allusions,' he thinks precludes them from being indiscriminately offered to the public.' But unless it can be proved, that prophecy before the event is clear to the learned, or that after the event it is obscure to the unlearned, this objection must either have too little or too much weight for the author's purpose. It must either leave the Bible with the multitude, or take it from the student." pp. 36, 37. "On the subject of the Book of Psalms, the author is sufficiently explicit. It is objected to them, that many of them were not written by David, or even in his age that many are in direct contradiction to the more pure and elevated precepts of the Christian Lawgiver-that many exult in the calamities, and even imprecate calamities upon the head, of the writer's enemies.' (p. 9.) "Now here, in the first place, does the author mean to assert, that those Psalms acknowledged not to be the work of David, ought on that account to enjoy less authority in the church? Does he not know, that the Psalms from various hands, were all classed by the Jews among the Hagiographa; and that, although they divided them, possibly in reference to the Pentateuch, into five books, or parts, those of David were not distinguished from the rest? Does he not also know, that if what he calls imprecations, are so in fact, and that, as such, they constitute an objection to the Psalms; the Psalms of David are not less guilty than the rest? But, in the next place, what is to be said of the declaration of Dr. Maltby, that many of the Psalms are in direct contradiction to the more pure and elevated precepts of the Christian Lawgiver?-The question is: are they inspired, or are they not? If they are, can the spirit of the Divine precepts at one period, be directly contradictory to their spirit at another?" pp. 57, 58. But, thirdly, as the author does not announce the parts thus subversive of Christian morality, and as the supposed imprecatory passages are those alone at which any objections have been levelled, let us for a moment touch upon them.-It is then, I conceive, next to impossible that Dr. Maltby should not have known, that the words now ren dered from the Hebrew in the imperative, might be rendered in the future; so that the passages now translated let them perish, may be translated, they shall perish.' But, knowing this, and knowing also, that the best interpreters have acquiesced in this change, should he not rather have inti mated this error of the translation, than impugned the Psalms themselves? If, however, he is determined, with some Hebraists, upon retaining the imprecatory form; is not every objection sufficiently obviated by receiving these passages simply as solemn ratifications of the holy judgments of God against his impenitent enemies?' "But I would ask, finally, upon this point, whether these Psalms, thus directly contradictory' to the precepts of Christ, have, in fact, already exerted any influence in the smallest degree malignant upon the morals of the people? Or if, from amidst the successive millions in the church of God, who from age to age have slaked their thirst, refreshed their piety, imbibed their consolation, at this great fountain of sacred truth, the author should chance to detect some solitary zealot who has managed there to sharpen or poison the arrows of his vindictive passions, shall his single error be set against the general good? Ought we to starve the church of God, because one man has wasted or abused the wholesome food provided for it? Was the manna withdrawn when a few collected it improperly?" pp. 39, 40. Mr. Cunningham next proceeds to examine the reasons of Dr. Malt by, for rejecting so large a portion of the New Testament. It is the opinion of Dr. Maltby, that the Epistles were not " designed, because they are evidently not calculated, for general diffusion." p. 9. "Valuable indeed," he tells us, they are, when considered as mere matters of record, connected with the introduction of our religion. But by far the greater part of the Apostolical Epistles relate to controversies, agitated at the time, about the partial or total rejection of the Jews, the introduction of Gentiles into the church, the necessity of circumcision, the permanence of the Mosaic law, with allusions to the situation of particular congregations, or the conduct of individuals-some the useful teachers, and others the mischievous disturbers of the church." P. 10. contained in this passage, it might, In reply to some of the assertions perhaps, be sufficient to make assertions exactly contrary. "Where is the record of facts, for instance, in the Epistles to the Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, Hebrews, &c." (Mr. Cunningham, p. 45:) and, " with what shew of reason can it be maintained, or even intimated, that the Epistles relate wholly, or chiefly, or in any large measure, to controversies peculiar to the times and places in which they were written?" (ibid. p. 45.) There is yet another position connected with this part of the subject, which is not unworthy of no tice. "There are," says Dr. Maltby, "no doubt, parts in the Epistles, wholly practical, and of great general use; but, perhaps, none differing in substance, either from the moral maxims of the Proverbs, or from the lessons so beautifully and energetically delivered by our Saviour himself." p. 11. The remarks of Mr. Cunningham upon this passage, appear to us particularly happy. preciation of the Gospels to say, that, alone, they less perfectly exhibit the scheme of Christianity; to affirm of a part, that it does not accomplish the object of the whole." pp. 46-48. After exposing the fallacy of the main position, Mr. Cunningham concludes by adverting to three points of minor importance, though, as he justly conceives, involving material errors. "In the first place, then, it is no small error, I conceive, that one of the works Dr. 6 Maltby proposes to substitute for the entire copy of the Scriptures, is a volume judi ciously selected from Cappe's Life of Christ ;' or, in other words, from a Life of Christ written by a known Socinian. Now, of course it would be practicable for a disingenuous reasoner so to avail himself of the term 'judiciously selected,' as to acquit himself of all intention to introduce the Gospels to the world with a Socinian commentary; but Dr. Maltby would shrink from any such evasion; because he is conscious that no‘selection,' however judicious, can render a Socinian work strictly orthodox.' pp. 49, 50. "A second point, in which Dr. Maltby appears to me no less fundamentally to err, is in his wish, for what I conceive to mean an extensive change in the Liturgy and Articles of the Church of England. "As to the Liturgy, if there be any expressions which offend the conscience of the wisely scrupulous, or even the taste of the justly refined, and these could be changed without risk to the whole, I should concur with Dr. Maltby in desiring the correction.” p. 51. "Not to dwell upon the inaccurate assumption of equality between the practical lessons of the Gospels and the Proverbs, is it the fact that the Epistles did not enlarge the code of practical instruction presented to us by Christ himself? If even the word *practical' be confined to morality (which possibly the author designs), many moral duties are distinctly treated in the Epistles alone; as, for instance, the duties of husbands and wives, of fathers and children, of masters and servants, of citizens and subjects, of the members of a church and their spiritual governors. And if the import of the word be extended, as it ought, to every branch of active duty, the Epistles may be considered as making still larger additions to our practical lessons; for what may be called the practical part of religion, is taught chiefly in the Epistles. Nor is this fuller developement of duties in the writings of the first followers of Christ, any disparagement of the Gospels. It was in religion as it is in nature; the sun did not reach its meridian at once, but adapted itself to the eye of the spectators. The Gospels, and the Gospels alone, probably were suited to the actual exigencies of the moment; and our Lord himself intimated, that in happier periods a fuller revelation would be granted: 'I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot "In fact, is there any solid ground fr bear them now: When He, the Spirit of objection to our Articles? Can it be hoped truth, is come, he will guide you into all that any will be framed at once as scriptetruth' be shall teach you all things :ral and more comprehensive?" p. 53. ⚫ he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.' Such being the fact, it is no de "But, then, we should remember, both that there is a degree of refinement which is fastidiousness, and that much of the ancient scrupulosity about modes and expres sions in religion is laid in the grave with the puritans. Almost every change of the 'Liturgy, therefore, may be resisted upo these two grounds-that we shall never please the over-nice, and that the devout are mostly pleased already." p. 51. "In the revision' demanded by the asther for the Articles' of the church, 1 have the misfortune to differ as radically from him." p. 52. "The third and last error, which I shall venture to notice, in the work of Dr. Maliby, is, that he has throughout omitted to give sufficient importance to the safeguard which is, or ought to be, supplied in the Clergy of the Establishment to the free circulation of the whole Scriptures. When he paints, in such gloomy colours, the dangers of suffering the Bible to range abroad in the country, does he forget that the nation provides eleven thousand clergy to watch over and regulate its course? Are they negligent at their post, or incompetent to their high function?" pp. 55, 56. "Or it, which is the fact, this church contain a large body of devout and learned ministers; if the country be at least sprinkled with men able and willing to publish the *glad tidings' of salvation, to explain the difficulties, and press home the lessons of Scripture; ought Dr. Maltby to speak of the Scriptures as though they were to be tossed, a sort of tangled skein, among the multitude, to be unravelled by the mere clumsy hands of ploughmen or mechanics?" p. 56. The extracts, which we have been tempted to select from this masterly Reply, will furnish the strongest recommendation of the work. It would have been easy to produce many other parts, which display a brilliant imagination, and which captivate no less by their reasoning than their eloquence: but our concern was with the argument: and of this, our readers will now be able to form a tolerable judgment for themselves. There is one argument, in opposition to Dr. Maltby's reasoning, which Mr. Cunningham has omitted; we mean that which may be drawn from his peculiar obligations as a minister of the Church of England. We have already referred to the Articles subscribed by Dr. Maltby, which assert the undoubted authority of the whole of the Scriptures as they now stand. The Homilies go still farther: they assert, in direct opposition to Dr. Maltby, that, "Unto a Christian man, there can be nothing either more necessary or profitable, than the knowledge of Holy Scripture."-"Therefore, as many as be desirous to enter into the right and perfect way unto God, must apply their minds to know CHRIST. ORSERV, No. 131. Holy Scripture; without which, they can neither sufficiently know God and his will, neither their office and duty."-"Therefore, forsaking the corrupt judgment of fleshly men, let us reverently hear and read Holy Scripture, which is the food of the soul; let us diligently search for the well of life, in the books of the New and Old Testament." "These books ought to be much in our eyes, in our ears, in our mouths, but most of all in our hearts." We might go on quoting whole pages to the same effect; and be it remembered, that to the soundness and wholesomeness of this doctrine, Dr. Maltby has solemnly subscribed his name. Nor is the practice of the Church at variance with her professions. The first work of the Reformation, when, shaking herself from the dust of popery, she resumed her primitive purity and beauty, was to expose the entire volume of Scripture in the most accessible places, and to invite all, of every rank, and sex, and age, to read it, or hear it read. She has incorporated into her service the whole of the New Testament, and the greatest part of the Old, including the entire Psalms; and this error, if it be one, Dr. Maltby has sanctioned, not only by declaring his assent to the Book of Common Prayer, which prescribes the order in which the Scriptures are to be read, but by continuing himself to follow this prescribed order for a series of years. Thus, according to his view of the matter, has he been accessary to misleading the people committed to his charge, by reading to them what is likely to be perverted, and what must be misunderstood. For our own parts, we do not comprehend how it is that a conscientious man, as we believe Dr. Maltby to be, has contrived, with his sentiments, to reconcile it to his conscience to continue to officiate as a minister of the Church of England. The reasoning which Dr. Maltby employs to 5 A prove the mischievous tendency of "Nevertheless, for the hardness of the general circulation of the whole of the Scriptures, is nothing more than a revival of the popish arguments against the Reformation. He will find all of them ably answered by anticipation, in the Tracts of the Bartlett's Buildings' Society. We will content ourselves with naming a few of them, to which we would refer our author:-viz. Plain Directions for reading the Holy Scriptures; Archbishop Synge's Charitable Advice to all that are of the Communion of the Church of Rome; Questions and Answers concerning the two Religions; Archbishop Tillotson's Dissuasive from Popery; Protestant Catechism, &c. &c. We know, however, of no better answer to those popish arguments, which would deprive the poor and unlearned of free access to the well of life, than is contained in the Homilies of the Church of England. "If you be afraid," says the church, "to fall into error by reading of Holy Scripture, I shall shew you how you may read without danger of error. Read it humbly, with a meek and lowly heart, to the intent you may glorify God, and not yourself, with the knowledge of it; and read it, not without daily praying to God, that he would direct your reading to good effect."-" Presumption and arrogancy are the mother of all error; and humility needeth to fear no error.” Therefore, the humble man may search any truth boldly in Scripture, without any danger of error. And if he be ignorant, he ought the more to read, and to search Holy Scripture, to bring him out of ignorance." And, concerning the hardness of Scripture," "whoever giveth his mind to Holy Scriptures, with diligent study and burning desire, it cannot be that he should be left without help; for either God Almighty will send him some godly doctor to teach him,”~ or Himself from above will give light into our minds, and teach us those things which are necessary for us, and wherein we be ignorant.' such places, the reading of the whole ought not to be set apart. By the Scripture, all men be amended; weak men be strengthened, and strong men be comforted. So that, surely none be enemies to the reading of God's word, but such as either be so ignorant, that they know not how wholesome a thing it is; or else be so sick, that they hate the most comfortable medicine that should heal them; or so ungodly, that they would wish the people still to continue in blindness and ignorance of God."-Homily on reading of Holy Scripture, Part ii. We are tempted, before we quit this part of our subject, to send Dr. Maltby, for farther instruction upon it, to two of our modern poets. Mr. Crabbe, in the true spirit of a Christian minister, speaking of his illiterate country school-mistress, remarks: "And what her learning? 'Tis with awe to look In every verse throughout one sacred book : From this her joy, her hope, her peace, is sought; This she has learned, and she is nobly taught." In the same strain, the seraphic "Yon cottager, who weaves at her own door, true, A truth the brilliant Frenchman never knew : Her title to a treasure in the skies.”— plant! No soil like poverty for growth divine, And never check'd by what impedes the wise, Believe, rush forward, and possess the prize." COWPER's Truth. Of the many extraordinary circumstances connected with Dr. Maltby's work, it is surely not one of the least surprising, that the ultimate bearing of his pamphlet is to extol the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge. What, then, is the reasonable inference? Does the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge maintain that the whole of the Bible is neither "necessary nor intended for the use of all classes of mankind?" That "out of sixtysix books, not above seven in the Old Testament, nor above eleven in the New, appear to be calculated for the study or comprehension of the unlearned?" That "the mass of mankind ought no more to expect to understand the prophecies of Ezekiel, or the Epistles of St. Paul, than the tragedies of Eschylus, or the Letters of Cicero and Pliny?" and, by consequence, that many portions of the Scripture, appointed to be read in our churches, should never reach the ears of the poor? Would the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge propose to substitute for the entire copy of the Scriptures "a volume judiciously selected from Cappe's Life of Christ"-the work of an avowed Socinian? Are these the arguments by which they would expect to recommend themselves to the patronage of a Christian public? Are these the measures by which they intend to form the principles of the rising generation; to train them to all virtue and godliness of living? No: we are well persuaded that the Society will not lend themseives to so unworthy a system. The attack of Dr. Maltby on the Bible Society, is also an attack upon them; they, too, have dispersed the whole of the Scriptures for upwards of a century, without note or comment; and even to this hour, they circulate the Book of Genesis, and the Psalms, and the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, without one apparent feeling of remorse, or any expectation of evil. Yet we know not by what rule of consistency some opponents of the Bible Society could censure our conduct, if we should charge upon the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, the strange language which has been held by certain of its advocates. If an injudicious assertion, whether correctly reported or not is of very little consequence, should be attributed, even in the columus of a newspaper, to a friend of the Bible Society, some doughty controversialist is always at hand to visit the offence, not upon the individual merely, but also upon the institution: the Society itself seems to be considered as responsible for all the sentiments, or alleged sentiments, of all its friends. If the advocates of the Bible Society should adopt the same rule of judgment, is there any absurdity, whether of fact or reasoning, which they might not charge home upon the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge? The articles of their belief, and the divergencies of their reasoning, if extracted from the conflicting creeds and irregular sallies of their friends, would be highly amusing: and Dr. Maltby himself would add not a little to the entertainment. But into that subject we will not enter: and the only reason which has induced us even to mention it, is this: to display the extreme unfairness with which the Bible Society has been treated in certain recent publications; and, if possible, to introduce a better taste, sounder principles of reasoning, and a more correct distribution, whether of censure or of praise. There is, however, another view of the subject, which we are unwilling to omit. It has lately been very much the fashion to attack, as en thusiasts, as enemies to good sense and good works, a certain body of men, who are known by the title of Evangelical Clergymen. The way in which the attack is conducted is this: All who agree in some general principles, such as the doctrines |