In the Catechism we are told, that we are "by nature born in sin;" in the Baptis: mal Service, that "all men are conceived and born in sin;" and in the Collect for the first Sunday after Trinity, we profess, that "through the weakness of our mortal nature, we can do no good thing without thee (God)." Ail this, if it prove nothing more, will at least prove, that Mr. F. avows and inculcates opinions diametrically opposite to those of which he has solemnly expressed his belief, and by which he promised to be guided in his ministry.

"We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works of deservings." Christ shed his blood, according to Mr. F. "to render sinners acceptable to God, and heirs of eternal blessedness, on the conditions of their faith, repentance, and sincere obedience." (p. 10.) Allowing, for the sake of argument, that this statement is accurate, so far contracted view of the subject, Christ as it goes, yet it surely affords a very having also by the merits of his death procured for us those very gifts of re

fits flowing to us therefrom, though not perhaps so broadly opposed to the confessional he has subscribed as those he holds respecting human corruption, are no less radically defective? It is but natural, however, for one,who has such low views of the corruption of human nature, to have equally low views of the blessings conferred on us by the death of Christ. Contrast his sentiments on the subject with the following passa.

ges:

"So pleasant was this sacrifice and oblation of his Son's death, which he so obediently and innocently suffered, that we should take it for the only and full amends for all the sins of the world" "Yea, there is none other thing that can be named under heaven, to save our souls, but this only work of Christ's precious offering of his body upon the altar of the cross. Certainly there can be no work of any mortal man, be he never so holy, that shall be coupled in merits with Christ's most holy act." (First Homily concerning the Death and Passion of our Saviour Christ.) To the same purpose, we might have quoted the whole of the second Homily on the same subject, as well as the third Homily on Salvation, both of which stand opposed, not only to Mr. F's. whole system respecting man's corruption and redemption, but also to his views of the ground on which the righteous are rewarded, viz. their having merited a recompense in a just ratio to their progress in moral goodness. The 11th Article also says,

which we agree with Mr. F. are essential to our salvation. The offering of Christ is not only that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual, (see 31 Art.); but it also restores us to the favour of God and communion with him, gives us access to the Throne of Grace, and procures for us "the inspiration of his Holy Spirit" to cleanse the thoughts of our hearts that we may perfectly love and obey God. (Collect in Comm. Service.) But if farther proof were wanted of the little value which Mr. F. affixes to the doctrine of Christ's Atonement, and of the minute and almost imperceptible space which he al-lows it to occupy in his system, we may confidently refer to the following hardy assertion, which is repeated, and strongly insisted upon, in the course of his work: viz. that our Saviour's Sermon on the Mount, " contains a sum-mary of every thing which it is necessary to believe or to practise." (p. 13, & 25.) There are several doctrines, however, which our Church deems very essential, nay indispensably necessary to be believed, and to which she requires the subscription of all her Ministers, and which nevertheless do not clearly appear to be contained in this summary. We will instance them. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity, (Art. 1.) The Incarnation of Christ, (Art. 2.) The Resurrection of Christ, (Art. 4.) The Holy Ghost, (Art. 5.) Original Sin, (Art. 9.) The method

it is impossible to conjecture since he so carefully excludes from other parts of his system almost every thing that is peculiar to Christianity.

The review of this work has already far exceeded our limits, otherwise we should have been induced to comment on some other expressions almost as reprehensible as any we have already noticed; but we trust we have said enough to guard our readers against the poison of Mr. F's. principles, which we scruple not to say are very nearly allied to the Socinian heresy. The rejection of the doctrine of man's corruption, of atonement for sin, of the influences of the Holy spirit, of the reality as well as the eternity of future punish ment, and of salvation by grace, is common to his and the Socinian system. They both unite in depreciating the writings of the Apostles, and insidiously extol the preceptive parts of the writings of the Evangelists, that they may more effectually disparage the other portions of the sacred volume. The resemblance is undoubtedly a striking one.

The subject of our present animadversions was reviewed in the Anti-Jacobin Review of Dec. 1801. We think it right to notice this circumstance, particularly as the conductors of that work have endeavoured, by their strong commendation, to give to the heterodox sentiments of the writer all that currency which the considerable place they hold in the public estimation enables them to do. "We give Mr. F. very great credit," say these Reviewers, "for the two discourses, &c." And having made several extracts from the work, they add, "After these quotations any farther recommendation of those discourses would be superfluous." Their praise however, though thus warm, is not absolutely unqualified. "We cannot," they say," in justice to the public close our critique without hinting, that one or two opinions occur (particularly in the 15th page) not strictly orthodox :" And with this genthe rebuke they dismiss the pamphlet. Our readers will judge after the exhibit which we have made of Mr. F's. work, whether it merited the praise

bestowed upon it by these Reviewersor whether they have in this respect acted up to their professed purpose of guarding from contamination the valuable doctrines of our Church. We apprehend they have been off their guard in this instance, and have been betrayed, by their Anti-Calvinistic prejudices, into the support and propagation of sentiments more befitting a disciple of Priestly than a true son of the English Church. Why should the name of Fellowes, with its various adjuncts, make opinions palatable to them, which from the pens of Priestly, Belsham, or Lindsey would have met with their most marked reprobation? Where is the boasted fidelity and impartiality of this work, and where its veneration for the constitution of the Church, of which the Articles here so shamefully and unblushingly opposed form a main support?

But we must now return to Mr. Fellowes. One great object of his work seems to be to shew, that those who are the subjects of his attack abuse the doctrines of the Gospel to immoral purposes, while his own views of them have a directly contrary tendency. He dwells much upon the pure morality which the Gospel teaches, making it indeed to constitute the whole of Christianity; for with him the Gospel is nothing more than a rule of life; and the heavy charge which he brings against those whose views differ from his own is, that they sap the foundations of morality. Doubtless Mr. F. has not forgotten a passage in our Saviour's Sermon on the Mount, which recommends it to us, before we attempt to pull the mote out of our brother's eye, to cast the beam out of our own. He has not been sparing of accusations of immorality. His charges are severe and reiterated. Disloyalty to the moral government of the Gospel is attributed by him to whole bodies of men, though he adduces no proof to support his assertion. Surely it becomes him, who thus sets up for the public censor of the immorality of other men, to be careful that, in his own conduct, there be nothing which shall justly expose him to censure.

Is this Mr. F's case? We have, indeed, no means of judging but what the work, now under review, affords us; and if we were to judge of him by what appears there, our opinion of his actual progress in attaining those qualities which he professes to value so highly, would not be very favourable to him. He talks much, it is true, of meekness, kindness, and benevolence (p. 12), but we see little of either in his book; but on the contrary, much petulance, flippancy, and illiberality, He talks much also of integrity, truth, uprightness, moral goodness, self-denial, purity, fidelity to promises and engagements, &c. &c. (p. 12, 14.) But suppose one were to ask him how he could reconcile to a high regard for any of these last-mentioned qualities, the subscribing of Articles which he directly impugns; or the professing himself a minister of the Church of England, while he not only does not think it necessary to believe and practise what she enjoins, but holds and propagates opinions subversive of her doctrines; would he not be at some loss for an answer capable of satisfying a conscientious man? Does he recollect the terms of his Ordination Service? Did he not solemnly declare, that he willingly & ex animo subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England? If he plead in excuse, that his views have changed since that time, and that the dogmas of Socinus are become more congenial to his mind than the more scriptural tenets of the Church of England, yet can he be said to act honestly or faithfully to his engagements who retains his preferment and rank in a church whose dearest interests, though paid to maintain them, he scruples not to betray? Without pretending to say that the Church of England is right and Mr. F. is wrong in their opinions considered in themselves, (that not being the point at issue) yet it is plain that they differ toto celo, and that while Mr. F. participates in her endowments, he is, not covertly but openly, sapping the very foundations on which she stands.

We shall close this long article with an extract from the Bp. of Lincoln's Elements, which we hope will make

its due impression on such characters as Mr. F. and either bring them back to their allegiance to the Church, or shew them the necessity they are under if they would retain the reputation of purity, integrity, and fidelity to which they aspire, to "quit their office for their errors sake."

"All persons when they enter into holy orders," says this Prelate, "or are admitted to any ecclesiastical curacy or benefice, are required by law to subscribe those (39) Articles, with a design that those who are employed in whether as Curates or Incumbents, should unthe ministry of our Established Church, feignedly believe the truth of the doctrines which they contain."

"I do willingly, and ex animo, subscribe to England, is the indispensible form of subscripthe Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of tion, and therefore it behoves every one before he offers himself a candidate for holy orders to peruse carefully the Articles of our Church, and to compare them with the writtion he believes them to be authorized by ien word of God If upon mature examinaScripture, he may conscientiously subscribe them; but if on the contrary he thinks that be sees reason to dissent from any of the doctrines asserted in them, no hope of emolument or honour, should induce him to express his assent to prono dread of inconvenience or disappointment, positions which in fact he does not believe. not, indeed, necessary that he should approve every word or expression; but he ought to believe all the fundamental doctrines of the Ar

It is

ticles, all those tenets in which our church dif

fers from other churches, or from other sects of Christians.

He ought to feel that he can from his own conviction maintain the purity of our established religion, and sincerely and zealously enforce those points of faith and prac tice, which our church declares to be the revealed will of God. This appears to me the only just ground of conscientious subscription to the Articles, and let it be ever remembered that in a business of this serious and important nature, no species whatever of evasion, or subterfuge, or reserve, is to be allowed, or can be practised without imminent danger of incurring the wrath of God. The Articles are to be subscribed in their plain and obvious sense, and assent is to be given to them simply and unequivocally. Thus only can a person offer himself at the table of the Lord as his minister with safety; thus only can he expect to receive the divine blessing upon that course of life to which he then solemnly devotes himself."

It can hardly be necessary to observe, that the same principle which forbids a man to sign articles which he does not believe, compels him, in the event of his changing his opinion after having signed them, to resign that situa

tion in the Church which he obtained in consequence of his subscription. And upon this principle several have acted who, like Mr. F., have dissented from the doctrines which they had previously subscribed, and whose integrity and uprightness we cannot but highly respect, while we blame and deplore their errors.

XIII. Letters on the most important Subjects, addressed to a young Man on his first Entrance into Life; and adapted to the peculiar Circumstances of the present Times. By the Author of" A Tale of the Times." 3 vols. 12mo.

To guard the inexperienced against the dangers of a world of temptation, and to mould the manners of the young into virtuous purity, is a labour of love which rarely losses its reward. Authors who have treated on education, and endeavoured to store the minds of those who are just entering on the business of life with useful knowledge, have received a very marked attention from the public. Their labours indeed are important, and their influence may be extensive; but great effects are to be expected only from the combination of great qualities. A thorough knowledge of the human heart as indefinitely varied by outward circumstances or inward affections, a judgment prompt in separating what is practicable from what is visionary, and candour that is resolved to be of no party but is ready to bow submissively to truth wherever found; such a combination may ameliorate the moral character of multitudes, and extend a benignant influence beyond the present race of

men..

But the spirit of system is the grand enemy to all improvements in education. By its magic power it distorts facts the most stubborn, and warps even experience to its own purpose, till truth and error are so intimately blended that it requires more sagacity than falls to the common lot of readers to analyze the mass--to choose the good and reject the bad. Sober reasoning on this subject, although founded on the most erroneous principles, need not excite much alarm; for few, inclined to follow a series of argumentation, would fail detecting some

But sup

fallacy, sufficient to invalidate the whole scheme. But when a vigorous imagination displays the attractive graces of composition, the careless are allured to adopt any romantic suggestion of high promise with precipitancy, as if every expected advantage would be lost by assuming time for deliberation. Difficulties soon alarm these experimentalists, and indolence induces them to abandon what, if practicable, must be troublesome not to say dangerous. Apathy frequently succeeds the effervescence of admiration: Hence education is often entirely neglected, when one effort, which there was no well grounded reason to expect would succeed, has failed. posing that even after such a disappointment, due attention is paid to this important affair, can that time be retrieved which has been lost at a period of life when every hour is peculiarly valuable? Or can prejudices be eradicated, which are apt to strike deep, in proportion as they are noxious, into the tender soil of young minds. Caution is never more wanted than when parents are choosing a plan which may influence the happiness, and decide the future character of their children. Infinitely better would it be for them to pursue the track beaten for ages, than to strike into serpentine paths, pleasing to the eye yet concealing their course, which may lead to principles infidel or even atheistic, and to practices abhorrent to reason and hostile to society.

For these observations no apology need be urged to those who are acquainted with the prevailing rage of recommending new experiments in tuition, and that eagerness for adopting whatever has proceeded either by direct or circuitous channels from the foreign fountains of moral innovation. Error, however, is not meant to be defended; but surely propriety, experience, and truth, may claim some respect, when nothing can be urged against them but antiquity.

It is with much satisfaction that we find our sentiments on many important points relating to education, and the conduct of young men, on their first entrance into life, corroborated by those of the observant lady, whose work we are