With highly superior qualities of mind and heart, which shine even through the clouds that his less estimable ha bits threw around them, he was almost proverbially arrogant and contemptuous, grasping at every thing, and at universal and paramount dominion, in the world of literature. His knowledge was indeed wonderfully various, but not uniformly exact." Among his “ happiest effusions" no scholar will class his comments on Shakspeare and his strictures on Neal. He aceused the historian of the Puritans of false facts and partial representations;" but he failed in making good the charge, and has injured his own reputation by the blows that he directed against a writer far more judicious than himself. Had Neal lived to witness the publication of Warburton's strictures on him, it is probable that he would have replied to this prelate with the same ability and success with which he vindicated his History against attacks from other quarters. Neal did not claim an exemption from the infirmities of our common nature; yet his characteristic soundness of judgment usually preserved him from error, in his estimates of men and of events; while his deeply-rooted sense of religious obligation saved him from designed misrepresentation. The memory of so excellent an individual, may well be cherished by descendants (and such exist) whose kindred qualities of soul enable them to appreciate the value of their ancestry, and who, on the other hand, would account it a matter of dishonour to spring from an individual that could knowingly falsify the facts of history. While I was employed in the examination of Warburton's strictures on the historian of the Puritans, proofs of the calm and mild and candid good sense of the late Editor of Neal's work, constantly presented themselves to my eyes, and set before me the image of a man of whom I have peculiar reason to think and speak with affectionate and grateful esteem. Dr. Toulmin's notes on his author, are a fine transcript of his own mind: copies of his edition of the History cannot, I learn, be easily procured; and a republication of it is, in every view, desirable. There are some individuals whose amiable manners in private life form a marked contrast with that blind and furious spirit of party, which, on certain subjects, distinguishes them as writers. This, I grieve to say, is the the case of Dr. Southey, who ventures to style Neal (the Quarterly Reviewer had used nearly the same terms) "the most prejudiced and dishonest of all historians," and who, it is evident, has not investigated that document in Neal's work with a specific reference to which the accusation has been alleged. If the Poet Laureate be really a lover of truth, he will, in future, be more obedient to the first dictates of justice, nor wantonly offend the feelings of the living by thus calumniating the memory of the dead. * JOHN KENTISH. P. S. As strong presumptive evidence of Mr. Neal's equal and impartial justice, in the composition of his History of the Puritans, I should add, that he did not wholly escape censure from Nonconformists themselves. There now lies upon my table "A [printed] Letter to Mr. Sn--1, occasioned by some injurious Reflections in the Fourth Volume of Mr. Neal's History of the Puritans: wherein our present Liberty is opposed to the Persecutions of former Times. By a Protestant Dissenter." It is written apparently by some descendant of Richard Cromwell, and consists, for the most part, of a vindication of his character, and of that of other branches and friends of the family, Whether Mr. Neal took any notice of this pamphlet, does not appear. Its date is 1739-the bookseller, "Mesach Steen, [not Steers, as the name is erroneously printed in Nichols' Literary Anecdotes, &c., †] in the Inner Temple Lane. This Mr. Steen published Owen's History of Serpents; Neal's Hist. [Toulmin], and Book of the Church, Vol. II. (1st ed.) p. 309. It is not true, as Dr. Southey affirms it to be, that the inquiries of the commissioners are twice limited to lawful ways and means. I have shewn the contrary. The limitation regards punishment, not examination; with the reserve indeed, see paragraph the fifth, of offeuces cognizable by the ecclesiastical laws. + Vol. IX. p. 621. A of my esteemed Mr. Rutt, in your last number, (p. 535,) relating to myself, may seem to require some notice in reply. I am aware that I am a defaulter with the public on the score of unredeemed pledges; but my conscience does not accuse me of having failed in the fulfilment of any promise relating to the Bibliotheca Antitrinitariorum of Sandius. Quite satisfied I am that I have never committed myself by an engagement to attempt a translation of that very excellent work. It is true, indeed, that a few years ago I employed myself at intervals of leisure in writing a hasty English version of it; but before I had gone through my rough draft I saw reason to be convinced, that with the materials in my hands it would be easy to embody in an English history of the same kind a con siderable mass of new and valuable matter in addition to what Sandius had been able to collect. I therefore laid the undertaking aside, with the intention of inserting all the biographical information contained in the Bibliotheca," in my projected History of Unitarianism. This intention I have not abandoned. But when I shall be able to complete for the press a work of which former experience warns me that I ought not to flatter myself with the hope of being reimbursed even the bare expenses of the publication, I cannot take upon myself to say. All I shall now remark is, that the materials are on the anvil. 66 I am not aware that there exists a translation of Sandius's Bibliotheca in any one of the vernacular languages of Europe. Dr. Toulmin, it is evident, had never seen the French work to which he alludes; and his words, strictly interpreted, seem to intimate Bibliotheca Antitrinitariorum-but of the "Abridged History of the Socinians,” which he states it to contain. It is most likely that the French work, of which Dr. Toulmin had heard, was the "Histoire du Socinianisme," in 4to., published at Paris, in 1723. The Second Part (about one half of the whole) of this publication is biographical, and includes most of Sandius's facts, melted down, indeed, in a Catholic crucible, and sent forth with a good deal of Catholic alloy and co but is understood to have been written by Lamy. It is little to be relied upon as authority. Such is Bock's judgment of it, and every reader of discernment will, I conceive, concur in this opinion. It displays, however, considerable research, and may in some cases be consulted with advantage. The Vita F. Socini, &c., by a " Polish Knight," is not prefixed to the works of Socinus in the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum, but is printed in the additional volume, (419,) containing the works of Przipcovius. The small edition possessed by Mr. Rutt was first printed in that size in England, in 1651, and appended to a Latin edition of the Racovian Catechism, which was ordered by the Parliament, in its horror of heresy, and in the spirit which persecuted the eminently pious Biddle, to be burnt by the Sheriffs of London and Middlesex, at the Exchange, and at the New Palace, Westminster. The original printed Vote (a single leaf) I had the gratification to discover in the British Museum, and it is inserted as a curiosity, sui generis, in my edition of the Racovian Catechisın. When my translation of the Racovian Catechism was first announced as in preparation, my venerated friend Dr. Toulmin informed me, that this had long been a favourite project of his own; and that he had relinquished it by the advice of his friends, who thought it was not likely to answer as a literary speculation. Happy should I have been to have had my labours anticipated by so competent a hand! THOMAS REES. writer who signs himself C., (pp. 550 -552,) I beg to offer a few words in explanation of its design and intent. It was not called an "Ordination Service" by any person engaged in it, nor was it announced as such in any way, either publicly or privately. The objection to the title, therefore, must cease. But the Norwich congregation chose to have a service on a particular day and on a particular occasion. Perfectly true and I suppose any congregation is at liberty to do so when they think proper, without asking the permission of any person or persons whomsoever. In this case, the Society in question ventured to think, that the entrance of a young minister upon his connexion with them was a fit occasion for reminding each of their respective duties. They were also of opinion, that in a service of this kind, it was desirable to invite those who took a friendly interest in the welfare of both parties to unite and that it was not very inexpedient that a young man entering upon the discharge of his ministerial duties in a place in which he was a stranger, should see assembled around him those neighbouring ministers with whom he must be called upon more or less to co-operate. This may appear to C. very unnecessary, very absurd, and very superstitious. I must be allowed to be of a different opinion, and if he will trouble himself to read the service at Norwich, (which will shortly be published,) he will there see more fully stated the reasons for its adoption. I think he will find it difficult to shew that such a service may not be useful, and equally so that it could lead to any improper notions on the part of those who heard it. But he has "read the New Testament with no small attention," with out being able to discover ("eagleeyed," as he says he is) "any authority for a modern Ordination." Prodigious!-and it would have been more so if he had. How many customs and practices are there in common use among Christians of all denominations, for which no positive command can be found in the New Testament; or rather, how few are the laws relating to such observances which it contains! What authority is there for the formation of our various Associations, or for the services which form so proper and useful a part of their yearly meetings? What authority is there for the manner in which public worship is conducted, and the Lord's Supper administered? Nay, what express command have we for the observance of the Lord's-day? There is no authority for wearing a gown, and pray what authority is there for wearing a coat? Just the same for the one as the other. I would advise your correspondent, Sir, notwithstanding the acuteness of his vision, once more to "read the New Testament with no small attention," and he may possibly acquire a few more correct ideas of what Christianity was intended, as well as what it was not intended, to teach. One thing he evidently has to learn namely, in what the reward of a Christian minister ought to consist. And he has also to learn that in order to form an opinion of a composition, it is necessary either to hear it or to read it. Now he has never either heard or read Mr. Fox's Sermon: all he knows is, that a sermon was preached on such a subject by such a person. But assuming the mode in which the subject must be treated, taking for granted that, in speaking of "the reward of the labourer," the preacher could only mean money, he proceeds to criticise the Sermon, to say what effect it ought to produce, and to prediet that such effect will not be produced. Truly, Sir, your correspondent is a most " eagle-eyed" person. An individual so gifted, who can discern the meaning and intent of a sermon 100 miles off, who can sit in judgment upon its contents, and foretell what effects it will produce, may justly claim to be of that privileged class of auditors who "go to hear sermons, pour passer le temps," and who "make up their minds" before they hear what is addressed to them. But he should remember, that the multitude are not so gifted, that they are obliged to hear before they can understand or decide, and that there still remain some old-fashioned persons who listen to a preacher in the hope of deriving some "permanent good" from his instructions. No doubt this will appear very foolish in the eyes of your correspondent C.; 1 but he should remember that we Norwich people live in rather an out-ofthe-way corner of the kingdom, and are quite a century behind him both in acuteness and refinement. We have not yet acquired the power of judging of a sermon before we hear it, or learned the fashionable slang of saying that we attend public worship, pour passer le temps." But we have committed another unpardonable sin, in the choice of a young man for our minister. Alas! Sir, there are some men who, though they grow old, never grow wise; but to whom increase of years brings only increase of folly and conceit. Of a young man there is hope, even if before his entrance into active life he may have formed an erroneous estimate of his duties and his powers. An acquaintance with the world may correct and enlarge his views, and instruct him both what he should do and what he should avoid. But of a grey-headed coxcomb there is no hope. He will never be able to teach, for he has never been able to learn. I shall not attempt to follow C. through the whole of his letter. In truth I don't understand what he means, nor do I believe that he himself does. Let him read the paragraph beginning " Backed as he is," &c., and then let him tell me whether he means in it to justify or condemn the appointment of young ministers. If his words have any meaning he does both. He says, “ How can there be any thing in the range of Christian duty that it can be unbecoming and presumptuous in a young minister to advert to? If juvenility be an evil, our churches would be lacking advice till their ministers were 30 or 35 years old." Then, in the very next sentence, he says, I own, I think the circumstance that our congregations are committed to the care of such young men, as have been lately chosen pastors, is a very great evil." These two sentences resemble two clauses in the Athanasian Creed, where one contradicts what the other affirms, only with this additional defect, that the writing is as bad as the sense is obscure. He adds, " I attribute to this source" (i. e. the youth of our ministers) "the deficiency of devotional spirit, which has been charged, and not altogether without reason, on the Unitarian body." If this is the source, how happens it that this "deficiency of devotional spirit" is not common to all Christians, since Unitarian ministers do not enter upon the discharge of their duties at an earlier period than their Trinitarian brethren? I used to be told, that "like causes produce like effects," but the eagleeye" of C. has found out, that like causes produce different effects And yet this is the person who sits in judgment upon the Norwich congregation. To such an one we may well say, "Friend, who made thee a judge or an accuser?" What knows he of that society, or how is he enabled to decide what advice it might or might not want? He has been very free in givin his advice, and, whether he be as willing to receive as to give or not, I shall take the liberty to offer him a little counsel, which, for his own sake, he will do well to attend to. Let him endeavour, as his pretensions to the office of censor are singularly slender, either to endeavour to qualify himself for it, or to express himself with a little more modesty. 66 He thinks that a charge given to a young minister on the nature and importance of his duties is a piece of nummery:" he thinks "that the circumstance that our congregations are committed to the care of such young men is a very great evil :" he thinks "we have sermons enough at home, without any American importations,' though he thinks" they are very well in their way.' Such language is the joint offspring of ignorance and conceit, and is perhaps hardly worth the notice that has been taken of it. SIR, ONE OF THE NORWICH CONGREGATION. LLOW me to suggest to your A respectable correspondent T. F. B. (p. 536) that yiyeoas, or the Ionic yea, is used by Herodotus in the sense of val. Vide Wesseling, ad L. vii. c. xi. In ch. lii. of this book we read Tv σu papтus year. Aristophanes, Pl. v. 431, uses yiyo in the same sense; ουκεν ὑπολοιπον σοι το βάραθρον vera. I subjoin an observation of Valkenaer. This incomparable scholar, in commenting on Heb. i. 4, writes as follows: yodai frequenter poni tur pro ɛwai, frequenter et abundat. Nostro tamen loco virtute non caret, significans factus. Thus much in defence of Socinus.-With the interProem of John's Gos pretation of theddle, being contented with the conviction which I feel that the orthodox interpretation is inadmissible. In reading the excellent communication of Clericus Cantabrigiensis, (pp. 552-557,) I was somewhat amused to find that Dr. Copleston attributes the admission of the Necessarian system in part to the pride of the human mind in refusing to believe that the foreknowledge of God may co-exist with the contingency of events. What obstinate perverseness not to believe that an event can be certain and uncertain at the same time! But this pride of the human intellect is in many cases a provoking quality. It has an unlucky propensity to call things by their right names, and will not swallow a contradiction though recommended under the guise of an "apparent incongruity." Theologians in particular find it a troublesome thing to deal with. Even though they call it hard names and vilify it with the appellation of carnal reason, or imperiously demand of it to humble itself before their myste rious dogmas, it remains inflexible. It will pry into secrets which it is assured are above its comprehension, and pertinaciously refuses to admit that two propositions which are diametrically opposed to each other can both be true. When will men of sense and learning cease to deceive themselves and mislead others by the sophistry of words? When will they remember, or reason as though they remembered, that things will remain the same by whatever names they may be called? When will theologians especially be sensible that, unless they can refute the charge of maintaining absurd and contradictory propositions, to call their doctrines mysteries, is only to add evasion to the disgrace of defeat? It would be more magnani mous boldly to affirm, that what ap pears a contradiction to the limited understanding of man, may neverthe E. COGAN. less be true. The Athanasian Creed at variance with Common Sense and Christian Charity. SIR, Islington, British Critic is well known T to have been for in my ears a periodical publication devoted to the interests of the Church of England. On some occasions it has been candid, but, generally speaking, decidedly hostile to every species of Dissenters. The Unitarians have been honoured with no small share of its obloquy. But it is worthy of remark, that this High Church Review has lately been metamorphosed from a Monthly inte a Quarterly publication. Its first number has just appeared. One of its articles is truly liberal, especially towards Unitarians; for they are the oppugners of its darling Athanasian Creed. It is entitled, "Sermons on various Subjects, by the late Rev. Thomas Rennell, B. D., Vicar of Kensington, Prebendary of South Grantham, and Chaplain to the late Lord Bishop of Salisbury." His predecessor at Kensington, though not immediate, was the amiable and erudite Jortin, and he was the son of Dr. Rennell, the present Dean of Winchester. Mr. Rennell died recently in the prime of life and zenith of his usefulness, deeply lamented. The Reviewer thus notices and commends his sermon on the Athanasian Creed: "This Creed, which has been the subject of much misapprehension, has also been, we must confess, the cause of some uneasiness; aud certain it is, that if the eminent divines of our church, professing as they do precisely the same belief, should undertake to draw up a formula of this doctrine suitable to the present day, and agreeable to the mild and tolerant spirit of our church, they would be content to express it in simpler terms and to place it in fewer lights; and they would either abstain altogether from the damnatory clauses or express the sense of them in such a way as to prevent the possibility of those harsh constructions to which they have been liable. The who composed it, nor yet in the Creed fault, however, is not in the learned men itself, which, recording, as it does, the identity of our faith with that of the primitive Christian, is entitled to our highest respect; but in the numerous heresies and wild opinions in the midst |