« AnteriorContinuar »
wise, not to act now, as if the cycle were already begun. But Dr. Arnold was absorbed in his aspirations after good, and saw only one proposition at a time. Hence all his extraordinary speculations and alternatives, his concessions and contradictions : he thought honestly on every subject, but he was occupied wholly by the thought he was entertaining. There might not have been another subject of thought at the time in the world against which his could jostle in its application.
Keeping this estimate of his character in mind, I read, without surprise, his latitudinarian views of the articles, (vol. ii. p. 203,) and yet his reluctance to subscribe to them, (vol. ii. p. 133,) his constant attacks on the priesthood, and yet his magnifying it, even to saying (vol. ii. p. 173) that, if revived in power, it would be one of the greatest blessings conferred on the church-his attacking Laud's folly for joining two services into one, (vol. ii. 377,) that is, for saving people one journey out of three to church, who can with difficulty be driven to it once-his alterations of the liturgy (vol. ii. p. 203)—his lax notions of the obligation of the commandments (vol. ii. p. 200) and of keeping the Sabbath day holy, of the canon of Scripture, (vol. ii. p. 188,) and of the spiritual grace in baptism, (vol. ii
. p. 169.) I only advert to these opinions, without stating them at large, or approving of or condemning them, as proofs of his character, or in harmony with the one I have assigned him.
Far too much is said in the Life of tides setting against him, and turning in his favour. Curiosity alone crowded his lecture-room at Oxford to hear bistorical disquisitions. But his liberalism and religion would have found no more permanent favour there than ten years before. One might say, indeed, that it was well for him at the time, that some of his letters were not then published; for, let us try him by himself, and imagine his wildest dreams successful, what would have been the result? The Papist and the Jew are Jew and Papist still, because they are incorrigible. All those, besides, who had any deep-seated feeling, or prejudice, in favour of the sublimest mysteries, or surplices, or drab-coloured coats, would be forced to quit the country by tens of thousands ; the places of worship would have lost all distinctiveness,—organ and pulpit, and font and altar, and steeple and bells,—they would have become lecture-rooms, and occupied by an electioneering partizan, or Chelsea pensioner, holding forth from a book of the coldest generalities, to an indifferent-minded congregation. Such a result would hardly smooth down the dissatisfied and over-refining features which adorn the book, into a more healthy complacency.
In these remarks, I have confined myself to Dr. Arnold's religious opinions; but he is fanciful on all points : on oaths—fishing and shooting—the education of girls—on Pompeji, on writing the early part of his Roman history like Froissart's Chronicle—on the two professions of law and physic as callings-on almost everything he handles, or is consulted about, (vol. ii. pp. 235, 236, &c.)—and, superior as he was in intellectual gifts and piety, and laborious usefulness, I rise from the perusal of his most interesting life with little liking for him,
I think him what the reviewer expressly denies--a crotchety man, theorizing on the narrowest premises; and I rejoice that he had no power to act mischievously, but died, happily for his fame, ruling over boys.
Yours very truly,
QUEEN'S LETTER IN BEHALF OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE
PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL. SIR, -As a general collection in aid of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel is now in course of being made in all churches and chapels of England and Wales, under authority of the Queen's letter, some account of previous collections for the same object may be welcome-at least to clerical readers.
An ordinance was passed in 1649, during the Protectorate, for the erection of a corporation to be called by the name of the “ President and Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New England,” and a general collection was enjoined in all the parishes of the country. An estate in land was purchased with the proceeds, and some progress is said to have been made in the conversion of natives, both on the continent and in the West Indian Islands,
The present Society for the Propagation of the Gospel was incorporated in 1701, and was at first supported almost exclusively by the very liberal subscriptions of the bishops, clergy, and a few distinguished laymen. But so large an expenditure was necessary for the prosecution of the Society's designs, that, after a few years, it became obvious that recourse must be had to some additional measures to provide the requisite funds; and in the anniversary sermon of the Bishop of Chester, * in the year 1709, a suggestion was made which has proved of lasting benefit to the Society. After shewing how persons of all classes and conditions should combine in the great work of propagating the gospel throughout the world, he concludes with a practical proposal, which we give in his own words, not without a hope that it may some day be acted upon more fully than ever it has yet been :
“ And for the more effectual securing the alms and prayers of all good Christians towards the carrying on of this great work, give me leave humbly to propose a few things to you by way of question : As whether it would not be proper to recommend it to our governors, (especially since they have been already pleased to countenance and authorize this work, to set apart a day once in the year, by public fasting and prayer, to implore God's blessing upon it? And to make this as easy to all persons as may be, whether Good Friday, which is already appointed to be publicly kept holy, with fasting and prayer, in commemoration of the Son of God's dying for the redemption of all mankind, Gentiles as well as Jews, might not be a proper day for this purpose ?--especially, considering that our church itself has led us to this thought, by making one of its collects, for that day, a prayer for
* Sir William Dawes, Bart., afterwards Archbishop of York.
the conversion of all · Jews, Turks, infidels, and heretics:' and whether one or two collects more added, of the same kind, would not sufficiently accommodate the service of that day to this use? And farther, whether if a public collection were to be made in all churches, especially in the churches of these two great cities, (London and Westminster,) on that day, for the promoting of this work, it would not be both a very proper and a very great help and encouragement to it?''*
In consequence of this suggestion, the Society, at a meeting held on the 19th Dec. 1710, agreed, “ that an humble address be made to her Majesty, representing the condition of the Society, and praying that she would be pleased to issue her royal proclamation, or her letter, for a collection to be made in churches and chapels on Good Friday, and in other places of public worship on the Sunday following, in the cities of London and Westminster, and bills of mortality, for promoting the designs of the Society." +
A memorial was accordingly presented to the Queen by the Archbishop of York,† to which her Majesty was graciously pleased to answer, that “she thought not fit to direct a general collection to be made on Good Friday, because she was informed it had been customary to make charitable collections for other uses on that day, but that it was her royal intention to grant the request of the Society at a more proper opportunity."'S Trinity Sunday was the day ultimately fixed; and a royal letter accordingly was addressed to the Bishops of London and Winchester, for a collection within the limits above speci. fied. The returns under this first royal letter amounted to the sum of 30607.
Three years afterwards, a similar application, with, however, a more comprehensive prayer, was presented to her Majesty on behalf of the Society, and she was again pleased to return a favourable answer, and address her royal letters to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of London, Durham, Winchester, Exeter, Rochester, Bristol, and Chester, ordering collections to be made in the cities of London and Westminster, with the borough of Southwark, on Trinity Sunday, (9 May, 1713,) and in the cities of Exeter and Bristol, with the seaport towns of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Plymouth, Bideford, Barnstaple, Whitehaven, and Liverpool, on the 11th July following.
“ These royal letters," says the Report of the Society, for 1714, “ were attended with so good success, by the blessing of God on the fitting care and importunity of the clergy, and others, in collecting the munificent charities of a willing people," that they brought into the treasury of the Society no less an amount than 38871.
In 1717, a third collection, under authority of letters from King George I., was made in the cities of London and Westminster, and within a circuit of ten miles, as also in “the principal towns trading to the plantations in America,” the same as already mentioned on a former occasion. The day appointed for making the collection was the third Sunday in Advent. The amount raised was 37271.
• Printed Report, 1709.
§ Journal, ii. p. 27.
† Journal, vol. i. p. 328. | Dr. Sharp.
|| Printed Reports, 1712-13.
No other general collection was made until 1741, in which year
the Society having far exceeded its income, addressed King George II., in a memorial, stating that it “had distributed more than one hundred thousand copies of the Bible, Common Prayer, and other religious books, and that God had so far blessed its endeavours that not only some thousands of Indians and negrues had been instructed and baptized by the missionaries, but likewise by their means and procurement many churches had been built in several parts of America, where at present, in populous congregations, the Word of God is taught, and the sacraments administered according to the Liturgy of the Church of England," and on these grounds praying his Majesty to issue his royal letter for a general collection of charity throughout England and Wales, for the good uses of this Society. The petition was granted, and the letter addressed, through the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, to the several suffragans in the two provinces.*
This, which was the first collection directed to be made throughout the whole country, produced, of course, considerably more than any of the preceding ones; but it is not distinguished in the Report of that year from the Society's general receipts, and cannot, therefore, be accurately stated.
The next letter was issued, in 1751, by King George II., who himself set the example of a liberal contribution by a donation of 5001. The proceeds of this letter were 16,8941.
No royal letter after this was granted till 1779, when George III., in the midst of the American war of independence, authorized a general collection, and contributed from the privy purse a sum of 500l. The total receipts on this occasion were 19,323i. This was the last royal letter in aid of the Society during that cen
Those which remain to be enumerated have all been issued in quite recent times. That of 1819 (Feb. 10) was in aid of a special object of very considerable importance—the erection of a mission college at Calcutta. It produced 45,7471.
The dates and amount of collections from royal letters since issued are as follow's :
34,940 June 18, 1838
39,520 July 28, 1841
35,692 The decrease in the returns of 1841 as compared with those of 1838 may probably be attributed to the great commercial distress which was prevalent during that and the subsequent year—a distress which not only directly affected the amount of contribution, but led to the issuing of a Queen's letter during the same year, specially for the relief of the unemployed manufacturers.
The Queen's letter, now in course of being read in the several churches and chapels of England and Wales, was not issued till late in the year 1844.
Printed Report, 1742.
Comparatively few returns have yet been made; but it is confidently hoped that, as the sphere of the Society's operations and the number of its missionaries is larger than at any former period, so, also, the amount of the collection now in progress will be proportionately increased.
NOTICES AND REVIEWS.
The Churchman's Theological Dictionary. By the Rev. Robert Eden, M.A.,
F.S.A., late Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford; and Minister of
St. Mary's Chapel, Lambeth. London: Parker. 12mo. Pp. 400. Few works are more wanted than a Theological Dictionary, to answer the thousand questions which occur in general reading, and to which no one book of reference affords a brief and satisfactory solution. Unhappily, the want is far, indeed, from being supplied by the present volume. Whether Mr. Eden was competent to execute such a work, must have appeared rather more than questionable to those who know anything of the mode in which Philpot's Remains were edited for the Parker Society, and, without having read through the whole of the present volume, (which, considering it is a dictionary, could scarcely have been attempted,) enough has been noticed to make one regret that he should have been so ill-advised as to undertake it. One example may suffice.
“ Honeousian. A term describing the opinions of Arius and his fellowheretics, who declared the Son of God to be only of like substance (ououovotos) with the Father.”—p. 181.
How any one so ignorant of the opinions of Arius could attempt to write a theological dictionary is truly surprising. * But it is not merely on account of his incompetency that it is to be lamented Mr. Eden undertook to compile this dictionary. In the preface Mr. Eden states that he "repudiates as disingenuous,” “ the artifice, which unhappily is no uncommon one, of insinuating opinions of things under the guise of an explanation of the meaning of words.”
After such a statement one would be sorry to accuse Mr. Eden of “ artifice;” nor does it seem fair to be too ready, without some very direct proof of disingenuousness, to attribute to artifice the conveying (for “ insinuation” implies artifice) of the author's peculiar opinions, even through the explanations of words.
But, after such a disclaimer as this, one cannot but feel surprised
* No attempt is made in this notice to point out minor blunders. “ The Learned Martone,” (p. 3,) may be a printer's fault.“ Vincent of Lyra,” (p. 388,) is rather more unquestionable ; and reminds any one who has happened to read that absurd book of the “ Vincent of Lirius,” that Dr. Hook well is so fond of talking about to young ladies and gentlemen. One is sorry to notice “ Vincentius of Lirius" in Mr, Maskell's Ancient English Liturgy also.-p. xxxi.