« PreviousContinue »
nothing could be better than a Sinking Sir C. LONG defended himself from the Fuod. He was ready to consent that charge of neglect made against him by the country should make a great effort the honourable member; and stated, that to get out of debt, but he would be sure he could not ask persons coming to rethat the means taken would effect the ceive half-pay, whether they were in object. He would not trust any minis- Orders or not; and if he did, he had ters, no matter who they were, with a no power under the Mutiny Bill to ensurplas reveuue; and he should, there force an answer. fore, join in any vote for a remission of Mr. GOULBURN observed, that it was a taxes that might be proposed, so long as tyrannical principle to inquire into the a surplus revenue remained. The taxes private affairs of persons coming to reon candles and on salt had been pro- ceive half-pay, and to ask them whether posed for reduction, but though that on they were in Orders or not; or any salt was, undoubtedly, very burthensome, other matter affecting their private init did not appear to him to be that which terests, most demanded reduction. The taxes on law-proceedings seemed to him the
APRIL 17. most abominable that existed in the country, by the subjecting the poor man,
Marriage of Unitarian Dissenters. and the man of middling fortune, who MR. BROUGHAM presented a petition applied for justice, to the most ruinous from the Unitarian Disseuters of Kendal, expense. Every gentleman had his fa- in Westmorland, complaining that certain vourite tax, and this tax, upon justice, parts of the provisions of the Marriagewas that which he should inost desire to Act pressed on their consciences, and see reduced.
praying to be placed upon the same foot
ing in that respect with the Jews and MARCH 22.
Quakers in England, and with the Unita
rian Dissenters in Scotland and Ireland. Hall-pay clerical Military Officers.
Read, and ordered to be printed. In a debate on the Army-Estimates, Mr. W. Smith had brought forward Lord PALMERSTON said there was no his present measure in consequence of principle more recognised iu theory, nor various petitions presented on the submore established in practice, thau that ject (from London, Southwark, Hackney, the half-pay of the British officer was &c. &c.). But before he opened his proconsidered as a retaining fee for prospec- position to the House, he would beg to tive services. There were a number of put in two petitions similar to that preorders and proclamations of former times, sented by the honourable and learned which summoned the half-pay officer to member (Mr. Brougham)--the one from the service, under pain of losing his half- Sheffield, in Yorkshire, the other from pay. The British officer received his half- Stopford, (Stockton?) in the county of pay on the condition of being amenable Durham. to a future service.
The petitions having been read and orMr. HUME-If the noble Lord was dered to be printed, right in stating, that the British oficer Mr. W. Smith proceeded. In bringreceived his half-pay not as a remunera- ing forward the present motion, he should tion for past exertions, but on the ex begin by stating, as briefly as possible, press condition of his being subject to the the grievances of which the petitioners call for future service, then he must call complained. Their complaint was, that upon the noble Lord, ou his own shewing, by the regulations of the act of the 26th to relieve the country from the amount George II., commonly called the Marof hali-pay given to officers, who since riage-Act, they were placed in a situation the peace had speculated iu Holy Orders. · painful to themselves and different from These numerous clergymen could not di- ihat in which, previous to the passing of vest themselves of their new calling--they that Act, they had been accustomed and could not again join the army; and if permitted to stand. It would scarcely half-pay was not for the past, but a fee he denied by any one that marriage was for the future, these clergymen were not a civil ceremony. It was so considered, entitled to it a day longer. It was most not only by the common law, but by the shameful to refuse the Returns he called canou law; and from the period of the for on that subject. The right honoura- year 1753, up to the passing of the Act ble Gentleman (Sir C. Long) had the now complained of, marriages solemnized power to produce it; and if that power by the Dissenters in their own places of did not exist, why did not the noble Lord worship had been held good and valid. introduce a clause in the Mutiny Act, to The Act of the 26th Geo. II., however, disqualify these clergymen froin longer enacting that every marriage, to be held receiving that half-pay which was a re- legal, must be solemnized in the church, tainer for future military services ? by the ininisters of the church, and ac
cording to the ritual of the church, com- laws respecting marriage throughout Eupletely deprived the Dissenters of their rope, and which regarded marriage as a before-enjoyed privileges. He (Mr. Wm, contract. There was no doubt whatever Smith) was one of the class of persons but the Scottish law cousidered a marrinow praying to be relieved from the pres. age by consent of parties, and in presence sure of that Act, and it was important to of witnesses, to be as valid as if it were those persons as a class, that, coming by any clergyman. The Marriage-Act before Parliament, they should stand rectus had for its object the prevention of clanin curia. He begged then to aver, that the destine marriages. With that object Dissenters were unarraigned of any crime, he wished not to interfere, and he would and that they had as good a title to wor- therefore only propose the alteration of ship God in their own way as any mem- the religious part. Some religious cerebers of the Church of England. Marri- monies were common to all pations, and age was the natural right of the human were highly proper, but they were not species, and neither man nor woman, necessary. As a proof of that, he might without the grossest injustice, could be refer to the decree of Pope Innocent III. deprived of its benefits. Yet the act of in council, which declared the religious the 26th Geo. II, said to the Dissenters, solemnity not to be necessary to the va“You shall comply with terms which are lidity of Marriages. But the religious contrary to the dictates of your con- ceremony ought to be in unison with the sciences, or you shall forego the advan- feelings of the parties. The ritual of the tage of that natural right," Such a hold. Church of England was derived from the ing was most unjust. It was not without Romish Church. Now to make that ri. precedent, because the same course had tual a necessary part of marriage, where been pursued under Louis XIV., towards religious objections existed to it, was a the Protestants of France. The measure positive absurdity. He proposed leaving in France, however, though unjust, was out the whole of that part of the ritual not so inconsistent as the law in England; which stated opinions on which the pebecause the Government of that country titioners dissented from the Church of recognized at the time no religion but the England. As he understood from the Roman Catholic.
To presume every noble Lord that his motion would not be Frenchman a Roman Catholic was most opposed, he thought it unnecessary to go unjust ; but, such being the presumption, into further discussion of the subject pow. there was no inconsistency in saying that He might, however, mention, that the members of the Roman Catholic church wisdom of our ancestors had enacted should be married according to its rites. burning alive as the punishment for ChrisIn England, however, there was a gross tians marrying Jews. When that law and palpable inconsistency about the ar was repealed, and some time previously, rangement. At the very time when the more persons were found to contend for Act of Geo. II. passed, the Dissenters its justice, and even humanity, than had the benefit of the Act of Toleration. could now be found to advocate the part At that time it so happened that the of the present law, which he wished to Unitarian Dissenters were in small num- alter. He concluded by moving for leave bers, so small, indeed, that they had not to bring in a bill altering certain points a place of worship (60 called) belonging in the 26th Geo. II., cominonly called the to them; but the Jews and the Quakers Marriage-Act. were especially exempted from the pro The Marquis of LONDONDERRY wished visions of the Act. The Jews could not to be understood to pledge himself scarcely, perhaps, be called dissenters to the support of the measure. from the Church of England-(the Church Mr. H. Gurney did not see what posof England might, indeed, more properly sible objection there could be to Unitabe called dissenters from them, for they rians being married by their own clergywere the more ancient)—but the Quakers men. The whole service would then be were, to all intents and purposes, a sect suited to their own sentiments, and, bans dissenting from the Church of England, being regularly proclaimed in the church, and they could have no right to any ex no inconvenience could arise from it. On emptions in which the Unitarians were the other hand, there were many objec. not entitled to participate. By the canon tions to parties having the service perlaw, marriage was nothing else but a civil formed by clergymen of a different percontract. This was stated by high au suasion. He wished, therefore, that inthority in this country, when, in 1813, a stead of such a measure as was now question respecting the validity of a Scot- proposed, the hon. and learned gentleman tish marriage was discussed. The opi- opposite (Dr. Phillimore) would embrace nion of the Lord Chancellor was, that the the subject in his bill. Scottish law was founded on the canon Mr. W. Smith explained. law, which was the foundation of the Leave was given to bring in the bill.
The Introductory Chapters to Luke's Gospel Spurious : their Chronology
inconsistent with Truth and with itself. Sir,
April 27, 1822. thirty" cannot be fairly explained to LLOW me to say, through the mean any thing else than that he was I think Dr. Lant Carpenter is mis- nine or to thirty-one. He must, there taken when he imagines that, " inde- fore, have been more than twenty-nine pendently of the Introduction to St. and a half, and less than thirty and a Matthew, there is no chronological half; that is, he must have been bapdifficulty whatever in the Introduction tized some time within the twelve to St. Luke's Gospel.” (See Mon. months that intervened between these Repos. XVI. 360.)
two limits of his age. (See Whiston's Let us take his own statement, ac. Harmony, p. 8, No. vi. edit. 1702, cording to which the 15th year of 4to.) But Luke informs us not only Tiberius commenced August 19th, in that our Lord's age, at his baptism, the year of Roine 781; and place the was within these limits, but that it baptism of Jesus, as he does, in the began to be so. He could not, therefollowing January or February, in the fore, have passed through the first year 782 of Rome. Connecting these half of the limited year : for if he had, premises with what he reads in Luke he would have been ending instead of iii
. 23, the Doctor ascribes the birth beginning those twelve months. Conof Jesus to the year 751. But I think sequently he must have been baptized the words of the text do not justify before he had completed his thirtieth him in placing it earlier than 752. year. And therefore if, with Dr. Car
According to the common transla- penter, his baptism be placed in 782, tion, with which Wakefield and the his birth must be placed in 752. Improved Version agree, this text Now, in what is commonly called informs us that Jesus at his baptism the first chapter of Luke, the concep" began to be about thirty years of tion of John the Baptist is dated six age.”. Now, the words “ about months before the conception, and
consequently fifteen months before the
birth, of Jesus. (See verses 26 and • " Jesus was about thirty years of 36.) And if this birth were on the age, beginning so to be. A gXOLEYOF 25th of December, in the year of fixes the seuses of ck to the beginning Rome 752, the conception of the of the thirtieth year." (Newcome's Harmony of the Gospels, fol., Dublin, 1778, Note upon Lake iii. 23, page 5 of his ad baptismuin accessisse trigesimo anno Notes.) lo his translation of the New completo, et trigesimo uno ineunte," and, Testameat, 8vo., Dublin, 1796, he gives according to custom, is very angry with a different explanation. Lightfoot says, those who understand them otherwise. the Evangelist“ intimateth to us that (See his Canones Isagogici, Lib. iii. p. Jesus, when he was baptized, was but 306, at the end of his edition of Euseb. entering on his thirtieth year." “ The Thesaur. Temp. 1658 ; also De Emend. word apkoueros, beginning to be, denieth Temp: p. 255, ed. 1583, or p. 549, ed. his being thirty compleat; for if he were 1629.) Campbell has a good note on the full thirty, then he began not to be so. passage in his Translation of the Gospels. By the phrase, therefore, is to be under- Among other sound and sensible obser. stood that he was now nine and twenty vations, he says, that “ some critics years of age compleat, and just entering have justly remarked that there is an inupon his thirtieth.” (see his Harmony of congruity" between agxopeeyos and voel, the New Testament, p.8, [208, errala,) and “ the one a definite, the other an indeHarmony of the Four Evangelists, p. 455.) finite term, which confounds the meanScaliger critically examines the words, ing, and leaves the reader entirely at a and contends that they mean, “ Christuă loss." VOL. XVII.
Baptist could not have been earlier ordinary,--that would not have been than three months before the expira- sufficiently surprising,-but by the tion of the year 751. But the pre- sudden appearance of the angel who tended Luke places it (ch. i. ver. 5, presides over dreams; at whose com&c.) “ in the days of Herod the king mand the child flees into Egypt; by of Judea,” who, according to Dr. C., whose information it afterwards learns died in March, 750, a year and nine (what never could have been known in months at least before the expiration Egypt without) the death of Herod, of 751. Here, then, we meet with and by whose voice it is “ called out some chronological difficulty: The of Egypt” again, to fulfil a prophecy biography of the baby swaddled in a which was never uttered, and which, manger--if a few incoherent and in- without a call, could never have been congruous scraps, every one of which fulfilled. The little hero of the tale seems to whisper as we pass it, “I then becomes a miracle of rabbinical only am escaped alone to tell thee,'
"* learning at twelve years of can be called biography-contradicts, then, by a year and a half at least, the
“ meeting chronology of the Christian moralist A vast vacuity; all unawares, whose name he has usurped, whose Fluttering his pennons vain, plnmb down miracles lre has caricatured, and whose he drops morality and truth he has abandoned. Ten thousand fathom deep"
This is just what we should expect. into a yawning chasın, where he is Fiction is regardless of facts and of lost,-shall I say for 17 years? That dates, of sobriety and moderation, be- would imply that the son of wonder cause its object is to strike us dumb whom we lose at twelve, were the son like Zacharias, and to make us “inar- of Joseph who is baptized at 29. No: 'vel all” (ch. i. 20, 63); and therefore where he remains a thing forbid,” it sets before us“ one born out of one “for whom is reserved the blackdue time,” the offspring of a phantom, ness of darkness for ever," one nerer ushered into the world with dreams, heard of more. For the Son of inan and wandering stars, and wise men whom we read of in the gospel was from the East, worshiping with gold not a phantom, nor the son of a phanand frankincense and myrrh, with tom, but an ordinary man, superior shepherds abiding in the field, keeping to the rest of mankind, not in nature, watch over their flocks by night, with but in virtue only; who became the hosts of quiring angels, and with all son of God, not by supernatural genethe machinery of romance; petrifies ration, but by moral conduct and by us with an account of inurders not only obedience, an obedience unparalleled, so extensive and so savage, that they an obedience which no temptation far “out-herod Herod,” but so wild, could seduce, no provocation disturb, 80 frantic and so useless withal, that no fear of disgrace could stagger, no no man conld ever have ordered such painful suffering subdue. For this, deeds of foily as well as horror, but a God was pleased to set his seal upon raving maniac, whose orders would him, (Acts ii. 22; Rom. i. 4; Philipp.ii. never have been obeyed; † soothes 8, 9; Heb. ii. 9, xii. 2,) in order that and softens us again by extricating the he might give to all men power to bechief object of our solicitude from his come the sons of God even as Jesus perilous situation, not by the aid of was the son of God, that thus they God's providence, ordinary or extra- might have life through his name;
(John i. 12, xiii. 15, xx. 31; Rom.
viü. 14; Philipp. ii. 15; 1 Pet. ii. 21, Job. i. 15–17, 19. The church in &c.;) and for this purpose, that all its wisdom has selected this chapter for the evening lesson on St. Luke's day.
men might believe, practically believe, + “ lufanticidium quod mirum est
this truth; and for this purpose alone tacitum a Josepho."...."Sed quod paulo birth, life, parentage and education,
the evangelists have described, not the ante dixi mirum est tam belluina crude but the ministry, the conduct, the chalitatis exemplum a Josepho præteritum esse, qui tanta diligentia reliqua sævitiæ racter of their holy Master, and have Herodianæ facinora persequitur.” Scalig. told us, not how he was conceived in Animadvers. in Euseb. Thesaur. Temp. the womb, but how he went about
doing good. (Acts x. 34–39.) For
this, and for this alone, they have Doctor, however, concluding that lie faithfully and without exaggeration, completed his thirty-first year before for our conviction, recorded the mira- the expiration of 782, places his birth cles that convinced themselves; mira- in 751. cles, not like the wonders of profane Still, even if he were born before history, nor of fable, no, nor of coun- the end of 751, the difficulty, though terfeit evangelists; not miracles of diminished, does not vanish. Even astonishment but of instruction; mira- upon that supposition, if we adhere to cles neither extravagant, nor unwor- the commonly-received date of 25th thy, nor unwanted, but distinguished December, for the birth of Jesus, from all others by their propriety, by John's conception could not have their being worthy of him who alone taken place till six months after wo: keth miracles, by their being Herod's death; and not till three wrought to declare his will, upon oc- months after, if we adopt the earlier casions where man from his ignorance date of Joseph Scaliger, * Lightfoot, t or superstition has become blind to it, or from his wickedness wilfully disregards it; occasions which have occur. # “ Quare natalis Christi competeret red much more rarely than is com- circiter fiuem Septembris diebus cunyomonly supposed, even by those who mylas.” So says Scaliger in his votes allow no miracles but what they find, upon some Greek fragments at the end or fancy, in the Scriptures : * mira- of the last edition of his work “ De cles, lastly, which are neither dumb Emendatione 'Temporum," p. 59, Colon. (like all others, dumb as to morals at Allobr. 1629, fol. But in his prolegoleast) nor intended to strike us dumb mena to the same edition, p. xxii., speakwith stupid admiration, but miracles ing of the year of Christ's birth, he calls which speak-which speak a language it " annus Julianus 43, in cujus xxv understood by all, and which every the body of the same work (Book vi. p.
Decembris natus fuerit Dominus." In where proclaim, and call upon us to
551) he says, “ Christus natus anno proclaim, that God would
periodi Julianæ 4711 in fine, aut 4712 in mercy and not sacrifice."
principio." And again, (p. 545,) “ De What then saith the Scripture ? anno autem ita censuerunt veteres, et Cast out the phantom and its son, for recte: Christum natum anno xxviii Acthe son of the phantom shall not be tiaco. Hoc est natalem Christi circa heir with the son of God.
ultimos menses anni Juliani conferupt a But let us return to our chrono- cujus anni Juliani Augusto inivit vicesilogy. Dr. Carpenter seems to think mus octarus avnus Actiacus.” Aud in that he gets rid of the difficulty above. his edition of Eusebius's Chronicle, or stated, by supposing that Jesus Thesaurus Temporum, Amst. 1658, fol.
“ Natalis Domini at his baptism, in 782,
was not yet p. 306, mid. he says,
inciderit circiter Octobrem ineuntem, thirty-one years of age, which,” says plus, minus.” Here is considerable Auche, ** St. Luke's words (iii. 23) appear tuation of opinion. Probably, September clearly to imply.” To me these words
was the month in which he finally acquiare so far from appearing clearly to esced, as the edition of his book 'De imply this, that they appear clearly Emendatione, to which the Greek fragto imply the contrary, and to assert, ments are annexed, was a posthumous in the way I have explained above, publication, and as he speaks of the fragthat Jesus at the time of his baptism, ments as throwing light upon some of was not yet thirty years of age. The the darkest parts of Scripture chrono.
+ Lightfoot's Harmony of the New • Ye who reverence the Scriptures, Testament, Sect. vi. on second chapter of who value their solid, sterling worth, and Luke, Vol. I. p. 4, [204, errata]; ibid. prefer their virgin modesty and vative Sect. ix. p. 8, [208,) and p. 10  ; charms, to the leer of invitation, the also Sect. viii. of the Prolegomena to his loose and wanton attire, the tinselled Harmony of the Four Evangelists, Vol. I. glare and gaudy paint (1 Pet. iji. 3) with p. 390, and Harmony itself on Luke ii. 7, which established or fanatic fashions have p. 427; and again, pp. 452, 477, 455, disguised and tricked them to their iv. . See also bis Heb. and Talmud. terest or their fancy, remember, “ all Exercitat. op Matt. ii. 1, Vol. II. pp. 106, that glisters is not gold.”
107, and on Matt. iii. 16, Vol. II p. 128,