« הקודםהמשך »
ARRIVALS. 25. Betsey, (Bark,) G. S. Jones, from Rangoon 10th April.
Phønix, (Do.) A. Bane, from Coringa 19th ditto.
Ceres, J. Blampied, from London 19th Sept. and Mauritius 25th Feb. 26. Virginia, (Barque,) J. Hullock, from Vizagapatam, 22nd April.
Passenger.-From Coringa : T. B. Miller, Esq. Merchant 37. John Bannerman, J. Watt, from Bombay 14th, Cochin 26th March, and Ma. dras 20th April.
Passenger.-From Bombay : Master Sutherland.
Passengers.-C. J. Sutherland, Esq. J. Tomlin, Esq. E. P. L. Chamber, Esq.
6. Dalla Merchant, Wier, from Rangoon 15th April.
7. General Gascoyne, Fisher, from Isle of France 23rd Feb., Madras 14th April, and Coringa 3rd May.
Passenger.-From Isle of France : Lieut. Hopper. 8. Forbes, Forth, from Madras, 1st May.
Passenger.-J. Storm, Esq. Merchant.
Minerva, Esteve, from Coringa 30th April. 10. John Adam, Rocke, from Point De Galle 11th, and Trincomalie 19th April, and Point Pedro 3rd May.
Spartan, Webh, from Point Pedro, 13th April and Madras 3rd April.
Passengers.-From Madras : Mrs. Taylor and child, Mrs. M. J. Mitchin, and Mr. D. W. Hill.
Captain Cook, Thompson, from Point Pedro 1st, and Madras 3rd May. 17. Water Witch, Henderson, from China 27th March and Singapore 141h April. 18. Bordelais, Le Porte,from Bordeaux 10th Sept.Mauritius and Bourbon(no date)
Adelaide, Guthrie, from Isle of France 19th April. 20. Harriet, Solomon, put back leaky. 21. Bengal, Ritchie, from Glasgow 28th January, and Madeira 20th Feb.
Passengers.-From Glasgow: Mrs. J. Thompson, Miss Graham, Captain Campbell, 29th N. I. Dr. W. Buchanan, Cornet W. Waugh, 16th Lancers, Mr. M. Campbell, and Mr. T. Urquhart.
Crown, Cowman, from Liverpool 26th Dec.
Addington, Sedgwick, from Mauritius (no date) and Coringa 12th May.
DEPARTURES. 23. General Hewett, J. Bankier, for London.
Passengers. Mrs. Hunter, Mrs. Pringle and 2 children, Col. Hunter, and 26. Agnes, (Barque,) P. Holmes, for Singapore and China.
Hardings, (Brig,) J. Thornton, for the Mauritius. 27. Ruby, W. Warden, for Singapore and China, 3. Red Rover, Clifton, for China.
Belhaven, Crawford, for ditto. 4. Charles Stewart, Ross, for Moulmein.
Edina, Norris, for Moulmein. 5. Harriet, Solomon, for Penang. 7. Sylph, Wallace, for China. 8. Bolton, Fremlin, for London.
Caravan, Bray, for Boston. 11. Ceres, Blampied, for Isle of France.
Cecelia, Roy, for Straits and Malacca.
Passengers.—Messrs. J. Blackburn and Farquhar. 13. Elizabeth, Blenkinsop, for Bombay.
Eclipse, Perry, for Salem. 14. General Palmer, Thomas, for London.
Argyle, Donald, for Madras. 15. Althorp, Bridges, for New York. 16. Richard Bell, Wardie, for China.
Young Rover, Baker, for Moulmein. 18. Parsee, McKillan, for London. 21. Ann, Tindale, for ditto.
Passengers.-Mr. G. R. Richardson, R. H. McNeer, Esq. and child,
CALCUTTA CHRISTIAN OBSERVER.
1.-On the Connection between a Liberal Education, and the Spread of True Religion in India.
PART I. I. There are two classes of men that appear to maintain opposite and contradictory views respecting the power and effects of Education. While the one strenuously asserts the all but omnipotence of Education : its all but powerlessness is the favourite Watchword of the other.
These statements seem, at first sight, absolutely irreconcilable. But may not a little attention tend to shew that they are more so in word than in reality ? May not the objects to which they refer be totally different? Do philosophers and worldly politicians mean any thing more by the former expression, than strongly to assert the potency of Education in sweeping away the rubbish of vulgar prejudice and superstition? And do certain zealous supporters of religion intend any thing more by the latter, than strongly to assert the utter impotency of Education in implanting the grace of God in the heart ? If not, as we verily believe to be the case-each of these seemingly contradictory assertions is simply the expression of a truth. Between two truths there can be no real collision :-and both may and ought to be embraced.
Feeling assured, therefore, that it is the province of folly, not of sound wisdom, either unreasonably to exalt, or unduly to disparage—the one party ought not, by a breach of piety, to maintain that Education can do all things ; nor the other, by an abandonment of good sense, insist that it can do nothing. The one should be ever reminded, that there is a supreme good which Education cannot effect: the other, that there is a desirable good which it can well accomplish. In this way the basis of true harmony need never be shaken. There may not only be mutual forbearance, but close and mutual support in the promotion of common ends. Let those who advocate exclusively the supereminence of Education, freely and frankly acknowledge, that the
effusion of divine grace is independent of the will of man, and the production of spiritual fruits beyond the controul of human coalitions : let those who delight exclusively to talk of evangelical measures as candidly confess, that there is within the store-house of Providence a magazine of varied means that may be instrumental in producing some good, and that one of these is Education :and what must be the result? The happiest that can be desired, even the sure advancement of that which all profess most to value. Has not the experience of ages shewn, that if the channels of Education be multiplied and enlarged, the stability of nature is the only guarantee required for the certainty of reaping a rich harvest of knowledge and intelligence ? And have not know. ledge and intelligence ever been found the most faithful allies of true religion ? With the amplest admission that knowledge and intelligence alone cannot savingly enlighten, nor even miracles and prophecy alone savingly convert the soul, must it not be granted that the former prepare the mind for weighing the nature and amount of evidence, and that the latter, duly authenticated, tend to arrest the mind ? And may not the special influence of God's Spirit then descend to quicken with the life, and irradiate with the light of heaven ?
Let then reason and experience define the range and circumscribe the limits of education ; and within the tract of usefulness allotted to it, will not its advantages be great and manifold ? This consideration alone should carry the convictions and call forth the practical efforts of all truly enlightened men, whatever degree of prominence they may wish to assign to the higher and holier means in the scale of Heaven's ordination. And it cannot fail to do so, unless they adopt the maxim, that every source of blessing must be despised, which does not prove the source of all, or of the very highest blessings !
II. Some, however, are ready to say, that it is not the general good effect of education that is doubted, but the propriety of allotting to it a prominent foreground station in the great system means by which the world is to be evangelized.
What is a saying without evidence? What the value of an opinion not founded on satisfactory reasons ? A doubt is expressed, on what foundation does it rest? Probably the answer may be, that “ Preaching” is the grand Apostolical mean of rege. nerating a fallen world, and that there are secret misgivings of heart when recourse is had to any other. Opinions that are allied with piety, and scruples that proceed from tenderness of conscience, we must ever treat with lenience, if we cannot with respect. The opinions and the scruples may be alike unfounded. In the present instance, we should like to know, whether, in upholding the superiority of “ Preaching," the utility of education, or its scriptural character, is thereby disproven? This cannot be.
In the Law of Moses, the Proverbs of Solomon, the Epistles of Paul, and the word of God generally, is there no express injunction on the subject ? Those who know their Bibles best may almost accuse us, in putting such questions, of being in jest.
But altogether independent of direct injunction, what examples have holy men left behind them ? Where did the Apostles direct their chief efforts, when commissioned by Heaven to“ go and preach the gospel to every creature ?” Undoubtedly, to those places where a certain degree of education had relaxed the rigid fibres of minds hardened with ignorance, and awakened the capacity for thought, and spread abroad a certain amount of intelligence, in Jerusalem, in Tarsus, in Ephesus, in Smyrna, in Corinth, and in Rome. There, they preached with effect ; there, success crowned their labours; and thence did light emanate to diffuse gladness throughout the darkest surrounding regions.
More than this : did not the Apostles and their immediate successors, imbued with a just sense of the power of education in opening and disciplining the mind, give it their direct sanction and powerful encouragement by establishing, and aiding in the establishment of, seminaries of instruction ? Without fatiguing the reader with minute details on this head, let the following extract from Mosheim's learned and judicious work on Ecclesiastical History for the present suffice : “ The Christians (during the first century) took all possible care to accustom their children to the study of the Scriptures, and to instruct them in the doctrines of their holy religion; and schools were every where erected for this purpose, even from the very commencement of the Christian church.
We must not, however, confound the schools designed only for children with the gymnasia, or academies of the ancient Christians, erected in several large cities, in which persons of riper years, especially such as aspired to be public teachers, were instructed in the different branches, both of human learning, and of sacred erudition. We may, undoubtedly, attribute to the Apostles themselves, and their injunctions to their disciples, the excellent establishments in which the youth, destined to the holy ministry, received an education suitable to the solemn office they were to undertake. St. John erected a school of this kind at Ephesus, and one of the same nature was founded by Polycarp at Smyr
But none of these were in a greater repute than that which was established at Alexandria, which was commonly called the Catechetical School, and is generally supposed to have been erected by St. Mark."
Here then is example of a two-fold kind, as well as precept. And shall we, in our evangelical labours in India, neglect the injunctions of Scripture, and set at nought the Apostolic example? Shall we account the education of the people a matter of subordinate importance? If we do, besides despising Scripture precepts and holy ex