a. ,3 I THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, ^ Princeton, N. J. ^ ^ 'A /'T^^. ESSAYS AND CORRESPONDENCE, CHIEFLY ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. BY THE LATE JOHN WALKER, SOME TIME A FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN, AND A CLERGYMAN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT. COLLECTED AND PREPARED FOR THE PRESS, BY WILLIAM BURTON. VOL. n. LONDON: SOLD BY LONGMAN, ORiME, BROWN, GREEN, & LONGMAN'S > E. MADDEN, & R. M. TIMS, DUBLIN ; A. & C. BLACK, EDINBURGH. 1838. London: G. H. Davidson, Printer, Tudor Street, New Bridge Street. TO ROBERT LUCAS CHANCE, Esq. THIS SECOND VOLUME OF MR. WALKER'S ESSAYS AND CORRESPONDENCE IS INSCRIBED, IN MEMORIAL OF HIS STEADFAST CHRISTIAN ATTACHMENT TO THE AUTHOR, AND AS A TESTIMONY OF SINCERE ESTEEM, FROM HIS FRIEND AND BROTHER, WILLIAM BURTON. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/essayscorrespond02walk CONTENTS OF VOL. II. Pages The Petilion of certain Christian People resident in London to the Honourable the House of Commons, praying for Relief in the Matter of Oaths. With Notes by one of the Petitioners 1 — 22 Statement of the Interruption of Christian Connexion between the Church in London and the Church in Dublin 23—30 Some Remarks on H. M.'s Printed Letter 30 — 43 Some Observations on Mr. H.'s Pamphlet 43 — 46 Notes on the three preceding articles 46—53 Remarks corrective of occasional Mistranslations in the English Ver- sion of the Sacred Scriptures 54—122 I, On James v. 14 — 15 56 n. — 1 Timothy V. 12 60 TIL — Mat.xvii. 24—27 62 IV. — Luke xvi. 9 64 V. — John i. 9 66 VL — Acts ii. 42 68 VIL — Rom. viii. 17 69 VIII. — Jerem. xxx. 21 71 IX. — John V. 17, 18 74 X. i.51 77 XI. Instances of Ellipses inaccurately supplied, on Luke xviii. 1 80 — Heb.ii. 9 81 viii. 3 84 vii. 19 ib. — 1 Cor. iii. 9 85 — 2 Cor. vi. part of verse 1 86 — Acts xix. 2 87 XII. Instances of inaccuracy iu the omission or insertion of the definite article, on 1 Timothy ii. 8 88 — 1 Tim. vi. 10 89 — 2 Tim. iv. 7 ib. — Acts xxi. 4 90 — Heb. iii. 13 ib. — Rom. XV. 12, 13 : 91 XIII. — Luke xviii. 20, 21 92 XIV. Instances of inaccuracy in the rendering of tenses — on Luke i. 59. } og — John xi. 11.) * — Heb. X. 37 97 XV. — Ps. cxxx. 3, 4 98 XVI. — 1 Thess. ii. 8 103 XVII. — 1 Pet. ii. 7 104 XVIII. iii. 21 106 viii CONTENTS OF VOL. II. Pages. XIX. On Acts xvi. 25 108 XX. xvii. 22, 23 110 XXI. — 1 Cor. vii. 21 ib. XXII. — Heb. xiii. 10 115 — 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11 118 XXIII. — Ps. Ix. 5. and cviii. 6 119 — Rom. iv. 25 121 Remarks expository of Texts of Scripture 123 — 142 I. on John xiv. 8 123—128 II. — Pro. xiv. 9 128—130 III. — Mat.vi. 9 130—132 IV. — Rom. xii. 9 132—134 V. — 1 Tim. ii. 9, 10. 1 Pet. iii. 3, 4. . . 134—135 VI. — Rom. iii. 3, 4. Eph. iv. 3 ib. VII. — Mat.xxv. 31—46 136—137 VIII. — Mich. vi. 8 138—139 IX. — Rom. iii. 25 139—140 X. — 1 Sam. i. 17, 18 ib. XI. — Gospel ; or Glad Tidings 141—142 Brief Animadversions on a Pamphlet by Doctor Richard Whately, entitled " Thoughts on the Sabbath, in reference to the Christian Festival of tl e Lord's Day" 143 — 151 Collection of Letters on Scriptural Subjects 152 — 523 I. To Alexander Knox, Esq 152 II. — the Editor of the Evangelical Magazine 153 IIL — the Rev. R. H 157 IV. — Alexander Knox, Esq 160 V. — Mr. P. N 161 VI. — the Rev, Mr. M 163 VII. — Mrs. N 165 VIIL — the Rev. H. M 166 IX. — Mr. W. T 171 X, — B. M 175 XI. — Mrs. S 178 XII. — Mr. O'B 181 XIII. From the Church in D to the Church in C 184 XIV. To the Editor of the Christian Advocate .. 186 XV. A detached Piece on the Office of Elders. . 189 XVI. To Miss M 190 XVn. — Mrs, S 191 XV III. From the Church in D to the Church in R- — 193 XIX. To Miss Walker 195 XX. — the Same 197 XXT. — the Same 198 XXII. From the Church in D to M 199 XXIIL ■ to the same . . 202 XXIV. To 203 XXV. — M. B 206 XXVL — J. F. G , Esq 207 XXVII. — R. M'N 208 XXVIII. — B.B 210 XXIX. — B.M f 211 XXX. — G. T , Esq 2\2 XXXI. — J. G. S 219 XXXII. — J, P 220 • XXXIII. — J. G. S 223 XXXIV. 224 XXXV.— JR. K , Esq 227 CONTENTS OF VOL. II. XXXVT. XXXVII. XXXVIII. XXXIX. XL. XLI. XLII. XLiir. XL IV. XLV. XLVI. XLVIL XLV II I. XLIX. L. LI. LIL LIII. LIV. LV. LVI. LVII, LVIII. LIX. LX. LXI. LXII. LXIII. LXIV. LXV. LXVI. LXVII. LXVIII. LXIX. LXX. LXXI. LXXIL LXXIII. LXXIV. LXXV. LXX VI. LXXVII. LXXVIIL LXXIX. LXXX. LXXXL LXXXII. LXXXIII. LXXXIV. LXXXV. LXXXVI. LXX XV II. LXXXV I II. LXXXIX. XC. XCI. XCIL xcin. XCIV. XCV. XCVI. To the Same -< G. M — 11. L C , Ksq. . — J. II , Esq. ... — II. L. C , Esq. , — tlie Same _ M. B , Esq — R. L. C , Esq.. — the Same — the Same — the Same — the Same — the Same — the Same — the Same — J. B — the Same — the Same — J. A and T. D — the People called Bereans, who addressed a Letter to the Church of Christ assem- bling in Stafford-street, Dublin — J. L — the Same — the Same — the Same — Mr. J. C — J. H , Esq — the Church in C — J.L , — the Same — the Same — ^Messrs. D. K , &c — l^Irs. L. S. G — the Church in C — Mr. J. Haldane — J. L — ihe Same — the Same . . c — the Same — the Same — the Same — the Church in London — J. G. S — the Same — the Church in Dublin — T. M and T. P — A. M'l — the Same — T. A , Esq — Mrs. M — Mr. , I.e. G — the Same — his brother, James Walker. — Dr. F _ J.L — J. H , Esq — Mr. B — S, W — tlie Same — Mr. P. C Pages. 2;51 •ijt 238 211 211. •21G 219 2,51 253 2;51 2.58 2(J0 2«2 2(il 2G6 267 272 273 275 276 278 282 285 287 288 289 292 295 296 298 300 302 306 308 311 312 313 311 315 316 317 320 323 321 326 328 337 310 313 315 317 318 319 352 35 h 001 359 376 379 380 381 CONTENTS OF VOL. II. XCVII. To J. R. K , Esq 387 XCVIII. — the Same 388 XCIX. — the Same 390 C. — R. L. C . Esq 391 CI. — the Same 395 CII. — Mr. Y 397 cm. — F. C . Esq 399 CIV. — J. F 401 CV. — the Same 403 CVI. — the Same 405 CVII. — the Same 406 CVIII. — J. L 407 CIX. — Mrs. C 410 ex. ~ Mrs. T 413 CXI. — the Same 417 CXII. — the Same 418 CXITI. — the Same 420 CXIV. — Mrs. B 421 CXV. — J. L 422 CXVI. _ Mr. J. H 424 CXVII, _ P. H 425 CXVIII. — Mr. J. H 426 CXIX. — Mr. J. S 428 CXX. — Mrs. T 430 CXXI. — the Same 432 CXXII. — Mr. J. G. S 434 CXXIII. — A. C 435 CXXIV. — W. C , and J.M'G 437 CXXV. ~ J. H 439 CXXVI. — R. L. C 440 CXXVIL — Mr. J. H-: — 443 CXXVIII. — J. L 444 CXXIX. — the Same 446 CXXX. — the Same 447 CXXXI. — the Same 448 CXXXII. — Miss F 449 ■ ■ — Remarks on 1 Cor. v. ii. referred to in the preceding letter 450 CXXXIII. To the Same 452 CXXXIV. — the Same 453 CXXXV. — Mr. W. C- 454 CXXXVI. — R. L. C 456 CXXX VII. — the Church in London 460 CXXXVIII. — Mrs. B 462 ' Remarks on Acts xi. 19 — 21, referred to in the preceding letter 464 CXXXIX. To J. L 466 CXL. — the Same 470 CXLI. — the Same 473 CXLII. — the Same 477 CXLIII. — Miss J 478 CXLIV. — the Same 480 CXLV. — MissT 483 CXLVI. — R. L. C , Esq 485 CXLVII. — D. L , Esq 487 CXLVIII. — Mrs. B 489 CXLIX. — Miss Walker 491 CL. — J. L 492 CLI. — R. L. C , Esq 493. CLII. 494 CLIII. — the Same . 495 CLIV. — Mrs. B 498 CLV. 502 CONTENTS OF VOL. U. xi Paees. CLVI. To 50,5 CLVir. -Mr.J 508 CLVI 1 1. — IX H. R .Esq 509 CLIX. — II. M , Esq 512 CLX. — tlie Same 511. (CLXI. — the Same 515 CLXIL — J.L 517 CLXIII. — R. M.B , Esq 519 CLXIV. — A. B 523 Letters on various Subjects , 521 513 CLXV. To the Editor of the Literary Gazette .... 524 CLXVI. — the Editor of the Eclectic Review S'fo CLXVII. — Sir W. C. S 527 CLXVIII. — the Editor of the Times 528 CLX VIII. — the Editor of the Morning Herald 530 CLXIX. — the Same 531 CLXX. — one of tlie Public Papers 531. CLXX I. — one of the Public Papers 536 CLXXII. — the Editor of the Morning Chronicle . . 510 CLXXIII. — William Smith, Esq 542 Review of " The Epistles of Paul the Apostle translated; with an Exposition and Notes. By the Rev. Thomas Belsham, Minister of Essex-street Chapel" 514 57 1 Review of " Thoughts on the Anglican and Anglo-American Churches. By John Bristed, Counsellor-at-Law" 572 — 595 Review of " A Greek and English Lexicon ; in which are explained all the "Words used by the best Greek Writers of Prose and Verse, &c. By John Jones, LL.D., Author of the Greek Grammar". . . . 596 — 616 Observations on " An Answer to a Pseudo-Criticism of the Greek and English Lexicon, which appeared in the Second Number of the Westminster Review" 617—619 Review of " Lucian of Samosata ; from the Greek, with the Com- ments and Illustrations of Wieland and others. By William Tooke, F.R.S., Member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, &c." 620 — 634 Plain Truths ; or a Speech which may be delivered in the approach- ing Session, by any Member who likes it, on a Motion for going into a Committee of the whole House upon the State of Ireland . . 635 — 647 An Essay on the following Prize Question proposed by the Royal Irish Academy, " Whether and how far the Cultivation of Science and that of Polite Literature assist or obstruct each other?" 648 — 666 Letter to Editor of the Hibernian Evangelical Magazine 667 Remarks on Mat. vi. 22, 23 669 ESSAYS CORRESPONDENCE. THE PETITION OF CERTAIN CHRISTIAN PEOPLE RESIDENT IN LONDON, TO THE HONOURABLE THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, PRAYING FOR RELIEF IN THK MATTER OF O A T II S. WITH NOTES BY ONE OF THE PETITIONERS. 3VIihi, quanto plura recentium seu veterum revolvo, tanto raagis Itidibria reruni mortaliiiin cunctis in nej^otiis obversautur. Tacitus. [First Published 1822.] ADVERTISEMENT. For the NOTES, which are subjoined to the following Petitiom, I am solely and individually responsible. I have been induced to draw them up, bv the hope of exciting the attention of some of our Legislators to an application for relief, which seems to have hitherto failed of attracting any notice. On the question of the expediency of the publication, different opinions may be entertained : and I have not had an opportunity of consulting manv, to whose judgment on the occasion I should have been disposed to pay considerable deference. I think it therefore needfiJ to exonerate them from all responsibility for the publication, bv annexing to it my name. The very grave complexion of some of the Notes, may perhaps deter manv from looking at them. But I am more apprehensive of censure, from those whose censure I should most apprehend, for VOL. II. B 2 A PETITION FOR RELIEF liaving ventured, in other passages, upon some toi)ics which involve considerations of legislative jwHcy. In this certainly I have departed from my own usual course : yet, I hope, with such temperance of remark, as will exempt me from the charge of having departed from the CHRISTIAN character. John Walker. Camden Street, Camden Town, London. THE PETITION. To the Honourable the House of Commons of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled. The Petition of the undersigned Christian people, resident in London, and sometimes distinguished by the name of Sepa- ratists, Humbly Sheweth, That You.r Petitioners, as Christians, (A,) are peaceable and well- afFected subjects of the State ; thankful for the many blessings which they enjoy under its mild and tolerant Government ; and mindful of the divine authority which binds them to obey the poicers that be, as ordained of God, and to suffer patiently whatever they may be called to suffer for conscience sake. That they think it, however, consistent with this Christian duty, to renew their yearly appeal to the wisdom, justice, and humanity of Your Honourable House, for relief from the many trying losses and penalties to which they are subject, according to the existing laws of this country, in consequence of their obedience to the express command of Christ (B.) not to swear at all by a?iy oath. That Your Petitioners have long publicly maintained, and (as they are persuaded) sufficiently proved, that they act only according to the real meaning of that divine prohibition in refusing to take any oath : and that while the sincerity of their conviction is established by the severe forfeitures which many in their Churches have actually incurred (C), and the still more severe sufferings to which they are all continually exposed ; — the arguments by which they have publiclv supported their sentiment have never yet, as far as they know, been even plausibly answered. That Your Petitioners with all humility submit it to Your con- sideration, whether, in a country in which Christianity professedly forms part of the law of the land (D.), it be not inconsistent that Christians should be subject to fines, imprisonment, forfeitures of IN THE MATTER OF OATHS. 6 various kinds, ami g-encral insecurity both of person anil ])roperty, for obeying a plain Christian ])recept. That, among many other sufferings and hardships. Your Petitioners are at present disquiditied for acting as Executors to a Will ; dis- qualitied for answering any Bill which may be filed against them in Chancery, however false and inifjuitous ; dis(jualificd for proving a debt under a commission of liankruptcy ; disijualified for obtaining a Certificate, if any of them should become Bankrupts, as well as for availing themselves of the Act for the relief of Insolvent Debtors ; and in a great measure disqualified for acting either as Masters or Servants in importing, exporting, or manufacturing all articles con- nected with the Customs or Excise : and that from their inability to give legal evidence, thev are continually liable to heavy penalties for apparent contempt of the Courts of Justice ; although they are, from principle, among the most loyal subjects of the State, and dare not disobey its authorities — except when commanded to do that which the law of Gon forbids. That Your Petitioners also beg leave huml)ly to represent to Your Honourable House, that no political inconvenience (E.) has been found to result from the indidgence, which the Legislature has long- extended to the people called Quakers, of substituting a solemn affir- mation for (F.) the imprecatory engagement of an oath : — that a par- ticipation in the same indulgence is the utmost to which Your Peti- tioners aspire: — and that if thev obtain it, they must still remain subject to such civil privations and disadvantages, as may evidence the sincerity of their conscientious scruple ; and may therefore afford a reasonable security that their solemn Affirmation is equally credible M'ith an Oath. That Your Petitioners therefore again humbly pray for (Gr.) such I'elief in the premises, as to Your legislative wisdom shall seem meet. NO T E S. A. (page 2.) Your Petitioners, as Christians, are peaceable and xcell-affected, S suppose tliat it should ; — as absuvd, in some respects, as it \vuukl he to sav, tliat tlic liope of a patient's recovery to healtli shoidd cease, the moment he is sent to an hospital for cure. (Now let not M. amuse himself and others by shewinc^ that there arc points of dis- similarity between the two cases. Who denies it ?) Well then ; if the merciful hope, under which the fornicator was put away from the fellowship of the Church, continued during the interval between that solemn act and his restoration to its fellowship ; it follows — (Iwould say undeniably, but that M. has proved there is nothing which may not be denied — see his lOth page) — it follows that there was without the Church of God, and within the world — Satan's kingdom, a man whom the discij)lcs were taught to view with a difl'erent eye, from that with which they regarded those who had never been within the household of faith. And now, in asserting this, do I intimate, (as M. grossly mis- represents,) that the wicked person cast out from the Church is less wicked than those who have never been within it ? Or that he is the less to me, as an heathen, for not being actually so .'' (M. knows, that wfTTEf " as, as if" implies similitude ; and that the idea of similitude not only does not imply identity, but excludes it.) — Or that he will less assuredly perish in his wickedness, except he repent .'' Nay truly : those who know me, know that I am not backward to assert that solemn principle declared in 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, 11, and in Gal. v. 19. 20, 21. ^^^ly then, it may be asked, are they to be regarded in any respect vrith a different eye ? I really feel no anxiety to answer that question. Having established even from the 5th v. of this disputed chapter that the wisdom of God has ordered it so, I do not feel myself at all bound to meet the bold questions, by which disputers attempt to impeach that wisdom. Yet I add, that I think disciples may easily perceive the reasonableness of the divine appointment, or rather, its consistency with the glorious nature of that faith, which this wicked person not only had confessed, but (we have every reason to believe) still continued to confess with the mouth. And now, before proceeding to the latter part of the chapter in which stands that Apostolic direction which M. would set aside, I have no objection to concede to him, — if it may afford him any ad- vantage,— that had the Apostle dismissed the subject at the end of the 8th verse, there might be some plausible ground for questioning, whether he designed to prohibit any intercourse with that wicked person, except what is intrinsically of a I'elic/ious nsAare ; whether his exclusion from all Christian fellowship with the disciples did not comprehend all that the Apostle designed. But let M. observ-e, that the concession which I speak of is only hypothetical — on the sup- position that the Apostle had written no more on the subject than is contained in the first eight verses of the chapter. But the fact is, that he continues the subject through the five remaining verses : and M.'s assumption, or hardy assertion, that these contain no additional direction, no command to the disciples restricting them from the freedom of even social intercourse with that wicked person, — I say his bold assumption or confident assertion of this does not really weigh a feather against the plain command given us in the 1 1th D 2 36 SOME REMARKS ON H. M.'s PRINTED LETTER. verse. And here my main object is, to call the attention of disciples to the words of the Apostle, from the multitude of vain w^ords in which M. has endeavoured to envelope the subject. That the passage, therefore, may be immediately under my reader's eve, I transcribe it at large ; and I hope M. will not again be angry with me for having it printed in the Italic character, the better to distinguish the Apostle's words from mine. 9. / wrote to you in an epistle not to keep company loith fornicators : 10. Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this vwrld, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters ; for then must ye needs go out of the tvorld. 11. But now I have written unto you 7iot to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner ; with such an o?ie [no not'\ not even to eat. 12. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without ? do not ye judge them that are within ? 13. But them that are without Godjudgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. Now if any intelligent person — I care not whether believer or un- believer— were to read those words for the first time, and were then asked, 'What direction did the Apostle give in the 11th verse about such characters, as he enumerates, when found within the Church ? Was it only that they should be excluded from all religious fellowship with the Church ? or did he also prohibit the disciples from holding with them even the familiarity of social intercourse T — to such an inquiry what would be the reply of the person who should for the first time read the passage with intelligence ? Would it not be ex- pressive of wonder, how the question could be raised ? Would he not be apt to say, ' Surely the Apostle expressly tells the Christians, that they are not even to eat with such characters : and surely eating or drinking with a man is an act not of religious fellowship, but of social intercourse.' Well : let me suppose one question more proposed to the same reader : ' Did the Apostle impose the same restriction on the Corinthian Christians towards similar characters of the world not professedly Christians ?' Would not his reply be } ' No ; he plainly tells them that he does not mean this, and assigns two reasons for it : one, that they could not abstain from social intercourse with such characters of the surrounding world without quitting the world, or human society, altogether ; — and the other, that he as an Apostle, and they as Christians, had nothing to do with the characters and conduct of any except the members of the Church.' het the Christian reader, if necessary, read the words of the Apostle again ; and then let him think whether the view of them which I have expressed be not that, which they must present — obviously and without any doubtfulness present — to every reader, whose judgment is not strangely blinded. And accordingly, as far as I know, there is not an interpreter or commentator, ancient or modern, that has ever assigned another meaning to the passage : in which certainly their judgment is the more impartial, because most of them never dream of obeying an Apostolic command, however they may interpret it. Yet M. has the hardihood to say (p. 6'.) — " Had this chapter not been distorted by human ingenuity, ill-employed and ill-directed, its SOME REMARKS ON H. M.'s PRINTED LETfER. 37 meaning had been plain, its puqiort ol)vioiis," &c. — (/. c. it wtu'd have I)een plain and obvious that the Christians were not restricted from eating ever so freely Nvith the fornicator in the way of social intercourse!) — "but we have been for yeiw^ perverting it — for years we have been acting imperfectly and miserably, upon a principle which it nowhere enjoins — we have been adopting toward j)C()ple removed from the church a wretched ])artial system of non-inter- course, and this we have been hypocrilicdlhj calling a dealing of mercy ," &c. &c. \c. Ah ! i\I. — was not all this rattle of words and theolo- gical railing employed to drown the voice of conscience in your own breast, as well as to impose upon your readers ? Wonderful, certainly, is the dexterity which we have in imposing on ourselves. And so you rccdlv assert — that but for human ingenuity distorting the Apostle's words, it would have been plain and obvious and clear, that by not even eating with that wicked person the Apostle meant not eating with him in a religious way ! Does not a blush rise upon your cheek at the moment of reading this ? Does not conscience whisper ? ' I have been wrong in asserting it to be the obvious meaning of the words, even if I have been right in asserting it to be their true meaning.' But how does JM. make out the interpretation, which he contends for } Does he deny that the original words tid roiovru ^J^■n^B svyisOmv are accurately and literally rendered not even to eat with s^ich an one ? Does he assert that they admit any other correct version .'' No : he knows well that they do not. Does he assert that the Greek verb rendered to eat ivith includes, in its meaning, any thing of re- ligious fellowship, any thing beyond the natural and social act — con- vivial companionship ? No ; he knows it does not : no more than the expressions — to ride tcith — to sleep ivith, &c. include, in their import, any thing religious. On what ground then does he find himself at liberty to foist in this idea, and thus daringly to interpolate the divine word ? Simply on this ground ; that he set off with the gratuitous assumption, and has continued it throughout his pamphlet, that the Apostle did not and could not enjoin on the disciples any different con- duct or deportment towards the wicked person put away from among themselves, from that conduct and deportment which they main- tained towards the rest of the smTounding world who professed not the Christian faith. He has assumed this, I say, and assumed it in the face of the Apostle's express command in this passage : and from this assumption he pretends to infer, that the Apostle did not mean what he says in the 1 1th verse ; that he did not forbid their even eat~ ing tcith the wicked person mentioned, but only their eating with hirti in a way of religious felloivship f I shall by and by glance at M.'s objections to the suitableness and propriety of the Apostle's command : but at present I say, that with those who fear God they ought to pass for absolutely nothing, or less than nothing, in the view of that command, explicit and unequivocal as it stands. I repeat it, therefore, that the whole of M.'s argument, if argument it can be called, is comprised in the following gross sophism : — ' The A])ostlc could not forbid the freest intermixture of the disciples in civil life with that wicked person, after he was put out of the Church, because they were allowed it with those who had 38 SOME REMARKS ON H. M.'s PRINTED LETTER. never been within the Church. Therefore in the 11th verse he docs not forbid their eating with him in the way of convivial companion- ship, but only their eating with him in some way of Christian fellow- ship ! * In opposition to all this assertion, the disciple might well dismiss M. and his pamphlet with the following brief reply : — ' But the Apostle actually does that, which you assume that he does not, and could not do. After having enjoined them to put him out of the Church, which certainly excluded him from all (E.) Christian fellowship with them, — he after this proceeds to enforce the prohibition against all intennixture with him, by expressly extending it to their even eating with Mm : and this not only without the slightest intimation that he intends any companionship in eating that was peculiar to Christians, but in such a connexion as proves (F.), that he means such a com- panionship in eating as they might hold with heathens.' — A few re- marks, tending to explain and to establish the different parts of this brief reply, I throw into the form of notes. Among the objections which M. brings against the Apostolic precept, he descends even to that which I noticed in our printed statement as really ' a special pleading argument, more suitable to an Old Bailey solicitor than to a professing disciple of Christ :' namely. That the wicked person — when removed from the Church — would then be one of those without ; and that as the Apostle declares that he judges only those within, it would have been inconsistent to have forbidden them to eat with that man after his removal from the Church. I put as distinctly as I can the substance of the argument, which he reiterates in various forms and with tiresome verbosity throughout his pamphlet ; while the obscurity with which he en- velopes it looks much as if he were secretly ashamed of its being brought into the light. To this redoubtable objection I reply briefly, but decisively : Throughout this chapter the Apostle pro- nounces judgment on a wicked person then within the Church, and directs the disciples how they shall act towards him ; that they shall remove him from the Church and all Christian fellowship, and that with him they shall not hold even that companionship in eating which they might with a heathen. When the Church accordingly put him from among them, he was certainly no longer within ; but did the judgment therefore cease, which had been passed upon him when he was within, and for wickedness committed by him under the Christian name ? No, truly : on the contrary, that part of the judgment, which de1)arred them from maintaining familiarity with him even in social life, continued in all its force, just as much as the sentence of his exclusion from their Christian felloM^ship continued. But though I have now sufficiently exposed the weakne'Ss and un- fairness of his objection, I confess that I doubt whether such cavils ought to receive any serious answer. When a writer on a scrip- tural subject resorts to them, — and especially a writer with such a clear head as M. possesses, — it only indicates that he is resolved at all hazards to maintain his opposition to the scrip- tural principle which he rejects : and having of course no really conclusive argument to advance, he does the best he can with the SOME REMARKS ON II. M.'s PRINTED LETTER. S'J most distj^usting sophisms, and depends on his reader's want of acute • ness to detect them ; — he makes a noise hy firing bhudc cartridges, and hides liimself in llie smoke. Take away from M.'s pam- phk't that poor sophism, in all the dresses in which it appears, and in all the inferences which he attempts to derive from it, and I scarcely know what would be left. In note C. to our printed Statement a remark occurs, that the mere act of eating at the same table with the wicked person put away from the Church, does not necessarily constitute that companion-ship in eating, which is forbidden. Indeed it is very plain, that it would be as reasonable to suppose, that eating in the same house, or in the same street with him, were included in the prohibition. And it was added, that eating at the same table with him ' may be unavoidable, from the relations and duties of life.' The truth of the remark is obvious. Every one of scriptural judgment knows that positive institution gives way to mond dutv; — that, however sacrifice be en- joined, mercy takes precedence of it ; that David and those that were with him were guiltless in satisfying their hunger with the shew-brcad, which none but the priests might lawfully eat, &c. Yet even this plain remark M. opposes. And why? Because among his objections to the Apostolic precept, he urges that our practice is inconsistent with the view of it which we assert. Were it so, this would really form no objection at all against the precept, or the cor- rectness of our view. But hew does he attempt to prove, that we cannot (according to our vievi's) be vindicated in eating at the same table with the person put away, by the consideration of its being ' unavoidable from the relations and duties of life,' and that such eating is really no violation of the command ? How does he refute this ? I am ashamed for him, while I quote his argument, (p. 10.) " Suppose we were to say that praying ivith a person put aicay may be unavoidable from the relations and duties of life!" Suppose so, M. What then ? The difference between the two cases is simply this. In the one case, we have said what is true: in the other case we should say what is false. Think you that a small difference } But, says M. " the command is absolute; it no more admits of limitation or exception, than the command, deliver such an one unto Satan," &c. He might just as weU tell us, that the comniand — Siib- mit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake — is abso- lute ; and infer that we ought to violate every command of Christ at the orders of an earthly magistrate. It is melancholy to be obliged to remind j\I. that the holy Scriptures are not written with the specialties of an Act of Parliament — ' Provided always .... any thing in this Act notwithstanding :' — and that the opposite expec- tation would lead men to set scripture against scripture, and would open a door for every wildness and wickedness of interpretation. " Labour not for the meat which perisheth" is a very absolute pre- cept in the form of expression ; and probably the Thessalonian idlers availed themselves of it, to screen from censure their disobe- dience to Apostolic command. Ought not M. to be ashamed of holding a language, that would go to sanction such perversion of the word } 40 SOME REMARKS ON H. M.'s PRINTED LETTER. Connected with this is that wicked passage in his 11th page, artfully calculated to enlist on his side the feelings particulai-ly of the weaker sex. " They mean, a man is not to show complacency in the society of his wife. What ! she is to live in the same house — eat at the same table — she is one flesh with himself, and yet he is not to have complacency in her society ! .... Let them, if they will be consistent, separate completely from a wife who is a wicked person. Nothing short of this is obedience to their view of the precept." — Let M. allow us to know our own views. It is very easy for him to say, — " let them separate completely from a wife," &c. According to our views, — (and we are not afraid that M.'s declamation will prove them incorrect) — there is but one ground on which a Christian man can ever be justified in putting away his wife, namely, for unfaithfulness to the marriage bed. And further, according to our views, while she remains with him as his wife, he is bound, under all circumstances, to shew her all possible kindness and tenderness and patience ; and even when he cannot shew her the complacency of approbation, he is bound to feel — and therefore to manifest — compassion for her as the weaker vessel. I should never trouble myself about the inquiry, what complacency in her society he is — or is not — to shew. Let the feelings of his mind be scripturally regulated, and they will be scripturally manifested. But if M. mean, — (and if he does not, he is but beating the air) — that a Christian must and ought to feel, or to manifest, the same compla- cency even in his wife's society, after she has been removed for her wickedness from the Christian fellowship, as he did while they walked together in it ; I tell him confidently that he is mistaken ; and that the Christian, who feels undiminished complacency even in the wife of his bosom under such circumstances, is not regulated in his feelings either by true kindness for her, or by reverence for the word of God. "Would that I could make M, ashamed iox his profit! In this honest wish I add a consideration, which ought to bring conviction to his conscience that he has written dishonestly. If, instead of the amiable and most respectable partner in life whom he is blest with, he were married to a woman, who for some years walked with him in the fellowship of the Gospel, but was afterwards put away from the Church for one of those instances of wickedness specified in 1 Cor. V. — for drunkenness ; — I ask him would he continue to feel the same complacency in her, and in her society, as he had before } No, indeed he would not. And if his conscience testify the truth of that assertion, I ask him again, what would he think of my dis- honesty in such a case, if I should turn upon himself his own artillery of exclamations and invectives, and should call upon him to ''separate from her completely,' as the more consistent course.^ How is it then, that the change of feeling, and consequently of deportment, towards her, which he would think justifiable and necessary, vhcn the form of her icickedness was naturally disgusting and inconsistent with domestic comfort, should become the object of his fearless abuse and indignation, when it springs from aficctioiiate concern for her and from subjection of mind to the word of God } SOME RKMARKS ON II. M.'.s I'RINTED LETTER. 41 Tliorc is a short passap^c iii the hist pa^^e of M.'s ])ami)hkt, to Avhiili I should v.isli to recal his own attention, as well as direet that of my other readers. It is this. " Of the suilnbilily of avoiding wt)rldlv social intercourse with those removed from the assemhly of Cod's people, 1 shidl sav nothing. The (|uestion is not now, as to what is or is not suitahle : the sole question is as to what God has or has not commanded." Very true, indeed. And yet the sole grounel on which you reject and revile what (.iod has ])lainlv com- manded on the subject, is your conception of its iinsuilubleness. \o\x cannot deny, that the connnand is in the terms of it plain and explicit, — " not even to eat with such an one." You will not pre- tend that you can adduce any instance, in which that simple expres- sion is employed for eating with a person in a ivuy of C/iristiari fel- iotrship, as at a Christian love feast. And yet you would have us take for granted upon your bare assertion, that this is what the Apostle prohibits. And w^hy ? Because you think it would be unsuitable to forbid convivial intercourse of a ' worldly social ' cha- racter with the person put awav. This is the substance of all vour assertions, that it would be ' pursuing with a sort of Christian dis- cipline one no longer subject to the discipline of the house of God ;' — that it would be, ' employing a system of temporal pains and penalties,' &c. All these objections resolve themselves into this, that you think the command given is unsuitable. Yet shall I indeed say, that vou really tliink so ? Nay, put the question to your own conscience. Can you honestly reconcile the style of invective against our view of the precept, with which you set off in the very first page, and in which vour whole pamphlet is composed, — can vou honestlv reconcile this with the language which seems to have slipped from you in the last page ? " On the suitability of avoiding worldly social intercourse with, &c. I shall say nothing." What! say nothing of the suitability of that, which you pronounce ' an ungodly practice' — a ' wretched partial system of non-intercourse,' ' hypocritically called a dealing of mercy,' &c. &c. You will say nothing of the s^uitability of this ! Do not, M., do not add sin to sin, by denying that — at the moment you wrote that sentence — you were inwardly conscious of that suitability, about which you declined saying any thing. But let me shake your conscience a little upon that point. Let us suppose, that — at Corinth — the dav after the A})ostle's letter had been received by the Church, and had been obeyed in the removal of that wicked person from among them, one of the disciples meeting him should have accosted him thus : ' Will you dine with me to-morrow ? I expect a pleasant party, and among them two of my heathen neighbours, who have rendered me sers-ices, which make me wish to shew them civility : and I now find that I may do so, though thev are addicted to the prevalent wickedness of the Corinthians. You are now, for the same wickedness, cast out from the Christian community into the world, to which they belong. Come and join our party.' Suppose this: and suppose also, ii yon choose, the words — 'not even to eat with such an one' — did not form anv express part of the Apostolic command. Would you really think the language and conduct of that Corinthian disciple suitable to the nature and spirit of that solemn act, in which he 42 SOME REMARKS ON H. M.'s TRINTED LETTER. had taken part with his hrethren the day before ? Would yoir think it consistent with the due uhliorrence of such wickedness in one bearing the Christian name, — with that /ear of its contagious nature, — or even with that compassionate view of mercy to the offender, in which they had been called to put him out from among them ? Indeed you would not. And yet, though inwardly con- vinced on the grounds of reason and consistency, that the Corinthian disciple could not suitably have adopted the same freedom of social intercourse with the wicked person put away, which he might with his heathen neighbours, — you think yourself at liberty to revile those who refrain from it on the ground of the Apostolic command, as hypocritically calling it a ' dealing of mercy,' &c. &c. Certainly we do hold, that any familiarity even in the intercourse of this life with that wicked person, which would tend to convey to him that we thought lightly of the wickedness for which he had been put away, and that we had the same complacency in him as before, would be contrary even to the principles of that mercy towards him in which the Church had been commanded to remove him : and this we must maintain, ; in spite of all the indignation and scorn which it appears to excite in M.'s mind. But M, knows that he misrepre- sents us in putting forward this consideration (as he does through- out in various distorted forms) — as the point which we insist on either exclusively or principally, in asserting the suitableness and wisdom of the Apostolic precept. To prove that he knows it is not so, I only quote the following words from the last paragraph but two of our printed Statement : — " Is it not obvious, that the main purpose of the whole course, enjoined on the disciples towards that wicked person, was their own projit, to purge out from among themselves that leaven, a little of which leaveneth the whole lump .'' And are these disputers against the wisdom of God quite certain, that the continued restriction on the familiarity of social intercourse with that wicked person was not graciously and wisely adapted to keep the minds of the brethren awake to the due abhorrence of his wickedness ? Truly, if any of them felt the same pleasure in his society, as they might feel in that of one Avho had never been in the Christian connexion, their minds must think very lightly of his ejection from the kingdom of God, and of that which had occasioned it." In the 12th and two following pages of his pamphlet, M. pro- fesses to make observations on the precept in 2 Tliess. iii. 6, 14 : but appears to introduce it merely for the purpose of repeating the same invective, declamation, and misrepresentations, of which we have had abundance already. Upon that passage, therefore, I shall only notice the striking instance it affords of the deceitfulnes&, with which his false zeal leads him to handle the word of God. He writes thus : " Such [disorderly brethren] the Apostle commands and exhorts, with quietness to work and eat their own bread. He commands the Church not to count these disorderly brethren as enemies, but admo7iish them as brethren. Should they, however, persist in their evil course, he commands the Church (in verse G) to withdraw them- selves from such. la the 14th verse he repeats in other words the same direction." SOME OBSERVATIONS ON A TAMPIILET, &c. 43 Here M. evidently represents — untl (I must say) with intentional artifice, represents — tlic Ajjostolie direction, count lilm not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother, as ap])lying' only while the dis • urderlv brother was yet held in their fellowship by the Church, or previous to his removal from it. lie found this necessary to main- tain his svstem ; and therefore boldly tears the loth verse out of the position and connexion which it actually holds, and ])uls it before the 6th. To establish this charge, it is sufficient to quote the 14th and loth verses. 14. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. — 15. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. Alas! II. M., when we find ourselves involved in a system, which cannot be maintained without perverting Scripture so grossly, as you do here, we ought rather to suspect tl)at our system is un- scriptund ; and instead of vainly striving to wrest the divine word into a seeming accordance with our system, we ought to rejoice that this should be corrected by that unerring standard. While I would press such suggestions upon you, and would beseech you not lightlv to spurn theni from you, I have to confess with shame of myself, that mv own judgment was at one time led into a state of vacillation upon that direction in the 1 oth verse, — led into it (I believe) chieflv bv the undue weight and influence, which I idlowcd the judgment of an- other to have upon mine. But, for a considerable time past, I have been made content to return to that simple view of the passage, which I long ago put forward, and which must at once present itself to every unbiassed reader. SOME OBSERVATIONS ON Mr. H.'s pamphlet, &c. When the Exchange party discovered that the precept in 1 Cor. V. 11. which forbids us "even to eat with" the class of persons there described, is yet consistent with our maintaining the utmost freedom of convivial intercourse with them ; I was certain, and avowed the certainty, that they would not stop there : that such of them as persisted in their opposition to that precept, after the plain exposure of it, would proceed yet further in their wickedness. What I jire- dicted is abundantly verified in Mr. H.'s audacious production, and in the reception or toleration of it by the party. I have at length waded through his disgusting pages ; and proceed to complv with your desire, in putting on paper the substance of the few remarks on the subject which I made to you in conversation, with a very little additional matter which the perusal of his pages has suggested. The topic which he has selected to sport with — the final state of those who perish in their sins — is one, which a Christian in his right 44 SOME OBSERVATIONS ON A PAMPHLET, &c. mind will approach with awe : and we certainly did not need Mr. H. to write a pamphlet to instruct us that some of the expressions by which that state is described are figurative. When we read such language as that in Mark ix. 44, 46. " Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched" — I believe none of us were accus- tomed to think of a literal worm or literal fire and brimstone. But if the language of Scripture on the subject has any meaning, I may confidently assert that it imports a state of miserable existence, and not mere 7ion-existence, or annihilation, as Mr. H. maintains. The condemned " shall go away into everlasting punishment," [la xoXoctTiv diuvioyl Matth. XXV. 46. — "shall be cast out into outer dark- ness, where shall be weeping (G.) and gnashing of teeth;" Matth. viii. 12.xiii.42, 50. Luke xiii. 28. punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord." 2 Thess. 1, 9. &c. That all such language imports a state of misery, it would be a waste of words to set about proving : and the plainest believer of the Scriptures has abundant ground to reject Mr. H. as a teacher of lies, when he would persuade us that it imports no state of being at all, but the deprivation of all being, or annihilation — (you will find that he ex- pressly employs this phrase several times in his pamphlet ; as in pp. 24, 35, 40. 58, 63.) As to argument in his pamphlet, in proof of what he maintains, there is really none, but a contemptible play on the expressions destroy and destruction. These he assumes to be equivalent with annihilation ; though he must be well aware, that they commonly imply what we call ruin, the reduction of a thing or person to a state opposite to the state of ivell-being. If any one should throw some oil of vitriol on Mr. H.'s best coat, he would probably exclaim that it was destroyed; without at all intending to say that it was annihilated. But perhaps I ought to consider as argument his daring insinua- tion of mahgnity and unrighteousness in God (p. 22.) if he should visit with everlasting punishment " guilt contracted during a life (H.) of three score years and ten ;" and his appeals to our moral sense, in confirmation of this imputation against the most High. If this is to be considered argument, it is an argument which / will not under- take to answer. A day is at hand when it shall be refuted indeed, and its impious folly exposed to men and angels. But I would here remark, that — next to the hardy fearlessness of his opposition to the divine word — there is no character in the pam- phlet that strikes me more forcibly, throughout its pages, than its dishonest artifice. Among the instances of this, I reckon his arguing largely — or rather declaiming verbosely — against ideas, to which he knows that all scriptural disciples are as much opposed as he ; as against the popish doctrine of purgatory, — against the notion of Christ having descended into Hell, the place of the condemned, to endure their torments, &c. Against this he seems to take pride in disporting himself, upon the notion of " an exchange of eternal for tridual torments," — " of a three days' residence in flau\es being equivalent to a just and indispensable eternity of torture ;" &c. p. 26, 27. — and appears so enamoured with the ingenuity of this redoubt- SOME OBSF.IIVATIONS ON A I'AMPIII.ET, &c. 45 able argument, (I.) that he rcjieats it three times in the space of less than two papfcs. Now all such parade of ari^unicut aq'ainst senti- ments professed by the most uiiscriptural, but wholly unconnected with the scriptural truth which ho opjioscs, is really but a stalkinf^ horse to conceal that opposition, or an artful attempt to attach some imairinarv force to it in the view of unrefiectiiij^ readers : and such iiuleed are the generality, liut under this head of dislu)ncst artifice, I would mark particularly his constant style of language, in putting forward the grossest representations of Popery and I'oetry concerning the state of the condemned, as necessarily coincident with the scrip- tural doctrine which he opposes ; ringing perpetual changes on the idea of the wicked l)cing made to endure " eternal tortures" in a " Tor- ture-House,"— in which, " God had determined to torment them ever- lastingly ;" p. 55. — the devil represented as "forking the wretched in flames ; — while — benevolence itself hears, but regards not, the eternal shrieks of the malignant victims," p. 65. I almost shudder, while I transcribe his profane language : but it is well adapted to carry away many a reader. Now the dishonesty of artifice, which I notice in the whole of it, is this : — it insidiously represents us as holding, that the misery of the condemned is a misery superinduced on them by the infliction of torture, as by racks, wheels, &c. — and from which they would be exempt, if they were only let alone and left to themselves . So far from this being the case, I avow that I can conceive no more awful view of their misery, than that of their being utterly abandoned to themselves. It is with sobriety I w'ould think, or speak, upon the subject. The redeemed are told of their blessedness and coming gloiy : but we are told also that " we know not yet what we shall be ;" and are restrained from idle speculation on the particular scene and circum- stances of our future happiness. No marvel, therefore, that we are left equally in the dark concerning the particular scene and circum- stances of the final misery of the condemned. We are furnished, however, with general conceptions of both, in the way of con- trast. As we shall hear the joj-ful summons, " come ye blessed," and " shall be ever with the Lord," in whose " presence is the fulness of joy ;" so they shall be banished from it, under the irrevo- cable sentence, " depart, ye cursed." As " the glor}^ of God and the Lamb" shall be our light of enjoyment, (Rev. xx. 23.) so their utter exclusion from all this is aptly represented as a state of " outer dark- ness." As we " shall be like Him," so they shall be left under the bondage of that fallen nature, which is " enmitv against God " and opposed to his image. Can imagination picture any thing more awful, than a number of such evil creatures left to themselves ? to the fire of their own unsated passions, and the gnawings of remorse ? Even in this world there are horrid scenes of human wretchedness arising from and essentially connected with human wickedness ; of wretchedness so acute, that men often attempt (K.) a plunge into annihilation in order to escape it. But this world, as the stage on which God's wonderful work of mercy is going forward, has never yet exhibited human wretchedness or human wickedness, but accom- panied with numberless circumstances mitigating the effects of both ; 46 NOTES. the restraints of civil government, — the connexions of social life im- posing prudential control, — the sun of heaven shining, and the rain descending on the imjust, as well as on the just, — and God not leav- ing himself without a witness to the sons of men, in " doing them good " continually. This world would not otherwise he a fit stage for carrying on the divine pui-poses, for which it is as j^et preserved. But after those purposes shall have been accomplished, is Mr. H. prepared to arraign the Almighty, if he should not continue those manifestations of his goodness to the condemned ? if he should not maintain a continuance of the same circumstances, to control their wickedness and mitigate its effects ? Is he quite sure, that God is bound to terminate at once their wickedness and their misery, by annihilating them ? that the righteous governor of the universe may not leave them to the continuance of both ? — may not leave them in- deed to themselves, a terrible memento to perhaps unnumbered worlds, and unnumbered ages, of the awful effects of a creature's apostacy from the Creator ? I might easily enforce and enlarge on the subject. But I gladly turn from it ; and without noticing many other things in the pamphlet, which prove the writer to have plunged much deeper into systematic infidelity than he avows. I am glad of its publication : for none who fear God and tremble at his word can now be imposed on by Mr. H. or his party. You remark, that H. must get rid of the resurrection of the unjust altogether; and no doubt the idea of their being re-created in order to be re-annihilated is exquisitely absurd. But how can he get rid of it, till he expunges such texts as Acts xxiv. 15. and Dan. xii. 2. ? I should think it quite unsuitable for any of us to attempt any detailed reply to his pamphlet. NOTES. A. (page 26.) A former letter. Former is not inserted in the text, but neither is it inserted 2 Cor. viii. 8, where we yet are sure that it is to be understood, as he there plainly refers to this first Epistle. We know also from 1 Cor. vii. 1, that previous to this letter there was an epis- tolary intercourse between the Corinthian Church and the Apostle. B. (page 26.) Hold no society, (/.n a-vvavaiA.iywi9aci. That the Apostle employs this expression in the most comprehensive sense, as includingboth Chris- tian fellowship and civil companionship, is plain from its use in the 9th verse, combined with his own explanation of his meaning in that injunction. And this establishes the meaning of the same word in 2 Thess. iii. 14. NOTES. 47 C. (page 27.) Not even. (/.rl^t. ITcrc our triinslators Invc cx])rcssc(l the emphasis of tliis negation l)y cU)iibling the ncg.itivc — "no not ;" and in Kpli. V. 3, by inserting owre — " /ct it not be once navied (imnncj i/ou ," and of the ecpiivalent oi/Ss , in the first verse of the i)rcsent eliapter, by inserting so murh as — " is not ir-o much as named among the G'enli/es." (This however would be more aceuratelv rendered — " /.* not named even among the Gentiles.") — The emphatic force of the negative — not KVKN to vat — at onee exposes the worse than absurditv of those, who have interpreted the eating forbidden inverse 11, to mean eating the Lord's Supper ! — That gloss indeed is abundantly refuted by the con- nexion of verse 11 with verse 10, from which it is undeniable, that when the Apostle says not even to eat ivith such an one, he intends an eating in which they were at liberty to partake with heathens. We onlv add that, as the precept in v. 11, maj" evidently be vio- lated in various ways besides eating with the person put away, — (as if we should call him to take a walk of pleasure with us, &c.) — so it may not be violated at all by the mere circumstance of our dining at the same table with him. This may be imavoidable from the rela- tions and duties of life. It may occur, without our seeking, at a public table, or at the table of a friend with whom we have never been in Christian fellowship. And we protest agfiinst calling such cases exceptions to the Apostolic rule, as if there were any case in which obedience to his command might be dispensed with. D. (Page 34.) With heathens. M. in p. 9, of his pamphlet, quotes a passage from our statement, in which — in a kind of professed paraphrase — we endeavoured to set before our brethren a plain connected view of the last five verses of the chapter ; and in quoting it indeed he chooses to make absolute nonsense of the passage, by omitting the words — " But it did not." This however is a trifle. But he is highly indignant with me, because in that paraphrase I substituted the expression — heathen fornicators — for that of " fornicators of this world." V. 10. For this he as usual rails at me as " perverting the right ways of the Lord," and " insidiously suljstituting" the one expression for the other, in order to make what he calls " a distinc- tion bet^'een a professing fornicator of the world, and a non-profess- ing fornicator of the world." When I knew li. M. — (but alas ! it is quite another H. ]M. that I have now to do with) — he would have been ashamed even to intimate, that a paraphrase must or ought to consist of the same words as those paraphrased. It is indeed requi- site that it should not. That the words which I so insidioushj sub- stituted convey exactly the raeanirig, which the Apostle intended to convev in the 10th verse by " fornicators of the world," is demon- strable. Corinth was a heathen city ; though there were certainlv in it Jewish inhabitants also, and a Jewish svnagogue. With these, however, the Apostle could not have meant to say that the Christians 48 NOTES. might hold free worldly intercourse, because the principles of the Jew's religion would not allow them to hold it with Gentiles. When he therefore substantially tells them that they may lawfully hold such intercourse in eating, &c. with " fornicators of this world," he cer- tainly did intend heathen fornicators. And why is M. so angry at this paraphrase .'' Because he is de- termined to set aside the Apostle's plain command in the next verse, interdicting the Christians from holding even such intercourse with the fornicator appearing among themselves, and whom he calls them to put away from among them. M. is determined to maintain, against the express words of the Apostle, that he leaves them at the same liberty to eat with him as with fornicators of the world ; and descends to maintain it even by that truly contemptible special- pleading, that this man — when put out of the Church — would be one of those without, a fornicator of this world ! Obliged, as I am, to pass over numerous things in his pamphlet which would call for exposure and reprehension, I should scarcely have taken any notice of this passage in his 9th page, did I not view it as closely connected with an error, which has been long working in Ireland among those with whom I was lately connected, and which distracted the Dublin Church for many months before the introduc- tion of the disputes against the precept in 1 Cor. v. 11 . The error to which I allude, has assumed various forms and dresses ; for its partizans have been studious to disguise it ; but it seems to have at bottom this principle: — that none are to be considered as even pro- fessing Christians, but those who are found in connexion with Churches of an apostolic character, following in faith and practice the first Churches " which in Judea were in Christ Jesus." From this erroneous principle evidently sprang the wicked efforts made, to impose on us a law against putting forward the Scriptures or scrip- tural truth to the attention of our fellow sinners around us, though for the purpose of exposing and refuting the Anti-christian errors which prevail throughout Christendom. The deep erroneousness of the prmciple referred to, I have long ago shewn at large in one of my pieces against the modern Baptism. Indeed it is sufficiently refuted by the Apostle's language in 2 Tim. iii. 1 — 5, where the awful characters of manifested wickedness which he enumerates are evidently described as what would appear in men professing the faith of Christ, though proving that they possessed it not, that they were not what they professed to be : — for it is only in contrast with the sacredness of that profession, that these characters of wickedness could be considered marvellous in any of the human race. The man who tells me, that he believes what the Evangelists and Apostles testify concerning Jesus of Nazareth, as the Messiah foretold in the Scriptures of the Old Testament ; that he died, and that he rose again from the dead ; — that man is in my view distinguished as a professed Christian, from heathens, and avowed infidels, — even when I find him imder the deepest and most deadly errors, or walking in the foulest lusts of the flesh ; — even when he is cast out from the household of faith for his wickedness, when he is to me "as an heathen," and when his wickedness appears even more awful than that of heathens. NOTKs. 49 K. (page 3S.) Excluded li'im from all Christian fellowship, &c. — I would mark dis- tinctlv, that by Christian fillotrship I mean all that fellowship which is peculiar to Christi.ins one with another as Chris^tians. I could wish that M. had employed as distinct a lane^age to designate that companionship in eating, which he acknowledges the disciples are forbidden in the 11th verse to hold with the characters there des- cribed. But here he seems to labour for vague circumlocutions, such as indicate either indistinctness of ideas, or indisposition to express his meaning distinctly. He talks (p. 7.) of " Christian society both religious and social ;" and of its being " as evil to retain a wicked person in social Christian intercourse as in religious," &c. Now I confess that I am doubtful what he means by social Christian society, or intercourse, in oj^position to religious ; and I suspect that he has no clear or settled idea of it in his own mind. He does not mean the companionship in eating, &c. which Christians maintain indif- ferently with each other or with the world : for this he holds they are at libertv to maintain also with the wicked person put away from among them. Nor does he mean mutual intercom'se in any things peculiarlv Christian ; for this would be of a religious character ? \Vhat then is that social Christian intercourse, Avhich is not of a religious character, but which he admits the Corinthian disciples could not lawfuUv maintain with that fornicator ? But let us try and feel our way. If there be a dinner-partv or a tea-party, where all in the company happen to be members of the same Christian Church, will j\I. consider their companionship as necessarily constituting the "social Christian society," from which a wicked person must be excluded .'' I think I have witnessed such parties in Dublin, and that they would not have been at all defiled by the admission of a couple of the w'ickedest fiddlers, to aid the music or the dance : and this because the company were neither engaged, nor had been called together for the pui-pose of engaging, in any thing distinctively Christian. Eating together, or dancing together, or playing a piece of music together, may be all very good or harm- less things in their place ; but they are things not distinctively Chris- tian, even in the circumstance I have supposed, where none but Christians happen to be engaged in them. Two Christians may have mercantile intercourse or dealings with each other ; one may buy a horse of the other : but would M. call this " social Christian intercourse." because both buyer and seller are Christians ? I think not. The intercourse is of a mercantile or worldly nature, just as much as if they were both heathens, or one a Christian and the other a heathen. Christians indeed are called, " whether thev eat or drink, or whatever they do, to do all to the glory of God." But this does not debar them from eating and drinking with persons of the world, or engaging with them, as there may be occasion, in any acts not distinctively Christian. And thus, when I latelv had the satisfaction of receiving in my house and at my table some of my brethren from Ireland, — while our intercourse proceeded on the ground of Christian brotherhood and Christian hospitalitv, it was not VOL. II. K 50 NOTES. at all defiled by the entrance of an unbelieving friend or neiglibour, (as happened more than once), and his eating and drinking with us. I may seem to have dwelt needlessly long upon this topic ; but I have found it necessary, from the ambiguity of M.'s language about social Christian society, &c., which was calculated to intangle the consciences of the weak. Perhaps however he puts forward some- thing more distinct and specific, when he refers to Jude 12, as exem- plifying that " social Christian intercourse," from which that wicked person was to be excluded, as much as from " religious Christian in- tercourse." There the Apostle mentions the feasts of charity, or feasts of love, customary in the first Churches, and called Agapa: from the Greek w^ord expressing love. With respect to these, it is generally admitted, and the opinion is countenanced by what we read in 1 Cor. xi. — that they were a common meal, of which the brethren partook, in the place of their assembling on the first day of the week, either before or after their eating of the Lord's Supper ; which meal was provided at the expense of the richer brethren. Now it is quite obvious, that this common meal of which members of the Church partook, and no others, and which it is plain was originally designed to express the Christian brotherhood and Christian afl^ection of all who joined in it, — it is obvious (I say) that this was an act of distinctively Christian fellowship ,- and that it would indeed have been a profanation of that fellowship to have admitted to it any one not standing in connexion with the Church. Nor can I understand why M. conceives such a Christian feast of love not to participate in the religious, as well as social character. But amidst all the sharp rebuke, which the Apostle gives the Corinthian Christians for their gross abuse of this common meal, — (on account of which abuse he intimates that it would be better to lay aside the custom altogether), there is not the slightest intimation that they had ever thought of receiving any of those that were without to participate with them in it. Is it not evident therefore that the Corinthian disciples, when they found themselves enjoined to put that incestuous person out of their Church, must have understood that they were debarred from continuing to hold any Christian fellowship with him ; and therefore from admitting him to that feast of love, which was peculiar to their Christian fellowship } I must therefore say, that M.'s daring interpolation in the 11th verse would introduce a direction wholly superfluous, after the com- mand given in the 5th and 7th verses. / should not dare to express myself thus, if the fact were, that the Apostle — after enjoining his removal from all Christian fellowship with them — had thought fit to specify in the 11th verse a particular exercise of that fellowship as the smallest. But he has not. F. (Page 38.) In such a connexion, &c. — In our printed Statement of June 2d (Note C. p. 47.) I had said, that from the connexion of v, 11 with V. 10, "it is undeniable, that when the Apostle says not even to eat with such an one, he intends an eating, in which they were at libertv to NOTES. 51 partlike with heathens." M. by flatly deuyhig it, proves that in one sense I was mistaken. However, gratuitous denials and gratuitous assertions are of very little weight. Let us examine the matter. Probably M. will not deny that the two verses are closely con- nected, not merely in order of sequence, but in subject matter ; though indeed he has concealed that connexion as much as he could, by the manner in which he has quoted them, as well as by his alter- ation of the word altogether into at all. — (Of either his meaning or his object in asserting that such ought to be the version of 'na),Tus, I confess myself ignorant.) — The connection is manifestly this. In the 9th and 10th verses he tells them that they had mistaken his meaning in a former letter, when they supposed that, bv prohibiting all intermixture with fornicators, he had intended fornicators of this world : and he briefly marks to them, wl'.at might have prevented their mistake, tluit a command not to intermix at all with thnn wovdd amount to a command that they should quit the world altogether. — (Now let it be noted that the intermixture with fornicators of this world, which he allows, and which they had mistakenly supposed he forbade, was certainly not of a religious character, not in any thing connected with Christian fellowship ; but exclusively in the things of civil society and the ordinary intercourse of this life, as in eating together, &c. : just as in a subsequent chapter he says, ' If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go,' &c., 1 Cor. X. 97.) He ])roceeds in the 11th verse to mark what fornicators he reallv intended, and what their conduct towards them must be ; and this, in manifest contrast with the mistaken sense in which they had before understood him. " But xow :" But now I tell you that I intended not a fornicator of this world, but such a character appearing in the church — among yourselves ; and that with such an one ye are indeed to have no intermixture, not even to eat with him, much less to retain him among you in Christian fellow- ship. Now when I say, that I am allowed to eat with a heathen fornicator, but am not allowed even to eat with a fornicator bearing the name of a brother ; what reasonable and candid man could under- stand the expression — eating with — in two different senses, in the two clauses thus closely connected .'' or could question whether it is not the same social act, which is allowed me with the one, but for- bidden me with the other ? I almost blame myself for employing so many words, to prove what is really so plain on the very face of the Apostle's language in its connexion, that it is perhaps obscured in any attempt to prove it. Hitherto I have marked only the connexion of the 1 1th verse with that immediately preceding, in proof that the Apostle means what he says, when he charges the Corinthian disciples not even to eat with such an one. But the same thing still more abundantly ap- pears, from its connexion with the verse immediately following : "For tvhat have I to do to judge them also that are ivithout ? Do not ye judge them that are within ? " Now the conjunction — For, manifestly marks a connexion of this principle with the com- mand not even to eat with such an one. As if the Apostle added — " I say with such a wicked person among yourselves. For why should K 2 o2 NOTES. ye suppose, as ye did, that I would extend that judgment to such characters of the unbeheving world ? that I would command you not to eat with them also ? What have we to do with the characters or conduct of those that are without ? Them God judgeth. We judge those that are within. Therefore put away from among yourselves, from all intermixture with you, not only in Christian fellowship, but even in social companionship, that wicked person who is among you under the name of a brother." — I ask the Christian reader, marking this connexion, whether the companionship in eating mentioned in the 11th verse can be considered as a different kind of eating, from that which is referred to in the 12th. — And here I believe I ought to close the subject, and to lay down my pen. The attempt is idle to force those to see who are determined to shut their eyes. (G. Page 44.) Honest Mr. H. partly quotes these words in p. 59. but with sin- gular disingenuousness. His system, as any intelligent reader of his production must perceive, is that death is the extinction of being or annihilation ; agreeing in this with aU the French atheists ; but differing from them in a point, which indeed only renders him much more extravagantly absurd. Unable to get over the declaration, that there shall be a resurrection of the unjust, as well as of the just, he holds that those who have died in their sins are to be restored to existence at the great day, but this only for the purpose of hearing the sentence pronounced on them, which shall consign them back to annihilation again ! He declaims on the anguish they must feel — the momentary anguish in hearing their doom ; and adds — " well might the same be described as a scene of wailing and gnashing of teeth." And so he gets rid of such passages. But any one who will be at the trouble of looking at the passages, where the expression does occur in the evangelists, will see that the Lord employs it — not to describe any momentary scene of anguish in the condemned, previous to the execution of their sentence, but the consequence of its execution ; — not any passing scene, but a permanent state. He attempts, with similar dexterity, to get rid of the plain words of Christ in Matt. xxv. 46. " We read" (says he, p. 52.) " of everlast- ing punishment : but never of everlasting pain, everlasting misery." It is truly a nice distinction between punishment and pain, between misery and a state described as that of outer darkness, with weeping and gnashing of teeth— (outer darkness may naturally be conceived to indicate the utter deprivation of enjoyment, as its opposite light is continually employed as the symbol of joy.) — But out of his own mouth the rash man shall be condemned. He tells us in a note, p. 9, " The term eternal or everlasting death is not in Scripture ; it would be a pleonasm." Well, then, as we do read of everlasting punishment, this punishment cannot be the annihilation or extinction of being, which Mr. H. understands by death, and which he maintains to be the only denounced sentence against sin, and " the precise amount of penalty" due to it. Ikit I am almost ashamed of attempting to ex- pose such stuff. NOTES. 53 11. (Page 44.) It mnv appear to Mr. II. very \vi.«e and philosophical to estimate the amount of guilt by the length of time in which it has been con- tracted. But it is excessively absurd. We might as well make light of the wickedness of his pamphlet from the shortness of the time in which he penned it. I. (Page 45.) It might be curious to transfer a similar argument to his own idea of " the precise amount of penalty" (p. 65.) due to sin, and which he says the atonement paid, according to the view which he takes of death as the extinction of being. But it is not within my object to examine the tissue of absurd inconsistences in his pamphlet ; and in which a much abler writer than Mr. H. would necci^sarily be involved, in maintaining his lie under a professed appeal to the word of truth. K. (Page 45.) In one passage (p. 59.) Mr. H. facetiously remarks " one good effect I will concede to the doctrine [of Hell toraients :] it certainly has a tendency to keep men from hanging themselves. Yet he aftenvards seems to retract this sportive concession ; for he tells us (p. 63.) that annihilation is indeed the most terrible subject that a living being can contemplate." But he has himself some suspicion of a more terrible ; for in p. 35. he guards the position w^ith a perhaps ; — " the apprehension of annihilation is perhaps more exquisitely dreadful than the expectation of eternal life, even in misery and torment ! " — The phraseology of the whole sentence, if it were worth quoting at large, would shew a curious vacillation and misgiving of mind in the writer, when he indited it. 54 REMARKS, COKRECTIVli or OCCASIONAL MISTRANSLATIONS IN IHE ENGLISH VERSION OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. [First Published 1831.] TO WHICH ARE NOW ADDED SEVERAL EXPOSITORY REMARKS, NOT BEFORE PUBLISHED, ADVERTISEMENT. The following pages form a small part of a series of remarks which I have for some time wished to publish. The printing of these in a detached form is in compliance with the desire of a friend, to whom I happened to communicate the observations on the passage in the Epistle of James, and who conceived that they may be serviceable for checking some melancholy delusions, which have lately appeared in this city. I cannot put out even these few coiTcctions of our English Trans- lation of the Bible, without distinctly stating, that I hold at a very high rate the general excellence of that translation. It was executed, with much pains and care, by men who were sound scholars, and (what is even of greater importance in this matter,) by men who were intentionally /fiz/^/M? in the work. In these respects it stands most favourably distinguished from the various new translations, put forward since, by persons deficient alike in learning and in honesty. As men, however, our translators were fallible. They were also, in some degree, restrained from the free exercise of their own judg- ment, by the instructions of their royal employer ; and their con- ADVERTISEMENT. oo nexion with state-religion unavoidably product;d some unfavorable bias on their minds. While I, therefore, deprecate the thought of displacing their version, to make room for any other which could now be substituted, I vet conceive that such occasional corrections of it, as are exemplified in the following pages, mav be of use to the English reader for clearing the true meaning of particular passages. No English readers need be deterred from perusing these Remarks by the Greek characters which occasionally occur in them. These may be altogether passed over, without any injury to the general meaning. In the few cases where I do quote the original, it is for the sake of those readers who are more or less capable of examining it, but who may not have any copy of the Greek Testament immedi- ately at hand. Let me add, that I have not in any instance thought it necessary to examine, whether I have been anticipated in my criticisms by any other writers. I am less solicitous about the originality of my re- marks, than about their justice and utility. What has heretofore been done in the wav of biblical criticism has generally been inacces- sible to all, except the learned. It has been one of my objects to present what I offer in a form in which the Christian reader, who knows not any language but the English, shall be competent both to understand my remarks, and to estimate their truth. 56 REMARKS, CORRECTIVE OF OCCASIONAL MISTRANSLATIONS IN THE ENGLISH VERSION OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES. I. *' Is any sick among you ? Let him call fur the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of the Lord ; and the prayer of faith shell Save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and, if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.'" — James v. 14, 15. Instead of the words, "shall save the sick," we should read " shall heal the sick," or restore him to health. Nothing is more indubitable than this correction. The Greek word aua-ei is applicable to deliverance from any danger or calamit}^ as preservation from drowning, (Matt. xiv. 30.) to escape in ship- wreck, (Acts xxvii. 31, 44 ; xxviii. 1, 4.) &c. But in no fewer than eleven other passages of the New Testament, is the word applied to recovery from sickness, or deliverance from bodily infirmities, viz. Matt. ix. 21, 22 ; Mark v. 23, 28, 34 ; vi. 56 ; x. 52 ; Luke viii. 36, 50 ; John xi. 12 ; Acts iv. .9. In all these places our translators have rightly employed some English phrase denoting restoration to health, or bodily soundness ; wliile, in all of them, the Greek word is precisely the same, as they have mistranslated save, in James v. 15. (The same verb also, only compounded with a preposition, occurs in the same sense in Matt. xiv. 36, and Luke vii. 3.) That it is deliverance from disease that is here intended, appears indeed plainly from the words of the passage, " shall save the sick," and "the Lord shall raise him up." The latter expression is com- monly applied to a person raised up from a sick bed, as in Matt. viii. 15 ; ix. 6, 7, 25 ; Mark i. 32. And as to the former words, no one capable of reading the original to any advantage, can doubt that the necessary import of the Greek a-uaa tov KAMNONTa is, — " shall de- liver him from his sickness." The man who does not feel this to be the decisive force of the words, at least when his attention is directed to it, may think that he knows Greek, because he has learned to spell it ; but he really knows nothing of the language to any usefiU purpose. Something of this may be felt even by the mere English reader, if for " the sick," we substitute the phrase " the patient." In mark- ing the character or state of the person whose deliverance, is spoken of, the nature of the deliverance intended is sufficiently intimated. n K M A II K S CORli !•; C T 1 \ I', , .S. c. 57 If Diio 1ms fallen into the water, and I exclaim, " who will bave that diowninfi^ man ?" could anyone doubt that the exi)iession " A-aue " in such a connexion, implied deliver him from drowning ? Even so in the case of a sick person ; if I speak of something as that which will save the patient, is it not manifest from the connexion, that, by his being saved, I mean simply delivered from his disease ? But some perhaps may urge, as an objection to this view, that it is written, " if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him." — It is : and this leads me to mark one or two things for the further elucidation of the passage. It is plain, that it could not have been the Apostle's design to give anv directions by which a Christian should be exempted from the bodilv infirmities, and ultimate mortality, which are the common allotment of aU men in this world. But beside such cases of sickness and of death as occur in what ia called the ordinary course of nature, the Scriptures expressly teach, that there are other cases, wliich form part of the fatherly discipline which the Lord maintains over his children, for their profitable cor- rection, and "that they should not be condemned with the world." Ilebr. xii. 5, 7 ; Job v. 17, 18 ; xxxvi. 8, 10; Ps. Ixxxix. 30, 33. Thus, when the Apostle Paul rebukes the Corinthian church for their gross abuse of the Lord's Sapper, he declares to them, (1 Cor. xi. SO, 31.) "for this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep," that is, have been visited with death. He recals their attention to the divine origin and nature of the ordinance which they had so much perverted, that it ceased with them to be the Lord's Supper, (v. 20,) and testifies that in this they were " eating and drinking judgment to themselves," (v. 29,) that is, bringing on themselves those judicial visitations of sickness, and death itself, by w^hich the Lord mercifully rebuked their sin. Now it is evidently such a case of sickness that is spoken of in the passage under consideration from the Epistle of James, when it is said, " if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him :" that is, if the sickness has been sent as a visitation of corrective discipline for sin. And, in such a view, the sick person appears to be represented as acknowledging it when he calls for the elders of the church, that he may be restored to health. His sin being forgiven, the rod of correction which it had occasioned shall be removed. One word more on the anointing with oil, directed in the passage. ' As we have seen that the case of disease spoken of, was, in one sense, beside the ordinary course of nature, so also was its removal. The sick person was restored to health, through the inten'ention of the elders of the church, in the exercise of that supernatural "gift of healing," (1 Cor. xii. 9,) which existed in the Apostolic age, and for the confirmation of the Apostolic mission. Yet the cure, though superhuman, was preceded by an external application, and by prayer. And, in like manner, we find that the Lord Jesus, when about to confer sight on the man born blind, " anointed his eyes" with moistened clay, and directed him to "wash in the pool of Siloam," John ix. 6, 7. Many other examples might be adduced, but in Mai-k vi. 13, it is expressly related of the twelve Apostles, when first sent out by 58 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. the Lord, and endowed with miraculous gifts, that, in heahng the sick, they employed this very act of anointing with oil : " they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them." I have treated this passage the more at large for two reasons : First, because it is by this text of Scripture alone that the Papists attempt to support their extreme unction, a rite which they employ, not with any view to the recovery of the sick person, (for they never administer it save when his recovery is hopeless, and he is considered " in extremis,") but as a kind of safe passport out of the world. The view of the passage which I have proposed, and which I defy all their priests to refute, affords a short and easy method of proving the corruption of that communion, and of refuting its arrogant pre- tensions to infallibility ; when we find one of their so called seven sacraments, resting on the grossest mistake, about the meaning of the passage, by which they endeavour to support it. Perhaps it may please Him, who doeth great wonders, according to the counsel of his own will, to bring these pages under the eye of even some eccle- siastic of that most corrupt communion, and to bless to his conviction the plain remarks which I have offered ; so that he may be no longer a blind leader of the blind, but may see and abhor the foulness of the imposture which he has been instrumental in palming on the people. But, secondly, because I have known some who appeared really at a loss to account for it, that those who now maintain the obligation on disciples of returning fully to the enjoined practice of the Apos- tolic churches, do yet not think of acting in case of sickness accord- ing to the directions here given by James. Now, from the real meaning of it, which I have sufficiently established, it appears that there is, in these days, no room for putting that direction in practice, since the miraculous gift of healing no longer exists in the churches. We might as reasonably pretend to put in practice the Apostolic direction, in 1 Cor. xiv. 27, concei*ning the gift of tongues, although no such gift now exists, nor is ever likely to be renewed. Any attempt of the kind, in either case, would be found, on examination, to be not any conformity to Apostolic rule, but a farcical mimickry of what was practised in that day, under circumstances that no longer exist. Having incidentally expressed my opinion that the miraculous gifts are never likely to be renewed in the churches, I would briefly state the grounds of that opinion. It is not that the Lord is less really, or less gloriously, with his people at this day than in the Apostolic age. It is not that his arm is shortened, or that their high privileges are diminished. O, no ! He is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever ; the same mighty God of Jacob, who wrouglit all the recorded wonders for Israel in Egypt, at the Red Sea, and in the wilderness ; and believers of the Gospel are his true Israel, " a people saved by the LORD," a people for whom he has obtained eternal redemption, who are the "children of God, and as children are heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ," Rom. xviii. 17. Can any language express, or any imagination picture a height of privilege and blessedness superioj- to this ? REMARKS CORRECTIVE, *c. A9 NDr was the possession or exercise of niiraculous g^ifts the {greatest privilege of believers in the Apostolic days, nor any peculiar part of their jirivilege. They were possessed and exercised by some who were not disciples indeed, as they had been even by Judas Iscariot. The same folly and hardness of heart which Christ upbraided of old in that language, " except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not be- lieve,"— it is the same that ever makes us think of the cessation of miraculous gifts as a diminution of our Christian privilege. Of all these miraculous powers, as existing in the Apostolic Churches, I conceive that we may say what we are expressly taught of one of them, (1 Cor. xiv. 22.) that they were not designed to serve them that believe, but " were a sign to them that believed not." Now they were a sign simply of the divine authority, sanctioning the Apostolic ministry. They accredited that ; were calcidated to draw attention to that, and left without excuse those who rejected it ; thev did not communicate, and never were designed to communicate a knowledge of the truth. They did not enlighten the understand- ing of those who witnessed them, to discern the real import and glorv of the Apostolic testimonv. They answered, however, the tem- porary purpose for which they were designed. But could this revival in the churches answer the same pui-pose now ? I think it could not. With respect to the great mass of Christendom, who verbally ac- knowledge the Apostolic mission, as of divine origin, there is not anv need or occasion for that jim'pose to be answered to them. And, with respect to others, who avowedly reject their mission as a human imposture, (a small number comparatively, but an increasing number, and hkely to increase much more, and rapidly,) the renewal of mi- raculous powers generally, among professing Christians, would seem to be calculated only for giving a kind of supernatural sanction, in the eyes of Deists, to all the coiTuptions and errors of the Anti- christian world ; and, if we suppose them renewed only among those who are Christians indeed, (not to say that this would be directly opposite to what took place in the Apostolic age,) would it not be calculated to give such a supernatural sanction, as we have no reason either to expect or desire, to the Christian profession of certain individuals, or certain bodies, to the genuineness of their faith, and correctness of their practice ? For such an end as this they certainly never were ordained of old. For these reasons I look not for the renewal of miraculous gifts in the Church of God, nor regard their cessation as any want ; while I am quite ready to admit that they shall be renewed, if any period or circumstances should return, when their renewal would be for His glory, and the good of His people. Some may wonder that I have touched this subject. But I have been led to it from finding (what does not surprise me) — that parties and individuals are starting up in these countries who put forwai'd, or insinuate, pretensions to the possession of miraculous gifts. This, and eveiy other delusion, we may expect to be multiplied as the coming of the Lord drawcth nigh. 60 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. II. Having damnation because they have cast off' their first faith. — 1 Tim. v. 12. Our translators seem to liave been unfortunately fond of intro- ducing this word damnation ; and frequently, where the original con- veys nothing at all like the import of that English expression. The present passage, for example, ought to be rendered " having censure," or "incurring censure, because they have made light of their first faith," that is, of the faith pledged to the first husband. The second marriage of a female was generally considered discredit- able. By contracting it she was conceived to throw a slight on the memory of her former husband, and so to violate a kind of fidelity still due to him, though dead. Thus Virgil represents the widowed Dido on ^neas's desertion of her, as bewailing her breach of faith to the dead Sychceus. (Non servata fides, cineri promissa Sychceo ! Mn. iv. 552.) The English expressions damn and damnation are immediately formed from the Latin damnare, and damnatio, which signify to con- demn— condemnation ; and in this general meaning the English deri- vatives were originally employed. But having long lost that general meaning, by the popular application of the terms exclusively to the futvu"e punishment of the ungodly, these expressions ought to be ex- punged from our English version, even where the Greek phrase does properly import condemnation. But that is not the case in the passage under consideration. The word {y.^nj.a.) which is there employed literally means judgment, or a judicial sentence, and is rightly rendered judgment in Matth. vii. 2 ; Acts xxiv. 25, and elsewhere. We know also that the Apostle, so far from considering the second marriage of a Christian female as necessarily involving apostacy from the faith, and final condemna- tion, expressly declares, in the 14th verse, that he would have " the younger widows to marry, and bear children," rather than incur the various evils to which they might otherwise be exposed. In that verse, indeed, our translators have given- — "the younger womew," without even printing the word " women" in the Italic character, to mark it as an ellipsis, which they have supplied. But it is evident from the whole context, that the ellipsis ought to be supplied with the word ividows, which some Greek manuscripts indeed insert. The Apostle also expresses the same judgment in 1 Cor. vii. 8, 9. We meet the same extraordinary mistranslation of the same word (xf, " I am come a light into the world." But do we find the same phrase of coming into the tvor/d applied in like manner, to express the birth of men generally } No, truly, I believe that not a single instance of it in point can be adduced from Scripture. That which might seem to approach nearest to it is, perhaps, the Apo«tle's language in I Tirr. vi. 7. "We brought nothing into the world :" but here, the mention immediatelv sub- joined of our /caving the world, — " it is certain we can carry nothing out," — at once accounts for the phraseology in the former clause. When the Messiah is said to come into the world, to be sent into the world, &c. there is evidently implied a reference to the antecedent glor)-, which he "had with the Father before the world was." (John xvii. 5.) But the Scriptures no where intimate any such an- tecedent existence of the human race in a former state, as would justify the same general expression for their being born. On these grounds I conclude, without any hesitation or uncertainty, that the words, coming into the world, in John i. 9. refer to "the true light ;" and that the passage ought therefore to be rendered, — "that was the true light, which coming into the world lighteth every man." Before the coming of Christ the revelation of the true God was confined (almost exclusively) to the posterity of Abraham, the Jewish people. " To them were committed the oracles of God." But when, in the fulness of the appointed time, "the sun of righ- teousness" arose, its light was universally diffused. The long fore- told appearance of the Messiah introduced a dispensation, which extends to every kindred, and tribe, and tongue, and people, with a universality including Gentiles as well as Jews ; and which, in this view, is continually contrasted with the Jewish dispensation, that was confined to the Hebrew nation ; the whole code of Levitical ob- servances forming a " middle wall of partition" between them and the rest of the world, till all the Levitical law- passed away as a shadow, receiving its full accomplishment in Christ, and the thuigs of his kingdom. In establishing the correct translation of the passage, I have abstained from noticing those most unscriptural doctrines, Avhich the common version has been often employed to countenance : — the doc- trine, that the mind of the infant is at its birth in some mystic way enlightened, without the communication of any truth, human or divine ; — and the doctrine, that Christ actually enlightens every in- dividual in the world, although that individual live and die disbeliev- ing the word of Christ, and therefore under the power of darkness ; or without his having ever had even that hearing of the word of Christ, by which /cfiVA Cometh. Rom. x. 14 — 17. r 2 68 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. VI. "And they continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking oj bread, and in prayers." — Acts ii. 42. This passage ought certainly to be rendered, "in the Apostles' doctrine, and in the fellowship," or " contribution." By the latter expression, the same Greek word (xoivuyix) is rightly translated in Rom. XV. 26. — " a certain contrihiiion for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem." In 2 Cor. ix. 13. it occurs in the same sense ; "for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all:" which would literally run — " for the liberality of your contribution," SiC. And again in Hebr. xiii. 16. — where our translators have rendered it verbally, — " to do good and to communicate forget not." And so the adjective HoiMuuMs, formed from the substantive, is rendered willing to com- municate, in 1 Tim. vi. 18. And in like manner the verb Koiyuvtu, in Phil. iv. 15. Rom. xii. 13. and Gal. vi. 6. These examples are more than sufficient to establish that the word recurring in Acts ii. 42. is employed in the Apostolic writings, for that communication of worldly goods to the necessities of their bre- thren, which the Christians were exhorted not to forget, and in which — as one of the stated ordinances — the Church at Jerusalem is de- clared to have "continued steadfastly." I say, — as one of the stated ordinances ; for, in this view, the contribution here spoken of is to be distinguished from such an occasional collection for the necessities of distant saints, as the Apostle speaks of and regulates in 1 Cor. xvi. 1 — 3. See also Acts xi. 29, and 2 Cor. viii. But why might we not retain the common version of that passage, — " in the Apostles' doctrine ^\iA fellowship" ? understanding, in fel- lowship with the Apostles, or in the Apostolic communioti. I reply, b ecause the structure of the original will not properly admit this version. [To warrant it, the words should run t»j twv aTioa-roXuv °'"°^XV "*' x^o'vcovia, instead of t*; ^^§«^>j tuv d'noaro'kuv, xtxi rri aonuiviai.^ I insist the more upon the corrected version of this passage, be- cause it tends to prove that the communication of goods, which went on among the disciples in the first church at Jerusalem, was no other than that which the other Apostolic churches practised, and which the disciples generally were exhorted to maintain ; nothing like that theological fiction of an absolute community of goods among the Jeru- salem Christians, to the exclusion of all private property. That fic- tion would represent the thing which took place in the first Apostolic church, as an exempt case, not to be brought into precedent in other churches : for none but the wildest fanatics can hold, that Apostolic Christianity did away in general with the distinction between the two classes of rich brethren and poor. Now that fiction concerning the Jerusalem Church may, no doubt, be abundantly exposed from other considerations ; as from its being related of Barnabas particu- IIE.MARKS COllIUiCTlVE, &c. 69 hirly, that he sold a fann, and laid the price of it at the Apostles' feet, Acts, iv. 36, 37. — what all alike, who had any land, must have done, according to the popular hypothesis : — but especially from the following narrative concerning- Ananias and Sapjjhira. There we have the express declaration of the Apostle, that the possession was his own before he sold it, and that after he had sold it, the price was in his own power ; and this, so that he would have incurred no stigma, if he had kept either of them in his own hands. These, and other considerations, do abundantly refute that sup- posed community of goods in the first church at Jerusalem : but so also, I repeat it, does the corrected version of the present passage ; as it shews, in connexion with the other texts adduced, that the libe- rality of communication, in which the christians at Jerusalem con- tinued steadfastly, was that which is recorded of the other churches also. And thus it appears, that none — in any age or place — who are followers of the Apostles, and of the Apostolic churches, can so count any thing they possess their own, (Acts iv. 32.) as to withhold, what they can spare themselves, from the real necessities of their brethren ; even although this liberality of communication should oblige them at times to break in upon their capital. The reader may see the same subject treated in pages 366 and 367 of "Seven Letters on Primitive Christianity." VII. " We are the childreti of God: and if children, the nheirs, heirs of God, and Joint heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer ivith him, that we may be also glorified together.''' Rom. viii. 17. [i«ri^ iruft^af^ofti*, ita xai rutio^ccff^uftlt.^ Instead of the translation, if so be that, &c. the words ought to be rendered — " inastnuch as" — "since" — or "seeing that:" — "inas- much as we share in his sufferings, that we may also share in his glory." In the connexion, in which the words stand, there is really no- thing conditional or uncertain intimated. Having stated the high blessedness of which believers were made partakers, as children of God by adoption and grace, in Him who is the first-born among many brethren, and consequently " heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ ;" the apostle meets an objection, which the flesh might raise against the reality of this their blessedness, — an objection derived from the tribulations in this life, to which they are even peculiarly called. It is as if he said, — Yes, we are heirs with Christ in all the blessedness included in having the everlasting God for our portion ; 70 KE.MARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. we a?'e thus blessed, though we are " a poor and an afflicted people :'^ for in all our suiferings here we are but conformed to Him, who was " a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief," and this, that we may be conformed to Him in his glory. What a cheering assurance to the Christian in his deepest trials I To the Greek scholar it would be superfluous to add a word for proving, that the conjunction hirc^ has most frequently the force, which I have here assigned to it, of since — inasmuch as, &c. But in order to confirm the justice of the alteration to the mere English reader, it may be sufficient to remark, that it is the very same word which occurs in 2 Thess. i. 6. where our translators have rightly assigned to it this interpretation: — "seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you," &c. I would make the same alteration in Rom. viii. 9. " inasmuch as the Spirit of God dwelleth in you :" and in 1 Pet. ii. 3. " inasmuch as ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious." The Apostles, in their letters, address themselves to those whom they unequivocally con- sider as " saints in Christ Jesus," — " appointed not unto wrath, but to obtain salvation," whom as such they call to a coiTespondent walk ; and not in that language of uncertainty, which is very naturally em- ployed by those who assume a kind of religious ministration over a mixed multitude, whom they pretend to manufacture into saints. Many examples might be adduced of the same force in the simple conjunction h, from which Inn^ is formed. But I rather pass to notice one instance of it, in the cognate word hyz, as employed in 2 Cor. V. 3. In our English version the passage runs, " if so be that, bei?ig clothed, we shall not be found naked." I am quite satisfied that we ought to read — " inasmuch as, even when unclothed, we shall not be found naked :" — that is, when divested of the earthly taber- nacle, we shall be invested with an heavenly. [The biblical scholar will perceive, that I adopt the reading of several manuscripts — ix^vaoc(ji.svoi for ivova-afj-Evoi, — the two words diifering only by a single letter, or part of a letter, but the one importing clothed, the other un- clothed. This reading is marked by Griesbach, as w^orthy of atten- tion ; but appears to me decisively recommended to our adoption as well by the plain and consistent sense which it affords, as by allow- ing its proper force of even to the conjunction x«< : — iyi KAl REMARKS CORRECTIVE, itc. 71 VIII. "Atid Ibiir nobles shall be of themselves, and (heir governor shall proceed from the tnidst of them ; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me : for who is this that engaged his heart to approach unto m./ saith the LORD." — Jerein. xx\. 21. Instead of the plural expression — " their noWe^," we ought indis- ])utablv to read it in the singular number, — " their noble," or " their (//o7-ious one." The original word is as decidedly singular as the fol- lowing word, " their governor." Indeed, from the whole tenor of the rest of the verse, it is manifest, that one individual is spoken of, not several : and so little room was there for any mistake in the translation, that I have often suspected that it originated in the in- distinctness of dictation, the first letter of the word, " shall" coales- cing with the preceding word " noble." However this may be, there is no room at all to question the justice of the correction : and, small as it may appear, the remarks, which I am about to add, will perhaps convince the Christian reader of its importance. The words stand in immediate connexion with the 18th verse : " Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will bring again the captivity of Jacob's tents, and have mercy on his dwelling places," &c. Now if we receive the distinct interpretation of all such promises assigned by the Apostles, we shall be certain that it is to the times of the Mes- siah, they aU point, — to his coming, and to his kingdom. Thus, the promise in Amos ix. 11. " In that day will I raise up the taber- nacle of David that is fallen .... and I will build it as in the days of old;" — is obviously similar to this in Jer. xxx. 18 — 20. But we have the express authority of an Apostle, (Acts xv. 13 — 18.) that the promise in Amos pointed to what took place in the Messiah's kingdom and the Apostolic age ; and we are therefore bound to in- terpret similarly the coiTesponding promise in Jeremiah. We are therefore led at once to decide, that He who is marked in the 21st verse as the noble, or glorious one, of Israel, — as their gover- nor tvho shall proceed from the midst of them, — is no other than the Messiah. We may leave it to the commentators and divines of the antichristian world to point to some earthly prince, or succession of earthly princes, raised up to the Jews after their return from the Babylonish captivity ; as the unbelieving Jews still dream of such a prince to be yet raised up to them. The true Israel of God are called to "be jo\-ful in their King," (Ps. cxlix. 2.); and to acknowledge with praise and thanksgiving to the Lord, that he " hath visited and redeemed his people ;" that he "hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David ; to perform the mercv promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant." Luke i. 68, &c. But it is delightful to see various scriptures reflecting multiplied 72 TIE MARKS COrulECTIVE, &c. light upon each other. Must not the language — " their glorious one shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them," remind us of the promise uttered by the mouth of his servant Moses, and interpreted of the Messiah by the Apostle Peter? (Deut. xviii. 15. Acts iii. 22.) "The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me." [Rather " as me," as he hath raised up me. Gr. us t^A.i.'] Every high priest, being " ordained for men in things pertaining to God," is " taken from among men," (Hebr. v. 1) : and so our great High Priest, to be qualified for the office to which he was called, took part in flesh and blood with those whom he is not ashamed to call his brethren (Hebr. ii. 11 — 14), and was tempted in all things like unto them. They are bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh, in a closeness of union, of which the marriage union is but a shadow. Eph. V. 25—32. Again — does not the language, " I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me" — immediately refer us to that in Ps. Ixv. 4. " Blessed is the man w^hom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts : we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple." That holy one of Jehovah's choice has entered with his own blood into the holiest, as the great high Priest over his own house ; is made most blessed for ever, crowned with glory and honour: and because He has drawn near with the oftering for sin, wliich God has accepted, as taking it away, therefore ive sinners are blessed in Him ; and shall be satisfied with the goodness of the Lord's house, even of his holy temple, when we " shall see the King in his beauty," (Isa. xxxiii. 17.) and shall be with Him, where He is, for ever. In perfect harmony with aU these scriptures are the 15th and 24th Psalms ; in which the character is given of the man who shall abide in the tabernacle of Jehovah, and dwell in his holy hill; — seme of the many Psalms pei-verted to their own destruction by unbelieving men, who apply the language to some imaginary excellence of cha- racter in sinners. And as, in the passage of the Prophet Jeremiah, we read of that glorious one " engaging his heart to approach" unto Jehovah ; so, in these Psalms, He is described as " swearing to his own hurt, and changing not." He " sware not deceitfully :" he failed not in the awful engagement which he made, as the surety of his people, to take upon himself their sin, and be made a curse in their stead. He drew not back from this, great as was the cost of sufi'ering, in which the fulfilment of his engagement stood him. [The Hebrew expression in the prophet for engaging his heart, is commonly applied to the engagement of a surety, or one who becomes bondsman for another.] In connexion with the Scriptures already cited, I shall refer the Christian reader to but one more, the history of Korah's rebellion given in the 16th chapter of Numbers, and the language of jNIoses in the 5th and 10th verses. "Even to-morrow the Lord will shew who are his, and who is holy : even him whom he hath chosen w-iH he cause to come near unto him. Seek ye the priesthood also?" In the whole of the narrative we may see with what divine jealousy the REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &t. 73 office of high priest was guarded under the law of Moses ; and wliut sijifnid vengeance fell upon anv who attempted to intrude into it. Now all this was but a s/iadoir : and I have heard of some who pre- tend that it shadowed forth the supposed sacredness and importance of the clerical character, and the great sin and danger of the so-c. Here again the word " man" has been unwarrantably inserted. We should leave the ellipsis unsupplied, and read, " that he bv the mercy of God should taste death for ail." And who the " all" are, for whom he has tasted death, we may see distinctly marked in the words immediately following: — " for it became him, for whom are all things, and bv whom are all things, in bringing nia/ii/ sons unto glorv, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctilieth and tkei/ who arc sanctified are all of one ; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saving, I will declare thy name unto my brethren ; in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee." Now what can be a more plain specification of the persons in whose behalf " Jesus was made for a little while lower than the angels for the suffering of death, that he by the mercy of God should taste death for all }" What can be more plain, than that the " all" here intended are all the many sons, of whose salvation he is* the Captain ; all whom it is the purpose of God to bring unto glory by him, and to whom he declares (or manifests) the name of the Lord ; the whole of that church, or congregation, in the midst of which he sings praises to Jehovah } Ps. xxii. 22. And, in perfect accordance with this, Christ is declared to have " loved the church, and given himself for it :" Eph. v. 25 — to have " laid down his life for the sheep," even those his sheep of whom he declares, " I give unto them eternal life ; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand." Jolui x. 1.5, 27, 28. The notion that Christ has tasted death for any others, even for those who yet ultimately perish in their sins, is utterly inconsistent with the faith of the Gospel ; and goes to pour utter contempt upon the cross of Christ. I am well aware that many who have spent their lives in maintaining the blasphemy, have at times — and parti- cularly on their death-beds — spoken strongly of deriving all their hope towards God from the consideration that Christ died for them. But their strongest language to this effect, unaccompanied with any professed change of mind, must be considered by the disciple as " great swelling words of vanity." 2 Pet. ii. 18. For must it not be the most absurd inconsistency to maintain, at once, that any shall perish for whom Christ has died, and yet that all a sinner's hope of salvation is to be derived from Christ's having died for him .' Assuredly, if Christ has tasted death for every individual of the human race, and if any such individual fads of salvation, those wdio are saved must owe their salvation to something else than to Christ's having died for them. VOL. II. G 82 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. But as the holy Scriptures are the great storehouse, from which " the man of God is thoroughly furnished unto all good works," so Satan borrow^s from them his chief supply of weapons against the truth. Accordingly, the Arminian objector has often urged — Is it not said, that " Christ Jesus gave himself a ransom for all?" And is not this said in connexion with the declaration, that God " will have all men to be saved ?" (1 Tim. ii. 4, 6.) — Yes ; so it is written, and in such connexion. But if we read from the beginning of the chapter, we find this declaration connected with the Apostle's direc- tion to Timothy, that " supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men ; for Kings, and for all that are in authority," &c. : which sufficiently marks that the expression " all men" imports men of all the various ranks and conditions in himian society. But when I say sufficiently, do I mean that it will suffice to convince the Arminian objector ? By no means. The Scriptures ever have been, and ever will be, " a gin and a snare to those Vt^ho stumble at the word : and God is righteous in leaving anv of them to strong delusion, that they should believe the lie which they love : while he yet magnifies his mercy in giving repen- tance, to the acknowledgment of the truth, to such of them as he has " ordained unto eternal life." As I may probably have no opportunity more fair for introducing some remarks on a very important subject, I shall make no apology for the following additional observations : I have distinctly asserted that Christ has not died for any — in the room or behalf of any — save those, whom he shall absolutely " bring unto glory." With those who deny this, or who shrink from assert- ing it undisguisedly, I can keep no terms, as if they and I were of one faith. So far, many would say of me — ' this man is a high Cal- vinist :' — and so far I am. I look at low, or half- Calvinism, as com- bining great dishonesty with great folly. Yet I must say, as plainly, that there is in this country a very numerous class of professors, and commonly designated as high Cal- vinists, from whom I yet differ essentially ; and whom indeed I con- sider as no less opposed to the unadulterated truth, than the Armi- nians ; — though they often employ a much more plausible and im- posing language. I allude to those who hold, that justifying faith consists in a sinner's firm persuasion that Christ died for him specially ; or in other words, that he is one of the elect. Now this is not the faith of the Gospel ; concerning which it is written, that " whosoever believeth shall be saved ;" for a man may be filled with the most presumptuous confidence that he is a favourite of heaven, and yet be nothing nearer that favour of which he thinks himself the object. This is not the faith of the Gospel': for that faith has a divine revelation for its object and its basis, the icord of the God of truth for its warrant and support ; and assuredly that word no where testifies of any individual living, that he is one of Christ's sheep ; though it does abundantly testify that it was /or his sheep Christ laid down his life. And, accordingly, those who adopt the sentiment which I am now opposing commonly manufacture each for himself some private revelation, which they talk of as their ex- KEMAUKS CORIlKCTlVK, \i-. 8-3 perienre ; how thcv heard a voice, or felt ;i divine i/)iprc!i.s ru fj^acKx^iu ©ta] — which from the beginning was preached in promises and held forth in tyjjcs-, — is now sent unto all nations for the obedience of faith ; ])roclaim- ing that Christ, the promised seed, has come in the flesh, and has finished the work which he undertook to accomplish. He that be- lieveth it shall be saved ; and he that believeth not shall be con- demned. ' For we are labourers together with God: ije are God's hnsbandry ; ye are God's buildbig.'' — 1 Cor. iii. 9. I KG not stop to inquire, whether this passage might be more fitly brought under some other head : but at once remark that it cer- tainly ought to be rendered "we hre /elloiv-labourej'S in the service of God," or to that effect. Literally it runs, " we are God's fellow- labourers" [0£w crvvt^yoi] : but the whole context proves indisputably that the Ai)ostle's meaning is what I have expressed ; and therefore that the passage affords no gi'ound at all for the blasphemies, which Arminians have built upon it, of man's co-operating with God in a work belonging to both in common. The Apostle, from almost the commencement of this Epistle, is sharply rebuking the Corinthian discijjles for their carnal glorying in men ; and for causing schisms in the church, by classing themselves under the difJerent instruments employed in calling them to the knowledge of the Gospel. Some boasted that they had been called under the preaching of Paul; others ofApoUos; others of Cephas, (or Peter) ; and some under Christ's personal ministry, i. 12. These vain-glorious divisions, Paul sets himself immediately to oppose : and continuing the same subject throughout this third chapter, he indignantly demands — "who then is Paul, and who is Apollos but ministers [J/axovo/ — sers'ants, agents] bv whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man ? I have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave the increase. For we are fellow-labourers in the employ- ment of God." — The different Apostles and others commissioned to preach the Gospel, are fellow servants of one master, even God ; and employedby him, as mere instruments, in one work : which is his, S6 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &-c. and not man's. For " neither is he that planteth amj ihuxj, neither he that watereth ; but God tliat giveth the increase." v. 7. Perhaps it would be difficult to find language more strongly op- posed to all glorying in man. Yet upon this passage multitudes of religious professors justify their profane boast, of being "as Gods to themselves, — co-operating icith God in the matter of their salva- tion. The reader may observe that I have incidentally suggested a cor- rection in the translation of the 5th verse ; substituting the word servants for ministers. Such indeed was originally the meaning of the word minister, boiTowed from the Latin ; but it has long passed into quite another acceptation, in common parlance, soinething of a clergyman : particularly in such a connexion as the phrase, " ministers, of Christ :" and the cognate word ministry, in like manner, is too commonly understood as importing some exercise of what is called the clerical character or office. That the word properly means a servant, or person employed by another, the mere English reader may satisfy himself by referring to Matth. XX. 26, 28. compared with Luke xxii. 26,27. The expression rendered, " he that serveth," in the latter passage, is (I may say) identical with that rendered " minister" in the former. Also in Matth. XX. 13 xxiii. 11. and John ii. 5, 9. the original word rightly rendered servant, is the same which our translators have ren- dered minister in so many other places. There is indeed anoth r word [Woj] which they frequently trans- late servant ; as in Matth. xx. 27. This properly denotes the kind of servant, that is the absolute property of his master ; or what we call a slave: and such are to be understood in all the Apostolic exhortations addressed to masters and servants. Yet I confess, that in many passages I should not wish to substitute the temi slave : for to this the English ear commonly attaches the idea of reluctant ser- vitude, a notion that is excluded from such applications of the term [J«Xoj], as in Rom. i. 1. 1 Pet. ii. 16. Tlie servants of Christ are indeed not their own, for they have been bought with a price. 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20. But in this consists their blessedness and their glory. U i. .'/'.>« as workers together with him beseech, &^c." — 2 Cor. vi. part of verse 1. The common translation countenances an error with regard to these words exactly similar to that which I have just noticed. The original reads so : We then icorking together beseech, &c. i' e. obvi- ously. We (to whom the ministry of reconciliation hath been given) being engaged all of us in the sayne labour, and uniting our earnest endeavours, go on to execute that office to ichich God has called us, and in ichich He has joined us together as one. if any should object to the above remarks, and abide by the com- mon version of thci^e passages spoken of, it remains with such (put- ting the Greek text out of the question) to shtvr how an int^lrument can REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. S7 be said to co-operate with him that employs it, in any sense in which it will not be also absurd and impossible to suppose the contrary, and then to sav so amounts to nothing. For my part, when it is gravely told me, that the axe co-operates with him that hcwcth there- with, I am not sensible of learning any thing more than that — an i'lstrument is — an instrument. " .-liid thcij said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there he any Holy Ghost." — Acts xix. 2. These words constitute the answer' given by certain disciples at Ephesus to the iVpostle Paul, when he said unto tliem. Have ye re- ceived the Holy Ghost since ye believed ? and by some, they liave been supposed to express ignorance with respect to the existence of the Tliird Person in the Sacred Trinity. It requires but little consi- deration, on the part of any who know what it is to be a disciple, to suspect the propriety of an interpretation, which represents these persons as ignorant of the first principles of that Gospel which an inspired writer declares they believed ; in darkness with respect to Him by whose power they must have been enlightened ; yea, totally destitute of the knowledge of that God, ichose they tvere and ivhom they served. And as a suspicion of this nature will always lead them that love the word of God to a closer investigation, and a more accu- rate comparison of scripture with scripture ; so the result will ever abound in satisfaction to the inquirer, and will repav the labour of his research with increased views of the excellence and consistency of the Sacred Writings. For such researches those who are acquainted with the original language are above others qualified, and they are, on that account, peculiarly called to make them, not only for their own information but for the instruction of such as possess not the same advantages. Having this object in view, I present my readers ■with a passage which has suflfered much by misinterpreta- tion, and propose to their acceptance what I deem a solution of such difficulty as appears to involve it. And, 1. We observe that our translators have been guiltv of incon- sistency in their version of this text, compared with their version of John vii. 39. The Holy Ghost tvas not yet given. They manifestly considered this last (as it occurs in the original) to be elliptical, for in it they have supplied (given) a word of their own : but, forgetting that analogy which unity of subject and coincidence of expression required, they have translated the other as if it were a complete sen- tence, merely introducing the word any, to express its supposed meaning more fullv to the English reader. 2. In consequence of this inattention, the English version exhibits two different ideas, where the Greek text expresses but one ; for, removing the supplied word from each, we read in John, The Holy Ghost WAS 7iot yet ; and in Acts, Whether the Holy Ghost be : be- tween which two clauses, any reader may discern an exact coinci- dence of expression, (allowing only for the change of tense) so that 8^ REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &j. the subject of negation in the former, and of doubt in the latter, must be acknowledged to be one and the same : whereas the common translation denies the giving of the Holy Ghost in the one, and in the other questions his existence. 3. The error will be corrected by applying the same rule of inter- pretation to both, and by looking for guidance to whichever of these passages may be more clearly determinable than the other. 4. Now that the passage in John is elliptical, is most obvious ; because otherwise an Evangelist (for these are John's own words) nmst be supposed to deny the existence of the Holy Ghost previous to the glorification of Jesus. And not only so, but the context marks the propriety of that very word {given) which has been sup- plied ; because it directs us to the long-promised descent of the Spirit of God, called elsewhere the gift of the Holy Ghost, which was not to take place till Jesus was glorified, being necessarily subse- quent to that event which it was designed to attest. Accordingly, the first preaching of the resurrection, and the first descent of the Holy Ghost, took place on the same day, the day of Pentecost. The meaning of these words of the Evangelist being thus established, 5. We conclude that the passage under consideration is also ellip- tical, and is also to be supplied by the word given. It will then run so, we have not so much as heard whether the Holy Ghost be given : and thus the answer marks no ignorance of that spirit who dwelt in them, but merely intimates that they had not heard of the Holy Ghost's having yet been poured out ; a circumstance which affected not their views of the only True God, involved no error in their faith of the gospel, and for which the place of their residence fully accounts. XII. INSTANCES OF INACCURACY IN THE OMISSION OR INSERTION OF THE DEFINITE ARTICLE. " / U'ill thcrefure that men prai/ everywhere, liftivs: f'P holy hands, uitlwut wrath and doubting." — 1 Tim. ii. 8. We certainly ought to read — "that the men pray everywhere;" or literally, " in every place." The men, in contradistinction to women. The original is decisive — [tus av^^ay]. Accordingly, the Apostle proceeds, in the next and following verses, to give his in- structions about the women, the sobriety of their apparel, their silence in the church, iStc, It is therefore plain, that in the Sth verse, the expression ])}'ay imports leading in social prayer ; as it is certain the Apostle never REMARKS COURIiCTlVE, &c. S9 intfiukcl to debar Christiun women from prayer, either from praying individually in private, or from joining in spirit with the social worship of the brethren. And the addition of the words, " in every place," marks, I think, that the Apostle extends his regulation bevond the meeting of the brethren on the first day of the week, to anv other occasion in which sevenU of them united in prayer : an in- stance of which we have in Acts xii. 12. — I make the observation, because, (if I mistake not) it was at one time maintained ])y Mr. Wakk.i-ikld, that all open engagement in social proycr is contrary to the direction which Christ gives his disciples in Matth. vi. G. Jkit that this direction related exclusively to private, or individual prayer, — and that the sentiment I have mentioned was 'utterly erro- neous,— is proved decisively by the Apostle's language in this pas- saere of his letter to Timothy. *' For the love of moneij is the rout of all evil.'' — 1 Tim. vi. 10. Wk should read, " is « root of all evil." [pi^x yx^ — not -n p'^x.] — The common version would seem to imply, that the love of money is the on/i/ root of all evil. / have fought a good fight,'' — 2 'I'im. iv. Here we should read, " the good, fight." Tlie original is em- ])hatic — [toy xycuvx TOY xacAov] — as if he said, " I have maintained the contest that is indeed the glorious one ; I have finished the race ; I have kept the faith." — The Apostle's language here and in the following verse obviously alludes to the public games, of running, &c. in which the Greeks especially delighted; and a prize in which they spoke of frequently as the highest honour attainable by mortals. We find the same allusion in 1 Cor. ix. 24 — 27. and elsewhere. The Christian, while engaged in maintaining " the good fight of faith," (1 Tim. vi. 12.) must lay his account indeed to meet with the contempt and scorn of the world. But even in this he is enabled to glorv, while kept looking unto the great forerunner. He " en- dured the cross, despising the shame." He was " viocked" and " spit ypon." He is " despised," as well as " rejected, by men." (Isa. liii. 3.) And the remembrance of Him may well enable his fol- lowers even to " rejoice, when they arc counted worthy to sufi^er shame for his name." (Acts v. 41.) But as yet " their life is hid with Christ in God." It is " when Christ, their life, shall be manifested, — [(px\tquQ-n] — that they also shall be manifested with him in glory." (Col. iii. 3, 4.) And then it wnll appear to all, that the " fight of faith" which they have maintained, at whatever cost of suffering for his name, is indeed " the good fight," — the honourable and glorious contest. 90 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, ^d. " And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days." — Acts xxi. 4. It should be — " And having found out the disciples." [^xviv^ovrss Here, besides the omission of the definite article, our translators have very imperfectly given the force of the preceding participle, which really implies that Paul and his Christian companions, on their arrival at Tyre, had inquired, or searched, for the disciples in that city. This is ahvays the proper force of the compound verb [«ytuf/<7xw] ; of which we have another example in Luke ii. 16. The simple verb [Irfjo-xw] neither implies, nor necessarily excludes, the idea of such an antecedent search ; and accordingly it is employed in the 2nd verse of this chapter ; the finding of a ship sailing to Phe- nicia having been, perhaps, unlooked for. Trifling as the coiTcction which I have suggested may appear to some, it renders the naiTative much more interesting to those, who are at all acquainted with the fellowship of Christian brethren. Paul, arriving at Tyre (as it would appear) on a Monday, sets about inquiring for the Christians of that city ; and succeeds in finding them. Finding any one of them, he in efi'ect found them all ; for all were in one body most intimately associated. But the Apostle, anxious to meet with them all assembled on the first day of the week, and to join with them in shewing forth that which was the one foundation of their common hope towards God, tarries at Tyre for the purpose seven days. (We find him tarrying the same period at Troas for the same purpose, in the preceding chapter, v. 6 and 7.) Perhaps he had never before seen the face of one of these Tyrian disciples. Yet, O ! what closeness of heart union, what endeared fellowship was there among them ? And is not this intimated in that most striking, though most simple description, which is con- tained in the fifth and sixth verses? Can we contemplate the whole narrative, without contrasting Apostolic Christianity with that which passes under the name, at this day and in this country ? Shall we imagine a Christian stranger, of the Apostolic school, arriving in any city in Christen- dom for the first time ; and proceeding to inquire for the disciples — for the Christians of that place ? " The Christians ! Sir : we are all Christians!" — Perhaps the inquirer has just passed by two of these Christians, — staunch upholders of Church and State — going out to the field of honour, deliberately to shoot one another. Perhaps — But I forbear. Too wide a field opens before me. *' But eihort one another daily, while it is called to-day ; lest any of you he hard- ened through the deceitfulness of sin." — Heb. iii. 13. Ir should be " of the sin" [rwr ai^x^rixs'] ; namely, that sin of unbelief, against which the Apostle has warned the Hebrew Chris- REMARKS CORRECTIVE, Sec. 91 tians in the verse immediately preceding, and warns tliem throuf^^li- out the Epistle. Nor is it without reason, tluit in tlie 12tli verse he connects the " evil heart of unhelief" with " departure from the living God." It is in the doctrine of Christ, that the name — or character and glory — of " the onlv true God" is declai'ed. They who are turned from darkness unto light, from the false religious sentiments, which natu- rally possess the sinner's mind, to the belief of the truth as it is in Jesus, — thev, and they alone, are turned to the only true God ; arc indeed converted, and have " repentance unto life." And, on the other hand, those who depart from the faith and uncorrupted truth of the Gospel, after having once professed it, do awfully " dejjart from the living God ;" and are indeed apostates, for whom there rcmaineth a " fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries." Heb. x. 27. " ^InJ again Esaias sailh, There shall be a root of Jcs.ie, and he that shall rise to reign over the Geiililri, in him shall the Gentiles iuist. [i\fri)t(n.\ Niiw the God of hope [rtit iXiriJaf] fill you with all joy and peace in hcLeuuig, that yc may abound in liojjc, through the power of the Holy Spirit." — Rom. xv. 12, 13. We should read, " in him shall the Gentiles have hope. Now the God of this hope" — and — " that ye may abound in this hope." The Apostle speaks not of every hope, or of every religious hope, indis- criminately : but sj)ecially and exclusively of the hope of the Gospel ; of that *' good hope through grace," of which sinners believing in Christ are made partakers ; which has the living God for its author, his faithful word for its warrant, his immutability and omnipotence for its guarantee. The distinguishing character of this hope is marked in all the pro- phecies which the Apostle has quoted, and which declared that the Gentiles should be partakers of it : the Gentiles, whom the Jews were accustomed to consider as dogs, in comparison of themselves ; and whose natural state is described as that of " aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, having no hope and without God in the world," " dead in trespasses and sins." (Eph. ii. 1, 12.) Herein " the hope of the Gospel" stands distinguished from all the vain hopes, which men derive from the consideration of some supposed worth, or wisdom, or power in themselves. It is for those that are ungodly and ivithout strength (Rom. v. 6.) ; and it rests on the " sure foundation, which God has laid in Zion." In such Gentiles, the Apostle declares that " Christ is the hope of glory." (Col. i. 27.) And this is the hope that " maketh not ashamed." 92 RExMARKS CORRECTIVE, &:c. XIII. And tvhen he was demanded of the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, lie answered them, and said, — The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, lo here ! or, to there .' for behold the kingdom of God is within you." — Luke xvii. 20, 21. We certainly ought to read, " the kingdom of God is in the midst of you." And so the French version.. The more closely we examine the context in the light of scriptural truth, the more will this correction appear indisputably just. The Lord Jesus had not as yet publicly and avowedly put himself forward as the Messiah. On the contrary, he enjoined his disciples who acknowledged him in that character, not to tell any man that he was the Christ : and this, for the wisest reasons. The contrary course could at that time only have excited the people to revolt against their Roman governors ; and so have countenanced the im- putation that he was an enemy to Cnesar. Indeed we find on one occasion, that the people, excited by the miraculous feeding of the multitude, would have " come and taken him by force to make him a king." (John vi. 15.) How much more forward would they have been to engage in such attempts, had he not appeared in circum- stances— and uniformly pursued a course — opposite to all the great- ness and splendour of earthly kings ? The Pharisees, however, could not fail to understand the various intimations by which, from time to time, he left his hearers to con- clude that he M'as the Christ ; nor were they ignorant that his follow- ers considered him as such. Accordingly they had agreed, " that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue." (John ix. 22.) And when the whole Sanhedrim condemned him to be guilty of death as a blasphemer, it was because he replied with an explicit affirmative, " / am," to the High Priest's question — " Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed }" (Mark xiv. 61 — 64.) To ensnare him into such an avowal prema- turely, and so to establish against him the charge of making himself a king in opposition to Csesar, was the object of the Pharisees on many occasions, in which they endeavoured to entangle him in his talk : and it appears to have been their object in demanding of him, " When the kingdom of God should come ?" In the Lord's reply, we may admire that divine wisdom which ever flowed from his lips. Without either denying or asserting that he was the King of Israel, his reply strikes at the root of the false conceptions concerning the nature of the Messiah's kingdom, upon which the question of the Pharisees proceeded ; and testifies against the blindness which possessed their minds. " The kingdom of God cometh not with observation," — not with any outwaixl display of RKMARKS CORRECTIVK, &c. 93 greatno*!! and power marking its arrival, so that men noticing it should sav — " Lo here ! or lo there ! For l)ehold the king(lon\ of (iod is among you." That kingdom, ahout which ye inf[uire when it shall come, is here already — among you — in the midst of you — before your eyes. No wonder, if these Pharisees indignantly ex- claimed, as on another occasion, " Are we blind also ?" John ix. 40. To disciples the subject rises in its interest, when we view it as exhibiting the contrariety of the ways and thoughts of God to the thoughts and ways — not of the Jews merely — but of man, fallen man, in every age and country. Indeed, in any other view, it would only tend to impress us with a notion of the extraordinary wickedness of the Jewish people and their leaders, above ourselves. But what have been all the attempts to incorporate Christianity with the various civil constitutions of Europe, but vain and ungodly attempts to transform the kingdom of Christ into a kingdom of this world ? what, but attem])ts to take him (as it were) by force, and make him a king after the fashion of earthlv kings, in opposition to his most express declaration, and, we mav say, protestation against it .'' Wliile the Jewish dispensation lasted, there was indeed a real in- corporation of church and state, of their religious and their civil code. They were, in fact, identified ; and both emanated, not from man, but from the God of Israel. Yet even that dispensation, in which the institutions were shadows of better things then to come, and the peculiar sanctions of its law, temporal and earthly in their nature ; even that dispensation is continually spoken of in the New Testa- ment Scriptures as worldli/, and carnal, and passing away ; in contrast with the Messiah's kingdom which displaced it, and " which cannot be moved." (Heb. viii. 5, ix. 1 — 24, xii. 22.) The Lord himself marks this contrast in his memorable confession before Pilate ; while he declared himself a king, declaring as dis- tinctly— " My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews : but now [vt/y l{] is my kingdom not from hence." (John xviii. 36.) That word, " noio," is emphatic ; and plainly distinguishes the character of his kingdom from that of the Mosaic dispensation, which it superseded. But just as the Jews, who " despised and rejected " Jesus of Naz- areth, were most ardently attached to the false Messiah they had imagined, and were ready at any time to fight for such a king of Israel; even so, multitudes in anti-christian Europe burn with zeal for the false Christ, whom they have set up in their union of church and state, while they scorn and detest the only true Christ, the Christ of God, and manifest this by their contemptuous rejection of the word that testifies of him. Tlie earthly sj)lendour and pomp of the temples they have consecrated to their idol, the wealth of their endowments, the various orders of lordly priests, and various rituals of service they have appointed for his worship, — all these are things that of course have strong attractions for their eartlily minds, and the stronger their attachment to these, and admiration of them, the more cordial is the disgust and hatred excited in them by that, which rejects them all. 94 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. Greatly, however, should I be mistaken, if I were understood to mark this Judaizing- corruption of Christianity as peculiar to the re- ligious establishment of the country. In various forms it just as much pervades the general mass of Dissenters. Hence all their eflbrts to attach some worldly respectability to their several synagogues and systems, — respectability from the number or rank of their adherents. — respectability from the paltry splendour of even their edifices, — respectability from the talents and eloquence of the Reverend gentleman, who apes the clergyman in his garb and style, and whose ministrations to a crowded audience of admiring pew- holders and hearers are substituted for the assembling of a few saints on the first day of the week, to break bread. But hence, above all, the various schemes of Churchmen and Dissenters conjointly to cover the offensiveness of the unadulterated Gospel, by concealing that heavenly truth which publishes salvation to the lost, justification to the ungodly, mercy higher than the heavens to the chief of sinners, and " reigning through righteousness by Jesus Christ unto eternal life ;" concealing, I say, this heavenly and joyful truth, by substi- tuting for it, the several counterfeit doctrines of men and lies of Satan, which are forged in opposition to that truth, but attired in its perverted phraseology. And just as, among the Jews, the ringleaders of the opposition to Jesus of Nazareth, those who excited the populace to join in the cry — " crucify him, crucify him," — were the persons most eminent in the nation for religious knowledge and zeal and strictness ; as' these were the persons most fired with indignation at Him, who avowed himself " the friend of publicans and sinners ;" even so is it now. The Scribes and Pharisees would have borne with a great many other things which they disliked, and have been ready perhaps to acknow- ledge the Lord as a divine teacher and prophet ; if he had only in- timated that he came to favour persons so good and respectable, as they considered themselves, and had scowled upon the confessedly wicked. They would then have been ready, with the good young ruler, to admit his claim to the character of goodness, and, it may be, would have joined with that very serious inquirer in consulting him on the good question* — " what good thing shall we do that we may inherit eternal life ?" So full of goodness and excellent moral dis- positions were these " betrayers and murderers of that just One," whose coming they professed to expect most confidently, and to desire most earnestly. Even so at this day the false teachers, hired by the people to feed them with the lies they love, hold out various false Christs, as in various degrees helping the well-disposed, those who. have good desires, and much willingness to avail themselves of the offered aid. * The commencement of Christ's reply to that inquirer is commonly read with an emphasis very falsely placed, — placed on the word me, instead of on the word why. " Why callest thou me good? There is none good hut One, that is God." The young ruler had complimented Jesus with the title, just as.he thought that it belonged to himself. But he heard in reply a principle, which laid the axe to the very root of all his goodness, while it left the Lord's claim to the title of good neither affirmed nor denied. HKMAilKS CORUl'.CTIVK, &c. .95 And tlie doctrine that encourages suc/i, tliat instructs and excites them to hiv holtl on the blessedness which is \)h\ccd within their reach l)y the fidse Christ of the system, is termed evaiujelical. But to the absohitely bad and ill-disposed, who have no good desires, these teachers have no gospel, or none till they become good; and the Apostolic Gospel, which publishes a Saviour of such wicked, stubl)oru rebels against the Most High, is just as much an object of scorn and detestation and blasphemous reviling to these zealous champions of goodness, as ever it w;is in the Apostolic age. We often find that the Pharisees expressed their desire, that the Lord would shew them " a signy>o;« heaven," some display of sen- sible glory in the sky ; having in view, no doubt, the prophecy con- cerning the Son of Man in Dan. vii. 13, 14. That sign of the Son of Man they demanded to see prematurely, that he might be authen- ticated to them as the Messiah ; but he Yefused it to that generation, while he assured his disciples that they should see it in due season. (Matt. xxiv. 30.) On one of those occasions, the Lord reliuked the Pharisees and Sadducees for their blindness to the signs of the times, that were before their eyes. (Matt. xvi. 1 — 3.) At this day, in like manner, that second coming of Christ, which forms one of the articles of the national creed, much engages the thoughts and specu- lations of the religious world ; they consider it to be at hand, and look anxiously for signs of its near approach. But I apprehend that the signs they mainly look for are connected with their false concep- tions of Christianity ; more national conversions, and an increased Jiourishing of their religion bv an addition of numerous and respectable proselytes ; while they see not the signs, which most distinctly mark to disciples the approach of " him that cometh." Among these signs of the times, I especially regard that " con- sumption of the man of sin" (2 Thess. ii. 8.), which is quietly but progressively going on, " by the spirit of the Lord's mouth," by the Avord of truth, that " sword wliich proceedeth out of his mouth." This noiseless recalling of disciples to the purity of Apostolic doc- trine and practice, from which they had been more or less borne aside by the wide flood of anti-christian corruption, this — so far as it excites the attention of the religious world at all — excites also their disgust and indignation. Yet this is among the most conclusive signs of the times, w^hich indicate to disciples that the great day is at hand. When the number of the elect is fulfilled, and the last of them gathered in out of Babylon, this world will then be as the lifeless carcase, upon which, wherever it is, the birds of prey fall, " the eagles are gathered together." (Luke xvii. 37.) It was so in the days of Noah. It was not till the day of Noah's entrance into the ark that the flood came. It was so in the days of Lot. It was so in the day of Jerusalem's judgment. And " even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed." And his coming shall be suddenly, in an instant — " as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven j" — " in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye." (1 Cor. xv. .52.) How wisely and graciously is this ordered and revealed ! All the 96 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. vain speculations ai-e thus put down, which would lead us to calcu- late the particular time of his appearing ; and with them all that agitation, that commotion of mind, which the idea of its immediate arrival would necessarily occasion. This mental perturbation is the thing really imported by the expressions " shaken in mind" and " troubled," in 2 Thess. ii. 2. Our utter ignorance also of that day and that hour impresses on disciples, every day and every hour, that salutary monition — " Watch, as men who wait for their Lord, watch." XIV. INSTANCES OF INACCURACY IN THE RENDERING OF TENSES. "And they cSiWeA him Zacharias, after the name of his father.'" — Luke i. 59. It should be — " they were calling \{\v(\ Z." [sxaXoyv.] They were about calling him after the name of his father ; and would have done so, but for the interference of Elizabeth, to whom her husband had, no doubt, by writing communicated the name prescribed by the Ansrel. '' Our friend Lazarus slee'p&ih.." John xi. 11. — It should be — "hath fallen asleep." We are told that the Lord, after receiving the message from Martha and Mary announcing their brother's illness, " abode two days still in the same place where he was." And it is evident that he purposely waited so long, in order that the death and burial of Lazarus might take place before he should arrive at Bethany. With what anxious alternation of hopes and fears did the sisters, we may suppose, look out for his arrival, during the progress of their brother's illness ! With what a sad sinking of the heart were their hopes ap- parently extinguished by his death ! and not unaccompanied perhaps with some chagrin, when they heard that Jesus was coming. Little were they aware, that all which passed in their house of sorrow, had passed under his observant ken, and that he had purposely allowed it to take place, for the greater display of the glory of God. Surely his followers may learn cheering and profitable lessons from the narrative, in seasons of their sorest affliction, and when the looked- for relief is longest delayed. i REMARKS CORRECTIVE, Sec. 97 " For yet a Utile nhilt', and he that sli.lll come, will come, and will not tarry." I should decidedly prefer to render this literally — "he that Com- eth," or, " he that is coming." ['o ffp^o/ixfvoj] This more emphatically expresses our confidence that his arrival approaches, than the inde- finitely future expression — " he that shall come." I would make the same alteration in Matt. xi. 3. and Luke vii. 19, — "Art thou he that Cometh, or look we for another?" From the latter passages we may collect, that the expression " he that comcth " was, with the Jews, a kind of title distinguishing the Messiah ; for this was certainly the designed and understood import of the Baptist's inquiry.* And the phrase appears to have received this current acceptation from its use in Psalm cxviii. 26, " Blessed is he that comcth in the name of the Loud." In this language, the multitude of rejoicing disciples who attended the Lord on his last entrance into Jerusalem, acknowledged him as the Messiah ; and in the same sense did the Lord apply the language to himself in his last lamentation over Jerusalem. Matt, xxiii. 39. At this day indeed believers have to remember with joy, that the coming of Christ in the flesh has taken place ; that coming which * Some have conceived, tliat it was not for the satisfaction of his own mind the Baptist made this inquiry, but for the satisfaction of his disciples, tlirough whom he proposed it. They think it impossible that any doubt upon the subject could have occurred to himself, after the divine information he had received, the evi- dence he had witnessed, and the testimony he had borne, identifying Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. But this idea proceeds upon a false estimate of what is in man. I am far indeed from conceiving that the Baptist was nllowed to re- nounce that view of the Lord. But it is evident from the narrative, that he was staggered in his mind ; and staggered, (it is more than probable) from find- ing that the Lord did not interfere at all to release him from prison. According to the generally prevalent misconceptions of the nature of the ^Iessiau's kingdom, (prevalent, we know, at that time, among the most favoured disciples of the Lord, and no doubt affecting also the Baptist's mind,) he appears to have been quite un- able to reconcile it with the greatness of that kingdom, that he himself should be left so long in the hands of his enemies. Perhaps also he designed, by making the inquir)', to put himself and his situat'.on in the Lord's revived recollection. Those who imagine, that so great a prophet could not have fallen into sucii a halting state, are puffed up with a vain admiration of him, and a vain conceit of themselves. Accordingly, the Lord, in his reply to the Baptist's inquiry, treats this manifestation of his fleshly mind with no more indulgence than he treated a similar manifestation in Peter, (Matt. xvi. 23.) Simply referring to the works of mercy in which he was engaged, he adds the declaration—" Blessed is he, whoso- ever shall not slitmble at me :" words which plainly mark the mind that he rebukes in the Baptist, as the mind of unbelief; the tendency of which is to make men stumble at that stone, against which whosoever falls shall be broken. This mind "savours not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men :'' and is of precisely the same ungodly character in those who are saved from its destructive tendency, as in those whom it destroys. ^Vhen the iron (2 Kings vi. 6.) was miraculously made to ascend from the bottom of the water, and to float on the surface, its own tendency to sink to the bottom was just the same as before; and would have been at any moment manifested, if the supernatural power which raised it weie but for a moment intermitted. Even such is evcrj' fancied improve- ment of our own nature by what the religious world miscall Grace. VOL. II. H 98 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. "many prophets and righteous rnen desired to see," and to which they looked forward with eager expectation. This coming of Christ has taken place, and the work which he came to accomplish in the flesh is finished. He has been " made sin," or a sin-ofFering, for his church, and has put away sin by that one offering of himself in the place of the guilty, the just for the unjust. But still is he held out to the faith of his people as "He that cometh;" and still are they held out as a people who love and look for his appearing — who " look for and hasten vmto the coming of the day of God." At that day. He who COMETH shall appear the second time, without sin, unto salvation" (Heb. ix. 28) ; " to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe." (2 Thess. i. 10.) We are taught to " comfort one another with these words," which describe the glory of that day ; and as we observe the signs of the times announcing its approach, it is cheering indeed to exclaim — " Behold, He cometh !" — Rev. i. 4, 8. iv. 8. xi. 17. xxii. 20. Having been led to mention the second coming of the Lord, I may as well here introduce a corrected version of 2 Tliess. ii. 1. That passage ought certainly to be read " Now upon," or " concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him, we beseech " you brethren, that ye be not," &c. The com- mon version — " We beseech you, by the coming .... and by our gathering," &c. — is, in every view, indefensible. The Greek prepo- sition [oTTSf] is employed, to indicate the subject upon which we speak, in Rom. ix. 27 — 2 Cor. i. 8, and elsewhere. XV. " If lliou. Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared," — Ps. cxxx. 3, 4. I believe this passage is generally quoted as intimating, that God is not extreme to notice what is evil in men ; but that he overlooks, or winks at, such forms of it as are to be considered rather venial failings and infirmities, than sins. Such, at least, is commonly the imagination of the unbelieving mind, of "the fool who saith in his heart, God is not ;" who denies the existence of the only true God, in denying his immutable holiness and perfect righteousrtess. But, however the English expression, " mark iniquities," may seem to lend some countenance to that infidel imagination, the original lends not any ; and the whole passage — rightly understood — presents at once the most awful view of sin, and the surest ground of hope to the chief of sinners. But who can understand it aright, except those to whom " the Son of God hath giveti an understanding to know the true God ? " 1 John v. 20. It cannot be understood by any, who re- IlKMAUKS CORRECTIVi:, \r. 9.0 ject the principle so distinctly given in the New Testament for inter- preting the PsiUms. that they were uttered l)y David as a Prophet, speaking not from himsdf, hut hy the Holy S])irit ; not of himself, but, as the Spirit of Christ that was in him did signify, of the suffer- ings of Christ and the following glories. Acts ii. 29 — 31. xiii. 33—37. Luke xxiv. 44. Mark xii. 3G. 2 Pet. i. 21. 1 Pet. i. 10—12. It cannot he understood by those, who, in spite of this infallible in- terpretation of the Holv Spirit, persist in regarding the Psalms as the language of the sinner David about himself, his experiences, his joys and sorrows, his afflictions and deliverances, his conflicts and his triumphs. But well is it for us, believers, that in hearkening to the voice which speaks in the 7th verse of this Psalm, — " Let Israel hope in Jkhovah, for with Jehovah is mercv, and with him is plenteous re- demption :" — well is it for us, that in hearkening to such a call we hearken not to the voice of a sinful man like ourselves, but to the voice of Him who indeed " was made of the seed of David according to the fiesh," but yet is David's Lord ; (Rom. i. 3. Mark xii. 35 — 37.) to the voice of Him, who, addressing his heavenly Father, said by the mouth of his sen-ant David, " I will declare thy name unto my brethren : in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee." See Ps. xxii. 22. intei-preted in Heb. ii. 10 — 12. and Ps. xl. 6 — 10. in- terpreted in Hebr. x. .5 — 10. \Ve are told in Hebr. v. 7. that Christ in the days of his flesh offered up prayers and supplications, with strong crying and tears, unto Him that was able to save him from death : and this short Psalm (the 130th) is one of those, in which we are admitted, as it were, to hear the Man of Sorrows pouring out his soul before God. In this view of it, and of him as at once the great High Priest and sacrifice for sin, let us take a survey of the Psalm : premising that the expression translated "mark" in the 3rd verse literally signifies to keep or hold fast : as the word rendered "forgiveness" in the fol- lowing verse literally denotes loosing, or relaxing. The two words, as applied to sin, are nearly equivalent with the " binding " and "loos- ing"— "retaining" and "remitting", which occur in the New Testa- ment. (Matth. xviii. IS. John xx. 23.) Now the iniquities of all his people were laid, or made to meet, iipon him, Isa. hii. 6. He was ynade sin for them. 2 Cor. v. 21. And as he took upon- himself their iniquities, and endured the penalty of them, so he confessed them as his own. " Mine iniquities," saith he in the 40th Psalm, " are more than the hairs of mine head:" this Psalm is expressly interpreted of the Messiah in Heb. x. 5 — 9. And again in the 3Sth Ps. he saith, " Mine iniquities are gone over mine head : as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me." Under this hea\"y burden he groaned, and poured out his soul unto death ; and whatever were the instru7nents of his sufferings, men or devils, they were but the sii'ord of the Lord of hosts, called to " awake against his Shepherd, against the Man that is his fellow." (Zee. xiii. 7, compared Avith Matt. xxvi. 30.) It was imder the righteous judgment of Jehovah against sin, that he suffered. Accordinglv, he speaks in the Psalm last quoted, " thine arrows stick fast in me, and H 2 100 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &e. thy hand pressetli me sore :" and again, in the 39th Psalm, " T wa dumb, I opened not my mouth, because thou didst it : remove thy stroke away from me ; I am consumed by the blow of thine hand :" and again, in the 69th Psalm, " They persecute him whom thou hast smitten ; and they talk to the grief of thy wounded one :"* and in the 42nd Psalm, " All thy waves and thy billows are gone over me." " Out of these depths," awfully unfathomable, he " cried unto Jehovah :" and it Avas in the full assurance of faith, believing the ioord of the Lord with unshaken confidence, that he cried for the promised deliverance, and w^as heard. To him the divine word was passed, and confirmed by an oath, establishing him " a Priest ybr ever." Heb. vii. 21. Of him Jehovah spoke, as in Psalm Ixxxix. 18 — 35, " My covenant shall stand fast with Him : once have I sworn by my holiness, that I will not lie unto David," — unto the Beloved, — for such is the import in Hebrew of the name David; and again, in Psalm xci. 15 — 16, " He shall call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in ti'ouble; I will deliver him, and honour him : with long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation." (Compare this with Psahn xxi. 1 — 7.) Thus, our great forerunner had the word and oath of Jehovah for the basis of that confidence, with which he called upon God for deliverance. With this his confidence he was taunted on the cross : — " he trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he ivill have him." (Matt, xxvii. 43.) And a glorious deliverance God did effect for him ; and thereby proved that he had accepted his sacrifice. (Psalm XX. 3.) He that was by men adjudged worthy of death as a blas- * So the passage ought certainly to be read ; as it is in the Vulgate, the Sep- tuagint, and the Syriae Versions. See Dathius. Led to name that German divine, 1 would say that I name him with respect, as honourably distinguished from 7nany of his compeers, as both a scholar and an honest man. The prophetic character of several Psalms seems to have forced itself upon his mind ; and he asserts it plainly against his theological brethren. Yet it is lamentable to observe how he commonly blunders and gropes his way in vain, like a blind man in broad daylight, from want of subjection to the general principle that David, inditing the Psalms as a prophet and by the Spirit of Christ, speaks throughout of Christ and of that Church, which is his body, one with him. A curious instance of this blundering has occurred to me, in drawing up the present article, and T would briefly mention it as exemplifying what I have said. Dathius pre- faces his translation of the '20th Psalm with the observation, that it "contains pious vows, with which the people followed the king, as he was going with his army to a war; but that ^^ what war it was is altogether uncertain." The Psalm does indeed relate to the last great conflict, in which the King of Israel was en- gaged, but engaged " o/o?it', and of the people there was none with him ;" while his people are indeed represented as beholding and contemplating the conflict with awe, and with the deepest interest in the issue, )iraying for and anticipaTing the triumphant result. In the following Psalm, closely connected with the 20th, the same people are introduced, as celebrating and rejoicing in the triumph of their exalted Head. Many a poor old woman could have taught the Leipsic Pro- fessor of Hebrew and D. D. tvhat the war was, which he pronounces to be altoge- ther uncertain. The scriptural view of the book of Psalms may be seen copiously treated and maintained in the Preface to a metrical version of the Psalms by John Barclay, of Scotland; a man reckoned mad, of course, by the devout and honourable of his country. But I have heard from some who knew him per- sonally, that he used to say jocosely, tapping his foreiiead, — '' Aye, folks say that I am crack' d ; but that is the crack the light got in at." Ilis Preface. may be had separate from his metrical version. REMARKS CORRIiCTlVK. &c. 101 phcmcr, or claiming to be the Son of Cod, was " declared to Lc the Son of God with power, according' to the Spirit of holiness, by his resurrection from the dead." Rom. i. 4. Jkhovah interposed to decide the controversy in his favour. He was " raised from the dead by the glory of the Father" (Rom. vi. 4) ; and exalted at the right hand of the majestv on high." (Heb. i. 4. viii. 1 ; I^ph. i. 20 — 23.) From all the burden which had been laid upon hin), he was released. He was "justified in the Spirit." 1 Tim. iii. 16. And then was his Church virtually *' raised together with him, and made to sit together with him in heavenly places." Eph. ii. 6. Then were all her sins, that sore burden laid upon him, and from which he had cried for deliverance, " cast as a stone into the depths of the sea." Mic. vii. 19. Tliis justification, and consequent glory of his redeemed people, and the manifestation of the glory of his heavenly Futher in this, had been " the jov set before him," in the assured prospect of which " he endured the cross" Heb. xii. 2. And in this 130th Psalm we hear him encouraging and comforting his heart with a view of it, in all the depth of his sufiering, and under all the weight of sin that lay upon him. " If thou, Lord, shouldcst retain iniquities, () Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared." As if he had said, ' If thou, I^ord, shouldest not loose me from the burden of the iniquities laid upon me, and which " have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up," (Psalm xl. 1 2.) would not all those whom " thou hast given me out of the world" sink with me for ever ? and there w-ould be no seed on earth to serve thee. But there is — assiu-ed in thy word of promise — that loosing of the burden, that release and justification of me, which brings redemption unto them, and which shall make thy name known and reverenced with godly fear by all my brethren, with whom I have taken part in flesh and blood, that I might bear and put away their sin.' Continuing our suiTey of this Psalm, we read — " I wait for the Lord, my soul doth wait ; and in his ivord do I hope. My soul waiteth for the Lord more than thev that watch for the morning." It was in aU the earnestness of thirsting desire, as well as in the full confidence of assured hope, that even in midnight darkness he looked for the coming day of his promised glorv ; looked for it to Him, whose the niyht is, and who, in the darkest hour, " hath prepared the light and the sun." (Psalm Ixxiv. 16.) How emphati- cally does he express that earnestness of desire in the 42nd Psalm ! " As the hart panteth after the w-aterbrooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God. My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God ; when shall I come and appear before God ?" It is with good reason, and on good and sufficient grounds, that he turns to his Israel, his ransomed Church, at the close of the Psalm, calling them to be followers of his faith and sharers in his hope, as they are joint heirs with him in his glory. " Let Israel hope in Jehovah : for with Jehovah is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption. And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities." He that provided the lamb for a burnt- offering, that found the ransom, and has dcclaixd his acceptance of it as abun- 102 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. daiitly glorifying his law, — " He will abundantly pardon,''' and mightily deliver, all that " great congregation" of sinful men, in whose stead he was " pleased to hruise his Holy One." Believers ! let us look well at the characters of this mercy which does " belong to Jehovah :" while the attribute commonly called mercy stands in direct opposition to his holiness and truth, and righteous- ness. Let us look well at the sure foundation, on which the mercy of the LORD rests ; at its exuberant riches, abounding vvhere sin abounded ; at its almighty efficacy, reigning unto eternal life " where sin had reigned unto death;" but " reigning through righte- ousness by Jesus Christ." (Rom. v. 21.) Say, is there in this MERCY any thing like that, which the world attribute under the same name to their false Gods ? any thing like an indulgence of at least some sins as venial, an ovei-looking of them, and a forbearing to execute his denounced judgment against them ? Rather, in the mercy re- vealed as belonging to Jehovah is there not that which discovers *' the only true God" as " glorious in holiness," "very gi'eatly to be feared in the assembly of his saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are round about him ?" " Glory ye in his holy Name." " They who know that Name," or character, — who believe the heavenly testimony of Him who declares it, they " will put their trust in him." (Ps. ix. 10.) They, kept abiding in the truth, will be kept from the vain and ungodly labour of searching for some tokens of good about themselves, either naturally possessed or super- naturally bestowed ; from searching for any thing to supply some supposed deficiency of hope afforded by that one good and glorious object, which the revelation of the glory of God in the face of his anointed has discovered to us from heaven. (Micah vi. 5, 8.) "Kept by the power of God," in the view of this, they will be kept " walking in the light, as children of the light and of the day :" they will be kept "walking in the/e«r of Jehovah, and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit." (Acts ix. 31.) It affords the most abasing view of ourselves, of the unchangeable vileness of our own hearts, that nothing but the power of God can keep us thus walking in the truth, even after having "tasted that the Lord is gracious," after having been ever so long established in the faith. A "people bent to backsliding from Him," is to the end our own character. (Hos. xi. 7.) But we may be assured that, if ever we be so far left to ourselves, — for shewing us " what is in our hearts," — (2 Chr. xxxii. 31.) as to walk in a mind contrary to the fear of his holy Name ; he will not leave us altogether unchastised. Jer. xlvi. 28. However he may leave others to walk in their own,ways, un- disturbed by the visitations of affliction, he will not so deal with his children. Earthly parents may spoil their children by indulgence. But He will make good that word of promise to his Holy One, (Ps. Ixxxix. 30 — 32.) " I will visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes." " Whom the Lord lovetli he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth." Hebr. xii. 6. I do not mean to say, that the afflictions of his children, though always ¥cnt for their profit, are always sent in the way of chastisement. They may be " in heaviness through manifold trials," for the exercise REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. lOS and futherance of their faith, (1 Vet. i. 6.) and for otherwise glorify- ing Goil. But of this they niay he assured, that, when tliey turn to any wai/ contrary to the Loan, he will sooner or later make them know and see that it is an et'il thing and bitter they procure unto them- selves, lie will mercifully hut awfully make " their own wickedness to correct them, and their backslidings to reprove them." Jer. ii. 17 — 19. XVI. ■ So, being ajfectionately desirous of yoti, wc were willing to have imparted unto yoiL, not the gospel of God ohIi/, but also our own souls, [^nx"'] because yc were dear unto us." — 1 Thess. ii. S. We ought certainly to read, "but also our own lives;" as the same word is rightly rendered in Acts xx. 24. and in numerous other passages: though I am far from denying that there are passages of the New Testament, in which the worxl does import the soul, in con- tradistinction to the body, and is so rightly translated. In INIatth. xvi. 25, 26. our translators, in the former verse, cor- rectly render it life ; — " whosoever will save his life — and whoso- ever -will lose his life :" but erroneously turn to the other meaning in the verse immediately succeeding. This also ought to run — " For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own life ? Or w-hat shall a man give in exchange for his life ?" As a man's life is more to him than the whole world ; so believers, looking fonvard to the coming of the Son of man in his glory (v. 27), have in view that " recompense of reward," which infinitely outweighs all that they can lose for his name; though they should. suffer the loss of life itself. Reverting to 1 Thess. ii. 8, it is obvious that the common version presents to the English ear an idea, which we cannot suppose to have been in the Apostle's contemplation. Yet some perhaps may think that it is countenanced by another passage, Rom. ix. 3. which in the Enghsh version runs thus : " For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh." I believe the commentators have made various attempts to throw off the monstrous idea, which these words suggest, by a modified interpretation of them. But the fact is, that nothing more is needed to clear up the passage, than a corrected punctuation and literal version. Remo^^ng the period at the end of the second verse, let it be read in continuation with the words " for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh ;" and let the intermediate clause, literally translated, be marked as a parenthesis. Then the whole will rua thus ; — " I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart — 104 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. (for I did myself wish to be accursed from Christ) — for my brethren, my kinsmen, according to the flesh." The Apostle, expressing his affectionate concern for his Jewish brethren who remained in unbe- lief, reverts naturally to the period, when he was himself of the same mind, when he persecuted the Church of Christ, and abhorred the thought of any connexion with Jesus of Nazareth. It is as if he said, " I mourn (and well I may, for I remember what used to be my own mind) I mourn over my unbelieving countiymen." For the clearing up of this passage I am indebted to a writer, who in many respects has rendered so much service to the Church of God, that it is no wonder his name is of very bad odour with " the devout and honourable" of the world ; Robert Sandeman, M.D. of Scotland. Under the signature of Pal.emon he published Letters to Mr. Hervev, on his Theron and Aspasio, and other pieces. I have not his work at hand, but am sure that I have given, substantially, the correction which he proposes in our ti'anslation of this passage. To me it seems indisputable. On the substitution of " I did myself wish," for, " I could wish that myself were ;" I am sensible that the Greek would admit the latter version ; {-rtvyp^yDi being not inelegantly used for what is ex- pressed in Acts xxvi. 29. by iv^o(.i(/.vf» a»). But it is undeniable that it equally admits the translation, " I did" or " used" to wish ; and that this is the more literal. [Let me also suggest to the Greek scholar that, if the other were the meaning intended, we might rather expect a different construction of the following pronoun ; f/ytanTov, rather than avro^ tyu. I shall only add, that the proposed correction is supported by that ancient and valuable version, the Syriac] xvn. " Unto ijoii therefore which believe, he is precious." — 1 Pet. ii. 7. We ought certainly to read, " Unto you therefore which believe is the preciousness :" i. e. that preciousness of the corner-stone, spoken of by the Prophet. The Apostle has just quoted the word of the Lord concerning his Messiah from Isa. xxviii. 16. " Behold I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a jifecious corner-stone, a sure foundation : he that believeth shall not [make haste] be in trepida- tion." And this brings to his remembrance two other scriptures concerning the same corner-stone, Isa. viii. 14. and Ps. cxviii. 22. and leads him to contrast the opposite 7'esults of Christ's coming in those who believe and those who believe not : much as the Apostle Paul contrasts the effects of the Gospel in the two classes, when he gavs — " to the one wc arc the savour of death unto death ; but to 11 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &:c. 105 the Dtlar, the savour of life unto life." 2 Cor. ii. 1"), If). " Unto vini thiTcforc which believe is the prcrioitsncs's : but unto tliem which (lisMicvr' Ix'nciOova-i'] the stone which the builders dii^alluweci, the same is iniule the head of the corner, and a stone of stuinblinti^, and u rock of offence, who stumble at the word, disbelieving ; whereunto also they were appointed." The first part of this quotation is obviously from Ps. cxviii. 22. a passage applied by the Lord to himself. (Matth. xxii. 42.) It is as obvious that the latter part is a quotation from Isa. viii. 14. a pas- sage similarly applied to the Messiah by Paul (Rom. ix. 33.) : and similarly quoted bv him in combination with the other passage, Isa. xxviii. 16. It would appear therefore that any, who do not pretend to be Aviser than the Apostles, or rather wiser than the Spirit of Christ in his Apostles, must acknowledge without hesitation, that in Isa. viii. 13, 14. there is a prediction of the Messiah ; as " God the Saviour," a sanctuary and sure refuge to all that believe ; but a stone of stumbling, at which those who disbelieve the w'ord fall and are broken. In this passage of Isaiah, He is distinctly characterized as " the LoRii of hosts." Indeed, if the Saviour of his jjeoj) I e were anv other than Jkhovah, the word that proclaims salvation to sinners would at the same time sanction idolatry. But is He not expresslv marked by the same title in Ps. xxiv. ? and this, combined with the description of his work of perfect righteousness as the Son of Man ; in conse- quence of which He became " head over all things" to his ransomed Church ; rightfully claimed those gates to be opened unto Him, into which nothing unclean could enter ; and is set dowm as " the King of glorv" at the right hand of the majestv on high. Compare Ps. cxviii. 19, 20. The reader may have observed, that in both the 7th and Sth verses of 1 Pet. ii. I wish to substitute the expression disbelieving , or unbelieving, for disobedient : and this, because it more distinctly marks the contrast with those that believe, mentioned in the first clause of the passage. And in this sense the same word [aTTEiflfiv] occurs, and is rendered by our translators, in John iii. 36. Acts xiv. 2. xvii. 5. xix. 9. and elsewhere. Indeed, when the Gospel is said (as in Rom. xvi. 2G.) to be now " made known to all nations for the obedience of faith ;" the expression simply marks the divine authority with which it is sent throughout the world, demanding the credence of those who hear it, " commanding all men everywhere to repent." Acts xvii. 30. Tliis repentance, or change of mind, — the " repent- ance unto life," which is the gift of God, is repentance to the ac- knowledging of the truth. (2 Tim. ii. 2,5.) Those who disbelieve it are disobedient indeed, setting themselves in rebellious opposition to the authority of the most high God. But on the proposed change in the version of 1 Pet. ii. 7. some perhaps may demand, " what matters it, whether we read the pas- sage unto you ivhich believe he is precious, or unto you ivhich believe is his preciousness '? Is not the meaning of each version identical ?" I answer. No : not, at least according to the way in which the com- mon version is ordinarily quoted and applied. I have known it ordi- 106 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. narily quoted as declaring the high esthnation, in which believei's hold the Messiah, his preciousness in their view — to their hearts. And often have I known it applied, in this sense, so as to minister rather to the self-conceit of religious professors, than to their profit. There is indeed no doubt that Christ is the " one pearl of great price" in the view of those who know him. But those who know most of his value have reason rather to acknowledge, that their high- est thoughts of him fall infinitely below his intrinsic excellence, than to be engaged in contemplating how high they reach. What the Apostle asserts in the passage is, not any thing about the believer's estimation of Christ, but what Christ is intrinsically to his believing people. This his preciousness to them is infinite, unfathomable, past finding out, " the unsearchable riches of Christ." Eph. iii. 8. They may therefore understand something of that paradox, " having nothing, and yet possessing all things," and, though commonly " a poor and an afflicted people," may well glory in Him who " was rich, yet for their sakes became poor, that they through his jK)verty miffht be rich." 2 Cor. viii. 9. xvm. " The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also noiv save us, (vol the putting away of the filth of the flesh, hut the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." — 1 Pet. iii. 21. The translation of this passage is, to say the least, very strange and obscure. It is a very harsh exj)ression, to say that a figure saves : and, in the ordinary meaning attached to the tei'm baptism, it is utterly false to say that baptism saves us. The literal version of the original would be, " the antitype baptism to which," that is, the baptism answering to which as an antitype to its type. But the idiom of the English language scarcely admits this literal translation : and I would therefore substitute one a little different in construction, but perfectly equivalent in its import and much more intelligible: viz. " which was a type (or figure) of the baptism that now saves us also." To call one thing a type of another, and to call the latter an antityjte of the former, are expressions obvi- ously identical in their meaning. In the preceding verse the Apostle has mentioned the preservation of Noah and his family in the ai"k ; " wherein" (saith he) " feiv, that is, eight souls were saved by water :" and then follow the words that •we have quoted, " which was a figure of the baptism (or washing) that now saves us also .... by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." But lest any should imagine for a moment that, in thus mentioning REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. 107 baplhm, the Apostle intended that rite of baptism, or dipping in literal water, which marked the commencement of the Christian profession of the first proselvtes, he immediately disclaims that meaning, and in language apparently indicating his abhoiTence of such a mistake : " not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God." The literal baptism, or washing with literal water, could but cleanse the body, or purify to the cleansing of the flesh. He therefore distinctly guards against the supposition, that this was the baptism he intended ; and as distinctly marks that he speaks of that which cleanseth our conscience from guilt, " purging it from dead works to serve the living God," (Heb. ix. 14.) giving us peace with God, and leading us to walk with him as dear children. Now we know, that it is the blood of Christ which thus cleanseth the conscience, that blood which has been " shed for many for the remission of sin," and the assurance given unto all by his resurrec- tion from the dead of the divine acceptance of his one offering : we know (I say) that this is the baptism, or washing, which gives " the answer of a good conscience toward God." It therefore only remains to inquire, why the Apostle marks this as represented in figure by the icaters of the food, which preserved Noah and his family in the ark, but destroyed the rest of the world. It seems to me to intimate, that, as the flood of waters displayed the divine indignation, and ex- ecuted the threatened vengeance against the wickedness of an ungodly world, while they yet bore up in safety the eight persons inclosed in the ark ; so the death of Christ for sin, while it has effected the eternal redemption and salvation of all that are in Him, " a remnant according to the election of grace," is at the same time the most awful manifestation of the righteous judgment of God, as well as the surest pledge of its execution, against the " world that lieth in the wicked one." Some perhaps may be surprised, that in the preceding remarks I have used the expressions — baptism and ivashing — indifferently, as equivalent. But that I have not done so unwarrantably, the mere English reader may satisfj- himself by referring to Mark vii. 4, 8. Luke xi. 38. Heb. ix. 10. In all these passages, the words, justly rendered by our translators wash and xvashings, are the same with the Greek phrases baptize and baptisms : for these are but Greek words adopted into English. In fact, to baptize literally means, in Greek, to wash by dipping, or, in one word, to bathe. And thence it is sometimes applied to other fonns of washing, as in Luke xi. 38. I would incidentally remark, that there is a decided mistranslation in our common version of Acts xxii. 16. Instead of " arise, and be baptized," the Greek indisputably is "arise, and bathe." [CxTtria-xi, the middle voice ; not SscrrTiaOnri, the passive.] I do not introduce the observation with the least idea of applying it to what is called the Baptist controversy. Tlie important questions, connected with that, are to be decided on much broader and stronger grounds. 108 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. XIX. '* And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises tn God: and (lie pri- soners hea.ri them," — Acts xvi. 25, [liTijxgswvTa.J It should be rendered — " and the prisoners were listening to them." The sacred historian marks the time, that it was the hour of midnight, — and the respective engagements of Paul and Silas on the one hand, and of their fellow -prisoners on the other ; the former occupied in prayer and singing praises to that God, whose servants they were ; the latter, in a separate part of the prison, listening to them : when " sud- denly there was a great earthquake," &c. Amidst all the simplicity which distinguishes the grandest descriptions of the sacred volume from other writings, the scene represented in this passage claims the closest attention of disciples, and ofters matter of reflection the most interesting and profitable. Here were two men, led to the city of Philippi by the special guid- ance of their divine Master, yet apparently given over to the will of his enemies. Dragged before the rulers on a charge the most un- founded,— the whole population had risen up against them, as one man. The magistrates, without examining the cause, had rent off their clothes, and commanded them to be beaten with many stripes. Without any of that attention to their wounds which common huma- nity might have suggested, they had consigned them to prison, with a strict charge to the goaler to keep them safely ; and tlie goaler — a stern and willing instrument of their cruelty — had " thrust them into the inner prison, and made their feet fast in the stocks." There was indeed, sojourning in the city, a Jewess, to whom, and to her household, Paul and Silas had been made the instruments of communicating the Gospel of Christ ; and how gladly would these, if they had been allowed, have ministered to the wants and soothed the affliction of the Apostles ! But from any such service of love they were eft'ectually shut out. Even the melancholy consolation was withheld — of the society of their fellow-prisoners. Thus the darkness of the dungeon, and of the midnight hour, might seem but an image of the cheerless desolation of their circum- .stances. Yet in this thickest gloom of desolation, their voices are overheard — not bemoaning their situation — not venting the' sounds of lamentation and despondency, but uttering the accents of prayer and songs of praise to God. Sounds so extraordinary have caught the ears of their fellow-prisoners ; they are listening to the Apostles, and no doubt listening with surprise, wondering much what matter of rejoicing two men can find in such circumstances, and at such an hour. Believers ! we know what accounts for the marvellous fact.. They had light with them in their dark dwelling, the light of " heaven REMARKS CORRKCTIVE, &(;. U)'.) opened." (See Remarks, No. X.) They had witli them the presence of Him, whom no prison walls or bars could exclude: of Him, iu whose "presence is the fulness of joy ;" whose "favour is better than life-:" — thev had Him with them, who is " our refuge and strength, a verv present help in trouble ;" and who suddenly interposed for their deliverance, and baftted in a moment all the power and precau- tions of his adversaries. Without pursuing the particulars of the narrative further, let those, " who have obtained like precious faith" with the Apostles, learn this lesson from it among others: — that there arc no circumstances in which we can be placed, so dark, so desolate, so grievous to flesh and blood, but that we hai'e in the midst of them abundant matter for the joyful exercise of praise, as well as a gracious call to "pour out our hearts" in praver before Him who " is a refuge for us," and " nigh imto all them that call uj^on Him." In the latter exercise, in prayer, we may almost say the believer 7)}usf be engaged in the hour of affliction. But the more we are engaged in it aright, in the mind of faith, the more we shall be led to combine praise with our prayer ; praise for the wonderful mercv that admits and calls sinners to the mercy-seat ; praise for that divine word which warrants the full as- surance of faith in our aj)proaches to God, from the consideration of the great High Priest who addresses us in the cheering language just now referred to — "trust in him at all times; ye people, pour out your hearts before him : God is a refuge for us," (Psalm Ixii. 8.) ; — praise for the infinite blessedness brought and secured to us in Him, with whom the covenant of Jehovah " standeth fast for ever," (Psalm Ixxxix. 3, 28.) who was made a curse for us, to put away our sin, and who brings us with acceptance to his God, and our God — his Father, and our Father. Is there not here indeed abundant matter for combining praise with prayer; if it were even the first time the sinner ever called on the name of the Lord ? This combination is marked in what may be called the apostolic recipe, for keeping our hearts in perfect peace : "in every thing by praver and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your request be made known unto God : and the peace of God .... shall keep your hearts and minds by Christ Jesus." Phil. iv. 6, 7. But it is in our great forerunner we see it perfectly exemplified. He, and He alone, could say — "all thy waves and thy billows have gone over me." (Ps. xlii. 7, 8.) But in these deepest waters he adds — " yet the Lord will com- mand his loving kindness in the day time, and in the night his song shall be with me, and my' prayer unto the God of my life-" The metaphorical sense is here obvious, in which the expressions day and night are to be understood. And the same is their high im- port in Psalm Ixxiv. 16, " the day is thine ; the night also is thine : thou hast prepared the light and the sun." Afflicted believer ! in the dai'kest gloom of midnight, let his song be with you ; in the assured prospect of that light which he has prepared, that light which " is sown for the righteous." Psalm xcvii. 11. 110 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c, XX. " / perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and he- held your devotions, I found an altar ivith this inscriptioii, to the unknown God. Wliom therefore ye ignorautly worshij), him declare I unto you." — Acts xvii. 22, 23. In this passage our translators have quite failed of preserving the dexterity of Paul's address. He did not at once offend his polished aviditors, hy teUing them they were superstitious. He employed a word of middle signification, (to use the phrase of grammarians,) like our religiotis, or devout, p£/(7/oa;/tAovE£7Tff tj.] " I perceive that ye are extraordinarily religious." But much less did the Apostle acknowledge them as worshippers of the God whom he was about to declare to them. The words falsely translated " whom ye ignorantly worship, [o'v uyyoavris svaiQurc.'] would literally run " not knoioing lohom ye are devout ;" but, to pre- serve the English idiom, ought to be translated " whom ye know not amidst all your devotion." Yet upon this mistranslated verse I have known an opposer of scriptural truth raise a subtle distinction, between worshipping a false God, and worshipping the true God ignorantly ! [Every Greek scholar must be aware, that ivai<^it)i also is a word that does not include in its signification either the good or the bad character of the devotion, to which it is applied ; as well as that it never admits the construction, tvTiQziy Giov, as a verb transitive : so that ov certainly depends upon xyvomTis, not upon zvaiQEin. As to the expression in 1 Tim. v. 4, which some might think a solitary ex- ception against the universality of this position, I am satisfied that it really is not ; that the true reading there is m^oi tov, instead of Wfo^Toy.] XXI. '^ Art thou called, beivg a servant ? care not for it; hut if thou maycst be made free, use it rather." — 1 Cor. vii. 21. However strange the correction, which I propose, may appear at first view even to disciples, I am satisfied that the passage ought to be rendered ; — " but even if thou canst be made free, rather lend thy service." [The Greek runs — x?^\ a y.xi ^wxaxi eXsvOi^os ysvs^xi, /xaAAo* V^VO'XI. Not tl 01 OVVXlTXl.'^ REMARKS CORRFXTIVR, .^-o. Ill In tlie construction of tlie first clause, there is not the smallest anibig^uity or difHculty. Every one, the most moderately acquainted with the original, must be aware when hi.s attention is called to the words, that the version of them 1 have assi<;ned, — " kvkn if" — conveys the only meaning-, which they really admit. And here the translators and interpreters seem to have been led astray by their not conceiving it possible, that the Apostle should direct a Christian slave to continue in slavery, even if he could obtain his manumission. This indeed might be pronounced incredible, if we did not remember that the instruction is given to men not of this world, but whose "citizenship is in heaven." Phil. iii. *20. And I should ho])C, that the following remarks may be sufficient to satisfy the mere English reader, that I have given the true meaning of the original. In the first place, then, that meaning is in ])erfect harmony with the entire context fi-om the 17th verse to the •24th inclusive. That this may be more immediately under the view of the reader, let me quote the passage more largely. " As the Lord hath called each, so let him walk : has any man been called [to the Christian faith] in circumcision? let him not become uncircumeised. Has any man been called in uncircuracision ? let him not be circumcised. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. Hast thou been called in slavery ? care not for it ; but even if thou canst be made free, rather afford thy service. For the slave that is called in the Lord, is the Lord's freedman : in like manner also the freeman that is called, is Christ's servant." [See No. xi. p. 86.] "Ye have been bought by a price ; be not ye the servants of men." [Regard not any as your master, having property in you, beside Him who has purchased you with his own blood.] " In what state each has been called, brethren, therein let him abide with God." Now must not every candid and attentive reader acknowledge, that the direction to Christian slaves, here presented, harmonizes perfectly with all the I'est of the passage ? But, in the second place, is the same harmonious consistency to be perceived in the common English version ? I must acknowledge that, according to it, the direction to Christian slaves seems to me at ab- solute variance with that general rule, — which the Apostle evidently proposes to illustrate in the instance of slavery — if not to contradict it. Is it not inconsistent with the direction in the 20th verse — " let ever}'' man abide in the same calling wherein he was called," — to subjoin immediately in the 21st verse a direction to the Christian slave — not to continue in the state of slavery, if he can obtain his freedom .'' Would it not completely nullify the former principle, if we should consider it as meaning — let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called, — unless he be able to change it for a better ? Surely the Christian slave, who could not obtain his freedom would necessarily remain a slave, if the Apostle had given no advice upon the subject. I would add, in the third place, that the consideration by which the 22nd verse enforces his instiniction given in the 21st verse, is de- prived of all its force by the common translation of the latter. " For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freed- 112 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. man."* What connexion is there hetween this consideration and the supposed advice to get manumission from his earthly master, if he can obtain it ? But let the corrected version of the 2 1st verse be admitted, and the connexion of the 22nd at once appears with striking force : if thou wert in a state of slavery, when called to the faith of the Gospel, trouble not thyself about obtaining earthly fi'eedom, even if thou canst ; for thou hast an heavenly. I confess myself somewhat uncertain of the precise meaning, which our translators intended to convey by the expression — " use it rather" — in the 21st verse. The version, which I have ventured to substitute — " rather afford thy service," — seems to me sufficiently warranted [by the ordinary force of the middle voice in Greek, and the common use of the verb for lending, or affording to another the use of something which I might withhold or recall. Such would be the service rendered by the Christian slave, who might have his freedom, but rather remained with his master.] It will probably sui-]^)rise some, that I should take such pains to establish an interpretation, the accuracy of which they may still remain indisposed to admit ; and indis^oosed, because they dislike it. Let disciples, however, in forming their judgment on the subject, beware of the influence of prejudice and disinclination. I believe — (but have not examined the matter) that the interpre- tation I have offered is not only new, but in direct opposition to that which has been generally adopted hitherto. f And I readily admit that this — in itself and prima facie — forms a strong argument against the justice of my view ; but if that view be really correct, notwith- standing \\\\s^ presumptive argument, it only affords the stronger reason, with all who indeed reverence the Scriptvires, to enforce the propriety and importance of asserting and defending the corrected version. It was very slowly I adopted it myself, even after the construction of the original forced itself on my attention. I am now convinced, not only that it is indisputably the correct translation of the Greek, but that it harmonizes with the whole context, with which the common version is at variance. And I would beseech my Christian brethren to look attentively at the genius of Apostolic Christianity, as exhibited in this exhortation to persons called in a state of slavery. When Paul instructs such, — even if they can obtain their freedom, — rather to remain slaves, he does indeed give them an advice, against which all the principles of their earthly mind ever must revolt. Worldly wisdom will take fire, and will declaim earnestly on the pro- priety— nay, the duty — of trying to better our condition in life. And * Frredman — not freema7i — is the proper English expression for flie Greek a-riXii^i^Df. It imports one who was formerly a slave, but has been manumitted : wliereas the term free -mini, iXivS'.^oi, applies to one who has never been in slavery. t I find in a French edition ot tlie Testament, 1724' — 1 Cor- vii. 21. translated thus — ' Avez vous ete appelle a la foi etant esclave ? neportez point cet etat avec peine ; mais plutot faites-en un bon usage, quand meme vous pourriez devenir libra.' — And in Antonio Martini's translation of the Bible, it runs thus — ' .Si fu stato cliiamalo, essendo servo? non prendertcne affanno ; ma potcndo anclii divcntar libcro, piutobto elcggi di scrvire.' — Ed. UE.MAUKS COllRKCTIVE, &'e. 113 pcrliaps this is wise for those who have tlieir portion in this hfc. But I helieve the chikh'cn of God have often experienced the cor- rection of our Heavenly Father for that very worldly wisdom ; and have found the correcting rod formed out of its consequences. However this he, f/teij certainly are called to live for objects of infinitelv higher consideration ; even for glorifying Him, whose thrj/ are, in whatever station he is pleased to employ them. They are HIS servants ; and are called to remember this character as their highest honour and blessedness ; — to live not unto themselves, hut unto Him ivho has loved them and given himself for them. 2 Cor. v. 1.5. Gal. ii. 20. And after all, is there anv thing in this instruction given to Christian slaves, more extraordinary than in that general principle confessedly asserted bv the same Apostle? 1 Tim. vi. 9. "They that will be rich [that icish to be rich, Qtihoij.tvoi wAwTi/v] fall into tem[)ta- tion and a snare," or, than in the exhortation given in 1 Tim. vi. 8. Heb. xiii. 5. It has also struck me, that this instruction to slaves is in harmony with another observable circumstance ; namely, that while we are distinctly informed in the New Testament of persons called to the Christian faith in the military profession, than which there is ])erhaps none into which it would be more unsuitable or inexpedient for a dis- ciple of Christ to enter, — yet there is not the slightest hint of a direction to those who became Christians after they were soldiers, to seek their discharge from that service. I had written thus far, and conceived I had brought the article to a close ; when an opportunity occurred of consulting the Syriac : and it gratified me to be able to say, that the interpretation of 1 Cor. vii. 21. w'liich I have assigned, is decisively born out by that ancient and valuable version. It gratifies me — not as strengthening the con- viction of my own judgment : I knew that the Greek could not admit the common translation of the passage ; but I am glad that I can now produce an authority, which may lead some to pause before they reject an interpretation, against which I am aware that many will be disposed to revolt without consideration. It is only to believers of the Apostolic Gospel, that I have aimed at addressing myself through- out these remarks, but I know that the fleshly mind in them — their otvn mind — is as earthly, and as much opposed to the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven, as it can be in unbelievers. It has also been mv study all along, to keep back as much as pos- sible the appearance of what is called learning : as I have wished to put forward nothing, upon which the plainest and most unlettered Christian may not judge, as well as the most literate. But, on the present occasion, I think it needful to offer a few obsen^ations for putting scholars on their guard, who may look at the passage in the Syriac ; on their guard against the unfairness of the Editors. In the folio edition by Tremellius, the Syriac text Avill be found apparently countenancing, in some degree, the common interpretation : for though it plainly exhibits the Syriac for — " even if thou, canst be made free," this is strangely followed by a direction to the slave to prefer fi-eedom. The following is his Latin version of it in the opposite column : — " sed etiam si potes liberum fieri, elige tibi potius VOL. II. 1 114 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. quam ut servias :" — that is, — "but even if thou canst be made free, let it be thy choice rather than to serve." — But if the reader cast his eye at the margin, he will there see a note by the Editor to the fol- lowing effect: — " In the Syriac we do not read the particle signifying rather than. But the context shews that it must have escaped the copyist ; as no sense can be extracted from the passage unless it be restored." Let us try this, by omitting the words " rather than," — which Tremellius owns he has inserted on his own judgment, (or, as he expresses it, has restored) — ^without any corresponding expression in the Syriac copy. How then will it read without this interpolation ? — " But even if thou canst be made free, let it be thy choice to serve." — Is there no sense in this ? Nay : the meaning is very plain indeed, however it may be disliked. But it is curious to observe that while Tremellius rejects this plain meaning as nonsense, the spurious text and version which he fabricates of his own are really nonsense ; from his retaining the Syriac word for " even," and yet foisting in the expression " rather than." Even if thou canst be made free, accept thy freedom ! Is such language any thing short of nonsensical or absurd ? As to the Syriac conjunction, justly rendered by him — etiamsi — even if ; it exactly corresponds, both in composition and in import, with the Latin etiaynsi : and like the latter word is most frequently expressed in our English version of the N. T. by "although /' as it might be with perfect correctness in 1 Cor. vii, 21. Looking at Schaap's edition in quarto I find him very inconsistent. He gives indeed the genuine Syriac text without the particle Tre- mellius has interpolated ; yet retains Tremellius's latin version of it, inserting " rather than .-" while it must be acknowledged that he does print the words " potius quam" in the Italic character. On the whole, I am reminded of another instance of editorial un- fairness, or presumption, connected with the Syriac version. The formerly disputed verse in the Apostle John's first Epistle appears in the text of Schaaf's edition, in good Syriac, with a corresponding Latin translation : so that a scholar, consulting the volume on the subject, might very possibly close it under the impression, that the passage was supported by what would be indeed no contemptible argument for its authenticity. But in the short notes at the end of the volume, Schaaf acknowledges that he has introduced that verse into the text from Tremellius's edition ! — where the latter, how- ever, more modestly, had only offered it in the margin, as what might be a Syriac version of words, which he confessed did not exist in any Syriac copy, and which he therefore would not venture to insert. The mere English reader, whose information exclusively I have generally aimed at in these remarks, will pardon me for having, in this one instance, added a little for scholars ; — a little that I should probably have no other opportunity of bringing forward. IIKMARKS COKRKCTIN K, \.-. 115 XXII. It'e h.X»tru*, in the text of this passage; especially as the con- text really calls for the change. Some other slight alterations t'lati have intro- duced in the version arj ohviously supported by the Greek. I i 8 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. Ignatius was one of the earliest of them ; — had seen some of the Apostles ; and for this and his episcopal character, and his martyr- dom, has been sainted, or made one of those demigods set up in the antichristian world mider the name of Saints. Yet we find that Ignatius — the saint — the Bishop, " the blessed Martyr," does style the communion table an altar, — nay, the " one altar" of Christians ! Indeed, in the selfsame sentence he gives the name of " Eucharist " to the Lord's Supper ; and (almost expressly) contradicts the Apostles by denying the Plurality of Bishops (or overseers fTria-MTtot) in a Christian Church. (Tit. i. 5, 6, 7. Acts xx. 17. 28. Phil. i. 1.) Now, is not this a sufficient specimen for Christians of what is commonly called, but falsely called, the primitive Church ? The really primitive age of the Christian Church was the Apostolic : and even in it an Apostle teaches us that there were "many Anti- christs" (1 John ii. 18.); that is, many, who under the christian name, opposed the purity and simplicity of christian truth. But the disciples were warned, that after the removal of the Apostles the ad- versary should come in as a flood. (Acts xx. 29, 30. 2 Pet. ii. 1, 3.) Can we then wonder that those who wish to counteract the promised consumption of the man of sin, that consumption, which has been, and is blessedly progressive, are so fond of appealing to the ages succeeding the Apostolic ; and of quoting the authority of the soi- disant Fathers in support of every antichristian corruption ? it is a field, into which christians have no need to follow them. " Lei not the wife depart from her husband ; but and if she depart, lei her remain unmarried vr be reconciled la her husband.''—! Cor. vii. 10, 11. To the attentive English reader there must appear something strange on the face of this passage. Would it not be strange if the Apostle should in one verse give a plain command to christian wives ; and should subjoin in the next verse another conmiand to the same persons, proceeding on the supposition that they wovild disobey the former ? " Let her not depart, but and if she depart," &c. The whole of this inconsistency disappears on a more accurate translation of the Greek. It ought to run thus : " Let not the Avife separate herself from the husband:" — [the common reading y(^u^is^ri*(xi is much inferior to that of some MSS. ^(^ufi^is^ai, as An the 15th verse] — '* but even if she has been separated, let her remain unmarried," &c. "even if she has been separated, [trzv ^t xxi p(^u^is%, pass.] — By the act perhaps of an unbelieving husband putting her away ; or in consequence of a domestic disagreement previous to the receipt of this Epistle. RK.MARKS COIIRIX'TIVK, &c. HO XXIII. That thy beloved may he delivered, save wilh thy right hand, and hear me ? (or answer me.)" — Ps. Ix, 5. ;ind cviii. 0. In order to convey the plural signification of the original wotd, we should read " thy beloved ones." The Messiah pleads that He may be heard and delivered, in order that all the children given to him (Heb. ii. 13.) may be delivered; their life being wrapped up in his. And when he denominates them the beloved ones of his Father, we are reminded of the same designation of them by the Apostle Paul (Rom. i. 7.) — " to all that be in Rome, beloved of God." In the gift of his own Son, whom he spared not, but delivered liim up for us all, (Rom. viii. 32.) " God commendeth his love toward us." And thus estimated, it appears indeed to have been " ^rea^ love, wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins." (Eph. ii. 4, 5.) And in every view of the greatness of the blessings be- stowed on the rebellious, — the forgiveness of all iniquitv, adoption into the family of God, the inheritance of an exceeding and eternal weight of Glory, — the love of our Heavenly Father toward us appears truly " marvellous loving kindness" (Ps. xvii. 7.); in the contempla- tion of which we can but exclaim, " O ! the depths ! " But there is a view of the surpassing greatness of this love of God toward us afforded by a few words of Clirist, as recorded in .John x\'ii. 23, which pre-eminently discovers it as one of the unsearchable things of God ; while the faintest and most imperfect glimpses of it may well fill our hearts with adoring wonder and praise. There the Redeemer praving to his Father, just before the closing scene of his sufferings on the cross, praying/o/* all those who should believe on him through the Apostolic word, — declares that he had given them the glory which he had received of his Father, and adds these words — " that the world may know [or, have a decisive evidence] that thou hast sent me, and hast loved the.m, as thou hast loved me." [xat-ji/f t/xc ■nyxirnTxs.] Be astonished, O heavens ! — A sinful nation, a people by nature laden with iniquity, yet " beloved of God," even as He is beloved of whom the voice from heaven pronounced — " this is my beloved Son." In Him, the righteous and Holy One, was no sin. He who hum- bled himself, to take upon him the likeness of sinful flesh, was one with the Father; and alone could say, " I do alicays the things that please Him." John viii. 29. Yet it is He that says, addressing his Father, — " Thou hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." But in the very next verse the Redeemer is recorded to have said — "Thou lovedst me before the foundation of tlie ivorld." — And can there in this respect be any parallelism between Him and his re- deemed ? — There is ! Accordingly, they are declared to have been 120 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, Sec. " chosen in Him before the found at ion of the world," Eph i. 2. " Chosen IN HIM." Yes : HE is the " firstborn among many brethren." It is IN HIM — THE BELOVED — they are all " made accepted" (Eph. i. 6.) : IN HIM they are sanctified (1 Cor. i. 2.) — ^justified — saved — and glo- rified, even with the glory given unto him; — "Joint-heirs ivith Christ," and therefore " heirs of God," is the wonder. ul accomit of that inheritance we are allotted in Him. (Eph. i. 11. Rom. viii. 17.) With good reason does the Apostle speak of the " riches of Christ as unsearchable." (Eph. iii. 8.) In exploring them, we explore the riches of our inheritance, and at the same time " the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints." (Eph. i. 18.) And in this wonderful salvation of sinners is the Glory of the only true God displayed in an effulgence, in which it could not otherwise have been discovered. " God is love :" and herein is love, not that we loved him, but that he loved us, and sent his son to be the " propitiation for our sins." 1 John iv. 10. 16. According as "we know and believe the love that God hath to us," so do we " dwell in God, and God in us," ib. It is "by the Holy Spirit given to us," that this love of God, in the believing view of it, is " shed abroad in our hearts (Rom. v. 5.) :" and that spirit in the highest exercise of this office, " fulfilling in us the work of faith with power," testifies of Christ alone ; and testifies none other things, but what are " ivritten in the Scriptures for our learning," and are declared to all alike wherever the Apostolic word is " sent among all nations for the obedience of faith." In the following verses of the 60th Psalm, we are called to hear the same glorious speaker, exulting in the confidence of faith — in the full assurance that God would make good to him, what he had " spoken," or pronounced, by his holiness : that he should inherit the people given to him out of all the nations of the earth, not of the Jews only, hut of the Gentiles also. The language indeed is figura- tive ; that of a mighty conqueror glorying in the extent of his domi- nions and conquests. But the Apostolic interpretation of that pro- phecy in Amos ix. 1 1, 12. — concerning the raising up "of the taber- nacle of David, so that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen that are called by my name, saith jehovah," — is the master key that opens the true import of such language, as we read in this Psalm, " over Edom will I cast out my shoe," as a token of his subjection; and the true import indeed of many other passages in the Psalms and other Scriptures. We find in Acts xv. 13 — 17, that an Apostle expressly quotes the above prediction of Amos, as fulfilled in that wonderful work of God — the calling in of the Gentiles to be one body with the Jews, by the faith of the one messiah. And if we receive this instruction of the Spirit by the Apostle, we can be at no loss to hear that mkssiah, in the 6th and following verses of the Psalm, rejoicing in the con- templation of the " goodly heritage" given to him, surveying the number and extent of the conquests of his redeeming love. Upon this let me only add, that in the 8th verse the words ren- dered— " Philistia, triumph thou, because of me" — ought to run " over Philistia is my shout of triumph." And without attempting to intro- duce here the critical reasons for this correction, (for Nvhich see REMARKS COKRECTIVl':, &c. 1-M Dathius or Rosenmiiller) — the English reader may be satisfied of its justice, not only by the context, but by referring to the perfectly panillel passage in Ps. cviii. 9. where he will read " over Philistiu will I triumph." Having just now mentioned Rosenmiiller, and hav- ing more than once referred to him, 1 think it needful to make a few observations for guarding the young scholar against him. It is one of the black characters which ai)j)ly to all men by nature as haters of the only true CJod — that "they delight in lies," and "only consult to cast him down from his excellency whom God hath crowned with "-lorv and honour." Ps. Ixii. 4. Hcb. ii. 7 — 9. " Who ivas delivered for our oflcuces, and was raised again for uiir juslificuliuit.'' Horn. iv. '25. SfRKLV the literal rendering of the Greek preposition [5;a] would be much more clear and emphatic : — who was delivered on account of our transgressions, and was raised again on account of our justifi- cation. If any, contemplating the suffering and death of him, who was emphaticallv " a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief," over whom all the " waves and billows" of Jehovah passed, — and at the same time hearing the testimony of him, as the righteous servant of Jkhovah, in whom was "no sin," — should inquire on what accovmt he was given up to be thus smitten and afflicted, on what account " it pleased the Lord to bruise him ;" — the answer of the Lord is re- corded. Is. liii. 8. — "for the transgression of my people loas he stricken." It was on account of sin that he suffered, the righteous one for the unrighteous ; — on account of the sin of manv, even of all that great congregation of the elect that were chosen in him out of an apostate world before its foundation, Eph. 1,4. The awful penalty of their sin he stooped to bear in their place, " giAang his life a ransom for many ;" that they all might be fully released from that penalty, in the only way consistent with the glory of his Heavenly Father. And on what account was this their surety and substitute raised again from the dead } It was on account of their justification being com- pleted,— their release effectually executed — in his obedience imto death; — because that work of righteousness was then finished, in which God is glorified and all the seed of Israel justified before him. Undoubtedly, the common version — "for our justification" — may be understood in the same sense : but it is equivocal. For that ex- pression might naturally be conceived to mean, that he was raised from the dead in order to obtain, or effect, our justification. Whereas the words " on account of our justification" — reallv import, that the work of our justification was accomplished by his death. He died, because we were sinners, who must else have borne our own sin : he rose from the dead because our sin was put away by his 122 REMARKS CORRECTIVE, &c. obedience unto death. When he with his expiring breath declared — " it is finished" — he pronounced the perfect removal of all the sin that had been laid upon him, and the consequent acquittal of all his ransomed people : his resurrection from the dead affixed the divine attestation confirming this joyful truth. Those who believe it are freed, of course, from the ungodly vain inquiry what they shall do to obtain justification in the sight of God : they have done with that question ; and they glory in his holy name in whom they are justified ; for his righteousness is unto and upon all them that believe, without diflference and without exception. My readers are aware, that the division into chapters and verses is altogether human and modern : also that the introduction of stops (or the punctuation) is posterior to the original text. These may therefore be altered without scruple, when the sense calls for it. Now I confess I think the last verse of the fourth chapter has been inexpediently disconnected from the first verse of the fifth ; and that the comma in the latter should be placed after the word "justified," instead of after "faith." The whole passage will then run thus : " Who was delivered on account of our transgressions, and was raised again on account of our justification. Therefore, being justified, by faith we have j)eace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ." It seems to me, that the context recommends this change ; as well as the tense employed in the original word for " being justified," — or rather "hav- ing been justified" — {^ixaiuOtvns not ^(K«t£vo/.] In making this remark, however, I am well aware, the expression "justified by faith," &c. is of frequent occurrence in the writings of the Apostle ; and that men hostile to the truth will continue to misinterpret such language, and to suppose that it countenances their idea of something merito- rious in faith, as a godly exercise of the mind, which makes it the procuring cause of our acceptance or justification in the sight of God ; while the believer knows that in this respect his faith has no more to do with his justification than his works. But the heart of man still seeks something "to cast Him down from his excellency," Ps. Ixii. 4. upon whom God laid all the glory, and who alone shall "be glorified in his saints." 2 Thess. i. 10. — In Rom. iii. 24, the Apostle expresses the truth with admirable distinctness and accuracy, when he says — " being justified/ree/y by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." KEMAKKS EXroSlTORV, iS:c. 123 REMARKS EXPOSITORY OF TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE. I. " Philip saith unto him. Lord, shcto us llir Falher, and iC sujjiceth us.'' — John xir. 8. How ver)' foolish, though very natural, Avas the desire expressed hy Philip — " Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us !" " Shew us THE Father !" give us some visible manifestation of the invisible God. He evidently sought some wonderful impression on his cor- poreal organs ; some discovery, of which his senses might take cog- nizance. Yet is it imaginable, that there should be any colour — figure, &c. or aiiy combination of figures — colours, &c. of which it could be asserted without profaneness — ' that is God ?' And even if Ave should for a moment admit a supposition so monstrous, what benefit could a creature and a sinner derive from any such discovery of God ? Of what imaginable use or service coidd it be ? But the absurdity of Philip's request — " Shew us the Father" — is still more strikingly marked by the consideration, that at the very moment he expressed it — he had before his eyes a manifestation of " the only true God," the most wonderful, the most indubitable, and the most sufficient to communicate blessedness everlasting and com- plete to every man discerning it. And of this the Lord's reply re- minded him. " Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip ? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father ; and how sayest thou then, shew us the Father .''" Greatly should we mistake, if we considered this discernment of the Lord Jesus as importing the sight of him with the natural eye. This woidd be but to " know Christ after the flesh." No; it im- ports that discernment of the glory of God in him, which we are given in believing the words of Christ ; — that sight of him which is pos- sessed at this day as really and efficiently by all w^ho believe the divine testimonv concerning him, as it could be enjoved of old by any who ate and drank in his presence. " No man hath seen God at any time : the only begotten Son, which is the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." John 1,18. Sent into the world by the Father to save sinners, by giving himself a ransom for them, he has discovered to us "the only true God," in a character which we could not naturally have conceived, and which it is now life eternal to know, as at once the just God and the jus- tifier of the ungodly ; has discovered him in the combined glorv of perfect righteousness and holiness and truth, harmonizing with mercv higher than the heavens, — mercy abounding above all our abounding 124 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. need of it, — mercy brought home to those who never could have advanced themselves to reach it, — mercy made sure to every one that believes the divine report, by its being estabhshed in him with whom the covenant standeth fast for ever, in Him who " is the head of his body the Church." Ps. Ixxxix. 28. Is. Iv, 3. He has loved that Church, and given himself for it: and while we view this his love that passeth knowledge, we view the love of God ; in the Son we behold the glory of the Father, kind indeed to the evil and the unthankful, — blessing apostate creatures and rebellious haters of him, blessing them effectively, eternally ; — providing of his goodness, Ps. Ixviii. 10. — his inexhaustible goodness — for the poor, for those who have nothing to render unto him — nothing but those sacrifices of praise with which He richly and continually furnishes them ; while, left to themselves at any time, they would requite him with nothing but base ingratitude and evil. Yes : it is very blessed to remember that, in viewing the mercy and compassion of the good Shepherd, we see exhibited in him the mind of the Father ; that in hearkening to the good words and com- fortable in which the Lord Jesus speaks to the guilty and the vile, testifying that he came to call such, and not the righteous ; to seek and to save that which was lost, and that he will in no wise cast out any that come to him, — no, " in no wise," not on account of any extremity of unworthiness ; — it is very blessed (I say) to remember that, in hearkening to these his gracious words, we have a declaration of the mind of the invisible God, " of his Father and our Father, of his God and our God ;" to remember that saying which he sjjoke — " I and the Father are one." We there indeed come unto God by him. Our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. We have that discovery of the divine glory, of which we may say in the language of Philip — " it svfficeth us." This wisdom cometh from above : and as the heavens are high above the earth, so superior is it — both in its origin and its effects — to all the systematic theories, whether orthodox or heterodox, which are taught in worldly schools of human theology. I have intimated above that, so far as we are left to ourselves at any time, even to the last, we never fail to render to the Lord evil in return for all his goodness. It is a heavy charge against us, of the truth of which none but the children of God are convinced : and it is important indeed, brethren, that we should be so convinced of it, as to see in this an evidence of the unchanged and unchangeable un- godliness of our own hearts ; that we may " have the sentence of death in ourselves" at aU times, and may not trust in ourselves, but be kejit, " looking for the mercy of our Loi'd Jesus Christ unto eternal life." Jude 21. Some, who talk speciously about the Gospel, as glad tidings from heaven to the chief of sinners, are yet much shocked at the idea that it brings any glad tidings to sinners as such. They would allow that it speaks to believers good words and com- fortable, as to those who were ungodly creatures : but they conceive that this is no longer their own character. And they cannot com- prehend how we can be " walking in the fear of the liord and. the comfort of the Holv Ghost," while at the same time our own hearts Kli.MARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. I -''^ nre as utterly un£Todly as they ever were in the days of our unbelief. It niav perhaps be for the profit of disciples themselves, that we should consider this abasing truth a little more closely. Where lav the root of our natural ungodliness ? In our natural af/i('is)n ; in our alienation from the life of God, " through the iffno- rance that was in us, because of the blindness of our hearts." Eph. iv. IS. — Many, no doubt, suppose that the vitiosity of our natrn'O consists mainly in our immoral propensities ; and many of the graver sort conceive that it lies in our want oi heart religion and piety. But let us remember, brethren, that among unbelieving men, or those who yet remain in their natural state, there are several distinguished for what is called morality, amiable in their tempers, correct in their outward conduct, beneficiiJ and useful members of society in their lives. And as to religion — many avowed haters of God and of his Christ— open blasphemers of the truth revealed from heaven, — abound in religion, in heart religion ; and in their profession evince as much fervour, earnestness, and zeal, as any real Christian can in his. In all their unbelief and antipathy to " the Gospel of the glory of God," such fcUse professors exemplify the principle that the carnal mind is enmity against God: and in this they but manifest the common character of our own hearts, our oyinfesk. They exemplify our own contrariety to the only true God and to the revelation of his distinguishing glory in the Gospel of his Son, — our own blindness to that light, — our own indisposition to admit it, — our oicn continued promptitude to turn from it. When He who knows what is in man, and who knows us ft-om the beginning (Is. xlviii. 3 — 8.) pronounced this word — " niy jjeojtle are bent to backsliding from me," it is plain that He pronounces their con- tinual character, after they have been turned and brought near to Him. And may not this remind us of that divine aphorism laid down bv the Apostle in 1 Cor. xii. 3. .'' "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord hut by the Holy Ghost." It is plain that the Apostle in- tends not hereby the mere utterance of these words, with the lips, but the owning of the truth imported by them from the heart, — that belief of the testimony concerning Jesus, which includes the under- standing of it in its real meaning and the conviction of its divine certainty. This is indeed " the work of God, that we believe on him whom he hath sent." And every believer knows that, had it been left to himself — to his own will or wisdom — whether he should believe the Gospel or not, he would be to this hour rejecting and opposing it, and — under some form or another of false profession — would be turning the truth of God into a lie. But blessed be the God of all grace, his arrows are sharp in the heart of the King's enemies, ■whereby the people are subdued unto him. (Ps. xlv. 5.) For •wherefore is it, that none but He who spoke the world into exist- ence,— who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, — where- fore is it that nothing short of his power can convince a sinner that Jesus is the Lord .' that no man can own this truth but by the Holy Ghost ? It is on account of the natural contrariety of the human mind — in all its priiiciples and workings^ — to the glory of the only 12G REMARKS EXPOSfTORY, &c. true God. It is therefore only a new creation that can bring us out of darkness into light, by discovering to us that glory as revealed in Christ : and this is a discovery that brings the chief of sinners to the footstool of the mercy- seat, in peace and thankfulness and joy. (Ps. xix. 7, 8.) That word — " the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, — neither can he know them," — is a word which may well beat down the pride of human wisdom in the things of God. But it is not alone in the first discernment of the truth, but in its continued indwelling, that this principle holds good, — " no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." And there are many, who professedly acknowledge the principle as applied to a sinner's original conversion, but are manifestly unacquainted with it in its application to his continued walk and standing in the faith : — many who seem to regard the faith of the Gospel as a kind of deposit put into our keeping ; no otherwise than they look to the use and improvement we make of it as that, upon which the ultimate result must turn. And it is no wonder, that the father of lies fur- nishes them with one and another text of Scripture, which they hope countenances the proud delusion that they love. But let us remem- ber, brethren, that it is not more true that " no man hath quick- ened his own soul," or brought himself into the life into which the sinner enters in believing on the Son of God, than it is true that the same Lord alone is he " who holdeth our soul in life, and suffereth not our feet to be moved." (Ps. Ixvi. 9.) " He that keepeth Israel is He that made}\\m" (Ps. cxxi. 3 — 5, c. 3.) : and He keeps the feet of his saints, by " fulfilling in them that work of faith with power" (2 Thess. i. 2.) which is his from first to last, the one work of his Spirit in them, to which all their own hearts are from first to last opposed. These views discover us to be continually dependent upon mere mercy ; — as dependent at the last hour of our course as at the first. And to the natural mind this would appear very discouraging, and inconsistent with all " confidence and rejoicing of hope." Naturally men have no idea of hope, that is not ultimately founded in them- selves : and to be absolutely destitute of all such hope, they conceive must of necessity be connected with absolute despair. Yet it is really to creatures so utterly destitute of righteousness and strength, — so totally and continually evil, — that the living God has revealed himself in the Gospel as the " God of hope" — of that hope with which he fills them in believing the testimony of his word. " They that know his Name (or revealed character) will put their trust in Him :" (Ps. ix. 10.) and blessed are they ; for they " dwell in a peaceable habitation, in a sure dwelling, in a quiet resting place." (Is. xxxii. 18.) We indeed can no more at this hour " say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost," than we could have done so at the first. But " the mercies of David" — of the beloved — are revealed as " sm-e mercies." (Is. Iv.) And this is one of the " exceeding great and precious promises" in that covenant of Jeho- vah which '• standeth fast with Him" (Ps. Lxxxix. 2, 3, 28.) ; " my spirit that is upon thee, and my words whicli I have put in thy ki:mahk.s EXrOSITOllY, &c. 127 mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith Jkiiovah, from henceforth and for ever." (Is. lix. 21.) Now having maintained, that so far as a believer is at any time left to himself and to his own spirit — he brings forth no fruit but what is evil ; it may perhaps be well to add one more remark, though it ought to be unnecessary. Let me not, then, be understood as asserting that, in such a case, he will of course turn to the indul- gence of the flesh in the grossest forms of its lustings : although, in the view of the grossest of them, no Christian is waiTanted to say " am I a dog, that I should do this thing ?" But even in the period of his acknowledged unbelief he may not have been addicted to these : and really from these either the animal constitution, or age, or worldly prudence, may be sufficient to restrain. But what I assert is, that — so far as we are left to ourselves at any time — we really forget God our Saviour, and like a broken bow start aside from him, and from the blessed hope in his revealed mercy, to some of those various forms of self, which are so many idols that we naturally serve. Self is the great ruling principle of our fallen nature ; se/f- seeking, se//'-confidence, our otcn glorv, our own wisdom, our own righteousness ; self in one or another of the diversified forms it assumes. And to some of these, disguised perhaps under a specious form of very evangelical language — yea, of contention for the truth, we should at any time turn, unless the spirit of truth keep the words of trutli in our remembrance, and thus the revealed glory of the only true God before our view. We are sure that this his glory is not before the view of those, ■who are manifestly walking in the indulgence of their fleshly lusts, and therefore in a mind contrarv' to " the fear of the Lord." But let none of us deceive ourselves by inferring, that we must of course be holding fast the faith, because we are not walking in such fleshly indulgences, and talk a verv correct language about the Gospel. It is perfectly consistent with all this to be at the same time going on in a course quite aside from the truth ; neither working righteous- ness, nor loving mercy, nor walking humbly with our God. The history recorded concerning good King Hezekiah, in 2 Chron. xxxii. 24, 25, 31, 32, may stand as an illustration of what I have said. Few among the kings of Judah are described as having done more of what was " right in the sight of the Lord," or having ex- perienced more signal deliverances at his hands. Among these was his miraculous recoverv from a mortal sickness ; of which the Lord had condescended to assure him in answer to his prayer by a mira- culous sign — the shadow receding on the sundial of Ahaz ten de- grees. The King of Babvlon, having heard of Hezekiah's sickness as the occasion of this wonderful phenomenon, sent ambassadors with letters and a present to inquire concerning it. (2 Kings xx. 12.) Well now, might we not expect that good king Hezekiah, so favoured of Jehovah, would gladly avail himself of this fair oppor- tunity to set forth the glory of the true God, the God of Israel, in opposition to all the Babylonian idols ? But it was quite otherwise. We are told,, that on this occasion " God left him to trv him, that 128 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &;c. he might know — (or manifest) — all that was in his heart" — his own heart : and indeed it all proved to be very had. " He rendered not again according to the benefit done unto him ; and therefore there was wrath upon him and upon Judah and Jerusalem." But was it that he turned to commit adultery and murder, like his father David ? or to such enormities of wickedness as distinguished his own son Manasseh ? Not at all. His evil was indeed " naked and open to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do ;" but would have been impei'ceptible to man. " His heart was lifted up :" and in the elation of his heart he shewed them all that was in his house ; there was nothing among his treasures that he did not display to them (2 Kings XX. 13 — 15.) — thus diverting their admiration to himself and his kingly glory. Such was Hezekiah, when left by God to manifest what was in his heart, and it was only the mercy of the Lord that made him — (as we are informed) — ''humble himself for the pride of his hear't ." What continual cause have we to be similarly humbled ! In fact, the more we know of ourselves, the more shall we be convinced, that all the most awful descriptions given of Israel after the flesh — such as we may read in the 78th Psalm — are but a picture of our own hearts. Many, looking at a portrait so black, are disposed to thank God that they are not such. But believers in their right mind will rather say, with the Apostles, — " What, then, are we better than they ? No i — in no wise." Rom, iii. 9. 11. " Fools make a mock at sin.'' — Prov. xiv. 9. The following thoughts have been suggested by the perusal of a religious tract entitled " Sin, no Trifle." Sin is indeed " no trifle." The greatness of that God, against whom all sin is rebellion, proves it. The hopeless misery of the angels that sinned, proves it. All the disorders, which sin has intro- duced into this lower world, prove it. Above all, the stupendous propitiation for sin, which is set forth in the Gospel, proves it. Yet fools do 7nake a mock at sin, conceiving of it as a trifle : and this is one of the awful evidences of the blindness and hardened wickedness of the human heart ; I say — of the human heart. For every man by nature is that fool ; and continues so, tiU he is made wise unto salvation by the belief of the true doctrine concerning Jesus Christ. UKMAKKS rxrOSlTUUV, ."vc. 129 Yet among those who believe not that (loctrine tlKie arc uianv most sober and rehgious characters, who look with pity or indigna- tion at the profane and irreligious ; while they little imagine that thev are themselves the very fouls, who moke a mock at sin. Is it no sin to denv the being of the only living and true God ? The most religious professor who disbelieves the one unchangeable record which God hath given of his Son, walks in this sin and makes light of it: for in that record the true God testifies his name and cha- racter. Is it no sin to hate God ? That professor rejects the true doctrine of Christ, because he dislikes it : and his dislike of it proves his aversion to the true Christ : and his hatred of the Son proves his hatred of the Father tdso. (John xv. 23.) That he may have the most raised and devout affections towards the false Christ in whom he trusts, and the false God whom he worships, I deny not. But he makes light of the sin of hating the true. Is it no sin to make God a liar ? (1 John v. 10.) This is the sin of that professor. And of all these tremendous sins he is living — not in the occasional — but in the continued momentary commission : while he makes so light of them, that (amidst much disturbance of conscience on other accounts) he feels not the slightest remorse for these sins. Nay, he goes a step beyond the irreligious fool. The latter makes a mock at sin, and regards it as a trifling thing : but the other admires it, and regards it as a good thing and acceptable to God. The system of false doctrine which he believes, and to which he attaches the name of Gospel, — he is zealous for, and often laborious in propagating, — sometimes even at the expense of life itself. The false Christ v.hom he represents to himself and trusts in, he serves with devotedness of affection. All his religious performances (or sacrifices) he engages in, as duties well-pleasing to Heaven : while the Scripture testifies that they are all an abomination to the Lord. (Prov. XV. 8.) It is awful wickedness to call evil good, and good evil; io put dark- ness for light, and light for darkness. It is an awful woe that is pronounced against those who do so. Is. v. 20. This woe is more especially pointed against the religious world. The assertion of the truths of God against the infidelity of men — they call unchari- table bigotry and unchristian judging of others. The infidel hope, that those who hold various gospels may be alike accepted in the sight of God, if they be but pious votaries of their respective systems — to this they give the name of Christian charity and a catholic spirit. Preachers of lies, they call ministers — nay, even ambassadors, of Christ ; and think it a religious duty to sit under their word, and a kind of sacrilege to arraign them as unbelieving men. The few witnesses of the truth as it is in Jesus — they term disturbers of the peace of the religious world ; and commonly think they do God ser^-ice, in propagating against them calumnies the most foul. The belief of what God declares in his word, they call bv every contemptuous epithet — " the faith of devils," " a spe- culative notion," &c. To the unbelieving effort of the heart, by which they are taught to gi'asp at righteousness, they give th?j VOL. 11. K 130 llEMARKS EXPOSITORY, &e. name of the precious faith of God's elect. Their anxious solicitude in making that effort, and their delusive joys in its imaginary suc- cess— they call Christian experience ; and dare to ascribe to the Spirit of Truth that work of the father of lies. The whole of the unbeheving world lieth in the wicked one ; and is proved to be not of God, by not hearing God's words. (John viii, 47.) But the most religious part of it go into a still deeper malignity of wickedness ; and (as far as they can) poison the very fountain of truth for others, by annexing false meanings to the words and phrases of Scripture, and thus applying the word of God to support and propagate the lies of Satan. Me, said the Lord Jesus, the world hateth, because I testify of it that the works thereof are evil. Perhaps the world never hated any one for testifying that murder, and drunkenness, and adultery, and profane swearing, &c. are evil : for even they who walk in those things acknowledge that such works are wrong. But to testify (as Christ did, and as his disciples are called to do) that all its works — even those which it thinks most good, and performs as religious duties — are evil; that the things highly esteemed amongst men are abomination in the sight of God ; — this has ever irritated the world, and most irritated those who abound most in these highly -esteemed works. III. " Hallowed be thy name," — Matt. vi. 9. The children of God are called to sanctify him in their hearts and are taught to pray, " hallowed [or sanctified] be thy name." 1 Pet. iii. 15 ; Is. viii. 12, 13 : and it is of high importance that we should have scriptural views of the thing intended by these expres- sions, holy — holiness— sanctification, &c. Tlie general idea of the original word is separation, and the recol- lection of this wiU afford a clue to the right interpretation of it in its various applications. Thus, in the highest application of the term *' holy" to the only true God, it marks the infinite separation of character which distinguishes Him from every thing else that is called God, and worshipped ; which forbids that He should be con- founded with anv of the gods of the world. UKMARKS EXI'OSITOIIV, \,-. \:)\ The Je\v.< are cliargod with " jjro/(tni/ic/ tlii' liohm^s of .Tclinviih," in all the various idolatries which tliev attempted to eomljiiie with hi^ professed worship. For this was the character of all their idolatries ; — not an o])en and avowed renunciation of the God of Israel ; — hut «n attempt to associate other gods with him ; — as even in the case of the golden calf. Ex. xx.xii. 5. Every such attempt must origi- nate in forgetfulness of the holiness of his name, and of that glorious character, which exclusivelv helongs to him, and therefore separates Him infinitely from idols. The same idea of separation from ordi- nary purposes pervades all the applications of the term " holy" to places, garments, utensils made under the Levitical law, as the tahernacle. the temple and all its furniture, the vestments of the high priest, &c. The latter, for example, were not to be used as ordinary clothing ; hut were set apart appropriately for the occasions of his priestly functions. Thus again, when the Jews, as a nation, are called an ho/i/ nation, it is always in reference to their separation from the other nations of the earth, to be a peculiar people of the God of Abraham ; as is expressly marked in licv. xx. 26'. " Ye shall be holy unto me, for I the LORD am holy, and have severed [separated] you from other people, that yc should be mine." The same is the true import of the sanctification or holiness attributed to believers under the Gospel. Our great High Priest who " sancti- fied himself;" — or was set apart to that office by the divine appoint- ment, and has willinglv undertaken it, prayed for his Church, "sanctify them through thy truth." John xvii. 17, 19. By that unadulterated truth of the Gospel in which the distinguishing glory of the only true God is manifested, by this truth declaring his holy name, they are all sanctified — separated from the world that lieth in wickedness, turned from idols to the living God as his peculiar people, set apart to be for Him and not for another ; and suitably called to sanctify Him in their hearts, and to maintain sacred in their minds the holiness of His character, in contradistinction to them all ; suitably taught to pray that, " His name may be hallowed ;" its distinguishing glory asserted and manifested against all the gods of those who believe not the truth. Being thus " holy unto the Lord," " they have their fruit unto holiness;" though the fruits of holiness in them are no more their holiness or sanctification, than the fruits of righteousness are considered their righteousness. Of the holiness which I have attempted to mark, the religious world have no con- ception. Indeed, it stands in direct opposition to all that they reckon most excellent in religion, to all that lil)erality and false cha- rity, which represent differences of doctrine (or mere opinions) as comparatively unimportant ; and which in this represent it of little consequence what gods men acknowledge, if they but serve their gods with sincerity and fervent zeal, and cultivate piety. How many thousands are all their lives gabbling the words " Hallowed be thy name," while the whole course of their religion is a syste- matic profanation of its holiness. As to the sentiment of different degrees of glory in heaven, regu- lated by the different degrees of fruitfulness and faithfulness here, it is l.'3-2 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c one of those theological speculations, upon which I have very little to say : but I confess it smells to me strongly of fleshly pride and unbelief. " We know not yet what we shall be," 1 John iii. 2. but we know that a crown of righteousness is laid up, not only for the Apostles, but for all that love his appearing : 2 Tim. iv. 8. " in the world to come eternal life" — that is the enduring and satisfying portion of all the children. If an Apostle should ever have murmured at the thought of the thief upon the cross receiving as bright a crown as himself, I should confidently say, that the Apostle was not then in the mind of Christ, but was savouring the things that be of men : look at Matt. XX. 1 — 16, and look at it in connexion with the four last verses of the preceding chapter from which it has been injudiciously dissevered. Peter's flesh was on that occasion ready enough to put forward a kind of claim for extraordinary recompence for extraordinary sacri- fices : and accordingly the Lord puts a great damper on the unloving pride of heart in which such a thought originates. Why should the labourers, who have borne the burden and heat of the day, murmur at finding that the fellow labourer, who had been but one hour in the vineyard, got the same payment with themselves ? was their pay- ment the less on that account ? The idea springs from nothing but that vain aftectation of pre-eminence above others, which men would carry with them even into the heavenly world. But do I assert that all the heirs of glory shall be perfectly alike in their capacities, enjoyments, &c. ? I say nothing for it or against it, for I know not any thing of the matter : but this I know, that it was truly said by one concerning the crown that is laid up for all the heirs of the kingdom, that " God crowns in his people the gift of his own mercy :" and assuredly the greatness of the gifts mercifully dispensed to any of them here cannot give such any claim of right to a brighter or richer crown hereafter. IV. " AbJior that ivhich is evil; cleave to that which is good." — Rom.-xii. 9. Thk state of mind and sentiment, of which believers are here re- minded by the Apostle as becoming the gospel of Christ, is that which nothing but the gospel of Christ, discerned in its unadulterated truth can produce and maintain in us. It is a sentiment and state IIEMAIIKS KXPOSITOllY, .S.c. 133 of miiul which, in its leul nature, can be found only in those who know the jovful sound of that divine word which pubHshes salvation to the lost, bringing righteousness to the most guilty, and jjroclaims the name of the Lord God as the just God and the Saviour, just and jus- tifying the ungodly. But this, like every other exhortation of the Apostles, is wholely misunderstood by the religious world, and (taken in the fiUse meaning which they put upon it) becomes a j)art of that system of lies by which many of them are very earnest to regulate their hearts and conduct. One of these, for instance, devoutly thank- ing God (with the very religious character described by the Lord) that he is not as other men are, imagines that he abhors that which is evil, and cleaves to that which is good, while he looks with abhor- rence at those gross forms of iniquity (extortion, adultery, drunken- ness, &c.) from which he conceives himself exempt, and steadfastly adheres to that course of seriousness, and strictness, and piety, which he regards in himself, as the good work of, what he calls, the grace of God : looking with complacency at the characters in himself, which he conceives favourably distinguishing him from others his fellow sinners, he is filled with this (as he thinks) holy indignation against evil, and zealously aflected (as he thinks) in a good thing. But all the time, so far from being of the sentiment to w^hich the Apostle exhorts disciples, he is really cleaving to that which is evil, and abhorring that which is good ; he hates and despises that one good thing in which Jehovah declares Himself alone well pleased, which He sets forth in his divine word as the propitiation for sin, in which the most wicked and ungodly, discovering it, find peace, righteousness, and salvation ; — he cleaves to that which is e\-il, in maintaining that system of Antichristian religion and re- ligious hope, which proceeds on the denial of the truth and holiness of God. — On the other hand, the chief of publicans, having his eves mercifullv opened to discern the propitiation for sin, which God has set forth, clings to that as all that is excellent, and glorious, and needed by a sinner — as divinely perfect : and so far as the word of truth abides in him, it will keep him cleaving to that which is good ; it will discover to him the evil of all that is opposed to it, and there- fore of all that is in himself, as well as of all the most specious forms in which the religious of the world would invade the sanctity, or obscure the glory, of the divine truth. But this abhorrence of evil, and this cleaving to that which is good, like every other part of the mind of faith in its genuine nature, is reckoned and must ever be reckoned by the world, a most evil and satanic mind. Their religion they think, of course, a good thing, and if we only were of another religion, but kept fair terms with theirs, they would naturally bear with us and judge that, among a variety of good things, we and they but differed in the taste of selection : and indeed there could not then be any essential difference between their religion and ours. But when they find that, which they reckon best, viewed by us with ub' horrence as most evil and ungodly, we need not wonder if that be the natural expression of their feelings. — Away with such fellows from the earth — it is not fit that they should live ! But let us remember that the servant is not above his Lord ; if thev have called the master l;Jl REMARKS EXPOSITORY, Sec. of the house Beelzehub, how much more shall they call those of his housLhold ? The more we see of the genuine nature of the Gospel, the more we must be convinced that the friendship of the world is enmitv with God. " ill like manner also that the wumeJi adorn themselves in modes! apparel, with shame- facediiess and sobriety ; not with hroidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or cosily ar- ray ; but {tehich hecometh women professing godliness) with ifooc/ uwrks."" 1 Tim. ii. 9, 10. *^ Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of 'plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel. But let it be the hidden man uj the heart, in that whieh is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meeic and qtdei spirit, winch is in the sight of God of great price." — 1 Pet. iii. 3, 4. These two passages are of such perfectly similar import that Avhat IS said of one will immediately apply to the other. They both cer- tainly enjoin on Christian females that sobriety and modesty of dress which corresponds with the heavenly mind : and in op])Osition to that fondness for finery of apparel, to which the sex have perhaps a natural tendency, the Apostles call them to have for their ornament " a meek and quiet spirit," with " good works," or works of kindness and be- neficence, rather than any adorning of their persons — to recommend themselves by the former rather than by the latter. That the lan- guage "whose adorning let it be a meek and quiet spirit," not such and such outioard ornaments, is really equivalent with, let it be the one rather than the other, might be shewn from various other passages : but one may suffice. In Hoseavi. 6, the clause " I desired mercy and not sacrifice " is immediately followed by — " and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Now, the phraseology of the two clauses might be interchanged — ("mercy more than sacrifice" — the knowledge of God and not burnt offerings,) — withovit making any alteration in their meaning. Certainly, sacrifices and burnt offerings were at that time enjoined under the law : and thus I think it appears that it is not any particular articles of dress or modes of dress which the Apostles forbid — but that they call the Christian female not to place her ornament in those, even in the finest of thcnr. There is here something much higher than any regulation of the toilette. A pretty Quaker, in all the nice simplicity of her apparel, may be in a mind directly opposed to that enjoined; and a Christian lady going in a court dress to the drawing-room at St. James's may be in a mind according with it. If it shall be said — But. does not the Apostle forbid the Christian female to "plait her hair orioear gold:'" I reply certainly not, for if the words of Peter were so to be inter- preted, it would follow that he forbid:^ her to put on apparel ; for the HEMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. 13.) former words arc immediately foUowi'd by " or of putting on of ap- parel." Now we can be at no loss to interpret the words, " whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of tlie putting on of apparel." We are quite sure that the meaning is — not, that she should not wear some apparel, but that slie should not make any apparel she wears her adorning in comparison of that whicli is inward. Must not then the preceding words be similarly interpreted ? VI. ' Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptiztd unto his death ? Therefore we are buried luith him," S)C. — Rom. iii. 3, 4. " One Lord, one faith, one baptism." — Eph. iv. 5. Is the former of these passages the apostle is simply shewing how inconsistent it would be for any who profess the faith of Christ to continue in sin ; seeing that those who have professed to believe in him profess to have fellow^ship with him in his death, so as to be dead to sin, or to have their old man crucified with him ; and to have fellowship with him in his resurrection, so as to be risen to newness of life in him. He expresses their conversion to the faith of Christ by the word baptism, in as much as that was the stated rite by which men, who had not before professed to believe what the Apostles taught, took upon them that profession. The Baptists often insist on the literal translation of the Greek word Baptize — namely, to immerse. Let them introduce it into this and similar passages; and to speak of, as many as were immersed into Jesus Christ being immersed into his death, will be something very like nonsense. As to the latter passage, they take indeed a narrow view of the one baptism spoken of, who think it means one immersion in water. The words of the same Apostle in another passage are a sufficient comment on this — " By one spirit are all baptized into one body — and have been all made to drink into one spirit." 1 Cor. xii. 13. 136 REMARKS EXI'OSITORV, &c. VII. frhen the Sou of wan shall come in his glory — Iheii shall he sit on the throne of his glory : and before him shall be gathered all nations, S^-c.'" — Mat .xxv. 31 — 4(j. There is in man a natural passion for prying into futurity : his vain mind is anxious for information which it cannot get, and which, if it could, would be unprofitable, if not pernicious ; while he is at the same time neglectful of the information that is given about what shall happen, and what is most important : credulous and supersti- tiously prone to give in to foolish or uncertain predictions and vain prognostics, but incredulous of that declaration concerning futurity which rests upon the most indubitable authority, the authority of the God of truth. The;e words contain what may be emphatically called " The great prediction." When every thing in this world, that now appears most great, shall sink into insignificance ; when all that now most excites the hopes and fears, the joys and regrets of the children of the world, shall have passed away as a dream, then shall be known the great reality of the things set before us in this prophecy ; then their enduring importance shall be acknowledged and felt by all. But we are assured in another part of Scripture, 2 Pet. iii. 3, 4. that previous to the appearance of " this great day of the Lord" — " there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts and saying, where is the promise of his coming?" and this declaration is at present jjrogressively verified : increasing numbers openly throw off the profession of Christianity, and mock at its prediction of a coming judgment. Yet an event has taken place already, near two thousand years ago, that is a pledge of this, and that is as truly won- derful.— He, who shall come the second time, has come already the first : " God was manifest in the flesh." He came at first a man of sorrows, because he came to bear the sin of many — but he shall come the second time in his glory, because he shall come without sin. He shall then " appear" — be manifested — to be that which his disciples, >Nhose eyes were opened, knew and testified him to be, even in the days of his flesh ; what He, witnessing to the truth, declared himself to be — a king. Then every eye shall see him ; for all nations shall be gathered l)efore Him, the king of nations, the king of kings, the Creator and Judge of all, seated on the throne of his glory. -A sepa- ration will be made, and made by Him, who knoweth those that are His, who cannot err ; and there shall be but two classes, into one or other of which every individual shall be distributed. Numerous dis- tinctions appear at present amo)ig men, civil, moral, and religious ; but these cannot be of importance, for they shall not last ; all shall be at that great day absorbed in this two-fold classification, which will be but bringing out to view the only great and important distinction which at present subsists among men, those who arc the sheep of UKMAlllvS EXroSlTOKV, v\i-. i;}7 Cluist, and those wliu are not. He shall place the one at his right luuul, separated from the rest, as his sheep. This is not any natural distinction : all are alike by nature sinners, children of wrath: that anv should be acknowledged as his, and placed at his right hand, is of his redeeming work, not of themselves or their works ; they were 1)V nature even as others. The characters and marks of liis sheep by wliich they come to be distinguished here are, that they hear liis voice and they follow him ; he brings them into his fold, brings them unto God : he speaks indeed of them as his sheep, even while they are dead in sins, " other sheep I have," &c. ; but till he gathers them in, thev are undistinguishable bv men from those who perish, though thev are known to Ilim. He laid down his life for them, and he has given to them eternal life. He addresses them, therefore, as the blessed of His Father, " Blessed art thou, Simon," &c. "Blessed is the people that know the joyfid sound," " Happy art thou, O Israel," &c. : they are taught here to know and acknowledge the author and source of all their blessedness ; they are taught to glory in the Lord, and to begin that song which thev shall sing through eternity. He addresses them as heirs of the kingdom prepared for them. \Vho is an heir, but the son ; and who among men are sons of God, but those " who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God?" John i. 13. "If children, then heirs; lieirs of God, and joint heir? with Christ." Rom. viii. 17. But because many profess themselves to be Christians who are not, the ivord will produce the decisive evidence that proves those, whom he addresses as His, to be his disciples indeed ; their works of love, shewed to his name ; love to his brethren, for his name's sake ; love not in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. These prove that they loved the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, that they believed from the heart the record of his love ; " for we love him, because He loved us ;" and " this is His commandment that ye love one another." 1'hese prove that they are what they are afterwards denominated, the righteous — justified in Him the Lord their righteousness ; "created unto good works which God hath before ordained, that they should walk in them." He addresses all others as wicked and accursed, and pronounces on them the awful sentence, " depart." Their hearts had long said that to Him. He addresses them as in their sins, and therefore vessels of wrath consigned to the same doom of the angels that sinned. And he produces the evidence of this in proving that they are none of his; and he proves that they are none of His — by what evidence ? Tliei'e are now appearing various evidences of this ; all the works of the flesh, murder, adultery, &c. : " he that committeth sin is the servant of sin:" but then those outward fruits do not appear in many of the unbelieving world ; many are sober, chaste, and religious. The Lord, therefore, omits idl the.se, and ))roduces one evidence comprehending all unbelievers within its application — their want of love to Him, and this evidenced by their want of love to his disciples, and this l)y theii not having performed the acts of love. 138 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. VIII. " He hath sheu'cd thee, 0 man, what is good." — Mic. vi. 8, This is an answer given through Balaam (a prophet, though an un- righteous man) to the question of Balack (stated in the preceding verses,) a carnal man, who, terrified at the displays of the power of the God of Israel in behalf of the Jewish people, anxiously inquired by what sacrifice he might propitiate his favour and engage the Lord on his side. The matter lay so near his heart that he was willing to make any sacrifice ever so costly to attain his object. It appears from the close of his question that the sin of his soul was that which made him apprehend the displeasure of Jehovah : he desired only to have it stated, what he should give for this, and he was ready to give it. — He was yet a carnal man; and this question was never proposed by any but a carnal man : its terms import ignorance of the object, ignorance of Jehovah, of sin, and of himself. It has more or less forced itself on the mind of every man in one form or another. It is a question that weighs with various degrees of solicitude upon various men, and upon the same man at various times : but there are times and occasions when all men are disturbed with the inquiry, and propose it with anxious uncertainty. Those who know God, or rather are known of him, cannot any longer ask it (except, as know- ing the answer, to call the attention and admiration of themselves or others to the vanity of the question, and the glory of the answer.) Yet it has commonly been considered as one which, if only proposed with sufficient solicitude, argues the inquirer to be either in a gracious state, or approximating to it ; in a state called conviction of sin. On the contrary, it proves him to be altogether ignorant of sin, and of the true God. Look at the question. Two beings are introduced in it — the inquirer a creature, and a sinful guilty creature — and Jehovah, the creator, glorious in holiness and righteousness and truth : the proud worm degrades the living God to a level with himself, and proposes to give Him something to bribe Him from his purpose against sin. A real knowledge of Him and of sin bars every such thought ; and if it be supposed unacconapanied with the knowledge of the joyful answer, an acquaintance with which is inconsistent-with the disqviieting solicitude of the inquirer, can leave the sinner in no state short of absolute despair. No true hope can spring in the sinner's mind but from a view of that which is the answer Jehovah is declared to have shewed. Till the sinner sees this he is looking out in vain for something to take away sin ; and any hope derived in this way is the proud presumptuous vain hope of one under the power of dark- ness. He hath shetrcd what is good — what He is well pleased with — what he has accepted as taking away sin. If He had not exhibited HEM AUKS EXPOSITORY, &c. 139 it, (lie against whom we have sinned) we couUl have no good hope. Ikit He has, in the first |ironiise, and in all the subsecjuent revelations of himself to the patriarchs — in all the types and sacrifices of the Levitical law — by all the prophets — by John the IJaptist — by the Apostles : they all point to the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world, and with one voice testify to him as the pro[)itiation for sin. — And what doth he look for from us ? not any thing to do that which he has already done — a work which all the angels would liave trembled at the thought of laving their hand to ; but that in the believing view of what he has revealed, in the happy enjoyment of the peace which he Inis made, we should have our conversation as becometh the Gospel — doing justice or bringing forth the fruits of righteousness, as accepted of God as dear children ; — (an unrighteous man cannot work righteousness ;) — loving mercy, the rich mercy whereby we have been saved, — delighting in every act of mercy to- wards our fellow sinners; — and walking humbly with our God. There can be no walking with God, but as our God; — How can two walk together unless thcv be agreed ? nor except humbly ; the proud he bcholdeth afar off; walking by the faith of Avhat he has shewed in Christ Jesus, as wc have received Him. IX. lyiium Gull halh ict furlli lo be a propitiation through fuilh in his bluod." — Rom. iii. 2 J. This passage marks the nature and great object of all divine reve- lation, from the first to Adam to the last by the Apostles of Jesus Christ. How solemn is the thought that God hath made a revelation to man ! yet man, generally acknowledging the fact, is commonly indifferent to the inquiry what the matter of this revelation is, and passes through life contented to borrow from it certain phrases and forms inherited by tradition. This indifference is partly to be ac- counted for by the apprehension with which the guilty conscience of a sinner regards the idea of a divine revelation : Adam hid himself. Yet, from the blessed nature of this revelation, the guiltiest sinner needs not be afraid to hear it : for it is a revelation of divine mercy to the guilty ; — of that which every sinner needs ; without which he is lost for ever, and with which he is blessed for ever. — Suppose but one sinful creature upon earth ; — let us view him — fallen from God — a rebel against Him — What does he need } What can do him good ? can all that is in the world — its riches, its honours, its pleasures ? can these bring blcs:icdness to a dying sinner ? even if he possesses 140 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. them all through this life, and goes on intoxicated by them, he but forgets his misery for a moment, but to awaken wretched and ac- cursed : " Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity." This then is what the sinner needs — to have his sin taken away ; and all men more or less feel this want at times, and inquire anxiously, " what shall I give for the sin of my soul ? " a vain in- quiry— the sacrifice of the wicked is abomination. — But now God himself hath set forth the provision of his own mercy ; a propitiation for sin ; and this in his own son — one with Him — who alone could interpose in behalf of a guilty race, and who took upon Him the form of a servant to do this gracious will of his heavenly father. — He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, by bear- ing the sins of many. The perfect suflnciency of this atonement is marked in the words of the Apostle by the declaration that God has set him forth in that w^ork, and for that pur])ose ; and the faithfulness of the revelation is crowned by the truth, that this righteousness of God is unto and upon all them that believe, without diflference. — All have sinned — all stand on one common level in the divine sight : all flesh is brought in guilty before God ; that the glory of Jehovah may be revealed and all flesh see it together. X. '' TliCH Eli answered and said, go in peac : and the god of Israel grant thy petition that thou hast asked of him.'' " So she ivent her way, and did eat, and her countenance was no more sad." — 1 Sam. i. 17, 18. It is plain that she went her way, believing that she should have the petition which she had asked, and which the high priest had sanctioned, when he dismissed her with his blessing. And in all our approaches unto God, when we pour out our hearts before him, have we not a great high priest sanctioning our requests, who has lifted up his hands and blessed us, and whose language is, peace unto vou ! "my peace I give unto you!" why should our countenance be anv more sad } RKM.VUKS EXl'OSITOllY, ."vc. 141 XI. THE GOSPEL ; OR, GLAD TIDINGS. That is ti very brief, but very comprehensive, statement of the Gospel, whicli tlie Apostle gives in 1 Tim. i. 15, when he says, that " Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." Whoever un- derstands and receives this saying-, in the plain and only true mean- ing of it, is rvise unto salvation. Who is it that is here said to have come into the world ? — Christ Jesus. The literal meaning of the Hebrew mnwc Jesus — is Jehovah, the iSaviour : and He who came into the world, who humbled himself to become the i^on of Man, is declared to be the Son of God, "the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person," one with the Father, yea " God blessed for evermore." He " took upon him tiie form of a ser\-ant," and appeared in the last age of the world as "a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief," to accomplish the merciful will of his Father, " to put away sin by the sacrifice of him- self," dving the just, in place of the unjust. But though he "was numbered with transgressors," and crucified between two malefactors, he is now highlv " exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour ;" his resur- rection from the dead, of which the Apostles were chosen witnesses, being the divine evidence that he is indeed the Christ, that God has accepted his sacrifice, and " is well pleased for his righteousness sake." The name of Christ, or the Messiah, imports the Anpinted One : and as under the Jewish law persons were set apart to various offices bv anointing them w'ith oil, so this " Anointed One of God" was consecrated by the fulness of the Spirit resting upon him to that office, which he sustains by the divine appointment. But wdiat is this office ? — That of saving sinners. Not (as so many doctors of lying divinity teach) of putting men into a way in which they may save themselves, in which they may make their peace with God, and may obtain eternal life by some good endeavour after it. No : his office is absolutely " to save unto the uttermost" those who have been " given to him out of the world;" to " give them eternal life ;" to bring them unto glory, "as the Captain of their Salvation." In his character of the great High-Priest over his Church, he " gave him- self for it," " offering himself through the eternal Spirit unto God ;" and " has made peace" by his blood, and " obtained eternal redemp- tion" for his people, by bearing their sins in his own body on the cross. Set as " King upon the holy hill of Zion," "head overall things to his Church," he has sent forth his w^ord as the sceptre of his power out of Zion, and rules in the midst of his enemies, giving that word entrance into the minds of those who have been "ordained to eternal life," and calling whom he will to the belief of the truth; thus turning them from darkness unto light, and from the dominion of Satan into the kingdom of God ; and keeping them through the 14-2 REMARKS EXPOSITORY, &c. power of the same word, unto the full enjoyment of that salvation, wherewith he hath saved them. And what is the character of those, in whose hehalf he came for this purpose into the world ? Are they persons well-disposed and good ? or half-good ? — Quite the reverse. They are sinners, nothing but sinners ; ungodly and without strength ; whose sins had righte- ously earned that curse, the sentence of which was executed upon Him as their substitute, in order that they might be " blessed in him," in the only way consistent with the righteousness and truth of God. And who are they that are partakers of this salvation, which is thus altogether- of God ? — Whosoever lelieveth the divine report of it, sent throughout the world in the Apostolic word. Whosoever ; without distinction or exception : for God is no respecter of the persons of men. "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that run- neth ; but of God that sheweth mercy :" and " therefore is it oi faith, that it might be hy grace (or mere mercy), that the promise might be sure to all the seed." The Christ testified of in this word, revealing the glory of the only true God, " is despised and rejected by men," by all but those whom God calls to the knowledge of him by convincing them of its truth : and they are " a little flock," despised and " hated of all men" (as far as their sentiments are known) for the Son of Man's sake. But the day is approaching, when He, for whom they wait, " shall come the second time without sin unto salvation," to their joy, and to the confusion of those who hate him. 14:3 13RIEF ANIMADVERSIONS ON A PAMPHLET, BY DOCTOR RICHARD WHATELY, ENTITLED "TUOUOIITS on the SAlir.ATH, in REFERENCK to the christian PESTIVAl OF THE lord's DAV." [First Published 1833.] BRIEF ANIMADVERSIONS, &c. &c. Although the piece, on which I am about to animadvex't, has been published two years ago, it is but very lately that I have seen and read it. Since its publication, the Author has been raised to the archiepiscopal See of Dublin ; and it is not from any personal dis- respect, that 1 pi'efer to designate him still as Dr. Whatley. In a shoi't advertisement prefixed to the edition from which I quote, (London: B. Fellowes, 1830,) the author speaks of "the Lord's Dav," as " precious in the eyes of eveiy right-minded Chris- tian ;" and of "its proper observance," as "of manifold utility." In what that proper observance consists, he has no where, as far as I can discover, informed us. If he suppose it to consist in the current attendance on multiplied clerical ministrations, in hearing many masses and many sermons, he may be assured that the "right-minded Christian" can take no part in such an observance of the day. Dr. W. has very justly opposed the sabbatical observance of it ; or any observance of it, which is rested on the fourth precept of the De- calogue as of continued authority. Yet, if I mistake not, he devoutly prays every Sunday, or professes to pray, that " his heart may be inclined to keep that law." He has not yet obtained permission from the king and parliament to lay aside that solemn mockery of the Most High. Such is State-religion. But I must also assure Dr. W. that, to any " right-minded Chris- tian," no religious observance of tbe first day of the week would be at all "precious," if it rested on the ground, on which alone he 144 BRIEF ANIMADVERSIONS, &c. imagines it can be placed securely : namely, the same ground on which he observes " Christmas-Day, Good-Friday, Holy-Thursday, &c." (p. 21.) The Doctor thinks that he thus places the duty " on its true foundation." But it is a foundation, which the word of God sweeps away, along with every superstructure built upon it. But what is this foundation, on which, according to Dr. W., the obligation rests of observing the Lord's-Day, Christmas-Day, Good- Friday, Holy-Thursday, &c ? The authority of what he calls the Church : which Church, he tells us (p. 23.) "has full power to SANCTIFY any day that may be thought most fitting." — Power to SANCTIFY ! The assumptions of the man of sin can scarcely be carried higher than this. Here he appears indeed " as God, sitting in the temple of God." (2 Thess. ii. 4.) For who but the living God has power to sanctify, or constitute any thing holy to Himself ? This necessarily includes in it the establishing of an obligation on all, who know his Name, to acknowledge the holiness of the thing thus saiic- tified, to regard it as holy unto the Lord ; so that any profanation of it is a profaning of his holiness. Any men, therefore, who assume the power of sanctifying a day, assume the power of establishing divine obligation ; and, in that, attempt to usurp the throne of God himself. I shall by and by examine the grounds on which Dr. W. asserts, that what he calls the Church is " endued with ample powers to enact" such regulations as the sanctification of Holy Thursday, &c. (And in the catalogue let me not forget what he calls " our Lady's Day ; " which, he tells us, " Christians annually celebrate." Among the number of such Christians I am not ; nor are any, with whom I walk in religious fellowship.) But at present let us stop a little to inquire what the Doctor means by this same Church, to which he thinks God has transferred his authority. Now, Dr. Whatdy is a logician ; and has written, as I understand, tipon Logic. He must therefore be aware, that in all close reasoning nothing is of more importance, than the distinct and definite use of words ; especially of such as are immediately essential to the argu- ment, or as have been currently employed in a variety of meanings : and that nothing can more absolutely vitiate any argument, than the use of any such term, without notice, in several different senses. Yet the Doctor in his short pamphlet, has fallen into all these vices of rea- soning in his use of the word Church. When he rests so much of religious observance upon the authority of the Church, we might expect that he would have plainly stated what he means by that phrase ; which, if I mistake not, is among those that Mr. Locke adduces, as exemplifying the mischievous ambiguity and uncertain signification of words in current use. But Dr. W. has not only left it enveloped in that mystical obscurity in which divines have involved it, but has increased the difficulty of ascertaining his meaning, by changing the sense in which he employs the term at least three times. However, I shall endeavour to trace him in all his applications of it ; and, in each, to expose the invalidity of his arguments. One sense in which I find him using the plirase " the Church," is, as equivalent with the men styled Bishops and Arch- ON DR. W.S i'AMPlILirr. 14.') bishops, in tlic several states of Christendom. Now, common as it is witli tlic benig^htcd papists of Ireland to speak of their C/ntrch and of their Clerg'j as synon\inous, yet it might seem almost incredible, that in the nineteenth century, the Principal of St. Aldan's Hall, Oxford, should adopt any similar application of the word. But the fact is incontrovertible, as will appear from the following quota- tion of a passage already referred to, in the 21st page of his pamphlet. " And when it (the kingdom of Christ,) did come, his Apostles were, as I have said, not commissioned by Him to change the day, and pei"petuate the obligation of the Jewish Sabbatli ; but they and their Successors, even the Church which He promised to be with ' always, even unto the end of the world,' were endued with ample power to enact regulations with a view to Christian edification; and among the rest to set apart festival days, such as the Lord's day, Christmas-day, Good-Friday, Holy-lhursday," &c. Now what can be plainer, than that in this passage Dr. W. consi- ders those whom he calls the " Successors of the Apostles," as constituting what he calls " the Church V Nor are we left at any loss to ascertain whom he intends by the Successors of the Apostles. For if we only look at the table of Ecclesiastical Officers, printed by authority, at the end of the English Bibles, we shall find the penultimate article running in these words : — " BisJiops, successors of the Apostles in the government of the Church." To expose the profane falsehood of this claim of the Hierarchy, I shall not insist upon the line of succession, through which those men professedly derive their successorship, — even tlirough the vilest of the Roman Pontiifs : — nor shall I insist upon the political inti-igues, by which in these countries they obtain an appointment to their function. No : — I abstain ft-om these copious topics, that I may at once grapple with the subject more closely. And I tell Dr. W. that there are riot, and cannot be, any successors to the Apostles ; inasmuch as the Apostles stiU hold their office, and with respect to it are not defunct. It was to the tvord of the Apostles, not to \hQ\Y persons, that the divine promise was given; — " Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world:" — not, "with you and your successors." Nor was there a whit more of Christ's authority sanctioning their word spoken, tlian the same word icritten. Or will Dr. W. assert, that an authenticated letter from the apostle Paul, read in the Chris- tian assembly at Corinth, carried with it less of divine authority, or of divine obligation on the disciples to obey the injunctions it contained, than if Paul had been personally present, and spoken the same things .' To this day Christians have with them the word of the Apostles : and " he that knoweth God heareth them." (1 John iv. G.) — But this is part of their language to the Churches of the saints : — " Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or inrespcct of an holiday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." (Col. ii. 1 6.) Such was the apostolic language to a Gentile church, concerning the holidays that really had a divine origin, and were once of binding authority to the Jews ; though but " shadows of good things" then to come, and shadows which, even to the Jews, were " ready to VOL. II. L 146 BRIEF ANIMADVERSIONS, &c. vanish away." (Heb.viii. 13, x. 1.) The Gentile Christians, there- fore, were indeed enjoined " not to despise" their Jewish brethren for such Mosaic observances — (Rom. xiv. 3 ) : but were as expressly enjoined to repel any attempt which false teachers might make, to impose these observances upon the Gentiles. And the adoption of such observances was. in the Gentiles, expressly marked as involving a departure from the Gospel. (Gal. iv. 9 — 11. v. 2.) What then are we to say to a class of men, who pretend that the Apostles of Christ have been displaced from their office, and succeeded by themselves ? — who, in perfect consistency with this arrogant assumption, have taken upon them to set aside the apostolic precept ; and attempt to impose on disciples the observance of holidays and festival days, according to their own tradition ; which they dare to represent as sanctioned by divine authority, and therefore binding on the conscience of a Christian. What are we to say to such men, but this ? — " whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye." Acts iv. 19. Enough has been said to shew, that, while Dr. W. conceives that he places some religious observance of the Lord's day " on a rock," (p. 7.) by i-esting it on the asserted authority of the Bishops, as successors of the Apostles, to sanctify it, or what they call " our Lady's dav," or any other day " that may be thought most fitting," (p. 23.) every " right-minded Christian" must feel himself bound, by divine authority, to resist the religious observance of any day resting on such a foundation : — and still more strongly bound to this, when the men who would impose that obsen^ance, embody in this attempt the claim to an office and character the most obviously Antichristian. I pass to another meaning, in which Dr. W. employs the word Church, as connected with the same subject. In page 28. he remarks, that " it is very useful to shew (to the strenuous advocates for the observance of the Lord's day) that an institution, which they would be very unwilling to see deprived of all divine sanction, can derive such sanction from no other source than from the power con- ferred by Christ on every Christian Church :" — or, as he ex- presses the same idea in a few lines before, " a divinely-sanctioned power" — " vested in a Christian community, and binding on its members." Here the Bishops, successors of the Apostles, have disappeared ; and, in their place, we are presented with an idea which is in itself perfectly scriptural ; a Church of Christ in any place always import- ing in the New Testament the community of Christians in that place, coming together on the first day of the week, to shew -forth their Lord's death in the ordinance of his supper. But is it true, that Christ has conferred on such a community of Christians the power of sanctifying such days, as " may be thought most fitting," and of imposing the observance of them as " binding on its members ?" In other words, is it true that Christ has vested in each Christian Church the power to release its members from their allegiance to Him, to turn away their ear from his accredited ambassadors, and to assume to themselves the right of enacting laws and ' ordinances ON DR. W.S PAMrJlLKT. 147 nccordiiii^ to their several fancies ? So far is tliis from luing- triit-, that every real Church of Christ has nothini>" at all to do with making any laws, or inventing any ordinances for their fancied edification. They are simply called to hear, and observe those pro- mulgated by the King of Zion in the Apostolic word. Accordinglv, the Apostle Paul commends a C'hurch, because they " remembered him in all things, and kept the 07-(li nances, as he had delivered them," (1 Cor. xi. 2.): — and another Church, for being " followers of the Churches of God, which in Judea were in Christ Jesus," (1 Thess. ii. 14.) ; enjoining them to withdraw themselves from every brother " that walked disorderly, and not after th<; tra- dition received of the Apostles." (2 Thcss, iii. 6.) Tliey were charged in solemn language such as this : — " we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more." In the way in which the Apostolic Chm-chcs were called to walk, there was no room for diversity of faith or of practice : — no rooa; for any human contrivances in addition to the regulations of the Apostles. Their authoritative language was — " If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor. xiv. 37.) " He that knoweth God hcareth us: — he that is not of God heareth not us." (1 John iv. G.) Thus it was of old; and thus it is at this day. That it is so, is a necessary result from the promise of Him '•■ whose words shall not pass away " — (Matt. xxiv. 35.) — " Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." It w^as a promise made to the Apostles by their divine Master ; — not to any pretended successors of the Apostles. Tlie very terms of the promise involve the continuance of their fimction unto the end of the world ; and therefore exclude all idea of any successors to them. I have known some indeed who wish to substitute for " the end of the world," in that promise, the version — " unto the end (or completion) oi the age." And this translation is perfectly unobjectionable; but, understood aright, is perfectly equivalent with the common version. The " last days" (Heb. i. 2.) or last age of the world, had then com- menced. Tlie Kingdom of heaven was fully introduced, in opposi- tion to the earthly kingdom of the Mosaic law. And as it was then the last age, the completion of that age must synchronize with the end of the world. Many, I am aware, in order to make room for their traditions and human enactments in the Church of Christ, are accustomed to repre- sent the Apostolic word, which Christians have with them at tills day in the Scriptures, as insufficient, and not affording that fulness of regulation which the Churches of Christ require. They have never brought this to the test of experiment by obeying what is re- vealed. But none indeed can really be engaged in this attempt, but those who believe that Apostolic Gospel, which is "foolishness" and a " stumbling block " to the pride and ungodHness of man; — none but those who, being " ordained to eternal life," have been subdued to " the obedience of faith." (Acts xiii. 48.) To attempt to intro- j. 2 148 BRIEF ANIMADVERSIONS, &:c. tluce the established laws of Christ's kingdom into the so-called Churches of the world, would be absurdly inconsistent, a vain and wicked profanation. They were adapted and designed for " saints in Christ Jesus," or (in other words) for believers of the unadulterated truth as it is in Christ ; for they all are " sanctified through the truth." (John xvii. 17.) They were designed for such, and for no others. But I believe I may confidently assert, that all such, so far as they are engaged in the attempt to walk together by Apostolic rule, find that rule divinely full, and sufficient for the regulation of every thing in a Church which ought to be brought under rule. No doubt, in speaking of the Apostolic rule, I mean to include the recorded and approved example of the Apostolic Churches ; and I am fully justified in doing so, — in regarding such recorded example as equivalent with express precept. I am justified in this, from the consideration, that it records how the Apostles regulated the Churches, which they planted ; how they " taught always in every Church." Under what head I should treat the following argument, I am quite uncertain ; being quite uncei'tain in what sense Dr. W. employs the word Church in it. However, it seems as well to introduce the passage here, as in any other order, (p. 22.) " When our Lord ' appointed to his Apostles a kingdom,' and declared that ' whatso- ever they bound on earth should be bound in heaven,' promising also to be ' with them always, even unto the end of the world,' He must surely have conferred on his Church a permanent power to ordain rites and ceremonies, and to institute and abrogate religious festivals, provided nothing be done contrary to God's word ; and must have given the ratification of his authority to what should be thus ordained. For if his expressions have not this extent, what do they mean ? " Upon this very extraordinary argument I would remark, in the first place, — that, as a mere argiimentum ad ignorantiam, it has no degree of force whatever, for supporting the inference which Dr. W. draws from it. And of this he himself, as a logician, must be sensible. But waving this ; I say in the next place, that the argument is otherwise destitute of all vis consequentiee ; that there is not the slightest connexion between the conclusion drawn and the principle from which it is inferred. ' With the Apostles Christ is present, sanctioning their words, even unto the end of the world : therefore, the Church has power to ordain rites and ceremonies, and to insti- tute and abrogate religious festivals ! ' Really, from the authority with which the Apostles were invested, to regulate all things in the Church of Christ, it would rather follow that the Church has no authority to regulate any thing. But beside the promise in Matt, xxviii. 20. the Dr. also adduces the promise in Matt, xviii. 18. which does indeed apply to every Church of Christ, acting according to the Apostolic word ; but is nevertheless as remote as the former from conferring any such power as the Dr. contends for. The words which we have now to consider, stand in immediate connexion with that grand law of the kingdom of heaven, for maintaining the free circulation of brotherly affection in a Christian Church, by directing the discipline to be exercised in the ij ON DR. W.'S PAMrilLET. 149 case of a brother trespassing against his brother, " Go and tell liini his fault between thee and hini alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thv brother. But if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every ^Yord may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto THE Church, (to the assembled disciples). But if he neglect to hear the Ohurch, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican :" (let him be removed from all Christian fellowshi[)). Im- mediately after this injunction, the Lord adds the declaration, — " Verilv, I say unto vou, whatsoever ije sJudl bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." These words, taken in their connexion, seem not ob- scurely to import, that his divine authority, as King of Zion, should ratify and sanction the act of that Church, however small and despised, acting in such a case according to this heavenly law ; cither in their putting away the offender, on his not hearing the Church, or in con- firming their love towards him, on his manifesting repentance. Yet of this divine promise Dr. W. ventures to assert, that it must confer on the Church the power to institute and abrogate religious festivals, &c. ! And he ventures to enforce this assertion, by demanding — if it confer not this power, " what does it mean ?" — In return for Dr. W.'s question, let me be allowed just to suggest to him another ques- tion— what is the authority which he conceives has abrogated that law of the Kingdom of Heaven, just noiv quoted ? There remains yet a third sense, in which I find Dr. W. using the word Church. It occurs in page 29, in the following extraordinary sentence : — " If we hold as indispensable the observance of the Lord's day, and that, on the Church's authority (which we must do, if it can be established, as a binding ordinance, by nothing else,) then, we must admit that our Church's claims to such a power (the powder to sanctify any day that may be thought most fitting, p. 23,) are valid, and rest on the appointment of our Lord." Here it is evident that the Dr. employs the phrase " our Church," as equivalent with " the Church ;" and that by " our Church," he intends, what is called the united Church of England and Ireland. Upon this ap])lication of the word, very little needs to be said here. The thing now introduced, as the Church of Christ, is a thing altogether of this world ; one of the daughters of that " great whore," produced in the " fornications she has committed with the kings of the earth ;" (Rev. xvii.2.) and among them, with \\\n.\. good Defender of the Faith, our eighth Henry. In the Mosaic economy, it may be said there was a real and perfect incorporation of Church and State, of the religious and the civil institutions delivered to that peculiar people ; and delivered, both of them alike, from the God of Israel. But that age has passed away, and the kingdom of heaven has taken place of it; a kingdom, which its divine Author has pronounced to be " not of this icorld." Any attempt now to confound, or incorporate, his kingdom with the kingdoms of the world, is virtually a denial that " Christ has come in the flesh :" and in all such attempts the thing put forward, as Christ's Church, is always, and of necessity, a thing essentially different from it. toO BRIEF AMMAUVERSIONS, &c. Indeed, if that great wliore had not " made the inhabitants of the earth drvnk with the wme of her fornication," they would have per- ceived indisputable evidence of this assertion in the very phrase, — the Church of England, of Scotland, &c. &c. The Scriptures afford no one instance of any such phraseology ; but always use the word Church, or assembly, in its application to Christians, — either for the body of ChristiariS assembling in a particular place, — or for the collective aggregate of all Christians, in every age and place ; that "great congregation," in the midst of which Christ declares, (or manifests,) the name of the oidy true God to those whom " he is not ashamed to c&ll his brethren." (Ps. xxii. 22. Hebr. ii. 11, 12.) Yet it is not surprising that those, who profanely attribute the title of Christ's Church to any of those politico-religious systems, which have been established by human enactments througliout Christendom, should maintain a consistency of profanencss by charging those with heresy and schism, who obey that solemn call, " come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." (Rev. xviii. 4.) But lest my meaning be mistaken, let me here remark, that I do not view the great mass of Dissenters in these countries with a more favouiable eye, than those retaining their connexion with the Es- tablishment. Both are equally remote from even the thoughts of returning to Apostolic Christianity in faith or practice. And if I were to be regulated at all in the concerns of religion by human tra- ditions, I should certainly, as a matter of taste, prefer the regidations made by Acts of Parliament, to the inferior authority of one or more dissenting Ministers. The systems originating with the latter are no less Antichristian than the former ; while they have much less of worldly respectability and splendour. In the passage I have last quoted from Dr. W. he declares his opinion, that "the observance of the Lord's day can be established, as a hindi^ig ordinance, by nothing else than the Church's Authority,"' to sanctify any day that may be thought most fitting. If it were so, I have sufficiently proved, that " every right-minded Christian" would be bound to abandon its observance. But it really is not so. There is an observance obligatory on Christians upon the first day of the week; and the obligation rests indeed upon an immoveable rock, how- ever weak and insufficient it may appear in the eyes of Dr. W. The recorded example of the Apostolic Churches, (Acts xx. 7. 1 Cor. xi. 17. 20.) and our certainty as to the source whence they received their regulations, to the end of the world must bind the Christians of any place, who professedly hear the Apostles, to come together on the first day of the week, as brethren, the redeemed of the Lord, for the purpose of shewing forth Christ's death in the ordinance of his Supper. (Some further observations on this head may be found in the " Remarks corrective of Occasional Mistranslations," &c. No. XII. on Acts xxi. 4. In No. IX. also, of the same publication, may be found a short exposure of the supposed Sabbatical character of the first day of the week.) The obsei'vance of the Lord's Supper was so much the leading ob- ject of the weekly assembling of the Apostolic Christians, that this ON DR. W.S PAMl'lILET. 151 singly is selected to designate the object of that assembly ; though we are taught that they came together for other exercises also of brotherlv fellowship and mutual edification. Hut these were subordi- nate to the commemoration of that death and resurrection of the Lord, which formed the basis of all their hope toward God, and of all their heavenly union with each other. I add only two more short remarks on the general subject. The first is — that the intimations given in the Scriptures of the way, in which the first Churches were directed by the Apostles to walk, were never designed to form such a systematic code of laws, as the vanity of gainsayers might require ; though sufficient for the children of God, to mark out their course to the end of the world. The second is — that I have preferred the phrase of " the first day of the week," to that of " the Lord's dmj," by which Dr. W. designates it. The former continually occurs in the Scriptures of the New Testa^ ment : — the latter is to be found there only in the one passage. Rev, i. 10. ; and it is more than doubtful, whether it be there employed to mark any particular day of the week ; though I am aware that such an application of it is very common in ecclesiastical writers posterior to the Apostolic age. Certainly, " the day of the Lord" is used in very different applications, in other parts of Scripture, both of the Old Testament and of the New. 152 COLLECTION OF LETTERS ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS, TO ALEX. KNOX, ESQ. Nov. 4, 1802. Dear Knox, — I thank you for the copy of your Remarks which you have sent me. I have read it this evening with attention, and not without a very serious engagement of mind before I opened it. It is written with your usual ability and in that gentlemanly manner which I expected ; but I fear is too well calculated to counteract the good I hoped my little Address might produce in the Methodist society. However, so far as I am enabled to act with a single eye to the glory of God, I may with happy confidence leave all results to Him. I knew that my little piece would be very obnoxious to many in and out of that Society, and I know as well that yours will be very acceptable. Yet I confess to you that I would rather be the writer of mine than of yours. You give me more credit than is due to me for facility in composing. I mean, if life be spared, to answer your Remarks ; but it will probably be the work of several months, i. e. of the horae subsecivee of several months. I desire not only to weigh my words well upon these subjects (and you will find I have done so more than you are aware in some of those passages where you think I am most open to attack,) but to have a close eye to the spirit in which I utter them : and all this is inconsistent with a hasty reply. But I shall probably without delay put to press a second edition of the Address (altering, however, the word " most" to " many," Vol. 1, p. 7.) as I see nothing in your remarks that ought to make me withdraw it from circulation, while I am glad that they win give me an opportunity of discussing some of the topics more at large in a reply. And now, my good friend, will you pardon me for addressing a few words in this private letter, as a poor dying sinner addressing a fellow-sinner. My heart's desire for you is that you might be made a happy partaker of that simple faith in a glorious Saviour, against which I think in the latter part of your Remarks you at least covertly contend : except in the twentieth line, p. 50, when you assert what, rightly understood, includes the whole. If ever you be brought to Him, you will be brought to Him stripped of all your preliminary re- pentance and piety and doings of every kind — us a poor publican — COLLECTION OF LETTKUb, &c-. I.):; as nothing but a sinner to the Saviour of sinners : and you will find all in him that a poor ruined hell-dcscrving sinner can want for pre- sent and eternal sidvation : and you will then see that the texts of scripture vou have adduced are in no wise against the doctrine you opj)ose. Till then you will not find rest to your soul : till then any rest you take is a false peace. Before I begin to prepare a public answer to your work, I give you this simple testimony — not indeed as to me a matter of uncertain dispute. I testify that which I know; but I am right willing to have the testimony tried and proved by the word of God. That alone will abide for ever. May God give you the joy of simply believing his joyful word, and lead you into that rest into which you never will enter but by believing ! But indeed, dear Knox, this is a joy and rest as open to the poor harlot that came into the Penitentitu-y to-day as to you, and as open to you as it was to Peter the xVpostle. These things I know appear very strange — they ever have appeared so, and ever will — except to those who know their truth. The discussion of them — and not an attack upon the Methodists — which I never designed — is w^hat you may expect in my reply. Your kindness (whatever you may think of those senti- ments) will, I expect, excuse my freedom, which our former inter- course upon these subjects encourages me the more to take. Believe me, &c. II. TO THE EDITOn OF THE EVANGELICAL MAGAZINE. 1802. Mr. Editor, — You invited your correspondents to oflfer a concise and scriptural answer to the question which Simplex has ])roposed concerning the nature, object, and effects of justifying faith. All who are partakers of that faith must acknowledge the importance of the question : but it is awful to think that at the end of the eighteenth centul■^■ since the promulgation of the Gospel, so many professors of the faith of the Gospel should be at a loss to reply, or disposed to give such various and contradictory answers. The following I can venture with confidence to offer as scriptural; and if it be not as concise as you desire, that must be imputed, not to any intrinsic per- l)lexity in the subject, but to the various writers who have perplexed it bv a heap of human lumber placed about the simplicity of divine truth. I say more than I may, to some readers, appear to sav upon the subject, when I say that our gracious Lord, in commissioning his apostles to go through all the world and proclaim to every creature the glad tidings of salvation in his name, and in declaring that who- soever believeth their testimony should be saved — really and simply meant what he plainly uttered. Do any of your readers think that I say little towards the solution of Simplcx's question in saying this ? 154 COLLECTION OF LETTERS I am sure that this is the substance of all that ever ought to be said, or can be said with truth upon the subject. There is no difficulty in the meaning of our Saviour's expression : every one knows what is meant by believing a testimony — the most illiterate old woman un- derstands the term just as well as the most learned philosopher. But the difficiUty lies in this, that men cannot think that our Lord meant what he says, because they really do not believe his declaration ; and, at the same time professing to submit to his authority, they strive to get over the blessed force of his words by distorting them from their obvious meaning. Here open infidels act much more consistently than many pro- fessing Christians. The open infidel understands the meaning of the expressions at once ; and having no motive to conceal his infi- delity, he avowedly opposes the truth of the declaration. * How irrational!' he exclaims — 'Believe, and thou shalt be saved! la tliis a doctrine fit for wise or good men ? No ; — give us the religion of nature, which aftbrds something on which to exercise our reason, and directs to the due exertion of our moral powers — and let the helpless, ignorant, and careless rabble adopt such an unphilosophical system.' Well, when we hear this language, we know whose lan- guage it is : but many a professor who is shocked at that infidel, is just as much an infidel himself, only less consistently. ' Oh, yes,' cries he, ' to be sure, whatever Christ says is true, and it is a terrible thing to be a deist. But then what Christ says — " he that believeth shall be saved" — he cannot mean literally what he seems to to say.' And then he proceeds to put the preceding truth into the crucible of his infidel fancy, and blows the furnace of his wit till he brings out a bit of something as different from the scripture which he put in as darkness from light, or dead earth from fine gold. Perhaps he brings out an eastern metaphor (like those divines whom a witty writer of this day so happily and justly exposes) — perhaps some mysterious and indescribable exertion of the sinner's mind — perhaps (as I have more than once heard from the pulpit) some mixture of good disposition and affection — some Corinthian brass that is neither gold, silver, nor copper, but composed of them all — something that he describes as faith, hope, and charity, all at once ; while it is neither the charity, hope, nor faith which the scriptures plainly speak of. Alas ! for poor sinners ! If in calling them to believe the Gospel that they may be saved, we speak in an eastern metaphor, or called them to an exertion of mind difficult and inex- plicable, or required them to attain every or any good disposition that they might become partakers of Christ, — would the Gospel, which we called them thus to believe, be a gospel, i. e. glad tidings to lost sinners — dead in trespasses and sins ? And when we attempt to bring these professors back to the joyful simplicity of our Lord's declaration and the declarations of his apostles after him, do they not betray their ignorance of Scripture and the infidelity of their hearts by crying out — ' O ! but, in that way, what will become of good works and morality ?' Precious guardians of morality and good works ! take your proper place with your brethren, the avowed deists,-^(nay, do not despise them, for they are your brethren,) — ON SClllPTURAL SL'UJECTS. l.)5 ami employ yourselves in devising systems of morality, while the poor sinii)lc hclievcr sluxll be saved — saved from his sins, from their f^uilt and from their power — and shall be led by his divine Saviour in the paths of righteousnes?s for his name's sake, abounding in the fruits of righteousness, and rich in such good works as (if your eyes were opened) might put you to the blush for your immorality — yes, your immorality, even when you have your finest coat upon you of civil decency covered with the gold lace of self-devised religion. Now, Mr. Editor, any of your readers that are made very angry, ])robably understand what the Scriptures mean bv faith or believing the Gospel. May God give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth, that they may be saved ; for they can never be saved in any way but by grace through faith — that precious simple faith which they so despise. Let them not go away indignant from the prophet's door, because he directs them to such a simple way of cure. It is of God's appointment : it is etiectual, wise, and gracious ; and there is no other. " He that beheveth not shall be condemned." But as Simple.x's question is proi^osed in such loose form, perhaps some of your readers may. wish for a more methodical answer. I will endea- vour to indulge them: but let them remember that in what follows I am not going to unsay what I have said hitherto. God forbid that the trumpet should give an uncertain sound ! They will not understand what follows aright, if thev understand it in any sense ditlcrent from what has gone before. Simplex inquires — 1st, the nature — 2nd, the object — J^rd, the effects of justifying faith. Then I say, first, its nature is this — it is a divinehj-icrought persuasion of tilings divinely revealed. Secondly, its object is the Lord Jesus Christ — in that character and work of the Saviour of sinners, in which the Scriptures of truth reveal him. Thirdly, its effects are all the fruits of the Spirit, " love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, temperance;" — in short, every good work — love to God and love to our neighbour. Allow me to add a few words by way of explanation upon each of these heads. There must be a divine revelation for the basis and warrant and rule of the faith of which we speak : therefore, " faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." They talk unscrip- turally who talk of any thing as the matter of faith, which is not revealed by God in his word — his revealed truth being now all com- prised in the canon of Scripture, which is completed and closed. The things which he has revealed are things future or things invisible; and thus the Apostle divides them, Heb. xi. 1. into things " ex- pected" (for so the word should be rendered,) as opposed to things present, and things " not seen" opposed to those wiiich come under the observation of our senses. Faith is the " confidence of things expected and the conviction of things not seen ;" or, in a word, the persuasion of those things divinely revealed : and the author of faith is God the Spirit, as a spirit of demonstration and of power. We are naturally creatures of sight and sense, and no man, whatever he professed, ever yet really believed or was persuaded of the things revealed in God's word, but by the Holy Ghost. And as this faith is originally of his operation, so we depqjid upon his continual in- 156 COLLECTION OF LETTERS fluence for its maintenance and increase. By these two things, therefore, this faith or beheving is distinguished from all other believ- ing— that it has for its matter things divinely revealed, and for its author God; and though always necessarily combined with a percep- tion, or view, or understanding of the truth (for we cannot believe what we do not understand), it is essentially distinct from the mere understanding of the propositions contained in the word of God ; for it is one thing to understand a proposition, and another thing to be persuaded of its truth. Faith, therefore, will exist in various de- grees, according as the spirit of wisdom and of revelation discovers to us the import, and persuades us of the truth of the divine testimony. But the Scriptures have been given " to make us wise unto salva- tion;' and both in the Old Testament and in the New, by Moses in the law, by the Prophets, and by the Apostles, bear one imited testi- mony to the Lord Jesus Christ, as the only and the all-sufficient Saviour of lost sinners — God with us — manifest in the flesh — to make an end of sin and bring in everlasting righteousness — to bruise the head of the serpent — to destroy the works of the devil — to save his people from their sins — to be the Captain of our salvation, bringing many sons unto glory. In this — his person — his offices — his work — all the lines of divine truth meet as in the centre : for which reason (as well as others) he calls himself " the truth ;" and inti- mates that his people shall be wise unto salvation by declaring, " I am known of mine ;" and declares the great office of the Spirit in declaring — " He shall testify of me" — " He shall glorify me" — " He shall take of the things that are mine and shall shew them unto you." He is therefore the great object of that faith which believes the record of God. " This is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son." " He that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." Lastly, this faith — both from the glorious matter which it believes, and from the divine Author which produces and maintains it in the sinner's mind, does and ever must work by love, purify the heart, and overcome the world. This faith is indeed most holy faith : the truth which it believes is indeed truth " according to godliness," and through it the great head of his church prays that his people may be sanctified. John xvii. Sinners, believing the record of the love of God that passes knowledge, are won to love him, are encouraged to draw nigh to him, are enabled to walk with him, are excited to serve him without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of their life — are taught of him to love one another, and led by him as strangers and pilgrims upon earth — in Christ their living way, the way of holiness — to press toward the mark for the prize of their high calling, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God. Triumphantly we may demand. Who is he that over- cometh the world — who is he that is delivered from the bondage of corruption — who is he that possesses the glorious liberty of the sons of God, whereby thev serve him with a willing service — but he that belicvcth that Jesus is the Christ ? Neither my time nor the limits of this essay will allow me to treat more largely upon these cfl'ects of faith and their necessary connection with it, or the various workings ON SCKirTLRAL Sl'IUlX'TS. 157 of the fleshly mind — the evil mind of unljeliuf in opposition to it. I shidl only sav that, wliatever garl) he aj^sumcs, he is the enemy of holiness and of every good work who is the enemy of this precious simple scriptund faith of God's elect. May you, reader, he a happy l)artaker of it. III. TO THE REV. DR. H . 1803. Reverend and much beloved sir, — I saw, with pleasure, vour note on the cover of the Evangelical Magazine for March, intimat- ing your kind acceptance of the letter I took the liberty of addressing to you. It is needless to detail the circumstances that have since prevented my writing : among them have been sickness and multi- ])licitv of engagements. But indeed, now that I sit down to repeat the liberty I took before, (according to your permission) it is with a considerable mixture of wonder at the thought of having ever taken it, and with some feeling of shame (though unknown) at the recol- lection that I dropped a hint of wishing to make a few obsen'ations on ditferent passages in the pieces you have published. That is all I can remember of my former letter, — and that I wrote under the constraining impulse of much brotherly affection towards you, for the truth's sake. And now, dear sir, as you encourage me to pi"o- ceed, and as I trust I can appeal to the searcher of hearts that I have no allowed motive, in what I am about to offer, but the glory of that dear Lord, who, I believe, has called us both by his grace, and will soon take us to himself — bear with me while I offer the follow- ing remarks to your consideration. I think I see in your writings the manliness of a faithful soldier of Christ, desirous to advance his reproached cross in the face of all the opposition and contempt which the world throws upon it — not seeking to escape the reproach by hiding the object of it — or by dressing it up with some trappings which its enemies can like. Yet I think that you appear to have taken up unintentionally some of those views which many indeed, who are called evangelical, have long put forward, but which I am persuaded corrupt the glorious simplicity and obscure the character- istic ofFensiveness of the gospel. Tliese views in your writings appear blessedlv contradicted, from time to time, by plain testimo- nies which you bear to the unadulterated truth : and 1 cherish the persuasion that your testimony will progressively become more and more uniformly consistent with itself and with scripture. In propor- tion as it does, it will become more and more distinguished from that of many who bear the name of Christ's ministers, and from them you may expect a peculiar outcry. I shall select at present but two 158 COLLECTION OF LETTERS instances of what T mean. Examine, dear sir, the character and state of your " Zion's pilgrim" at the time when you represent him as first converted, regenerated, and entered on the road to Zion, (see from p. 5 to p. 8 of the third edition) and consider whether that great change can scripturally he said to have taken place in him at that period, or for some time after. He appears to have been then indeed deeply serious, and much concerned and engaged about divine and eternal things. But was he not still in wickedness — a stranger to the true character of God as a just God and the justifier of the ungodly ? Could he be said to be in the way to Zion, when he knew not him who is the only way ? — to be born of God, when he yet believed not that Jesus is the Christ, the anointed one of God for the office of saving sinners unto the uttermost and bringing many sons unto glory ? to be converted, when — (though turning from some forms of the flesh which he before had served) he yet was not turned from himself nor brought to the Shepherd and Bishop of souls ? I know it is common in the popular divinity to represent such very serious and religious characters — especially if inquiring with apparent candour about divine things — as at least fairly on the way toioards salvation, if not already safe — though they believe not the gospel of God our Saviour. But does his word warrant any such representations ? does it know any thing of what so many ser- mons and writings under evangelical titles are stufl'ed with — of half believers — a medley between — a state of nature and a state of grace ? Does not the gospel, where it comes, find all alike dead in sin — and leave all as dead as it found them and more condemned, except those who are given to believe the record of him who is the resuiTection and the life ? That the mighty and gracious hand of God has been over those, even before they believed, leading them, controlling them, and variously working on them, I readily grant, and you have sweetly shewn ; but I know not any stage of a sinner's course, till he is brought to the knowledge and belief of the truth as it is in Jesus, in which I have any warrant to address him, except as an alien from the life of God — an enemy against him — and willing captive of sin. If Satan be the father of lies, I can consider all false religion, even in its fairest form, but as among his devices : — and surely, the religion of Zion's pilgrim was false till he believed, and is described as false at p. 27. He might well acknowledge the rich grace of God in bringing him out of such false ways, but could not justly consider himself as entered on the road to Zion till brought out of them. The other instance which I would beg leave to mention, is from your paper against all despair. In various passages of it you give blessed testimonies to the sovereign riches and freedom of the grace of God — in opposition to all supposed qualifications in the object for receiv- ing it. But have you not been led elsewhere to represent a previous awakening, and apprehension of having sinned beyond the possibility of forgiveness, — and a falling of the weapons of sin out of our hands, as that very qualification which, at other times, you deny? Why say, dear sir, that in any declaration of the gospel the un- awakened, unhumbled, unconvinced sinner has no immediate inte- rest ? The Apostles declared it to thousands of such, and thousands ON SCRIPTURAL SUIUliCTS. 1.')!) of such, believing it, became new creatures. In one sense none but the believer of the gospel is interested in it, — in another sense, those who are most insensible to tlieir need of forgiveness just as much as those who most despair of forgiveness — and it needs just the same divine power acconipanving the word to reveal the grace of the gos- pel to the latter as to the former : and we are just as much warranted to declare to the former, that believing in the Lord Jesus Christ they shall be saved, as we are obliged to declare to the latter, that except they believe they shall be damned : the timidity to declare the rich grace of the gospel to sinners till they have had a previous work of supposed conviction under the law, I consider as one of the corrup- tions of the gospel, which the art of the devil, with the help of sys- tematic divinitv, has long introduced and widely diffused. You divide sinners into two classes — awakened to a sense of sin — and unawakened. Would it not be more scriptural to say believing and unbelieving ? To the unawakened you observe there is not a pro- mise in the whole Bible ; no, nor to the awakened in any sense of the word, but that which includes the character of believing the gospel. The promises are all in Christ, and till we believe in him we are strangers to the covenant of promise. And if the most con- vinced and awakened sinners (so called — for I acknowledge no genu- ine— no gracious conviction or awakening, till we are given to be- lieve) are led to suppose themselves interested in the promises of the gospel, by their being convinced and awakened, they will be led into a fatal error — while the declaration of our Lord shall continue to be fulfilled in the most unawakened, that the dead shall hear his voice, and they that hear shall live. Dear sir, I would not obtrude these plain remarks on you, did I not see that, when you get out of the systems of men, you so plainly declare the grace of God in truth, and justly state the beiiig a sinner — not the being an awakened sinner — the only qualification for it. I trust you will not think the topics I have glanced at unimportant, or my observations hypercriti- cal. But whatever you may think or conjecture of the writer, may the God of all grace bless to you, and through you to the church, ■what I have written. He can make use of the poorest instrument he has. Indeed, dear sir, while I have ventured this, (and shall not apologize for stating what I consider scriptural truth) I yet feel much more disposed to wash your feet as an honoured witness for our Lord, than to assume the office of censor. But we may commu- nicate to one another for our mutual help and furtherance, without ex- alting ourselves above our dear brethren. Beside the warm affection with which my heart embraces you, I believe I have been led to those communications, by having been long pained at seeing the publications which come out under the name of Evangelical in Eng- land, in many of which the fundamental principles of the glorious go=pel are insidiouslv undermined, and by having cherished the opinion since I saw your writings, that our Lord is progressively teaching and anointing you to oppose their prevailing errors. Look, for instance, at the Christian Observer for last March, p. 192, (and it happens to lie before me) where the Editors, opposing indeed an unscriptural opinion, talk of the " distinguishing circumstances of a IfiO COLLECTION OF LETTERS hopeful nature in the case of penitents," who appear to be called at the eleventh hour, — of the Pharisees being far greater sinners than the publican — of the probability of repentance being proportioned to this and that ; — and enumerate the circumstances of Mr. F.'s being the son of a clergyman — a professed believer — and a loyal man, as those distinguishing traits of character, which they intimate (though they will not speak out) induced God to have mercy on him, or con- tributed to render the means of grace eifectual. Oh, dear sir, may the Lord enable you to lift up your voice as a trumpet against such earthly systems : may he establish, strengthen, and settle you more and more in the precious faith once delivered to the saints ! Fear not, O man greatly beloved, — be strong, yea, be strong ! and when enjoying boldness of access to the throne of grace, through the great high priest of our profession, and by that living way which he has consecrated for us, sometimes remember the least and unworthiest of your companions in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ in your unknown but most truly affectionate, &c. IV. TO ALEX. KNOX, ESQ. Nov. 1803, Dear Knox, — I send you my 7th and last letter, in which I have hurried over many of your concluding Remarks, in order not to have " more last words of Richard Baxter." I perceive that my letters have been becoming progressively offensive, from the nature of the sub- jects handled in them : and I am glad to learn from you that you are at length sensible that we see things in a very different light, because this affords me reason to hope that my meaning is now somewhat understood ; while it must be with regret that I hear I have not excited in you the smallest doubt of the substantial truth of your own religious sentiments. The gospel is so unaccommodating and so re- pulsive to all our natural feelings, that it is indeed a miracle when anv seriously accept it. Like its divine Author, though full of grace and truth, it exhibits no comeliness that can naturally allure either the irreligious or religious world. It will not bend to a coalescence with the prejudices of men — it cannot become an engine of state policy ; it cannot become a step to influence or reputation. Ft is for the salvation of the lost, and answers no other purpose, except to dis- play the justice of God in condemning those that perish. Its few professors must even be exposed to the most various and contradic- tory imputations — must be a sect every where spoken against. They can have nothing to support them in their testimony to the truth, but the preciousness of that truth and the good hope that it reveals. I can wish you no higher blessing than a participation in their sorro.ws and ON SCim'TlHAL SU IJJKtrjS. 161 trials and their joys. I have lived to see taking place every thing that I had predicted as the pro1)able effect of this controversy. Vet I reckon the day that I was led to commence it, one of the hap- piest of mv life. I perceive an appearance of soreness in your last, under a veil of some jocoseness. In some respects I do not wonder at this, for thoug-h a man may at first hear without any emotion to have all his religious svstem opposed, yet a serious attack upon it must be wounding in proportion to the strength of his attachment to it, and the strenfjth of argument by which it is invaded ; the more religion he has, the less he can reckon this a trifle ; here it would be unsuit- able for us to be really jocose. But you seem to intimate some de- gree of doubt whether I have continued my endeavour not to wound your personal feelings needlessly ; believe me I coidd remove that doubt by communicating to you some passages which I have alto- g"ether forborn to insert in my letters — one for instance upon the concluding sentence of the paragraph, p. (il, in your remarks. I would not repeat any assurance on this head, but for mv anxious desire that you may be led to give a serious and candid consideration to my reply. I feel a good deal of solemnity in thus closing the controversy — perhaps finally — with you. We have thus far publicly asserted our respective tenets in religion. A solemn responsibility lies upon us both. But I forbear. Excuse the length of this — and believe nie, dear Knox, with the best wishes, &c. TO MR. r- X '. May, 4, 1804. ^l\ Dear N . — The number of letters, along with other husiness that I have generally on my hands, has made me more dilatory than I could wish in replying to vours. I trust you will find me as ready as you can be, to meet a " quiet and friendly com- munication" upon the important subjects touched on in it ; but I hope you will not think I depart from the spirit of quietness and of love in opposing you plainly where I think you wrong, nor shrink from the fair and candid discussion of differences as if it were controversy, and as if controversy on these matters were to be deprecated. That, indeed, is one of the principles in which I fear we differ, and in wdiich I fear you are led to the sentiment you embrace, by your being in- sensible to the importance of divine truth. However that be — as long as you will bear with a faithful declaration and vindication of that truth, I rejoice to embrace anv renewed opportunity of commu- nicating with you upon it. But life is too short, and my master's business too urgent, to allow a correspondence on any other terms. You observe that you did believe I long considered you as taught of God. I did long cherish the hope that you were, although that hope VOL II. M 162 COLLECTION OF LETTERS was always weakened, by my never having anv satisfactory evidence that you had been deHvered from some errors, which I knew you had formerly adopted. But I did formerly maintain that hope more firmly of many others, of whom I now see every scriptural reason to think that they are under the power of darkness : because I see that Christ — the Christ whom the Scriptures testify — is a rock of offence to them — that they stumble at the word — and evidence every spirit of hostility against it and its witnesses. Now Christ declares that every one, who hath heard and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto Him — that he that is of God heareth God's words — that his sheep hear his voice and follow Him, and will not follow a stranger. I dare not, therefore, in fidelity to my Lord, pretend to consider those, who deny and oppose the Faith of the Gospel, as the children of God, or as lovers of God. They may love a false God ardently — but the glory of the only true God shines in the face of Jesus Christ : and he has said — " he that hateth me, hateth my Father also." Finding many religious professors of this stamp, whom I formerly did not know to be so, I am forced to change my view of their cha- racter— and in doing so and in declaring it — I know not that I trans- gress the law of love. Love to God demands adherence to the truths which declare his name — let who will be offended by them — love to man demands that I should not flatter any to their undoing. You ask, have my sentiments undergone no change } I am not con- scious that my view of the saving truth has undergone any change for many years ; except the change, which every believer of it may expect, and which I acknowledge with thankfulness to the Father of Lights — of increasing clearness in the knowledge of it — increasing firmness in the persuasion of it — increasing attachment to it — and increasing blessedness in the enjoyment of it. But, indeed, the question, how long have I known it ? is a very unimportant one. As to the modes of expression, they are far from unimportant, as the truth is to be conveyed by words, and some are more likely than others to make its meaning understood. And that I have, for some time past, succeeded better in that than formerly is prettv obvious, fi-om the offence and irritation felt by many, who formerly liked what they heard from me. And that many things in Sandeman have con- tributed to this better furnishing me for my work ; and particularly contributed to it, by his plain exposure of the subtle evasions, by which many have corrupted the Gospel — and by his manly testimony against many writers of the greatest name, whose sentiments, though widely difi\ised through the religious world, were almost en- tirely unknown to me, till I found them laid open in Sandeman — this I freely and thankfully acknowledge. Except in this, Jie added nothing to me — for even the scriptural view, which he gives of the meaning of the word Faith, (although that — far indeed from unim- portant, is yet altogether distinct from the truth believed) was nothing new to me; but what I had learned from Scripture, (Heb. xi. 1.) almost immediately after the publication of my sermon at St. John's. You ask me whether I can now ratify the whole of that sermon, and of my letters on Faith ? I have scarcely read either of them, I believe, since they were published, and therefore cannot answer the ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 1 G3 question particularly : Init it would surprise me very much, if two such earlv productions of my pen, (one of them, indeed, before I had come to manhood) did not contain many injudicious statements, and perhaps some false sentiments ; though I believe they both contain, and am sure that one of them contains, all the essence of that truth which I am now so much more offensively, because more clearly witnessing. Nothing, however, from them, or from any thing else that I have ever written, will I allow to have the smallest force against the truth ; nor would I turn aside from the declaration and vindication of that truth to discuss the question, whether it is opposed or not in this or that passage, adduced from my former publications, or how far back my knowledge of it may be traced in my writings. Nor can I wonder that, in the earlier productions of my pen, even after I knew the truth, my modes of expression are such as would now leave me doubtful about another whether he knew it. But at any period that I would have rejected the great truth clearly expressed, I am ready to admit that I was an unbeliever dead in sin. My paper is so nearly full, that I can only add, that I shall, as soon as possible, answer the remainder of your letter. Affectionately yours, &c. VI. TO THE REV. MR. M.- July. 29, 1804. Rev. Sir, — I shall make no apology for addressing you on the sermon which I heard you deliver this day — it is one of the things which my hand " findeth to do," and which (according to the exhor- tation of vour text) I would therefore " do with my might " — remem- bering that " there is no w'ork nor device, nor knowledge, nor wis- dom in the grave whither I am going." I heartily hope and pray that you may not be offended by the liberty I am about to use. But in a few years at most it will be of little consequence to me whether all the world has been offended at me as a disturber of its peace ; •while it will be a matter of eternal consequence to me, whether I am found " faithful unto death" — not ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified — and therefore to testify against those who deny that faith and coiTupt his gospel. — I can truly declare that whatever desire I felt of having an opportunity to preach the gospel of Christ, this moraing, in the church of S , it would have given me tenfold more joy to have heard it faithfully preached by you. But it gave me proportional pain and grief to find that throughout your sermon there not only was not a syllable like the Gospel, but that its fundamental principles were directly contradicted — to hear the con- gregation told that sobriety, honesty, and diligence, in their respec- tive callings, would "entitle" them to the favour of God and "merit-' M 2 1-64 COLLECTION OF LETTERS his rewards, — and this — not even followed by the poor salvo, with which such sentiments are usually accompanied, the complimentary mention of Christ's merits and the Divine mercy. Too often have I heard the truths of God opposed from the pulpits of our churches ; but seldom indeed have I heard them so unequivo- cally contradicted as this day. — O ! sir, it is a solemn office that you undertake, when you undertake to be the guide of immortal souls ; and awfuUv will the blood of those, who believe what I heard you declare to the people, be required at your hands, unless they and you receive repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth. — It would degrade the authority of those truths which you have contradicted, to refer you to the Articles and other formularies of the Established Church in which they are asserted. The truths which vou have con- tradicted are the Truths of God. He has declared that "by the deeds of the law no flesh living shall be justified" — that those who are saved are saved by grace through faith, and that not of them- selves, " not of works lest any man should boast ;" that they are a people "saved by the Lord," and "justified in the Lord," "his work- manship created in Christ Jesus unto good works indeed, which God hath before ordained that they should walk in them — to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he has made them accepted in the beloved." — But if you will address your congregation as those who may be entitled to eternal life by the works of the law, and may merit the rewards of God by something they can do ; take heed how you substitute the meagre system of sobriety, honesty, and diligence, which I heard you describe, for the demands of that divine law which enjoins — " thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and mind and strength ; and thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thyself." If they keep not this law, if they be sinners, take heed how you cherish their hope of escaping the curse that it denounces against every transgression of it, by anything they can do. "Christ has redeemed his people, from the curse of the law, being made a curse for them," — and is, "the end of the law for righteousness, to every one that believeth." " He hath received power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as the Father hath given him." " Neither is there salvation in any other." He is the only foundation laid in Zion ; and is, at the same time, the great Rock of offence, to those who stumble at the word "which reveals him," to those especially who have most of that religion which leads men to " trust in themselves that they are righteous." " But whoso shall fall against that stone shall be broken, and on whomsoever it shall fall it shall grind him to powder." May he have mercy upon you, and upon the poor blinded people to whom you have hitherto been a blind guide ! If you yet become a preacher of the faith, which you are now destroying, it will be but one of those miracles of saving grace, of which (blessed be God) there are numerous instances. Pardon, sir, the plain freedom of my testimony — indeed it is not designed to irritate or offend you ; though I am well aware how offensive it is likely to prove, unless it be blessed for your profit. Were I to be another Sunday in S , I should attend in the ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. IGn Church for the worship of God, during' our sound and scri])tural Liturc^y : but I should feel myself called on, not to wait Ioniser in it to countenance by my presence, a system of doctrine from tlie pulpit, which I know must issue in the eternal ruin of those who believe it. — With every earnest wish, that you may be saved yourself, and be made the honoured instrument of declaring the Saviour's name to others, — I remain — Rev. Sir, Yom* faithful humble servant, &c. VII. TO MRS. N . Nov. 4th, 1804. Very dear Friend, — I have been slow in answering your kind letter of the 27th ult., and, in fact, have been obliged to run in debt to all my correspondents. For much that I have to say on the sub- ject of the late changes in my views and circumstances, I must refer them all to a printed address, which I have been busy drawing up, and is now at press. I suppose it will be published in about a week. I am to be congratulated, indeed, on the goodness of our dear Lord to me in rectifying my judgment, which was so long beclouded as to the rule by which his people are led to walk. May he graciouslv discover it to all the little flock, and give them one heart and one way, " that his glory may he seen upon them !" I share in your desire to have the disciples at C , be they ever so few, gathered into one body, that they may walk together as a Church of Christ, according to the same rule with the Apostolic churches. And I trust this will be increasingly eftected wherever there are disciples. But it is most important that, at the commencement of the attempt especially, those who join in it should be of one mind, have a clear view of the object which they propose, and pursue it with scriptural simplicity. If a visit from me may be subservient to this or any other part of the Lord's work among y'ou, gladly will I -s-isit you as soon as any opportunity may ofi"er. For the present, however, my itinerancies must be greatlv abridged, by the scantiness of my pecuniary means, and the necessity of staying for the most part in Dublin to earn mv bread. I am under a promise also of visiting Scotland, as soon as my engagements at Bethesda shall terminate, which will probably be very shortly. Still I hope to see you before winter is over. I suppose you have heard that has also come out and given up his curacy. I believe he is likely to reside for some time in Dublin to study medicine. Five disciples have united at P to walk together as a Church of Christ. They are labouring men, and I think I never saw the power of divine J66 COLLECTION OF LETTERS teaching more strikingly than in them. Thus, though is about to be removed from P , the standard of the cross will remain there. And surely it ought to be, in anyplace, — not with an individual preacher, but with the body of disciples. And so it will, when the disciples (wherever they are) walk in one body, by one rule (not any rule of man's invention, but those delivered by the apostles to the first churches) — and consequently separate from all who believe not. I pray that you, and all with you, who know the truth, may be kept standing fast in one mind and in one spirit, walk- ing in the ti'uth and holding it forth to the world. My love to all who love the Lord in sincerity. I long to speak with you face to face. Remember me to ■ The Lord be gracious to her, and make his name known to her ! Then she will not let Mr. Fletcher or Mr. Anybody say a word against his truth. Whenever she knows the onlv true Gospel, she will not be afraid to adopt Paul's sentiment. Gal. i. 8. 9. Your tridy affectionate, &c. VIIL TO THE REV. H M . • 1804. My dearM , — Your letter affords me great satisfaction, as it shews a readiness to give a fair and serious discussion to a subject which certainly demands it ; and indicates a particular readiness to act according to the discovery of our Lord's will upon the subject from his word, whatever may be the issue of our discussion. May this mind be continued and encouraged in us throughout our com- munications, and then I do not fear but we shall ultimately agree both in judgment and in practice. As far as / know the spirit which is given me I can say, that it is not a zeal for proselyting to my own opinions that makes me forw^ard to embrace every opportunity of calmly and patiently discussing it with every one that I consider a fellow disciple. No ; I trust it is because I have been led to see our Lord's will plainly marked in his word, and to see also, in some degree, how much his glory is connected with his people's walking according to his will in this particular. But it is only so far as I have reason to think that Others follow the same rule, from a discern- ment of it, and from subjection to its divine anthority — it is only so far that I would feel any satisfaction in their acting as I have acted. Continue fairly to write all your objections, and to say every thing that you think is to be said against my views. But as we both appeal to the Scripture, and I trust heartily desire to be regulated by that rule, let us pray, and let us expect to be brought in the course ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS, IC7 of the di.scu:<.sion to a discernment of what the word cunun:inds, und to a consequent agreement in mind. Your first iirgument for mixed communion. — liut here, to prevent mistakes, let me precisely state what I mean by that mixed com- mui»ion which I hold to be unlawful. I mean outward church fellowship with those who deny any of the essential ])rinciples of the Gospel of Christ, or with those who, confessing it with their mouths, manifest the insincerity of their profesed faith by walking after the flesh in any of its lusts (in either of which cases the Scriptures do not warrant my acknowledging them as brethren), or lastly with those whom I can scripturally acknowledge as brethren, but who will not, after admonition and instruction, walk with a church of Christ according to the rule of his word — or, in short, brethren that " walk disorderly." Except in these cases, the existence of mere professors in a church does not constitute its communion mixed in the sense that I hold unlawful. Other cases belong to the searcher of hearts alone. \ our first argument, then, in favour of mixed communion is drawn from our Lord's parablo of the tares and the wheat growing together in the same field, and not to be separated till the harvest. You truly observe that this parable is exi)lained bv an infallible interpreter; and what does he tell us that the field is ? A Christian church ? nay — " the field is the world." And do I plead for the ministers of divine vengeance prematurely destroying the wicked from the earth ? Nay — then indeed among those who now appear in that character many would be swept away who shall yet be found children of the kingdom. I believe I need say no more to convince one of your candour that this parable, so often applied to the defence of mixed communion, has nothing to do with the subject. Only let me add, that even if it had not been so decisivelv intei"preted in a difi'erent way by our Lord, you might be certain that you mistake its meaning, because on the supposition of your application being just, not only would mixed communion be lawful, but any attempt at separating from a church, the most openly wicked, would be unlawful, and an inspired Apostle would be found expressly commanding a church to violate his Master's command. If our Lord's words, " let both grow together," bear the meaning you have supposed, what should we say of Paul's command — " put away from among yourselves that wicked person ?" ^ our ne.xt argument is borrowed from the visible mixture that confessedly existed in some of the apostolic churches. There were, as you say, in the Corinthian church particularly, very wicked per- sons. Well, but the question is, docs the Apostle countenance your principle that they ought to be retained in the church ? Does he not, on the contrary, solemnly and expressly enjoin the church to remove them ? to purge out the old leaven that they might be a new lump, and not so much as to eat with any man called a brother who was a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner ? nor is it the question whether the Corinthian church did fully act up to the apostolic injunction ; but whether the apostolic injunction did not bind thcni to put away from I6H COLLECTION OF LETTERS among them all such ? When you say that only the incestuous person was cut off from the communion of the rest, I only say that if so, and if others remained among them without repenting of their ungodliness, fornication, &c. (of which the Apostle expresses his apprehension) the Corinthian church did not in such cases comply with the apostolic injunction. But will their disobedience excuse ours ? I cannot lelp observing how graciously it was permitted that such evils should have existed in the apostolic churches. Their existence gave occasion to the instructions and rules of discipline Avhich the Apostles addressed to the churches, and of which we would otherwise have been destitute. And shall we quote the facts, that occasioned these instructions, as a reason for thinking that the instructions need not be observed } Or is the plain meaning to be set aside by a deduction from the svmbolical language of jirobably a prophetic passage in the Apocalypse ? This is your third argument. If it were necessary to bring such passages to the determination of the question, I vvould be much more warranted by the analogy of Scripture to infer that the few names in Sardis who had not defhd theb' garments, had come out from the dead church, and were separated, not touching the unclean thing, especially when I find them absolutely commended; while the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatini, otherwise praised, are sharply reproved for //ci/w^' in them, and for suffering those who held false doctrine. But in truth, however such obscurer parts of sacred writ may be illustrated from the plainer, we cannot safely proceed vice versa ; much less can we safely build on them any doctrine opposed to the plainer. Your fourth argument is taken from the fact, that under tl-.e Jewish law mere professors partook of the ordinarces of circum- cision and the passover. True, for they were all alike Jews, the natural descendants of Abraham ; and to all such, by divine appoint- ment, all these ordinances were to be administered ; and their right to them was altogether unconnected with their character as persons carnal or spiritual. But what inference can you in your sober judgment draw fi'om this ? All Jews, without distinction, partook of Jewish rights, therefore the disciples of Christ may join in Christian ordinances with all men indiscriminately. Will the premises sup- port this inference ? Nay, but an opposite inference may be much more scripturallv deduced from the Jews. They as a nation were typical of the spiritual seed of Abraham; and as the Jews would not and could not lawfully join, in their Jewish rights with those who were not acknowledged by them as Jews, so neither can the true circumcision now join in Christian ordinances with those whom they do not acknowledge as brethren. And here is the thing that marks mixed communion in these ordinances inconsistent with their nature, that those who join together in the ])articipation of them profess in them to have fellowship one with another — profess to be one bread and one body : and can vou, dear M., in faithfulness to your liOrd, or in faithfulness to the souls of voin^ congregation, make this pro- fession concerning those with whom you join. In the fifth place vou return to Jud;;?. You mistake when you say that I have acknovvlcdgcd that .ludas partook vi the supjjcr ; ON S3RIPTIIIAL SL B.irX'TS. Hj.O nav, I l)olieve it can be proved from a comparison of the narrativcs< that he d'ul not. But I shewed that, even admitting- tliat lie did, it wouUl make nothing for mixed communion, as, altliough known to the Lord, he was not (upon this supposition) then known to the other disciples. And what is it you urge against tliis .'' Vou refer to Jno. vi. 70. as ])roving that he was long before ])ointed out bv Christ as a false disciple ; whereas our Lord there only declares that there was a traitor among them : but which of them it was, you know thev remained uncertain till the sop was given. You refer to Mat. xxvi. 14. 16. to shew that Judas had before this covenanted to betrav his master : very true, but was this known to his fellow disciples ? How then should thev appear so completely ignorant of it afterwards .'' and lastly you refer to Luke xxii. 21. to shew that our Jjord pointed him out as a traitor at the time of the ordinance. But do you not know that he was not pointed out as a traitor till he had received the sop, and he then " went immediatehj out ;' so that if you allow this, (for one part of your argument,) to have been before the supper, you are forced to give up vour argument altogether, and to admit that Judas did not partake of the supper. Ah ! indeed you would argue better if vou had a better case. You observe it is in itself a verv striking circumstance that our Lord should have taken Judas into the com- numion of the Apostles. Truly it is : and, among many other pro- fitable inferences, it strikingly marks that in no church on earth, can the mere circumstance of outward church membership be rested in as asceitaining the character. As to the Baptism of infants, which you think inconsistent with the Separation I contend for, no scriptural view of infant baptism will be found inconsistent with it. Supposing that in the apostolic churches the infant children of their members were baptized, yet surely neither the Apostles nor elders of those churches employed themselves in baptizing the infants of those who were not members of those churches : nor as the children of their members grew up would the circumstance of their having been baptized in infancy prevent the enforcement of the rules of a])Ostolic discipline against them — if they denied the faith into which they had been baptized, or walked con- trary to it. Any view of infant baptism that would tend to this is to be opposed as unscriptural. Y^ou seem to question whether Christian communication be intended in 1 Cor. v. 11. But your idea that perhaps private intimacy and familiarity alone are forbidden with such oftenders, Avhile they are to be left in the church, is altogether opposed to the true nature of a Christian church — opposed to that close union as brethren, and sympathy which throughout scripture are represented as subsisting between its members. Now, I readily admit that even private familiarity is forbidden in that place with such persons; but this only mai-ks yet more that excommunication is enjoined ; for it is preposterous to say I will join with a man in the closest Christian fellowship, and will not join with him in the common intercourse of life; I will walk with him as a brother in the church — and stand aloof from him in the world, and not hold with him even such inter- course as I am allowed to hold with heathens. But vou seem more 170 COLLECTION OF LETTERS than once (though reluctantly) to admit that those who are " guilty of obstinate heresy or of gross sin," ought to be excluded from a Chris- tian church ; and you say the Church of England " admits the same." Ah! M., how can you put this cheat on yourself? Christ orders a thing to be done in Christian churches : a nominal church admits or allows it to be done. But does she do it ? or do you, in connexion with her, do it ? or can you, connected with such a body, do it ? I know that some clergymen have absurdly attempted in some instances to keep away certain individual offenders from the sacrament, as it is called, as if that ordinance were the only one in a Church, and as if the individuals thus marked out were a whit worse than the great mass of those who were admitted to it. With respect to heresy, how few are there in this country that do not expressly deny, when you come to speak with them, the most fundamental principles of the Christian faith ? And with respect to gross sin, I suppose drunkenness and fornication may be reckoned so ; and I know there are parts of the North where the communion in the Churches would be thin indeed, if only the known drunkards and fornicators were excluded. You say that an unmixed Church is desirable. I hold it only desirable in the sense which I have already stated, and in which a Church is commanded to be unmixed. I believe it would be very un- desirable, if it were even practicable, that any Church on earth should be so constituted, that aU who belong to it should be known to a cer- tainty to be disciples indeed. There is degree of doubtfulness necessa- rily and profitably attaching itself to the characters of all men on earth. Yet this is not inconsistent with the brotherly confidence that ought to subsist between the members of a Christian church. In this con- fidence also there will be various degrees, according to the various degrees of evidence that we have of the sincerity of the faith of others. But while a Church walks according to the precept of the word, none will be in it but those whom the Scriptures warrant and command to walk together as brethren. Brotherly jealousy may be excited about many of them ; and there we are to admonish, and reprove, and restore, and not let evil surmisings rankle in our minds. O! that you may see the divine glory of a Christian church holding fast the apostolic precepts, exhibiting to the surrounding world the truth of the Gospel and the influence of that truth ! It is not in any national church (so called) that you can see this. It must be in a body of disciples, in some one place, that wiU join together to take the w ord of Christ for their only rule. The substance of your question about Diotrephes I have already answered ; and does not the Apostle more than intimate that when he came, Diotrephes should not remain in that church, in which he usurped such unwarrantable autliority. You will say that this is an extravagantly long letter, and I must not increase its length by adding more, than that I am yours in true affection. ON SCRIPTIIIAL SUBJKCTS. 171 IX. 1805. My Dear T . — Let me now attempt to reply to your letter, and let me add what I had designed to write before I received your letter. To your too strong expressions of what you supposed you have received from me, I can only reply with an assurance that I never conceived myself as conferring any thing on you ; that any kindness I have ever been able to shew has been but the natural ex- pression of that true attachment which I felt, and has been more than repaid by the kindness which you returned. Upon the termination of our mutual intercourse, of which vou speak, I must repeat what I have already observed, that it has not been, and shall not be my act ; and from my heart I deprecate your taking that step : and consider, dear T., one of the many inconsistencies in which you are involving yourself bv following this vague principle of common sense in oppo- sition, I will say, to the word of God. You exclaim at the idea as awful and absurd, that I should think myself called by the word, not to company with one, whom I yet acknowledge as a brother, on account of an error in his judgment concerning scriptural rule ; and at the same time you are about to break off all intercourse with one whom you acknowledge as a brother, for what you think an en'or of his judgment, trying it by the principles of common sense. This is only one of the instances in which, what is called common sense, (taken as our rule in place of Scripture) lands us in conclusions and practices the most inconsistent and irrational. Take another instance of it from yourself. You deny that the persons, about whom that precept in Thess. was given, were to be considered as brethren : vou say that "admonish him as a brother," means only admonishhim with kindness and tenderness — but not as a believing brother — for common sense tells you that an Apostolic church could not be called to withdraw from one whom thev acknowledged as such. Well; consider, I beseech you, if so, what is that difference between him and those mentioned in 1 Cor. v. upon which, in your letter, you ground your different interpretation of the same word. The persons in tlie Cor. call themselves brethren, but shew by their works that they are not. Is not this, according to your position, precisely the character of those mentioned in the Thess. Yet, on the ground of a supposed great difference between the characters mentioned in the two passages, you now rest your opinion that a command expressed about them in precisely the same words is to be interpreted in two different mean- ings. While I am writing, my soul adores the wisdom of God in his word. It may truly bear the motto, " quocunque jeceris stabit :" and when all the wit of man is employed to overturn any part of it, all the wit of man will be only found foolishness. But let me ac- knowledge to you, dearT., that I find it very hard to persuade myself, 172 COLLECTION 01' LETTERS that one, who has that acquaintance, which you have, with the text of the Greek testament, can seriously beheve that, when the Apostle said vu^sTtirt oji a.^i'he mind by the Spirit of God: but all the Scriptures assure iiR- that every man who disbelieves the gospel (or who has not justifying faith) is not under the Spirit of God, but the spirit of delusion — the spirit of Satan, the father of lies. ^ ou say, " Docs not Christ bid ?/*' ask, seek, and knock ?" He docs bid his disciples ask , &c. (see Mat. v. 1, 2.) those whom he instructs to pray saying, " Our Father, which art in heaven :" and they alone either do or can call upon God. Vou plainly intimate, that your unbelieving ])enitent is addressed in these words of Christ; but how shall they call on Ilim in whom they have not believed ? Rom. x. 14. Do not, however, suppose that I wish to restrict, in the smallest degree, the blessed universality of that declaration — " every one that asketh rcceiveth;" — " Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." I only assert, that those who do not believe the divine testimonv of the scriptures, in which that name or character of the onhj true God is revealed, are deniers of his being, and certainly do not come unto Him, however diligent and fervent they may be, and often are, in their approaches to that which thev call God and Avorship. In rejecting, also, and opposing the testimony sent to them from lieaven in the Word, they prove themselves haters of God, and that amidst all their piety and zeal they have not the love of God in them. This is the natm-al mind of every foolish man : and nothing but the sovereign mercy and power of God, accomplishing the pur- poses of his own grace, gives to any another mind by convincing them of the truth as it is in Jesus. He does this in all whom he saves, for salvation belongeth unto him. You ask, "Does God reprobate any to unconditional eternal damnation?" The language in which vou clothe this question is as unscriptural as the ideas con- nected with the inquiry : the word reprobate being never used in scripture in the sense in which you employ it. However, the scrip- tures are express that those who perish in their unbelief have been appointed — ordained unto the condemnation that sluUlfall upon them. 1 Pet. ii. 8. Jude 4. 1 Thes. v. 9. I am well aware of the blas- phemies which they utter against the God who has mercy on whom he wiU have mercy, and hardens (or leaves to their hardness of heart) whom he will : and but for mere mercy, I should now be taking part with their various objections against the word of the Most High. iVll, however, who are of the truth, will join with the apostle's language — " of his oicn icill begat he us w-ith the word of truth." James i. 18. And as " they are born again by the word of God," 1 Pet. i. 2.3, so they are " sanctified by the same truth," John xvii. 17, " and are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation;" 1 Pet. i. 5. kept "giving earnest heed to the things which they have heard, lest at any time they should let them slip." Heb. ii. i. As to the hoHness unto which they have their fruit, no unbeliever can understand its nature ; and, in fact, every scriptural expression the most important (as grace, faith, repentance, holiness, &c.) has been wrested out of its scriptural meaning by the religious of the world, and is employed in their language to denote things as different from their real import as the lies of Satan are different from the truth of God : so that the very fountain of divine 292 COLLECTION OF LETTERS truth is corrupted by the cunning craftiness of men who pervert the scriptures to their own destrviction and that of others. Let me conclude with one example of this. The expression, the grace of God, in scrijtture, imports his wonderful mercy and loving kindness in bestowing eternal life in Christ Jesus on the most undeserving and evil; (see 2 Cor. viii. 9. Rom. iv. 4. xi. 6.) and this his grace, ■which bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men in the universal promulgation of the gospel which repoi-ts it, sent not (as the law of Moses) to one nation only, but to every nation indiscriminately. This his grace or sovereign mercy, effectually teaches those who believe the testimony of it to deny ungodliness, &c. Tit. ii. 11, 13. But in what sense is that text continually quoted and applied in your connexion ? By the grace of God you mean a certain mystic in- fluence on the minds of men unconnected with the revealed truth of God ; and by its appearing unto all men, you mean that every man in the world has what you call common grace — a certain portion of this supposed divine influence — upon the stock of which he is set up in what you term a salvable state, and by impro\dng which he is to win his actual salvation. Indeed, sir, the works of Paine and Voltaire are not a more efi'ectual instrument for Satan's destructive purposes than the Bible thus misinterpreted. Yoiirs, &c. LXII. TO J. H , ESQ. May, 1819. ****** -Qyj^ the facilities of communication afforded by my present situation have determined me to break silence without further delay ; and, as far as I can promise any thing for myself, I promise that, if you kindly restore me to your correspondence, I shall not transgress again in like manner. And now, my dear sir, dismissing that ungrateful subject, let me turn to what is more interesting to us both. In the retrospect of our course since we last communicated, and in the view of our present standing, I trust we are both kept discerning but one glorious object — the glory of God the Saviour — of that sovereign boundless mercy that reigns through righteousness by Christ Jesus to the salvation and blessedness of the ungodly and the lost. I well remember the pleasing unity of mind that appeared between us on this grand point, and earnestly look for the confirmation of that appearance in all our further communica- tions. " The Lord is good; his mercy is everlasting, and his truth endureth to all generations ;" — this is all that we can boast of to the end — all that we shall celebrate in heaven. But this indeed — discerned in the light in which it is revealed — is enough — enough to ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 293 support the joy and glorying of creatures whose own character, and the character of all which proceeds from themselves, is that of un- mixed and invariahle evil. lUit the doctrine in which the only time God reveals his distinguishing glory is so sacred, that though I har- bour no suspicion of disagreement with you there, yet I think it bet- ter to mark distinctly where I conceive the system of doctrine among the Glasites (with whom you were formerly connected) departs fi-om the truth. Have you ever attended to Sandeman's language in some parts of his second vokune, where he is justly ojiposing the real Antinomianism of the ])opular Calvinist, and is stating how a sinner arrives at what he c;ills the assurance of hope ? I do conceive that the unguardedness (to say the least) of his expressions, has given countenance to the idea so congenial to our flcshlv minds, that assured hope towards God is derived from the view of something else than that which gives a sinner his first good hope ; derived from the sinner's observing in himself evidences of the genuineness of his faith — and thence concluding, something like the appropriation, that Christ died /or him. I have not Sandeman's work before me, and therefore cannot quote ; hut you will probably recollect' the passages to which I allude. Whether this were at bottom his idea, I think it not worth while to inquire. But against the sentiment and svstem we protest, as tending to the subversion of that very truth of the gospel, for which Sandeman elsewhere seems to contend so blessedly. I do not wonder that any disciples infected with the idea, should go on through life without that assured hope and full confi- dence toward God, which the gospel itself is at all times calculated and sufficient to aftbrd to a sinner ; nor that they should look with the utmost jealousy at any appearance of that fuU confidence in others. While they conceive it derived from the contemplation of our own faith, they must naturally conceive that the believer who manifests the enjoyment of it, thinks very well of his own fruits and evidences for heaven ; that he is pufted up with a vain self-import- ance in his attainments. But I believe this is commonly accom- panied with a view of their own doubts and fears as arguing due humility ; and though the system is designed by those who main- tain it, to guard the gospel against the fleshly perversion of it, and enforce attention to its genuine fruits, yet I am satisfied that its genuine fniits cannot be produced in that way ; that they are inse- parably connected with tlie clear perception and full persuasion of the divine truth, and that so far as any sinner at any time has this before his view (which is no farther than the report of the truth brings it to his view), he will have boldness to draw nigh unto the holiest, crying Abba Father, and will walk in neA;\Tiess of mind — in the fear of the Lord and the comfort of the Holy Ghost. This is the assurance of good hope which he is called to give diligence to main- tain to the end, giving diligent heed to the things that he has learned of the divine glor}'. In the continued propensity of my flesh to let them slip, I see its continued ungodliness and opposition to the true God ; while at all times that my eye is opened to his revealed glory, I see what is sufficient to aftbrd the fullest rejoicing of hope to a creature so totally and invariably ungodly ; and if at any time. 294 COLLECTION OF LETTERS instead of rejoicing and glorying in his holy name, I be without the pre- sent answer of a good conscience toward God, doubting whether I be a real believer or not, whether I have the faith of God's elect, it is but a symptom that my eye is darkened to that glorious object which is cer- tainly revealed, and turned aside to behold vanity, to look for some- thing good in myself under the name of faith ; and though I might in this mind be excited to a kind of great strictness and circumspection, and talk a most true and self-abasing language about the only hope of a sinner, yet I should be really compassing myself about with sparks, and vainly trying to supply the good hope that is lacking in my conscience, by something essentially different from it, though dressed in its name. I confess I despair of making my meaning known, except to the few who are walking in the truth. Others will suspect me of meaning something like those who profanely assert, that a man may enjoy the confidence that he is a child of God, while he is walking most palpably after the flesh and its grossest lusts. But I am satisfied that the doubting Glasite, and the presump- tuously confident Berean, though apparently so opposed in their sys- tems, proceed on a common error ; the idea that personal confidence towards God is to be derived from the contemplation of our faith. I trust, my dear sir, that we shall understand one another here in this indeed fundamental point, and that there will be found that unity of mind between us, which the one Teacher of the one thing needful produces. The pieces sent you along with this letter will shew you something of our course : most of them consist of short tracts which we circulate largely among our fellow- sinners — all upon one subject. Of the largest publication (the Letters on Primitive Christianity), I own I am anxious for your attentive perusal and serious consideration. You will see by it that, some tim.e after the receipt of your last, the Lord brought us to repentance on the salutation with an holy kiss. About one-third of the former body, both in town and country, left us on that occasion, and have since afforded too much evidence, by increasing laxity on other matters also, that they were not of us. When you wrote, I think you lay under a misconception of our views about what is called foi'bearance. Ever since our union, we rejected the ungodly toleration of evil which goes under that name. But you will see our more mature sentiments on that subject in one of the letters. ON SCllirTlIlAL SUjyECTS, 295 LXlll. TO THE CHURCH IN C . 1819. The church assembling in D , to the church of Christ assembling in C « : Grace, mercy, and peace be multiplied. We are called to thankfulness, beloved brethren, for our attention having been directed to the important subject treated of in your letter ; and, we trust, duly appreciate the tenderness and fidelity, which that communication has manifested on your part towards your brethren in the Lord. We have to confess the evil of that careless tolerance, wherewith we have hitherto allowed our marriages to be solemnized by religious ministers, and according to religious rites. Our conduct rested upon the supposed ground — that, in each instance of tlie kind which occun-ed, the disciple concerned made avowal to the clergyman of the one pui-pose for which they appeared before him — that of having a marriage contract legalized — apart from any of those religious services in which the minister, or his church, might please to involve the transaction : it being also taken for granted, that the avowal was made with sufficient distinctness, and accompanied with such consistency of posture and deportment as deprived the act of that ungodly character of participation in the religion of this world ; which, without such an avowal, must unquestionably have been attached to it. But further, brethren, we are bound to confess the indifference of spirit, with which we suffered cases of the kind, one after another, to pass before us ; as if taking no thought whether the parties maintained their fidelity to our common Lord : so that, while we could not but recognize an appearance of evil already alluded to, we sat at ungodly ease as to the question, whether our brethren were not immersed in all the depth of its reality. Tlie continuance of this course amongst us was also closely connected with the idea, that the laws of the land absolutely required the service of a religious teacher, in order to the marriage engagement being substantiated : — an idea well calculated to deter us from inves- tigating minutely the scriptural lawfulness of our submission. But we have ascertained, brethren, upon authority not to be doubted, that our marriages can be legally ratified in Scotland, without the inter- ference of any religious officer, or the appendage of any religious ceremony. Now — should we not be led, in this discovery, to acknowledge a merciful dispensation of divine providence ! not only as affording obvious relief to the individuals who may be immediately concerned, and as removing a snare from their path ; but as deliver- ing the Christian body from the necessity of bringing into public discussion (an employment, in most instances, unscriptural, and in all painfid) the question of the possibility, under some rare circum- 296 C0LLE,CT10x\ OF LETTERS stances, of a marriage being so conducted by a clergyman, as that submission to it should not be considered as absolutely at variance with Christian duty. Brethren, we feel ourselves called upon to rejoice ; and we trust that you are prepared to partake in our feelings, that the necessity of discussing such a question — a question of remotely possible lawfulness — is thus superseded. And we exhort you, hencefoi ward, to take, with us, the plain and unambiguous course, which a knowledge of the above fact opens to us in all such cases. LXIV. Jan. 9, 1820. My very deau Friend, — Your letter was, as usual, very accep-- table and refreshing to me. It is refreshing to hear from any one a decisive language, accordant with the great truth. It does not appear to me at all extraordinanj that you should feel little desire for a more extended fellowship. My flesh would be very glad to pick out about a dozen pets of fellow disciples, and shut myself up with them in a snug corner. But when the new mind remembers Him who pleased not himself, we shall rejoice in every new display of his victorious mercy in our fellow sinners, though, as our connexions with them multiply, assuredly our trials will inultiply likewise. But the period of our trials is very short, and passing fast. Those who have in prospect to be for ever with the Lord, may well endure hardship for a few days. One of the greatest trials I have had in my course, has been connected with the calling of my brethren's attention to that precept on which you and I yet differ. To give up swearing myself, at whatever loss, would have been nothing in comparison of being instrumental in leading others most dear to me to incur the loss of all their livelihood. With you, at present, I do not desire to say much on the subject. I do not think you have looked it in the face : for if you had, how could you talk of its merely prohibiting profane swearing in common conversation ? "Neithershalt thou swear by thine head, /or thou canst not make one hair white or black." I suppose this is true only when we swear lightly, and irreverently, by our head. J. H (though he talks plenty of wicked nonsense upon the subject) is perfectly right in referring to Numb. XXX. 2. for the illustration of it. The Jews were there taught, tlia*- when a man swore an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he was not to break his word. The Lord Jesus teaches his disciples, that they are not to bind their soul w-itha bond at all, by swearing any oath. What that awful bond is, under the forfeiture of which men are now understood to bind their souls in swearinc:, mav be collected, (if w^c \ ON SCIUriUllAL SUBJECTS. 297 choose to look at it) even from the published speech of the Attorney Ccncnil, at tlie opening of Carlilc's trial ; where, rcfcrrino^ to the oaths of the Jury he speaks of their having " pledged their hope of vternal life, arising from Christianity, for the truth of their verdict." Let me onlv add, that if any choose to call it an oath, if I answer under an adjuration by the living God, I shall not fight about words. I am as certain as !Mr. II., that this is not the thing forbidden^in the text; and have not the least scruple about its lawfulness. Enough of this subject, to which I do not think I shall return till vou invite me. What ailed you, when you penned that sentence, in which vou talk of Satan's empire promising " to be completely and universally established ?" Were you forgetting on wliose shoulder the govern- ment is : Satan, and all that is in the world, and all that is in the Hesh of disciples themselves, have formed in all ages one league against the truth of God. But the kingdom is the Lord's, and his arrows are shar]) in the hearts of his enemies ; and his word sliall stand good, which declares that one generation shall declare his Avorks to another; which says to the church — " instead of thy fathers shall be thy children ;" " shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb, &c. ?" There never would have been a seed to serve him in this w^orld of sinners, but that he can raise up children unto Abraham from the very stones : and when the last of his elect are gathered in, the stage of this w^orld shall be taken down. I have given ^Ir. H.'s Strictures one hasty reading since I received your letter, and found, as you suspected, much need to look up. j\Iv proud flesh was continually prompting the thought — " I will give this man a good trimming." Surely he cannot, in one sense. sav worse of my spirit than it deserves. There was one, and but one, who could say of himself, " I seek not mine own glory." " He that speaketh from himself, seeketh his ow'n glory : but He that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him." The mind of faith in his people, is the mind of Christ ; and truly in tliis and every thing, it is op- l)osite to their own. I think I shall shortly re))ly to I\Ir. H. on the subject of the truth. I do think his pamphlet very weak and very wicked, but a masterly production for the purpose for which it is designed, of raising a clamour against the truth and making his peace with the religious world. Surely Mr. H. must sorely repent liaving published ray letters to Knox : for in them many of the principles, which he now holds up to the execration of his readers, are explicitly asserted. I think he has quite receded from the pro- fession he made when I first knew him. What does he mean by the marked separation with which he charges us ? If I mistake not, there is more marked separation in his Tabernacle, than in S- His dexterity I admire, in raising a dust about other questions, and escaping from tliem under cover of it. However, he will assiu"edly have the best of all the argument in the eyes of those for whom he writes. I am quite like you, in being better pleased to receive ten letters, than to write one. So that, from my punctuality in rei)lying, you may judge that I wish to hear from you. That I mav make this letter worth the postage, let me just add — compare Levit. i 298 COLLECTION OF LETTERS xvi. 16, 19. with Haggai ii. 10 — 14. and Hebr. x. What a view does it present of our own uncleanness, of the holiness of the Lord, and of the greatness of that atonement by which we have access unto God. The Lord increase in us the good hope, which this revelation of his name affords to the chief of sinners ! If you take these for the texts of your next letter, you will be at no loss for a subject. LXV. TO THE SAME. March 1, 1820. My very dear Friend, — I see a month has elapsed since I received your last welcome letter, and that is too long an interval. I have just finished a long letter to D K , and four of his associates, who sent me, some time ago, a strange kind of epistle in reply to my former. Theirs is rather abusive, and filled with the most ridiculous cavils, but betraying a mind and sentiments much aside from the truth. I shall be glad of your calling on him shortly, to ascertain whether he has received it, and how he meets it. Unless it please the Lord to bless it to them, I dare say it will increase the irritation they manifest, at my moving any question about the sound- ness of their profession. But till they shut the door to further com- munication, I am unwilling to drop them altogether, they verbally acknowledge so much important truth. Well does it become such as us to be "patient towards all men." See if they will communicate to you both the letters, theirs and mine. Tliey make, or pretend to make, the strangest mistakes about my meaning. Explain it patiently, as long as they will let you. As to my intended reply to Mr. Haldane, I have not yet commenced it, and it is uncei'tain when I may. It is, indeed, a nice and solemn thing to publish anything on the subject. So you have been preaching ; and you are half sorry for it, and doubting whether you should have done so. It reminds me of a question, which you put to me in one of your first letters, which, I believe, in the press of more important matter, I never answered. I can enter fully into all vour feelings on this matter. A disciple, sickened by the religious world, seeing the mass of iniquity that goes on under their so-called preachings, and that is mainly promoted by them, is very apt to turn with disgust from every thing that passes under the same name. But we are always ready, in running from one evil, to bolt right ahead upon another. Now let us consider — (putting out of our thoughts the sentiments, both of tlie Glasites, and of the popular religionists) — on what scriptural ground a Christian could be warranted in declining to tell his fellow -sinners, when they are willing to hear him — cither in public or in' private, according to his abilities and opportunities — what he has learned ON SCRirXURAL SLBJECTS. 299 from the word of God. Sliall he decline it because they have Moses, and tlie prophets, and tlie Apostles, authoritatively declarinf>- to them, at all times, the thint^s of God in the words of God; and because we, so far as we speak aright, can never speak but the same things which they testify ? Specious as this may appear to some, yet, legitimately followed up, it would bind disciples in never opening their mouths on the truth, either among tliemselves or others, but in the very words of Scripture. And I have heard of a little party in vour country (I know not whether now existing) who did go this length, and confined themselves in their own meetings to the reading of the ]iible. But, in fact, there is absolute scepticism as to what is truth at the bottom of this, under the show of exclusive reverence for the words of the most High. If I see and am convinced of the divine truth, in any of the numberless passages of Scripture which have been awfully perverted by the cunning craftiness of men, (for instance in Hebr. xi. 6.) shall I be afraid, either by writing or speaking, of protesting against their ungodly perversions, and asserting its true import in any words the most intelligible, and best calculated to convey my meaning } Is it in the mere articulate sounds of the words of Scripture — as words — that any charm or importance lies ? and not rather in the glorious things meant and intended bv those words ? I am aware of what some may say — " O ! then the vain man thinks his own words better than those of the Holy Ghost." Let that be followed up ; and it is in Greek and Hebrew the Scriptures must alone be read to men. But, as I said, the objection, under a show of reverence for the ivords, despises and questions the things of God, But, perhaps, your doubts and difficulties on the suljject have arisen rather from your consciousness of the workings of your own vain and deceitful flesh in preaching. Shall I, then, decline speaking to my fellow-sinners on the great salvation, because my own heai't would, at any time, make an ostentatious display of my zeal or eloquence, or my knowledge, and sacrifice to its own drag, at the very time that it pretended to be setting forth the glory of the Lord .'' If this were a good reason, I might well never open my lips : and I confess, that long as I have been what is called preaching — (I hate the name if I could obtain another) — I have uniformly foimd it, on this account, the most trying engagement that I can attempt, and have peculiar cause ta sav, before engaging in it, and during and after the engagement — God be merciful to me a sinner ; — while I scruple not also to avow (what would stamp my character with a Glasite) that many is the watering I get in watering others. But to drop myself — a bad subject every way — are you at any loss to see the rankness of pride and unbelief concealed under that humble objection to a disciple's speaking to his fellow-sinners upon the one thing needful ? Of course, I suppose, in any other matters in which he does venture to engage, cither alone or with others, he is free from dangers from his own heart. Away with the thought ! Shall I then lastly decline it, because some persons conclude, when they hear of my preaching, that I am led to it by the religious flesh, and am saying — " come sec my zeal for the Lord." I am sure they cannot suspect too ill of me: 300 COLLECTION OF LETTERS but what hypocrisy and seeking to please men would there be, in my accommodating my conduct to their views ? I consider my preaching but as talking to a greater number at once. Many are offended at my being engaged in it so little, and others at my being engaged in it at all. What have I to do with the opinion of either party ? I confess I hold the preaching opportunities very cheap in comparison of conversation ; and I have often endeavoured to combine the two ; as I find a quarter of an hour's conversation generally conveys my meaning more than twenty sermons. But many will hear me preach, who Vv'ill not converse. When I say many, observe that my audience at 3 o'clock on Sundays- when I speak, seldom exceeds a score, and is often smaller. You treated me better in Scotland, but I fancy it was because vou did not understand me . I am half vexed at having filled my sheet with this sub - ject : yet having entered on it at all, I was anxious to guard you against what I think a snare in the Glasite views. There may be a great deal of hypocrisy in our trying to avoid the appearance of hypocrisy. I shall be glad to hear of your being much engaged in talking to your neighbours, as long as you tell them the truth : while I am- sure that you will talk to them in the mind of the truth, only so far as the mercy and power of God keeps you in the perception of its glory. When we lose sight of that, it is little matter whether we talk or be silent. Be strong, dear friend, in the Lord ; and care not whether others think you carnally strong; — " Remember that Jesus Christ has been raised from the dead:" what more do we want, at any time, to bring us into the presence of the living God, crying Abba ! Father ! It will be a fight to the last, especially against our wicked hearts, bent to depart from Him, in departing from this truth. But the time is short : Salvation belongeth unto Him : and He in- creaseth strength to those who have no might. We talk of our weak- ness, as if we had some little — though too little strength. — But re- member our character — no might. Remember His — the mighty God — the God of Jacob. Write often. I like to hear from you. LXVI. TO THE SAME. May 1,1820, My very dear Friend, — I am ashamed of having so long de- layed answering your last ; and that which I now write must be rather a note than a letter. I am about leaving town to-morrow morning for Dublin, and shall probably be absent for nearly six months. The uncertainty of my plans till within these few days partly caused my silence ; but along with that, the circumstance of my being deeply engaged and fully occupied with a reply to Mr. Haldane. I have now nearly finished the rough draft, but in traa^ ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. HOI scribing sli;ill have carefully to prune away every thing that might irritate him needlessly — such as a remark that he has much more marked separation in his tabernacle than we have in any of our churches — the evidence that he has formerly seemed to countenance, by republishing my letters to Knox, many of the principles which he now most keenlv opposes, &c. Yet my reply will abundantly confirm liis abhorrence of my spirit and mv sentiments, unless the God of all mercy open his eyes. The chief point I enlarge upon is the same- ness of character in the hearts of believers and unbelievers — of man in all circumstances. xVnd I find increased reason for thankfulness, for having had the occasion to take up my pen again ; though I am sure that the more clearly my meaning is developed, the more it will excite a general feeling in aU religious parties — " away with such fellows from the earth." Dr. M set off for Ireland last Saturday. He was disappointed with you on one point ; and though I say little on it, I am much pained. I do not wonder at your discerning the indisposition in your own heart to look the subject in the face. If you gave a dif- ferent account of yourself, I should not believe you. I3ut when I see a professed disciple of the Lord walking after his own heart, in shrinking from the close consideration of a divine precept to which his attention has been called, I sigh and wonder just in proportion to the apparent clearness of his professed views of the truth. I do not at all wish you to lose sight of the wickedness of our interpreta- tion of the precept, if it be wrong, nor of the carnal bias which you justly observe might prompt to it, even if it be right. But, my friend, if you see the glory of the only true God, and have life in His name, take that part of his divine word and consider ivhnt it means. It has some one definite import ; look steadily what it is ; and do not longer turn away your eye from it, contented to vibrate between various fancied interpretations, in no one of which you settle. If you once settle in an interpretation of it different from ours, in the love and fear of the Lord set about reproving and cor- recting us. If you should be convinced with us that the thing allowed under the law of Moses, but forbidden under the gospel, is — the swearing of any oath to bind our soul icith a bond, with respect to what we shall say or do ; but remain of opinion that the oaths admi- nistered in your country are not of such a nature, avow this : and then we shall know the ground of disagreement between us, and it will be narrowed for subsequent examination. At present, I do not know where to meet you ; and I do not think I shall mention the subject again till you say in what sense you understand those words of the Lord — " Swear not at all." I have written more than I thought I should have been able. Farewell, dear Friend. 302 COLLECTION OF LETTERS LXVII. TO MESSRS. D. K , &C. March 1, 1820. Dear Sirs, — I have had some doubt whether I ought to make any reply to your letter, from some of the characters which it bears. But I have had so much satisfaction lately in reading some pieces of Mr. Barclay which I had not before seen, and such increased confi- dence that he contended earnestly for the truth, and was a happy partaker of its blessedness, that I am unwilling hastily to drop the correspondence of those who profess agreement with him in senti- ment. However, while I continue to write I must continue to write with plainness. That there may be no needless misapprehension of meaning between us, let me distinctly mark, that the man who prays, " God be propitiated to me, a sinner" — in the sense which you choose to affix to the words — conceiving that God is yet to be propitiated through the sinner's " pitiful approaches" — or through any thing else, is decidedly an unbeliever. But I must say, that this sense is so plainly opposed throughout the tract on which you endeavour to animadvert, that your opposition to it might seem to indicate more disposition to cavil than jealousy for the truth. How- ever, to avoid as much as possible all ambiguity of language in any future edition of the tract, I shall expressly protest against your construction of the words, and substitute such a paraphrase as this — be propitious to, or deal mercifully with me, a sinner — i. e. ac- cording to that mercy which thou hast revealed as belonging to thee, flowing to the chief of sinners through that propitiation for sin which thou hast provided and hast accepted. (See vol. 1,543.) Such was the publican's prayer, and such will be the prayer of every believer to the end of the world. You think that he is described as an unbeliever, offering therefore the sacrifice of a fool; and yet in a more hopeful state, " more accessible to the words of truth than the proud pharisee." Here is, indeed, a fundamental difference of sentiment manifested between us. I shall come by and by to the perverted scripture by which you support your sentiment. But at present let the con- trasted opinions be brought distinctly under view. You plainly intimate either that a profligate unbeliever, or that one who has very lately been a profligate unbeliever, but is now becoming piously, but unbelievingly, exercised and solicitous about obtaining what he calls mercy, is more accessible to the words of truth, is in a more hopeful way — and, as you say, more to be justified — than the man who has long been a strict religious unbeliever. I say they are both alike dead in sin, without God in the world ; and that none but he who quickeneth the dead, and calleth things that are not as though they were, and to whom nothing is hard, can give his truth entrance into the minds of either. But you refer to the Lord's words in Mat. xxi. 31, as containing your sentiment, very much as Mr. Haldane under- ON SCUIPTUHAL SUDJECTS. 303 stands the publicans to have been a much better disposed kind of sinners than the Pharisees. In these words, the Lord states a fact iUustrating the divine sovereignty, and the character of liis kingdom ; and well calculated to beat down the pretensions of those whom he addressed — the fact, that He who hath mercy on whom he will have niercv, and hardeneth whom he will, called into his kingdom many of those who were thought the most worthless, while he left to their hardness and impenitent heart those who thought themselves most worthy. But does this warrant the inference that the former Avere " more accessible to the words of truth" than the latter? I should be glad to find you manifesting something of the character of the ingenuous believing Bcrean, in abandoning the sentiment unequivo- cally. After endeavouring to fasten on me the charge of vieioing God as yet vnpropitiated, and putting some icork for the purpose into the sinner's hand, vou go on to charge me with having used the word oj^er in p. I G. of the letters, " instead of declare, as it ought to be." (See vol. 1 . 363.) When I first read this, I wondered, if I could inadvertently have cniploved any language which could, by any ingenuity of misinterpre- tation, be conceived to countenance the popular idea of the gospel as an offer of mercv, &c., an idea against which I have long publicly and privately protested as inconsistent with the truth ; and indeed I was somewhat amused as well as surprised on reverting to the passage of my letters to which you refer as involving that sentiment. Why, sirs, any person acquainted with plain Enghsh may see, (if they will) that the passage has no more to do with that sentiment than any other line of the work you could have quoted at random. When I there speak of persons yielding a verbal assent to "what I offer," the expression is plainly equivalent with the words, " what I lay before them ;" as we talk of offej-ing remarks — offering obsei-vations, &c. And this is so obvious, that I really should be ashamed to vin- dicate myself against your criticism, or to notice it all, but that it plainly stands connected with another eiTor in your minds. You conceive of me, or of some men now on eai-th, as offcially declaring the gospel : and accordingly you conclude with a hope of my being " made more abundantly an able minister of the new covenant." 1 own not any man in that office but the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ. They declare to us and to all the world his gospel officially, as commissioned by him for the purpose. I am glad of any oppor- tunitv of telling my fellow sinners, either in private or public, either orally or bv writing, what I have learned from the apostolic word ; and calling their attention to the divine truth declared by the Apos- tles. But indeed I am as far from assuming to myself, or from ad- mitting in others, any qffce of declaring what the gospel is, — almost as far as from making what diA-ines have called a gospel offer, in their presumptuous claims to the rank of negotiators between God and man. From a short passage in one of Mr. Barclay's pieces which I latelv read, I think he would have joined me in protesting against that clerical leaven, with the influence of which I fear you are infected. In what follows of your letter there is a great deal so like railing, that I should decline replying to it, even if I had room and time. I 304 COLLECTION OF LETTERS shall therefore confine mvself in the remainder of this letter to some general remarks, which I shall be glad to find you receive with more patience and candour than you have my former. In my last I really meant not to bring any accusation against you. I know but little of you, and I aimed at coming to a fuller knowledge of your mind. I made inquiries and offered remarks. I candidly expressed the hopes and the fears which I felt about your profession. I now acknow- ledge that your reply makes me stand much more in doubt of you, and for this among various other reasons : you evidently seem piqued and hurt at my having made any question about your soundness in the faith ; really, I look upon this as a very black mark. The man who comes to me avowing his doubts whether I believe the truth, says nothing at all calculated to disturb or offend me while I am in my right mind : he gives me an opportunity, always pleasing, of put- ting forward that truth which I believe, and which I am sure he can never shake or overturn. If he attacks it, is it me he attacks ? If he sift my meaning at aU points, and be not satisfied with the sound- ness of my profession, without proposing ever so many forms of false- hood to see whether I reject them, is that oflfiensive to me .'' No, verily. And if he add ever so many cautions against the deceivableness of unrighteousness, and the deceitfulness of my own heart, he speaks the language rather of a friend than of an enemy, in reminding me of dangers of which I would never (in one sense) lose the fear, while in the revealed salvation of God I see a sufficient shelter from them aU. But I have long found that professors who have fallen into that snare, m.y mention of which you think so strange, of substituting a confident persuasion about their having faith, or their being among the number of the elect, for the gospel, are offended and irritated when any disciple calls this their gospel in question ; and I do not wonder at it. It is a thing no where testified in the word of God. The ground is hollow on which they build, and they are up in arms lest the building should tumble about their ears. The confidence of such a professor has for its basis the principle, " I am a believer, and therefore there is no fear of me." The confidence of the believer rests on that immoveable truth, God is, that God which the word from heaven reveals him to be. I put to you a question, the very propo- sal of which seems to have displeased you much ; and I cannot but observe that, while you mvdtiply words about it as if to shew that it was unnecessary, you have not throughout your letter answered it. It was whether you conceived that any man can believe the written testimony of God concerning his son Jesus at any tiine without the Holy Ghost. Mark, I say written testimony — which does not con- tain one word about Duncan King or John Walker specially. In- stead of answering this distinctly and cheerfully, you tell me what every Calvinist (of the most corrupt form of popular profession) would tell me, that it is God alone who calls, enlightens, manifests, or begets again, &;c. O, very true ! — though we may be qujte disagreed as to the inquiry who are the called, enlightened, begotten, &c. But besides your appearing thus to shy a very plain and simple question, I observe afterwards a language which increases the ne- cessity for pushing it — " Were they sanctified through the truth. ON SCRU'TUKAI. SUIJJECTS. 30.') mani/'e^lhig their sins forgiven, as ^lary was who believed lu hiin whu was the propitiation for the sins of many ?" This langunf^e at least looks vcrv like that popular doctrine of appropriation which Sandc- nian well exposes, while he afterwards sadly and awfidly beclouds the subject by reprcscntnig the gospel itself insufhcient to afford the chief of sinners the fullest personal confidence towards God. The appropriators and he agree in that ; as the most apparently opposed errors often meet. The scheme of which Sandemaii talks at times, would supplv the supposed insutRciency of the revealed testimony of God, by sending the sinner to pore over hiniself for some good evi- dences to buttress up his hope — and the appropriators would supply it by sending him to look for some supplementary revelation of a thing, not contained in the divine testimony — that Christ had died for iiiM — his confident persuasion about which they call justifying faith. — You talk of the truth which ^lary believed as manifeslinfj her sins forcjiven. Sirs, that truth manifests the Saviour of sinners : and thev who know his name will put their trust in him. He and He alone, in that revealed work and character in which the word testifies of Him, is that fulness of Jehovah's house with which his ])eople shall be satisfied, and in which He calls the sinful and the evil, the wicked and unrighteous, to delight their soils continually. Isa. Iv. Ps. x.xxvi. Our hearts are continually like a deceitful bow, bent to backsliding from him, and to go a whoring after our own inventions. But He will keep the feet of his saints abiding in the wav of peace, will keep them holding fast that hope, which the pub- lican and the harlot and thepharisee need only to see, in order to be happy partakers of it. This is that work of faith which He fulfils : Avhile indeed the heart of man, left to its workings at any time, is abundantly competent to keep a sinner feeding on ashes, in a high evangelical profession, at the bottom of which is a confident persua- sion " that he has been ordained to eternal life." — Such professors will be verv apt to object to me as some do — " you are always afraid of yourself," and will think themselves very strong in faitk because they are not afraid of themselves ; and will be unable to see the con- sistency of a perpetual fear of myself with perpetual peace. But in truth there is a fear which is very different from being fearful, as there is a confidence very different from the assurance of faith. Another ungodly symptom that I am sorry to observe in you, is your inability to discriminate between things the most essentially distinct, your confounding some of the plainest truths of scripture with the grossest falsehoods. For instance, you think that my asser- tion of the continued ungodliness of the flesh (or of his own heart) in the believer, is equivalent with an assertion that the believer is carnally minded ; and your views on this important topic appear to be just the same with Mr. Haldane's and those of all the religious world. My assertion that unbelieving men cannot suitably be addressed with any of the precepts or exhortations directed to disci- ples (or as you choose to express it, " are unprepared for them") you confound with the systems which hold a progressive preparation in the sinner for the gospel, and a preparation which is to be forwarded bv human exertion. But I must add on this head, that if I could VOL. II. X 306 COLLECTION OF LETTERS detect no error in your professed sentiments, I should view as a black mark on your profession, the contempt with which you treat the revealed will of the Lord concerning the walk of his people. Attention to that revelation, you set aside, as " breaking our teeth upon shells," while you set in opposition to it your fancied persua- sion of the truth, as " enjoying the kernel." Any supposed enjoy- ment of the truth that is set in such opposition, I must consider but a fancied enjoyment : and I suspect that, if you spoke out, you could point to passages in the tract No. iii. which you dislike as much as any thing else in my writings. You say that " I do not see eye to eye with you on that subject." There is much truth in the old vulgar saying, that none are so blind as those who do not choose to see. I suspect you are forced to see more than you choose, on the discrepancy between the course of your sects, and the divinely ordered course of the first (disciples) — the first christian churches. That discrepancy happens to be too clearly marked in my letters : (see Vol. 1. 370.) and I dare say your minister has a decided objection to its removal. Choose then what you will hear. — But till you manifest an ear for the word of the Lord, notwithstanding all the high ground you take, your professed knowledge of Christ and rejoicing in him, I must suspect that a deceived heart has turned you aside, and that there is a lie in your right hand. But believe me it will give me great joy to have my suspicions scripturally removed. Remaining, dear sirs, your real well wisher. LXVIIL TO MRS. L. S. G- . April 18, 1820. Dear Madam, — T am not quite sure that I may not presume too much in addressing a written communication to you : but I am quite sure that, even if I do, your kindness will forgive me, from a consideration of the motive; and that your professed views of scrip- tural truth will plead for my writing with all plainness, jvhen I write at all. I have not seen any of my brother C 's communications to you, but I have seen with much pain yours to him : your short note of yesterday looks too much like a finale, occasioned by the tenor of his last to you. Perhaps from his natural quickness he may have employed a language somewhat too summary ; though, from our perfect unity of mind, I cannot suppose that he has expressed any sentiment in which I do not fully concur. The truth of the gospel of the glory of God, as the divine testimony concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, his person, work, and office, is a sacred and in- ON SCJUl'lUKAL SUBJECTS. -"^f'' violablc truth, not admitting any change or alteration. It is one, woven from tlic top througliout without seam ; and any attempt to rend it, anv avowed rejection of any ])art of the testimony, whether in the form of taking from it or adding to it, must be regarded with al)horrence bv the behever standing in the truth, as a profanation of the hohness of the Lord. Even the profession of subjection to it for ourselves (as some speak) in its uncorrupted integrity, but accom- panied with the false charity /o?- others, which would admit them to be right enough, though they hold some other doctrine under the name of gospel than that which we profess, is utterly inconsistent with the real discernment of the truth. How far your notions of the gospel come at present under either of those cases, I really pretend not to pronounce ; but I must unequivocally pronounce, that the sentiment you have adopted concerning the laws of Christ's house, (that subject on which I perceive my brother has forborn to enter) is altogether irreconcileable with the real nature of his kingdom. It is very little I am about to say upon the subject : you seem to require some text of Scripture expressly informing us, that the precepts issued from the King of Zion througli his apostles to his disciples, and recorded in the scriptures of the New Testament, are of binding authority on his disciples at this day : and vou will jjcrhaps be con- firmed in the sentiment which rejects them, when I tell you at once that I can refer to no such express declaration as you require. But may I not more suitably require from vou the divine revelation wiiich has repealed them? Is not the ungodliness of your sentiment sufficiently mai'ked to a believer bv all the scriptures, which do expressly describe the Messiah's kingdom as one " which cannot be moved ;" of which " not one of the stakes shall ever be removed, neither shall any of the cords thereof be broken." Is. xxxiii. 20. Heb. xii. 28. And observe, dear madam, as in the last quoted pas- sage, that this is one of the characters by which it is expressly con- trusted with the Mosaic dispensation which was to be removed, and which has passed away. (It is remarkable, indeed, that it is in that very epistle to the believing Hebrews, which announced to them the termination of the earthly kingdom, that the express warning occurs, not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together.) Accord- ingly, with those apostles whom He commissioned to teach his dis- ciples in his name to observe aU things, whatsoever he commanded them — with these apostles He declares that he will be — binding ■what they bind, and loosing what they loose, even unto the end of the world : that stability is sufficiently ascertained to us, in opposi- tion to all the corrupt glosses that would confound it with the end of the Jewish dispensation, by the permanent nature of that kingdom that wa.s to remain after the otlier vanished away, as well as it is distinctly marked in 1 Cor. xv. 23, 26. But, in short, your senti- ment immediately strikes at the throne of Him who is seated as a king upon the holy hill of Zion ; and if it nominally leave him a lawgiver and king, (Isa. xxxiii. 22.) exhibits him as a lawgiver without laws, and a king who allows his subjects to do whatsoever is right in their own eyes. And here, dear madam, I must briefly mark an inconsistenc\- — (one of those inconsistencies with which error is pro- x2 308 COLLECTION OF LETTERS lific) — which appeared in your language as we walked together, and which is repeated in one of your letters to my brother C . You profess to see much sin in the course in v^?hich you lately walked, in a kind of fellowship with other professors. But according to the sentiment which you maintain, (and which on the day I saw you, I hoped was but the perplexity of an agitated mind), what sin after all was there in it ? or what sin would there be in your returning to the Establishment — if you like it ? If indeed it be so, that the rule which was formerly binding on disciples in the apostolic word has ceased to be binding now, I cannot understand what sin there is in walking contrary to that rule ; and I am sure no other revelation from heaven has been given since, which they can transgress. You continued in that kind of fellowship while you liked it : you gave it up when you ceased to like it ; and you may resume it, or any thing in its place, when you like. Where is the hama in any part of this course .'' where lies the sin that you mean to acknowledge and take shame for ? But I do not wonder that many who were engaged in such an attempt should find it much more comfortable, and (as they will say) more profitable, to abandon it. You did seem in some points pleasingly distinguished from them : but, indeed, you now seem just of their m-ind. Praying the God of all mercy and power, that if you be one of his, you may receive the reproof of his Word, I remain, dear madam, yours faithfully. LXIX. TO THE CHURCH IN C . July, 1820. Beloved Brethren, — We write to you at the desire of the church in Dublin, about a matter in which we have all to acknow- ledge much unfaithfulness heretofore. Our attention was called above a year ago by the church in C to the intrinsic unlawful- ness of our employing a clergyman to solemnize our marriages, in any circumstance, or under any supposable modification of their religious rite. At that time, most of us conceived that we had sufiiciently come to a scriptural settlement of mind upon the subject, because we were professedly agreed upon the utter inadmissibility of the thing, in the circumstances in which we are placed ; having an opportunity of obtaining an equally legal validity to the marriage contract without having recourse to any antichristian priest for the purpose. And satisfied with that kind of hollow imanimity of sentiment, which we flattered ourselves would produce a unanimous abandonment of our ON SCIUPTUUAL SU13JKCTS. 309 fi)rmcr wicked practice, we most unwarrantably (with the exception of a few brethren) deprecatcil tlie agitation of the cjucstion — whether circumstances might not be at least imagined, in wliich, if we had no other way of having our marriages legalized, we might have it effected even by the intervention of a clergyman ; — provided that he either foreborc the usual reUcjious exercises on the occasion, or re- ceived our explicit declaration that we did not mean to join with him in them. A marriage that has recently taken place in the church at L lias again forced our attention to the subject : and we would lay before you the plain considerations which now make us avow the full conviction — (with shame for our past slowness to admit it) — that the thing is in itself absolutely inconsistent with our allegiance to Christ. We beseech you then to consider, brethren, that — although marriage is in its nature essentially a civil contract — yet the soletH' nization of marriage by a clergyman is essentially and avowedly a religious rite ; in which the clergyman acts officially as such, and in liis capacity of a priest of his religion : that when, therefore, we apply to him under any circumstances to solemnize our marriage, we necessarily call upon him to act for us in that capacity, to exercise his clerical function for us ; and that no explanation we could offer, nor any indulgence he could afford, can possibly make us throw off the fellowship, which we do thus hold with his antichristian system. This position we shall confinn by taking a case the most apparently favourable to the opposite view which can possibly be imagined. We shall suppose that a good-natured clergyman, in order to meet QUI- scruples, not only consents to lay aside all religious exercises or expressions upon the occasion, but even dispenses with our appear- ance in what is called his church ; that he merely pronounces the parties man and wife, on their declaring that they receive each other in that relation, and upon this gives them the usual certificate that he has solemnized their marriage : now, would not the parties, in submitting even to this, have employed that clergyman to perform for them, in his clerical function, that which none but a person sus- taining this function is considered capable of doing ? Would they not have had their marriage professedly solemnized according to the rites of his religion^ And would they not vainly put a cheat on their own consciences by pleading that these rites indeed have not been really observed ? Allow us to illustrate this (if it need illus- tration) by putting another perfectly parallel case. The law of the country requires men to qu;ilifv for various offices by receiving what is called their sacrament. We should all look with horror at the idea of this conformity, whatever might be the worldly temptation. It is well. But let us suppose that the same good-natured clergy- man agrees to lay aside every tittle of religious ceremony on this oc- casion also, — merely to give us some bread and wine, which (he says) we may innocently receive from any man, — and upon this to furnish us with a certificate of having qualified, — a certificate of our having committed the most awful abomination. Could we seek it .' Could we receive it ? Could we, without the most hypocritical treachery against the King of Zion, concur at all in the wicked im- 310 COLLECTION OF LETTERS posture ? Yet, to mark the case as perfectly parallel with the former, it is only needful to add, that — according to the prin- ciples of that religion of which that clergyman is a priest — the administration of (heir sacrament is not more essentially a religious rite than their solemnization of marriage. We are persuaded, that nothing more needs to be said on the sub- ject for deciding the minds of all who are kept standing fast in the truth, and therefore " sanctifying the Lord God in their hearts." We only beg it may be distinctly observed, that we should not conceive the decision rested on scriptural gi'ounds in the mind, if the circum- stance of our being able to have ovir marriages legally ratified other- wise, were allowed to enter at all into the considerations which produce it ; if we stood not prepared in the strength of the Lord to encounter every loss that could possibly be incurred by our ad- herence in this matter to the principles of the divine Word. We have to confess in this (as in every thing) our own awful unfaithfulness ; and to praise him for that mercy which endureth for ever. We pray that you may all be " kept in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life :" and hoping soon to hear from you in reply, we remain, &c. [A brief remark or two on the answer of one of the members Is added.] His decision seems to consist of two parts : — 1 . That it is intrin- sically unlawful to employ a clergyman to solemnize our marriages. 2. That in a certain supposed case it would be better to commit this sin than a greater. In the first point, the matter on which we wrote would seem given up. But is it given up honestly ? with a manly — a Christian acknowledgment of antecedent error, in opposing our admonition as altogether unscriptvral in its tenor ? Alas ! what pour work we make when we want to preserve our consistency ! But on the second point, I must say, that a most unscriptural principle is put forward. According to the whole nature of the revelation from the living God, I am not at liberty to suppose that it ever leaves me to a choice of evils — to choose which part of his revealed will I shall violate. I believe I was sufficiently distinct in marking, that our assertion of the wickedness of employing a clergyman to solemnize our mar- riage, never was to interfere with our marrying, where the Word points it out that we ought to marry. And when any one says against this — ' What, if I can get no tvoman to live with me as my wife unless I will join in a sacrifice to Jupiter to solemnise the mar- riage ?' — he says what is absurd in the supposition, and what is pro- fane in the application : profane in implying that our heavenly Father, who has given us the two precepts in the Word — " fi.ee for- nication," and " flee from idolatry" — will yet place some of his children in circumstances in which they cannot obey both — but ought to balance in their judgments the comijarative importance of the pre- cci)ts, in order to decide which of them they will violate m the name of God. No other answer ought to be given to the argument. ON SCRIPTURAL SUUJKCTS. 311 LXX. TO Mn. J. HAI.DAXE. Jan. 1821. My dkau Sir, — Having at length decided on replying to vour strictures publicly, I have just finished the rough draft of an intro- ductory letter to you. But I find that in it I have been obliged on one point to employ terms of reprehension, which I think it safer to communicate to you in the first instance in private. No doubt the blessed rule of dealing among fellow disciples, given in Matt, xviii. 15, is not in some views applicable to us, as we have never walked together as brethren ; yet the spirit of it, as well as other principles which I need not enter into, lead me to think this the more expedient course : I shall therefore proceed without further preface or apology to extract the passage to which I allude. — " As to your grossly ca- lumnious," &c. and down to " sacrificinghis truth to gain your appro- bation." (Vol. 1. 434.) Such, my dear sir, are some of the obsen'a- ations which I find it necessaiy to make in my introductory letter. Greatly should I rejoice if they were made the occasion of leading you to consider your ways in the light of the revealed wiU of God. Any other consideration of tliem is a vainer thing than you suppose. Very difi'erent indeed is the course you and I are pursuing, (so differ- ent that one or other of them must be very evil) as well as the views and spirit with which we wTite. By and by we shall both stand before the judgment seat of Christ ; and there the opinion that men have formed of us, will be a matter lighter than vanity. In your jealousy for the characters of " excellent men" — in your so rapidly- retracing the steps, by which you formerly seemed to approximate towards the assertion of most important scriptural principles — in vour joining and now heading the popular outcrv against them, — in all this I am sure you think yourself engaged in a course of christian usefulness ; and I suspect the unscriptural ambition of that, has long been your great snare. But I know that the spirit which prompts it, is a very evil one ; for it is our own, though in a very fine dress. You think you are promoting God's service, in cultivating a friend- ship which is enmity against him, and the wickedness is covered from your view, under the specious motive of winning the religious world to some shi'eds, which you retain of professed principles like scriptural truth. Yet with all the increasing respectability of your character, and increasing obloquy attached to mine, I am happy, and I do not think you can be so. I doubt whether the popular teachers do not stiU look at you with something of a jealous eye, on account of yom- former approaches to that same Sandemanianism ; and whether you must not recede still farther and more openly from the profession you once made, before you can fully satisfy them that you also ai"e not, or were not, one of that sect everywhere spoken against. 312 COLLECTION OF LETTEilS You have gone far indeed towards clearing yourself from the impu- tation : but can you be quite at ease between the conflicting consi- derations, that still more- ,is needful to wipe it off thoroughly, and that any more explicit recantation may hazard the loss of those " excellent men," whom you have hitherto attached to vou? Ah, dear sir, if ever you be brought to the mind of seeing nothing glori- ous but the name of the Lord, the object of your contention will be changed ; you will have all the world against you ; but you will find in the light of His countenance what will outweigh all worlds. But let me not increase the enormous length of this letter by further remark. Only let me suggest to you that it is an awful state which is described in Hos. vii. 9 ; and that all that kind of self examina- tion, which I dare say you diligently employ, or at least earnestly enforce, never can prevent or detect it. Yours, &c. LXXl. Jan. 1821. My very dear Friend, — You must indeed have greatly mistakeil any expression of mine, from which you inferred that I wished to terminate our correspondence. Your intelligence of having now a few connected with you, is very interesting to me ; and I think the better of their profession, from their being desirous to canvass with us the only point of difference. That is but consistent with their conceiving us to be of one mind with them on the faith and hope of the Gospel, The existence of any difference is very — very painful. But let us make it a matter of joint petition, that it may be scripturally removed, and not fear but that the prayer shall be answered. Coming with any legitimate request to Him to whom sinners have access, what but our hardness of heart and unbeUef ever makes us doubt of being heard? Matth. vii. 7 — 11. Mark xi. 2^. John. xiv. 12 — 14, xvi. 23, 24. 1 John v. 14, 15. These are great'words : but not too great for the warrant of a sinner's drawing nigh to God. There are just two points to be considered in the question — (I do not mean to argue either of them now.) 1st. Whether the thing forbidden us in the word be not a pledging ourselves before the Lord, that we will act so or so, undier scnj forfeiture, however small. — 2dly. Whether all oaths in this country, and indeed in every country, be not such a pledge ; and whether this be not the essential difference between an oath and a simple affirmation, however solemn. Now, dear friend, resume your pen to me ; and tell me all particulars about ON SCIUPTURAL SUIUKCTS. 313 your course, and those witli you. I cx])cct, ere long', to address you, as brethren beloved, in the full fellowship of the Gospel. But for the present, if you do not choose to say anything about our difference, be silent on it, and write only about the grand point of agreement. With the most affectionate interest, yours. LXXII. TO THE SAME. April. 1821. My veky dear Friend, — Believe me, I never had an idea of putting out of view the question so painfully at issue between us, though I wished to hear of your course, even though you should, for a time, say nothing upon it. Your letter of Feb. 8th, though pro- fessedhj giving a view of the meaning you attach to the precept in Matt, v., really left me quite at a loss to know what you mean. I have sufficiently marked that I understand it to be a prohibition against binding ourselves, as to our future conduct, under the impre- cation of any forfeiture, liowever small, or by any pledge that we stake for our acting as we engage to do. At times j'ou w-ould seem to intimate that all such binding of our souls by a bond, is incon- sistent with Christian principles. Yet, at other times, you seem to have a different idea. What do you mean by quoting the Apostle's language — "I call God to [record] w^itness vpon my soul? Do you think, with many, that Paul intended to imprecate the divine vengeance on his soul, in case he spoke falsely — in short, to say may God damn me if it be not so and so ? The ])lainness of the dress in which I put the sentiment does not at all increase its profanenes3. Do you ask how / interpret the passage ? As usual I say, in the first place, I am sure he had no stick meaning as this. In the next place I say, that I think he uses the word soul here as equivalent with the inivard man. What he was assuring the Corinthians of, was not any thing cognizable by man — any thing of outward conduct — but the inward motives which influenced his conduct ; and he suitably appeals to God as the 'icitness oithem. I smile, and I sigh, at the fight you make about the import of the promissory oaths in this country. And let it be observed, that every oath administered in this country is essentially a promissory oath, as much as the oath of allegiance. But do you deny that the oath administered in England and Ireland to all nations, e.xcept those of the Scotch Kirk, is expressly imprecatory in the words, " So help me God !" or, as it ran originally, " So help me God at the judgment day ?" Tlie special clause in an Act of Parliament which provides for swearing those of the Scotch Kirk here, according to the Scotch form, pro- 314 COLLECTION OF LETTERS ceeds not upon any difference in the import of the two forms, but upon their scruples to kiss the book, &c. And truly, any one who chooses to see, may easily see precisely the same import in the phrase, " As I shall answer before God at the great day of judgment." You quote various persons, lawyers and others, who loosely speak of an oath, as the 7nost solemn of all appeals to God, or modes of affirmation ; without their marking in what its peculiar solemnity consists. Does that go one tittle against the uncontradicted interpretation of those who do precisely mark what the others admit ? And are they divines merely ? Was it as a divine that Archdeacon Paley wrote ? No : it was as a civilian. Were the compilers of the article Oath, in the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, and Rees's Encyclopaedia, divines ? One of the Barons of the Exchequer in Ireland, distinctly admitted to me last summer the imprecatory nature of every oath ; and con- firmed it, by mentioning the form in which (I think) a Japanese was lately sworn in our courts, by holding up a china dish, and dashing it against the ground : just as Livy, detailing the form of Oath by which the Romans ratified their treaties, describes the priest knocking out the brains of a ram, with an imprecation that Jupiter might so destroy the party who should violate the terms of the league ;^and agreeably to old Varro's express declaration, that every oath terminates in an imprecation. Yet, I would observe to you, that I am by no means sure that all the things called oaths, under the old Testament, were of this nature ; or were, some of them, any thing more than such a simple appeal to God as the witness, as any Christian may employ. I was pained, my friend, by an appearance in your last to me, as if you were disposed to cttt this subject short. If you write again, keep in view the distinctness of the two questions. — 1. What the thing prohibited in Matt. v. is. — 2 } Whether the oaths of this country be a thing of that nature ? Still affectionately yours, for the truth's sake, LXXIII. TO THE SAME. June 11, 1821. I bear you on mv heart before Him that heareth prayer, in whose gracious presence we sinners are set by the revelation he has made of his glorious name. I cannot but say, that I think your flesh has been struggling against plain scriptural principle. You now dovbt the lawfulness of what men call you to. Under even that doubt, I trust you will see your course plainly marked, not to do the thing. How can my friend express himself so undecidedly upon the clause, " So help me God !" "It is an ill phrase— -but is a person necessarily obliged to subjoin what is not expressed — but not otherwise P" And ON SCRIPTUIIAL SUBJECTS. 31 j does that need to be expressed, my friend, in order to expose the ■wickedness of our saying — " So may God help me, as I shiJl bear true lUlcgriance to," &c. If that be not binding ourselves, under a curse that we shall act so and so, I know not what is : and you have professed to abhor the thoui^ht of this. That this is the design and intention of every oath administered in this country, I think has been fully established, whatever be its form : but when the form is as above, I know not how it can be disputed. And is there any instance of such an oath being enjoined, even under the law of Moses .'' Or is this, by any subtility, to be confounded with a solemn declaration of an antecedent fact, as in the presence of Him who searcheth the hearts ? But if vou bring the oath of cursing, enjoined in Numb. v. 21 — 22, as parallel, I must say you might as well bring the meditated slaying of Isaac by Abraham, or the extirpation of the Canaanites by the Jews, as justificatory of similar acts now. The divine command rendered that right which, without it, must have come from the evil one. I have already marked tlie passage of the law, to which the Lord's prohibition decisively refers : and the binding of the soul there was voluntary ; and I hesitate not to say even then came from evil — from the hardness of their hearts — on account of which it was permitted, just as the putting away a disagreeable wife was permitted. But I have done. I have been corresponding with one A. M' , a baker in Cupar Fife, and, fi-omhis last, I hope the Lord has opened his eyes. To the riches of his abounding mercy I commend you and yours. LXXIV. TO THE SAME. July, 1821. " How good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity !" This also is the Lord's doing, and it is mar\'ellous in our eyes, like all his works. Om- hearts embrace you all — yom'self and your wife — brother F • and his — with unreserved affection, as beloved in the Lord, fellow-heirs of that glory which is about to be revealed, and-fellow pilgrims in a world in which we are warned that we shall have tribulation. Tell me what may be the value of your present employment. We need not trouble ourselves with calculating the probabilities of your being allowed to retain it. The Lord knows and has determined how that shall be. He knows, also, what vou have need of for food and raiment : and shall he withhold that from those, to whom he has given eternal life and the adoption of children ? I shall now be weary to see you all ; and if it please God to continue the amendment which appears in my health, I think it likely that I shall strain a point to get to Leith before the 316 COLLECTION OF LETTERS end of the summer. One of my proposed objects in giving up my establishment at Dublin was, to be more at liberty to go about. Perhaps there was much of the working of fleshly vanity and pride in the wish. "He knows the things that come into oiir mind, everyone of them;" (Ezek. xi. 5.) and knows that every one of them is evil — every imagination of the thought of our hearts : and it is on such a black ground he displays the glory of his rich grace and great salvation. You mentioned brother F 's family as with you. Tell me the particulars of his family — of what it consists. Be not cast down at any prospect of the spoiling of your goods. Take it joyfully, remembering Him who is " God with us," and who has said, " I will never fail you nor forsake you." To his rich mercy and mighty keeping I commend you all. LXXV. TO THE SAME. Sept. 18, 1821. My very dear L , — It affords us matter of thanksgiving to find that you were kept so still and unanxious in your trying cir- cumstances. O yes — kept : and it is an easy thing to the Lord to keep us so in circumstances the most trying. What a little glimpse of his glorious name is sufficient to effect it ! Well may he say to us — " If ye had_/««7A as a grain of mustard seed." I was thinking lately of what a West-India planter once told me, of the comfort of the slaves, in having no care about providing for themselves or their families in sickness or in health, knowing that all this will be done by the master whose they are. " Ye are not your own ; for ye are bought with a price." How wonderfully is our full blessedness and security interwoven and incorporated with the most constraining motive to glorify God with our bodies and our spirits, which are God's. " Be stiU ; and know that I am God." Yes ; every thing opposite to that stillness is the working of those atheistic hearts of ours, which deny that God is. The Lord be with you all,and keep you glorying in his holy name. ON SCIUrTUUAL SUIUIX'TS, 3J7 LXXVI. TO THE SAME. Oct. , 1821. Your last letter, my very dear L , afforded us much matter of praise and thanksgiving to Him " who alone doeth great wonders." For surely it was He that gave you favour in the eyes of ]\Ir. , He that tumeth the hearts of men whithersoever he will. After such a deliverance, we are often ready to say, in the elation of our minds, that we shall never distrust the Lord again. But that word describes us to the end — " Then believed they his words : they sang his praise. Thev soon forgot his works : they waited not for his counsel." (Ps. cvi.) Well; that other word describes Him — " But He being full of compassion forgave their iniquity, and destroyed them not." (Ps. Ixxviii.) I conceive the fortnight spent at C has been of sersice to me. While there, I had much fighting with a set of j^rofessors — ( at their head) — in whom the deceivableness of unrighteous- ness assumes the novel form, of combining Arian or Socinian views of the person of Christ, with a veiT plausible language about his work, and such an outward accommodation to some scriptural prin- ciples, that Mr. has for some time preached without the usual accompaniments of singing and prayer. He is a very amiable and interesting man ; but holds every thing with such laxity, that not only J. Haldane's profession, but John Wesley's, appears very good in his eyes. We found one or two of his people apparently very differently minded : and perhaps it may please God to make the coal of fire thrown in among them burn. Mr. candidly avowed a state of mind which I believe is very common, though generally concealed. He sees two sets of scriptural passages, which he thinks speak an opposite language. He balances one against the other ; and according as either scale at different times preponderates in his view, he is strongly inclined to adopt one or the other set of sentiments. Such a state of mind is almost unavoidable in a serious inquirer, not persuaded by divine power what is truth : while the man must frequently study to conceal his scepticism from himself as well as others. Such are the men who have two strings to their bow. The Lord himself keep us all holding /a^^ the faith ! I hope you have not been over hasty in calling to fel- lowship in all the ordinances. I am sure that no precise limit of age can be marked for this. It must var}' according to different circum- stances and characters. But there are two opposite errors (as in most cases) which we should equally guard against — a premature reception of them into church membership — (I use the phrase for brevity — not that I like it, but you know my meaning — ) and such an unwarrantable delay of calling them to it, as would leave them to grow 318 COLLECTION OF LETTERS to men and women in a neutral kind of character. In one of the Irish churches, a short time ago, they fell into the former mistake ; and were for calling children of five or six years old to join in par- taking (Si the Supper. But it has been eventually blessed for bring- ing the minds of aU there to a more scriptural settlement on the sub- ject. Not to insist at present on the principle that the Supper is exclusively a church ordinance, not to be separated from the other acts and exercises of the collective body, when they come together on the first day of the week ; nor to insist on the plain fact, that mere young children cannot really take any part in all those acts and exercises ; and that it is only making them young hypocrites if we lead them to pretend to do so ; does it not evidently accord with all the principles of divine wisdom in the Word, that during the period of early childhood, the child should be under the exclusive and abso- lute control and management of its parents ? When it joins the full fellowship of the church, that species of absolute control, which it has been so important previously to maintain, ceases. And though there is a parental authority and filial subjection which continue, yet it is obvious that the exercise of the former becomes very different from what it was before. The young disciple must now be supposed to think, and act, and judge for himself in the concerns of the king- dom of God, and must be treated accordingly. It might be very important (for instance) to whip a young child soundly for naughty conduct or temper ; and any thing which would exclude that kind of treatment during the proper period, would be utterly inconsistent with all the principles of due parental discipline. But I certainly think any such mode of discipline is excluded as soon as the child passes into church-membership. If any thing improper be observed by others in the child previously, it is the parent and not the child that is to be dealt with on the subject. The evil of the opposite error, I need not enlarge on. On the whole, if we are kept adhering to the general principles of the Word, I think we shall be at no great loss about the proper period: and I should scarcely expect it to appear much below the age of twelve or fourteen years ; and certainly I should not expect it to be much after the latter age, if the child has indeed been brought up in the instruction and admonition of the Lord. I believe I should have scarcely entered on the subject, if I thought it would have occupied so much of my paper. The account you have given of the two actually added to you, and the three likely to be so, is most interesting, and makes me impatient to hear from you soon again. And so a Presbji^erian elder seemed likely to become a fool for Christ's sake ? O, haw glo- rious does he appear reigning in the midst of his enemies, and making his arrows sharp in their hearts ! We have very little in- crease as yet here ; and are, indeed, a most sorry set to put our- selves foi-ward as the church of Christ in this grand city. But one and another now and then, from the lowest classes, are brought in ; and some a little more I'espectable are unsettled from their former pro- fession, but not yet settled in the true. They are considering : and when it comes to a sinner's considering whether he shall believe and obey the word of the Lord, though divines think him in a very ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 319 hopeful way, and he thinks himself engaged in a very good process, Ave know that it is only divine mercy and power that can turn the scale to the truth. I have heen asked before bv some very specious professors in Ireland, how they should proceed to get at a scriptural decision on this and that point : and thev have stared at me when I have told them that I knew of no rule for the purpose. I have been for the hist two months engaged in an afternoon preaching (so called), chiefly on the Psalms. And surely John Barclay has been honoured to do good service there. From a dozen to a score of outliers attend, but few of the same persons twice. I have often thought that, if I had means, I should like to publish a revised edition of aU the scriptural pieces I wish to survive me, in order to put down some of the earlier productions of my pen. As to the Address to the Methodists of Ireland, I have mentioned in my Roi)ly to Mr. Haldane that I am willing that any one should reprint that and the Letters to j\Ir. Knox, (thev must go together) provided he print along with thera castigatory notes, which I shall be ready to furnish. With these, I should be glad of the republication ; for there is much important matter, particularly in the Letters to Mr. Knox : but without the antidote of the notes, I protest against the rejirint. Could I, for instance, now countenance the pages of wicked nonsense in which I expostulate with the Wesleyan Methodists for their bigotry in not co-operating with the Calvinistic Evangelicals in spreading the gospel } There are strange inconsistencies in that piece, a conflict between light and darkness : I get clearer towards the close of the controversy with Mr. Knox; but I could not agree to the separation of the address from the Letters. Next comes the Address to Believers, &c. to which I must for the present demur ; at least to its republication without the Appendix, or without the addition of two or three pages which I think much wanted in that piece. It says too little distinctly about the gospel of Christ ; and on the conversation becoming the gospel there is a serious omission, on the topic of obedience to the peculiar commands of the King of Z ion. These omissions at present commend it to many who would dislike it if they were supplied. The bookseller, who you say is apprehensive of injuring the circu- lation of this piece by attaching to it a name in such bad odour with the religious world as mine, is at liberty to substitute for it, " An Apostate from the Church of Antichrist." ^\Taat will Mr. Haldane say to Mr. O 's circulating the wicked doctrine, in the Address to the Methodists, of the total and inva- riable corruption of the human heart ? Tell me how you have got on at Cupar. My prayers are offered up for you all, that the Lord may fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness in you and the work of faith with power. Let us be re- membered bv vou in the same wav. 320 COLLECTION OF LETTERS LXXVII. TO THE CHURCH IN LONDON. March 17, 1821. Being doubtful whether I shall be able to meet with" the brethren next Sunday, I am led to put on paper the substance of what I wish to offer on the subject which has been introduced, and which some appear disposed to press, or push forward, to a precipitate decision. In the first place, let it be well observed, that the relation subsisting between man and wife, is in itself altogether of a civil, teinporal, and earthly nature ; and not at all intrinsically a religious connexion. The opposite view has obtained gi-eat currency from priestcraft, and from the religious rites which are generally made to accompany the solemnization of marriage. And I readily admit the marriage con- nexion is the most lasting and closest of all earthly connexions. But I repeat it, that it is essentially as much of a purely civil and earthly character, as the connexion subsisting between a master and his apprentice, or between two partners in trade. And the truth of this statement is put beyond all contradiction, by the Scriptures of the New Testament. For they expressly acknow- ledge the marriage relation as subsisting in full force and permanent obligation between a believer and an unbeliever. (See 1 Cor. viii. 1 Pet. iii. 1.) Now, between such parties, there could subsist no religious connexion or religious fellowship. And it is quite idle to urge against this, that such were instances of marriage formed before either of the parties was a Christian. Be it so. Yet it is indisputable, that when one of them became a Christian — if the marriage connexion be to a Christian of a religious nature — the marriage relation must have been immediately dissolved between them. But we know, on divine authority, that it was not ; and the inference from this is incontrovertible. I push this very plain point so much, because I am sure, when it is duly considered in the light of the word, it goes very far indeed towards a determination of the question now agitated. At least I am warranted to say, that, after this principle has been once established, when we recollect that the Christian dispensation leaves us at liberty to form and maintain all other civil connexions with those who believe not, we ought to require the most decisive scripture authority, before we admit the idea of an absolute law, prohibiting a Christian from forming the merely civil connexion of marriage with any, except one united with him in the faith. And here, in the second place, let me notice the vanity of all those references to the Old Testament Scriptures, and the law given to the Jews, with which divines abound on the, subject, but which ought not to be heard from any of us. Have we yet to learn that essential difference (among others) between the law given by Moses, and the Christian dispensation, — namely, that the former was for a people outwardly separated, by temporal enactments, from the ON SCRIl'TURAL SUIUFX'TS. 321 rest of tlic world, and restricted from intercourse with others, even in tlie things of this life. But that this external and civil separation of them, as a nation, from the other nations of the earth, was hut an earthly shadow of the higher separation unto God, of those who hclong to that kingdom of heaven, introduced by the Gospel. It was in perfect consistency with this, that the Jews were commanded cvcato put away unbelieving wives whom they had taken, but that to the Christian such a step is prohibited. But, in the third place, (in order to prevent, as much as possible, all mistake of my meaning) I would remark, that what I spoke just now, of our being left at liberty bv the Gospel to form and maintain connexion with the children of the world in things relati)ig to this life, I spoke of " a liberty which wc have in Christ Jesus ;" — a Christian liberty, which leaves us not without law to Christ in these very matters ; and the exercise of which is to be regulated by all those general principles of the word, which call us, whether we eat or drink, or whatever we do, " to do all in His name, and to His glory." And, I would add, that while all our engagements, connexions, and intercourse with the world will be restricted and regulated by those principles, just according to the indwelling of the glorious truth in our minds ; so it is peculiarly important that we should be thus regulated in forming the closest and most permanent of all earthly connexions. Else, we shall be found " abusing our liberty for an occasion to the flesh." (Gal. v. 13.) This is a sore evil, which the Lord will visit with correction in his children, and which often proves the occasion of manifesting evils deeper and more radical. But I see an equally awful evil, manifested by those who would vainly attempt to guard against this abuse of Christian liberty, by making (as it were) a complete code of laws square at all points, and (as they think) providing for all cases. All such attempts to enforce the particulars of Christian conduct, which nothing but the influence of the blessed Gospel can produce, originate in the presumption and ungodliness of our flesh. Now, the con- siderations are obvious to the mind of faith, which mark the general hi""h expediency and desirableness of a Christian's forming the marriage connexion only with one like-minded with him in the things of the kingdom of God ; the desirableness of having in his partner through life a comfort, and an help in matters of the highest concern- ment, instead of a discomfort and an hindrance, and especially the importance of having one who, instead of counteracting his paternal labour in bringing up his children in the instruction and admonition of the Lord, will aid nnd co-operate with him in the work. I think it more consistent with sobriety of mind to express myself thus, than rashly to say, what I have heard some advance, that a Christian who marries an unbeliever, incapacitates himself for the discharge of that solemn parental duty. This would be in effect to say that the Apos- tles gave a general command to Christian parents, which some of them, at that day, were incapable of observing. These considerations I would urge upon the attention of any believer thinking of marriage. If he be thinking of it in the mind of Christ, and from the influence of scriptural principles, I am sure he will not be insensible to their w^eight : but I am not equally sure that he yet may not eventually VOL II. Y 322 COLLECTION OF LETTERS marry one that is an unbeliever ; for I am not sure that he will be able to obtain any sister in Christ ; much less am I sure that he will be able to obtain any sister at all suited to him in age, education, &c. ; circumstances which it is idle to say, are indifierent and unconnected with the comfort of the marriage state. And, truly, those who would make an absolute law that he shall marry a believer, if he marry at all, may find it needful to have another law, making it compul- sory on the sister whom he asks, to accept him. But if they say, (as I have heard some say) — let him remain unmarried, if there be either no unmarried female in Christian fellowship with him, or no one who will marry him, they greatly err in this, and manifest their forget- fulness of the plainest sayings of the word of God. For that it is not good to marry, is a saying which all cannot receive, save they to whom it is given ; (Matth. xix. 11.) and again, " to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband." (1 Cor. vii. 2.) Mark well the 7th, 9th, and 37th verses. But this, indeed, is not the only instance in which the wickedness of setting up laws of human tradition goes hand in hand with setting aside the laws of God. In the fourth and last place I would say a few words (for many are not needed) on the passage in 1 Cor. vii. 39, which is adduced as an express prohibition against a Christian's marrying any but a Christian. And here I confess, that if the Apostle give such a pro- hibition to a Christian widow, it does appear to me that, by all fairness of inference, it must be considered as extending to every disciple. But those who apply the passage in this way, are obliged to insert words that are not either in the original or the translation. Fastening upon the phrase, of " being in Christ Jesus," (which frequently occurs, and confessedly imports being a Christian) they would read the latter part of the verse, as if it ran — " she is at liberty to be married to whom she wiU, if o^Ay he be in the Lord. Now, I forbear every observation upon the original, which indeed is literally rendered in our version. But it is undeniable that the words, which they would supply* — ' if he be' — are an arbitrary insertion of their own ; unwarrantable, if the passage admit an easy interpretation without them ; and utterly to be rejected, if the intro- duction of them affix a ineaning to the passage, which contradicts any of the rest of Scripture, as I have shown this interpretation does. To illustrate this — let us suppose that any one should take it into * J. M'C ,011 hearing this read, observed that he did not consider there is any ellipsis, but that the phrase oi marrying in the Lord, must mean, according to the analogy of Scripture language, marrying a Christian, and proceeded, as usual, to refer to the phrases of receiving and saluting such and such persons in the Lord. It was replied, that while the persons described to be thus saluted or received, were confessedly Clnistians, yet it is certain, that saluting or receiving in the Lord, cannot mean in itself, saluting or receiving a Christian ; for that, if so, an infidel saluting or receiving me, might be said to salute or receive me in the Lord ; which he himself admitted could not be said — and that, besides, even a Christian might salute or receive a fellow Christian, and yet not do it in the Lord, but on principles of natural civility, earthly attachment, or self-interest. So 'that it is plain the words, in the Lord, in these phrases, (just as much as in Eph. vi. I.) really import the Christian mind, principles, and grounds, on which the disciples were commanded to salute or receive their brethren. But to this obvious and indu- bitable remark, he was as deaf as to every other. 1 ON SCUirTUllAL SUliJECTS. ;i'23 his head, that beHcving' children are bound only to obey bdicving parents, he might — with equal justice — nd', which we have in Christ Jesus." And that in Gal. v. 13 — " ye have been called unto liberty, only use not your liberty for an occasion to the flesh." And now, how plain and how suitable is that restrictive guard which the Apostle throws in upon the con- sideration of the Clu^istian widow! He asserts, indeed, her liberty to be married to whom she will ; but immediately suggests to her attention, that the liberty which he speaks of, is a liberty which she has in Christ Jesus — a Christian liberty, and therefore not to be used for an occasion to the flesh, but exercised, or abstained from, under tlie regulation of Cliristian principles, and with a view to the will and glory of the Lord. Fully persuaded that the views, I have put forward in this paper, are accordant with the Scriptures of truth, I have every confidence in the Lord that they will commend themselves to the new mind of all my dear brethren ; and that through the abundant mercy of our God, we shall be all found of one mind upon this, as upon other scriptural subjects. Lxxvin. April Ath, 1821. There was one who could say — " I am a stranger upon earth." All that surrounded hivi in this sinful world presented no attractions to him. We are of the earth, earthly ; but this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith, turning worldly-minded sin- ners into strangers and pilgrims upon earth, according to the mind of Christ. Well for us that the word of Jehovah has gone out, not to be recalled — " rule thou in the midst of thine enemies." Ps. ex. Y 2 324 COLLECTION OF LETTERS 2. His power seems blessedly manifested here (though in a way the most quiet and contemptible to man), giving his word entrance into the heart of one and another sinner — almost aU in the lowest ranks of life : and hitherto I have the joy of seeing that the little body gathered in this great city, rest and rejoice simply in the one work of redeeming mercy finished on the cross, as all their glorying before God, ccnd a sufficient ground of glorying for the chief of sinners. They are not such theologians as your Scotch folk. It is well ordered for the pride of my heart that I have little or nothing to do, even instrumentally, in the work that is going on. Those who have received the word tell their friends and acquaintances of the great thing it reports, and the Lord opens the heart of others at once to see and rejoice in the glory of it. When I write thus, you are to understand that the number gathered does not exceed thirty. Most of them (and the most satisfactory of them) are persons who never had made before even what is called an evangelical profession. The only one of the body who plagues us occasionally, talking of duties, is an old Scotch professor. Now that I have told you all about our course here, I shall expect you will communicate freely to me all about yours, and those that you know I would wish to hear of. Are you still for making the Lokd's ordinances matters of mutual forbearance ? Oh ! my friend, that may carry a fair show to the flesh ; but it cannot consist with real obedience to the word of the Lokd. Is it in obedience to that, you take up the attempt of walking in fellowship with any ? or is it in the indulgence of a kind of private taste or fancy ? But I have done. Very truly yours. LXXIX. TO THE SAME. June 12, 1821. My dear Friend, — As I have to dispatch a packet to Mr. D to-morrow, I now sit down to give all the answer I can to Mr. 's inquiries about Messrs. ■ , &c. The only one of them, of whom I have had any personal knowledge, is Mr. E , a pleasing intelligent gentleman, but quite the clergyman still. I have not kept up any acquaintance with him since his last publication. Mr. K at one time opened a correspondence with me on the subject of baptism ; which I of course turned to the grand fundamental topic. On this he wrote once or twice very pleasingly ; but very soon got tired. He never replied to a letter in which I marked the error of the high Calvinists, who mistake for faith a strong persuasion that they are among the elect of God. Some observations that I oftered ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 325 upon thcit, seemed evidently to touch him on a sore point. And I have otherwise reason to apprehend that the error I noticed widely per- vades their connexion, though some of them have got to speak a correct language ahout the meaning o{ faith. IJut as far as I have had oj)i)ortunity of ohserving, they generally seem more occujjied with tlie talk and consideration of the love of God to them individuallv, than with the glorious mercy revealed and testified in the word. And indeed it is amazing what a plausiljlc language the deceivable- ness of unrighteousness sometimes assumes in such professors, and what zeal for doctrines that sound most like the truth. There are many subordinate differences of sentiment and practice among them ; but none (as far as I have heard) that have at all disturbed their amiable brotherhood ; for on all the principles of christian fellowsliij), thev are as lax and tolerant as Mr. or any such could wish. Tliey all however agree in direct and open opposition to the truth, in the person of the Lord Jesus. Mr. E • and Mr. B have published books upon the subject ; but I confess I have not read a page of either of their productions, for I abhor the proud speculations in which thev fearlesslv indulge, and which are too congenial to my own ungodly heart. They seem very vain of their system, as if it were a new discovery that reconciled all difficulties ; though I believe it to be abundantly old. As far as I can understand, it is a kind of compound of Sabellianism and Socinianism. They allow to Him who was made flesh, a kind of angelic human nature created before any thing else ; and apply to him the epithets and character of God, from the most High dic'elUny in him as his temple. One of them (a disciple of Mr. E ) attended one of our meetings, and getting into conversation with some of us afterwards, expressed (as they usually do) the greatest satisfaction with all that she had heard — excepting (she added) one little expression. This on inquiry proved to be some expression, in which a brother had intimated the proper Godhead of Him who came into the world to save sinners. I pro- ceeded to expostulate with her, and asserting that He who was made flesh was indeed God over all, she keenly interrupted me with — • " No — he who was made flesh was not God." Here I thought slie had involved herself in such a direct contradiction of the express testimony of the word, that she might at any rate be made ashamed. I therefore calmly refeiTed her to the declaration that the word was God — and the word was 7nade flesh : but I soon found that she i)aid no more regard to that declaration, than if it were quoted from the Koran. Mr. S of C is the one among them all who pre- sents the most pleasing appearances : but even he is carried away with their philosophy and vain deceit on this point. He visited Dublin some time ago, and after attending a meeting of the church in Staftbrd-street, got into close and long conversation with some of mv brethren, in which he expressed the greatest delight with what he had heard and witnessed, and afforded them equal delight bv the apparent clearness and simplicity with which he confessed the truth ; till one of them, who had heard of these speculations, introduced that subject and inquired his views. He was very unwilling to bring them forward, for he seemed quite anxious to present himself as fully 326 COLLECTION OF LETTERS of one mind with us : but when pressed, he avowed himself qaite of a mind with Messrs. E and B ; and went into a long dis- quisition in defence of their sentiments. I have heard also from a sister who heard him at C , that though he had oftei> spoken agreeably to the truth, he on one occasion expressed princi- ples in direct opposition to it. Some of them have discovered that the ordinance of the supper and all other things delivered to the churches formerly, have no decisive authority now j — that christians now are under a higher dispensation than was in the apostolic age ; that this was the dispensation of the Son, but that now is the dispen- sation of the Spirit, &c. But enough. What I have said is sufficient to intimate to in what light / view them all. He probably will think it very happy that they are not bigots in matters of chmcb fellowship. On the morning after I wrote to you in reply to your letter of the 6th, I was seized with a slight paralytic affection, which among vari- ous other symptoms promises the religious world a speedy release from one of its plagues. But He, before whom the walls of his Zion are continually , will accomplish all his own work, and be at no loss for instruments — will make his arrows still sharp in the hearts of his enemies, so that one generation shall declare his name to another, till the great controversy is finally decided by his coming in his glory. Even so. Lord Jesus, come quickly ! Affectionately yours. LXXX. TO THE CHURCH IN DUBLIN. Mffy 27M, 1821. Beloved Brethren, — We have received the letter which you commissioned two of your members to send us, and have read it with that attention which the importance of the subject demands. We receive it as an expression of your godly jealousy for the truth, and of your love to us and to the brother with whom you call us to deal, and for whose " unscriptural language" and " avowed error" on the subject of repentance you say we are accountable. Accurate expres- sion of our meaning upon every scriptural subject, we acknowledge to be very important ; and still more important the accurate inter- pretation of scriptural language. It must be held. so by all who truly fear the Lord and tremble at his word. But we have to ac- knowledge also how short we all come in this ; and how prone we are either to mistake the meaning of the divine word, or to express our sense of it incoirectly. To be watchful over and helpful to each other here, is indeed one of the most important exercises of brotherly ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 327 love. Wc acknowledge also that every church of Christ is so far accountable for any manifested departure from the purity of the faith in anv of their body, that if they sutler that " root of bitterness" to remain among them, they are partakers with the otlender in his sin, and betray their own allegiance to the truth. But we confess, brethren, that even supposing our brother's interpretation of repent- ance to be erroneous — (and if it be, we must observe that it has been avowed in much earlier publications from him, than tlie one you refer to — see, for instance — ) (Note I. Vol. i, .554) — we do not view his error as inconsistent with the faith and hope of the gospel, though its correction cannot be unimportant : and we do not therefore see it an occasion for that dealing with him from the collective bod^^ which we conceive ought not to be taken up unless where it ought to be pursued, if necessary, to the last stage of discipline. We woidd not be understood as by any means declining the serious consideration, of the subject presented to us in your letter : but we hope that, on the grounds which we have stated, you will allow us to refer the immediate discussion of the question to a communication between the brother whose sentiment you reprehend, and some in- dividuals of your body. We are the more led to this course, because we are almost all of us very young in scriptural knowledge, and incompetent to nice ver- bal disquisition ; and because we have to acknowledge that there are parts of your letter which we do not understand. We would rather for the present set it down to this cause, that some passages of it strike us as very objectionable, than suppose that it arises from un- scriptural sentiments in those, of whom we have every confidence that they are of one mind with us on the things of our common sal- vation. We do not, for instance, understand what you mean by pronouncing, that " there is a sense in which repentance may be scripturally said to precede faith, but no sense in which faith can truly be said to go before repentance." The only sense in which we can. understand that repentance may be said to precede faith is this — that till a sinner's mind is changed he believes not the go.'-pel : and in this sense we conceive it may be as truly said that faith precedes repentance^ inasmuch as there is no true repentance till a sinner believes. But we confess that all such questions — as whether faith precedes repentance or repentance precedes faith, w-e consider among the foolish and un- learned questions which we are called to avoid ; because we cannot acknowledge any period when a sinner has repentance without having faith, or has faith without having repentance. Whether, in the scriptural application of the term repentance, the change of mind to which Jesus Clirist came to call sinners, and is exalted to bestow upon his people, refers exclusively to the change in their judgment, understanding, and discernment, in opposition to our natural ignorance of God, — or whether it refers generally to that new mind of the spirit, which in all its characters is opposed to the mind of the flesh, — is a question on which we would forbear pronounc- ing a decisive judgment, till we understand better what you mean to urge against the latter sentiment. We all, however, desire firmlv to maintain, that it is in believing 328 COLLECTION OF LETTERS the unadulterated truth of the gospel, and according to the discern- ment of its glory, that all the characters of that mind, in which we are called to walk towards God and towards men, are produced and are maintained ; — not by our willing or striving — but by God working in us both to will and to do ; — and this in the same way from the beginning to the end ; — at first giving the word of his grace entrance into the mind, and tliroughout the believers course keeping the same word abiding in him. We pray that He may bless all our communications to our mutual edification and to the glory of his name : — that He may at once keep us all vigilant and jealous for the purity of his truth, and at the same time keep us from departing from scriptural simplicity in the pursuit of unscriptural refinement : — that we may be all found speak- ing the same things, and with one heart and one mouth glorifying God for that mercy, which reigns through righteousness by Jesus Christ. Signed in the name of the Church assembled in Portsmouth-street, London. LXXXI. TO T. M . AND T, P May 26. 1821. Very dear Brethren, — Were it not for the consideration that every circumstance is wisely and graciously ordered or controlled by Him who numbers the very hairs of our head, I should greatly regret that I was not present at the dealing you had, some time ago, with brother H- ; as it might have enabled me better to imderstand your meaning. But except a very general account of that occasion, and the quotation of some expressions of his, which obviously appeared to cari-y an unscriptural sense, I heard little or nothing of what passed. And yet I recollect that some of the few things I did hear, struck me once with a passing apprehension that there might have been on the other side something of an unscrip- tural refinement embodied with a just opposition to his language. Probably, I ought not then to have let this apprehension give way to that general confidence, which I am accustomed to repose in your\ scriptin-al judgment. And believe me that, on the present occasion, I have found myself in more danger of yielding an unwarrantable deference to that, than of lightly resisting you. I do not mean to say that I have not had to guard jealously against the latter also. After the closest examination of your letter, it is with great pain I say, that there seems to me something more of difierence between us, than mere difference of expression. And, in order that we may get to the bottom of it, 1 must write with great plainness, and at some length. If I write on one point a little more metaphysically than there ought to be occasion for, you must attribute it to your ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 329 own Uuinchinf? into such considerations as that — trilk irhat mind wu believe tlie Gospel. Ah ! dear brethren, is such a vain and subtle question tit to be thrown before a church of youni? disciples ? Your letter was read to them at our last meeting, and sucli an answer offered them, as I mentioned my intention of proposing. J3ut it was justly observed that, before they agreed to send it, they ought to luive an opportunity of more closely considering your letter, each for himself. That has been afforded them by the multiplication of copies passed from one to another during the week ; and what the result may be at our next meeting, I know not yet. But, while I could not consistently deny the justice of affording them all that opportunity which one called for, I tell you candidly, that I think they have been very unprofitably and very dangerously employed. And, from the language which I hear that one of them has used of apparent acquiescence with you, in opposition to the sentence, commenc- ing with — "Every thing called repentance, but antecedent," &c. (See "A brief Account of the Separatists," &c. Vol. i. p. 558.) I am not without fears that he has been stumbled — probably mis- taking you as well as the Scriptures. However, I look to Him who can turn into a blessing things apparently the most adverse. But to the point. And I must commence with some remarks on the meaning of the expressions — the mind — and change of mind ; because I think undigested views on that subject lie at the bottom of our difference. By the mind, I can understand nothing but the inward man in opposition to the outward : and by the inward man, I mean simply all that passes within us, comprising not only our thoughts and judgments, but our desires, affections, intentions, SfC. And I mean this, in contradistinction to all idea of the substance of the mind, of which, I repeat it, that I know absolutely nothing — have no more notion of it, beyond these mental characters, than an infant. Accordingly, when a man is said to change his mitid, it will import as various changes as the things in the inward man, to which a a reference is at different times made ; but without ever importing any further change than — a judgment, intention, desire, &c., different from what he had, before his mind was changed. For instance, suppose a man says — " 1 thought very iU of you once, but I have changed my mind :" — or — " I intended to ride to-day, but I have changed my mind :" — or again — " I was desirous to marry her, but I have changed my mind :" — we have here three distinct references, according to w-hich the phrase, change of ynind, will convey a change either of opinion, or intention, or of wish and inclination. And does it, even in common language, convey any thing more ? What would you say, for instance, to my proposing the question — "and tvith what mind is it, that you now think well of me ?" &c. It is not, dear brethren, either for cavilling, or for parrying your censure of ?ni/ language, (to which I shall come by and by) — that I wish to direct your attention most closely to that passage of your letter, where, in order to prove a change of mind (in one sense) antecedent to faith, you say "that it is not withourown minds we believe," &c. It is because that here, if any where, T think the real difference between us must lie. And I conjfesis, that were I 330 COLLECTION OF LETTERS not so well acquainted with your sentiments on the truth, I should", from that sentence, and the sentence beginning with — " We have no hesitation in saying, &c." — apprehend the existence of a most serious difference indeed. I should apprehend that the writers so conceive of the order of God in a sinner's conversion, as if there is first given him a certain spiritual mind — in opposition to the fleshly, — with which (when the sinner has it) he then believes, to the saving of his soul. And in this, I should see exactly the system of Fuller, and almost all the mass of evangelical professors. I have indeed no apprehension, but that you will reject with abhorrence all such ideas. Yet — as we are continually prone to receive, both in our language and our thoughts, a tincture of every ungodly leaven — I would beseech you seriously to consider, whether there were not at bottom, in the language you have employed, some floating half-formed notions bordering on this. The belief oi any thing, brethren, is seated in the mind, or is one of the characters of the inward man : and in this sense alone I can understand the phrases — believing ivith the mind — or with the heart, in opposition to the mere outward profession of believing. Now, as we are all naturally ignorant of God, and at any moment, left to ourselves, would become blind to his glory, there must indeed be a change of mind, or a neio mind, where any sinner believes that Gospel which reveals his name. There is a new character in the inward man — in his judgment, understanding , discernment . And greatly indeed do you mistake me, if you suppose that I consider not that change — without reference to any other — repen- tance unto life : — so that, wherever that is, the sinner is alive unto God, and where that is not, the sinner is still dead in sins. The assertion of this is indeed embodied in our maintenance of the essential truth — that whosoever believeth shall be saved. And it is truly most important, that we should maintain the simplicity of the meaning of the word believing, without involving in it any reference to the yrM«75 of faith. But passing this for the present — you will observe the only sense in which I can admit that any change of mind goes before faith, — (while even in this sense the proposition is so dangerously ambiguous, that I should never think of so expressing myself) — namely — that as we are all naturally ignorant of God, there must be a great change in our minds before we believe that God is. It would certainly be much more accurate, and less ambiguous, to say — that there must be a great change in the sinner's mind ivhen he believes : and this I now mean, not in any reference to the influence wluch the knowledge of the truth has — not in reference to any other, though concomitant change in his mind, — but to the mere circumstance of his believing that which he before disbelieved ; — in reference to his antecedent ignorance of God. And here, dear brethren, I do think that I express myself more correctly than you, when you write thus: — "to say that repentance precedes faith, only implies that, when God opens the eyes, we see his glory," &c. It does not (I conceive) immediately and truly imply any thing about the author of repentance — about its being a divine gift and work. But that passage in your letter might be so easily understood, as equivalent ON sciiirruiiAL subjects. 331 with what I say myself, that I should not think of noticing any inaccuracy in it, but for its co/incrion with other passages. And tliat makes me fear, you might have had some floating notion of a divine work Jirst opening the sinner's eyes — giving him a kind of new spiritual faculty, — and then giving him with the eije-sicjht he has got, to discern the truth. Yet I trust that, on reconsideration, you will acknowledge with mc, that the only tme and intelligible sense of your proposition — that repentance (or a change of mind) precedes faith — is in reference to the antecedent unbelief of the sinner who now^ believes. I hope, also, that you will sec with me the great and serious danger of expressing even that meaning in any such language. But will vou still maintain that "there is no sense in which faith can truly be said to go before repentance }" Js it not true that a sinner must believe the Gospel before he has any such change of mind as repentance unto life imports } — true in this sense — that till he believes the Gospel he has no such change of mind ? I honestly declare that I think it essential to maintain this : nor do I doubt that you really maintain it along with me, — though I am wholly unable to intei"pret vour language in consistency with this. But the longer I live, the more I see of the ambiguity of words, and of the mischief which it produces. I pass now to what you conceive an error in my language about repentance. You think that the import of the word refers exclu- sively to the change in our judgment, understanding, discerntnent, when we are brought to the knowledge of God. I have long been accustomed to speak and write of it in a more comprehensive sense, as refeiTing not only primarily to this fundamental character of the new inward man, but to all the other features of the new mind — the mind of the Spirit — consequent on faith : w^hile I have long also been anxious to maintain (as wtU as I could) their inseparable con- nexion with faith — so as that it is not only in believing the truth they are first produced, but in continuing in the faith, as we first believed, that they are all maintained, and in our growth in the faith that they all grow. Now I confess that, after the closest review and consideration of my sentiments and language upon the subject, I see no reason from the scriptures to alter either, — bating that imperfect- ness with which I may have expressed my meaning, either in the passage on which you animadvert, or in various others w'hicli you might as well have selected. I have already noticed the compre- hensive reference in which, in common language, w-e speak of changing our mind. And surely you will not deny, that the word rendered repentance has in its proper meaning a reference as comprehensive. You will not say that the proper meaning of the Greek word (x.irxvoitit refers exclusively or particularly to iho. judgment , understanding , dis- cernment. This would be contradicted plainly by its use even in the New Testament scriptures. It would be suflicient to adduce against it Luke xvii. 3, 4. When the brother who has trespassed against you is described as turning again, saying, " / repent," it is evidently an avowal of a change — not merely of judgment and understanding, but of disposition towards vou — a mind towards vou opposite to that from which the wrong originated. 13ut then vou conceive that 332 COLLECTION OF LETTERS whenever repentance towards God is spoken of in connexion witli faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, it is to be understood in that exclusive reference. And why, dear brethren, shoukl you tliink it important or right to narrow the general import of the word here ? The self- same ministry of the gospel v.'hich the apostle expresses, as a testifying of " repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," he elsewhere expresses as a beseeching of sin- ners to be " reconciled unto God." Writing to you, I am not solicitous to vindicate myself from the false ideas attached to the latter phrase by unbelieving religionists. But I must say, that it seems to me plainly to refer to men as of a mind — not merely with- out the knowledge of God, but ill-affected towards him, full of hatred of his name, as well as ignorance of it. Need I say, that among all the black features of our natural mind — the mind of the flesh — I ad- mit, and I assert, that ignorance of God — or the poiver of darkness under which we lie — may well be (as it often is in scripture) pre- eminently and emphatically marked ? because, from the nature of the gospel, when that is removed — when the knmvledge of God is com- municated— there is a new creation ; " all things are become new ;" there is a mind opposite in all its features to the mind of the flesh. So that, without at all confounding faith with love, joy, &c. or in- volving in the import of faith the idea of any of its fruits, — I think it perfectly warrantable to speak of the mind of faith, as being the new mind of the spirit in all its characters of absolute dependence upon God, reverential rejoicing in him, and unreserved subjection to him : because every one of these new mental characters is so inse- parably connected with the belief of the truth, that every thing con- trary to them springs from the mind of the flesh, or the mind of un- belief: much as we would say that the avaricious mind is a mind of selfishness, of hard-heartedness , &c. without at all involving any of these characters in the meaning of the word avarice. But I have somewhat digressed. It is indeed very important, brethren, to express ourselves cor- rectly, and (as far as we can) unambiguously, upon di\ane truth. But it would be a vain idea to expect, that by any precautions here, we can prevent the inconsistencies of misinterpretation which unbe- lieving men will fall into. And it would be a sore evil if, in pur- suing our precautions, we kept back or concealed any parts of that truth, which is in itself one uniform and consistent whole. Now I do think that you are in some danger of falling into this evil, when you would insist on interpreting such passages as these — " I have come to call sinners to repentance" — " exalted a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance," &c. — as exclusively referring to a change in the sinner's judgment, understanding , discernment . If, indeed, this be the correct scriptural import of the word in such passages, no doubt you are quite right to insist upon it. But if it were, might vye not rather have expected, in the former of the passages quoted, that the characters contrasted with the sinners, whom Jesus came to call to repentance, would have been designated, not as the righteous, but as the wise or the understanding ? But I would rather say to you, think — (divesting yourselves, not so much in one sense of system, as of ON SCRIPTURAL SUHJKCTS. 333 our little human solicitude to preserve considtcncy of system)— think caudidlv ftnd seriously what was conveyed and intended to he con- vevcd to tlie hciirers or readers hy the word repentance, or change of mind, in these passages : — think whether the word did not simply refer to the general unyodliness of mind in those whom lie came to CcUl to a new mind, and on whom He hestows it : — think whether we he not in these expressions called to see Jesus as the minister of that new covenant, of which the promise, as revealed hy one of the proi)hets, ran — " A new heart also will I give you, and a 7iew spirit will I put within you," &c. And however important it is to main- tain that this is done wherever the gospel is believed, and nothing of it done where that gospel is dishelieved, — think whether there would not he more of theological hypercriticism than of scriptural accuracy, in denving that the reference in that promised change of mind is as comprehensive and general as the characters of ungodliness in our own minds. Just as I conceive the same thing expressed by the apostle, when he declares Jesus as sent to bless his people " in turn- ing every one of them from their iniquities:" — or just as another apostle opposes that "renewing in the spirit of our minds," which we are taught, to the " old man which is corrupt according to the de- ceitful lusts." Eph. iv. 22. And here, I confess, I am a little jealous of your sentiments : — not at all (you will readily believe) as the evangelical world wovdd be jealous of some Antijiomian aspect in them ; but on another point. Perhaps my meaning will be at once conveyed, and (I should hope) commended to your better judgment, by the following brief sug- gestion : — If I see myself called at this day to a continual renewal in the spirit of my mind, but in declaring the gospel to the greatest infidel, I thought it inconsistent to call him to the same newness of mind, in the same comprehensive sense, would there not be reason to suspect that I had one gospel for him and another for myself? or that / was pursuing some newness of mind different from that to which he would be brought, in merely believing the gospel ? or that I was pursuing it in some other way than in holding fast that gospel which I call him to believe ? Certainly my meaning is quite misun- derstood by those who conceive that — in speaking of the new mind as consequent on faith, and yet not in the sense of subsequent to faith — I intend something following faith at a very short interval. The apostles, in preaching the gospel, call on their hearers to repent and " be converted," or turned to the Lord: and believers are exhorted, that with pui-pose of heart they should cleave unto tlw Lord. Now, if we be walking in Christ Jesus as we have received him, surely we shall see that either call is obeyed in believing the Word, which re- veals the name of the Lord : that " a right spirit" — right towards God according to all the characters of the mind of Christ, can be " renewed within" us continually only in the same way in which it is first given to the man who never before believed the truth : — that we can cleave unto the Lord only in the same wav in which a sinner can first turn to him. Yet, shall we say, that conversion or turning to the Lord refers exclusively to the judgment, understanding, discerti' ment 9 Indeed I must say, that it refers to our natural character, as 334 COLLECTION OF LETTERS not only ignorant of God, but estranged from him, and indisposed to him in the whole inclination and posture (so to speak) of our minds, just as much as the call in Is. Iv. C, 7. Nor am I afraid of having my orthodoxy questioned by you for saying this, unless there be some more real difference between us than I at present suspect. But perhaps you say — ' Are there, then, no jiassages of scripture in which repentance is to be interpreted as referring exclusively to the change in the sinner's judgment, tinderstanding , discernment, when he believes the truth ?' O yes, decisively there are : and among them I reckon that passage — " if God peradventure will give them repentance to the aclmowledging of the truth;" — which you hesi- tated about adducing, for some reason that I cannot for the life of me comprehend. And I should be disposed to mark Acts xvii. 30. as another instance of that exclusive reference, on account of the imme- diate connexion in which the word there stands with — " the times of this ignorance," &c. And in several other passages, from a similar connexion either nearer or more remote, I should think it \ery fair to understand it in that exclusive reference for which you contend ; while I own that in several even of these passages, I should have no quarrel with a brother merely for his interpreting the change of mind as referring more comprehensively to the general antecedent ungodli- ness of mind described in them. But I have, indeed, sadly failed of conveying my meaning, if you think that, in admitting ever so many passages, in which the word refers exclusively to the change in the sinner's judgment and understanding, I have admitted any thing inconsistent with what I have before urged; or inconsistent with the avowal that I do not think it was intended in the same exclusive re- ference in that summary of Christ's preaching — " repent and believe the gospel" — or in his words — " except ye repent, ye shall all like- wise perish" — or — " one sinner that repenteth," &c. &c. In these and other passages, I do conceive that the change of mind spoken of refers to all the ungodly characters of the mind of fallen man, as not only ignorant of God, but proudly rebellious against him and turned from him. At the same time, this is a point which I would not fight with you ; being quite sure that any whose judgments or understand- ings were changed, or who believed the gospel, had all the repentance to which they were called. But I cannot see it equally unimportant to contend against your apparent idea of a new mind first given to a sinner, with which he then believes ; and against your supposed priority of repentance to faith : for which I consider the mere order of the words in that passage — " repent and believe the gospel" — a very weak argument. When two phrases were employed, it was necessary that one should be expressed before the other : and I should see strong objection to saying — believe the gospel and repent. It would be at best pleonastic, and would too much seem to intimate that some other change of mind was intended, than the belief of the gospel brings with it : — while the other order, I think, suitably inti- mates the present ungodly character of those to whom the call is addressed, and the joyful testimony of God sent to them as- such, and calhng them to turn to Him and live. As to what you say about " confounding the manifestations of the new mind with that ON SCRiriirilAL SUBJECTS. 335 tnind itself," you will be at no loss to answer it yourselves, if I have succeeded in conveying to you what I offered in the early part of this letter, on the meaning of the term mi/id. Of the mind itsklk, cither old or new, we know litendlv nothing but its characters ; and among the characters of the new mind certainly arc those mentioned in the obnoxious jxirenthesis. I call them -also cliaracters, rather than (with you) manifestations. Tlie new viind, or characters of the inward man, are manifested in the conduct of the outward man. Do you mean, by calling these mental characters manifestations of the new mind, that they manifest a believer's faith to himself? I should hope you would reject that meaning of the expression, and reedly I know not any other. I think I have said as much on the general subject of your letter as ought to be needed. But let me add a few words on the parti- cular passage in the " Brief Account" which you censure. I see nothing in the whole which, fairly interpreted, is open to just objection. But when I define repentance to be " the new mind which the belief of the gospel produces," if any one should conceive that I mean either to exclude the belief of the gospel from its distinguishing features, or not to mark that as its leading feature, he would certainly much mistake my meaning. And I readily admit this misttike might be somewhat guarded against by substituting the words — " the change of mind which takes place in a sinner's believing the gospel." I do not, then, know any thing which I should wish to alter in the fol- lowing paragraph, which seems to have most displeased you ; unless that I would (if publishing it again) substitute subjection for devoted' ness ; and instead of " the sole work of God," say — what I meant — " the woi-k solely of God" — or something to that effect. If you read that paragraph with a view to the general scope of it, you will see that, after having stated in the former paragraph the scriptural sense of faith and repentance, considered in themselves and inde- pendently of their divine Author, I then proceed to state that God is the sole giver and maintainer of them, and that his revealed word is the instrument by which he works them. There is nothing in the sentiment that I could honestly alter or retract. But now I say ultimately, if what I have offered fail of reconciling you to the little pamphlet, let it be called in. The copies in Dublin can easily be so, as they were sent over by brother C -, and I shall buy up the copies in London from the bookseller whose property they ai'e. Were it not that the pamplilet professes to be a statement of our senti- ments as a body, I should not think myself warranted to call it in, on any objections that have been yet stated. My engaging in it did not originate in my own thought or wish. Indeed I was for some time very averse to it ; and after I undertook it, I should have been right glad to have had an opportunity of submitting it to some of you previous to publication. StiU I think it usefully calculated to suggest important points of scriptural truth to scattered disciples. But if we be not agreed in the sentiments which it contains, — (claim- ing only for the expression of them that candour of intei"pretation which everv human composition needs) — it certainly ought not to remain before the public. I shall only add, that I pray God to make 336 COLLECTION OF LETTERS you quick to discern, and able clearly to expose any thing which I may have said contrary to the purity of scriptural truth. Yours, very dear Brethren, Most affectionately for that truth's sake, P.S. (May 27th.) — Well — I have just returned from our meeting: and right glad should I be, brethi-en, that without any interference on your side you could have heard what passed on the subject of your letter. I think you would have been ear witnesses of its most injurious tendency. I should particularly like you to have heard an old shrewd Scotsman — (who was the individual that last Sunday desired a week's delay, that the brethren might consider and try to understand your letter) — that you could have heard him to-day avowing that he understood your meaning very well, and proceeding to explain it. I did not wonder at all when he explained it in the broadest way, as a new mind first given by the Spirit, and then the sinner believing with this neiv mind. I could only assure him, from all my long and intimate knowledge of your sentiments, that this was not, could not be your real meaning : that I am persuaded you would be among the foi-emost to reject that sentiment with abhor- rence. I shoidd be glad to have seen in him more prompt and marked abhorrence of it. But I am sorry to say, that under this conception of your meaning, he had in the course of the week spoken of the difference between us as only verbal: I should consider it as going to the very root of the gospel. But though utterly unable otherwise to interpret that extraordinary paragraph, in which you speak of our not believing with our own minds, but with or according to a new mind, — I shall not yet admit the fear but that you will explicitly disclaim all such notions. Dear brethren, might you not as well say that a believer does not himself believe, as that he does not believe with his own mind ? Indeed, the former is the only intelligible sense of the latter ; and that sense strikes me as very like nonsense. But let me not add to the length of this letter. The Church ulti- mately concurred unanimously in sending the reply which goes in their name. May it appear that they indeed hold fast the principles expressed in it ! I have not yet read to them this private letter of my own. But I shall think it needful to do so: though, alas! it unavoidably involves them in considerations with which they ought to have nothing to do. I need scarcely say, that I cannot be quite easy till I hear from you. May your next afford more satisfaction than your la^t ! If you perceive the dangerous tendency which I have marked in your language, you will of course calculate some of your future commu- nications— not merely for satisfying me — but for confirming the minds of young and weak disciples against the errors which you have seemed to countenance. And for a particular reason, I wish you to say very distinctly whether you concur or not with what is expressed in the sentence of the pamphlet, beginning, " Every thing called repentance," &c. ON SClUPTrUAL SUDJECTS. 33/ LXXXIl. TO A. M'I . June 12, 1821. Dear Sir, — I should not have been so slow in replying to your letter of the 8th ult., but that I have been ill and much hurried in settling mv family in a house which I have lately taken in London. At the same time, now that I take up my pen, I feel at a considerable loss how to address vou. I lind vou have been reading different publications of mine ; and the general approbation which you inti- mate of the sentiments they contain, is in some degree pleasing ; but it is ver}' indistinct. On the subject of church fellowship at least, you must greatlv mistake mv views, or you would not have thought it necessary to propose the question, whetlier I think you might to Join the Baptists in your place. You speak of having some time ago separated yourself from one of their societies ; but you do not mention on what grounds you took that step. If you take up and lay aside Christian fellowship as a matter of taste and individual fancv, it is of little consequence whom you join. I am rather surprised at your intimation that the Berean Baptists with you, agree with the doctrinal sentiments put forward in ray late publications : for I have had a good deal of communication by letter with several individuals of that connexion in Edinburgh, who decidedly differ from me as to the fundamental truth. The idea that a man's own heart is as whollv evil, after his believing the gospel as before, they avow to be unintelligible to them : and they deride all attempt to distinguish betAveen the good hope towards God, brought to a sinner directly by the testimony of his name in the gospel, and that confidence in which he builds himself up by the consideration that he is a believer. I have, therefore, every reason to fear that their boasted _ confidence rests on the latter sandy foundation. With respect to church order also, in which you say there is no difference between me and the two meetings in Cupar, there is such a great difference between me and the Berean Baptists of Edinburgh, that they do not come together on the first day of the week to break bread. But, indeed, they seem not to consider divine avthority in the matter at all : and this may probably account for a considerable diff'erence of practice in their difl^erent societies, without any interruption of the connexion which, I suppose, subsists between them all. If so, however, I think no better of the Bereans of Cupar than of the Bereans of Edinburgh. Your objection to them, "that they make Baptism the door of their church, because," &c. I think a weak objection. If their Baptism rested on scriptural grounds, they would do very right in not receiving a person who refused to be baptized. Do you think that a person, however professing to believe the Apostolic word, and desiring to be received into one of VOL. II. z 338 COLLECTION OF LETTERS th^ first Apostolic churches, would not have been rejected, if he, at the same time, declared that he must be excused from observing the Lord's Supper weekly ? Or, do you think that the weekly obser- vance of the Supper could therefore be fairly said to be the door of admission into the church ? No — there is an ungodly inconsistency in the idea of any man's wishing to walk in fellowship with a chris- tian church, but not to walk in the same way, or by the same rule, with them. The man who desires it, and the churches that yield it, are alike proceeding on antichristian principles. You speak of some Glasites meeting in your place. I should like to know what you think of them and of their doctrine, and why you do not seem to en- tertain the idea of joining that body. On the general principles of church fellowship they certainly have more scriptural notions than most others, and also, as far as I know, speak more clearly on tlie grand subject of grace reigning through righteousness by Jesus Christ, till they come to separate the assurance of faith from the as- surance of hope, and so bevvilder themselves with another hope, than that which the gospel brings to the guilty. How stands it with yourself here } Do you see in the revealed testimony concerning the work finished by Jesus Christ enough to satisfy your conscience ; — enough to give peace and confidence of approach into the holiest to any other sinner who believes the report of it, as declared to all alike in the scriptures ? Some talk very fairly about the work finished by the Lord Jesus ; but after all it appears that they do not see enough in it to satisfy their consciences and give them peace with God : and they go on to get this secret something, as yet un- possessed, by trying to walk so as to find out in themselves evidences of genuine faith. Others appearing for a time fairly to oppose that error, go on to substitute for the faith of the gospel a confidence that they are believers. The faint hopes of the former that their faith may perhaps be genuine, and the full persuasion of the latter that their faith is genuine, are much more nearly akin than the two par- ties imagine. But they are alike remote from the soul-satisfying peace, which the grand thing revealed in the gospel, affords to the sinner who discerns it. Blessed are their eyes that see this ; that see the real character of the mercy, which the gospel reveals as belonging to the only true God, in something of the glory of its ful- ness, freedom, and sovereignty, and in its awful holiness, brought in and brought to light through the wonderful propitiation for sin, which has taken it away. They, indeed, see the heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man ; they see that fulfilled which was set forth of old in vision to Jacob ; and in the discovery of it have their feet set in the way of jieace, and in the gracious presence of the living God. If any two or three sin- ners in Cupar be brought by divine power to this view, they are called to walk together and build up each other in this most holy faith, just as if there were two or three hundred of theni. You call on me for my foundation from scripture, for saying that two or three disciples may be a church of Christ. I might more justly call on you to produce any scriptural warrant for the idea, that the obliga- tion of disciples to obey the rule of the word, depends upon their ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 339 mimbers. Tlic nile is abundantly plain, that disciples of Christ are to come tof^ether on the first day of the week, to shew forth the Lord's death in the breakinf? of bread, and to observe the other ordi- nances as delivered by the apostles. Put the question, whether two or three disciples can be a church into plain English, by asking whether two or three disciples can assemble themselves, or come together thus into one place ; and jcrhaps the magic and mystery enveloping that ecclesiastical term church may be dissolved. I forget now what is the smallest number which the Glasites and others say can constitute a church — suppose seven. Well, let there be seven disciples in any place joining in church fellowship. Are they bound by divine authority to come together and observe the ordinances as the first churches of the saints did ? Are all of them alike so bound } Well — one of them dies in the course of the week. Can the divine rule be now abrogated to the other six ? As to those who talk of one or more elders being necessary to dispense the ordinance of the Suj)per, they ai-e but bringing in priests and priestcraft under another name. But you object (with many others) that two or three cannot form a church, because they cannot attend to the discipline as de- livered in the scriptures. And shall the possible occurrence of cir- cumstances, in which thev must cease to walk together as a church, prevent their so walking together till such circumstances occur ? Why — the same objection would equally prove that the seven disci- ples, or any other number which can be assigned, cannot constitute a church. For an evil either in sentiment or practice may appear among them, in which every individual but one may take a part and be involved ; and after the reproof and admonition of that one has been rejected, the ordinary and stated course of Christian discipline for purging out the evil cannot proceed : but all which the one who stands for the Lord can further do, is to leave the body — just as if there were but two disciples, and one of them failed of restoring his fallen brother by admonition, he could then only turn away from him. You ask me about the time when we observe the Supper. It is suffi- cient to reply, that we know of no meeting of a christian church on the first day of the week but one, when we obsers'e all the ordinances. The multiplication of religious meetings is altogether borrowed from the religious world, and makes a fair shew of edification by ob- servances not divinely appointed, but resting on human tradition. — That is always accompanied by a rejection of the appointments of God. I shall rejoice if any thing I have written be serviceable to you, and am, dear sir, youi"s faithfully, ?2 340 COLLECTION OF LETTERS LXXXIII. TO THE SAME, June 30. 1S21. Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of the 12th mst. with much pleasure : the reasons you assign for not thinking of joining the Glasites are abundantly conclusive, and the view you take of that people seems quite to coincide with my own ; yet I cannot but hope at times that there will be found, both among them and the Bereans, scattered disciples, who cannot however be manifested as such on earth, till they come out from their present connexion. When I speak of the Glasites as having juster views than most others, of the principles of church fellowship, I refer particularly to their profession of holding sacred all the institutions delivered to the first churches, in opposition to the ungodly liberality which, in most other societies, tolerates disobedience to them. In this Glas and Sandeman had quite the advantage of John Barclay. The latter (as far as I know, or can jvidge from his followers that I have known) appeared not to trouble his head about the divinely appointed order in the churches of the saints : probably under the idea of confining the direction of his zeal to the maintenance of the uncorrupted gospel. This certainly is the only topic on which I should ever wish to insist against those who deny it : but in walking with those who confess it with me, if we thought it released us from solemn attention to all the revealed will of our heavenly Father, as delivered to his children in the apostolic writings, we should certainly be setting the revelation of the Lord's glorious name in opposition to the reverence and godly fear which it commands from all who know it : and those who do so, however clearly they may talk of the truth, are not walking in it. Those who confess Christ before men, must confess him with reverential subjection as the king of Zion, as well as with godliness of heart, as the great high priest who has taken away sin by the one offering of himself in the place of the ungodly. I fancy that John Barclay would have been quite willing to remain in connexion with the Kirk of Scotland to his dying day, if he had been allowed : probably his flesh caught at the corruption of doctrine in the Glasite societies, as a pretext for turning away his ear from their -testimony for other points of the divine word ; and probably the Glasites were hardened in their rejection of his testimony against their corruption of doctrine, by observing his open disregard for divine institutions. I have formerly read what John Barclay wrote on the assurance of faith, and in general with much pleasure ; though I recollect thinking one or two passages ambiguously expressed, and suspecting that the Bereans have taken them in a sense difl'erent from what I be- lieve the author intended. But I am much better acquainted with his work on the Psalms, and esteem it highly. As to the expression in the Glasites' prayer which you mention, and on which you desire my ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 341 opinion, I luivc no hesitation in saying that I think it very bad, and indicative of a mind quite aside from the truth, under a fair tihew of lowliness ; but it corresponds with what I have often noticed in their prayers; that they seem to study to pray, os if they did not think themselves believers ; as if they did not think themselves at present children, and possessed of eternal life in Christ Jesus ; but hoping some time or other to become so. This is altogether opposite to the prayer of faith ; opposite to the mind in which Christ taught his disciples to pray, saying, " our Father;" opposite to the persuasion that God is what his word declares him to be ; for he tliat professedly calls upon God, and is at the same time doubting and questioning whether he is heard, and comes with acceptance before him, must at bottom be questioning whether the god, upon whom he calls, be the. only living and true God, who has revealed himself as the justifier of the ungodly, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus — the Saviour of all that call upon him. Tliose who use the phrase you mention, " if thou wilt thou canst make me clean," appear wholly to forget the declaration of our Lord Jesus to his disciples, " Now ve are clean through the word which I have spoken to you;" appear to avow iheir doubt whether his blood has taken away sin, whether it be true that he saves to the uttermost all who come to God by him. I think it verv likely that many of them have no distinct idea annexed to the words which they use ; but employ them as an unmeaning cant which they have been taught to think very modest and humble ; but it is too probable that others, bv the cleansing after which they groan, mean some change for the better in their own hearts, of which I am bold to sav that the man who asks it, gravely asks God to falsify his word. The full Glasite system upon the assurance of hope, where it is fully imbibed, I consider utter y inconsistent with all prayer, as well as with all praise ; that blessed exercise to which the Gospel calls continually all those who are brought nigh to God by the blood of the covenant, and for which the man, who was to the last moment a blaspheming infidel, but is this moment convinced of the great things of God reported in his word, has all the s<'\me ground and warrant with an apostle. I have met with one Glasite, a dear old man now dead, an Elder of the body in Liverpool, who, in prayer and conversation, seemed to have that peace of God in his conscience which the Gospel gives ; yet he was evidently restrained by the trammels of the system, so as to be half afraid of speaking as if he had it : he used to admit me also to a freedom of conversation with him, which is very unusual in their connexion. I confess that 1 often regret the repulsive stand-off manner by which they commonly shut the door against free and patient discussion. And now, my friend, opposite as the Berean confidence appears to be to the doubting system of the Glasite, I apprehend that the same principle is at bottom of both ; while the evil is much more refinedly disguised in the former. Tlie thorough Glasite prays doubtingly, because he is doubtful whether he has faith. The thorough Berean prays confidently, because he is confident he has faith : in each case is not our faith considered the warrant of our confidence ? The Gospel calls the evil and the lost to draw nigh with boldness to the 342 COLLECTION OF LETTERS throne of grace, because the grand things which it reports from heaven are assuredly true; because Christ has once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust, — and has risen again from the dead — because God is such a God as he has revealed himself to be. The divine certainty of these things warrants the fullest confidence towards God in any sinner on earth : but I have to acknowledge my own evil heart continually working in opposition to the divine glory of God ; and have nothing fine to say like the Bereans, about the high degree of believing confidence in which I actually walk : when it is strongest it is less than a grain of mustard-seed, in comparison of the greatness of the things of God which excite it ; while I bless him that his real glory and truth so much over-pass the narrow limits of my faith. You tell me that the Bereans with you object to the expression of my reply, " while kept standing in the truth, I can never," &c. (Vol i. p. 456.) I need no more information about them to mark to me their mind, high and lifted up with a presumptuous self-con- fidence altogether different from the hope of the Gospel. So then they would have me say absolutely, ' I never can have any difficulty in avowing that I believe, and that believing I have eternal life :' the professor, who would deliberately say so, I would consider "as advancing a boast as vain as Peter before he fell : there is no depth of unbelief into which / could not, or should not plunge, if but left to my own heart. Yet this consideration cannot in the least disturb my rejoicing in the hope of the glory of God, while kept in memory (you see I again use that oflfensive while) of that salvation which belongeth to the Lord. I would observe to you that I have no wish for the concealment of any thing I write upon Scripture subjects, or indeed any thing I think, so far as I have formed a judgment upon them. I should be very glad that both the Bereans and the Glasites with you would give a patient reading to what I have written ; you are surrounded by a great variety of professors ; and your country is the most theological country I ever knew. Guard against your mind being occupied, and your attention being distracted from the simplicity of the word, by the various systems of men. Human theology, in its most shining form, is a thing essentially difi'erent from the light and understanding, which the entrance of the divine word giveth to the foolish, and such are we continually. P.S. Some expressions in pages 24 and 25 of J. Barclay's Assurance of faith, I think verv bad. ON SClUrTl'llAL SUlUliCTS. :U3 LXXXIV. TO T. A , KSQ. Oct. 24, 1821. My dkar T , — I dare say you will be surprised at getting a letter from nie, but let me hope that you will not be displeased, even when you find it a letter of serious admonition and reproof. To the language of faithful reproof, we are all naturally averse. The pride of our vain and wicked heart rises up against it : and while we arc striving to cover our evil ways, even from our own view, we regard any attempt of any other to expose the evil to us, as intrusive and offen- sive, though it is reaUy the most important expression of true affec- tion. There is solemn weight in that divine declaration, " the ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise ;" but " he that refuseth instruction sinneth against his own soul." Prov. xv. 31, 32. But let me come at once to the immediate occasion of my writing. You have, I dare say, heard of the rich mercy that appears to have been extended to • . I say appears — because God alone knows whether that word of eternal life which he now confesses, does indeed dwell in him. Everv appearance at present is most gratifying, and I trust will be progressively confirmed by the prac- tical fruits in his conduct ; though he must probably, throughout his life, smart under the temporal effects of his former wickedness. That is a small thing, if his spirit be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. He mentioned to me, some days ago, his having met you several times before he left Dublin, in one of those gambling houses which he frequented — not (he admits) either playing yourself or betting. Being then in that mind which rejoices in iniquity, he states that he rejoiced to see you there — rejoiced in the idea of your having thrown off the trammels of the Christian profession ; and it was with consi- derable surprise that he learned here, that you are still in outward fellowship with us. He observes truly, that though you did not at the time engage in the gambling whicli you witnessed, yet the almost inevitable consecjuence of your frequenting such scenes must be, that you wiU be drawn in to take an active part in them : and the temporal ruin of this I need not enlarge on. Indeed, it is far the least important i)art of the subject. But, my dear T , supposing you were never to be led on to that further step, is a notorious gambling house a suitable scene for a disciple of the Lord to frequent ? As children of the light and of the day, we are called to " have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather to reprove them." (Ephes. v. 11.) We are called " to let our light shine before men" to the glory of our heavenly Father (Mat. v. 16. 1 Pet. ii. 9.); and if we attempt to reconcile with this, our seeking amusement in the haunts of the grossest wickedness, avowedly appropriated to the prosecution of the works of darkness — and to reconcile the two under any pretence of exercising our Christian liberty, we are plainly turning the grace of 344 COLLECTION OF LETTERS God into lasciviousness, and might, with equal plausibility, vindicate our seeking amusement in a brothel. But even the persuading you to abandon all such practices would fall quite short of my real aim in writing. That is, to direct your attention to the root of the evil — to the character of the unbelieving fleshly mind, after which we mast be walking, when we walk in such a course. Vf e must then have lost sight of the great things of God testified in the word from heaven. We must have fallen into a lifeless formal profession of the faith, in which we cease to be persuaded of the divine realities of the kingdom of heaven, though a remaining suspicion that they may turn out true, perhaps prevents our expressly renouncing the faith. But are we not then living to ourselves, and not unto Him whose we profess to be ? Are we not then really walking after the flesh, after the imaginations of our own evil hearts, and not in the truth ? Are we not deceiving ourselves with a name that we live, while we are dead ? " For if we say that we have fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ, while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth." 1 John i. 6. Is it not a fact, T , that your inti- mate associates and pretended friends are young men of notorious pro- fligacy of manners ? And how can we fairly account for your compla- cency in them and their complacency in you ? If, in your intercourse with them, you were acting and speaking as a disciple and witness of the Lord, they would soon be sick of your society. But is it not the fact, that in the idle vanity of imitating their licentious dissipa- tion, you would be ashamed boldly to confess the Lord Jesus before them ? And it is a solemn word which he has pronounced against those who are ashamed to confess his name before men. Well — I do not conceal from you that I think your state is a very awful one, — marked with the characters of an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God. Yet I view it with a hope derived from the nature of his glorious gospel, that he will open your ear to the reproof of his word — to the instruction of that divine wisdom, of which it is pronounced, " happy is the man that findeth her." Prov. iii. 13. O that you may hear " the voice behind you" — the voice of Him on whom you have turned your back — wooing you, in the accents of sovereign mercy, to turn to Him and live. His presence surrounds you while you read these lines. His faithful word testifies the rich mercy that is with him, the great salvation that belongeth to him — " Incline your ear and come unto Him ; hear and your soul shall live." Is. Iv. 3. Read the whole of that chapter, and read it as the voice of Him that speaketh from heaven, in connexion -with the apostolic testimony of him " whom man despiseth," but who is set for the salvation of God unto the ends of the earth ; — once made a curse in the place of transgressors, that sinners, even the chief, may be blessed in Him and brought to eternal glory by Him. Brought back to the remembrance of His glorious truth, you will feel the force of that language — " Ye are not your own, for ye are bought with a price : therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." I shall wait in anxious expectation of hearing from you, and in the hope that your reply will afford me joy and not grief. ON' SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 345 LXXXV. TO MRS. M . 18!21. Dkau Mrs. M. — I feel myself, on various accounts, at a loss in attempting to reply to your inquiry. You know that I do not think vou, in vour present mind, competent to judge upon that subject ; and how far any cf the parties are, about whom you arc interested on the occasion, I am ignorant. However, I can have no objection to express my own views on the general question : and if any one should desire further communication with me in explanation of them, I believe you know that I am easily accessible. Persuaded as I am that the Scriptures afford a rule sufficiently directive and divinelv authoritative for the regulation of Christ's disciples, both in their individual and collective capacity — a rule which never has been annulled, and never can to the end of the world ; I consider the precept in 1 Cor. v. 11. as binding on me now, as it was on the Corinthian believers when Paul sent them his letter. But this view binds me to consider the real meaning of the apostolic direction from the context, and from the whole analogy of Scripture ; and thus I am led to view the precept as restricting the civil intercourse of disciples — not with those of the world, who have never walked with them in the fellowship of a Christian church — in which alone disciples can walk together scripturally — but with those who have appeared of that household of faith, but have been removed from it, according to the scriptural discipline by which its purity is to be maintained ; and I consider the civil intercourse with such, which is prohibited, as that, which indicating complacency in them, would convey — on the side of the disciples who should indulge in it — that their minds had ceased to be impressed with an awful sense of the evil, which had occasioned the separation of the offending brother from their fellowship, and would thus be injuriously calculated to weaken the solemn testimony of the body against it in his view. With respect to the Antichristian world around me, with whom I have never walked in the scriptural fellowship of the gospel, I do not think that this Apostolic precept bears at all on my social intercourse with them. But even in the case where it does apply, and where I and mv brethren aim at observing it, I have another remark to make. From the whole analogy of Scripture I am sure that neither it, nor any precept rightly understood, will be found to trench upon any of those duties, which are connected with the various relations of life. I am, therefore, persuaded that the precept would be misunderstood, if a disciple took it in all cases literallij. A husband and wife — a parent and child — a master and his apprentice, may be so circumstanced, that the wife, the child, or the apprentice, shaJl be called to be regulated by that precept, in their deportment towards the husband, the father, or the master. Now, I conceive they would greatly mistake, if they thought themselves actually forbid to sit at the same table and eat with those, towards whom thcv stand in such an intimate relation, the duties of 346 COLLECTION OF LETTERS which may require that they should do so. And, although those who wish to set aside all the peculiar precepts of the divine word, may think that, in saying this, I concede a case in which one of them cannot be obeyed, it is really no such thing. Such a case is as supposable when the apostle wrote, as at this day ; and only proves that the thing really forbidden, is that voluntary needless intercourse which is sought for the purpose of mutual satisfaction, and indicative of mutual complacency. I should not, therefore, consider myself debarred at all by the precept, from remaining at the table of one of the world who had bid me to a feast, though I found seated at it a pel son who had been removed from the fellowship of the church, and whom I, therefore, could not ask as a guest to my own ; and though I should literally eat with him in such a case, yet, if I bear in mind the divine direction in its real import, it will importantly regulate my deportment and demeanour towards him, though certainly not so as to produce moroseness or incivility. He knows that I have not sought his society, and nothing in my manner should lead him to think that I enjoy it. When I have marked voluntary needless intercourse even in civil life, as the thing forbidden in that passage, I mean to include all that intei'course which does not arise from, and is not connected with, the duties of the various relations in which the providence of God places disciples ; and among these duties there is, 1 think, a degree of kind correspondence and occasional intercourse with those, with whom I stand in other very close fleshly relations be- sides the few I have mentioned. I have two sisters, for instance, who once stood in Christian fellowship with me, but have long ceased to do so, from their turning aside to the religions of the world. Our inter- course is in consequence very little, very dry, and unsatisfactory : yet I occasionally write to them ; and were I in their neighbourhood, would think myself called to see them ; or if they came to London I should have them, if they needed the accomodation, at my house : and yet I might all the time be regulated by that divine precept, which I am sure was not designed to interfere with the natural kindness due to such near relations according to the flesh. As to the precept in 2 John 10, I think it simply forbids disciples to extend that hospitality to teachers of another doctrine, which would indicate a desire to forward the objects they have in view. Disciples were called to be helpful to those who were indeed engaged in the ministration of the word of Christ ; and, as in other ways, so in receiving them into their houses, and affording them such accommo- dations of lodging and of food as they might need. But this help they are forbidden to afford to any one who taught differently from the apostles, lest they should even appear to countenance " his evil deeds." I conceive that I might occasionally have at my table, in the way of courteous neighbourly intercourse, one of the clergy or preachers of the religious world, who are teaching (I am. sure) in direct opposition to the word of the apostles, and yet without at all violating that precept in John : because it would not even appear to be done for abetting his evil deeds. Yet I own that in proportion as I observe any of them calculated to deceive, by an approximation of language and profet^sion to the truth, I am disposed, and feel myself called in general, to avoid them. ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 3i: LXXXVl. , 1821. You ask my opinion on the letter which you gave me to read, and tlie character of tlie writer. The general complexion of the letter is indeed bitter had, for it seems to be an attempt to encourage some one, who spoke the language of unbelief, to entertain some favourable opinion about his state and character. Any attempt so to encourage any one (believer or unbeliever) is contrary to the truth — as much so as the state of mind that needs such ungodly encouragement, that wants to see something favoural^Ie about them, in order to come to God with confidence. It is true, that the encouragement afforded in many passages of the letter, would appear to be derived from the consideration of the revealed truth of God — the mercy that is with him. But how inconsistent with that is the idea of en- couracjing a fellow sinner, to whom the divine testimony is sent, to believe what God reveals. Tlie apostles, in setting forth Jesus Christ as the propitiation, warned men indeed of the awful conse- quences of disbelieving the record which God hath given of his Son ; but when did they set about encouraging , and coaxing, and entreating, and charging them " to receive into their hearts the joyful tidings" — or, in plain language, to believe it .'' The idea is more suitable to those who mean, by believing, some venturesome act (as they call it) of the mind : which is nothing more or less than a presump- tuous venture to believe that they are believers. Its inconsistency with the scriptural simple meaning of faith will be manifest, if we apply it to a human testimony, from the reception of which the apostle illustrates the reception of the divine. 1 John v. 9. " Ah! do beheve what I have told you." What nonsense in the affairs of men ! What wicked nonsense when applied to the things of God ! But one encouragement plainly suggested in the letter, is plainly contrary to the truth — ' Has he not given you to wisJi to be delivered from it V That is thorough language of the insidious teachers of a gospel that is not the gospel of Christ — daubing the wall with un- tempered mortar. Whether the person addressed was encouraged by the supposed discovery of that icish in his heart, or continued mourning at not being able to find it, the person addressed was alike in either case astray from the hope of the gospel, and the encouragement which it affords and conveys to any ungodly sinner who believes it. The writer of the letter would seem then to have no gospel, no glad tidings, nothing joyfully encouraging to lay before a man absolutely so wicked, as to have no wish that is nst opposed to the truth of God. Yet to such the apostles published their gospel, and all, that believed what they told, rejoiced. Their gospel to be sure is only fit for such. When I am asked my opinion 348 COLLECTION OF LETTERS of the state or character of the writer of the letter, I suppose I am asked whether I think him a believer or not. Reading some parts alone (such as the parenthesis in the second page) I should hope that he may : reading others alone I should conclude that he is not. And reading the whole, I can only say, that if he does not receive the reproof of the Word, when the wickedness of the general tenor of the letter is pointed out to him, and reject with abhorrence the sen- timents in it that oppose the truth, I must conclude him a stranger to the faith and hope of the gospel. But I must add, that this part of the question proposed to me, seems to originate from a mind that looks more at the characters and reputation of men to determine what is truth, than at the word of God. With persons of this mind, corrupting the word of God is a venial error, but invading the character of a man is an unpardonable sin. LXXXVII. TO MR. J. C. G . Oct. 14, 1821. Sir, — You were not mistaken in supposing that 1 would receive with readiness any such communication as you have favoured me with. Few things would gratify me more than that those who differ from me at present most widely, should yet afford an oppor- tunity of amicably discussing our differences ; and I often regret that this is so generally denied me. But beforg I reply to the im- mediate subject of your letter, allow me to observe upon it in gene- ral, that although I hold the question of oaths to be one of very great importance to disciples, (as I consider every thing i-elative to the revealed will of their God and Saviour) yet I bv no means con- sider it oi priynary importance. In that rank I hold but one thing — the faith and hope of the gospel : and till there appears agreement in that, I have no desire to labour for agreement on any points rela- tive to the conduct of disciples. I am not sure that I quite understand what you mean to put for- ward against my views of the unlawfulness of all oaths to a Chris- tian ; and certainly I do not understand at all the sense you affix to the precept " Swear not at all." You say that I hold my own views " in opposition to all explanation." Now I confess that I have never found proposed any explanation of the passage, opposite to its obvious meaning, which would stand a moment's critical or rational examination. You ask me, " is not such a most solemn affirmation as I admit to be lawful, something more than the literal yea, or the literal nay prescribed by our Lord as tlie limits of our communica- tions V Now I never intended to convey that the Lord confined ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS 349 his disciples to any particular form of words in expressing their nffiriiiation : but I conceive that he confines them to atfirmation, and that the pinii)licity of mere affirmation is not at all aflcctcd bv its solemnity. The shnpliciti/ of mere affirmation I consider as standing opposed to the pledging of ourselves, under any forfeiture, to the truth of what we declare, or to the certainty of what we promise. It is the latter, indeed, against which the Lord's prohibition is immediately pointed. I by no means say that the precept points particularly to Judicial oaths ; but I say that it points to oaths in general — oaths properly so called — in which men " bind their souls with a bond" that they will do so or so ; (see No. xxx.) and I say that every oath administered in this country, even to the swearing of a common affidavit, is such : and I candidly own to you that this — while it seems to me clearly the very thing against which the Lord's precept is pointed, is a thing so inconsistent with all the principles of revealed truth, that I now dare not do it, if there were no such express prohibition of it as I see. ^NHien you speak of the literal precept as violated by a Judicial affirmation, as much as by a Judicial oath, 1 suppose you must refer to the solemnity of the affirmation. But if you refer to this as constituting a viola- tion of the precept, it is plain that the Judicial occasion of it has nothing to do with your position ; and how you then reconcile the solemnity of some of Paul's affirmations with the precepts of his Lord, I am quite at a loss to conjecture. But it is very possible that, from a misconception of your meaning, I may be fighting in the dark; and I am persuaded that an hour's conversation would go farther towards producing a mutual understanding, on this and other points, than ten hour's writing. Have you any objection to afford me such an opportunity ?****** Lxxxvin. TO THE SAME. Nov. 6, 1821. Dear Sir, — My answer to your last has been delayed longer than J could wish, by bad health and much occupation with business. Let me indulge the hope, as long as nothing appears to forbid it, that vou are not mistaken in supposing we are essentially agreed on the faith and hope of the gospel. On that I would only say at pre- sent, that there can be no disagreement there, that is not an essential disagreement. But on the immediate subject of our correspondence, we certainlv do not as yet understand each other. In such cases I commonly find it advantageous to mark distinctly how Jar I agree with the person, with whom I am engaged in discussion, that it may appear more distinctly where our disagreement lies. I therefore say. 350 COLLECTION OF LETTERS that I quite agree with you, that it is to the rra/ meaning of the pas- sage we are to attend, and not to the mere sound of the words ; and that, in considering the real meaning of this passage, we must fairly take into account both the preamble, by which the prohibition is intro- duced, and the reasons by which it is enforced. Again, I quite agree with you that the preamble refers to Num. XXX. 2. and gives us not jjartially — but wholly — the subject matter on which the Lord intended to comment. Again, I quite agree with you, both that it may proceed from evil if we employ any peculiar solemnity of affirmation on an unsuitable occasion, and that it may in other instances not proceed at all from evil, to make the most solemn appeal to the Searcher of hearts for the truth of what we say : and I would add, that I hold this to be so, not merely in a case of life or property, nor merely when we are judicially or publicly called on to do so — (the cases to which you seem to con- fine the lawfulness of the thing) — but in other cases also ; such, for instance, as those in which we find an apostle thus solemnly con- firming the truth of what he declares. And, lastly, I quite agree with you, that no abuse by others of a thing intrinsically lawful can impeach the legitimate use of it by us. But now I could wish that you had not broken off so abruptly towards the close of your letter, when you say that the Lord's " own reasoning comes decisively to our aid in judging of his inten- tions, and clearly leads to the real object of his animadversions and legislation." I could wish that you had proceeded to mark distinctly what that real object in your view is, so as to distinguish between it and all that is now strictly and properly called an oath. As well as I can coUect your meaning, however, it is this — that the Lord for- bids to his disciples all voluntary solemnity of confirmation when they declare any thing as true, beyond a simple assertion that the thing is or is not so or so : and I think you use the word volun- tary here, in opposition to those occasions on which a magistrate or judge requires such solemnity of confirmation at our hands. Now if I be right in my conjecture that this is your meaning, I can confi- dently undertake to prove that you are mistaken. In the first place, let me remark, that in an important sense — no act of mine is the less voluntary for being done at the requisition of a magistrate. Suppose Nero commanded me on pain of death to go and burn in- cense on the altar of Jupiter. If I do so, I do it voluntarily . I have the alternative — the choice proposed to me — to do so or to suffer death ; and I chuse the former. If I be dragged indeed by force to the altar, my being there is no act of mine, and nothing voluntary. But even then, if I take the incense in my hand and put it on the fire, this is my voluntary act. However, if you chuse to use the word voluntary merely as opposed to what is done at the command of a magistrate, I shall not contest your right to do so, though I think it a misapplication of the term. But then I know not how you can reconcile with vour interpretation, the solemnity of Paul's declaration, made neither publicly nor at the requisition of any magistrate. But in the next place I would observe, that your interpretation is ON SCRIPTURAL SLliJlXTS. 331 utterly at variance with that preamble, which you justly refer to as niarkini; tlio g-oneral theme of the Lord's di.«coursc. From that we find iudisputably it relates, not to any solemnity of declaration of what is true — not to any asseveration of -a fact that has taken place, — but to engagements under which men bind them.-ielves with respect to their future conduct. This, I think, cannot be controverted, whether we look merely at the Lord's words in the .33d verse, or at Xiiinb. XXX. to which his words plainly refer. I would observe, also, that I think you mistaken as to what you call the Lord's 7-easo/ung in the passage. He has condescended to enforce his precept by as- signing reasons ; but those reasons do not lie in the words to which you refer, (v. 37.) These words are but an authoritative declaration of the evil from which every departure from his precept originates. The reaso>is are given in the three preceding verses — namely, that none of the things are our own, under the forfeiture of which we would pledge ourselves to act so or so, and that over the least of them we have no power. Now, my dear sir, if this reasoning be admitted to have any force, it applies as forcibly to such an en- gagement made at the requisition of a magistrate as to one made ever so voluntarily : it concludes the intrinsic unlawfulness of all such engagements, by which we would bind our souls with respect to our future conduct : and no earthly magistrate can convert into lawful what is intrinsically unlauful. I have been assured by one who long served in high rank in the East Indies, that it to this day is no uncommon mode of judicial swearing among the natives there, to swear by the head of a near relation, a wife or child, (the juror placing his hand upon the head of the person) and that the meaning is well understood to be the staking of the life of that person, as devoted to fall a victim to the anger of the gods in case the juror fail of what he engages. Well, suppose a magistrate called on me to pledge in this way, swearing by my own head. Would the reasoa which the Lord assigns against the thing cease to applv, because a magistrate commanded it ? The only remaining question to a disciple ought to be — Are the oaths taken in this country engagements of such a nature as the thing prohibited ? (For I readily allow that the mere nayne of oath shoidd not decide the matter.) I say — yes — every one of them. Everv one of them is an engagement binding the juror's soul as to his future conduct under the most awful of all pledges, over which he has no power ; while he presumes to stake it, and expresses his desire to forfeit if he fail of fulfilling what he engages to do. I will do so and so ; and may God so help me as I shall fulfil my engagement. Asa Christian, I acknowledge the Christian duty which I always owed to the king and the constituted authorities of the state. But could \, as a Christian, pledge myself under the forfeiture of the divine favour, that I will discharge that duty the next hour } or that I will not commit murder to-morrow } I believe I need not trouble myself to prove to you, that the oath of testimony in those countries, and even the swearing of an affidavit is as much a promissory oath as the oath of allegiance ; and you are well aware what is the course of exami- nation of a child, to ascertain whether it understands the nature of an 352 COLLECTION OF LETTERS oath — and what is the only reply that is looked for to the question— 'And what do you think will be the consequence if you should not tell the truth after swearing to tell it ?' ' I shall go to hell.' Yes — the poor Japanese, when he dashes the china plate to the ground in his form of swearing, probably contemplates only a similar destruc- tion to his body, which he prays to light on him if he shoidd swear falsely. The so-called Christians have just leanied from the scrip- tures to sport with a more tremendous stake. But the disciple of Christ, who remembers that " a man's goings are not from him- self," will shrink from pledging himself absolutely as to any thing in his future conduct : much less will he desire that the salvation of his soul may be taken off from that ground on which the scriptures rest it — ("not of him that willeth or of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy") — and made to rest on his own adherence to the engagements which he forms. Let me add a brief word on the two passages to which you refer — Exod. xxii. 11. Numb. v. 19, 22. They are dissimilar from each other, but both alike essentially different from all engagements with respect to future conduct. In the former, there is mentioned " an oath of the Lord that he had not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods ;" and here I have no reason to think that any thing more is intended than a solemn appeal to the Lord — or declaration of the fact as before the Lord — to which on a suitable occasion I make no objec- tion. In the latter passage, decisively " an oath of cursing" was enjoined in the case. But let it be remembered, that it was en- joined by divine authority, and connected with the miraculous effect assigned to the bitter water of jealousy, and that it also related to an antecedent fact, the truth of which the God of Israel saw fit to decide by his own interposition. Now had it pleased the Lord to command his disciples, under the new dispensation, to appeal to him in any similar way to decide a controverted fact, I say that in such an appointment there would not have been a tittle of inconsis- tency with the prohibition in Mat. v. 34, which we are discussing : yet I acknowledge that, without such a divine appointment, it would be most evil and presumptuous to appeal to him for any such miraculoiis interference. I remain, sir, with best wishes. Yours faithfully, LXXXIX. TO HIS BROTHER, JAMES WALKER. 1821. My DEAR James, ***** * — You say that j/" my ideas of religion lead me to believe that primitive Christianity may be again revived, yours is the very country (Tennessee, U, S.) where I may be ON" SCRlPTrUAL SURJIiCTS. 3.1:] useful. Vcs. mv dcnr James, I believe, find aru puro, tliat primitive C'hristianitv shall he ac:ain revived ; nay, I witness its revival, tlu)Ui::h in a verv small and despised wav. Tiic trround on wliich I c\])ress nivself with so nuieh eontidence, is that word of the Lord " whieli ahideth for ever." He has said that he will consume the man of sin with the spirit of his mouth, 2Thess. ii. 8; and " is any thina:too hard for me, saith the Lord ?" Every departure from primitive Christianity, either in doctrine or in practice, is the work of the man of sin — the effect of human ungodliness corrupting and setting aside the word of God ; and bv that word, as " the sword of his sjjirit" — " the sword which proceedeth out of his mouth," he is bringing back the flock of his pasture to the good old paths from which they have been turned. It is one of the signs of the times, an indication of the apjiroaching appearance of the Lord from heaven. There are many adversaries : but he laugheth them to scorn, and his is the kingdom, the power, and the glorv. AW of ma/i's that has been displayed on earth since the entrance of sin into the world, has been one exhibition of ungodliness, and of besotted blindness — of rebellion, stubbornness, and ingratitude : but on that dark ground the mercy and the power of God are exhibited, accomplishing that work of saving whom he will, which is his own exclusively, and in which he displays all his glory. I should be very glad to send you some of my publications on the subject, and I hope yet to find an opportunity of doing so. I think I will enclose in this letter a smaller tract — very short — but simply putting forward that fun- damental divine truth, of which it is declared, " whosoever believeth shall be saved." All return to primitive Christianity must commence there. As long as men disbelieve the truth of God, and are left to strong delusions that they should believe any of the lies which pass under the name of Gospel, but are not the Gospel — all their religion is vain, and all their very sacrifices abomination to the Lord. And such/alse religion is one of the main instruments in the hands of the man of sin for leading his captives to destruction. In the revealed truth of God there is one thing alone excellent and glorious dis- covered, the glory of the Lord — as just, and yet the jiistifier of the ungodly — the just God, and yet the Saviour of sinners, even the chief, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. He a])])eared once in the end, or last age of the world, to ])ut awav sin by the sacrifice of himself, Heb. ix. 26. He has finished that work ; it is done ; and the divine acceptance of that, his one oftering for sin, has been proved bv his resurrection from the dead. The Gospel is sent preaching or proclaiming to the rebellious peace by Jesus Christ — l)eace made by the blood of his cross, who bore the sins of manv, and was made a curse for them, that men might be blessed in him. ITie same divine word brings nigh this righteousness and salvation of God, to every one alike to whom it comes in the declaration, not that whoso doeth this or getteth that to forward himself to it — but that whoso believeth the testimony of God shall be saved — not put into a siUvable state (as many profanely talk) in which he may save himself if he bestir himself sufficiently in the work — but sItuUbc saved unto the uttermost by him, who is the captain of salvation appointed VOL. II. 2 A 354 COLLECTION OF LETTERS to bring many sons unto glory. The belief of this of old gladdened the heart, enlightened the eyes, and made wise unto salvation even the betrayers and murderers of the Lord of glory. They were then taught by the apostles how they ought to walk and to please God, as children of the light and of the day, as heirs of the kingdom. And those apostolic instructions are still given in the New Testament Scriptures, and in the record of the way in which the first churches walked in the fellowship of the Gospel. " He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." * * * * It is now many years since I have renounced with abhorrence the title of Reverend, and the whole of the clerical character connected with it. That character, under whatever name or modification, is one of the ungodly fictions of the man of sin, and one of the main pillars of Antichrist's kingdom. xc. Dec. 8th, 1821. My VERY DEAR Dr. . — Though I should in general be glad to take up my pen to you at any time, yet I own that on the present occasion there are considerations which would make me very averse to it, if I dare yield to them. But as I see that I ought to encounter the task, let me set about it cheerfully ; in the hope that it will end in the profitable correction of error, on which ever side that error exists at present. Poor B has naturally and necessarily trans- mitted to our brother C ■ your two letters, with a copy of his reply to your first. You will, in the first instance, be confirmed in your apprehension that our minds " need some regulation on the subject," and that we " have still to learn what the scriptures teach about church-bounty," when I tell you honestly that I dislike your letters very much ; that I think they are very like giving a brother a stone when he asks for bread ; and seem to me to assert principles with great confidence as scriptural, which — from their plain opposi- tion to the spirit of brotherly kindness — I am persuaded the Word does not sanction. Observe, that however I may have occasion to advert to B 's case for the purpose of illustration, I write not to press that case upon your attention, but to sift the general principles of the Word, You say that his case " is not such as can scriptiirally be met with the bounty of the church :" — that " the objects of church-bounty are such as may be said to be past labour and deso- late;"— referring for the proof of this to 1 Tim. v. 4, -5, 9, 16. Now, if this language (in the connexion in which it stands) have any meaning, it must mean that this passage marks the limit, beyond which church-bounty cannot scripturally extend. And I conceive (IN sen [I'TURAL SUBJECTS. 3').') that you niiglit as n-aponahly adduce the same scripture to prove, that no ])oor eaint-* hut tvidows are to have their necessities suppHed hv the church, and no widows but those who are at least sixty years old. As to the .')th verse, if you can point out to nie its precise meaning', I shall be glad ; for I confess myself doubtful about it : but I am quite sure that it does not mean what you seem to adduce it to prove. As to the 4th and 16th verses, if you can shew that 15 has anv near relatives, who arc able to relieve his wants and are believers, their attention ought to be directed to the plain instinic- tion there given. There remains only the oth verse, which I believe you will scarcelv say has any thing to do with the question : and I am utterly at a loss to conjecture what part of the entire passage you mean to sav proves that IJ^ 's case " cannot scriptunilly be met with the bounty of the church." As to desolate, if you had taken any trouble to inquire, you would have found that he has long been so desolate, that but fbr the bountv of an individual brother he might have starved in a gaol. And it does seem to me extraordinary to assert, that what any individual may scrij)turally do in such a case, a number of the brethren, or the whole body, cannot scripturally assist in doing. What mystic charm is this you have discovered in the word church ? Besides that passage in Timothy, you refer in proof of your assertion to Rom. xii. 13. Now, in the whole of the latter passage, from the 9th verse, it does appear to me that the apostle treats of the conduct and tempers of individual believers one towards another, rather than of any thing to which he calls the church in its collective capacity as a body. Ajid if I judge rightlv in that, and you judge rightly in thinking that the 13th verse amounts to di pro- hibition, on those addressed in it, to supply B 's wants, it must exclude him from the bounty of any individual brother, at least as much as from church-bounty . I confess I think you had not any right to rebuke poor B so sharply for not yielding to \.\\q force of what you put forward as scripture principles. But I am sure you had every right to rebuke him sharply for his worse than foolish lan- guage about brother C and myself ; and also to expose the un- suitableness of his applying to anv church for a loan. But observe, my dear F , (1 think it not unimportant to note it, in order to call your attention to the kind of mind in which vou wTote) — observe that you quoted Rom. xii. 13. as excluding his case from the bounty of the church, before you had got any of that proof against him, which you think his reply affords, that it was not for necessities he sought relief, but that it was in " a worldly speculation" he desired the church to aid him. You think liis reply affords you proof of this ; but it is because vou misunderstand it : and your mistake might easily have been prevented or rectified by a communication with P . For bread to eat and raiment to ])ut on (which I think are necessaries) he must have continued dependent on the bounty of his brethren. I am ashamed of the special-pleading question which you put — " are your /??//;//*• saints ?" — as if he thought of their being sup- ported by the bounty of the church. He does undoubtedly " hope to make gain of them;" — if that be sufficient to put down his object as a " worldlv speculation." And so would a shoe-maker hope to 2 A 2 356 COLLECTION OF LETTERS make gain of the leather which he bought. And therefore, I suppose, a christian of that trade, but so poor that he could not buy leather, could not svripturally apply to the church to aid him in the purchase ; nor could his case scripturally be met with the church-bounty. If he did apply, it would certainly be very fair and right for the deacons to exercise a sound discretion in judging, whether it would not be better for him to seek journey-work : but I can easily conceive the circum- stances to be such, that he could not get any journey-work, from not having served a regular apprenticeship, or various other causes : and to say that it would then be unscriptural to apply to his bre- thren, either individually or collectively, to enable him to get the materials by which he has a prospect of earning his own bread ; — to say that the scriptures " prescribe limits of church-bounty," out of which he lies, because he is not past his labour, or because he aims at making a gain of the materials, &c., does appear to me, I confess, a gross abuse and perversion of scripture. When I read in scripture of a christian church, that none among them lacked ; — when I hear an apostle saying, " bear ye one another's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ ;" — and presenting to the attention of disciples on the subject, that principle of the word — " he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack ;" — I ought to be very jealous of your language, as indeed a worldhj speculation, when you talk about the limits of church- bounty prescribed by scrip- ture. I know no limits, but the ability and willingness of the church on the one hand, and the real good of the brother to be aided on the other. ' But if the church were to aid B in carrying into efiect his worldly speculation — for earning his bread, — they would be em- ployed in raising bounty, to put one member much above most of the others.' Well ; I shall allow some force to that argument when you shew, either that B is aspiring to any situation above that " wherein he was called;" — or that he can earn his bread in any other situation. I am intimately acquainted with him and with his affairs ; and I confess 1 know not any way in which he could set about earning his bread different from the present, — or on a more moderate scale, — or with any thing like so fair a prospect of success- ful exertion. I am sure you could not expect a man near seventy years old, who has never worked as a day-labourer, to earn his bread by digging. And yet he might be immediately connected with a church, in which every other member was a day-labourer. If they affected to become farmers and to live in slated bouses, it might im- mediately appear that they were forgetting that truly important word, which calls us " not to mind high things but conform to low :" while he might be perfectly warranted by scripture in seeking means for doing so, as the only way in which be could make the legitimate effort to eat his oicn bread. But why is he — not only to be refused the aid he sought, but made an offender for seeking it .'' If .he meant by calling on the church in Dublin, or by having a claim on them, any such claim as it was co7npulsory on them to answer, — (but I am sure he did not) — he meant very wrong indeed. Christian bounty, I conceive, is in all cases a matter of bounty and not of necessity. The only compulsion iu it is the constraining inliueuce of the love of ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 357 Christ ; the only necessity, tlmt which the law of love binds upon the conscience. And here also I believe we differ. You seem to conceive that a church, however abounding in means, is not to be applied to for the relief of necessitous brethren, unless in some ex- treme cases which you contemplate, and in which you think the ap- plicant is warranted to say in effect " you must supply me, or I will bring vou under discipline." Every part of the idea I protest against, as contrary to the real scriptural nature of christian bounty. If a man in any case be warranted so to apply to me, he would apply to me not for bounty, but for his due right. I believe that you have lately had one error on the subject corrected in your mind : but think well, my dear F , whether you have not been running right a-head into another. That is the way of us all. It is very strong language you use, that the nature of B 's application " would only need to be kuo\vn" by the church in Dublin " to be resisted, if the scriptures tvere attended to." And has it really come to that with the church in Dublin.'' I can only say, that — if it be so — however proud thev may be of some supposed knowledge of scripture principles, — I fear it is a knowledge which puffeth up, and not the love which editieth. Now, do not suppose that I have any quaiTcl with you for declining to lay B ''s appbcation before the church ; or with the Dublin brethren for declining to take any share in the burden of relieving him, with the individual on whom it has lain so long. No : I dare not call you or them to account for the free exercise of your judgment in the matter. But to say in effect, that attention to the scriptures must bind the Dublin brethren to resist the application, does indeed appear to me awful. Certainly the new scheme that you have discovered, seems well calculated for saving the pockets (and hardening the heai'ts) of the Irish brethren ; as well as for draining the pocket of the only one here, who can ex- ercise christian bountifulness. Though my letter is enormously long, I have much that I could wish to add on the subject. But if the Lord bless w^hat I have written, it will prove sufficient for bringing us to one mind on prin- ciples ; and beUeve me always, in the love of the truth, Youi" attached brother. XCI. 1822. The opposite objections to your doctrine from the Baptists and Bereans, are — ^just as it should be. That there is some lie (though hard to be detected) in the Gospel of the latter, I have no d( ubt ; 358 COLLECTION OF LETTERS if it were only from their general indifference about the laws of the heavenly kingdom : and I fancy that it is, with many of them, nothing but the old ap])ropriating system of a private revelation, &c. dressed up in a more specious garb. But I can easily suppose that there are disciples among them : and in that, and other views, I am very glad to learn that you are likely to have more commvinication with them. While any are willing to communicate with us patiently, we ought to be forward to meet them. I need scarcely sav, that there is a mode of using the word IF — in our professing the hope of the Gospel, which believers of the truth might well object to. The sinner, standing in the faith and hope of the Gospel, has the hope of eternal life, without any IF : but that hope is derived from the character, which he knows belongs to the only true God, not from the reflex consideration that he has this knowledge or discernment. In the fondness of the Bereans of speaking about their own hope without an IF, I consider them as speaking very confidentlv — not about the revealed truth of God — but about their being believers of it : and the more boastfully they speak upon that subject, the more I am disposed to question their pretensions. We meet but the once, like you. It is plamly the only meeting of divine authority ; and to multiply religious meetings, while it makes a fair shew in the flesh, would be very like impeaching the wisdom of the divine appointment. In your letter of Dec. 14th, you mention a woman who had drawn back after fair appearances. It is less marvellous when any draw back, than when any come forward, and hold on cleaving to Him who is despised and rejected by men. The latter is the wonderful work of God. The former is but the natural developement of what is in man. Who would not wonder more at seeing a piece of iron rise from the bottom of the water and swim, than at seeing it remain at the bottom or sink ? It will be matter of great joy if Mr. 's partner in life be subdued by the truth : and I do not wonder at all at her brother's indignation being excited by any appearances tending that way. The religion of Jesus is a very sorry thing for a lady or gentleman to be brought down to. But what a change they must think (if they thought at all) has taken place in the world since the days, when Christ spoke of people being ((shamed to confess him before men, &c. The thing put forward on all sides as Christianity now, is a thing which even the Deists are generally ashamed of not confessing. And, indeed, as it turns in its most refined forms, upon that which is most highly esteemed among men — human goodness attained to in a supernatural way — it would be surprising if the world were not rather proud of professing it. But the friend of publicans and sinners — the Saviour of the lost — God just and justifying the ungodly — is, and- must be, a stone of stumbling and rock of offence to the end of the world, unto all but those of the king's enemies, in whose hearts he makes his arrows sharp to subdue them to his word — and this because he hath mercy upon whom he will have mercy. I was verv glad to get even the names of our dear brethren with you. I trust ovir sister T will be brought well through the trial of her faith which you speak ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 3o9 of. It i.s a little trial : but the least would be sufficient for our llesh to stunil)lc at. If she be kept iniiulful of the ground on which she and our brother come toe^ether on the first day of the week — mindful of the sj;-reat things of God which they shew forth in it — the death and risinc: again of the Lord Jesus ; — she will think little of the contem])t of the world for their meeting. Our flesh turns into a snare the observers of our assembly, whenever our thoughts are occupied about them. May you all be kept with that as the motto of your union — Thij God thij glory ! He all our glory ! He our sufficient glory in tlie deejiest circumstances of trial and abasement. What garbage are our vain hearts ready at all times to feed upon. Handful as we are, we would be for glorying in our numbers or our greatness. And so some of you have got it in your heads that I am a great man — vou ought not to have told me so ; for I should be ready enough to believe that there must be S07ne ground for the imagination. But this I can tell you, that I know an effectual recipe for making a little and contemptible man even of the greatest : and any among you, that have had any respectability in the world to lose, are in the high road to get rid of it. What blessed levelling that is which James speaks of, i. 9, 10 : and what he applies immediately to the rich and the poor, is equally applicable to the learned and unlearned, the wise and the foolish. XCII. TO J. H , ESQ. March, 1822. Very dear Sir, — I again find myself a shameful defaulter in my correspondence with you, and have need of all your kind indul"-ence to forgive me : I received in due course your favour of Mav 20th, 1 820, a short note from yourself, but inclosing copies of three long letters, two of them apparently addressed to you, and one to Mr. I. M- -. In your note you tell me that you were then copyin"- a letter which I should receive very soon ; but no communication from you has reached me since : I heartily hope your letter has not mis- carried : the ex])ectation of its arrival prevented me from takin"- up my pen immediately. I w-as also, for the latter six months of 1820, very much unsettled, by going over to Ireland, with mv family on a visit ; and since my return here I was attacked earlv last spring with an illness, which almost incapacitated me for all busi- ness ; and for some time appeared likely to terminate my earthly course : for the last four or five months it has pleased God to restore my health to a wonderful degree, but I have been so busily emploved in preparing a classical work, which I have now sent to press, that I 3G0 COLLECTION OF LETTERS got into arrear with all my correspondents, and you are one of the first of them I now sit down to address. The kind patience and labour which you and your friends bestow on me, call for my hearty acknowledgments ; and I can truly say, that I feel an affectionate interest in you all, though mixed with much pain that there should remain any difference between us, to prevent our full union in the fellowship of the gospel ; but is any thing too hard for me, saith the Lord ? He is the God that doeth wonders, and it is his work to make brethren dwell together in unity. The oftener I read over Mr. C 's letter to you of Sept. 27th, 1819, the more of almost unmixed satisfaction does it convey to me ; and that satisfaction is heightened by the postscript, in which he says that all his brethren at Preston professed entire agreement with the sentiments expressed in it. From that letter alone I should have no doubt that the writer agreed with me substantially, in all that I am contending for, on the assured hope toward God, which the gospel is calculated to convey— alike to any sinner whatsoever believing its report — according to his faith ; and the writer was then eighty-four years of age. Probably he has before this changed faith for sight : if not, may the Lord fulfill in him all the good pleasure of His goodness, and the v/ork of faith with power. But why did I say that my satisfaction from that letter was almost unmixed ? I will tell you, in order that nothing may be left un- noticed on this fundamental topic : I think some of the expressions even in that letter too weak ; for instance, " and in holding the beginning of his confidence fast unto the end, he is safer than in labouring for a source of greater consolation in any thing he con- ceives of in himself." Are there two safe ways here, of which we can say that one is safer than the other ? I do not suspect the writer meant this ; but the expression is dangerous : and perhaps the tenderness of the language originated in the thought of some highly esteemed individuals, who had sought, or put others upon seeking that supposed higher consolation in the unsafe way : but let God be true and every man a liar. Again, quoting a passage from one of my writings, he says, " it is, if I understand him, designed against those self-righteous doubts and fears, that proceed, as such fears often do, from not having in view the truth we profess to be- lieve :" when I look at the sentence immediately following this, I cannot doubt but the writer would agree to change often for always. Again, "as to what is said of an assurance of hope, proceeding from a consciousness of loving from the heart, it appears to me not only not ivorth contending for, but to appearance implying a trust in one's own heart ;" is not this also too weak ? It does appear to me worth contending against to the last extremity ; and when the writer, in a former part of his letter, says, " no one, I suppose, will presume to say that the perfection of his faith consisted in a consciousness that he was obeying God in what he did, or that his joy arose from such a consciousness ;" could he be ignorant that Palemon, in the sixth of his letters to Mr. Harvey, has repeatedly held such lan- guage .'' as when he says, " if our hearts condemn us not as desti- tute of love to that truth which the world hates, then have wc confi- ON SCRIPTURAL SUIUKCTS. 3(J1 dtiicc towards God; even as much confidence as the testimony nf o in- own conscience can give us :" * * * * •• such ii testiiuoiiy of one's own conscience must give no smidl confidence ; yet this is hut one witness and needs to he supported," &c. He then goes on, misin- terpreting, I am persuaded, the text Rom. viii. 16, to descrihe an additional testimony of the spirit of God, sujjporting this testimony of our conscience ; and adds, " thus that love to the truth, which formerly wrought in the way of painful desire, attended by many fears, is perfected by being crowned with the highest enjovmcnt it is capable of in this mortal state ;" * * * * " the assurance of faitli, then, arises from the evidence carried in the divine testimonv to the conscience of the ungodly ; the assurance of hope arises from exi)e- rience in the hearts of them that love God and keep his command- ments :" and his meaning here manifestly is, arises from their con- sciousness of loving God and keeping his commandments, corroljo- rated by a supposed testimony of the Holy Spirit, to the same fact. Again, " to have the Holy Spirit as the Comforter and Earnest of the heavenly inheritance, is an attainment far beyond the regene- rating work of the Spirit, by which men are at first brought to the knowledge of the truth, and taught to love it :" * * * * " it presupposes the work and labour of love, and the testimony of our conscience, that love is the spring of our w'ork and labour." * * * * "By this proof men come to know that the joy they had on their first believing, was not the joy of the hvpocrite ;" * * * * " and thus they receive an additional knowledge and certaintv about the truth, in the way of experience, by perceiving that it works effectually in them, producing its genuine effects." Indeed, my dear sir, it is not from any desire of picking holes in Mr. Sandeman's writings, that I quote these passages, but I do think that thev contain rank poison, which I fear has altogether cor- rupted the truth in the minds of many who profess to be his admirers. I do think that they describe the advanced believer as rejoicing in a hope altogether different fi-om the hope of the gospel, and as having done with the ladder by which he had painfully ascended to it : and shaU I screen such passages from exposure, or regard them with less decisive abhon-ence, because they have been penned by a man whose memory is otherwise endeared to all the lovers of the apostolic gos- pel, by the clear statements and bold assertions of it which he else- where makes } No : I should detest such sentiments as much, and be even more forward in exposing their wickedness, if I had penned those passages myself. Wherever the principle is maintained, that the assurance of faith, or assured faith, must not always be accompanied with corres- ])ondently assured hope and confidence towards God, the mind must be looking for a hope and confidence derived from something else than the revealed truth of God. So far as the conscience at any time is not relieved from the fear that hath torment, bv the glad tidings testified in the scriptures, it will, and must be looking for relief to some other quarter. Mr. Sandeman employs in support of the doctrine which I oj)pose, the words of the apostle John : — " If our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence towards God," and 362 COLLECTION OF LETTERS considers this as applying, not to the behever who is but now called to the knowledge of the truth, but to those who have passed through the long course of painful desire attended with many fears, in the su^^posed self-denied obedience and labour of love, and have now obtained that highest enjoyment, the testimony of their own conscience and of the Spirit of God, that their love is genuine. Now it might be well to observe the preceding words of the apostle ; " If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things :" he seems here to treat with very little ceremony those who have not that confidence toward God; he seems to consider them as not standing in the truth, though accord- ing to Palemon's application of the following verse, every believer must long be in that state, in which his heart condemns him. And when the apostle says afterwards, " these things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God," he does not seem to consider that, which he so strongly calls the knowledge that we have eternal life, as the peculiar attainment of a few believers, but rather as the common blessedness to which the gospel calls all who believe it. As to the believer's hope and confidence being perfected and assured by his becoming satisfied, that the joy he had upon his first believing was not the joy of the hypocrite, I must say that this is a hope and confidence quite aside from the hope of the gospel, and resting as much as any of the false hopes of the appropi'iators, upon something novvhere revealed in the scriptures ; and indeed it is a sandy foundation. If I w^ere to look at any time to the joy which I have from believing the truth, in order to assure my present confidence toward God, and if my conscience were at the same time made honest, I could find nothing but what is calculated to plunge me into the most painful doubt, and even in absolute despair: there is such a deceitfulness of the flesh mixing itself with all my joy, my faith, my hope, and trans- forming itself into a very angel of light, that I can only say in that view, " God be merciful to me a sinner." But, blessed be his name, the hope which the gospel reveals and brings to me, is each moment a hope whoUy independent of and unconnected with the question, whether I ever before believed it. It is a hope resting on a foun- dation, about which there is no uncertainty ; which is at all times equally and unchangeably sure, even the truth that God is ; and while the Word that reveals his distinguishing character and glory, as the just God and the justifier of the ungodly, with whom there is forgiveness, yea plenteous forgiveness, and to whom salvation be- longeth ; unto whom no sinner can come, upon whom no sinner can call, without being accepted of Him and saved by him ; while that word stands true to my conscience, I care not whether I ever believed it before ; I want nothing more to assure my heart before him, and to bring tne to his mercy seat, with the boldness of a child, and with the sacrifices of praise for his unspeakable gift. Observe, my dear sir, that it is not about that confidence and joy, which I actually derive at any time from the revelation of God, that J speak great things ; far, very far from it : in the clearest pcrcep- ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 3G3 tion i)f the glory of God, in the face of that Son of Man whom he has made strong for himself, the greatness of the things of God only shows me the littleness of my faith, as indeed less than a grain of mustard seed ; hut I am not afraid to speak great things of the fulness of hope and confidence towards God, whicli the gospel war- rants to any sinner alike ; and which the gospel, the great instru- ment of the Holy Ghost the Comforter, is adapted and sufficient to afford ; and I therefore know not any exercise of that office of the Holy Ghost, as the Comforter, distinct from his fulfilling the work of faith with power in God's people. Mr. Sandeman speaks of a joy which a sinner has on his first believing the truth, and which he long alter discovers was not the joy of the hypocrite : well, I should think then that it must have been the joy of the Holy Ghost ; but no, to have the Holy Ghost as the comforter is (according to him) an attaiimient beyond the work of the Spirit, by which men are at first brought to the knowledge of the truth ; and certainly the kind of comfort which he afterwards attributes to the Holy Ghost, is quite a different thing from all peace and joy in believing : yes, it is in be- lieving in Christ the disciples are declared to rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory. It gives me great pleasure to find Mr. C. in different pas- sages, appears to disavow all idea of the comfort of the Holy Ghost, distinct from his taking of the things that are Christ's, and showing them unto his people ; distinct, in short, from the work of faith ; but I must candidly own, that there are other parts of his letter to JNIr. j\I , which I dislike much, but in which the in- consistency with the good parts appear to me so glaring, that I trust the truth which he generally professes, will bum up the chaff which is mixed up with it. A passage at the close of that letter involves so much of the matter in debate, that I shall at once quote it, and proceed to offer my remarks upon it with that plain freedom which the nature of the subject demands : — " Nor can I see but the sup- ])osition that the belief of the gospel is always connected with an assurance of one's own salvation, is in effect the same as supposing faith to consist in such an assurance ; they do either of them debar all the comfort of hope from the man who entertains fears for him- self, lest he should in time of temptation fall away ; and such fears the scripture itself appears to me calculated to excite." Yes, indeed, and blessed is the man that feareth always ; but Mr. C. expresses himself at times as if such warnings in scripture, as " be not high- minded but fear," " let us therefore fear lest a promise being left," &c., were only addressed to those who apprehend, or ought to apprehend, that thev have not the faith of God's elect, but not to all believers at all times ; especially not to those who (he says) have attained that greatest perfection which a sinful man can attain to in this life, to be made sure of the favour of God. Thus, for instance, he speaks in another passage, " I can hai'dly think he (Mr. Walker) is contending for a doctrine, that were it scriptural, would render all warning useless as to believers : for, were all such sure that they should never fall, there would be no propriety in warning them of any danger they were in of the contrary." Do not these words more 364 COLLECTION OF LETTERS than imply, that there are some believers so sure, that they shall never fall, that to them the scriptural warnings of the contrary danger cannot with propriety be considered as addressed ? — Now this sentiment I utterly protest against, and abhor ; be the man who is supposed to have got above these warnings, an apostle just finishing his course, or any other man : and I do hope that you and Mr. C. will renounce it also. Can the most advanced believer for instance consider himself as net included in the import of that warning, " Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall ?" assuredly any man who conceives that such warnings cannot with propriety be addressed to himself, is filled with that pride that goeth before destruction. If so, and if it still be admitted that there are (or ever have been) some believers, professing personal filial con- fidence toward God, and assured hope of eternal glory, does it not inevitably foUovv that all such warnings, and the Godly fear which they are calculated at all times to excite, are perfectly consistent with the fullest assurance of hope ? Indeed in the whole of that cleaving to the Lord with purpose of heart, holding fast the truth, and flying for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us in the gospel, there is intimately included a perception of perpetual danger, to which we are exposed ; from the tormenting fear of which, the gospel is at all times calculated to relieve the mind of a sinner ; but from the godly awful apprehensions of which, it never was designed to release the most advanced believer : on the contrary, it innpresses and enforces this fear, and is the grand instrument by which the Lord fulfills that promise of his mercy to the heirs of salvation : " I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not de- part from me." And here, that I may not be misunderstood, let me remark that I consider any boasted assurance of a man's own salvation, as nothing but presumption and ungodly con- fidence, if it disjoin in his mind the idea of departing from the Lord and destruction. Well, now what view do the scriptures present to every believer, whether the weakest and youngest, or the strongest and most mature? what view of himself? what but that of a sinner in whom, that is in his flesh, dwelleth no good thing — but a body of death, every tendency of which at all times is con- trary to the Lord, and to the truth which reveals the glory of the Lord. This I trust you will agree with me is the only view which the scriptures warrant any man to take of himself ; the unaltered and unalterable character of every sinful man: but to such ra'dically ungodly creatures the glad tidings are sent from heaven, revealing the righteous and holy God as the Saviour of such, and bringing nigh that salvation of God to all alike in the divine testimony, that whosoever believeth its divine report is a partaker of that salvation ; a salvation absolute and perfect like all the works of Goo ; one com- plete whole from the first justification of a sinner in His sight to the crown of righteousness in heaven. Now if there be but one .gospel declaring the same divine testimony to all alike, and revealing the only ground of hope to any sinner ; those who have ' the most assured hope and joy must derive it from that gospel, and not from the consciousness of any circumstance of difference between them ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 'SC.'t and any of their fellow sinners ; which they could not thus derive, if tlic gospel were not in itself at all times calculated to communicate the fulnes^s of ho])e and jov to cvcrv sinner alike who believes it. Accordiiiijlv when the apostle prays that the CJod of hope would fill the disciples with all jov and peace, he marks that it is in believing they must thus he filled. In short, if the gospel of the glor}' of Christ he not adapted and sufficient to give the most assured hope tosvard God to every sinner alike, those who have the most assured hope must derive it from something else than the gospel. Can it he necessary for me to add, that I by no means assert that all who believe the gospel have the same degree of assured hope from it? or the same believer has at all times .'' This would be to assert, that all who believe are equallv strong in faith, equally clear in their un- derstanding of the truth, and firm in the persuasion of it. But I speak of the proper eft'ect of the gospel where it is believed, and according to the measure of faith : every thing contrary to which proper effect I must trace to one evil root — unbelief: and this with- out at all " supposing faith to consist in the assurance of our own salvation." Every thing like that sentiment I renounce and abhor, and have no doubt that many have perished in tlieir sins, filled with an as- surance of their own salvation. Mr. C. and Palemon himself admit that some believers have, what the latter calls the assurance of hope ; though I trust he was never allowed to get what he describes under that name. Now if this assurance of hope be had by them in be- lieving the gospel, as I am glad to find 2\lr. C. at all times asserting, why should he apprehend, that the assertion of the perfect adaptation of the gospel to convey it tends to confound the faith of the gospel with the possession of that assured hope } but why also should he say that my assertion " debars all the comfort of hope from the man who entertains fears for himself, lest," &c. .'' Ah ! if I could convey to you all mv views of the deep poison that I think is in that sen- tence of his letter ! What is that comfort of hope which he is afraid of men's being robbed of.'' is it not the hope, that although they have not the answer of a good conscience towards God, they yet may be believers, and therefore accepted of him .'' But is that the comfort or hope of the gospel ? No, positively ; no, it is that deceitful looking for comfort and hope to their own faith, which is perfectly consistent with the most abasing complaints of unbelief. Suppose that any of these fearing professors — (I have before explained the sense in which I admit and assert that every believer is called upon to fear, yea to fear lest in time of temptation he should fall away ; and I am sure that any man that does not, cannot really join in the prayer, " lead us not into temptation ;" but 1 am now sjjeaking of the fear that hath torment ;) suppose, I say, that any of these feai'ing professors came to be assured, that to the last minute he had not believed the truth, does this overturn his comfort of hope at this minute .'' If so, I must sav that it had better be overturned in time, for it is built upon the sand. But does this debar him from the comfort and hope of the gospel ? Not a whit ; on the contrary, it is Palemon's doctrine in the assurance of hope which indeed debars from it ; which shuts up (as far as man can) the abundant fountain 366 COLLECTION OF LETTERS of everlasting consolation and good hope from the poor ungodly sinner : and instead of allowing him to hear the voice from the mercy-seat, which calls such " to drink, vea to drink abundantly," teaches him, that the spring indeed is there, but that to get at its rich supplies he must go through a course of painful desire, till he arrives at '* a consciousness of loving God, and keeping his command- ments." O yes ; it is this that keeps him under Egyptian bondage, and sends him to make bricks without straw. That hope is worse than faint, — it is of a spurious kind — which can be damped or extin- guished by the plainest assertion of the fulness of hope, which the gospel ought to inspire. I am not afraid that this, scripturally maintained, will discourage the weakest believer ; it has quite the contrary tendency, even when it most exposes to him the unbelief of his own heart. I remember a period of my course, even after I spoke freely and clearly on the way of a sinner's justification before God, when I used to attempt to comfort and strengthen two persons in whom I was much interested, and who professed agreement with me in sentiment, but were often in perplexity and doubting their own in- terest, from the apprehension that they had not the faith of God's elect ; when I used to attempt to comfort and strengthen them by insisting on the evidence which then satisfied me that they did believe the truth. You will probably agree with me that in this I pursued a very unwarrantable course ; yet if any believers are to have their hope assured by observing such evidences in themselves, I really do not know why another, conceiving that he observes them, should not point to that spring of consolation and encourage- ment. But, blessed be God! those two persons were not suffered to take that deceitful comfort ; and I was soon cured of administering it, from being brought to more scriptural views myself. I was led to deal with them just as if they had never believed the gospel; to put the question of their faith wholly out of consideration, and to direct their attention to the glorious sufficiency of the thing revealed for all the wants of the chief of sinners. Almost as soon as I did so, the comfort of stable hope flowed in upon them: and I have every reason to believe that they were kept rejoicing in it to the end of their course. Mr. C. no doubt, in different passages of his letter expresses himself so, that according to the most obvious mean- ing of his words, there ought to be no controversy between us on the subject ; and indeed I have a lively hope that there will not ulti- mately be any. But even in these most excellent passages, com- paring them with others, I am led to apprehend some ambiguity of meaning. He says, "He that says he has found enough in the gospel to set his mind at rest as to the way of peace with God, but is still saying with the many, " who will shew us any good ?" or with the young man, " what lack I yet V is ignorant both of himself and the extent of the grace and mercy of God :" and again, " they whose minds are not relieved frome very anxious inquiry after conversion, faith, or whatever they term it, whereby they think to be saved, it is certainly foUy for them to pretend to believe the Gospel;" from such passages I should conclude that we were quite agreed ; but how can I recon- cile them with Mr. C.'s contending elsewhere, that a believer of the ox SCUirTUIlAL SUHJKCTS. .'5(J7 gospel, l)v which I mean not one who has formerly believed the truth, but one who is now Ptandint;^ in it, may yet be apprehensive that he has not tlie faith of Ciod's eleet ? St) far as he apjjrehends this, can his mind be really relieved from every anxious inquiry after conversion, faith, Sic. ? can it be set at rest as to the way of peace with God? must it not be still secretly saying "what lack I yet ?" If there be any ambiguity in the good language I have quoted from this letter, I think it must be in the words " set at rest as to the way of peace with God ;" at least I know some who would assent to the statement, but mean by it only this, that every one, in believing the gospel, must be satisfied that there is no other way of peace with God, but that which the gospel reveals, and that this is a sure way of peace to those who know it, and are in it ; while yet they conceive, that the believer may be ever so apprehensive, that he does not know it, or is not in it. Now really if this were the case, the gospel would be little calculated to set the mind of any sinner at rest ; it would onlv tantalize him with the view of a thing very blessed perhaps to others, but without bringing any of that blessed- ness to him. And here I am obliged to revert to that passage in my letters on Primitive Christianity which Mr. C. has quoted with disapprobation ; " the man who with his mouth confesses the gospel to be true, yet avows his apprehension that he has not faith, talks but wicked nonsense." I should not have expected opposition to this from the man who said in his shorter letter to you, "when the gospel commends itself to one's conscience in the sight of God, it can leave one in no doubt whether what he has in view be really the truth of God or not." Would that his letter to you on this subject had been subsequent to his letter to Mr. Mansfield : but that offensive assertion I can neither retract nor qualify ; I penned it deliberately ; and deliberately do I say, I hope to be kept maintaining it till I die. That such a man talks nonsense, I have somewhere in my writings sufficiently proved ; and what on every other subject all men would perceive to be nonsense. Is it not nonsense to say, I am sure such and such a thing is true, but I apprehend that / do not believe it P that is, I am sure it is true, but I fear I am not sure it is true. Yet this is what the man says, who professes that he is persuaded that so and so is the gospel of God, and at the same time declares his apprehension that he has not faith. We know that manv so called evangelical professors would vindicate themselves indeed from tlie charge of talking nonsense in this, by shewing that they use the word faith in a meaning subversive of the truth of the gospel. But if another, who adheres to the scriptural meaning of the word faith, attempts to vindicate himself from the charge by explaining, that he is not sure what is the true gospel of God, but is only disposed to suspect that it is such a testimony as I say it is ; then I can no longer consider him as confessing with his mouth that the gospel is true : at the most he only confesses that it is probable ; and in fact makes that avowal of his unbelief, which it would ill become me to contradict. All I can do with such a professor, is to lay before him again the scriptural evidence of the gospel, connected with the divine declaration, that whosoever believeth it not, shall be condemned. 368 COLLECTION OF LETTERS But I have called the language which I describe not only nonsense, but wicked nonsense ; because it plainly speaks of faith as something distinct from the belief of the gospel. And let us not, my dear sir, be surprised at detecting wicked nonsense sometimes in the language of disciples themselves : what else do we speak, whenever we speak according to the imaginations of our own hearts ? Mr. C.'s argument against my position I have already noticed. In fact, if it disproved what I have advanced, it would equally prove that no believer would be justified in conceiving that he had faith ; there being no believer who is not addressed in such language as this, " be not high-minded but fear." I can honestly assure you that I abhor the thought of anything that would undermine the force of such at any time, as much as I abhor the thought of saying any thing derogatory to the glorious joy fulness of the gospel. I would never be so anxious to shew the consistency of different parts of scriptural truth, as to maintain them all in their true meaning and legitimate extent. I am sure they shall be all found consistent, and in perfect harmony with each other. I think I see these two points which I must say Mr. C.'s argument would set at variance, are thus consistent : I think I find them so in my own daily walk. Whatever degree of joy in the Lord and of godly fear [ am led in, they always keep pace with each other, rise or sink together. But I must distinguish between the godly fear, to which every principle of the word calls every believer at all times, and the fear that hath torment. Those who are not walking in the former, I am sure are not walking in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, whatever may be their boast or their actual presumptuous confidence ; and those who are walking in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, [ am sure are not walking in the latter, that is, in the fear that hath torment. And let me assure you (I say it in order to remove, if it may be, groundless suspicion of my meaning) I find myself as much involved in controversy with the people called Bereans, and against their confidence, as ever I have been with the people called Glasites, and against their doubting system. As to the former indeed, (not to speak now of the gross appropriation among the high Calvinists of this country, who mean by faith a confident persuasion of their own election ;) even before I understood things as well as I think I do now, I suspected something unsound in their professions, not only from their general diregard of the peculiar precepts of the word, but also from their being led to speak so continually about the strength of their own confidence ; an effect W'hich I never find produced by the views I contend for. In short the Berean gospel seems to be ; ' I am sure I am a believer, therefore I am safe.' They professed for a time to like much what I said ; but for some time past they have discovered that there is a grand difference between us ; and while they object to an if which they find in my writings, suffer me can- didly to say, that I do not like Mr. C.'s language in the passage where he says, — " the certainty of each one's salvation is evidently suspended upon the event of his keeping the commandments of Christ." In the connexion in which this stands, I can well conceive he means nothing wrong ; and there is so much of important truth to be contended for, that I would earnestly avoid all mere verbal ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 369 controversy : vtt the expression strikes me as so ambi.'ruous, and so calculatccl to convcv ideas always cone^cnial to our foolish hearts in their religious mood that I slioukl hope Mr. C. will not insist upon it. I'art of that salvation wherewith tiie remnant according to the election of grace are saved by the Lord, and in the Lord, is their kcei)ing the comniandnients of Christ, and walking in his good ways, hearkening to the voice of their shepherd in the word, and following him. In the chain of their salvation we may well distinguish various links ; but they are all links cf one chain, which cannot be broken, and which is suspended wholly from the mercv-seat of God. Accordingly, while Christ says to his disciples, " If ye keep my commandments ye shall abide in my love," all the inference which our vain hearts would be ready enough to draw from the words, (as if our abiding in his love were suspended upon our keeping his com- maTidments, and so turning the very law of faith into a law of works) is elsewhere set aside expressly by the plain language of the new covenant ; as when the Lord, who calls the things that are not, as though they were, declares it to be the unchangeable counsel of his mercy towards his true Israel, " they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them." Ez. xxxvii. 24. It is because the whole of their salvation is the exclusive work of Jehovali, not suspended on any conditions to be fulfilled bv sinful man, that we may be certain that wheresoever there is any one link of the chain, there will be found the whole : in which sense it is, that I imderstand such language as " 7/" w-e believe," "T/wecall on the name of the Lord," " 7/ we love him," //"we keep his command- ments," "7/ we endure unto the end we shall be saved," &c. I do not suspect, however, tliat we really differ here, unless perhaps Mr. C. intended by the expression I have noticed, that the ccrtaintv of a believer, that he shall abide in the love of Christ, depends on, and is derived from, his finding that he has kept, o-r does keep, the cora- manchnents of Christ : and in this view I do think that the sentiment would be very objectionable, and too well calculated to remove a man from the one and only sure ground of confidence and assured hope, .and to build him on the sandy foundation of what he has observed, or thinks he observes, in or about himself. But it is time for me to draw to a close this important subject, after I have made one more attempt to communicate my meaning. Among the many things which please me much in ^Ir. C.'s writing, one is, that his mind appears exercised with some of the great words of the Lord, encouraging his disciples to confidence in prayer; such as that, " if ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto vou." Oh ! it is for our profit to hearken diligently to such words ; while they are well calculated to rebuke us for our hardness of heart and unbelief : it is when we have most of the confidence which such wonderful divine sayings ought to inspire, that we are most constrained to ask only according to the revealed will of our heavenly Father ; and most restrained from asking according to the will and desires of our fleshly minds. See also John xiv. 12 — 14. xv. l(j. Mark xi. 24. 1 John V. 14, 13. 'Aye' — says the flesh — 'but all these words VOL 11. 2 b 370 COLLECTION OF LETTERS are addressed to disciples ; and if I could but be assured that I am a disciple, a partaker of the faith of God's elect, then I should be encouraged by such words.' No ; the man who is so encouraged to come with boldness, is not really encouraged to come to the throne of grace by the view of the great High Priest over the house of God, whose blood has opened a new and living way into the holiest for sinners ; but is encouraged by the self-complacent view of certain characters, which he thinks distinguish him from his fellow-sinners. And now, dear sir, let us direct our attention to another word of the Lord, Matthew vii. 8, 11, "every one that asketh receiveth ; if ye then being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father, who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him." Taking these words in their connection with that revealed propitiation for sin, through which God is thus kind to the unthankful and the evil, just and the justifier of the ungodly, I say that they afford a sufficient ground of hope at all times for emboldening the chief of sinners to come unto God, nothing doubting, for all the good things of his salvation ; and this with the most assured confidence of receiving all that, for which he calls on the name of the Lord ; a confidence resting wholly upon the revelation which he has made of his name. Dear sir, do they not afford such a ground ? and what but unbelief can make any one look for any more or any other encouragement ? In the light of the glorious security and fulness of the divine warrant, and foundation for filial confidence in drawing nigh unto God, let the whole controversy about the assurance of hope be viewed, and is it not decided ? I remember, many years ago, before I had read a line of Mr. Sandeman's writings, a conversation I had with one who was familiar with them, and had imbibed all Mr. S.'s sentiments, at least all the bad part of them. The question was stated by him, ' who are warranted by the word to put their trust in God ?' I maintained, to his great surprise, every soul of man alike to whom the word is sent; and I maintain it still ; while assuredly none, but those who believe the report of the word, will see that blessed warrant which it affords, or enjoy that everlasting consolation and good hope which it is abundantly sufficient and adapted to convey. Since I have been engaged in writing this letter, I have received one from a brother in DubHn, Mr. T. M , now an elder of the church there, which among other articles of intelligence, contains one communication so connected with the topic I have at- tempted to treat, and illustrative of it, that I think I may as well transcribe the passage ; though you would mistake me much, if you suppose that I rest my views of the subject on any human anecdote. My correspondent writes thus: — "How little we know who the Lord's people are, or where they may appear ; but surely when they do, we are called to glorify him for his mercy ; and you will join with mc, I am sure, in this exercise, when you hear of the striking display of that mercy in the case of one of our boarders, a Miss G , who died the beginning of last month." (Mrs. M— : keeps a boarding-school.) " She had been brought up in the church of England religion, or rather no religion at all ; for she knew nothing ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 371 of the modes or terms of it. She hatl been jjretty hcnlthy iluriiii!^ the time slic w;u< with us, nearly a year and a half, till within a few weeks of her death, when she looked delicate ; hut was not much more than a week seriously ill, in which time the real nature of her tliseasc ai)))oared. It was pulinonarv, and made rapid work indeed. She died on a Saturday ; the Sunday evening previous to which mv wife intimated to her the probability of her not recovering. She shewed the natural workings of the natunJ mind; said, if she was but prepared, wanted to have prayers said, Ike. Mrs. ]\I spoke to her of the gospel ; she was anxious to hear, and during the night made many inquiries, but still appeared not like one receiving the truth. In the morning, however, particularly after directing her attention to some portions of the word, and speaking a while on it, she saw the gi'eat sidvation, and all its blessed effects appeared ; her countenance, her language, almost every thing she did, expressed the happy change ; and from that period, till her death, all was most delightful : she seemed like one that had found a pearl of great price, the very hope that she wanted, simple, satisfying, and divinely given ; her triumph over death was complete, and her only anxiety for herself was to be gone. She wished to see her sisters, and her aunt, Mrs. F : they came accordingly, and she at once stated her object to be, to tell them of what gave her such joy and comfort. It was quite affecting to hear her, a creature who, but a few hours before, was uttering words of ignorance and despair, now testifying of the one sacrifice for sin, and shewing its efficacy to give peace to a dying sinner. You would have been delighted to hear the many things she said, which I could not attempt writing, and to observe the increase of light in her mind during the short period she re- mained ; for, to use her own expression, she had been rejoicing in the gospel but one day and one night. It was, indeed the Lord's doing ; and thus he seeks out and saves his lost sheep ; and whether called at the eleventh hour, or to bear the burden and heat of the day, is a matter of no consideration. The mcixy in which an apos- tle rejoices after fighting the good fight, and finishing his course, and ready to dejjart, brings equal blessedness to the sinner, who, but the hour before he expires, is visited with the light of its glory. "^ Well, my dear sir, that young creature seems to have found no deficiency in the gospel itself, for supplying a sinner with the most assured hope towards God : she certainly had no opportunity of getting it in the way Palemon describes. Some, I am aware, would evade the force of such an instance, by saying, that the Lord de- parted in it from his ordinary way of proceeding ; but I trust you will agi-ee with mc, that there is nothing to be seen in it, but the genuine and proper effects of the revealed truth believed. In the hope that full unity of mind will ap])ear between us on this funda- mental subject, I now dismiss it, and must hasten to bring this long letter to a close. I must, therefore, in a great measure, postpone the two other topics which Mr. C. treats on, to perhaps another opportunity ; only making a few remarks for clearing the way to them. On the subject of oaths, I quite agree with Mr. C. that if 2 B 2 372 COLLECTION OF LETTERS they be not forbidden by the Lord, my misinterpretation of Matt, v, 34, involves along with many other evils, tliat of disobedience to magistrates ; and that disciples need to look well to it, before they refuse obedience to earthly rulers in any particular ; and to be well assured that the case is one in which they cannot obey them, without disobeying their heavenly king. But, indeed, independently of this, the attempt to add to his laws, by binding what his word does not enjoin, is quite on a par with the attempt to take from his laws, by loosing Avhat his word does enjoin : either is an awful display of human wickedness and presumption ; and I have to plead guilty of both. Mr. C. thinks that the passage forbids the use of oaths in the church. But whatever the thing forbidden be, is it not mani- fest that it is absolutely foi'bidden ; and that grounds are assigned for the prohibition, which remain invariably the same, whatever be the occasion or circumstances of the oath ? (it is a point of distinct inquiry what we are to understand by the oath or swearing, which is thus absolutely prohibited.) For instance, when the Lord says, " neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black /' without now at all inquiring into tlie pre- cise import and connexion of those words, (though I do not think them obscure) must we not own that this reason stands as good against swearing by our head, out of the church as in the church, at the requisition of a magistrate, as without such requisition ? and this simple remark, I do conceive, is quite sufficient to set aside Mr. C.'s interpretation of the passage, as well as many other inter- pretations which I have heard, whatever may be said afterwards upon its real meaning. I do not understand the grounds on which he has previously said, " that, unless when required by civil rulers, there can arise no doubt of its unlawfulness upon all occasions." Supposing (but not admit- ting) that the divine prohibition regarded only oaths between disci- ples in the church, there might easily be conceived occasions for a disciple's confirming by oath his engagement to those that are with- out, where yet human laws did not command him to do so ; and if the thing be not forbidden in the word, or be not a thing intrinsi- cally opposite to the principles of the word, why should a disciple scruple to do so ? and if it be forbidden in the word, or be a thing opposite to its principles, can the command of civil rulers legitimate it ? I might add, that nine-tenths of the cases, in which oaths are taken without scruple, and in which, I believe, Mr. C. as yet thinks they may be taken by disciples, are cases in which civil rulers do not require them : for instance, if I should take an oath for re- covering a debt or getting a draw back from the custom-house, can I reasonably or truly vindicate my conduct, by pleading that I do it at the requisition of the magistrate, or in obedience to the laws of the land ? certainly not ; I do it to get my monev, which, I am justly entitled to ; but the law does not command me to prosecute my right ; it only says, if I will do so, T must swear : but it will not, in such instances, even impute to me the civil criminality of disobedience, though I should abstain from the swearing, and forfeit my rightful property. Ah ! it is hard to argue in a bad cause. 1 rather sus- ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 373 pcct Mr. r. lias not yet caught the precise view uf the passage whicli I mean to put forwaj'd. I conceive tliat the thing absohitely forbidden, is the vowing that we will do so or so under sonic pledge or forfeiture, which we stake to confirm our engagement — wliicli is called, in Nuuib. xxx. the hindliiy viir souls with a bond, fur the per- formance of what we undertake. That such is the intention of every oath administered in this country, even the oath of testimony, I think, is indisputable ; though I long wilfully shut my eyes against it, not so much for sparing myself, as for sparing others ; and I am persuaded that the more the thing is examined l)y disciples in tlic light of the truth, the more will it be found revolting, not only against the passages of scripture, in which it is expressly forbidden, but against all the principles of the gospel. Though such an oath was not expressly forbidden under the law of Moses, yet I do not at present recollect any instance in which it was commanded. Tlie thing most like it, perhaps, was the oath of cursing, which attended the administration of the waters of jealousy ; but that was u divinely instituted appeal to the God of Israel, for his miraculous interference to authenticate the truth of an antecedent fact. As to its being necessary to the nations of the world, that men should bind them- selves under a great curse with respect to their future conduct, I am aware that political writers are apt to speak of such oaths as the grand bond of society ; but I consider it as one of those principles wliicli j)ass current in the world without examination, though utterly without foundation in truth. Do you really think that any man was ever restrained from acts of treason, by the consideration of his having taken the oath of allegiance, and in that had im^jrecated against himself the forfeiture of the divine aid, in case he should fail of keeping it .'' But I have been betrayed into more argument on this sul)ject than I designed. I pass on to a few remarks on the question of Baptism. I could wish that Mr. C. had only seen, or only attended to what I have offered on that point in the seventh of my Letters on Primitive Chris- tianity. I there aimed at divesting the subject of every thing which I conceive can be at all fairly questioned ; of every thing on which mv own mind is not quite decided : for I have no hesitation in confess- ing, that I profess not equal decision of judgment on some questions, which may be raised about the subject, in some of its bearings. I have written chiefly against the baptism of the so-called Baptists in these countries ; and I am fully persuaded, that it has no warrant or precedent in the word ; that it is a mere human figment, and very wicked in the principles connected with it. I am sure, also, that although I was sprinkled by a clergyman in my infancy, it would lie vain to think of instancing that rite as any thing like what I read of, as practised in the apostle's days. I am sure, therefore, that I have never been baptized with water, as the first christians generally were ; and I find myself wholly unable to see from the scriptures, how I could either now, or at any period of my life, conform to the rite, which confessedly was then practised, except in some farcical imita- tion of it. Mr. C. savs, " one convinced that he ought at some time to have 374 COLLECTION OF LETTERS been baptized would, without trying to determine exactly when that time was, desire, without further delay, to have it now done ;" and I have often heard a similar remark, but I confess it appears to me to have more of plausibility than force. I cannot be convinced that I ought at any time to have been baptized, without knowing in gene- ral who ought to be baptized, and on what occasion ; for surely it might be shown, even from the acknowledged ordinance of the supper, that a disciple may live and die in circumstances, in which he cannot and ought not to practice it. The same divine authority which marks the ordinance, marking also the occasion on which it is to be observed. But here, in order that I may not waste arguments in the dark, I should like to know what your practice is : some of Mr. C.'s language would lead me to suppose, that, when you receive additions to your churches from the antichristian world, you call them to be baptized with water : I speak not now of the children born to you subsequent to your own church membership. But I should conceive that you do not acknowledge, as christian baptism, any rite under the name, which had been practised towards your members previous to their connexion with you : for Mr. C. says, " as to those who never professed that faith, (and he has sufficiently marked that he means by profession here, that profession in which there appears nothing that nullifies it) nor were baptized at the request of parties who did profess it, I cannot think they were ever entitled to baptism, or that any thing they received under the name, ought to be considered as such." I am not disposed at all to controvert this ; but as it seems to me to point to a practice, quite different from what I understand to be the practice of the Glasites in these countries, I wish to ascertain whether I mistake the writer's meaning or not. I never conceived that Mr. Glas or Mr. Sandeman had any other baptism with water, than what they had received under the name, in the church of Scotland. You will not suppose that in making this remai"k, I mean to insinuate that you are disciples of men. I rejoice to think that you have manifested a very diJSerent mind. We certainly appear to differ greatly in our application of the phrase professors of Christianity ; and I think the scriptures will bear me out in speaking of the professioji of the christian faith, in connexion with real opposition to it, as constituting that which is properly antichristian. I do, therefore, consider the whole anti- christian world as jn-ofessors of Christianity : does not Paul take the same view of them in 1 Tim. iv. 1 — 3. and in 2 Tim. iii. 1 — 5.? are we, in such passages, to understand him as describing the blind- ness and ungodliness of men, not even professing the christian faith } I confess that I feel a weakness of judgment and indecision of mind, whenever I am pressed with the question, " What would you do if you were among heathens, and any of them received the truth ? would you call on them to be baptised with water ? I have no legitimate motive for concealing that indecision, and the remain- ing ignorance of scriptural rule connected with it : yet 1 see no reason for retracting in the least my j)osition, that in the commis- sion given to the apostles in Matt, xxviii, 19, the Lord did not command them to baptise with water ; and bear with me when I say ON SCRIPTURAL SU15JI:CTS. 375 that I do not sec any force in Mr. C.'s argument for cstablighinc; the contrary. I l)y no means wish to suppress the reason, wliicli Paul assigns for his having baptized so very few, " lest any should say I baptized in my own name" — but I do not see how that, or any similar consideration of expediency, could account for his thank- fidncss to God, that he had so seldom done what the apostles are supposed to have been commanded to do. Apply such a reason to tlie preaching of the gospel, and what would you think of it ? and as to the supposition of any thing distinct in Paul's commission from the rest of the apostles, Mr. C. justly admits, that we have more recorded instances of persons baptized by Paul, than by all the rest of the apostles. Now I allow that the administration of baptism was no more exclusively confined to the apostles in the primitive practice, than the preaching of the gospel ; but if they were charged in their commission alike with both, I cannot understand huv»- an apostle should thank God that he had been so little engaged in one. As to Mr. C.'s objection, that my view of the commission would produce an unmeaning tautology, it might be so if we were to stop as he does at the word baptizing them ; but I think not at all, when we connect these words with the following. Suppose it had run thus, " go ye therefore and disciple, not men of the Jewish nation only, but men of all nations, baptizing them, not unto Moses, but unto the doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit;"would there be any unmeaning tautology, although we took the word baptizing in the same sense which it obviously bears in 1 Cor. X. 1, S.-* I think not ; and I think the passage last referred to, would be sufficient to authenticate the sense in w^iich the word bap- tism, or baptizing, was to be understood. The expression in Heb. X. 22, w^hich Mr. C. adduces as indisputably importing baptism with water, I really do not think refers to any such thing; except so far as there is an allusion certainly to the Jewish washings, the substance of which shadows, believers are declared to have ; and I would beg of you to consider in connexion with that the passage in Eph. v. 26, and the words of Christ in John xv. 3 : in all these pas- sages I think our attention is directed to that, which all the Jewish washings or baptisms typified. But I feel rather uncomfortable at taking up the subject in such a hurried way at the close of my letter. By the length at which I have written, you will judge that I feel no small interest in your coirespondence. May it issue, to the glory of the Lord, in the correction on each side of whatever is contrary to His revealed truth and will. Believe me, dear sir, &c. 370 COLLECTION OF LETTERS XCIII. TO MR. B . Dec. 2, 1 822. My DEAR Sir, — '^ * * * Much of your language is pleasing. It appears pleasing that you profess approhation of such plain and offensive truth as you have met in my reply to Mr. Haldane. But excuse me for saying honestly, that in the greater part of your letter, vou seem to be less occupied with the greatness and glory of the unadulterated truth of the gospel, than with the display of some supposed discoveries, which you think you have made in the inter- pretation of the Old Testament scriptures. I mean to return to that subject before I conclude ; but, at present, let me observe that we are all vain creatures naturally, seeking our own glory and trying to set off ourselves in all that we do and say ; nor do I know any class in which this vanity is more strikingly predominant, than in religious professors of long standing. I do not mean by any remarks of this kind, to disavow the hope that you may prove to be a disciple of the Lord. I would cherish that hope as far and as long as the Word of God warrants. But, according to that rule, I cannot return the language of brotherly confidence with which you address me, till vour profession is authenticated by something more than words. If you had all knowledge, so that you could understand all mysteries, and interpret the most difficult passages in the law of Moses and the prophets with critical exactness, it is yet possible that you might not have love, by which faith works, and which can be manifested only in keeping the commandments of the Lord. You say you have been a professor of the name of Jesus for near forty years. Probably you have been long a professor of that name ; but I dare say you mean by professing it — a profession of the uncorrupted gospel : perhaps you mean that you have been so long a partaker of the precious faith of God's elect. I shoidd like to know how that has been manifested, what are the fruits that have evidenced it. Pro- bably the fact is, that you have been so long a very serious professor of what is called evangelical religion. Well : this country abounds with such ; and so far as 1 weigh most of them in the bidTvnce of the sanctuary — (false weights and a deceitful balance are an abomination to the Lord) — I know not any greater enemies of the cross of Christ. In general, the doctrine they profess and teach, when their meaning is stripped of the spurious disguises which conceal it, proves to be another gospel tlian that which the apostles preach ; and, accordingly, when the latter is brought forward plainly against their corruptions, I know not any who avow more unequivocal hatred of the truth. From such a disciple I cannot look for any of the genuine fruits of faith. But there are some others, and their number is at this day increasing, who appear to confess with ON SCllIPTUllAL SUBJECTS. 377 tluir nioutli the same unadulterated gospel, wliicli whosoever lulicYcs shall be saved. Yet tlieir profession is nullified in my view, beeause it appears to be only talk, and they prove themselves, by their works, destitute of the fear and of the love of the Lord. Themselves and their admirers would thiidc this a very extraordinary charge for anv one to bring against them, because they are often eminent for what is called piety and strictness in their religious life — hold fast the traditions of their ciders, what is called /"c/jH/Vy duty, and the ob- servance of the Christian sahhalh, and the hearing or preacliing of l)lenty of sermons, &c. &c. Hut talk to those men of the special commandments of the Lord — of the way in which the apostles teach disciples to walk together in the closeness of Christian fellowship — and of the divine institutions by which that fellowship is to be regulated ; and they are found utterly deaf to the reproof and instruction of the Word, and as zealously making it void by their traditions, as the Scribes and Pharisees of old. That such professors have not the love of God in them, and that the fear of God is not before their eyes, the scriptures bind me to conclude ; just as much as if I saw them living in drunkenness and adultery. When I therefore find a man, who tells me that he has professed the truth as it is in Jesus for forty years, supposing him to be really a man of truth, I should rather expect to find this statement accompanied with an avowal of shame and godly sorrow, for having long taken part with the antichristian abominations of the religious world : I should expect this, because I know how widely these have over- spread the country, and how even disciples have been infected by the deceivableness of their unrighteousness. But passing this — my first inquiry from that professor would be — what he has been pro- fessing as the truth ? and here my great object must be to get out of words and phrases, at the real meaning w^hicli he attaches to them. If he stands that test (and veiy few do), my next inquiry must be — have you been, or are you, holding fast the tradition of the apostles (2 Thes. ii. 15), or the precepts delivered by them to the churches of the saints ? are you walking with the disciples by that rule ; or, if you can find none to walk with you by it, are vou standing alone, in absolute separation from any religious fellowship with all others ? You have said so little distinctly in your letter about the truth which you profess (though what you have said is pleasing), that I am disposed to ask your meaning in that expression, — " None ever received him yet unto salvation but sinners." I ask it, because I well know the meaning of the words, as emploved by the evangelical world, and they mean a lie. By sinners they understand what they often term sensible sinne7-s — sinners who have been previously brought to acknowledge their need of such a Saviour as the gospel reveals ; and this they mean to mark as, what they call, the first work of the Spirit of God, which they say is in a man prior to his believing the gospel. Tlie same professors commonly mean by receiving the Lord Jesus Christ, something else than receiving the testimony of God in the scriptures concerning him, or, in short, believing that testimony ; and the mere belief of that they reckon a thing of very subordinate importance. Now if any thing 378 COLLECTION OF LETTERS like this be your meaning, you certainly do not yet profess the truth of the gospel, any further than almost all the inhabitants of Great Britain profess it. But if you only mean that all men are sinners, and that none but sinful men receive the Lord Jesus, it is decidedly true : for unto none others is he sent. It is equally true, if you mean that the belief of the truth, as it is in Jesus, always includes or brings with it a discovery of the real nature of sin, and our own character as sinners. Let me add a few words upon the two texts, about the inter- pretation of which you say you differ from me. You judge quite right in supposing that I have no pretensions to infallibility in the interpretation of particular passages of scripture. In fact, there are many on which I can honestly say nothing, but that I do not understand them ; and others, of which, though I may con- jecture their meaning, I am quite doubtful, and would much rather learn than teach. But I own that I see nothing in what you have offered on Numb. xxx. to make me change the language I have held on that passage. Whatever may be said of your view of the typical meaning of the regulations given to the Jewish people in that chapter, it would be quite wild to deny that it literally contained directions about what vows were to be considered binding, and what were not. To take another instance, we know, from infallible authority, that the passover was a striking type of Christ; yet would you deny that the Mosaic directions about the observance of the passover were to be literally attended to by the Jews, while the Levitical law continued .'' Now, on that chapter in Numb. I believe I have simply reinarked, that there is an obvious allusion to the 2nd verse, in the introduction of Christ's prohibition against swearing ; and have introduced the passage as illustrative of the nature of the oaths prohibited. But perhaps you would like so to spiritualise the Lord's prohibition, as to leave yourself at liberty to take as many oaths as your worldly interest called for. As to Phill. ii. 13, I do not recollect that I have said a word upon that verse, though I know I have at some length asserted the real meaning of the preceding verse, against the divines and our translators. Upon your inter- pretation of the 13th verse I do not think it worth while to raise an argument. It is very certain that the Lord's people are made a willing people in the day of his power. I am glad to learn the general view you take of the book of Psalms. David was a prophet, and spake not of himself, but as the spirit of Christ that was in him did signify, of the sufferings of Christ and his following glory. There is no part of scripture more devoutly wrested to their own destruction, by ungodly religionists, than that book ; and none more glorious, when it is seen in the light of that interpretation which the Spirit of Truth gives in the New Testament scriptures. But you are quite mistaken, when you suppose that others have not maintained, and publicly maintained, the same view. If ever you meet with honest John Barclay's work on the Psalms, you will find it blessedly asserted. To be sure he was reckoned mad in his day, as those who are made wise to salvation may expect to be reckoned ; the servant is not above his master. However, 1 fancy I ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 379 shouUl never be able to keep pace with you in your interpretations of the book of Job, &c. I see strong, and at present insuj)erable, objec- tions to view Job as either identified witli, or ty])ical of, the man Christ Jesus. If vo\i marked him, as to be seen in Ehhu, jjcrliaps vou would speak much more coiTcctly. But really such critical disquisitions on difficult scriptures I should decline, even if we had a jHTSonal interview. I am mostly occupied by what is plain in the word, as plain to any old woman as to myself: and I do not find that real scriptural knowledge is promoted, by exercising our vain fancies in squeezing some evangelical interpretation out of every part of scripture. At the same time, I know that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of projihecy ; and am therefore sure, that if I had more of the spirit of wisdom and revelation, I should see Him in many a passage where I do not now. But why should I pretend to be wiser than I nm } * * * * Yours, &c. 8ic. XCIV. Jan. 6, 1S23. Dear Brother, — We have been commissioned by the church to convey to you their solemn and affectionate admonition on the evil of your conduct ; and we adopt this method of doing so, from the apprehension, that we should at present find insuperable difficulties in the attempt to obtain a personal interview. For a long time now, those who have observed you most closely, have mourned over the many symptoms of your declension from the faith ; but the imme- diate evil which was laid before the body at its last meeting, is vour having determinately refused to afford to some of the brethren any opportunity of inquiring into a report, which we had heard, of your being lately married, and in circumstances which necessarily excited the apprehension, that you have had your marriage solemnized (as they call it) in the common way, by the intervention of a clergyman ; as well as probably preceded by the affidavits, which the law in such cases requires. The object, however, of our present dealing with you, is not at all to inquire whether that report and those appre- hensions be or be not well founded. It is to call your attention, in the name of the Lord, to the undeniable evil of which you have been guilty, to your violation of every principle of brotherly love, in obstinately refusing to afford your brethren an opportunity of ob- taining satisfaction from you, by either sparing a few minutes when we last saw you, or by appointing any time (as you were intreated to do) when we might meet you on the subject. You must have become, indeed, awfully blinded to the principles of our Christian 380 COLLECTION OF LETTERS fellowship, if you think for a moment that such conduct is consistent with them. It is conduct which can spring from nothing but pride of heart, indifference to your brethren, or desire to cover your sin. Deceive not yourself, brother, by saying that you have faith, and talking about the glorious gospel, when you manifest that you have not that love which is one of the first works of faith. But, blessed be God, that gospel which you too plainly are letting slip, still abideth the same and unchangeably true ; still proclaiming to you from heaven peace by Jesus Christ, who has died for our sins and risen again according to the scriptures. Whatever be the depth of varied iniquity in which you may be found, this is still suited to restore your soul, to heal vour backslidings, and to lead you in the {)aths of righteousness and peace. Remember from whence you are fallen, and repent : " for it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God ;" and He has said, " If any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him." We commend this our admo- nition to the blessing of Him, who alone can make it effectual for your recovery ; and still cherish the hope that you will be restored to otir confidence. xcv. TO THE SAME. Jan. 13, 1823. We once more address you, dear brother. We address you as a poor sick brother, at the point of death. We address you with the words of eternal life. It is a faithful saying — " He that hateth re- proof shall die :" — " He that despiseth instruction despiseth his own life :" — " He that being often reproved, hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without pity." Prov. xv. 10. 32. xxix. 1. If, indeed, you have ever tasted that the Lord is gracious, if you have ever had your fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ, may we not appeal to your own conscience, that it is even now an evil thing, and a bitter, to depart from the living God. For where is now the blessedness you have enjoyed,' your peace and joy in believing, your glorying in the holy name of the Lord, your standing in the light and liberty of his glorious gospel? In place of those things, is there not darkness, and the shadow of death, and vexation of spirit, irritation and pride of heart, while the recollection of the divine truths which you have acknowledged, only haunts your conscience, and produces a kind of anticipation of that worm which dieth not ? But is there no balm in Gilead .' Is .there, no physician there ? Does not Wisdom still cry aloud to the most foolish and the most rebellious, " Turn you at my reproof;" — " Re- turn unto the Lord, for thou hast fallen by thine init^uity ;" — " Take ON SCRIPTURAL SUIUECTS. 3SI with you worib ami turn to tlic Lord; s-ay unto him, Take away all iniquity and receive us gruciously ; so will wc render the fruit of am lips." He that indites such words to backsliding sinners, will assuredly Jrt no wise cast out ani/ that come unto him. But beware lest that come upon you that is written — " Because I called and ye refused," &c. — " Our God is a consuming fire." If we should not hear from you before the next meeting of the church, or if we see you not before its termination, wc must infer that you still reject the admonition offered to you in the name of the Lord : and you will sooner or later know that it is an awful thing — (however impatient for it you may be in your present mind) — to be cut off in his name from the fellowship of a church ncting under the authority of his \Yord . XCVL TO MR. r. c . March 21, 1823. My uiiAR Sir, — I regret that I have been so tardy in replving to \our letter of the 2Sth ult. from bad health and raucli business, and the necessity I feel of replying at considerable length ; as you may perceive from the enormous sheet of paper I have taken. I read your letter with considerable satisfaction, a satisfaction connected (as you inav suppose) with the appearance w-hich I sec, of your discerning the great truth as it is in Jesus, in contradistinction to the various counterfeits which pass under its name. I have long been convinced that a great majority of those who profess to like many parts of my writings, and to agree with me in general on the way of a sinner's acceptance in the sight of God, really mistake my meaning ; and themselves mean quite a ditTerent thing from that which I desire to put forward. I cannot, therefore, but be pleased when any thing I sav proves the occasion of manifesting that difference, which I am sure exists, and which they are dishonestly anxious to cover. '^Tliis has been the case with those parts of my Reply to Mr. Haldane, which assert the unchanged and unchangeable character of oi/rsclves. iVIany of the evangelical world are willing to admit in words the totalitv of human corruption in a sinner, on his lirst hearing and believing the truth of the gospel, and deriving from it relief to his conscience, and hope towards God. But when they are told that tills is the only good hope which a man can ever have, and that the gospel speaks no comfort to the oldest believer, but that which it speaks equally to the publican and harlot ; they immediately shew their animosity to the truth, and view it with just the same aversion and distrust as it excited in the Scribes and Pharisees of old. Thev 382 COLLECTION OF LETTERS conceive they stand upon a much higher ground and firmer foun- dation than is laid for absolute sinners ; and Avonder how any, whose words they were before disposed to admire, can assert a doctrine, which seems to them to subvert the very basis of morahty and good works, especially that good work which they mean by sanctijication. Their views of what they call sanctification in themselves I have been accustomed to illustrate, from supposing that the mass of iron, which the prophet caused to swim, was endued with consciousness, and occupied with admiration of its having lost the properties of iron, and become cork. However, we know that it was iron still when at the surface of the water, just as much as when at the bottom : and nothing but the same divine power, which raised it fi-om the bottom at first, kept it afloat afterwards — kept it from its own con- tinual tendency to sink. I confess I should need no more to con- vince me, that any man's hope was the hope of the hj^ocrite, (how- ever plausibly and clearly he might appear to speak about the truth), than his telling me that his nature was less corrupt and ungodly than it had been. At the same time I am sure that, while I assert these sentiments, I must be regarded by the most refined professors with a jealous eye, as indisposed to the interests of holiness. They do not know what the " holiness of the ti'uth" is : and they conceive that a believer's flesh — or his proper self — can be no further evil, than as he is left to walk after its lusts. Its lusting also against the Spirit they recognize only in those overt acts of wickedness, which all the world agree in reprobating : but it is not till the mind is sub- dued by that great truth which reveals the glory of God, that we discover the evidence of our own ungodliness, in the continued opposition of our minds to that divine truth, and in our continual propensity to let slip the things which we have learned. As to your brother's boasted evidence of his nature being sanctified, it ought reasonably to check his confidence to consider, that Socrates, and many another heathen, might have given the same account of him- self with equal truth. But to tell the truth, I should not be at all surprised if the man who made the boast — (supposing that he ever had a taste for the mountain deio) — went to bed that night as drunk as Bacchus ; and if he be a vessel of mercy whom God has ordained to glory, I can readily conceive such a thing to be mercifully per- mitted, in order to plunge his fancied holiness in the mire. But unless I pull in the reins, I shall fill my sheet, without entering on any of the topics of inquiry which you propose. The unsettlement of your Baptist principles I hear of with satisfac- tion, only as they appear to be shaken by the breaking in of the great truth upon your mind. I would not give a bawbee to convert all the Baptists in the world from their baptism, if thev did not give it up by being converted from their false gospels. As to the passages of scripture which still stick with you, little needs to be said. You say that you have " no difliculty in getting over the other passages in the Acts of the Apostles," &c. Now probably you mean veiy right : but let us be much upon our guard against attempting to get over any passage of scripture. I would always desire to give the fullest and freecst scope to every thing contained in the Word ; certain that to attempt main- ON SCRinURAL SUBJECTS. 383 t;iiniiii^ any tliint^ in opposition to what is there declared, is an attempt as vain as it is wicked. And if any ])assage of scripture comes and knocks to atoms any system that / have maintained, — I would onlv say, Blessed be God I and blessed be the power of his Word. That the modern Baptism — (I must call it so) — is utterly without scriptural foundation, I am sure. But there are various (piestions that may be proposed on the subject of primitive Bajjtism, on which I would mucli rather learn than pretend to teach. And I would desire to have my mind kept open to all further instruction from scriptui-e on the subject ; wuthout the slightest apprehension tliat any new scri})tural information will shake the principle upon which I am decided. You say that you are still at a loss how to understand the passages which you quote, " as applying to any pro- fessor in our day." In one respect they are not all applicable to professors in our day, — so far as some of them intimate that the persons addressed had been dipped in water, when they first pro- fessed the gospel ; and the professors in our day had not been so : — few comparatively have been so dipped at any period of their Chris- tian profession. Now many a Baptist would think that in saying this I concede a great deal to the Baptists. I care not about that : I say so far truth ; and I am not afraid of any just inference from it. But what can they fairly infer from my concession ? Is it, that in order to make these passages applicable, they are to practise a baptism — in such circumstances — and for such purposes — as the Scripture nowhere commands or relates it to be practised .'' That assuredly would be a strange inference. But are these tiie only parts of the apostolic addresses to their converts, which are not apjjlicablc (in some respects) to the professors — or to the real disciples — of this day ? I am sure they are not : and I am as sure that the assertion — seen in its real import and bearing — does not at all impeach the unchangcableness of that word of the Lord, which endureth for ever. What think you of the latter words in Eph. i. 13 ? I am aware of the popular interpretation, which applies that sealing tvith the holy spirit of promise — subsequent to the belief of the gospel — to some fancied private revelation to the believer, of a thing nowhere declared in the word — his own personal acceptance. Every one standing in the truth will reject that interpretation : and it seems to me, that no one acquainted with the apostolic language can have anv just room to doubt, that the sealing with the promised holy spirit there mentioned, refers to the miraculous gifts of the spirit communicated by the laying on of the apostle's hands. And what would you think of professors now pretending to those miracidous gifts, in order to make that jjassage applicable to them ? I might adduce various other passages, in which the apostles address the first disciples in a language not applicable to professors at this day, even while the truth incidcated in their addresses continues applicable to the end of the world : as when they refer to their Jewish converts as having been literally circumcised, and to their Gentile converts as having been literally worshi})pers of dumb idols. And does this take off from the real force of such passages to me and to you ? Not the least. If, for instance, the Thessalonian disciples were "turned to God /rom idols" 384 COLLECTION OF LETTERS (1 Thcss. i. 9.), it was in believing that apostolic gospel which reveals "the living and true God ;" and I am taught that I can no further serve him, than as I am kept abiding in the same apostolic word ; and that every thing called god, and worshipped by those who are not of the truth, is no better than an idol : — while it would be nonsense to say, that you or I — even when most ignorant of the truth — have ever been worshippers of the image of Jupiter or Diana. A grave Baptist elder once remonstrated with me very seriously for saving, that I considered their baptism — in one view — as futile a thing as the sport of children, agreeing to play Philip and the eunuch. But really I can say nothing better of any thing done for the purpose of making passages of scripture applicable to us, that are really inapplicable. I would now say a little more upon the particular texts you refer to. One of them — 1 Pet. iii. 21, tells me expressly, that the washing with water is not the baptism intended in the passage. " The antitype-baptism to which doth also now save us, by the resurrection of Jesas Christ." And lest we should dream of water-baptism as the thing alluded to, the apostle throws in this guard — "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God." Whatever is to be said of the rest of the passage, this cautionary explanation satisfies me that we are not to think of the washing with water as at all com- prehended in it. It seems to me that the passage is to be illustrated from Matth. xx. 22. The apostle has noticed Noah and his family as saved by that very water which executed the vengeance of God upon an ungodly world. And even so, elect sinners now are saved from condemnation, and have the answer of a good conscience toward God, by that very condemnation of sin in the flesh, which was fulfilled in the baptism of suffering unto death, wherewith Christ was baptized. But whatever may be said for or against this illustration, I must believe the apostle that the passage has nothing to do with washing with water. As to Rom. vi. 3 — 5. and Col. ii. 12. I am aware that all commentators give into the notion, that the apostle intimates some typical similai'ity between the immersion in water and Christ's death, and the emersion from the water and Christ's resurrection. But I confess that the idea seems to me most puerile and fanciful, without the least support from the passages fairlv interpreted. In both the apostle reminds disciples of the import of their Christian profession, — that they professed to be dead with Christ to sin, and risen with him to newness of life. And in this respect they are applicable to disciples — yea, to all professors of Christianity — to the end of the world : however little the great mass of professors are aware of the real import of their profession. The apostle indeed marks the Christian profession of those whom he addressed, liy the phrase of being baptized into Christ : in which I acknowledge an allusion to that rite of washing with water, by which they had taken on them the profession of Christ's disciples. But the only typical significancv in that rite which I can acknowledge, is its cleansing import. " Now ye are clean through the word which I hftve spoken unto you." Those who, for the first time, professed to believe that word, professed to have passed from their former state of uncleanness ON SCIUl'TliRAI. SUBJECTS. .3S,"» in unbelief, to the state in wliicli tliey were cleanped from all hin by bis blood : and in their wasbinc^ with water, I can .see nothinuj else typitied. In the passaj^e of Colossians I think there is a mis^trans- lation, which has contributed to countenance the fanciful inter|)retation that I reject. The 11th verse begins — "in whom" — i. e. in Christ — "ye are circumcised," &c. Now, the expression in the 1 '2th verse, rendered " ichtrein," and applied to baptism, is preciselv the same with that before rendered " in xvhom ;" and ought. I am per- suaded, to be so rendered there. But if I even could believe that there was an allusion to a distinct typical significancy in the immenion. and the emersion, I must be certain that the apostle alludes to the rite of baptism, only as indicative of the import of their Christian ])rofession, and not in reference to any virtue in tlie rite itself. Therefore, all the lesson that he really teaches in the passages, I see applicable to you and to me at this day ; while I must think that we should be worse than idly employed in practising some imitation of the rite, in order to bring ourselves into circumstances more exactly ])arallcl with those of the first converts. On the remaining passage. 1 Cor. XV. 29. I have only to say that / do not ^(/ulerstand it at all ; — (do you?) — and that 1 have never met an interpretation of the phrase — " baptized /or the dead" — in which I could satisfactorilv acquiesce. I must des])atch very briefly the two remaining topics which you propose. You ask me whether I am " decidedly against a disciple's bearing arms in every case." If I mistake not, I wrote my mind upon that subject lately to my brother, J. L , whom, I hope, vou will soon know, if you do not already. The substance of what I can reply to the question, is this. I cannot conceive a disciple walking in the truth, and taking upon him the profession of arms. Indeed, in this countiy, that is put blessedly beyond con- troversy, as no man can become a soldier without being attested, or sworn before a magistrate, i. e. without directly violating the express command of Christ. But a man who is in the ariny — (or who is a ])ublic hangman) — may be called to the knowledge of the truth : and in that case I find myself without warrant in the word for dealing with him as an offender against the law of Christ, even though he continue in the profession of arms ; — while I should, without hesitation, urge him, on the grounds of Christian expedicncv, to quit it if he can. t find a military officer at Ca?sarea received as a disciple by an apostle, and no intimation given of any injunction to him to lay aside the use of arms. As to the abstract question, whether I would, in any case, think myself justified in resorting to the private use of arms — (even so far as the taking away of life) — in self- defence, — I am not fond of debating it. I think disciples may peacefully look to their heavenly Father, never to place them in any such circumstances as alone could justify it. But if pressed for an opinion on the abstract question, I must frankly say that I can con- template cases in which 1 think that 1 would, without any scruple, shoot a ruffian, and consider myself in doing so, only as the executioner of the laws : just on the same ground as— if I were in the oHice of Sherilf — I might be legally bound to hang a criminal VOL. IF. 2 c 386 COLLECTION OF LETTERS with my own hands. But really I should rather decline arguing the point, if any thought differently from me : and I do not conceive that a difference of theory on such a question could har our Christian fellowship for a moment, till it came into ])ractice. The question about the marriage of believers with unbelievers, is one that must more necessarily come into practical operation : and if the little that I have room to say upon it here should not satisfy you, I can send you at another time a copy of a longer paper on the subject. All our churches were once of the same mind about it that you incline to : and whenever such a case occurred among us, we took it up in the way of discipline, as any other case of violating a divine precept. The scriptural ground upon which we rested was 1 Cor. vii. 39. — assuming that the expression, " only in the Lord," meant — provided he be a disciple; and fairly inferring that there could not be one rule for Christian tvidmvs in the matter, and a different rule for other Christians. In one instance we removed from our fellowship a dear sister, who would not profess repentance for the thing ; and she died, not in outward connexion wdth us, but I believe in the Lord. I say it to our shame. But I well remember that the other cases, in which the discipline terminated in a profession of repentance from the party, used always to leave my mind more painfully dissatisfied : because I could not honestly believe that they would not do the same thing again (if it were yet to be done), or that they really regretted having done it : and because the latter is a state of mind which I could not wish to produce in a married person. However, I shut my eyes against all such difficulties ; thinking that we were following the plain authority of the word. But it is now some years since we have been convinced, that we misinterpreted that passage in 1 Cor. vii. on which we had grounded our practice. The expression is not — " she is at liberty to be married to whom she will, only to one who is in the Lord ;" but — " she is at liberty — only in the Lord." And I would connect the latter words with — " at liberty :" as if he said — ' she has the liberty — onlv let her remember that I speak of the liberty which she has in Christ Jesus, as a disciple of his, and which she is therefore called to use to his glory, and not to the mere indulgence of the flesh.' Compare Gal. ii. 4. and v. 13. Others connect the words " onlv in the Lord," with the expression — to " marry whom she will ;" and fairly illustrate the expression of "marrying in the Lord," by such language as that in Eph. vi. 1 , where believing children are called to " obey their parents in the Lord," i. e. from Christian prin'ciple, with a regard to the will and glory of the Lord ; — certainly not meaning that they are to obey their parents, only if their parents be disciples. Taken in either way, the import of the passage is much the same : and while it admonishes disciples not to lose sight of their Christian cha- racter and rule in forming that most important connexion of marriage, it certainly lays down no general law against their taking an unbeliev- ing partner. This having been the only portion of the New Testament Scriptures on w'hicli we rested our former practice, our practice of course changed with the changed view of its meaning. It would be a profane mockery of Christian discii)line, to apply any thing under UN SCUirTUKAL SUliJKClS. 387 the name, for binding tliat wliicli the word of the kingdom hath left loose. And now that my juilgroent is released from the shackles which our former misinterpretation of the pas-sage imposed on it, I cannot but admire the divine wisdom in not having laid down such a law as we had imagined. How inconsistent would it be with some other parts of Scripture ! Nothing is more clear in the word than that there are circumstances in which a Christian man will find himself absolutely bound to marry, as the appointed preventive against fornication and other acts of uneleanncss, which are opposed to the possession of our vessels in sanctification and honour. IJut who can say tliat he will always and everywhere be able to find any woman with whom he can have religious fellowship ? or any who can be prevailed on to receive him as a husband ? ^Vnd let it be well noted that the marriage connexion, though the most intimate and lasting of all human connexions, is yet decisively one not of a religious but of a civil nature : else the relation of husband and wife could not subsist — (as we know from the word that it may) — between a Christian and an heathen. But after saying so much in vindication of our opinion, that there is no absolute law on the subject to Christians, let me add that I am persuaded, if a Christian use his liberty in this matter as a Christian, — if he proceed on Chris- tian principles in choosing a wife, — he will generally, if possible, seek a believing partner. The considerations that enforce the general expediency of this are obvious, if we reflect either on his comfort or his profit, or especially on the scriptural care and treatment of their future offspring. But there are various things in which we may most suitably urge, on a brother considerations of Christian expediency ; and yet we should act most sinfully if we attempted to bring him in as an oflender, even though he may act differently from what we think expedient. If you be not frightened at the length of this, I shall be glad to hear from you again. Its length may shew you how much I am vour friend and willing servant for the truth's sake. XCVII. TO THE SAME. June 10, 1823. Dear Brother, — Your letter of the 1 Ith ult. was very welcome. It found me very ill, as I have been indeed most of the spring ; I am now better : l)ut very busy. Most of the leisure time I used to have, is now occupied with writing for a review, and must stand as my excuse for being such a bad coiTespondent ; but as I expect an opportunity to-niorro\N of sending vou a few lines free of postage, I 2 c'2 388 COLLECTION OF LETTERS must no longer delay writing, however briefly. I rejoiced (but was not surprised) to hear of your junction with the brethren at Leith. May we grow up together in the knowledge and love of God, con- tent to have Him alone for our glory and defence. The contempti- ble appearance in the world, which a Christian church must make, is one of the trials at which our carnal hearts would always be ready to stumble. We might be willing enough to submit to it for a time, in expectation of some respectability being hereafter attached to us, from increasing numbers, &c. ; but to be to the end of our coin'se a poor, little, despised, and hated sect, the objects of indignation and contempt to all the finest and most esteemed people around us, this is very hard to the flesh. One thing, however, makes it and every other trial easy, when our eyes are kept open to the Glory of the Lord — when our ears are kept open to that voice which speaketh from heaven in the word, " Behold me, behold me!" (Isa. Ixv. 1.) I have had for some time Mr. Sang's pamphlet, but really I have not yet read it. I looked at one page, in which I found misrepre- sentations of my sentiments so gross, as to be scarcely worth expos- ing. Whether I shall ever notice the piece I cannot yet say. I have spoken to my brother C to send the tracts which you desire, and should hope you will soon receive them. T quite agree with you that what I said about a christian in the office of sheriff" was perhaps very untenable, but we need not trouble ourselves with such supposed cases. You speak of the disappointment of the brethren in Leith at my not visiting them last year. My desire to do so is (I think) fuUy as strong as theirs can be ; and I may now say that I indulge the hope of seeing you and them in the course of next month, or beginning of August. Let us remember that there is but one who can make our meeting a mutual blessing, and that needeth not any of us as instru- ments of blessing to the rest. The prospect of conversing with you so soon, face to face, reconciles me the more to the necessity I find of concluding this letter abruptly. My hearty love to J. L— - — and the other brethren at Leith, when you see them. The Lord Jesus be with your spirit. XCVIIL Aug. 22, 1823. My dear Friend, — Agreeable to your desire I sit down to give you some account of myself, and of my interview with . The Monday after my arrival I sent a note to , and he very kindly called the next day. We sat together in close and unre- ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 389 served communication for nearly three houis. I found in him no Gla.iite backwardness to converse freely on scrijjtural topics : and we came at once to the grand point of Sandeman's doctrine on the assurance of fiope. You uill be surprised to hear that he unequi- vocallv renounced it, and avowed a full unity of mind with me on the subject, expressing himself as abhorring the idea of a sinner's deriving anv hope towards God, at any period of his course, from the contem- plation of anv good evidences about him, or from any thing but that one glorious truth which S])eaks peace, and gives hope to the most guilty and ungodly of the sons of men. lie also as unequivocally spoke of that truth as sutHcient to afford the most assured hope at any time to a sinner, and of ;dl attempts to separate the assurance of faith from the assurance of hope, as striking at the very root of the gospel. This was verv pleasing : but what surprised me more, and in some views damped my satisfaction, was that he spoke of this as note the common mind of the Glasite societies. He seemed scarcely aware that tlie opposite doctrine had been put forward in Sandeman's writings ; talked of having seen it with much pain in some letters of a IMr. , who was engaged in the Perth controversy : and of his son having been lately brought under discipline in the church in ■ , for reviving the sentiment in some of his exhortations. He described this as terminating in his professed repentance. seems a verv intelligent as well as candid man : so that I cannot doubt but that a stand has been made against the deadly error in — . But in a subsequent conversation nearlv as long as the first, I pressed on his attention the evidences, that the false doctrine on the subject has been to a veri/ late period publicly asserted by Glasite writers, and that the world had every reason to consider it as generally held by their body. He admitted that he may perhaps have too much taken the contrary for gi-anted, but repelled all that I offered on the obligation of their making their repentance and disavo^Yal of the doctrine as public as their sin, on the ground that all human publications on scriptural subjects are to be depi"ecated. I am satisfied that there is something bad at the bottom of that. Since these two long conferences, he dined here ; when our conver- sation was more general, but still mostly on scriptural subjects. On various other points he is not a thorough Glasite : and I find that they are covering up differences in their society, which will, however, 1 trust, break out. He Avas, till a few weeks ago, an elder, but displaced on his marrying a second time. He then told his fellow-elders plainly that he is not at all satisfied on the truth of their inteq)retation of the passage — " the husband of one wife." He also gives up that cursed part of their discipline of not receiving any profession of repentance, from one who has been twice put away. And he admits that their interpretation of the " two or three," as meaning the two or three elders, is untenable. You will not think the worse of him for all the forbearance that he must be exercising for peace-sake among the Glasites : but indeed I do. I am glad to have been able to write some intelligence, which I think will prove interesting to you. It interests me veiy much. Believe me always very affectionately yours. '^W COLLECTION OF LETTERS XCIX. Aug. 25, 1823. My dejsr Sir, — Any hopes I had entertained of hcing able to call on you before my dej)arture are at an end. I have been advancing pretty steadily towards convalescence since I had the pleasure of seeing you, but so very slowly that I cannot yet manage a walk of more than half a mile. I am to sleep on board the steam packet to- morrow night, and in bidding you most heartily farewell, I scarcely know how to thank you for your kindness, for the quantity of your time you have indulged me with, and for the satisfaction you have afforded me in so much free and unreserved conversation. Very, very gratifying to me has been most of that conversation. I cannot perceive a shadow of difference between us as to our professed faith and hope towards God ; though I do seriously apprehend that you too mucli take it for granted, that the rest, who are in fellowship with you, have got freed from the leaven of that sentiment, which would ground assured hope towards God on something else than the bare revelation of his glorious name — a sentiment which would lead us to end in the flesh after beginning in the spirit. Passing this, suffer me to say (with the same openness with which all our communications have proceeded), that reflecting on what you have said on other topics, I do fear that you are pursuing a false peace in your societies. There are three points on which you do not seem agreed (at least fully agreed), with what is considered the Glasite system (I use the phrase only for brevity). The interpretation of " the husband of one wife" — the unmerciful rule of withholding read- mission from a person twice excluded — and the interpretation of Matt, xviii. 19, 20. The latter bears closely on the question on which we are at present divided — whether the administration of ordi- nances comes within, or belongs exclusively to the office of elders ; (that idea which seems to me plainly a remnant of clerical leaven ;) or whether disciples gathered together to the name of the Lord, are not warranted and bound to observe all his appointed ordinances, even before they receive the gift of elders. Dear sir, be not afraid to look the question in the face, and consider whether even, accord- ing to your present views, you be not adopting an unscriptural/or- bearance in not calling your brethren to consider their ways on these subjects. As the coming of the Lord draweth nigh, the call to his disciples becomes louder, to remove the stumbling-blocks out of the way, which prevent the full manifestation of that unity of mind and way for which he prayed. The fear of appearing vain in my imagi- nations (and I cannot appear more vain to any than all the imagi- nations of my own heart are), must not restrain me from avowing' the expectation, that discijjles are to be gathered moi"e closely and ON SCIUI'TURAL SUBJECTS. 391 brought more generally into the old paths than they have been yet : iiiul it woukl be most un.suitable for you or me to jjrefer the interests (as it were) of the several societies with which we are connected, to the divine prosperitv of that Zion, which her children arc called to love, and to mourn for, and rejoice with. It l)Ccomes us rather to ])rav that, if there be any false sentiment or way retained among us, on either side, upon which our respective societies will not bear the reproof and instruction of the word, that word of the Lord may break them to pieces. You will forgive me, I know you will, for all the freedom which I use. Knowing how your time is occupied, I do not think of taxing you with any reply to this, though I shall always be most happy to hear from you on any occasion. I was interrupted yesterdav in writing this, and conclude it under the painful feelings of temporary separation from those who arc greatly endeared to me. Farewell, dear sir, and believe me always with lively and allcctionatc interest. TO K. L. C , E;Q. Sej.t. 18, 1823. Dkar Brother, — * * * * j found our brethren here in general as well as usual, and retaining an affectionate remembrance of you. You know they have been engaged in a trving discussion with the church at C ; and it still hangs as a dark cloud, which none can disperse but He, with whom all things are possible ; and who has fonnerly scattered many another cloud, which seemed big with mischief. I am necessarily a good deal occupied in my thoughts with the subject, and am therefore disposed to give them to you on paper. The principle, that it is unlawful for Christians to employ a person of the world, or allow him to be employed in any service for them, in executing which he will have occasion to take an oath, seems to be now avowed with so much positiveness, and propagated with so much zeal by some, that it obviously threatens a speedy breach among the churches. If those who scruple the thing were contented to abstain from it themselves, without imposing on their brethren a law which is destitute of all scriptural authority, in that case others would be called not to interfere with their weak consciences. But this not being the case, it becomes necessary that idl, even those whose con- duct in life is least affected by the question, should have their judgment formed on the subject. Perhaps it may please God to bless the following observations for producing or confirming a scriptural decision on it. If I know that an unbelieving man is about the commission of 392 COLLECTION OF LETTERS murder, or robbery, or any act by which injury would be done to others or to himself, and if I have any micans of dissuading or pre- venting him, it would obvious-lvbc my duty to endeavour to dissuade or prevent him. " That love which workelh no ill to his neighbour," a id which is therefore " the fulfilling of the law," must prompt us to prevent harm to our neighbours, if we can, as well as not to do it. Yet, even in such a case, if I were to set about dissuading the unbe- liever from tlie meditated act, on the ground of its sinfulness, and as if to prevent his violating a divine command, I should act most inconsistently with Christian principles, and in a way calculated to build up that unbeliever in some of his most deadly delusions. Accordingly, heretofore we have been all accustomed to acknow- ledge, that it would be most unsuitable for us to present any of the divine precepts to the attention of the world for observance, and peculiarly so, to call them to observe any of those precepts, which are exclusively addressed to disciples of the Lord for the regulation of their conduct. Such is certainly our Lord's prohibition of all oaths to his disciples : and while they are debarred iVom the thing forbidden by the divine authority of the word, and may no doubt observe the inconsistency of the thing with the principles of that gospel which they believe, on what ground could they endeavour or tvish to pre- vent unbelieving men from taking an oath every day — from pledging themselves to any conduct under the forfeiture of the favour of their gods, whether called by the name of Jupiter or any other name ? It would be impossible to mark any harm done by their swearing, to themselves or any others: and greatly must we have lost sight of the word, if we should attempt to deal with them on the ground of the command given to disciples : of obedience to that command they are at present incapable ; and denying its authority, it signifies nothing whether they never swear or swear every hour. Now, if these things be admitted, they immediately expose one of the grossest fallacies of the main argument put forward in the com- munications from the brethren at C . They speak of the two things as parallel — the employing of a worldly man to murder or rob for us, and the employing of him (as they say) to swear for us. Supposing for a moment that the latter pai't of the representation were a fair one, it appears that the two things are not at all parallel; since the one is an act of his which we should be bound to prevent, if we could, while it would be inconsistent with our Christian prin- ciples to try to prevent the other. The whole argument, therefore, which they raise upon that assumption, falls to the ground. But there is an additional and very gross fallacy in their language — of employing another to swear for vs — or, as some of them have expressed it, our stcearing hij proxy. Assuredly, the man who swears, swears for himself, to confirm his own testimony or declaration ; aad neither swears, nor is considered to swear, as the proxy of any other. And if they abandon that absurd language of our swearing by proxy, and explain the expression, swearing/or tts, as importing only /or our beiic/U, so that we expect some advantage (pecuniary or l)crsonal) from his swearing, thcv introduce a circumstance into the question which really cannot affect it at all, or alter the nature of ON SCRU'TURAL SUBJECTS. 'VJ:] tl)o tliinc:. If I mii^lit lawfully call on a worldly man to boar cvi- (loiicL', for the purpose of proving the innocence of a third person falsely accused of murder, and this in a case where I have no personal interest in the matter, then assuredly 1 may as lawfully call on him to bear evidence for the purpose of establishing my right to a thou- sand a year ; and it is nothing but palpable sophistry to ])erplex and throw a false gloss upon the sul)ject, by involving the general ques- tion in the consideration of his swearing _/br us. But in the next place it is utterly unfair to represent us as employing or compelling any man to swear. This will perhaps appear more clearly by attentling to some other cases to which the sweeping principle asserted bv the Church at C' applies. Let us take one, to w^hich they have themselves adverted. Suppose a C'hristian man possessed of an estate, for the management of which he appoints a man of the world as his agent. A law is now set up, that he shall not ajjpoint that agent but in a qualified way ; i. e. no doubt, under the restrictions that the agent shall not distrain or eject a tenant, or take any step in which his swearing would be necessary; otherwise the Christian is represented as employing the agent to swear for him. Now (not to repeat w'hat has been already said on the evil of that solicitude manifestly to prevent, as it were, unbe- lievers y/-o»j committing sin), can it be said with any fairness that the Christian enij)lovs his agent to swear ? No, indeed : he employs him to manage his estate, to collect his rents, &c. ; while, perhaps, he is aware, that in effecting those purposes for whicli alone he is employed, he certainly will swear. In like manner, when I ask a worldly friend to let me name him as an executor to my will, is it fair to say that I ask him to swear for me ? I do not. I ask him to administer to my eflects ; aware that he cannot do this without swearing. Or if, being drawn for the militia, I procure a substitute, this is really ])roviding him, not to be attested for me, but to serve in the militia ; which he cannot do indeed without being attested : and even so, if I apply to a man of the world, or even summon him to prove a fact, or send a clerk to the Custom House to effect the clearance of a ship, the thing which I aim at having done, and w^hich 1 call those persons to do, is perfectly innocent, though the way in which they must do it, is one which / could not adopt, but one which the wit-_ ness or the clerk is perfectly consistent in adopting. Do any ask, but am I justifiable in employing another to do a service for me, which I know he will do in an unchristian way ? Really, those who will answer this in the negative, cannot consistently employ an unbe- lieving labourer to plough his field. When Paul was brought to Rome, in consequence of his appeal to Ca;sar's judgment-seat, let us suppose that he was called with his accusers to plead liis cause before one of the heathen triljunals, and that in the course of his defence he saw a heatlien soldier in the court, who could disprove some fact that was falsely laid to his charge: might not Paul, consistently with every principle of the heavenly kingdom to which he belonged, refer to that soldier's testimonv, and call on the court to examine him upon the fact ? And this, even though he should know that the man, if he were examined, would 394 COLLECTION OF LETTERS lay his hand on the altar of Jupiter, and confirm his evidence in tl way customary with heathens ? Was the man any more an idolr' ^. if he did this, than if he did it not ? Could Paul fairly be said to call him to that act of idol worship ? and how unsuitably would Paul have acted if he interfered to stop the witness from giving that con- firmation of his evidence by exclaiming — " Pray do not swear by Jupiter, for in doing so you will commit a great sin." It was a very different thing when he and Barnabas resisted the people of Lystra from offering sacrifices to them ; for this was connected with a tes- timony against the general principles of their idolatry, and with a setting forth of the only true God. Let us imagine that we live in a heathen country, where none were allowed to travel a particular road without making an obeisance to an idol-image by the way side. A Christian would find himself debarred from going along that road. But if he had a message to be delivered, or business to be transacted on it, who will say that he might not lawfully send one of the hea- thens on his message or business ? And could it justly be said that he sent that heathen to make obeisance to the idol. Notliing seems to mark more clearly the falsehood and the danger of the principle taken up by the brethren of C , than this consi- deration, that none who adopt it can consistently stop short of endeavouring to restrain unbelieving men from swearing, or to make them, as it were, observe a precept given exclusively to disciples of the Lord, For example, a few days ago I had occasion to call on my attorney, for the purpose of signing a pair of leases, the deed of surrender of another lease, and the memorial of one of them for the purpose of being registered. The attorney rung the bell, and desired one of his clerks to come in, that he might witness the sig- nature. This certainly was with the view of his making the neces- sary afiidavit to get the memorial immediately registered, and of his being competent to prove the execution of the other papers legally. Now, if I had declined to allow him to be present for this purpose ; (and one of the C brethren expressly says — " If I either allowed or engaged a man to swear for me, it would be virtually the same thing as if I did it myself;) if I had said that I would not allow him to witness my signature, lest in proving it he should commit the sin of swearing, would not this have been directly interfering to prevent that man's swearing ? an interference, which any who are standing fast in the truth, must see to be altogether unsuitable to it. But if, on the other hand, I was fully justifiable in allowing him to be.called in by my attorney for the purpose of witnessing my signature, must I not have been equally justifiable if I had called him in myself, or brought him with me, for the same purpose ? What essential difference there is between the two things it would be very hard to point out. On the whole, the C sentiment strikes me as having nothing to countenance it, but the unfair and sojihistical form in which it is put forward, and as involving a mass of the most dangerous errors — such as the idea that vmbelieving men are more or less evil according to the number of their evil acts ; and that Christians are called either to prevent their transgression of divine precepts, or to engage their ri ON SCRIPIURAL SUBJECTS. 395 TJjt, observance of them wliile they still remain in unbelief. That scruples on the question should be excited in the minds of some disciples bv the fallacious forms of proposinj^ it, is not surprising ; but that they should continue after that fallacy has been exposed, will be surprising- and very lamentable. In coming to the consideration of such questions, we need to remember that it is not merely against the tcorldly bias of our fleshly minds we have to be guarded; that there mav be a morbid appre- hensiveness of this ; and that the vanity of the flesh may equally operate in leading us to encounter worldly trials to which we are not called. I confess I feel a great deal of satisfaction in having been led to a full settlement of judgment on this subject. If you see any weak point in what I have suggested, you will of course not spare it. Yours affectionatelv, CI. TO THE Same. Nov. 23, 1833. Dear Brother, — I will aim at simplifying the question, of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of playing at games of chance, by pre- senting to your consideration a particular case. Suppose you and I should amuse ourselves by throwing dice, and decide by the higliest throw which shall pay the other a penny. I say this is essentially resorting to the lot to determine the matter : and I have little doubt you will be at once sensible of this, if the thing to be determined were of higher importance. If, for instance, a tyrant decreed that one of us should die, and left us to decide which should be the suf- ferer : in case we could not otherwise agree on the point, we might decide by lot ; and if we did, we ought to feel that we were leaving the decision to the Lord, in the persuasion that " the whole disposal thereof is of Him :" and might we not as freely employ the dice for the pui-pose as any other form of lot ? We know not exactly the foroa of lot by which the apostles chose between Joseph and jNIatthias ; but whatever was its form, could it l)e essentially diflerent from the highest thi'ow on a pair of dice ? Now, if so, have we anv right to employ the same lot in the way of amusement for deciding a matter so trivial as a penny ? That those who do the latter intend not any appeal to the Lord I allow, and that they may not be at all serious on the occasion, but merely diverting themselves. But the question is, whether such diversion be suitable to Christians who remember what is said of the lot. Those who do it appeal to somethiiuj for the decision of the matter — to something wholly beyond their own con- 396 COLLECTION OF LETTERS trol, and the result of which no human judgment has any means for conjecturing or regulating. This something they nre accustomed to call chance. What is that ? You will observe that, to simplify the question at present, I suppose the two persons who are proceeding to throw the dice, do not continue any such amusement through a number of throws, but that each throws but once, and that but one penny is to be decided at the time. Before either A. or B. has thrown, there is no more reason to conjecture that either will be the winner than the other. Perhaps A. throws sixes, he has then cer- tainly calculated the chances (as it is called) against B. It is 35 to 1 that he will not win ; 35 to 2 that he will lose ; however, the matter is still uncertain. He has a chance of winning, to which he appeals ; and contrary to all our calcalations of probability he throws sixes. If we were seriously employing the lot, on an occa- sion that warranted our appeal to the Lord for his decision, even after the one had thrown sixes, it would not become us to calculate any probabilities about the ultimate result ; but when we amuse our- selves with the lot, we put out of consideration Him with whom the whole disposal of it is declared to be, and employ rational calcula- tions of probability, while we are forced to own that in any one in- stance chance or luck may run counter to them all. Is not this same chance or luck one of the idols of the world } You attempt to distinguish between the lot in scripture and throwing the dice, &c. for amusement. " The lot," you sa)^ " is merely a renunciation of our own judgment in the act we are performing." Consider whe- ther, in this respect, it does not exactly coincide with the scriptural nature of the lot. It would certainly be unsuitable to employ the lot in any case, where we have rational or scriptural rule for tbe regu- lation of our judgment. That the lot ought to be a most serious appeal to God, and might to be connected with the persuasion that we are acting in conformity with His will in the appeal, is certain. But this cannot be admitted as constituting any essential difference between the lot and throwing the dice for a penny, without assuming what is the question, that we may lawfully amuse ourselves with the most light employment of that, which (when we employ it at all) ought to be employed most seriously. In weighing what I have oifered, put out of the consideration altogether whether many, or few, or any, agree with me on the subject. If you think there is an essential difference between a game at cards or backgammon, -and the case I have proposed of deciding by the highest throw on the dice who shall pay a penny, state it as strongly as you can. I cannot at present see any. " The lot," you say, " is not foi-bidden, and we may look for the divine blessing, while amusing ourselves with the lot, as much as in any other act which is neither forbidden nor en- joined." You perceive that, in stating this argument, I substitute for your words — " whilst playing a game at cards or backgammon" — a plainer phrase, which, according to your present concession, is equivalent. And now I readily admit, that in any intrinsicaUy laicful amusement or relaxation, a Christian may well use it as to the Lord with thankfulness to him and looking for his blessing. I am sure also that the lot is not forbidden : but is not its nature sufficiently ON SCIlIPrURAL SUBJECTS. 3.')7 intimated, and the occasions on which it is to be employed PiifTi - ciently marked in scripture, to debar us from making it a matter of amusement ? Honestly sijeaking", sliould wo aiiuise ourselves wilh it, while we really recollect and believe what is said of it in the Word of God? I should wonder much if any Christian would throw the dice for amusement under that recollection, and conscious that he was then t-akini; the lot. I rather think the matter might be left to you there, and that further argument is^but calculated to entangle the subject. However, you go on to remark, and most justly, that the disposing of every event is as much of the Lord as the lot, even where our own judgment is exercised ever so ])roperly and prudently. It is a blessed truth, the remembrance of which is calculated to make us " in all our ways acknowledge Him." Yet in ordinary cases this is not only consistent with the prudential exercise and use of ap- pointed means for arriving at the end proposed, but the right view of the one binds and encourages us to the employment of the other. I conceive that the inference which you meant to be drawn from the remark is this, that there is no such particular solemnity in the use of the lot as I conceive. But I think its proper solemnity remains unshaken, when we consider that it immediately involves tliat " re- nunciation of our own judgment" which you have marked, and in this virtually includes the looking for a determination to some other and higher direction. CII. Bee. 10, 1823. De.\r ^Ir. Y , — You had no cause to apprehend that I should consider you as taking any liberty with me in writing. I thank you for your letter, in which, I doubt not, you designed my profit ; and if I do not go to the same length in reply, it is only because I think I have exhausted all 1 have to say upon the subject. Though you speak of having read what I have offered on it in print, you seem not to understand my meaning yet, or you would not speak of me as representing a law of Christ's kingdom to have become obsolete by the lapse of years. The thing that you contend for and practise under the name of baptism, I positively deny to have been at any time a law of his kingdom, or practised at all in the apostolic days : I mean the baptism of a person who has never but professed to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the jNIessiah. Whe- ther that baptism of proselytes to the Christian faith, which con- fessedly was practised in the apostolic days, was observed as a Jewish washing, or as an institution of the Lord Jesus in the Kingdom of 398 COLLECTION OF LETTERS Heaven, is a question which it really is not necessary for me to go into at all, as immediately affecting my own practice ; any baptism that I could observe being essentially distinct from that of the apostolic days; and indeed involving in it a lie — that I had not before 2>?-o- fessed to believe in Jesus of Nazareth. At the same time — on that question — I must utterly deny all force in the remark by which you and so many others attempt to get over my argument from 1 Cor. i. 14. The administration of baptism, you say — and very truly — was not peculiarly apostolic. But no more was the preaching of the gospel. But who could admit the idea of Paul's thanking God (on any account) that he had preached the gospel to very few of the Corinthians ? You equally mistake my meaning, in seeming to think it necessary to maintain, us against me, that all the proselytes to the Christian faith in the days of the apostles were baptised, or washed with water, on their conversion. I really never thought of denying it. I wonder much at your selection of the two passages, 1 Cor. XV. 29. and 1 Pet. iii. 21. as supporting your views. As to the former, I have to confess that I do not understand at all what baptism for the dead means. Do you ? As to the latter pas- sage, it contains a verj^ explicit declaration that the apostle is not speaking of baptism with water at all. Notwithstanding the appa- rent approximation of our views on the subject of children, I suspect there is some essential difference still latent. For though you now talk of acknowledging your young children as disciples from their first instruction in the truth, and only making baptism with water a part of that instruction and admonition, in which you would bring them up, I fancy you would have your young child to collect, as well as it was able, from your statement, that it ought to ask for baptism, instead of plainly calling and exhorting it to the rite. If you do the latter in plain English, I am sure your children would readily receive the washing ; and then all I could say against your practice would be, that we have no intimation in the New Testament Scrip- tures of any such baptism being commanded or practised, though it is certain that there was in the apostolic age a most numerous class of such young disciples. And in all this, I think I make a most direct appeal to the Word.. But you seem to forget that, when I am engaged in proving that a doctrine is not in the scriptures, which some falsely derive from it, (as, for instance, the popish doctrine of jiurgatory,) I am unavoidably involved in a line of argument some- what different from that, by which I prove that a doctrine is in the scripture. If I were a Baptist, I should certainly quote a much greater number of texts in supporting the error, than I now do in opposing it : but you are quite mistaken when you infer that I should therefore make a more direct appeal to scripture. - Looking to Him who alone can wdl bring us to one mind on this and every other part of his truth, I remain. Yours, with sincere interest, ON SCKIPTniAL sriUF.CTS ^09 (III. TO F. f -, K.SQ. Fib. 24, I Si! 4. Mt dear Friend, — In one of your letters you expressed a \visli to know wherein our fundamental difference consists. Perhaps some of the little }icces which I sent you may have already answered that inquiry. Do you not perceive that we do not I)clieve the same gospel .'' that w^hile we hoth hear the Christian 7/«nie, we do not mean the same thing- at all hy Christianity .-* Our difference of sentiments and opinion upon this subject, is in your view of no essential importance ; nor, in fact, is what you call Christianity, if you were to look honestly at the state of your mind. In my view, any difference of opinion on this subject is fundamental indeed. If we believe not the same gospel, we do not worship or sei^'e the same God. You say it has always appeared to you " that the Christian road to salvation was u broad one, designed to embrace all descriptions of believers." Now, if you were to ask yourself seriously — what you mean by salvation ; and what you mean by the Christian road to it ; perhaps you would find that you had never attached anv distinct ideas to the phrases. But, on the opinion you express about the broadness of that road, ought it not to strike you that you avow your disbelief of the plain declaration of Christ, Mat. vii. 13, 14 : — " Enter ye in at the strait gate ; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat : because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." When such a passage is quoted, folks commonly run to a commentator (if they have one) to see what he says upon it. ^Yhy so ? Is it because there is any obscurity or doubtfulness in the import of the words ? No : there cannot be any language more plain and unequivocal in its meaning. But they do not like the meaning ; and at the same time they do not like to avow their rejection of the scriptures. They want help to get over the meaning, and they therefore apply to the commentator for assistance to affix some other meaning to the words of scripture, to twist them into a sense opposed to their real import ; and they commonly succeed in finding what they look for — some support and authority for the lie they love. This has been the grand business of the commentatoi'S for ages. When you add that the Christian road to salvation was destined to embrace " all descriptions of believers," there is a sense which your words might be supposed to have, in which I should cordially concur with you. i\l\, of whatever description — who believe the divine testimony in the Scriptures, have everlasting life, and shall be saved eternally. But nothing of that kind was your meaning. You mean that persons who believe every variety of doctrine under the name of Christian, 400 COLLECTION OF LETTERS shall alike participate in what you call salvation, provided they possess those characters of personal goodness which you think the essential point, and which at bottom vou conceive will equally lead to salvation the infidel as well as the Cliristian. Indeed, if varieties of faith, under the common name and profession of Christianity, be alike consistent with salvation, it is idle to talk of the Christian faith being essential to it. The Christian is one, and invariable; (and here, in order to shut out, if possible, a class of questions and speculations not immediately affecting ourselves, I would remark that I, throughout, wish to be understood as speaking of the case of those alone to whom the word of God is sent, and who, therefore, either believe or disbelieve the testimony which it declares.) But the fact is, that the great mass of professors in these countries have no persuasion of the divine certainty of that revelation which thev say they believe. They have found the profession of it general around them, and creditable — provided it be not a serious and scriptural profession. They have been brought up themselves under the Christian name, and certain religious forms that they call Chris- tian. They are, perhaps, also av/are that the evidences of the divine origin and authority of Christianity are such as no infidel has been able successfully to assail, and such as have extorted the acknowledg- ment of the most able men who have examined the suljject most closely. They find also, that — as might be expected in a real revelation from heaven, — the belief of it is declared to be of vital importance : that the words run — " he that believeth shall be saved," and " he that believeth not shall be condemned." On all these accounts they have a suspicion at times that it may be true, and are partly ashamed, and partly afraid, to ov/n the lurking suspicion that it is false — to own it even to themselves. Yet so far as they examine the Scriptures at all, they find things in every page, at which their incredulity stumbles, declarations which they accordingly disbelieve. They find, however, other passages, which they think — (because they misunderstand them)— consistent with the principles which they have adopted as indubitable and good. Of such passages, therefore, they are often forward to express great admiration, wliile anxious to turn away from the former as dangerous and false. Their occasional language about them as unintelligibly obscure, is only a more civil method of saying that they think them false. Their minds having never been subdued to the authority of the divine word, they derive not their sentiments from it, but will make it bend to their sentiments, or reject it when they cannot. Thus they com-- monly contrive to keep the whole subject at a convenient distance from, their minds. Their serious attention is engrossed by the various objects of the present life, which have in their view a certainty and reality which the others have not : while the latent suspicion that, after they have done with the present life, they may perhaps find substantial realities in another, leads them to maintain what they consider a decent and prudent regard to what they call religion. Do not, however, supjjose from this language that I should think any better of their course, if (as sometimes is the case), they were ever so intensely and exclusively occupied with what they call ON SCRIPTURAL Sl'IUF.CTS. 401 rclif^ion. So long as the only true God is unknown and iloiiud, man's, religion (be it much or little, cold or fervent), is idolatrous and vain. The only true God has discovered his character and glorv in the tcstimonvHe has sent from heaven concerning his son : and it is life eternal to know him, or to believe that testimony. John xvii. 3. He conveys this knowledge to whom He will, even to all whom lie has before chosen out of the world and ordained to eternal life. Compare Matt. xi. 25, 27. John vi. 37, 44, 45. x. 26 — 28. Acts xiii. 48. Those are the sheep for whom Christ has laid down his own life — stooped to be made a curse for them, that they might be blessed in him. The gospel is a testimony of the glory of God in their salvation^ in that salvation which is absolutely and exclusively his work. In the divine truth, of which they are con- vinced by divine report, they are brought to the knowledge of that living God, whom they had before disowned and denied, and from the life of whom thev had been alienated ; and w-hile this discovery shows them the utter evil of all that they thought best in themselves, — the idolatrous character of all their former religion — while it abases them in their own sight, it also exalts them and gives them "ever- lasting consolation and good hope," 2 Thcss ii. 16, from the cha- racter in which God is discovered, as the justifier and saviour of the ungodly, — from that propitiation for sin which he sets forth in the one offering of his own Son bearing the sins of many; — from the evidence which his resurrection from the dead affords that he has finished that work, which he willingly humbled himself to undertake, and that God is well pleased for his righteousness sake ; and from the divine assurance, which brings this righteousness and peace nigh unto those who are farthest from righteousness, — that those who believe — not those who do this or that to attain unto righteousness — but those who believe the word that testifies the righteousness of God, are accepted in the beloved, are justified from all things, and have everlasting life. I forbear enlarging on this topic, because my views of it are detailed in several of the little pieces that I sent vou. If there be any point on which you desire further information about my sentiments, use all freedom in calling on me to afford it. CIV. Feb. 9, 1.S24. Mr VERT DEAR BROTHER, — Though I am ill able to write, yet a letter I have just received fi-om H. F marks the necessity of my communicatiug with some of the church at h on his case ; and on some accounts I think it better to write to you than to L . I VOL. II. 2 D 402 COLLECTION OF LETTERS had heard with much grief of the contest and disturbance of mind which he had produced among you : but when he informed me by letter that he had left your fellowship ! on account of your singing the Psalms, I immediately wrote to him, not to argue the question about the comparative expediency of singing the Psalms or Hymns, but to call his attention to his wicked trifling with the ordinances of God, in making a difl'erence of judgment on any such question the ground of his forsaking the fellowship of the body. By his answer I find he makes quite light of the reproof, and continues utterly in- sensible to his sin. I had expressed my hope that the church at L would pursue the scriptural course for calling him to re- pentance : but some of his language in his last leads me to appre- hend that nothing has been done in that way. When any one quits our fellowship, is not the church whose assembly he forsakes called immediately to pursue the same course of admonition and effort to restore the offender, as in any other case of manifested evil? And observe well, that in dealing with H. F on his sin, ye are called to decline all discussion with him of the question, whether it would be better to sing the Psalms or Hymns. His sin consists in making agreement on either side of that, or any such question, one of his terms of communion. And really, when the fellowship of the saints is so trifled with as to be made to turn upon such points, there is an awful indication that the person does not see its really divine ground and limits. You will perceive, that according to the views which I offer, the church is not at all disqualified for acting together in applying the discipline of Christ's house to H. F , from the circumstance that you and others have been brought over to think with him on the question between psalms and hymns. Though you might prefer hymns — (and, indeed, I understood that you were waiting with some degree of impatience for the Dublin hymn-books) — yet I trust "you abhor the idea of saying, " I will not walk in Christian fellowship with any who will sing the Psalms of David." 1 regret and wonder that such arguments as H. F puts forward should carry any weight to your mind. But all that is a very sub- ordinate matter ; the weakness of his argument is lost in the wick- edness of his conduct. Yet is it not disgusting to read this as one of his weightiest arguments in his last ? " We cannot use language as our oion, which the Lord by his prophet speaks of himself." And which of the brethren did he find doing so ? There, indeed, he would have found an error worth contending against. In his former letter he urged the question, how could we sing, " Lo, I come to do thy will," &c. taking for granted that in singing such w^ords we must personate the Messiah. He might as well say, that when you and S were singing " Scots wha hae wi' Wallace bled," you were both intending to personate Bruce. But all this discussion should be for the present put wholly out of sight. H. F says, in his last, " All the church, I believe, with two exceptions, are of the same opinion now. We are to have a meeting on Sunday, and I hope all will be brought to one mind." Whether ye all concur or not in preferring hymns to the Psalms, or the Psalms to hymns, I comparatively care not a i"ush ; and it is awful to find him persisting % ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 403 to talk of such agreement as the unity of mind to which the Lord brinp^sr his people by the influence of the truth ; but I should l)c sorrv indeed to find, that you had received him back in n^\y skc/i u-uij as he intimates in that sentence. It would be covering liis sin and coun- tenancing it. You arc all agreed that you may use some of the psalms. You are all agreed that you may use some hymns. There is no fair room, therefore, for any dissension hci-e. But I trust you will be all agreed in marking your abhorrence of the con- duct of him Avho would rend the body of Christ on such a question ; and that, unless he be brought to repentance for his wickedness, vou will agree in that language which I, from the heart, pronounce — though he thinks that none but an ai)ostle ought — " Let him be accursed." I have been very ill for several weeks ; and can only add, that I shall anxiously wait to hear of a scriptural termination to this business. The good Lord bless and keep you all in the simpli- city of faith and love. Your affectionate brother. CV. TO THE SA.ME. March 3, 1824. It is witli grief of heart, my brother, I find, by a letter received this day from our dear L , that H. F has neither been brought to repentance for his iniquity, nor been put awav from among you. In the former, I see the continuance of his sin ; in the latter, I see the rest of you acting the most cruel part towards him, and the most unfaithfid towards the Lord, in taking part with his sin, or suffering it upon him. I am sorry that I happen not to have your letter at hand, but I remember the substance and general tenor of it ; and I observed them with great pain. For though you professed to agree with me that H. F had acted in some degree wrong, in quitting the fellowship of the body because you sing the inspired songs of David, you yet evidently sought to extenuate his evil by sharing the blame (as it were) between him and another who has opposed him; and were only anxious for a kind of deceitful settle- ment of the difference betii-een than. My brother, whereinsoever you think J. L has sinned in the business, reprove him, marking his sin distinctly. I know not yet wherein you think it consists. But is any evil in him (supposing ever so much can be established) to be used as a set-off against the gross, obvious, and continued wickedness of the other ? (I wish H. F to see all that I write.) Ever since he came among you, instead of seeking his edification and yours in the common faith, he has appeared to amuse himself with distracting and subverting vour minds. He at length abandons 2 D 2 404 COLLECTION OF LETTERS your fellowship because you si?ig Psalms ! and sufficiently marks his object in this step, as expecting to be a ringleader of schism, by coolly observing to me, that indeed you and others of one mind with him had not yet left the body, but that he expected you soon would. Though you appear to have been sadly infected with this leaven, I trust you wiU be found not of one mind with him. But, indeed, I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy. You seem to think J. L unwarrantably severe in expressing doubts of H. F 's standing in the truth. This is one of the bad symptoms of false charity in yourself. But I wish you distinctly to understand that I fully coincide with J. L there. When I see a man — no matter if he were my own son or brother after the flesh — making such a profane plaything of his connexion with a Christian church, and re- jecting and making a mock of all reproof ofi'ered to him, — when I see him for months exerting himself in the service of the devil, — labour- ing to divide and rend asunder the body of Christ, can I have confi- dence in such a man as a brother ? can I take the talk of his lips about the truth in opposition to his conduct ? No. From the bot- tom of my heart I say — would that he were cut ofl" who troubleth you ! And I see in that course, as much the course of mercy to him — if he be a vessel of mercy — as of profit to the body and faithfulness to the Lord. And what mean you, dear F , by allowing him or any one this week to abandon your fellowship, and the next week to rejoin it, without even any profession of repentance .'' Think you that, in any case, this can scripturally go on in a Christian church ? His present conduct is much of a piece with (but worse than) a former instance, in which he left the church in London, because we would stand up (instead of keeping our seats) while blessing and giving thanks before taking the bread and wine ! That was bad enough ; but, indeed, there is something more profane in the present case. The songs which were given by inspiration of God to the sweet Psalmist of Israel, and all, from the first to the last, celebrating — not David — but his Lord, — put by the royal prophet into the hands of Ethan, Asaph, Jeduthun, &c. to record, and to thank, and praise the Lord God of Israel, (see 1 Chron. xvi.) — he gravely tells us, are unfit for the purpose to believers ! Surely, then, he must suppose that David, and the singers he appointed, must have sung them in unbelief. And if any of the singers then had his mind enlightened to see the import of the Ixxxixth Psalm, for instance, as David's mind certainly was, (Acts ii. 30, 31.) he would, I suppose, take his hat and walk out when Ethan raised that Psalm in the sanc- tuary. I write in great haste and in much bitterness of spirit, seeing that the unavoidable and speedy consequence of your not purging out the evil from among you, must be that any one who sees and abhors it must leave your fellowship. My love to J. L , and tell him that I must remain in his debt a little longer ; as I am but slowly recovering, and have a press of business on me at present. Ever, with true afi'ection, yours, ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 405 CVI. TO THE SAMR. March 7, 1824. Alas ! my clear John, the melancholy intelligence which your letter brought me yesterday is only what I expected to hear. In- deed, I know not what tlse J. L could have done. All his efforts had proved vaiu to engage the body in a dealing of scriptural discipline with II. F . Ye took i)art, and still take part, with his ungodliness. In such a case, any disci))le who sees and abhors the evil, has no part left but to turn away from the body who will not purge it out from among them. Some may say that J. L should have waited a week or two longer. I really cannot pronounce on this : but it seems to me, from the whole course of the business, that it would have been but another week or two of vain jangling, and that he has been very feu* from precipitate. What you say of the kind of acknowledgment which you were unanimous in receiving from H. F only proves, how deeply and universally you are infected with the leaven of his sin. He would not, forsooth, have left the fellowship, if he had been satisfied that the objectionable Psalms would be discontinued ! Words cannot more plainly avow his impenitence. What is it but to declare that he still sets it up as a term of communion, that those with whom he will condescend to walk shall not sing (for instance) the Ixxxixth Psalm .'' And this is received by you tfll as a profession of repentance ! I am sure, I wonder not that my brother L suspects he has erred, in trying to select the Psalms that ye would not object to. I am sorry to re- mark that you, dear John, seem infected not only with H.F 's immediate principles, but with the radical principle of the popular forbearance. You seem in one of your letters plainly to intimate, that he was justified in leaving the body because he could not con- scientioiisli/, in his present views, sing the Ixxxixth Psalm. This is just setting up the worldly notion of men's consciences being the standard of right and wrong. However, he has now succeeded in effecting the schism which he seems to have worked hard for from the beginning: and all who know the circumstances must take one side or the other. / wish it to be distinctli/ understood that I stand tvith J. L . I cease not, however, to pray for you and H. F , that ye may be led to see and to abhor your iniquity ; and particularly that you, dear John, may be given to see the evil of that false good-nature which has proved such a snare to you in this business. 406 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CVII. TO THE SAME. Jpril9. 1824. My very dear F. — The letter which I received from you on the 20th ult. afforded me great joy. It found me very busy ; and 1 have since been postponing my reply in the daily expectation of hearing from J L . How comes it that he does not write ? Besides my solicitude to hear how the Excise business has terminated, he must surely be aware, (if he thinks) that I need some communication from him about the state in which you are as to Christian fellowship. I trust that, before this, you and he are again walking together ; that the breach between you, which Satan was allowed to make, is fully repaired ; and that I am therefore no longer to have the most painful feeling, that, in maintaining my Christian union with one of you, it is interrupted with the other. The sacredness and closeness of that union is seen only in the light of that divine truth which produces and cements it. While kept in the discernment of this, we shall see and abhor two apparently opposite evils, but equally pro- fane, and springing from the same root of bitterness. The one, and perhaps the more common, is that of sacrificing divine truth, or divine command, in order to maintain something under the name of church connexion. Such union is the unity of confederates against the glory of the Lord. The other evil — (less common, because it can be developed fully only in those who stand, or have stood, in outward connexion with a scriptural church) — is that of lightly rending the visible body of Christ, and sacrificing Christian union and fellowshij) to the maintenance of our own whims and fancies. Both evils must alike originate in a mind blind to the divine nature and sacredness of the unity of brethren in the faith ; must originate, in short, in that common spring of all evil — unbelief, — that insen- sibility to the one revealed glory, which leaves a man under the power of his fleshly mind to follow his idols, and the vain imagina- tions of his own heart. It will rejoice me to hear that your dealing with poor H. F. has been blessed for calling him to repentance; — to find that his sickness is not unto death. If his eyes be indeed opened to see his sin, he will no longer be found justifying himself by attacking others. In his last letter to me — chiefly filled with railing invectives against dear L , — he reprehends me sharply for reviving the recollection of his former evil, and mentioning to you his having abandoned the fellowship of the bi'ethren here for a similar vagary. Circumstanced as we are, I cannot acknowledge that I did any thing wrong in mentioning it. If one, who has been called a brother, turns away repeatedly, again entangled in the same evil for which he has before professed repentance, it is idle to say that the recurrence of his sin must not revive the recollection of the ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS, 407 former instance of it, until scriptural repentance appears anew. Whenever this appears, it would be indeed very unwarrantable to remember or rake up aj^ainst him any thing that has passed. Though 1 luivc written so far, I am not decided whether I will despatch this letter to-dav ; I feel it so unsatisfactory to write, without knowing what has taken place since your last. Mondav (r2th.) Still no letter: but, perhaps, this day's post may bring one. At anv rate I cannot longer delay sending this, as I fear vou must think mv silence strange. Ihere have been a few lines on business from H. F. to Mr. C ; and from the style of his address, and his total silence on the subject of his conduct, it is plain that he had not then repented of his evil deeds. I have little doubt that he looks for support from some in D ; and that, in his present mind, he will aim at spreading the schism wider, which he succeeded in producing among you. It is an awful spectacle. If all those, who have walked together at L , be really brought to the mind which you express in your letter, I doubt not that the breach has been repaired before this. But I apprehend there may have been some difficulties to J. L 's re-uniting himself to the collective body. Certainly I conceive that each of you, when led to see your sin, was called to seek re-union with him ; and not to wait till he could seek it with the body. It is not from any idle punctilio that I mark this. But, as I consider that he was divinely bound to act as he did in leaving you, I must consider that the standard of scriptural truth moved with him, and ceased to be with the rest of you. Round that standard any who were afterwards brought to repentance, should immediately rallv. Among all the profitable lessons of instruction and reproof which this melancholy business is calcidated to impress on disciples, that is one — the importance that each — male and female — from the oldest to the youngest, should have their judgments formed for themselves from the Scriptures, so as to adhere to that rule, at all cost, in the fear of the Lord, unswayed by personal influence and regards. I expect this will go to you under Mr. D 's cover; and you and L may avail yourselves of the same for some time in writing to me. Write without delay, and tell J to do so likewise, whether his Excise business be decided or not. My love to your dear partner, and the children. Grace be with you all ! Very affectionately yours, for the truth's sake, CVItl. Jan. 0, 1824. My veuv dear L , — So it seems that, at the veiy time I thought your trials about oaths at an end, they have begun again. 408 COLLECTION OF LETTERS uiid with a more formidable aspect. It is well, my brother : — all right ; for it is the Lord's doing. Has he not told us that the hairs of our head are all numbered ? Does he not say — " It is /; be not afraid ?" Does he not mercifully rebuke our unbelief in such lan- guage— " Do ye not remember ? Are ye yet without understanding ? O ye of little faith !" You say you feel yourself " less able to refight this battle than when it first began," No matter : it is not your's. Remember that word — " When I am weak, then am I strong." But you are really weary of such a contention, and ashamed of it, as it is deemed to spring from enthusiasm or imbe- cility, &c. It is a sad aftair, to be sure, when such clever fellows as J. L or John Walker are laughed at as fools for Christ's sake : and there is but one effectual remedy for that pride which kicks at it, and would make us faint under it — to consider him who endured to be called mad, and to be the song of the drunkard. March — , 1824. * * * * Have you ever read, dear J- of certain women which ministered to him of their substance } To whom .? do you know .'' ' Aye, aye ; it is wi'itten, Luke viii. 2, 3. I know that passage very well.' Say, my brother, do we not forget the thing, however w^e may recollect the words, when we kick so proudly, as you seem to do, against the idea of our possibly becom- ing dependent on our fellow sinners. That the flesh will kick at it, I know : I am well acquainted with the feeling : but let us not be imposed on by it. as if it were a good and proper feeling. There is a spirit of independence which the Word enjoins, of eating our own bread, &c. But if He, whose we are, be pleased to say — " I see it best that you should be unable to earn your own bread, for I see the pride and naughtiness of heart which lurks under your independent spirit. Go — I have commanded the ravens — or a widow-woman — or such and such brethren, to sustain you" — would it not become us to say — " Good is the will of the Lord?" But all this while you are fretting and fuming under an imaginary trial in possible prospect. You have discovered it to be false, I sup- pose, that " sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." O, J ! let us rather be in subjection to the Father of Spirits, that we may live. " Be still : and know that he is God." It grieves me much to hear that F is disturbing you with questions that minister strife rather than godly edifying. I w'ell recollect how much comfort and food I had singing the Scotch ver- sion of the Psalms of David with you. I believe I checked your impatience for the new hymn-books, thinking that you are better off' as you are. But really I should think myself ill employed lighting with any brethren, ichich should be used. While the Psalms are used, in the mind in which they were indited, they are a feast of marrow and fatness above all hvrans that ever were composed by man. I smile at his objection to the version on the ground of taste. I should decisively object to the more poetical English version, or to Dr. Watts's, I do view with pain and surprise our brother's objection ON SCIUI'TUR.VL SUliJECTS. 4(Ji) to tlio language in Gal. i. 7, 8, as if unfit for any believer except an iiisi)irc(l apostle. May it be tbc language of our wbole heart and soul unto the end ! lint as used by the apostle or by us, I really have never conceived the words, " Let him be accursed," as denoting a j)rayer that the curse of God should ultimately fall upon him (though we must be sure that it shall, if he be not given repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth), but as a direction that he should be regarded by us as an accursed thing, as one (however specious and highly esteemed) upon whom the wrath of God lies. He that will not heartily join with the apostle in the solemn words, must be animated by some spirit very different from that of the truth. May you all follow the things that make for peace, and the things whcrebv ve mav edifv one another. Jpril — , 1824. * * * * Thanks for your interesting letter of the 14th. It relieved and rejoiced me in many views. How tenderly does our Heavenly Father deal in allowing you to retain your situation in the Excise ! It is what I expected : but to find my expectations realized, is delightful and cidls for praise. So also does the termination of H. F 's business. It had a very threatening aspect for some time ; but I trust will be turned into a blessing. Dear J.'s last letter prepared me to expect a happy result, though I scarcely flattered mvself that you would be so soon re-united to so many. I trusc that mutual confidence and love will be more than ever strengthened and abound among you. July — , 1824. * * * * Jt rejoices me to hear that you are all going on in the peace and comfort of the gospel. O ! it is indeed a good and a pleasant thing for brethren to dwell together in unity. And the restoration of that blessing must be considerably endeared by its late interruption. Your account of our sister 's health, and the pecuniarv prospects of the familv, ought to excite our sympathy and pravers. !May they acknowledge the rod, and Him who hath appointed it, and be profitably exercised under his correcting hand ! How cheering are the assurances that whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth ; " that when we are chastened of the Lord, it is that we may not be condemned with the world." I be- lieve manv of the pecuniary trials of Christians originate in their not attending to the plain rule given them — " ^lind not high things, but conform to low." Rom. xii. 16. I am at present threatened with an attack of gout. But I have had a longer interval of freedom from it than I have been accus- tomed to for some years. I labour also under a new disetise, which I thought would have subjected me to a painful surgical operation. I felt very cowardly at the ])rospect, but I found great comfort from the consideration of that word — " We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones," Eph. v. 30. (It is out of his flesh; 410 COLLECTION OF LETTERS taken out of it as Eve from Adam's). No man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church. Surely, if we had faith as a grain of mustard seed, the closeness of this union which subsists between the members and their Head, is sufficient to make us yield ourselves to him and his gra- cious dealings at all times and in all circumstances, in implicit reliance on his tenderness, and care, and wisdom. He does not wiUingly afflict or grieve us ; but he loves us too well to leave us without chastisement ; and has too high aims for us, to let us take up our rest here. " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel from ever- lasting to everlasting; and let the people say, Amen." CIX. TO MRS. C . May—, 1825. * * * * — .And now I must dismiss my nonsense for the present. He was indeed a wise man that said — " Even in laughter the heart is sad," Prov. xiv. 13; and, perhaps, even in nonsense the heart may be sober ; driven to the nonsense from not knowing how to bring forward the sober verities that press upon it. But there are circumstances which will force them out head foremost. You are going to spend (I think) three years at P ; and 1 am sure I do not think my life worth three years' purchase. You may, on your return, find me vegetating where I am ; but I think it more likely that I shall by that time have done with this life, and have got behind the scenes. You think that I shall be in a state of insen- sibility, or, in fact, of temporary non-entity. I am sure I shall not : for I am sure the scriptures plainly oppose the notion, and I know nothing at all about the matter but what the scriptures testify. They have spoiled me as a philosopher, and they have spoiled me as a man of prudence and respectability in the world. In short, they have made (what the world thinks) a fool of me. Yet, if I had to begin life anew, and were allowed one wish, it should be to be " yet more vile," 2 Sam. vi. 21, 22, in the same way. What folly would it be to make any of the objects of this life the matter of any one wish ; for which of them is it that is not like a passing dream .'' But, my friend, you would mistake me much if you should think that I aimed at exciting in you or myself such a moralizing fit as has led many, under a general conviction of the emptiness of every object in this world, to devote their main solicitude to the supposed concerns of another world. One may be so exercised to any degree of earnestness, and yet be occupied with a more unreal shadow than the irreligious sensualist. If the irreligious world are walking in a vain shadow, the religious are walking in the shadoio of ON SCIUI'TIHAL SUBJECTS. 411 II shade. The Christian alone is a child of the light and of the day : ■' he idonc is awake, and knows whither he is going." And when I t^peak of the Christian, I mean that man or woman who believes the truth declared from heaven in the gospel of God the Saviour. That revelation discovers the character and glory of the only true and onlv living God. It is the light of life ; and as every Israelite who saw the brazen serpent lifted up by Moses in the wilderness was healed (Numb xxi. B, 9. John iii. 14, 15), so every man that sees the truth revealed from heaven in the gospel, is restored to eternal life. Probably, my friend, you would wish me to throw in some qualification to this assertion, to modify it in some way, to insert some proviso or condition. If so, it is because you do not believe the statement, and hold some doctrine which represents the attain- ment of eternal life as hanging upon something which the sinner has to do for the pur])Ose. And this is the universal thought of man's heart, so far as man thinks at all u])on the subject. " What shall I do that 1 may inhei'it eternal life ?" is the question which man's excited conscience suggests : yet he does not like the only answer which is in point to the inquiry — " If thou wilt enter into life, [thus] keep the commandments of that righteous holy law, which enjoins perfect love to God and to man, mider the penalty of death." He has a secret misgiving that he is a sinner against that law, and will be so to the end. Hence it happens, that in the part of the world called Christendom, a private gospel has been introduced, which represents an imaginary Christ, whose office it is in some way to make up for the deficiencies of good and well-disposed sinners, and to reveal a spurious mercy in their false god, which consists in indulgence to sins so small as theirs. So far as they can contrive to twist the scriptures into a coincidence with this deism (and here they have all the tribe of commentators and divines to help them), they are ready to admit the Bible to be a very good book, though they conceive that they could do very well without it, and that many do. Many think it an unsafe thing to call in question its divine origin, and therefore take pains to conceal, even from themselves, their scepticism on the subject. But when they meet plain passages of scripture, in point blank opposition to their fundamental principles, they do not hesitate to blaspheme the doctrine of scripture as very wicked doctrine, and the God whom it reveals as unreasonable and unjust. The parts of scripture which they like (for instance, the Sermon on the Mount), they like because they misunderstand them. Other parts they cannot for the life of them misunderstand, even with all the aid of their commentators : and those, therefore, they pro- nounce bad and dangerous. Indeed, when I consider the essential opposition of the human mind and all its principles to the revelation of God made in the scriptures, my wonder is not, that so few believe the report, but that any do believe it, and in this I see not any betterness of disposition in those who believe, but the power of God, whose word shall not return to him void, but shall accomplish all that for which he sends it. (Isa. Iv. 11.) It has pleased God, bv the foolishness of preaching [of the apostles' preaching], to save those that believe. (1 Cor. i. 21. xVcts xiii. 48.) "It is not of him that 412 COLLECTION OF LETTERS wiEeth, or of Ixim that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy j" (Rom. ix. 16), and the mercy that he showeth is indeed mercy " higher than the heavens," such as a creature altogether evil needs : while the perfection of this mercy is revealed in full harmony with the perfection of righteousness, and holiness, and truth, through that propitiation for sin which is set forth, as provided by God and accepted of Him, in the one offering of his Son dying the just for the unjust, and stooping to be made a curse in the place of sinners, that sinners (consistently with the divine glory) might be blessed in him. Here the revelation of God shows to man what is indeed good — that with which God is well pleased; and thus the gospel testifies the righteousness of God — that work of righteousness accomplished, on account of which God is just while he justifies the ungodly. The good hope which this gospel affords, it brings as near to the murderer on the gallows as to me or to you. He that believeth the report shall be saved, whoever he be ; and he that disbelieves it, whoever he be, shall be condemned. And as to the grave apprehension, that such a doctrine will encourage men to commit murder, &c., it only shows that the person committing them, rejects the counsel of God against his own soul, and is of just the same mind with those who reproached Christ in the days of his flesh with being a friend of publicans and sinners. It is quite time to release you. I could mention circumstances which have led me, particularly at this time, to give you one plain testimony against that " philosophy and vain deceit" which corrupts the gospel of Christ. However, it at least is designed in true kindness ; and if we should not meet again in the flesh, consider these as the last words of your faithful, though unphilosophic friend, P.S. Why should I leave the ends blank, when I shall perhaps never communicate with you again upon the subject } You are a rational philosopher, and you think me irrational, because I disre- gard all the supposed discoveries of human reason about God and the ways of God, and consider the revelation made in his word as the one and only decisive oracle of divine truth. But let me not be misunderstood here. Far be it from me to undervalue right reason: but I am sure there is no right reason in these matters, till reason is rectified, by the mind being subdued to the acknowledgment of the truth and enlightened by its precepts. (How forcibly does the apostle reason against the reasoners on that subject in 1 Cor. ii. 11.) I know and am sure that mi/ reason, or the intellectual faculty as exercised by myself, did lead me, and would have led me (if I had been left to its guidance), for ever to reject all the essential prin- ciples of divine truth, and to build one and another religious- system of vanitv and lies : in supporting which I might have gone through this world with great eclat and prosperity, but would have lived and died without God and without hope ; i. e. without the only true God and without the only good hope. But I am equally sure that my views were then as irrational as they were unscriptural. And now that I see and am convinced of what is declared in tlie Word of God, I do see that this is the only thing consistent with right reason ; ON SCRIPTURAL SUUJECTS. 413 and tliat cvcrv system opposing it, is not only ungodly but irra- tional. I admit that ditiicult questions may be pressed on various points, which I cannot answer but with an honest avowal of my ignorance, because the scriptures do not inform me on the subject, liut I say that the philosophers are unreasonable and unfair in urging these dilliculties against the truths of scripture : for it would be easy to show that whatever system they embrace, is pressed with equal dirticulties. The objections, for instance, which most derive from ques- tions about the origin of evil, about the consistency of the creature's responsibility with the divine foreknowledge, &c — these objections, legitimately followed up, would lead the objectors into downright Atheism ; and I am sure that with that they would find themselves embarrassed with as many difficulties as they have attempted to escape. Instructed in all that I need to know, as a sinful creature, for my guidance and sui)port, I am content to be ignorant about a great many matters of curious inquiry, and acknowledge the divine wisdom, as well in the limits of revealed discovery, as in its extent. ex. TO MRS. T . Aug. 6, 1825. Though scriptural principle will not allow me at present to address vou as a sister in Christ, yet I am ready to reply to your letter of the 2oth ult., and to acknowledge that I am pleased with the general sobriety of mind which it manifests. I had heard of the distractions at C ; and am quite uncertain whether, if I were there to-morrow, I could unite with any of the little parties that remain. The breaking up of the church there I did not wonder at, as I know the state in which it had been for some time. When once a church is turned into a debating society for the agitation of curious questions, under the pretence of seeking increased knowledge in the good ways of the Lord, the sooner it is broken up the better. The adversary (often in the form of an angel of light) has succeeded in turning away their ear from the truth. They have become tired of the heiivenly manna. To have " nothing at all besides that manna before their eyes," (Num. xi. 6.) seems to them a poor thing ; and, therefore, they seek out many inventions ! Tliis is the continual pro- pensity of all our hearts. But when an individual or society is left to that mind, they are as much walking after the flesh, while engaged (as they think) in prosecuting scriptural inquiries, as if they were walking in drunkenne.'^s and adulter}'. I have never thought of C for some years without a sigh : but " the Lord knoweth them that are his ;" and will in his own time make them manifest. 414 COLLECTION OF LETTERS Your carnal policy in maintaining religious fellowship with your husband, while he denied a divine command which you acknowledged, — in short, in loving him more than Christ, — has been rebuked. You seem to see that it has ; and therefore I pass to the other subjects to which you call me. As to a believer's marrying an unbeliever, I do think that there is no rule in the New Testament against it ; and I abhor the sin, of which I was guilty with others, of making a law which Christ has not made. And yet I am sure that the principles of Scripture mark the general inexpediency of such a con- nexion, if it can be avoided. That the marriage connexion is a civil or earthly connexion, and not a religious, — (though it is the most lasting and intimate of all mere earthly connexions) — is certain from this ; — that the connexion continues in unabated obligation between those who can have no religious fellowship. The unbelieving husband is declared to be sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife by the husband : that is, the marriage connexion with the unbelieving party is lawful to the believing. (1 Cor. vii. 14. see also 1 Pet. iii. 1.) And herein appears as plainly the difference of the law under the Gospel of Christ and under Moses. The Jew was bound even to pvt away a heathen wife with whom he had cohabited. But can we wonder at this, when we know that the Jews were debarred by their law from civil intercourse, from eating and drinking, with the unbelieving world. And those false teachers, who would refer us to the Jewish law in this and other matters, ought con- sistently to call a Christian husband to put away an unbelieving wife. The only passage of the New Testament Scriptures — (and to them alone Christians are to look for their rule) — which I formerly thought warranted the opposite inference, is that in 1 Cor. vii. 39. — " she is at liberty to marry whom she will, only in the Lord." As if this meant — provided it be to one who is in the Lord, that is, to a fellow-disciple. But this in fact was inserting in the text what it does not contain. And the expression in the Lord, or the liberty which we have in the Lord, — is sufficiently illustrated by a reference to Eph. vi. i. and Gal. ii. 4. v. 13. At the same time I wish to say distinctly, that if a disciple act in this matter, of choosing a partner for life, in the Lord, (that is, as a disciple of the Lord, with an eye to his will and his glory) — I am sure he will choose a believdng partner, f/^he can obtain any such at all suitable : and this, from the considerations which you justly suggest, especially those connected with the bringing up of the children. But I am obliged to put in the "if" — that I have inserted. For I must say that a Christian man may be so circumstanced, that he would be bound by the authority of the Lord to marry an heathen woman. He might be in a heathen country, where he had not one fellow-disciple ; or, if he was in a church of fellow-disciples, none of the females might be unmarried ; — or none of the unmarried females might be willing to take him for a husband ; or none of them might be such as would make a wife at all suitable for him. And as to those who would say — ' let the Christian man in those circumstances remain unmarried ;' — they are only acting consistently in setting aside a divine law, in order to establish their own tradition. The Christian man,- so cir- ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 41.") cumstanccd. may be bound by the divine law to marnj. (1 Cor. vii. 9. Hob. xiii. 4.) IJut this divine law worldly rclii^ionis-ts tliink of less autlioritv tlian a law of \sox\i\\y prudence, and oi pretended superior purity, whicii they substitute. I pass to the other subject to which you call. On this general question about the distinction of the law into moral and ceremonial, which the divines run upon, I would briefly remark that, as they apply it — I think it only calculated to darken counsel by words witliout knowledge. In the ordinary scriptural use of the phrase — " the law" — we are jjlainly to understand that law which " was given by Moses" — generally — without any sucli distinction as they w'oiUd introduce : though it is certain that, in the law given by Moses, there is included that law called moral, the work of whicli is written in the hearts and consciences of all men, charging them with guilt for doing evil. But, to come to the point for which you seem to introduce the other question, I acknowledge not any religious observance of the first day of the week obligatory on Christians, but that of coming together on that day, as the first disciples did, to shew forth the Lord's death in the Supper, and to observe the other ordinances of Christian fellowship. I was too long deterred from speaking a plain language on the subject, partly from being myself infected with the popular doctrine on it, — (though I could never rightly make out the scriptural authority for a Christian Sabbath daij) and partly from worldly policv, unwilling to shock the prejudices of the world. But I must now say that the idea of a Christian sabbath- day, succeeding the Jewish sabbath, and to be observed by cessation from the ordinary business of life, is one which, is utterly destitute of scriptural authority, and which the man of sin has introduced. Here also full well do the corrupt professors of this day, like the scribes and pharisees of old, set aside the commands of God, that they may keep their o\ati traditions. Look at one of them, on the first day of the week, running to this or that religious meeting, to hear this and that preacher, or perhaps liimself to preach ; but altogether deaf to the instruction and reproof of the word as to the real observance of the day. The hypocrite challenges you for letting your children play on that day. (I do not know that even a Jewish child was restrained from that on the Jewish sabbath.) But I suppose he would be still more shocked if he saw you darning your husband's stockings on Sunday. And what has he to offer in support of this ? Nothing, but a human tradition ! ' Under the Christian dispensation there is a change of the sabbath from the last day of the week, which was appointed to the Jews, to the first day of the week ; and now the first day is to be observed by Christians as the last day was by the Jews, and they must do no manner of work on that day ; — not even (as the tip-top professors say) so much as to shave themselves.' Well : if a poor disciple of Christ may ask the question, I would beg to learn from these good gentlemen what ground they have for asserting this change of a sabbath day, and the continued obligation of any Sabbatical obsenance to Christians ? ' O ! as to the change, all the divines are agreed — Dr. Doddridge, and Dr. Watts, and (I suppose) Mr. Kelly, and all the good people, that the change mwit have been made by divine appointment : and 416 COLLECTION 01' LETTERS though the New Testament Scriptures are silent upon the subject, yet it was probably made between the resurrection and ascension of the Lord. And as to the observance of a Christian Sabbath none but enemies to aU religion and godliness can disregard it.' Thank ye, gentlemen; ray blessed master was ranked in that class before me. A Christian standing in the light of the truth and adhering to the word of the Lord, can need nothing more to embolden his rejection of the current tradition on this subject, than to find that it has no foundation in the Scriptures of the New Testament, and that they plainly declare the cessation of all Jewish observances, on account of the accomplishment of that good thing, which these shadows typified — the Redeemer's entering into his rest on the completion of his work. Those who believe the testimony of that, have a Sabbath indeed ; but not on any one day of the week more than another. Though I do not think any further remark on the subject necessary, yet I would briefly add that, according to the popular system, we must suppose that t2Vo different sabbath days were observed in the first Christian churches : nothing is more certain than that the Hebrew Christians continued to observe the law of JVl oses, and assuredly this special precept of it. They kept the sabbath, of course, on the only day on which it could be kept — the last day of the week. But the Anti- christian divines would persuade vis that the Gentile Christians had another sabbath, which they kept, and were bound to keep the first day of the week. So that, in fact, the Jewish disciples were weekly breaking the Christian sabbath, and the Gentile disciples the Jewish sabbath. This absurdity may be swallowed by the besotted followers of the man of sin : but Christians are called to maintain the one observance of the first day of the week, which was delivered botli to Jewish and Gentile converts — the coming together on that day into one place to eat the Lord's Supper. This, and all the Christian fellowship connected with it, appears a contemptible thing in the eyes of worldly professors. But they really despise Him whom God hath crowned with glory and honour. You see I have readily set about replying to your inquiries. I have done so, because you seem to make them with a view to scriptural re-union with the disciples of the Lord. The last pieces I have published, are " Seven Letters on Primitive Christianity ;" and " A Sufficient Reply to Mr. J. Haldane's Strictures" on that work. If you have not seen them, I believe they may be had at Tims's, 85, Grafton Street, Dublin. If not, I would endeavour to forward you copies. I remain yours in the hope of the Gospel, P.S. I received a long time ago a letter from J. D , to which I did not reply, because I could not without making myself a party in a division, upon which I had heard only one side. It seems a very dubious ground for any man's departing from a Christian church, that they do not manifest enough of love. He seems pretty plainly to say — " I manifest enough of love." — That " great I" is a great devil. f)N scnirTLiiAL sriMi:cTs. -117 CXI. TO THK SAMT.. Dec. 20, l82o. Dear Mrs. T , — A few days ago I received your note of llic J)th instant, and now send you two copies of the Letters on Primi- tive Christianity, the Reply to Haldane, Thoughts on Rehgious Estabhshnients, and each of the seven tracts. Accept them as an expression of warm aflectionate interest. I have an indistinct recol- lection of Kelly's pamphlet that you allude to ; but I never answered it. I was quite satisticd with the evidence which it alibrded that we differ on the fundamental truth ; and was willing that professors should be left to manifest themselves by taking such side on the 1 appearing; ia the Christian, liut did he mean to ullow them to hold fellowship in the ordinance of the supper with fornicators of the world ? The tliree verses (0. 10. and 1 1.) are most closely connected, and plainly amount to this: ' I enjoin you not to associate with forni- cators, t'icc. not even in convivial intercourse : but when I say this, 1 intend such characters only, when they have appeared in your Christian bodv, and not fornicators of the world. For how could you avoid their society, uidess ye were altogether to go out of the world .' Nay, if any of the infidel world bid vou to a feast, and ye be disposed to go, use your liberty. But not so if any one called a brother, &c.' Now, taking the 1 1th verse in this connexion, from which it cannot be disjoined, how can anv one sav that the eating which is allowed to Christians icitk a fornicator, &c. of the world, but forbidden with a. fornicator called a brother, is the eating of the Lord's supper ? I hear so many extraordinary things, that I should not be much surprised if I heard some such objection as this, against the view which I have contended for — ' And is it only in civil companion- ship that we are forbidden to associate with fornicators, &c. appear- ing in the church, and are we allowed to keep them in the Christian fellowship .''' Any one starting such an objection must willingly overlook what has gone before and what follows. In the 4th and and 5th verses, the apostle has expressly commanded the Corinthian church to put away such a character from their Christian fellowship ; and he briefly recalls their attention to that command at the close of the chapter : distinct from this, though closely connected with it, is the direction which he gives in the 11th to regulate their deport- ment towards such an one, even in the civil intercourse of this life. The w-isdom of the latter direction is disputed. urged against it — " What additional punishment is there in not having him at our table, after we have removed him from our Christian fel- lowship ?" It is a very awful thing to set up our wisdom against the wisdom of God ; and when we attempt it, it is no wonder that our wisdom should be found folly, as it obviously is in the present case. What can be more suitable, what more adapted to keep alive on our minds a due sense of the awfulness of the case of one, who has rebelled against the divine word — as well as consistently to present to him our solemn testimony against his rebellion — than that we should be enjoined to abstain from all that intercourse and companionship with him, even in the things of this life, which would import complacency in him and satisfaction in his society ? And this at once exposes the futility of an objection which some have started, as if the precept were impracticable, as inconsistent in many cases with the duties which are imposed on him by the various rela- tion s of life .'' ' Should a husband refuse to eat his meals with his wife, or a wife with her husband, a parent with a child, or a child with his parent, if one of the parties be a disciple, and the other has been put away from the church ?' — Is there, in such a case, any of that convivial intercourse which the apostle really forbids, and which is sought from mutual complacency in each other ? I would freely sav„ 2 G 2 452 COLLECTION OF LETTERS in reply to such cavils, that while I CQiitend for the apostolic precept in its real and obvious import, I should not think that I violated the precept at all, by actually partaking of a meal (in many cases) at the same table with one of the characters described. I dare not, for in- stance, either ask him to an entertainment that I made, or accept of his invitation ; in doing so I should break a plain command. But if I were invited to dine by one of the world, and found at his table one who had once been in Christian fellowship with me, but was put away, should I therefore leave the table ? I have known some that would, and I respect their adherence even to the letter of the Word, though I think it not enjoined by the spirit of it. Have I sought his society ? In my remaining at the table, is there any thing indi- cative of my complacency in him ? or is there any thing that conta- minates me, any more than in dining in the same house with him, or in the same city } No — I should remain at the table without scruple, while guarding my deportment against even the appearance of familiarity with him, or of pleasure in his society. CXXXIII. TO THE SAME. April 25, 1829. In addition to the paper of remarks which I sent you yesterday, on I Cor. V. 11 , allow me now to request your attention to the following, suggested by ■ 's letter to you. Her communi- cation makes me more acquainted than I was before with the extraor- dinary ground taken by her and others, for their rejection of the apos- tolic command. But before I notice that, let me remark how awful it is that she has not condescended to take the slightest notice of the Apostle's words, " not even to eat with such an one" — or to give the least intimation what she conceives to be their meaning, but absolutely passes them over, as if they were unworthy of consi- deration. " Whatever the dealing was there ordered, it could only be so long as the offender was called a brother, which he certainly is no longer after he is put out of the body. Paul says. What have I to do to judge them that are without," &c. The Apostle had commanded the Corinthians to have no fellow- ship with fornicators ; and he now remarks, that this prohibition related not to fornicators of the world, but to the case of such a cha- racter appearing within the Christian body — such as had now occurred in the incestuous person ; proving thus, from the remark, that he had nothing to do to judge them that were without, and that the Corinthians must needs go out of the world if they were not to associate with its fornicators. With respect to such a character ON sciurniiAL SLUJLICTS. 4j.i appearii',^ within tlic cluirdi, and therefore at that time called, or bearing the name of a brother, and therefore a proper object of the apostolic jiide^mcnt, he repeats and enforces his coniinand, that they slundd put him out of their body, and abstain from all companion- ship with him, even in the convivial intercourse which they were allowed to hold with heathens. O yes, says Miss H 's argument in effect — obeving one part of your injunction in removing him from our Christian Jellou'shlp, we may, in opposition to the other part, hold as much good fellowship with him as we please, in the social intercourse of this life ; for he is then tvithout, and you say that vou have nothing to do with judging those that are without. Really, such pitiful special pleading would be ludicrous in common matters ; but, on a scriptural subject, it is very profane. Admitting that the Apostle had nothing to do to judge them that were without, yet Miss H might allow it to be within the apostolic province to in- struct and command those that were within ; and what she calls the dealing ordered with the fornicator. Cor. v. 11, is simply a prohibi- tion to the disciples against eating with him. A little more modesty might have made her pause before .she virtually denied his authority for this. If !Miss H , bv the words " not even to eat with sucli an one," understands eating the Lord's supper with him, combining this with her assertion, that the " dealing ordered" could only have been so long as he was within, she must imagine that there was some such practice then, a«! what has since been called suspending a person from the conwiiinion. If she mean that while he was still within the body, and therefore joining the body on the first day of the week in aU Christian ordinances, the church were yet forbidden to eat an ordinary meal with hiin, I w^ould ask ]Miss H , how long she con- ceives a fornicator is to be retained in the church ? I would tell her that he is to be put out forthwith, as soon as his wicked character has appeared. CXXXIV. TO THE SAME. April—, 1829. Believe me, dear Miss F., it went to my heart last Sunday to be obliged to call you to such a trying interview in the present weakly state of your health. I fear the very sight of my handwriting must now be painful to you. But can you wonder that I am unwilling to omit any effort for averting the sad result which seems so fast approaching ? iUlow me, therefore, to return to one point, which is capable of being put so as must command your assent, unless the 45i COLLECTION OF LETTERS Lord has said — " Let her eyes be holden ;" or (what I consider perfectly equivalent with this) unless you are left to shut your eyes wilfully against the clearest light. The point I mean, is this — that the English phrase no not, is exactly of the same import with ?wt even, and therefore that it does not require, as vou intimate, anv knowledge of the Greek, to be satisfied that the eating, mentioned in the 1 ] th verse, is not the eating of the Lord's supper. I have sometimes attempted to illustrate the force of " 7io not," hy supposing that I told you of a person from whom I had expected a legacy, that he left me nothing, no not sixpence. I have appealed to you, whether you, and every one acquainted with English, would not understand by that expression — not even so small a sum as sixpence. It is dis- couraging enough that this appeal has not carried conviction with it. But pei'haps, if I pursue the illustration in a somewhat different form, it may strike you more. Suppose you asked me how much has he left you? and I replied — "nothing — no, not tivo thousand u-j/ear." I now call on you to think whether you would not be disposed to say, why that is strange language; as if 2,000 a-vear would have been a small legacy ; — whether you would not at once feel that the phrase "no not" — in connexion with the mention of a legacy so great — was improper and absurd. There are one or two other remarks which I would offer ; but yet, if you still conceive that the words in the 11th verse " no, not to eat with such an one," refer to the highest act of Christian fellowshipj there is obviously no use in savins: anvthinc: more. cxxxv. TO MR. W. C . May 7, 1829. Dear Brother, — I need scarcely say that your letter afforded me joy, and matter of thanksgiving to Him, who maketh men to be of one mind in an house — in that house which is indeed his building. I should make very little of the intelligence that the W brethren had ceased to be baptized, had it not appeared that this change is connected with one much deeper, — with a clearer perception of that gFory of the Lord, which confounds and lays low all the fancied glory of man at his best estate, Ps. xxxix ; (Mark the emphasis of the Psalmist's language in the passage referred to ; Every — not some, or many, or most men — but every man ; — not in some circumstances and unfavour- able conditions, but — at his best estate; — not — is beset with much vanity — but is altogether vanity.) which at once furnishes us with an infinitude of substantial glorying in His redeeming mercy, and ON SCRirTURAL SUBJECTS. 4.').') laithfulness, and power, and at the same time discovers to us our own utter vilcncss at all times, the utter contrariety to God of all our own thoughts and ways, and willings and workings. Tlie salvation, wlu-rcwith ho saves us from ourselves, is great and wonderful indeed. " Bent lu hurksUding from me," is the character which he gives of his people ; not the character (as so many think) which u-as theirs, hut which is theirs unvaricdly to the end. Yet in .such rehcls he acconipli.«hcs that word of his promise — " I will not turn awav from thcni to do them good ; and I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me." The various and gross corruptions of the revealed truth of God throughout Christianity, in those days of the Gentiles, present an awful display of human wickedness, as just similar to that of the Jcwi.'-h people. But there is a still hlackcr display of it, and of crowning malignity. It is this. Let us only he left to ourselves to make our own use of the gospel of the grace of God, in the purest form in which words can convey it, and there is no one of us that would not ahuse and per\'ert that glorious gospel, into an occasion to the flesh in any of its most loathsome forms ; talking perhaps most excellently ahout the truth of God, and at the same time walking after our own lusts, led hlindfolded by the father of lies with a lie in our right hand. Well, how blessed is that hope, which, even this view of the malignity of our own hearts, does not shake or in the least affect. Any hope is false, that would be shaken by the conviction that we are fully capable, even of the wickedness last described ; not only capable of it, but that it is one of the forms of ungodliness, to which our own hearts continuallv tend : the hope, which such a conviction would shake, must be a hope that we are not quite so bad. But blessed be God, the way^ into the holiest is so made manifest for such sinners, that we can at all times come boldly unto God, with full boldness, confessing our sin, without any attempt or wish to cover it ; loathing ourselves, but giving thanks to his holy name, and glorying in it ; satisfied with his goodness, and looking to him confidently to fidfil in us all his good jjleasure, even to the end. But I must check myself, in order to add one or two remarks. You introduce the phrase, " workei's together with God," which is borrowed from our translation of 1 Cor. iii. 9. In the original, it is not — " labourers together with" — but fellow -labourers, and not " with God" — but "of God" — in the employ of God; and happily a little attention to the context will be sufficient to satisfy any disciple of this, though wholly ignorant of Greek. The apostle had sharply reproved the Corinthians for the schisms and parties that were among them. Tliey classed themselves under different leaders, according to the different instruments through whom they had been called to the belief of the Gospel, as Paul, Peter, ApoUos, &c., and some, no doubt, thought they stood on much higher ground, as having been called under the personal ministry of Christ himself. The Apostle strikes at the root of this carnal glorying. " Who is Paul, and who is Apollos," but mere instruments in the work which is exclusively God's, and in which the instriunent employed is nothing, but that God, who works by 456 COLLF.CTION OF LKTTKRS any he pleases, is all ; and how unreasonable to make any difference between Paul and ApoUos, &c. the occasion of divisions among you, when we all possess one common character, are all fellow- servants of the same Lord. I believe I need not say more to satisfy you that the idea in the passage, is — not " workers together with God ' — as if God and the Apostles were fellow-workers, but fellov^r- labourers one with another, employed by the same God in the same work. It is the more needfid, however, to insist on this correction of our translation, as we know what a handle the Wesleyan Methodists and others make of the text, for giving a countenance to their pro- fane atheistic idea of a sinner's co-operating with God in the work of his salvation; and indeed it is an idea which is at the bottom, not only of the Arminian blasphemy, but of most of the Calvinistic orthodoxy — in short, of the creed of all who would reject the sentiment, that every work and thought of the mind, and motion of the will, that springs from the believer's own heart, is from first to last opposed to the only true God — so far from being in any co- opcration with him. Blessed be God ! in such he worketh both to will and to do, and his mercy reiyns victorious unto eternal life. To his faithful care and keeping I commit you, and all the dear brethren at W , to whom, though unknown in the flesh, I desire my affectionate salutation. cxxxn. June 8, 1829. P need not endeavour to enlist feelings on his side. It is unnecessarv, and the attempt is unsci'iptural. He really writes like one utterly ignorant of the nature of Christian admonition and scrip- tural reproof. He talks of them throughout as an exercise oi juris- diction on the side of those who offer them, over those to whom they arc offered. He takes for granted that a CJmstian Church has the right of exercising jurisdiction over its own members, and that we attempted to exercise it over the body in Dublin. The whole of this idea is monstrous. The only jurisdiction over Christians, either col- lectively or individually, in matters relating to the kingdom of God, belongs to the king of Zion ; and the moment any church, or any member of a church, thinks of exercising jurisdiction in the affairs of His kingdom, there is indeed an usurpation of Christ's authority. Take the last act of discipline in a church, — the removal from among them of an unreclaimed offender. It is an act which their king commands, and in taking which they but obey his authority, but exercise not the slightest autliority themselves. In obedience to his commands, they cease to walk with that wicked person ; — they cease ON bCRIl'TlRAJ. SUBJECTS. -i.j? to holil liiiii in their fellowship. But let us look a little closer at the nature of Christian admonition and reproof. To ttihtioiiish a person is to put him in mind of sonicthins; : and this implies that the person has before known, or professedly known, that of which we put him in mind. In doing this, do we exercise any jurisdiction over him ? For C/iristian admonition there is ulwaija room from a church or an individual disciple towards any other disciple or church : there is always room and (jrovnd for it, on account of the continual tendency of our hearts to let slip the things which we have been taught ; and therefore the apostles speak of it as an exercise of brotherly love, in which it is well that disciples should always be engaged. Col. iii. 16. Rom. XV. 14. And when they are thus blessedly engaged in admo- nishing one another, are they exercising jurisdiction over each other? Bat when anv one, with whom we are in Christian connexion, appears to have let slip, or to be letting slip, any of the Christian principles he has professed, then there is a more special call on those who observe this, to admonish him, to put him in mind oi what he is forgetting ; but not a whit more exercise of jurisdiction or authority over him. Now, suppose that I send a letter of C'hristian admonition to a brother in those circumstances, with whom I have not an opportunity of a per- sonal interview, what should we think of him, if, instead of meeting my brotherlv labour of love in a similar mind, he were to throw my letter unread into the fire, and manifest that he was affronted and irritated at mv officious interference P What should we think of this, if he even tried to vindicate it, by saying that, indeed, before the ar- rival of my letter he was beginning to recollect the principles, to which I aimed at recalling him ? Nay, I will give P more ad- vantage. I shall suppose that I wrote my admonitory letter under misinformation or mistake ; and that my brother was really at the time kept in full remembrance of the principles, of which I put him in mind ; — if it were reallv so, would he be more likely to burn my letter, or to be aflronted at the receipt of it ? Indeed, he would not. — And what I have to sav of one individual Christian writing to one, I say of twenty associated, writing a common letter to twenty others associated ; whatever mystic meaning P may annex to the term church. But of this more hereafter. But is not the exercise of ju- risdiction implied in any attempt to reprove ? Not at all necessarily, according to the scriptural import of the word, any more than in the attempt to admonish. The Greek word, commonly translated to re- prove, is the samo which in Matth. xviii. 15. is translated "tell him his fault;' in which passage all idea of the exercise of jurisdic- tion or authority is excluded by the whole spirit, in which the disciple endeavours to gain the brother who has trespassed against him. The strict and literal meaning of the term is — to prove the character of a tiling — (generally its evil character) — by bringing it to the test hy which it should be tried. In scriptural reproof, that test, by which we show the evil that we reprove, is the divine word. Tf'e exercise no jurisdiction or authority by referring to that tribunal, to which all the authoritative decision belongs. But where the reproof is scrip- tural, it constitutes one of the highest exercises of brotherlv love, in that familv where " all are brethren" on one common level : and 458 COLLECTION OF LETTERS truly there is reason to apprehend some great mistake in the mind of those, who repel that exercise of love as the attack of an enemy. P seems to admit that we have scriptural authority for the idea of sister churches — i.e. churches so acknowledging each other as hold- ing the same faith and walking by the same rule, that a member of one visiting the other, joins its fellowship of course, on being re- cognised as a member of the former. In fact, it is evident that the apostolic churches were generally thus connected : and the con- nexion naturally (I may say) arises from the nature and ground of Christian connexion. But according to the nature and ground of that communion, how can this connexion be scripturally maintained, without allowing the freest communication between them, on all things concerning the kingdom of God, — without the most open door to the interchange of Christian admonition and reproof : no more than the Christian fellowship of two individuals in the same church can be maintained, if either close the door against the other. It would be but the 7imne of brotherhood that would then continue ; and disconnected from all the grounds that are essential to its real exist- ence. Is this less true of two collective bodies of Christians, than of two individuals ? Is not mutual confidence as to the unity of their faith and way, essential to their acknowledged connexion ? And does it consist with the maintenance of this confidence, that one of them should reject a Christian communication by letter from the other, and repel it indignantly as " a wanton creating of a cavse of probable disunion ?" Really, such conduct and such language invade every principle of Christian fellowship ; and only prove that it was high time for us to adopt the course which we have taken. But what reason had we to think it probable, that a disunion would be occasioned by our sending that letter of brotherly admonition to a body, with whom we professedly stood in Christian connexion ? could we have calculated on such an unbrotherly rejection of it by all of them ? I certainly should not have been surprised if the same party, who openly opposed the divine command, should also oppose the reception of our letter exposing their sin, and the sin of the adverse party, who had tolerated their rebellion for so many months ; nor should I have been surprised if this had accelerated a separation, which ought to have taken place so long before. But that the nominal asserters of the command should also concur in rejecting our admonition, is what assuredly we could not have anticipated. And now who have made that letter the occasion of our disunion ? We or they ? But how unfair and unfounded is P 's representation, that we have cut them o^ for not reading that letter in the church assembled! He seems to have penned that representation for the sake of the 2)oiMt, that " we admonished them for one ofi'ence, and cut them off for another." From my letter to M informing him of our pro- cedure, P , if he looked at it (but perhaps his indignation would not allow even this), must know that the ground of our procedure was, their non -repentance of the evils on which we admonished them. — (as far as M 's reply conveyed any information of their mind ; combined certainly with their closing the door against communica- ON SCIUI'I TUAL snUKCTS. 450 tioii with them as a sister chiiiTh.) ]Uit if the language of M "s re|)lv had aUbrded any scriptural ground for hoping that they really :-a\v the wickedness of the course in \Yhich they had been so long walking — instead of aflbrding evidence to the contrary, would their mere refusal to receive our letter have led us, who reported the result to the church, to mark the course which we did, as that which alone remained, or have led the church to adopt it ? You, my brother, know and can testify the contrary. Yet undoubtedly, even then, the rejection of our letter would have formed a subject of the most serious remonstrance and expostulation ; nor could I think of con- tinuing in connexion with any church, that would continue to adopt and vindicate such unbrotherly conduct. But certainly every com- munication which we have as yet received, affords accumulated proof that they remain utteily insensible to the radical evils on which we admonished them. But what right have we " io proceed to an act of discipline to a distant church ?" An act of discipline ! Shame that P should cmplov the phrase in the wav of mvstcry or charm, for beclouding a most simple subject. If we are warranted by the word to acknow- ledge a distant body of disciples as a sister church, must we not of necessitv be warranted in declaring that connexion dissolved, when the grounds of it and of the brotherly confidence essential to it are removed ? Or, having once acknowledged that connexion, must it continue of course for ever ? No, P himself savs " that he would not absolutely charge us with evil, had we thought fit to withdraw from them three months ago." — (Why he fixes upon that period I know not, it being now more than five months ago since H. made his speech disowning the precept, and was tolerated in it.) — So, had we dissolved the connexion so long ago, without previously making any effort to recall them from their evil ways, all would have been well, in P 's view. Not so in mine. I should never have consented to break off a connexion so close and of such long standing, without an attempt at reclaiming them by scriptural admonition. And what does P mean by saying — " Do not think I dispute vour right to take ever}' means in your power to convey instruction to other churches, or to point out evils in ichich ye may find them icalking." What more did we do in that admonitory letter, and from which he has chosen to be affronted, and which it is plain was rejected by the body through his influence and misleading ? And now he raises an outcry against us for a rupture, of which he has been himself the author ; which he appears so anxious to perpetuate, that he is about retiring from the Stafford Street body, because (it seems) they are about employing some means for healing the breach which he has occasioned ! But really the more I examine the whole of that pas- sage in his letter, the more inexplicable it appears, — or rather, the more irreconcileable with any true principles of Christian union. He goes on to say, " Had you sent us, instead of your admonition, infor- mation that you could not continue to countenance our course by walking with us, — you would have very speedily heard that we had put an end to this course, attended with probably as ample a confes- sion of evil on our parts as you would have desired." Rcallv ! But 4S0 COLLECTION OF LETTERS now (this is the necessary supplement intended) ye shall have no confession of evil from us, but we shall stand on our defence and on a vindication of our evils, because ye presumed to offer us brotherly admonition upon them ! And this man talks of the evil of making Christian fellowship turn npon straws ! Had we merely given them the information that we could not continue the connexion, without endeavouring to point out the evils to their attention, P might have had some pretext for charging us with employing a threat, as he does now for accompanying our admonition upon them with a remark, that their continuance would be inconsistent with continuance of our connexion as sister churches. As to his accusing us of know- ing, when we sent the admonition, that " the distracting matter was just arriving at its close," I must tell him that we knew it not, either when the admonitory letter was ordered by the church, or when it was dispatched by us. But I must tell him further, that v/e know it has not arrived at a scriptural close to this day, — unless some great change has taken place since the writing of his letter, of which we have had no telegraphic account. The really distracting matter has been their profanation of the divine commands, by tolerating for more than five months the open disavowal of subjection to one of them in an individual member, and the progressive spreading cf that rebellion through a majority of their body, as well as the turning of the Church of God into a school of disputation. For these evils we neither knew of any symptom of repentance, when v/e admonished them on the subject, nor do we know of any now, but have lament- able evidence of the contrary in P 's letter. In the last of these evils, indeed, P seems to glory; when heboasts that himself and A. B. " all along stood unflinching in the fore-front of the hot battle;" and declares that " it ought to sink deep in our consciences," that such fine combatants should now (through their own pertinacity in evil) be likely to be separated from the Stafford Street body. I am sick of his letter, and drop it with one more remark. I have held P very, very dear, for the truth's sake : and it will relieve my heart fi-om a load of pain, if he ever be restored to the same place in my brotherly affection or confidence which he has formerly possessed. But reflecting on the course, in which he has been, and is still engaged, I cannot at present regard him with any complacency. CXXXVII. TO THE CHURCH IN DUBLIN. June 8, 1829. Very dear Brethren, — Much endeared to us bv the manifesta- tion of the mind of Christ in your letter of tlie 3rd instant. That letter was marked with such Christian honesty and cxplicitness of ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 4G1 candid aikMo\vlcd<,am'nt, that we could not hesitate to \ay it before the churcli, which we did on yesterday ; and the cliurch with as Httle liesitation jovfidiv declared the connexion restored between them and vour bodv as sister churches, and gave us the pleasing conunissioa to inform you of this with their most Christian salutations. Jilessed be the good shepherd who is faithful to that promise — " / will seek that wliicii was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken and will strengthen that which was sick." E/ek. xxxiv. 16. We doubt not but, through his powerful blessing, what has passed (though for the time not joyous but grievous indeed) will prove abundantly useful for knitting us togetiicr more closely, and leading us to watch over each other in love more faithfully. Excuse us for writing so short a letter at pre- sent. We are much occupied, and unwilling to delay sending this. Poor P will shortly receive a paper of remarks on a most pain- ful letter lately received from him. That paper we wish you to see after he has done with it. And now, dear brethren, grace be with you, and keep us all walking in that heavenly wisdom " all whose paths are peace." P. S. — Unity of mind is so essential to real Christian union, and any concealed difference of mind, covered up by a laxity of principle, is so surely productive in the end of every evil, that we think it at least safe (though perhaps not necessary) to state to you distinctlv, that toe hold it lawful for a Ckristian to employ any means that come within the compass of his ability and opportunity , for expo'^ing and re- futing antichristian lies, by putting foncard scriptural truth in opposi- tion to them, either privately or publicly, either by speech or by tcriting. If vou note the terms we use, you will see them adapted to mark the legitimate use of scripture towards them that are without, in contra- distinction to that which is illegitimate and evil. We shoiddwish the church in Stafford Street to be clearly acquainted with our mind on this subject. If any hold that to be actually unlawful, the lawfulness of which we assert — (while we do not urge upon any, exertions which may seem to them inexpedient) — such persons certainly could not honestly walk with us. They would be tolerating in us what they think evil. If, as we trust, there is no such discordance of mind between us here, you will probably see it needful to use caution, in the reception into your body of others whom you may suspect to differ from us on this subject. You know the lengths to which some in Ireland have lately gone upon it. 4C2 COLLECTION OF LETTETIS CXXXVIII. TO MRS. B . June—, 1829. Thanks to my dear Mrs. B for so promptly sending me so satisfactory a letter — satisfactory, as giving me the information I desired, and, as part of that information, the restoration of the D to your fellowship, and the greenness of Mrs. N 's old age. My heart's love to her. I should he ungrateful if I were not ready, as far as I can, to communicate my sentiments on any suhject upon which you and M desired to know them ; but I believe I need not say that I fully concur with you in holding it unlawful for us to read the scriptures to or with unbelievers, in any way that im- plies or involves religious intercommunity with them. But I con- fess I wonder that this has been agitated so exclusively as to reading the scriptures, there being so many other ways in which we may fall (and are in fully as much danger of falling) into the same evil ; — for instance, joining them in that kind of vague religious talk and obser- vation, which they are forward to introduce as good and spiritual. I wonder also that, if nothing more was originally meant than is nov/ stated to have been intended, the church in Dublin should have been kept in hot water for so many months, by the discussion of a princi- ple which at once commends itself to the conscience of every one, who knows and hallows the name of the Lord. I wonder also that the subject has been dropped in Dublin, without some more marking of the way in which, and the purpose for which, we may lawfully read the scriptures to unbelievers every day in the year — namely, for the express purpose of proving their disbelief of those scriptures which they profess to own as the oracles of God— exposing and refuting from the scriptures their ungodly misinterpretations of it. Does this involve or imply any religious intercommunity with them ? Nay, the very reverse. The more we are faithfully engaged in such an use of the scriptures, the more shall we be considered " men of strife and contention," opposed to all the world in our re- ligion. I do wonder, also, at many things, which I really cannot re- concile with the principles of common sense or common honest}', in those whom I have most highly esteemed. For instance, I wonder that P should now say he never thought of laying down a law for us, when he opened the subject in his first letter to Mr. C , in these words: — " It is unlawful for a Christian to read the scrip, tures to or with unbelievers ; this we are prepared to maintain :" and when, in his last letter to Mr. C , he declares that the terms which he there employed had been stated and canvassed '.' in various private assemblages," before they were brought forward; and em- phatically protests against the supposition that he does not still adhere to them to the verv letter. I do wonder that P '- , whose ON SCllIl'TUllAL SUIJJKCTS. hGI] acutcncss of intellect and studied accuracy of lang'uage wc all know, should talk, as if the terms which he employed admitted any diversity of meaning', or as if thev do not expressly lay down a law for Chris- tians, which wc should receive as a law of Christ, if it be sanctioned 1)V the word, but if not, should reject as a human interj)osition, I do wonder that, after so long assertint^ the genera/ unlawfulness of readini!^ the scriptures to an unbelieving professor of them, and in- deed without admitting any alteration to this day in the terms of that assertion, he should yet talk now of leaving the matter to each disci- ple's discretion ; and I confess that, while these strange inconsisten- cies are jjcrsisted in, I must apprehend that the peace which has been patched up is hollow, and that much evil is covered up under it. The unbelief of the professing world is (I may say) bottomed on scripture misinterpreted, and employed to support the lies which the world loves. Our controversy, therefore, against those lies cannot consistently be maintained, without a continual reference to those scriptures, the sacredness of which consists in the sacredness of that truth which they declare, and for which we are called " earnestly to contend ;" and the sacredness of that truth is consistent with the most indiscriminate promulgation of it. It is utter nonsense to distinguish, in making that reference, between quoting these scrip- tures from memory and reading them from the book, or between reading a single verse and an entire chapter — to admit the one as lawful and condemn the other as unlawful. But, indeed, I appre- hend that there are among us some, who secretly disapprove of all contention for the truth against the errors of the antichristian world around us, though they would allow us to communicate in a whisj)cr on the subject, with such as should take the pains to cross-examine us. But let any Christian read such a passage as that in Acts xi. 19 — 21, and then say whether the first disciples made such a piece of free masonry of their faith — whether they did not rather act on the principle, " what ye hear in the ear, that publish ye upon the house- tops." Matt. X. 27. Any principle opposed to this, I avow that I abhor. There is one more remark I would add. I think there is much and mischievous ambiguity in the position that " the scriptures are given only to the church of God." The scriptures are, in a most important sense, given to all alike to whom, in the providence of God, they come ; and I wish P would dis- tinctly state what he means by saying, that they are given more specially to the Christian church in Stafford Street, than to the anti- christian synagogues of Plunket Street or Eustace Street. It is, indeed, most true that the scriptures cannot profit where they are not mi.xed with faith ; and that as all things are for the elect's sake, so in the divine counsels the scriptures are not designed to make any others wise unto salvation. But those who would infer from this that the scriptures are not adapted to make wise unto salvation any, but those who already have received that wisdom without the scriptures, or any but those who are already ostensibly among the elect of God, draw an inference against which I protest as pregnant with the most ungodly enthu- siasm. How did P ■ and F and G , &c. come to the 4G4 COLLECTION OF LETTERS knowledge of the truth ? I read that faith cometh hy hearing — or by having the truth set before the mind for the obedience of feith ? Now, the scriptures (it seems) have not been designed and are not to be used for the purpose. Well, was it by what they heard from those in antichristian societies ? (There were no others in Ireland.) They will scarcely say this. Or was it by what they read in such writings as Sandeman's ? Why, the very same persons set their faces against all publications upon scriptural subjects, however scrip- tural. Or was an angel from heaven sent to tell them the gospel ? Or were they brought to the belief of it without hearing it at all ? If they mean that they are in the same circumstances with those to whom the writings of the Nev\r Testament were addressed, it is partly not true. They are not evangelists, like Timothy and Titus ; nor masters of Onesimus, like Philemon, &c. ' But they are in connexion with ostensible believers, walking together by apostolic rule, like the chui'ches of the saints, to whom many of the epistles were addressed.' This is very well, so far as it is true. But I hope it has been by the scriptures that their former antichristian disobedience to apostolic command has been corrected ; and yet they tell me that the scrip- tures were not then given to them, nor designed for their correction ! Indeed they were, just as really as they are given to them now. REMARKS ON ACTS xi. 19 21. REFERRED TO IN THE PRECEDING LETTER. In my correspondence with different persons here and in Ireland, I referred to Acts xi. 19 — 21. and especially to v. 20. as containing a divine instance of the gospel being preached by Christians bearing no apostolic character or mission, and preached not only to Jews but to Gentiles, while their warrant and ours for thus declaring the word of life indiscriminately, is established by the declaration — " that the hand of the Lord was with them." I have complained also to more than one, that as far as I could understand, P and his associates, in opposing this scriptural course, had never condescended to make the least reply to this reference, or to take the least notice of it. But I now find that P conceives he has succeeded in evading its force, by discovering that the Grecians spoken of in v. 20. were not Gentile Greeks, but Hellenists, or Jews,* living among the Gentiles, and using the Greek version of the Old Testament scrip- tures in their synagogues. This assertion, it seems, he has put forward triumphantly to per- sons unable to examine whether it is true or false : and I dare say he thinks himself borne out in it, by finding in his Greek testament, that the word rendered Grecians is (Exx«v(a-Taj) as in Acts vi. 1 . — not {E'hXvivxs). But I must now tell him, that every one w*ho has the least pretensions to biblical scholarship knows that the true reading is EAXuvatj, and not (as in the vulgar text) 'EKXriviarxs. * Such certainly wrrc the mass of Jews bora and resident in Antioch. ON SCRIl'lURAL SllJ.I ICCTS. 4(J') For this, he may tincl quoted by Wetstein, (in his folio edition) a liost of MSS., ancient versions, &c., and among tlie MSS. two of tlie JHo.ihould take my leave, but that, knowing your oddity, I bear with you. You mav, therefore, look at my books ; and you will sec, that when I balanced them a month ago, my credits exceeded my debts by many thousands." A. " Sir, I meant no oflencc, ajul believe your word without looking at vour books. I jjcrceivc that it would be unreasona1)lc to ask vou to engage absohitchj to do, what you might possibly become unable to do, though it is highly improbable. 15ut allow me to ask, will you evrja(jc, tliat in case of your becoming insolvent before pay- ing me for the tobacco, and in case of your ever becoming wealthy after the settlement of vour affairs, you will then pay me in full?" B. " I will make no such engagement. I know not any reason for binding myself to that with you, which should not equally lead me to make the same engagement to all from whom I get goods. It would amount to an engagement, that in case of insolvency, from circumstances the most unavoidable and unforeseen, and after a set- tlement with mv creditors and discharge from them, I should then make viyself over to t/ietii, as their slave, for the remainder of my life, to labour for their benefit and not for my own. I should really decline trade altogether, if it were to be carried on upon such a principle. Let me ask, do you look for any such engagement from others with whom you deal ? or do you understand them as implicitly making it, when they obtain credit from you } or do you consider yourself as making it when you obtain credit from them ?" A. " No, indeed, I cannot say I do." B. " But you favour me specially. Good morning." A. " Nay, stop, friend B., you shall have the tobacco without any such unreasonable pledge. It is but fair that I should be subject to lose by unavoidable contingencies, as well as you." Now, I have made ^Ir. A. say things very absurd. But why are they absurd, except because they outrage the stated and well- understood principles of all mercantile transactions. Nor do I really see what can be fairly urged for holding such an insolvent as B. (after the settlement of his affairs) still conscientiously bound* to pay his former creditors in full. There is a painful feeling , in- deed, which may very strongly prompt him to it. " I have been the occasion, though the innocent occasion, of loss to them." And it is an honourable feeling ; yet even it may need to be regulated bv the judgment. There might be just the same feeling in the case of loss sustained by the underwTiters on a policv of insurance ; vet should I not be rather quixot'c, if this led me to reimburse them, at least if they were better able to sustain the loss than I. But I repeat it, that for one case of insolvency, such as I supposed B.'s, I am persuaded there are nine of quite a different character ; in which the insolvent is not the innocent occasion, but the culpable author of loss to his creditors ; and in which, therefore, conscience * I think it may be shewn, that it would go to bar tlie rightful claims of his future creditors, by {giving the former v.Iiat is called (I believe) a lien on every iliing he might acquire through life, as not his own property but theirs, till they were paid in full. But enough has been already said for exposing the principle. 470 COLLECTION OF LETTERS cuglit to suggest to him that he is bound to repair the injury as far as he can. In general, I should think — (but must speak very hesi- tatingly on a subject with which I am so unacquainted) that the insolvent, to have his conscience justly released, must be able to shew, that in the fair prosecution of his business he has sustained unavoidable losses sufficient to account for his failure ; and that, if t,.is cannot be shewn, there is at least a strong presumption that he has failed from mismanagement, neglect, extravagance, or something worse. Can B , for instance, assign the bankruptcy of any of his debtors to account for his ? And if not, how can. he account for his iiisolvency, when he new carries on the same trade of shoemaking — on reduced means — so effectively, as not only to support his family, but to lay by money ? I quite agree with vou, that the fear of encroaching on the jnoperty of others is a most salutary one, which can scarcely be too much en- couraged: and when a man, like you, trades upon borrowed capital, it cannot be doubted that it is the property of others he is managing. But, indeed, I could not wish you to be more impressed with this, than I have every reason to believe ycu are. As to C , the gross falsehood and hypocrisy of his assertions are obvious, and of course cannot be passed over. CXL. TO THE SAME. My vkry dear Brother, — Before I proceed to reply to anv of your questions, I must notice what I think more important — a passage in your letter to B. C, which makes me think ye have acted WTong. B has been able to collect about 15/. of debts due to him, and has applied the money to his own use. Now, I wish you all to think — did that money belong to him of right, or to his creditors .'' Surely, to the latter : and what right had he to employ a shilling of it for his own occasions ? he used it for buying leather, that he might earn more m.oney. Very well — if his creditors agree, all of them, that he should do so : but without this, I conceive he could not justly keeji a penny of it, any more than if it were money of another's, passing through his hands in transitu. And did not the body with you wink at this departure from moral integrity, (I must call it so, according to my present views, however common it be) in order to save their own pockets ? It does appear to me that it is incumbent on the church to advance cheerfully, from time to time, whatever is necessary for enabling him to get materials for his trade, while he goes on diligently and economically. vr ON SCKIPIUIUL SUBJECTS. 471 And have you not here a definite object for your contribution, accordinc^ to your sevenil abilities? You see this lends me to one of your knotty (jucstions. I have no idea of a pecuniary weekly con- tribution, either for the sake of form, or to make a fund against future casualties. But if tlicre were in any part of Scotland a church, consisting of ever so few individuals, all of them in easy circum- stances, I do not see why they should not still remcmhci- the poor. Gal. ii. 10. "The poor always ye have with you" — if not of the house- hold of faith, yet of this world. But as long as our brother B., for instance, remains unable to render justice to his creditors, I should not think tluit any of the churches wanted an immediate definite object for their contribution — their weekly contribution. What — you will say perhaps — should we contribute to his creditors, many of whom may be richer than ourselves .'' No — I say it would be a con- tribution to him for his food and clothing, which he provides now by money that is not really his own, though the indulgence of his creditors may allow hiui to make this use of his earnings. If ye were able actually to support that man and his family, so that every penny that he expended, should come from the liberality of the churches, and every penny that he earned should be transferred to his creditors, I should think there was in this a definite object for your stated bounty importantly connected with the glory of God, and the profit of your body — more so, than if an individual were at one l^ayraent to clear off all his debts : because the other mode of extricating him would have a greater tendency to keep alive on his nnnd the true principle, that while he owes more than he can pay, lie has no property of his own. Let me put it in this way — do you think that we could be justified in leaving our poor to be supported by the bounty of the world, so far as we had means for doing it ? I dare say you all answer that with a decisive negative. Well — is not our brother B. supported at present by the bounty of his creditors ? But supposing him completely extricated and independent, do you think there are not in the other churches several individuals, to whose necessities it would be most desirable to contribute? And if — what we have no reason to suppose — but if there were not — how many are there of the world, sick and in prison, to whom we should minister, as imitators of Him, who causeth the rain to descend on the just, and on the unjust ? Talk no more of the want of definite object of contribution at any time. But should it be a stated weekly matter ? You admit that it would be easier for most to contribute 20^. in forty or fifty payments, than all at once ; and I think the evident truth of this may lead us to discern the wisdom of God in that direction to the churches, 1 Cor. xvi. 2. Is it not remarkable that the first day of the week is specified in that direction ? But there, it may be said, the brethren are desired each to lay by him in store. Well, I should not strongly contest the matter, if that course were followed by any church, instead of each putting his contribution into the deacon's hands. Yet I think the apostolic direction in the passage would have been really observed, if the Corinthian brethren lodged their contributions with the deacons of the church, for the specific object which Paul called them to contribute to ; while that 472 COLLECTION OF LETTERS object having been the supply of the poor saints at Jerusalem, through his ministration, I can easily understand why he distinguishes this collection from the ordinary and stated one, which I do think went on among the churches. Certainly, that passage which is rendered, " they continued steadfastly in the apostle's doctrine and fellowship" — should run — ■" in the apostle's doctrine, and in the com- munication or contribution :" (It is an adjective formed from the same word, which is rendered "ready to contribute.") and if I might hazard a conjecture — though as but a conjecture — I suspect, that what Paul learned from the Apostles at Jerusalem about the remem- brance of the poor — was that stated weekly practice. It certainly was not the lesson of general bountifulness. But, as I said, if the members of any church preferred each to make himself his own store-keeper, I should not strongly contend against it ; though I should wonder if they contended for this mode of depositing their weekly contribution, in case they saw that continual need which there is for the stated remembrance of the poor ; and there is the point for which I am disposed to contend. I would deprecate contests about the particular mode and form of the thing. I would only lecommend the simplest mode, and that least calculated to feed the hypocrisy and vanity of our heaj-ts. I think such is that which we commonly practise, and at least suggested by the specific mention of the first day of the week in 1 Cor. xvi. 2. and by the mention of the contribution in connection with other stated observances of the church, one of which belongs exclusively to the assembly on the first day of the week. I trust we shall have no ultimate difference on the subject. As to the other hard question in your last, it is very little indeed that 1 can say upon it. I have been myself often pressed with the same inquiry — and have only replied, that if ever I be placed in such circumstances, I trust I shall be enabled to see my way more clearly than I do at present ; and I am sure it is important that brother C , and all of us, should be ready to acknowledge our ignorance and inability to solve all difficult cases of casuistry which may be presented to us. If any man, professing the Christian faith, now baptize a Gentoo or Mahometan on his professing it, (I readily allow) he does a thing just like what was done of old in the days of the apostles — and a thing to which my arguments against^ the practice of tbe baptists, as employed in these countries, do not apply. This acknowledgment does not make me at all less undecided on the unscriptural nature of the practice, against which I have argued. I am quite certain that this has not either precept or precedent of the Scripture to support it. If I be further questioned why I do not express myself with equal decision, either for or against the other, I can only reply — because T have not the same clearness and decision of judgment, and do not like to speak much about the question, lest I should speak foolishly. I should therefore rather learn than teach ; and I readily admit that this indecision of my mind betrays an ignorance, which needs to be removed and corrected ; but which I do not think is to be removed by my allowing myself to be involved in a discussion on a case which, with me, is altogether hypothetical, and likely to remain so. You perceive that ON SCIUI'TUUAL SUliJECTS. 4 73 utiy one who applies to me as an oracle, will find himself greatly niis^tukcu. There remains yet another ([nestion in your letter of April 2G, and I declare 1 am uncertain whether I have replied to it or not. But I helieve not. Vou raise the question about the lawfulness of bearing arms for the defence of the country. I fancy we may save ourselves the trouble of canvassing that, for I believe no one would be allowed to bear arms for the purpose, without being attested or sworn before a magistrate. But here also there is a certain ])oint to which we may go clearly ; and if we be satisfied to stop there, we shall escape questions that are rather curious and puzzling than important. CXLI. TO THE SAMK. June 26, 1829. My vkry dear Jamks, — Mr. C. being called by business into Yorkshire, has commissioned me to pen some remarks on your letter of the loth instant, addressed to the church here, and to assign our reasons for at once determining not to lay it before the body. In the first place, it w'as written under the supposition, that circumstances continued as described in our printed statement, whereas they have happily changed. You of course have heard before this, that we have been able to renew our connexion with the church in S Street, on the most satisfactory evidence of their repentance. (Observe, M , and those with him, assemble in our old place of meeting in S Street.) Mr. C, calculating dates, thinks you must have had that information, when you took the step of separating from them. But I am persuaded there must be some mistake in this. You surely would not have taken the step under that knowledge. Their letter, of which a copy has been sent you, arrived the very day that om* statement was printed off, so that on the following day we were able to acknowledge them again as a sister church ; and though our separation fi'om them was of such very short duration, yet I see the merciful hand of the Lord in allowing it to take place : and I doubt not he will make it productive of much good. But now I will say that we had other cogent reasons for not laying your letter before the church. Any written communication from one church to another, ought not to contain debateable matter, and yours contained much, about the correctness of which I doubt. In the first place, you seem to make yourself a kind of party with Dr. Hamilton, and that without having heard both sides. (By the bye, of Dr. II. and his excommunication, a majority of the brethren 474 COLLECTION OI" LETTERS here have never heard, and how should they ?) I do not question the intentional con'ectness of his statement, hut I have it on good authority that the most important assertion of it is incorrect. But I confess I am not disposed to trouble myself with any inquiry into that. His own shewing satisfies me, that he acted neither like a Christian nor like a gentleman, in disturbing a Christian assembly, by attempting to force himself and Mr. B upon their meeting ; and had I been present, I should have resisted that attempt to the very utmost. Did Paul act so when he essayed to join himself to the disciples at Jerusalem, and they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple ? Did he insist upon a kind of ecclesiastical right to seat himself with them, as having been in fellowship with the disciples at Damascus ? Or did Barnabas disturb the assembled brethren by trying to force Paul upon them, on the ground of his own testimony. You see a very different course described in Acts ix. 27. You say that you would have sufficient ground for separating from the Dublin disciples, merely in their ejection of Dr. H., under the circumstances he describes. I am persuaded it would not have afforded you any scriptural ground for it ; and it is very possible that you may yet have the same ground for withdrawing from us. For if any thing should lead Dr. H. to London, I think it very likely that he would make the same attempt on our assembly ; and assuredly it would be resisted. We do not hold him in fellow- ship with us, though I once saw him in the church in Dublin as a visitor like myself, and though I have never dealt with him in admonition for joining men, with whom I could not retain fellowship. Hov^r should I set about admonishing him for this ? He had a right to join whom he pleased. He thinks the men that he has received into his fellowship disciples, and indeed he seems to have imbibed much of their spirit. I think very differently of them : but how should I set about convincing him that he has erred in his estimate of their character ? If circumstances should lead brother D to remove from London to a distant part, where you have at present none in connexion with you, and in the course of his residence there, he should receive into communion with him, a member whom he conceived to be of one mind with you, but of whom you knew nothing more, would you consider him as of course admitted into fellowship with you? This is Dr. H.'s language, p. 3 and 4 ; and so conclusive does he conceive his own act in Wicklow to be on the church in Dublin, and of course all the sister churches, that he encouraged Mr. B. to maintain his right to communion with the Dublin church— unless they were unani^iovs in excommunicating him — in excommunicating a man who had never been acknowledged in communion with them, p. 7. Now observe — if Mr. B., in the first instance, desired to join the body of disciples in Dublin, he could not have taken his seat among them, but on their unanimous concurrence in receiving him : a single dissentient would be sufficient to bar his junction with them on that day, until the grounds- of the dissent should be examined. But one individual director in Wicklow claims the power oi admitting Mr. B. into the Dublin church by his ON SCRirrUllAL SUBJECTS. 47.3 iiuUvitUitil act, an>l of maintaining him in his seat among them I Is it not monstrous .'' I would not enlarge so much on this subject, but that I think it highly important that the false views should be corrected ^Yhich Dr. II. evidently adojjtcd, and which 1 think you have partly yielded to. I must add that I have never been acquainted with Dr. II., and that there are several passages in his narrative which 1 am wholly unable to understand. Do I say, that if he came to London, and desired to join us, he would not be received ? I do not sav so ; but certainly not as a matter of course and of right, nor till he unequivocally professed repentance for his conduct in Dublin, gave up his disputiir^-'T't^ilie church, and also gave up the attempt of teaching things of which he knows so little as the millennium, as the locality of the new heaven and the new earth, where the glorified saints shall be for ever with the Lord. So full is he of curious inquiries into that and other subjects, that he plainly considers his views upon them as tci-ms of Christian communion, (see his second paragraph) ; and I suppose his interpretation of the number of the beast, (whatever it may be) and of every thing else in the book of revelations, he would think himself equally entitled to make a subject of teaching in the church, and to force upon his brethren. O ! what delightful discussions we should have then in every meeting. Of his sobriety of judgment in interpreting the scriptures, we have a very curious specimen, in his application of 1 Johnii. 19., in p. 6. — Really, one might almost suspect he was making game. You seem, in one passage, to return to an idea whicii you formerly threw out, " that every thing coming before a Christian church must be treated as a matter of fact, and be introduced at the mouth of two or three witnesses, for the information, and solemn and silent con- sideration and decision, of the body." I rather suspect that you have in view tlie account given in Acts xv., and particularly the 1 2th verse ; and it is indeed importantly instruc- tive. But consider, dear J , that, in this case, the Apostles and Elders were the persons consulted on the question, and who came to consider and decree, though the multitude of brethren were present. These, of course, kept silence, awaiting the decision of those, whose decision was to be binding on them. But when that decision was pronouncedjwas itdeliveredat all, as the twoor three witnesses in Mat. xviii. testify the fact, "this man has trespassed against his brother so and so ; we have laboured to raU him to a sense of his sin, but he will not hear us .'" Surely, no. The Apostles and elders declared what seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to them : to them who had authority to declare the will of the king of Zion to his people, and whom his people arc bound to hear with implicit subjection. But I trust we shall reject with abhorrence the attempt of any man or men to arrogate to themselves such authority now. Every matter of fact, indeed, cognizable by men, and involved in a case of discipline coming before a Christian church, must be brought before them, established at the mouth of two or three witnesses, and so established, that no question is to be admitted, whether the facts be or be not. But that is a very different thing from the authoritative decision bv a few, of the question, what the revealed will of tlie Lord is, and that 476 COLLECTION OF LETTERS decision to be submitted to in silence by all the rest. If we were all fully informed on that which is so fully revealed, and if all our minds were in due subjection to it, undoubtedly questions about it would not arise. But it is not so : and though any such question arising certainly indicates the existence of an evil, we must yet beware of preventing its appearance by any usurpation on our part. My meaning, perhaps, will be put more clearly by considering the case when all the churches in Ireland were deaf to the divine pro- hibition against oaths, till one, brought to repentance, called the rest of the brethren in Dublin to repentance on thy ' "bie^t* He certainly ought not, and I think did not, inti'oduce, fif^'^'^tion, as what you call " a matter of free debate." He laid" the subject before them as a matter decreed by the word of the Lord,' -ao^jTrthe- clear view that those who receive that decision could not continue to walk with those who should continue disobedient. But would it not have been most unsuitable if he, and the few who first concurred with him, had proceeded in the way of testimony as to a matter of fact, and claimed their testimony to be received by the rest in silent acqui- escence ? As we had been ourselves very slow to learn, and fruitful in inventing all fallacious arguments to set aside the divine command, I think we were bound to hear patiently, and answer distinctly, what others offered against it. But after its plain meaning had been sufficiently established, and the various attempts to evade it exposed, for which a very few conferences on the subject might have been sufficient, I am sure that any further protraction of the controversy was evil, and I am convinced that I allowed it to be protracted too long. I think it likely that I ought to have separated from the opposers in three weeks after the introduction of the subject. In the next paragraph of your letter, you mention artificial speeches made " under the name of short and simple addresses." I am not sure to what you allude ; nor do I think we have any such thing among us. But though nothing is more abominable than artificial speeches in the church, I should be afraid of saying any thing that could lead the brethren to refrain from the simplest address, however short. I think there are some among us of very weak utterance, who, if they would be content to speak a few words simply, might speak to the edification of the body. The simplicity that I mean is opposed to every thing artificial. I have in view some of our bre- thren, whose own souls are, I believe, exercised and fed and com- forted with opening views of this or that passage of scripture during our meetings : and if such would then (speaking because they believe) just direct the attention of the body to the passage that is made food and life to themselves, without attempting to enlarge beyond the few words that they can utter without confusion, I then think it would be very desirable ; and it is what I have often urged upon them. Indeed, I often hate myself for the multitude of words that I use. But do you know, my brother, that I have been somewhat startled by your quoting such a passage as Mat. x. 20. as "fully applicable" to any of us who now speak on the things of God. There seems to me in that some want of sobriety of language, and perhaps of sobriety of mind. Yet I find it hard to express my ob- ON SCUU'TUllAL SUBJECTS. -177 jcction, without seeming' to disclaim that gracious influence and aid of tlie spirit of truth in speaking, without which I would earnestly desire to he restrained from speaking at all. But in scripture, does not the i)hrase of *' the spirit speaking in or by a man" generally, if not always, import one of those extraordinuiij or miraculous gifts, which we have no reason to think were continued after the apostolic age ? And, observe, it was to the twelve apostles, when first sent out, that the words which you quote were addressed. So the Holy Spirit is said to have spoken by the prophets of old, by Balaam, by Caiaphas ; and when the Holy Spirit fell on the assembled disciples, they spake with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Probably, I need not add a word more, in order to suggest the need of some caution in a])plving the same phraseology to any speaker at this day. But it may be more jirofitable to remark, that I would infinitely rather speak of the things of God, under that divine in- fluence of the spirit of truth which continues, and shall continue, with disciples to the end, than imder that extraordinary or miraculous impulse which has ceased. " No man can call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Spirit." To speak under that work of the spirit, opening to the mind the glory of the truth contained in the confession that Jesus is the Lord, and turning the eye from every thing that the flesh would glory in, — that is more blessed speaking, than to speak with the tongues of men and of angels. We may covet earnestly that gift : and be sure that, when we have spoken most imder that blessed influence, we have experienced little of it in comparison of what the glory of the truth and the power of the spirit of truth may afford ; as well as that, so far as we have in any degree spoken so at all, we have spoken not from ourselves. I must only add, in one word — that the question about elders never was raised in the church in Dublin. The report arose from one or two having intimated a douht on the subject in private conversation. I believe those who talked as if a man must not eat with his wife, &c., were the opposers of the precept, Avho urged this as a conse- quence which they supposed must follow from it. On the subject of our warrant to put forward the truth in any way in opposition to the lies of Antichrist, we are (blessed be God !) of one mind here : and I have no reason to think that they are not so in S • Street. But we have directed their attention to it. I know you will forgive any freedom of animadversion I have employed on your letter. CXLH. TO THE SAME. Oct. 2G, 1829, A Mr. , a quondam clergyman, who, I hear, made a very fair profession, turned Deist while I was in Dublin ; and so has, I under- 4 78 COLLECTION OF LETTER:; stand, ****** Such instances, I suspect, v.iil become more common. Such shakings and divisions as have taken place in Ireland are calculated to try the profession of many, and to over- turn it where it has been but a profession resting on notions of divine truths taken up in a natural M'ay, and supported by the coun- tenance and concurrence of many others. That support failing, the professor, who has seemed to run well, is all unsettled, and termi- nates in avowed scepticism. Well, my beloved brother, faithful is He that " keepeth the feet of his saints." V/e might, indeed, despair of our own standing and of the stability of the church, assaulted as she is both from without and within, were it not that the most High himself hath established her. She is His ; his inheritance, his por- tion, his chosen habitation. What room, then, is therefor fear ? and what a goodly inheritance have tve ! The everlasting God — in all the inexhaustible riches of his grace and all- sufficiency. When we think of the immensity and glory of this portion, it might well seem exti-a- vagantly too much for a sinful creature, were it not for the way in which it comes to us. " Heirs of God" — how ? "joint heirs with Christ." His God, our God ! His father, our father ! The glory given to him, made over to us in Him ! He that was rich having be- come poor that we through his poverty might be rich ! The believing Lazarus — the starving beggar — rich indeed : having nothing and yet possessing all things ! Does it not well become us to offer the sacri- fice of " praise to God continually ?" CXLHI. TO MISS J Oct. 8, 1829. Dear Sister J , — My daughter being much occupied, I take up my pen for her in reply to your letter of the 20th inst. As to any difficulties about baptism, which Mr. B 's remarks and book have excited in your mind, I shall say very little indeed. If what has been already laid before you on the subject fails of convincing you that, for any baptism either of adults or of infants practised in these countries, there is not a tittle of either precept or precedent in the scripture, it would be quite vain to continue the controversy. I should remark that those who assert, with the author of The Infant's Case, and assert truly, that the children of believers are " born within the visible clmrch" (see p. 11, 1. 22) are peculiarly inconsistent in contending for their being baptized ; the baptism or washing prac- tised in the apostolic days having always marked the transition of the person baptized into the visible Christian church as one who before had not been in it. So that to baptize the new-born child of a be- liever would be, in fact, to say that it was unclean, in direct contra- diction to the scripture. 1 Cor. vii. 14. But the writer \yho would pen or approve such a sentiment as occurs in p. 8 of that same book. ON SCUIl'TL'llAL SUBJECTS. 47f) tluit God haa sent such a child into the world (dying in its infancv) only " to receive that which should make it meet for the inheritance of the saints I" and who urges the necessity of its baptism, lest it should " go out of this world without any visible waij of blessing from God" — is manifestly ignorant of the first principles of the kingdom of God. lie has (as I observe well expressed in the preceding page) set up his calf and dances about it. I almost blame myself for having written a line to you upon this subject, when I see another of such pro- minent importance calling my attention. In sending us Mr. B 's epistle to you, it is very plain you sent it as something you considered verv good and Christian-like, as the production of a man who, as vou express it, " possesses much clearer views of eternal realities" than others. Now, I request you will for the present lay down this sheet till you open his letter, and again attentively read the passage in the first page of it which I have marked in the margin. He continues the subject in the same style through the next page : but what occurs in the first page is sufficient — read it, I say, again attentively, before you return to my letter. Now, I beseech you to answer me can- didly, and as before the searcher of hearts, what you think of that passage ? What you think of the state and character of the man whose sentiments it expresses, and this, whichever be the case, whe- ther he be rejoicing in that kind of assurance of hope which he de- scribes, or mourning for the want and seeking to attain it ? If his sentiments on the subject accord with your present views, I request a candid answer to one other question — were those, or anything like them, your sentiments when you joined our fellowship ? If so, I must avow- that we mistook your meaning, and that you have quite mistaken ours. Such a mutual mistake very frequently happens, but whenever it is discovered, the sooner the outward connexion which was formed upon it is dissolved, the better. Perhaps you may see the point of my inquiry more clearly when I propose it in this foiTu : — Do you conceive that a man can be sound in the faith of Christ, who is seeking to obtain hope towards God in anv way, or to have his hope confirmed by being assured that he produces the genuine fniits of faith .'' and do you think it any part of the work of the Spirit to testify to a man's mind that he does produce them ? Do not be restrained by any disinclination to change your religious connexion, from answering these questions explicitly and honestly. If you, indeed, think with Mr. B , you will be at no loss to find a religious connexion, not only more suitable, but more pleasant to you ; and no doubt he will help you in it. If I could, I would have proposed these inquiries to you, without any intimation of my own sentiments, but it was impossible. If you reject his sentiments, and reject them with abhorrence, as all (I will not say disciples, but aU) agreeing with me in opinion must reject them, there may then be room for my entering a little more on the subject. But, indeed, I think I have done so in some part of my Sufficient Reply, a copy of which I send you, lest you should not have one. But if you have, I shall thank you to bring mine with you when you come to town, as I doubt whether I possess another. I need scarcely assure you, dear Miss J^ , that I shall rejoice to be always able to subscribe myself. Your affectionate brother. 480 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CXLIV. TO THE SAME. Oct. 31, 1829. My very dear Sister, — My daughter and I returned about a week ago from an excursion of nearly seven weeks to Dublin and to Buxton, It was not till our return that I received your letter of last August ; and I can't tell you with what joy I read it, and the more lively joy, because the first word which caught my eye, " Sir," excited in me fear that all was wrong. But when I found you so decisively rejecting the poison in Mr. B 's letter, " abhorring that which is evil, and cleaving to that which is good," it did indeed excite in me thankfulness and praise to the God of all grace, " who keepeth the feet of his saints and delivereth them from the snare of the fowler." It has endeared you to me more than ever as a sister and beloved for the truth's sake. Your blessed escape from the snare that was so insidiously laid for you, is (you see) not the fruit of our own wisdom or watchfulness, for you were ready to fall into it ; but I trust it will prove the occa- sion of making you more jealous of that which the scriptures so em- phatically and justly term " the deceivableness of unrighteousness :" never is that deceivableness greater and more dangerous than when it appears in a doctrine often approaching most nearly to the truth, but involved with sentiments utterly subversive of it. Such, asssur- edly, is Mr. B 's notion, that it is the office of the Spirit of God to witness to his conscience that his works are the genuine fruits of faith, and so to give him assured hope and confidence towards God : nor can I conceive a more awful instance of human vanity and Sata- nic delusion, than is exhibited in a man coming to the comfortable conclusion that he is a genuine believer, and shaU be assuredly saved, from observing (as he imagines by the aid of the Spirit of God) the abundance and genuineness of the fruits which he produces. The Lord taketh pleasure in those that hope in his mercy, Ps. cxlvii. II. — in that mercy which is revealed from heaven in the gospel, as reigning through righteousness by Jesus Christ unto eternal hfe. How differ- ent is such a hope from Mr. B 's ! The thief expiring upon the cross (according to Mr. B ) must either have died without any assured hope towards God, or must have got some hope by reflecting on the fruits of his faith ! And yet Mr. B- will talk grandly and speciously of the joyfulness of the gospel to a sinner, whom it finds ungodly and without strength ; but it is only talk : for while he maintains that the assurance of faith is separable from the assurance of hope — (and truly he has a goodly company to keep him in coun- tenance in this) — or in other words, that an ungodly sinner may be assuredly persuaded of the truth of the gospel report, and yet be des- titute of any assured hope towards God, the hope that he .proposes ON SCRIPTURAL SUnJIX'TS 4Sl is not tlie hope of the gospel, i. e. derived from whnt is reported from lieavcn in the i;;ospel, but turns on something else; ;md accordingly he tinds unothcr spirit and another revelation necessary to his peace, than anv that is to lie found in the scrii)tures ; —a revelation disco- verin"" to him that he produces the genuine fruits of faith, and a spirit to make that revelation to him. iriowever, we find that those who of old believed the apostolic gospel, "rejoiced believing in God;" vea, that it was in believing it they were filled with all joy and peace. i have somewhere sufficiently exposed the alisurdity as well as wick- edness of the idea, that a man may be fully assured of the truth, and vet quite uncertain whether he is a true believer ; — the absurdity of savin"-, I am certain so and so is the truth of God, but I do not know whether I believe it or not ! In fact, the man who avows that he doubts whether he is a believer, avows that he is not sure wliat the gospel is, and in this he avows that he is uncertain whether the God upon whom he calls be indeed God or an idol. 15ut though such a sentiment cannot be deliberately harboured in the believer's mind, it is ccrta'nly not from any reflection on his being a believer that his jov and iiope towards God sprung, but from the truth that he be- lieves. Of this Mr. B seems to have no conception. Like all religious teachers of lies in Christianity, he is at no loss for texts of scripture in support of the assured faith of his doubting and joyless professor ; and, among others, he brings that abus:d passage in 1 Pet. i. 1(1. where the apostle plainly exhorts disciples to give clearer evidence bv their fruits that they vrere indeed the called of God ; and I think it might puzzle Mr. B to say distinctly how a man who knew not whether he had faith or not, could be consistently exhorted " to add to his faith virtue" — or boldness in the mainte- nance of it. But here comes in another part of Mr. B 's soul-destructive teaching. " Let xis," says he, " addressing him as a believer" — • (namelv, that doubting professor who docs not know whether he believes the truth or not) — " let us — addressing him as a believer — encourage him in Christ and his promises to all dihgcnce," &c. Ave, Mr. B pretends to know better than the man himself what he believes. " I do not think I believe the gospel you have stated to me," savs the poor man whom ]\Ir. B has in religious training. " Nay, but I am sure you do," replies Mr. B ; " and therefore I know that vou are a child of God, though you think not, and therefore all the promises of God in Christ are yours." Such is the use they make of their Christ, and such the awful encourage- ment which they minister to their disciples walking in the broad way of darkness and of death. All these daubers with untempered mortar agree with Mr. B in representing the opposite course of Christian fidelity as very cruel and uncharitable. " It would be," says he, " in some measure quenching the smoking flax, to sav such an one was not a believer." Ashe does quote that scriptural expres- sion, and applies it as is usual in the popular theology, it may he well to remark, that the words in Is. .xlii. .3. have really not the remotest ^ relation to what these false teachers apply them. Look at the passage as quoted and api)lied by the Evangelist, Matt, xii , VOL. II. '- I 482 COLLECTION OF LETTERS 16 — 20. and you may see that they describe the appearance of the Messiah in these circumstances of lowliness and weakness — (" a worm, and no man") — which were opposed to all the grandeur and noise of earthly kings, as if he were unequal to effect even the smallest object, as the breaking of a reed already bruised, or the quenching of smoking ivick — (so should the word be rendered). Com- pare Ps. xxxviii. 13, 14. with Is. xhi. 19, 20. That He, so poor, so weak, so despised, without form or comeliness, was set forth by Jehovah as the mighty Saviour, his anointed servant ordained to bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. From an examination of the context, and the Evangelist's application of the passage, I am satis- fied that such is the real meaning of the words " a bruised reed," &c. But one of the many evidences that the teachers of the reli- gious -world have not the fear of God is, their utter want of reve- rence for his Word. What the real meaning of any text is, i. e. what is the meaning of the Spirit there, they commonly care not a rush, so they can but ingeniously find out a sense in which it may be applied or accommodated in what they call a spiritual and savoury way to some insidious doctrine. Dear H. G — , whose case I related in Vol. i. 473, of the Sufficient Reply, did not find that there was any harshness or cruelty in addressing her as an unbeliever, when she came to me lamenting that she was so. But then I had to lay before her that which is adapted and sufficient to convey at once the fulness of joy, and peace, and hope, to one that it finds in the depth of infidelity and darkness : while Mr. B knows not any gospel of that character, however speciously he may at times talk of its joy- fulness. "It is presumption," says he, " and not the assurance of hope, if the believer's certainty of his own safety arises from any other source than the witnessing of the Holy Ghost to his spirit by the unerring rule of the Word, that his fruits or ivorks are the fruits of faith." Now, observe the cruelty as well as wickedness of this doctrine. It would go to shut out the believer from ever having the assured hope towards God, or rejoicing in God, and to incapacitate him from bearing any of the fruits of righteousness. " The joy of the Lord is the strength of his people ;" the hope of salvation is the helmet with which the youngest soldier of the cross goes out to fight the good fight of faith. 1 Thess. v. 8. All — including him who but the last moment passed from death unto life, believing the record of God concerning his Son — aU are saints of God, and, because they are so, have the spirit of adoption that cries Abba, Father — the spirit by which they know the things that are freely given to them of God. Gal. iv. 6. 1 Cor. ii. 12. So is it according to the apostolic gospel, and effectually does that gospel work in all them that believe it. But not so is it according to Mr. B .'s gospel : his believer, however assured in faith, must not think of rejoicing in God as his God and Father, and rejoicing m the hope of glory, till, in a course of obedience and fruitfulness, he has got a supposed revelation made to him that he may now venture to conclude that his faith is genuine, and that he may therefore, without presumption, conclude that he is a child of God, and stands fair for heaven. Cruel doctrine, indeed ! that sends his disciples indeed to make bricks without straw, to ox SCUIl'TURAL SUllJr.CTS. -},s:; walk as cliiklrcn of tlic light of the day, as children of God, iiiulci- the uncertainty whether they are not children of darkness and of tiie devil. " Thev may weary themselves in the j2:reatncss of their wav" in the effort, and they may at lenp^th be encouraged, under ^ir. B 's wicked consolation, to think that they have succeeded, that their evidences for heaven are clear enough. But vain is the attcnijjt to produce grapes of thorns, or figs from thistles. It is hard to know where to stop on such a subject. 1 must therefore stop abruptlv. My wife and daughter join in hearty Christian salutation to you, with, &c. CXLV. TO MISS T . Nov. 2b. 1829. Among tlie other characters of the God of Israel — the only true Grod — which arc celebrated in the cxxxvi. Psalm, and which his people are called to recollect with thanksgiving and praise, I am forced to think of that mentioned in the 4th verse. " To Him who alone doeth gue.-\t wonders." And is it not indeed xvonderfid, that you and I should he brought into Christian correspondence on our mutual faith and hope, and into that intimate and endearing con- nexion which unity in these produces ? Yes, we may well confess — " this hath God wrought ;" and may well join in the coiTcsponding language at the close of the Ixxii. Ps. 18, 19. While every instance of the Lord's reigning in the midst of his enemies, and subduing them to him by the sword of his Spirit, affords matter of unspeakable joy, I confess, my dear Miss T , that in your case my joy is greatly heightened from the consideration of our dear, dear sister L and of her joy. She will easily believe that my wife and daughter share in it largely, as 1 doubt not the whole church will, when they are put in possession of the intelligence. But when I mention the whole church, and think of the materials of which for the most part it is composed, and think of a high-minded young lady like you being made desirous to take part with such a despised set in the fellowship of the despised gospel, I am reminded of old Lear's remark (is it not King Lear's }) " that misery makes us acquainted with strange bedfellows." So, indeed, we may say, that the overbearing power of divine truth in the stoutest heart, brings us into strange company. Yet let us ever recollect, that there is only One of whom it can be said — in the most important sense — that he " humbled himself;" Him who, though the Lord of all, took upon him the form of a servant, and descended indeed that he might exalt the lowest. When we, through the knowledge of 2i 2 4S4 COLLECTION OF LETTERS Him, are most " clothed with humility," it is not that we descend from any rank of dignity which really belonged to us — (for all have sinned, and in that have become miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked) — but that we are brought to our senses out of the delirium of blind ungodliness and self- righteousness in which we had imagined ourselves very fine creatures. A patient in Bedlam who had con- ceived himself an emperor, if cured under the physician's care, would not descend from any real dignity, but only discover his proper character ; and if he were then disposed to glory on this account over his companions that remained insane, might it not well rebuke the folly of such glorying to find, that, if he passed for a mo- ment from under the physician's care, he was ready to relapse into his old dreams of imperatorial dignity. So is it with us. Let us but be left any hour to ourselves — to our own hearts — and we are ready to be as proud as Lucifer — proud of our fancied humility! So here am I prating to you on paper just as if we were old acquaint- ances. But while I have room left, I wish to offer you a few remarks suggested by some expressions in your letter. When you say, that through His righteousness we shall be justified, I doubt not that you will joyfully agree with me in desiring to alter the language to the present tense — " we ore justified." I do not suspect vou of having meant any thing else ; indeed, other passages prove that you did not ; but it is delightful and profitable to contemplate the language of the Holy Spirit concerning the present blessedness of aU them that believe the testimony of God concerning his Son. " We have peace with God" — " we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" — " He hath made us accepted in the Beloved" — " He is made unto us of God, wisdom and righte- ousness"— "He hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling." So that the believer possesses all that righteousness and salvation which the votaries of Antichrist are seeking after and trying to get. Those are labouring to become what they are not as yet — righteous and holy, &c. We are called to walk as what we are — children of God, and " as children heirs — heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ." We have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God — I Cor. ii. 1 2 ; and corresponding with this is the language of the Apostle John — " these things have I written unto you, that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye HAVE eternal life." 1 .John v. 13, Surely it is with reason that we are called to " offer the sacrifices of praise continually" — " to rejoice in the Lord always." You say — •" I am aware that constant watchfulness nrust be exer- cised by me, and probably to my last hour." I am sure you do not mean by this any kind of condition that tve have to fulfil ; and i dare say, intended no more than is contained in the Apostle's ex- pression of giving earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. Heb. ii. 1. That is blessed watchfulness indeed — being kept awake to the glorious gospel. In none can this watchfulness be found, but in the children of the light and of the day. Observe the striking language of the Apostle in ON SCRIPTL'llAL SUIUKCTS. 4S.") 1 Thcs. V. 4, 5, G. ; — " "^'c arc not in darkness. Ve arc all llie cliil- dron of light and of the day. Therefore, let us nut sleep as do others, but let us watch." If a man lig-hted a thousand candles at midnight, it would still be night to him : nothing but the appearance of the sun can produce day ; and so nothing but the shining of the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the person of his Anointed, can make any sinner cease to be' " of the night," and make him capable of watch- fulness to that onlv true light. And it is thus that the Lord kecpeth the feet of his saints, and holdeth their souls in that life which he has given them, even bv keeping them awake to that glorious truth which thcv have believed — keeping them to the end by his own j)Ower through faith, so that he will not suffer them to depart from Him, as is the perpetual tendency of their own hearts. It is on this character of ourselves as a people, " bent to backsliding" from Him who has made us his people -Hos. xi. 7. — ever prone to relapse into sleep by forgetting that truth in which the glory of the Lord is revealed ; it is on this, our unchangeable character, that the repeated calls to watchfulness proceed : and we may bless the Captain of our salvation for sending us such animating and awakening calls as that, 1 Cor. xxi. 13, " \Vatch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong" — " strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus." I must hasten to a close. It grieves me to hear that your health is not as we could wish ; but I trust that even it wmU be benefited by the blessed repose of mind which the decision of your late inward struggle tends to produce. Mrs. W and M join me in kindest salutations to you and to our dear L . Mercy and peace be multiplied to you both. Yours, dear Miss T , with true attachment, and in (I doubt not) everlasting bonds. CLXVI. TO K. L. C , £SQ. Jan. 1, 1S30. The following arc the leading considerations I would suggest on the subject of your note. The account we read of the first disciples at Jerusalem, that all who believed were together, seems naturally to have arisen from their intimate unity of faith, and from the brotherly love "wherewith they were taught of God to love one another." Those who are thus united in one mind and one heart (I may say) will naturally aim at being as much together as the circumstances of our present state will admit ; and may look forward gladly to that future state of being, when the circumstances that now prevent their being all outwardly togetlier shall end ; when, being ever with the Lord, we shall be ever with each other. But that thev cannot be .so 486 COLLECTION OF LETTERS at present is obvious ; liowev er, it would seem that the same prin- ciples wiU lead them to be as much so cis they cati ; and therefore that any light and needless multiplication of churches, and conse- quent outward separation of disciples, must originate in evil. This further appears, when we consider what the scriptures teach us of the Lord's wise and gracious designs in congregating his disciples into assemblies, consisting of many individuals of various characters and gifts, "differing according to the grace that is given them," but all needful to the well-being of the body, and designed for mutual service and edification. The illustration given from the variety of members in the one natural body is verv striking, (Rom, xii. 4, 5, &c. i Cor. xii. 4, to end) and marks, I think, that the needless splitting of a church into distinct meetings would be to overlook or undervalue the revealed designs and appointment of the Lord. In that day of the Lord's power, when the Apostles penned their instructions to the churches, their language on this subject (as well as on others) was adapted to the state and circumstances in which they considered the churches as originally existing, without descending to the minute consideration of possible and occasional exceptions from those ordinary circumstances. It is adapted to the case of several disciples, male and female, associated and coming- together into one place, rather than to the case of one brother meeting with one or two sisters. In these days, we have to mourn indeed over the comparative hiding of that divine power, which of old gathered and established the assemblies of the saints, but we have also to look for its renewed display in the progressive consumption of the man of sin, and have to avoid every thing that would be adverse to it. However, we must admit and maintain that, even in the Apostolic days, there existed distinct churches very near to each other, Cenchroea, for instance, being much nearer to Corinth than • to , and that some of them were comparatively very small, being spoken of as a church in the house of an individual. How small some of them might have been, even to the coming together of two or three disciples on the first day of the week, it does not become us to pronounce. But however short the distance was between two Christian meetings, or however small the number in any of them, we are not to admit any thing in such facts inconsistent with the principles before adverted to : we may be sure there was a need and just occasion for their meeting in distinct assemblies. All the remaining inquiry, therefore, resolves itself into the question, what constitutes such a need and just occasion for forming a distinct church ? and indeed it is one of those questions which from their nature admit not such a precise answer as our vain wisdom might require ; but, after a suggestion of the general principles bearing on the point, the matter must often ultimately be committed to the judgment and discretion of the disci])le, while there are extreme casics in which the determination is plainly either favourable or unfavourable to the thing. I can easily conceive that the number of disciples at unable to meet in , might be so increased, as to mark the formation of a distinct church there as desirable ; while I cannot pretend to define exactly the minimum of that increased ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 487 number which would evidently justify it. On the other hand, you secnned to feel, when speaking together, that 's permanent inability to attend in would not justify me in withdrawing from that meeting, when I can attend it, to form a church in my own liouse, or in engaging others, who can and do attend in , to join me in such a plan. I doubt much whether this would be marked with any real difference in my instance, and in yours. In fact, I believe, that what recommended it at first to you was the consideration of your children, and your just attachment to Mrs C. ; for if she and the children had been out of the question, you surely would not have thought of forming a church in your house, in order to afford the comfort of it on the first day of the week. Yet, in matters relating to the kingdom of God, I conceive that she and Mrs C. must be considered as standing on one level ; and as to your children, the only one of them that has been joined in church fellow- ship does, and still may, meet with us in ; the rest have been but witnesses of our assembly, and would as yet be no more in your house. Now, however desirable it mav be, that after a certain age they should have an opportunity of obsen'ing the meeting and practices of an assembled church, yet this is a very subordinate and comparatively unimportant part of the parental duty towards them ; indeed, it can scarcely be considered as necessarily included in that " ins(rucfion and admonition of the Lord," in which they are to be broiKjht up ; and much less can it be considered as a legitimate sub- stitute for tlie latter. Certainly, they arc two distinct things, not to be confounded one with the other. CXLVII. 1. L , ESQ. Jan. 23, 1830. My dear L , — You perceive that I see none of the incon- sistency which you think attaches to such a style of address from me to you. It only expresses the affectionate interest which I really feel for you. I thank you for sending me Dr. Hoskins's pamphlet. I have read it with all the attention such a production required. I expected to find it weak and wordy, and from my knowledge of the side he has taken upon the subject, I knew I should find it wicked : but sorry indeed am I to find that he has gone so awfully far in eman- cipating himself (p. 9) from what he thinks weak scruples, but from what is the feai* of God and reverence of his word, — that he occupies so boldly the seat of the scornful. I observe but one sentence in his pamphlet that has any real bear- •i^8 COLLECTION OF LETTERS ing on the question at kswQ. I refer to that near the close of hi?, paraphrase, on the chapter, p. 12. — " You shall not admit 'him even to that table, admission whereto is the simple recognition of profession, discipleship, fraternity, and fellowship." Such is Dr. H 's inter- pretation of that part of the apostolic command — " with such an one no not to eat." Now, I must say plainly, that this is one of the most impudent forgeries on scripture that I have ever heard of, and as absurd as it is grossly impudent. Can he adduce any instance from scripture, or from any interpreter of scripture, either in Greek or in English, or in any other language, in which the simple expres- sion of eating idih a person is employed to denote eating the Lord's Supper UHi/i him ? No ; but he does not servple to coin the meaning for his occasion ; and this, though it goes to turn the apostle's lan- guage into profane nonsense. With such a man have no Christian fellowship, not even in the highest aud most sohnui ordinance cf Chris- tian fellowship, the supper of the Lord ? Yes, Dr. H , the highest and most solemn, though so simple. And all this profane nonsense and corruption of the word is maintained in despite of the context both preceding and following the command. For let Dr. H labour ever so hard to conceal it in a heap of words, the connexion of the 10th verse (marked by the word " for") is evidently this : I say, with such a person not even to eat,yor as to fornicators, &c., of the world, I did not think of prohibiting your eating with them. Does not this put it beyond doubt (if there could otherwise have been any reasonable cause for doubt) what the eating is he intends to prohibit. In the 9th verse he permits that eating with the forni- cator of the world, which he prohibits them maintaining with the same character found within the church. Did he permit them to eat the Lord's Supper with heathens ? or did the Corinthian disciples ever fall into the mistake of supposing that he thought it necessary to prohibit this .^ It is not to Dr. H. that I would suggest any such considera- tions. It is not argument, but the fear of God, that he wants : and all his scoffs and buffoonery of disputation (p. 19, 20, oO, &c.), I would meet simply with " the Lord rebuke him." More than enough has been said and written for others on so plain a matter. And what is the amount of all that ye urge against the divine command ? Why, that there may be cases in which the literal act of eating in company with one removed from the body is unavoidable, from the relationships of life and the duties arising from them. A more sober inftrence from this would be, that the apostle did not contemplate such particular cases in the passage, nor think it needful to discuss them ; — that such unavoidable companionship in eating is. not the convivial intercourse which he intended to prohibit, but that which is needlessly sought for enjovment in the person's society. In tinith, the majesty of the divine word, in giving its precepts, does not descend to meet or provide against the cavils and objections of men, who oppose it. Suffer me to put it to your conscience, w^hether you would think it consistent with the precepts in Rom. xvi. 17. to cultivate needless intimacy, even in social life, with the character tlierc described ? ON SCRinUUAL SUBJECTS. 489 Vet it nui::lit ju«t as reasonably be objected, that a Christian wife cannot avoid her husband, nor a Christian child its parent, though of such a character. But I have done. I do not cease to pray tliat lie who alone can repair the breaches of Zion will make bare his arm for etFecting that work in Ireland, by calling- out his own children from the tents of ungodlv n\en. Yet, in saying this, I must add an avowal that I consider it an eminent mercy to his church that he has caused the removal of some such persons as Dr. H. CXLVIIl. TO MRS, B- July 2G, 1830. Mv VERY DEAR Mrs. B , — Tlie Lord's mercy has indeed been very great in restoring to us dear M B , and a few others. Never, I think, has it been more strikingly exemplified how our eyes are holden and our hearts hardened against the plainest principles of the Word of God, than in the course of that rebellion in the Exchange ; and as clearly is it manifest, that such a riucjleader in the rebellion as our dear M could not be brought back by any thing but divine mei'cy and power. I long held him very dear ; but he is indeed dearer than ever. And I trust the same mercy and power will yet be displayed in Mrs. M . I have no doubt that she has never yet read the passage with that sobriety of serious attention, and that subjection to divine authority, which the word claims from every one that fears the Lord. And what work we do make, when, instead of hearkening to what the Lord saith, we give ear to the suggestions of our own wisdom, dictating what it is fit that he should say ! With what loathing of themselves will any of them return, who are indeed brought to a right mind ! I saw your , in some respect, with great pain at the prospect of the trial that 1 think awaits you, though tempered by the blessed confidence that it will be all wisely and graciously ordered. I may be over-apprehensive : and assuredly the Lord who wounds can heal what appears the most deadly wound, and can avert the trial that appears most inevitable. But be prepared, my sister for giving him up. It will be comparatively easy, when you recollect that he appears to have been marked as one of Christ's sheep, and consider out of what a world he is to be taken. I dare say, many would blame me for thus frightening you by such plain talk ; but we shall not he frightened, if our ear be but kept open to the voice that spcaketh from the mercy seat, " Fear not !" 490 COLLECTION OF LETTERS The vagaries you mention of the Hamiltonians and Burghites are, indeed, awful instances of the delusive power of Satan. I do not understand their notions any better than yourself : but I have seen and heard enough of them to make me sure that they are turned aside from the truth to fables. In several instances, they directly contradict the apostolic word : but in other points of a more doubtful character, connected with prophecies yet to be fulfdled, and specially connected with those in reserve for the Jewish peojjle, I consider that they as decisively evidence the character of ungodlv men, by their hardihood in making points of doctrine, matter of teaching, things of which they know so little — of which it is declared that so little is or can be known. " We know not yet what we shall be." And with all their rash and heady speculations, what do they know (more than you or I) about that new earth which shall succeed the present after it has been burnt up ? or of the state of being when we shall be like the angels of God, without marrying or giving in marriage ? Mr. Irving, indeed, one of the teachers of falsehood here, regardless of that plain word (as they all appear to be) has published to the world, that his imagination riots in the thought of the intercourse of the sexes that shall take place in the new earth, and he has found many a silly woman laden with lusts to listen to his dreams. But the whole occupation of mind with these hidden mat- ters, which those like H and B manifest, proves at once to the spiritually minded that they are not occupied with the glorious things that are revealed. Those who have come " to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem," &c. will not trouble themselves much with doubtful speculations concerning the earthly Canaan. But we may expect that evil men and seducers will wax worse and worse as the day of the Lord approaches ; and their deceitful ways have such attractions for our flesh, that if the Lord himself did not keep them, his very elect would be deceived. My love to all with you. CXLIX. TO MISS WALKER. , 1830. You wish me, my dear child, to put on paper some of the remarks I offered upon your friend's letter. When you first showed it to me, I expressed myself little pleased with it; and now, upon a second and more attentive reading, I dislike it still niore. I see nothing in the letter, or in the spirit which it manifests, that distinguishes ON SCRII'TUIIAL SUiUECTS. 491 the writer fiDm the n1ll^•s of pious and strict evangelical professors; very careful and troubled aljout many thine^s, and in that very cir- cumstance manifestini? the want of perception of the ijlory of the one thini:; needful. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh and the pen writeth. Is there a syllable in her letter, from beginning to end, upon the one glorious theme of heaven, and the only theme worthy to occupy the redeemed on earth ? Perhaps, according to her views, that is a subject which may be laid aside where there is professed agreement on it. Yet professed agreement to the plainest statement of the truth is now carried so far by many, that the hollowness of their profession is chiefly discoverable from the cir- cumstance, that their minds and their tongues are occupied about every thing else of a religious kind, rather than it. Her ready reception of every imputation against the disciples — down to that old reproach of sinning that grace may abound — is another very ungodly symptom. Her indiscriminate language about the pleasvres of the ti'orld is most like the religion of the world — one of the highest pleasures of many. I suppose she is too " spiritually minded" (according to her views of spirituality) to take any pleasure in any of the same objects with the world. Probably she will call that a sneer at one adorning the doctrine of, &c. &c. I cannot help it : some of the imputations she retails against us are bad enough ; but indeed I hope we shall be better employed than in defending ourselves against them. Her question about B is a very black one. Of course, before she would join the apostolic church at Corinth, she woidd have taken care to ascertain that the man who had been guilty of incest was not with them; indeed, she seems quite too good for a church of Christ. She hopes for a pleasing account of us, and our great improvement, from you : and what is the pleasing account she looks for ? Not that we are standing fast in the faith, and in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, rejoicing in hope of God, and in nothing terrified by our adversaries, ik,c. but that we are not frequenters of balls and plays, and do not hold the possibility of being spiritually-minded in a ball-room. Of course, if Mr. V chose to give a ball in his house, and to require her attendance, she would lose all her spirituality and become carnally minded ; or, more probably, she would be labouring to maintain some devout and religious frame of mind while the fiddles were playing ; and little aware that in that very pious effort (on which her peace of conscience would hinge) she was really under the intluence of that carnal mind, which (in its most religious form as well as most irreligious) is enmity to the only true God. I hope \ ou will not gratify her with the account she looks for ; for T fear it would be but gratifjing her religious flesh. She gravely observes, that she could not join any church holding such principles as she imputes to us. I wish her distinctly to know, that we could not receive any professor of the mind of which she appears from her letter to be. I shall rejoice to find that she turns out such as you think her : whenever she does, I am sure that she will see I have not written too severely. 492 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CL. Oct. 1830. * * * * Strife is placed in such a connexion in Galatiansv. and elsewhere, that I conceive those who will persist in striving about words to no profit, and agitating questions that are not for godly edifying, should be put away from our fellowship, and avoided just as much as those who walk in any other of the acknowledged lusts of the flesh. How rapidly, my brother, are the wheels of Providence revolving ! " Behold, he cometh with clouds !" and we may almost hear the distant sound of his chariot- wheels. Is there not " upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity, men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking for those things which are coming on the earth." How blessed that we are called at such a time to look up and lift up our heads, for our redemption draweth nigh. How blessed to hear the first-born among many brethren addressing the great congregation that he has received, in such language as that (Ps. Ixii. 8.) " Trust in Him at all times : ye people, pour out your hearts before him : God is a refuge for us." Wonderful: a. refuge for shiners, whose guilty consciences naturally would lead them to try and Qjfrom him, but are now led to fly (o him, and trust in him, and call upon him as their Father and their God ! And all this blessedness brought to us " through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" — who humbled himself and took upon him the form of a servant, and amidst all the sorrows of death that compassed him held fast his confidence in Jehovah, trusted in Him, and was delivered : and gives the privilege of being the sons of God to all that believe in his name : and " if children" — or rather — since chil- di-en — " then heirs : heirs of God, and joint heirs ivith Christ." How briefly do those few words sum up the wonderful blessedness we are called to, and the wonderful way in which sinners are called to it ! " Heirs of God!" — what an infinite inheritance ! But how can a sinful creature have such a portion ? — -joint heirs with Christ! How slow of heart we are to know the things that are freely given to us of God. What a boundless field of discovery is there under the teaching of that Spirit, who alone searcheth all things — vea, the deep things of God ! May you and I, and all his children, be led into it more and more ! ON sriUlTURAI- SUIUICCIS. 49:3 CLT. TO R. L. C- , KSQ. After disposing of such cases, there are in others geneial jirinciples which it is most important for a Christian to attend to. Whatever he the form in which he may have this workl's goods hiid hy, he cannot he too suspicious of the workings of his own covetous heart : and if — for the jiurpose of either keeptug or addiny to liis store — he shut up his howels of compassion against the real wants of a necessitous hrother, he is then ahsolutely in the snare of that covetousness which is idolatry. And this evil — though generally perhaps secret — mav hecome so manifested hy overt acts, as to call for the discipline of the house of God to purge it out. But if I were to go hcvond such general principles, — the application of which can he effectually produced in the disciple's mind only hy the influence of the truth, — if I were to attemjjt (for instance) to lay down and enforce a law against a Christian's going into a benefit society : I should fear that I was presuming to be wiser than Christ, and to add to the laws of his kingdom. The following considerations, I think, justify me in saying so. A man may have money laid by in vaiious forms. It may be in Bank ; it may be in Government debentures ; it maybe in the funds of a benefit society ; it may be in the rent of a house ; it may be in land. For let it be observed, that if I have inherited landed pro- perty of 1000/. per annum rental, all the value of that, which is beyond my wants for the present year, may be considered as so much stock in Bank, the interest of which is calculated to meet the wants of future years . Dare any lay down a law, that a Christian must not hnvc a landed estate ? I think we should be opposed in the attempt by the explicit testimony of scriptm-e. From the Scriptures of the New Testament we not only know that there were rich as well as poor in the Apostolic churches, — (the former of whom were exhorted indeed not to " trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, — that they he rich in good works," &c. but no intimation given to them that they could not lawfully be rich) — but we know that in the first church at Jerusalem there were persons possessed of lands and property, the whole of which they might have kept without any censure from the Apostles (Acts v. 4.) The exercise of active love among them is indeed on record for our imitation, in those who sold this or that piece of gi-ound or house, which they coidd spare, to supply the wants of their poor brethren : for this is what the original really imports, and not that each land-owner sold all his land, &c. Well : if there was nothing necessarily inconsistent with Christian principle in their having lands, and continuing to have them, so as to be distinguished as rich brethren ; neither could there be anv 494 COLLECTION OF LETTERS intrinsic contrariety to Christian principle in their obtaining lands by purchase, &c. ; still supposing that they did not, in order to efl'ect such purpose, " withhold good from those to whom it is due." Well : is not what I have said on landed property immediately applicable to money in the funds, or laid out in any way that we think prudent ? The evil is not in having it, or in laying it out so as that we continue to possess a pecuniary interest in it. But it consists in regarding any such stock, as a store not to be broken in upon, even when the present real wants of a brother require it. It seems to me that this view by no means trenches on the force of divine injunction in Mat. vi. 19 — 21, and that the appai-ently stricter interpretation which some have put forward — (as if it were forbidden to have any stock of worldly goods sufficient to meet future occasions, as well as present wants) — is untenable, contradicted by other parts of Scripture, and calculated to land in hypocrisy and various other evils. You will see from what I have written, that — however needful Christian caution and jealousy of ourselves be in the matter — I think we have no business to attempt laying down a law, that a Christian must not put money (if he can lawfully spare it) into a benefit society. I was for some time afraid to express myself so decisively upon the subject : for though not engaged, nor likely to be engaged, in any thing of the kind myself, I felt what a snare the consideration of others might be ; as well as how awful it would be for me to be a stumbling-block to them, by corrupting the rule of the word. But under the restriction and control of the general Christian principles, which the power of the truth only can enforce on the conscience, I now feel myself quite at liberty to say, that the thing cannot be pro- nounced unlawful in the abstract. CLII. , 1830. You tell me that for some time past you have been very discontented and unhappy. That is a state into which, from our unbelief and hardness of heart, we are always prone to lapse under the various trials of our course ; and it is always an alarming state, as indicating a dimness of eye to the one satisfying good thing shewn us from heaven, and is connected with a readiness to become " weary and faint in our minds," and it is only the strong power and care of the good shepherd that keeps us at such times from falling and turning aside with them who draw back into perdition, and He keeps us from this by recalling our minds to the good woj-ds and comfortable which He speaks to us from the mercy- seat. Is not this one of them ? (Ps. Ixii. 8.) " Trust in the Lord at all times ; ye people, pour out your heart he/ore him ; God is a refuge for us." What a poor thing it M-'ould be to take ON SCIUPTUIIAL SUBJECTS. 49j these word*; merely as the language of the literal David, a sinner like ciurselves. Do \vc not know the voice of the friciul of sinners, de- claring the name of Jehovah to his brethren in the midst of the con- gregation that he has received as his inheritance — setting forth be- fore them the deep tribulation through which he passed in the days of his flesh, and the unshaken confidence that he maintained in God throughout all, and calling us to be followers of him in this, as joint heirs with him, heirs of God and all the blessedness that belongs to his children. " I ascend unto my father and your father, unto my God and your God." Trust in him at all times — " in the times of the thickest darkness, of the bitterest sorrow" — when your spirit is overwhelmed within you. (see Ps. Ixi.) " Pour out your hearts before him," as the children given unto me, and whom I, presenting them before him, am not ashamed to call my brethren. " God is a refuge for us," a secure shelter and hiding-place from every evil, from every storm, from every enemy. Shelter yourselves in Him and fear not. Heaviness may endure for the night, but remember the glorious morning in which your expected joy shall come. In such language does he continually speak to us. And is there not enough in all this to banish discontent and unhappiness ? Our consciences, testifying all the vileness and ungodly workings of our hearts, might well suggest objections against the idea of such blessings being ours, did we not see how it comes to us, that it is the glory wherewith He is crowned •who is worthy. "Heirs of God." What an inheritance ! but how can it be the portion of a sinful creature? — " joint heirs with Christ." " The glory which thou hast given me I have given them." Shall we not exclaim, these are the sure mercies of David. Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things, and blessed be his glorious name for ever ! And shall not that name be hallowed by those who know it ? Shall they confound it with the various gods of the world that are but idols ? May it be as ointment poured forth with mighty efficacy and refreshing fragrance to vou. CLIII. TO THE SAME. , I 830. I HAVE read your letter with some pain ; and am startled, I confess, at what seems to me a kind of morbid tenderness or soreness of con- science, and at an apparent shaking of your mind upon scriptui-al principles, because you think they are not sufficiently exhibited among those you walk with. " One of ray strongholds is, that the spirit of truth produced unity in the believers of the apostolic gospel. If I sec not this unity, ivhat is the inference ?" That is, indeed, ugly language ; and before I ad- vert to the two points in which you think you see in us something ontrary to the unity which the spirit of truth produces in believers. 496 COLLECTION OF LETTERS I return your own question upon you — " What is the inference?" the inference which you mean to draw — supposing that this unity is not to be seen in us. Are you to infer that any scriptural principle you have scripturally held is to be relinquished ? Or that any prin- ciple you have held strongly is not founded in scripture ? It is by an appeal to scripture that it it is to be decided, and not by a reference to the practice or sentiments of any men, or to what is observable in any men. " Let God be true, though every man a liar" — is the language that expresses the mind of the Spirit. What then, I repeat it, is the inference you mean to draw ? The only inference would be, that you can no longer acknoivledge us believers those with whom you have been connected : and, indeed, it behoves us to be kept in a mind of readiness to forsake and hate all men — in that respect — for Christ's sake. Yet, ask yourself, was that the inference you secretly designed ? — or rather, another, which you probably half co- vered from your own conscience ? I freely say, that I think you in much greater danger from the amiable and respectable religious pro- fesssors around ycu, than from those in whom you think you see those inconsistencies : and I do fear that your mind has been weak- ened and entangled, by lending your ear to the objections which they speciously raise against us as net acting consistentli/ with our otvn pro- fessed jjrinciples. I would not descend to discuss that question with them. It would be a question about oin~selves, and not about divine truth ; and even about our professed principles of Christian fellow- ship we cannot consistently argue with any, but those who confess with their mouth the one everlasting gospel. We should generally find it our wisdom with false professoi's to " let them alone." And now, a few words on your two points, lotteries — or games of chance — and defrauding the revenue. I wish to mark distinctly that I think there is an essential distinction between them. I think the former highly inexpedient and unsuitable for disciples : the latter, I am sure, is utterly unlawful. I cannot but a.dmire the female sophistry in your desiring me to state the grounds for non-ohservance of the precept — render unto Csesar, &c. ; in which language you assume that either I do not acknowledge, or do not obey the precept, or that I walk with some who disown or disobey it. I confidently reply, that neither is the fact. I would as soon steal your purse as knowingly defraud the revenue, and woidd as soon walk in religious fellowship with a thief, as with one who practised the latter ; and I can tell you, that I know not one who holds the precept more sacred — who obeys it at more sacrifice of worldly gain — than . But you think that he and I would have disobeyed it, if I had made him the bearer of a note to you when he lately went to Paris- — a note which I should not think of sanding you by post, perhaps from a feeling that it would not be worth a sous, and, in my sending which bv him, the French post-office v/ould not lose a sous. And yet, with what is indeed strange inconsistency, you admitted in our last con- versation that we could not be said to violate the precept in bringing even to Paris an open letter of introduction, which it might be im- portant we should personally present. If the French law be reallv designed to visit with punishment such an occasional departure from its letter, I am sure it must be for the purpose of espionage, and not ON srilirTl'llAL SUIUFX'TS. 4!)7 of revenue ; and I tiui conceive many occasions tliiit would justifv nu- in mv conscience from riskina: the tlu'catened penalty, in order to avoid that espionau;e. If your conscience had not tlic same freedom, you shoulil ahstain : hut should yoii, theremre, set up your judgnieiit as the standard to which others must hend ? When I was removing from Duhlin to London, 1 got over my hooks dutyfree, though cer- tainly the letter of the act suhjected them to duty. How did I efJect it .'' I made interest with the Secretary of the Admiralty, whom I had known in college— he made interest with the heads of the Custom- house, and thev took mv affirmation that I was bringing over my library for my own private use, and not for the purpose of sale. Well, in that way I got them over without risk and without duty ; because the commissioners were influenced to regard the spirit of the law, rather than the letter : but there was no provision for such a case in the act, nor anv act granting them the power of remitting the dutv. And would vou think vourself at liberty to call them over the coals for this, as not obeying the precept of rendering to Cccsar, &c. It would require very little argument to prove, that you might as rea- sonably be charged with violating it when you got over a few letters and a couple of songs through the French ambassador. But, indeed, I am sick of pursuing a subject, on which there is all the substantial agreement between us that vou ought to look for. Nor ought vou to wonder that I shew no great respect to your over scrupulousness, when you recollect that the state of conscience that strains at a gnat, is generally the same that leads to the swallowing of a camel. You may perceive that I write under the influence of that jealousy which burns as " a vehement flame :" but that is necessarily connected with the love that I bear you. (Cant. viii. 6.) On the subject of games of chance, &c., I am glad that you see, with me, that a Christian ought not to meddle with them : but I am sorry that you should think of imposing your view as a law upon your brethren who do not see it. Are you ready to exclaim at this language, as countenancing the ungodly agreement to differ of the religious world ? It does no such thing. The ungodliness of their union consists in agreeing to diff'er about the revealed truth or pre- cepts of the Lord. Hut can we say that there is any precept against spinning a tetotum — for determining some circumstances in, perhaps, a geographical game, or letting our children amuse themselves so ? I w^ould not do it — I dare not, — and I laboured long with to convey to him mv view of the unsuitableness and inexpediency of every thing of the kind. It grieved me to the heart that I failed, but I am sure that I should sin grievously if I attempted to make a law upon the subject. Perhaps another case will explain my meaning to you more distinctly. One, formerly connected with us in Dublin, got a silver ticket for the theatre, and frequented it more than weekly. What sober-minded Christian could hesitate about the inexpediency and unsuitableness of this ? Yet, all remonstrances failed of convincing him of it : and could we pursue it further as a case of discipline .'' I think not, unless we are prepared to make a law with the religious world, or could lay down (what would be more difficult) how often a man may go to the theatre without doing what is sinful. VOL. II. 2 K 4'.)i COLLKCliON OF LKT'l'KRS CLTV^ TO MRS B . Auff. 7. 1831. Certainly, dear Madam, you did not misunderstand me, when you conceived that I court inquiry into my Christian principles and } ractices ; though not so as to continue any controversial discussion about them beyond certain narrow limits, — to which, however, you and I have not yet approached. The little that passed between us last Sunday se'nnight, was under circumstances very unfavourable. I would now, in the first place, notice the inquiry which you propose towards the conclusion of your letter of the 30th ult. viz. : — the nature of our church-government . The only church government which we acknowledge is Christ's. We have no other governor. Individually and collectively, we recognize no authority over us as Christians, but His : and it is in the word of his Apostles that we have his will authoritatively made known to us. The attempt of any man, under whatever name, to exercise any authority over us as Christians, we should repel, as a rebellious usurpation of Christ's prerogative. It is manifest, indeed, that if the laws of his kingdom — all its laws — are already made and promulgated in his word, there is no room for the exercise of any human authority in the things of that kingdom ; — obedience must be the only thing that remains alike for all its subjects. This applies just as strongly to the office-bearers in a Christian church, the Elders and Deacons, — as to any others. I am aware, that most who designate these men as officers mean to convey, that they are invested with some command over the rest as privates — or laity. But real Eldei's and Deacons are servants in the employment of the body under the great head. Of these most of our churches have Deacons, very few of them as yet have Elders. Such servants to the church are Christ's gifts. He, according to his will, raises up one or another of his brethren, in whom all the qualifications are found, so minutely marked as requisite. We count it a great mercy whenever we are thus supplied ; and feel it an humbling want, while we remain without these his gifts. But we dare not on that account draw a profane cover over the want, by investing with the name of Elders any who possess jiot, in some degree, all the prescribed characters. As to your other inquiry, which you join with that relating to our church government, whether we have any other practices as a church, besides those with which you have been made acquainted, I can truly say that I do not know of any. All our acts as a church are open to the public eye. You have witnessed the ordinary and s^«/ei practices, in which we join on the first day of the week : and we have but the one meeting of the church. In it takes place, as occa^to/irequires, the ON scRiriiUAi sriMi vis,. 4S9 reception or exclusion of members. But 1 am led, by one expression in vour letter, "the sahbutli" — to ajiprize you of what, I believe, I have not been led to mention in any of my ])ublications, that we rep-ard not the first day of the week as a sabbath, — or (as divines call it) the Chrisda/i sabbath, which they pretend has succeeded to and taken place of the Jewish. Undeniably the Jewish sabbath was the last dav of the week : and we are informed on g^ood authority, that it, and iJl such Jewish institutions, were but shadotrs of good things then to come, — shadows that ha\o passed airay since the coming of the heavenlv kingdom. As to the theological fiction, which divines so unblushingly put forward — that the day was changed to \\\q first dav of the week on the resurrection, and that Christ undoubtedhj before his ascension instructed his Apostles about this change of the sabbath, — we reject it with abomination as a mere human tradition, destitute of even the shadow of foundation in the Apostolic word. In writing to you, I need scarcely add tliat there is an observance of the first day of the week, that we hold divinely obligatory e.pon all disciples. On it, — in memorial of that resurrection, by which they are begotten again " unto a lively hoj)e," 1 Pet. i. 3. — the Christians of any neighbourhood are bound to come together into one place, to join together in eating the Lord's supper, and in the other appointed acts of Christian fellowship. I thought well to put you in earlv possession of our sentiments on this subject, as they greatly increase the bad odour in which we lie with the devout and honourable. But it is time for me to pass to some other topics on which you treat. I intimated that I thought you quite afloat as to the divine authority of all the peculiarly Apostolic precepts. (I use the expres- sion "peculiarly apostolic," to distinguish them from those moral exhortations, which many infidels will acknowledge to be very good and obligatory.) And I confess that nothing in your last changes my opinion. You do indeed quote my words with professed appro- bation— that " the word of the Lord is the onlv authoritative and only lawful rule of Christian conduct." But you evidently conceive that a person may very innocently walk contiary to this word in one or another instance, even after his attention has been called to it ; — innocently, if he only think himself right. And you seem to conceive that 1 must admit this, because in my own church we did not formerly submit to some of the practices which we now hold sacred. And was the n-il of our disobedience any the less, because it existed in my own church 9 When I was myself a clergyman of the establish- ment, and thus connected with all its antichristian abominations, I really thought that I did very right in remaining in such a connexion. Did this make it right } Does not any such notion immediately sub- stitute each individual's mind and judgment, as the rule of Christian conduct, in place of the word of Christ ? In fact, you might as reasonably say that Saul's persecution of the church was very innocent, because he then " verily thought that he ought to do many things against the name of Jesus of Nazareth," Acts xxvi. 9. In your former letter you expressed yourself dissatisfied with my saj-ing that the churches, with which I stand in connexion, include 2 K 2 5fO COLLECTION OF LETTERS all -whom I cp.n achnoiohdge as disciples : ar.d it is a declaration that must shock the charming liberality of the rclis^ious world. But your dissatisfaction resolves itself, in fact, into this : " Why should you not acknowledge me as a fellow- disciple, though I walk not with you or in connexion wilh your churches, becnuse I cannot see some of the precepts which you hold as sacred ?" My reply to any such inquiry must be — -j'vst because we hold as sacred the rule hy u-hich we loalk. Any attempt to throw the blame of disobedience to it upon an imputed obscurity in the rule, we think to be substantially a denial of its authority. But indeed, dear Madam, when you are confident of your sincerity and innocence in substituting, for instance, a holy and loving curtsy for the enjoined salutation with the holy kiss of charity, you seem little acquainted with the self-deceiving power of the human heart, and of the degree to which our will naturally influences our judgment. I confess to you freely that there is no one of the observances, in which we join on the first day of the week, that my flesh would so gladly get rid of, as that of salutation — it exposes us so much to the derision of scoffers. And that this aversion to the thing was at the bottom of my supposed inability to see the precept so long, I have no doubt. That your judgment also in the matter is warped by your will, you afibrd decisive evidence in the circumstance, that your judgment is not the least shaken by the removal of the ground on which it had professedly rested. " A kiss," you had said, " was at that period, as is well known, a common mode of salutation," &c. And thence you inferred, that the mode of salutation common at this period and in this country, might be substituted in the Christian observance of the apostolic precept. I had been well acquainted with the argument, and with the decisive refutation of it. This, however, you quote so inaccurately that I must repeat it. I was not so foolish as to assert, that the Romans were not in the habit of using the kiss as a mode of salutation. On the contrary, I expressly marked to you that I admitted there was no age or countrv, in which salutation with a kiss was not practised between close and endeared connexions. But I did say, that a kiss was 7Wt the ordinary or general mode of salutation among the old Romans, any more than it is among us at this day : and that the pre- cept of saluting one another with an holy kiss, occurring notwith- standing in the letter to the church at Rome, your argument against the literal practice must fall to the ground. (I might have extended my remark to the Greeks as well as to the Romans.) But though the ground on which your judgment had professedly rested was thus removed, your judgment was not the least shaken in consequence ; and you have now shifted your ground to the pedilavium . Upon that I shall not now say a word, in addition to what I have already offered in print ; except that, if you really think — after reading my published Remarks — that the literal meaning of the apostolic pre- cept concerning the salutation, can be shewn not to be its real mean- ing, in the same way as I have shewn the literal pediiaviwn not to be the thing really intended in John xiii. — if you really think this, I am sure it would be quite idle for me to say a word tp change your ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. ^01 opinioiu liut here I must remark, that from your hinguay;c in yuur hist letter, I am nut sure that you have really given up the idea of the kiss having been the ordinary mode of salutation in ancient Rome ; though vou shrink, through a kind of politeness, from maintaining it in opposition to my positive denial of the fact. Now, madam, there is no doubt that real cottrtesi/ is not only consistent with Christianity, but is enjoined by it. But, really, Christianity quite spoils the kind of politeness that proceeds on deception, or that is inconsistent with the most steadfast assertion of every thing that involves scriptural truth. And be assured that your plainest avowal, that you think me misinformed on that point of Roman manners, though it might make me smile, would not hurt me in the least. It is a point on which it requires very little scholarship to be rightly informed. If you can consult any one capable of examining a few passages that I should refer to in the Latin classics, I think I could satisfy yourself. Perhaps, I may even at present satisfy you, by tell- ing you an amusing little anecdote. One of the Scipios (I think) was a candidate for an office at Rome ; and canvassing the citizen electors, in shaking hands with one of them, he was annoyed by the hardness of his gripe. " My good friend," said he, " may I ask, do you walk on all-fours, that your hand is so hard.'" It was an un- fortunate joke, for it lost him his election. The candidate, during his canvass, was accompanied by a kind of agent called a «ome«c/a/or, who whispered in the ear of his employer the names and circum- stances of the citizens ; and it is in perfect correspondence with the above story, that a poet of the Augustan age describes one of these agents as whispering to the candidate — " that man has great in- fluence in the parish ; — shake hands luith him." Now, I would put it to your own consideration, if salutation with a kiss were the ordi- nary or general mode of salutation now in England — whether a candidate for Westminster would not employ it with a voter whom he wished to gain — whether he would employ any less warm mode of salutation on such an occasion ? Indeed, even grasping the hand was a more warm salutation than the ynost ordinary mode employed by the old Romans ; among whom, as well as among the Greeks, the most common salutation at meeting and parting, was by a mere expression of good-will, equivalent with our " Good morning!" or " How do you do ?" or " Farewell." You will please to recollect, also, that I admitted that, in a later period of the empire, an attempt was made by some young bucks at Rome., to introduce salutation with a kiss into ordinary — or at \ea.?,t fashionable — practice. But instead of succeeding, they were ridiculed in epigrams, some of which exist to this day. I should apologize for being betrayed, in addressing you, into any of the regions of scholarship. I think I scarcely should have been so, but that I suspect your ear has been pre-occupied on this subject by some of the systematic opposers of apostolic Christianity ; and I am aware of the combined ignorance and dishonesty which teachers, especially of that description, manifest ; particularly where thev con- ceive that the person whom they mislead, is unable to detect the falsehoods which they put forward. But it is time fjr me to con- 502 COLLECTION OF LETTERS elude this long letter ; most of which I have written with consi- derable difficulty, from an attack of gout in my right hand. I have found a copy of another tract, which I shall send you, and am, Madam, Your well-wisher and willing servant. CLV. — — , 1831. I HAvii long known Mr. Booth as a religious teacher, who held much of the " form of sound words ;" and indeed I was many vears ago instrumental in putting out a large edition of his work in Dublin. What my faith and hope were at the time, or what his faith and hope were, I feel no interest in inquiring, and have no de- sire to pronounce. Antichristian doctrine has been not only so •widely prevalent, but so insidiously interwoven with a language like that of the truth, that it is hard to say what mixture of the two lan- guages may consist together ; nor have I any thing to do with that inquiry. But this I may say, that if a believer of the truth has expressed himself in any way that trenches upon it, whenever this is pointed out to him, it may be expected that he will " abhor the evil and cleave to that which is good ;" and that no weight of human authority, or respectability of the names of men, will out- weigh in his mind the authority of the divine word. If it be other- wise, if he side with Antichristians against the truth after their opposition has been pointed out to him, a Christian has no scrip- tural warrant for regarding him as a believer, whatever plausibility of language he may at times employ to disguise his infidelity. It was so many years since I looked at Mr. B's work that I have now opened it as new, and with some kind of curiosity to see Avhat it is that I formerly assisted to circulate. But I have found no occasion to read beyond the Introduction. As I expected, I imme- diately found much that is good and important, particularly where he says, in p. xvi. " the ancient gospel is an unceremonious thing. It pays no respect, &c. ; no, the virtuous lady and the infamous prostitute stand on the same level in its comprehensive view. Its business is only with the worthless and miserable, whoever they be." Had I not been aware what lengths men go in good words and fair speeches, while they are yet disaffected towards the ancient gospel, I should have been apt to say — surely, the man who penned that sentence must have had a view of it. Yet before I come to the end of the very next page, I find the same man putting forward one of the ON SCRirTUIlAL SUIUIXTS. j'OS grossest contradictions of the truth — hut one that is cert;iiiily emhodicil in ahnust all the modern gospels, that arc not the gospel of Christ. Speaking of the " sad effects" of the false gospels which have been maintained by those who wished to remove the offence of the cross, he savs — " the consciences of atrakcned sin- ners have been left to grope in the dark for that consolation, which nothing but the unadulterated truth could give." Those who are groping in the dark for consolation, or for something to give peace to their consciences, are indeed in darkness and in death : yet Mr. H. more than intimates that such sinners may be at the same time what he calls aicitkened. In this he is countenanced by all the popular divines ; and indeed their so-called ministry could not pro- ceed at all, without that classification of unbelievers into awakened and unawakened. But the idea is fundamentally opposed to the trtuh of God. According to this, there is but a two-fold classifica- tion of all to whom the gospel is sent, — namely, into those who believe it. and those who believe it not. The former are children of the light and of the day : they are not in darkness, as others ; and they have given to them everlasting consolation and good hope through grace. 2 Thess. ii. 16. I Thess. v. 4, 5. The latter remain under the power of darkness, dead in trespasses and sins : their sleep of death continues alike, whatever dreams may occupy them, •whether frightful or pleasurable. But to admit, and honestly to act upon this plain scriptural principle, would be utterly incon- sistent with the ministry (so called) of a popular preacher. His meeting-house may be considered as a manufactory of what are termed Christians, but are not. His profane and careless, or un- awakened hearers, are the raw material, on which he first labours to get them into a sober and demure mood ; then into a state of alarm and perturbation of conscience, which he calls awakened ^ then he is busied in training those who are to seek consolation, and encouraging theni to take the insidious consolation, which he offers them in his gospel : and the various styles of address, which he employs to those different classes of hearers, he profanely calls, " rightly dividing the word of truth." I am aware that all this language which I employ upon the subject will appear intolerably harsh, and abominably un- charitable, to those who savour not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men. But whoever regards it so, is really siding with the coiTupters of the Gospel of Christ, whatever plausible profession of believing it he may make. But it mav be asked — may not Mr. B have fallen into this language without really perceiving its evil tendency against the truth of the gospel, and without meaning to support it in that opposition to the truth } I can easily admit the general possibility of such a thing : but it docs not dispose me at all to lower the tone in which I reprobate the unscriptural sentiment expressed. If Mr. B., or any other who expresses it, be, at bottom, of another mind from what the language appears to convey, that better mind would delight to have the falsehood exposed most plainly ; and any mind that would wish to screen the falsehood from expn^urc (in all its anti- christian malignity) on account of the respectability oi the names of 504 COLLECTION OI- LETTERS ir.en, who liave held the same language, any such mind is not the mind of Christ. But I must, in honesty, say, that the lie which I have marked seems to constitute an essential pai't of Mr. B's system. In the very next page I find this language : " To the sensible sinner, there- fore, it (the doctrine of reigning grace) must always he a joyful sound." Here we have concentered the quintessence of the popular false gospels. The gospel of Christ is glad tidings of great joy to sinners, even the chief, to sinners indiscriminately, and is sent as such to all nations, and all ranks and characters, without distinction, whether they will hear, or whether they will forhear. When Paul in the synagogue at Antioch addressed his hearers, " We declare unto you (//ad tidings," &c.. Acts xiii. o'2 ; did he pre- viously inquire whether his hearers were, what Mr. B., and fellow divines call, sensible sinners — made somewhat acquainted with the deadly nature of sin — humbled under the conviction of it — panting for deliverance from it — and thus (as is su])posed) prepared for the reception of the gospel.^ No: both there, and wherever he went, he declared the same gospel (or glad tidings) to all whom he met, with- out distinction ; because, preaching God the saviour of sinners, he was certain, not only that they wxre all sinners, but that they were all sensible sinners, so far as to know that they were sinners — to be charged in their consciences with sin. No doubt, none but those who believed the glad tidings, which he declared, rejoiced in them, or knew the joyful sound : but this was a mind, not which the gospel of God found in those to whom it was sent, but which it produced (as the rod of His power) in those who believed it, having been ordained unto eternal life. When Mr. B. and the divines talk of sensible sinners, to whom the gospel " must be a joyful sound," i.e. must be a gospel, they plainly intend certain characters, so pre- pared for the reception of the gospel, that when it is sent to them, they will acknowledge and receive it, as what it is, glad tidings of great joy to sinners. Now, any such preparation in a sinner for the reception of the gospel, while it is a corner-stone doctrine in all the popular systems of theology, is essentially anti -christian, or op- posed to the gospel of Christ. Yet, the great object and business of the so-called ministry of the popular teachers is, first, to produce some such preparation in their hearers ; and secondly, to apply to their prepared hearers a corrupted gospel accommodated to this idea. " To the sensible sinner the gospel must alwavs be a joyful sound." I suppose in this it must be at least included, that this sensible sinner must believe the gospel, when it shall be laid before him. Now, to say that a sinner, not yet acquainted with the gospel, must believe it when he shall hear it, is to sav, that darkness must be light, that death must be life, that enmity must be love ; it is to attribute to the mind of an ungodly sinner all the characters which belong to the mind of Christ. Mr. B. had learned to say, as in p. xvi. ; " the ancient gospel has not the least regard to the devotee for the sake of his zeal, or righte- ousness." But he seems to have been as disaflected as that devotee to the ancient gospel, which has not the least regard to i\\e_sensible sinner for the sake of his sensibility of sin, the depth of his con- victions, and the ardour of his desires for deliverance. ON SCllirrUUAL SUliJKCTS. 50.5 I ^ay, the inorecontideiitly, tluit he sceins to have been thus disaf- ficted to tlie trutli, on cii.stinc; niveve forwaril to the followint^ patrc xix. \vhcrc he says, in plain lanc^uag'e; "to have a bare eonvietionul tl»c truth in the mind, and to experience its power on tlie licart, are very dilFerent things." Here we have Mr. B. directly and broadly opposed to the word of God ; and this, not on a subordinate and non-essential point of divine truth, but on the very essence of the g-ospel of Christ. There is no more essential point of the gospel than this ; that ichoso- evcr believeth it hatk everlasting life and shall be saved eternally. But, according to Mr. B., a man may have a conviction of the truth in his mind, or may believe it, and yet may be damned. No- thing more can be necessary to prove to a Christian that Mr. B. was an infidel when he wrote this : and as to all the good words and fair speeches which he employs throughout his work, those who re- member wliat the apostle says about the transformation of ministers of Satan into ministers of Christ, will see nothing inconsistent in them with his infidelity. The man who holds a gospel which may be believed by a sinner, and yet that sinner not be saved, may talk ever so highly about grace, about faith, about the righteousness of God, &c. &c., but all the expressions which he employs, stand in his mind for things essentially diti'ercnt from what they really import in the language of scripture : and to maintain this juggle of deceitful words is, indeed, the grand trade of the so-called ministers or clergy. Mr. B. classes himself with " the faithful dispensers of sacred truth." The disciple of Christ taught from the scriptures would expect to find any man a clerical impostor, who makes such a claim ; and needs not. therefore, be surprised to find the Baptist minister, Abraham Booth, a wolf in sheep's clothing. I do not think it at all necessary to read or note beyond the introduction of his work. CLVI. 1831. ***** And now let me pass to more important matters, I confess I was considerably startled by the opinions you tell me arc broached by some among us on both the first day of the week and on amusements ; and I strongly suspect there is a ivhilc devil at work on these subjects. As you have not told me who the persons arc, I know not whom I may hit by any of my remarks : and, perhaps, so much the better, as foohsh tenderness might else lead me not to hit hard, ' like a Turk.' I had not been aware that you were acquainted with that ])hrase. ' lliough the Jewish sabbath is no more, it is becoming in Chris- tians, for many reasons, to keep holy the first day of the week.' 506 COLLECTION OF LETTERS If these words mean anything, they seem to me to put forward pretty broadly the common notion, that the first day of the week has succeeded as a Christian sabbath to the Jewish. The Jews had strong ground, indeed, for the observance of their sabbath, — the express divine command that they should rest from all the ordinary occupa- tions of life on the seventh day of every week ; and thus keep it holy, or set apart from the other six. It would have been very strange language for any one to say, that it was " becoming" in the Jews thus to keep holy the seventh day of the week : becoming in them not to rebel against the God of Israel ! Nay, they were bound on their allegiance to keep holy the sabbath day. Well, we are taught that this Jewish institution was " a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ," Col. ii. 1 7 ; and this, and the other Jewish shadows, have passed away on the coming of the substance, Heb. ix. 9 — 12 : so that now any adherence to the shadows involves a virtual denial that Christ has come in the flesh. Well, when we are told that it is be- coming in Christians to keep holy the first day of the week, is it intended that Christians are bound to sanctify the first day as a sab- bath, or rest from the ordinary occupations of life ? This, certainly, is the thing intended, though not plainly spoken. Now, where is the scriptural ground for the sentiment } Is there any precept for such an observance in the New Testament scriptures ? Let it be ad- duced. Is there any recorded example of such an observance in the apostolic churches ? That would be equivalent with a precept ; there is not one : on the contrary, it is easy to collect from what is re- corded, that the apostolic Christians pursued the ordinary occupa- tions of life on the first day of the week, just as on any other. For is it not certain that the Jewish Christians, continuing to act as Jews, did continue to observe the seventh day of the week as a sab- bath ? (It was not till the writing of the epistle to the Hebrews they were taught, that the whole Levitical dispensation " was ready to vanish away.") And is it not as certain that they did not observe the first day of the week as a sabbath ? for to have observed two sabbath days in the week would have been as contrary to the fourth precept of the law, as not to have observed one. Well, and what shall we say of the Gentile Christians .'' That they did not observe the last day of the week as a sabbath is certain, since they were ex- pressly taught their freedom from the law of Moses : and can we suppose that they observed the first ? That there were two difl^erent sabbath days observed by the two difierent classes of Christians ? That on the day the one class ceased working, the other class worked, and vice versa : and that the Christian slaves, for instance, took the first day of every week as a day of idleness, and were allowed to' do so even by their heathen masters. The supposition is monstrous. On the contrary, we may see a plain account why the time of Christian assembling was in the evening of the first day (as is sufficiently inti- mated), from their having then done with the ordinary business of the day ; which would not have allowed them to meet at the time we usually do. And now, I would ask, is it becoming in Christians to adopt as a religious observance, anything that has no foundation whatever in the word of the Lord, — in either a precept or recorded ON SCRinURAL SUBJKCTS. ;'j07 example ? This, that you tell me, some urge as becoming in u;;, 1 would rather protest against as most unbecoming. ' But the first day of the week was waited for by the first Chris- tians ?' Yes, indeed, sec Acts xx. 6—7. xxi. 4 : but what do those passages prove ? That Paul and his companion?, in their travels, when thcv wanted to meet with the disciples, waited for the stated period of their assembling as a church on the first day of the week. But does it go a tittle towards proving that day to have been observed as a sabbath ? or do any of us deny, that it is not only becoming in us, but our boundcn duty, to hold that day distinguished from the other six, as that on which our Lord rose from the dead, and on which we arc to " come together to break bread," in remembrance of the great work which He finished in his obedience unto death .'' This is the blessed observance of the day w-hich has scriptural autho- rity ; and no other observance of it can I acknowledge. The divines of the world often tell us gravely, that nature and reason sanction the Christian sabbath, from the great expediency of having a fixed por- tion of time peculiarly dccoled to religion and religious exercises. Those with whom that argument carries any w-eight, or who think that Christians are to be more religious and holy at some seasons than at others, must have gone far, indeed, in imbibing the spirit of false religion. I do not mean to intimate that there are any such among us. ' But a respect is to be paid to the laws of the land.' Yes, indeed : in all things lawful we are to obey them ; and, therefore, I would not keep my shop open on Sundav, nor if I were a mason, would I work at building a wall. But, if I were a shoemaker, and had a pri- vate room, I should have no scruple about making a pair of shoes in it ; nor was the law ever designed to interfere with such private oc- cupations. But, as to the law about Sunday observances, it enjoined every one to go to his parish kirk, and afterwards to amuse himself with sports and pastimes, for which they published an authoritative directory. I think we are called to avow that we take none of our religion from human law ; but would it not be doing so, if we even professed to keep the first day of the week from any respect to acts of parliament. ' As to casting a stumbling-block in the way of the world ;' I never could wish to conceal from the world, that I do not regard Sunday as a sabbath : but neither should I wish to obtrude that needlessly upon their attention, because this would be putting forward a subor- dinate matter in place of the one grand truth of the gospel. And now, large as my sheet is, I am obhged to conclude with- out treating the topic of amusements. Since I began this, I have received a letter from our dear Mrs. P , communicating the double bereavement to which poor Mrs. B • has been called. May she be abundantly comforted with the remembrance of Him, who has said " I will be with thee in trouble." 508 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CLVII. April —, 1832. My dear , — Your letter is a painful one, but it describes a state of mind that I have been well acquainted with many a year ago. It is sometimes a sullen dissatisfaction, and at other times a fretful impatience, at finding yourself so very vile. You are out of humour with yourself, and with the Most High : and I am sure I have nothing to say to put you into good humour with yourself. On the contrary, I am sure, that in the blackest view you have of your own vileness, you have never seen the half of it. In fact, amidst all the seemingly strong acknowledgments you make of your wickedness, you altogether suppress or overlook the blackest instance of it, your " making God a liar," by discrediting the plainest declarations of his word. Indeed, it is well for me, and for all the elect of God, that he extends his mercy and salvation to such stubborn, wicked, rebellious, incorrigible infidels. You think not but that he expects some good return from those, to whom he extends whatjyou call mercy, and that, if instead of that, all the returns they make to him are evil, and only evil continually, nothing is to be looked for but that he would cast them off. In short, thovigh you are verbally (I believe) a Calvinist, yet what you call salvation hinges, in your view, upon some con- ditions to be fulfilled by the sinner. Now, all such imaginations are entertained in direct contradiction to the word of God. He knows what is in man, and tells us plainly of his saved people, that in them dwelleth no good thing. There are manifestations of the evil character, which may come by surprise on them; but never upon Him. His design is to " shew the riches of his mercy" on those who need mercy higher than the heavens, and who need it continually — who have nothing else to stand by. Now, that the gospel is such an absolutely unconditional declaration of the giacious purpose of God, may appear sufficiently from a reference to Jer. xxxii. 38, 39, 40, There the God of Israel takes the whole upon himself with an " I will," and "they shall:" while, in the preceding verses (30 — 35), the character of Israel is so marked, that it appears nothing else could meet their case. Nor is there just ground left for any oik;, while he admits it true that God deals thus with his elect, to put away the joyfulness of it by urging — " Ah ! if I knew that I were of the number." He that believeth — he that is convinced that the divine testimony concerning the salvation of God is true — he shall be saved. So the word from heaven declares ; and no supplementary revelation is necessary to tell that believer that he is one of the elect. Indeed, if his hope rested on the ground of any such persuasion, as that he is among the elect of God — it would rest on a ground quite diflereht from the hope of the gospel. That liopc is derived from the ON sciurruiiAL suiiJEcrs. soy cluiracter of God, as Ho has revealed his glory in the j)erson and work of his anointed, in the combined perfection of righteousness and of mercv, and from the word that brings nigh his salvation to all alike, who read the report of it in the declaration, that he who believcth that report is jus?tiHed from all things, and has eternal life; — and this on the ground of worthiness too — but the worthiness of llini who died the ju^^t for the unjust, and on whose head are many crowns ; — and in consequence too, of the fulfilment of conditions — but con- ditions that have been fulfilled by the mediator of the new covenant — that surety of his people, with whom the covenant has been made, and therefore standeth fast. I know that you have been accustomed to express assent to these things ; but if you be now only persuaded of the truth, you would not stop to inquire whether you have here- tofore believed, nor would even the certaintv that you never had, now keep you back from drawing nigh boldlv to the mercy-seat. If you but believed them now, you would come now — you would not hold back in a pet — you would come at once to Him who rcceiveth sinners — who in no wise casteth out any. Nor can there be any circumstances of malignity of evil, or incorrigibility of wickedness in yourself, that would prevent your drawing near while you are kept in the belief of that word, which shews " heaven opened" in setting forth the full prohibition that has been made and accepted, and pro- claiming the sure mercies of the beloved throughout a sinful world — sure to all the seed, on account of their being based exclusively on him who is a sure foundation. If you urge, perhaps secretly, that, after all, must we not truly repent, and bring forth fruit, &c. and may not these be justly considered as conditions to be vet fulfilled on our part, I only say that you might as reasonably talk of our being brought to glory, as a condition of our being saved. He does give his people repentance unto life ; and this in giving his word of truth entrance into their minds. But that is part of the salvation wherewith he saves them ; and to talk of one part of his salvation as the con- dition of another, is nothing but the wicked nonsense of infidel theologians. CLVIII. TO D. n. n , ESQ. March. 1832. YocR letter has blown off the ashes of forgetfulness, revived all affectionate interest, and stirred me up to bear you in remembrance before the mercy-seat. Much of the intelligence is verv interesting. The worst part of it is their being entangled with an ecclesiastic, and him pensioned. In that they have among them one who holds a 510 COLLECTION OF LETTERS reasoning fee in the service of Antichrist. Yet, even such — as sinners of every class and description, the Lord does call, as I have to own, to his glory ; — but, when called, they will throw up their brief, and fling away the fee that accompanied it with abhorrence. It will rejoice us to hear shortly that ever so few have come out from those who will not follow the Lord fully. Farewell, dear brother. Be strong — yea — be strong. May, 1832. — Your intelligence about the happy issue of your communications with the s is most gratifying. We see in such instances the triumphant power of Zion's king, reigning in the midst of his enemies, and leading captivity captive ; — bringing into captivity to the obedience of his word those who were held in willing thraldom by the God of this world. I quite agree with you in con- sidering the second coming of our Lord as very near. All the signs of the times concur in marking its rapid approach. The consumption of the man of sin by the spirit of the Lord's mouth, goes on mar- vellously ; and this we know was to precede his final destruction. 2 Thess. ii. 8. The kings of the earth also are evidently prepared to hate the great whore and her daughters, that have committed for- nication with them so long ; or at least are beginning to feel that they have tasked themselves with a cumbersome stone, in attempting to combine the concerns of another world with their earthly govern- ments. Then the general rapidity with which the wheels of pro- vidence are turning — pohtical events more numerous and more important taking place now in a few years, than centuries formerly used to give birth to ; this also speaks loudly to us — " behold, I come quickly !" for without attempting to quit our proper province for politics, we know that all things serve Him, and are but preparing the way of the Lord. The general expectal also, even among those who are most blind to his true character, I do with you think in some degree indicative ; though I make not so much of this as of other signs ; for I believe history teaches, that a similar expectation was very generally entertained at the time of the Crusades. But enough of this. On the expression— /o//ow holiness, (Heb. xii. 14.) little needs to be said, when the true import and nature of scriptural holiness is known. The exhortation is suited only to those who are holy, " sanctified in Christ Jesus," " called to be saints :" and when they are exhorted io follow holiness, it is simply to pursue the course \\\nch. becomes such a people — a people holy to the Lord, separated to Him and his service — turned from all the gods of the nations that are but idols, and from all the religious ways connected with their worship, and taught to sanctify the Lord God in their hearts as the only living and true God ; taught this by having their eyes open to the discernment of his revealed glory in the work of his anointed. Others will mistake this, as every part of Scripture ; and will imagine they are following holiness, when they are striving hard to Tiecome something like what they call saints, to become what they are not, or to pretend to be so. The plain import of the expression "follow ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 511 after" — (retained, indeed, in our phrase of pursuing a course) — you mav see exenipliticd in 1 Tim. vi. 11. and 2 Tim. ii. 22. The JiOrd's i)eople are characterized in Is. li. 1. as "following after righteousness," and we know this does not mean trying to become righteous — for they are righteous, justified from all things, and have peace with God : and they are addressed accordingly in the 7th and t^th verses. To us Ps. Ixxxv. 13. may stand as a comment on the l)hrase. But do not unhelieving religionists similarly mi^^interpret, to their own destruction, the expression of " seeking the Lord," and every other in the Scriptures ? On churches, I hope your judgment is cleared from the clouds that raised. If two or three — including certainly one or more brethren — cannot lawfully come together on the first day of the week to break bread, because in the course of time none but the sisters may be found adhering to scriptural princi- ples, and they cannot pursue church-discipline against their anti- scriptund brother ; is it not plain that the same objection might be raised against the lawfulness of a church of two or three and twenty } Are we to anticipate such circumstances, and on account of the possibility of such an occurrence, to abstain from walking together, as long as we can scripturally ? Whoever hold Elders as necessary to administer the ordinances of Christ, or authorize dis- ciples to obsen-e them, hold, under the name of elders, the worst of the Antichristian principles of the clerical character and function. And as to preaching sermons — aptness to teach is certainly one of the characters, which those called to the eldership ought to have more or less manifested in the church : but it w'ould be hard to say why an elder should teach, the week after his appointment, at greater length than he had taught the week before. In this, as in every thing, he is to be an ensample to the flock. When I deny that either the administration of ordinances, or preaching of sermons is any part of the elder's business, many would think that I leave them nothing to do. They would perhaps think otherwise if they witnessed our dear bro- ther M 's occupation in the church in D ; or if they entered more into the import of the name, " overseers of the flock." Very high do I hold the importance of having some specially charged with that watchful care, and acknoivledged by the church as called to it, and given them for it by the great Head. Particularly as a church multiplies, I am sure it will be lacking in an important gift, if it remain long without elders ; but I am as sure that, in general, the most important sen-ice of the elders is rendered not when the church is assembled. But I must have done. My love to all that are with you, though unknown in the flesh. Mercy and peace be multiplied to you. March, 1833. — Mercy and peace be multiplied to you from Him who is our peace, and from whom abundance of peace flows like a river making glad the city of God ; and through whom abounding mercy reigns unto eternal life, where sin had reigned unto death ! May you, and all that are with you, one in Christ Jesus, know more 512 COLLECTION OF LETTERS and more of the blessedness bestowed on us in Christ ; and be led by the great captain, with singing, unto the heavenly Zion, with songs and everlasting joy upon your heads ; — glorying in his holy name, and seeing there a sufficiency for any sinner upon earth to glory in, and nothing anvwliere else for the most blessed saint to glorv in. What else have I wherein to glory at this moment ? when I am so incurably vile, and bent to backsliding " from the only true God," that, left but to myself, I would now turn aside from Him, forget his name, and go on to glory in vanity and lies ; — yes, and pretend perhaps at the time that I was offering incense to Him. Truly, "it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps," Jer. x. 23. " Order my steps in thy word," Ps. cxix. 133. is a suitable prayer for us. May we be kept to the end under the abasing conviction of our^own cha- racter, and the blessed discernment of His as the justifier of the ungodly, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Should I be living, when our sisters return to Dublin, you may be sure that I shall be ready to give them as much of my time and attention as they may desire, and as circumstances may admit. But it is not very likely that I should ever see their faces in the flesh. Blessed be the mighty God of Jacob, that He is the strength of our hearts and our portion for ever, even when flesh and heart fail. We have had several removals by death for some time past — all of them affording matter of praise ; — and some pleasing additions — the body here in general appearing to stand fast in the one faith and hope — and a very pleasing appearance in it of a young growth of promising olive-branches. " One generation shall declare thy name unto another." Ps. cxlv. 4. He who has spoken that word makes it good, — in a world where otherwise the fire of his truth would have been long since extinguished. Farewell, my brother. CLIX. TO H. M- , ESQ. May, 1833. When we recollect the character of the apostolic writings, as differing essentially in the /orwi of their instructions from all abstract systems of human composition, we cannot wonder that no passage is to be produced laying down formally the general rule that, in all cases where a church is called to remove an offender from their fel- lowship, the brethren must avoid needless social intercourse with him in matters of this life — all that company-keeping which would indicate complacency in him. No passage (1 say) is to be expected formally presenting this abstract rule, even supposing it to be really conveyed in the mind of ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. ')13 tlie Spirit in the scriptures. Anil, therefore, uur inability to pro- duce such a passage forms no aryvmcnt at all ag-ainst the position, that this principle is really and sufliciently conveyed to us. 1 have long conceived that this is obviously to be inferred from aivj one of those jjassages — I Cor. v. 11. 2 Thess. iii. G — 14. or Rom. xvi. 17. But Nvithin these few days, the consideration of the three combined has struck me with wonder. How very far the Spirit of Truth has gone in condescension to our slowness and hard- ness of heart, so far as to repeat substantially the same rule in distinct application to each of the three cases, wliich can alone occa- sion exclusion frofn the fellowship of a Christian church ! For, while every case of discipline which terminates in that exclu- sion, must ultimately proceed upon one and the s iUic ground — the offender's refusiU to hear the word of the Lord through his church, — and this, whatever form of evil occasioned the couiniencemcnt of the discipline, yet it must be admitted that these forms are various. But, however varied, must they not all be reducible to three classes ? 1st. The evil may consist in some act or conduct violating what is called morality — contrary to the dictates of conscience, even in un- believei's. 2dly. It may consist in conduct contrary to the practical injunctions delivered to the churches by the apostles, the authority of which rests upon the Apostle's word, and may not be recognized by unbelievers. Or, 3dly, the evil may be something not immediatehj connected with the conduct — either with respect to morality or apostolic ordinance — but some falsehood of sentiment opposed to the apostolic doctrine or gospel. Now, I do think it worthy of most serious remark, and of our thankful admiration, that while this threefold classification comprises every case of evil in which the discipline of a church can originate, we have substantially the same direction three limes repeated, but applied distinctly to sueh a class of evils, enjoining much the same course towards the person put away — the avoidance of company- keeping with him. I repeat it, however, that when we consider the obvious ground of this injunction, as connected either with true love towards the offender, or with godly jealousy over ourselves, we ought to have been forward to draw the r/p«e;v// conclusion from anv one of the par- ticular cases. But now, I really know not what more of detail or explicitness we could reasoiiablv look for. We surely sl^ould think it most unreasonable to maintain, that we are at liberty to hold convivial intercourse with a man removed from our fellowship as a thief, and to vindicate sueh a liberty by urging, that theft is not among the evils mentioned in 1 Cor. v. 11. But would this be more unreasonable than the attempt to conf n • the direction in 2 Thess. iii, 6. to the idler, as if the only iraditioa received from the apostle was against idleness ? VOL. II 514 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CLX. TO THE SAME. Sept. 18, 1833. I WRITE immediately to remove a mistake under which I believe you lie as to my meaning. I am informed (whether correctly or not) that you conceived, from my language on Sunday, that I declined hearing you farther on the subject of discussion. Believe me. nothing could be more remote from my real meaning ; though I did and do consider it quite unsuitable to continue any debate about it in our asseinbly on the first day of the week. But so far from wishing to withdraw from the discussion impatiently, while any matter of difference remains, I deprecate such a termination ; and shall rejoice to resume the subject with you in any other circum- stances most convenient to you. Indeed, it would be strange if I were not cut to the heart by the idea of any ultimate difference with a brother, so much and so long endeared, and to whom I am in various ways so deeply indebted ; or if I were not anxious to employ every means for averting such a teiTnination. I have felt, indeed, very desirous to have further communication with you on the subject, from having failed last Sunday to catch the precise meaning of several things that fell from you. For instance, when you expressed yourself as if you considered that the command in 1 Cor. v. — " with such not even to eat," is in all cases to be taken literally ; and as if you thought T was frittering it away, by interpreting it as forbidding all unnecessary intercourse. Surely, you would not consider a Christian woman warranted in declining to eat at the same table with her husband, because he had been removed from the christian fellowship for covetousness. J confess, I should be much afraid of such an apparently strict adherence to the letter of the command ; because I think it would go in practice to set it aside altogether, and certainly would set aside its spiint. I should as little think the precept violated by my happening to dine at the saine ordinary with such a person, or as a common guest at the table of one, who had never been in Christian fellowship with us. In such cases a disciple, acting under the spirit of the precept (i.e. its real import), will, I conceive, be at no loss to see his way ; and I should be very far from desiring to draw a more distinct line. Now, if the thing really forbidden in Corinthians be any of that familiarity, which would be at once injurious to the offender and dangerous to myself, as importing complacency in him, and either originating in such complacency or calculated to ensnare me into it ; I am quite at a loss to conjecture what difference you design to mark between the course enjoined in Corinthians, in Thessalonians, and in Romans. Do not suppose that, in saying this, I mean to say, -that I regard with the same eye all persons removed from the body ; or thai I ON SCRIPTURAL SUBJECTS. 515 would conduct myself towards all of them in precisely the same way. To say the former, would certainly not be true ; and the latter (I conceive) would, in some respects, not be consistent with the scrip- tund principles, which should regulate my estimate of characters — mv hopes and my fears about them. But I am fully persuaded, that it does not consist with the principles of either godly fear or chris- tian love, to continue to maintain habits of familiar social intercourse with any who have widked with us in the fellowship of the gospel, but who have been removed from that fellowship, _/br whatever evil — under the authority of our Great Head. If you agree with this general and broad position (and some of your language would lead me to hope that you do), I know not any ground of variance remaining between us. I certainly do not con- sider as such our removal of ; even if we acted in this under an erroneous impression of her sentiments. In the course of any ^veek, that error may be corrected, on finding that her avowed senti- ments accord with the truth. But I own that, at present, I am per- suaded we did not mistake her, though I should rejoice to discover that we did. How loosely poor S must have held his Christian connexion, when he could break off at once on such a ground, and on statements received altogether from herself. It pains me to occupy so much of your time, my brother. But I trust you will give this note an attentive reading, and that you will suggest some arrangement for a little conference viva voce. May our great and gracious Lord " stablish, strengthen, settle you ;" and not sufter any weapon formed by the adversary against his church to prosper ! Ever in true affection, &c. CLXI. TO THE SAMD. Sept. 23, 1833. Do not suppose, my dear M , that I mean to weary vou because I write so soon again. But the fact is, I wish you should have before you all I desire to say, before you make any reply. It is not much I am now going to add. Your argument, from the sin- gular form of the word tradition, 2 Thes. iii. 6. as confining the direction given us in the 14th verse to the one case of those who will persist in leading idle lives, has always appeared to me so weak, that I did not venture to encounter it. But I noticed, yesterday, a passage that I think must satisfy yourself at once of its inconclusive- ness. I refer to ]Mark vii. 2 — 13, in reading which I wish you to attend particularly to the 8th and 13tli verses. The word tradition 2t.2 51 G COLLECTION OF LETTERS is there also in the singular number ; and vet, is it not obvious that it is emploj'ed to denote the whole mass of human i?-adi(ions by which they set at nought the word or commandment of God ? Of this, several different instances indeed are given, but without limiting the application in the least to those instances. Is it not obvious, that it would be no less unreasonable to infer any such limitation from the singular number of the word tradition, than to infer that the expression, " the commandment of God," in the 8th verse, im- ports but one divine precept ? I have heard also from M what I think a very just and im- portant remark. It is this, that your attempt to confine 2 Thess. iii. 14, to companying with the idler, on account of the singidar form of the word tradition in the Gth verse, goes immediately to an equal limitation of the command in the Gth verse, which enjoins us to withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly, or contrary to apostolic rule, and therefore goes immediately to unloose the binding authority of every apostolic command — even of this, that you acknowledge singularly binding. For what, if any member of a Christian church should persist in companying with the obstinate idler ? Might he not plead that he was not in this violating the apostolic tradition, which enjoins diligence in labour ? Other mem- bers of the church might indeed say, that he did very wrong in thus companying with tlie idler ; but still as it was not the one tradi- tion referred to in the Gth verse that he despised, — they would have no warrant for withdrawing from him ; and it would be easy to shew, in the same way, that there is no precept of the Apostles, to which disobedience might not be tolerated in a church— without affording even those who acknowledge the precept any scri{)tural ground for purging out the evil from aaioug them. Yet it is plain that, in 1 Thess. iv. 1 — 8 that Apostle reminds the disciples of all that he delivered them for regulating their walk as of equal authority, as of " coinmandments he gave them by the Lord Jesus :" just as the same Apostle warns the Corinthians of his being in a readiness to revenge " all disobedience, when their obedience should be fulfilled." 2 Cor. X. 6. In fact, the whole question would be decided in your mind, if you were but led to revert in your imagination to the apostolic age ; and to suppose any member of an apostolic church associated in fauiiliar intercourse with any one put away from its fellowship as refusing to hear the divine Word. At that day, the awfulness of this wickedness was not disguised by the multitude and respectability of those who walked in it, and yet called themselves Christians. And now, I think, I shall not give you any more last_ words of Baxter. To the Lord I look ; convinced that he alone can effec- tually com.mand the scales to faU from our eyes at any time — can alone bring us into, and keep us in, that unity in which it is pleasant for brethren to dwell together. With true affection, vours, &c. ON SCIlirrURAL S113.IELT.S. 517 CLXII. Jan. 31. 1833. My vkry dear l)iioTiiER, — It is almost time, yjii will say, that I should make my appearance to you: but, iiulccd, J ratlicr exjKX'tcd to have disappeared before this. Silent as I have been, I have had you daily in my remembrance. Blcssc peo|)lc, if lie were to make that dei^pised cliureh in distin- guished among tlie churehes for the prosperity whieh he gives. That is a very remarkable word in Jer. xxx. 17, " because they called thee," &c. CLXUI. TO K. M. B , ESQ. Jan. 10. 1833. Sir, — Whether you will condescend, or can find leisure, Iro read this letter or any of the printed pieces which I take the liberty of sending vou, I am very uncertain. But some passages in three of your publications, which I have lately read — (your letter to the ^Vrchbishop of York, and two sermons) — have excited in nie an interest which constrains me to make the attempt, if so be it may please God to bless it, for engaging your attention to some points of divine truth, on which you appear at present to be astray ; but astray in common with the great mass of religious professors in these coun- tries. You will not be surprised at my writing with all plainness and simplicity, for I write on subjects, on which, if 1 sought to please men, I should not be a servant of Christ. You see something of the Antichristiau character of all slate- religion, of all attempts to incorporate the kingdom of Christ with the kingdoms of the world. (On this subject I send you a short ])am- phlet, which I published many years ago.) IJut you more tlian once express yourself, as if you conceive that the soi-disunt church of England mav vet become a true church of Christ by an entire dis- connection from the state, and some other improvements in her con- stitution, discipline, liturgy, &c. This idea arises partly from inattention to the scriptural meaning of the phrase, " a church of Christ ;" namely, an assembly of the Chris- tians of anv place, coming together on the first day of the week to break bread, and walking together in the fellowship of the Gospel as feUow-heirs of the grace of life. In this view it is obviously non- sense to talk of the church of England : and so far as the phrase has any meaning, it must have an unscriptural meaning. Accordingly, we never meet in Scripture with such an expression as, " the church of Judaa," but, " the churches of Christ that were in Judaea," &c. 1 Thess. ii. 14. Now, it has long been one of Satan's devices to give a currency to the words of Scripture in an unscriptural sense : and it is an evil, which a disciple in his right mind will abhor. But the idea whicli I have marked is obviously connected in your mind with another deep error : namely, an admiration of the clerical 520 COLLECTION OF LETTERS character, when the clergyman is devout, zealous, and evangeViail. Such men you view as ministers of Christ, and almost semi-opostles. But stare not, when I assert that the distinction between clergy and laity is essentially Antichristian, and indeed one of the main pillars supporting the edifice of the man of sin. You are somewhat aware how high the superior orders of clergy have carried their pretensions. The blasphemous titles assumed by the pope of Rome go but little beyond the profane arrogance of our English bishops, in styling themselves " successors of the apostles in the government of the church." Successors of the Apostles ! Well do they approve them- selves legitimate ministers of him, who puts himself forward as having succeeded to the throne of the king of Zion. And from the prime ministers of Antichrist all the inferior orders of clergy receive their ordination — their appointment to their sacred function ! But let us forget for a moment the obviously foul source whence they derive it ; and consider the clerical function itself in the most moderate form of its pretensions. The clergy are a distinct caste, assuming to possess a peculiar or exclusive right to preach sermons, and administer Christian ordinances to the laity : insomuch that these ordinances are supposed to be deficient in validity, unless administered by one of the corps wearing black regimentals. As to the preaching or hearing of sermons, I shall only say at present that it forms no part at all of the objects for which a Christian church comes together on the first day of the week : and that, if any member of it should attempt to preach a sermon to the rest, his brethren, holding fast the word, would immediately consider him a subject of reproof and discipline. Then, as to Christian ordinances — for instance, the supper of the Lord — do the words of the divine institution convey the slightest intimation of an administrator of the bread and of the wane ? "This do in remembrance of me," saith the Lord. ' No, no !' say the clergy ; ' presume not to do it, unless ye have among you one of the clerical caste, to consecrate the elements, and administer them to you.' But some will still urge — had not the Apostolic churches elders, or bishops, who were specially charged with the watchful oversight and diligent feeding of the flock .'' Yes, indeed, they commonly had. These were among the gifts given to his churches by their great head of old, and still given according to his sovereign will. But it is utterly false that these servants of a Christian church were ordinarily coeval with the church ; and still more grossly false that they were any thing like clergymen, either in their origin or in their office. It appears evident from Acts xiv. that the first churches, as planted by the apostles, were commonly for some time without elders : and indeed, in the nature of the thing, it is evident that a chur-ch must ordinarily be going on for some time as a church in Christian fellowship, before it can be proved which of the brethren possess the qualifications needful for the eldership. But in the course of their walking together as churches of the saints, in the observance of all the ordinances delivered to them bv the apostles, teaching and admonishing one another, and building up each other in their most holy faith ; in the course of such a walk, one and another of the brethren appeared distinguished by " aptness to teach," and ON SCliU'TUUAL SUIUKCTS. .-,01 tlio otlu'i- cluiractcrs marked in the Epistles to Timothy iuul Titus. Such j)erson.s, arcordint? to the aposftolie direction, were acknow- ledged bv the church, and recognized as the gifts of the Lord, as raised up for taking the lead of them in the way, and watching over them in it. But the week after one of them waa thus called to the elder's office, did he turn aside from the course he had pursued before ? Did he cease speaking in the meeting of the brethren as he had heretofore spoken, and connnenced preaching a sermon "' or did he attempt to lord it over his brethren, so as not to allow them to keep the ordinances of the Lord, unless he w^ere present to give them validitij by his administration ? But I must hasten to another topic ; only adding on this, that they know not the real nature of an elder's office, who suppose that the main exercise of it takes place in the meeting of the church; and that none can comprehend the real nature of a christian church, but those who are given the know- ledge of that divine truth, which is the one bond and object of its union. The subject to which I now jjass is of paramount importance, from its immediate connexion with that truth : I mean the notions vou have imbibed, concerning the supposed progressive conversion of a sinner, through a long course of spiritual exercises and convictionSy issuing in what is considered as justifying faith. It was in the second of your sermons — (containing just animadversions on Mr. Irving's pretensions) — that I noticed this sentiment ; but I cannot quote any of the passages containing it, having returned your publications to the person from whom I bon-owed them. It a])peared to me from that sermon, that, since your first appearance in print, your ear has been gained by some of the clergy of the high Calvinistic class, and that they have succeeded too well in cramming you w'ith their false theology. (Here I would beg leave to refer to the " Remarks cor- rective," &c. Article xi. on Hebr. ii. 9.) However this may be, nothing is more certain than that all such views of a sinner's con- version to God are utterly opposed to the real conversions we read of in the apostolic word. In these — (see, for instance. Acts xi. 21. xiii. 48. xiv. 1. xvii. 4. xxviii. 24.) — a sinner, dead in sins, heard the glad tidings of the salvation of God, preached to all indiscriminately ; he heard and believed the divine report, and was thereby converted (or turned from darkness to light, and from the powers of Satan to the living God.) He at once had " wisdom, and righteousness, and sanetification, and redemption." He was complete in Christ, having passed from death unto life ; and was led " walking in Clirist as he had received him." His conscience was purged from guilt and dead works, by the blood once shed for the forgiveness of sin : it was " purified by faith ;" not left for a scries of weeks, or months, or years, groaning for deliverance from guilt, and for a participation in Christ. Those who are thus exercised, may be persuaded by their spiritual guides that they are spiritually exercised, and in a hopeful way of attaining to what they pant after. But they are under the power of unbelief, and blindly led by blind guides. No doubt, while life is spared, it may be that the mercy of God, against which they are fighting, may apprehend and overcome them : but, if not. 522 COLLECTION OF LETTERS righteous will be their condemnation, for rejecting the counsel of God against themselves, for disbelieving the record which He hath given of his son. According to the Scriptures, there is no intermediate class be- tween believers and unbelievers. The former are children of the light and of the day : for that divine truth, which they believe, discovers the distinguishing glory of " the only true God," as at once just and the justifier of the ungodly, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, This is that law of the Lord which has gone forth out of Zion; which " converteth the soul, maketh wise the simple ; rejoiceth the heart, and enlighteneth the eyes." (Ps. xix.) As to those who disbelieve it, they remain asleep, and under the power of darkness, whatever religious dreams may occupy them, either pain- fully or joyfully, in that sleep of death. But this view of conversion obviously strikes at the root of the clerical trade, and the whole of their occupation, and zealous bustling about the training of souls for God. No marvel that the clergy are so loud in their outcries against the impious heresy, against the " sect everywhere spoken against." But the temple at Jerusalem " was built of stone, made ready before it was brought thither ; so that there was neither hammer, nor axe, nor any tool of iron heard in the house, while it was in building." (1 Kings vi.) And vain is all the hammering of the preachers to build a spiritual house with lifeless stones. (1 Pet. ii. 5.) I the less regret my inability at present to prosecute this all-important subject, because it enters more or less into all the printed pieces, which I hope will be forwarded to you with this letter. I shall not extend its unreasonable length by offering any apology. None will be needful, if the Lord bless it. If not, none would be sufficient. Should you have any curiosity to know who it is that addresses you, I just say that I was for many- years a fellow of Dublin College, and a clergyman ; that many years ago I renounced the clerical character in every shade and modification of it ; that I have since had the comfort of walking in the fellowship of the Gospel with several little companies of disciples in Ireland, and a few in Great Britain, among whom, however, I hold not any office of elder or deacon ; that, after residing for the last twelve years in London, I now find myself likely to spend the remainder of my days in this my native land ; and that, under many infirmities, and that old age, which " ipsa est morbus," I am waiting in peaceful expec- tation of my change, and of the coming glory. Meantime I should receive any lines addressed to me at . I can but subscribe myself yours, with every best wish, 1 ON SCiUl'TUKAJ. S115JECTS. J2:3 CLXIV. 1803. My dear a , — Wlicn ycu were here, a few evenings ago, you found me rather backward to talk upon some matters into which you and ■ were dasliing. That arose partly from my being fright- ened by an appearance of eagerness, that seemed to me like the beginning of a fight, to which I was quite unequal, and every way indisposed — partly from my thinking that the little I did say was not minded — and partly from an inclination for a game of chess with F. . Do you recollect that, on your expressing your judgment that the brotherly admonition enjoined in 2 Thess. iii. 15. could not be any admonition from the church after the idler was removed from their fellowship, I briefly, but distinctly, remarked that in this opinion I decidedly concurred ? Yet you seemed to me to go on as if I lent my authority to the interpretation I disclaimed. I well recollect, that I had formerly countenanced it in the " Apostolic Traditions ;" but I was as clear in my recollection that, in some of my subsequent publications, I have stated what I could for correct- ing the error. Unable, however, on the moment, to refer to the place where my recantation might be found, I said no more. I have since found it in the " Letters on Primitive Christianity," (vol. i. 392.) It is couched in language rather needlessly strong, and certainly leaves no room for any one to quote me as supporting the idea of admonition continued after removal from the fellowship. Look also at my language in — (Vol. i. 373, 390.) If you have not a copy of that piece, I have one or more at your service. But I con- fess to you, that I rather wonder that any should debate the ques- tion with much earnestness ; for I do not see that, in the nature of things, the idea which I have given up as erroneous can affect the practice. If any still adhere to that interpretation, do you find them more engaged than others in renewing their ad- monition of the person removed ? As to the church collectively renewing it, that is obviously impossible ; and the epistle is addressed to a church. I am grieved to hear that any among us should take occasion from this matter, to hold a language represent- ing us as at unscriptural variance among ourselves in any matter of faith or practice. It is a language obviously calculated to stumble the weak and rejoice the adversaries. But I do trust that it is not founded in fact ; and the faithful Lord will make good his word, that no weapon formed against his church shall prosper. To His blessed keeping I commend you and yours. Your attached brother, 524 LETTERS ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS. CLXV. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LITERARY GAZETTE. June 8, 1822. Sir, — A friend has just pointed out to me an article in your last Number (headed An Irish Lexicographer), in which you make your- self and your readers merry at my expense ; because, in the Ijexicon subjoined to my Selections from Lucian, I interpret ^ixirxaQxi " to live," while the only passage in the work where the word occurs, is one in which o'l vta^oi (the dead, or the shades) are described in the other world as ^ixtTu(ji.Bvoi xxtx s6»v, " living classed according to their tribes," &e. You are pleased to mark the interpretation of " dead people living," &c. as "a tolerably fair Hibernicism." If it be, sir, give me leave to say that the Hibernicism is not mine, but Lucian's : and that it is Lucian's not only in this passage, but throughout all his Dialogues of the Dead ; and even embodied in the very title, vBx^ix.ot ^ixXoyoi. Any one the most moderately acquainted with that author knows, that he describes the dead, or those who have done with this life, as possessing a kind of existence in another life, about the nature and reality of which, however, he betrays (as was natural) the most complete scepticism. And although the defence of my Hibernicism may afford you additional matter of merriment, I must confess that I see no blunder in the idea of the dead living in another world. If your objection be to the accuracy of my interpretation of the word ^itxirxaOaci, I would invite you to propose your own. In the meantime I assert, that " to live," in that sense which the English expression often bears, of following a certain course of lifo, is the proi)er meaning of the Greek verb : a meaning which is suffi- ciently ascertained by the two compounds given in the same Hiber- nian Lexicon, i-i^tocnoca^xi and iA.iToi.^ia.irx7Qxi : as well as supported by all the standard lexicograjjhers, not Irish, who interpret the word by vitam degere ; and still more decisively authenticated by the fol- lowing examples, out of many others which I could adduce : — Thu- cyd. 1. ii. c. 14 and 52. Xen. Memor. 1. i. c. G. 1. ii. e. o. 1, iii. extr. Soph. GEd. Col. v. 760. Yours being the first notice taken by an English journalist of any of my ])ublications, classical or scientific ; and this notice being marked (1 freely say) with characters of great ignorance, unfairness, ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS. ri'2") tmcl illihonility. I appiwl from Philip drunk (u riiilij) soln-r, and di'|)ond on the candour and ju^^tice of your second thouyfhts. for the in:>ertion of this vindication in ijour newt nmnber ; though 1 am aware that an Irish schoh\r may think himself flattered, when he is even made the whetstone for sharpeniu": the wit of an English reviewer. However, as I have removed my residence to this country, it is to be hoi)ed that, under the influence of your atmo- sphere and critical animadversions, I shall graduallv he divested of mv Hibernicisms ; and sliall also learn tliat courtesy to strangers, for \\hich your countrymen arc distinguished. I am. Sir, Your Irish Lexicographer. CLXVI. TO THE EDITOR OF THE ECLECTIC REVIEW. April 21, 1823. Sir, — A few days ago I met with the passage in the last Number of your Review, in which you do me the honour of introducing me and mv religious sentiments to the notice of the public. I met with it accidentally, for I cannot declare myself a constant reader of your work ; and how often I may have heretofore figured in your papers I know not. You are pleased to amuse yourself and your readers with my " absurdities," my " almost facetious reasoning," my " Hibernian logic," &c. I confess that I do not consider it alto- gether fair to let off merely such incidental squil)s, against one who has been for so many vears publishing his sentiments on scriptural subjects. If vou think that my sentiments are false, and that vou can refute them, ^Yhy do you not directly review any of my publica- tions in which they are asserted ? I send you copies of two or three of them, that you may not plead ignorance of their existence. Meanwhile, I trust that your feelings, as professedly a gentleman and a man of letters, (to say nothing more) will lead you to give a place to the following brief remarks on the passage, in V\hich you hold me up to the ridicule of your readers. It is rather unfair, either to adduce a quotation from my writings, without referring to the work in which it is to be found, or to mark words as a quotation from my writings, which are no where to be found in them. Yet you have done this, I am sure; though I readily admit that an argument, substantially similar to that which you borrow from me, occurs in some of my theological pieces : I cannot now exactlv say in which. Passing this, I come, in the next place, to the reasoning which you mark as so absurd, Hibernian logic, &c. And pardon me — (as a blundering Hibernian) — for avowing my un- altered conviction, that the reasoning is most simple, clear, and con- clusive. I have long contended with those that you term Sande- manians, and against the popular divines, that the scriptural meaning 526 COLLECTION OF LETTERS of faith in Christ is merely believing the testimony contained in the scriptures concerning Christ ; in that simple sense of the word believing, which supersedes all inquiry into the thing to be under- stood hy faith, while it leaves open the grand inquiry into the divine testimony which is sent into the world " for the obedience of faith." I have maintained this in opposition to all the views which repre- sent faith as some mysterious work, act, or exercise of the mind, which a sinner, yet unbelieving, is called to perform, instructed to perform, and exhorted to exert himself for its due performance ; and I admit, sir, that I have been so absurd as to argue, that those who maintain any such views of faith as the latter, are but deceiving themselves and others, in asserting (as they often do) that a sinner is not justified by works, or by something that he does. For the life of me, I cannot distinguish between a work done, and an act done, by the sinner ; such is the hebetude of my Hibernian intellect. Indeed, the only difference between you, for instance, and the greatest advocates for justification by works, seems plainly to me to be this — that you conceive the thing to be done for justification in the sight of God is a mental act, while others conceive it to be what is called, in common parlance, an outward good life. Now, sir, it is very easy for an anonymous writer in a review to assert, thatthis reasoning is " almost facetious, meant to turn the whole subject of justification by works into ridicule, that it hardly deserves a serious answer," &c. &c. But let me observe to you, that such assertions are no argu- ment, though perhaps the most successful way of opposing truth. The more absurd my reasoning is, the more easily may it be ex- posed by fair reasoning. I invite you to the attempt : but I suspect you will find it too hard for you. I am the more confirmed in this suspicion, by observing the little scrap of Eclectic logic which you condescend to employ against my " Hibernian logic." You say — " the reasoner would hardly deny, that hearing is an act of the mind." It must amuse you greatly to be told, that I do seriously deny it. In hearing, thei'e is an impression made on my bodily organs and conveyed to my mind : but in receiving that impression, I have learned from Mr. Locke — (who, I suppose, was of Irish ex- traction)— that I am perfectly passive — that I cannot help receiving it, and cannot alter or modify it. Your logic may have taught you otherwise. But pardon me for requesting, that you will forbear the exercise of your active powers, the next time a pistol is fired off by your ear, and try not to hear it. You seem, indeed, to have had some misgiving about the assertion, that heai'ing is an act of the mind ; for you immediately subjoin, listening, as if the two things were equivalent. In listening, sir, the mind is active, in so -far as we endeavour to dispose our organs so as to catch the sound. Yet even then, in hearing the sound, I do assert that the mind does nothing. As to the Reverend James Carlisle's remarks on my sen- timents, it would be very easy to expose the sophistry and misrepre- sentation on which they proceed : and perhaps I may some time or another take occasion to do so. But I confess I have never yet looked at his book, though I was informed on its first appearance, that he had done me the honour of attacking me. I am, Sir, yours, &c. ON VARIOUS SUH.IFX'TS. 627 CXLVII. TO Sin w. c. s . March 22, 1827. Mr. P is described in the late debate upon the Irish question as declarinc: his opinion that a religious establishment is necessary in every country for the existence of religion. I cannot think that a man who is of that mind has at heart any religion. He must conceive that all religion is the creature of the state, i. e. is a human inven- tion. Tlic religion of such a statesman is the religion of the state, whatever that be ; — or, in other words, is no religion, but a political contrivance originating in the wisdom of man, and dependant on his pleasure. Yet, though legislators think this very conducive to the good order and decorous conduct of society, and while they are en- couraged to cherish the notion by the priests of all classes whom they employ in such worldly religion, I am satisfied that there is nothing which more effectually in the end propagates irreligion among the people ; for they must, sooner or later, see through the inconsistency and hollowness of the contrivance. With the policy or impolicy of the thing, however, I have nothing to do — except that I cannot view with indifference the national calamities of which it has been — is — and will be, the fruitful source. Is it not one of the striking evidences of the divine origin of scriptural Christianity, that it is utterly inca- pable of being made a state-religion ? and the truth of this position, as a Christian, I must maintain against Mr. P and the whole hierarchy of England and Rome. Not only every religion that has been incoi"porated with the state, but every religion that is capable, under any supposable circumstances, of such incorporation, is essen- tially distinct from the religion of Him, whose kingdom is not of this world ; and however it may pass current under the same name and many of the adopted forms, it is at best a good forgery. There was once, under a really divine revelation, a perfect incoi-poration (so to speak) of church and state. It was under the Jewish theocracy ; and that dispensation is continually spoken of in the New Testament scriptures as earthly — nnd but a shadow of the heavenly things re- vealed in the gospel, (Heb. ix. 1. 23. and throughout). That dispen- sation has passed away, and the declaration of the Messiah is, " Now (vwy J») is my kingdom not from hence." (John xviii. 36.) Instead of beingsupportedby human power and humanlegislation.it is continually opposed In- them as far as they interfere with the matter at all ; and but that the kingdom is his, and that the gates of hell shall not pre- vail against it, the spurious antichristian systems, which liuman policy- supports, would long since have abolislied Christianity from the earth. Thus, the only true religion not only needs not political su])port, but 528 COLLECTION OF LETTERS is absolutely incapable of receiving it : and as to false religion, really, statesmen need not be at the trouble of providing it for the people. There is no danger but that sinful men, under the workings of a guilty conscience, will frame plenty of it for themselves. When will worldly rulers have sufficient common sense to confine themselves to their proper province, the affairs of this life ? CLXVIII. TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES. , 1827. Sir, — Great a quantity of nonsense as I read daily in the news- papers, without ever thinking of vainly interposing my finger to stem the torrent — (you cannot suspect me of intimating that any of the nonsense comes from you) — there is that in an article which appeared in the Times of last Saturday, the wickedness and stupid sophistry of which tempts me to try whether you will admit a brief exposure of it. I allude to the letter from one who assumes thmt pi/ e-bald de- signation, " another English Roman Catholic ;" and as I do not think a newspaper the best or most suitable vehicle for theological contro- versy, I shall confine my remarks to the last sentence of his letter ; "With respect to the religion of the primitive Christians, if it was not the Roman Catholic, at any rate it could not be Protestant, for it was only two or three years ago that they themselves were celebrating, in different places, the third centenary of their existence as a religious body, which proves that twelve centuries must have elapsed since the close of the Pagan persecutions and the commencement of their reli- gion." Ibis is the old argument niewly dished up, of whicli the ])a- pists make so much use, and which has been a thousand times sutli - ciently answered. But let us look at it a little in its new dress. The religion of the Protestants cannot be that of the primitive Christians, because Protestantism is little more than three centuries old. Now, I admit that disease must have existed, before restoration to health is effected : but, it seems a queer inference that, therefore, disease has more of antiquity to recommend it than health. No doubt, the antichristian corrrupters of popery preceded all that protestation against them, from which Protestants derive their name. But it will require more Jesuitical sophistry than your correspondent possesses, to prove that these abominable corruptions therefore formed a part of primitive Christianity, or that Protestants have not returned to the latter so far as they departed from the former. The letter- writer seems, indeed, to be in some degree sensible of this, for in the latter part of the sentence he slily shifts his ground from jtrim it ice. Chna- tianity, and the authentic documents of it founded in the apostolic ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS. 521) writings, to the period when the Pagan persecutions had ceased ; no doubt, in order to involve us in the mist of his traditions, and in manv of the corruptions which at that period had confessedly been intro- duced. I shall not notice that many of the Popish corruptions were long subsequent even to that period. But 1 protest altogctlier against that as the period of primitive Christianity. 'J'he contemptible and absurd dishonesty of the passage is only equalled by its effrontery. Whether the Protestants, at the time of the Reformation, threw off all the corruptions of Popery, is quite a distinct question ; upon which this is not the proper occasion for avowing my opinion. Hut this I sav, that those who have but yesterday returned to any point of Christ's truth or practice, from which there has been an antichristiau departure, can be at no loss to defend themselves against the Popish argument on the ground of antiquity. I confess, that I have long leaned in mv judgment to the opinion, that it would be ex- pedient to grant the Papists all that they at present claim under the al)surd name of Catholic emancipation. (His majesty has many good Protestant subjects who need emancipation more than the papists, and have sounder claims to it.) Not that i have any idea of their being contented with obtaining what they ask at present : but because I have thought it foolish to afford them a specious pretext for their dis- content, by withholding what may be much more safely conceded than many things which they have already obtained. But, when I observe the high tone which they begin to assume even in this country, I own that I am almost led to hesitate (perhaps foolishly) about the expediency of any further concessions. I have been long aware, however, of that character of Popery, that she can assmne - every variety of appearance according to the pm-pose to be served. Like Virgil's Alecto, she can, one moment, present herself as a piti- able weak old woman, and the next moment disclose her expanding dimensions on the affrighted gaze, in all the terrors of a damning fury. Yours, &c. P.S. In using the terms Papist and Popery, I really do not wish to give needless offence to those, whom I rather regard with comi)as- sion. I know not why the terms should offend any who acknowledo-e the Pope of Rome as Christ's vicegerent upon earth. I cannot sacri- fice truth by calling them Catholics, nor the common propriety of language by calling them Roman Catholics. VOL. II. 2 M 530 COLLECTION OF LETTERS CLXVIII. TO THE EDITOR OP THE MORNING HERALD. Sir, — Please to admit into your widely circulated paper afew])Iain remarks from a plain man, on the strange kind of fracas which oc- curred a few days ago in the soi-disant church of , It has always appeared to me a strange inconsistency in those same freethinking Christians (as they term themselves) at once to protest against the m.arriage ceremony enjoined by the Ecclesiastical Establishment of this country, and to apply to one of its priests to perform that cere- mony for them ; nor can I, for the life of me, reconcile this with the high pretensions those men commonly make to peculiar rationality in their religious principles and practice. But I can as little reconcile it to the plea of conscientiousness on which they ground their protest. Whatever a Christian scruples in his conscience, {i. e. considers con- trary to the divine will) that thing no human power, and no earthlv inducement, can justify him in doing. Let us suppose that the laws of heathen Rome had made it necessary to the legality of marriage, that the contracting parties should offer a sacrifice to Jupiter through the intervention of one of his priests ; what would have been thought in the apostolic age of a Christian man and woman who should apply to the priest to make this sacrifice for them, and while they joined in it by throwing incense on the altar, should gravely, at the same time, deliver a written protest against the act ? What could, reasonably, be said of them, but that their protest condemned them under their own hands, for doing deliberately, and with their eyes open, that which they knew they ought not to do. Would Christians be au- thorized to abjure Christianity, if they lived under a government whose laws would not recognize the legal validity of the nuptial rela- tion between Christians, nor the legitimacy of their offspring? But, I must now add, that the plea embodied in the protest delivered by these free-thinking gentlemen is absolutely false, namely, that they cannot in this country have their marriages made legal without employing the antichristian means which they resort to. The parties who desire to have their marriage legalized without religious rites,' need only pass into any part of North Britain, and there declare before any competent witnesses that they receive each other as man and wife. This, followed by cohabitation, constitutes a marriage as valid, ac- cording to the laws of England, as if it had been celebrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury in pontificalibus. And this is so well known that I can scarcely persuade myself that these freethinkers are igno- rant of it. If they urge the trouble and expense of going to Scotland on the occasion, it only shews at what a low jM'ice they hold their ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS 531 consciences. And now, sir, lot me not be misunderstood. I assert, with tlicse men, the essentially civil nature of the marriacfe contract. Cliristians, indeed, can have no doubt about that, when tliey find by the scn])turcs of the New Testament, that the marriaj^e relation may subsist in binding obligation between a Christian and a heathen (who can have no religious union). I join them, also, in protesting again.'^t the usur])ation of a priestly character by the clergy, against their altars, &c. &c. I do hope that our legislators will yet see the absur- dity and impolicy- of imposing any religious ceremonies on his Ma- jesty's subjects, in order to Icgabze their marriages; and will yet allow us to go before a magistrate on the occasion, after a sufficiently public notification of our intention; and on payment of a certain fee, to be entitled to a certificate and registry of our marriage. I expect that this will yet be allowed, because I look for the progressive emanci])ation of civil governments throughout Europe from ecclesi- astical bondage. However slowly old ]>rejudices are discarded, yet the present course of events is calculated to force corrected jirinciples on the attention of our rulers, while they see priestly domination threatening the overthrow of the Bourbon dynasty both in France and Spain, as well as the dismemberment of Ireland from the British empire. In the mean time, I must say that there are others who have much stronger claims on the legislature for relief in the business of marriage than the so-c;dled Unitarians ; and yet they are those who consistently evidence, that it is against their consciences as Christians to employ the clergy for the celebration of their marriages, by quietly submitting to all the inconvenience and hardship of not doing so. CLXIX. TO THE SAMK. Sept. 13, 1830. Mk. Ei'ITOu, — In your paper of the 8lh inst. my attention was attracted by the report of proceedings at a meeting in ('heltenham, of friends of the " Society for Promoting the Religious I'rincijiles of the Reformation." Will you aftbrd room in vour impartial and vei*y respectable columns for a few grave reflections which the account suggested to me ? It was obviously drawn up by one of the gentle- men who made Protestant .speeches on the occasion, and who, on that dav, had the field to themselves. But I would remark to them, that the most important principle of the Reformation, as far as I know, was in the manly a])i)eal then made to the Sacred Scriptures, as the only — the sufficient — and the infallible rule of Christian faith and practice; and from this prin- ■2 M 2 53-2 COLLECTION OF LETTERS ciple, however they may talk of it, there is decisive evidence that Mr. Digby and his coadjutors have departed. If he, for instance, were indeed a hearty friend to that principle, he would not at this day be a priest in the national establishment; that politico -religious system, which its own sons acknowledge to be necessarily and in- trinsically a corruption of Christianity. Archdeacon Paley's confes- sion of this, as quoted lately by Mr. Brougham in the House of Commons, must be fresh in the recollection of your readers. At the time of the Reformation, the light of Scripture broke in upon the foul abominations of the Papal See ; and led multitudes to forsake that Antichristian communion. But the Reformers were men — and we cannot, therefore, wonder that they left t e work of reformation imperfect ; and retained some sentiments and practices which are opposed to scriptural purity and truth. Among all such instances, there was not one more inconsistent with both, than that unnatural coalition between the soi-disant Church and State, which worldly policy led them to adopt and sanction — that coalition, which is plainly stigmatized in the language of prophecy, as fornication committed with the kings of the earth, by " the mother of harlots" and her daughters ; which would confound " the things that are Cyesar's," with " the things that are God's ;" and pretends to incor- porate with the kingdoms of the ■ world that kingdom, which its Divine head declares to be " not of this world." Those who continue their adherence to such corrupt religious sys- tems, acknowledged by themselves to be corrupt, are not real friends to that which I have marked as the grand principle of the Reforma- tion. If they could, they would arrest the progress of that scriptural light, which exposes the corruptions they wish to screen. But they cannot. The sentence pronounced against " the man of sin," in 2 Thess. ii. 8, shall be fully executed. Mr. D. had considerable hardihood in mentioning, however slightly and darkly, the " discipline among the members" of a Christian church, " which the New Testament inculcates and re- quires." Will Mr. D. venture to say that any such discipline either does subsist, or could subsist, in what he calls his church ? Nay ; he knows well that it would not be " pract'cable " He is no stranger to Rosenmiiller's admission of this in his Commentary on Matt, xviii. 17.* But is that a Christian church, in which obedience to the express commands of Christ is impracticable.'' In the Liturgy for that Papistical fast, Ash Wednesday, the framers of it make the priest read to his congregation a grave lament for the non- existence among them of the old godly discipline. Now, if a plain man among his hearers were afterwards to propose this -question : " And pray, your reverence, why should we not have among us that discipline of which you lament the want }" What must be tlie answer but, substantially, this ? " O ! we could not, without the * TLec puhlica adnionitio iion potest habere locum nisi in coetu niinore, ne specifni qiiidem aiictoritatis rivilis prae se ferente, seque ipsiim e Christi praeceptis liberriine gubernanre. In statum ecclesise externum at civilem, qui apud iios est, liaRc disciplinse Ciii'istiaii;r pars paritm conveiiit. — He niiglit have added, wiih equal tiatli, '■ .Nee ulla quideni alia." ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS. 533 leave of the king and parlianicnt." But really the wickedness of waiting for the permission of men to obey the commands of God, is* oidv eriuallcd bv the hypocrisy of lamenting that this permission is not afforded. But I ought to recollect that Mr, I), designates his " true Catholic and visible church," as " the widowed .spouse of C^HuisT ;" and that since he considers her former husba!ul as defunct, he naturally considers her at liberty to be married to another. Rom. vii. "i, 3. Afraid of encroaching imrcasonably on vour indulgence, I leave, for the present, Mr. D. and the " Society for jiromoting the Prin- ciples of the Reformation :" but would beg leave to add a brief remark or two connected with the subject of state-religion. If it were politic for earthly governments to interfere at all with the con- cerns of another world, 1)y incorporating any religious system with the state, it would assuredly be their policy to adopt some religious system, as unlike as possible to the Christian. And, in this view, it might be recommended to our statesmen, if it were not too late, to return to Popery, or, what would be substantially the same thing, to form an amicable coalition between the two churches, the mother and the daughter. But, happily for Christians, any such attempt is now too late. Statesmen are therefore finding it their wisdom to loosen the connection between the so-called church and the state ; and I doubt not that they will, at length, find it their wisdom to (hssolve it. They will find tliat the things of tiiis woild are the ])roper province of the rulers of this world, and that in attempting to legi.-?late about the concerns of another world, and to provide for the souls of their peo])lc, they have cumbered themselves with a burden which they are not called to bear. Is it not, indeed, a " ciindier- i?ome stone," the weight of which is obviously pulling down ahiiost all the governments of Europe .'' What else has dethroned Charles X. ? What else is precipitating to their ruin the other i)rauches of the Bourbon dynasty ? And look at the kind of religion which is incorporated with the state ? When his Most Christian Majesty, the other day, delibe- rately perjured himself, and violated the Constitutional Charter which he had solemnly sworn to maintain, who were the prime movers that instigated him to this act of wickedness and infatuatfon? Priests of the state religion and priest-ridden ministers. It is not long since an Hon. Baronet, in our House of Commons, ludicrously expressed a wish to see a Jesuit, to see some specimen of the breed of animals of which he had heard so much. In the undeniable fact to which I have referred, I would present him with the desired spe- cimen. How does Sir Francis like it.'' And is there any essential dillercnce between what was, a few weeks ago, the state-religion of France, and what is now the state- religion of this country ? To be satisfied that there is not, we need only look at the celebrated article, on " M. Cottu's Necessity of a Dictatorship," in the late Quarterly Review. ITiere — in a publi- cation professedly the champion of Church and State, and of all thj religion that priest? put forward as excellent — the hope was avowed, that the Kinti- of France might succeed in the measures, wliiuh ll-.e 534 COLLECTION OF LETTERS writer acknowledged to be " a virtual abolition of the Charter;" and a work, which is a kind of recognized organ of our Protestant Hiei'archy, urged on his Most Christian Majesty to the same perjury, which his Popish confessor recommended as an acceptable service to God ! One word more, and I have done. After such notorious instances of royal perjury as our day exhibits, can our legislature continue in- sensible to the utter futility of promissorv oaths, as binding men's consciences ? And in a country, where one of our legal fictions represents Christiasiity as a part and parcel of the law of the land, will our legislators — in contempt of Christ's plain command, and without any public advantage — continue to impose and enforce the practice of swearing ? CLXX. TO ONE OF THE PUBLIC PAPERS. Sir, — I shall be obliged by your giving the following observations a place in your widely circulated paper, if the signature, under which I write, should not render them inadmissible. My attention has been a good deal arrested by the course of cross- examination, to which Mr. was subjected on a late trial, and my disgust has not been a little excited by the language, to which it has given occasion, in some of the contemporary prints. I know so much of the latitude allowed to barristers in cross-examination of a witness, that I take it for granted Mr. ■ did not transgress the due limits in holding an inquisition upon Mr. 's religion. But I should gladly call reflecting minds to think of the reasonableness of the proceeding, and of the system with which it is connected. The testimony of a Jew or of a Gentoo is admissible in our courts of justice, and why the testimony of a native should be impeached, because he has honesty enough to avow himself a deist, is more than I can see. This no doubt is called a Christian country ; but I am bold to say that perjury is much more common in it, than it was in the old Roman Republic among the worshippers of Jupiterj and that I should think the testimony of Cato, upon a matter of fact, as credible as that of my Lord Primate. But what I wish particularly to notice, is the surprise and horror afl'ected by some of Mr. 's opponents at the discovery that he is not a believer in the Christian revelation. The innocent creatures would appear never to have heard before of such a thing as a deist in these countries, or to have heard of it only as a rare monster, against whom all the soi- disant Christians of the country should be up in arms. This hvpocritical cant ii~ obviously adopted for the purpose of stage effect, ()N VARIorS SUBJECTS. 53.5 .iiul ;i< a ("l\rii-tian I (Icsirc to enter my protest a^aiii.-t it. 1 slioukl 1)0 curious indeed to know the result of cross-examination of those pious ijcntlemen as to their own religious faith, and should not he at all surprised — (sup])osing them to meet it with as much candour as Mr. manifested, at least upon this point) — if it ])rovcd that they arc just as sceptical as himself. Is it not notorious that multi- tudes throughout Christendom, the most respectable for talents, information, and integrity, are deists ? very many of the legal pro- fession, for instance, and many of the medicid ; — and is this a fact, that a real Christian should wish to deny or to conceal ? No douht, most of those would quulifij (as it is called) for a gt)od place under Government, and most of them pcrha]).s occasionally go to church or to mass : but, though religious establishments are of course contented with such outward compliances, I could not esteem their testimony in a court of justice the more credible, on account of their dishonest inconsistencies. They would all likewise, as well as Mr. , be very averse to have their deistical sentiments recorded ])ublicly on their own oaths, however freely they may communicate them in private companies ; and this, from a very natural ap))rehensit)n of some civil disadvantages resulting in a country where all the iidiabitants, by u fivlion of law, are considered Christian.<. But those who arc Christians indeed know how small their number is, and must regret that the name of their divine religion should be i)rofaned, by state policy employing it as an engine for ejecting its temporal purposes. The religion of Christ never was designed by its blessed author for a politiwd engine ; and whatever religion is employed as such, though it may bear the name of Christianity, is a thing essentially distinct. I believe the governors of the world will yet find it their interest to cut the connection between religion and the state : but ambitious ecclesiastics of all sorts have long given such currency to the notion of their necessary connexion, that I do not expect the absurd and mischievous prejudice to become extinct in my ilav. Of its mischievousness, this unhappy country, at least, has long aribrdcd a striking exemplification. For it may be conlidcntly asserted, that the great curse of Ireland has been, and is, RjiLiciON. But let not Mr. confound the religion of any of its contending factions with the Christianity of the Bible. To the latter, he is not a wliit more opposed than they. 536 ( OLLECTION OF LETTERS CLXXI. TO ONE OF THE PUBLIC PAPERS. Sir, — The more I observe and reflect upon the controvei'sy with the Papists, revived at present by the " Reformation Society," the more am I convinced that the members of the so-called church of England, or of any other politico-religious establishment, are unfit to maintain it ; and this, because thev cannot effectually expose the corruptions of Popery, without giving themselves a hard slap in the face. For instance, I see they have been lately discussing at Bir- mingham the question of the " infallibility of the church ;" and a simple Christian, adhering to the Scriptures, would have no difficulty in refuting all the sophistry and trickeries of argument by which popish priests are trained to perplex the subject, if he only kept clearly in view, and insisted steadily on, the scriptural meaning of the term church. But how could this be expected from a clergyman of the establishment .'' He could not do so without admitting that what he calls his own church, is no church of Christ at all. It will be admitted that the Greek word, rendered church, literally imports an assembly or congregation. Connected with this literal meaning of the word are the only two acceptations in which it is applied to Christians in the Scriptures of the New Testament. In the first place, it is applied to the whole aggregate of Christ's redeemed people, for whom he gave himself as a ransom, to whom he is the appointed " captain of their salvation" for bringing them unto glory, and who shall be all brought together or congregated before the throne of God in the heavenly mansions which he has gone before to prepare for them. This " general assexably , or church of the first born which are written in heaven," is evidently to be understood when Christ is said " to have loved the church, and given himself for it," as well as in all those passages of the Prophets, in which " the great congregation" is spoken of, in the midst of which he, the Redeemer, declares the name of the Lord to those whom he is not ashamed to call his brethren. (Ps. xxii. 22. Heb. ii. 10 — 12.) In this application, the phrase — " the church of Clirist," imports an assemblage that never yet has been visible to the human eye, though all its component members are at once and for ever before the eye of him, to whom all things are alike present from everlasting to everlasting. In this sense of the term, to attribute visibility to the Catholic, or general church, is rank absurdity. It amounts to the monstrous assertion that man can discern and distinguish, not only all the real believers scattered over the earth at present, but all that have died in the faith in every antecedent age of the world, and all that are " ordained to eternal life" in the generations yet unborn. I shall bv and by mark the onlv sense in which infallibilitv can be ON VARIOUS SUIUKCTS. 537 trulv attributed to this duirch of Christ. But at present 1 j)ass on to state the second acceptation, in which the word church is to be un- derstood in Scri])ture, — namely, as applied to any particular assembly of Christians coming together into one place, on the first day of the week, to " shew forth the Lord's death" in the ordinance of his supper, to " exhort and admonish one another," to maintain the discipline, and obsers'C the other institutions delivered by the apostles to the churches of the saints ; and this is obviously the meaning of the term church, when we read of the church at Jerusalem, at Corinth, at Ephesus, &c,, or of the church in the house of such and such an individuid. (Rom. xvi. 5.) Besides these two meanings, distinct indeed, but closely connected, the term church is not employed in any other meaning throughout the Scripture : and however the art of ecclesiastics has misnamed and perverted the phrase, there are few expressions in Scripture of more simple and unambiguous import. And now, when a clergyman of the establishment boasts of his church of England, or a Presbyterian clergyman talks of his church of Scotland, is it not manifest that they employ the word church in a way in which it is never employed in Scripture ? Do they even profess that there is any assembly, in which all the Chris- tians of England or Scotland come together on the first day of the week ? No. Or can they adduce any instance from Scripture of such language as the church of Judea, the church of Galatia, or the church of any other country ? I defy them to do so. Here the language always runs — The churches of Judea, churches of Galatia, of Asia, &c. ; and, light a thing as those men may regai'd it, to pervert the language of divine revelation in order to give a currency to scriptural phrases in a sense utterly unscriptural, none who truly reverence the word of God can make light of it. Indeed, it is one of the arts which the father of lies has most successfully eraploved for overspreading Christendom with every Antiehristian corruption. If one of these reformed clergymen adhered in any degree to the scriptural import of the term " a church," he would apply the name — not to the politico-religious system established by acts of Par- liament in these countries — but to the congregation with which he assembles on Sundays. There is an assembly indeed, an tK>t\-ncria. — but certainly, in its constitution and its objects, utterly unlike the churches of the saints described in the New Testament ; and there might be some danger of directing men's attention to this dis- similarity, if the person should talk of his congregation as his church. He professes, therefore, to talk of, as his church, the building of stone and mortar in which the parishioners meet to hear a sermon ; a misapplication of scripture language, which is exceeded in its pro- faneness only by osa other perversion of the term — namely, when the word church is employed to designate the clerical order in con- tradistinction to the so-called laity. I would, in the next place, desire it to be remarked, that each of the Christian churches, spoken of in the New Testament, was perfectly independent of all the other churches, and subject to no authority in points of Christian faith or practice, but that of Christ himself as the one divine head of his universal church ; and that the Apostles were 538 COLLECTION OF LETTERS authorized organs of declaring his will. With them Christ declared he would be to the end of the world, sanctioning their word, so that whosoever heard them, hears him, and whoso despises them, des- pises him. No doubt, among the several churches, while they con- tinued to adhere to the one common rule of the Apostolic word, and so far as they were known to each other, and had opportunities of communication, there would be a brotherly intercourse, and a mutual acknowledgment of each other as sister churches : but as to the idea of any one of those churches exercising the least authority over any others of them, it is utterly contrary to every scriptural principle, and originated in nothing else than the domineering ambition of corrupt ecclesiastics. The first Christian church was that at Jeru- salem, and this existed before there was any such a thing as a church of Christ at Rome, But the church at Jerusalem exercised no jurisdiction, as a metropolitan church, over the other churches in Judea, no more than the church that was afterwards planted in Rome exercised any over the other churches in Italy, or in Achaia. Each church of Christ, I repeat it, was in itself competent to every act of discipline or Christian observance directed by the Apostolic word, and this without the interference or control of any other church, and subject to no authority whatsoever but that of Christ himself. The sanction of that authority they had with them for all their course according to that Apostolic word, as reaUy when the Apostles were absent as when they were personally present. And so it is to this very day, wherever there is a church of Christ ; and thus the simplicity of scrijitural principles strikes at the root of all the Antichristian pretensions of Rome and her pontiffs. But can it be expected that any of the reformed clergy should honestly employ that simplicity of divine truth against the Papists, when it equally exposes the antichristian character of their own ecclesiastical courts and canons. Again, let it be noted that each of the Christian churches spoken of in the New Testament, was a changeable, transient, and perishable body ; and that, however distinguished by the purity of Christian faith and practice at one period, there was no error in faith or corruption in practice that might not be introduced into it. What has become of the church that was at Jerusalem, or that was at Smyrna, or at various other places, where we know that churches of the saints did exist in the Apostolic age ? What has become of the church that was then at Rome } It is extinct, and succeeded by something assuming the name of a church of Christ, but really a synagogue of Satan — " a cage of unclean birds" — amass of idolatrous worshippers of a flour-and-water God, and of a Goddess whom they blasphemously style " tlie mother of God,"* and " the queen of heaven" — a besotted multitude with their besotted priests, given up * Let not any theologian pervert this language Lc represent nie as dcnyiiii^ the Lord Jesus Christ to be indeed " God over all, blessed for ever." I abhor So- rinianism, as mueh as I abhor Popery. But it was " aceordiiig to the ilesh" that Jesus of Nazareth was made of the seed of David, and conceived in the .womb of the Virgin. She was honoured lo give birlli to liis humanity, not to his Godhead. ON VARIOUS SUBJFX'TS. 5;J9 " to stronp: delusions that they should hclicvc a lie," hcc:ui in the judgment of a sound and candid scholar, cannot stand a mo- ment in competition, upon the wliole, with our pubhc version. We say, upon the whole, because, perhaps, in the very worst of tliem, there are here and there alterations which are undeniable improvements, as might naturallv be expected from the quantity of learned labour which has been expended on the original text since the time of James I. Archbishop Xcwcomc and others have been earnest for obtaining a revision of our English Bible bv ])ublic authority. We confess, that even his Grace's versions would be sutlicicnt to make us rejoice that our governors have not sanctioned the attempt. And, though we should be verv glad to see an edition of the English Scriptures, in which all the iiufisputuble corrections should be introduced either into the text or the margin, and a few antiquated phrases exchanged for others more intelligible ; yet we cannot wish, that even this object should be taken up by the authority of the state. For we scarcely know any set of men, who would be contented to make svjficiently little alteration ; and any change in the general texture of our public version, we are persuaded, would be a change for the worse. Many a new translation have we examined ; but we have seen very few in which we were not disgusted by the vain and tasteless effort to im- prove passages, which are not only most faithful to the original, but unrivalled also for excellence as specimens of English composition. One example mav perhaps convey and illustrate our meaning. We read in our English Bible, (Luke ii. ^.) " And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping icatch over their flock by night." A writer* of learning and taste has noticed this simple passage as a sentence of exquisite harmony and the most beau- tiful structure, presenting to attention successively the several circum- stances of the scene in the most happy collocation. Let the reader who has an ear, and anvthing of critical judgment, pause a little on the words, and say whether the praise is undeserved. " And there were — in the same countrv — shei)herds — abiding in the field — keep- ing watch over their flock — by night." No one also can deny that the English words faithfully convey the meaning of the Greek, flight we not then reasonably expect, that the improvers of our public ver- sion would suffer such a passage at least to remain unaltered ; a pas- sage in which not a word can be changed or transposed without injury to the sentence } But no : we do not at present recollect one of the new versions, in which even that passage has escaped the pru- rient vanity of alteration. Curiosity led us to look at the rendering of it given in the last soi-disant improved version of the New Testa- ment which has issued from ^Ir. Belsham's school ; and, indeed, we were rather surprised to find so little change, liut instead of the fine musical cadence, keeping watch over their flock by night, thev give us, " keeping night watches over their flock." What an improve- ment I t Such things, we admit, are comparatively trifles ; and we • We think Dr Thomas Leland, in Jiis Lectures on Eloquence ; but we Iiave not the work before us. t Harwood's ma^nijicfut version of ihe passage is really worth e.\h;biting in a note. "It happened that there were in the adjacent fiehls a company orsh.plu'rjj fniploying the hours of night in guarding their it-^pccive flocks!"' VOL. II. 2 N 54C REVIEW OF BELSHAMS may ackl, ut'uiam his potiiis nitgls tota isti dedissent tempora ! In noticing such trifles at all, we only mean to justifv ourselves for deprecating, even in a literary view, the sanctioning by public authority of any new version of the Scriptures, executed bv men so vain, and so devoid of the first principles of literary taste. But it were well indeed, if vanity and tastlessness were the worst charges that could be brought against most of them. We have noticed the intentional ^c?e/i7y of the received version, as one of the important characters which commend it. Mr. Belsham, indeed, denies it this praise ; but we defy him to refute our assertion. The translators employed by James, it is well known, were all what are called Trinitarians, and all, probably, what (now at least) are called Calvinists. But who can say that their version is either Tri- nitarian or Unitarian .'' that it is either Calvinistic or Arminlan .'' What passage, that is employed by Unitarians or Arminians as a stronghold for maintaining their sentiments, have our translators attempted to alter or disguise ? We are bold to say, not one. Like honest men and sound scholars, they appear to have examined the original fairly and carefully, and to have aimed at rendering each text faithfully to the best of their judgment, without any regard to its possible bearing on this or that theological system. And we do maintain, that this alone, or, at least, this taken in combination with the very high qualifications of erudition and judgment which they possessed, stamps their version as a whole with characters of inestimable public worth, and characters which strikingly distinguish it from almost every thing that has been offered as a substitute in later days. That they have often left obscure and ambiguous passages which they did not clearly understand, is certain ; that, as fallible men, however able and honest, they have en-ed in their interpretation of several texts, is freely admitted ; as well as that the labours of Ken- nicott and De Rossi, Wetstein and Griesbach, in collating numerous manuscripts of the Scriptures, afford some advantages to a translator at this day, which were not then possessed. Yet, upon this point, we candidly avow our judgment, that the main importance of all their laborious collations, and one which indeed amply compensates all the labour bestowed on the object, consists in the resulting evidence of the general integrity of the text as it has been transmitted to us, and the general unimportance of the various readings which have been col- lected with so much diligence of research. We are ready also to admit, that in the progress of biblical criticism, so far as it has not been diverted from its legitimate office by theology, several obscure passages of Scripture have been elucidated, and several corrected in- terpretations proposed since our received version was formed. But Ave are persuaded, that by far the greater part of what is called bibli- cal criticism, in modern times, is a thing utterly unworthy of the name ; the vain effort of men, (some of whom have been learned and able men,) to torture the Scriptures into a pretended coincidence with their infidel theories, and to wrest them from that meaning which, to the eye of any candid reader, they obviously present. For this fact we are at no loss to account. From many circumstances, (inost of them arising out of the political establishment bi something TRANSLATION OF TAUL'S EPISTLl',.'^. 547 under the name of Christianity,) the profession of reeeiviiif^ the Scriptures as a divine revelation has lonj^ been general in Europe. Manv also, having their attention directed to the external and inter- nal evidences of their authenticity, have had their judgments seri- ously convinced that they possess more or less of a divine origin. This is bv no means wonderful ; the evidences are so strong and so numerous. But this is perfectly consistent with their disbelief oi all the most essential truths which the Scriptures declare from heaven ; and, indeed, the belief of these ever has been rare. None were more firmly persuaded of the general divine authority of Moses and the prophets, than the Jews who crucified the Messiah, and of whom it is distinctly testified, that they " believed not Moses," and that they " knew not the voices of the prophets which were read every Sabbath day" in their synagogues. (John v. 4G, 47. Actsxiii. 27.) All that remained, therefore, for unbelieving theologians, whose sentiments were not in accordance with the Scriptures, was, to force the Scriptures into a pretended accordance with their sentiments. And, in this vocation, they have indeed laboured diligently, and compiled many a long pa- raphrase or exposition, as well as published many an improved \cys\ot\. Often have we wished, though we are aware that in some views the wish is vain, but often has the wish crossed our minds, that some society, (for the work is too great for any individual,) some society of Deists, — (let not our readers be startled,) — possessing the requisite talents and learning, the requisite kind, as well as degree, of learning, could be induced to bestow the necessary time and labour on giving a critical edition and version of the Bible, as they would of any an- cient work in classical literature. But it is certainly a vain wish. Whatever were their talents and learning, they would be found defi- cient in that sobriety of judgment and candour of mind, which ought to be brought to the task; and, if «i"0!tTrf Deists, would want all the needful inducement to undertake and execute it. But it is tunc for us to dismiss these general preliminary remarks, and attend to our author. He must excuse us for treating him with very little ceremony ; though he informs us in his title-page that he is The Reverend Thomas Belsham, Minister of Essex Street Chapel. We have not been altogether unacquainted with Mr. Belsham here- tofore. Annexed to the present work he gives a list of forty-eight pamphlets, (most of them Sermons or Discourses,) with which he has favoured the public. We have seen one or two of these ; and we con- fess that the little acquaintance which we had with him excited from us an involuntary " heigh-ho .'" when we found ourselves condemned to wade through four octavo volumes of his composition. But we have long been well acquainted with the school to which he belongs ; and we plainly avow our conviction, that it takes the lead of every other in audacious corruption of the Scriptures ; and that, while its professors put forward the most arrogant pretensions to the character of rational divines, they are the most irrational, as well as the most dishonest, that have ever assumed the Christian name. We are aware, that among the old Socinians there were many men of considerable talents and learning ; and there appeared in them a comparative so- briety, which generally attends real talents and sound learning. We 2n 2 548 REVIEW OF BELSHAMS acknowledge also, that, in modern days, they may boast of a Priestley, — a man of most acute mind, — a sterling philosopher in all things to which human philosophy is competent. But we plainly assert its utter incompetence to produce the conviction of divine truth, even with the Scriptures before us. (For the present we leave that irrational assertion, as Mr. Belsham will call it, for his amuse- ment.) Priestley was a curious instance of a man, whose judgment was overcome by the evidences of revelation, while he continued to stumble at the plainest truths revealed, and struggled with — we believe — intentional candour to evade their force, through all the shifting varieties of sentiment in which his speculative mind involved him. With this exception, and perhaps a very few others, — (among which we do not reckon Mr. Wakefield, saving that we admit him to have been a man of much classical reading,) — we really know not any more superficial smatterers in literature, any more self-sufficient pretenders to rational and critical disquisition, than the tribe of modern Socinians. Our language is strong and decisive : and let it be censured as unwarrantably strong, if we do not fully justify it, in the instance of Mr. Belsham, before the termi- nation of this article. Yet how small a portion of our evidence can we bring forward within the limits to which we are necessarily confined ! There is certainly no literary occupation, in which a man may now set up creditably with a smaller stock of his own, than that of biblical criticism : such ample materials are furnished to his hand by lexicographers, commentators, and divines of all sorts and sizes. Accordingly, we have scarcely ever known a half-fledged theologian, who had spent his year or two at a dissenting academy, and learned so much of the Greek (and perhaps Hebrew) grammar as enabled him to consult a dictionary, or to spell the quotations which he found in his expositor, — who did not think himself qualified, when mounted in his wooden eminence, to run a tilt against the learned translators of our Bible, and amaze his audience with the information — how such and such a passage reads in the original. But in Mr. Belsham w^e may expect to find a much larger stock of erudition. He informs us, that he has " officiated as Divinity Tutor in the Academical Institutions at Daventry and Hackney" — that he " re- gards it as an honour to l*ave been one of a committee appointed by the Unitarian Society for publishing the Impi'oved Version of the New Testament :" — that he was " the party chiefly concerned in carrying it through the press;" — that he is "responsible for the whole of the Introduction, and for many, perhaps the major part, of the Notes ;" — that his " present work was drawn up above thirty years ago," and is now given to the public, with all the improve- ments of matured age, at the instance of "partial friends, who volunteered a munificent subscription to a quarto edition, the whole of which they took ofl^ his hands," &c. &c. We find also imme- diately, that Mr. Belsham enters the field furnished with all the biblical apparatus of Griesbach's text, (from which, however, he departs ad libitum,) Schleusner's Lexicon, Rosenmiiller's Commen- lary ; besides the theological productions of the English school. TIIAXSI.ATION OF PAUL'S EPISTLES. 549 from Locke to Archbishop NeNvcome, and from his Grace down to Mr. Wakefield. Almost every page also presents to the eye a jiiirade of Greek or Latin quotation. To a thcologue making such a formidable display, it might be expected that ■\ve should at once doff our bonnets. But we have long known how easily such a display may be made, and what hollowness it often covers. One of the first things that must strike any judicious reader on opening these volumes, is that it is very hard to say for what class of readers they were designed. The exposition, which forms the more bulky part of them, is obviously calculated for the ladies and gentlemen of the L'nitarian societv. No one sentence of the text, however plain or unequivocal, is left without its paraphrase, to put what the apostle says — or does not say — into genteeler language, to expand or to dilute, to overlay or to distort, its meaning. This, surely, could not be designed for scholars. But for scholars alone, and not for the general mass of readers, the Greek and Latin in the Botes must have been intended. Yet, no : we cannot believe this. Every person who is capable of reading the original text, and disposed to such study, must he supposed to possess some of the editions to which various readings are subjoined ; at least the elder Wetstein's, or Fell's, or Curcellwus's, even if he be not master of the younger Wetstein, or of Griesbach. And any one who has ever looked at the mass of various readings given by any of these editors, knows that a vast majority of them relate to the omission, insertion, or substitution of words or particles, of which the omission, insertion, or substitution, is absolutely indifferent as to the sense of the pas- sage. Now, Mr. Belsham, though he xloes not give us the original text, or any regular collection of various readings, every now and then favours his reader with a note of information that such or such a MS. reads so or so ; and this in cases where the variety of reading is utterly unimportant *, however suitably preserved by editors who profess to give the various readings. The very smedlest collection is vastly more copious than Mr. Belsham's. We are forced, therefore, to ask, why has he introduced such into his notes at all } Or, if at all, why has he not given much more ? For what class of readers, we repeat the question, were such notes designed .'' From his con- tinual references, " see Griesbach," they were ostensibly designed for those who have access to Griesbach, and are capable of consult- ing him. But against this supposition is the plain fact, that such readers, or indeed those who have access to any of the editions we have mentioned, so far from needing the information which Mr. Belsham gives them, could furnish him with hundreds of various readings equally important, of which he has taken no notice. Was it then that his munificent subscribers contracted for a certain quantity of learning in his pages .'' Or was it that he thought it otherwise expedient to give his general readers something that they should admire, because it was unintelligible ? We have heard of • As when he tells us, on 1 Cor. viii. 2. tliat " the Alexandrine manuscript reads irt tor iiiivu," — on the words in cilari 1 ( or. vi. 2. that " Griesbach prefixes « ujoii the aulhority of the Ale.xauuimc, Ei^hrein, and other copies," &c. &c. 5oO REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S such things. We have heard of a minister, who lost almost all his congregation to a neighbouring preacher that quoted Latin in his sermons : but was afterwards enabled to get them all back, and to make considerable inroads also on the flock of his rival, by learn- ing to repeat a sentence or two from Aristotle, and quoting Greek in every discourse. Another remark, which must strike every one upon the most cur- sory inspection of these volumes, is Mr. Belsham's injudicious and unfair treatment of the sacred text, in mincing it into fragments of sentences, separated from each other by his perpetual exposition interposed between the several members. It is true, that in the beginning of the first volume he gives some paragraphs in conti- nuation ; but he very soon becomes weary of this. For example, the first five verses of Rom. ix. constitute one sentence, which Mr. Belsham breaks down into no less than twelve disjointed sentences, separated from each other by his exposition of each, and exhibits in no other fonn. And yet, with strange inconsistency, in his preli- minary dissertation he quotes a long passage from Mr. Locke, in which that writer justly notices the division of the epistles into chapters and verses as often seriously obscuring the sense. This evil certainly is multiplied tenfold in Mr. Belsham's new version. The reader of the English Bible reads the 7th and 8th verses of 1 Tim. iv. in immediate continuation ; and could only need to be briefly informed, that the apostle having, in the 7th verse, employed an expression borrowed from the Grecian games, for which those who entered the lists prepared themselves by long and laborious traiiiuig, takes occasion in the 8th verse to contrast the low and perishable objects, for which they submitted to that bodihj training, {auixocriKvi yv/j.vx(7ix,) with the glory and greatness of the prize for which he called his son Timothy to maintain the contest. But the reader of Mr. Belsham's Epistles of Paul, finds the 7th verse dis- jointed from the Sth not only by two pages of comment, but by the termination of one section and the commencement of a new section, with its distinct heading and introduction. And so in numberless instances. Really, when Mr. Belsham extended his work to four octavo volumes, he might reasonably have allowed the text, even in his version of it, a little more fair play. But we have hitherto been but skirmishing with the reverend gentleman. It has been but the a.y.qoZoXia-^Qs (Mr. Belsham is fond of a little Greek,) previous to the closer engagement, to which we must now hasten. We find in the preliminary dissertation, (p. xxi.) the following extraordinary canon of criticism for the regulation of a translator of the Scriptures. " All believe their own system to be the true doctrine of the apostles ; and when they come to a jjassage which must be translated in a sense fuvourahle or unfavourable to their own sense, they will, and OUGHT to translate it in the favourable sense, which must necessa- rily appear to them to be the true sense." We need not say, that anv version formed avowedly upon that "j)rinciple is unworthy the attention of a scholar or a Christian. We also acknowledge our conviction, that half the things which have TJI.VNSLATION OF PAUL'S Kl'lSTLES. •^•■) 1 been |)ut foiwjnd as improved versions of the Scriptures, havo really been formed upon the principle which Mr. Belshani iippcius there unequivocally to profess. That Mr. Belshani has faithfully acted up to that rule of determined and systematic dishonesty of in- terpretation, ^vhich he has expressed in our quotation, we shall demonstrate. Yet ^ve add, that wc cannot give him credit for the honesty of the warning which the passage might be considered an affording to his readers. For though his expressions are most general and unambiguous, and that on a subject and occasion which cdled for the greatest distinctness and precision of language, yet we are persuaded that he there unintentionally let slip from his pen what we shall prove indeed is his real meaning ; but that he was really insensible to the grossness of the import of his words. And now we are most forward to concede to our author all the benefit which he can claim from a saving clause that he does introduce, two pages after that from which we have quoted, limiting this canon to what he calls " ambiguous passages." * But we say, that the intro- duction of this limitation cannot screen him at all, unless he mean by an ambiguous passage, one in which, after the application of all the rules of fair and impartial criticism, different readings, or different interpretations, remain equally balanced, or nearly balanced. And we shall demonstrate from his own words, but still moi-e clearly from his practice throwing the most decisive light upon his theory, that, so far as he had any definite meaning in his own mind, this was nox his meaning. Mr. Belsham immediately proceeds to argue in defence of the extraordinary canon which we have quoted ; and the whole tenor of his argument, however inconsistent in some parts, establishes its dishonesty. Let us hear him, " Who can blame a Trinitarian for translating Tit. ii. 13. ' the glorious appearance of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ .-'' \Vho can condemn an Arian for rendering Heb. i. 4. 'being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they :' And who ought to take offence at a Unitarian, because he prefers ' the church of the Lord, (Acts xx. 28.) which he has purchased with his own blood,' a reading sup- ported by all the best manuscripts, to ' the church of God,' " &c. .' We shall first reply to the last of Mr. Belsham's questions. Wc are not what are called Unitarians, nor Arians, nor Sabellians. We abhor all their corruptions of the plain doctrine of Scripture. Yet, so far from taking offence at his preference of the reading t« Kfj-ia, instead of TK ©ja, in Acts XX. 28. we assert that ever}' competent and candid judge must decisively prefer it ; and this not only on account of the immense preponderance of critical evidence in its favour, but because the phrase and idea of the blood of God revolt against the whole current of scriptural language and doctrine. He who suffered on • In p. XX. he has laid down another canon, that an ambiguous word is to be translated, if possible, "by a word which has the same ambiguity." We had wished to expose the ridiculous absurdity of this ; but important matter crowds upon us so, that we have not time to dwell on mere absurdities. -'52 REVIEW OF BELSIJAM'S Mie cress was " the man Christ Jesus ; and for this end "he humbled himself" to become flesh, that he might '" suffer for sins, the just for the unjust." But how absurdly inconsistent with himself is Mr. Eelsham, in noticing at all upon tliis passage the authority of MSS. en one side cr the other, when he adduces it in exemplification and confirmation of the rule he has laid down, that mere theological syslem may justify us in adopting one reading or interpretation in ])reference to a,nother ! Does not this involve a plain avowal, that what determines him to adopt the true reading here is — not the decisive authority of MSS. — but that he conceives it more favourable to his system than the other ? Let it be well observed, that Mr. Belsham cannot put forward this passage as one in which the text is ambiyuciis, in which the authorities for the two readings are equally or nearlv balanced ; for he himself indeed distinctly marks the con- trary. Yet he does expressly put it forward as an instance, in which isystem is the thing that fairly decides the interpreter ; and the vvhcle tenor of his language and argument proves, that he would consider a Trinitarian \\\\.Q\^Ye\.ti: justified in adopting the spurious reading, if he thought it favourable to his system. Mr. Belsham indeed has plainly said, that he ought to do so. If we did so, it would only prove a secret conf cousness that our system was unsup- })orted bv the word of God, and a wicked determination to wrest and pervert that word into a seeming support of it. We avow our con- viction, tliat " the man Christ Jesus," who redeemed his church by his own blood, was also truly and unequivocally " God, blessed for evermore ;" while we deprecate the supposition, that v/e know, or understand, or believe, any thing about the mode of that union of the Godhead and manhood in the Messiah ; and abhor all human speculations upon it, and all pretences to illustrate or explain it. But the conviction which we avow, rests upon scriptural grounds too strong to need the support of any dishonest arts. We jircceed to the other questions, by which Mr. Belsham attem.pts to enforce and justify his canon. He asks, " Who can blame a Trinitarian for translating Titus ii. 1.3. ' the glorious appear- ance of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ V " We reply, in the first place, that we know not who has translated it exactly so. Mr. Belsham tells us that Beza has ; but we cannot take Mr. Belshnm's word for that, and v/e do not think it worth while to examine the matter. But, in the next place, we say, that if any man trt^nslate the passage, " the glorious appearance," or rather, literally, "the manifestation of the glory of Jesus Christ the great God and our Saviour," he will translate it indubitably right. Every one acquainttd with Greek idiom, and unbiassed by system, knows that if the apcstle had meant to distinguish " the great God" from " our Savio;.:r," the words sliould properly have run, s-mcpxytsixv rtis Ss|»s tb fxiyocKa 0£« xa( TOT 'Lurr,^os ri^^uv I. X. If Mr. Belsham does not know the justice of this simple remark, v^-c cannot help his ignorance ; nor can we now stop to read him a lecture on the elementary prin- ciiles of the Greek language. We may add, that the' only various reading of tl.e passage which Griesbach himself exhibits, (but not at all supported so as to commend itself to any critical scholar) is the TRANSLATION OF PAUL'S EPISTLES. 55.3 omission of the copulati\"c koci before "Lur-n^os. which would unctiuivo- callv nut the words, " our Saviour Jesus Christ," in what [gram- marians cidl apposition with the " great God." And although Wetstein has an Arian note upon the verse, in which he asserts that the Scriptui'e nowhere calls Christ the great God, we assert that in Is. ix. 6. (a passage to which we think it highly probahle that the apostle alludes.) he is expressly called "iId:: i?^*, "the mighty God." We sav, the Messiah is there called so ; for that the passage is a prophecy of the Messiah, we are distinctly taught bv the Scri))tures of the New Testament, Matt. iv. 14 — 16; and we seriously think the EvAngelists of more weighty authority in the matter, than the reverend minister of Essex Street chapel. We believe the Scriptures ; and care not for any religious principle or practice that has not their support. So irrational and tinphilosophic must we be content to appear in ]Mr. Belsham's eyes. But whatever he may choose to say of that prophecy, wc really know not any thing of two gods, a great and a little ; and therefore think Wetstein's note upon the passage intrinsically nugatory and profane. We leave it to the so-called Unitarians to render John i. 1. "the Word was with God, and the Word was a God." And now, after having been led to say so much upon Titus ii. 13. we would only remark to Mr. Belsham, that it is a passage in which we are perfectly content with the public version ; and in which, even supposing it ambiguous, which we do not think it is, he ought, in consistency with the first part of his own canon, to have retained that version. But it is not upon it, or upon any similar text, our con- viction of the true and proper Godhead of the Messiah rests ; and we should, therefore, never think of continuing any contest with him upon the translation of that verse. The doctrine, for which we would contend to the uttermost, rests upon scriptural testimonies most numerous, and much more distinct. In our view, indeed, it is so embodied with the whole of divine revelation, that the truth of the one cannot be rejected, and at the same time the authority of the other maintained, without the grossest inconsistency. It cannot be exj)ccted that, within the compass of this article, w^e should discuss at large this or other topics of controversy between us and Mr. Belsham. But the position that we have just now laid down is one, which we shall have occasion by and by briefly to illustrate and confirm. We now pass to the next question so confidently proposed by Mr. Belsham, " Who can condemn an Arian for rendering Heb. i. 4. ' being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheri- tance obtained a more excellent name than they V " Does the reverend gentleman mean to insinuate, that King James's translators, who give this version, were Arians } He knows the contrary. But he intimates at least, that the passage thus translated, and, as we shall immediately prove, rightly translated, countenances the Arian doctrine rather than what is called the Trinitarian. In this he shows himself as defective in his acquaintance with theological systems, as he is imfair and uncritical in his own version of the text ; and though we could not expect fairness or honesty of interpretation from a So- 554 HEViEW OF BELSHAM'S cinian divine, we might reasonably expect, from a quondam di^^nity tutor in two academical institutions, some understanding of the "Systems which he opposes. The very words of the text, as well as the whole context, prove that in the 4th verse the apostle is not speaking at all of the antecedent glory of him, who humbled himself t that he might "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself;" but is speaking of that glory and honour with which he is crowned aa Mediator, in recompense of his obedience unto death. And it is well known that every scriptural Trinitarian — (we are compelled for brevity's sake, though reluctantly, to use this and some other theolo-^ gical phrases) — not only admits, but asserts, that in the whole of his mediatorial character and work, the Messiah acted as the servant of Jehovah, as that which he humbled himself to become, " in all things like unto his brethren," truly and literally " the wiaw Christ Jesus," trusting in his Father and his God (with that perfect faith, of which he is the great exemplar to his people,) for all the promised deliverance from death, and for all that reward of the " travail of his soul" which it was declared that he should see ; upheld by the Father in his work, and receiving from the Father that kingdom and glory, which he holds as " head over all things to his church." At present we only say, without asserting the truth or falsehood of any system, that every theologian (not to talk of Christians) knows, that this is essentially an integral part of the system called Trinitarian p and most unscriptural indeed are those Trinitarians, in whose system this does not stand forward as a prominent principle of divine truth. Now, may we not justly demand of Mr. Belsham, on what grounds, and under what pretext, can he insinuate that the Trinitarian doctrine is discountenanced by Heb. i. 4. as it stands in our present version ? discountenanced by the assertion, that He who was " made for a little while lower than the angels, for the suffering of death," has received by inheritance a name superior to the highest angels of God, a kingly glory, in which " angels, and authorities, and powers, are made subject unto him." (1 Pet. iii. 22. Eph. i. 21, 22, &c.) On what grounds, we ask, and under what pretext, can he insinuate that this countenances the Arian system, which represents him who be- came flesh as having been antecedently but a kind of demi-god, of a supra-angelic nature indeed, but not properly God ? The insinuation is as illogical and irrational as it is an ti- scriptural. We press our question the more, because we have been long aware, and long disgusted by observing, that the stronghold both of Arianism and Socinianism, is no other than that silly sophism, which objects against their opponents innumerable passages of Scripture asserting the proper manhood of Jesus Christ, and his subjection in all things to his heavenly Father ; passages which, in their fullest force, are acknowledged and asserted by their scriptural opponents as strongly as by themselves. Take away this line of argument from them, and what in the way of argument have they left } Nothing, but the vain and presumptuous inquiry, " How can it be, that the Word which was viade flesh was God — God blessed for evermore?" " How can it be, that in the one Jehovah there should be such a distinction, or plurality, that the Word, which was with God, was God ?" ' How I TRANSLATION OF PAUL'S KPISTLES. 555 a modest question to be proposed about the being of the most high Crod, bv crcHtures, of whom the most intelligent and rcHecting best know their utter incapacity to comprehend the mode of their own ex- istence, or to penetrate the how of any fact with which tliey are most familiar. And what remains for them in the way of scriptural ap- peal ? Nothing but the very grossest perversion, mistranslation, and corruption of the sacred text ; such as, in the interpretation of any other book, would stamp with disgrace those who were so absurd as to employ it. We would once for all tell Mr. Belsham, that we court the most truly critical interpretation of the text of Scripture ; that we hold it is to be interpreted according to all those rides of sound and fair cri- ticism, which the best scholars employ in the interpretation of the Greek and Latin classics ; and that we abhor the profaneness of those popular divines, who make light of the question, " What is the real meaning of such or such a passage .''" provided they can but give it an application suited to their purpose. We think this essen- tially contrary to real reverence for the word, and therefore to the real fear of that only true God who reveals himself in it. But our grand objection here to those who assume the name of Unitarians, and boast the character of rational divines, is that they, above all others, violate every principle of true critical interpretation, in order to torture the Scriptures into an acquiescence with their infidelity. And in the same way in which they treat the Scriptures, we would confidently undertake to misinterpret what is called the Athanasian creed into an Unitarian formulary ; though draw-n up, as it is, with all the special-pleading precision and metaphysical subtlety which men think needful, but which the word of God disdains. We should only have to set some parts of it in opposition to others ; to mis- translate ever so grossly some of the parts which we aimed at putting down ; to foist in conjectural emendations of others ; and, where any were too stubborn to be got rid of by these means, to assert boldly that they were interpolations, and to expunge them. We have one more preliminary remark to offer briefly, before we come to the critical examination of Heb. i. 4. Mr. Belsham consi- ders the received version, " being made so much better than the angels," &c. as countenancing the Arian system ; and therefore thinks himself quite justified, as a Socinian, in substituting, " being become [very classicid English, by the by] so much greater than these mes- sengers," &c. i. e. tlian the former prophets. What is the immediate and necessary inference which we must draw ? Certainly this : that, according to the principles of modem Socinianism, he, who was made " lower than the angels for the suffering of death," has not even since his ascension to the right hand of the majesty on high, le- ceived any glory or authority superior to the angels of God. How old Socinus himself would stare at the minister of Essex Street chapel I The Messiah, since he entered into his glory, has become (according to Mr. Belsham) greater than any of the former prophets ! Ho%Y strange is this ! We could adduce more than one passage from Mr. Belsham's own exposition, in which he speaks of Christ as having been, in the days of his flesh, the Jirst of all the prophets ; but then 556 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S we are aware, that, among all the other features of dishonesty in his book, there is abundance of that vile dishonesty — an exoteric language for the weak, and an esoteric doctrine for the initiated. Let us treat our readers with a epecimen of the latter, which is conveyed but oc- casionally. " It cannot, however, be doubted, that God is able to qualify any being for the office to which he may call him out, and he certainly will do it ; and Dr. Priestly justly remarks, that they who make this objection," \i. e. who object to the idea of a fallible and peccable man being appointed to judge the world,] " do not sufficiently consider the wonderfully rapid progress in knoivledge and in power which our Lord is necessarily making in the long interval antecedent to the day of judgment." And these are rational divines ! But will Mr. Belsham excuse us for suggesting, that, considering the loonderful rapidity of these ad- vances, he might perhaps allow, that the Messiah, at the date of the Epistle to the Hebrews, had become greater than even the angels. Truly, the wise of this world are so " taken in their own craftiness," that often their folly becomes manifest to all men except themselves. And now let us say a few words upon this text, which Mr. Belsham adduces to exemplify his canon of critical interpretation. Much will not be necessary. Every schoolboy knows that the Greek word ayyiXos properly and literally signifies a messenger ; and we readily admit, that in some passages of the New Testament it ought to be so rendered, where our translators render it angels. But Mr. Belsham himself cannot deny, that in many other passages it does import what we call angels ; for, thovigh he makes war against the angels as much as he can, and informs us that they are only fictitious beings of the " Hebrew mythology," yet he is obliged not unfrequently to admit them into his version. (1 Cor. iv. 9 ; vi. 3 ; xiii. 1. 2 Cor. xi. 14. Gal. i. 8. Col. ii 18. 2 Thess. i. 7. Heb. ii. 5. 7. 16 ; xiii. 2.) The only question, therefore, is, or ought to be, which of those in- terpretations, according to the rules of sound criticism, should be assigned to the word in Heb, i. 4 ; whether we are there to under- stand human messengers, or supra-human but created intelligences. And this question is to be determined independently of all considera- tion about its bearing on this or that theological system, though cer- tainly not without due regard to what we are assured of indisputably from all the rest of Scripture. Mr. Belsham, in his note upon the passage, says of his interpretation (which applies the word to those messengers of God, the old prophets,) that it was suggested many years ago by an ingenious friend, and " is adopted by Mr. Wakefield in his new translation." He adds, " It is surprising that it was never thought of before." In one view, we are not disposed to contradict this position. For so indefinitely numerous have been the changes of absurdity and wickedness which have long been rung by professed interpreters of the Scripture, that it may be considered surprising that any novelty of absurd falsehood should remain to be excogitated by the moderns. In any other view, we should say that it is surprising how any man, ever so little conversant with the text of Scripture, could think for a moment that the former prophets are there intended.' Mr. TllANSLAllON OF I'AUI/S EPlSl'LlvS. hJ/ Belsham will not, cannot, deny, that the apostle is speaking in that text of the glory which follotced the sufferings of the Messiah, of his exaltation siibspqneiit to his obedience unto death. Now we have tlic express testimony of Christ concerning John the Baptist, his im- mediate harbinger, that he was " much more than a prophet ;" that among those born of women, there had " not arisen a greater than John the Baptist." (Matth. xi. 9 — 1 1.) And we have the testimony of the Baptist equally express concerning Christ : " He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear." (Matth. iii. 11.) Is it possible then, that Mr. Belsham can deny, that Jesus of Nazareth, even in the days of his flesh, while " made lower than the angels for the sullcring of death," was greater than all the prophets, greater even than he who was much more than a prophet :^ And if he admit this, can he possibly maintain that his dignity, when crowned by his Father with glory and honour after his resurrection, consisted merelv in his having become, (or, as Mr. Belsham prefers it, being become,) " greater than those messengers .^" Do we succeed in making ourselves intelligible to Mr. Belsham .'' Or does his »•«- tionaUtij soar above us at a height too great to permit his perception of our argument ? We might adduce other arguments against this version ; and, in proof, that if the writer had intended to express the idea which Mr. Belsham forces on him, he must have expressed it differently.* But we consider any additional arguments needless ; and shall only sub- join the observation, that we might on the present question quote Belsham against Belsham. While he renders hi xyyi\oi by " those messengers," in the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 13th verses of the first chapter, he vet, in tlie second chapter, renders the word by "angels," in the oth, 7th, yth, and 16th verses. We do not stop to notice some of the extravagancies of his mis-translation, even in these passages. Now, if, according to that version of the second chapter to which j\Ir. Belsham is driven by considerations that we are at no loss to under- stand, it be stated, that " unto angels God hath not committed the world to come," which he has committed to the Messiah ; we should be glad to know with what consistency he can pretend, that the 4th verse of the first chapter does not declare the Messiah to be made " greater than the angels." The same word, employed on the same subject, in two consecutive chapters so intimately connected, ought surely, according to all the principles of reason and sound criticism, to be interpreted in the same way. We rather wonder that Mr. Belsham did not add a fourth question to the three which he has proposed in confirmation of his canon. We wonder that he did not ask, " Who can blame a Trinitarian for maintaining the authenticity of the common text in 1 John v. 7 ?" And, as we have avowed ourselves such sturdy believers of the doc- • Mr. Belsham is very fond of rendering the Greek article by the English de- monstrative pronoun, whenever it can answer his purpose ; and often, indeed, from the mere vanity of alteration. We are forward to admit, that there are some con- nexions in which the article is best and most fairly rendered thus ; as, for instance, in Rom. xv. 13. But we assert, that the man who thinks the Greek article may always be so rendered, knows nothing of the Greek language. 558 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S trine, which that text was too long^ brought forward to support, be may probably think us very foolish for avowing our persuasion of its spuriousness. Indeed, the mere indisputable fact, that among all the manuscripts of the Greek Testament in existence, only one can be produced exhibiting it, and that one obviously a manuscript the most modern, this alone ought to be sufficient to decide the judg- ment of every candid scholar against its authenticity. We only wonder and lament that the contest about it was so long continued, and that any one has attempted to revive it in the nineteenth century. We have said, that Mr. Belsham's dishonest theory of interpreta- tion is abundantly illustrated by his dishonest practice. Under this head, we are obliged, by the necessary limits of our present article, to confine ourselves to a very few examples. But they shall be decisive. In Rom. ix. 4, 5. the apostle, speaking of the Israelites, " his kinsmen, according to the flesh," says of them, " whose is the adoption, &c. whose are the fathers, (yy)ro(''t\s T«f a'tujyxs) This passage has long been a plague to ancient and modern infidels, who have assumed the Christian name, and we have selected it for particular notice, because it is not pre • tended that any various reading of it appears in any one of the manuscripts, or of the ancient versions, or of the ecclesiastical writings of those who are called the Fathers. Let it be observed, that the whole of this constitutes a mass of evidence for the genuine- ness of the text, such as cannot be adduced in support of any passage in any Greek or Latin classic ; the number of existing manuscripts of the Greek Testament being so immensely greater than those of any classic ; the old versions being of such various ages and countries, as well as some of them of such very high an- tiquity ; and these same fathers forming such an uninterrupted chain of testimony, as we should vainly look for to authenticate any other writings. The words of the original, also, are most plain and unambiguous, and literally rendered by our translators with the strictest fidelity. And, lastly, each of the assertions in the passage, as it stands, is in perfect harmony with other parts of the sacred text, which even Mr. Belsham does not venture to alter or expunge. Can he deny that Christ is elsewhere declared to be over all ? or that he is elsewhere called God (©tor) ? or that he is elsewhere pro- nounced blessed ? Now. we say, that according to every rule of fair critical interpretation, this passage assuredly ought to be left by any translator as he found it, whether he believed the truth declared in it or not. But he found it a passage which (as he says) " must be trans- lated in a sense favourable or unfavourable to his own system ;" and, adhering to his canon, he verily thought that he ought to force it out of the unfavourable bearing, which he perceived. What then does he do ? He alters the text ! He foists into it, in place of the apostle's words, a conjectural emendation of Shchtingius, one of the divines of that German school, which has so conveniently accommodated our modern Socinians with numberless corruptions of TRANSLATION OF PAILS EPISTLES. .')o^ tlie Scriptures. He renders the passage, " of whom is Christ, uccording to the flesh; whose is the God overall, blessed for ever- more." He then treats his readers with the following learned note : "all 0 for 0 wv. This, most probably, is the true reading, agree- ablv to the judicious conjecture of Slichtingius, Whitby, and Taylor, though it is not authorized by any manuscript, version, or ecclesiastical authority ; but the connexion seems to require it." \Ve pause here to remark, that Mr. Belsham really seems to us a bungling and inconsistent corrupter of the sacred text. For, as he has not vet decreed that the 1st verse of the Gospel by John is to be expunged, but contents himself with rendering that passage, " the word was a God," why should he not have preferred to render the same expression here, " a God blessed for evermore ?" He might so have avoided the barefaced impudence of manufacturing a text for his own purpose, in defiance of such a weight of uncontradicted evidence for the present reading. But probably he had some secret misgiving, that the mis-translation of even that passage in John was but an awkward evasion of its force, and that the consistent adop- tion of a similar mis-translation here would still leave the words of the apostle, bearing an ugly complexion in reference to the Socinian system. However this be, let us hear Mr. Belsham's sagacious reason for pronouncing, that " the connexion S€e7ns to require" the alteration which he has made. " It is next to impossible that the apostle, when enumerating the distinguishing privileges of his countrymen, should omit the greatest privilege of all : namely, that God was in a pectdiar sense their God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This he has before men- tioned as the boast of the Jews, chap. ii. 17 ; and as the chief glory of believers in Christ, who succeeded to the privileges of God's ancient people, Rom. v. 11 ; and he could not avoid repeating it here." Bravo ! Mr. Belsham. That is the right way of talking for your purpose. Confidence of assertion will, with most of your readers, pass current for strength of argument. But, disgusting as the task is of combating such imbecility of argument, we must be allowed to examine your assertion. Now, we shall not insist upon the remark, though we could prove it to have considerable force, that the lan- guage which Mr. Belsham wishes to force upon the apostle, would appear rather inconsistent with the principle which he asserts in chap. iii. 29, in opposition to that boast of the Jews, which he men- tions in ii. 17. We shall not insist upon this, because we are ready to admit, that if the apostle had here used the language, " whose is the God over all," &c. it might be interpreted in a sense consistent with the declaration, that God is " not the God of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles also." Neither shall we insist upon the obvious verbal criticism, that had he thought it necessary to insert among the privileges of the Jewish nation, " whose is the God over all," we might fairly expect it to be inserted in another order, namely, whose is the adoption, whose are the fathers, whose is the God over all, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, is Christ ; instead of inverting the 560 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S * two last clauses. We shall not press this remark, because Mr. Belsham could easily get over it by saying, that the apostle did not express himself according to the principles of good composition. But we do positively say, what at once overturns all the edifice of Mr. Belsham's reasoning, that it would have been perfect tautology to insert the words, which Mr. Belsham asserts it " next to impos- sible" that the apostle should have omitted ; inasmuch, as all the idea of the peculiar relation, in which God had stood to the Jewish people, is intimately included and obviously conveyed in the mention of the other things, which are said to be theirs ; " the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service, and the promises." Does Mr. Belsham perceive the strength of our position ? As he may be unwilling to perceive it, let us force it upon his notice by a brief illustration. The Apostle John (1 John iii. ] .) addressing the disciples of the Lord, and calling them to admire the height of privilege to which they were raised, uses this language : *' Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that Xfe should be called the sons of God!" Who would not laugh at the critic that should gravely assure us, on this passage, that it wnstiext to impossible that the apostle, speaking of the privi- lege of Christians, should not have added, " that God was their father ?" Such is the futility of Mr. Belsham's professed reason for altering the apostle's words. But we must now add a more important remark, which, hov.ever, we candidly avow that we do not consider Mr. Belsham competent to understand. We shall be ready to maintain it against any scholar, if any such be found to controvert its justice. Many will be disposed to controvert it, if they can. We say that the clause, " who is over all, God blessed for ever," is established and confirmed, if it needed any confirmation, by the preceding clause, " of whom, as concerning thejiesh, Christ came." Mr. Belsham, indeed, with the usual flip- pancy of ignorance, tells us, that " the phrase, according to the flesh, as applied to Christ, no more intimates a superior extraction, diffe- rent from that of the flesh, than it does when applied (verse 3.) to the Apostle Paul. It is a mere Jeivish idiom, expressing natural consanguinity." That the phrase mxTOi a-x^na. expresses natural con- sanguinity, or natural descent, both in the third verse, where it is applied to Paul's kinsmen the Israelites, and in the fifth verse, where it is applied to the man Christ Jesus, we believe no reader needed to be informed by Mr. Belsham. As to his assertion, that it is a Jeivish idiom, we should have been better pleased if he had adduced the cor- responding Hebrew phrase. The unsupported statement, put for- ward as it is here and elsewhere, reminds us of the artifice by which a professed teacher of Euclid's Elements used to evade the explana- tion of every difficulty which his pupils proposed : " You cannot un- derstand that at present ; that is trigonometry." But we assert, that accordingto the well-known principles oi Greek idiom, the article TO before Kurtx, ax^x.x in the fifth verse, indisputably indicates an extraction or descent different from that of the fiesh. We assert that the words e'| uv o X^i^os, TO ttocra. ax^nx, are learnedly, however in- elegantly, rendered by our translators, " of whom, as concerning the TRANSLATION OF PAUL'S EPISTLES. nCA flesh, Christ came:" where they obviously use the word " as" in the restrictive sense of the Latin quatemts, so far as. We assert that no competent and honest Greek scholar can deny, that the original phrase intimates anotiier view, in which Christ was not descended from the Israelites ; and that this clause, therefore, is at least in perfect harmony with tlie following-. We have a very similar use of the article in the fifteenth verse of the first chapter : to xxr' i/xe, justly rendered by our translators '' as much as in me is," but sagaciouslv altered by Mr. Bclsham, to, " according to my ability;" with the following learned note — " Gr. ^/««^ which is in me !" For any the most moderate Greek scholar, it would be quite superfluous to confirm the justice of our remark by examples : and the attempt would be vain for those, who imagine they understand Greek because they have learned the alphabet, and a little of the grammar, and a little praxis of construction. Mr. Belsham's in- stance is by no means the first, in which we have seen reason to think it a man's misfortune that he was ever taught the Greek letters. We must pass more rapidly than we had designed over the remainder of Mr. Belsham's note on this fifth A'erse. He goes on — " If the common reading should be preferred," — (aye, it is some- times well to have two strings to our bow,) — " the proper transla- tion would be that of Erasmus, Dr. Clarke, Mr. Locke, Mr. Lind- sey," [three Arians and one Socinian,] " and many others, viz. who is over all, God be blessed for evermore ; or, God who is over all be blessed for evermore." This would be the proper translation ! The apostle tacked this benediction to the words, " of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came ;" much as a Roman Catholic would cross himself upon pronouncing them. We shall not conde- scend to say more upon this outrageous evasion, than that it is every way worthy of those who repel the plain and decisive force of Thomas's acknowledgment, (when convinced by the testimony of his senses that Christ was risen indeed) — "my Lord, and my God," by representing it merely as an exclamation of astonishment, just as a Frenchman with uplifted hands would cry, O mon Dieu ! Reasoning against such w ilful perversions of the Scripture would be quite out of place. But what will the reader say to the effrontery of a short note on the passage last quoted, (John xx. 28,) in the itnproved version of the New Testament, in which the writer insinuates that old Beza favoured the Unitarian interpretation of it ! We know not whether Mr. Belsham or some of his associates will claim the credit of that note. We have, however, a parallel instance of di.•^honesty at the close of Mr. Belsham's note on Rom. ix. 5. from which we have made so many extracts. After the words last cited, he proceeds, " Mr. Lindsey says, (Sequel, p. 204.) that this clause was read so as not to appear to belong to Christ, at least for the first three ceiituries. Origen calls it rashness to suppose that Christ is God over all." If this be not at least an insinuation that Origen interpreted this pas-, sage, so as not to refer the latter clause to Christ, we know not the meaning of words. xVnd while there is perhaps the same moral tur- VOL. II. 2 o 562 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S pitude in an insinuated falsehood and in a direct bold lie, we confess that we regard the former as the more contemptible. To any smat- terer in ecclesiastical history, who is acquainted with Origen's con- tentions against the Arians of his day, the thing here insinuated must appear, prima facie, intrinsically incredible. It was mere curiosity that led us to examine what Origen does say upon the passage. It has come down to us only in the translation of Ruffi- nus ; and we quote the following words from his Commentary on Rom. ix. 4, 5. " Et miror quidem quomodo quidam, legentes quod idem apos- tolus in aliis dicit. Units Deus Pater, ex quo omnia ; et iinus Dominus Jestis Christus, per quern omnia, negent Filium Dei Deum debere pro- fiteri, ne duos deos dicere videantur. Ex quid de hoc loco apos- TOLi FACiENT, IN QUO APERTE Christus Super Omnia Deus esse PROFiTETUR ?"* i. 6. " And I wonder how some, reading that other expression of the same apostle ; There is one God the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, infer that they ought not to acknowledge the Son to be God, lest they should seem to speak of two gods. And what will THEY MAKE OF THIS PASSAGE OF THE ApOSTLE, IN WHICH ChRIST IS EXPRESSLY DECLARED TO BE OVCV all God ?" What an old simpleton was Origen to propose such a question ? Little did he imagine what the ingenuity of modern Unitarians can effect. He then goes on to expose the vanity of the argument de- rived from 2 Cor. viii. 6. remarking with a force of reasoning which Mr. Belsham will find it hard to repel, that they might as reason- ably infer from that passage, that the Father is not Lord, as they attempt to infer that Christ is not God. Yet we are to be gravely told by Messrs. Belsham and Lindsey. that for the first three centu- ries, Rom. ix. 4. was read so as not to refer the latter clause to Christ ! We could point out a possible source of Mr. Lindsey's blunder, but it would lead us into too long a detail. In Mr. Belsham's case, we find it very hard to account for the assertion altogether from ig- norance : and that because we know that he consulted Rosenmidler upon the passage ; and was he incapable of translating these plain words of that German commentator } " Vulgarius admonet, hoc loco refelli Arianorura impietatem, &c. " Similia disserit Origines, indicans jam tum fuisse, qui non audebant Christum appellare Deum, ne plures Deos facere viderentur." And now, we can honestly assure Mr. Belsham, that, in the highest view, we care not wh^t Origen, or all the so-called fathers of the three first centuries, thought or wrote upon the subject; and, that, in the scale of our judgment, their sentiments or practices carry not the weight of a feather as authority. Of Origen, also, we are aware how much he corrupted the doctrine of Scripture upon this subject by his scholastic subtleties and metaphysical refinements ; and how hard it would often prove to defend the language of his Trinitarianism from the charge of real Tritheism. The writings of the fathers we value * Orig, Op. a C. de la Rue. Par. toni. iv. p. 612. • TRANSLATION OF PAUL'S EriSTLF.S. ■' (i'-\ chicllv in two views, the latter of which we acknowledge to be of r,o inconsidoruble importance : first, so far as it is a matter of curious historical inquiry to trace the progress of corrupted Christianity in the world ; and, secondly, so far as they furnish a chain of historic evidence of the genuine authenticity of the Scriptures. But to the Scriptures alone we appeal, and acknowledge no yjr/»ij7 /re Christianity but that of which we have an account in the apostolic writings. Upon the subject on which we have enlarged so much, and indeed upon every other, we find the language of the Old Testament Scrip- tures in perfect accordance with the New. To prove anything to a modern Socinian yVo?H the Scriptures, is impossible. But to any one really believing tlie interpretation given in the New Testament of the things " written in tlic law of ]\Iose?, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning the Messiah," (Luke xxiv. 44.) it is easy to prove, bv numerous quotations, that to the Messiah the incommu- nicable name of Jehovah is expressly applied. See, for instance, Isaiah viii. 13, 14, a passage of which Mr. Belsham himself speaks, but no doubt eiotericaUy, as if he admitted its application to the Messiah. (Vol. I. p. 222.) On this point we must add the avowal of our conviction, (however laughably old-fashioned our divinity may appear to ^Ir. Belsham) that no Hebrew scholar, unless blinded by the most obstinate prejudice of system, could ever have thought of denving the proper plural significancy of the word Q'n^t*, constructed as it is with the singular mrr' ; our conviction that all the efforts of theologians to evade the force of that construction, (by adducing a few rare instances in which the plural number is used in Hebrew, as in other languages, where the singular is imported) are in a criti- cal view among the crudest absurdities, by which the wise of this world have endeavoured to support the delusions that they love. And let it be remarked, that the real force of this argument lies, not in anv rare and occasional use of that plural designation of the Godhead, as revealing himself in his relations to his redeemed people, but in the stated and continual use of the construction ; while the name niH' or Jkhovam, confessedly designating the essential being of God, is never used except in the singular, nor is ever employed in regimine. (To this, we are persuaded, the phrase n'lt^::^ mrT" forms no real ex- ception.) We avow that we know nothing of the only true and living God, but from the revelation of his word ; and we are persuaded that the testimony of Moses to Israel of old, (Deut. vi, 4.) " Hear, O Israel ; Jehovah our God [irn^i^ mrr'] is one Jehovah," will stand for ever as an impregnable bulwark against the blasphemies of all ancient or modern Socinians, and Arians too. Mr. Belsham may perceive, that we are not afraid of opening to him multiplied points of attack. We court on this subject the assaults of criticism and real learning. But, indeed, much ignorance, and folly the most con- temptible, pass current under the name and show of learned criticism, merely because they act as allies to that infidelity which the world loves, and as oppugners of that divine truth which the world hates. But we must hasten to dismiss this topic with one more observa- tion, to which (as well as to others) the necessary limits of this article forbid us to think of rendering that justice which its importance de- 2 o 2 564 RKVIEVV OF BELSHAM'S serves. Tlie Holy Scriptures never were designed to form scholastic theologians, qualified to discourse philosophically upon every point of their system of divinity. Tliey were designed for making wise unto salvation, those, in whose salvation from sin, in all its consequences, the infinite God is displaying his own glory ; for making them " wise unto salvation through the faith which is in Christ Jesus," — through the belief of the revealed testimony^ concerning him. (2 Tim. iii. 15.)"^ That testimony is one divine and uniform whole, from which no part can be separated without destroying the entire texture. It is, therefore, no marvel that those who disbelieve the Scriptural testi- mony concerning the work and office oi the Redeemer, should stumble at the scriptural testimony that he who was made Jlesh — who became the man Christ Jesus— is yet the word which " ivaswith God, and teas God — God blessed for ever" — one with the Father who called him to that work, which he willingly humbled himself to undertake. Nor is it any marvel that those who are led by various circumstances to hold what is called the orthodox system, but who really corrupt the doc- trine of Scripture on the work and office of the Messiah, should cor- respondently corrupt the scriptural doctrine concerning his person, and make it the theme of presumptuous metaphysical speculations, and the vain subtleties of the schools. The two things stand in the most intimate and indissoluble connexion ; both pervade the whole texture of the Scripture ; so that any attempt to disjoin or to corrupt them produces that inconsistency of error, vvhich would turn the truth of God into a lie the most absurd. For instance, we have no hesita- tion in saying, that even the little which Mr. Belsham professedly allows, concerning the relation in which the Redeemer stands to his people, is so monstrously inconsistent with the rest of his avowed sentiments, that he and his disciples have very little pretensions in- deed to the title of rational Christians. In a short note borrowed from Dr. Taylor, on the very first words in the epistle to the Ro- mans.— " Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ," he tells us, — and most truly, that " AyXoy is a servant who is the absolute property of his master." Correspondently with this, the Redeemer is declared to be * Kv^ios, the Lord, the absolute proprietor of his people, '.unto whom * Innumerable as the matters of reprehension are, which we are obliged to pass over in Mr. Belshanrs work, we tliink it would be unfair to withhold altogether from our readers one that occurs in his Exposition of Horn. xv. i. The apostle having, in the preceding verse, quoted from the Psalms one of those testimonies which -he marks as delivered concerning Christ, adds, " For whatsoever things were wrilten aforetime, were written for our learning, that we, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, might have hope." Tliis Mr. Belsham chooses to mis- translate as follows : — '■ For whatsoever things were fonnerty written for our instruc- tion, were written that," &c. ; and immediately subjoins this profane exposition : '' The examples of patient sufTering under reproach and persecution, recorded IN ANCIENT HISTORY, and particularlj' in the Jewish Scriptures, were written for our information and encouragement," &c. It is only a hint, but it is a curious hint, of that esoteric doctrine for the initiated, v>'hich we noticed as occasionally appealing in the work. And does Mr. Belsham really believe that the apostle meant to include in his statement such histories as Plutarch's Lives, and Xe- nophon's account of Socrates, as well as the Jewish Scriptures ? I\'o; he does not. We must ask another plain question. Is not Mr. Cari.ile a more honest and a more consistent man, than such professedly Christian divines ? TRANSLATION OF PAUl/S EPISTLES. 56.5 they live, nncl vnto whom they die: (Rom. xiv. 8, 9.* 2 Cor. v. 15.) — while he him-sclf testifies thatplain principle, — that " all live unto Uod ;" (Luke xx. 38.) and believer? are therefore suitably addressed in this language, " Ye are not your oirn, for ve are bout^ht with a price : therefore, glorify Cod in vour body, and in vour spirits, which are God's." (1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.) Now, we tell Mr. Bclsham, that while he admits anything of the indisputable force of these passages, it is vain for him to struggle against the declared Codhead of the Messiah. He unto whom the believer lives, andww/o ivhom he dies, is, and must be, the believer's Lord and Cod. Tt is vain for him to mis-translate 1 Cor. i. 2. and similar pass:iges, — (as Acts ix. 14. Rom. X. 12, 13. 2 Tim. ii. 22. the last of these Mr. Belsham seems to have forgotten to corrupt,) — in which believers are described as " call'nig upon the name of Jesus Christ their Lord." It is vain for him to bolster up his mis-translation with the i)arade of learned au- thorities of men, who try to confound two Hebrew phrases perfectly distinct, and distinctly rendered in the Greek of the New Testament, iiTixaXiKrOxi to ovr/xa:, and £?>' HS iTriKty.T^-nrxi ro o)io//.ac. We tell him that all this unrighteous labour is vain ; for that the worship of the lips, or verbal invocation of the name of the Lord, is a small thing, in comparison of that homage of the heart, and that devotedness of the life, which the most high God alone can claim or rightfully re- ceive. And while it is not at all from the exercise of natural reason, that we derive our conviction of the truths for which we contend, we candidly avow, that w^e consider our views as much more truly rutional than Mr. Belsham's ; nay, that we consider his views as utterly irra- tional, as they are utterly unscriptural. " The foolishness of God is wiser than men." L'pon the work of the ^Messiah in redeeming his people by his own blood, becoming at once the great high priest over the house of God, and the great sacrifice for sin, " bearing the sins of many in his own body on the cross," and putting them away by dying, " the just for the unjust;" upon this subject our limits forbid us to say much in opposition to Mr. Belsham's perversion of the plain testimony of Scripture. Mr. Belsham, in his exposition of the words " ye have been bought with a price," (1 Cor. vii. 23.) gravely tells us, that "it is not necessary to limit the price of redemption to the death of Cliris-t alone ;" — that Christians have been redeemed not only " bv all that he has taught, and done, and sufl'ered, by his resurrection and ascen- sion ;" hut " bv the gifts of the holy l^pirit and the labours of his apostles." We are such tame and un[)hilosophic readers of the Bible, that we think it of infinitely more importance to inquire what the Scriptures say upon this solemn subject, than what Mr. Belsham or any other reverend gentleman may think it necessary to say. And inquiring in that way, we do hold his language to be as impudent an outrage upon the uniform testimony of Scripture, as can be paralleled even from his own writings. The church of Christ has been redeemed • On the passage, ■' ^^^)etllcr we live, wr live In the Lord," &c. IMr. Belsham favours us with the following short note: " T* V v^iv — ' to this master.' Wake- field, i. e. to God. See ver. 6." All the answer we siidll make to .Viessir.N. Belshum and Vakefield, but it is decisive, is, Hec verse 9. 566 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S " by the labours of his apostles," and no doubt by what they also have suffered as well as done, in the apostolic character ! We need not pursue the profane idea ; else we could easily prove that Mr. Belsham considers himself a redeemer of the church of Christ. But he mvist pardon us for giving more weight to the testimony of Christ himself, (Matth. xx. 28.) that he came " to give his own life a ran- som for many," Xvr^on elvn moXKur that his blood was " shed for many for the remission of sins." According to the Scriptures, we find that he exclusively is " the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world ;" and that he " appeared in the last age of the world, to put away sin bi/ the sacrifice of himself." (John i. 29. Heb. ix. 26 — 28.) According to Mr. Belsham, the indignant question which Paul proposed to the Church at Corinth, in rebuke of their classing themselves under human leaders, — " was Paul crucified for you?" — might a few years after be repelled by the answer, " No : but Peter was crucified for us, and Paul beheaded for us." But we must forbear to enlarge on this topic ; and must abstain even from exposing the dishonest artifice which Mr. Belsham employs in aid of his system ; — that stale trick of putting forward the grossest misrepresentations of the truth which he opposes. To any one, who wishes to be dishonest here, it is most easy to confound that Sciptural truth with the very unscriptural language, which some professed ad- vocates for the doctrine of atonement have held, about the blood of Christ, his appeasing the wrath of God, &c. &c. But Mr. Belsham knows right well, that all consistent Christians maintain, that the provision of the Redeemer was the " unspeakable gift" of the love of God ; while they maintain that this w^as the only way in which pardon and eternal life could be given to sinful creatures, consistently with the divine righteousness and holiness and truth. But, passing this point, we think it not inexpedient to illustrate the ignorance of this expositor of Scripture, — his ignorance even of the letter of those Scriptures which he pretends to interpret. Mr. Belsham finds it convenient for his purpose to assert, that, under the law of Moses, " no sacrifices were appointed for voluntary transgressions," but " only for sins of ignorance," by which a Jew contracted ceremonial pollution. (Vol. iv. pp. 574-577.) And this assertion he repeats most frequently, and with the utmost confidence. Now, instead of arguing this point with Mr. Belsham, we shall only quote a few verses from Levit. vi. — " If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour, or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely,"" [something more, we think, than sins of ignorance, described here] — " then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore, &c. And he shall bring his trespass- ofiering unto the liord, a ram without blemish, out of the flock. . . . And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord," &c. This, we conceive, is quite sufficient for exposing the utter falsehood of Mr. Belsham's assertion. But our learned author refers us to the Apostle's words in Hebrews ix. 7, in proof of his position, that " the sacrifices on the day of atonement were expressly appointed for sins of ignorance," and ren- TIIANSLATION OF PAUL'S EPIS'lXES, 567 dtrs the words vTri^ Ixvth kxi roiy t« A«e ayiiYiixxru^ by — " for the sins of ignorance oj himself , and of the people !" Here, also, he only betrav? his ignorance, and that the more inexcusably, because the correction of it lay before his eyes, even in Rosenmiiller, upon whom he draws so largely for his learning. We would refer him, also, to Bid's Thesaurus, and Trommius's Concordance, under the words i'/vorjixa, ayvo/a, ayyofo;. Indeed, that the words are used in the same comprehensive sense with xfxx^Tr.ixx a.i/.x^rix, and a/xx^rxvu, is obvious even from Hebrews v. 1 — 3. The biblical student may advantage- ously trace the analogy between them and the words rendered /oo/, and folly. But we must dismiss much important matter upon this subject unnoticed, to make a brief remark upon another, and to exemplify the absurdities in which Mr. Belsham, and so many others, involve themselves, bv their dishonest determination to wrest the Scriptures into a seeming support of their own system, formed altogether inde- pendently of the Scriptures. We have now in view the subject of divine influence, or influence of the Spirit of God upon his people, as distinct from those miraculous gifts which were peculiar to the apos- tolic age, and communicated by the laying on of the Apostles' hands. And, lest our sentiments here should be mistaken, and confounded with those too generallv prevalent among religious professors, we wish to premise, that we hold all pretensions to divine influence, except through the medium of the truths revealed from heaven in the written word, to be the delusions of enthusiasm, or the fictions of imposture. But we are as firmlv persuaded from the Scriptures, that this word is, "the sword of the spirit," which none but the Spirit of God can at any time render eflectual, bv his own power, for either commenc- ing the work of faith, or maintaining it in his people. We need scarcely observe, also, that, in many passages of the New Testament, the expression " the Holy Spirit" does designate only those extra- ordinary communications which have ceased with the occasion for which they were made ; and which, even while they continued, were essentially distinct from every thing connected with salvation. For example, when we read, in Acts xix. 2. what ought to be rendered as the self-same expression is in John vii. 39. — " We have not so much as heard whether the Holy Spirit be given ;" — w^ho can doubt but the gifts of the Spirit ai"e the thing intended .'' Mr. Belsham, of course, sets his face against the ideaof anv work of the Sj)irit of God, distinct from the communication of miraculous gifts in the apostolic age ; and these gifts, he repeatedly acknow- ledges, were not possessed by the Christians at Rome, when the Apostle addressed his letter to them. Well, when he comes to that passage of the letter, (Rom. xv. 13.) where the Apostle thus ex- presses himself, " Now, the God of hope [of this hope] fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope [in this hope] through the power of the Holy Spirit !" what does Mr. Bel- sham make of this ? The words plainly and unequivocally mark, that while it is only in believing the things reported in the Gospel, disci- ples can be filled with all true joy and peace, it is at the same time only through the divine poxcer of the Holy Spirit that this efl^ect can be produced by the gospel. But this woidd not suit Mr. Belsham's 568 REVIEW OF BELSIIAM'S system. He therefore gravely assures us that the meaning is, " Through the promises of the Gospel, which are confirmed by th6 poioeifiul operations of the Holy Spirit :" and adds, " Of these the Roman believers must have had abundant evidence, though, not hav- ing been yet visited by an apostle, they had not themselves been the subjects of the 56 powers." Again, on Rom. xiv. 17. he remarks, that " the Roman converts had not indeed yet received the Holy Spirit, but they probably knew and conversed with many who had received it." IBut, may we not ask Mr. Belsham what a pious hum- bug, according to his system, was this prayer of the apostle, (and Mr. Belsham himself expounds it very piously as a prayer addressed to God,) that God miyht fill them, &c. if the effect desired was to be produced in a merely natural way, independently of all divine power exerted on their minds ? But much more may we not ask him, how it was possible that this effect could have been produced at all by the promises of the Gospel, according to his system ? For he elsewhere informs us, — very foolishly indeed, — that, by the gift of his Spirit to the apostolic Christians, God " announced his acceptance of their ser- vices." (Vol. ii. p. 60.) So the Roman Christians were to be filled with all peace and joy, by hearing thr.t this gift was communicated to others, while they had themselves no such announcement of the divine acceptance of their own services ! Into such absurdities do men plunge themselves, in their zeal for opposing the word of God ! We shall only add, that any who were rejoicing in their possession of those miraculous gifts, were filled with a joy essentially different from " joy in the Holy Spirit ;" opposed by the express words of Christ himself, Luke x. 20. and inconsistent with the nature and de- sign of those gifts, which were " for a sign not to them that believed, but to them that believed not," 1 Cor. xiv. 22. At the same time, we are aware that many passages of Scripture, which are commonly otherwise applied by those popular divines who trouble themselves very little about their real meaning, do indeed import nothing but those miraculous gifts of the Spirit, which have ceased'with the occasion for them. We are also well aware that Mr. Belsham, in almost the grossest of his perversions and corruptions of the word, is kept in countenance by numbers of the most respect- able name; that he may boast the authority, not only of leai'ned phi- losophers, but also of Most Reverend, Right Revei'end, Very Vene- rable, and Reverend Doctors of Divinity : — high-sounding titles for dying sinners. The believer of the Scriptures can be at no loss to account for this ; and sees in the fact only a confirmation of those sacred oracles, which are so generally opposed by those who profess to receive them as of divine original. He sees, that in these times of the Gentiles just a, similar display of human ungodliness and human folly is going on throughout Christendom, as was in the former age exhibited by the mass of the Jewish people under the law of Moses ; while the word of God continues in every age to accomplish the pur- poses for which it has been sent, the grand purposes of his rich mercy and saving power in that remnant left " according to the election of grace ;" and shall ultimately confound all the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nought all the understanding of the prudent of his world. TIIANSLATIUN or PAL'L'i^ KIMSTI.ES. .'^GO It now only reinuins that we should justify the opinion which we have pronounced of ^Ir. Bcbham's utter incapacity — in point of sckolarsliip — to execute the ta.sk which he undertook. Some in- stances of his learning have ah'cady incidentally appeared while we were treating of other topics. We subjoin a few more ridiculous specimens, which must prove decisive with every real scholar ; though Mr. Belsham so seldom ventures out of the leading-strings of his learned guides, that they may otherwise appear of a very trilling nature. We shall adduce our examples per lanvem satiiram, as they meet our eye in turning over a few of his pages ; oidy avoid- ing those which might involve us in any prolixity of remark. 1 Cor. vi. 2. " Do ve not know that the saints shall judge the world?" — Mr. Bcl.sham renders it — "What! know ye not," &c. and subjoins the following note: — " What! ' ^ »x.' Griesbach prefixes 'i upon the authoritv of the Alexandrine, Ephrem, and other copies. — Nam ignoratis. llosenniuUer." Now, is it not most manifest that the writer of this note imagined, that the insertion of the interrogative particle r, atlectcd more or less the sense of the passage, so that the translation nitm ignoratis, which he thinks it needful to adduce from Rosenmuller, would not be warranted if v ■were omitted ? And if he conceived that there was some extraordi- narv force in this particle, which he aimed at retaining by his ex- clamatory " what !" we beg to know why he did not introduce the same improvement into his version of the 9lh verse, beginning with the self-same words, ij uk o]^xTi. 1 Cor. viii. 2. For — " he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know," — Mr. Belsham gives, he knoweth not yet as, &c. with the following sagacious note : — " He knoweth not yet. The received text reads, ' he knoweth nothing,' &c. But the Alexandrine manuscript reads, uttu for u^iTfu, and both that and many other ancient copies drop t;J£». See Pearce and Griesbach." Here it is certain that he imagined some difference of meaning between the two words, koi-noj and isiru). We suspect also, that we could conjecture the ludicrous mistake upon his mind, which made him dislike the construction, iionru soev. But we shall only assure Mr. Belsham that, whether with Griesbach we retain the com- mon text, or adopt that which IMr. Belsham patronizes, in either case, the version of our translators is equally correct. In a note on 1 Cor. ix. 10. he informs us, that " Griesbach reads, he who thresheth ought to partake of his hope." Now Griesbach's reading, and a very good one, is xa; o oiXou)i, In' IX-m'Si ra ixert^iiv. i. e. oyii^ti di'KoaDi. Mr. Belsham will probably stare when we inform him, that this reading — so far from admitting the translation bv which he expounds it in his note — is the very reading which he has unwittingly introduced into the text, from Bishop Pearce's English version, viz, he who thresheth ought to thresh in hope of partaking. 1 Cor. X. 33. It has long been remarked by all interpreters, and, indeed, is obvious to an attentive Englis«h reader, that the first verse of the following chapter ought to be read in immediate connexion with ihs verse. But Mr. Belsham, not content with adopting this, and 570 REVIEW OF BELSHAM'S anxious to add some farther improvement from his own stores, runs the two verses into one sentence, separating them only by a comma; thus, " And as I ... . that they may be saved, so be imitators of me," &c. Here, it is evident, that because unfortvmately he knew that lyw is 7, and xai and, he conceived that a^Qus xayw might sig- nify and as I. It would haA'e been much safer for Mr. Belsham not to have been so ambitious, as he commonly is, of improving Gries- bach's text. But there is nothing which so infallibly brings its own punishment with it as vanity ; and, especially, the vain affectation of learned criticism in an unlettered man. We believe we might save ourselves the trouble of adducing any farther specimens of Mr. Belsham's learning ; but let us open an- other volume. Rom. v. 20. Mr. Belsham translates, " Now the law made a little entrance," with this note " 7rx^iia-/iK9iv, subintravit . Vulg." Is the classical reader curious to know what put this comical idea into the man's head } We shall tell him. Mr. Bel- sham found subintravit as a Latin version of moc^aaYiXQiv, and again unfortunately happened to know that sub, in Latin compounds, often has a diminutive significancy. To tell tlie truth. Dr. Newcome's version, (if Mr. Belsham quote it truly, which we do not ston to examine,) " entered in privily," is little less ridiculous. The Greek verb undoubtedly imports, what in common English we express by " to slip in." But in the present passage, it obviously denotes the incidental introduction of the law as an accessory ; as subordinate to that Gospel which was both preached before the law, and continues in force after the law. In Rom. X. Mr. Belsham transposes the 16th and 17th verses, placing the 1 7th in connexion with the 1 5th, and treats \is with the following note: " This transposition of the 16th and 17th verses, as suggested by L'Enfant, is so necessary to clearing up the Apostle's reasoning, that the propriety of it can scarcely be doubted, though it is unsupported by authorities." So little does he make of the testi- mony of all MSS. ancient versions, &c. &c. But it is obvious to any one looking at the original, that the 17th verse is an inference drawn from the words of Isaiah quoted in the 16th, and, therefore, rightly stands in the most indubitable connexion with these, th iTiKjTivai rri ocwYi rifji.uv ; 'a^sc vi ttistis s^ o-kovs. Numberless, indeed, are the instances in which Mr. Belsham, from the want of all critical knowledge of his own, adopts the most crude and txtravagant sug- gestions of preceding interpreters ; and, like a strainer, lets the pure liquor escape, while he faithfully retains the sediment and straws with which it has been blended. But in the 1 9th verse of the same chapter, he gives us a really new interpretation of the words, " hath not Israel known }" which is properly his own, and for which he seems to take some credit, introducing it with the remark that most of the commentators in- terpret the text erroneously. It is not worth w^hile to copy the whole of his note : but he tells us, that the Apostle divides some sup- posed objection from the unsuccessfulness of the ministry into two parts: " Ver. IS. Have they not heard.' Ansiver. They have. Ver. 19. Have they acknowledged and received the Gospel.^ An- swer. No. "^riiat the word yivMCKiu sometimes bears the sense of TRANSLATION OF PAUL'S EPISTLES. 571 i-rriyit^ua-Kco, is well known. See Schleusner." So, because the simple verb and its compound arc sometimes used in the sense of acknowledging, our learned author conceived that the words ixv ov-< lyfui Io-fa»)X, could mean, Iin/h Israel acknowledged :' no doubt imagining that ^>9 kx were two negatives, and equivalent with an affirmative. It is almost superfluous to remark, that the real mean- ing of the passage is, hath not Israel had notice .'' i. e. of the conse- quence of their rejection of the gospel. We have a perfectly similar instance of this use of the verb, in Rom. i. 21. "^lon "poiTis roi Qiov, " because that when they knew God," i. e. had sufficient notification of his " eternal power and Godhead." We might prove Mr. Bel- sham's ignorance of the common force of the interrogative fA», from his improved version of Rom. xi. 1. \tyu iv iji.yt imwaxro o Qeos rov Xxoi avTu ; which our foolish old translators render, " I say then, hath God cast away his people ?" but Mr. Belsham so much more accu- rately, " Do I say, then, that God has rejected his people.?" But really, the task of exposing his ignorance becomes quite disgusting. His ignorance would be blameless, if it were not equalled by the presumption and affectation of learning which accompany it. Our author often manifests as classical a proficiency in English as in Greek. Rom. viii. 13. '• If ye live after the flesh, you ivill die." xi. 26. " And so all Israel icill be saved." xi. 34, 35. " For who hath known, &c. Or who has first given to him," &c. 1 Cor. viii. 1. " Knowledge pufTeth up, but love edifies," &c. &c. &c. Such is the improved version of Paul's Epistles Avith which the Reverend gentleman, after the labour of thirty years, obliges the Unitarian Society and the public. If we be asked, whether the work does not contain instances of reaUy amended version, we readily reply, several ; not one indeed new, but adopted from preceding interpreters : though Mr. Belsham frequently fails of assigning them to their proper authors, and some- times ludicrously mistakes the meaning of the right translation that he adopts. So much has long since been done in the field of bibli- cal criticism, that it was scarcely possible he should not light upon something good. If we had room, we should gladly quote him with commendation, in Rom. ix. 3. xiv. 23. 1 Cor. i. 26. iii. 9. vi. 4. 2 Cor. v. 3. et al. But we must add, that along with all his wilful corruptions and pers-ersions of the text, and along with all his most puerile and ignorant alterations of the received version, he fre- quently leaves that version unaltered where it calls for amendment, and where the amendment is most obvious. E. cjr. in 1 Tim. vi. 10. he retains, " For the love of money is the root of all evil," instead of " « root." He throughout retains " bishops," for " overseers ;" " ministers" and " deacons," for " servants," &c. But we must conclude this article, which we have been obliged to extend to an unusual length ; though the criminutions of our author, which we have brought forward, form a very small portion indeed, of what we are ready to substantiate. W^e think it not improbable, that we shall have occasion to return to the subject ; and we shall be for- ward to meet Mr. Belsham again, if he should attempt any defence, even in a sixpenny pamphlet. 572 REVIEW "THOUGHTS ON THE ANGLICAN AND ANGLO-AMERICAN CHURCHES. BY JOHN BRISTED, CCUNSELLOa AT LAW. New York, printed : London, reprinted. Holds vvorth, 1823." [This Article was printed for The New Edinburgh Review, but never published.] We are alwavs well pleased, as reviewers, when an author gives us some account of himself. We understand a work the better for having some acquaintance with the writer ; and when he introduces himself to our acquaintance, we som.etimes come to know him better than he designed we should, — perhaps better than he knows himself. The auto-biography with which Mr. Bristed favours us, is dispersed through his Introduction, and is interrupted almost as often as the renowned " Story of the King of Bohemia and his Seven Castles." But the following is a summary of it : — His father was a beneficed clergyman of the Church of England, as his grandfather and great-grandfather had been, and his elder brother is now. He was sent, while yet a child, (as we collect, be- tween eleven and twelve years old,) to Winchester College, of which Dr. Joseph Warton was then head master. (P. 6.) He had been there little more than three years, and was near the head of the senior part of the fifth form, when a rebellion broke out against the authority of Dr. Huntingford, the warden of the college, and now combining with that office the bishopric of Hereford. He describes the rebellion as " headed, and the oath of universal conspiracy ad- ministered, by Richard Mant, then one of the prefects in the sixth form, and now a Protestant champion of the Popish doctrine of bap- tismal regeneration, and one of the editors of Mant's and Doyley's Family Bible." (P. 10.) We must observe, en passant, that this same Right Rev. Dr. Richari) Mant seems an object of our author's pcculinr spleen and acrimony : whether on ground? exclu- ANGLICAN AND AN(JLO-AMi:UlCAN CIIURCIIKS. 573 pivelv theological, we shall not now inquire. This boyi^?h rchelliou issued in the expulsion of the first forty boys, who stood senior on the college rolls ; among whom was young Jiristcd. We hope our author is inaccurate when he charges the Warden and Fellows with a direct breach of faith in exercising this severe discipline. Returning for a few years to his parental roof, he informs us that, until he was seventeen, his " steps were steadily directed towards an entrance into the vestibule of the Church of England;" that is, in English, lie designed to follow his father's profession of a clergyman in the E:^tablishn1cnt. We next find our author at Oxford (p. 15,) ^Yhere he is dissuaded from taking orders by the Rev. Dr. Septimus Collinson, Provost of Queen's College; the Doctor urging that a man's preferment in the national church is determined, not by his personal merit, but by interest, &c. and that the clerical market is overstocked. He is thus induced to " relinquislx all thoughts of Me Church, and embrace the calling of a physician." — \Ve must pause a little here, to animadvert briefly on our author's inconsistency in the following sentence : — " Mv objections to the Church of England tcere then, and are now, confined exclusively to her political position ; her close alliance w-ith the state ; her system of patronage, whether lay or clerical, exclud- ing the congregations altogether from any choice of the clerk who is to minister to them spirituallv ; and her provision of tithes. Her liturgv, articles, and homilies, are all strictly spiritval," &c. &c. Fair and softly ! Mr. Bristed. Your objections to the Church of England, according to your own showing, ivere then, certainly, neither more nor less than this : that you apprehended she did not afibrd you a sufficient prospect of preferment adequate to your merit; and we do not say that it was not a very suitable consideration to decide a voung man in his choice of a profession for earning his bread. But why should you endeavour to disguise this motive ? Whether you have now any objection to the Church of England, essentially ditferent from Avhat you had then, we shall perhaps be better able to decide, as we proceed in the examination of your work. Our author tells us, p. 34, that in his eighteenth year he applied himself to the study of medicine; " first in the country, then in London, then in Edinburgh, with the characteristic ardour of a san- guine temperament." Whether he ever graduated at Oxford, we are not informed ; nor how long he remained at Edinburgh. But on his return to London he soon relinquished all thoughts of the practice of medicine ; enrolled himself a member of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple : and continued for two years in the office of Mr. Chitty, cultivating " the melancholy science of special pleading," p. 37. However, before he was called to the English bar, [Qu. Has he ever been called to it?] he describes himself as bitten with the imagination, that thei/ order matters better in America than in Great Britain; and in the spring of ISOG, (when, we conceive, he was about the age of twenty-four,) he emigrated to the United States, with sanguine expectations, which appear from his language not to have been realized. At this we are not at ail surprised. I\Iany emigrate to America undir great mistakes about .574 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S the country to which they go, and possessing Httle of the qualifica- tions requisite for succeeding in it. On his arrival in New York, our author renewed an acquaintance which he had formed in Edinburgh, with the Rev. Dr. jNIason, a Presbyterian minister of the Associate Reformed Church, p. 41, and this acquaintance " soon ripened into an intimacy truly fraternal, that lasted about six years, when it was broken up, and for ever scat- tered to the wild winds, by the systematic sycophancy and incessant intrigue of a very reverend brother." This is very sad : but our readers must receive Mr. Bristed's invectives and panegyrics cum grano salis. He lays on both with a trowel. Of Dr. Mason, he tells us, that " if his, &c." he " might have brightened the remotest recesses of Ghristendotn with the blaze of his intellectual glory — might have been what Chalmers is" ! ! ! We think we might venture to draw a craniological map of Mr. Bristed's organs. The sentence which immediately follows the words last quoted, and which con- cludes his personal narrative, affords a curious and awful spectacle of a popular religionist. It runs thus : — " When the breach between Dr. Mason and myself had been ren- dered sufficiently deep and deadly to admit of no possible cure on this side of the grave, I returned into the bosom of that mother church which had nourished me, and my brethren, and my father, and my father's father, for many preceding generations." It is with a feeling veiy difierentfrom anything hostile towards Mr. Bristed, that w-e advise him, before he resumes his pen upon such sub- jects, to think what kind of religion it can be, with which the senti- ment he has deliberately penned is consistent. A breach between two men, bearing the Christian name, so deadly, as to admit of no possible cure on this side of the grave ! and this after a truly /ra- ternal intimacy of six years ! Supposing that Christian brotherhood had subsisted between them during that period, whatever might be the trespass of either against the other, (and we have not the least curiosity to inquire into the particulars of the breach,) there was a plain and decisive rule, prescribing, on divine authority, a healing course, which, even in the last stage of it, is utterly inconsistent with the sentiment which Mr. Bristed has thought himself warranted to express. We do allude to the pi-ecept in Matt, xviii. 15 — 17. though we are aware that it is commonly considered as antiquated, even by those who make the most ado about evangelical religion ; as well as that most of the religious communities called churches are so constituted, as to render the observance of the precept impossible in them. But we confess that we think little, or think very ill, of any religious system, which sets aside such a divine command.- Every thing imder the Christian name, which stands opposed to the word of Christ, we regard as antichristian. One more remark we must offer on the passage which we have last quoted from Mr. Bristed. It strikingly exemplifies the light way in which many professors change their religious connexion as they would change a suit of clothes. Our author was bred up a staunch Episcopalian. Settling in America, he formed an intimacy with a Presbyterian minister, and, (as he tells uS;) " waF- prodigioi/sly struck ANGLICAN AND ANGI.O-AMKltlCAN CHURCllKS 57'> with tlie force, and vigour, and range of intellect, exhibited in his conversation." He al.>-o " never heard a greater preacher," nut ex- cepting " the mighty Ilorsley him?clf." He, then-fore, " during- six vears, sat under the tninislry" of this Presbyterian divine. But a deadly breach takes place between them : upon which our author lavs aside his Prcsbyterianism, and returns to the bosom of hia mother church. Mr. Bristed has multitudes to keep him in counte- nance ; multitudes who are similarly determined in iheir selection of a soi-disant church, not by any scriptural consideration, not by the slightest regard to divine authority, but by their taste and fancy, and especially bv their admiration of one preacher, or their quar- relling with another. A favourite clergyman is the factotum of their religious connexion ; and to sit under his ministry is the phrase constantly cmploved for expressing their church-fellowship. We onlv sav, at present, that if any thing like this now constitute the fellowship of a Christian church, — if any conduct like this be now allowable to Christians, Chi-istianity must have indeed greatly changed in its nature and principles since the apostolic day. But if " the word of God liveth and abideth for ever," (1 Pet. i. 23. 25.) all such nominal Christianity, as we have exhibited, is but nominal. It mav be needful to apprize our readers, that by " The Anglican and Anglo-American Churches," Mr. Bristed means that part only of the religious system in both countries which is termed Episco- palian ; and that while he boasts, at the outset of his work, that he has " a kind of hereditary and family claim to be enrolled among the advocates of the Protestant Episcopal Church, whether it be that established in England, or its legitimate offspring located in these United States ;" he at times appears to combine with this attach- ment to Episcopacy what, we believe, is rarely connected with it, a decided hostility to the close alliance between church and state. We sav that he at times appears hostile to this alliance : for he really seems to us to have no fixed principles upon the subject. As to his attachment to Episcopacy, we cannot discover throughout his work anv reason that he assigns for it, but his hereditary and family con- nexion with that system ; and we must submit it to Mr. Bristed's consideration, whether that would not have been fully as cogent a reason whv his ancestors should have remained in connexion with the see of Rome. He quotes, indeed, the following from Mr. Gran- \-ille Sharp, with apparent approbation, p. 22. " If I am prejudiced at all, I am sure it is in favour of Episcopacy ; for ... I am even descended from one of the same holy function, . . . and above all, I am thoroughly convinced by the holy Scriptur-es, that the institution of that order in the Christian church is of God." Indeed ! convinced of this from the Scriptures! Really, we should have thought this impossible, had not Mr. Sharp assured us of it. As far as we know, the other advocates for the divine right of episcopacy bring us, not to the Scriptures, but to the so-called Fathers ; whose authority in these matters we utterly deny. But that the Scriptures of the New Testament speak of the l-niay.o'noi, the bishops or overseers of a Chris- tian church, as identical with its elders or Tr^eo-ffvre^oi, we have thought and think indisputably evident. (Acts xx. 17.28; Phill. •576 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S i. 1 ; Titus i. 5 — 7.) Would that Mr. Sharp or Mr. Bristed had condescended to point to the Scriptures which teach them otherwise. Till some one does so, we must be allowed to say, in the first place, that the apostles use the exj)ression Church of Christ exclusively in one or other of two senses, either for the collective aggregate of those in every age and nation who have been redeemed unto God, and shall be brought unto eternal glory by his Son, or for the assembly of believers in any particular place, who, united together in the profession of the apostolic gospel, walk together as brethren according to the rule of the apostolic word, and meet on the first day of the week, " to show forth the Lord's death ;" but that they never use the phrase in any such sense as that in which men now speak of the Chnrcfi of England, the Church of Scotland, &c. And, in the second place, we say, that each of these Christian bodies or churches, in any place, is described as having, or designed to have, a plurality of bishops or elders, whose office was very different indeed from that of clergymen or preachers ; persons selected from the brethren as qualified to take the special oversight of the church, and acknow- ledged by the chui'ch as the gifts of Christ to the body for that ser- vice ; and that this is the only sense in which the bishops of a church are spoken of in the New Testament. Without intending to enter into any regular discussion of the question, we throw out these suggestions for Mr. Bristed's consideration ; and would only add, that while we allow, within certain limits, the right of every man to use words in whatever sense he pleases, if he only make known the meaning in which he employs them, we must yet assert, that the misapplication of script^iral terms ought to be dreaded by every one who reverences the word of God ; that there has been no more powerful engine for obscuring divine truth, and supporting the most pernicious errors, than the use of the words of Scripture in an un- scriptural meaning. Mr. Bristed, p. 226, speaks of the non-juring bishops of Scotland, to whom Dr. Seabury of America applied for consecration, as having " preserved the succession of their order by new and regular conse- crations." From this language our readers might be led to think, that our author carried his Episcopalianism so far, as to credit the lineal succcession from the apostles transmitted by the Nags-hcad consecration to our Protestant bishops, through all the most profli- gate and impious of the popes of Rome, — a fiction so monstrously absurd that it might excite laughter, if it were not so monstrously profane that indignation rather must predominate in the Christian who considers it. But in another passage Mr. Bristed himself ap- pears to laugh at the notion. For thus he expresses himself, 'p. 299. " Mr. Daubeny denies the validity of any sacrament, unless it be episcopally administered. Yet two primates of all England, not to mention some simple Anglican prelates, and four supreme, secular, sovereign pontiffs of that church establishment, v/ere never baptized by a bishop, priest, or deacon. What then, accoi'ding to the Sarum archdeacon's position, is to become of these M?^baptized hierarchs ap- pointed by r/wbaptized heads of the church, and consecrated by bishops whose predecessors were excommunicated at Rome by the old lady of ANGLICAN AND AXGLO-AMr.UUWN rUl'IU'IIKS. ')77 Babylon ; from whose hands alone the Anglican Cliurcli (/(rirrs her unbroken, apostolic, episcopal succession :'" Indeed, our author, thou p 2 580 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S often a very bad man. What would you reply? Again, suppose that the King of England and liis ministers were what you consider evan- gelical, spiritual men, would you then see any objection to this alliance between church and state ? From many parts of the work before us, we suspect you would not. Mr. Bristed remarks, pp. 18, 19, that "The ministerial and \ixy patronuc/e of the Anglican Church . . . almost of necessity insures a constant supply of formalism, at least, if not of absolute irreligion to the clerical estal)lishment." " Suppose, what has happened in English history, that the British Prime Minis- ter and the Lord High Chancellor of England . . . -should be both, or either of them, avowed infidels, or merely irreligious, &c. What sort of bishops would be appointed to fill the vacant sees? What kind of clergy to possess the empty parishes ? Evangelical men, think you ?" This is the grand topic on which Mr. Bristed declaims most largely. And it is indeed very obvious, that there is such an opposition be- tween the things that are of men and the things that are of God, between a human political institution and real religion, tliat a politico- religious establishment must form a strange and most incongruous mixture ; and only the more incongruous, when the religion which \t professes to establish is truly divine. But it is observable that Mr. Bristed's great objection even to the ministerial patronage, in the Eng- lish establishment, is derived from the way in which that patronage is exercised. And accordingly the grand panacea which he proposes for remedying, not only the formalism of the Anglican church, but even all the political evils of Great Britain, is this, that the minister should appoint evangelical bishops, and their loidships give the best benefices to evangelical parsons. " Let the eleven thousand ])laces of worship in the Anglican Church establishment be filled with evangelical incumbents ; let the stalls, and dignities, and palaces, be filled with evangelical deans, and bishops, and archbishops, all faithfully discharging, &c. &c. and Eng- land will soon be freed from all alarm respecting the infidelity and profligacy which now menace the speedy perdition of all her civil in- stitutions and social order." " If the British government deem the preservation of the national church of any importance to the state, it ought to know, that the only possible mode of preserving the establishment, is to fill its pa- laces and parishes with an evangelical ministry. Then no apprehen- sion need be entertained of the growth, either of sectaries or of radi- cals . . . they will soon be secure from all alarms of sedition, privy conspiracy, and rebellion — of all false doctrine, heresy and schism, — of hardness of heart, and contempt of God's word and commandment !" Really, in holding this language, Mr. Bristed pledges himself for a great deal. In short, the whole nation would become what he calls evangelical, if all the clergy of the establishment were so. We might easily expose the inconsistency of his notion with Scripture, and its inconsistency with various passages in his own work, particularly with one, p. 224, in which he states that Mr. Newton, in July 1778, could not hear of one spiritual person in Weston Favel, the scene of Mr. Hervey's evangelical labours. But we rather content ourselves ANGLICAN AND ANGLO-A.MEIUCAN CHURCHES. 581 with assuring him, that if lie could effect all that change in the \m. tronage of the Anglican church, which would remove his ol)jcctioiii^, it would he in our view as nuich a thing of this world as it is now ; A forgenj still, tlu)ugh perhaps a better forgery. We are not, how- over, disposed to controvert another position of our author's, p. 3-4."). " Tlie most ellectual remedy for these, and for all ufhcr mitional evils, whetlier present or prospective, is to be found in tlie (jcncral cunvcr- >ioii of the people to real evangehcal Christianity." No doubt that wouKl be a sovereign remedy for all internid evils in any country, and would form a nation such as never has yet a[)pcared on eartli. Mr. liristed, with many other religionists, thinks the time will come ; and yet he elsewhere quotes withap])robati()n the following language from Bishop Hurnet's exposition of the 'li)\.\\ article, p. 257. " The greater jiart, both of the clergy and laity, ever were, and everxvill be, depraved and corrupted," i\c. To much the same ellect, but more to the purpose, does J\lr. Bristed speak his own mind, p. 155. " Real Christians are always fearfully outnumbered, in every human societv, by the formal, the secular, the profane, and the profligate ; and should, therefore, keep themselves pure from all contact with a mere worldly religion," &c. We shall leave Mr. Bristed to settle this point with Bishop Burnet and with himself. While our author would be content with the state-religion of Eng- land, if he coidd get the ecclesiastical palaces and parishes filled with ecclesiastics after his own heart, he is so outrageously dissatislied with the present distribution of the loaves and fishes, that he brings charges the most unfounded against the British government and- hicrarchy. What must any candid reader think of the following language } " Indeed, now, the British government and its hierarchy unite in their efforts to destroy the evangelicals more cordially and more strenuously than has been done before, since the reign of the most execrable of the Stuarts." " The Anglican Church, ever since its establishment at the Refor- mation, has generally pekskcuteu pure evangelical religion, whether detected in its own members, or in those of other connnmiions." " Persecution seems to be a necessary adjunct of an established church; and, at this moment, formal Englisli bishops persecute, to tlie utmost extent of their power, the unbeneficed evangelicals within their dioceses." " The evangelical dissenters . . . must encounter the frowns and opposition of the established hierarchy ; which, not contented with generally, as a body, neglecting the spiritual, the immortal interests of the people committed to their pastoral care, invariablv calumniate and PERSECUTE all who are in earnest about the everlasting safety of their fellow-men." We must say that we consider these assertions most unfair, and utterly unsupported by fact. We are aware that many religionists are very fond of raising the cry of persecution on every the most tri- vial loss which they suffer, or tliink they suffer, on account of their religious profession ; and at the root of this generally lies the most contemptible and disgusting vanity. But in what consicto that per- 5S2 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S secutioH, — that effort to destroy the evangehcals which Mr. Bristed imputes to the British government and hierarchy ? In tliis, according to his own statement, p. 145, that, in the dispensation of church preferments, " for the most part, effectual care is taken to exclude from the mitre, the stall, and the benefice, those who faithfully preach the evangelical doctrines of the Bible, of the Reformation, of the pub- lic formularies of the Anglican Church." Now, we not only think there is much meanness in this, Et mild dividuo findetiir munere qva- dra ; but we must beg to put one plain question to Mr. Bristed's conscience. If he, with his present views of those evangelical doc- trines, and the present zeal for them which we suppose animates him, were prime minister or Lord Chancellor of England ; would he not similarly persecute those of opposite sentiments, those whom he terms formalists ? Would he not take effectual care, as far as he could, to exclude them from the mitre, the stall, and the benefice ? And would he not, perhaps, be forward to expose the absurdity of his being, therefore, charged with a jjersecnting effort to destroy them ? As to his imputing to the English hierarchy any persecution of the dissen- ters at present, we can only say that we are utterly unable even to conjecture M-hat he alludes to. Tliat they should dislike, and oppose, and frown upon dissenters, is very natural ; that they should calum- niate them as schismatics, for not choosing to join the train of the ecclesiastical state-coach, is very comical ; and equally comical we consider Mr. Bristed's language, about the people cominittcd to the PASTORAL cai'e of the English hierarchy. Our author seems unable to disconnect certain ideas, borrowed from the Christian revelation, with a political system Avhich has really nothing to do with it. While we hoiiestly vindicate the present English hierarchy from the charge of persecution, and while we avow our belief that indivi- duals of tliat body are men of enlarged and liberal minds, indisposed to persecute even if they had the power ; we yet acknowledge that the tendency of every religious establishment is to persecute non- conformists : and for the non-persecuting character of our Establish- ment, we think ourselves indebted, rather to the general prevalence of the principles of civil liberty, than to any general change in the character of ecclesiastics. At them we must always look, in this respect, with a jealous eye. Nor can we be at all surprised, that both they and the government look with a very jealous eye at those whom Mr. Bristed distinguishes as evangelicals. He indeed broadly asserts, p. 153, that " the comparatively small portion of evange- lical clergy in the Establishment alone preserves that establishment from impending perdition." Unconnected as we are with either of the parties, we must candidly avow our conviction, that the opposite of Mr. Bristed's assertion is true. We are aware that this will bring our evangelism with him into discredit. But let him calmly consider what we proceed to offer in vindication of the reasonableness of that hostility to the evangelicals, which is generally manifested by the English government and hierarchy. Mr. Bristed himself tnily remarks, p. 179, that " the English established church is a political machiiie." (We might be disposed to extend the remark.) Now, in every political machine, its quiet AN(.I,ICAX AND AiXGLO-A-MKllICAX CHURCHES. 583 ami reffular operation is obviously important. And this machine being' ck'LMgncd for nominally relitjious objects, every thing which tends to make a stir about religion, to set men a thinking seriously about reliirion, to insrtitute a comparison of the movements of the machine with a different and higher rule, — every such thing, we say, is evidently to be deprecated. Mr. Bristed frecjuently notices the tendency of religious establishments to formulism. But we beg of him to consider, whether what \\e cAX^ formulism be not necessary to the well-being and safety of every religious establishment. For instance, the svstem of augury and idol-worship in heathen Rome, so far as it was incorporated with the civil polity, must it not con- sistently have been hostile to the disturbance of men's minds, which the Christian revelation was calculated to produce ? And can Mr. Bristed seriously wonder, that men whom he himself describes as secular and worldly, and proposing only political objects in their religious profession, should regard with a hostile eye the zeal that calls the people to higher principles ? Or can he honestly think, that this zeal is not ultimately hostile in its tendency to the merely political machine w-hich they employ ? We are not afraid to declare that we think it is. That the hierarchy, therefore, should generally set their faces against the so-called evangelicals, and against the indiscriminate cir- culation of the Scriptures, we consider perfectly consistent. That the government should make themselves a party in the matter, we deeplv lament. However, while thev think that the ecclesiastical is essentially interwoven Avith the civil constitution of the country, we cannot wonder at this. We are persuaded that the latter might con- tinue to subsist in full vigour if totally disconnected from the former ; and that the present connexion is a dead weight upon the state, how- ever it may contribute to " the purpose of swelling the patronage and influence of the crown." But without entering on the discussion of that politic'cd question, w^hich w-e may be very incompetent to treat, we nmst positively assert that Protestantism is not nearlv so well adapted as Popery, for the politico-ecclesiastical machine. The fun- damental principle of Protestantism, (however widely nominal Pro- testants have departed from it,) that the Bil)le is the one standard of divine truth and religious practice, must always expose the machine of a Protestant establishment to disturbance, from the agitation of scriptural inquiry, and the progressive elucidation of scriptural prin- ciples; whereas the unchangeable stagnation of Popery in its svstem of darkness and of death, guards against all such danger, as far as the wicked policy of corrupt religion can guard against the diffusion of divine truth. Mr. Bristed, therefore, must excuse us for maintaining against hini; that Archbishop Lal-u formerly, and the Rev. Samuel Wix recently, have been most consistent in pursuing a reunion between the old lady of Babylon and her reformed daughter. If it could be affected, we are persuaded that this would be the wisest possible measure next to one other. But in England we see, and are glad to see, great (if not insurmountable) difficulties in the wav of the attempt; from the fonnidable numbers and weight of the Protestant 5S4 REVJKW OF BRISTEB'S dissenters, and the comparative paucity of the Popish. But perhaps ft miglit not be impracticable in Ireland, wliere the absurdity of the most expensive of all existing religious establishments, including among its nominal adherents only one-fourteenth part of the entire population, is more and more forcing itself upon general attention ; where a vast majority of the inhabitants steadily maintain their attachment to the see of Rome ; and their hierarchy (always aspiring at domination, even when they assume the most modest garb and the most lowly language,) must of necessity cherish the hope that they will yet I'ecover the rights, of which they conceive themselves unjustly dis- possessed ; and must therefore feel it their interest to keep alive the distractions which prevail in that unhappy land. Long has Ireland been presenting to statesmen a lesson, which every year becomes more and more legible. But if our statesmen should ever think of attempting a coalition there with the papal see, they must be pre- j)arcd to !ind that the mother-church is too politic to meet them half vnnj. She will be glad to receive the advances of her repentant daughter, but she will take care' not to give up her own immutahility; though slie might perhaps be induced to concede the cup to the laitv, and a liturgv in the vernacular language. On the whole, we apprehend that the time has gone by, when the reunion might have been effected ; and how, therefore, a remedy is to be applied to the evils of unhappy Ireland, assuming that the re- ligious establishment is to be maintained, we confess ourselves utterly unable to conjecture. If any of our readers should think it extraordinary that we have at all admitted the idea of a Protestant government establishing Popery, we only say to such — look at Ca- nada, It is sufficiently evinced by existing facts, that, in the politi- cal esiablishmcnt of religion, the truth or falsehood of the religious system is a question altogether out of contemplation. And this cer- tainly is one of the circumstances which render everv religious esta- blishment an eminent instrument of promoting irreliyion. The populace may be very slow to notice this merely political character in the state chinxh ; but thinking and observing men must perceive it, and will call the attention of others to what they see themselves. Naturally indisposed to view the revelation which the only true God has made in the Scriptures, and v.-illing to draw their puny conclusions against all religion from what they perceive to be the character of siiite religion ; they find in this a ready justification to their consciences for laughing at every thing sacred, either openly, or under the profession of ardent zeal for the church. But it is time for us to pass with Mr. Bristed from Great Britain to America. To us by far the most interesting part of his book, is that which describes the state of religious affairs in the New World. We shall here, therefore, extract more coj)iously for the satisfaction of our readers ; premising that Mr. Bristed, throughout his work, employs tlie barbarous compound American- Anglo-Church, to desig- nate that which, in his title-page, he more correctly terms the Aiiqlo-Aimcrican. " By the fourth article of the constitution of the Amcrican'-Anglo- Church, it is enacted, that the Inshop nr l)ishops, in every state, ANGLICAN AND ANGLO-AMKIUCAN CllUUClIKS. 6t«.3 (>li:ill be c'liDscn agreeably to sucb rules as shall be (ixcil by tbc cdii • vciitioii, which consists of l)i)th laity and clergy of that state. And the second canon ordains, that no diocese or state shall j)rocecd to ihv election or appointment of a bishop, unless there be at least six olHciating ])resbyters, or priests, residing therein ; and who, agrec- alilv to the canons of the church, niav be (pialiticd to vote for a bisiio]) — a majority of whom, at least, shall concur in such election. At present there are vine in the American-Anglo-Church, to wit, iSic. Tlicrc are t\YO dioceses, the state of Delaware and the State of North Carolina, which have no bishops. Every state in the Union may become a diocese whenever its Protestant Episcopalians are sutHciently numerous, and deem it expedient. " The whole church is governed by the General Convention, whose power pervades every diocese. It sits regularly once in three years, but may be si)ecially convened in the interval. It consists of an upper house, composed of all the existing bishops, and of a lower house, containing a delegated portion of clergy and laity from each diocese. The state conventions arc held, for the most part, aunuallv in each diocese, and consist of clergy and lay delegates from cverv separate congregation. These bodies leyishUe for their respective dioceses ; but their canons must not contradict the consti- tution of the general church. " The liturgv, articles, and homilies of the Anglican-Churcli are adopted, with some few slight local alterations. No particular reve- nues arc attached to the episcopate ; and the bishops, generally, are l)arish priests, in addition to their bishoprics. But eflbrts arc making, in several dioceses, to raise a bishop's fund, in order, &c. iVrchbishops there are none, nor prebendaries, &c. i^c. Tlie senior bishop presides in the House of Eisliops during the session of the General Convention. " Tlie parish priests are elected according to the charters of the cnvgreyations. Some churches choose their minister by the vestry, consisting or persons elected annually by the freeholders. Others by ballot, the whole congregation voting. The bishops have no direct patronage — no livings in their gift. The clergy are settled by the choice or call of the i)eople to whom thev minister ; and the stipend is fixed by the compact between the pastor and the congregation ; and the conniion law enforces the fulfilment of this contract on both sides, whence all undue dependence of the clergy upon the people is prevented." We must pause a little here, to tell Mr. Bristed jilainly, that we consider the thing which he describes in his Anglo-American church, as a thing just as carnal, worldlv, and utterly unscriptural, as that which he so often reprobates in the political Anglican church — only much more ludicrous. There is something consistentlv pompous in the Anglican episcopacy, in the mitred fronts of the prelates, their ])alaces, their lordly endowments, &c. &c. But the republican imitation of this finery iu America presents a most heterogeneous compound. We could have wished for more minute information on many points, and arc somewhat curious to know how those bishops, who are not parish priests, get their bread, where no particular 5S6 REVIEW OF BIIISTKD'S revenues are attached to the episcopate ? We know from other pas- sages, that they do not support themselves by honest labour. When Mr. Bristed talks of the charters of the congregations, and describes the state conventions as legislating for their respective dioceses, he is manifestly little aware that he describes a thing which could not take place in any real churches of Christ. They have nothing to do with making laws for their government. They are only called to obey and maintain the laws made by the King of Zion. " The government is upon his shoulder." Our author thinks the patronage in his Anglo-American church much preferable to that in the Angli- can. We think it just as antichristian. The congregation, a term •which ought to be equivalent with the l-Av.'K-na-ia., or assembly of Christian brethren, is composed of the ]}eu'-holders ; and these pew- holders, any persons who choose and can afford to pav rent for one of those pinfolds called pews in the parish kirk, elect, either imme- diately through a vestry, or immediately by a general ballot, the reverend gentleman called a minister, under a legal contract for the regular payment of his stipend on their side, and the due perform- ance of clerical functions on his side, to be enforced, if necessary, by common law. (If we mistake Mr. Bristed's account, we shall be happy to have our mistake corrected.) The bond, and the pleadings on it, must be very comical. In what light does Mr. Bristed suppose that the whole process Avould have been regarded by the apostolic church at Philippi ? Can he imagine that any man there was admitted to church-membership, and retained in it, by his paying rent for a peiv in this place of meet- ing ? and that, upon this pecuniary qualification, he took part with the Christian body, in the choice of their bishops and deacons ; but that the Christian ^j««/'er, who could not afford to pay for a seat, was either not accommodated equally with the rich, or was excluded from taking any share in the proceedings of the church ? Can he imagine that the elders then commenced a legal process against the flocks, of which they were overseers, if they did not i-egularly pay them a stijmlated salary ? No : little as our author has hitherto attended to the apostolic word, he must be aware that the whole thing which now goes on, in the so-called churches that he de- scribes, is essentially difi'erent from the Christ'anity described in the New Testament : and that while the appointment of his clergy is made in a democratic way in America, and in an aristocratic way in Eng- land, the one is not a whit less antiscriptural than the other. What we chiefly complain of is, that any such systems should be palmed upon the world as Christian. To tell the truth, if we did not believe the Scriptures, if we viewed religion as a matter of human policy and civil regulation, there is no religious profession to which we should be more disposed to conform than to that of the Anglican establishment. It is the most gentlemanly and respectable that we know : and whilst it has got rid of some of the glaring absurdities and mummery of the Papal system, it retains a sufficiency of pomp and splendour. As to the objection which Mr. Bristed often urges, that it is too expensive, we think it a pitiful objection against a state-machine in a great kingdom, — if the machine be a useful one. ANGLICAN AND ANGLO-AMKllICAN CIIURCHKS. 587 I?ut in Scotland we can give him his choice of another very decorous istablishnicnt. which even the honourable member for Aberdeen must confess to be unobjectionable on the score of economy. It is verv remarkable, that while Mr. Bristed declaims most vehe- nientlv ac^ainst the formulism of the Anglican church, and accounts for that formalism from the intimate connexion between church and state, and from the improper exercise of ministerial patronage, he vet rcpeatedlv describes the Anglo-American church as in a state of e(|iud formalism, and ccpially hostile (in general) to what he speaks of as evangelical, and to the circulation of the Bible. " Tlie Established Church of England," (that church for which he pravs, Amenl Esto perpetua ! aUt afio-Tty-fiN !) "has always svs- tcmaticcdly opposed those religious efforts which, &c. &c. All of which, we regret to say, are too little regarded by the Ame- rican-Anglo-Church, while they are hailed, and cherished, and for- warded, bv the other denominations, Presbyterian, Congregational, Methodist, Ba])tist ; all of which prosper and increase, in proportion as they promote the cause of pure evangelism," — " The American Bible Society is supported almost entirely by non-episcopalians ; the Anierican-Anglo-Church generally standing aloof from this labour of love." — " The American- Anglo- Church halts very far behind many other denominations, in numbers, and activity, and influence." — " Is in the wake of other Christian denominations, in numbers, talent, influence, and utility." — " The real cause why the American- Anglo-Church is so fearfully in the wake of other denominations, Presbvterian, Congregational, Baptists, and Methodists, is to be found in the prevalence oi formalism in her clergy." We protest, this same American- An(/lo-Cku)-ch, at her next general convention, ought to excommunicate her unworthy son, John Bris- ted, for circulating such evil reports of his mother. But then, j\Ir. Bristed, you have before accounted for the general formalism of the Anglican church, from " the utter exclusion of the congregations from all part, and lot, and voice, in the selection of the clerk who is to administer to them spirituallij." Now, how do you reconcile this with the existence of the same formalism among the Episcopalians in America, where the congregations elect their bishops and clergy ? We are at no loss to account for it. A carnal prime minister is not more likely to appoint a carnal clerk to a benefice than a carnal congregation of pew-holders is to elect him ; and we think it not worth a moment's controversy which is the better system. But we must treat our readers \v\\.\i the following testimony of Mr. Bristed against his favourite Anglo-American-Church, for the sake of the droll prayer with which it concludes. " It is a deep stain upon the American Anglo- Church, that she alone, of all the compacted religious bodies, has degenerated into extensive formalism. While the Presbyterians, of every various shade in doctrine, discipline, and government, have continued, as Calvinists, faithfullij preaching the systematic creed contained in their respective confessions ; and while the Wesleyan Methodists, «*- Arminians, have preserved the system of scriptural instruction, handed down to Ihcm by their rjrcut founder and leader ; too munv of 588 ni:VIEW OF BRISTED'S the Protestant Episcopal clergy have g-rievouslv swerved from the high standard of their own evangelical articles, homilies, and liturgv, to which may the (jreat Head of the church briny them back ivith all CONVENIENT Speed!" We could not hut smile at the drollery of Mr. Bristed's piety. Yet we have really cjuoted the passage as much with a view to his profit as to the amusement of our readers. We seriously advise hini to think more when he next resumes his pen. One of the annoyances we have been plagued with in reading Mr. Bristed's book is this : that while a great part of it consists of quo- tations from other writers, Mr. Newton, Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Mason, &c. &c. the quotations are seldom marked as such ; so that the reader often cannot say who the writer is, whether Mr. Biisted or some other from whom he extracts. The following is among the number of such passages. We give it, as affording some farther view of the religious state of America: — " Even in the United States themselves, partial legislative enact- ments, in favour of religion, have been from time to time found necessarv : which enactments the civil magistrate is bound to suj)- port, and the public purse to carry into effect. From a table, drawn up a few years since, showing the provision for religious instruction, in the states of, &c. it appears, that ten out of fifteen of those states have no provision for the maintenance of religious instructors, but the other five have a partial or full provision. Eight have no reli- gious creed ; the others use a formal test : namely, three require a belief hi God ; one, faith in the Gospel ; two, faith in the Old and New Testaments ; four, faith in the Protestant religion. To this add, that chaplains are appointed for the army and navy, and paid from the public purse ; and strict orders are issued, under severe penalties, for the attendance and decent behaviour of the soldiers at divine \vorship. Profane cursing and swearing are also punish- able," &c. . We believe the preceding passage is extracted by our author from Mr. Wilks, who goes on to remark — " That there is so little religion throughout the Union is not to be wondered at, when we recollect how scanty and parsimonious are the public means of instruction in almost every state ; but that little would probably have been less, had there been no publicly recognized means at all. But America is a new country ; and some years must elapse before the general effect of its present system can be fully developed. It is devoutly to be hoped, that long before that period shall arrive, the necessity of a church establishment will be sufficiently felt among all classes, to induce the legislature to carry into effect some adequate provision for that purpose ; if not on the higher ground of duty as Christians, yet, at least, on the prin- ciples of political expediency and civil decorum." Upon this Mr. Bristed remarks: — " It would be .more difficult than perhaps Mr. Wilks imagines, on such an assumption, to deter- mine which should be the dominant state sect. Certainlv it would not be the American- Anglo- Church ; and the political precedency could not easily be settled among the Presbyterians, Congrega- ANGLIfAX AND ANCT-O-AMEnirAN riH' HrilF.?:. 580 tionalists, Methodis^ts, and Baptists." We ;uv very k''"^ ^^ I'l'-'i'' <•' this dirticultv ; and, for the sake of America, we hope it will prove insunnountable. Tlic liritish Review and Dr. Beecher (a Congregational divine in Connecticut) draw a sad picture of the alarming state of religion in America, from the want of " comi)etent religious teachers." In opposition to this, Mr. Kristed remarks — " That Dr. Beecher counts onlv recjulnr clergv : all the rest go for nothing with him. I?v regular clergy, he intends such only as have been rcgulurly trained to the ministry* at some academic insti- tution or college; whether at Harvard, Princeton, ^ ale, or elsewhere. Now, within the limits of tins calculation are not included all, even of the Indejjendent, Presbyterian, and Episcopal clergy throughout the I'nion. And they do not comprehend any of the three thousand irregular Ba])tist i)reaehers ; the cme thousand travelling, and the four thousand local preachers among the Methodists. JJeduct the services of fill but college-bred ministers in England, and the religion of that country will be in a vrnj small way. The clergy of all arms in the United States, may be thus counted in round numbers: — Ameriean-Anglo-Church, or Protestant Episcopal 300 Presbyterian, since their late junction - - 1300 Congregational, or Independent - - - 1600 Baptists, chiefly Particular, some general - 3000 Methodists, Travelling Preachers . - . ] 000 Local Preachers . . - 4000 All other denominations, including Papists - GOO Total of American Clercjy, in 1 822 11 ,800 " Wliicli gives more than one clergyman to every thousand souls, even computing the population of the United States at ten millions. The established clergy of England and Wales are about eleven thousand. The population of England and Wales is rather more than twelve millions, averaging less than one state clergyman to each thousand souls. Indeed, by adding the dissenting ministers, eleven thousand clergy more may be joined to those in the Establish- ment. But the formed high-churchmen do not allow any of non- episcopal ministrations to be valid or regular." " Throughout the United States, pure evangelical religion is much more generally difi^used than in the English church establish- ment, and the standard of morals is higher. We have, in propor- tion to our population, much less infidelity and profligacy, fewer divorces, robberies, murders, tumults, &c. &c. The American- Anglo- Church herself has at length followed the example of other religious denominations, and established a general theological semi- nary for the instruction of her divinity students. The Congrega- tionalists have a very flourishing, and munificently endowed, theolo- gical seminary at Andover, in Massachusetts ; the Methodists, one • Mr. Bristed's expression is " the ministry of reconciliation^^ — We really deem such an application, of such a scriptural phrase, little short of profane. Regularly trained to the apostolic office ! 590 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S in the western part of the State of New York ; the Baj)tists have instituted a divinity college at Washington ; the Dutch Church has ^ school of the prophets — (fiddlestick! Mr. Bristed) at Brunswick, in New Jersey ; the Presbyterians have a theological hall at Princeton, also in Jersey." We are sorry to understand that the American colleges are so involved with theology and the manufacture of clergymen. In our view it augurs ill for their literature, and no better for their religion. As to the apprehended scarcity of clergy in the United States, we conceive that the argument drawn from it by tlie advo- cates of religious establishments is very idle. We have long under- stood that there are few parts of the world where the clergy are regarded with more reverence, or drive a more successful trade ; and in this, as in every other marketable article, we may be certain that the demand will create a pro])ortionate supply. Mr. Bristed makes a brief incidental mention of one sect in America, against which, we dare say, all the clergy of all denomina- tions make common cause, p. 448. " The sine nomine secta per- ceives a very clear revelation from heaven, that the New Testament proscribes all clergy, of every order, sort, and kind ; and permits none but laymen, who have some secular occupation during the week-days, as tinkers, weavers, cobblers, et id genvs omne, to be teachers, and preachers, and expounders of the law and gospel, on the sabbath." We confess that we should be glad of some more information about this sine nomine secta, of whom our author speaks with such scorn, and we do think it likely that they know much more about Christianity than Mr. Bristed. Does he need to be informed, that the whole distinction between clergy and laity is con- fessedly without any foundation in scripture, a mere human inven- tion, unknown for some ages after the apostolic ? We say, is confes- sedly so ; because Dr. Campbell, himself a regular formal clergvman, owns and proves it, in his " Lectures on Ecclesiastical History ;" and we believe none of the clergy have ever attempted a refutation of his statements. We smile at Mr. Bristed's enumeration of the honest trades by which Christians, who exhort and admonish one another on the first day of the week, may earn their bread in the course of it. But we are struck by its perfect coincidence with the language which he condemns in Lord S., p. 204, when, in the year 1811, he supported his attempted invasion of the Toleration Act by " describing the non-conforming preachers as blacksmiths, cobblers, tailors, pedlars, chimney-sweepers, and ivhat not f Neither the noble British peer, nor the American counsellor at law, seems to have ever thought of what is ascertained to us by the scriptures, that an apostle laboured at his trade, working with his own hands, and urged his own ex- ample, in this respect, upon the elders of a Christian church for their imitation. (Acts xx. 34, 35.) But we really do not mean to speak of such elders as an order of men at all like the clergy ; nor of the churches of which they were overseers, as at all like the con- gregations to which the clergy minister ; nor of that simplfe " speak- ing of the truth in love .•'" which went on in the Christian assem AXCLICAN AM) A NC; l.O-AM i: Ul'JAN CUT KCll KS. •Jf'l, blics, as at :ill like our inotlern sermons. ^Vhat a diHVront tliintr, i" the view of Lord S., and of Mr. Biisted too, is Christianity at this dav, and Christianity in the davs of tlie apostle I a m\ich Jiner thing cer- tainly now. Init, in our view, real Christianity is unaltered and unalterable. Anionir all our author's inconsistencies, none strikes us more than his -wish for a modified establishment in the American States, and his dissatisfaction that they leave religion so much to itself. " It is .1 grave question, which every American statesman, who knows, and feels, that pure and undefilcd relic/ion is the great sheet anchor of human societij, ought to ask, if there be no safe and effectual medium to be found, between making one dominant sect, and the ruling powers completely disregarding religion, making no provision for gospel ordinances, &c. &c. Cannot, as in some of the New Eng- land States is already done, the American governments generally provide, that in every township throughout their respective jurisdic- tions, there shall be SOME religious ordinances and worship, still leaving to every individual the personal rights of conscience un- touched, and his otcn choice of the ])articular sect, or denomination of Christianity, to which he wishes to be attached, unimpaired .'" But what, Mr. Bristed, if some poor Christian, less liberal than yourself, should be unable to find any one sect or denomination of Christianity in bis township, to which he could conscientiously attach, himself.'' What is to become of the rights of his conscience .'' We fear it might be necessary to teach him more liberality by fine and imprisonment. And when any religion called Christianity will an- swer your purpose, we might beg to know why you should not extend your liberality still more widely. In the following pages Mr. Bristed gives a detailed account of the legislative provisions for religion, in the states of New England and Massachusetts ; the whole of which account we should gladly tran- scribe, if our limits permitted. It proves with sufiicient clearness, that the fundamental princijjle of religious establishments is admitted, and acted upon, in some parts of the United States. We even read of a congregational clergyman (the congregationalists are called the standing order in New England) levying his tax from persons of other denominations, h\ distraining nnd selling their goods. There is, ho^v- ever, an indistinct intimation, that a considerable modification of the old law on the subject has recently taken place. But the citizens must bv law be nominal Christians and Protestants ; while they may pick and choose among all the assortments of protestantism, which the public warehouse of religion furnishes, for that denomination which they wish to support. And our author wishes something like this to take place throughout the rest of the Union ; while he is comically perjjlexed to know how it shall be equitably effected. For our parts, if the state is to interfere at all with the religion of the people, we think it much more consistent to fix on some one re- ligious system, — no matter what, which shall be legally patronized and supported, to the exclusion or discountenance of evety other. We do not say this would be more icise ; but it would be more con- sistent. In a Christian view, indeed, there is something grossly pro- 592 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S fane in the extended liberality of the New England and Massachu- setts establishment. The legislature savs in effect to the people, " Good citizens, we care not a fig what religion you have ; but you must have, or pretend to have, some. We care not what your faith is ; but you must call it Christian and Protestant. ^Ye care not what God you worship, or whether you worship any ; but you must appear at church once in three months, if it even be a church composed of Johanna Southcott's followers." And this is the political and religious wisdom which Mr. Bristed has learned in America I He assures us, indeed, p. 345, that a. pious man "could not possibly disapprove of the care taken in New England to keep the Sabbath holy ;" and that " it is self-evident that there can be no stability for the American, or for any other political institutions, if once a majority, or even a con- siderable portion of the population become infidels, whether baptized or unbaptized. So, after all that Mr. Bristed has elsewhere said about the paucity of real Christians in every age and country, he con- ceives that a great majority of the American population are indeed believers of the Gospel of Christ ; and that legislative provisions for religion have effected this, and are necessary to secure its continuance. On his idea of a national " keeping of the Sabbath holy," we would only say at present, that there is one observance of the first day of the week, which is of indisputable obligation from the Scriptures to disciples of Christ ; their coming together into one place to break bread, in commemoration of that sacrifice for sin by which they have been redeemed unto God. But we have never found any more regardless of this scriptural observance of the day, than those who are most zealous for what they call the observance of the Sabbath. If Mr. Bristed, when he speaks of the great mass of the American population as not being infidels, merely mean that they assume the Christian name, and profess something which they cull Christianity ; we must beg to know, in the first place, why the poor papists should not pass muster along with all the various sects of nominal protcs- tants : and, in the second place, what there is in the mere name and profession of Christianity, which is essential to the well-being and security of a state. We could point to some parts of the British do- minions, in which there would be much less distraction and outrage, much less of all that is to be deprecated in a well-ordered p litv, if the present Christian population were exchanged for an ecpial number of Gentoos. But elsewhere Mr. Bristed seems to restrict his position to some- thing more than the mere name and form of Christianity, p. 58. " Those who have learned from the study of their Bible, and from acquaintance with the history of the world, that human communities and nations invariably flourish or fade in proportion to the prevalence or absence of pure vital religion in the hearts and actions of the peo- ple, will readily acknowledge, &c." P. 1 01. " The periods of national history are prosperous or calamitous, in proportion as piety prevails or languishes." WiU our author be shocked, when we plainly protest against the sentiment which he so confidently advances, and avow •our persuasion that it is wholly unsupported either by history or the Bible. The idea seems altogether Jewish, and connected with a mis- ANGLICAN AND ANGl.O-AMKUICAN CllUIlCJir.S. 5:)l understanding of that dispensation which has passed away, and in which national prosperity was annexed to the ohscrvance of tlic hiw eciven hv Moses. 'J'hat the flourishing and decay of empires is closely connected with the 7/j«««c;-a' of the people, wo readily admit. Hut the character of popular manners, as far as they affect civil society, is conunoidv determined hv things very different from popular rdujion. Will Mr. Bristed maintain, that it was the prevalence oi pure vital rrliijion among the people, which occasioned the flourishing of the Roman republic during so many centuries .'' He does, indeed, assure us, p. 1C7, that the reason why England was so " terrible to all her foes abroad, as well as secure at home, during the protectorate of Cromwell," was, that " a great portion of her people were serious/i/ inclined, and religion was encouraged." liut we must tell him, thai the plain account of the fact is to be found in the talents, energy, and firmness of that military usurper ; just as, a few years after, the op- posite character of the executive produced the opposite cflect Cer- tainly the prevalence of this same "pure vital religion" is a very pre- carious thing, and altogether dependent on the excitement of court- favour, if, in so few years as elapsed between the death of Cromwell, and Charles's acting as " a hireling pensioner of the French court," the religion of the people became extinct. We can no longer wonder at Mr. Bristed's lamentation, p. 390, that in the Anglo-American church, there is " no bounty for jnetij, because formalists proscribe every thing in the shape of evangelism," &c. &c. But does it not become more and more manifest, that he would be quite content with the English establishment, in spite of ail the hard things he says against it, if he could persuade the minister and the hierarchy to such an exercise of their church-patronage, as would give a sutiicient bounty to piety and evangelism .^ Yet with extraordinar)^ inconsistency, Mr. Bristed writes as follows : P. 3G3. " Persons who have never lived out of England have no aderpaate opportunity of knowing how religion is to subsist, when left to find her own level, without the interference, and free from the close em- brace, of the civil magistrate. The English people never see Chris- tianity, but as embodied in one dominant state sect, clothed with power, rioting in wealth, and proscribing, and discountenancing all other denominations ; which, nevertheless, are compelled to contri- bute to the support of the national priesthood, as well as to maiiitain their own clergy. In recompense for which, they are put under the ban of the empire, the brand of religious disability is stamped upon them, &c. &c. Under such circumstances, and always seeing religion inseparalily blended with state policy, what can the English people know about the progress of Christianity, when left entirely to the guid- ance of its Almighty Author } It is quite childish to suppose, that the arm, whether civil or military, of the British, or of any other go- vernment, is necessary to preserve alive the church of Christ. Its divine Master has promised to be always with her to the end of the world. And he has alwavs hitherto protected her, alike against," &c. &c. Again, " Immediately after the Ascension of its Almighty Founder, Chris • VOL. II. 2 y 592 REVIEW OF BRTSTED'S 1 tianity experienced, according to his own predictions and warnings, the increasing enmity of a corrupt and idolatrous world. During the thi-ee first centuries of its progress, it was called upon to struggle with, &c. Yet, under all the persecutions, general and local, imperial aiid popular, Christianity increased daily, and spread itself over every corner of the then discovered world. By the time, says Bishop Por- teus, the empire became Christian, there is every reason to believe, that the Christians were more numerous and more powerful than the Pagans. Which consideration induced Constantine to make the first established national Christian church ; a measure that injured Chris- tianity infinitely more, than all the ten bloody persecutions of his Pagan predecessors." In the preceding extracts, along with much truth there are various points on which we should wish to animadvert. But we must con- tent ourselves with a brief remark on the assertion in the last sen- tence. Previous to the time of Constantine, Christianity (under- standing by this word the prevalent profession of Christianity) had become so corrupted, as to be quite prepared for his political esta- blishment of it ; otherwise, indeed, the Roman emperor could not have found it an engine fitted to his purposes. That his nominal conversion, and his political patronage of the thing, opened the flood- gates of corruption wider, and developed the existing corruption in a grossness of form, which perhaps it could not otherwise have assumed, we freely admit. But all the while, Christianity, real Christianity, remained, and has since remained uninjured. It is that kingdom of heaven, the interests of which are always effectually cared for, and secured by divine power. But we do apprehend, that our main difference with Mr. Bristed, and indeed the main source of all his perplexity and inconsistency, lies in the erroneous view which he takes of the nature and design of that kingdom. He seems to have an idea, with multitudes of reli- gionists, that Christianity has been designed for that which certainly it has never yet accomplished ; for efi'ectually communicating to whole nations upon earth what he calls " pure vital religion." We are sure that it has effected, and will effect, to the end, all that it was designed for. This certainly indeed is embodied in our persuasion of its really divine origin and nature. But we learn from the Scriptures, that they were designed to make sinners, who believe their testimony, " wise unto salvation;" to set their feet in the way of righteousness and peace. As to those who, under the profession of Christianity, believe a lie, (and few there are who do not,) we do not wonder at all that they should not be benefitted by that gospel, which they dis- credit just as much as those who avowedly reject it. Our author does sometimes speak a language, in a degree, corresponding with this view; and expresses his/eftr, that " the re«Z Christians, in these na- tional ecclesiastical establishments, are, comparatively, a very little flock." P. 353. But he is enamoured of the dream, that it will be otherwise : and meanwhile he clings to the common notion, that Christianity has introduced a higher tone of public morals, even among those whom he would not own as real Christians. For our- selves, we would be glad that the tone of public morals, (or manners ANGLICAN AND ANGLO-AMERICAN CHURCHES. .093 rather,) were as liiirli in Christianized England, as it was in the re- pubhc of heathen Rome. We are sure that it is not ; that adultery, perjury, murder, drunkenness, fraud of every form, and all other vices n)ost injurious to the wcll-bcinfj of a state, are unspeakably more com- mon in the former than they were in the latter. Some of them, in- deed, were for centuries almost unknown in the latter. Yet we arc by no means among those who are fond of amusing themselves with in- vectives against the manners of the age. But we would appeal to Mr. Bristed's knowledge of history, whether the general history of Christendom present not just the same scene of human folly and wickedness, of bloodshed and cruelty, with that which the his- tory of the world exhibits before the introduction of Christianity. And if so, what reason has he to suppose, that the gospel ever was designed by its divine Author to alter the character of tluit world ? It is not easy to say precisely what !Mr. Bristed means by the gos- pel, or by evangelical religion ; but it is plain to us, that his senti- ments on this subject are derived more from preachers and commen- tators, than from the Scriptures. Divine truth holds a very subor- dinate place in his system, in comparison of the excitement of strong religious feelings, " yearnings" after this and that, (Pp. 33. 43. 4G4. &c.) especially after the due performance of that indeed arduous task, to " obtain a personal interest in the all-sufficient sacrifice." P. 40. CcUvinism and Arminianism are all one with him. He even quotes with approbation, (.P 436.) John Wesley's infidel language — " Twill not quarrel with you about any opinion, only see that your heart be right towards God," &c. Yet he certainly does demur, in the same page, to John's view of Marcus Antoninus as a spiritual person, be- cause this emperor unfortunately was " a horrible persecutor of the Christians." To the same effect, however, is all that language, in which Mr. Bristed employs the phrases, seriousness, piety, religion, &c. as equivalent with the Christian mind. This so called charity is so extended, that he seems to view all who are ver}' serious, pious, and religious, as right in the main ; and urges on them the excellence of " that mysterious union, in which men agree to differ." P. 293. Tlie central point of union, in which such liberal divines meet, has been well characterized by one, as consisting in piety towards the gods. We must appear sad bigots to Mr. Bristed, when we assure him that the greatest fervour of piety, where a false god is the object of religion, appears to us not a whit better than irrcligion ; and that we consider the only true God as known and worshipped, feared and loved, only by those who believe the one unadulterated testimony of his character in the Scriptures. Our author, in his last chapter, is very vehement against Dr. Mant's doctrine of baptismal regeneration, or the efficacy of water baptism, when regularly administered, to communicate to the infant some in- ward spiritual change. lie quotes the Docter as asserting, that " the Spirit moveth upon the face of the baptismal waters, imparting to them a quickening power !" From such blasphemous nonsense, cer- tainly, a Christian can only turn away with disgust and abhorrence : though we may remark, that his lordship's sentiments on the subject, or rather, perhaps, the sentiments which he advocates, seem to be in 2q2 594 REVIEW OF BRISTED'S obvious harmony with the language of the catechism and baptismal service of the Anglican church. But we do conceive that Mr. Bristed himself needs to have his attention directed to the simple account of regeneration, which the Scripture gives, 1 John v. 1. " Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God." Here it is obvious that the apostle states a divine truth, in the words, " Jesus is the Christ," the belief of which he declares to be always accompanied with the change called regeneration. But what Mr. Bristed means by faith, or believing, it is very hard to say: for he tells us, (p. 4-^3.) that it is " unscriptural, unprotestant, unchurchmanlike, and danger- ous to say, that infants are justified without faith." Now, it is evi- dent that the infant, whether baptized or unbaptized, neither believes nor disbelieves any thing about a truth, of which it has never heard, and the import of which it is utterly incapable of understanding. Yet we have the highest authority for maintaining, that of such, of objects so helpless, ignorant, and utterly incapable of doing aught to forward their own interests, " of such is the kingdom of God." We are aware that the expression which we have just quoted is commonly interpreted in a very different way, as if it described characters as innocent, simple, and teachable as little children. It might easily be shown, that this popular comment is in direct opposition to the whole context of the passage, as well, indeed, as to the whole analogy of scriptural truth. But we must abstain, and hasten to conclude an article, from the length of which Mr. Bristed may perceive that we consider his book, with all its faults, as containing much interesting matter. The hints which we have suggested to his consideration, and a few more which we are about to subjoin, we hope he wiU re- ceive with the same friendly feelings which have prompted them. In his future publications, we strongly recommend that he should aim at more sobriety ; sobriety of thought, and sobriety of language. No doubt it is much easier to prescribe this to an ardent, desultory, and head-long writer, than to administer the remedy. But let us ask him, whether the following position be not most unwarrantably strong. (P. 397.) "The chief objects of every native American, after bettering his own condition, are to aggrandize his country ; to drive all Europeans out of this western world ; to federate the two Americas, north and south, &c. and, eventually, to dictate the law to Europe, and to the world ?" These the chief objects of every wa^eye American ! even of the Christian natives ! Alas ! alas ! for America, if this be true. Setting aside the influence of Christian principles altogether, we really had attributed a much greater share of good setise to the Americans than this passage would intimate; though we never doubted that there are foolish and hot-headed politicians among them who may conceive that such objects are desirable. Those who pursue them will be found among the worst enemies to the real interests of America. Let us submit it also to Mr. Bristed's good taste whether such lan- guage as the following be really energetic, or do not rather throw a ludicrous and disgusting air upon his sentiments .'' (P. 410.) " He (Rev. Mr. Polwhele) dips his pen in the doubly-distilled venom of the damned, when he raves against the evangelical clergy." (P. 188.) ANGLIC.SNAND ANGLO-AMERICAN CHURCHES. 595 " Formtil hich churclimen . . . generally have about as much mcrcv, as there is milk in a male tiger." We would especially advise Mr. Bristed to abstain from cant. Ought not either a Christian, or any educated man, to blush for jjcn- ning such sentences as the following.'' (P. 42.) " It is mv wish not to be understood as in any way designing to reflect upon the study or the practice of the law, by occasionally escaping from the toil and dust, and litigation of the forum, into the city of refuge." (P. 56" ) " The unction of humility, which flowed from the silvered temples of Beveridge, down to the skirts of his garment." As we are anxious for the preservation of the English language in the new world, we could have wished (though it is certainly a very subordinate matter), that our author had studied more purity of Eng- lish stvle : and we might have reasonal)ly exi)ected, that a gentleman, who has received a literary education in these countries, should abstain from such barbarisms, or perhaps Americanisms, as the following : " to locate," "to eventuate" '"product to drive," " intermediate the complaints " " one of our largest divines," &c. &c. But, to use Mr. Bristed's language, p. 413, the liynits of the present article are leaning to their close. We therefore only add our advice, that when he next writes on theological subjects, he would adhere more closely to the good principle expressed in the Greek motto of bis title-page : In twd Ociuv y^ccyut SeoXoyotyxEv xay QiXu<7iv ol e^O^oi, xav fAv. Hitherto certainly we may complain, that, in adopting that motto, he has hunfr out false colours. 506 REVIEW *' A GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON; IN WHICH ARE EXPLAINED ALL THE WORDS USED BY THE BEST GREEK WRITERS OF PROSE AND VERSE, &C. BY JOHN JONES. LL. D. AUTIIOH OF ^/te GREEK GRAMMAR. Longman and Co. 8vo. pp. 870." [Published in No, II. of The "Westminster lleview, April, 1824.] When we consider the numerous and ample endowments which the liberaHty of former ages has provided in this country for the support of learning, and especially classical learning, it seems extra- ordinary that our schools have remained so long almost wholly des- titute of books properly adapted for facilitating its acquisition. In numerous instances is this want observable ; but in none is it more strikingly apparent, or more injurious in its eifects, than in the instance of Lexicons. Every competent judge, acquainted with the state of scholastic education in England, is aware that the Lexicons generally used in our schools, for teaching both the Greek and Latin languages, are grossly and scandalously defective, utterly in- adequate to afford that critical aid to the learner which a Lexicon ought to supply. We have sometimes been inclined to think that it would be a fair and expedient object of legislative enactment, to apply some of the literary funds which exist in the country to the purpose of providing for our classical schools — what may be called — suitable classical fur- niture. In this we include Grammars, Exercise-books, Lexicons, and editions of the classic authors. The most elementary works ought always to be drawn up by the most advanced scholars. But other qualifications, besides profound scholarship, would be essentially requisite in the persons engaged to undertake the task which we point out. It would be requisite cspe- DR. JONES'S GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. .007 cially that they should have good sense ; that they should have the faculty of taking a clear view of the end to he proposed, and of the means hy which it is to be attained. They should be well acquainted with the' kind of aid which a school-boy needs and ought to l)e fur- nished with ; and thev should aim at supplying that aid w ith all the brevitv that is consistent with clearness, and not sutler themselves to be diverted from the singleness of this object by any of the literary vanitv, which prompts to a display of erudition. Such men, though they are not met with every day, yet surely might be found, and engaged in the work : nor do we see how the work is likely to be efi'ected without some nation;d interference, such as we suggest. It is vain to look to our Universities for stirring in it. They seem to think, with the bishops, that things go on very well as they are. Yet, even if this were admitted, it might be worth considering hoiv long they are likely to go on as they are. All who know what passes in the world, know that the tide of public opinion has for some time been setting most strongly against clas- sical learning. We aie persuaded that it will be decried only by those who possess it not. We therefore consider the prevailing dis- esteem in which it is held as one of the indications, that our nume- rous public seminaries founded for its advancement are sadly inef- ficient ; and we confess that, in the present unsettled state of Europe, we api)rchend that all institutions ineffective, but costly, are of a very precarious duration. It is, however; with great caution that the legislature ought to be desired to take a part in providingfor the wants of the literary con- sumer (in this case the schoolmaster, tutor, &c.) who is generally the best judge of them, and who will sooner or later procure the object of his wishes. We have never seen the co-operation of literary bodies patronized by the state, attended with such advan- tages as to make us much lament the absence of that kind of assist- ance. The Uelphin Classics may serve as a warning against em- powering a government to appoint and pay individuals for remedying deficiencies in books designed for the purposes of instruction ; the fact is, that had even a society for such a purpose been formed, we should have had nothing better than a revisiou of the old books, or perhaps more cumbrous and inefficient new ones upon the old bad plan. Neither literary individuals, competent to the duty of com- posing really gocjd books, have been w^anting, nor yet have the trade been backward in adopting the suggestions of such men. The backwardness has been on the part of the bodies who have hitherto monopolized the public education, and has arisen from the general mass of ignorance and prejudice in which the whole subject has for centuries been immersed, and which that monopoly was calcu- lated to perpetuate. In the instances in which good books have been l)roposcd to them, they have not been adopted : and it is now only, when these prejudices are beginning to disperse, that such good books are coming into favour, and many more into being ; now that there is some chance oi sale to the trade— and some hope of reward to the scholar. It never could be expected that the trade would produce books to rot in their warehouses, or that competent indivi- 598 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S duals would expend their labour on works which were met with no other reception than that of neglect — or if not neglect, ridicule. If in any case national funds are appropriated for the advance- ment of either literature or science, it ought to be especially pro- vided, that they should be distributed in the way of compensation ; and not after the manner too generally established. To give a man a place or sum of money to induce him to perform any given task, is to take away the principal motive to accomplish it ; and, generally, to change an active and vigorous promoter of knowledge, into a lazy, and often dissatisfied, spectator of improvement. I3ut the more we lament the want which we have noticed in our schools, the more must any of the attempts to supply it, which are occasionally made by literary individuals, be commended to our favourable acceptance ; and the more disposed are we to extend to such attempts all the encouragement that we can honestly aflbrd. In the work which now claims our attention, Dr. Jones has made a commendable exertion, to furnish our schools with a Greek Lexicon of a moderate size and critical character. He states that it has cost him " three years' hard labour in composing and printing." We can readily believe it : and we know not many — may we say — operative scholars, oloi wv jl^oroi t'ta), who could labour so hard. In former ages, indeed, one scholar would bring out as many learned works, well executed, as we should think sufficient to employ the lives, and task the powers, of many. Dr. Jones describes himself as engaged in preparing a larger and more general Lexicon of the Greek language, to finish which, he calculates, will cost him " the labour of five or six years more." Would that we could infuse the doctor's active industry into a dozen of the crack scholars of Oxford or Cambridge ! And, as we are wishing, we may as well add — would that we could infuse all their knowledge of Greek into Dr. Jones ! and then — would that he might live a thousand years ! We cannot, however, flatter Dr. J. with having succeeded in producing such a work as is wanted in our schools. The plan of giving the interpretations in English instead of Latin, we decidedly approve ; and we think it likely that this circumstance alone will give his Lexicon a considerable currency, in a certain class of academies in this country. We expect, therefore, that a new edition will be called for ; and as he promises to spare no pains in the revisal, and to give attention to " the suggestions of enlightened and candid criticism," we shall proceed the more freely to offer some strictures on the general plan, and on the execution of the work. Our author tells us, that he is " sufficiently sensible of its errors and imperfections." We hope it will not be between him and us, as it was with the facetious Rowland Hill, and the woman who came to him complaining that she was a great sinner. " Indeed, I know you are," said his reverence drily, " a very great sinner." " What!" exclaimed the humble complainant, breaking out into a rage, " what bad have vou ever known of me, or can any one say of me, with truth ?" Seriously, we assure the doctor, that it is vvith no hostile feelings we have examined his publication ; and that we GKEKK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. 599 should imich latlicr have found occasion to speak of it in the lan- guaj^e of stronji: commendation, than of critical animadvcrsiion. We mut^t remark, in the first place, that the Lexicon mi"::ht have hccn much more useful, if, in forming the i)lan, Dr. Jones had fixed upon one class of students, to whose use it should be adajjted ; and if he had not extended his view beyond schoolboys. That they principally were in his view in this publication is evident, even from its size and form ; as well as from the fact, that our author is actu- ally preparing a more extensive work, in a large quarto volume, for more advanced scholars. But he tells us in the title-page, and re- l)eats it in his preface, that the present work is " intended, not only for the use of learners in i)rivate and in the public schools, but also for those, who, after the usuid periods of education, seek to acquire a more accurate and extensive acquaintance with the language," &c. From his aiming at the two objects at once, we may in some degree account for his missing both. In a School-Lexicon, of such confined limits, why should Dr. Jones admit words for which he could adduce no authority but that of the obscurest writers, of whose works a few fragments alone have come dow.i to us, and whose names are scarcely known even to many advanced scholars .'' In two consecutive pages,* beginning with the word cv^v%t^os, and ending with the word tvroix.Tuf, we are referred for authority, four times, to " Leon. Tar. ;" three times to " Antip. Sid.;" once to " Thcodorid. ;" to " Anyte ;" to " Jul. Aeg. ;" and to " Crinag." Perhaps, unless the reader has the Greek Anthology at hand, he may be at a loss to guess what names the learned doctor intends by some of his abbreviations. Most of them certainly might be in vain searched for in Harles's copious Introduction to the History of the Greek Language. But may we not ask, of what use to school-boys is the great mass of Dr. Jones's references even to the best-known Greek writers ? He refers, for instance, but without (/«o//«(7 the passages, to the book, section, and line of Schweiglwuser's Polybius, in nine volumes, or to the volume and page of Reiske's Plutarch, in twelve volumes, or of Hemsterhuis's Lucian, in four volumes, &c. &c. where a passage may be found containing the word, and in the sense, which he sup- ports by this authority. Now, are we to suppose a schoolboy pos- sessed of a Greek library, affording not only these authors, but these particular editions of them ? Or, if we should suppose any thing so improbable, are we to suppose that the schoolboy will verify the doctor's reference and interpretation, by turning to the passage ? If our author reply, that this part of his work was intended not for bovs, but for men ; we must say, that to the man, as much as to the boy, it is useless, unless he possess the authors and editions referred to ; and is it to be supposed that the adult scholar, who has any such collection of Greek classics, is unprovided with even that knave Scapula' ij compilation, or with some Greek Lexicon, which * Before we close the two pages to which we refer, we would inci'Iciitally sug- gest to Dr. Jones, that ahhough iv(y;i^mtht might be formed from p^a'nu, •ig«;^«3«f cannot. This must be considered as formed from AJ"?*") lo <-'ontuin. 600 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S must supersede the use of Dr. Jones's ? In a Lexicon otherwise adapted to the use of advanced scholars, we should by no means undervalue the bare reference to the pages of specified editions, even though unaccompanied with any quotation of the passages. For our- selves, we should rather that Stephens, for instance, had given such precise references without the quotations, than the quotations without such precise references. But we confess, that the latter alone seem to us very useless in such a work as that now before us. But there is no volume to which Dr. Jones makes such numerous references, as to the sacred Scriptures, the version of the Seventy, and the writers of the New Testament : and in citing from the latter, he is too frequently tempted to enlarge in the way of com- ment. Now, for what class of readers was this part of the work designed ? Biblical scholars have Biel, Schleusner, and a tribe of subordinate lexicographers in this department. In our schools, we believe, the New Testament is made a kind of first Greek book ; and perhaps to some of them. Dr. Jones's copiousness here may com- mend his work. But, for our parts, we have too great a reverence for the Scriptures, not to reprobate any such use of them ; and we should have considered Dr. Jones as acting much more judiciously, if he had not admitted into his work a single reference to either the Septuagint or the New Testament. This would have been quite consistent with his professed object, of explaining " aU the words used by the best Greek writers." To say nothing at present of the Seventy, it surely is not a matter of controversy at this day, that the writers of the New Testament do not write in classical Greek ; but, as might be expected, in a style abounding with Hebraisms and Latinisms, as well as variously affected by the peculiar nature of the subject which they treat. Are such writings fit to be employed for teaching boys Greek ? The shortness, indeed, of many sentences in the narratives of the Evangelists, and the simplicity of their structure, seem to have in- duced teachers to mis-employ that volume so grosslv, as if it were not easy to select from the classic writers plenty of sentences as short and as simple. But we are bold to affirm, that the New Testament, so far from being a book suited to the youngest learners of the Greek language, is one which cannot, with any advantage, be studied in the original but by those who have otherwise attained a manly ac- quaintance with the language. The smattering, upon which many set up to spell, and parse, and criticise, the text of the Evangelists and Apostles, by the aid of some of the numerous lexicons manufactured for the purpose of assisting them, is commonly but the occasion of making them dupes to their own vanity, and to the ignorance or the dishonesty of others. But allowing that Dr. Jones, from whatever cause, might have thought it necessary not to exclude altogether the sacred writers from the number of the Greek classics, we must still urge the ques- tion— why should he be so extraordinarily copious in his comments on them ? And why should he so needlessly multiply references to them in cases where numerous classical authorities were at hand ? Did he think that there is any dearth of lexicographers and commen- GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. 601 tators oil the New Testament ? Above all, xchij should he make such references the occasion of bringincj forward, we miyht suy of smuygliny in, his own theological sentiments and favourite i/iterprelalioiis ;' It may he needful to adduce some examples to vindicate the justice of our censure. " MOPiM^", ris, V, a form, shape, figure, beauty, Iv (xo^pv Qi5 v-nd^^ujv, being in the form of God, in a splendid form, alluding, seemingly, to our Lord's transfiguration, Matth. 17.* " XfJifoXoy/i, as, v, flattery, or gentleness of language, opposed to guile in the heart. This word occurs only in Rom. IG, 18, and, in truth, the composition of it is X^vtos Koyix, i. e. \oyix irc^l t» Xfrira, oracles concerning Chrcstus ; that is, oracles which certain impostors in the church at Rome propagated concerning Christ, Xqi^ls being changed by them into X^-nror, the usual name given him by the Gnostics, and even bv unbelievers. " ' Aia.Qi(ji.x, xTos, TO, that which is set apart for holy purposes, a victim — nix^o/xriv otvros tyu> ccva.9ciJi.x thxt cctto (rather v'no) roZ X^is'ov, Rom ix. 3. 1 too (i. e. I too, as well as Peter) would have gloried in being separated, i. e. appointed by Christ, for converting my bre- thren, and to be sacrificed as a victim in their cause. " 'iXxafjLos, ov, 0, atonement, sacrifice for sin — the means of expi- ating sin, or of forsaking a sinful life, and thus reconciling man to God ; and this is said of Christ, who is the author of salvation to mankind, and said of him in reference to the sacrifices of the law, with a view to withdraw the attention of the Jewish believers from the Levitical code, to which they were prone, and fix it on repent- ance and reformation through Christ, as the only means of ac- ceptance with God. 1 John ii. 2 ; iv. 10." Now, if these theological interpretations were as indisputably excellent as the author conceives, may we not ask, what business have they in such a lexicon as the present ? Was Dr. Jones at a loss for classical examples of the words /xo^^ri and iXxa-iJ!.os, that he turned aside to those passages of theological controversy in the New Testament ? No such thing : but he wished to take the opportu- nity of throwing the weight of his authority into one of the contro- versial scales, against the divinity or pre-existence of Christ, and against his atonement. The doctor ought not to be allowed to com- pile a Greek lexicon for the use of schools without being bound over to keep the peace theologically. But are his comments of such value as might apologize for his stepping out of the way to introduce them ? He must excuse us for holding them very cheap. Whatever any one may suppose to be the precise meaning of the words h i^o^p^ Qei hzji^yui in Phil, ii, G, no candid and competent reader of the passage can deny, that they evidently denote a state of the person s[)oken of antecedent to that in which it is said that ixvron lui^utri, fAo^(priv ohXh X«/3w», It lixoiu/fjiecTi u-ii9^unTs yo/o/xtvtjs. And will Ur. Jones pretend to say that Christ took not on him the form of a servant, nor wjis made in the likeness * Dr. Jones's book is printed without accents. He will pardon us for disfi- guring his Greek with those vain marks. 602 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S of men, till after his transfiguration on the mount ? It would be amusing to follow our author into his chaotic interpretation of 't\3iaiMs : but the subject would lead us further into theological dis- quisition than the nature and limits of the present article allow. As to Dr. Jones's whim about 'j^^^-nroXoylat, one can but smile at the oracular confidence with which it is put forward, in opposition (we believe we may say) to all lexicographers, commentators, and translators, ancient and modern. Dr. J. remarks that " the word occurs only in Rom. xvi. 18 ;" and we believe the remark was designed to convey a justification of himself for departing so strangely from the received interpretation. We wonder how he could venture to pen that article without even looking at Henry Stephens, who would have furnished him with a passage from Chry- sostom, in which the word occurs ; as well as with the word x?'^^°' Xoyos from Julius Capitolinus. Wetstein, on the passage, would have furnished him with other examples of the word, as well as with citations which decide its meaning, if there were any doubt about it. E. gr. Anth-ol. 71.4. %f>JS"ov xiyoKri, ■zaoKifA.tov '^l rois t^ottoh. Hero- dian, viii. 3, 10. x?'^'^°^^ T^oyois '^iKioca^i^/ra.s . But, in truth, a Greek scholar can be at no loss or uncertainty about the formation of the word ; the analogy is so obvious between it and svKoyix (which occurs in immediate juxta- position with it in the passage), as well as a numerous tribe of similar compounds, ^^ocyvKoylae., ma-XtKoylx, isoXvKoylx, •\^iv^oKoyioc, vI/t/j^foAoy/at, &c. &c. And how Dr. Jones could dream that the word was formed from Xoy^a, oracles (a neuter-plural), would be unaccountable, but that it made part of a dream about the Gnostics, and Chrestus, and oracles concerning Chrestus. "With respect to our author's interpretation of Rom. ix. 3, it is needless to state the objections to it, since an interpretation altoge- ther different has been assigned, which we conceive at once com- mends itself as unquestionably true. Dr. Jones may see what we allude to in Mr. Belsham's late work on the Epistles of Paul; though Mr. B. is quite mistaken in assigning the intei"pretation to Mr. Wakefield as its author. When the doctor interprets /:/,■« (/.irsu^i^ia-Qt (Luke xii. 29) " do not, through anxiety about the future, imitate those ivho go to the stars for the knowledge of future events," he ought to have been guarded against this idle fancy, by attending to one of the significations which he himself has just before assigned to ixiriu^os, " anxious, suspended. Nub. 263." Demosthenes and Thucydides employ the word in the same sense ; which seems borrowed from the agitation of a shij) riding at anchor. We thought that the meaning and origin of the name of Pharisee had been perfectly ascertained and generally known ; but Dr. Jones informs us, that the Pharisees were " a sect among the Jews, who professed to explain the law of Moses from ti>1Q, to expound, or un- fold !"* * On examination, we find that Joli. Drusius long ago offered the same account, in which, however, we believe he has not been followed by any scholar since. The proposed etymology, and the misinterpretation on which it proceeds, obviously confound the Pharisees with the scribes and lawyers, from whom they were alto- gether distinct. GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. C03 Tliis leads us to notice another circumFtaiicc, in wliich we think Dr. Jones's Lexicon, in its present state, ill-adapted to boys, and nothinu^the more adapted to men — we mean his eastern etymolofi^ies. llo informs us, that " whenever the primary sense of a simple term has been overlooked, or mistaken, the orif^in of that term is pointed out in one of the oriental toni^ues;" and in this part of his work our author seems to take jjcculiar pride. It must he inferred that Dr. Jones could with equal certainty assig'n the oriental orii|;in of every simple term in the Greek toni^ue, and we really think that he could, liut while some mav rej^ret that he has not done so, we confess that this jjrofession in liis titlc-pac^e and preface did not raise in us any high expectations. We have known a good deal of the vagaries of etymologists, and of their empty parade of oriental learning. We formerlv knew one cf them whose works abound so with etymologies from the Hebrew, Syriae, Arabic, Persic, &c. &c. and with words exhibited in every variety of oriental character, that many admired him as a prodigy of eastern learning. But he was more honest than most; for he has frequently acknowledged to his confidential friends, that of all these languages with which he made so line a show, he knew nothing beyond their alphabets, and what he learned from indexes and glossaries. In short, nothing is more easy, or requires a smaller stock of philological knowledge, than either to collect or to invent etymologies from the oriental tongues. We are verv far from imdervaluing etymological researches, in their proper place, and soberly conducted : but, unfortunately, the subject affords so many allurements to the indulgence of the imagi-- nation, and such easv means for indulging it, that it is more rare to find sobriety in etymologists than in any other class of writei's. We were not, therefore, much surprised at finding Dr. Jones very extra- vagant and fanciful in many of his eastern etymologies : as well as very ignorant, not only of the eastern languages in general, but even of Hebrew. Into the evidence of this ignorance we shall not at present go, in- viting as the field is which the subject opens to us ; because our im- mediate business is with the doctor's knowledge of Greek, and com- petence for compiling a lexicon of that language for the use of schools. And to schoolboys we do think it very useless to trace Greek words to oriental roots, and very likely to mislead them from the real etymology to which their attention ought to be directed, as well as from the real meaning also of the word, whenever the etymologist ventures to deduce its meaning from its supposed oriental derivation. Few etvmologies bear a more plausible aspect at first view than that which Parkhurst (and Dr. J. after him) assigns for the Greek word (jLv^^iov, viz. from the Hebrew root IMD to conceal, with a formative "O ; or, as the doctor says, " from the Hebrew 'iDDU niustar." Suppose the schoolboy attends to this. He is not much the wiser for it if it were true : but we say that he is misled from the real etymology. When we obsers'e the words fAvu, yi.vs-v)s, (j-vrn- fiov, can there be any reasonable doubt that the two latter are 604 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S formed from the same theme, and that this theme is the verb ia.vw, to close the lips ? And has that verb any connexion with the Hebrew root "nna ? This is one of the examples of a very plausible etymology, which w^e yet think decisively false ; while we are well aware that there are instances of etymologies decisively true, which yet appear at first view the most extravagant. But our author boasts that by his oriental etymologies he ascer- tains the primary sense of a term, and thence its secondary senses, " whenever the primary sense of a simple term has been overlooked or mistaken." This is professing a great deal ; and to do our author all justice, and enable oui' readers to form a fair estimate how far he has advantageously employed his oriental learning for the pur- pose, we shall quote at length one of those articles which he appears to have most laboured, and which we do believe he would himself be most ambitious of presenting, as a specimen of his work. " TAP, (a conjunction) in fact, indeed, truly, then — for, because, wherefore. " The real signification of this particle is supplied only bv its origin, which is the Persian, kar-dan, to do, and which is the parent also of the Latin cur, and the French car. Hence the primary notion of yoc^ is, IN FACT, INDEED, TRULY, THEN. Ai/Tos yx^ o 'l-fiaoZs 1/j.x^rV' f*)£7£v, John iv. 44, and in fact, indeed, Jesus himself bore testimony. us yct^ vTiacysis (xirix rov avn^inov aov, Luke xii. 58, while you are indeed going with your adversary to the judge, ru ya.^ Mwaji Ai-yf;, in fact, to Moses he says, or to Moses, indeed, he says, Rom. ix. 15. zv^oy.yia-otv yaf, XV. 27, they have indeed thought fit. ^ ya.q vmu-t^^os yviii), Rom. vii. 2, the wife is in fact, is indeed or assuredly, bound by the law to her husband while living, ov ya§ ^la. voi/.ov ri inxyyiklot. rZ 'A(3^xaiJL, Rom. iv. 13, in fact the promise was made to Abraham not by the law. t/ yci^ kockov iTtoI-nu-iv ; Mat. xxvii. 23, and what evil in fact hath he done ? dWa, ya.^ rls us, Acharn. 594, but who in fact are you ? who then are you ? " Fronm signifying in fact ya,^ came to express the cause of some circumstance preceding it — for, because, therefore, just as Efyti;,* in fact, means in Latin {ergo) therefore. But it is to be remarked, that the sentence in such cases is very often elliptical. ' Do you not know, brethren, for (yaf) I speak to them that know the law,' Rom. vii. 1 . Here y«f refers to a clause understood ' Do you not know, brethren?' I put this question because I speak to them who know the law. 'JIMS yxq rot ^ua-ova-i ys^as, II. «. 123. ' Thou, Atrides, art most avaricious, and thy avarice has prompted thee to rnake an impracticable request, for how shall the Greeks give thee a reward ?* Sometimes, in the rapidity of association, the writer gives his reason for a thing which he has not yet expressed ; and the force of yoc§ is to be observed only by new modelling the sentence, see 11, -n. 328. Sometimes yaf refers to a circumstance preceding at some distance. * Deducing the Latin ergo (as is very fair) from the Greek Vfy», tve should interioret the latter, not in fact, but hj the effect of, in consequence of. ' What hap- pens, or is by the effect of something else, is therefore, or on account of that thing. GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXFCOX. C05 ' And tlu'V saiil to themselves,* who will roll away the stone from the mouth of the inomiment ? for (yaf) it was very large,' Mark xvi. 4. The writer, chiving wav to the impulse of his ideas, interposes the clause, ' and having lifted up their eyes, they saw that the stone was rolled away.' It is to he observed that the lexicographers, Damni, Schleusner, and Sturzius included, from not knowing the ])riniary and genuine sense of this particle, have assigned it a variety of senses which do not belong to it. ' Now, certainly, any lexicographers are mistaken, who assign a variety of senses to ya.^. It is exactly etjuivalent with the Latin enivi; and opening Stephens's Thesaurus, we find this to be the only sense which he as.-igns it : so far from founded is our author's charge against all the lexicograjjhers, who were ignorant tliat ' the Persian kar-dan, to do,' is the origin of the word. (Hy-the-bye, the word is l)laiidv a cond)ination of the two Greek particles yt and af). But the fact is, it is our autlior who multiplies tlie meanings, not only needlessly, but erroneously. " In fact, indeed, truly, then." — " For, because, therefore." To sav nothing now of the first set of mean- ings deduced from " the Persian kar-dan," wc venture to assert that yij- never means therefore. We are aware that ya.^ olv often signifies therefore, lint in that combination the catisal force of yaf is lost, and the illative force of olv alone retained. Diffuse and redundant as the article is, and injudicious in the quantity of citation from the New Testament, it is yet materially de- fective, and fails of aflbrding the information, which it ought to convey, of the other particles which enter into combination with ya.^, of the position which it holds, &c. But we may^ ask Dr. Jones, has " the primary sense" of this conjunction been " overlooked or mis- taken," that he resorted to the Persian kar-dan to establish it ? Or, was it from his knowledge of that wOiich he so confidently delivers as its etymolog)', that he discovered that yao means for ? Or, does he seriously expect, that any Greek scholar will assign to it any other metming in 'any of those passages, where he informs us that it * Dr. Jones is quite mistaken here, in his supposed correction of the received version, " tliey said among ihumtclves.'' It is very true that vrfit is lo, and tliat Xauriit is themselves fcni. And it is this kind of knowledge of Greek which we say is worse than absolute ignorance of the language, especially when applied to the "sacred writings. Our translators were men of learning, and had good reason for rendering these plain words " among themselves," instead of " to themselves." Dr. J.'s version would import that they said it in their own minds (i» iccvraTf), but without expressing it in words. 'Ilie common version imports that they said it to each other. And this is the real meaning of the original. The writers con- tinually use laurif in the same sense as iXX^Xm, though it is a meaning of the word which our author wholly omits in his Lexicon. See Eph. iv. 32, v. 19. Col. iii. 13, Hi. Hebr. iii. 13. 1 Pet. iv. 8, 10, &c. — This is not the only occasion on which Dr. J. exposes himself by attempting to improve the common translation of the New Testament. On the word oukS> he quotes from John xviii. 37, evMur (ccftXtuf i7 ri, and gives this version, " thou art 7iot then a king ?" in place of the common version, " art thou a king then 1" Is it possible that Dr. J. is ignorant that i»St has not a negative signification ? His improvement, indeed, makes non- sense of the passage, as well as mistranslates the Greek. If any change were made to express more closely the force of i«5» in this and similar constnictions, it should be only the following — " So then, thou art a king, art thou?" 606 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S means — in fact, indeed, truly, then? Or, will any Greek scholars credit his assertion, that the primary sense of (ptXfu is to marry P an assertion, for which he offers no other proof, hut his fancy that the word is derived from the Hehrew biH'J. We fear that we must have Dr. Jones bound over to keep the peace etymologically, as well as theologically. We have remarked that Dr. J. needlessly multiplies the significa- tions of ya.^ ; and we could adduce many instances of the same fault. One, that immediately presents itself to us, is rather amusing. Among the other significations of w/tttw or -niru, he assigns the fol- lowing: — " fall into the tvorld, am born," II. r. 110. Our classical readers no doubt recollect the passage : — "Os xiv lir *ifj.xrt rai^c mia-Yi [jiBrai 'Jioaa-i yvvxiKos, The doctor must look for another example to justify his interpretation : for we can assure him, that in the pas- sage to which he refers, the verb imports literally and simply — to fall or drop. Our author is very ambitious, to " preserve the same original idea through the several ramifications" of meaning annexed to a word ; and he carries to an extravagant length this plausible, but often impracticable, notion. In assigning the original idea, also, he has often no ground to support him, but some whimsical conjecture that strikes his fancy. Thus, " the particle ol^x," he says, " seems to have the same common origin with ofaw :" and from this seeming, he concludes, that " its primary signification is that of lo behold ;" and he then proceeds to dance this idea through two columns for the edification of the student. " It is," he tells us, " a common notion, that many words in all languages convey a variety of significations. But, in strict pro- priety, a term has but one sense, or at most but two, a literal and analogical sense. Every word, on every occasion, presents the same idea ; and it conveys different ideas only, because it stands in different connexions." — After all, then, although the same word " on every occasion prese7its the same idea," yet it does not on every occasion convey the same idea. We are rather bewildered. — " Thus, in one connexion, ixryi may mean bread ; in another, a shore; and with an accidental change of termination (uktis) it denotes a ray of the sun. But in every place the word still means the same thing. For dx-TTi is aysT^, broken ; from oiyu, to break ; corn broken is meal; broken ground or rock, is a shore ; and the broken, scattered light of the sun is its rays. So xiyar, to speak ; and Xeyoixxi, to lie down, are still the self-same word. For it is the Hebrew pnb, to assemble or gather: to gather letters, or words, is to utter them; to gather myself for repose, is to lie down." We acknowledge that we hold such fancies very cheap. It is nothing new certainly to derive a,y.ri) and aKTis, from uyu, frango ; and we are not disposed to dispute it, though we confess that we know not what is meant by calling a sunbeam, the broken light of the sun. But if Dr. Jones holds oiKrit and aKrls (or qcktIv) for the same word, notwithstanding "the accidental change of termination," we beg to know why he considers ayu and ayu as different words, on ac- count of the accidental change of quantity ; why he does not trace CHEKK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. C07 tlic two ideas of breaking and leading to some one common stock ? Wf think it would not be ditHcult to a writer of the doctor's lively imaj^ination. But what if we find the doctor assigning; to the self- same word two senses, not only different, but directly contrary to each other ; and this, in opposition (as fur as we know) to all Greek lexicoq^raphers, ancient and modern ? E. gr. " ^A-nx^Ti^Myf. la-oj (tzTto aortas) I make a thing even with a design or model, i. e. complete — make uneven or unequal, aitov^ii xxl rolde ovx. aiTx^Tt^ti mo^x, Septem 376, haste makes his step not uneven with that man, i. e. an urgent business makes him come with speed equal to this man. — Eteocles and the scout hastily come on the stage the same moment." Here our author forgets the canon he laid down in his preface ; and after assigning to the word the sense of making even, he coins for it the contrary sense oi making uneven, in order to bring forward a pet interpretation of aline in .Eschylus. The expression of the poet, we conceive, evidentlv denotes the hurried and irregular movement of each. A man walking leisurely plants his foot steadily, so as to makea/>pr/(?c^ step ; but this their hurry did not allow. We seriouslv, and with the most friendly intention, advise Dr. Jones to Avithdraw all the original matter from his Lexicon, and to be content with the humbler office of a mere compiler. The existing materials for a useful Greek Lexicon are ample, but widely scat- tered. To select judiciously, to collect, and to abridge, would task the powers and employ many years of the life of the ablest scholar; and the ablest scholar need not be ashamed of the employment, even under the restriction which we should think it necessary to im- pose on our author. We are disposed to account for his doing so imperfectly and incor- rectly, that which we must suppose to be within his pow'ers, from his attention being so much occupied by the seductions of other, and, as he conceives, higher objects. Dr. Jones almost entirely neglects that needful labour, which, in his title-page and preface, he professes to have employed — the marking of the quantity of doubt- ful vowels. Of the few instances in which he has mai'ked it, a ma- jority are of that kind in which we should be disposed to omit it ; e. gr. the penultimate of the verbs in vtu — of the future of verbs in ^w, &c. where the youngest scholar ought to be familiar with the common rule of prosody, which determines the quantity. But the student will in vain seek in this Lexicon the quantity of such words as xK^i^iis, y-l^ovxis, xfiS^, ixxXx, Ov/j-oi, and a whole tribe of its deri- vatives and compounds, l^xOio! and all the words compounded with the particle ^x, &c. &c. And we complain of the omission only in those cases, in which Dr. Jones could have found no difficulty in supplying it, at least with the aid of Dr. Maltby's edition of Morell. L^seless also to schoolboys as we think his mere references to this and that passage in the Greek classics without citing the words, yet, for ourselves, we could wish that he had better fulfilled his engage- ment of authenticating each word, and the senses assigned, even by such references. For instance, we are somewhat curious to know on what authority Dr. J. assigns to awa^ the meaning of, as soon as, VOL. II. 2 R 608 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S We believe he is singular in that interpretation of the word ; and we confess that, until we see a decisive classical example of such an application of it, we must remain incredulous, notwithstanding the weight of the doctor's authority. There must have been some pas- sage under his view, in which he thought the word had this mean- ing ; and had he referred to it, we should probably be able to trace the origin of his mistake, as in other instances. Thus, on the verb yvw^'/^w, our author assigns to the passive yvco^t^nij-xi the meaning, 1 am reconciled ; and refers to a passage in iJemosthenes, p. 1390. ed. Reisk. We were very certain that the verb never had this meaning ; and accordingly, on examining the page referred to, we found the words rus m^oG-nyo^lxs b^ovtss. a'ls ^tto Ti/v £v yivsi y^w^i'Cpvra.t — " titles by which they are distinguished by those belonging to the family." As no blundering of translation could introduce the idea of he'ing reconciled here, we were still at a loss to account for Dr. J.'s interpretation and reference ; till at length we examined " Reiske's Index Gr. Demosth." under the word yvojf/^f/v, which immediately cleared up our author's mistake. There, immediately before the passage to which Dr. J. refeiTcd, Reiske cites (from p. 925), the words oTroSty ort'noQi)/ lyvu^iaf/AvQi, and adds the following interpretation : " quacunque tandem ratione cum eo conciliati." Now, it becomes evident that our author hastily consulted this Index alone, without examining the text of Demos- thenes; accidentally referred to the words in p. 1390, instead of to those in p. 925, and mistook the meaning of Reiske's Latin, cu7n eo conciliati. The words ottoObv ovTroGsv lyvM^iaiAvoi tovtu simply mean " from whatever circumstance they had become acquainted with this man," — without the slightest intimation of any previous enmity between the parties, or any recoiiciliation. To justify our assertion, it way be well to quote the context : — hyu yac^, u ocvo^ss oin.xs'xi, ocvtos ij.iv ho o7rws"'«v lyvu^iLpv ras a»6fW7r«s rims. Q^aavixwris os . . . y.xi M£\xva)7T0!, o xocXipos xvra, i'nirifi^stoi (jloi slcri, nxi y^^uiixiQx u'kX'nXots, uis o7ovrs (/.aiXifx. cvToi ir^o- o-yjXSov i*.oi iJLiTx AxK^im rarii'i., ottoQsv oiottoQev lyvu)^iaiA.s\oi thtu' « yx^ ol^x' xxi I'SioiTo IJ.H x.. T. X. — We have insisted the more at large on this example, in order to press upon our author the importance of examining the original of each passage which he cites. It must surely be to haste and inattention, that we should attribute Dr. Jones's gross mistranslation of a very simple passage, which he ad- duces from Xenophon (K. n. i. 6.) under the particle xv. — ip^ovi/xos ^s •ffc^t Tov (Twoia-Biv /At'AXovTOj Troji ocv ris raJ ovri yivoiro ; oijAovot/, u itxT, e!pri, oax iji.h If I i/.x^o\irx u^ivxi, ijlx9uv xv ; i. e. " plainly he may by being taught, as far as matters can be known by teaching." Instead of which the doctor renders the words — " whatever things it is lawful to know after having learnt them." If he had read on to the end of the sentence, he must have seen that a. Is-i (j.x9ovrx iloivxi is equiva- lent with ixaO-nru. — We may remark also, that when Dr. J. on the same particle informs us, that Ittio-x'^v xv, in the beginning of the first Philippic, " means iTsia-yoii/.i xv," (the Dr. means ItteV^ov av) his language is calculated to lead a schoolboy into a great mistake. Taking the words in connexion with the following, they may, in- GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. 609 deed, advantageouslv be translated as if they ran — tTrfV^^ov «► iu>s . . . Kxi, It f/.n . . . r)7v^ixy ci> iiyov. But when We so resolve the sentence, the nccessitv of inserting a copulative particle shows, that cTno-y(^uv retains its proper participial meaning. We almost blush, while we are obliged to pen an observation so puerile. Our author, indeed, often seems more anxious about teaching a bov to tran., Dem. 305, 11, — if I diminished the resoui'ces of the state, wrong being on my side, he would have proved so — he would have proved t';at wrong actually existed on my part." Instead of, he would have proved thai the icrony ivas with me — lay at my door. Again, — " E; (A.IV yoL^ //.■>? i^f^v, i.'K'Ku riiv Mvauv \eixv y.oc.Xv(j.ivriv t^v 'EXXa^as »!Tav oip6-/)v«;, ^uvruv Aarittxiuv x«( bvTwv, irs^iti^ycx.a/j.cxi fj-sy lyu tti^i ruii ■Yoiiruv c'lTTuv, Dem. 248, 25, if indeed it was not fit that Greece, while really Greece, should appear what is called a Mysian })rev, (i.e. an easy unresisting prey to Philip) while the Athenians lived and v/ere really so (and were really worthy of that name), I have trifled in speaking of these things." Here, along with every thing else that is extraordinary, cur au- thor makes the orator say exactly the contrary of what he really savs. He had proposed the indignant question — " Ought there, or ought there not, to have appeared some of the Greeks, to oppose him in these proceedings ?" He immediately adds. If there ovght not, but Greece ought to have been seen the prey (as is said) of Mysians . . . then indeed I have been over-busy in speaking about such matters ; and you, 8fc. As to the words ^tlivruv 'a9. aai ovrujv. Dr. Jones is more excuse- able for assigning some emphasis to ovruv there. Yet we confess that we are disposed to think it one of those pleonastic expressions which occur in all languages : as we say, while I live and breathe. Perhaps, however, the words may import, while Athenians lived, and the Athenian state subsisted; the city and commonwealth un- destroyed. Demosthenes is one of those prose writers w^hom Dr. Jones pro- fesses to explain in this Lexicon ; and strongly should we recom- mend that classic to his most assiduous study, before he brings out another edition of the work. At pi'esent, certainly, the student, who should sit down to read Demosthenes with the aid of this Lexicon, would not only be absolutely led astray upon many pas- sages, but would continually find himself left in the lurch, without any of that assistance and information which a young student must need ; and this, even in cases in which the commonest lexicons afford it. A few examples will explain and illustrate our meaning. The Greek Orator continually uses the expression o'l mx^iovra, for those who come forward to address the people. But Dr. Jones fur- nishes the student with no other meanings for the verb, but to " pass by, withdraw, neglect :" assigning, in fact, to 'zud^eiixi the significa- tions of Trac^iyjfA.!, as well as its two participles 'acc^iU and zya^tQeis. The verb taxfexOch is employed in the same sense (Dem, 169, 559, GREKK AND KNGLISl! LFAICON. 611 and Luc; Menipp.) But of this also no notice is taken by our author: though in both instances, even Hedcric's Lexicon wouUl supply liis deficiency. As totally woidd Dr. Jones's guidance fail the student upon the orator's expression (pp. 30', 174) o'?^' oa-ns olnravTis o^acre l^rnx.lai littt- Xn/xfjiito, — where i^y>(ji.ix is used for " an open field, in which there are no antagonists to oppose us." And upon that passage (p. 90) v ixiy «> (TTrti^vi TJi^i ra/v h ^cppo*yij, our author quotes the following passage from Lucian's Dialogue between Menippus and Tantalus : Ov (pOacvu (3^e^xs XK^ov TO y^slXos, xxi oix rejv oxx.rvXuv oiojppvsv, xiroXsi'Trsi ^'i^av rviii Xi\^ /^<"' — and thus interprets the words, "I no sooner wet the top of my lips, than escaping through my fingers it left [leaves] my hand dry." This would import that Tantalus succeeded in wetting the top of his lips ; which certainly is contrary to Lucian's meaning. The proper import of the Greek words is, " I do not succeed in whet- ting the top of mv lips, before it runs through my fingers," &c. The Latin interpreter, however, renders the words, " simul ac rigavi extrema labia, statim per digitos dilapsa," &c. And we freely ac- knowledge, that in many instances the phrase may very justly be rendered as Dr. Jones proposes. Thus, the other example of it, which he quotes — ot'x Ef9») jAfiiv, y.x\ t^» (^iXonixlxv Ivi^siixro, may fairly be translated, " he no sooner came than he shewed his ambi- tion." Yet the strict and proper import of it is, " he had not arrived before he shewed his ambition." And the quotation from Lucijui proves, that the two expressions are not always equivalent. But for all inaccuracies, into which he has been led bv former lexicographers and intei-preters, we hold our author perfectly ex- cusable. For the others, which are truly and properly his own, and of which we have given but a very small specimen, we have been as lenient in our censure, as justice and honesty to the pubhc would allow. We are willing, as far as possible, to impute some of theni to haste ; others to a vain pursuit of novelty of interpretation ; and many of them to a fondness for hobbyhorsical etymologies. 612 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S Some of them are of a description, for which it is hard to account, but from a supposition, which we are reluctant to admit ; because it would be conclusive against Dr. Jones's capacity for the task which he has undertaken. Whatever may be thought upon this point, we should hope he must now be sensible that he published much too soon ; and that his Lexicon needs to be re- composed, in order to be useful either to boys or men. In preparing it anew for the press, we should strongly advise him to arrange the words either alphabetically or radically. The former ar- rangement, though not the most useful, is the least troublesome to schoolboys. The latter alone is adapted to the scholar. But the disarrangement, which our author has at present adopted, forfeits alike the advantages of both. Before we close this article, we wish briefly to justify some opinions which we expressed in the beginning of it. We have unequivocally avowed our approbation of Dr. Jones's giving his interpretations in English, rather than in Latin ; and we have also strongly declared our conviction, that a new Greek Lexicon for the use of schools is deeply wanted ; that those at present in use in this country are scan- dalously bad ; — and that Dr. Jones's attempt to supply their deficiency is therefore in itself commendable. Upon the first of these topics it is the less necessary to enlarge, because the remarks in our last number, on the absurdity of teaching boys the rules of Latin grammar in the Latin language, are mostly applicable to the Latin interpretations in a Greek Lexicon for schools. If any, after having had their attention called to the subject, continue to maintain the expediency of such Latino-Latin grammars, we con- ceive, that with them, reasoning can be of little avail to remove the veteres avias^' which have possession of their minds. And we shall only recommend to these gentlemen one improvement on their sys- tem ; and that is, to teach boys the rules of the Greek grammar in the Greek language. But some, who give up as indefensible the idea of conveying the rules of Latin grammar in Latin, may yet be disposed to vindicate the propriety of making that language the medium of teaching school- boys the Greek grammar, and the meaning of Greek words ; — inas- much as their acquaintance with a language, in which they are sup- posed to have made some progress, is thus increased, while they learn another language. But may we not ask, in the first place, why it should be made necessary to learn Latin before we learn Greek ? The inverse order would seem the more natural of the two ; though we conceive that the two languages may be most advantageously studied together. But, waving this, we would ask in the next place, whether clear- ness and inteUigibility be not the most essential requisite in all expla- nations aflbrded to a learner ? whether the object of the interpreta- tions given in a Lexicon ought not to be, to explain the meaning of the words or phrases with as much clearness and precision as possible ? and, whether this object can be as effectually attained by Latin in- terpretations, as by English, in the period of their progress at which bovs conimcnce the study of Greek .'' * Pcrsiiis. GllKKK. AND ENGLISH LLXICON. C13 Wc believe this will not be asserted by any. It will be aduiitted that the bov commonly finds a difficulty in understandinu; the as- piji:ncd interpretations in a Creek and Latin Lexicon, which he would not find if thev were given in his native tongue. Why, then, should we sacrifice clearness of explanation to another object ? Is it because the latter object cannot otherwise be attained ? Assuredly not. Nay, it mav be more effectually attained otherwise ; namely, by exercising the schoolboy in translating his Greek lessons into Latin. Indeed, it ought to be sufficient to remark, that the time which he now loses in surmounting needless difficulties — in finding out an cvphniat ion of the explunations in his Greek Lexicon — might be much more advan- tageously employed in studying c/f/s.s^/cw/latinity. In short, if it be admitted, that the interpretation of a Greek word is less clear and intelligible to a schoolboy, when proposed in Latin, we think it decided that the interpretation ought to be aflbrded him in English : and we conceive that common sense and sound reason must allow the inevitable force of the conclusion. On the other hand, ice are ready to allow, that if — to the boy or to the man — Latin in- terpretations be as clearly intelhgible as English, it must be a matter of great indifference which language is employed : though we are of opinion that the English language is in some respects better adapted than Latin to the interpretation of Greek. But is the information conveyed to boys, in our School Lexicons and Grammar, so correct, and suited to the occasions of the student, as to redeem the absurdity of the form in which it is conveyed ? Cer- tainly, those who preside over the literature of the countrj", seem to think so. Tlieir utter indifference about providing any better literary aids for our youth would appear to argue that they are quite satisfied with the present. And yet, we can scarcely reconcile thi.? with the high estimate which we are bound to form of their critical knowledge. Is it possible, for instance, that the head of Eton College, in the 19th century, conceives that the relative in Latin has any different rule of concord from the adjective } or, that in such a construction as fratris mei est hicce liber, the genithe/ratris is governed by the verb substantive est ^ But we must refrain at present from exposing the crude absurdities, with which the Eton Grammars are filled ; and confine our attention to the Greek Lexicons in common use. It is very seldom, we believe, that any other is used in our schools, than Schrevelius's or Hederic's. Upon the former we need say little. It is a very impretendingwork : a meagre vocabulary, professedly designed by the compiler for the interpretation only of Isocratcs and yEsop among the prose classics ; Homer, Hesiod, and a few of the minor writers, among the poets, along with the New Testament, and Septuagint version of the Old. It would be a waste of criticism, to show proof that any such com- pilation must be utterly inadequate to the interpretation of Greek ; and it is the less necessary, because (if we mistake not) the work is generally considered to be decisively inferior to Hederic's ; and be- cause every instance of deficiency, or error, which we shall proceed to notice in the latter, is to be understood by our readers as common to the former. The work of Hederic has come to us with the improvements of 614 REVIEW OF DR. JONES'S Patrick, Ernesti, Morell, and Larcher. But it was bad in the first concoction. Ernesti, in his Preface, justly expresses himself thus, of the original compiler : — " Non libenter dico, quod preesens insti- tutum dicere cogit : Hedericum ilium, virum bonum cetera et labo- riosum, at Grsece doctum, et ad tale Lexicon rite conficiendum satis a lectione Grsecorum scriptorum instructum non fuisse. Totus ille, id quod per totum opus observare licuit, e Scapula, aliisque vulgaribus Lexicis, pendebat ; tot pra^claras doctorum hominum de verbis pluri- mis, post Stephanum et Scapulam, observationes ignorabat, nee ipse e lectione ipsorum scriptorum meliora didicerat." Now, we say, that a Greek Lexicon, compiled by such a man, must have that radical un- soundness in all its frame, which no sanative process can remove. To the booksellers of this city we seem to be indebted for the last — and not the least — improvement of it : the insertion of numerous additions and corrections from the papers of the learned Larcher ; which thev purchased at the sale of his library in Paris, and submitted for revisal to an eminent scholar of this country. We could wish that the editor had distinguished Larcher's additions by the first letter of his name, or some other mark. They can now be ascertained only by comparison with the former editions ; though they may often be conjectured from the verdure of certain spots, amidst surrounding ste- rility. But after all the attempts that have been made to supply the deficiencies, and correct the errors, of the work, it still remains so er- roneous, defective, and utterly unscholarlike, that we do consider the continued use of it in our schools disgraceful to the literature of this countrv. Let us adduce a few examples to justify our opinions. Longinus (§ '24), marking the beauty of that expression in Hero- dotus, If §axft(Z £7)-E(7£ TO SirjT^ov. says, TO ya^ Ix. rut cr^^rfy.evMV tU roi vivui/.itot liriav^qi-\>xi rov i^iO/xov, cTuiJLXTosi'Ses'tfov. Here it is plain, that iTTtav^^i-^xt means conglohare, to collect, or incorporate into one ; ac- cording to the common import of the verb avs-^i'pu. But let the student consult Hederic on the word, and what does he find for the interpretation of lzuta-vs-qk(pu ? " Una converto ad aliquid suscipiendum contra aliquem !" Now, this stuff passed from Stephens to Scapula, from Scapula to Schrevelius, and so on to Hederic ; in whose Lexicon it is carefully retained to this dav, for the instruction of our English youth in the Greek language. We beg pardon of Stephens's memory, for having mentioned him in such company. Longinus is not among the clas- sics to whose authority he refers, or with whom he appears to have been familiar (Pseudo-Longinus is frequently cited by Stephens.) On this word he evidently was at a loss for classical authority ; endea- voured to conjecture its meaning from its composition ; and ultimately wavered in his judgment. For, after giving the interpretation which alone Hederic has retained, he adds — " vel, Colligo, seu cogo ad ali- quid, &c. [/. e. suscipiendum contra aliquem] ea nimirum signif. qua aliquis dicitur factiosam catervam cogere. Sed affertur ex Maccab. 1. i. c. 14 liriavr^c-^xi avs-fo(^m pro coHvocare conventiim." Here it is plain that Stephens was led astray by wanting a classical example of the word, and by endeavouring to give some peculiar force to the preposition eirl in its composition. There is none; no more than in GREEK. AND ENCLISH LKXICON. 615 iTnavtayofjinai* at the beginning of the same section. But Hederic omits all that approached towards the rijiht meaning in Stephens ; and retains only the interpretation, in whieh he furthest departed from the true. l^ueian, in his treatise on the composition of history (§ 45), says, ^iriffii yxp roTt zjoirjTina mos aiifji.o iTTx^idaaovTos roL ocxocrix, kxi av>oioi • ffO¥Toi iyl^nXvy . . . T^» vxvy, where it is evident that xku'tix means the *«//.s'. (See Xen. Hell. 6. 2,27. Ed. Schneider.) But the only inter- pretation of the word which the student will find in Hederic, is, " parvi navicjii genus, genus navicula: piscatoricc, ajmba :" in which sense cer- tainlv the word occurs in Thuc. 1. 4, c. G7, and elsewhere. Stephens, though he complains of wanting a classical example of the word, sup- plies the other meaning ; but Scapula, upon whom Hederic depended, deserted him. A few lines after the passage we have last quoted from Lucian, that writer urges the importance of the historian's examining most carefully what he relates as facts, and adds xxi fA.a.>^irx fji.sv tix^oi/tx kxi cfo^utTx, u Ts fjiv X.. T .X. " if possible, from his own personal presence and inspection : but if that cannot be," &c. This use of f^aXirx /xcy ...£(' Sf (XV is common in the Greek classics, and perfectly analogous to a corresponding use oi 7naxime in Latin. Sail. B. Jug. c. 46. — maxume vivum, sin id parum procedat, necatum. We observe that Ste- phens largely illustrates the phrase ; but in vain would the student look for any notice of it in Hederic. Upon another equallv common use of (xctXiTx, and noticed by Ste- phens, Hederic is equally silent ; Iv toTs yi.x\i7x iv^oy.iix.os (Luc. Som. § 2.) which Hemsterhuis illustrates with his usual copiousness of learning. We need scarcely add, that Hederic appears to have been equally a stranger to the similar use of h oXlyon, as -leroTa/^ov Jv o>Jyota-i y.iyxt (Her. iv. 52.) But why should we proceed in the disgusting task of collecting ]jarticular instances of error and defect in Hederic ? When the general texture of his work is, as we have said, utterly un- scholarlike. An example will illustrate our meaning. " ZaOj'oy, fa ^(^t, putris, flaccidus, marcidus, vietus ; (2) debilis, fragilis, quassus, futilis, frivolus ; (3) vitio aliquo occulto laborans, et in neutro vitium ipsum. A a-n-nu." We shall not pause to examine the accuracy of these severalinter- pretations. He seems just to have collected together, without any examination, all the Latin expressions which he could find for o-xO^os, in the former Lexicons : and he flings them in a mass before the stu- dent, to take his choice from among them, in whatever connexion or application the epithet may occur. We would ask any scholar, is this the way in which the meaning of .- Aii» iriTi(i»ai — iir'i \c. G16 REVIEW or DR. JONES'S LEXICON. The reader, who wishes more examples of such interpretation, may examine Hederic's ten meanings for ocvocrxa-is, ten for lirls'xais, eleven for x.xrdcs-occris, nine for TnxqxTocais, ten for zjs^i'^xa-is, ten for av^xan, &c. thrown out without any quoted authorities or examples, except one from Larcher's papers at the close of the article on iitls-ix.vts. And when we mention so many different meanings, it is to be ob- served that he is commonly very liberal under each. For instance, the second meaning assigned to avs-xats is expressed by six different Latin words : coagmentatio, compositio, coagmejitum, concrementiim, crassitiido, concretio. Surely, the student must be fastidious, who cannot please hiinself, and find something suitable to his wants, in such a copious assortment of explanations as is spread before him. Some may have imagined that the necessary limits of size and price, within which a School- Lexicon must be confined, are incon- sistent with the critical character, which we contend it ought to pos- sess. But is it not evident, even from the examples which we have adduced, that the most vague and indistinct interpretations are the most diffuse and wordy .'' Those which are accurate and critical, may commonly be proposed in the briefest form. Again, let it be observed that a considerable portion of Hederic's pages is occupied with the merely grammatical analysis of words, which ought to present no difficulty to a boy, even moderately disciplined in his grammar. We have opened the volume at random ; and in the first column which has presented itself to our eye, we find ten lines occupied with the analysis of the following forms : SoASvra, Qoqs, Oo^vpsvaiv, Bo^vjSvcT'n, Oo^vsicrOai, 9ovi^(ji.!xiov. And perhaps there is scarcely one of these words in which any such assistance ought to be afforded to the student. But again, we remark that many thousands of words have place in Hederic, which might, without any loss, be omitted in a Greek Lexi- con compiled for the use of schools ; words, of which many are of no classical authority, and many others are found only in writei's the most obscure, or most out of the line of a schoolboy's reading. We must add, and we wish Dr. Jones particularly to attend to the remark, that there is a class of words, which not only may well be omitted, but which ought never to appear in the pages of a School Lexicon. Begging pardon of the reverend gentlemen, to whose care the educa- tion of our youth has been for ages almost exclusively committed in this country, we must confess that we know not what legitimate bu- siness a schoolboy can have with studying the filthiest obscenities of Aristophanes ; and we know not why a Greek Lexicon, compiled for the use of schools, should afford him any interpretation of them. The considerations which we have suggested, convince us, that in a volume not much larger than Dr. Jones's, and nothing more costly, all the Greek words which a young student will meet with, in an ex- tended course of school-reading, might be critically interpreted, clas- sically authenticated, and by brief quotations illustrated in their se- veral connexions and applications. At the same time we are aware, that to execute such a work, however humble some may think it, would require several years of laborious application, soundjudgment, and good sense, extensive reading, and a critical acquaintance with the Greek language. 617 OBSERVATIONS "AN ANSWER TO A PSEUDO-CRITICISM GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON, WHICH APPKARED IN THK SECOND NUMBER OK THE WESTMINSTER REVIEW." 1824. We are cordial friends to the right of appeal from our critical decisions to the tribunal of the public ; and are equally disposed to pay all due attention to any motion for a re-hearing in our own court. But the extreme scurrility of this pamphlet has caused us to hesitate considerably whether we should take any notice of it. We shall handle the foul object as delicately as possible, and hasten to wipe our fingers, and dismiss it and the author for ever. If self- partiality and passion had not blinded Dr. Jones, he might easily per- ceive that, in our last number, we laboured to be as gentle in our censures on his work as possible. We went quite as far as was con- sistent with the honest discharge of our duty to the public, in attri- buting his blunders, absurdities, and defects, to haste — to inattention — to every thing rather than to ignorance and incapacity. Our feelings of tenderness to him led us to hold a language of encou- ragement and hope, that a future edition of his work might be so altered and amended as to merit praise. We confess, that in this we held a language not warranted by the inward conviction of our own judgment ; but we must add, that we then had not any ade- quate conception of the depth of Dr. Jones's ignorance. If we had any of these hostile feelings towards him, which he so profusely attributes to us. they might be abundantly gratified by his present production. But, indeed, we sincerely regret that any one who has devoted so much time to literary pursuits, should make such a me- lancholy exposure of himself both as a man and as a scholar. He shows himself even incapable of understanding the plainest correc- tions which we offered of his grossest errors. For instance, on that 618 OBSERVATIONS ON AN ANSWt:R TO A CRITICISM passage of Xenophon, oaa. ixsv Js-/ uxOovra. h^ivxi, which he translated " whatever things it is laioful to know after having learnt them," p. 608, we briefly remarked, that if he had read on to the end of the sentence he must have seen, that a sr/ />taSovT« si^noct is equivalent with/M,a6«Ta, things which may be known by teaching. (These Xeno- phon contrasts with things discoverable only by divination.) But it now appears that we judged quite too favourably of Dr. Jones's attainments, in conceiving that he must have seen this if he had read the whole passage. He gravely maintains that his version — " what- ever things it is lawful to know after having learnt them" — is " an exact representation of the original" — twice alleges that we accuse him of mistranslating- the passage, because he has given to ixxvOxvu the meaning of to learn — and exclaims against our assertion, that « Iri ixoc^ovra I'l^ivoci is equivalent with /xxOnrac, as an assertion that " things which are known after being learnt are the same with things to be learnt." Certainly, this man " cannot teach and v^'ill not learn." The same obstinacy of error appears throughout his stric- tures on our article ; and is carried so far, that he even employs two pages in maintaining the justice of his version of bxSv QocaiXivs il av ; " Thou art not, then, a king?" in place of the common version, " Art thou a king, then }" We had asked, " Is it possible that Dr. Jones is ignorant that ax5v has not a negative signification ?" It now appears that he not only was, but is. He gravely tells us, that «kSv " is an interrogative" ! and that " it depends upon the views of the person who puts the question — whether the question which it was intended ^0 elicit, (what can the man mean.'') is to be understood as negative or affirmative" ! There is but one instance in which Dr. Jones defends himself suc- cessfully ; and of that instance we wish to give him the full benefit. We noticed the extraordinary meaning assigned to the verb yvwf /^o- (jixt, I am reconciled, and offered an account of the error, which struck us as bearing internal characters of being indubitablv the true one. But Dr. J. gives us a different account. He says — "The word reconciled, is a typographical mistake for recognised, which escaped me when correcting the press, but which, soon after the publication of the book, I discovered and corrected."— (He must mean corrected in his private copy of the work.) Very well, let all we have written on that passage be considered as expunged. But could he not state the fact of this typographical error without charging us as having been aware of the fact ? " The inserting of recognise, as I have done, under the active form yvw^ii^ui, must lead every reader, however superficial, to perceive that by — / «m recon- ciled— under the passive yvi>;^i'(oiA.xi, I must have meant, / am recog- nised. Common candour, therefore, would lead the critic to point it out as a typographical mistake." Rude and foolish man! The very circumstance which he marks as sufficient to convince us of the typographical error has exactly the opposite tendency. He sets up a similar defence, but altogether ineffectually, in another instance. We animadverted on his mistranslation of the sentence in Demosthenes, beginning, 'E/ /xsv yxf jjlyi exf^"' <^^^^ '^'"' M'. X. x.. T>)v 'E, Bo-av ofOrjMxi, x. T. X. Here, also. Dr. J. tells us, " there is an ON TlIK GUEKK AND ENGLISH LEXICON. 0]0 error of the press, which unfortunately escaped detection — the omis- sion of but; — My manuscript was thus — If indeed it was not fit, but that Greece, &c. : mv reviewer perceived the tijpographicul error, but instead of jjointinj^ it out, he, witli his characteristic candour, leaves the reader to infer it to be the consequence of incapacity in me." Rude and foolish man ! we must say again. Let the passag'e be read as he savs it stood in his manuscript, and the sentence is still altogether mistranslated. But he cannot understand that the con- struction is o^Qrjva/ Hcrxv T»y M, X. ; he will persi.st in making it rr,v 'E. irrxi, " Greece while really Greece;" and talks of "the participle u)ya/." Lest we should omit any concession to Ur. J. whicli he does or ought to claim, we must observe, that among the instances ?<;hich w-e gave of words whose quantity Dr. J. had neglected to mark, ocu^iQ-rn ought to be expunged, as the remark (pen. long.) does occur after the word. It is no wonder that this escaped our notice, as it is so very rarely that Dr. J. thus designates the quantity. The place of ccx^i0fis may be supplied by dyxv^x, or by examples afforded in almost every page of the Lexicon. Dr. J. goes out of his way to furnish multiplied additional evi- dences of his ignorance of Greek by playing the critic upon others. He tells us, that v 69ovn zja^a.y.tx.^u'raci (in the beginning of Lucian'3 KxTXTT.) means, " the sail is beating itself in the wind." The same hardy defiance of all distinction of tenses he employs in his spirited version of the w'ords ■wttk ^^xto'ttc^ov a iic(pxXriv IXsKyiOsn e%^v ! " Zounds, sir, you seem not to know that you have a camp, and not a head on your shoulders." Defending the common reading in that passage of Lucian's Nsx. Kxt iji.xXi^x THi AiyvTTTiii]) ocvTHs, hc interprets it, " and especially those of the Egvptians we have found to be themselves, i. e. such as tbey were when alive," and he assures us that " Lucian alludes to the beginning of the Iliad, dvTus ^* IXu^ix riv/i v.viiaa-it'" ! He tells us that " E;Xoy is for uXov av," in that verse of the Iliad, (n. 698.) Eyy^t KEN t'vl/iTTfXoy T^otniv sXov vies A^xiuv. But we must abstain from adducing any further specimens of Dr. J.'s learning, amusing as many others are. He gravely informs us, that the principle on which a great portion of his Lexicon is founded, has been " unknown to all lexicographers, ancient and modern." We think it very probable, and here dismiss John Jones, LL.D. without exhibiting any of the flowers of Billingsgate rhetoric with which his pamphlet is decorated; and without gratifying his inquisitiveness by either affirming or denying the truth of his conjecture about the writer of that article which has excited in him so much causeless rage. 620 REVIEW ''LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA; FROM THE GREEK, WITH THE COMMENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS OF WIELAND, AND OTHERS. BY WILLIAM TOOKE, F.R.S. MEMBER OF THE IMPERIAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, AND OF THE FREE ECONOMICAL SOCIETV OF ST. PETERSBURG ; 2 Vols. 4to. pp. 790 and 793, 1 820." [Published in The Monthly Literary Register, No. II.] The character of Lucian as a writer has been so well and so long established, that it would be superfluous for us to detain our readers by any panegyric on his excellencies or censure of his faults. Eras- mus, who, in many respects, resembled the Grecian, expresses but our own opinion of his happier pieces, when he says,* — " He pos- sesses so much gentlemanly ease in his style, so much felicity of in- vention, such elegance of humour and poignant raillery ; he is so de- licately playful in his allusions, so blends the serious with the trifling, and the trifling with the serious ; tells the gravest truths so spor- tively, and, in his sportiveness, tells so much truth ; he depicts in such lively colours the manners, passions, and pursuits of men, and so brings them before the reader's eye in all the reality of life ; that, w^hether we regard amusement or utility, no satire nor comedy can be compared with Lucian's dialogues." Such a classic it was natural that many should be ambitious of presenting to the public in an English dress. Accordingly, besides two old translations hy Hickes and by Spence,vfeha\e had in modern times (previous to the appearance of the present work,) an English translation of the works of Lucian (of all that ought to be translated, and of some more,) by Thomas Franklin, D.D. some time Greek * Tantum obtinet in dicendo gratise, tantum ininveniendo felicitatis,'tantum in jocando leporis, in mordendo aceti ; sic titillat allusionibus, sic seria nugis, nugas seriis miscet; sic ridens vera dicit, vera dicendo ridet ; sic hominum mores, affec- tus, studia, quasi penicillo depingit, neque legenda, sed plane spectanda oculis exponit ; ut nulla comcedia, nulla satyra cum hujus dialogis conferri debeat, sen voluptatem spectes, seu spectes utilitatem. Erasm. I. 29, Epist. 5. IIKVIKW OF TOOKirS LUCIAN. Gil Pru/cssor in the University of Cumhridge ; and another by Mi-. J. Carr. The former hes before us, and some extracts from the hitter, which wouhl lead us to conjecture that Mr. Carr was a somewhat better Greek schohir than Dr. Franklin, and not so good an Enghsh schohir. On Frankhn's version, which, wc beheve, has been the more popular, we sliall say little. We hope that the University of Cambridge has acquired much more knowledge of Greek than it ap- pears to have possessed when he was Professor in it of that language. His blunders are such as would disgrace a schoolboy.* However, his translation has in general an air of gentlemanly scholarship, is readable, and perhaps sufficient to convey to the English student some idea of Luciun's manner. This is much more than we can say for the work which now comes under our review. The author is the late Rev. William Tooke, about fortv years ago (if we mistake not) Chaplain to the English Factory at Petersburg ; and since known to the world (with how much credit to himself, or benefit to the public, we shall not stop to en- quire,) by his translation of iMr. Zolikofier's sermons, a freethinking divine of the German school ; by his life of the Empress Catherine n. made up of extracts from the rVnnual Register incorporated with a translaticm from the French ; and by his View and History of the Russian Empire. Less than two years have elapsed since the publication of the pre- sent work ; and within that short interval the author has died. We received this intelligence accidentally, after we hud nearly prepared a long article on his translation of Lucian, in terms of the severest eas- tigation, but not more severe than merited. The greater part of that article we now consign to oblivion in his grave. And were it not that the author often survives the man, and that in the present case we owe a paramount duty to the public, from the honest discharge of which we dare not shrink ; wc should gladly decline all notice of this publication, under the feelings which at present predominate in our minds. It is marked with some characters, which, we are persuaded, had they been known to the very respectable publishers whose names appear in the title-page, would have prevented them from having any concern with its sale. On this point we shall say no more ; for it fortunately happens, that, considering it only in a literary view, we can say with truth, and shall prove incontrovertibly, that it is one of the grossest impositions which have for some time been attempted on the public ; that the author was utterly destitute of every qualification for such a task ; destitute of taste, of judgment, and of scholarship ; destitute of all real acquaintance either with the Greek language or • If any of our classical readers should wish for some examples to justify this expression, let them compare with the original his version of that passage in Lu- cian's dream, ayaXftmria rtta ftix^a KaravKiva^uf (cd. Bipt. i. p. 5.) of the words T» rn Eituxiv; tziita in the treatise on writing History, (ib. t. 4. p. lO'l.) where by one stroke of his pen he transfers the Kf«>i/«» from the Isthmus of Corinth to the shores of the Euxine sea ; of the passage in the same piece »iia (in ut v Travu 9ro\Xn( atiTuf ixiff4'»'f » r X. (pp. 163, IG-i.) and of the sentence (in p. 006,) beginning 'a fjt.li B» «fli»« vmirut Xayui In a very slight inspection of his work, to wliich the present occasion has led us, we have obsened a multitude of blunders equally ridiculous. 622 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. even with his own ; if we except that use of words which Mr. Locke speaks of, by a curious association, as sufficient for the purposes of " merchants and lovers, cooks and tailors :"* while it is not more strongly characterized bv the ignorance which it throughout displays, than it is by those most disgusting forms of ponderous stupidity, which spring from the unsuccessful effort to appear witty, wise, and learned. To pronounce a judgment so decisive and so unfavourable would be idle, if we did not adduce a bodv of evidence to confirm its justice ; and to do this effectually will require us to go into some detail. As we shall not often trespass in the same way on the patience of our general readers, we hope for their indulgence on the present occa- sion, though our critique must be much less amusing than we think it would have been if Mr. Tooke were still alive. It shall also be much shorter and less severe. When a man writes for the public, and especially when he pro- fesses to compose a work of taste and polite literature, the first qua- lification he should be expected to possess is, a scholarlike acquaintance with the language in which he writes. We are ready to admit that there are cases in which the importance of an avithor's matter may atone for many deficiencies and inaccuracies in his manner of conveying it. We do not, therefore, say that no man ought to write for the public who cannot write with elegance and classic purity of style ; though in a translation of Lucian we should consider even this an essential requisite. But we mean to charge Mr. T. with ignorance of the first principles of general grammar. We mean to say and prove that he is nearly as unable as the most uneducated dregs of the populace to express himself with ordinary correctness and propriety. And when Lucian had been before translated decently, we do conceive it great effrontery for such a man to impose upon the public a new version of that elegant author in two massy quarto volumes. Let our readers observe a few specimens of his English composition, which we take almost at random, as we turn over his pages. V. i. pp. 80 and 81. " Whence we may in some degree form a judgment how this astonishing Colossus, which, with its throne and appertaining figures, composed a mass that filled the whole recess of the temple, from the ground to the ceiling, which rendered necessary, all that frannework of timber, with all the pitch and mortar that Lu- cian speaks of, in order to keep it properly together, and enable it to bid defiance to the attacks of time." P. 254. " I could not restrain my indignation, and it appeared to me exactly as if an actor, who, though in person a soft and effeminate little fellow, should play the part of Achilles, or Theseus, perhaps even Hercules, though he had neither the voice nor the looks of a hero, but disgraced the part of those great men by an effeminacy, which even in Helena or Polyxena would be found insupportable ; whereas Hercules, if he saw himself so basely represented, would scarce be * Essay on the Human Understanding, B. 3. Ch. 11. Merchants in his day must have been a very different class of persons from our merchants, or lie would not have placed them in sixch company. REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. 623 able to refrain from crushing with his club the masked head of such a mimic." P. I'AO. " On annllK'r side I beheld how Arsacos, ra2;inf;^ with jea- lousy, fell upon his concubine with a drawn sword ; and how Arbaces, her chand)erlain, coming to her assistance, attacked Arsaccs with a nuked sabre, while the handsome Mede, Spartinus, who being wounded on the forehead with a golden cup, ^Yas dragged out by the heels by some of the satellites. The like was to be seen in Africa," i\c. ikc. Pp. 353, 354. " Tliat is easily to be accounted for ; her brother is a youth who has strength and fortitude to endure such a trip ; whereas the girl, alarmed at the first thought of her perilous adven- ture ; and giddv with the dart-like velocity of the flight, when cast- ing a sudden glance of the eye upon the horrid abyss beneath her, no more was wanting to complete the dizziness so as for an instant to let the horn of the ram by which she had held slip out of her hand, and thus was precipitated into the sea." P. 6'2S. " It is with you precisely as with him, who, mounted on a Aicious and unrulv horse, which, having set oft" at once and run away with him, could not dismount, but must resign himself to the caprice of his horse." P. 522. " And after Mercury o.^cially as herald has dulv called toge- ther those who think they have a right to assist in the divine councils, they shall, each bringing along with him his sworn witnesses, and producing his regular testimonials and records, one after the other, before the said committee, and then, strict examination having been first made of their validitv, the postulants shall either be declared true gods, or sent back to tlieir appropriate graves or to their family vault." V. ii. p. 320. " An allusion to the amnesty which, in the second year of the 94th 01\mpiad, immediately after the expulsion of the famous thirty tyrants, and the restoration of the old form of govern- ment, it was proclaimed, for the confirmation of the internal peace of Athens, under the archon Euclides, by an edict, in pursuance whereof it was prohibited, under the severest penalties, to dispute or converse concerning any thing that had been done under the usurped admi- nistration of the thirty tyrants." But— o/ie ! Jam satis. Enough, at least, of this class of sentences, — if sentences they can be called. For it may be observed that, as we have turned over the leaves of this work for collecting examples, we have confined our selection to sentences of a particular species ; — • in which the latter end of the period runs away from the beginning, and the disjointed members lie sprawling and looking in vain for something to support them. If our object had only been to quote instances of bad English, we might have taken any twelve consecu- tive pages of the work, and found abundance of examples. But the ex- tracts which we have made — (and we can honestly assert that we have copied them most faithfully in every word and letter and j)oint) — are of that peculiar kind, which most decisively stamps the publication with the character of illiterate, in the view of every English scholar. We should not be surprised, indeed, if our readers, in wading through those few specimens, should at first suspect — as we did ourselves, for VOL. ti, 2 s C24 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. a time — that they must be disfigured by some most extraordinary blunders of the compositor. But a very slight exantiination of the work will soon remove that suspicion. We had intended to exemplify our author's barbarous ignorance of the English language by other sentences, of a great variety of species. But we are really afraid of wearying the patience of our readers by any more lengthened extracts : and we believe it is unnecessary. None ca.n now wonder at such barbarisms, as the following, meeting us in almost every page : " It is them from whom I promise myself the most candour." — " Exactly so does the lives of men appear to me" — " the mask was tore off" — " she had took me up" — " if it had been shook" — " had fell in love" — " all that had befell him" — " it was broke to shatters" — " it must have been writ" — " let you and I" — "the like of which" — &c. &c. Equally numerous are such instances, as the following, of vulgar- ism and vile slang : — " A wipe at the philosophers" — " a wipe at the affected subtlety" — " a good-humoured fellow, and an arch dainty-chops" — " that I may no longer keep your beak watering" — " hatched a plot against his life" — " they are gone, every mother's son" — " they worry the quality with their importunities" — " this oracle was dispensed only to the qualitv" — " you should have given the fellow something to wet his whistle" — " he began to smell a rat" — " he had a month's mind to her" — " my worthy" — " the worthies are very enlightened on that point" — " he swung himself by his talents into the favour of King Lysimachus" — " it can hardly be believed that Lucian sucked the circumstance out of his fingers" — &c. &c. And this is the man, who gravely assures us, at the close of his Introductory Essay — " My principal endeavour has been to do him (Lucian) no injury ; and that the beauties which are so much admired in him by the adepts in the Greek language, might suffer as little as possible under my hands, I have strove to acquire his spirit, his hu- mour, his geniality, and, as far as the nature of our language, so dif- ferent from his, perspicuity, and other regards would allow, to imitate even his turns and the colouring of his diction :" modestly adding — " but how can I daf-e to hope, that I have always and evei-y lohere a.c- tually accomplished it ?" — " I may occasionally have missed somewhat of his elegance." This is the man who talks, in one of his notes, of introducing his " old friend of Samosata into the ^^en^ee/ societies" of his courtrymen ; nay — incredible as it might appear in some views — ■ intimates, in another note, his expectation that he shall have female readers ! i. 736. But we would not wish it to be understood that Mr. T. is incapa- ble of rising to the finery and grandeur of English composition. We think }»e excels in that as much as in the free and easy style. A few short exp.3anples may not be unamusing. Introd. Essay, p. xviii. "We will not presume to pry into the in- nermost replications of the heart." lb. p. xxi. " Deducting a few eflusions of a too careless joviality, and ocasionally a prevention trespassing on the Aristotelian line of IIKVIKW OF TOOKK'S LUCIAX. <>2.". demarcation 1)etween the too much and too little, against the founders of sects and their votaries." V. i. p. GO. " A sort of facetious characters, who were hired hy agitating the midriff to jjromote the digestion of the company by all kinds of buffoonery and harlequinades." P. 131. " To go articulately through the whole of it, my friend, would be impracticable." V. ii. p. 329. " The words — strew genuine lucianic salt on this sarcastic prosopopoeia" — (Note on a passage, in which the reader will look in vain for anything like that figure.) P. 573. " Contained nothing but reiterated loci coynniunps, ampli- fications, digressions, and opportunities to fabricate a superficiid om- niscience." P. 635. " Only it amounts to an impossibility, for them not to lose in any translation a portion of those diminutive beauties, to which the Greeks were so particularly sensible, and which consist not so much in thoughts as in the dress and collocation of them, in the va- rious metaphors, and in the elegant absorption of these propositions ill ornamental periods, and the like, and can rarely without detriment be rendered in a foreign tongue." This certaiidy is what may be called ^we writing, and its admirers may be assured that^VIr.T.'s pages will enrich their vocabulary with a numerous supply of elegancies ; such as — " ornature — parentation — demagogy — domesticity — teratologers — autonomy — clarity — eu- daemony — epistolation — hereticizing — autorculus," besides — " ho- merican, homerical, and homeriau :" for by no chance does Mr. T. ever light upon homeric. We have introduced our readers to Mr. T. as a writer of English prose. He shines equally as a poet. Lucianhas left us a mock-heroic drama on the Gout : the opening of which runs thus in Dr. Frank- lin's version : " O name for ever sad abhorr'd of heaven. Parent of groans, from dark Cocytus sprung. Immortal Gout ! in gloomy Erebus, Whom erst Mega?ra, dreadful fury, bore ; And from her poison'd breasts Alecto fed," &.c. &c. Let us now observe how gallantly Mr. Tooke acquits himself in breaking a lance with Dr. Franklin : " Ah ! cursed name ! abhorred by gods and men. Pitiless Podagra, Cocytus born, Tliat in the darkest depths of Tartarus From her womb Megasra Erinnys dropt. And Alecto from her empoisoned drugs Distilled into thy lips," &c. &c. Our translator, with equal modesty and elegance, expresses his hope, that " through this imperfect attempt, enough of the spirit of the original will be tratisparent , for discerning," &c. &c. 26 2 626 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. He favours us with the following version of the opening of Pindar*^ first Olympiac. v. i. p. 67. " Water is the chiefest thing, But gold is far more bright Than any riches else beside. And gives a fairer light Than doth the clear and flaming fire Within the darksome night." Nay, so ambitious is he of the bays, that he fears not to challenge Mr. Pope himself to the contest. Observe the following elegant ana- paestic in which he renders a verse of Homer : " No league can subsist between lions and men." And, in the same page, (v. i. p. 239.) the novel metre, in which he translates two other verses of the same poet : *' Reviler, brass nor gold shall blind our sight ! Thou'rt my captive, hope not to purchase flight." But we beg pardon for having designated this metre as novel. We penned that epithet, before we had appealed to our fingers. But as we transcribed the lines, a suspicion occurred that Mr. T. might have framed them according to that unerring standard : which we find on trial, to be actually the case. No doubt therefore can be raised, but that the lines belong to the class of English heroics : much as — Urbem fortem nuper cepit fortior host is — is a Latin hexameter. But we might be charged with injustice to Mr. T. as a poet, if we did not treat our readers with one more specimen, of which he ap- pears to have been particularly proud. In that elegant little dialogue between \''enus and Cupid, where the mischievous urchin accounts to his mother for his not venturing to attack the muses ; our learned translator has the following note: — " This reminds me of a pretty epigram in the Anthologia, a translation of which I throw enpassant as a flowret on the altar of the Muses." Then follows the original epigram in good Greek, (excepting of course the errors of the press) succeeded by this spirited translation : " Court Aphrodite maids ! Thus Cypris spoke; If not, against you I will Cupid arm ; To her the Muses : spare for Mars that joke ; Thy Cupid's wings can't reach to do us harm." Well ; but ridiculous as Mr. T.'s poetry appears, must he not have been a man of some classical attainments, when a passage in Lucian reminded him of an epigram in the Greek Anthologia ? Unfortu- nately, Hemsterhuis, in his note on the same passage, adduces verba- tim the same Greek epigram. However, we own that there is no reason why the same thought should not have occurred to two great scholars ; and that it is very extraordinary, if Mr. T. employed a contemptible untruth in throwing his delicate flowret on the altar of the Muses. But alas ! we have long remarked that there is nothing niakes such fools of men, as vanity. IIKVIKW OF TOOKK'S LUC I AN. G'27 Wishing to keep our English readers in our compftny as long as we can, we shall here oiler a few miscellaneous remarks ; before we pro- ceed to establish by evidence Mr. T.'s utter ignorance of the Greek tongue. We own ourselves indebted to him for some most extraordinary information on ancient manners and ancient history. For instance, in a long note on the piece entitled " Aiowaos," he assures us — "The antients did not drink as we do, by lifting the cup, or goblet up to tl\e lips, l)ut bv pouring the liquor from on hiyh into the open mouth, so that it required address to empty a goblet with promptitude and pre- cision." No doubt of that; and the greater address, because in their compotations they certainly employed brimmers — x^-nrn^xt nria-Tf^sjcs oivoio. Mr. T. having omitted to quote his authority for the assertion, we own that we were at first a little sceptical about the fact. But finding that he repeated the same statement verbatim in a note, V. ii. p. 6'2G, we were put upon a laborious search, and at length discovered authentic evidence of his accuracy, in that most scarce and erudite work — M. Sciubleri Antiquitutis reconditioris janua resei'atu, torn. xvii. p. 598. " Non eadem, qua apudnos,methodo compotationes apud antiquos fiebant," S;c. (It is in the same chaj)ter, in which the profound author proves that the ancients did not walk, as we do, on their feet ; but on their hands, and with their feet elevated, as he expresses it, supra nates. These antients were certainly queer fellows.) The point being now established, we would humbly su"-- gest to our learned universities that some obvious advantages might arise from reviving the ancient method of drinking ; that it would conduce particularly to the virtue of sobriety : and that a new statute, therefore, should be framed, enforcing this as the only mode of aca- demic compotation after commons ; and appointing a professor to in- struct the members in the classical method of emptying a goblet " with promptitude and precision." We beg, however, (as we are too old to learn the new trick) that a clause may be introduced in favour of occasional visitors, who have taken any of the higher degrees ; so that they may be allowed to empty their glasses in the modern way. Ou author is as deeply read in ancient history as in ancient cus- toms. He informs us, in a note, vol. i. p. 67, that Demosthenes, (the Athenian general) " was surrendered to Nicias, as commander of the troops by which the Athenians expected to conquer Sicily." And, in p. 59, he gives the following translation of a passage in Lucian's Treatise on the Composition of History : " Since now Thucydides, as all the world knows, was the first who delivered a sort of funeral oration on those who fell in the Peloponnesian war :" with the fol- lowing short and learned note upon the words " funeral oration" " On Pericles." But we must treat our classical readers to the original of that passage. E/ra eTrci^ri Qukv^ioyh cTriraipiov nvx ttiri rots 'a^urois T8 rjcXifxts txciva ycx^ois. Literally — Then since Thucydides has introduced a funeral oration on the first who fell /« that tvar. The same page presenting to our eye two other instances of the author's critical wisdom and sagacity, we may as well introduce them here. Lucian is laughing at the absurd imitators of Thucydides in his day, one of whom introduced a soldier making a ridiculous 628 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. oration ovei* the grave of Severianus, and stabbing himself with his sword at the conclusion of his speech. He drily adds, swearing by the god of war, that " the man deserved to have died long before, if he were accustomed to make such harangues :" bk ccvx^ios un, fA.ac rov EyvxXiov, zj^o- •c7oXXa ccvav-iviiv, si Toiocvrac t^^yiro^fje. Upon these words Mr. T. has the following annotation. " I here give rather a different turn to the words of Lucian, be- cause, by a more faithful translation, I must have made him say, what the reader would think very dull and insipid. I hope, in be- half of this kind of liberty, by which Lucian rather gains than loses, &c. &c." Now, what is the turn for which Lucian is so much indebted to Mr. William Tooke, and by which he becomes so much less dull and insipid? " He drew his sword, and slew himself before the eyes of all the assembly ; which I had rather he had done much sooner, before he began his deplorable speech." In the beginning of the next paragraph, Lucian says : " Many, my friend, are the similar instances which I could enumerate : however, after mentioning only a few, oKiyuv o(a,us ett;/*- tyiaOiis, I shall then pass to the second topic I have proposed," &c. And accordingly, he adduces a few more examples of similar ab- surdities, before he enters on the second part of his treatise. But Mr. T. thus translates the preceding sentence : " I could, my dear friend, cite to you numerous other examples of this sort ; but these few may suffice at present, that I may pass on to the second part of my promise," &c. And then, grounding a censure of his author upon his own mis- translation, he gives Lucian the following castigation in his next note, p. 60. " Method is not the bright side of this tract, as it appears. Lucian has hardly begun the didactic part, but he forgets his w^ords in the same breath, and runs on a good while in making merry upon the wretched scribbler W'ho had created Parthian wars in such quantities." Lucian had not yet entered on the didactic part, nor intimated that he was commencing it. And if Mr. T. had combined a little more modesty with his ignorance, he might have suspected that he did not understand his author, when Lucian appeared to him to v/rite absurdly. As we have been accidentally led to this topic, we shall offer a few more specimens of the incredible platitude, (to use one of Mr. T.'s favourite phrases) with which he occasionally animadverts on his " old friend Samosata." In the council of the Gods, vol. i. p. 521, the decree, which Momus brings forward against the spurious divini- ties, is prefaced with the customary formula, ocyxOri rvyri. This Mr. T. elegantlv renders, " with good luck !" and subjoins the following note : — " Lucian here allows his Momus to forget that he is wishing good luck to those ichom he had just before declared monsters." The same charge certainly lay, with equal force, against the Athenian people, in eveiy damnatoiy decree which they passed against any culprits. In that pleasant and trulv Lucianic piece, the Menippus, when the Cynic informs his friend of the occasion which led him to descend IIKVIKW OF TOOKI'VS LUCIAN. 629 to the shftdes in order to con:?ult Tirc^ias, Mr. T. nvakc.-i the fo'.low- in{^ achuirably wise remark : — V. i. p. 4G6. " What Ulysses wisely did, Menippus does fool- ishly. The former wants to know somewhat future, and asks a pro- phet: what the hitter wouUl know is a moral problem, which reason alone can solve, and to which a soothsayer can avail him nothinsi;." We wonder much how the foolish Horace escaped the critical lash of our translator, 1. ii. Sat. .5. In the Panegyric on Demosthenes, falsely attributed to Lucian, the author introduces Demosthenes as holding* this languai^e : — " The friends, whose sons or relations I have freed from captivity, or the fathers whose daughters I have portioned out." V. ii. p. oli2. Upon which ^Ir.T. makes this remark: — " Of such a tirade any eloquent orator, and even Lucian himself, who could not always fort^et his old trade, mig-ht applaud himself : but to put into the mouth of Demosthenes, who always expressed himself with so much modesty, even when compelled to speak of his own merits, without object or necessity, such a boasting declama- tion, is unpardonable." Vet it happens, unfortunately, (as any man might know .who pos- sessed even much less classical erudition than Mr. T. pretends to) that Demosthenes actually uses this identical " boasting declama- tion" in his oration on the Crown, ed. Reisk. t. i. p. 31G. ar' ei nvxs We cannot now wonder that Mr. T. ventures at times to plav the critic on the other translators of Lucian. Dr. Franklin and the Abbe Massieu, he repeatedly cliarges with translating from the Latin : and we think it very likely that the charge is well founded. There is an old and homely proverb, set a thief to catch a thief. We shall now prove to demonstration, that IMr.T. in general does not even attempt to translate from the Greek ; that he frequently translates, or strives to translate, from the Latin ; but more commonly, we believe, from the German. Not having Wieland's version before us, we speak doubtfully there. Call the evidence. (Tn quoting the Greek, we shall refer to the Bipontine edition.) Pro. laps. int. sal. t. iii. p. 294. Ka/ nroXtiA.xios ^t o Aay*:, SfXtyxw t7[iari\Xu)t. Lat. Et Ptolemccus Lagi, scribens ad Seleucum. Mr. T, V. ii. p. 40.5. " Ptolemy Lagi, writing once to Seleucus." Yet we acknowledge that in p. 624 we have " Ptolemy the son of Lagus." But why.^ There (t. i. p. 21.) the Latin version is, "Ptolemscus igitui- Lagi filius." We hear the classical jurors calling on us to close the case for the prosecution, and to allow them now to bring in their verdict without lea%"ing the box. But there arc considerations which oblige us to proceed, till we shall have fully redeemed our iiledge, and proved the guilt of this writer on every count in the indictment. T. i. p, 88. 01 Of, x.x9xnc^ 0 i)itvs, xTto rrii ^x^vyya Tr,v T^a^jjy vtto Twy ei^7:viU¥ x^xi^a/xiif)!. a?.X' aTriOi *)oin x. t. X. ]Mr. T. V. i. p. 41. " the others, like Phine\is, have their meat snatched out of their mouths bv harpies, just when on the point of swallowing it. But of what use is all this chattering ? Get you gone, I say." &c. With this note upon the question, which we have marked in italics, and of which there is not one tittle in the orig^iiial : — 530 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. " Lucian seems to snatch this question out of the mouth of his reader ; for truly this dialogue abounds more than the rest in the verbose babble of the rhetors and sophists of his time," Here our translator must surely have been ignorant that the words on which he makes this wise remark, were not at all in the original ; and must, therefore, have been translating from something else than the Greek. Or, will the counsel for the defendant choose to say, that Mr. T. did know they were not in the Greek, but wittingly foisted them into the text, in order to hang upon them his own im- pertinence of annotation ? Passing two other ridiculous blunders in the same page, we offer Mr. T. tbe benefit of the same dilemma, in his note, v. i. p. 394, on the words, " should call for a full flowing cup ;" and in his note, p. 520, on the words, " big words, ^ the abstract notions of tokich militate against one another." If the reader turn to the Greek text, t. ii. p. 148, and t. ix. p. 189, he will see that in each of these pas- sages Mr. T. is sagaciously commenting on his own insertions. In the same page in which the former passage stands, our eve catches another tolerably decisive evidence that Mr. T. is not translating from the Greek. The original says — " citoc o /xev stt-zxev" — which runs thus in our elegant version : — " so that the old man voided his (cup) without receiving any injury." Who can doubt but that some of the other translators rendered the words — the old man emptied his cup ; and that Mr. T. ingeniously mistook this for voiding it .'' T. i. p. 124. TJiXTrai, y^qovios tiixiv Q^xavuXris ; Mr. T. v. i. p. 59, " Ey, here comes Thrasycles, as if called." We are almost ashamed to acknowledge that we have taken some pains, but ineffectually, to trace our translator in these words. Every smatterer in Greek must be certain, that he is quite innocent of meddUng with the original. But how did he come by the nonsense which he has substituted } Instead of offering a reward for the solution of that question, we shall hazard our own conjecture. We suspect, then, that he found some foolish editor or commentator, Avho — ignorant of the stated use of the phrase ^^onos sXduv, see Arist. Qio-(A. 912. — gave some such note upon the passage as this ; " quasi vocatus -^qovios" — " as if called, Thracycles the Tardy ;" from which Mr. T. naturally concluded that p^^ov/oj means as if called. We give ourselves some credit for this conjectural criticism. T. iv. p. 207. aivovvos yx^ acvTos Tori /xtyiTos 'cjcc^xKivnaoci. Lat. Turn enim maximum periculum est ne extra numeros moveatur. Mr. T. V. ii. p. 72. " otherwise he is in imminent danger of getting out of the metre." Here it is evident that Mr. T. was at the Latin version, and unable to interpret it. The reader will observe, that Lucian is speaking of the prose stvle of historic composition : and of the danger to be guarded against, peculiarly when the subject calls for some extraordinary elevation in the diction. We had begun to transcribe a passage from the preceding page — " ette/ rois xacrv^TVfAsvois ruv (^aifAuv coiKorxs ocTT v yiy.vxs-i-n.-n. Mr. T. p. G9, " whose manufacture of history has ever been as disgusting as the cosmetic of gymnastics." AVith a learned note upon the words, beginning thus : — " Du Soul and Gesner observe here a very plain allusion to a pas- sage in Plato's Gorgias, where Socrates contrasts the KOfjiixuirinvy of the yv/xyxs-iKri." The reader perceives that the note and the text are quite of a piece. But it occurs to us, that our specimens latterly are taken from Mr. Tooke's second volume, because it is the one that happened to lie open before us. Perhaps it may be suspected that he flagged there ; and ought to have some benefit from the plea — opere in Ion go, &c. Let us, therefore, lay that volume aside, and open the first : — no matter where. We have opened the Cobbler and the Cock. T. vi. p. 289. '/)v yuv zj^iv xyxrtiXxi -nXioy /juxv k^vvi^x i^yxaxto, 632 nKVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. ■cjfooJa ia"n tuto ss tx xT^'Pirx zymovfiKui. i. e. For if you should finish but one slipper before sunrise, you shall have made so much tcay toivurds earning your dinner." Now let us hear Mr. Tooke — V. i. p. 63. " For if you go out before sunrise with only one slipper on, you have earnt so much for your next day's support." As we turn over the leaves, why should we withhold from our readers the following short note on the cestus of Venus ? P. 73. " The girdle that Juno borrowed of Venus, for inducing soinnolency on the father of the gods." lb. p. 318. tyvvxix.i^'i li TO srcci^iicov. Mr. T. i. p. 76, " and kept a gynseceum of lovely lasses." Poor Aspasia ! The elegant Aspasia is turned into a bawd. But to do Mr. T. justice, he found gynccceiim in the Latin. T. i. p. 73. ore rri'KiiKX.vrYi ev coioc^ci Xf^*" v^zvccyix zmi t« AeviccxXiutos tycviro, us x. r. X, i. e.' SO that in the time of Deucalion such a general wreck took place in an instant, that, &c. Mr. T. i. p. 34. " Witness the great deluge in Deucalion's time, when, ere a man could turn him round, such a horrid inundation ensued, that all the ships, on which mankind had cursed and swore, went to the bottom." But there, also, our poor translator was wi'ecked on Gesner's absurd Latin. lb. p. 80. (A-rioi a'noc}\\%mau'jiiaxv «rw ^xoius, xacv on fj.a.Ki'^ix lira y^^r,<^orinTos ocv9is tx2iux.yi avms rrii oiKKixi. Mr, T. p. 38. " and not lightly depart from him, unless he, by means of his old acquaint- ance. Goodnature, turns them out of doors again." lb. p. 82. (A,o)/ov tt^t ^ix^xvois iA.e i^suQsi rvis oiKiacs, axQxiTi^ oi to -tsv^ ly. ruv yii^uy a7roff(77TavT£.<-. i. e. He drove me out of doors almost with main force, as hastily as a man would /ling a coal of fire out of his hand. Mr. T. p. 38. " he drove me out of doors ; not indeed with a pitchfork, nor by suddenly throwing at me something that burnt his hand, but in perfect cold blood," &c. We were going on to quote from the next page his translation of the simple words — xiju^v^a zj^os [xz — " you complained bitterly of me ;" but we believe it would be superfluous to adduce any further evidence in proof of Mr. T.'s absolute ignorance of Greek. We are sorry to be here obliged to quote the last sentence from his introductory essay : — " So much the seldomer on the contrary I believe I have mistaken the meaning of his words and thoughts, and can the more confidently hope this, but therefore with less merit on my part, since I could not only avail myself of the labours of my predecessors in various lan- guages, but also of the celebrated editor ofyEschylus, whose ingenuity and taste are no less conspicuous than his knowledge of the Greek language and literature, who has such a friendship both for Lucian and for me as to revise the greater part of this translation in manw script, and to employ some of the few moments left him by the multi- tude of his other afl'airs, in correcting it." We confess that this statement at present appears to us "incredible ; and we do heartily hope — on more accounts than one — that it may prove to be one of those groundless boasts into which Mr. T.'s egregious vanity has in numberless instances betrayed him. But as KKVir.W OF TOOKK'S LUCIAN. 633 there are in this country three editors of .'IC^cliyhis now livinc;', — Messrs. Hlomkiiclu, IkucKSs, and Bi'tlku, — we think it but justice to at least two of them to afford them an opportunity of pubhcly dis- avowing tlie imputation. Our j)agcs shall be open to them for the purpose. Thcv sliall be open also to any defence of Mr. Tooke's publication, which anv scholar may unfortunately think fit to ofJ'er. And we add, tliat — should we thus be called upon to take up the subject again — we shall be content to confine ourselves to the first short piece of Lucian, his humourous imitation of Prodicus's Choice of Hercules, — occupying with the notes not quite eleven pages, — or to any equal number of consecutive pages which Mr. T.'s advocate may select; for the puqjosc of establishing every charge which W'c have brought against the work. We cannot close this article, though already protracted to too great length, without offering a remark in vindication of the severity of chastisement which we have inflicted. Some perhaps may ask — Is ignorance, however gross, the just object of such keen reprehension ? We reply, that when gross ignorance and dull inanity assume the mask of learning and critical sagacity ; when thev appear in the walks of literature in the form of two large and costly volumes; we hold it the duty of an honest literary journal plainly and promptly to expose the fraud. But when such a writer supports his pretensions to extraordinary^ erudition with unblushing effrontery, by a con- temptible system of the vilest plagiarism and dishonest artifice ; the duty is the more incumbent of tearing off thelion's skin, and sending the animal — whipped — to rejoin the com])any of his long-eared brethren. The application of the lash is always a more ungrateful task, than to confer the wreath : but it is often more useful to the public. Did we not still maintain the silence, which we have pre- scribed to ourselves, upon other characters of Mr. T.'s work, we could easily prove that — instead of being severe — we have been very imwaiTantably lenient. None but those who have examined Mr. T.'s volumes, as we have, can conceive the ridiculousness of dishonest A'anity, which pervades his notes and dissertations. Had he even been really possessed of any learning, it would have argued bad taste to display it in critical dis- quisitions on the text — not only of Lucian — but of various other classics ; to make a parade of Greek ([uotations in an English version of the author ; and that, when he thinks it needful to explain most copiously the commonest allusions to Greek mythology, with which every schopl boy is familiar. But what shall we say of this vanity, when it appears that the whole garb of erudition in which he attires himself is stolen from the conmientators, to whom every scholar has access ? — except perhaps when it becomes his oxen (according to Mr. Locke'stheoryof the origin of property) by being blended, soiled, and disfigured with his own absurdities and impertinence. We re-open the book once more ; and find in one page (v. ii. p. 492.) two examples suflficiently illustrative of this charge. In the beginning of the piece. A/a?., ■nrfor 'Ho-/oJov (t. viii. Ed. Bip.) Evcinus says, addressing Ilesiod — otius kXcioh hxi Ifx^ot-ns tx •nra^'a- >.r,XiQorx, Kxi 6ca-7Tii^'i,s rx laoixivx. Upon these words Solanus (Du Soul) and Gesner very properly remark — properly in a critical 634 REVIEW OF TOOKE'S LUCIAN. edition of the Greek classic — that Lucian appears to have found a different reading from the common, in the passage of Hesiod to which he refers : the poet giving usn nXvoipn to. t ea-a-oixsvx k. t. X. and Gesner adds that the metre requires xAdoz/a/. Here was a bit of learning which Mr. T. thought he found within his reach ; and thus bedecks himself with it, to astonish his English readers. " Lucian, it must be owned, has here allowed himself a legerde- main trick, by changing the y.XsioiiJ.t of Hesiod into nXeiois, which gives rather a different meaning . . .However, to give him fair plav, we will here insert the poet's own words, Oioy. lin. 30, et seq." And then he attempts to transcribe the same lines which Gesner had quoted; but unfortunately in the third line gives K^siot/j.. t« t* caTOfjiivx, which, as Gesner has noticed, the verse would not admit. — Let us be allowed to remark — (though we feel how much out of place any thing of critical learning would be in reviewing such a work as the present) — that we think Lucian's text immediately leads to the emendation of Hesiod's. We would read xAeo/^/. See Hom. Od. V. 299. The words ivsz^vcvactv av'Sriv seem to require this alteration. In another note, in the same page, Mr. T. favours the reader with the following display of his emendatorial sagacity: — " ' Whoever heard,' exclaims here M. Du Soul, ' that Telephus was among the prophets .'' This word is therefore corrupt, 07' what other is to be put in its room might not prove so easy to divine.' — — (Sed quid reponendum sit, &c.) — If it were allowable, notwith- standing this, to guess (without, hoioever, positively asserting that I have guessed it,) I would say that Lucian perhaps casually misirrote it himself, intending to write Telemus ; or the transcriber, from inat- tention, or the rapidity of his pen, metamorphosed the less known Telemus into the better known Telephus." Then, after quoting a passage from the Odyssey, and from Ovid's Metam., he concludes — " I should think, however, that we ought to adhere to the Home- rican Telemus : since it is only to put in an »> and (ji. for i and (p." Ingenious critic ! But, alas ! all that is good in the note is stolen from the commentator following Solanus, on the passage : (t. viii. p. 491.) " Pro T7jX£(poy Valkenarius ad Herod. &c. rescripsit T>jXj/^oy, assentiente CI. Beh de Ball. [Belin de Ballu.] De Telemo vid. prseter Homer, in Od. — Ovid. Metam. xiii. v. 771." We here close the case for the prosecution; and close Mr. T.'s volumes : handing them up, however, to the Bench, with some pas- sages marked for his Lordship's inspection. The Counsel for the Prisoner has thrown up his brief — the Jury have protested against the Judge's troubling them orhimself with any charge or any summing up of evidence, — they have brought in their verdict, finding the prisoner Guilty on every count. The Judge flings the book from him with a frown, and pronounces the sentence of the Court : That the Prisoner at the bar, falsely styling himself '.' Lu- cian OF Samosata, from the Greek, by William Tooke," &c. &c. be twice publicly whipped through the pages of The Weekly Register, and then transported for life in vicum vendentem thus et odores — the Botany Bay of Literature. 635 PLAIN TRUTHS: OR, A SPEECH WHICH MAY BE DELIVERED IX THE APPROACHING SESSION, BY ANY MEMBER WHO LIKES IT, ON A MOTION FOR GOING INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE UPON THE STATE OF IRELAND. A((7^fov tarn, u ocvS^ts Aarivxioi, ii(^ii» txvrovs, [Translated for the benefit of the Country Gentlemen.] " It is shameful, Gentlemen, that we should humbug ourselves." [Published 182J.] A SPEECH, &c. Sir, — I rise to oppose the motion that this House should go into a Committee on the state of Iukland. I oppose it, hecausc I think it unfair to mock that unhappy country by holding out hopes, which we are not prepared to realize. If the disorders of Ireland could be he.aled bv anv measures, which the British Legislature is likely to adopt, I would gladly go into the Committee. But I am persuaded that they cannot: and thinking it important that the House should itself be undeceived, and cease to encourage delusive expectations, I beg leave to state, with all plain- ness, the grounds upon which I regard the case of Iiieland as at present hopeless. In offering my sentiments to the attention of the [louse, I feel that I am likely to displease all parties ; because I cannot agree with the views of any. Yet I may, in some measure, also avail myself of the support of all ; because, even those who have advanced opinions the most opposite to each other, appear to me to speak some import- ant truths. Thei'e are certain topics, upon which honourable Members are ac- customed to enlarge very eloquently, but which, I think, have no- thing to do with the question that properly comes under the con- 630 PLAIN TRUTHS. sideration of this House ; because they concern matters that come not Vi'ithin the limits of legislative interference. If the Irish pea- santry be oppressed by rack-rents, if they be in a state of squalid poverty and wretchedness, an overgrown population of ragged pau- pers, can we gravely think of passing an Act of Parliament for re- medying these evils ? an Act of Parliament for regulating the am.ount of rent which the landlord may demand, or the tenant pay ? an Act of Parliament for prohibiting the use of potatoes as food, or the mar- riages of those who cannot afford to use wheaten bread ? an Act of Parliament for preventing the peasant's pig from occupying the same hovel with his family ? — No, Sir ; there is no use in declaiming here vipon such topics as these. They are either matters of private regu- lation ; or evils which bring with them their own correction : or mere indications of a state of rude society. But as one honourable Member has insisted largely on the distresses of the Irish peasantry, as at once the cause and palliation of their outrages, I cannot forbear making two brief remarks. The first is, that the persons most actively engaged in those deeds of outrage and plans of lawless combination, are notoriously — not the lowest and most distressed of the peasantry — but men who are comparatively in easy circumstances, and who might possess every comfort of life, if their habits were industrious and peaceful. My second remark is, that gentlemen of this country, who talk of the extreme ivretchedness of the lower orders in Ireland, really do not know Ireland. They have, perhaps, made a six-weeks' tour in the country, and imagine that this has made them acquainted with it. They have observed the peasant living in a mud-built cabin, surrounded with smoke, and dirt, and naked children, and pigs, and poultry ; and have concluded that he must be ivretched, because they would be so in such circum- stances. But let me tell such gentlemen, that these circumstances produce not the slightest discomfort to the object of their sympathy. And let me not be charged with speaking paradoxically, when I say — and I say it (upon a long and intimate acquaintance with the people) — that, except when arare failure of the potatoe-crop occasionsrealfamine in the country, I do believe that the Irish peasantry have more pleasurable enjoyment of existence than the English ; and that for one who has not a sufficiency of wholesome food in that island, scores die of starvation in this metropolis of the British empire. But I dismiss such questions, as really unconnected with the proper subject of our debate. And I have observed, that whatever other topics were introduced by the speakers who have preceded me, they appear all to agree in marking what is called the Catholic Question as of primary importance on the present occasion; that to this they aU ultimately reverted, from whatever point their ai'guments set out ; and that apart from this they seem aware that the state of Ireland cannot be discussed. In this, sir, they are right. But, in other respects. I maintain that both the advocates and the opponents of the Catholic claims are equally wrong ; the oppo- nents in maintaining that these claims may safely be resisted ; and the advocates in maintaining — not only that they may safely be conceded — but that the concession will satisfy the claimants, and PLAIN TRUTHS. G:)7 traiuiiiillize Ikf.i.and. Sir, it will not ; ami ia t)ic nature of tliiiijjs i cannot. Yet do I agree with those who say, that the concession ought to be made. It ought to be made, in order to remove the stalking-horse of disaffection. It ought to be made, in order to detach from the ranks of the disaffected a few of the Popish nobility and gentry, who are safe Subjects of the British Empire. It ought to be made, in order to exj^osc the further objects of those, who are essentially hostile to British connexion. It ought to be made, even for the sake of vindicating the legislature from the imputation of absurd incon- sistency ; — the inconsistency of granting to thousands of semi-bar- barous peasants the right of electing Members of Parliament, and withholding from a few respectable gentlemen of the same faith the right of being eligible to a seat in Parliament. But it is idle to think, that anv concessions which can be made, consistently with the existence of a Protestant Establishment in Ireland, will satisfy the Popish aspirants, and tranquillize the country. No, sir ; it is impos- sible : and the expectation of it is founded in utter ignorance of the genius of Poperv, and inattention indeed to the nature of man. It has for some time been fashionable to talk of the genius of Popery as considerably altered from what it was in former davs. The encaged tiger is supposed to havethrown off its pristine ferocity, and to have become as gentle as a lamb. While I protest against the notion, let me not be misunderstood. I distinguish between the character of individuals professing the Romish faith, and the genius of the faith itself, particularly as maintained by its hierarchy. That there are individuals of that communion, as amiable as any Protes- tants in private life, and as safe and useful members of civil society, I gladly acknowledge. But they constitute not what is called THE Church, to whose decrees even their private sentiments and wishes must bend. That Church boasts of her immutability : and simple indeed are they who dispute the immutability which she claims, and who refuse to estimate what she is at this day by the undisputed records of what she has been in days of old. Well indeed does she know^ how to assume every variety of form and appearance, according to her varying occasions. For the thunders, in which she was once accustomed to speak, she can employ the feeble timid accents of helplessness. Concealing her snakes and her scourges,* she can present herself in all the pitiable decrepitude of anility. But even then she only waits the fit moment for re- assuming her proper form ; for repelling the man who scorns or opposes her ; and bursting on his confounded sight in all the terrors and expanding dimensions of the fury. Many were surprised lately at finding that the Popish priests revived their pretensions to miraculous powers. But everyone who knew their system knew that these powers were reserved in petto. In these heretical countries, indeed, the exercise of them has been, • Alecto torvam faciem et furialia membra Exuit : in vultus sese transformat aniles, &c. At .... tot Eriiinys sibilat liydris Tantaqiie se facies aperit. — Virg. 1. vii. /En. 638 PLAIN TRUTHS, Oil for good reasons, very rare. But who has not heard of the annual liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius at Naples ? though it has been so fashionable to forget all the lying legends of the Church of Rome, that many may not have heard of the flight of the Holy House from Judea to Loretto. Great certainly is the impudence of the Reverend and Right Reverend Knaves, who, in the nineteenth century, and in these countries, put forward their grossest claims upon the public credulity ; but great also is their cunning. They seem to have rightly estimated the temper of the times. When Prince Hohenlohe falls a praying to one of the innumerable gods or goddesses, with which they have peopled their heaven; and his confederates assure us, that on the invoked interference of St. John Nepomuscene, a miraculous cure has been effected ; — the protestants of these countries, — instead of laughing at the imposture, and simply remarking the long- established character of the shop from which it issues,— gape with wonder at the prodigy, and proceed gravely to canvass its authenticity in pamphlets without number. And shall I be told that the men, who still practise these pious frauds for the good of the Church, would not still also consider every other means sanctified by that end ? — that they would not still also, if they had the power, enforce submission to the Church's dictates even by the tortures of the inquisition, and impose her iron yoke (as formerly) upon the necks of kings ? I may be told, that — however willing — they have not the power, and are not likely to recover it ; that the world is now too enlightened, the rights of conscience too well understood. And I admit it to a certain degree ; though I do think that the age boasts of much more light, and much more liberality, than it really possesses. But I aim at present only at asserting the unchangeable character of the Church of Rome, as it influences the wishes and the aijns of her priesthood ; the domination which they seek to establish over the consciences of men ; and their ambitious aspirings after worldly power, in order to advance the interests of their ecclesiastical system. And knowing that such is the essential character of Popery, can I rationally expect tranquillity in Ireland, while there is a Protestant establishment and a Popish populace ? No : there will, and must be, a continued struggle, on the one hand, to obtain Popish ascendancv, and, on the other, to maintain Protestant ascendancy ; — a struggle, which in various forms must spread barbarism and distraction throughout the land ; — a struggle, in the course of which every advance of the Popish multitude in numbers, wealth, and political privilege, will be employed as a stepping-block to further elevation. I am old enough to remember the first relaxations of the penal code in Ireland, during the last reign. The Papists had long been patient sufi'erers, and were then humble petitioners for relief. They have since become loud claimants for privilege and power ; and their claims have proceeded from one object to another, till they now avow, that they require a new modelhng of the Established Church, and an admission of their professors to every office in the state most intimately connected with our Religious Establishment,— even to A SPEKCII, Xc. C3y tliat of the Lord High Chancellor of Englaiul. Ami if all this were conceded, think ye that they would he content, while thtir relif^ion was excluded from the throne itself, and while any other religion than theirs was estahlished in Ireland ? No, Sir; it were idle to expect it. And I must add. that the ultimate object of their priesthood, to become the Establishment in Ireland, is as fair, and their claims for that as reasonable, as any which they now avow. You have one form of religion established in England, the religion of the majority : you have another established in Scotland, the form that best i>leases the major part of our Northern fellow-subjects. And why — may an Irish Papist well demand — why should not Popery be established in Ireland ? Is it, that the principles of the British constitution are inconsistent with the political support of Popery in any part of his Majesty's dominions? Assuredly not so. Look at Canada ; and there you will see Popery established by British law. I know that a distinction has been set up between its establishment, and the political support and endowment of tithes, which it there receives. But it is a distinction without a difference. That there are in Ireland some of the Popish communion, men of property, and of cultivated minds, who do not propose to themselves the overthrow of the present Establishment, I believe. They naturally dread the violent convulsion, which would, probably, accom- pany such a change : and though abundantly dissatisfied with the existing order of things, they yet would rather bear its evils, than seek a remedy for them by a civil war. To lessen the causes of that dissatisfaction, which such men feel, — (to lessen them as much as possible, for, under a Protestant Establishment, they cannot be wholly removed) is, I am persuaded, among the important objects of legislation for Ireland. But the great mass of its Popish population have nothing to lose, but the blood of which they are prodigal : and are little accustomed in any case to the cool calculation of consequences t while the priests — cut off by their celibacy from the ordinaryconnexionsand engage- ments of civil society — have but one paramount object perpetually in view, the advancement of the interests of their Church ; an object, which their system teaches them to pursue /jer/rtir et nefas. In the pursuit of this, they do generally lay themselves out with insidious industry, to keep alive in the minds of their people a feeling of hos- tility to British connexion ; and to attach to the name of Sassenach the combined ideas of one of English blood, a heretic, an oppressor of the country, and usurper of the rights of Irishmen. Some of those men I have known to be distinguished by the title of loyal priests : and I remember one of these, in a A-ery disturbed district, v.ao invited his Protestant neighbours to hear a pacific harangue, which he was to deliver from the altar, for the express purpose of quieting the minds of his people, and persuading them to give up their insurrectionary schemes. Vet Mark Antony's speech to the Roman populace, over the body of Ca-sar, was not more insidiously inflammatory, than the pacific harangue of that /oyw/ priest on that occasion — while it must be admitted that he did strongly impress upon the people the hopelessness of their being then able to VOL. II. 2 T 640 PLAIN TRUTHS, OR avenge the wrongs of ages, which he detailed, and the prudential necessity of their forbearing to break out into rebellion then. The priests of lRE:t,AND I do not hesitate to denounce as, generally, the great agitators of that country ; and if, in the rebellion of 1798, a ship had been freighted for Port Jackson, with all the officiating priests, I am pei'suaded tliat there would not have been expatriated six persons guiltless of misprision of treason. It would have been a measure not more illegal than others, which were then adopted ; but much more effectual for restoring quiet to Ireland. I am aware, that in speaking of the Popish population of Ireland as generally disaffected, I hold a language likely to offend both the advocates and opponents of their claims. Their long and general loyalty is a favourite theme : and even the ebullitions of joyous revelry, which the novel pageantry of a Royal visit lately excited in the metropolis, have been adduced as evidence that they are very good subjects of King George the Fourth. Some who talk in this manner, must undoubtedly know better; but thev are afraid to avow the truth. For mv part, I think it quite time that this House, and the British public, should be disabused ; and informed that the deeply- rooted feeling of the great mass of Irish papists is hostile to Great Britain ; that the hope which lies nearest to their hearts is that of recovering their country at some future period, out of the hands of the English invaders. It is time that this House should know the real characters of the distemper for which we seek a remedy. Yet let me not be understood as partaking in the fears of those, who apprehend an immediate or speedy rebellion in Ireland. No, Sir : the leaders of disaflection there have learned more prudence. And however well pleased that there should be a continuance of that kind of smothered and harrassing warfare, which has distracted many parts of the island, yet, I am sure they would be forward to restrain the people from openly taking the field against the overwhelming- power of Great Britain. But let Europe be again involved in war, and let the military resources of Great Britain be occupied as they have been in former wars of Europe, then I do avow my appre- hension, that Ireland will be lost to this country, lost probably after an internal struggle the most bloody. Sir, I am not an Orange-man ; and I am decidedly of opinion that, in a well-regulated state, no secret political association ought to be tolerated. But I must add, that the principles of a well regulated state are not applicable to Ireland : and that, combined as the nu- merical majority of its populace is against the existing laws and con- stitution, I cannot wonder that the minority should combine for their own preservation and the maintenance of the existing order. Nor do I think that the latter combination can be either safely or effec- tually put down, while the former continues : and I repeat it, that the former must continue, as long as the religious Establishment of the country is Protestant, and the great mass of its population Popish. What then is to be done .'' what can be done for that unhappy country ! You are moved to go into a Committee upon its state. But is this House prepared to go to the root of the evil ? And if not, what use in deceiving yourselves and the nation, by employing A SPEECH, &e. C41 temporary palliatives ? Ynu can but keep military po.s«epsion of lui> LANi), while she is u hostile CDUutry, and the gronnd of her hostility continues unremoved. This is undoubtedly a very precarious tenure ; much more so tha i niai\y flatter themselves; and every year it will become more and more precarious. But if this must be the course adopted, abandon the inconsistent notion of applyin:^ British law and British liberty to that country. These are in fact little suited to a people combined against established law and order. That they •will cease to be so combined, if what is absurdly called C«//!o//6' luisii alaul:.mv. 637 production? of modern Europe with those standards of composition, which the poets, orators, j/liilosophers, and historians of ancient Greece and Rome afford us ? Their works are the great storehouse from which every thing of correct taste in the beautiful and subhme has been derived: and among the writers of modern times, they have made the nearest approaches to perfection, who have formed them- selves most studiously upon the unrivalled models of antiquity. What modern language, indeed, on a comparison with the Greek — or even with the Latin tongue^ must not yield the palm ! Which of them must not be owned inferior, in the combined characters of bre- vity and copiousness of expression, in elegance, and force, and har- mony of varied structure ? Let it also be observed, that Latin is the common basis of most European languages ; and that the clas- sical scholar can find no difficulty in mastering any of these, at any time, by the a])])lication of a few months: while it is rare to find, and hard indeed to conceive, any one ignorant of the classics, and at the same time critically acquainted with his mother-tongue. In short, if the knowledge of French, Italian, &c. extend our lite- rary citizenship to other countries than our own ; an acquaintance w-ith the languages of ancient Greece and Rome at once infinitely facilitates the former acquirement, — opens to us the original and. richer sources of literature, — and connects us by a kind of co- existence with past ages. Let classical learning become extinct, and we become inhabitants of a younger world, to which the expe- rience, the wisdom, and the w-it of ancient times are effectually lost. Let the popular objection be admitted against classical learning, as a thing of little practical benefit ; and the very citadel — not only of polite literature — but of science, is surrendered to a barbarous foe. But some mav say — " We are not enemies to polite literature; nor do we desire that classical learning should become extinct. But is it not put out of place, in being made the chief, or sole, object of liberal education in our schools?" My design is not to defend, in all re- spects, the present system of school education ; and I shall hereafter point out some particulars, in which it appears to me defective, injurious, and absurd. But I confess that I prefer it, with all its present defects, to any pretended reformation, which would displace classical learning from the rank of a constituent — and principal — part of all liberal education. If education be conducted aright, it must commence at a very early age. And if, at a still earlier age, that preparatory control has been maintained over the child, which is needful for subjecting it to discipline and habits of attention ; the subsequent course of instruc- tion may proceed — not only without trenching at all upon youthful enjoyments — but so as to promote them considerably. Far, indeed, would I be from abridging the exercise or amusements of childhood. But no mistake can be greater, than the supposition that absolute idleness promotes, or is consistent with the true enjoyment of life, either in man or child. Few states are more wretched, than the void of listless satiety, in which the mind — wearied of pleasure — preys upon itself, and knows not where to turn for employment. If you would bring up a child for the sole object of pleasurable exists- 2 u 2 658 AN ESSAY ON A PRIZE QUESTION, ence, form in that cliild early habits of submission to control, and of application to business. It is not then unreasonable to suppose, that the child at eight years of age is so far acquainted v/ith his mother tongue, as to be able to read it with correctness and facility, and to know some of the principles of general grammar. Now I ask, in what branch of study can he be employed more profitably, from that period till the age of fourteen, than in the study of the Greek and I^atin tongues ? Child- hood is peculiarly the age for learning the elements of languages. The elements of languages can at that time be effectually taught ; and in acquiring the knowledge of them, the youthful mind is exer- cised, and cultivated, and stored with ideas, and trained to skill in using an instrument the most extensively important, whatever be the future objects to which the attention may be directed ; — the most important in its connexion both with accurate thinking, and with the clear and elegant communication of our thoughts. The moderate, but regular application of two hours a day, under a proper method of instruction, would be sufficient — I am bold to assert — for conveying to the child, during the period which T have specified, such a know- ledge of the languages of Greece and Rome, as would render the further study of their writers a matter of elegant enjoyment to his ripening taste, and delightful improvement to his maturer judgment. But if we exclude the classics from the general system of liberal education, what can we efi'ect during the same period in the cultiva- tion of science ? Shall we proceed to make the child of eight years old a philosopher .^ Yes; I am aware that some of our modern re- formers conceive the notion, of teaching children geometry, and astronomy, and chemistry, and geology, and I know not what.* But it is a preposterous and cruel notion, founded in ignorance — both of the human mind — and of the sciences, which these smatterers in literature profess to patronize. We must wait for the progress of nature to develope and strengthen the intellectual powers ; and if we attempt by injudicious culture to force the fruit of science, we can at most obtain a production crude and noxious ; and we bid fair to destroy the mental faculties by overstraining them. Others there are, who would avoid this error by letting the child run wild to the age of puberty : and the eloquent, but visionary, Rousseau has employed all the fascinations of language and fancy, to recommend this system — of leaving the intellectual faculties inactive as long as jmssible, that they may at length be called to the most eff'ectual exercise. According to this theory, " if we covdd but bring up our pupil healthy and robust to the age of twelve years, without his being able to distinguish his right hand from his left, the eyes of his understanding would be open to reason at our first lesson ; and he would become under proper instructions the wisest of men." If this were so, what a rare philosopher might have been formed out of the savage of Aveyron ! I formerly knew a gentleman, who followed Rousseau's plan in bringing up his son. I very early warned him of the probable result ; * See Note A. at the end. PROrOSED BY THE ROYAL IRISH ACADEMY. 659 and had afterwards abundant opportunities of seeing my predictions verified. The vouth, — who seemed to hibour undcrno inferiority of natural understanding, and had grown up to the age of twelve or thirteen without knowing even his letters, — when an attempt was afterwards made to educate him, proved wholly unequal to the attention and mental exercise requisite in abstract reasoning. I saw him once brouglit, by great exertion, to perceive the inference — that two lines, of which one was neither greater nor less than the other, must be equal. I believe it was the first rational inference, the force of which he ever discerned; and I believe it was the last. Having succeeded in producing any motion in the wheels of the intellectual machine, I entertained a hope that they might receive a continued progressive impulse. But I soon perceived, that his mind — as if exhausted by the effort — sunk back to its former state of motionless inactivity. Indeed it is hard to say/which is most injurious to the intellect of children, the total neglect of early culture, or a culture excessive in degree, and ill-adapted in its kind to the tenderness of early life. As the latter exhausts the soil, and produces a growth as unhealthy and ill-formed, as it is premature ; so the general consequence of the former is a rigidness of texture, which defies future cultivation. And it is worthy of observation, that the study of languages is that to which the mind in very early childhood appears most competent ; which — in its first elements — exercises the attention and the raemorv, while — in the progress of interpretation — it em])loys thought, calls forth the ingenuity of research, multiplies the ideas, enlarges the views, informs the judgment, and refines the taste. But let it also be observed, that the time, which I propose allotting to the acquisition of the learned languages, can by no means interfere with any other objects, which may be supposed suited to the age of childhood. For the prosecution of other studies, one or two hours more in each day, during the same period, would be found amply sutHcient : and during childhood, I would never extend the time of application to business beyond four hours in the day. Writing, English reading. History, Geography, and Chronology (as far as connected with the two latter) — one or more of these I suppose to form part of the daily employment : while some of them may be taught in such a form, as will contribute to the amusement and relaxation of the pupil. In the course also of English reading, a considerable acquaintance with facts in Natural History may be formed : and I am aware, that under proper masters a child may — in his walks — be usefully led to distinguish various objects in the vegetable and mineral kingdoms ; so far, at least, as to be familiar with the leading characters of the principal classes. Yet I confess that I value these acquirements, at the early period of which I speak, rather as calculated to awaken a s])irit of accurate and attentive obsers'ation, than for the immediate information which they convey. But there is one branch of science, — science strictly so called — the elements of which I am persuaded are level to the capacity of a child ; and I consider the neglect of it as a great and lamentable defect, in our svstem ofliberal education. I mean Arithmetic : — not 660 AN ESSAY ON A PRIZE QUESTION, that art of technical calculation, which commonly goes under the name : — but the science of numbers, considered as a branch of Mathematics. I know not any class of ideas, with which the mind may be sooner made familiar, than those of number : nor any, about which it may sooner be engaged, with much advantage, in close reasoning. The thing taught as Arithmetic, in mercantile schools, is unworthy of the name of Science ; and even to this, in classical schools, little or no attention is paid : which, I am convinced, is the reason, why so many students in the University find insuperable difficulties in Geometry and Analytics. If I might pi-esume to suggest a hint to the heads of that learned body, I would say that the remedy of this evil might well deserve their consideration ; and that it might be remedied, by their introducing into the schools a system of scientific Arithmetic, which should combine familiarity of illustration with a method strictly demonstrative. The use of such a treatise might easily be enforced in the classical schools, by their including it in the course of examination requisite for admission into College. The mention of this leads me to not the most grateful part of my subject; — to point out some other particulars, in which the present system of classical education does seem to me to impede the progress of science and of general literature. This is an ungrateful task ; in which nothing but the paramount consideration of public utility could induce me to engage. But most of the particulars, which I shall notice, are such as admit an easy remedy ; and are but the accidental imperfections of a system, which I value as radically good, and would lament to see displaced by any of the visionary theories of modern reformers. The first evil I would mark is — the extravagant length of time in each day, for which children ai'e kept in school. I leave it to the medical profession to determine, how far so much confinement is con- sistent with the health and vigour of their bodies. The objections which I advance against it are two : 1st. that it tends to give them a distaste to study, — a relish for which it ought to be one great object of liberal education to form : 2dly. that it promotes a habit of mental indolence and inattention during the periods of study, — than which no habit is more unfavourable to literary progress. The child cannot, in the nature of things, have his mind actively engaged for so many hours, as he is obliged to have his books and papers before him. But he must in general seem to be engaged ; and he therefore lounges, and dreams over his books and papers. Half the time, or less, would be sufficient to finish his assigned task ; but, from this very circumstance, he is often led to give no real application to it from first to last. It may pei'haps be more easy to point out this evil, than to find a remedy for it, as long as that observation of the Roman Satyrist shall remain true — res nulla minoris constabit patri, qtiamfilius. But parents may be assured, that their children might make much greater progress in literature, if the time they nominally spend in study were much less. Another evil, connected with the former, though apparently of an opposite nature, is— the number of holidays, so called, and the length PllOPOSED BY TllK ROYAL IIllSlI ACADEMY. G61 of vacations, which bovs are allowed in most schools. This con- tributes to impress on their minds the sentiment, that absolute idleness is enjoyment ; — a sentiment as unfounded in truth, as it is pernicious in its influence on the future habits. It besides accustoms them to that kind of desultory application, by fits and starts, which never can supply the place of regular diligence. A course of uniform — daily study, attentively pursued, and therefore moderately con- tinued,— is that which alone can insure eflectual progress ; and that %vhich — so far from impeding — promotes enjoyment. I have now to notice the comparative inefficiency of our school- education, for communicating a real and manly acquaintance with the languages of Greece and Rome. And in stating this, and proceeding to assign one of the obvious causes of it, I do not really depart from the subject of this Essay. The imperfectness of school-education is most unfavourable to the success of Collegiate ; and too much diverts the latter from that which ought to be its princi])al object — science, to that which cannot be taught effectually in College — the learned languages. I by no means intend that they should not, as they do, form a considerable part of Collegiate exercises. But I con- ceive that the student, passing from school to College, ought to possess such a radical acquaintance with Greek and Latin, as would render his further prosecution of the Classics rather a literary relaxation, than a laborious and ungrateful task. Now, on the con- trary, it commonly happens, that he is so occupied with the drudgery of classical preparation throughout his collegiate course, that he has little attention to spare for the sciences ; and looks forward with impatience to the close of his Academic studies, as the period when he shall be released from the irksome necessity of studying at all. For the defectiveness of our present system of school-education various causes might be assigned ; and among them, some general errors in the methods of teaching employed. But I shall confine myself to one cause, which I believe is little noticed ; while its exist- ence is certain, and its influence most injurious. I mean the total want of proper books, for teaching the learned languages. I speak not now of the absurdities of the common Grammars and Dictionaries. I speak of the editions of the Classics used in our schools : and I denounce them, with very few exceptions, as scandalous to a country professing literature. In the first place, they are printed with so much typographical inaccuracy, as to be in many passages unintelligible even to a scholar ; while they often present, in almost every page, difficulties utterly insuperable to a schoolboy. The last edition pubhshed in this city of the selection of Lucian's Dialogues, which is read in schools, and the only edition now to be obtained in this country, exhibits in the first Dialogue (containing about one duodecimo page of Greek) no fewer than nine gross errors of the press : and a similar imputation, though not in equal degree, lies against almost every other school- book, printed cither in this country or in Great Britain. This indeed is but the natural effect of their being left, as amatter of trade, to illiterate printers. Each subsequent edition retains all the errors of the former ; and creates at least an equal number of its own. 662 AN ESSAY ON A PRIZE QUESTION, T remember once asking an old schoolmaster, how he managed ■with such copies. " I will tell you," said he, " how we manage. When the poor boy comes to one of these errors of the press, he spends half an hour puzzling his brains, and searching his dictionary for a word which is no where to be found. When all has failed, he comes blubbering to me, with a declaration of his inability to make out the passage : and then I send him away with — Pugh, you blockhead ! it if; an error of the press ; and ought to be so or so." — Is it thus, that the time and mental energy of an ingenuous youth ought to be employed ? In fact, there are few books, in which typographical accuracy of execution is of so much importance, as in those designed for the use of schools ; and there are none, in which it so much neglected. But besides this objection to them, most of them are intrinsically tmfit for their professed purpose. Among these I must reckon all, in which the notes are written in the language to be learned; instead of being written in that, which is most intelligible to the scholar. I know, that — in saying this — I have to combat with a considerable force of old prejudice. Many still insist upon the usefulness of obliging schoolboys to read Latin notes. " It familiarizes them with the language : and the very difficulty, with which they obtain the information in the note, imprints the information more deeply." — Now the fact is, that not one schoolboy in ten thinks of taking the trouble to read any length of Latin annotation. But if they did, — and if the notes were written in purer Latinity than they often are, - — might not the time thus spent be more profitably employed, in reading a greater quantity of original Latin writers ? And does not common sense dictate, that the explanation, or illustration, or remark, which the note is intended to convey, ought to be made easily accessible, and conveyed in the clearest form to the learner ? It is quite time for the friends of classical learning, to abandon some of the absurdities, with which the study of it has been embarrassed. But I have objections as decisive against the matter, as against the form of the annotations, in most of the Classics read in schools. Thev are defective, and redundant, and grossly erroneous. As to the Latin classics, those published in usum Delphini are almost exclusively employed : and I venture to assert, that the editors of tl^ese — with few exceptions — were fitter to be at school themselves, than to publish books for the use of schools. As this assertion may be thought to require proof, I shall adduce in a note* a few instances of their ignorance, from De La Rue's edition of Virgil, — the first of the Latin poets to which the schoolboy is introduced, — and from Crispin's edition of Sallust, the only prose writer in the language, which he is required to read previous to his entrance into College. The number of instances it would be more easy to enlarge, than to exhaust. But I conceive the specimens I have noted are quite sufficient, to mark the character of these editions as beneath criticism ; and to mark also the low state and lamentable neglect of classical learning in a country, where such books continue to be employed — year after yeai- — for teaching boys to misinterpret Latin. • It is a "^ See Note B. at the cml. PROPOSED BY THE ROYAL IRISH ACADEMY. CG3 great mistake to suppose, that any largeness of pecuniary endow- ments, allotted to the advancement of literature, — (and they arc in this island liberal) — is sufficient for the object ; unless their ai)pli- cation be actively superintended by literary men. As to the Greek Classics read in schools, the character of their editions is not quite so contemptible : for it happened fortunately that Greek Classics were not published in tisum Delphini. Yet even of these, I know not one fitted for the purpose. The selection from Lucian, to which I have already referred, has the notes indeed in English : but the editor possessed no critical acquaintance with the language, has adopted a text the most vicious, and has fallen into perplexities and mistakes the most ridiculous ;* — while the vulgarity of his attempts at humour must disgust any reader of taste. Of Homer — venerable, wonderful. Homer ! — the only edition used is Doctor Clarke's ; a man who deserved well of literature. But it is well known, that this is a posthumous work of that editor, left by him incomplete, and never designed by him for the use of schools. This edition has gone through perhaps more than twenty reimpres- sions ; while it is every time republished with all its imperfections and all its errors ;t and this, although it would be just as easy, and just as cheap, to reprint Ehnesti's revision of the work, in which many of these errors are corrected. Many others indeed remain, as must be weU known to those, who are acquainted with the invaluable Lexicon of the laborious Damm, and the edition of the book-making, but literary Heyne. And why — let me be allowed to ask — why should mistakes be pei'jDetuated in our schools, which have been for half a century exposed and rectified in the learned world .■* Do not such facts evince, bej-ond contradiction, the neglect of classical learning? And does not such neglect account for the general deficiency of progress in it among oui* youth, notwithstanding the length of time which is devoted to the study ? Nor is this to be remedied, by attempting to make them all Latin poets, — to enforce the composition of verses in a dead language. The attempt, though such a favourite one in the sister island, has always appeared to me a ridiculous waste of time. There really are not so many, who can write poetrij even in their mother tongue ; — though all now write verses. It is very well, that encouragement should be held out to any, whose taste leads them to cultivate this exercise. But the structure of classic verse, and an accurate acquain- tance with quantity, may be attained, as efficiently, with much less trouble. To promote the great object, a sound and critical interpretation of the Greek and Latin Classics, — completely new editions of them all are wanted ; and these, furnished with critical Indices Grcecitatis ct Latinitatis,X in order to supply the defects of the common Lexicons. * See Note C. at the end. t See Note D. X These are the more needful in the Greek Classics, because at least three-fourths of the Students, who enter College, possess no Lexicon but Schrevelius's ; — a bad Lexicon for Plonier and tlie Greek Testament, but not designed for any other book. Such indices also, accompanying the Greek Classics, would more than any thing else facilitate, what is so much wanted, — a new and improved Edition of Stepuens's TnEs.iURUs. G64 * NOTES. Never also should they be destitute of that class of annotation, which is calculated to form the taste of the youthful student, to regulate his judgment, and to excite his attention to the elegances of classic structure, and his admiration of the beauties of classic composition. In such a well-directed and regular application to classical studies, let the age of boyhood be passed ; and in other such pursuits, as are adapted to a boy. And at the age of sixteen, — the very earliest, assuredly, at which any ought to enter the University, — the youth will come to his collegiate studies with a mind so furnished, — with faculties so invigorated and enlarged, — with powers of combining and discriminating his ideas so exercised, — that his literary progress shall be insured ; and multiplied experience shall satisfactorily decide the question — Whether the cultivation of science and that of polite literature assist or obstruct each other. NOTES. (A.) page GoS. The curious reader may find this absurdity notably exemplified, in the Monthly Review for August, 1796, pp. 4.56 and 457. The article is a review of — An Essay on an Analytical Course of Studies, containing a complete System of Human Knoioledge. By J. B. Florian ; A. M. — It announces a new system of general education, which the Reviewers tell us " may deservedly claim the attention of the public, as well adapted to furnish a regular series of instruction in the prin- cipal branches of natural knowledge, in the room of that narrow plan of education which has devoted eight or ten precious years of early life to the mere acquisition of dead languages." " Mr. Florian," they proceed, " lays down precisely the business of each year, from the 7th to the 17th, as follows." — The whole is a choice morceau, which will amply repay the trouble of turning to the passage. But the sciences of the 4th and 7th years may serve as a specimen to those, who have not the work at hand. " Fourth year. Astronomy. Mechanics. Dialing. " Seventh year. Anatomy. Theory of Surgery, of Medicine, and Pharmacy. Pneumatology . Physiognomy." — Augur, schcenobates, medicus, magus : omna novit. — But Juvenal's Grecian was a fool to Mr. Florian's schoolboy. Latin is mentioned, as part of the business in the three last years. But as to Greek — Gracum est : non legitur. In place of it, however, NOTES. ' CGj " Politics and Pulitical Economy" are introduced : and an ample share of attention is given to Mitsic, Dancing, &c. Now which of the good citizens of Bath, (where Mr. F. was about to open an Academy, for " carrying this ])hin into execution") would not rather see his bov a fiddling, capering statesman, with the combined accom- plishments of a Surgeon, Physician, Apothecary, Physiognomist, &c. &c. &c.tlian cramp his genius by the tiarrow plan of studying the dead languages ? Accordingly, the Reviewers — (blessed guardians of literature) — conclude the article with observing, "that the under- taking seems to promise considerable utility to the public." Who can doubt it .'' (B.) page 662. Virg. 1. 7. jEn. v. 154. — ramis velatos PaUadis omnes. — Inter- preted— omnes coronatos ramis Minerva:. V. 236. — ne temne, quod ultro Prteferimus manibus vittas, &c. — Interpreted — quia s'ponte portamus, &c. V. 413. — et nunc magnum manet Ardea nomen. ^SetZfortuna fuit. — Interpreted — Sed casus ita tulit — with the following critical note. Vel ad superiora refertur ; Fortuna casusque fuit, ut nomen urbi tamdiu remanserit, &c. Vel ad subsequentia ; Fortuna casusque fuit, quod Turnus turn dormiebat, &c. V. 634. — alii thoracas ahenos, Aut leves ocreas lento ducuntargento. — Interpreted — alii excudunt loricas areas, vel poUtus ocreas argento flexili. It is well that Ru/EUs is not an Irish name. Let one more instance suffice of this Editor's learning. That pas- sage in the 8th book, v. 408. cum femina pi^'imum, Cui tolerare colo vitam tenuique Minervd Impositum, cinereyn et sopitos suscitat ignes, &c. is thus exhibited — ad usu)7i Serenissimi Delphini — — cum femina, primum Cui tolerare colo vitam tenuique Minervd, Impositmn cinerein et sopitos suscitat ignes, &c. — And thus interpreted — quando mulier, cui pra:cipuum est sustentare vitam colo et exigud arte, excitat ignem coopertum et cinerem super- additum igni. Now for Crispin — Sail. Bell. Cat. c. 18. — prohibituseral consulatumpetere, quod intra legitimos dies profiteri nequiverit. Note — Profiteri'] De/ensionem suam et expurgationem, scilicet. Bell. Jug. c. 4. — At contra, quis est omnium his moribus, quin divitiis et sumptibus, non probitate neque industrid, cum majoribus suis contendat 9 — Interpreted — Quis omnium ita vivit 9 c. V. — Bello Punico secundo, quo dux Carthaginiensum Hannibal, post magnitudinem nominis Romani, Italia opes maxume attriverat : &c. Note — Post magnitudineni] Id est, non contentus Romanorum gloriam proculcasse. c. 35. — Huic Sp. Albinus . . .pcrsuadet, quoniam exstii-pe Masinissa sit, Jugurtham ob scelera invidia [invidia] cum metu urgeat ; regnum NumidicE ab senatu petal. Note — Metu^ Id est, invidia et metu. 666 NOTES. Arhitror verb intelligendum esse de metu Romame plebis, nt aliqnando etiam contra se ipsa ausurum Jugurtham credat sceleru sua convertere. EccE iTERUM Crispinus — once more, and I have done. Sallust (Bell. Jug. c. 45.) describing the strictness of discipline, which Me- tellus restored in the Roman army, says — ceteris arte modum statuisse : upon which we have the following sagacious note. Arte] Ed opus est omnino, edque maximd in ejusmodi occasionibus. Qua verb in re sita sit, vix ullus dixerit : ita sunt, aut certe videntur, exigui momenti innumera quce ad id concurrunt. Although this be the edition most commonly used, yet it must be confessed that the two other editions of Sallust are accessible to boys in this country. One of these, however, might rank with the Dauphin's : and the other, (by Mair) though of a more respectable character, is accompanied with a literal English translation, by the side of the text. (C.) page 663. If the classical reader will turn to any of the following pas- sages, he may satisfy himself by reading Mr. Murphy's notes upon them, that I have not underratedthis edition. Necyomantia.^. 12. lTn-\/y\(pK7oiv fjilv a.1 a^y^OLi. — Charon.^. 4. "flf o Yloait^ujv avvriyxys, SlC. — - ib. la ToaHTu l[xsTii oXi'yx ySv ^ix(^vXa.rr£iv. — Somnium Luciaui. §. 6. «^£ yoc.^ 0 'B.svoc«^' E^^ajy.] tenebantque sedes ; and again in V. 211. A. V. 472. av»jf V av^g'' l^voTraX/^Ev. virque virum manu occidebat. E. V. 150. ToTs iix. i^y(p(ji.i)iois 0 yi^aiv Ik^Ivxt ovsi^as. Quibus non, ad bellum projiciscentibus, senex interpretatus est somnia. Ib. V. 844. Toil f/.h A"fry svcH^i^s. Hunc utique Mars occidebat. (See vv. 843. 847. and 848.) M. V. 139. A"a-iov a/Ayay worthy of prcsen'ation. — Ed.] TO THE EDITOR OF THE HIBERNIAN EVANGELICAL MAGAZINE, 1803. Mr. Editor, — I have never before \villin2;ly allowed my name (insignificant as it is) to appear in any publication such as yours ; because I would not wish to be thought answerable for the sentiments of a production so miscelLineous, and conducted by such a varietv of hands. But a particular circumstance leads me, at present, to beg a place for the following in your pages. Some days ago 1 got — and have this evening read a pamphlet, entitled, " Human Nature Vindicated, with a Short View of the Con- duct of Providence towards Mankind," &c. I beg leave to announce, through the medium of your Majiazine, my intention of examining, at a future day, that publication. And I do so, because from mv engagement with another antagonist (Mr. Knox), it is possible that so long time may elapse before 1 reply to it, as might lead the Author to suppose I had no intention of giving it an answer. I differ from some who have spoken to me concerning that pamphlet. The writer seems to me to be a sensible thinking man, who comes forward with tolerable plainness to tell what he believes. That, to be sure, is very opposite to what the Bible declares ; and various parts of it are very inconsistent with each other. But I really think he has made as much of his side of the question as any man else. And after having read various doctrinal productions of Arminians, and Pelagians, and Arians, and Socinians, I seriously declare that I think his pamphlet as good as any of them ; and, as comprising in a small compass the leading errors of most of them, I consider it deserving of a reply — which, in one form or another, I 2 X 668 mean to give it, if my life be spared. Meanwhile your readers may take the essence of his system (as far as he has any) in the words of Cowper, the poet : and it is a system very generally adopted, but contrary alike to the divine justice and the divine mercy, as those attributes are revealed in the Scriptures : I plant my foot upon this ground of trust. And silence every fear with — God is just; But if perchance, on some dull drizzling day, A thought intrude that says, or seems to say, If thus th' important cause is to be tried, Suppose the beam should dip on the wrong side; I soon recover from those needless frights, And, God is merciful — sets all to rights. Thus, between justice, as my prime support, And mercy fled to as the last resort, I glide and steal along with heaven in view. And — pardon me — the bottle stands with j'ou. Cowper's Hope. If the vindicator of human nature should happen to see this letter, I would recommend to his serious consideration a question, which has occurred to me upon a passage in his work. He says (p. 20,) that Paul, " when a blasphemer and a persecutor, was not a had man." Well, but — good a kind of thing as human nature is — I suppose the writer will acknowledge that there are some had men in the worlfl. Now, I wish him to consider whether there is any hope for such; and if there be, what it is. /am sure the Gospel which Paul preached, held out a blessed hope to the worst of men, in the testimony — that " Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners," and that " who- soever believeth in Him shall be saved." Indeed, / have been long accustomed to consider the Apostle himself as an instance of the greatness of that salvation. But no matter for the present : let the writer suppose some bad men, in whose case this blessed hope should be realized; and let him consider how he will state " the conduct of Providence,"— in such an instance. I wish him in the first place to examine this question, in its various bearings, for himself ; and if he afterwards take up his pen upon the subject, I shall be well pleased to see his thoughts on it given to the public, as an Appendix to his — " Views of the Conduct of Providence" — towards sinners that are — not bad men. I am, Sir, Yours, &c. 669 " The light of the body is the eye ; if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall befall of darkness." — Mat. vi. 22, 23. Thkse words are closely connected with the preceding admonition against laying up for ourselves treasures upon earth, and with the following declaration of the impossibility of serving both God and Mammon. The expression " an evil eye" occurs frequently in Scripture ; and commonly imports a grudging mind, opposed to bountiful kindness. See Matt. XX. 15. Deut. xv. 9. Prov. xxii. 6. And so the lust of the eyes, in 1 John ii. 16, appears specially to mean the love of riches, or covetousness. But in the present passage, I think the Lord uses the figurative term eye in a more extended sense, for that which the mind looks at as good and desirable. And in this sense, if our eye be evil — if that which we view as good be emptiness and vanity — we are full of darkness. But if we be given to see, and be kept in the discernment of the " One thing" that is good indeed — substantially and com- pletely good — so as to include in it all the blessedness that a sinner ever can need, thus our whole body shall be full of light. And when- ever it is otherwise w'ith a disciple, it is because he has so imperfectly in view that one glorious object ; and is therefore lusting after other things, (often of a very religious kind) and not satisfied with the revealed goodness of the Lord to the evil and unthankful. THE END. London : G. H. Davidson, Printer, Tudor Street, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars.