"The means of comprehension intended were not any general ambiguity or equivocation of terms, but a prudent forbearance in all parties not to insist on the full extent of their opinions in matters not essential or fundamental, and in all cases to waive, as much as possible, tenets which might divide where they wish to unite."-Remarks on the Design and Formation of the Articles of the Church of England, by William, Lord Bishop of Bangor, 1802.—pp. 23—25.

We will finish with Bishop Horsley :

"It has been the fashion of late to talk about Arminianism as the system of the Church of England, and of Calvinism as something opposite to it, to which the Church is hostile. That I may not be misunderstood in what I have said, or may have occasion further to say upon this subject, I must here declare that I use the words Arminianism and Calvinism in that restricted sense in which they are now generally taken, to denote the doctrinal part of each system as unconnected with the principles either of Arminians or Calvinists upon Church discipline and Church government. This being premised, I assert, what I often have before asserted, and by God's grace I will persist in the assertion to my dying day, that so far is it from the truth that the Church of England is decidedly Arminian and hostile to Calvinism, that the truth is this, that upon the principal points in dispute between the Arminians and the Calvinists, upon all the points of doctrine characteristic of the two sects, the Church of England maintains an absolute neutrality; her Articles explicitly assert nothing but what is believed both by Arminians and by Calvinists. The Calvinists indeed hold some opinions relative to the same points, which the Church of England has not gone the length of asserting in her Articles; but neither has she gone the length of explicitly contradicting those opinions; insomuch, that there is nothing to hinder the Arminian and the highest supralapsarian Calvinist from walking together in the Church of England and Ireland as friends and brothers, if they both approve the discipline of the Church, and both are willing to submit to it. Her discipline has been approved; it has been submitted to; it has been in former times most ably and zealously defended by the highest supralapsarian Calvinists. Such was the great Usher; such was Whitgift ; such were many more burning and shining lights of our Church in her early days (when first she shook off the Papal tyranny), long since gone to the resting-place of the spirits of the just.-Bishop Horsley's Charges, p. 216."— Pp. 25, 26.

So that these unhappy curates are turned out of their bread for an exposition of the Articles which such men as Sherlock, Cleaver, and Horsley think may be fairly given of their meaning. We do not quote their authority to show that the right interpretation is decided, but that it is doubtful—that there is a balance of authorities—that the opinion which Bishop Marsh has punished with poverty and degradation, has been considered to be legitimate by men at least as wise and learned as himself. In fact it is to us perfectly clear that the Articles were originally framed to prevent the very practices which Bishop Marsh has used for their protection-they were purposely so worded, that Arminians and Calvinists could sign them without blame. They were intended to combine both these descriptions of Protestants, and were meant principally for a bulwark against the Catholics.

"Thus," says Bishop Burnet, "was the doctrine of the Church cast into a short and plain form, in which they took care both to establish the positive

articles of religion and to cut off the errors formerly introduced in the time of Popery, or of late broached by the Anabaptists and enthusiasts of Germany, avoiding the niceties of schoolmen or the peremptoriness of the writers of controversy; leaving in matters that are more justly controvertible a liberty to divines to follow their private opinions without thereby disturbing the peace of the Church."-History of the Reformation, book i., part ii., p. 168, folio ed.

The next authority is that of Fuller.

"In the Convocation now sitting, wherein Alexander Nowel, Dean of St. Paul's, was Prolocutor, the nine-and-thirty Articles were composed. For the main they agree with those set forth in the reign of King Edward the Sixth, though in some particulars allowing more liberty to dissenting judgments. For instance, in this King's Articles it is said that it is to be believed that Christ went down to hell (to preach to the spirits there), which last clause is left out in these Articles, and men left to a latitude concerning the cause, time, and manner of His descent.

"Hence some have unjustly taxed the composers for too much favour extended in their large expressions clean through the contexture of these Articles, which should have tied men's consciences up closer, in more strict and particularising propositions, which indeed proceeded from their commendable moderation. Children's clothes ought to be made of the biggest, because afterwards their bodies will grow up to their garments. Thus the Articles of this English Protestant Church, in the infancy thereof, they thought good to draw up in general terms, foreseeing that posterity would grow up to fill the same: I mean these holy men did prudently prediscover that differences in judgments would unavoidably happen in the Church, and were loath to unchurch any and drive them off from an ecclesiastical communion for such petty differences, which made them pen the Articles in comprehensive words to take in all who, differing in the branches, meet in the root of the same religion.

"Indeed most of them had formerly been sufferers themselves, and cannot be said, in compiling these Articles (an acceptable service, no doubt) to offer to God what cost them nothing, some having paid imprisonment, others exile, all losses in their estates, for this their experimental knowledge in religion, which made them the more merciful and tender in stating those points, seeing such who themselves have been most patient in bearing will be most pitiful in burdening the consciences of others."-See Fuller's Church History, book ix., P. 72, folio ed.

But this generous and specific spirit gives no room for the display of zeal and theological learning. The gate of admission has been left too widely open. I may as well be without power at all, if I cannot force my opinions upon other people. What was purposely left indefinite, I must make finite and exclusive. Questions of contention and difference must be laid before the servants of the Church, and nothing like neutrality in theological metaphysics allowed to the ministers of the Gospel. I come not to bring peace, &c.

The Bishop, however, seems to be quite satisfied with himself, when he states that he has a right to do what he has done—just as if a man's character with his fellow creatures depended upon legal rights alone, and not upon a discreet exercise of those rights. A man may persevere in doing what he has a right to do, till the Chancellor shuts him up in Bedlam, or till the mob pelt him as he passes. It must be presumed

that all men whom the law has invested with rights, Nature has invested with common sense to use those rights. For these reasons, children have no rights till they have gained some common sense, and old men have no rights after they lose their common sense. All men are at all times accountable to their fellow creatures for the discreet exercise of every right they possess.

Prelates are fond of talking of my see, my clergy, my diocese, as if these things belonged to them as their pigs and dogs belong to them. They forget that the clergy, the diocese, and the Bishops themselves, all exist, only for the public good; that the public are a third and principal party in the whole concern. It is not simply the tormenting Bishop versus the tormented Curate, but the public against the system of tormenting; as tending to bring scandal upon religion and religious men. By the late alteration in the laws, the labourers in the vineyard are given up to the power of the inspectors of the vineyard. If he have the meanness and malice to do so, an inspector may worry and plague to death any labourer against whom he may have conceived an antipathy. As often as such cases are detected, we believe they will meet, in either House of Parliament, with the severest reprehension. The noblemen and gentlemen of England will never allow their parish clergy to be treated with cruelty, injustice, and caprice, by men who were parish clergymen themselves yesterday, and who were trusted with power for very different purposes.

The Bishop of Peterborough complains of the insolence of the answers made to him. This is certainly not true of Mr. Grimshawe, Mr. Neville, or of the author of the Appeal. They have answered his Lordship with great force, great manliness, but with perfect respect. Does the Bishop expect that humble men, as learned as himself, are to be driven from their houses and homes by his new theology, and then to send him letters of thanks for the kicks and cuffs he has bestowed upon them? Men of very small incomes, be it known to his Lordship, have very often very acute feelings; and a Curate trod on feels a pang as great as when a Bishop is refuted.

We shall now give a specimen of some answers, which, we believe, would exclude a Curate from the diocese of Peterborough, and contrast these answers with the Articles of the Church to which they refer. The 9th Article of the Church of England is upon Original Sin. Upon this point his Lordship puts the following question :

"Did the fall of Adam produce such an effect on his posterity, that mankind became thereby a mass of mere corruption, or of absolute and entire depravity? Or is the effect only such, that we are very far gone from original righteousness, and of our own nature inclined to evil?

Excluding Answer. "The fall of Adam produced such an effect on his posterity, that mankind became there by a mass of mere cor

The Ninth Article.

"Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk); but it is the fault or corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of

ruption, or of absolute and entire depravity."

his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore, in every person born into the world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation."

The 9th Question, Cap. 3d, on Free Will, is as follows:-Is it not contrary to Scripture to say, that man has no share in the work of his salvation?

Excluding Answer.

"It is quite agreeable to Scripture to say, that man has no share in the work of his own salvation."

Tenth Article.

"The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God. Wherefore, we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will."

On redemption, his Lordship has the following question, Cap. Ist, Question Ist:-Did Christ die for all men, or did He die only for a chosen few?

Excluding Answer. "Christ did not die for all men, but only for a chosen few."

Part of Article Seventh.

“Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) He hath constantly decreed by His counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ unto everlasting salvation as vessels made to honour."

Now, whether these answers are right or wrong, we do not presume to decide; but we cannot help saying, there appears to be some little colour in the language of the Articles for the errors of the respondent. It does not appear at first sight to be such a deviation from the plain, literal, and grammatical sense of the Articles, as to merit rapid and ignominious ejectment from the bosom of the Church.

Now we have done with the Bishop. We give him all he asks as to his legal right; and only contend that he is acting a very indiscreet and injudicious part-fatal to his quiet-fatal to his reputation as a man of sense-blamed by Ministers-blamed by all the Bench of Bishops-vexatious to the Clergy, and highly injurious to the Church. We mean no personal disrespect to the Bishop; we are as ignorant of him as of his victims. We should have been heartily glad if the debate in Parliament had put an end to these blamable excesses; and our only object in meddling with the question is to restrain the arm of Power within the limits of moderation and justice-one of the great objects which first led to the establishment of this journal, and which, we hope, will always continue to characterize its efforts.

INDIAN MISSIONS.

Considerations on the Policy of Communicating the Knowledge of Christianity to the Natives in India. By a late Resident in Bengal. London: Hatchard, 1807.

An Address to the Chairman of the East India Company, occasioned by Mr. Twining's Letter to that Gentleman. By the Rev. JOHN OWEN. London: Hatchard.

A Letter to the Chairman of the East India Company, on the Danger of Interfering in the Religious Opinions of the Natives of India. By THOMAS TWINING. London: Ridgeway.

Vindication of the Hindoos. By a Bengal Officer. London: Rodwell.
Letter to John Scott Waring. London: Hatchard.

Cunningham's Christianity in India. London: Hatchard.

Answer to Major Scott Waring. Extracted from the "Christian Observer." Observations on the Present State of the East India Company. By Major SCOTT WARING. Ridgeway, London.

AT T two o'clock in the morning, July the 10th, 1806, the European barracks at Vellore, containing then four complete companies of the 69th Regiment, were surrounded by two battalions of Sepoys in the Company's service, who poured in a heavy fire of musketry at every door and window upon the soldiers: at the same time the European sentries, the soldiers at the main-guard, and the sick in the hospital were put to death; the officers' houses were ransacked, and everybody found in them murdered. Upon the arrival of the 19th Light Dragoons, under Colonel Gillespie, the Sepoys were immediately attacked; 600 cut down upon the spot, and 200 taken from their hiding-places and shot. There perished of the four European companies about 164, besides officers; and many British officers of the native troops were murdered by the insurgents.

Subsequent to this explosion, there was a mutiny at Nundydroog; and in one day 450 Mahomedan Sepoys were disarmed and turned out of the fort, on the ground of an intended massacre. It appeared, also, from the information of the commanding officer at Tritchinopoly, that at that period a spirit of disaffection had manifested itself at Bangalore and other places, and seemed to gain ground in every direction. On the 3rd of December, 1806, the Government of Madras issued the following proclamation :—

"A PROCLAMATION.

"The Right Hon. the Governor in Council having observed that in some late instances an extraordinary degree of agitation has prevailed among several corps of the native army of this coast, it has been his Lordship's particular