« PreviousContinue »
tion, as if for a constant memorial to mankind that “ without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.”Heb. ix. 22.
Fourth. The influence of the Divine Spirit on the minds of men. In the most ancient writings of the Hindoos, some of which have been published, it is asserted, that " the Divine Spirit, or light of holy knowledge.” influ. ences the minds of men. And the man who is the subject of such influence is called “ the man twice born.” Many chapters are devoted to the duties, character, and virtues of - the man twice born."
Other doctrines might be illustrated by similar analogies. The characters of the Mosaic ceremonial law.pervade the whole system of the Hindoo ritual and worship. Now, if these analogies were merely partial, or accidental, they would be less important: but they are not accidental, as every man who is erudite in the Holy Scriptures, and in oriental mythology, well knows. They are general and systematic Has it ever been alleged that the Light of Nature could teach such doctrines as those which we have above enumerated ? Some of them are contrary to the Light of Nature. Every where in the East there appears to be a counterfeit of the true doctrine. The inhabitants have lost sight of the only true God, and they apply their traditional notions to false gods. These doctrines are unquestionably relics of the first faith of the earth; they bear the strong characters of God's primary revelation to man, which neither the power of man, nor time itself, hath been able to destroy; but which have endured from age to age, like the works of nature, the moon and stars, which God hath created, incorruptible.*
• Dr. Buchanan's Christian Researches,.p. p. 272, 273, 274, 275, 276. VOL. 11.
Among the ministers of various denominations whose sentiments are Evangelical, it cannot be denied that there are to be found weak men, but there is no reason to suppose that their number is proportionally greater than may be found among those who have adopted a system Anti-evangelical. Some men of violent spirit and unhallowed tempers are likewise to be found in their society, as they are to be found among the partizans of every religious creed. There have also, no doubt, been some characters among them detected, who have been a disgrace to the professions of religion which they have made, but in this class these have never been numerous. Let them be compared with those who have embraced an opposite system ; in talent they will be found not to be inferior; in morals much more correct and exemplary; in zeal for religion much more abundant; and in disinterested virtue superlatively eminent. What a celebrated wri. ter among them, who has touched the infirmities of his brethren with no light hand, has justly said of the Evangelical Ministers of the Church of England, may, with the strictest justice, be said of Evangelical Ministers in general—“As a body they are more than free from immoralities."* In the number of the Evangelical are to be numbered almost all the Calvinists and the genuine followers of Arminius. There is also a considerable number of those who take no decisive part between these systems, so far as they are opposed to each other. These neutrals suppose that the love of system has carried both Calvinists and Arminians to extremes, and made them both seize the one half of the Bible with ayi.
• « Zeal Without Innovation," p. 162.
dity, while they set no proportional value on the other. Two excellent writers, Mr. Wilberforce and Mrs. More, correctly and decidedly Evangelical, have taken no part whatever in this controversy. The former, in his “ Practical View," &c. has shown a happy union of strong intellectual energies, and language elegantly polished, and blended with the warmest, yet soberest piety.* The
• Mr. Evans, in his Sketch, represents Mr. Wilberforce as an advocate for the Methodists. " The Metbodists have found an advocate in William Wilberforce, Esq. M.P. who pleads their cause at some length in his Treatise on Vital Christianity." The cause Mr. Wilberforce pleads is that of Evangelical Re. ligion in general, without the smallest reference to the peculiarities by which the Methodists are distinguished from other denominations. Mr. E. must have known, or might have known, that Mr. Wilberforce was a regular member of the Church of England. It was therefore utterly indecorous to treat a Gentle man, entitled to the respect of the human race for his exertions in the cause of humanity, in such a manner. But Mr. E. very well knew, that with a certain class of men, to be informed that a man is a Methodish, is to be informed that he is a fool and an enthusiast. Every well informed person will indeed be ashamed of such ignorance and prejudice. The writer who can allow himself to give publicity to such misrepresentations, has forfeited every claim to candour and im. partiality. Mr. Wilberforce's forcible statement of Human depravity is, un. questionably, the cause of the offence Mr. E. has taken at the Treatise on Vital Christianity. In a le:ter which Mr. E. addressed from the Press to Dr. Hawker he asks “ In what light will the Court of Heaven view those who libel Human Nature, pronouncing it to be rotten to the core ?" We shall take the liberty to ask him another question, In what light will the Court of Heaven, view those who libel that infiaite wisdom and love which made the blessed God rovide a ransom for our souls, in the Atonement of his own Son, and a Sanctifier, in the person of his Spirit, to regenerate our natures and to create us again to righteous. ness, whilst, according to Mr. E.'s system of Divinity, we were neither liable to his wrath, nor unable to accomplish our own sanctification ? Or, let us state the question thus, Io what light will the Court of Heaven view those who, when the Supreme Judge bas pronounced the imaginations of Man's heart to be evil, and only, evil continually, and unregenerated men to be enemies to Him in their heart, by wicked works, dare to call his decisions abominable, and represent them as those of a tyraat? If the doctrine of human depravity is taught in Scripture, they themselves must be sensible of the consequence of such hard speeches. If those who believe the doctrine are in a mistake on this subject, the libel surely cannot be a malicious one, for they include themselves in the charge as deeply
latter, in a variety of performances, has dedicated her fine talents and taste to the doing of good, been a blessing to society, an ornament to her own sex, and a noble example to ours. Mr. Hall and Mr. Jay among the Dissenters, both masterly writers, have, in their sermons, supported, with distinguished abilities, the interests of Evangelical piety, without declaring themselves on the side either of Calvinism or of Arminianism.
The progress of Evangelical religion in the Church of England and among the Dissenters has lately awakened the fears of many, who are hostile to the distinguishing doctrines of Christianity. A most furious attack was commenced on Evangelical preachers and on Evangelical preaching, in a production, the title of which was “ Hints to the Public and the Legislature, on the Nature and Effects of Evangelical Preaching,” by a Barrisster. Two other parts were afterwards added. The writer, evidently a Socinian, hypocritically pretends great con
as any of their fellow men; a demonstration that it proceeds from no bad principle, from no want of love either to God or to man, but from (supposing them to be mistaken) a greater concern for the honour of God, than for their own vindication. But let us suppose that the vindicators of human nature are in a mistake (and they surely are as liable to mistake as those whom they opposed), are they prepared to prove, before the Court of Heaven, that it was not pride, or arrogance of mind which led them to apologize for their own sins, and to refuse submission to the Righteousness of God, that made them choose the part they have taken in this controversy. Mr. E. must think strangely of the laws by which the Court of Heaven decides, if he supposes that they make it a high offence for men to take part with it against themselves. Those who believe the doctrine of Original sin consider this as a point at issue between God and man. They therefore condemn themselves and justify God. Did they ascribe this corruption to God, they would be guilty of blasphemy. Did they exculpate themselves and others of the same sentiments, they would loudly proclaim that self-love, and not humility, was the main-spring of their actions. But as they are witnesses against their opponents, and for themselves, it is easy to see on which side selflove is most likely to prepouderate.
cern for the Church of England, though his own creed is destructive of her best interests and subversive of her whole Liturgy
If passion, misrepresentation, and ill language, can effect any thing, this Gentleman has un. questionably proved his point. He charges Evangelical Ministers with teaching " that God made men originally sinful and depraved ;" represents them as the enemies of morality; calls them fools, madmen, blockheads, pious pontiffs, bloated lay priests, &c. &c., and says, he might as well reason with Aldgate pump. Dr. Hawker, Dr. Collyer, and Mr. Styles have replied to the Barrister, with temperate language and a force of argument, to which such a writer was scarcely entitled.
ON ANTINOMIANISM AND ANTINOMIANS.
THAT the Son of God came into the world to redeem men from the Moral Government of God is a position so wretchedly absurd, and so horribly impious, that did not facts forbid the conclusion, we would be disposed to think the existence of Antinomians among those who believe in the doctrine of Redemption, a thing almost impossible. 'The Sacrifice and Atonement of Christ are the means of religion ; but the end of it is the reconcili. ation of sinners to God, and of God to sinners. The sufferings of our blessed Saviour exhibit, to all intelligent beings, the criminality of rebellion against God, more forcibly than the everlasting destruction of the whole human race could possibly have done. He who believes