Critic," that his judgment is per- | suppose that something should be verted, and that he is altogether believed. The elevated tone in mistaken respecting the nature of which he utters his oracular decia christian church, would be to as sions, and the supercilious contempt little purpose as it would to read a with which, ex cathedra, he looks lecture on sobriety to a company of down upon the church at Salters' drunkards. I would otherwise un- Hall, certainly exhibit a delectable dertake to shew him, that whatever specimen of clerical insolence. But human laws may teach to the con- "let us not mistake the venom of trary, Dr. Collyer has the uniformly the shaft for the vigour of the bow." explicit authority of divine revela- Though every line of his animadtion for his use of the term church. versions on Dr. Collyer breathes the Has the British Critic yet to learn, spirit of a Bonner, and indicates the that the Greek word ε××λσia, which rancorous state of this reviewer's in our translation of the New Testa- mind towards the Dissenters at ment is rendered "church," invari- large, let us be thankful to the good ably denotes "an assembly of per- providence of God, which has sons," and nothing more? And that pared the lion's claws, and rendered by a christian church nothing more the animal harmless. It was preis meant, in the apostolic writings, dicted in the book of the Revelathan a society of professed believers tion, ch. xvi. 10. that when "the in Christ, voluntarily associating to- fifth angel should pour out his vial gether for the worship of God, and upon the seat of the beast, his the observance of his ordinances, kingdom would be full of darkness, having their scriptural officers of and they (the supporters of it) bishops, or presbyters, and dea- should gnaw their tongues for cons; the former to labour in the pain." I could almost persuade word and doctrine, and the latter myself that I contemplate someto take care of the poor. Such was thing like this in the strictures the church at Jerusalem, the first which the British Critic has passed christian church that was planted upon Dr. Collyer. The blunders of by the apostles. Acts ii. 41-47. the writer indeed are easily exchap. vi. 1-7. Such also was the posed, and his sophistry unmaskchurch at Antioch, Acts xi. 26; at ed; but what shall excuse him for Philippi, Phil. i. 1; at Ephesus, imputing to Dr. C. mistakes which ch. i. 1. and ii. 22; at Corinth, he has not made, and base motives ch. i. 2. &c. &c. Every one of these of which he is not guilty! Even in churches was a single congrega-professing to give the title of the tion, regularly assembling in one place to perform social worship and observe Christ's institutions. Let the reader, for proof of this, consult, Acts ii. 1. 46. iv. 31. and v. 12. 1 Cor. xi. 18, 20. Such also were the seven churches in Asia, Rev. ii. and iii. I will further add, that the New Testament knows no more about a national christian church established by human laws, than it does about a church in the moon! But the language of this "British Critic" is calculated in no small degree to impose upon the credulity of his readers; for, where much is confidently asserted, it is natural to Doctor's Sermon, the reviewer has grossly misrepresented him. He describes it as "A Sermon delivered-on taking the Pastoral Charge of the Church Assembly" at that place. Now I must beg leave to tell this sagacious Critic that Dr. Collyer could not write such nonsense as he has here imputed to him. The Doctor well knows, though his reviewer has it yet to learn, that a church," and an assembly" are identical propositions, and that they mean pre-cisely the same thing. But this is not all; for towards the close of his review (if to apply that epithet 66 to such a farrago, be not a gross misnomer) he has learnedly confounded David, the writer of the twenty-seventh psalm, with Moses, the writer of the ninetieth, attributing both compositions to the same penman, though, could his mightiness have condescended to take a lesson from the minister of Salters' Hall, he had been prevented from blundering after this manner, for Dr. Collyer has, in his Sermon, very correctly marked the distinction, terming one "the prayer of David," and the other that of Moses, p. 7. and 21. But that I may not be suspected of doing injustice to the reviewer, I shall give you his very words. Referring to the two psalms just mentioned, he thus proceeds. "Now this learned interpreter of scripture at Salters' Hall is not perhaps aware that in both these passages the Psalmist refers to that eager and anxious desire which he (the Psalmist David) ever entertained to build an house unto the Lord."* This learned Critic perhaps is not aware-but I refrain. Your readers will no doubt think that what has been said is quite sufficient to enable them to decide between Dr. Collyer and the British Critic; and yet I cannot take leave of the subject (so prolific is it of animadversion) without noticing one particular more. The Preacher at Salters' Hall had ~occasion (see his Sermon, p. 21.) to quote the words of David, "One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his temple." Here the reviewer charges Dr. Collyer with having had recourse to the base artifice of altering the translation of the passage to serve his purpose. His words are "the beauty of the Lord is applied to spirituality of worship-we should almost suspect that the Doctor knew this already, by his alteration of the expression, "to visit his temple," which stands in the original, into one which suits his ideas better, to inquire in his holy temple'." Now I must appeal to all your readers, is this vile charge against Dr. Collyer true or false? Has he altered the translation, in the text referred to, or has he not? Let them turn to Psal. xxvii. 4. and if the result be not a complete justification of the Doctor's integrity, and at the same time a condemnation of the conduct of his reviewer, I am content to be "dubbed" a blockhead! After this exposure of a conduct so vile and scandalous, what must we think of a writer who could close his critique with the following lines. "So much for the dependence to be placed on those whom we have long known as corrupters of the meaning, and now we discover to be corrupters of the text of that Scripture of which they claim the exclusive knowledge. We have not room to go through the remaining blunders, nor to expose the sly cant which distinguishes the rest of this inaugural discourse at Salters' Hall.” May I not now in my turn say"So much for the dependence that is to be placed on the candour, the equity, and the fairness of the writers in the British Critic towards Dissenters." Were the reviewer of Dr. Collyer's Sermon susceptible of shame, how overwhelming must be his confusion, at seeing his deeds of darkness thus dragged into open day-light. The best apology I can offer for him is, that probably the article was written after taking an extra glass; and if he wish to atone for his folly, I advise him that in future he keep sober, and let the Dissenters alone! I am, yours, CASTIGATOR. * This blunder of the reviewer's reminds me of a circumstance which fell under my own notice some years ago. Being obliged to spend the Lord's day in a country village, I attended the public worship at the parish church. When the prayers were over, the clergyman, dizen'd with his black gown and bands, entered the pulpit, and directed us for his text to the first chapter of Paul's first Epistle to Peter !!! "Lovest thou me?" "LORD, thou knowest all things, thou knowest that I love thee," would be the answer of some: but it is not every Christian that can without hesitation adopt this language. There are many who would say, "Oft it causes anxious thought, do I love thee, Lord, or not?" Many who are apt to question their love to Jesus, rather than avow it; and yet in various instances, these humble-minded individuals afford no less evidence of their sincerity than the former. is more difficult to ascertain the genuinness of our love to Christ. It is easy to be accounted for, that we should love those whom we have seen, rather than those whom we have not seen: in one case the affections are aided by the senses, in the other that assistance is withdrawn, and every thing depends on testimony only. Nothing do we know of God, but as he is revealed to us in his word; nothing of the Saviour, but what is testified of him by those who beheld his glory. Moral excellence is that which constitutes his chief, his only glory: the love of this is the love of God and of the Saviour. So great is the importance attached to this affection, such interests are involved, as may well render it a matter of the most anxi friendship with this, that, or the other person, may be of little consequence; but whether I love THEE, oh my Saviour, is a point on which all my salvation depends! May not this arise from the deep consciousness they feel of their own unworthiness, and of the weakness of their love, compared with the infinite worthiness of HIM who is the object of it. Compared with HIM, in whom are hid all the trea-ous solicitude. Whether I have any sures of wisdom and knowledge, all our wisdom is folly; placed before the eyes of his purity, behold, we are vile. Considering the greatness of his love'to us, ours to him seems little better than criminal indiffer-Were it possible that our eternal ence. How often does it resemble the smoking flax, which seldom kindles to a flame; and how mixed, how debased, with the forbidden or inordinate love of other objects! In some cases, the fear of not loving the Saviour may arise from the want of considering the various operations of that love, and what are its proper evidences. Some pious persons are ready to conclude that their love to Jesus cannot be sincere, unless they feel that burning ardour and rapturous delight which would exclude the existence or the influence of every other affection; not considering that love operates in a way of ap- And thou, oh heart, deceitful probation, as well as of grati- above all things, and desperately tude, and produces self-abhorrence wicked-thou who hast so freequally with objective admiration. quently imposed on my credulity, We are more easily assured of and soothed me with thy syren our attachment to visible and sensi-song-shouldst thou deceive me as ble objects, than we can be to those thou hast done, and give forth thy that are intellectual and invisible; sentence falsely-I_am eternally and for this reason among others, it undone ! EPENETUS. interests depended on the love we bear to any created object, clear and certain as we now are of the existence of such an affection, the consequences involved in it would create a thousand doubts and perplexities where none at present are found to exist. The man who stands on yonder shore, and sees the vessel sailing into port, after a long and dangerous passage, can easily and confidently anticipate her safe arrival; but he who occupies the same ground, and views the same object, but whose all is on board the vessel, feels innumerable anxieties to which the other is necessarily a stranger. Theological Review. A View of the Rise and Progress of the Divisions in the Scots Church, London Wall: including a Correspondence between the Elders and a Committee of the Congregation: with introductory Observations on the exculpatory Statement of the Vestry. By the Rev. Archibald Barclay, A. M. London: printed and sold by J. Peck, Lombard Street. 1815. 8vo. pp. 200. Pr. 5s. THIS is one of the many publications which, had we been left to our own choice, we should decline noticing; but our judgment upon it, and also upon the proceedings which have occasioned it, has been asked; and as we are totally unacquainted with the parties, and consequently have neither antipathies nor predilections to gratify, we shall give it with the strictest regard to impartiality. 66 The Scots Church, London Wall, appears to have been founded early in the year 1766, at which time "A Deed of Settlement" was drawn up, and executed by the Rev. Robert Lawson, M. A. its first pastor, and eight other persons acting as elders, (more properly deacons) and co-trustees, having for its object the regulating and conducting the choice and election of all future ministers and pastors of the said congregation. According to this instrument, it was stipulated that, upon the death or dismission of their minister for the time being, the vacancy is to be declared to the congregation from the pulpit, on the second or third Lord'sday next after such vacancy took place, that the elders and trustees shall have the power to propose and nominate a candidate, or candidates, for supplying such vacancy-but that the elders and trustees shall have no power or right to the calling or election of any minister more than the rest, except only their right of nominating; and that no person shall give their voice or ballot for the choice of a minister, unless they are subscribers, (that is, persons who subscribe to the support of the minister, &c.) and were so at the vacancy happening, and that a majority of | such subscribing members, shall determine the call and choice. The vacancy is required to be filled up in six months from the time of its taking place. The death of Dr. Young on the 8th of Oct. 1813, having left the congregation without a minister, four or five respectable gentlemen came forward as candidates, and, agreeable to the tenour of the trust deed, fore the congregation, for the trial preached on different sabbaths beof their abilities; these were Messrs. Cunningham, Wilson, Finlayson, and Dewar. A Mr. Burns also had exof becoming a candidate; but before pressed a wish to preach, with a view an opportunity could be found of his abilities, the elders considered giving the congregation a trial of themselves called upon to make a didate for the vacancy, and accordreturn to the congregation of a caningly, on March 27, 1814, (a fortnight before the six months were expired) they returned the Rev. Daniel Dewar for the choice of the subscribers: and here commences all the animosity and confusion that has since distracted and nearly ruined the society. As there were at least three other candidates, it is manifest that, according to the "Deed of Settlement," their names ought to have been mentioned along with Mr. Dewar's; and the omission very na turally infused into the minds of the congregation an idea that "the vesand deprive them of their right of try" designed to forestall their choice election. Mr. Barclay, the author of the pamphlet before us, sarcastically remarks that "This nomination of Mr. Dewar struck every person in the congregation with astonishment, and excited no small degree of carnal indignation against the elders for the conscientious fidelity with which they had discharged their duty. On this fatal day were sown the seeds of the calamitous divisions, which, in spite of the conciliating efforts of the vestry, exerted with the most unwearied perseverance, have attained so stately a growth as to overrun and desolate the church. "It is in vain for the congregation to say, that this kind of nomination annihi 1 lates the right of election vested in them by the deed of settlement. With as much plausibility may it be said, that the king's appointment of a bishop annihilates the right of election vested by the ecclesiastical constitution in the dean and chapter of a diocese. The king appoints or nominates the bishop, and the dean and chapter elect him, and thus the rights of both parties are preserved inviolate. This nomination, therefore, does not annihilate the right of election; it only limits it to one person. The congregation, however, took it into their heads that the elders were going to obtrude a minister upon them, and every effort to quell the alarm, which this idea had excited, proved utterly ineffectual. In vain did the vestry argue with the most forcible reasoning; in vain did they plead with the most melting pathos; in vain did Dr. Nicol harangue with the most fervid eloquence: all their arguments and all their oratory were insufficient to eradicate the impression that the elders had usurped a power which the charter had not given them, and that they had trampled upon the rights of the sub scribers." the augmented by the high degree of Such was the state of things in the interval between the 27th of March, the day on which Mr. Dewar was nominated, and the 8th of April, on which it was intended that the vacancy should be filled up: but during this period two fresh candidates arrived from the North, viz. a Mr. There appears to have existed an Burns, from Paisley, and a Mr. Ran-unaccountable repugnance on the nie, from Banff; an unfortunate oc- part of the vestry, to nominate Mr. currence, which entirely frustrated Rannie as a candidate for this vacanthe scheme of the vestry, and dis- cy; and hence several months were appointed them of their favourite suffered to elapse before any further candidate, Mr. Dewar. The gentle- steps were taken, though a commen brought with them such hon-mittee, which had been formed by ourable testimonials of their charac- the congregation for the purpose of ter and talents (Mr. Rannie in parti- managing their interest in this affair, cular) from the principal Professors were continually goading them to and Clergymen in Scotland to whom bring the matter to issue. On the they were well known, that, in spite 23rd of October, however, it was in, of all their efforts to the contrary, timated from the pulpit, that the the vestry were obliged to yield to elders had appointed the 2d of Nothe voice of the congregation, and vember for the congregation to degrant a trial of their abilities. This cide on Mr. Rannie's pretensions to prevented the election from taking be put in nomination as a candidate, place on the 8th of April, as intend- and the 7th of December for the ed; and to make bad worse, an eligi-election of a minister. But here a ble station in Aberdeen being at the moment offered to Mr. Dewar, he wisely accepted it, and, quitting London, declined all further competition for the vacancy at London Wall. It appears but too plain, from the whole narrative of their proceedings, that this double disappointment galled the vestry to the quick, and their mortification was still further new catastrophe, of a very singular nature, opens upon us. No sooner had the elders given notice that Mr. Rannie's claims were to be finally settled on the 2d of November, than curiosity was changed into alarm. From certain dark hints and oracular expressions, which had fallen from one of the vestry, the most alarming apprehensions were excited through |