in the same sense that I do, without being a So- | his apostles preached, and admitted men into the cinian. You may read what he says concerning church for believing, is not all that is absolutely reNathaniel, in his first sermon, 'Of Sincerity,' pub- quired to make a man a Christian; or, that the lished this year. His words are these:And believing him to be the Messiah was not the only being satisfied that he-our Saviour-was the article they insisted on, to those who acknowledged Messiah, he presently owned him for such, calling one God; and upon the belief whereof they adhim the Son of God, and the King of Israel.'” mitted converts into the church, in any one of those many places quoted by me out of the history of the New Testament." He then proceeds to show that if those admitted into the church by our Saviour and his apostles, were admitted without having any other article explicitly laid before them, the belief of no other article is necessary. "Unless," says he, "you will say that our Saviour and his apostles admitted men into the church that were not qualified with such a faith as was absolutely necessary to make a man a Christian; which is as much as to say, that they allowed and pronounced men to be Christians, who were not Christians. For he that wants what is necessary to make a man a Christian, can no more be a Christian than he that wants what is necessary to make him a man can be a man.'

Locke afterwards found in Patrick, Bishop of Ely's "Witnesses to Christianity," several passages in support of his interpretation of the phrase, "Son of God." If, therefore, Mr. Edwards persisted in calling him a Socinian, to be consistent, he must bestow the same epithet on Bishop Patrick, who says, "To be the Son of God, and to be Christ, being but different expressions of the same thing;" and, "It is the very same thing to believe that Jesus is the Christ, and to believe that Jesus is the Son of God, express it how you please. This alone is the faith which can regenerate a man, and put a divine spirit into him; that is, make him a conqueror over the world, as Jesus was."*

This leads us to the principal subject of the controversy. Locke having laid down, as the great In the "Reasonableness of Christianity" Locke basis of Christianity, the belief that Jesus of Na- is methodical, clear, concise. He encumbers not zareth was the Messiah, to prove which is the his argument with unnecessary illustrations, nor object of his whole treatise on the Christian reli- does he carry forward his analysis beyond the gion, Mr. Edwards accuses him of reducing limits which a severe judgment may approve. In Christianity to one article, in order to bring it the "Second Vindication" the reverse of all this nearer to none. This might, at the first blush, is true. He appears to have ill digested his plan; have caused it to appear that Locke desired to not to have considered where he should begin, or exclude the belief in the existence of a God, where end; he pauses, and exhausts his own inwhich was manifestly untrue. To excuse himself, genuity, and the reader's patience, in refuting therefore, for dwelling so jocularly on the "one some pitiful cavil, in repelling scorn with scorn; article," the Unmasker says:-"When I told him and loses himself in a maze of endless repetitions. of this one article, he knew well enough that I It must, moreover, be acknowledged, that through did not exclude the article of the Deity, for that many a dreary page we look in vain for any trace is a principle of natural religion." To this the of that superior mind which gave birth to the "Esphilosopher answers:-"How should I know it? say on the Human Understanding," the "Letters He never told me so, either in his book or other-on Toleration," and the “Treatise on Governwise. This I know, that he said I contended for 'one article, with the exclusion of all the rest.' If then the belief of the Deity be an article of faith, and be not, the article of Jesus being the Messiah, it is one of the rest;' and if all the rest were excluded, certainly that being one of all the rest, must be excluded. How then he could say, I knew that he excluded it not,-that is, meant not that I excluded it,-when he positively says I did exclude it, I cannot tell, unless he thought that I knew him so well, that when he said one thing, I knew that he meant another, and that the quite contrary."

Having given a list, which has already been cited, of fundamental truths, Mr. Edwards observes: "From what I have said, it is evident, that the Vindicator is grossly mistaken, when he saith, Whatever doctrine the apostles required to be believed to make a man a Christian,' are to be found in those places of Scripture which he has quoted in his book. I think I have sufficiently proved that there are other doctrines besides that, which are required to be believed to make a man a Christian."

In answer to this, Locke insists that all his adversary might advance would signify nothing, unless he could prove "that what our Saviour and

* Witnesses to Christianity, p. 10, 14.

ment ;" and though some striking passages do occur, they are few, and hardly compensate for the drudgery which must lead to their discovery. The following outline, however, of the whole scheme of natural and revealed religion is worthy of being preserved.

as

"As men," he observes, "we have God for our King, and are under the law of reason: Christians, we have Jesus the Messiah for our King, and are under the law revealed by him in the gospel. And though every Christian, both as a Deist and a Christian, be obliged to study both the law of nature and the revealed law, that in them he may know the will of God, and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent; yet in neither of these laws is there to be found a select set of fundamentals, distinct from the rest, which are to make a Deist or a Christian. But he that believes one eternal invisible God, his Lord and King, ceases thereby to be an Atheist; and he that believes Jesus to be the Messiah, his King, ordained by God, thereby becomes a Christian, is delivered from the power of darkness, and is translated into the kingdom of the Son of God, is actually within the covenant of grace, and has that faith which shall be imputed to him for righteousness; and if he continue in his allegiance to this his king, shall receive the reward-eternal life."

He then deprecates the practice, too common

among theologians, of erecting individual views | illiterate people cannot understand, be required to of religion into systems, and endeavoring to force be believed to make them Christians, the greatest them upon mankind; nearly every proposition in part of mankind are shut out from being Christhe Scriptures, with every deduction that may be tians." drawn from it, having been, by some one or another, advanced as a necessary article of faith. "'Tis no wonder, therefore," he observes, "there have been such fierce contests, and such cruel havoc made amongst Christians, about fundamentals; whilst every one would set up his system, upon pain of fire and faggot in this, and hell-culty as to the reality and certainty of them, befire in the other world: though at the same time, whilst he is exercising the utmost barbarities against others, to prove himself a true Christian, he professes himself so ignorant that he cannot tell, or so uncharitable that he will not tell, what articles are absolutely necessary and sufficient to make a man a Christian. If there be any such fundamentals, as it is certain there are, it is as certain they must be very plain."

To this, by anticipation, Mr. Edwards answers:-"There is a difficulty in the doctrine of the Trinity, and several truths of the gospel, as to the exact manner of the things themselves, which we shall never be able to comprehend, at least on this side heaven: but there is no difficause we know they are revealed to us by God in the Holy Scriptures." "Which answer," says Locke, "of difficulty in the manner, and no difficulty in the reality, having the appearance of a distinction, looks like learning; but when it comes to be applied to the case in hand, will scarce afford us sense. The question is about a proposition to be believed, which must first necessarily be understood. For a man cannot possibly give Against the idea of Christianity's being plain, his assent to any affirmation or negation, unless and reasonable, and intelligible, Mr. Edwards he understand the terms as they are joined in that takes violent exception. He thinks it absurd proposition, and has a conception of the thing af that the vulgar should be supposed capable of firmed or denied; and also a conception of the comprehending all the truths of their religion; thing concerning which it is affirmed or denied, though, at the same time, he insists there is as they are there put together. But let the pronothing in the Scriptures not necessary to be be- position be what it will, there is no more to be lieved; and, as it seems somewhat harsh to re- understood than is expressed in the terms of that quire a man to believe that of which he can form proposition. If it be a proposition concerning a no idea, he, upon second thoughts, but without matter of fact, it is enough to conceive, and beperceiving he is conceding a point to Locke, ad-lieve the matter of fact. If it be a proposition mits that the truths of the gospel are as clear as clearness can make them.

Let us put all these propositions together in Mr. Edwards' own words, to show upon what a logical system he reasons. "Christianity is called a mystery. ... All things in Christianity are not plain, and exactly level to every common apprehension. Every thing in Christianity is not clear, and intelligible, and comprehensible by the weakest noddle." Anon, taking another view of the matter, he says:-"Why did the apostles write these? was it not that those they wrote to, might give their assent to them? Why should not every one of these evangelical truths be believed and embraced? They are in our Bibles for that very purpose." And, as a reason why they should be believed, he says they are "intelligible and plain;" that there is no "ambiguity and doubtfulness in them; they shine with their own light, and to an unprejudiced eye, are plain, evident, and illustrious."

Upon this Locke remarks:-"To draw the Unmasker out of the clouds, and prevent his hiding himself in the doubtfulness of his expressions, I shall desire him to say directly whether the articles which are necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, and particularly those he has set down for such, are all plain and intelligible, and such as may be understood and comprehended (I will not say in the Unmasker's ridiculous way, by the weakest noddles,' but) by every illiterate countryman and woman capable of church communion? If he says yes, then all mysteries are excluded out of his articles necessary to be believed, to make a man a Christian. For that which can be comprehended by every day-laboror, every poor spinster, that is a member of the church, cannot be a mystery. And if what such

concerning the manner of the fact, the manner of the fact must also be believed, as it is intelligibly expressed in that proposition: v. g. should this proposition, veroi Eyripovrat, be offered as an article of faith to an illiterate countryman of England, he could not believe it; because, though a true proposition, yet it being proposed, in words whose meaning he understood not, he could not give any assent to it. Put it in English, he understands what is meant by the dead shall rise.' For he can conceive, that the same man who was dead and senseless, should be alive again; as well as he can that the same man who is now in a lethargy, should awake again; or the same man that is now out of his sight, and he knows not whether he be alive or dead, should return and be with him again; and so he is capable of believing it, though he conceives nothing of the manner how a man revives, wakes or moves. But none of these manners of those actions being included in those propositions, the proposition concerning the matter of fact-if it imply no contradiction in it-may be believed; and so all that is required may be done, whatever difficulty may be as to the exact manner how it is brought about.

"But where the proposition is about the manner, the belief too must be of the manner; v. g. the article is, the dead shall be raised with spiritual bodies;' and then the belief must be as well of this manner of the fact as of the fact itself. So that what is said here by the Unmasker about the manner, signifies nothing at all in the case.What is understood to be expressed in each proposition, whether it be of the manner, or not of the manner, is-by its being a revelation from Godto be believed, as far as it is understood: but no more is required to be believed, concerning any article, than is contained in that article.

"What the Unmasker, for the removing of diffi- of the " Essay on the Human Understanding," culties, adds further, in these words: But there which appeared during his lifetime, Locke changis no difficulty as to the reality and certainty of ed his opinion on more than one point; and, like the truths of the gospel, because we know they an honest and independent thinker, he was always are revealed to us by God in the Holy Scriptures,' careful to acknowledge this change. This, among is yet further from signifying any thing to the pur- other things, was the case with the use of syllopose, than the former. The question is about un- gisms. For in book iv. ch. 17, "I grant," says derstanding, and, in what sense they are under- he, "that mood and figure is commonly made use stood, believing several propositions, or articles of of in such cases, (in the discovery of fallacies,) as faith, which are to be found in the Scripture. To if the detection of the incoherence of such loose this the Unmasker says, there can be no diffi- discourses were wholly owing to the syllogistical culty at all as to their reality and certainty, be- form; and so I myself formerly thought, till upon cause they are revealed by God.' Which amounts a stricter examination I now find, that laying the to no more than this: that there is no difficulty intermediate ideas naked, in their due order, shows in the understanding and believing this proposi- the incoherence of the argumentation better than tion that whatever is revealed by God is really syllogism." His opinions, however, on this point, and certainly true. But is the understanding and were fluctuating; for in his "Second Vindicabelieving this single proposition, the understand-tion," speaking of the fallacies and incoherences ing and believing all the articles of faith necessary of his antagonist, he has these words:" Nay, if to be believed? Is this all the explicit faith a Christian need have? If so, then a Christian need explicitly believe no more but this one proposition, viz. that all the propositions between the two covers of his Bible, are certainly true. But I imagine the Unmasker will not think the believing this one proposition is a sufficient belief of all those fundamental articles, which he has given us as necessary to be believed, to make a man a Chris-troversy, every where employing, as far as possitian. For, if that will serve the turn, I conclude he may make his set of fundamentals as large and express to his system as he pleases: Calvinists, Arminians, Anabaptists, Socinians, will all thus own the belief of them; viz. that all that God has revealed in the Scriptures is really and certainly true."

Between the publication of the several editions

he, or any body, in the 112 pages of his 'Socinianism Unmasked,' can find but ten arguments that will bear the test of syllogism, the true touchstone of right arguing, I will grant that that treatise deserves all those commendations he has bestowed upon it; though it be made up more of his own panegyric than a confutation of me."

We have here given a concise view of the conble, the words of the writers themselves; but, it must be confessed, our outline is far from being complete; it being impossible, perhaps, to condense into so small a space, the matter of so many bulky volumes. If the reader is desirous of examining the subject at greater length, we must, therefore, refer him to the original works, where he will find more than enough to satisfy his curiosity.

AN ESSAY

FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES.

LOCKE having, in his controversy with Mr. Ed-dily occur to me. The nature of epistolary wriwards, had his attention frequently and forcibly tings in general, disposes the writer to pass by the directed to the epistles of St. Paul, which, in his mentioning of many things, as well known to work on Christianity, he was accused of keeping him to whom his letter is addressed, which are purposely out of sight, betook himself, with re-necessary to be laid open to a stranger; to make newed diligence, to the study of those parts of Scripture. The result of these studies, undertaken in a mature age, and furthered by every help that learning or philosophy could furnish, was "A paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, and Ephesians." To this work, not published until after the philosopher's death, was prefixed, "An Essay for the Understanding of St. Paul's Epistles, by consulting St. Paul himself," written in the best manner of its distinguished author. But, notwithstanding its singular excellences, it appears to have hitherto attracted comparatively little notice. No collection of religious works, so far as I know, contains it; nor has it ever, I believe, been detached from the Paraphrase and Notes, and published in a separate form. I trust, however, the reader will quickly perceive its great value, not merely as a literary composition, though in that respect also it be a remarkable work; but as showing how earnestly and incessantly the noblest minds have labored to master The language wherein these epistles are writthe sense of the Apostle to the Gentiles; thus, by ten are another, and that no small occasion of their example, encouraging others to the under-their obscurity to us now: the words are Greek, taking, which he who properly enters on will

consider no task.-ED.

him comprehend what is said: and it not seldom falls out, that a well-penned letter, which is very easy and intelligible to the receiver, is very obscure to a stranger, who hardly knows what to make of it. The matters that St. Paul wrote about, were certainly things well known to those he wrote to, and which they had some peculiar concern in, which made them easily apprehend his meaning, and see the tendency and force of his discourse. But we having now, at this distance, no information of the occasion of his writing, little or no knowledge of the temper and circumstances those he wrote to were in, but what is to be gathered out of the epistles themselves, it is not strange that many things in them lie concealed to us, which no doubt they who were concerned in the letter understood at first sight. Add to this, that in many places it is manifest he answers letters sent, and questions proposed to him, which if we had, would much better clear those passages that relate to them, than all the learned notes of critics and commentators, who in aftertimes fill us with their conjectures; for very often, as to the matter in hand, they are nothing else.

a language dead many ages since; a language of a very witty volatile people, seekers after novelty, and abounding with a variety of notions and sects, to which they applied the terms of their common tongue with great liberty and variety; and yet this makes but one small part of the difficulty in the To go about to explain any of St. Paul's epistles, language of these epistles; there is a peculiarity after so great a train of expositors and commen- in it, that much more obscures and perplexes the tators, might seem an attempt of vanity, censur- meaning of these writings, than what can be occaable for its needlessness, did not the daily and ap- sioned by the looseness and variety of the Greek proved examples of pious and learned men justify tongue. The terms are Greek, but the idiom or it. This may be some excuse for me to the pub-turn of the phrases may be truly said to be Hebrew lic, if ever these following papers should chance or Syriac. The custom and familiarity of which to come abroad: but to myself, for whose use tongues, do sometimes so far influence the expresthis work was undertaken, I need no apology.sions in these epistles, that one may observe the Though I had been conversant in these epistles, as well as in other parts of sacred Scripture, yet I found that I understood them not-I mean the doctrinal and discursive parts of them: though the practical directions, which are usually dropped in the latter part of each epistle, appeared to me very plain, intelligible, and instructive.

I did not, when I reflected on it, very much wonder that this part of sacred Scripture had difficulties in it many causes of obscurity did rea

76

force of the Hebrew conjugations, particularly that of Hiphil, given to Greek verbs, in a way unknown to the Grecians themselves. Nor is this all: the subject treated of in these epistles is so wholly new, and the doctrines contained in them so perfectly remote from the notions that mankind were acquainted with, that most of the important terms in it have quite another signification from what they have in other discourses: so that putting all together, we may truly say, that the New Testa

ment is a book written in a language peculiar to itself.

very much mistake, and misunderstand his meaning, and render the sense very perplexed.

These are intrinsic difficulties arising from the text itself, whereof there might be a great many other named, as the uncertainty, sometimes, who are the persons he speaks to, or the opinions or practices which he has in his eye; sometimes in alluding to them, sometimes in his exhortations and reproofs. But those above mentioned being the chief, it may suffice to have opened our eyes a little upon them, which, well examined, may contribute towards our discovery of the rest.

To these we may subjoin two external causes that have made no small increase of the native and original difficulties that keep us from an easy and assured discovery of St. Paul's sense, in many parts of his epistles; and those are,

To these causes of obscurity, common to St. Paul with most of the other penmen of the several books of the New Testament, we may add those that are peculiarly his, and owing to his style and temper. He was, as it is visible, a man of quick thought and warm temper, mighty well versed in the writings of the Old Testament, and full of the doctrine of the New. All this put together, suggested matter to him in abundance on those subjects which came in his way; so that one may consider him, when he was writing, as beset with a crowd of thoughts, all striving for utterance. In this posture of mind it was almost impossible for him to keep that slow pace, and observe minutely that order and method of ranging all he said, from which results an easy and obvious per- First, The dividing of them into chapters and spicuity. To this plenty and vehemence of his, verses, as we have done, whereby they are so may be imputed those many large parentheses, chopped and minced, and as they are now printed, which a careful reader may observe in his epistles. stand so broken and divided, that not only the Upon this account also it is, that he often breaks common people take the verses usually for distinct off in the middle of an argument, to let in some aphorisms, but even men of more advanced knownew thought suggested by his own words; which ledge, in reading them, lose very much of the having pursued and explained, as far as conduced strength and force of the coherence, and the light to his present purpose, he reassumes again the that depends on it. Our minds are so weak and thread of his discourse, and goes on with it, with- narrow, that they have need of all the helps and out taking any notice that he returns again to assistances that can be procured, to lay before what he had been before saying, though some-them undisturbedly, the thread and coherence of times it be so far off, that it may well have slipt any discourse; by which alone they are truly imout of his mind, and requires a very attentive rea-proved and lead into the genuine sense of the auder to observe, and so bring the disjointed mem-thor. When the eye is constantly disturbed with bers together, as to make up the connection, and loose sentences, that by their standing and sepasee how the scattered parts of the discourse hang ration appear as so many distinct fragments, the together in a coherent, well-agreeing sense, that makes it all of a piece.

Besides the disturbance in perusing St. Paul's epistles, from the plenty and vivacity of his thoughts, which may obscure his method, and often hide his sense from an unwary, or over-hasty reader; the frequent changing of the personage he speaks in, renders the sense very uncertain, and is apt to mislead one that has not some clue to guide him: --sometimes by the pronoun I, he means himself, sometimes any Christian; sometimes a Jew, and sometimes any man, &c. If speaking of himself in the first person singular has so various meanings, his use of the first person plural is with a far greater latitude; sometimes designing himself alone, sometimes those with himself, whom he makes partners to the epistle; sometimes with himself comprehending the other apostles, or preachers of the gospel, or Christians: nay, sometimes he in that way speaks of the converted Jews, other times of the converted Gentiles, and sometimes of others, in a more or less extended sense, every one of which varies the meaning of the place, and makes it to be differently understood. I have forborne to trouble the reader with examples of them here. If his own observation hath not already furnished him with them, a little attention will satisfy him in the point.

mind will have much ado to take in, and carry on in its memory an uniform discourse of dependent reasonings; especially having from the cradle been used to wrong impressions concerning them, and constantly accustomed to hear them quoted as distinct sentences, without any limitation or explication of their precise meaning from the place they stand in, and the relation they bear to what goes before, or follows. These divisions, also, have given occasion to the reading these epistles by parcels and in scraps, which has further confirmed the evil arising from such partitions. And I doubt not but every one will confess it to be a very unlikely way to come to the understanding of any other letters, to read them piecemeal, a bit to-day and another scrap to-morrow, and so on, by broken intervals; especially if the pause and cessation would be made as the chapters the apostle's epistles are divided into, ending sometimes in the middle of a discourse, and sometimes in the middle of a sentence. It cannot therefore but be wondered, that that should be permitted to be done to Holy Writ, which would visibly disturb the sense, and hinder the understanding of any other book whatsoever. If Tully's epistles were so printed, and so used, I ask whether they would not be much harder to be understood, less easy and less pleasant to be read by much, than now they are?

How plain soever this abuse is, and what prejudice soever it does to the understanding of the sacred Scripture, yet if a Bible was printed as it should be, and as the several parts of it were written, in continued discourses where the argument is continued, I doubt not but the several parties would