a confidant of the Prince of Orange, and took a considerable part in those political intrigues against James's go. vernment, which, being successful, could not be punished as a rebellion, but triumphed in a revolution. The information collected, during his travels, he had communicated to his friend Mr. Robert Boyle, in five Letters. These were first printed at Rotterdam in 1686, and soon after in England, but immediately suppressed. On the contrary, this translation of the Reflexions, was, as might have been expected, readily encouraged. On the second page is the following Imprimatur: "March 27, 1688. This may be printed. Ro. L'Estrange." A learned foreigner, who had resided for several years, in an official capacity at Rome, was easily prepared to correct, on many occasions, the hasty remarks en passant of an English traveller, and a domestic of the Pope would have no desire to spare the author of " The History of the Reformation," but rather to watch for his halting. M. Schelstrate has, indeed, offered several observations which, however unfriendly in design, might be usefully attached to Burnet's Travels. I shall, however, confiue any farther extracts to those passages which respect the Heavenly Witnesses. These do not appear to have found an advocate, even in the Librarian of the Vatican. It is well known that this text was one of the "Two notable Corruptions of Scripture," of which Sir Isaac Newton wrote "An Historical Account," published in the 5th Volume of his Works, by Horsley, p. 494, and in the late Mr. Matthews's Recorder, II. 182. Under S. xix. Newton says of the text, "Dr. Gilbert Burnet has lately, in the first letter of his Travels, noted it wanting in five" MSS. "kept at Strasburg, Zurich and Basil; one of which MSS. he reckons above 1000 years old, and the other four, about 800." The account which Dr. Burnet gave to his truly illustrious Correspondent, on that subject, is largely quoted and considered in the following passages. In his general view of "the argument of the first letter," M. Schelstrate says: "We must not forget a relation of our author concerning a passage, 1 Ep. John v. 7, There are three that bear witness in Heaven, the Father, &c. Upon which account our author perused manuscript bibles among the Switzers and in Italy The sum is this: in the Greek copies, which he saw, that verse is not found, nor in many of the Latin, though 800 or 900 years old, in some, that it was written but in another hand. That it is found in the book of Geneva, and also in the Venetian Library of St. Mark, and in the Florentine of St. Laurence, and in one of four at Strasburg. That in all these the eighth verse is misplaced, and joined unto it by the word sicut. But he admires that it is omitted even in those, before which St. Jerome's Preface is read, which defends that passage against the Arians; and that Erasmus did not add that Preface to his edition of St. Jerome, when yet he saw it in a manuscript at Basil, and the same is found in many more. By the way he observes, that in the Vatican Library there are no copies of the Bible above 400 years old, except a Greek one, which is accounted, but only by conjecture, to be of 1400 years' standing." P. 10. The Reflector afterwards enters into the subject more at large in the following quotations and comments. "I have taken some pains in my Travels to examine all the ancient MSŚ. of the New Testament, concerning that doubted passage of St. John's Epistle: There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Spirit, and these Three are One.' Bullinger doubted much of it because he found it not in an ancient Latin MS. at Zurich, which seems to be about 800 years old: for it is written in that hand, that began to be used in Charles the Great's time. I turned the MS. and found the passage was not there, but this was certainly the error or omission of the copier. [P. 44. Ed. 1737.] "The Doctor confidently affirms, that the copier, either out of error or negligence, had omitted that doubted passage; there are Three, &c. which he found not in the ancient MS. at Zurich, and he gives this reason for it, because before the general Epistles in that MS. the Preface of St. Jerome is to be found, in which he says, that he was the more exact in that transla tion, that so he might discover the fraud of the Arians, who had struck out that passage concerning the Trinity. [[d.] But what's all this? Jerome says he was very exact, that he might discover the cheat of the Arians; hot that he had effectually done it; and, indeed, that want of this place fully satisfies us of the contrary. And, certainly, this opinion is much more rational than that of the Doctor, who supposes it was omitted by the error of the copier. For it is very unlikely that he should be so stupid or negligent, to leave out those very things upon whose account the translation was chiefly undertaken, as the Preface would inform him: but there needs not much confutation, since our author obligingly himself has taken the pains to do it. For he says, that in many other places he hath seen ancient MS. Bibles which have wanted that passage; though the same Preface of St. Jerome hath been prefixed to them. And first he mentions those of Basil. Take his very words, 'There are two Greek MSS. of the Epistles at Basil that seem to be about 500 years old, in neither of which this passage is to be found: they have also an ancient Latin Bible, which is about 800 years old, in which, though St. Jerome's Prologue is inserted, yet this passage is wanting. Secondly, those at Strasburg at Strasburg I saw four very ancient MSS. of the New Testament in Latin: three of these seem to be about the time of Charles the Great, but the fourth seemed to be much ancienter, and may belong to the seventh century: in it neither the Prologue nor the place is extant, but it is added at the foot of the page with another hand. In two of the other the Prologue is extant, but the place is not: only in one of them it is added in the margin." [Id. P. 45.] "Were so many copiers therefore exact in every thing else, and did they, through negligence, fail in the translation of this only passage; or, did they commit an error by joint consent? Nevertheless I do not say thus Dr. B. adds, "In the fourth, the Pro. logue is extant, so is the place likewise; but it comes after the verse of the other three and is joined to it thus, sicut tres sunt in cœlo." P. 45. much to defend Arianism, which is not indeed my sentiment, but to shew the cunningness and malignity of our author, who (as many others have done) seems to oppose that sect with such weak arguments, on purpose to establish it the better." Pp. 4548. M. Schelstrate appears to have supposed, that Jerome failed to “ discover the cheat of the Arians," because they had not been guilty of any fraud; and, upon the whole, he seems to have agreed with that learned priest of his communion, F. Simon, who gives up this text as unauthentic, in the 18th chapter of his Critical History, where he introduces Calvin explaining away the systematic importance of the passage, by declaring that the expression "Three are One, does not denote the Essence but the Consent." C. H. Pt. ii. p. 14. Bishop Burnet, in 1694, when he wrote the Exposition, was still only doubtful as to the authenticity of the text, and not, as these Roman Catholic divines appear to have been, convinced of the forgery. He thus writes on the first Article: "I do not insist on that contested passage of St. John's Epistle. There are great doubtings made about it. The main ground of doubting being the silence of the Fathers, who never made use of it in the disputes with the Arians and Macedonians. There are very considerable things urged on the other hand to support the authority of that passage; yet I think it is safer to build upon sure and indisputable ground: so I leave it to be maintained by others, who are more fully persuaded of its being authentical. There is no need of it. This matter is capable of a very full proof, whether that passage is believed to be a part of the Canon, or not." Whatever may be thought of the Bishop's " sure and indisputable grounds," on which to raise such a structure as a Trinity in Unity, be doubtless imagined that he had found "sure proof" of that dogma in the Scriptures. How unjust then, in the author of these Reflexions, to charge him with the "cunningness and malignity" of having served the cause of Arianism, by designedly opposing it with insufficient arguments! VERMICULUS. The Heavenly Witnesses and Becket's Shrine. SIR, Sept. 2nd, 1817. HAD occasion, lately, to look into "An Index to the Sermons pub. lished since the Restoration," 1751. This volume contains the texts and authors' names of the English sermons published, during about 90 years, by all denominations. It occurred to me, that I might profitably compare the attention paid to the forgery of the Heavenly Witnesses, with the use made of those universally received passages which clearly teach the apostolical doctrine of the Father and of Christ; at least in the opinion of that religious fraternity who, by leave of the sublime astronomical Christian Dr. Chalmers, are not yet come to nought, and with whom it would have brought no discredit on Sir Isaac Newton's memory to have more openly discovered his now well-known agreement. The result of my examination was the following: Three sermons had been preached and published during that period, on 1 Cor. viii. 6; Three on Ephes. iv. 6; Four on 1 Tim. ii. 5: but on 1 John v. 7, no less than Eleven. Nor indeed is it any subject of surprise that imposture should receive the homage due only to truth. Bishop Burnet in "The History of the Reformation," says of the Shrine of Becket, who" for 300 years was accounted one of the greatest saints in heaven," that "in one year there was offered at Christ's Altar, 3l. 2s. 6d. ; but at St. Thomas's 832l. 128. 6d." I. p. 233. VERBUM SAT. Boerhaave's Religions Opinions. SIR, Clapton, Aug. 17, 1817. T994), quotes, as uttered by "Mr. "saying," which A. R. (p. Bradbury, when he saw any one carried to execution," has been frequently attributed to the martyr John Bradford, probably on the authority of Fox. I suspect that your Correspondent has mistaken the name. It is a sentiment, which, however variously expressed, must be common to those who justly apprehend their condition as creatures of an Almighty Creator, who is all in all. I find it, in nearly the terms quoted by A. R. at the close of a passage in the short account of Boerhaave, in Latin, written by himself in the third person, and annexed by Dr. Burton, to his Life of that eminent physician and pious Christian. It is entitled, Commentariolus de Fumilia, Studiis, Vitæ cursu, e. propria Boerhaavii Manu conscrip tus, et post obitum inter ejusdem MSS. repertus. The eighteenth section to which I refer, may be thus rendered: He acknowledged the truths revealed in the Hebrew and Greek originals of the Sacred Scriptures, and on them alone relied for his salvation; taking every occasion to declare that the doctrines taught and exemplified by Jesus Christ, could alone afford tranquillity to the mind. He often expressed to his friends, that a diligent observance of the great precept of Moses, to love God and our neighbour, was the only security of mental peace, nor, exclusive of the sacred records, could he find any satisfaction. He devoutly worshiped the self-existent Deity, and desired to conceive of God, only as he had discovered himself. Thus content, he inquired no farther, lest he should wander into idolatry. He so acquiesced in the Divine will as to maintain, that it should be implicitly obeyed, and entirely and uniformly reverenced as a paramount authority. He was accustomed to compare others with himself, so that when he heard of criminals adjuged to capital punishment, he would often express these reflections: Who can say that they are not better than I? Or, if I am better, nothing, I freely confess, can be imputed to myself, but all must be attributed to the Divine goodness.* Deum "Doctrinam sacris literis Hebraice et Græce traditam, solam animæ salutarem et agnovit, et sensit. Omui opportunitate profitebatur disciplinam, quam Jesus Christus ore et vita expressit, unice tranamicis, pacem auimi haud reperiundam quillitatem dare menti. Semperque dixit nisi in magno Mosis præcepto de sincero amore Dei et hominis, bene observato. Neque extra sacra monumenta uspiam inveniri, quod mentem serenet. pius adoravit, qui est. Intelligere de Deo unice volebat id, quod Deus de se intelligit. Eo contentus ultra nibil requisivit, ne idoquiescebat, ut illius nullam omnino rationem indagandam putaret. Hanc unice supremam omnium legem esse contendebat, deliberata constantia perfectissime colendam. De aliis et se ipso ita sentiebat: ut quoties criminis reos ad pœnas lethales lolatria erraret. In voluntate Dei sic re Such was the Christian self-abase- being ridiculed for such a change," is, ment and the unsystematic theology of I am persuaded, quite unfounded. Boerhaave, who does not appear to With feelings, far estranged from the have been so ready to "follow the levity which would encourage ridicule, great wheel of the church," as our must his former associates, at least, learned physician, Sir Thomas Brown, contemplate the case of a Christian in Religio Medici, perhaps, ne idolola- brother, losing sight of the paternal tria erraret. It is, however, remark- character of a God, who is good to all, able that Boerhaave's summary of faith as Christ and his followers have so would have exactly suited a Larduer, fully declared him. And what indeed a Lindsey or any Christian who wor- is offered in exchange for this filial shiped one God and Father of all, ac- reliance, unless it be the selfish hope 'cording to apostolic authority, and to share in an exclusive favouritism, believed in the Man Christ Jesus, who which may well consist with the chawas sanctified and sent into the world, racter of an Almighty tyrant, for such, to declare, but in no sense whatever after all the palliations which can be to purchase the Divine mercy to the offered, is the God of Calvinism! penitent. J. T. R. Sep. 6, 1817. P.S. I have been attracted, in your last Number, to the interesting ac SIR, count from Clifton, (p. 481,) respect. IN ing the new opinions in theology, The letter-writer's expectation "of damnatos audiret, semper cogitaret, sæpe On the System of Malthus. Temple, Sept. 8, 1817- In his prodigious calculation of the possible increase of the species, Mr. Malthus supposes not only the removal of the most formidable obstacles to its progress, but the most favourable situation which we can imagine. In short, he depicts a state of society which, according to his own doctrines, could not possibly continue. He supposes, for his purpose, the nullity of his own conclusions. He estimates nothing but the natural power of the species to increase, unopposed by want of space or of food, unchecked by misery or vice, undestroyed by disease, accident or war. But when he comes to oppose to this astonishing progression, the possible increase of the means of subsistence for this stupendous population, he takes into account nothing but that which may easily happen. Time, space and circumstance, are immediately considered in making the estimate. In short, the first is a calculation of abstract power, the second of power limited by actual circumstance. But for this fundamental sophism, a geometrical ratio might as easily be shewn of the increase of food as of persons to consume it. In themselves, considered apart from impediments, vegetables have as great a tendency to multiply, or rather much greater, than man. The animals which serve us for food are many of them, by nature, rendered more fruitful. It is true, a point must arrive, when subsistence can increase no further, and when the population of the world shall retain its tendency to multiply. But, in the mean time, the boasted ratios, the arithmetical progression of food, and the geometrical progression of consumers, are mere chimeras. They are built, in the first instance, on the assumption of an inherent power which can never be brought into action; and, in the second, on a comparison of this abstraction with a capability within the powers of human enterprise. riods. Mr. Malthus himself repeatedly demonstrates this. He complains that governments have been hitherto actuated by a mistaken policy, and that instead of directing their wisdom to the depression, they have framed all their measures to promote the increase of their people. There is, in short, no connexion between war, disease, pestilence and vice, and the supposed difference between the ratio ou which the system of Mr. Malthus is founded. He has not shewn that the principle of population has, in any age or country, produced one great evil with which man has been visited. Instead of inferring from the evidence which he has adduced, that the tendency of man to unlimited increase has occasioned the miseries of the world, it would be much more logical to speak of it as a wise provision of heaven, without which the follies and crimes of luxury and ambition would have extinguished our race, and left the world a barren and voiceless solitude. The object of Mr. Malthus is, I ap- But the admirers of Mr. Malthus prehend, to establish, that the prin- will still, perhaps, contend that, supciple of population is the main-spring posing the checks to population reof human evils, and that as this fruit- moved, in consequence of an ameliful source of woe is inseparably con- oration of the human character, the nected with our nature, all hopes of principle will supply their place like the material improvement of the world the serpent of Aaron. They will are visionary and baseless. Now, maintain that if vice is diminished, if what is the kind of evidence by which wars cease, if contentions are hushed this proposition is supported? A for ever, the influx of human beings mass of facts is brought forward tend- into the world will only change withing to shew that in every known out lessening its miseries. Does not country, and every state of society, all experience, all history, all knowthere are certain existing evils; vice, ledge, contradict this blasting phanmisery, war, crowded cities and un- tom? All the improvements which wholesome labours; which tend to the world has made, every step from repress the increase of human life, or savage to social life, every gradation to limit its duration. Now, the reader from barbarism to refinement, proves is led by a chain of rapid deduction to that it is utterly destitute of truth. suppose that between these checks to The same objection might have been population and the fatal tendency of raised with equal force to the first man to increase, there is some myste- enclosure, the first town, the first corious connexion. The argument to lony. It might then have been said, be complete, requires that these evils "you are extending the means of subshould either immediately or remotely sistence, indeed, but population will arise from the principle itself; from increase much faster; by augmenting the superfluity of human life, or at least, the facilities of marriage, in holding its constant tendency to overflow its out a prospect of food you are deludprescribed boundaries. But the fact ing the poor; by increased produce, is directly otherwise. So far from you are preparing the way for starvathe miseries which have afflicted man, tion." Melancholy, indeed, would arising from the necessity of repressing have been the condition of man had population, that very necessity was such doctrines then been attended never discovered till very recent pe- with success! Their injury now would |