Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

" Be it known to all who are under the dominion of hereticks that they are fer free from
every tie of fidelity and duty to them; all oaths or solemn agreements to the contrary notwith-

DECRET. Greg. lib. 5. tit. 7.

Standing."

VOL. XXI.

LONDON:
Etiated, and published for the Proprietors, by J HALES, at the Anti-Jacobin Prefs,

No. 22, Old Boswell-court, Strand,
AND SOLD BY ALL THE BOOKSELLERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOMS OF GREAT

BRITAIN ANG LARLAND; AND ALSO BY SERJRANT, NEW YORK, -

1805.

.

THE

ANTI-JACOBIN Review and Magazine,

&c. &c. &c.

For MAY, 1805.

Accufatores effe in Re publicâ utile est, ita Criticos in Re literariâ, ut metu contineatur audacia.-Anon.

ORIGINAL CRITICISM.

The Prophetic or Anticipated History of the Church of Rome, woritter

and published fix Hundred Years before the rise of that Church. In achich the prophetic Figures and Allegories are literally explained ; and her Iricks, Frauds, Blasphemies, and dreadful Persecutions of the Church of Christ, are foretold and described.' Prefaced by an Address dedicatory, expostulatory, and critical, to the Rev. MR. WHITAKER, Dean of Canterbury. To which are added, 1. A Pill for the Infidel and Atheist; in which the divine Authority of the Apocalypse is logia cally and philofophically proved. 2. A Word to the Editors of the Gofm pel Magazine and Theological Review. 3: The Errors and misrea presentations of Bishop Sherlock, in his Discourses on the Prophecies, detected and refuted. By Joseph Galloway Esq. Author of Brief Commentaries upon the Revelation &c. 8vo. Pp. 233. 55 West, Jones, Higham, Jordan and Maxwell, Pearmain and

Ridgway, London; and Blackburn, Knightsbridge. 1805. TT has been observed, we forget by whom, that it is no mcan prooe I of genius to write a good advertisement, or to manufacture a good title-page ; and the observation, though apparently jocular, is really founded in truth. For both thefe species of composition, though genesally short, and seemingly simple, require, in order to their perfect execution, the power of juft and accurate thinking, together with a talent for discrimination, arrangement, and compression. On the enormous length of the present title-page we shall make no remarks; but it contains a blunder of a singular kind, which we cannot help noticing, and for which we find ourselves unable to account. Our readers will observe that it styles Mr. Whitaker, the learned author of " A general NO. LXXXIII. VOL. XXI. · B

364620

and

dr. Galloway's could not favore very highudable

and connected View of the Prophecies relating to the times of the Gospel" Dean of Canterbury. Mr. Whitaker, we believe, is as de. serving as any man of being a Dean or even a Bilhop. But the fact is that he is only a Rector; and accordingly, in the title of our author's address to him, he is rightly designed " rector of St. Mildred's Canterbury.";

In our review of Mr. Galloway's “ Commentaries" (Vol XVII. Pp. 225 &c. 394 &c.) though we could not rate his success as an interpreter of the difficult book of the Apocalypse very high, we gave him full and unlimited credit for excellent principles and laudable intentions. We felt, indeed, for him all the respect which we must ever entertain for a good man, who endeavours, with all his ability, to promote the cause of religion, of virtue, and of social order. But, from the publication now before us, we have reison to suspect thai, had Mr. G. lived to read over our Review, we, instead of receiving thanks for our praise, should have smarted severely, under his lash, on account of our censures. For, before his death, our worthy old friend appears to have become extremely irritable. This volume displays, in various places, especially in the address to Mr. Whitaker, a spirit of bitterness towards those who differ from him which we cannot, by any means, approve, and a harshness of language which borders on rudeness.

6. You will perhaps," he says to Mr. W. “ think this a strange kind of dedication .... It is intended chiefly to expoftulate with you upon the un. + civil, and I must call it unchristian-like censure, (which] you have passed on a work, evidently deligned, whatever may be the success, to promote the truths of the Gospel of Christ.”

It appears from this address, that Mr. G.'s " Commentaries" were published in march, 1802, and that a second edition as we suppose of Mr. Wi's • View" (which we have not seen,) was published in the month of July following. From this circumstance Mr. G. concludes that Mr. W. had seen his Commentaries, and that they are particularly alluded to in a passage of Mr. W.'s preface, which paflage it is proper that we should give as it is quoted by Mr. G.

- At the same time, the conftancy with which it (the Church of Rome) is holden up as the great persecutor of God's witnesses even to the laii, will convince him (the reader,) that the notion lately taken up of the appearance of Antichrift under different characters, is not only an error, but one big bly pernicious in its consequences, in drawing the attention of Christians from a quarter (the Church of Rome) on which they should cyer keep the ftri&teft

guard.”

- This unfortunate sentence excited in our author such high resente ment that he writes as follows: “ This long sentence is replete with fo much equivocal and sophistical froth, that it is impossible to find out the substance. If there be nothing in it to wonder at, its ab. furdity will create a smile." (P. vii.) To us, we must.confess, his fenfibility appears to be excessive, and his resentment unreasonable. With Mr. Whitaker's opinions on the subject of Antichrist, though

fupported,

· fupported, as they are, (we speak of his first publication) with great

learning and ingenuity; we are far from being prepared to coincide. But it was not, we apprehend, to be expected that, thinking as he did, he should speak of those who differed from him in any other terms; and if his language is strong, it must, at least be allowed to be that of a gentleman. Besides, the animosity of our author seems altogether unjustifiable, on another account. “ It is," te says “ a reasonable conclufion that I am one, if not the principal, of the culprits (whom] you have disingenuously, and without ceremony, condemned." Now we, for our part, can see not even the shadow of a reason for this conclusion, Mr. G. could not possibly have been ignorant (indeed, he afterwards clearly shews that he was not ignorant,) that he was far from being the only person who had maintained that the designation of Antichrist is, without sufficient warrant, appropriated to the Church of Rome. And he does not alledge that either his name or his book, in particular, is so much as hinted at by Mr. Whitaker.

He proceeds, however, to comment on the sentence quoted above with a severity which certainly savours of rancour, and; seemingly, we are sorry to add, of difingenuity. To what other principle can we impute the following and similar cavils ? " this, Sir, is really the first time I have ever heard or read that constancy in maintaining a doctrine is the proper ground of mental conviction. Persons who have been acquainted with what has passed in the world, have known that the most mischievous doctrines, as well as evident truths, have been with great conftanty and perseverance held up from age to age, and yet the former have been believed and the latter rejected." (P. viii.) We cannot take upon us precisely to fay, and that for the reason already assigned, what Mr. W's. particular meaning is, when he talks of the “confancy" with which the doctrine that the Church of Rome is Antichrift is holden up. He probably, however, means the confiancy, with which, as he supposes, that doctrine is holden up in fcripture. But Mr. W. we are sure, was incapable of affirming as a general proposition, what Mr. G. in this place makes him affirm, that, the constancy with which opinions are maintained is a certain evidence of their truth. This per: version, therefore, of Mr. W's. sense arose, we are afraid, from a voluntary misconstruction.

Our author, however, has better success when he contends that Mr. Whitaker's opinion has not been the general belief of the Church. “All the ancient fathers,” he says, “ who have mentioned the 'ubject, fuch as Irenæus, Cyril, Jerome, Austin, &c. &c. have from the evidenc meaning of the prophecies of Daniel and St. John, relerred the ærde of the rise of Antichrist to the latter times,' and the last time' of the Gospel of Christ; and you will not, surely, insist that the Church of Rome, whose power and influence commenced in the beginning of the seventh, and has continued twelve centuries fince, arose in the last time or latter times' of the Christian dispensation. (P. xi.) And, Sir, in respect to the opinions of the later divines, I suspect you will find it a difficult task to produce any of them, who ascribed to the

Churche

« PreviousContinue »