Page images
PDF
EPUB

in every one of the different states," with the exception of South Carolina, the importation of slaves has been prohibited. The prohibition had taken place in South Carolina also; but was suspended about two years ago. In the last session, Congress, indignant at this suspension, would have passed a resolution imposing a tax of ten dollars a head on all slaves imported, had there not been an express agree ment on the part of the members from South Carolina, that in case the measure was relinquished they would use their endeavours to procure the renewal of the prohibition. So unpleasant, indeed, was the act of the legislature of South Carolina to the members generally, that even the delegates from that state expressed their regret at its existence.

In the state of New Jersey an act

was passed during the last year, abolishing slavery in that state, so far as it respects children born since the first of July last; thus adding one more to the list of those states, now nine in number, whose local regulations either put an end entirely to the condition of slavery, or limit its continuance to the present generation,

Such being the case, we are fully warranted in considering the total and unconditional extinction in a little more than three years hence, of even that limited species of slave trade, which the subjects of the United States are still permitted to carry on, as a certain event; and in congratulating the friends of religion, justice, and humanity, on the progress which their righteous cause has made in the western hemisphere. May it be equally successful in this!

REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS.

CLXXXI. DAUBENY's Vindicia Ec- ism, is capable of the most satisfac

clesiæ Anglicana.

(Concluded from p. 663.)

Ar p. 434 et seq. Mr. Daubeny condemns Mr. Overton for saying, that the Church of England inculcates the doctrines now often termed moderate Calvinism; and considers that phrase as altogether absurd, as well as a contradiction in terms. Whether Mr. Daubeny's reasoning on this point he logically correct or not, it is an undoubted fuct that many are to be found amongst the greatest ornaments of the English church, who may, with strict propriety, be called moderate Calvinists. (See Christian Observer, p. 434.) The names of Jewell, Hooker, Hall, and Beveridge, omitting a number besides, will readily occur to the learned reader as instances in point. These excellent men, though evidently Calvinistic, were yet so moderate in their Calvinism, as to be the delight and admiration of all holy and devout christians, however differ ing from them in some speculative points. That they did not inculcate all Calvin's tenets we readily admit; but that in their statement of many of the doctrines of christianity, they favoured the Calvinistic hypothesis, as contradistinguished from Arminian

tory demonstration. If this is denied, for what will not men deny who are determined at all hazards, even at the hazard of their character for honest dealing, to maintain a favourite system? we would only observe, that what we mean to assert is the perfect compatibility of the views which were entertained by these eminent divines, when adopted and professed by persons in the present day, with the liturgy, homilies, and articles of the Church of England. Nor, let it be remembered, is the claim of such persons to sound churchmanship in the smallest degree lessened, because the name of Calvinist is invidiously affixed to them by their enemies, or improperly assumed by themselves.

Mr. Daubeny himself is of opinion, (p. 458,) that the doctrines of the Church of England are not modelled after the Calvinistic or Arminian pattern. We perfectly concur with him in this sentiment. But Mr. Daubeny will scarcely affirm, that they fall below the scheme of Arminius, though they differ from it; and we certainly do not think that they rise to the level of Calvin's system. Must they not then occupy some middle point between those two systems? This middle point, for want of a better name,

would probably be considered by some as moderate Arminianism, by others as moderate Calvinism. Both these terms are perfectly intelligible, and though it would be better to avoid them altogether, yet they seem to us to involve no more peculiar absurdity or contradiction, than the terms moderate Whig or moderate Tory, when opposed to violent Whig and violent Tory; terms which are also perfectly intelligible: or than a moderate, as distinguished from a high churchman; a distinction which Mr. Daubeny will admit may exist. It may farther be observed, that if the possible inferences to be deduced from some insulated propositions in the one system, (inferences, let it also be remembered, which are disavowed by those who hold it,) be decisive against its truth; the same argument may be applied, and is applied, with equal unfairness, but yet with equal force, to the o

ther.

It is wholly unnecessary again to animadvert on Mr. Daubeny's mistakes respecting justification and baptism, which are repeated at p. 447 to 454. Like many other parts of the volume, these pages contain much truth mixed with much error.

In the following quotation Mr. Daubeny gives his opinion as to the reasons which induce Calvinistic divines to adhere to their principles.

"It too often happens, that divines, who, from a certain predisposition of mind, or some concurrence of circumstances, become advocates for Calvinism, commit themselves upon it in early days, when, (to make use of Barret's words,) they have scarcely saluted the threshold of divinity, and are not, therefore, qualified te judge of a cause, which can only fairly be ascertained by much comparative reading, accompanied with a cool and discriminating judgment. The fact is, Calvinistic divines, generally speaking, associate only with Calvinists; read, for the most part, only Calvinistic books; and then too easily satisfy themselves with the confident persuasion that they are arrived at the ne plus ultra of their profession. Whilst the great misfortune in this, as in many other cases, is, that however partial may be their knowledge of a subject, when once men commit themselves upon it, vestigia nulla retrorsum;' the pride of human nature insensibly mixes itself with the business, and they feel themselves, as

it were, pledged to maintain the ground they have taken; and therefore (for the most part) they industriously and determinedly keep out of sight that evidence,

which might convince them of their error." p. 469.)

That some Calvinistic divines, and perhaps some Arminian divines, may act in this manner, is very probable: but is Mr. Daubeny so well acquainted with Calvinistic divines, and their communications, as to authorize such assertions as these? Does he know, that "generally speaking, they associate only with Calvinists?"That they "read, for the most part, only Calvinistic books?" And is he so timately acquainted with their characters, and with their thoughts, as to know, that they too easily satisfy themselves with the confident persuasion, that they are arrived at the ne plus ultra of their profession? Would it not be possible for some Calvinist, with at least equal justice, to retort these charges? Might not such an one very fairly ask Mr. Daubeny, whether, generally speaking, he associates with persons of the Calvinistic persuasion, or only with those of his own way of thinking? Whether his reading be not, for the most part, confined to Anti-calvinistic authors; and whether he has not nearly persuaded himself, that he has arrived at the ne plus ultra of his profession? Whatever sentiments Mr. Daubeny may entertain of the partial attainments of those who differ from him, and, doubtless, persons will be found to whom such random expressions are applicable, we think it our duty distinctly to state, what has been abundantly exemplified in the course of our review, that, in conducting this controversy, he himself has often shewn great inacquaintance with his subject, and a very partial and limited knowledge of those authors whose theological opinions do not accord with his own. In one thing, however, we perfectly concur with him, which is in wishing that the words Calvinism and Arminianism were not to be found in the Churchman's vocabulary, the doctrines of the church being modelled. after the pattern of neither; and that all those would renounce the name of Calvinist, who do not maintain the system of Calvin in its full extent. At the same time it is but justice to them to state, that, possibly, the renunciation of the title would little avail them. It certainly has little availed the Christian Observer. The conductors of that work, though they have never professed themselves

Calvinists in any sense, are still lavishly honoured with that title by the Anti jacobin Reviewers. And Mr. Daubeny himself, from whom more candour might have been expected, notwithstanding their explicit disavowal of the name, and in the face of the strong est evidence arising from the uniform tenor of their work, chuses to represent them as considering "the essence of the gospel to be in a great measure contained in the unscriptural pe culiarities of Calvinism." Letter to a sound member, &c. (p. 44.)

We turn with pleasure to a beautiful extract, inserted at page 458, from Bishop Hall's Fia Media, which we sincerely recommend to all whom it may concern.

As ministers of the same church, who ought to be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, let it be our care to study and preach Christ and him crucified; to work the souls of men to faith, repentance, piety, justice, charity, temperance, and all other heavenly virtues; that they may find cordial testimonies in themselves of their happy predestination to life, and their infallible interest in the precious blood of their Redeemer. Let us beat down those sias in them, which make them obnoxious to everlasting damnation, and strip them of all comfortable assurances of the favour of God. Let us not indiscreetly spend our time and pains in distracting their thoughts with those scholastical disquisitions, whereof the knowledge or ignorance makes nothing to heaven. The way to blessedness is not so short, that we should find leisure to make outroads into needless and unprofitable speculations." (Quoted by Mr, Daubeny from Hall's Via Media, p. 386. ed. 1660.)

Mr. Daubeny no sooner makes this quotation, than he proceeds to affirin, in peremptory terms, that "the doc trine of predestination was never heard of in the church till christians amused themselves with raising questions out of the scriptures, and disputed about many things to no profit." The scriptures, he adds, contain it not. Now, besides that this is mere gratuitous assertion, and of no avail whatever in deciding the question at issue, is it not evident that Mr. Daubeny is at least unguarded in his affirma tions? For if we grant, which we do very readily, that certain modes of understanding the doctrine of predestination have been the effect of a cap tious and disputatious spirit; yet the doctrine itself is a doctrine both of scripture and of our church, nor can CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 35.

681

we imagine how Mr. Daubeny should deny it. The doctrine of predestination is professedly the subject of our seventeenth article and even in the above quoted extract from Bishop Hall it is distinctly mentioned. This doctrine has, without doubt, been abused, misrepresented, and misunderstood. Men also may, and will, differ about its real meaning; but it seems a very extraordinary position to say, that it is unknown to scripture and to the Church: See Rom. viii. tend not for any particular explana29, 30. Eph. i. 5. and 11. We contion of the term "predestinate" contained in those passages, nor of the term " predestination" which forms All we contend for is, that a divine the subject of the seventeenth article. of the Church of England should at least restrict his condemnation of "the doctrine of predestination," the godly consideration of which is stated, in that article, to be "full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort," to its misinterpretation or abuse; and a mere excrescence of christianity. not argue as if the doctrine itself were We are always glad to bear our testimony of praise to such sentiments as the following:

every sincere and pious Calvinist, in the. "I should be happy to co-operate with dissemination of the genuine doctrines of the cross; and where a christian spirit prevails, this might be done without of-, fence being given to private opinions on either side. Neither Calvinism nor Anticalvinism, abstractedly considered, constitute the precise standard by which true" christian characters ought definitively to ous and exemplary christians have been, be ascertained; because most conscienti and doubtless still are to be, found under each description." (p. 460.) O si sic omnia!

however, after a careful examination
We are very clearly of opinion,
of Mr. Daubeny's volume, and of the
general temper which pervades it,
that he himself, at least, is deceived
when he says, (p. 461),

"I have confined myself chiefly to
facts, avoiding, at least intentionally, to-
gether with that flippancy of language un-
suited to the subject, all those harsh,
sneering, and disrespectful expressions,
which tend more to provoke than to con-
gious controversies, appear to savour so
vince; and which, whenever used in reli-
much of that intemperate zeal, to which
our SAVIOUR's rebuke in some sort ap-
plies, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye
are of."

4T

Truth obliges us here to say, that the candour of this volume, as has been abundantly shewn, is far more in the letter than in the spirit; and yet even in the letter, we find many harsh, sneering, and disrespectful expressions, tending more to provoke than to convince, and appearing to savour much of mere party zeal. (See Christian Observer, p. 431.) By insinuation, Mr. Daubeny frequently says much more than he expresses; and he often speaks a language of triumph or defiance, as inconsistent with the meekness of wisdom, as with the conclusiveness of his own reasoning. The attentive reader will be struck with the great contradiction between his occasional professions of candour, and his remarkable deviations from it in practice. He is at times as indiscriminate in the condemnation of all who hold Calvinistic sentiments, as he accuses Mr. Overton of being towards those who do not hold them*.

Those who pursue Mr. Daubeny's facts and arguments to their primitive source will perceive, that by following unsafe guides himself, he often becomes an unsafe guide to others. The various instances of error and mis-statement, which we have already produced, will prove to the satisfaction of the impartial reader, that Mr. Daubeny is very far from being either a safe guide or satisfactory reasoner. His mistakes too are of such a nature, as plainly indicates some important misconceptions in his general view of those questions which he has undertaken to discuss: and, in several instances, they are so very extraordinary, that, as the intelligent reader will have seen, they furnish powerful weapons against himself, and even overthrow some of his most laboured positions; particularly those which affirm the designed exclusion,"

* At p. 460, Mr. Daubeny asserts, that "from the general tenor of Mr. Over ton's publication, it should seem as if he thought there was no middle way between the Calvinistic interpretation of our articles and the propagation of absolute heathenism," Even if this assertion could not be directly contradicted, which we have already shewn that it may, (p. 424, 425, 426,) yet the decisive approbation, with which Mr. Overton frequently men. tions the names of pious Auti-calvinists, and their views of religion, could not have escaped an impartial reader.

on the part of our reformers, of a Calvinistic interpretation of the thirtynine articles, and those also which respect the nature of faith, and its office in the justification of a sinner. On the first point, such a variety of luminous evidence stands opposed to Mr. Daubeny's hypothesis, that we do not hesitate to affirm, that nothing but a very prejudiced or partial view of the subject could lead any enquirer after truth to adopt it. With respect to the questions of faith and justification, Mr. Daubeny, as has been already shewn, adheres to those views which are to be found in King Henry's book, entitled, the "Erudition of a Christian Man;" but which are not to be found in the writings of our reformers, during the far more Protestant days of King Edward. It was the opinion of Bishop Gardiner, who espoused the doctrine of King Henry's book, that the views of faith and justification there given, were in direct contradiction to those stated in the Homilies written by Cranmer after Henry's death: nor was the fact denied by Cranmer. We refer our readers for proof of this position to our last number, p. 629. A very singular coincidence is observable between the expressions respecting faith and works, in Gardiner's letter to Cranmer which is there referred to, and those which are to be found in some of Mr. Daubeny's pages on the same subject. Now Gardiner a vowedly opposed Cranmer's views of faith. Since, therefore, it can be shewn that Mr. Daubeny agrees with Gardiner, it will be a difficult task to reconcile his opinions with those of Cranmer and his brother reformers†. But, notwithstanding the extreme incorrectness of some of Mr. Daubeny's representations, such is the inadequate state of general information on most

On comparing the language of the "Erudition," of Gardiner's Letters, (No. 35, 36, in Append. to Strype's Cranmer,) and of Harding's Reply to Bishop Jewell, with Mr. Daubeny's Statement of Faith and Works, a remarkable resemblance may be traced throughout, A coincidence, equally remarkable, though of a very op posite kind, will be found, on comparing together the Homilies, the Sermons of Bishop Latimer, the Declarations of the Martyrs in prison, Jewell's Works, and, we believe, every other Church of England writer during the reign of Elizabeth, who has treated on the subject.

of the points which are here discuss ed, and such is the tone of confidence, and even of triumph, with which Mr. Daubeny exposes the alleged er rors of his opponent, that many, we doubt not, will be led to conclude that his publication is decisive of the question at issue. Enough has already been said to shew, that this would be a very hasty and unfounded conclusion; and that Mr. Daubeny is little fitted, either by the extent and accuracy of his knowledge, or by his freedom from passion and prejudice, to act the part of an arbiter in the present controversy.

Some, however, of the errors of Mr. Daubeny are of a nature which scarcely admits of their being regarded as proceeding merely from a want of acquaintance with the subject, or as the mere effect of prejudice or irritation. For these sources of error some allowance may fairly be claimed; and, in the present instance, we feel fully disposed to admit the claim. But when Mr. Daubeny represents Bishop Cleaver as maintaining the Non-calvinism of Nowell's Catechism; although that prelate has distinctly admitted it to be Calvinistic*:-when, by the reiterated omission of an emphatic NOT in an extract from the homilies, he attributes to our reformers sentiments directly the reverse of what they entertained+: when he refers to Strype as his authority for asserting that Bradford's Treatise on Election did not obtain the sanction of Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer; although Strype affirms that it did obtain their approbationt: when he quotes the same author to prove, that our reformers did not employ Calvin as their counsel; although that annalist distinctly states that Cranmer did apply to Calvin for counsel§; when he adduces the preface to Archbishop Parker's Bible, as furnishing decisive evidence of the designed exclusion of Calvinism from the church; although the notes to that Bible, as well as the catechism which is inserted in it, are in the highest degree Calvinistic: and when, in opposition to all existing testimony, he contends that King James, and the English delegates to the Synod of Dort, preferred the sentiments of Ar

[blocks in formation]

minius to those of Calvin**: we must profess ourselves unable to frame any probable hypothesis, which, without derogating from Mr. Daubeny's character for ingenuousness, will account for such errors. We can scarcely suppose them to be merely the result of inadvertence, or of ordinary prejudice, but either of some cause which remains to be explained, or of preju dice the most extraordinary+t.

Before we conclude this article, we would bring to the recollection of our readers the real nature of the question which is at issue in the present controversy.

Several divines of the Church of England having thought proper to stigmatize, as heretics and schismatics, those of their brethren who had either obtained or assumed the name of evangelical ministers, Mr. Overton was induced to write a book in defence of their principles. His professed object was to prove the perfect consistency of those principles with the doctrines of the Church of England; excluding, however, from the line of his defence all who, like Dr. Haweis, were guilty of irregularities in the discharge of their ministerial functions.

Had Mr. Overton been satisfied with an apologetic statement of the sentiments of his friends, he would have stood on unassailable ground. But he went farther. He engaged in offensive operations; and endeavoured to shew that, not only were his friends true churchmen, but that they were the only true churchmen; and that Mr. D. and such as united with him in sentiment were dissenters from the church. We do not mean to discuss this question: we merely state the fact. In the course of his inquiry, however, Mr. O. was led, as we conceive, into some mis-statements respecting the opinions of Mr. Daubeny, which af forded that gentleman just occasion of complaint. Expressions too occur which are more likely to irritate than to convince: and the general aspect of his work must be admitted not to be conciliatory.

Mr. Overton further undertook to prove, that the Church of England,

** Christ. Observer, p. 631.

++ Neither the Anti-jacobin, nor the British Critie, though they have largely reviewed Mr. Daubeny's work, have taken any notice of the errors which it contains.

« PreviousContinue »