contrary to every dictate of reafon, and every fentiment of the human heart, we are perfuaded, that it hath no foundation in the facred writings. The ftrongest expreffions of fcriptare, upon the fubject, amount to no more than this, that fuch as are finally and incorrigibly wicked fhall, at length, be punished with everlafting destruction. The wages of fin is death; while eternal life fhall be the portion of the upright. The fermons against Popery, in the fourth volume, which are thirteen in number, contain a very judicious display and refutation of the principal tenets of the church of Rome, and may be deemed particularly feasonable at the prefent juncture. In the last of these fermons, Dr. Pearce confiders that defcription given by St. Paul, of a heretic, in his Epiftle to Titus (Tit. iii. 10, 11.), which hath occafioned fo much controverfy among divines, and the explication of which hath been found fo difficult. As our Right Reverend Author feems to have been fingularly happy in explaining who the heretic meant by the Apoftle was, and how fuch a heretic might be faid to be condemned of himself, we fhall lay that part of the Sermon before our readers: To begin then with the first of these heads, and to fhew you what St. Paul most probably meant by an beretick in this place., And for doing this we must look back to the words immediately preceding the text, which, we may fairly fuppofe, led the Apostle to give this direction to Titus. His words are thefe, Avoid foolif queftions and genealogies, and contentions, and frivings about the law: for they are unprofitable and vain *. From whence we may gather, that the perfons who are charged as introducing into the Church of Chrift thefe foolish questions and privings about the law, were some of the Jewish converts to Christianity; no others, but these, having any fuch zeal for the law of Mofes, here called the law. And this we find confirmed by what St. Paul fays in his Epistle to Titus; where he exprefsly warns him, not to give heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn from the truth and farther fays, that there were then many unruly and vain talkers, and deceivers, especially they of the circumcifion 1. From all which laid together, it feems highly probable, that the man, whom St. Paul in the text diftinguishes by the name of Heretick, was one of thofe Judaizing Chriftians, who living in communion with the church of Christ, taught fuch things for duties under the gospel, as had no warrant from the doctrine of the gospel: particularly, that fome of the Mofaic laws and ceremonies were neceflary to be obferved and practifed by all Chriflians. Every one who reads St. Paul's Epistles with any attention, will find, that fome of thofe Jewish converts infifted upon it as a necessary duty, that the Gentile converts fhould be circumcifed, that they should keep the feats of the new moons, and should obferve the Mofaical dittinction of meats: And he will there fee, with what zeal and • Titus iii. 9. † lbid. i. 14. ‡ Ibid. 10. what what force of reafoning the Apoftle endeavours to throw this yoke from off the necks of thofe Heathens who had embraced Christianity. Such then was the Heretick moft probably of whom St. Paul fpeaks in the text; and his berefy confifted in his raifing fuch foolifo questions, and giving occafion to fuch firivings about the law, as tended to make men look upon thofe things as the will of God, which, under the gospel-covenant, were no better than the unwarranted commandments of men. I proceed, fecondly, to fhew you in what fenfe it seems most probable that St. Paul reprefents this Judaizing Heretick as one, whom Titus knew to be not only fubverted, but to fin, being condemned of himself. The chief difficulty in the words of the text, is, to find out what the Apottle, moft probably, meant by this Heretick's being condemned of himself, in fuch a fenfe as that Titus might be fuppofed to know it; for the Apoftle fays to him, knowing, that he, that is fuch, is fubverted, and finneth, being condemned of himself. Is it, that this Heretick taught for the true doctrines of the gospel, what he himself knew in his own confcience to be falfe doctrines? This is one fenfe given by the expreffion of the text; and in this fenfe he was properly condemned of himself: but then it may be jully asked, how Titus could know this? The Heretick himself knew at plainly but how could Titus be affured, that the wicked teacher was thus condemned of himself, unless we fuppofe that he had a perfect knowledge of the fecrets of his heart? And is this to be fuppofed as a gift vouchsafed by heaven to Titus, when we do not find that, in ordinary cafes at leaft, it was a power communicated even to the Apostles themselves? They speak of this commonly as of a divine perfection: thus, at the meeting of the Apostles in council at Jerufalem, St. Peter introduces his fpeech with faying, God which knoweth the hearts, &c. The whole body of the Apostles feem to have difclaimed any fuch power in themselves, by their applying themselves to God, that he would direct them in their choice of a rew Apofile, and faying, Thou Lord, who knoweft the hearts of all men, fher awhether of these two thou haft chosen †. Or, is it St. Paul's meaning in the text, that fuch a Heretick condemned himself, i. e. accufed or bore witness against himself, becaufe he openly maintained his falfe doctrine, and endeavoured to propagate it, to all around him? This fenfe Dr. Folter, and other learned men have given to the words condemned of himjelf. And it is true that Titus, or any one elfe without knowing that the Heretick knew his doctrine to be falfe, might know that he was thus condemned. But then in this cafe the Heretick was only condemned of his actions, not of himself, i. e. not of the teftimony of his own mind. He might believe his doctrine to be true, though his actions condemned him, or witneffed against him for openly teaching and fpreading it. Befides, this would be only a circumftance attending his fin and aggravating it: it would not be the formal caufe or the ground of his fin, as the Apoftle feems to fuppofe it was, when he fays, that he Acts xv. 8. ↑ Ibid. i. 24. finneth, finneth, being condemned of himself; i. e. in this his fin confifteth principally, that he is felf-condemned in what he teaches. • To find out then the true meaning of the expreffion, as applied in the text to an Heretick, it must be remembered, that it is a Judaizing Heretick, of whom the Apostle fpeaks, one who endeavoured to lay upon the Gentile converts to Chriftianity, as a neceffary part of their duty, thofe obfervances which at that time stood only upon the foundation of the commandments of men. ⚫ Very few of the books of the New Teftament were written at the time when St. Paul gave this Rule to Titus; and it is not improble that in the Island of Crete where Titus was then Bishop, Chriftianity was no otherwife known than by teaching, I mean teaching in oppofition to writing. But, however that was, we find the Apostles always laying it down as a fure rule, whereby their converts might diftinguish between what were the doctrines of the gospel, and what were the mere commandments of men, that thofe converts had been taught and had received the doctrines of the gospel from the Apostles themselves, or from fuch teachers as had been fent to them by the Apoftles: whereas fuch as were the mere commandments of men had never been taught to them by any Apostle, or Preacher authorised by an Apoftle; but were, in those who taught them, the entire fations of their own brains, the workings of their own fancies. On this account St. Paul commends the Corinthians for keeping the ordinances, as he had delivered them unto them*. And he calls upon the Theffalonians to ftand faft and hold the traditions, which they had been taught either by his word, or his epifle +. The fame Apofle exhorts Timothy to keep that which was committed to bis truft, avoiding profane and vain babblings ‡: and in this very epiftle to Titus he directs, that a Bishop fhould hold fast the faithful word, as he had been taught §. In the 2d epifle to Timothy he charges him in these words, Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned, and hast been affured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them and in the fame epifle he fays, foolish and unlearned questions avoid **, i. e. queftions not learned by any Chriftian at his inftruction upon entrance into Christianity. And this is the language of the other Apoftles: for St. John advifes, that if any man brought not the doctrine, which they had learned of him, they should not receive him into their houses ++. And (to quote no more paffages in fo plain a cafe) when St. Jude exhorts Chriftians, that they fhould earnestly contend for the faith, he points out the true faith by faying, that it was that which was once delivered to the faints 11. Whatsoever Chriftian therefore in Crete (under Titus's government) or in any other part of the Church, taught as an article of faith or rule of practice received by him from fome Apoftle or apoftolical Preacher, what he had not received as fuch from any Apostle or • 1 Cor. xi. 2. + 2 Theff. xi. 15. See alfo Gal. i. 9, 11, 12. and 2. Tim. i. 14, 15. and 2 Tim. ii. 2. and Rev. iii. 3. 1 Tim. vi. 20. *Ibid. ii. 23. tt z John 10. 2 Tim. iii. 14. See Dr. Clark's Sermons, vol. viii. page 171. Titus i. 9. apoftolical Preacher, was fubverted and turned from the truth; as they are faid to fubvert men's fouls; who taught as neceffary to be practifed by the Gentile converts, what the Apostles gave no fuch commandment for; and fuch an Heretick finned, likewife being condemned himself, because he knew in his confcience, that he had received no fuch doctrine, and had been taught no fuch practice from any perfon authorifed either by Chrift or by his Apoftles, to teach the will of God to mankind. So that he was jelf-condemned in the ftrict fenfe of the word, because he taught a lie: even if the doctrine itself were fuppofed to be true, yet it was falfe that he had received such a doârine from them; and therefore when he taught it as thus received, he flood condemned by the teftimony of his own mind. And this Titus might very well know, as the text fays he did, and as the paffages which I just now cited from the epiftles of three Apostles fuppofe, that every one of their converts might do; without our fuppofing him to have any knowledge of the Heretick's heart: for the question is about a fact; not about the truth of the doctrine which the Heretick taught, but about this point, whether he had ever received any fuch doctrine as he taught? and Titus could be very fure, that he could produce no authentic and infpired teacher of the gofpel for his author, and that therefore he was condemned of himfe'f, or, in other words, that he was inwardly confcious of his having no fach warrant for his doctrine as he pretended.' Without profeffing to coincide with every doctrinal fentiment, which may occafionally have been advanced by Bifhop Pearce, in thefe four volumes of Difcourfes, we can truly fay, that they contain a fund of matter, on fubjects of the highest importance to the temporal and fpiritual welfare of men; and that they will afford great inftruction and edification to the clergy of every denomination, and to private chriftians. In the ftyle, our Prelate hath not been ambitious of ornament, but hath contented himself with being perfpicuous, plain, and accurate. Such a mode of compofition, perhaps, beft agrees with the dignity of truth, and the fimplicity of the gofpel. ART. IX. An Inquiry into the Caufes that have hitherto retarded the Advancement of Agriculture in Europe: With Hints for removing the Circumftances that have chiefly obftructed its Progrefs. By James Anderfon. 4to. 3s. Edinburgh printed, and fold by Cadell in London. 1779. T is univerfally allowed that agriculture is the most useful of all arts; and as it is an art abfolutely neceffary to the very existence of man in a state of civil fociety, it appears a little furprising that it fhould not have been carried nearly to its ultimate degree of perfection long before the prefent period; nor can we help regretting, that while fo much ingenuity has been exerted in bringing to maturity many other arts of less utility to mankind, this fhould have been fuffered to remain in its prefent imperfect state. 'But But when we reflect that true knowledge can only be attained by accurate and judicious experiments; when we con template the immenfity of objects that require our attention in agriculture; when we advert to the difficulty of devifing proper experiments for elucidating every feparate article, and the length of time that is required for each of thefe experiments, together with the numberlefs circumftances that may affect their refult, and the difficulty of attending to all thefe circumftances, and making proper allowances for them, our wonder is indeed abated, but our regret continues; and we cannot help earnestly wifhing that fome method could be devised for facilitating experi ments in agriculture, and of rendering them of more univerfal utility. Such is the exordium of the work before us; and it is be lieved that every man of found judgment will join with our Author in wishing fuccefs to every attempt that hath such a valuable end in view. The Author of this work is already fo well known to the Public by his former performances, as renders any praises on our part unneceffary. We obferve in it the fame candour of difquifition, the fame beneficence of intention, and the fame depth of investigation which are fo confpicuous in his other works. There is too, obfervable in this, as in all his other writings, a cautious diffidence, and an unceafing attention to guard against every circumftance that may lead to error, which gives to his writings the appearance of a minutenefs of detail, of which he is obvioufly fenfible, and which he does not feem to think will contribute to their popularity. Perhaps he is right. But this circumstance will add to their durability, and their utility; objects of much higher moment than the Auctuating breath of popular applause. The ftate of our knowledge in agriculture, Mr. Anderson obferves, is as yet extremely limited but, although he does not think that this will be fo univerfally acknowledged for an undoubted truth as it ought to be, he declines giving a formal proof of it, because he thinks the experience of every attentive obferver will foon convince him of it, and because he himself had exhibited proofs of it, as to fome particular branches of agriculture, in a former work. We, for our own part, had but a limited idea of the very imperfect state of our knowledge in this art, till we had perufed the treatife before us. We thought that England not only far excelled all other nations in the knowledge of agriculture, but that he had even made confiderable Effays relating to Agriculture and Rural Affairs, and Obfervations on the Means of exciting a Spirit of national Industry, &c. See Review, vols. Ivii. and lviii. advances |