« PreviousContinue »
MASTERS OF ARTS. College, has been elected a Foundation
Thomas Greenwood, St. John's Coll. Fellow of that Society.
Rev. J. P. Voules, St. Peter's Coll. Comp. Mr. John Legh, Mr. John Wilder, and
W. Hartley, Christ Coll. Mr. John Clement Middleton, Scholars of
R. T. Lowe, Christ Coll. King's College, have been elected Fellows of that Society.
BACHELORS IN CIVIL LAW.
John Vinall, Esq. Trinity Hall, Comp. A Grace has passed the Senate, to Rev. H. Montague Grover, St. Peter's Coll. authorize the Committee of the Pitt Club Rev. Philip Osborne, Catharine Hall. to erect, at their own expense, under the Rev. Coventry Payne, Trinity Hall. Comp. superintendence of the Syndics of the
BACHELOR IN PHYSIC.
BACHELORS OF ARTS.
W. J. Achilles Abington, Trinity Coll. There will be Congregations on the George Lionel Fraser, St. Peter's Coll. following days of the ensuing Michaelmas William John Barker, Queen's Coll. term :
H. Wright, St. John's Coll.
W. H. King, Catharine Hall.
The Rev. Robert Williams, M. A. of Thursday Dec. 16, (end of term) Jesus College, Oxford, has been admitted at ten.
ad eundem of this University.
On Tuesday, July 6th, being Commencement Day, the following Doctors and
DOCTORS IN PHYSIC. The Rev. Richard Newton Adams, Fellow William Joseph Bayne, Trinity Coll. of Sidney Sussex Coll.
B. Guy Babington, Pembroke Coll.
Fellow of St. John's Coll., Vicar of *Richard Hobson, Queen's Coll.
Thomas Elliotson, Jesus Coll.
W. Hill Tucker
St. John's COLL.
MASTERS OF ARTS.
F. W. Darwall
H. E. Goodhart C.S. Whitmore
W. C. Wollaston
James Scott Baker
C. De la Cour
F. John Farre
F. Duncan Gilby
H. S. Pinder
W. R. Colbeck
ST. PETER'S COLL.
J. S. Stock
[Those gentlemen whose names are preceded by an asterisk are Compounders.)
MARRIED. At Grantham (by the Rev. W. Potchett), the Rev. R. Wilson, M. A. Fellow of St. John's College, to Frances, the youngest daughter of the late R. Hough, Esq. of Newark-upon-Trent.
At Richmond, the Rev. Charles Edward Kennaway, Fellow of St. John's College, and second son of Sir John Kennaway, Bart. of Escot, Devon, to Emma, fourth daughter of the Hon, and Rev. Gerard T. Noel.
NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.
“ T. S.” will see that we have made use of his communication, although in a different shape.
A similar article to the unpublished one of “ E. B." has appeared in a former volume ; his MS. therefore, will be found at our publishers'.
The lines upon the “ Divinity of Christ,” after mature consideration, are inadmissible. “ E. B." on Rom. iii. 7, 8, has been received.
R E MEMBRANCER.
REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS.
Art.I.- Forty Family Sermons. By the Editor of the Christian Observer.
London: Hatchards. 1830. 8vo. pp. xxviii. 506. Price 12s.
ALThough this volume might, as will appear in the sequel, challenge our attention on the ground of its private claims, we will not conceal the satisfaction which the present opportunity affords us, of elucidating a question which it might otherwise appear invidious to agitate, the comparative grounds upon which the Christian Observer, and we of the Remembrancer, respectively solicit the public ear.
Let us be heard patiently. The point under consideration is, by no means, a mere contest between two rival periodicals. Were it so, whatever degree of advantage the public might reap from either, they would scarcely feel sufficiently interested to tolerate the impertinent substitution of private contention, for the information or entertainment which it is the sole duty of such a work to supply. But we have not, indeed, any contention with the editor of the Christian Observer. The remarks which we purpose to offer on the present volume, will, we think, abundantly convince him of this. And we are ready and forward to admit that, what we are conscientiously compelled to designate the essential blemishes of the Christian Observer, are often counterbalanced by valuable accessions to the cause of that Christianity, whose holy name we in common profess, and the spirit whereof, it is to be hoped, will always characterize our intercourse with each other.
The question then to which we invite the attention of our readers, is this:-Are the sentiments of the Church of England accurately represented in the Christian Observer ? Now the circumstance which alone gives importance to this question, and which alone can shield us, who start it, from the charge of impertinence, is this, that a large number of well-intentioned persons believe the affirmative, and without further inquiry, implicitly adopt the dicta of the Christian Observer, as the very spirit of the Established Church. It is evident,
then, that should this opinion be at least partially erroneous, it is an error of no small importance, as nothing regarding such a question as the sentiments of the Church, can be indifferent to any Churchman, or indeed to any sincere lover of the truth. The Christian Observer professes to be “conducted by members of the Established Church ;" the Christian Remembrancer is “ Churchman's Miscellany." “ Wherein therefore," say some, “ do these publications differ? Both are representatives of the same religious sentiments." While some thus injuriously endeavour to effect a reconciliation between principles essentially distinct, others, who evidently perceive the distinction, are induced to view the doctrines of the Church as uncertain and undecided, and inadequately understood even by those who are under the most solemn obligations to study them.
All this is undoubtedly evil, and much to be regretted by all who, with whatever varieties of opinion in minor matters, still regard the Church as the authorized expositor of the word, and dispenser of the sacraments of God, " the pillar and ground of the truth.” That there should be two classes of opinions in the Church of England, as long as those opinions regarded not essentials, was nothing surprising. It was honourable to her that there were no more. The Calvinists wondered how the Arminians could subscribe the XVIIth Article, the Arminians were equally at a loss to account for the acceptance of the XXVth and XXVIIth, the Baptismal services, and the Catechism, on the part of the Calvinists. Still the difference, we maintain, was one which might have subsisted alone, and was not necessarily connected with any other whatever. We are far from absolving the Calvinistic doctrines. “ Horrible” they were termed by him whose name they bear; and when we say the effects of them are no
we speak that We DO KNOW, and testify that WE HAVE SEEN.” But still these evils are only the occasional result--the legitimate indeed, and proper result, -yet the result alone, and not the inherent properties of Calvinism. Many a man holds Calvinism in all its length, and breadth, who would recoil from its genuine consequences with as much horror as the most consistent Arminian. There was no reason, therefore, why the Arminian and Calvinistic clergy should not have proceeded in perfect harmony. The conductors of the Christian Observer mention, in the Preface to their second volume, (quoted in p. x. of the Preface to the work before us) the following, as the essential doctrines which they wish to inculcate :-“the ruined state of man by nature, and his recovery by divine grace; justification by faith, and the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit; the unsearchable love of Christ, and the obligation of every one no longer to live to himself, but to Him who died for him." And in another part of the preface to the sermons we read
The doctrines of these sermons correspond with those which it has been the uniform object of the work in which they were inserted to maintain. It was thought that the chief topics for Family Sermons—and indeed all sermons—were such simple scriptural points as the fallen, guilty, and helpless condition of mankind by nature; the love of God in Christ; the atonement; repentance; faith; justification ; the offices of Christ, and of the Holy Spirit; sanctification ; peace with God; love to God; the forbearance of God; Christian obedience, and love to mankind; death, and eternity, heaven, and hell.-Pp. vi. vii.
On all these doctrines, the Arminian clergy as zealously insist as the Calvinistic. There was, therefore, we repeat, no reason whatever, why these parties should not have agreed to differ; their distinguishing peculiarities affected not the essentials of religion, or of Churchmembership. Whether man be wholly or partially corrupt, mattered. not to their common doctrine. Both were agreed that “the condition of man, after the fall of Adam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God."*
Such was the situation of the Church, when a portion of the Calvinistic clergy chose to erect into essentials of religion, opinions which were never received by the Cạtholic Church, and never obtained form or system till the age of Augustine. All who ventured to differ from themselves on very abstruse metaphysical questions, were stigmatized as unregenerate and ignorant, and Calvinism was proclaimed the pure and only Gospel. A consequence easily to be foreseen ensued. While the Calvinistic clergy, on the one hand, were thus virtually regarding as heretics their brethren who preferred, in a mysterious inquiry, to examine and interpret the obscure parts of Scripture by the clear, they were, on the other, ready to join fellowship with the most uneducated advocate of the most preposterous schism, in which Calvinism was a recognized or permitted ingredient. This disposition was ardently welcomed, and sedulously fomented, by the enemies of the Church. The breach was gradually widened, until a portion of the English Church was conspicuous in the unseemly act of renouncing the rest, and engaging in friendly intercourse with the bitterest enemies of the Church they had sworn to support. Such intercourse could scarely be barren. It was hardly possible to pass mental excommunication on a large majority of the Church of England, without a disposition to view the Establishment itself with a partial jealousy. It was equally impossible to maintain a degree of communion with her enemies, without imbibing the infection of their prejudices, and acquiring, almost insensibly, a laxity of opinion in many important matters. An irritability consequent on their minority, and on the views taken by their more consistent brethren, would at once supply to these partial seceders, motives for proselytism, and
* Article X. of the Church of England.