that Hammond, and Jeremy Taylor, and Pearson, and Bull, and Waterland are in the wrong. We are very ready to believe that Mr. Scott advanced in gentleness and candour as he advanced in years-and we hope that all his surviving friends will undergo a similar process. Mr. Wilson may claim the support of Apostles and Martyrs; but while the great mass of our standard writers on Divinity are opposed to him, and while among the productions of many other eminent living authors, the work of Mr. Young on the Epistle to the Romans, and of Dr. Lawrence on the Tenets of the Reformers, are lying unanswered and unanswerable on his table; the denunciations which he fulminates against "worldly theology," (p. 73) may be forgiven upon one consideration, and upon one only; viz. that he has nothing better to say.

One more extract and we have done. The hesitating reader may still be in doubt whether Mr. Wilson really means what the words that have been quoted signify. We our selves doubted, even after a second and a third perusal; and one sentence more especially, in which we are exhorted" to look up above names and parties and controversies," seemed to imply that he could not have intended to say what he has said. The following passage undeceived us :

"To this end, let us catch the mantle of each departing saint, and copy the particular excellencies which marked his cha. racter. Let us mark, and gain advantage from, the address, judgment, acuteness, and originality in his public discourses of one; the strength, vigour, and simplicity of faith of another; the kindness and tenderness of a third; the pastorai zeal of a fourth; the interior knowledge of the heart of a fifth; the generous compassion for the state of mankind of a sixth; whilst from all we learn spiritu

"The revered and beloved names of Cecil, the two Milners, Newton, Robin

ality, abstraction from the world, love to the Saviour, faith, humility, joy, activity in improving our opportunities, in redeeming time, and walking circumspectly in our

whole conduct." P. 79.

This sentence fully explains the advice in the preceding page. The names and the parties we are to look above, are those of the Church of England, and her orthodox sons, the names and parties we are to look to are those of Cecil, Robinson, and Venn!! Can Mr. Wilson imagine that such wretched trifling as this will promote either piety or peace? He cannot mean that the departed friends whom he enumerates, had no names. He cannot affirm that they did not constitute a party in the Church. He has no right to assume that they are to be taken for the Church itself, although their mantle has fallen upon him. as he positively declares that no doctrines but his own have ever been blessed by God to the conversion of souls, as he enumerates none among the revered and happy dead but his own predecessors, instructors, companions, and friends, we know not how to avoid concluding that he has imbibed the tenets of Popery; and denies that there is any salvation out of the pale of his

own sect.

Yet

enumeration of Mr. Scott's actions and opinions, concludes in these words; "Now I ask whether any fair solution can be given of such a case but the truth of the principles from which it sprung?" This question, as we have already observed, contains the pith of Mr. Wilson's argument. All besides is mere declamation, assertion, and effrontery. And as he knows that these three will pass undisputed with half his hearers, he calculates that his query will satisfy the rest. We shall shew very briefly, that it ought not to satisfy any body, and our task will then be done. If in the course of it, we should be led to speak of the writings of Mr. Scott in a manner which may wound the feelings of a single individual who was connected with him, we shall be heartily sorry for it.

Of Mr. Scott himself we are quite certain that we shall say nothing which ought to give offence. We have repeatedly quoted and commented upon his writings; and we have always said that we were indebted to him for a more accurate acquaintance with the tenets of his party, than any other cotemporary writer could furnish. We knew him only in his writings; and there we always found him candid, manly, and uncompromising. To his tenets we shall never assent-but the fairness with which he avowed them, deserves to be commended. He knew that a part of them, the belief in Calvinistic predestination more especially, was unpopular. He saw numbers who concealed or softened down similar sentiments. And the concealment was crowned with success. But so far was Mr. Scott from encouraging these practices, that he attempted to put them all out of countenance, and set an example of sincerity which bids fairer for applause than for imitation. For even in the discourses before us, Mr. Wilson speaks much less openly than Mr. Scott; and not only is this

the first time that we were ever distinctly told what Mr. Wilson's opinions concerning predestination are; but even now we should be at a loss respecting them, if he had not said that he agreed with his deceased friend. We cannot admit, therefore, that Mr. Scott "has given the impression to his age,' " or even to his sect; but he has done what was in his power; he has refused to receive theirs. He is explicit and unequivocal and candid far beyond those with whom he was connected. And he would have been more successful as a controversialist, and more esteemed as a partizan, if he had been less estimable as a man and a Christian.

But the diligence with which he formed, and the sincerity with which he expressed his opinions, can never prove that they were correct. He seems himself to have thought differently; and this notion among many others proves that he did not argue closely. For if it follows that a man is in the right because he has taken pains to make himself so, it will also follow that contradictory propositions may both be true. Since many very sincere inquirers after truth embrace opposite sides of the same question. In the "Force of Truth," a work highly commended by Mr. Wilson and others for its convincing properties, Mr. Scott lays the great stress of his argument upon two circumstances-that God has promised to teach those who pray for his instruction; and that he Mr. Scott had so prayed. He infers in the most unqualified terms, that either "the substance of the doctrines which he had embraced are contained in the word of God," or "the Scripture must be given up to be scoffed at by infidels and atheists, and rendered useless to the humble anxious inquirer after divine truth." This, in point of fact, is the sum and substance of Mr. Scott's argument; and nothing can be more

unsatisfactory or more inconclusive. God never did promise that he would teach any man, or any set of men, whatsoever they might be curious, to know. That the sincere and humble inquirer after truth shall learn every thing that is necessary to his salvation, we may confidently believe and expect; but more than this we are not authorized to demand. Mr. Scott himself does not think that belief in the great corner-stone of his scheme of doctrine, the predestination of an individual to eternal life is necessary to salvation; and although he does think that his notions of regeneration, justification, and sanctification, are indispensable to the character of a humble, pious, spiritual Christian, yet we shall venture to maintain that Mr. Scott was not the only person who understood the written word of God, and that some who take a different view of controversial questions, are as humble, as pious, and as spiritual as he was. But it does not follow that Holy Scripture is contemptible or useless; it does not follow that God's promises remain unfulfilled. Both parties may have received that teaching which will suffice for their preservation; and in things not absolutely necessary one or both may have been left to themselves. Hooker told the Puritans two hundred years ago, that he thought it very probable that Luther and Calvin might have been permitted to fall into errors, in order to teach us not to put implicit confidence in any man.

Mr. Scott has chosen to take it for granted, that some particular doctrines are necessary to salvation, and his inference is, that the Holy Spirit will teach them to every willing scholar. We have no objection to the inference, but we dispute the premises. Their accuracy is assumed, but is no where established; eminent writers, of unquestionable piety, have proved that

they are erroneous, and so the entire argument is built upon sand.

Nothing now remains but to shew that a fair solution can be given of the circumstances of Mr. Scott's life and doctrine, without admitting the truth of the principles which he professed. We have proved that he was mistaken in thinking his own solution infallible; we now advance another step, and say that it was actually false. The circumstances in which he was placed, and the particular bent of his disposition and temper, may account for all his errors. He was, as Mr. Wilson informs us, selftaught. As the Force of Truth informs us, he was seduced at an early age into Socinianism; and he took orders with these principles strongly impressed upon his mind. After a few years he gave them up one by one, and substituted a moderate Calvinism in their stead. He says, indeed, that he preached Arminianism; but he never believed it. All the time that he professed it, he was a Socinian or an Arian in disguise. And we are borne out by his own confessions, when we positively affirm, that he never for a single day was a sincere and pious believer in the Creeds and Articles of our Church, according to their Anti-Calvinistic interpretation. First, he denied our Saviour's atonement; secondly, he denied his proper divinity; thirdly, he fell into the society of the celebrated Mr. Newton, aud embraced the doctrine of individual election and indefectible grace. We have no reason to believe, that the doctrines of Bull and of Waterland were even so much as apprehended by his mind. That he never believed them is incontrovertible. What right then can he have to question their effect upon the heart, the conduct, or the preaching of one who really thinks that they are true? His preaching before he was converted, produced no effect!

Had he any reason to suppose, that his preaching would be blessed by God, while the preacher was merely acting a part? We refrain from saying more upon this part of the question; but if Mr. Wilson's at tempt is followed up, and the Force of Truth continues to be put for ward as an unanswerable case, we shall take another opportunity of entering at large into its merits. To the merit of honesty and sin. cerity we conceive that it can establish its claim; but we have never yet been able to see, and we have read it carefully and repeatedly, that it contains one tittle of evidence to shew, that its author was a logical reasoner, or a judicious

critic.

This, therefore, is the solution which we take the liberty of substituting, for the one which is offered in Mr. Wilson's Discourses. Mr. Scott was a good but was not a wise man; and although his actions were commendable, yet his reasoning was fallacious. His conduct improved, and his temper softened; and his labours as a student and a parish priest were exemplary and permanent, not because he was a Calvinist, but because he was conscientious and pious. Even in his early years, though he did not shun the stumbling-blocks of the young, yet it is evident that he knew and desired to perform his duty. After he was ordained he describes himself as having lived for a time in sin; but his sins were abandoned before he was converted. It is absurd, therefore, to contend, that he would have been an infidel, or a profligate, if he had rejected the dogmas of Calvin. The principles, and feelings, and habits, which make a diligent scholar, and a humble Christian, and a persevering teacher, were to be distinguished in him at a very early age. If he had re. ceived a regular education, and been preserved from the Socinians in his youth, he would have been preserved from the Calvinist in his

maturer years. The fault of his disposition was self-sufficiency; the fault of his understanding was inaccuracy; and the combined effect of the two was to make him the leader of a party, when he was qualified for a respectable situation in the Church itself.

Into the consideration of his various writings we do not now enter, not only on account of the length to which this article is extending, but also from our reluctance to use one word of unnecessary reprehension. Mr. Wilson has grievously exaggerated their merits. He asserts, that the Remarks on the Refutation of Calvinism form "one of the first theological treatises of the day;" and Mr. Scott's Bible, which is pronounced absolutely necessary for the use of careful students, is shortly to be acknowledged by all Protestant Churches" to be one of the most sound, and instructive comments of our own, or any other age." Yet there is evidently a little soreness about the slowness of its sale in this country. And we are assured, that in America, "where prejudice has less force," it goes off much quicker. If it be necessary, as we suppose it may be, that the congregation of St. John's, Bedford-Row, should never read the Word of God without a Calvinistic commentary, they may as well read Mr. Scott's as any other with which we are acquainted; and if they are deficient in patience, they will have a good opportunity of increasing their stock. But Mr. Wilson talks of students; and if by this we are to understand that he recommends the work to the study of those who are qualified to read for Holy Orders, if he wishes them to pass over all our own, and all foreign annotators, and give up their faith to the guidance of Mr. Scott, we hesi tate not to affirm, that the result of carrying his plau into effect would be to sacrifice sound learning and true Christianity to prepossession for an individual, and attachment

to a party. Mr. Scott did not possess a single requisite for his stupendous task, except piety and diligence. His work is full of er. rors, and full of mischief*, and we

* It happens singularly enough, that the very text selected for Mr. Wilson's Funeral Discourses, is misinterpreted by Mr. Scott. The confidence expressed by St. Paul is not a Calvinistic confidence; for it is not grounded on the immutability of the divine decrees, but on the humble consciousness of having kept the faith; from which he concludes, that " HENCEFORTH there is laid up for him a crown of righteousness." Mr. Scott's paraphrase is, He therefore assuredly expected the crown of righteousness,' that glory and immortality which were prepared for

have reason to be thankful that it is so unwieldly, and so unattractive. We are not ignorant of the attempts that have been made to force it into circulation, by crying down all commentaries of a different cast. But hitherto these attempts have failed; and it may be hoped that the renewal of them will be equally unsuccessful.

all true believers in Christ, according to the measure of their grace, sufferings, and service in his cause. This the Apostle knew had been laid up' for him; and he had now little more to do than to enjoy it." This change of tense is totally unauthorised; and is an evident misrepresentation of the Apostle's meaning.

Extract from the Third Annual Report of Proceedings of the Committee of Members of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge within the Deanery of Ackely.

"THE Committee of Members of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge within the Deanery of Ackely and its Neighbourhood, having arrived at the Third Anniversary, held since their first Institution; submit the following to the Public, as the Third Annual Report of their Proceedings

"On similar grounds to those which actuated the Committee in holding their Quarterly Meetings alternately at Loughborough and Ashby-de-la-Zouch, instead of Loughborough alone, as stated in the last Report; the Committee having previously obtained the consent of the Incumbent, resolved on holding the last Anniversary in the Parish Church of Ashby-de la-Zouch. Accordingly the Anniversary was so held, and a Collection made, after a Sermon preached by the Rev. Francis Merewether, Rector of Cole Orton, and Vicar of Whitwick, amounting to 281. 18. 6d. one third of which was immediately remitted to London by the Treasurer. At a subsequent Meeting of the Committee, a grant was made out of the remaining two thirds of Seven Pounds to the Parish of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, disposable at the discretion of the Incumbent, in Books on the

Society's list, for the Benefit of that Parish. This sum was applied, as will be seen wards the purchase of a Parochial Lendin a subsequent part of this Report, toing Library. And as it cannot be doubted,

but that much benefit will accrue to the

Parish of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, both from this grant, and from the special mode of its application; so it is hoped by the Committee, that both will alike furnish a strong ground for future pecuniary support, from the well disposed in the Parish of Ashbyde-la-Zouch, towards the future advancement of the Society's, and Committee's designs.

"On this subject, viz. the support afforded by Subscriptions and Donations, whether to the Parent Society, or to the District Fund, or both; the Committee are enabled to make a very satisfactory statement: and with regard to support to the Parent Society in particular; the Com mittee having now been in active opera tion for more than two years; it may be satisfactory to lay before the Public, the progress which has been made in encreasing the Funds of the Society, since the commencement of that period. From March 1819, the time when the Committee's circular was distributed, to the present, June 1821; in this comparatively very limited District, 32 Subscribers have been added to the Parent Society, and at the present time, ont of 22 Benefices, and 15 Chapelries in the limits of this Deanery; 20 of the former, and 14 of the latter, possess direct means of access to the Society's