« PoprzedniaDalej »
For the above criticism I
am chiefly indebted to Robertson, Clavis Pentateuchi in voce, to which excellent work ( beg leave to refer your readers—although I do not coincide with him in the view he takes of the Etymology and radical signification of the word in question. I remain Sir, your very humble Servant
ON THE CHURCH CATECHISM.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.
SIR– As the Catechism contained in the Book of Common Prayer is the formulary of instruction which the Church of England puts into the hands of her youthful members, in order to train them, by means of this short but comprehensive compendium of Christian doctrine, for the deeply-spiritual exercises contained in that excellent book-it is highly desirable that “
every member of the same, in his vocation and ministry,” should endeavour to become fully acquainted with every branch of doctrine which it contains. It frequently occurs, that, while some suppose the study of a catechism, designed for the use of children, unsuitable for the experienced minister or the advanced Christian, there are others who are inclined to cavil at detached expressions, which, through prejudice or misconception, they conceive to be at variance with sound doctrine. This arises in a great measure from not duly considering the nature of that valuable composition. The catechism was not designed to contain an exposition of every branch of Christian doctrine; hut, considered as a text-book, it is inestimable. Viewed in this light, it presents, as it were, to the attentive observer a series of well-defined land-marks at regular intervals, by due observance of which he may learn to direct his steady course over the widelyextended field of scriptural truth. He does not find now a complete and continued path, while now he is left in an uncertainty, without a single pillar set up to guide his way: he does not in one place meet with a series of particular definitions, while in another several important doctrines are scarcely glanced at; but the plan throughout is comprehensive in its design, consistent in its form, and perfect in its execution. It may be desirable to exhibit the whole structure of the catechism, arranged according to its divisions and subdivisions, so that the connexion of all its parts, and their mutual dependence upon each other may appear at once. 1. BAPTISMAL COVENANT. 1. Devil or The devil and all his works.
1 John iii. 8,
“ The pomps and vani-
1 John ii. 16.
Gal. v, 19, 20, 21,
• Father, Almighty, 1 Cor. viii. 0.
S Maker, &c.
I Cor. viii. 6.
Luke i. 35.
Luke ii. 7. Mankind. the Articles of
4. Suffered under, &c. Mat. xxvii. Acts, ii. 27. Christian Faith"
5. The third day be rose
1 Cor. xv. 4. Mark xvi. 19.
Aets i. 11. X. 42.
Acts ii. 33.
Eph. i. 22, 23, Rom. xii. 5.
Matt. xxv. 46.
Heb. xi. 6. 2. Fear,
xii 28. 1. Thou shalt have &c.
1. Heart, -3. Love,
2. Soul, Matt. xxii. 37. Epb.
Matt. iv. 10.
2. Give thanks, Eph. v. 20. make, &c. 3. Put whole trust in, Jer. xvii. 7. Prov. iii,
5. 2 Cor. i, 9. 4. Call upon,
Rom. x. 12.
1 Jobnii. 5.
Luke i. 74, 75. thou keep, &c.
the days of my life. 1. Love, honour, and succour, &c.
Eph. vi. 1, 2,3. 2. Honour and obey 5. Honour thy Father, the King, &c. 1 Pet. ii. 13-17, &c.
1 Thess. v. 13. 14, 3. Submit myself, &c.
Heb. xiii. 19.
word or by deed. Eph. iv, 32.
71 John iii. 15.
1 Cor. ix. 35. temperance, 7. Thou shalt not com
1 Cor. is.27. 1 Thes. v, 6-8. 2. Soberness,
1 Tbes. iv. 3-5 3. Chastity, 8. Thou shalt not steal, Keep my bands, &c.
1. Duty toward God-Love with Heart, Soul, Mind, and Strength.
3. Obedience-Moral Law.
2. Duty toward Neigbbour-Love
Epb. iv. 28. &c.
(1. Keep my tongue 9. Thou shalt not bear,
from evil speaking, Ep.iv. 29. 1. Pet. ii.l. 2. Lying,
Eph. iv. 25.
10. Thou shalt not co
3. Slapdering. Ps. xv. 3. Col. v. Tit. iii. 2.
Rom. vii. 7.
Eph. iv. 28.
II. MEANS OF GRACE.
1. L desire my Lord
James 1, 17.
Matt. vi. 33. Luke xvii. 21. 3. And to all people, Is. xi, 9. Rev. xi, 15.
1. That we may wor2. Thy Kingdom come ship him,
Rom. xiv. 17. &c.
2. Serve him, Ps. lxxii. 11. Heb. xl. 28.
3. And obey him, Rom. xvi. 25, 26. As it is in Heaven, As we ought to do. Col. i. 10-12.
1, All things needful 3. Give us this day, &c.
for our souls,
2 Pet, i. 3. 2. And bodies.
That he will be mer. Psalms xvili. 25, 4. Forgive us, &c.
Matt. v. 7.
I Cor. x. 13. 2 Peter 5. Lead us not, &c. Defend &c.
ii. 9, 1. Keep from sin and wickedness,
1. Thess. v. 22, 23. 7. Deliver us from evil,
2. From our ghostly Rom. xvi. 20.
I Thes, i 10.
lxxii. 18, 19.
2. Inward grace,
Acts x. 47.
We bereby, (by this Psalms ll. 6. Epb. li.
new birth) made &c. 3--9.
1. Repentance, 4. Preparation required
Acts ii. 38.-v. 31. 2 2. Faith, whereby,
Tim. ii. 25. &c.
Acts vii. 37. Epb. ll. 8. 1. Remembrance of 1. Reason of Institu
1 Cor. xi. 28.
Sacrifice, &c. tion,
2. Of the Benefits, &c. 1 Cor. x. 18. 2. Outward sign, Bread and Wine, &c. Matt. xxvi. 28- 28. 3. Inward part, s Body and blood of
Jobn vi. 54.
2 Cor. vii, 9, 10.
2. Faith-Have a live-
3. Gratitude-Thank- Ps. xvi. 12, 13. Jn.
ful remembrance &c. iii. 16. 2 Cor. xi. ló. 4. Love-To be in Charity.
Matt. v. 23, 24.
2. Lord's Supper.
THE CHURCH OF ROME A TRUE CHURCH.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER. SIR—Notwithstanding the valuable remarks, annexed by you, to the article in your last number concerning the assumed divi. nity of the Bishop of Rome, I may perhaps be permitted to offer some further observations upon the subject, in vindication of my own views, surprised, as I am, that the argument before inserted in your magazine (p. 189) should not have met the comprehension of each and all of your variously disposed readers. Facts, Mr. Editor, are stubborn things, and it is indeed melancholy to observe with what unblushing effrontery those best authenticated in the Papal History are at the present day set aside by certain professing Christians-set aside, I may say, now that the consequences which would necessarily flow from their adoption are clearly manifest, —with a hardihood only to be equalled by that with which they were, in the dark ages, publicly and practically relied on.To quote your own forcible and eloquent language, in a recent number, the advocates of Popery evade the plainest arguments, and explain away the most direct testimonies; against them history presents no facts, for they are all answered by conjectures ; reason can direct no arguments, for they are all eluded by equivocation; distinctions come in only to assist the ambiguity of language, and the sole use of words seems to be to enable us to avoid the direct collision of ideas.” Your correspondent y, however, in denying the justice of my conclusion, has not, in this instance, questioned the facts upon which it was made to rest; but has rather wished to invalidate the chain of reasoning which might, from the recognition of the circumstances set forth, cause the Pope to appear in the peculiar situation of Antichrist. Whether this consequence naturally flows from the established premises (though in my own opinion it does,) was not the point in debate: my argument was merely directed to meet a previous inquiry whether the claim of Deity had been ever put forth by the Head of the Romish See. To prove this, substantial facts have been alleged, and those facts are, and must be allowed, by all who admit the evidence of historical records : if the Pope, in consequence, comes within the definition of Antichrist, it is no business of mine further than to keep clear of his sin, and to warn others from receiving his mark. Mr. Faber's opinion upon the subject, (alluded to by you,) I do not profess to be precisely acquainted with. In his dissertation upon the prophecies I find the Papacy syllogistically excluded* from the dominion of Antichrist-I find the title of Antichrist specifically restrainedt to the wilful king of Daniel's prophecy,—I find that king, I also, stated to be “a motley monster, compounded of Atheism and Popery,-inwardly an Atheist, outwardly a Papist.” Mr. Faber, also, fully coincides with the interpretation given by Bishop Newton concerning the prophecy ofthe man of sin, "and its exact accomplishment in the Papacy." The justice of that interpretation being questioned by your correspondent, it were far betier to refer him to the dissertation (No. XXII.) of the Bishop, than to attempt a cursory view of so extensive a subject in a limited paper like the present.
* Preface p. XII.
+ Vol. I. p.113. 3d Edit.
# Ibid, p. 400.
In that treatise he will find every other conceivable hypothesis from Grotius and Caligula, Dr. Hammond and Simon Magus downwards, minutely passed in review, and refuted. One thing only I would remark, that it is they who reject the Papal power from its place in the Antichristian circle who enforce an exclusive system of interpretation, and not myself. I would include within the definition (according to St. John 1. Ep. ii. 23.) all who deny the Saviour in his revealed character and offices; nor can I conjecture a creed in which they are virtually nullified, rejected, and denied, in their saving efficacy more than in that of Pius IV. the key-stone of the Romish Church. As to the plea set up that the character of the man of sin is not fulfilled in the Pope, “ because no prophecy is of any PRIVATE interpretation ;"—(i. e.) that no prophecy has any particular meaning at all-I conceive that the passage* alluded to bears no such signification as it has been made to imply. The discussion of this matter would carry me too far from my present purpose, involving, as it does, the question of the inspiration of Scripture. Upon this, therefore, I would rather at a future opportunity, with your perinission, offer some observations, while I at present proceed to obviate the two consequences said, by your correspondent y, to “ follow immediately from the position advanced” regardingthe Pope, “ of themselves sufficient to prove its upsoundness."
And first, as to the Church of Rome ceasing to be a church, because thus branded with blasphemy and apostacy. I shall not enter upon the distinctions, so frequently drawn, regarding the manner in which she may be termed the Church of Christ, though some of them might be justified by Scripture analogy, and argument: for instance, as having been formerly a true church ; as usurping the name of the Church of Christ, &c. : for I believe, with the Church of England and Ireland, tbat Rome, in her apostate state, remains visibly a church, and contains within her the relics
2 Pet. i. 21.–The real bearing of wbicb, in the context, seems to be, that no prophecy in Scripture originates in the invention, composition, or will of man, that it comes not of man's resolution, wisdom, or by force of bis natural powers, in other words that it is divine and not human; for boly men spake moved by the Holy Ghost-See Whitby, Hammond, Gill, Doddridge, Poli Synopsis, Haweis, and Henry, in loco, Hooker Ist Sermon on Jude, and Bishop. Pearson on creed. 8vo. edition, p. 28, also Menochius's Commentary, where the text is interpreted “ vaticinantium inventione." Strange, your readers will say, that the authorized commentary of Maynooth, (so far as the use of Bibles is there enjoined,) should thus confine to the originating of prophecy a text which its eleves are continually dinning into our ears as the one which shuts every individual up from investigating the interpretation und seeking the sense of Scripture !