THE

1816.

Park Lane Chapel built 1796.

Gregoire, Bishop of Blois. HE Courier, as a palliative, has given to his readers a list of the persons who voted for the death of Louis XVI. copying it, most probably, from some list published by one of the many libellist partizans, always ready to add to the flame of kingly vengeance. He therein includes the name of the benevolent Gregoire, constitutional Bishop of Blois, thus repeating a calumny which in France his enemies have in vain sought to affix to his name.

Gregoire, at the time of the death of Louis XVI. was absent, as one of the four envoys sent to Savoy; and on its being known that, in the letter sent to him, he had expunged the word death, he was accused to the club of the jacobins, in 1793, for not having voted for the death of the king. In the speech he had pronounced as early as 1792, he had demanded that the penalty of death should be abolished, and that Louis, as the first to enjoy the benefit of the law, should be condemned "a l'existence." Thus the papers of that time, and principally the Journal des Amis, &c. (No. 5, Feb. 2, 1793) took great care to inscribe his name among those deputies who had not voted for the infliction of capital punishment. Gregoire's enemies, nevertheless, inscribed his name among those who had voted for the king's death; and although he treated the calumny with contempt, when the bishops were assembled in Paris to celebrate their second national council, in 1801, as the calumny was extremely prevalent, they commissioned Morse, Bishop of St. Claude, to ascertain the facts and make a report. This was perfectly satisfactory, and by order of the coun

cil, was inserted in Les Annales de la Religion, Vol. XIV. p. 35.

It is well known that Bonaparte was not fond of Bishop Gregoire, because, in the senate, he was always opposed to his ambitious projects; and an explosion of his fury in 1810 gave occasion to his flatterers to manifest their odium against Gregoire, and again repeat the falsehood which had been previously destroyed. His friends then reprinted the report laid before the council, with a small preface, and this served fully to establish the innocence of the accused.

How peculiar is the situation of this venerable man. The jacobins accused him for not having voted the king's death, and the anti-jacobins reproved him for having done it! The purchasers of negroes accused him, in the convention, of being a friend and partizan of the English, because he sought to destroy so illegal a trade; and now an English paper, without examining the facts, re-echoes the calumny of his enemies. In the convention he was publicly reproached for seeking to Christianize France, (Moniteur, an. 2, No. 57), and the incredulous and jacobins besieged him in his own house, and kept his life in jeopardy during 18 months, for having sustained his character and upheld religion in the session of 17 Brumaire, (an. 2), notwithstanding the cloud of enemies with whom he had to contend, (vide Annual Register, 1793, page 201, 202), whilst the Catholics have since persecuted him as a heretic. He was avowedly the principal support of religion in France, when it would have been extinguished by the flight of the greatest part of the clergy, and the apostacy of others; and when terror was still the order of the day, from the tribune he demanded the freedom of worship, and eventually was the cause of 80,000 churches being opened. It was he who obtained the freedom of the miserable priests crowded into the hulks at Rochefort (Moniteur, an. 3, No. 81, seance du 18 Frimaire), and priests are now his chief calumniators. When Bonaparte returned from the Island of Elba he exeluded him from the Chamber of Peers (though he was formerly a senator), undoubtedly, because he claimed and defended the rights of the people in his eloquent little tract, "De la Constitution Française de l'an. 1814,"

as well as in the vote with which he opposed the constitution sent by the senate to Louis XVIII. and as a reward, the latter has now also excluded him from the number of his peers! By these events, however, Bishop Gregoire had finished, as it were, his political career, and for the last year, has been entirely absorbed in his efforts in favour of religion, humanity and letters. Why then is he again to be disturbed? His virtues, in France, it is well known, are proof against all calumnies, and in England this same character, in union with his being the friend and defender of Protestants, Anabaptists, Jews, Negroes, Mulattos, in short, of the oppressed, ought to have shielded him from the taunts and designing statements of an editor of a daily paper.-Morn. Chron.

Some Account of the Rev. Dr. Lucas.

R. RICHARD LUCAS was

Dthe son of Richard Lucas, of Presteigne, in Radnorshire, and born in that county about the year 1648. After a proper foundation at school, he was sent, in 1664, to Jesus College, Oxford, where, after taking both his degrees in Arts, at the regular times, he entered into holy orders about the year 1672, and was for some time master of the free school at Abergavenny; but being much esteemed for his talents in the pulpit, he was chosen vicar of St. Stephen's, Coleman-street, London, and lecturer of St. Olave, in Southwark, in 1683. In 1691, he took the degree of Doctor in Divinity, and was installed prebendary of Westminster in 1696. His sight began to fail him in his youth, but he lost it totally about this time, and lived many years after this misfortune. He died on the 29th of June, 1715, and was buried in Westminster Abbey, but there is no stone or monument there to point out the place of his inter

ment.

It is somewhat remarkable that so few particulars should have been preserved of the life and character of a divine of such distinguished merit, We are only told in general that he was greatly esteemed for his piety and learning; and indeed that he was-a most excellent man may be justly inferred from his writings, which are exceedingly valuable, and will pre

serve his fame to late posterity. His principal performance is, "An Inquiry after Happiness," in two volumes, octavo, which has passed through several editions, and is justly held in high estimation. He also published, 1st, "Practical Christianity, or an Account of the Holiness which the Gospel enjoins, and the Remedies it proposes against Temptations," 8vo. 2d, The Morality of the Gospel." 3d, Christian Thoughts for every Day in the Week 4th, A Guide to Heaven." 5th, The Duty of Servants." 6th, Several Sermons, in five volumes, some of which were published by his son, who was of his own name, and survived him, and who was bred at Sidney College, Cambridge, where he took his Master of Arts degree. Dr. Lucas also translated into Latin the Whole Duty of Man, which was published in 1680, in 8vo. British Biography, Vol. VI. page 122,

in a Note to the Life of Mr. Howe.

Among other respectable writers, of whom we have but a very slender account, is Dr. Richard Lucas, author of several volumes of sermons, which possess considerable merit, and of an "Inquiry concerning Happiness, which has passed through, at least, eight editions. He was the son of Richard Lucas, of Presteign, in Radnorshire, and born in that county about the year 1648. In 1664, he was sent to Jesus College, Oxford; and after taking both the degrees in Arts, he entered into holy orders about the year 1672. For some time he was master of the free school at Abergavenny; but in 1683, he became vicar of St. Stephen's, Coleman-street, and was also chosen lecturer of St. Olave, in Southwark. He took the degree of Doctor in Divinity in 1691, and was installed prebendary of Westminster in 1696. About this time he lost his sight, but lived many years after that misfortune. He wrote his

University, who have, somehow or other, got hold of the book of "rules and orders of the Particular Baptist fund," and are extremely shocked at the absurdity of their conduct, the more so as they thought the Baptists were inalienable friends of the freedom of conscience. Your fund account I hope will be a corrective, and shew that all Baptists are not tyrants over their brethren. I am asked by the University several questions too hard for me to answer, as

1. Had the London Particular Baptists of 1775 the consent of their country brethren to compile a human creed for them? Most certainly they had no anthority from Christ.

2. What makes Baptists so fond of the name and the creed of Calvin, seeing the barbarian burnt Servetus, and denounced the vengeance of God and the civil magistrate against all Anabaptists?

3. How is the imposition of a human creed consistent with their profession of the sufficiency of Scripture, and the sole dominion of Christ over the consciences of his disciples?

4. With what face can such men ask for the repeal of the test-acts, seeing they impose human tests upon one another?

5. Have the General Baptists of fended or injured the Particulars, that they have thus excluded them from all their favours?

6. Is the belief of election a virtue, or the denial of it a sin; and is the acknowledging of persons in God any test of grace in the heart?

7. Are a people likely to improve, whose inquiries are bounded by human ereeds; and is it not a strong prejudice against Calvinism that it needs such props? &c. &c.

I wish their book of rules and orders had been at the bottom of the sea rather than at Cambridge. You cannot think what disgrace it has brought upon the London Baptists. Our church behold it with astonishment, and the University say the authors were strangers to the first principles of Christian liberty. The question is not of the truth of their creed, but of the imposition of it, for such only shall receive our charity as believe as John of Geneva did. Could I subscribe a human creed I would not do it for a poor Baptist dole, I would submit to my lords the bishops, for some good thing in their rich corpora

tion. These ecclesiastical sheriffs, appointed by the crown, play Jupiter with à better grace than our little Anabaptist tyrants. Believe what they will, but why pretend to write a creed for me? Why sap the foundation of the good old Baptists? Scripture alone is a sufficient guide for every Christian man.

Pardon, dear Mr. Taylor, niy prolixity. I hate dominion over conscience, because I am clearly convinced it dishonours God, degrades man, tacitly denies the perfection of the divine word, dethrones the King of saints, and introduces all manner of wicked passions among Christians, withdrawing them from the example of the mild and merciful Master, and imparting to them the contentious and cruel dispositions of bigots. They have turned the gospel into a miserable system of metaphysics; and to define natures, not to observe facts, is instead of talents natural and acquired, instead of good sense, exact reason, and often, instead of virtue itself. This depression lies upon all human systems, when they are made the tests of Christians.

My wife, who sits by, asks how people found the way to heaven before Calvin and Van Harmin were born? I answer, by the light of Scripture alone. Then, adds she, I shall content myself with my New Testament, and leave the great Latin folios to your friend Taylor and you. I reply, you may very safely, and we shall debate our points with as little gall as if the inquiry were which of us could most dexterously jump over a five-barred gate.

If you think proper to write to me, you may give your letter to my daughter, or ask her for a frank. She is the wife of a Mr. Brown, wine-merchant, No. 2, Love Lane, Little Eastcheap, where, I am sure, she will be glad to see you, and where probably Mrs. R. and I may have the pleasure of seeing you some time or other. My dutiful respects to Father Britain, and to your whole family.

I am, dear Sir, Ever your's most affectionately, ROBT. ROBINSON. By the way, my friend may alter his will, you will recollect, and then all the former part of my letter is nothing. Is not Mr. Winchester in your connection? His book, on the restoration of all things, is in the University library, and thence I had it to read. His ac