« ForrigeFortsett »
to censure, to ftab under the mask of friendship, is the lowest detrac. tion and the fouleft treachery.
“ Hic nigræ fuccus loliginis, hæc eft Ærugo mera. The writer's intention is evidently to depress Cambridge in compa. rison with Oxford. To effect this, he calls St. John's the first college in the former university, and then derogates from its merit by a malig. nant and envious aspersion, while Oxford has his absolute and unqua. lified approbation.
I have nothing, I trust, of that foolish and offensive vanity, which leads men to boait of themselves and their connections, ftill less would I make invidious comparisons ; but it is allowable to commend our. felves for the purpose of repelling an accusation. I call on this writer, therefore, to name that college in Oxford, where a plan of useful learning is pursued with that spirit, vigour, and effect, which are apparent in the discipline of St. John's in Cambridge. As to the inelegance of our manners, this is a calumny which has its foundation and support in envy alone. A residence for many years has given me a very extensive acquaintance with the members of the college ; fo large a society muft comprehend men of various acquirements and defects. I could mention a long list of Johnians, who are not inferior in virtues and accomplishments to any gentlemen in the kingdom; and, I could name too, from other colleges, and even from the writer's favourite university, men as inelegant in their manners, as the lefs refined members of St. John's.
What the writer's own elegancies may be, does not appear. He may be qualified to shine at routs and alsemblies; to "gallant the fan,” and to “ trip it on the light fantastic toe;" these exterior graces, whilst we know not who he is, we cannot say he has not. But Truth and honour, and the conscious dignity of a gentleman, disdain. ing every thing base and mean, and abhorring secret calumny and detraction ; these are elegancies which he certainly does not possess. The illiberality and grossness of his language, at the very instant he is censuring others for inelegance, prove his head to be as bad as his heart. This circumstance is so absurd as to melt our indignation into laughter, and make even depravity ridiculous.
TO THE EDITOR.
tians, Martin Luther supplicated! Frederic, Duke of Saxony, that he would treat them favourably within his dominions, for (that their er. rors excepted) they seemed good and pious men, and applied to them the sentence of Lactantius : “ O quam honefta voluntate miferi errant."
Bat these reformers of all communities, according to some literal and Jingle expressions of the gospel, when, by such merciful toleration, they had gathered strength and power, at last persuaded themselves that they were doing God acceptable service, by expelling their opponents from their habitations, by enriching themselves with the spoil and pillage of the country, and devastating a great part of Germany, for the period of the New Jerusalem was arrived, when “ the meek ones shall inherit ihe earth.
In the reigns of Elizabeth, James, and Charles, the Puritans affected extraordinary meekness, superior fanctity, and a disregard of all worldly concerns, and contempt of earthly governments. The rump tyranny, infolence, and intolerance, fully illustrate the real principles of such hypocrites when exalted above their brethren. The conduct of the Quakers, of the cobbler George Fox, of the presumptuous Bar. clay, who gives a new interpretation to the gospel, without a knowledge.of Greek, and of the war-abhorring Penn, that fitted out ships to capture a privateer, serves to exhibit more strongly the false preten. fions of such deluding enthusiasts.
These ideas occurred to me, when I read fome parts of your two last numbers; for whatever character or perfon (Mask,) a methodist, may now assume, I contemplate him in my mind's eye with greater fufpicion than Hooker beheld the levelling Calvinists at the clofe of Queen Elizabeth's reign. For what can be more alarming to a church and king-man, than to see a multitude of these schismatics, members of the national ecclesiastical body, and numbers of them, conftituents in the king's lower council, having the ear and contidence of a great premier and statesman ? On such an occasion, I cannot but exclaim, “dolens dico, gemens denuntio, facerdotum quod apud nos intus cecidit diu ftare non poterit." But, fortunately for prudent and energetic friends to our establishments, some of these a podrogussrtes, these makers of seats, have disclosed their plans and pro. ceedings in undue season, for the profefjed saints now cry,
we wilh they had held themselves longer in, and not so dangeroudly flowin abroad before the feathers of the caufe had been grown. peal to all friends of church and state, as by law established, whether the methodists are not adopting the same means to overthrow our reli. gion and government, that the Anabaptists and Puritans heretofore ef. fectually used? Are not these the schemes by which they intend to carry their designs into execution? They first display a wonderful zeal towards God, this allures many followers ; they next exhibit a fingular shew of hatred to fin, and here, taking an opportunity of railing against all authorised guides, both fpiritual and civil, easily gain numerous wil. ling hearers and converts. Afterwards they address their audience with the most favourable titles, saints, eieat, chofen, regenerated bre. thren of Christ, children of grace, and afperse all other teachers as time servers, greedy of filthy lucre, dumb dogs, who cannot speak the saving doctrines of the gofpel, or ensure salvation to their Chriftian brethren. By such delusions, and by particularly appealing to Аа?
I now ap
the vehemency of affection, not the reason or understanding, and by addressing female minds easily susceptible of impreffions, when alarmed by apprehensions of eternal misery, such hypocrites obtain the character of true and sincere gospel ministers.
I wish, Sir, the Church of England was restored to the state in which it existed previous to the times of Wesley, Whitfield, Ro. inaine, and other enthusiasts or deceivers. I wish that the parochial dutics in the diocese of London were discharged in strict obedience to the canons of our church, and the good old usage in the times of Bishop Gibson. But we have now churchings at kome in private houses, to return thanks to Almighty God for recovery from child. birth, on the pretencce that the ladies are not well enough to visit the temple of the Lord, We wish that the good maxim of a late curate of Aidgate universally prevailed in the metropolis, who, on similar applications, always read a note from a poor woman requesting to return thanks to the Almighty for again being enabled to visit his house. We wish that home-baptisms, that is, receiving children into the “ congregation of Christ's Church," in private rooms, before five or fix people was abolished, or, as is observed with great propriety, by an old rector in the Tower Hamlet, that our liturgy in such cases, might be altered from “ you have brought this child here to be baptized," to " you have brought me here to baptize this child." I conclude, at present, with the fincere wish, oxig nuus vewyeba, may our old constitution be restored. Your's,
THE SHADE OF HOOKER. June the 25th, 1799.
TO THE EDITOR. SIR, "Am under the painful necessity of occupying a finall space in your
pages, of which I know the full value. It is relative to an article in your last number, of which my romances form the title, and in which something is really to be found concerning them.
Your Critic afferts that the article “Romances in the Encyclopee. dia Britannica” is not copied from me. The assertion is bold, but it is not true.
In the Encyclopædia Britannica, third Edition, the article “Ro. mances” begins with these words :-“ Many authors of the first name have written on the ancient romance, It has exercised the pen of Hurd, of Warburton, &c. We have not, however, seen any where so concise, just, and elegant an account of the origin and progress of Romances, as in D'Israeli's curiofities of literature.” The article is then entirely inserted ad verbum, from that work.
You have compelled me to transcribe my own eulogium, for I would rather appear a vain man than a liar. As for the rest of your Critic's opinions, relative to an anonymous work, to which he affixes
my name, I blame his want of delicacy, and his violation of the MURALS OF CRITICISM; but when he tells us, he can estimate my character, hy “giving me full credit for my abilities, while he per. featly comprehends their nature and their extent," I say, Sir, respecting all this, you cannot conceive how I envy him his fagacity! I am, Sir, yours, &c. &c.
Answer to Do Ifraeli's Letter to the Anti- Jacobin Reviewers.
We are always happy to rectify mistakes from which, not pretending to the gift of infallibility, we do not hold ourselves to be exempted.
The observation which we delivered on the subject in question, arose from our having looked over the article novel instead of romance, in the Encyclopædia Britannica. Reading the observations on novel, and particularly the criticism upon Tom Jones, we conceived it to be beyond the powers of that author, who, in his Vaurien, with such Hippancy and misconception, pretends to describe the intellectual charac. ter of the Bishop of Rochester, and praises the profoundness of Vol. taire. Since we received his letter, we again consulted the Encyclopædia, and under the head “ Romance" perceived the praises of Mr. D'Ifraeli, which he here repeats:
-Quæ plurima fando
Enumerare valet." There he is right, the praises of himself are by himself accurately reported. We were in that instance wrong, and acknowledge our
It frequently happens that the oftenfible motive for writing letters, as well as for other actions, is not THE REAL. Had Mr. D'Ifraeli's reason been merely to convince us or others, that we were mistaken as to the fact, a reference to the documents would have been fufficient ; but as he has not confined himself to what we have advanced on his romances, we have to look for the causes which have extended his strictures. Accustomed to letters from authors, disappointed that we do not rate them so highly as they are pleased to rate themselves, we can perceive in the epistle before us, the pique of mortified vanity. In his first paragraph he evidently intimates that there is not enough said upon his Romances. In discussing these works, we bestowed as much attention and space on them as we considered their value to deserve or require.
What the author means by an anonymous work, we have not saga. city to discover, as we never reviewed any publication of his but Vaurien and the Romances, which are avowed by himself; therefore, we cannot speak either as to the want of delicacy, or violation of what he calls the morals of criticism..
From the concluding paragraph of his letter we are sorry to obferre, that he must be very prone to envy. He speaks of the fagacity which can comprehend the nature and extent of his! abilities as admirable and enviable. Entirely assured that we have, in our strictures on his Vaurien and his Romances, judged fairly of these works, investi. gated and estimated his talents fully and justly, we take no credit to ourselves foș any superior fagacity! What we said was very plain and simple, on a subject that required merely common observation and cominon understanding thoroughly to comprehend.
TO THE EDITOR, SIR, IN N consequence of your reviewing Cadogan's Sermons, and the
Strictures, in your latt number, and the controversy such review and letters may probably have excited, I take leave to corroborate your statement relative to the prevalence of methodistical enthusiafts in the metropolis, and its vicinity. In Whitsun week, two con. verted saints were ordained Ministers of the Gospel, in Lady Hun. tingdon's chapel, Clerkenwell. Previous to receiving the laying on of hands," they were called upon to give an account of the day and hour of their conversion, by whose ministry they were saved, and to relate their spiritual experience, One ftated, that he received the divine influx under Mr. Abdy; the other, under Mr. Goode. These are clergy men of the established church, and yet are making profelytes to SCHISM; nay, one is delivering sectures in the church of Bow, the peculiar of the Metropolitan of all England. Now, for what purpose are these Huntingdonian Minifters ordained ?-To accompany Mr. Rowland Hill in an excursion to Ireland, this fummir, who leaves the oétagon to Mr. Hay and Mr. Jay, who will damn all the non-elect, and abrogate redemption, by enforcing dam. nation on all but the babes of grace.
The diocesan of the metropolis has properly required that the names of all preachers should be regularly entered in a book, provided for that purpose, according to the canons of our church. In the parith church of St. John, Wapping, a charity-sermon has been preached by a perfon, advertising himself in the papers as Mafer of a dissenting Academy, within these two months. Surely, neither Dr. Willis, the Rector, nor Dr. Porteus, the Bishop, are acquainted with this circumstance? The name and character of this conventicler may be found in such parish.
În a parish not a hundred miles distant from thence, a chapel has been very lately confecrated by a Clergyman of the established church, a Rector, well known for not resigning a living conditionally presented to him, and a thunderer in an Eastern schism-shop, for the service of the members of the Church of England. The liturgy of our church is read in such chapel with a trifling variation in one or two collects, and the indiscriminating frequenters of public