was derived; and by what fort of cafuifts, and what fort of reasoning it was first propagated, and has been fince espoused.

It was at first, he thinks, an artifice of archbishop Laud, to open a way for his own Arminian opinions.-The author purfues his enquiries farther; but his investigation} is of no great importance. A latitude of interpretation became a natural and a neceffary expedient, as foon as the clergy of the church of England began to adopt Arminian principles. In the eighth chapter the author introduces the inferences arifing from the foregoing difquifitions, with this ingenuous appeal to the reader :

I have not, willingly and knowingly, mifreprefented any thing, in ftating the several cafes that have come under confideration. I have cited authorities fairly and candidly, and have not, to my knowledge, fuppreffed any thing that might fhew them to the best advantage. But if any one should think there is a partial bias in the reflections I have occafionally made upon particular paffages, I will readily give them up upon competent proof of fuch obliquity, and abide by the conclufions, which any man of common honefty and common fenfe fhall think fit to draw from this perplexity and contradiction among fo many learned writers, who, on other occafions, acquit themselves with fufficient clearness and confiftency.

Such a one, I prefume, will make no difficulty to acknowledge, that in this matter of subscription at least, a reformation is devoutly to be wifhed. The bishops Burnet and Clayton, the doctors Clarke, Sykes, and others, confefs it, and call for it. And though fuch writers as bishop Conybeare, and the doctors Nicholls, Bennet, Waterland, Stebbing, &c, the heroes of our fifth chapter, neither allow the expedience of fuch reformation, nor would have endured any proposals of that kind without a ftrenuous oppofition, yet their own writings on the subject, when compared together, are more than a thousand advocates for it; if it were only for the fake of taking away the offence and scandal, arifing from the fuppofed occafion the church of England has to employ fuch a fett of party-coloured cafuifts.'

The author proceeds to anfwer the objections against a reformation, drawn from its fuppofed impracticability, and proposes a method by which he thinks the grievance, which is the fubject of his book, may be effectually redreffed.

'. It may, fays he, be demanded, would you have the church to authorize and fend forth minifters and paftors among the people, without taking any fecurity of them for the faithful discharge of their office, and particularly without guarding against their preaching false and erroneous doctrines ?

VOL. XXI. May, 1766.

Answer. In our office of ordination there are eight quef tions put to every prieft: the answers to the fecond, fourth, fifth, fixth, and seventh of which feem to me to contain as ample fecurity in this behalf, as any Christian church can defire, or can be authorized to demand; and, I believe, I fhould have few opponents, if I fhould add, that whoever performs thus much of what he promises at his ordination, will give little occafion to the church to bind him in any ftricter obligation."

Whether thefe general declarations will be fufficient to secure the church against the introduction of certain errors which are exprefly, and indeed juftly, excluded by the articles, we halk leave the reader to determine; at the fame time we must acknowledge, that this ingenious writer has pointed out several glaring inconfiftencies in the cafe of fubfcription to our established forms, and attacked the heroes of his fifth chapter with great dexterity and juftice.

If the fame article may be taken in diferent fenfes, or subferibed by a Sabellian, an orthodox Trinitarian, a Tritheist, and an Arian, as Philelutherus Cantabrigienfis fupposes, we must allow with this writer, that fubfcription is utterly useless, as a teft of opinions.

If the fame article only admits of one determinate sense, and that fenfe is bound upon the fubfcriber by law, he is obliged to acquiefce in the opinion of the church; and in this particular there is an end of private judgment.

The only way he can think to escape is, by a clause in the fixth article, in which the church declares, that "whatsoever is not read in the Scripture, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it fhould be believed as an article of faith." Yet this evafive fcheme is precluded by a declaration which the fubfcriber has already made, namely, that "all and every article is agreeable to the word of God."

In this dilemma what courfe fhall he purfue? fhall he wrest and distort the words of the article from their original meaning, and compel them to come into another which he finds more agreeable to the Scriptures ? or fhall he compofe his confcience by an implicit faith in the interpretation of the church ?-Every expedient feems to be inconfiftent with the principles of an ingenuous mind; and therefore we are inclined to think, with the author of the Confeffional, that the ftumbling-block should be removed out of the way;' provided the barriers of pure and undefiled religion could at the fame time be fufficiently fupported against the invasion of bigots and enthusiasts.

6

II. Dif

III. Difcourfes on feveral Subjects. By William Cooper, A. M. Rector of Kirby-Wifke, in Yorkshire, and late Fellow of Tris nity College, Cambridge. 8vo. Pr. 5s. Becket.

THE

HE end and defign of revelation, the malignity of flan der, the certainty of a future ftate, the pernicious influ ence of bad examples, the precariousness of human life, the folly of pride, the infufficiency of heathen philofophy, &c. are the fubjects which this author treats of in thefe ten discourses.

We shall not attempt to lay the fubftance of them before our readers, as his arguments are generally flight and immethodical.

But though he enters into no difquifition which is calculated to awaken curiofity, or command attention, yet he has the art of writing in an agreeable manner; his fentiments are just and lively; his language eafy and genteel.

By the following extract the reader will fee that Mr. Cooper is no friend to enthusiasm or bigotry.

• A mad Whitefield and a fanatic Welley have already vio·lated the peace of mankind, by a fchifmatical divifion from the established church; and have yet, by another and a more enor✩ mous violation of it, thrown out the moft fcurrilous invectives against those, whofe extenfive learning, and whose unquestionable reputation, in their high calling, none dare difpute: yet, not withstanding their magnanimous efforts to defame and moleft us, they merit indeed our pity rather than our resentment. For whoever, calmly and candidly, obferves the nice conduct of thefe truly judicious and highly illuminated doctors, will not furely fcruple, on the most mature deliberation, to confess that, in the difpenfation of their miniftry, they aggravate the leaft indifcretion of their enemies, whilft, at the fame time, they are ever ready to extenuate the worst prevarications of their friends. Unfettled to any one point of view, they perpetually. roam about the globe, and, in order to attract the attention of mankind, they produce whole rhapfodies of unmeaning jargon, which, in their extatic fits, they recommend to their deluded auditory, by the most extravagant gestures and unnatural emotions, during which the poor creatures are taught to believe, that these emotions are the language of the spirit, and that infpiration implies the most perfect eloquence.

• The life and faculties of man, at the best but short and limited, cannot surely be employed more rationally, or laudably, than in detecting fuch impoftures as thefc, and expofing them, in a proper light, to the eye of the world, that others may be enabled to fee into the abfurdity of their proceedings, and thence determine impartially for themselves.

Z 2

• Of

Of all the fierce bigots, and hypocritical zealots, of the religious kind, none are of a more baneful nature, and conféquently merit our attention more, than the bold, infinuating Romish miffionaries; who, under the pretext of ferving God, craftily impofe upon men. Thefe old infidious enemies of our civil and Christian liberty, how often foever repulfed, still renew their attacks, and endeavour to corrupt what (thank God) they are unable to deftroy. The religion, which these people are fo ftudious to propagate, is fupported, principally, by virtue of foolish reliques, interceffions of faints, maffes for the dead, &r. So that we may juftly call its doctrines, abfurd; its rites, paganish; its worship, idolatrous: We may juftly affirm, that it is a fyftem of craft and policy, purposely contrived to enflave mankind, calculated entirely for the support of defpotic power, and therefore totally inconfiftent with the genius of a free people. Yet that which makes it the fcorn of Proteftants, whilft it is indeed the deteftation of the whole world, is that tremendous fpirit of cruelty which is infeparably blended with, and which chiefly diftinguishes the papal from every other government. Hence all thofe horrible maffacres, and perfecutions, of which we frequently read. Hence, Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, (thofe illuftrious champions of our religion!) were staked to the ground, and there, to the immortal honor of popish mildnefs and moderation, fuffered the most cruel torments human power could possibly inflict!'

The greateft part of thefe difcourfes confift of exhortations to a religious life; and the author generally addreffes his congregation in this warm and pathetic manner:

.: Deceive not yourselves, therefore, my brethren; religion has faid she will make you happy; she has proclaimed her will;fhe has invited you, and all mankind, to partake of her inftructions. Liften therefore, O liften to her mild and amiable voice, and let not the thoughts of your attachment to this world exclude the thoughts of your attachment to the next. Duty, you fee, as well as intereft, Chriftianity, as well as human prudence, now require, that you attentively confider these matters, these important matters, with that ftrictnefs and regard which they fo juftly merit and deferve. Think on them, therefore, with due esteem ;-think on them now ;-this very period of time may, perhaps, prove decifive of your future and everlasting happiness. Confider how vaft the difproportion is between the enjoyments of this world and the enjoyments of the next. Confider, that the pleasures of the one are fleeting and tranfitory; but the pleasures of the other, permanent and eternal.. Finally, confider that God has appointed a day in which he will judge the whole world, in which you, and I, and

all mankind, fhall ftand condemned, or acquitted, before his awful tribunal."

The author has subjoined a variety of citations from Greek and Roman, English and French writers, which either ferve to confirm his obfervations, illuftrate his meaning; or, in fome places, only to give the page a claffic air.

IV. A Defence of the commonly-received Doctrine of the Human Soul, as an immaterial and naturally-immortal Principle in Man, against the Objections of fome modern Writers: including the true ScriptureDoctrine of Death, Life, and Immortality, and of the Neceffity and Extent of the Chriflian Redemption. By Thomas Broughton, A. M. Prebendary of Sarum, and Vicar of St. Mary Redcliff, and St. Thomas, in Briftol. 8vo. Pr. 2s. 6d. Johnson.

MR

Broughton informs us, that he intended to make this defence the introduction of a larger work, which he is preparing for the prefs, entitled, “A prospect of futurity, or the life to come, in four differtations." But as thefe differtations proceed upon the fuppofition of an immaterial and naturally-immortal principle, or foul, in man, and the separate existence of that principle, or foul, after the death of the body; and as this opinion has been lately attacked by the learned and ingenious Dr. Law; by the author of A short historical view of the controverfy concerning an intermediate ftate; and the writer of a book, intitled, Univerfal reftitution, a Scripture doctrine'; he thought it neceffary to publifh an immediate answer to those objections, which were calculated to deftroy the very foundation of his first differtation, and invalidate much of the reafoning employed in the rest.

For the fake of method, and to give the reader a view of the points in debate, he has drawn up the objections of the three writers he undertakes to anfwer, in the form of propofitions, and ranged them in the following order:

"I. The words foul, or spirit, in Hebrew W, HOW), 717, in Greek veva, uxn, are never ufed in holy Scripture, to denote an immaterial principle or fubftance in man, wholly feparable from, and independent on, his body."

πνευμα

In answer to this objection our author replies, that these words in their proper and original fignification carry with them the idea of an immaterial fubftance; that revμa and Jux have that fignification in the pureft writers of antiquity; that areupa is applied to the Supreme Being by St. John; and that because they are used, by the facred writers, to denote perfons, or pea

Z3

ple,