of the public savours of affectation, acutè, graviter, copiosè, dilucide, if not of trick?

eruditè, disputârit.' But whence, Dr. Clarke proceeds lo the sug- then,” Dr. Clarke asks, “is this fallgestions of the Professor, in regard ing off, but from this FACT......that to neglecting to give the Prayer- the cause is radically bad." book, with the honest surprise of a Reserving ourselves more geneman to whom the neglect itself and rally for the contents of the Inquiry, the accusation are equally strange as they have been drawn out by sub"I am addressing myself, you say, sequent replies, we shall pass over only to churchmen in their inter- some short and pithy observations in course with cburchmen, such as the the present letter. Only we shali clergymaa has with his parishion- observe, that for ourselves we never ers. Then what reference have your felt the need of a longer or graver remarks to the Bible Society? If reply to Dr. Marsh, than Dr. Clarke you be merely instructing clergy. has afforded us. And the world, men in their parish duties, they will we are persuaded, will feel with us, tell you they do not require your ad- should they ever be made to think vice. There is no clergy man of the the Inquiry, what we are already. Established Church who does not we conless, disposed to call it, a sucdistribute Prayer-books in his pa- cession of laboured truisms, and atrish, if any book at all: and will ihe tenuated sophisnis. With one fact performance of this duty be inter- mentioned by Dr. Clarke, in conrupted by his belongiay to the Bible sequence of being associated with Society” p. 6, nole. After all, this “a party,” we take our leave of him. is the plain question, and common “When you communicated,” says he sepse must answer it. Dr. Marsh, to Dr. Marsh, “Mr.Vansittart's moindeed, tells us, “ It is of all sub- tive for publishing bis letter, you jects on which I ever undertook to neglected to inform us, that the write, the most intricate and per- Prime Minister of Great Britain, in plexed. And though at various consequence of your officious applitimes I have instituted inquiries cation to him, had written to you, and wbich demanded close reasoning expressed his unequivocal approval and profound thought, I never enter- of the Bible Society*." pp. 11, 12. ed on a subject which required so After a prudent delay, partly, much penetration as the present. perhaps, in expectation of Dr. It is a subject of so extraordinary & Marsh's yet future Appendix, the nature, that while oralrs whose wis- « Examination" of Mr. Dealtry apdom never goes beyond the surface, peared, bearing date March 21. We feel competent to decide, there are had not forgotten the laurelled champoints in it which elude the discera- pion of the Bible Society in other ment of the most sagacious and pro- wars : and it was with delight, but found.” Inquiry, p. 53. We could not with surprise, that we heard the say much on this extraordinary pas- flowing eloquence, drawn from the sage. But Dr. Clarke has summed sources of an overflowing heart, witin up all our feelings upon it in one which, on the memorable 12th of expressive sentence :'" How much December, Mr. Dealtry came forth, this passage reminds one of, Where urged, we are sure, by "no comis the wise, where is the scribe, mon cause, no vulgar sway," again where is the disputer of this world, to plead in favour of his triumphant &c. !' 1 Cor. i. 20.” Letter, p. 8. society. No one will wonder, who And this application, be it remem

*“Oh, hopes dissolved! Oh, prospects all bered, is made by a man who bas she candour lo apply to Dr. Marsh's Oh dawn of glory, opening but to fade!

decay'd! “ talents, on other subjects, the Pleas'd we beheld thy well-earn'd laurels words once applied to the last of the bloom, Fathers, by a well-known writer, Nor knew they wore a trophy for thy tomba

reads Mr. Dealtry's speech on that of letters to his friend and partner occasion, why he has been selected in defence, Dr. Clarke:- These lei. in the “Inquiry,” as the object of ters form so many chapters, which a peculiarly ingenious attack. Dr. treat respectively of the false asMarsh, who knows enough of con- sumptions, wrong conclusions as to troversy to put every thing in its matters of fact, general mistakes, inproper place, has put Mr. Dealtry sinuations against the Biblists, arguinto a note : where, besides the ad- menus, rei ies, with the charge vantageous contrast afforded by the of generalised Protestantism, all natural claims of the dignified per- brought forward, or implied, in the son in question, with bis situation at pages of the Inquiry. Under these the boiton of the paye, Dr. Marsh several heads, Mr. Dealtry has litehas also been pleased to add certain rally sbaken his adversary to pieces ; insinuations of a personal nature, and having fairly executed him, if and ove especially, of a very grave we may be excused the figure, has import to a lover of truth. Under delivered him over to dissection. such a provocation (it is to the shame Amid almost an infinite number of of Dr. Marsb that we use that word), severe wounds so inflicted, it is Mr. Dealtry has been called to the scarcely possible to designate the unpleasant task of replying to a Pro- coup de grace: but we shall select a fessor of Divinily. And if, in pro- few from which our readers may secuting the investigation, be has very contidently judge of the rest. been occasionally carried forward And we think those few will clearly with a zeal and a vehemence some- . convict Dr. Marsh of very unguardwhat different from the measured ed positions, the niost unjustifiable incalmness of Dr. Marsh's style, per- sinuations, and, to say the least of haps we might undertake his defence them, very unsound arguments. As so much the more readily on that far as we can separate these several account. We see, under the sube charges in Mr. Dealtry's rather dedued exacerbation of the" Inquirer," sultory statement of them, we shall something, or rather much. " more attempt it. But we cannot help meant than meets the ear:” wbere- saying a few words before we begin, as, under the honest ebullition of upon the nature and the guilt of feeling, on the part of the “ Esa- raising a cry. miner," we perceive a solid prin- When Dr. Marsh lays down a ciple of bebevolence, easily recon- position very plausible, and, if procileable with the expressions of perly guarded, very true ; when we momentary, and even of severe dis- galber from his insinuations that his pleasure.

opponents deny that position in prinNeither is it our place to decide ciple or practice; and when, to supon the apology, or the penance, port these hints, he has recourse to doubtless due from Dr. Marsh for arguments almost evidently irrelethe "gross and palpable” charge vant to the actual occasion--we cerInentioned above, and which “ the tainly are justified in warning him of 'reverend and learned the Margaret the existence of the aforementioned Professor,forgetting," as Mr. Dealtry crime in the statute book of morality. observes;*"phat was due to himself There is a homely but expressive as well as to me, has thought it right proverb, that “if you throw dirt to advance." p. 115 et seq. The enough, some will be sure to stick,” charge and the defence are both be- Such is the nature of men's '

minds, fore the public, which has nothing that statements of this kind must and to do, so clearly has Mr. Dealtry will entrap the unwary, the shallow, proved his innocence, but to pass the timid, the prejudiced, the insentence on his accuser.

different, nay even the orthodox, To proceed to the main contents if uninformed, or indolent. Above of this able reply, written in the form all, they " afford occasïon to those who desire occasion :” they ad- tion been at variance," says Dr• mirably adapt themselves to any ex. Marsh, " on the question what docisting principle of hostility in the tripes are contained in the Bible ? mind ; and the argument however ...... How can we know, if we give weak, the assertion however un. the Bible alone, what sort of Protesfounded, the calumny however gross, tantism will be deduced from it?" «.recipitur ad modum recipientis.” Inquiry pp. 14, 15. And in p. 5, The adversary is too often entirely without reserve, Dr. Marsh speaks indifferent to truth, and hails the ca- of leaving the poor who, without lumny almost as such ; at least as a assistance, cannot understand the bon mot, a good joke, a bright asso- Scriptures, &c. ciation of incongruous ideas. He is Now to this Mr. Dealtry replies, prepared with his hearty burst' and

“ There is an authority which states, that vigorous clap at every sentence: 'if any man will do the will of God, lie and so nearly allied are insincerity shall know of the doctrine whether it be of and enthusiasm of every kind, that God; and the controversialist who shall distatements so circumstanced will rectly affirm, that Infinite Wisdom has not come to be at length assumed as

furnished us with the most perfect means of truths, and acted upon in the deter- instruction, possesses boldness at least equal minations of life.

to his penetration. That the Scriptures are These considerations have made sometimes perverted to very unwarrantable the most conscientious writers of all purposes, no person will venture to deny;

and even the Prayer-book itself, though next ages peculiarly careful in their use

to the Bible, the best book in the world, is of arguments for the instruction of

not exempted from similar abuse.” pp. 7, 8. mankind. Those addressed to the weakness, not to the strength, of hu

He then strongly applies to the man reason, have been felt as libels

Professor the argumentum ad homion the sanctity, whether of instruc

nem in the instance of “justification tion or even of controversy. And by faith," to prove uniformity not persons detected in the use of such deducible from the Liturgy itself: weapons have been condemned as

and concludes, “ who does not see guilty of a breach of trust in the

that the argument against the dismost sacred office ever committed to persion of the Scriptures without a man; that of guarding the princi. Prayer-book is in a considerable deples, directing the opinions, and go gree applicable to the dispersion of verning the practice of his fellow. a Prayer-book without explanatory

notes.” p. 12. men. Of this guilt we distinctly disavow

To the second position, Mr. Deal. any intention of accusing Dr. Marsh. try replies, from a Bartlett's BuildWe are only sorry that so much ings' Tract against Popery, "The ground should have been laid, as we Scriptures being the word of God think Mr. Dealtry has justly laid, for cannot but be a sufficient and perothers to do so. Mr. Dealtry has fect rale, and able to make us wise very fairly appealed to tbe Margaret unto salvation. As to whatever is Professor's own words, which he necessary to salvation, they are plain places, as he proceeds, at the bottom and easy to those who read them of the page. And in his second with due care and suitable disposi. Letter, under the head of “ Assumptions,” &c. &c. To the suggestion, tions," seems clearly to have proved that these are sentiments against upoa Dr. Marsh the following un- Popery, Mr. Dealtry plainly replies, guarded positions.1. That the Bible

« They are in themselves either true or is not a sure guide to necessary false : iť false, let them be disproved; if trulb, and in fact is no standard at

true, you cannot choose but admit them.all. 2. That the poor cannot un. • What, then, Mr. Dealtry, do you pretend derstand the Scriptures." " Have

to say, that human learning is of no value?" not Christians of every age and na. I pretend to say no such thing: my life Zias been devoted to study:- Do you mean cient grace of God sustained and 10 affirm, Sis, that neither serinons nor litur- corroborated within him, by the pregy are useful for the instruction of the peo. sence of his prayer-book. This we ple?' 'I mean to affirm nothing of the dare not say; and to say it, we kind. I know, too well, the contrary maintain, is to close with the worst The whole of this assumption involves a

heresies and lowest arguments of fallacy, to which I will next advert.' p. 13.

Popery itself. Sectaries, indeed, are Assumption 3. That we bave no

numerous enough, and traps enough established priesthood and no regu- are laid beyond the verge of scriptuJar parochial service.".....i. e." Toral ground for the unwary and the furnish that very instruction, the want ignorant, and, let us add also, for“ the of which is so pathetically deplored wise, the scribe, and the disputer of by the Margaret Professor.” p. 14. this world,” to render the Prayer

In truth, where is the point, as to book a needful companion to the these positions, al issue between Dr. churchman's Bible: but never, never Marsh on one side, and Mr. Dealtry, shall the Editor of Michaelis perc, and, we must add also, ourselves on suade us, that error and truth are the other? We have all strongly equally deducible from the fountain asserted the obligation on cburcle of truth, or that it requires the wit men to accompany the Bible with as well as the honesty of Fathers the Prayer-book, and with liturgi- and Reformers to deduce the princal instruction. But the point is ciples of our Liturgy from those of here, that in proving this obligation the Bible. Dr. Marsh has gone too far. His This mischievous overstatement, general position is chiefly faulty in or rather false principle, seems to its want of guard. He has attributed

us to run through the whole of the to Scripture itself all that uncertain. Professor's reasoning. We cannou ty and versatility, which he ought think Mr. Dealtry's statement of to have attributed only to the per his argument respecting Lancaster's verseness of those sects, some of principle of instruction is at all unthem the wildest possible, to which fair, whilst it serves to illustrate our he has referred. This we could notion of the Professor's general wish to have seen more fully drawn want of guard on this head. out and distinctly brought to view Mr. Lancaster adopts the Bible as the grand line of demarcation be- alone. 2. He advances to the temtween the Professer's positions and ple without a clue: therefore, the the faith of Protestants. It is not Bible is no clue. 3. Merely by that the poor man may be misled; not using the Bible, he has been bewil. that the Bible may be preverted; not dered in his way. 4. By using the that the Bible itself may be made to Bible alone, Christianity has been mislead and pervert the poor man; lost from his view." p. 47. Whatbut that the Bible itself may mis- ever may be the objections to Mr. lead and pervert the man who sits Lancaster, yet can any Protestant down calmly and dispassionately to agree to this statement? Again, Dr. read it; and that it is necessary to Marsh quotes from a certain Unitagive a Prayer-book " to correct the rian report, an opinion, on which he evil" (we use Dr. Marsh's own founds' a conclusion, “ that Lanwords) which would result from giv. caster's system appears more favouring and therefore reading the Bible able to Unitarianism than to any alone : or, to speak more closely yet, other form of religion." Vide Sermon rhat a man so viciously and hereti- at St Paul's, p. 31. On this again, cally given, as of his own accord to Mr. Dealtry fairly puts the followput a perverse or heretical gloss upon ing dilemma :- Dr. Marsh either the sacred text studied alone, would believes this fact to be true or he have the deficient wisdom of that in- does not. If he do believe it, he bespired oracle made up, the insufi. lieves, of course, ibat the reading of

[ocr errors]


the Scriptures alone leads to Unita- gument used by the Papists in derianism. If he do not believe it, fence of the denial of the Bible to for what purpose was the passage in the laity. And, indeed, to such a serted? Again : he either believes length do you carry your argument, the assertion, upon which the con, that I do not know what answer you clusion is founded, or he does not. could give to a Catholic doctor who If he do believe it, he assents, of should justify the practice of his course, to the proposition, that in. church by your authority.” Second struction and Unitarianism are the Letter to Dr. Marsh, p. 27. same. If he do not hold this opi- Mr. Dealtry, in his fifth letter, nion, why did he give the note ? proceeds to state the “ unjustifiable

. Every partizan of every sect will tell insinuutions which the Margaret Proyou, that instruction and his own fessor makes against the whole race creed will almost necessarily go to. of Biblists.” He selects “ dozen gether.” (p.85.) How does the Trini- from the Inquiry' as 'a specimen tarian Doctor sescue himself from this of the rest ;" of which, co speak in dilemma? How does the Protestant equally round numbers, we must say Professor rescue himself from the the last half dozen seen to contain identity charged upon his


the substance or marrow. «7. We with those of Popery itself given by do not believe in the excellency Mr. Dealıry.

"Every Protestant, and useluluess of the Prayer-book. at I suppose, is persuaded that his 8. We justify and recommend the own opinions be true: and that he neglect of the Prayer-bopk. 9. The hath used such means ás are wont to

Biblists dare not tell what they be prescribed for understanding the mean. 10. We are friends to the Scripture--as prayer, conferring of Repeal of the Test Act. 11. We divers texts, &c.—and yet their dis- do very covertly circulate with our agreements shew that some of them Bibles Calvinistic Tracts. 12. We are deceived ; and therefore, it is speak what we dare not print, lest clear that they have no one certain the Margaret Professor should overground to rely upon for understand whelm us.”

All these are well suping of Scripture." Again : "The ported by direct quotations from the Very doctrine of Protestants, say the “ Inquiry.” We shall give Dr. Catholics, if it be followed closely Marsh's note, by which Mr. Dealtry and with coherence to itself, must of backs the last insinuation. necessity induce Socinianism. This

“ I am aware that there is now in the press I say, confidently, and evidently

A speech of the Foreign Secretary, which I prove," &c. &c. p. 92.

have been desired to see, and which gives a These quotations from Catholics,

very different account from all that had been given by Mr. Dealtry out of Chile said before. But all the other speeches ac lingworth, afford some clue to Dr. Cathbridge, which now have been printed Marsh's labours in undermining the above a nonth in the Cambridge Chronicle

, credit of that writer as a friend to and have remained uncontradicted by the generalised Protestantism. We had authors of Rhem, thight also at tinis rate bie intended to allude to Mr. Dealtry's new-modelled in consequence of my objecable defence of him, contained, toge

tions to them. On this subject I sball say ther with a reply to Dr. Marsh's

more in the Appendix." p. 39. complaint against “ Tracts upon We confess we are inclined to Popery,” in Letter 9th : but we call this the most illiberal sentence must only refer to it with approba- in Dr. Marsh's pamphlet. We are tion, and finish our remarks on tbis not at leisure, nor is it necessary, to leading delinquency of Dr. Marsh vindicate at length the circumstances with Mr. Vansittart's calm but forci- which gave to the speech of Mr. ble expostulation. " The danger of Steinkopff a varied form. A notice the perversion of Scriptury, on which on that subject was given in our you so much insist, is the very arnumber for January, and Mr. Stein.

« ForrigeFortsett »