they will escape future punishment and obtain everlasting happiness whatever be their characters? (p. 102.) That our Church expressly teaches the contrary, Mr. O. proves from the Articles and Liturgy; and also from the writings of Ridley, Latimer, Cranmer, Taylor, Jewell, and every one of her chief Reformers, which speak expressly to the same effect, (p. 105); and, in support of his argument, he produces quotations from Ridley and Latimer, which declare, in common with the Articles and Liturgy, the necessity of experiencing the spiritual and practical influence of Christianity, as well as of making an outward profession of it. 2. The Author then states that the persons for whom he is apologizing entirely accord with the Church, both in thus constantly referring to Christ as the sun of their system, and in inculcating the necessity of a personal and practical acquaintance with his doctrines in order to salvation. The " consequent distinction between real and merely nominal Christians constitutes the most striking of their peculiarities, and in the judgment of such Divines as Dr. Paley, Dr. Croft, Mr. Daubeny, and Mr. Polwhele, the very essence of their guilt." p. 107.) He allows that they dwell upon the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, but denies that they therefore exalt one part of the Christian scheme to the destruction of another; the doctrines in question being pregnant with duties both to God and man; though, in order to constitute these duties Christian morality, he shews that they must be enforced from Christian motives. He farther asserts, that in thus maintaining the necessity of practical Christianity, he and his friends neither omit, misrepresent, nor depreciate the true doctrine of Baptism, but that their views are in exact unison with those of the Church; which he shews, by various quotations from her Articles and Liturgy, considers her nominal members as real Christians, only in proportion as they are acquainted with the renovating, sanctifying, and cheering ef fects of religion. Mr. O. vindicates the propriety of some modes of speaking used by his friends; and, though he denies the affirmation which represents them as teaching "that no one knows Christ, or is a true Christian, until he can specify the precise time and hour of his conversion," yet he adds: Our Church declares and pronounces all those to be in a pardoned and absolved condition, "that truly repent, and unfeignedly believe the gospel." "They," she also says, "who in act or deed sin after their baptism, are washed by Christ's sacrifice from their sins, when they turn again to God unfeignedly." (See her Forms of Absolution and Hom. on Salva. p. 12.) All therefore who do this have her warrant to consider themselves in a state time when they thus turn unto him by true of favour and acceptance with God, from the faith and repentance. The absurdity on the subject will, therefore, perhaps, rather, be found with those who treat all pretensions to any knowledge of our religious state with ridibelieve, and he reformed, and carry on the cule; and who can suppose men to repent, and Christian warfare, as the Church prescribes, and yet themselves have scarce any perception of it. (p. 111, 112.) 3. But that the persons whom he opposes make comparatively little use in their Sermons of the peculiar doctrines of the Gospel, and in this respect also deviate from the Church, Mr. Overton next endeavours to show from the vindications of this method of preaching which have been attempted by Mr. Clapham, Dr. Croft, Mr. Benson, and Mr. Haggitt; and from the complaints upon this subject which have been made by Mr. Jones, Bishop Horne, Bishop Horsley, and the Bishop of Durham. Before the Author enters upon the inquiry, whether these Ministers, like the Church, inculcate, upon all capable subjects, the absolute necessity of inward and practical Christianity, in order to salvation, he premises : That it is no sufficient argument against the reality of a certain kind of experience in religion, or of certain religious attainments, that the objector is unacquainted with any such experience or attainments. He may not have used the proper means, or may be otherwise disqualified. Nor is it any sufficient evidence that the Christian improperly ascribes his repentance, comfort, and santification to the influence of the Holy Spirit, because he does not understand the mode of his divine operations; because he can only ascertain these operations by their effects; or because, in many particu lar instances, he cannot distinguish them from the workings of his own mind. (p. 114.) Mr. O. then quotes passages from the Anti-Jacobin Reviewers, Mr. Daubeny, Mr. Polwhele, Dr. Paley, and Dr. Croft tending to confound the profession of Christianity with its reality; and observes that The scripture terms and phrases "conversion," "regeneration," the becoming "dead to sin" and "alive from the dead," the being made "sons of God from children of wrath," and all the other passages of God's Word by which the change that leads to this difference, in the state and characters of men, is represented, these Divines tell us, now "MEAN NOTHING;" that is as they explain it "nothing to us, or to any one educated in a Christian country." (p. 118) The Author then vindicates the use of the term Christian Experience, which he had before maintained, (p. 110) to be neither absurd nor unintelligible, as applied to the various exercises of the Christian's mind, his spiritual conflicts, and his attainments in humility, faith, hope, love, and other graces; and defends Mr. Robinson's account of it against Mr. Ludlam, who affirms, that Mr. Robinson, in common with the whole tribe of Gospel Ministers, plainly mistakes the confidence of expectation for the certainty of experience.' "The whole mystery in the matter," says our Author, "is this: Christianity engages to bestow certain present blessings, and to produce certain present effects, as a preparation for a more perfect state hereafter, upon all who, in the Scripture sense of the word, receive it. In proportion, therefore, as any avowed Christians are possessed of these blessings, and the subjects of these effects, they are said to have Christian experience." Mr. Clapham, Mr. Daubeny, Dr. Balguy, and Mr. Polwhele, are also shown to deny the existence of any such experience as that for which the Author contends; the latter of whom, in particular, treats with indecent ridicule the idea of the agency of Satan, and, in common with others, though against the plainest declarations of the Church, stigmatises as enthusiasm any pretence to the actual guidance, sanctification, or comfort of the Holy Ghost. inquiry, is this, that these Divines must holdEither that ALL professed Christians, who are members of our church, whatever be their characters, are in a state of acceptance with God, and would go to heaven should they die in their present state;-or, that only some of such persons are in this state; namely, those whose characters correspond with their profession. we If the former position be maintained; pronounce it, without the smallest fear of refu. tation, licentious, unscriptural, and directly opposite to the most plain and express doctrine of our church. If the latter proposition be adhered to; then must they admit a distinction between "the good and the evil," between real and merely nominal Christians, and the necessity of the latter being changed and converted; then will their reprobation of others for making this distinction and inculcatin this necessity, be found absurd; then will it be obvious, that it is not, as they would persuade us, the Word of God, but their language about all baptized persons being in a state of salva tion, which means nothing." -If it is persisted in, that in making this ideal distinction among the professors of Christianity, no persons who possess outward decency of character, or as they term it, no "moral Christian," should be supposed radically defective; this is acknowledging in so many words, that internal and spiritual Christianity is dispensed with. In reference then to the whole which has been advanced in this chapter, we appeal to all competent judges to say, whose teaching most resembles that of the Church and her Reformers on these subjects; ours who make Christ and his peculiar doctrines the soul which animates the whole body of our divini ty, or theirs who make so little use of the Saviour and these doctrines; ours who thus insist upon internal and practical Christianity, or theirs who rest so much upon mere externals, and use the language which has been exhibited?- -(p. 126, 127.) (To be continued) VI. An Essay on the Divine Authority of the New Testament, by DAVID BOGUE. 12mo. pp. xxvi. and 296. 3s. 6d. boards, fine paper, 4s.-Seeley and Williams. 1801. WE learn from a Letter which precedes this Essay, that it has been written, with a view to being translated into French, and prefixed by way of Introduction to a large impression of the New Testament in that language, which the London Missionary Society has resolved to distribute in France. The Author's object is to furnish a compendious view of the various Evidences, both internal and external, which may be adduced in support of the Divine What we insist upon, in conclusion of our Authority of the New Testament; and Mr. Overton thus closes the chapter: to refute the most popular Objections which have been brought against it. This object, we are of opinion, he has accomplished with a considerable share of ability; and in a spirit of candour and moderation, highly becoming the advocate of Christianity. He does not profess to have discovered new arguments, or to have employed new modes of reasoning, on a subject which has already undergone so much able and elaborate discussion; but he is unquestionably entitled to the praise of patient investigation, judicious selection, and methodical arrangement; and he has also given to his performance, as great an appearance of novelty as could reasonably be expected. Mr. Bogue has divided his work into short sections, each containing a distinct head of evidence; a mode attended with this advantage among others, that the propositions he endeavours to establish being independent in some measure of each other, a failure in one part of his reasoning does not greatly weaken any other, nor necessarily affect, in any material degree, the general result of all his arguments. A few assumptions not perfectly warranted, and some reasonings of an inconclusive kind, might possibly be pointed out; but it is due to Mr. Bogue to say, that within the narrow compass of a pocket volume, he has comprised a greater variety of proofs in favour of Christianity, than has ever been brought to bear on the truth of any other facts, or perhaps than is even to be expected, except in the case of a divine revela tion. While, however, we cannot but cordially applaud the well tempered zeal and sound piety, which are generally displayed throughout this Essay, we should deem it a dereliction of our duty, were we to omit animadverting upon the Author's erroneous representation of the sentiments of the Apostles on the subject of Civil Government. In answering a supposed objection made to the Christian religion, as favourable to despotism, and inimical to civil liberty, he observes, (p. 208.) "But let us hear the New Testament speak for itself: and it speaks with plainness and fidelity, and yet with a Christ. Observ. No. 2. delicacy suited to the age in which it was written, and to the jealousy of the governments which then existed. (See Rom. xiii. 1.) Civil Government, it says, is an ordinance of divine institution: this means, it is the will of God that men should not live as the beasts of the field, without control; but that they should be formed into societies regulated by laws; and that these laws should be executed by magistrates appointed for the purpose. What kind of government and what kind of rulers are designed, the writer particularly specifies." They are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same; for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revendoeth evil...They are God's ministers, ger to execute wrath upon him that attending continually upon this very thing;" i. e. their talents and their time are all employed in this great and good work. Such is the government which the New Testament describes ; and such are the governors to whom it enjoins subjection." And he proceeds to add, that whoever refuses to be subject to such a government, and to give high respect to such rulers, and to pay them tribute, resists an ordinance of God which is both reasonable and beneficial, and deservedly receives to himself condemnation. as, 66 B. find those qualifying expressions, But where, we would ask, does Mr. which furnish any ground for asserting, that it is only to 66 such governments” to the evil," that Christians are enjoinare not a terror to good works but ed subjection? We mean not indeed ously to maintain, that in all cases God to deny, nay we are disposed strenumust be obeyed rather than man: and that whenever the commands, even of our lawful rulers, require us to act in opposition to the express will of God, dure any extremity of suffering. This we ought, rather than comply, to enreserve we are taught to make, not only by the words of the Apostles (Acts v. 29.), but by their example also, as well as that of the whole army Q of martyrs. We contend, however, the case of subjects and that of servants, that no other exception can be fairly deduced from the New Testament. Had Mr. B. quoted the entire passage, he would have furnished his readers with primâ facie evidence of the futility of his reasoning. Why has he not given the Apostle's words, instead of his own forced construction of them? Let us insert what he has omitted, and contrast it with his comment. (Rom. xiii. 1 and 2) "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God: the powers that be, are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist, shall receive to themselves condemnation." Again, (Tit. iii. 1.) "Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates;" and to the same effect is St. Peter's injunction, in his first Epistle, (ii. 13.) "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake; whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well." In these passages there are no exceptive clauses; no restrictions of the words to particular kinds of government, or to rulers of a certain character. When St. Paul so strongly commanded every soul to whom he wrote among the Romans, to be subject to the powers that be, no exception was made of the government then existing at Rome, or of the then reigning emperor. And yet, if the character either of the government, or of the person administering it, could be pleaded as an exemption from the obligation of this command, it might well be argued that the government of Rome under Nero was of that description. But, as if to silence for ever such reasonings as those of Mr. B., it is even under the despotic government of Rome, it is even under Nero, one of the most cruel, unjust, and despotic of Rome's tyrants, that Christians are commanded, on pain of condemnation, to be subject unto the powers that be; and that, "not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake." Could Mr. B. see no analogy between who are commanded to be subject to their masters "with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward?" (1 Pet. ii. 18.) The analogy, in our opinion, is so strong, as to remove every doubt on the subject, and, at the same time, to suggest the just qualifications and restrictions on this important point. It would, indeed, be foreign to our present purpose, and would also lead us into too wide a field, were we to attempt fully to lay down, explain, and apply the principles of civil government. But it may not be amiss for us, to give a brief general statement, of what we conceive to be the sound scriptural doctrine on this head; and we trust it will be found such as might have been expected from the genius and spirit of Christianity. We do an injury to the dignified simplicity of Scripture Language, when we construe it with the accurate minuteness of Special Pleading. The Gospel was addressed to plain men, and it therefore uses popular language; and, provided its general meaning be clear, it is not careful to guard against captious objections, or subtle misconstructions. It lays down general principles and weighty truths in plain, broad, and intelligible terms; so that he who runs may read: but having done this, it often leaves these general principles and weighty truths, though at the risk of being explained away, or distorted from their just direction, to the sound discretion, or rather the honest simplicity, of the reader. It is his part to supply the requisite qualifications, or to pursue the pregnant generalities of Scripture into all their practical ramifications. To apply this to our present subject. There was reason to fear from several causes, that persons converted to Christianity might consider themselves as absolved, by becoming Christians, from their obligation to obey the laws of the civil community to which they belonged. To silence all such suppositions, St. Paul reminds the Roman Christians, that civil government is the ordinance of God, established by Divine Providence, and sanctioned by its manifest utility, and by the clearly beneficial dates of the despot who ruled over effects of which the Divine Framer of them. all things had rendered it productive to society; that the direct object and tendency of this ordinance of God, civil government,are the promotion of "good works," "and the avenging of the evil;" and that therefore rulers, they who execute this civit government, are to be obeyed, not merely from considerations of temporal interest, but from a regard to the Divine Authority. But still human ingenuity may devise a case, which will form an exception to this general rule. "Extreme cases," as was well observed by the prac tical wisdom of Mr. Burke, "teach their own lessons ;" and when, in order to include them, we strain those principles of ordinary and general use, which apply plainly and directly to nearly all possible cases, and which, by their ge cient guide for our conduct, even in the painful and dreadful extremity which may be justly exempted from their literal application; when we do this, we commit a violence on the dictates of sound sense and just reasoning, and render principles which, rationally understood, would tend to the general happiness, the means and instruments of faction and anarchy, of discontent and misery. To apply to the case of submission to civil government, the parallel instance of the obedience of servants to their masters-It could not well be maintained, that there was no possible case wherein servants would not be bound to obey their master's injunctions; yet it is still more clear, that they were not to consider themselves as obliged to obey such commands only as were just and reasonable ;they were, on the contrary, to be "subject, with all fear, not only to such masters as were good and gentle, but also to the froward." Yet all this, let it be observed, is general spirit and genius, furnish a suffineral language; and they who should hence infer, that ingenuity can conceive no case in which it would be lawful for Christians to resist their governors, would reason erroneously on the one hand; while they who, with Mr. Bogue, conclude that it is only to governments eminently just and beneficial, that this subjection is due, reason far more erroneously, as well as dangerously, on the other. For the injunction is to be illustrated by the general spirit of Christianity. Her votaries were to be meek, peaceable, sober-minded, humble, contented, patient, full of self-denial, full of love, considering themselves strangers and pilgrims on earth, and remembering that the fashion of this world passeth away.—Now, it is obvious, that men of this character would be disposed to be quiet, orderly, submissive subjects, under almost any government. Thankful that in such a world as this, any restraints were imposed on the unruly passions of men; that by the strong arm of the Law, protection was administered to the weak and the defenceless; and accounting themselves happy if they were exempted from any great solicitude for their own and their families' safety; they would not be eager to obtain political power, nor to correct political grievances; they would not be forward to join political parties; and we may venture to assert, looking back on all the instances of revolutions recorded in history, that there are scarcely any wherein they would have been disposed to take the smallest share; scarcely any wherein, with the exception above mentioned of obeying God rather than man, they would have been inclined to resist the arbitrary man After having said thus much, it may perhaps be expedient to guard against one possible misconstruction of our doctrine, by observing, that where the established constitution of a country has invested any of its inhabitants with any share of political power, they are bound to consider themselves as entrusted with it, in the order of Providence, for the public good; and they are not at liberty to abuse it, or give it up. But here also, the genius and temper of Christianity will be manifest in the language and conduct of a true Christian. When he finds himself compelled to take part in any political struggle, he will not be clamorous, contentious, and violent; but mode |