XV. Son of God an appellation common to a great portion of the human race-Adam and Jefus in a more appropriate manner fons of God-Jefus the son of God-but not the fon of himself. XVI. Eternity of the earth-form of God-humiliation of God.

6

XVII. A spirit brooding over matter not the holy ghoft-the holy fpirit a thing given-proceffion of the holy fpirit-the holy fpirit allowed by the bishop to be a quality.

XVIII. A verfe in the English Bible fpurious-hopes that the bishop will continue the examination of the fcriptures.

XIX. Predeftination-newspaper herefy-mother and babebishop's babes--the women puzzled-fufpicion of episcopal herefy -author's opinion on the five, points.

XX. Herefy! herefy! herefy!-profane fwearing a very idle cuftom-the bishop and the author agree-the church of England point-blank against them both-bishop's violent language against the church-it is fafer for one man to steal a horse than for another to look over the hedge.

XXI. The bishop and the author convicted-can any one be a member of the church of England-wifdom of the articles for Christian communion-conclufion.'

The liberality of fentiment exhibited in the bishop of Lincoln's Elements, and the manlinefs of daring to think for himfelf, are well known, and have excited no fmall degree of aftonifhment in the church. And in confequence of his having thrown off the trammels of authority, and refolved to be determined by the reason of his own mind, our author, in the above series of letters, brings to this teft a variety of doctrinal articles which ftill appear to conftitute the bishop's creed-and candidly difcuffes with him whether or not they will endure this fiery and purifying ordeal, and, in confequence, whether or not he fhould any longer fubmit to their influence? As a fpecimen of the mode in which he combines pleasantry with ratiocination, we shall felect the letter on herefy, comprifing the twentieth in the above arrangement.

My Lord,

Not many years ago I was in a company when a clergyman gave a toaft pretty common in thofe times, "Damnation to the diffenters," and the impreffion made by it upon my mind was fimilar to that, which the damnation clause in the Athanafian Creed seems to have made upon your lordship. If a drunken wretch in the ftreets fhould call out on either of us as we were paffing-" Damn your eyes and limbs," we know how to pity him, and to lament, that fuch expreffions fhould bring us into deferved difgrace among foreign nations: but, if a fet of men, dreffed up in fine robes, with wax tapers in their hands, fhould in a folemn affembly, called for that purpose, addrefs an unfortunate individual, who happened

not to think as they did;-" Damn your eyes and limbs, you infamous heretick, infidel, apoftate, dejst, atheist," a sudden awe seizes the fpectators, they look with horror on the object of these curfes, they think that fuch a folemn denunciation will produce its effect on the almighty. Strange conceit! The poor wretch in the streets, and thefe poorer wretches in the church, are beheld with an equal eye by the Lord of Heaven and Earth. The God of Love will not Jiften to the curfes of human beings, the one drunk with fermented liquor, the others with the ferment of fpiritual pride, intolerance, and ambition.

The kingdom of England was for many years treated somewhat in this manner. An old bishop, attended by a number of archbishops and bishops, was accustomed to lay our country under a folemn curfe, and the farce, bating its impiety, was as amufing as many other farces played by that bishop and his brethren in publick. We fee at once the impiety of these curfes when levelled against ourselves; but, how common is it to entertain a similar fen→timent in our own minds when difguifed under lefs offensive terms! Thus, because the fcriptures have faid: "He that believeth fhall be faved, but he that believeth not shall be judged ;" fects have laid down the terms for this belief and falvation, and whoever differs from them in the articles of their creed is fubjected to eternal damnation.

Your lordship is not of this opinion. "We are not to confider all, who differ from us, as unworthy of or excluded from the favour of God." In this fentiment I heartily concur with your lordship: to his own Maker every man ftandeth or falleth, and there is one judge appointed over all, Jefus our Saviour. But, my lord, how are we to reconcile our opinion with that of the church of England. The church fays, there are three creeds" which ought thoroughly to be received and believed, for they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy fcripture." In one of thefe creeds is a clause which I fhall here copy: "This is the catholick faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be faved. Whofoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholick faith, which faith, except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he fhall perish everlastingly."

The church of England fays, that the above claufe "ought to be received and believed, for it may be proved by most certain warrants of holy fcripture." I read your lordship's account of this claufe, and find, firft, that, according to your lordfhip, the "church would have acted more wifely" in leaving it out. Is this really true? How muft the faith then of every churchman in the articles be ftaggered by an opinion advanced from fuch high authority? But this is not all! This negative difparagement of the church does not fatisfy your lordship: you fpeak more decidedly on this fubject, and abfolutely deny, that the Athanafian Creed can, as the church of England favs it may, "be proved by most certain warrants of

holy fcripture." For you do not fcruple to affert, that "it is utterly repugnant to the attributes of God, and it cannot be reconciled to our ideas of common juftice, that a person should be configned to eternal punishment, because he did not believe certain articles of faith, which were never proposed to him, or of the truth of which he was not qualified to judge." The church, my lord, does not allow of any such distinctions; her words are clear and explicit: "which faith, except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he fhall perish everlaftingly."

But, my lord, what fhall I fay to a ftill greater attack made upon the church, which affects its difcipline as well as its doctrine? These are your words: "I cannot but conceive it to be both unneceffary and prefumptuous to fay, that except every one do keep them whole and undefiled, without doubt he fhall perish everlastingly." Your lordfhip thinks it prefumptuous to utter these words!!! But the church of England not only fays that these words fhall be uttered, but has appointed the days in which they fhall be uttered folemnly in all the churches of England. Your lordship, much to your honour, frequents, and often officiates, I understand, in the parish church adjoining to your palace. What will be the confequence of this your declaration to that parish, and indeed to your clergy in general!!! If your lordship fhould officiate on one of the days appointed for the reading of this claufe, and it should be omitted, will not the clergy be encouraged by fuch an example to garble the liturgy according to their apprehenfions of the propriety of its language? If a clergyman officiates before your lordship on that day, and the claufe is uttered, how can he prefume to enter afterwards into your prefence? and, if it is not uttered, how can he reconcile with fuch a conduct his promife to perform the fervice of the church as prefcribed in its liturgy?

You may remember, my lord, a gentleman, who not many years ago was attacked at Cambridge by a cabal there known by the name of the cubicks, under the pretext of "impugning religion as established by publick authority within this realm." You were prefent at fome part of the proceedings against him, which ended in driving him from his ftudies, and raising feveral of his adverfaries to dignities and preferments in the univerfity and church. One article against him was for faying, that the liberty of the established church " is very far from the ftandard of purity in doctrine which is required in fuch compofitions." What an unfortunate man he was to be unacquainted at that time with your lordship's fentiments! Ho might have requefted you to anfwer a few queftions, which, without doubt, would have had fome influence on the court.

Question. My lord bishop of Lincoln, did you ever read in the liturgy the following fentence? "Which faith, except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he fhall perith everlaftingly."

Anfwer. I have.

Q. Does your lordship think, that this fentence is very far from the standard of purity required in fuch compofitions?

A. I think it both unneceffary and prefumptuous to utter fuch a fentence.

After such a declaration, my lord, is there not a danger that the name of the right reverend George Pretyman, lord bishop of Lincoln, will in the annals of the univerfity defcend to pofterity as an impugner of the liturgy of the established church.

With all the refpect I can entertain for a person who thinks it unneceffary and prefumptuous to utter what the church has ordained to be uttered in her moft folemn affemblies, I remain, &c.'

P. 141.

It fhould feem from a note fubjoined to this letter, that the ⚫ gentleman' here referred to, as having been attacked by the cubicks, is the author himself: and we are directed for farther information on this fubject to an Account of the Proceedings in the University of Cambridge against William Frend, M. Ä. Fellow of Jefus College, Cambridge, for publifhing a Pamphlet, intitled Peace and Union, &c. publifhed by the Defendant. 1793. Robinfons.'

The letter that follows concludes the feries; and, with an obvious allufion to what has been already advanced, Mr. Frend quotes from Dr. Pretyman the following very honourable declaration in his Elements, that if any one thinks that he fees reafon to diffent from any of the doctrines afferted in the articles of the church, no dread of inconvenience or difappointment should induce him to exprefs his folemn affent to propofitions which, in fact, he does not believe.' Upon this paffage our author makes the following obfervation.

Diffent in your lordship's estimation from any of the doctrines precludes fubfcription. It matters not whether the doctrine, which I difbelieve, is confidered by your lordship to be of great importance, or the doctrine, which you difbelieve, is confidered by myfelf to be of little importance, we are not either of us conftituted judges of this importance; we cannot either of us confcientiously fubfcribe to the articles: we are not either of us true members of the church of England.

If then, according to your lordship's account, you cannot be affured of "the divine bleffing upon that course of life, to which you have folemnly devoted yourself," what is to be done? Muit your lordship refign your bishoprick, give up the deanery of St. Paul's, quit your high ftation in the church? Thefe are ferious queftions, my lord, and the dilemma, in which you have placed yourfelf, is a folemn call on your lordship to compare the faith re"quired by the church of England of its members with the terms laid down by our Saviour and his apoftles for Chriftian communion.” P. 148.

.The dilemma here pointed out is, we think, obvious: but we should extremely regret if it were likely to be the means of inducing a man of the fentiments, learning, and character of the pretent bishop of Lincoln, to retire from an epifcopacy, to which he is fo great an ornament. Infinitely rather would we fee the doctrines and articles of the church bend to the more liberal creed of Dr. Pretyman, than the latter relinquish a communion, whofe authoritative interpretation of fcripture he diffents from, according to his own confeffion, in a variety of inftances. Nothing is more clear than that fome degree of change is peremptorily called for; and would the epifcopal bench in general unite with the prefent worthy dignitary in promoting fuch a change, they would acquire much credit in the view of the nation at large; and we believe, with refpect to the greater part of its members, would liberate themfelves from a thraldom which cannot but be occafionally felt in the more ferious moments of retirement.

From the fpecimens we have given of these letters, our readers, we apprehend, will wish to become farther acquainted with them; and they will uniformly find, in the perufal, fatire combined with courtefy, and ferioufnefs with ratiocination.

Journal of a Voyage performed in the Lion Extra Indiaman, from Madras to Columbo, and Da Lagoa Bay, on the Eastern Coast of Africa (where the Ship was condemned), in the Year 1798. With fome Account of the Manners and Customs of the Inhabitants of Da Lagoa Bay, and a Vocabulary of the Language. By William White, Efq. Captain in the 73d Highland Regiment of Foot. Plates. 4to. 75. Boards. Stockdale. 1800.

THE author of this Journal has prefixed to it the following advertisement.

When I left India I had not the flighteft idea of ever offering any thing to the public eye, and of courfe was by no means prepared for fuch an undertaking. My fole reafon for laying the fol lowing pages before the public is not vanity, but a fincere with of giving fome information to my country, refpecting a part of Africa not much known, though often frequented by both British and American whalers. If this fhould be fo confidered, my end is gained; though I must observe, that if my health had permitted, and I had made a longer flay, I could have rendered it much more interefting. I had hardly paper fufficient to make a fair tranfcript of what I had written, and few or no materials for drawing.'

The narrative is plain and unadorned. Captain White left