Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

who has declared, that to love God is to keep his commandments, and that in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh righteousness, shall be accepted of him.

I have been led into these reflections by the perusal of a letter (pp. 222-224) containing objections to Bible-Society Meetings; and which your correspondent commences with a suggestion, that I sincerely trust has no foundation in truth, namely, that Unitarians as a body do not patronize Bible Societies. I confidently hope, Sir, that Unitarians in general are neither so bigoted to their own creed, nor have so contracted a view of the great importance of moral worth and Christian virtue, compared with mere speculative religion, as to withdraw their assisting hand from so glorious a work as the general distribution of the word of life among those of their fellow-mortals, or rather immortals, who have hitherto been grovelling in Pagan ignorance and gloom; a work which it requires no very extraordinary measure of faith to believe, is appointed by, and under the directing hand of God himself. And let not an accusation of fanaticism be levelled against the man who from his heart believes this; for he who places any trust in the prophetic promises of his God, must believe it, or he has read those promises in vain. That the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea, is the delightful assurance given us by Him who never yet altered his decree; and may none of us be found in opposition to the Lord and his Anointed, but may we rejoice in every opportunity of furthering his gracious and benevolent designs! Surely, Sir, the very existence of these Societies (if we take into consideration the almost unbounded extent of their co-operation) may be considered as an additional evidence of the Divine origin of the sacred volume; being in fact that kind of evidence which is the most impressive, although most rare, viz. ocular demonstration. Perhaps one more only of the same description and of equal weight is now before us, and that is, the dispersion of the Jewish nation. This has always been to my mind a sufficient antidote against the sophistry of the sceptic, and, with other sources of conviction, has led me grate

fully to receive Heaven's last, best boon to man, and most cordially to rejoice in the success of that glorious cause which, if we believe the Great Shepherd of our souls, will, in the restoration of thousands of wanderers to his fold, cause joy in the presence of the angels of God.

I

SIR,

J. JOHNSTON,

Bristol, Aug. 8, 1822. HAVE no doubt that the gentlemen concerned in drawing up the proposed Bill to amend the MarriageAct set forth in your last number, (pp. 438-442,) having duly considered the subject, have only inserted such clauses and provisions as they deem necessary; and under this conviction I am by no means disposed to animadvert upon any part of it as a critic, but only to suggest my doubts as an inquirer, and which I do the more readily as the Committee have expressed their "readiness to receive any suggestions on the subject."

After an attentive perusal of this proposed Bill, I cannot persuade my self but that the consummation of the Marriage contract is burdened by it with unnecessary trouble to the parties concerned. In the first place, though the place in which the ceremony is to be performed is very properly required to be a place already registered for public worship, yet it is likewise required that it shall be again registered as a place for the solemnization of Marriage. Where is the necessity of this? What evil can it prevent, or what good secure? If there were any restriction as to the number of places of worship to be so registered for the celebration of Marriage within a certain number of miles, then, indeed, the necessity of the measure would appear; but as it remains wholly unlimited, and every registered place of worship, without exception, has the full liberty of being registered as a place for the solemnization of Marriage, does it not amount to exactly the same thing in point of utility, whether this fresh registration be required or not, and therefore, abstractedly, shewing such new registration to be nothing but mere extra, unproductive and unnecessary trouble?

Secondly. Where is the necessity of waiting the expiration of one year

Unitarian Marriage-Bill and Dissenting Trusts.

after the registering of such place of worship as a place for the solemnization of Marriage? Really, Sir, in the total absence of any good, there appears, I think, this certain evil in this provision, that though Dissenting places of worship may be newly registered for the solemnization of Marriage as soon as possible after the Act has passed into a law, yet the Act cannot be available to any one till at least 12 months have expired after its enact ment, and as much more as such Dissenting places of worship shall be delayed to be newly registered. I confess I cannot see any good in this procrastination.

Thirdly. In the case of obtaining a licence, the registered place of worship where the ceremony is intended to be performed, is required to be set out in the petition for such licence. Will it not be incumbent upon the ordinary, or at least discretionary in him, to require evidence that such place has been duly registered, not only as a place of worship, but also for the solemnization of Marriage, and that 12 months have then elapsed since such last-mentioned registration, ere he grant the licence for the performance of the ceremony in such place of worship?

Fourthly. The married pair are empowered to produce to the parish priest the certificate of registration of the place of worship at which the solemnization took place, when in fact (such certificate belonging solely to the occupant of such place of worship) they cannot have the legal power of doing so, otherwise than by obtaining an official extract of such register, which would be attended with expense and trouble, the necessity of which I really think does not appear.

Fifthly. As in the case of banns they are required to be published in the parish church, and a declaration in writing delivered to the parish priest, that the parties, or one of them, are or is a Dissenter, and desirous of being married under the provisions of this proposed Act, and therefore a certificate of the due publication of such banns is required to be obtained from such parish priest, and produced to the person performing the ceremony, with a penalty upon him for performing it without having such certificate first produced to him; and so in the case of a licence, as the dissent of the

527

parties or one of them from the Established Church is required to be declared in the petition for such licence, and the place named where it is wished to be performed, and also the usual bond with surety to be given ;-where is the necessity for the married pair to make their personal appearance before the parish priest in order again to declare their dissent from the Established Church, and to be examined and cross-examined by him at discretion, (for such the proposed Act appears to allow,) as to their being of mature age, having the consent of parents, &c.? Why would not a certificate from the person performing the ceremony, of the due performance thereof, be quite sufficient to enable the parish priest to register the same; or otherwise the two witnesses present at the performance of such ceremony may personally attend the registration thereof, and attest the same in the Parish Register Book as usual? I am aware that it may be replied, that the parties themselves should sign their names to the Register as they now usually do: but this I submit may very well be dispensed with; for if marriage registers be as well attested as those of baptisms and burials, (in neither of which cases does any signature of the book take place,) it will be very sufficient, and the parties may always send a confidential friend to see that it be properly registered, or may have an immediate certificate thereof; and in addition to which, an auxiliary evidence will doubtless be supplied by the entry, which of course will be kept at every Dissenting Meeting-house; not that I would rely upon the latter alone.

In reply to your correspondent J. B., p. 410, it appears to me that he labours under an extremely confused notion of the nature and operation of Trust Deeds of Dissenting Meetinghouses; and although he seems satisfied with his "endeavour to place the subject in a clear point of view," I really cannot understand what he aims at or means to express. I gather, however, from the whole, that he entertains the mistaken notions that Trustees have the sole power of appointing or removing the Minister, and a controlling power over the Meeting-house, and of which he supposes them to be the real and ostensible oc

cupants. Now, Sir, neither of these cases can exist, supposing the Trust Deed to have been prepared in the form usually observed on those occasions, and I cannot conceive but that every object J. B. proposes to attain, is already arrived at by the usual mode of settling Trust Property of this description for instance, the premises are conveyed to Trustees, so as to vest the legal estate in them upon Trust for such person for the time being, as the major part of the subscribing congregation shall elect to the office of minister.

:

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

Yet, notwithstanding the almost insuperable moral disadvantages of a princely education, it might have been expected, at least during the progress of numerous ages, that a period should occur, when the praise of moral excellence in a king could be justly united with the customary homage exacted by his worldly distinctions. Such a period, if the early history of Britain be not a fable, was the reign of Alfred. Such too, another rare temporum felicitas, "the Church of Scotland" (unless virtue be no endow ment or accomplishment of kings) appears to have very lately discovered under the government of George IV.

That Church, speaking by her Christian Presbyters, the established national guides to "the kingdom of God and his righteousness," thus expresses her "veneration, affection and loyalty" towards the reigning monarch, (always the best of kings,) in an Address presented to his Majesty at Holyrood, on the occasion of his having "most graciously condescended to visit" Scotland.

"From the first moment that your Majesty undertook the charge of pub

beamed upon you with a bright effulgence.-But we cannot express what we feel when, within the precincts of your ancient kingdom of Scotland, we behold your Majesty in person,-a king distinguished by every splendid endowment, and graced by every elegant accomplishment," (decus hu mani generis,) “at once the safeguard of our country, and the bulwark of our church!"

The larger part of two centuries had elapsed since Scotland had been indulged with the presence of royalty.

Book-Worm.

The last king who visited that country before George IV. was his collateral ancestor Charles II. In June, 1650, the wandering Stuart, then only 20 years of age, though he had already commenced his career of profligacy, Janded in Scotland, in search of a crown, or, according to a sarcastic republican, like Saul, "to seek his father's asses." The circumstances which followed this earlier royal visit, gave occasion to a publication, in 4to., bearing the following title:

"The Forme and Order of the Coronation of Charles the Second, King of Scotland, England, France and Ireland; as it was acted and done at Scoone, the First Day of January, 1651.

"Aberdeene. Imprinted by James Brown. 1651."

On the title-page, as mottoes, are the contents of Ï Chron. xxix. 23, Prov. xx. 8, xxv. 5.

Charles, in a declaration," dated at Dumfermline, August 16, 1650," had described himself as 66 deeply humbled and afflicted in spirit before God, because of his father's hearkening to and following evil councils-and his opposition to the solemn league and covenant-and for the idolatry of his mother." On the assurance of this declaration it was determined to dignify his brows with the crown of Scotland; being, according to the "Tabula Regum Scotia Chronologia," her 110th King from Fergus I., contemporary of Alexander the Great!

Thus, as Dr. Harris (Lives, IV. 67) well remarks of the Scots, though "the Stuart race had made sad work from time to time among them, it never entered into their heads to shake off the yoke, by changing families, or establishing a commonwealth, which would have been, in the circumstances of their country, most beneficial; though it deprived the great men of the power of oppressing their vassals. They had got little benefit from Charles I., yet for him they involved them selves in broils with their best benefactors, the English Parliament. From Charles II. they reasonably could expect less, and yet they must have him for king, though war with a superior nation and an all-victorious army was the known consequence."

Scone, near Perth, the scene of this last ceremony of a Coronation in

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Scotland, was an ancient palace, of which the glory had departed since 1302, when the successful injustice of Edward I. of England removed to Westminster the far-famed chair and marble stone, which for almost five centuries had assisted, like the miraculous oil of Rheims, to make it believed by a credulous people that some divinity doth hedge a king." Buchanan has not judged it below the dignity of history to preserve the following account of the transportations and final settlement of this marvellous relic. Speaking of Kenneth II., the 69th king, whose reign commenced in 834, he says (Hist. L. vi. S. iii.),

66

[ocr errors]

regno armis amplificato, et legibus composito, in rebus usque ad superstitionem levibus auctoritatem regum confirmare laborans, saxum marmoreum quod ex Hispania in Hiberniam transtulisse dicitur Simon Breccus in Scotiam Albinensem Fergusius Ferchardi filius, atque in Argathelia collocasse; ex Argathelia Sconam ad Taum amnem translatum Kennethus et in cathedram ligneam inclusum ibi posuit. Ea in sede Reges Scotorum et nomen, et regum insignia accipere solebant usque ad Edvardum Primum Anglum.” *

Under the reign of Baliol, the ninety-sixth king, Buchanan relates (L. viii. S. xxvi.) the cruel destruction of the monuments of Scottish history by Edward I., adding, "Lapidem marmoreum rudem, in quo fatum_regni contineri vulgo persuasum erat Londinum misit.” † On the stone is said to have been engraven this inscription:

settled wholesome laws for the good ad"Having enlarged his kingdom, and ministration of the government, he endeavoured farther to confirm his royal authority by mean and trivial things, even bordering upon superstition itself. There was a marble stone, which Simon Breccus is reported to have brought into Ireland out of Spain, which Fergus, the son of Ferchard, is also said to have brought over into Scottish Albion, and to have placed it in Argyle. This stone Kenneth removed out of Argyle to Scone, by the river Tay, and placed it there, inclosed in a chair of wood. The kings of Scotland were wont to receive both the kingly name and the royal robes, sitting in that chair, till the days of Edward I. King of England." History, 1762, 1. 229, 230.

"He sent also to London an unpolish

[blocks in formation]

Charles, arrived at Scone, being "placed in a chair under a cloth of state" in the hall of the Palace, was addressed by the Lord Chancellor, and intreated to accept the crown, on the condition of defending the "rights and liberties" of the people. The young royal hypocrite, destined at length to be made by the Church of England a "most religious king," now piously replies to the Chancellor of Scotland:

"I do esteem the affections of my good people, more than the crowns of many kingdoms; and shall be ready, by God's assistance, to bestow my life in their defence; wishing to live no longer than I may see religion and this kingdom flourish in all happiness." On this satisfactory assurance that Charles would prove, like his remote successor, "at once the safeguard of their country and the bulwark of their church," the nobles, &c. " accompanied his Majesty to the Kirk of Scone." Here, at present, I must leave him, to endure a penance of at least two hours' continuance, seated in "the throne or chair of state, set in a fitting place for his Majesty's hearing of sermon over against the minister."

SIR,

VERMICULUS.

Greek, and the several Translations of it and illustrated with Critical and Explanatory Notes, extracted from the Writings and Sermons of the celebrated Grotius, Hammond, Stanhope, Whitby, Burkitt, and many other curious and modern Annotators and Preachers. By the Rev. Mr. John Lindsay. London: Printed by R. Penny, in Wine-Office-Court, Fleetstreet. MDCCXXXVI." It is fairly printed in columns, in the manner of the folio edition of Matt. Henry's Bible. The commentary appears to be for the most part selected, like that in the Bible of the Society for promoting Christian knowledge, called Mant's Bible, and except where doctrines are concerned, is judicious and useful. The doctrinal system is moderate

orthodoxy;" moderate on all points, at least, but that of the Trinity, in which the annotator shews himself a

rigid Athanasian. He had not advanced beyond the a, b, c, of biblical criticism. Thus, assuming the vulgar reading of Acts xx. 28, to be the true one, he borrows from some unacknowledged source, if he did not make, the following choice comment: "Feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his blood. Where, observe, the divinity of Christ asserted: he is expressly called God, in opposition to the Arians, and their unhappy spawn the Socinians, who will allow him to be only man. But then his blood could never have purchased the church, which it is here said to do: being God and man in one person; man, that he might have blood to shed, and God, that his blood might be of infinite value, and inestimable preciousness when shed."

The date of this work is, I believe, I HAVE lately met with a "New prior to the period when printers and Testament" in folio, of which I booksellers put out Bibles and Histoshould be glad if some of your corre- ries of England in numbers, with ficspondents could give me an account. titious names and titles of men of Being not unacquainted with books straw. I presume, therefore, that the and yet never having seen but this one "Rev. Mr. John Lindsay" was a real copy, I conclude the work is not com- person, If so, some of your readers mon. The title is as follows: "The conversant with ecclesiastical biograNew Testament of our Lord and Savi-phy, may perhaps be able to furnish our Jesus Christ; carefully and dilime with particulars of him. gently compared with the Original

ed marble-stone, wherein it was vulgarly reported and believed, that the fate of the kingdom was contained." History, I.

349.

CANTABRIGIENSIS.

P.S. Since writing the above, a friend, very conversant with books, informs me that the work was not uncommon some years ago, but on the contrary was a drug on the stalls.

« AnteriorContinuar »