made ufe of by the apoftles to declare their doctrines to the world, are liable to be misreprefented. • I made choice of this latter inftance the rather; because the writer, to whom I juft now referred, propofing the example of the apoftles to the imitation of proteftant churches, afks, What courfe they took in this exigency? whether they framed a new creed or confeffion, or inferted into an old one a new article importing, that no man fhould do evil, for the fake of procuring the greateft imaginable good?" and then answers, "No, they left the calumny to be confronted by the gospelhiftory, and the tenor of their own writings and conversation, and gave themselves no farther trouble about it." We find however, that St. Paul was led by it to write thus to the Romans; If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I alfo judged as a finner; and not rather, as we be flanderously reported, and as fome affirm, that we fav, let us do evil that good may come? whofe damnation is juft.' Care therefore was taken by the apoftles explicitly to condemn this doctrine, and to infert an article in oppofition to it, if not into any creed or confeffion diftinct from the fcriptures, yet into the fcriptures themselves. When thofe, who allow, that +" fuch methods of promoting christianity as are plainly recommended by fcriptureprecedents, ought to be strictly followed, complain of it as an unwarrantable encroachment on Christian liberty," that fubfcriptions fhould be required to be made to religious propofitions expreffed in any other than fcripture-language; one is apt to fufpect, that by a fcripture-precedent they mean a precedent of a confeffion recorded in the fcriptures, and expreffed there in unfcriptural words. But without looking for fuch inconfiftencies, it is enough for us to find, that St. Paul, when he commanded Timothy and Titus to examine into the faith of all those whom they fhould receive into the ministry, gave them no directions to ufe only fcripture-language: for we may reafonably conclude from hence, that they were left at liberty to propofe their questions in any words, which would ascertain their meaning. ઃઃ Do we therefore fay, that new and unfcriptural words will better fix the fenfe of fcripture-doctrine, than the words of Chrift and his apoftles ?" To take off the invidiousness of this queftion, I will beg leave, before I answer it, to ask another. Do not they, who object this to us, hold, that § paftors and teachers by familiar, clear, and ufual forms of fpeech can make the fenfe of fcripture more plain to their hearers, than if they Confeffional. ibid. compare Rom. iii. 7. 8. + Confeffional. p. 29. 19. Confeffional. p. 41. were to read it to them in the words, which Chrift and his apofties made use of? They mult, if they think otherwise, maintain, that all preaching and interpreting of the fcriptures is entirely useless, and that the public teachers in proteftant churches have nothing elfe to do for the inftruction of their congregations, but to read the bible to them. I do not mean from the utility of preaching or interpreting the scriptures in Chriftian affemblies to infer the utility of eftablished confessions, but to remind the oppofers of fuch confeffions, that what they hold in one cafe is exactly fimilar to what they imagine would bring an odium upon us, if we were to fay it in the other. For if the fenfe of fcripture may be expreffed more plainly, why not more precifely, than in the words of Christ and his apoftles? To pafs over the ordinary mutability of language; every fect, which has fprung up fince the firit planting of chriftianity, has had an interpretation of fcripture peculiar to itself; and much pains have al along been taken by the feveral leaders of these numberless contending parties to give fuch a fenfe to the words of Chrift and his apoftles, as might appear moft fuitable to their own favourite opinions. Thus by the perverfe difputings of men of corrupt minds a variety of meanings has been found out for those fcripture-expreffions, which were originally intended to convey but one; and nothing is more common, than to extract very unscriptural doctrines from fcripture-language. The governors of the church have therefore found it neceflary to introduce what are called new and unferiptural words and expreffions, not to fix the fenfe of fcripture-doctrines, but to fix the fenfe, in which fcripture-expreffions are understood by thofe, who are candidates for the office of public teaching, and whose faith and doctrines they have therefore a right to examine into and afcertain. When thefe objectors come to explain themselves; they do not feem to mean, that the fenfe of fcripture cannot, but that it ought not, to be more exactly fixed, than it is in the words of fcripture. For they fometimes make it matter of complaint, that any church fhould "require affent to a certain sense of fcripture exclufive of all other fenses ;" because this cannot, they fay, be done "without an unwarrantable interference with the rights of private judgment, which are manifeftly fecured to every individual by the fcriptural terms of Chriftian liberty.” But can any one imagine, that Chrift and his apostles purposely delivered their doctrines in fuch expreffions, as would admit of different interpretations, that each particular person might interpret them for himfelf, and might, in determining what his faith fhould be, have a variety to chufe out of? If this • Confeffional. p. 41. 1 Confeffional. p. 32. ́ † 1 Tim. vi. 5. was was not their defign; if they intended, as certainly they did intend, not to leave any fuch ambiguities in their discourses or writings, but to deliver a fixed and certain religion to all mankind, and to oblige all those to have one faith, who profefs to have one Lord; though the cunning craftiness of defigning interpreters may have found out a variety of fenfes for any paflages of fcripture, yet the terms, which fecure to each Chriftian the right of interpreting them for himfelf, cannot without impropriety be called the fcriptural terms of Chriftian liberty they hould rather be called the natural terms of an accidental liberty, which belongs to Chriftians in their prefent fituation. But whatever names we may make ufe of, the question is, whether this liberty, call it how we will, is not unwarrantably interfered with by requiring Chriftians to affent to any certain sense of fcripture, where they are perfuaded, that it will admit of other fenfes, and have a right to judge for themfelves, which is the true one? The answer is obvious. No Chriftian is required to fubfcribe to such confeffions, as I am speaking of, who is not in his own private judgment convinced, that they are agreeable to the word of God. On the contrary, as they are defigned to be tefts, by which the governors of the church may find out, whether they, who defire to be appointed paftors and teachers, affent to the faith and doctrines contained in them, or not; whoever subscribes to them, when he does not affent to them, fruftrates the purpofe, for which they were established.' These are the principal remarks which the Doctor makes upon the CONFESSIONAL. It would be no difficult task to reply to what he has advanced; but the Author of the CONFESSIONAL is best able to defend his own cause, and we hope his will is equal to his ability. The fubject, though often handled, is ftill important, as the grievances, fo long and fo often complained of, are not yet redreffed. Ephef. iv. 5. A comparative View of the State and Faculties of Man with those of the Animal World. The third Edition *. 12mo. 3s. Dodfley. I T gives us no small pleasure to find that the opinion we formed of this very ingenious and entertaining work is fo amply confirmed by the public approbation, which has encouraged the Author to correct, and confiderably enlarge this third edition. In a very fenfible and modeft preface, he gives an account of the general train of fentiments that gave rife to his work; our Readers will be pleafed with what he says: *See our account of this work at its first publication, Rev. Vol. XXXIII. p. 356. By an advertisement prefixed to the first edition of this book, fays he, the public was informed that it confifted of fome difcourfes originally read in a private literary fociety, without the most distant view to their publication. The loose and careless manner in which they are written, is too ftrong an internal evidence that they never were intended for the public infpection. But, for what purpose they were originally compofed, and how they came into the world, are questions which a Reader will never ask: he has an undoubted right to cenfure them with all the feverity which their faults deferve, and to cenfure likewife the Author of them, unless he could pretend they were publifhed without his knowlege. The unexpected favour he has met with from the public has encouraged him to correct and enlarge this edition; but when he attempted to treat his fubject with that fullness and accuracy which its importance required, he found it run into fo great an extent, that he was obliged to abandon it, being neceffarily engaged in business and ftudies of a very different nature. He would gladly have fupprefled fome fentiments freely thrown out in the confidence of private friendship, which may be liable to mifconftruction; but he was afraid that, by too anxious an attention to guard against every objection, he fhould deprive the book of that appearance of ease and nature in which its only merit confifted. When we unbofom ourselves to our friends on a subject that interests us, there is sometimes a glow of fentiment and warmth of expreffion that pleafes, though there is nothing in what is faid, particularly ingenious or original. The title of the book does not well exprefs its contents. The public is too well accustomed to books that have not much correfpondence with their titles, to be furprized at this. But it would have been an impofition of a worfe kind to have changed the title in this new edition. The truth is, the fubjects here treated, are fo different, that it was impoffible to find any title, that could fully exprefs them. Yet unconnected as they feem to be, there was a certain train of ideas that led to them, which it may not be improper to explain. When we attend to the many advantages which mankind poffefs above the inferior animals, it is natural to enquire into the ufe we make of thofe advantages. This leads us to the 'confideration of man in his favage ftate, and through the progreffive ftages of human fociety. Man in his favage ftate is, in fome refpects, in a worfe condition than any other animal. He has indeed fuperior faculties, but as he does not poffefs, in fo great a degree as other animals, the internal principle of inftinct to direct these faculties to his greatest good, they are often perverted in fuch a manner as to render him more unhappy. He poffefics bodily ftrength, agility, health and what are called the animal faculties, in greater perfection, than men in the more advanced ftates of fociety, but the nobler and more diftinguishing principles of human nature lie in a great measure dormant. There is a certain period in the progress of society, in which mankind appear to the greatest advantage. In this period they have the bodily powers and al the animal functions remaining in full vigour. They are bold, active, fteady, ardent in the love of liberty and their native country. Their manners are fimple, their focial affections warm, and though they are greatly influenced by the ties of blood, yet they are generous and hofpitable to ftrangers. Religion is univerfally regarded among them, though difguifed by a variety of fuperftitions. This ftate of fociety, in which nature fhoots wild and free, encourages the high exertions of fancy and paffion, and is therefore peculiarly favourable to the arts depending on these; but for the fame caufe it checks the progrefs of the rational powers, which require coolness, accuracy, and an imagination perfectly fubdued and under the controul of reafon. The wants of nature, likewife, being few and easily fupplied, require but little of the affistance of ingenuity; though what most effectually retards the progress of knowlege, is the difficulty of communicating and transmitting it from one perfon to another. This ftate of fociety feldom lafts long. The power neceffarily lodged in the hands of a few for the purposes of public fafety and utility, comes to be abufed. Ambition and all its direful confequences fucceed. As the human faculties expand themselves, new inlets of happiness are discovered. The intercourse in particular with other nations brings an acceffion of new pleasures, and confequently of new wants. The advantages attending an intercourfe and commerce with foreign nations are, at firft view, very fpecious. By these means the peculiar advantages of one climate are, in fome degree, communicated to another, a free and focial intercourfe is promoted among mankind, knowlege is enlarged and prejudices are removed. On the other hand, it may be faid, that every country, by the help of induftry, produces whatever is neceflary to its own inhabitants; that the neceffities of nature are easily gratified, but the cravings of falfe appetite, and a deluded imagination, are endless and infatiable; that when men leave the plain road of nature, fuperior knowlege and ingenuity, instead of combating a vitiated tafte and inflamed paffions are employed to justify and indulge them; that the purfuits of commerce are destructive of the health and lives of the human fpecies, and that this deftruction falls principally upon thofe who are most diftinguished for their activity, fpirit and capacity. But one of the most certain confequences of a very extended commerce and of what is called the moft advanced and polifhed 24 |