respect, would place the German nation at the same point of the scale as the English, though the latter, from the freedom of its pólitical constitution, possesses much more encouragement to the improvement of the mind, and to a rational and excellent course of conduct?' Pref. p. iii.-vi.

This publication must have excited great attention in England. The obligation therefore lies the more strongly on the divines of Germany, to justify themselves against these accusations, and to shew that they are either groundless or made up of partial and defective information. To give to truth and reason the honours which belong to them, is to maintain the cause of God and man upon this earth.' p. x.

In this Preface is introduced the following curious article, from the celebrated journal Die Allgemeine Zeitung, which has long had much of an infidel tincture. It professes to be a letter from London.

An English clergyman, Hugh Rose, who has travelled in Germany as a scholar and a collector, has published some sermons, preached before the University of Cambridge, on the State of the Protestant Church in Germany, and furnished with numerous Notes, in which he describes the Rationalists of Heidelberg, Berlin, Gottingen, and Weimar, to the great alarm and offence of our orthodox churchmen. But, notwithstanding all this, Schleiermacher's Gospel of John has just been translated here. It cannot admit of a doubt, that the deadening formalism of the English Episcopal Liturgy; the lightmindedness with which any man, who has but the external means, may, without any very strict examination, get a good churchliving; the entire neglect of a course of education adapted to the clerical order, in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge (though the latter possesses the merit of a stricter system and a more liberal spirit); the affectation of Sunday-constraint; and the constitutional torpidness which wraps itself in the old forms and the 39 Articles; are making the separation between the Dissenters and the High Church wider every day, and filling the chapels of the heart-warming followers of Wesley and the indefatigable Methodists with their hundreds of Missionary and Bible Societies: while the Episcopal churches are attended with reluctance and merely out of custom. Be it also observed, that Rose himself cannot find words strong enough to commend the profound learning of the Germans, and the excellence of many of their theological writings.' [Here the correspondent who transmitted the letter, makes this note:] It is most devoutly to be wished, that a book, lately published at Essen [in Westphalia] might be universally read; Communications from Holland and England on the subject of Liturgies, with relation to the New Prussian Service-Book. The Author, Mr. Fliedner, a pious but truly liberal clergyman in the district of Dusseldorf, speaks as an eye-witness upon the incredible decline of the Episcopal Church and Liturgy in England. Heaven preserve the Service-Book, if it be like the English one! pp. ix, x.

If the flippant writer of this letter had taken such pains of investigation as Germans generally employ, he would not have crowded so many blunders together as he has here done, and which are quite of a piece with his not knowing even the subject of Schleiermacher's book. Dissenters as we are, we rejoice to tell the men of Germany, if any of them ever look into our pages, that the Church of England was never adorned with a larger number of pious, popular, and useful ministers than she is at this moment; that her assemblies, where such clergymen officiate, never were more, nor perhaps equally crowded; that never has her Liturgy been held in higher honour, not from ignorant superstition, but from the increase of truly devout and intelligent worshippers in her communion; and that all this is without any invasion of the liberties, or subtraction from the usefulness of Dissenters and Methodists. As for Mr. Fliedner, his opportunities of observation must have been partial and defective. The wrong conclusions of his eye-witnessing might read a good lecture to Mr. Rose and some others, upon the extreme difficulty which lies in the way of even well-meaning and inquisitive men, seeking to acquire correct knowledge upon the state of religious communities by travelling or transient visiting in a foreign country.

There is scarcely any subject on which more carefulness of thought and more precision of language are needful, than that of the duty and province of Reason, and the exercise of the power of comprehension, with regard to the objects of revealed religion. Iliacos intra muros peccatur et extra. To a passage of Mr. Rose (pp. 3, 4.) in which he sadly lays himself open on this quarter, his Translator subjoins the following note; which, if rightly understood, and if a guarded definition were given to the term comprehending, we cannot but think just and excellent: at least, it may teach us some useful lessons.

"If the English, or if this Author in particular, were as well acquainted with the investigations of Reason as many are in Germany, they would, in this matter, take quite a different course. It should first be settled, what Reason is, what are the extent of its powers, and in what relation it stands to the other faculties of the human mind; for instance, the Understanding and the Will. It is only by a critical process, of which Reason must be the active principle, that we can arrive at a clear understanding and a satisfactory determination of the important inquiries which refer to Religion and Faith resting on Revelation. The voluntary faculties cannot procure reception into the mind, of any thing of a moral nature, unless it has been evidenced through the exercise of the rational faculties: and true Religion is nothing but the entire sum of all the moral precepts of reason, with relation to God considered as the Supreme Lawgiver,

verse.

the Being of infinite holiness, and the righteous Ruler of the uniWhat reason cannot comprehend, it is capable of assigning the rational grounds why it cannot but it can comprehend every thing, of which the knowledge and practice are necessary to man, and connected with his salvation. But the philosophical line of investigation must be very carefully distinguished from the historical.'

Mr. Rose, we have seen, ascribes the blessing' of the Church of England being free (as he assumes) from errors in matters of faith, to the controlling form of our peculiar system of Church-government, and the binding power of the Articles which guide our faith, and the Liturgy which directs · our devotion.' Upon this most unfortunate passage, the spirit of which, however, runs through the whole work, the Translator makes these pungent observations.

To this encomium on the constitution of the English Church, a crowd of very serious objections may be made, to which both the system itself and its effects give but too much occasion. That system totally mistakes the nature of religion in its most general sense, and of Christianity in particular; and it produces bigotry, sanctimonious shew, intolerance, the lust of domination, and all those evils which are the necessary consequences of compulsory establishments in a country where, from other causes, the spirit of freedom has the ascendancy in both thought and action. Why are so many persons in England every year separating from the Established Church? What does the ever increasing number of Dissenters shew? And why are the most sagacious and upright English patriots opposed to the ecclesiastical form? The dominancy of any church is an impediment to the interests of religion, as it always resists reformation and improvement. And what is the state of morality and genuine piety among the lower classes of the people in England, who belong to the dominant church? The judicious constitution of a church has nothing in view but the advancement of virtue and piety towards God, the enlightening of the understanding and the moral improvement of the heart, by means of religious instruction: but is this the case in England? Who set themselves with the greatest pertinacity against the correction of the numerous abuses in church and state, in that country? Is it not the higher orders of the clergy?'

In the translation, (p. 63.) we find a note, referring to the English page 48., which appears to us to be little more than a naked avowal of Deism; for, though it recognizes the fact of a positive revelation, it denies its importance, and almost its utility. If the Writer may be considered as declaring the seutiments of the persons whom he is plainly enough anxious to defend, the question is decided. It is idle to fence and parry with Mr. Rose about little, or even great inaccuracies of statement: he has triumphantly gained his cause, by the very confession of the opposite advocate. Is it possible that this writer, or any of

his party, can attribute to their Natural Religion the production of genuine Gottseligkeit-(a most expressive word denoting the derivation of holy blessedness from the Adorable God) godliness? Or is not this language the mask of deception, habitually worn by some of the Neologists, to impose upon those around them who look only at words? Is it not a cover for the sentiment quoted by the Baron von Bulow from the Hours "of Devotion?" The Jew, who cries with devotion in his synagogue to the God of his fathers; the Turk, who, according to the doctrine of his supposed prophet, in the mosques of the east, bends his forehead to the dust before the Omni'present; the ignorant heathen, who, for want of better instruction, elevates his hands to an idol, at the same time that ⚫he fervently prays to the corruptible dust; he does not the 'less direct his prayer to the Most High God: then they are all sacred to me: they have all one God, to whom they cry, Allah, Abba, Father! They look with me, with tranquil expectation, to the same eternity.'*

The note in question is as follows:

Is not Natural Religion, which arises from the exercise of reason upon human nature and external objects, also a Divine revelation? And does it not inculcate every thing that men want to make them good men? Natural Religion lays down our duties to ourselves, our neighbours, and God, as the Christian Religion does; and the peculiar characters of the latter are some mysteries, which may indeed have a considerable value in experimental religion, but are not essentially requisite to genuine godliness. A complete view of the philosophical or moral religion may be found in the following lately published work, by Dr. Heinichen: A Representation of Natural Religion; with an Appendix on Rationalism and Supernaturalism, on Modern Mysticism, &c. for the use of all who love and value Truth, Honesty, and Virtue, and to whom God and mankind are dear. Leipzig, 1825. The Author of the Discourses has an altogether false conception of what Natural Religion is.'

Mr. Rose has said, If man must err, if he will not be content with the religion of Christ as Christ taught it, far, far ⚫ better for him is it, to believe too much, than too little.' The condition in this remark appears to render the whole nugatory; for what professor of Christianity (unless it were an unflinching Roman Catholic) would allow that condition to involve himself? All are, or profess to be, content with the religion of Christ as Christ taught it;' and to attain this for themselves, and to communicate it to all around them, is the sum of their wishes. But let us hear the acute Translator.

• Seventh Report of the Continental Society, 1825. p. 36.

The too much and the too little in believing, signify nothing. What we believe, ought to be something which avails to the moral improvement of the heart, and thus be necessary to eternal salvation. Consequently, it is not indifferent what and how much men believe. Believing too much, oppresses the understanding, and leads to su perstition. What we believe, must be substantiated by evidence; or else it will become the parent of a mass of error under the name of faith; and this will lend its aid, in some cases to superstition, and in others to infidelity. Believing [or faith] is a holding something to be true, upon subjective grounds apprehended to be sufficient; and it is either an historical or a moral faith. The former rests upon external matters of fact: and, as also the Christian religion depends upon the historical faith, the facts of which must be established by proof, the latter [i. e. the moral faith] cannot be at variance with nor set aside the other, since it must equally contribute to the spiritual benefit of the soul, which is only another expression for the moral improvement of the heart.'

It is, we believe, an undeniable fact, that some persons in Switzerland and Germany, aroused to a serious consideration of their relations to God and eternity, and having been repulsed, scorned, and disgusted, in their solemn inquiries, by the Neological infidelity of Protestant clergymen, have fled for relief and consolation to the Papal communion. This may well have taken place where the sublime piety of Count Stohlberg has been made known; or where such Catholic clergymen as Boos, Gosner, Lindel, and Van Ess have been, with apostolic light and unction, "testifying the gospel of the grace "of God." In reference to these facts, Mr. Rose says:

It is on record, that some sought, in the bosom of a Church which, in the midst of all its dreadful corruptions, at least possessed the form and retained the leading doctrines of a true church, the peace which they sought in vain amid the endless variations of the Protestant Churches of Germany, and their gradual renunciation of every doctrine of Christianity. p. 101.

Upon this passage, the German version has the following Note, not by the Translator, but by one of his contributors.

This is

The transition from one religion to another, is a step which requires the deepest consideration, and which those who take, seldom reflect upon sufficiently. The first and most important consideration for every man, in this matter, is the inquiry after TRUTH. what every man is bound to seek, and to lay as the basis of his religion and his religious convictions. The Christian religion is founded upon the New Testament; from it, therefore, must be ascertained, by means of Exegesis [the grammatical explanation of the sacred text], history, and philosophy, what is Christian truth, what Jesus taught, and what conduces to the spiritual benefit of the soul. Protestants acknowledge these data, and lay them as the foundation of