussing. Its subject regards principles, rather than persons: and, while I feel myself compelled to differ from the Evangelical Clergy (as He soon after, however, more they are now named) toto cœlo, both in fully develops his views on this their views of the doctrines of the New subject; and the reader will deterTestament, and in their ideas of the man-mine how far a part of the charges ner and matter proper for public religious here alleged against the body of instruction; I can clearly see, and persons in question, harmonizes cheerfully acknowledge, the many with the panegyric just proclaims which they present to my respect and esteem. I respect their sincerity, and unwearied exertions in the way' which they conceive to be the right one: I respect their purity of life, their irreproachable morals, and their sanctity of nounced. "It is a matter of general notoriety, that in the writing and preaching of the Evangelical Clergy FAITH is brought forwards as the great object, to whose attainment and culture the Christian is directed to devote all his energies; I will not say to the utter exclusion of GOOD WORKS, but, to their concealment or degradation: and, as the effulgence of the sun eclipses, though it do not extinguish, the stars, so this principle, arrayed as it is, by our evangelical brethren, in super-eminent glory, and made the constant subject of exalted panegyric, naturally engrosses all the attention of the hearer or reader, and prevents any slight, accidental recommendation, or feeble praise, of the divine morality of the Gospel from making an impression on his mind. Now, it is obvious, that such a view of religion as this must be very agreeable to the generality of mankind; because, it puts them in possession of a principle, which, while it may be easily obtained, will serve all the purposes of a troublesome course of moral virtue, and stand in the stead of humble thoughts of ourselves, and charitable dispositions towards others; which is compatible with many little deviations from rectitude in our transactions with our fellow-men, and with many secret and silent breaches of our duty towards God." Warner, pp. iv, v. Mr. Warner goes on to examine two arguments, which are sometimes, he says, alleged in support of the "truth and utility" of the Evangelical system; namely, its rapid growth, and its popularity among the Dissenters from the Established Church. Certain it is, that if this rapid growth originate in its congeniality with the bad passions or tastes of the human mind; or if its alleged popularity with Dissenters spring from any undue compromise of the distinct principles or discipline of our church; neither the growth nor the popularity of the system are trophies of honour, but badges of disgrace. But here we must stop to say, as the course of Mr. Dealtry's argument does not lead him into this corner of the subject, that the statements on which Mr. Warner grounds this as well as most other parts of his argument are wholly gratuitous; and, therefore, must be established before they CHRIST, OBSERV. No. 190. can lend any real weight to that argument. But let the reader satisfy himself upon this point, by listening for a moment to the reverend author. "To the first recommendatory cir cumstance we have already," says Mr. Warner, "given an answer, by briefly shewing the ease with which this system may be adopted, the convenience it affords to those who dislike the irksomeness of a rigid morality, and the comforts which may be purchased by it, without money, and without price:' which sufficiently account for its rapid growth." Warner, pp. vi, vii. Now here it is obviously altogether taken for granted, that the system preached by the Evangelical clergy is " convenient, &c. &c. to those who dislike a rigid morality." The subject is far too extensive for us at present to discuss; and indeed the onus probandi lies on the accuser. But thus far we may say, that a very large part of society appear to find the doctrine of the Evangelical body very far from convenient to them. Large classes of theologians, not forgetting that "sound divine," Dr. Butler, of Shrewsbury, at their head, are not indisposed to denounce their doctrines as irksome and burdensome to a very high degree. Dr. Butler considers this body of clergy as pushing to a most mischievous extreme, that very inconvenient doctrine of self-denial. He views the conduct of our Lord, when supping with publicans and sinners, as somewhat analogous to the intercourse of Socrates with courtezans; and claims vehemently for every Christian this convenient mea. sure of Socratic licence. Mr. War. ner also states, that the accompani ments of the Evangelical scheme are "gloom, melancholy, and terror that it scowls on all the innocent joys of life-contemns the whole range of intellectual pleasure— prescribes groans and tears, the sacrifice of present harmless enjoyment, and the anticipations of future and eternal woe, as the most 4 Q acceptable offering to Heaven." Now, if this be true, these are strange baits with which to solicit the appetite of irreligious persons. The dislikers of a rigid morality usually discover little predilection for tears, and gloom, and self-denial. These are not the gilded fruits which glitter in the garden of sensuality. We have often felt much astonishment that reasoners upon this subject should never be struck with the paradox involved in their own delineations, relative to the Evangelical body. We really think that if these delineations were presented to some remote nation as a sort of enigma, their cunning men would be not a little puzzled to solve them:-"What is that which is at once the most austere and the most loose in principle, the most gloomy and the most licentious in practice; which lives rigidly, and preaches 'conveniently; which, detesting holiness, makes its converts holy; which, overthrowing all the foundations of morality, renders moral all whom it touches; which, though an enemy to the Establishment, crowds all the churches that it enters; and which, though an enemy to the Prayer-book, spreads it more widely than any other instrument of circulation?" To be quite seriousshould not men of candour be led to suspect that the good fruit which they allow to exist cannot thus uniformly grow on a bad tree; and that men of irreproachable lives are likely, on the whole, to be acting on irreproachable principles? Let Mr. Warner bring the Evangelical principles to this test. land, and one which includes the Prayer-book in the covenant: it must not involve any compromise in the doctrines, or any change in the constitution of the church; and the act of union must be sealed on the altar of our fathers." Now here is a silent assumption that the alleged union of the Evangelical body with the Dissenters is formed upon a different basis; that peace is purchased by a compromise of doctrines or discipline, or both. But where is the proof of this? The Evangelical clergy deny it; and the Dissenters, who would naturally be quick enough in discovering so grateful a compromise, do not discover it. On the contrary, many of them pretty stoutly, though, as we think, unjustly, complain of the bigotry and high churchmanship of the Evangelical body. This is especially one of the common places of the Eclectic and Monthly Reviews. It may, however, be worth while to examine, for a moment, what is the nature and cause of the union, which, to a certain extent, may possibly be considered to exist between the Evangelical body and the Dissenters. There are, then, mingled with the Dissenting body in these realms, many excellent individuals, who are not so much in love with Dissent as not to venerate truth and holiness, wherever they find them; and, discovering in many of the Evangelical body, the pursuit and proclamation of truth, and the steady practice of active and selfdenying virtue, they give them the right-hand of fellowship; and are in many instances, gradually learning first to tolerate, then to love, then to prefer the Church, for the sake of its more holy and zealous members. There are, on the other hand, a large number of individuals in the Evangelical body, who, though they decidedly prefer the Establishment, yet respect the scruples of conscientious Dissenters;-who be lieve many of them are doing much good in their generation; who contemplate their labours among the heathen not without delight and gratitude; and who can heartily co-operate with them at home, in every work of piety or charity, which does not demand a compromise of principle, or a change of established discipline. These persons are not, by any means, loosening in their attachment to the church, or gliding into dissent. On the contrary, we firmly believe, and not a few Dissenters expressly complain of it, that this portion of the clergy were never more attached to the Church in their tastes and opinions than at the present mo ment. We must now return from this discussion to Mr. Warner, whose remark incidentally betrayed us into it. The discourse of the reverend author opens with some judicious observations on the Epistle to Titus-not unlike those which introduce the sermon of Mr. Dealtry. We perfectly agree with Mr. Warner, and we believe that he would not find an individual amongst the Evangelical clergy who does not agree with him, in thinking that the text already cited imposes upon the ministers of Christ " an awful obligation to display frequently and fully to their hearers the immense importance of the practical part of religion." (p. 16.) In the sentence, however, which follows, we should hesitate to pronounce our perfect accordance with the author, till we know the exact sense in which he employs one of its leading terms. He considers clergymen as bound to maintain "the absolute necessity of their observing the commandments of Christ as a condition of salvation through Him." If "condition" here mean a " sine qua non"-a something without which, if in our power, no man can enter into the kingdom of heavenwe, in common with Mr. Scott or Mr. Simeon (to whom the author afterwards refers), perfectly agree with him. But if he mean by the word a procuring or meritorious cause, he has neither our concurrence, nor, what is of far more importance, the concurrence of Scripture and we would add, that the ambiguity of this litigated term is, in our judgment, a sufficient reason why an exact and scrupulous divine should not employ it, in the undefined manner in which it occurs in Mr. Warner's pages. But, whatever may be the measure of our concurrence with him in this sentence, we can have no doubt as to withholding it from another sentiment in the same page, where Scripture is misquoted, and, in its misquoted state, applied to the establishment of a somewhat-unusual interpretation of the author's text. "When," says the author, "the angelic host chorussed the birth of the everblessed Saviour, they proclaimed, that peace and good-will among men,' the result of the general exercise of the relative and social virtues, was a part had designed, in his eternal counsels, of that rich plan of mercy which God for the salvation and happiness of the fallen and miserable race." Warner, p. 16. Now we read in our Bibles not reading certainly more favourable among" but "towards men"-a refers the expression to the "goodto the ordinary interpretation which ed in the Gospel, towards a lost will" or kindness of God, manifestworld. These, however, are trifling mistakes, in comparison with some of the statements which follow. Puritanism, and of the atrocities After a strong denunciation of Cromwell, the author proceeds to connected with it in the days of the days of Charles II., which he thus characterizes: "But, happily, this melancholy scene of religious error, and moral perversion, endured only for a time. With the restoration the country returned to its senses. The church was reinstated in its dignities, and in its former liberal influence on the public character, and on public manners; its sublime and improving Liturgy, its beautiful and af |