have great heavinefs and continual forrow in my heart (for I myfelf likewise once was an excommunicate outcast from Chrift) on account of my brethren, my kinfmen according to the flesh.'-The, word nuxouny, he thinks, is not potential, that is, has not the leaft idea of a wish annexed to it, but barely denotes fomething, which the apoftle had formerly done. Thus Homer, he obferves, frequently ufes the word: dios wais ευχετο είναι : 'He gloried in being,' or he professed that he was,' or fimply, he was the fon of Jupiter.'

This explication would have been fomething more fatisfactory, if sʊxouai had ever been used pleonaftically by St. Paul. We have the word in feveral parts of his Epiftles: Eugav, tr. I would to God, Acts xxvi. 29. Huxovto, they wished for the day, Acts xxvii. 29. Euxopɛba, we wish, 2 Cor. xiii. 9. EuXoux, I pray to God, v.7, &c. This objection, we confefs, is of no great force: we therefore lay no ftress upon it.

Mr. Keeling, in a fermon printed in the year 1766 *, endeavours to explain this paffage by a different mode of interpretation, thus: I myfelf could wish to be accurfed or feparated from Chrift; or, according to the fcripture expression a little before, to be delivered up, in the fame manner, or degree, that Christ was accurfed from God for a time, if this could be effectual to the falvation of my brethren.'

In favour of Mr. Keeling's interpretation it may be ob ferved, that the following expreffions of our Saviour might poffibly fuggeft this hyperbolical declaration of St. Paul: The geod fhepherd giveth his life for the fheep. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.' Joh. x. 11. xv. 13.-Dr. Bandinel's however is certainly an ingenious and a happy conjecture.

Thoughts on the Nature of the Grand Apoftacy. With Reflections and Obfervations on the Fifteenth Chapter of Mr. Gibbon's Hiftory, &c. By Henry Taylor, Rector of Crawley, and Vicar of Portfmouth in Hants. 8vo. 35. 6d. Johnson.

MAN

ANY ecclefiaftical writers, from the firft to the eighteenth century, have recorded a multitude of impudent forgeries, and abominable lies, under the name of visions and miracles; and have given us their own errors and groundless conceits, as the doctrines of the gofpel. Writers of a later date, who have not been much acquainted with the fcriptures, have

See Crit. Rev. vol. xxii. p. 158.

taken

taken their ideas of our religion, from thefe mifreprefentations. For example: they have adopted the notions of Calvin, concerning original fin, irrefiftible grace, and predeftination, and confidered them as the documents of St. Paul. Under this deception, they have abused and in ulted the facred writers, and defpifed Chriftianity itfelf, for abfurdities, which have no existence in the fcriptures. Probably indeed, in a lucid interval of good humour, they have perceived and acknowleged fomething great and wonderful in the, Chriftian religion; but having no juft idea of its genuine doctrines, and fixing their attention upon fome paffages which have been grofly perverted, they.have, with an unpardonable duplicity, employed their wit, when they should have used their underftanding, and told us, that the apoftles nod, when it is only they themselves that dream.

The excellent author of this tract, in his preface, thus humorously apologizes for those writers, who treat any of the doctrines of Chriflianity with an air of ridicule.

Whatever fome people may think, a fneer, he fays, has many ufes.

• I shall mention a few of them for general information.

I. A fineer will entertain the reader, put him in a good humour, and conciliate him to the fide of the fncerer.

་

2. It is better adapted to the apprehenfion of the generality of writers, as well as readers, than more folid reafoning. 3. It is of admirable ufe in evading the force of an argument, which the fneerer is unable to anfwer; by leading the reader away from the precife ftate of the queftion; and, in short, it ferves not only to conceal a thousand imperfections, but, as Sancho Panfa fays of fleep, it covers the fneerer all over, like a cloak-thoughts and all; by which means he lies as fecure and fnug from all poffibility of an attack, as a fcuttle fish under a cloud of its own making.'

It has been obferved, that fneers can have no place in an hiftorical narration..

But, fays our author, can the judicious Dr. John Moore, or any other fenfible proteftant, avoid fneering at the hiftorical narration of the wonderful travels of the house of Loretto, or many other parts of hiflory he meets with in the Roman legends, though ever fo gravely related? Or can any man be convinced of their abfurdity by reafon and argument? No certainly; nothing but a fneer can avail on fuch fubjects. A papit may tell us with a grave face, that he faw the devil upon a cow's back; and that Eutychius fet a bear to bring home the sheep of the monaftery. But what proteftant can help fneering at the FIRM

ÇON

CONSISTENCY of their faith, who are expected to believe fuch ftories, and the impudence of thofe faints, who invented them ?'...

-'I would farther obferve, that we frequently give the fneerer too much credit; for that many things which we look upon as fneers, are nothing better than mistakes and errors of judgment. Witnefs the three Creeds, that are held by Mr. Jenyns, Tertullian, and Mr. Gibbon. First, the ingenious Mr. Soame Jenyns argues, that a feeming impoffibility may be a mark of truth; and he believes, because it feems to be impoffible. Then comes the great Tertullian, who leaves Mr. Jenyns a little way behind, and he believes, not because it seems to be impoffible, but because it actually is fo.

The third extraordinary believer is Mr. Gibbon; and he informs us, that the revolution of seventeen centuries hath fhewn us, that an event foretold by the apostles is contrary to experience, and an error; and we must not prefs too closely the myfterious language of prophecy and revelation: and yet he de clares Chriftianity to be a divine revelation, and a genuine revelation, fitted to infpire the most rational conviction.

Now who would not imagine all this to be a fneer and a bam? Can a man poffibly believe a religion because it seems to be impoffible, or because it really is fo? or that a lying prophecy can be a divine revelation, and fitly adapted to infpire a rational conviction And yet in truth there is neither fneer nor defign in all this. It is the honcit truth, the true hiftory, the exact defcription of what thefe philofophers fancy that they feel in their own minds. Mr. Jenyns manifeftly understands Tertullian to be in earneft; and he certainly is fo himfelf, and very fanguine. upon the fubject, or he would not have been fo piqued at the fuperiority of Tertullian's faith in comparifon with his own, as to forget his ufual politenefs, and be guilty of fuch a folecism in good breeding against fo great a man, as to call him a mad enthufiaft. This is the very ftyle of bigotry, and deserves no other anfwer than, Bona verba quæfo!

Indeed there is not the leaft appearance, in either of these three confeffions, of any thing that difcovers levity or fneer; or tranfgreffes the boundary of what is folemn, grave, and dull. Mr. Gibbon feems as ferious as Mr. Jenyns, though not fo warm: he confiders the faith of Tertullian with a temper devoid of jealoufy, and endeavours to defend him, and all the ancients with him, in a candid manner; for he lays it down as a fact to argue from, that the faith of the ancients was of a more FIRM CONSISTENCE than the doubtful and imperfect faith of the moderns. It is an ingenious conjecture, and would do wonders, if it could stand a fair examination; but Mr. Gibbon has unfortunately mistaken the nature of the Chriftian faith, the perfection of which does not confift, as he here fuppofes, in delivering over, without hefitation, to eternal torments the far greater part of the human fpecies, nor in believing every thing that is offered to

our

our acceptance; but in believing the truth, and rejecting the falfhood for when Tertullian tells us the ftory of a vestal virgin carrying water in a fieve, and that the statues of Caftor and Pollux brought the first news to Rome of the victory over Perfeus; it is fo far from exhibiting a meritorious faith, that it difcovers a weak and culpable credulity. The true genuine faith of a Chriftian is founded upon rational evidence, and will reach no farther than fuch evidence will juftify. Contradictions, abfurdities, and impoffibilities, are not its objects.'

As, in the cafe of these creeds, we are apt to imagine a fneer was intended, when upon examination we find nothing more than an innocent confufion of ideas, and error of judgment, arifing from the chaos of a heated imagination, or perhaps too much learning; fo, at other times we deceive ourselves with the apprehenfion of a fneer, when upon examination we find only a defect of memory, to which the beft of men are fometimes liable. In both these cafes the fufpicion of a fneer is 'groundlefs, and arifes from our own inattention, in not confidering how very defective in judgment or memory men may fometimes be; which defect, when we meet with to any great degree, in those who generally speak the words of truth and fobernefs, we rafhly conclude that they are not in earnest, and mistake their imperfections for fneer and wit. But in this we are guilty of a very great injuftice: for as mankind is undeniably the moft nonfenfical of all God Almighty's creatures, no man can have a right to fet bounds to another man's nonfenfe.-Every one fhould be contented with his own fhare; and if Providence has vouchfafed to our neighbour fuch an abundance of it, that he can digeft contradictions better than we can, it should not be the object of our envy, but of our admiration.

When bishop Bull is fpeaking of Tertullian, he tells us, that he did not care what he faid of God, if he did but anfwer his adverfary. This to be fure was extremely wrong, ad highly to be blamed. But it is a very different thing when philofo phers, in the heat of their metal, in the purfuit of truth, or fame, fhall happen to forget, and by that means contradict, what they have just before said. And this is ftill more excufable, when it is the effect of zeal in fuch young converts as have juft taken up a new religion, and difcarded an old one; for here it may be in a manner expected, that fome fpice of the old leaven be as difficult to fhake off as was the poifoned fhirt of Hercules; and this obfervation is confirmed by Ovid, who informs us, that the heart of Daphne continued to beat as utual, even when she was changed in all outward appearance: Sentit adhuc trepidare novo fub cortice pectus. And as this is the cafe, we ought in juftice to excufe Dr. Maclaine, in having read twothirds of Mr. Jenyns, before he found, what he calls, the strange things in it, to be meant in earnest. And I must confe's, I did not fee the trim of Mr. Gibbon, till I had read him more than once and at length I found, or feemed to find, fufficient reafon

may

3

to

to acquit him of any evil defign against the truth, and ra ther to confider him as being in a ftate of doubt and uncertainty, upon meeting with difficulties which he could not explain, and wavering in his opinions, like a wave in the fea, driven with the wind, and toffed, James i. 6. Or perhaps he may be more properly compared, in the words of the Pfalmift, to the mariners themfelves in a tempeft; they reel to and fro, and stagger like a drunken man, and are at their wit's end."

-6

Away then with the idle notion of infidelity and fneers. If thefe philofophers believe Chriftianity, as they declare they do, they are Chriftians, by whatever accident it has happened, and whatever degree they may occupy in the fcale of faith, from the burning to the freezing point. And if they have actually found it neceffary to difcard their reafon, in order to make room for their faith; is it not most unreasonable and unjust in their adverfaries, merely upon that account, to call in quefiion their title to the name of Chriftian, which they have purchased at fo dear a price? And upon what pretence? Have they not for fome time figured in the world as the defenders of our faith? and with as great an eclat as any of the moft Chridian, moft Faithful, or mott Catholic princes in Europe ?-Have they not confcientiously followed the example of the Roman church, both in the rashness and fuddenness of their judgment, as well as in the uncertainty of their determinations? If any of their adverfaries are fo bold as to deny this, we appeal to fact, let them be confounded and put to fhame, by the following undeniable teftimony of Melchior Canus, the learned bishop of the Canaries. "It is ufual, believe me, fays he, for all the judges of the church, when they publish their decrees, to be driven on by a certain rashness and fuddennefs of judgment, as by a wind; fo that nothing can be looked upon as folid, grave, or certain."

I pretend not to judge whether this be the haven where these defenders of the faith would be; but (to fpeak without the figure) it is the fate to which their arguments tend to reduce revelation: and it must be owned, even by their adverfaries, that they have not only diligently followed the example of all the judges of the church; but been driven on like them as by a fquall of wind, and anchored at last in the very fame port; in the fairy-land of legendary romance, confufion, and uncertainty. And what modet man will dare to oppofe himself to fuch a refpectable authority as that of Melchior Canus, bifhop of the Canaries, and all the judges of the Roman church ?'

Mr. Gibbon having specified five caufes, as favouring the rapid progrefs of Chriflianity, our author confiders thefe causes; and obferves, that the learned hiftorian has not once attempted to prove, that any of them affifted the truth of the Chriftian religion; but merely, that they favoured the rapid progrefs of the church, as a fociety or party, without any examination into the truth of the principles they profeffed to

be