Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

1. The standard inch, foot, yard, acre, and mile, remain the same as at present. There is no change therefore in what is called long measure, and the measures deduced from it. 2. The pound, ounce, and pennyweight troy, and the pound, ounce, and dram avoirdupois, also remain the same as at present. The pound troy is declared to be the unit from which all others are to be derived. It contains 5,760 grains; and the ounce troy 480 grains. The pound avoirdupois contains 7000 troy grains, and the ounce avoirdupois 437. Thus we have still two different pounds, and two different ounce weights, an inconvenience which we could have wished that the act had remedied. As a means of restoring the weights, if they should be lost, the cubic inch of distilled water is declared to be equal in weight to 252.458 grains-the barometer being at 30 inches, and the thermometer at 62°. 3. The sole difference between the new system and the old is in the gallon and the measures deduced from it. The new or imperial gallon is declared to contain ten pounds avoirdupois of distilled water-the temperature and pressure being as above. It contains 277, or, more correctly, 277.27 cubic inches. The present wine gallon contains 231, and the present ale gallon 282 cubic inches. It follows that the new imperial gallon is to the old wine gallon as 6 to 5, and to the old ale gallon as 47 to 48, neglecting minute fractions. To convert wine gallons into imperial gallons, deduct one-sixth; to convert imperial gallons into wine gallons, add one-fifth. To convert ale gallons into imperial gallons, add 1-47 part; to convert imperial gallons into ale gallons, deduct 1-48th part. The new pint and quart being declared to be respectively the 8th and 4th part of the new gallon, bear the same proportion to the old pint and quart as the new gallon does to the old gallon. Two gallons are declared to be a peck, and eight gallons a bushel, as at present. But the proportions here are not the same as in the case of the pint

and quart, because the old gallon for dry measure is neither the wine nor the ale gallon, but a gallon of 268.8 cubic inches. The imperial peck and bushel are therefore to the old Winchester peck and bushel as 268.8 to 277.27. Hence to convert Winchester bushels into imperial bushels, deduct one 33d part; and to convert imperial into Winchester add one 32d part. This is sufficiently near for practical purposes: the sum to be added is correctly 1-31.73. The old Winchester bushel contains 2150.42 cubic inches; the new contains 2218.16. The new or imperial quarter has the same ratio to the old quarter, as the new bushel has to the old bushel. The standard measure of capacity for coals, culm, lime, fish, potatoes, or fruit, and all other goods and things commonly sold by heap measure, is to be the aforesaid bushel, containing 80 pounds avoirdupois of water, being made round with an even bottom, and being 19 inches and a half in diameter, the goods to be heaped up to the form of a cone, of the height of at least six inches. Three bushels shall be a sack, and twelve such sacks a chaldron. It is not obligatory on persons to buy and sell by these measures: they may use the old measures, but, when this is done, the ratio which the measures used bear to the new standard measure must be specified, otherwise the contract of agreement is void. This will render it necessary to refer to the new measures in all written bargains. Bargains made without a special reference to some other measures are held to be made according to the new measure. The existing weights and measures may be used if marked, so as to shew the proportion they have to the standard measures and weights, but not otherwise. All weights and measures made after the first of Jauuary, 1826, are to be conformable to the new standard. The act will be of great use in regulating this hitherto confused branch of public economy.

ECCLESIASTICAL PREFERMENTS.

Very Rev. Vesey Fitzgerald, Dean of Emby, Rector of Castleraghan, co. Cavan, to the Deanery of Kilmore, vice Magenis, deceased.

Rev. Dr. Holland, Rector of Poynings, to be Precentor of Chichester Cathedral, vice Toghill, deceased.

Rev. Marcus Beresford, Kildallen R. vice Magenis, deceased.

York.

Rev. Wm. H. Dixon, Wistow V. co. Rev. James Hoste, Barwick, V. Nor

folk.

Rev. W. C. Madden, Christ's Church, Woodhouse, P. C. near Huddersfield, co. York.

Rev. K. C. Packman, Langdon Hills R. Essex.

Rev. George Norman Gale, Corse C. Rev. G. Palmer, Parham R. Sussex. Rev. G. Pearson, B. D. Castle Camps R. Camb.

Rev. Benj. Pulleyne, Sherringham. V. Norf.

Rev. J. Arundel Radford, Nymet Rowland and Lapford RR. Devon. Rev. W. Russell, Chiddingley R. Sussex. Rev. Adam Sedgwick, Woodwardian Professor Shudy Camps R. Camb. Hon. and Rev. Adolphus-Augustus Turnour, Garveston R. Norfolk.

Rev. Dav. Williams, S. C. L. St. Mary's Church, C. Brecknock.

Rev. W. Corbett Wilson, jun. Bozeatcum-Strixton V. Northamptonshire.

Rev. J. Wood, Santhorpe V. Norfolk. Rev. J. W. Worthington, Evening Lecturer at All-Hallows, London.

Hon. and Rev. Dawson Massy, to be Dom. Chap. to his brother Lord Massy. Rev. J. Brown, Chap. to Nor. County Gaol.

Rev. Henry Fielding, Chaplain to Salford New Bailey Prison.

Rev. Samuel Paynter, Clerk, Domestic Chaplain to the Right Hon. the Earl of Cassillis.

Rev. Dr. Lawrence Adamson to the Church and Parish of Cupar, Kirk of Scotland, vice Dr. Campbell, dec.

Rev. N. M'Leod, Church and Par. of Campsie, co. Glasgow, vice Lapslie, dec. Rev. Edw. Hyde Cosens, Chap. to Shepton Mallett House of Correction.

Rev. J. Baldwin, Leyland V. Lanc. Rev. Wm. Buckland, B. D. F.R.S. P.G.S. Stoke Charity R. Hants.

Rev. Geo. Chandler, D.C.L. Allsaints R. Mary-le-bone.

Rev. J. Corrie, Morcott R. Rutland. Rev. G. Dixon, Tynemouth V. Northumberland.

Rev. P. Felix, Easton Neston V. Northamptonshire.

Rev. W. Harries, Amroth V. Pem broke.

Rev. Jas. Robertson Holcombe, Steventon V. Bucks.

Rev. Lanc. Ch. Lee, Wootton R. Oxford.

Rev. R. Churchman Long, Swainsthorpe, R. Norfolk.

Rev. Alex. Macarthur, Minister of Dairsie.

Rev. Dav. Fred. Markham, Addingham V. Cumberland.

Rev. J. Hollier Stephenson, Dengie R. Essex, vice Faithfull, resigned.

Rev. Ric. Bohun Tomkyns, B.C.L. Saham Tony R. Norfolk.

Rev. Fred. Twisleton, Broadwell cum Addlestrop R.vice Hon. Dr. Twisleton,dec. Rev. G. Williams, Sedgberrow R. Worcestershire.

Rev. J. W. D. Merest, Dom. Chap. to the Duke of Grafton.

Rev. Thos. Prince, D. D. elected Chaplain to the British Residents at the Hague.

Rev. J. B. Byers, Curate of Carmarthen, to the Vicarage of Nantmel, with Llanyre; vice Wm. Hewson, to St. David's.

Rev. R. W. Bamford, Bishopstone V. Durham.

Rev. Chas. Bowle, Milborne Port V. Somerset, vice Bp. of Hereford, res. Rev. Sam. Carr, Little Eversden R. Cambridge, vice Heaton, dec.

Rev. Cobb, Burmarsh V. Kent. Rev. Miles Coyle, A. M., Monningtonn-Wye R. Hereford.

on

Rev. Julius Deeds, M. A. Orlingbury R. Northamptonsh. vice Whitehouse. Rev. Wm. Creasy Drew, Sandringham R. with Babingley annexed, Norfolk.

Rev. R. Duffield, B. D. Impington V. Cambridge, vice Baker, res.

Rev. Thomas Hawes, Thorndon R. Suffolk.

ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS.

CAJITAN; J. T.; CLERICUS; G. C. G.; M. S.; A CONSTANT READER; ECCLESIÆ RECTOR; C. T.; and a correspondent who signs himself AMATOR VERITATIS, are under consideration.

We have often considered the plan suggested by a COUNTRY CURATE; but upon attempting to reduce it to practice have found it attended with considerable difficulties.

We were acquainted with one at least of the publications alluded to by S. C.; but our publisher could not procure a copy of it. It does not appear to us necessary at present to renew the discussion.

In reply to two or three correspondents, we have to state, that we do not insert anonymous Reviews; and still less pledge ourselves to admit them before we see them. G. B.'s direction shall be attended to.

S. Z. had better propose his difficulty to some judicious friend.

The Committee of the Language Institution will find that the substance of their Address has already appeared in our pages, with cordial approbation of the Society's object.

ERRATUM.

Page 613, col. 1, line 7, instead of for, read to.

CHRISTIAN OBSERVER.

No. 288.]

DECEMBER, 1825. [No. 12. Vol. XXV.

RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

MANKIND RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR RELIGIOUS OPINIONS.

(Continued from p. 666.)

It was proposed, in a former paper, to shew the responsibility of mankind for their religious opinions, by a series of remarks bearing upon two propositions; the consideration of the former of which will form the subject of the present communication, reserving the discussion of the second to another Number.

The proposition now to be examined is, that immorality or unholiness either of heart or life has a powerful influence in depraving the judgment in matters of religion. The effect of unholiness of heart and life, in producing false judgment in matters of faith, will be most conspicuously, though by no means exclusively, seen in the case of professed infidels. Among those who have rejected the evidences for the truth of the Gospel, where shall we find an individual who has conscientiously submitted to its allow edly excellent moral restraints? If we except a very few persons, whom literary habits, or a virtuous education, or self-respect, or an ostensible station in society, or a natural inertness of temperament, or a secret misgiving of conscience, may have restrained from the grosser excesses of vicious indulgence, where shall we discover a professed infidel who does not prove by his conduct that his rejection of the Gospel is so closely connected with laxity of principle, or immorality of life, as to furnish the strongest reason to conclude, that the one is the chief CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 288.

cause of the other;-that he has discarded religion precisely because he disrelishes its inhibitions and commands? The mere circumstance of the co-existence of two facts does not indeed necessarily prove their connexion as cause and effect: but where this connexion is frequent and striking, it furnishes a strong prima facie presumption; and that presumption is increased, we may say, to certainty, when, as in the case under consideration, powerful à priori reasons may be assigned why that effect ought to follow, which we find in point of fact does actually follow, such and such causes. In the late inundation of irreligious writings, for example, we saw infidelity joined in striking and intimate union with a spirit of detraction, sedition, blasphemy, and numerous other things contrary to sound" (that is, to Christian) "doctrine." And can we doubt that these evil propensities were among the exciting causes of that infidelity; which, in its turn, would naturally give birth to a new progeny of vices? Is it a circumstance peculiar to theology, that what men dislike, they easily persuade themselves to disbelieve? Is it extraordinary that immorality should nurture irreligion? Would it not even be difficult to believe that extreme wickedness could exist without eventually generating infidelity, even if it did not find infidelity already at hand to assist its efforts, by blotting out the fearful prospect of a future retribution ?

66

But we need not resort to extreme cases in proof of the powerful 5 A

[ocr errors]

were

effects of unholiness of heart and life in inclining men to a rejection of the Gospel; for as there are crimes of less malignant aspect than treason and murder, so also there are various approaches towards infidelity of a more specious character than the revolting blasphemies of a profligate Atheism. There is not an anti-christian or an unchristian principle, which may not lead to a corresponding anti-christian or unchristian creed. All the malignant passions, for example, may have this effect; as we find from Acts xiii. where we are informed (ver. 48), that the Gentiles " glad, and glorified the word of the Lord, and believed; but the Jews (ver. 45), "being filled with envy, spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming." The selfish passions also may produce the same effect. Thus "the Pharisees, who were covetous, heard all these things, and derided him." (Luke xvi. 14.) The proud and vain and ambitious passions also may have the same effect. 66 They did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." "How can ye believe that have honour one of another?" Thus enmity, covetousness, vain glory, to which various other evil principles might be added, are proved by scriptural testimony to be capable of subverting faith, and even of conducting men to the awful extremes of contradiction, derision, and blasphemy.

It would be easy to proceed to shew still more specifically, both by Scripture and fact, the injurious influence of sinful dispositions and habits in alienating the mind, not only from the love, but also from the understanding, as well as the belief, of the truth. To these sources may we also usually trace up those less glaring species of latent infidelity which often display their existence in the form of Antinomianism, Socinianism, or kindred

heresies. Even where there is no temptation to palliate the enormities of a profligate life, there may be secret sins, sins of a somewhat decorous kind, sins of the heart or sins of the intellect, which may greatly impede the spiritual perceptions, as well as vitiate the spiritual taste. In casting a glance over the names of the most celebrated persons who have enrolled themselves among the abettors of heterodox principles in religion, we shall discover in one a stubborn pertinacity which renders the admission of unwelcome truth into a mind under its influence morally impossible; in another, a hardihood which shrinks at no consequences, even though the declarations of God himself should be disputed and traduced before the bar of human presumption; in a third, a levity; in a fourth, a self-conceit; in a fifth, a petulance; in a sixth, a fearless self-confidence; in a seventh, a proud dictatorial dogmatism;—in all, a mental aversion to Divine truth, which must inevitably prevent a devout submission to scriptural authority, and the establishment of just and sober conclusions from scriptural premises.

Nor are such dispositions and habits less really culpable in the sight of God than those sins which men of the world look upon with greater abhorrence. Pride, in particular, in all its shapes, is one of the most offensive and injurious of evils; and in no form more so than when it wears the semblance of intellectual imperiousness. This species of pride has, from the first ages of the Gospel to the present moment, been always averse to " the truth as it is in Jesus." The Scribes and Pharisees, confiding in their boasted attainments, and exclaiming," Are we blind also? preferred remaining among those self-sufficient "wise and prudent" to whom the Gospel was hidden, to being numbered among those "babes" in simplicity to whom it pleased God to reveal it. Saint Paul alludes to

the same evil disposition of mind, when, in writing to the Corinthians, he says," The preaching of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe." A humble and conscientious use of the powers of the human understanding and of the best aids of literature, is indeed eminently serviceable in the cause of truth; for Christianity has nothing to fear from the most rigid scrutiny but the misdirection or perversion of the intellect and no misdirection or perversion is more baneful than that which springs from self-sufficiency-is one of the most frequent causes of false judgment in matters of faith. How often do we find, even in the case of persons who are not vicious in their lives,nay, who perhaps preserve a respectable decorum of conduct,that the heart is prejudiced against a practical admission of Divine Truth, at least of its more peculiar and mysterious doctrines, on account of the Scriptures not making their appeal to mankind in such a manner as to gratify the pride of the intellect. They find themselves required to believe promptly and implicitly upon the strength of a Divine declaration; they are enjoined to admit, without hesitation or scruple, many things that they cannot fully understand; and they are invited, yea, commanded, on pain of eternal condemnation, to embrace exactly the same faith which has been professed by thousands of the most illiterate of mankind;-in common, it is true, with men of the highest order of thought,

and the most extensive range of literature; but still a faith which owns no submission to human intellect, and refuses to bow its lofty claims before the tribunal of any created mind, however wide its grasp or exalted its powers. A mind vain of its intellectual superiority, and unsubdued by the grace of God, will not easily be persuaded to submit to this; it will recoil from such an unreserved self-dedication; it will demand something more conciliating to the pride of the human heart; and will venture peremptorily to denounce as false, whatever cannot be inferred by the deductions of uninspired reason, or, at least, which, when revealed, cannot be fathomed or fortified by human philosophy.

To illustrate the subject by an example-To what but to this cause, combining indeed with some other subordinate ones, must we attribute the vehement opposition which has always been carried on against that fundamental article of the Christian system, and of our Protestant Church, the doctrine of justification solely by faith? The humble practical Christian, whether poor or rich, illiterate or learned, discovers no moral danger attending this doctrine: so far from it, he feels it to be in his own case, and observes it to be in the case of others, not only "very full of comfort," but a powerful motive to love, to gratitude, and to good works; and he is perfectly convinced, that if any persons would so far abuse it as to say, "Let us sin that grace may abound," they understand not its real nature-much less are they among those who have a scriptural right to take to themselves the blessings which it exhibits. But the mere intellectual reasoner, experiencing nothing of the practical effects of the Gospel in his own soul, recoils, or professes to recoil, at such a doctrine. It is not enough to prove that it is revealed in the sacred Scriptures; it must also comport with his warmly cherished

[merged small][ocr errors]
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »