Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

ADDRESS TO THE SWEDENBORG SOCIETY,

Read at the last Meeting of the Society, by the Rev. A. CLISSOLD, on the occasion of moving the following Resolution:

"That this meeting cannot but recognise in the agitation which now so deeply affects the Christian world on the subject of the real character of THE WORD OF GOD, and the true method of its interpretation, a Providential opening for the especial work of this Society, which was founded for the very purpose of teaching the real character of the Word of God and its true method of interpretation, as communicated by the Lord through the instrumentality of His servant Emanuel Swedenborg."

ALLOW me to draw your attention first of all to the debate in the House of Commons, on Wednesday, June 10th. In that debate the following resolution was moved :—

"That in the opinion of this House the subscription required from the clergy to the Thirty-nine Articles be relaxed."

In seconding this motion the honourable Member observed

"We were unquestionably drifting into a religious change, which, be it a reformation or a deformation, would still be as great as that change of the 16th century which was eternally famous in the annals of mankind. It was impossible for a legislature to stay or advance it; but they might take order, that, whenever it came, it might be reasonable, peaceful, and not followed by those bitter hatreds which attended the great uprising against the Papacy, and which we still had to deplore. In what capacity, then, ought they to approach the subject? Solely as politicians."

But if this great change be impending, in what capacity ought this Society to approach the subject? I answer-Solely as theologians. The political part of the movement is only the effect: the cause of that effect is entirely religious and theological. This being the case,

346

ADDRESS TO THE SWEDENBORG SOCIETY.

it is of the first importance that, as members of this Society, we should keep clearly in view the position which it maintains, and will have to maintain, in regard to this impending change, and hence the solemn responsibilities which will belong to the members of the Society in general, and to the Committee in particular,-if, as we are told,—the impending change is one which, like that of the Reformation, is to be eternally famous in the annals of mankind.

In order to ascertain our position, it will be necessary to have a clear idea of the nature of the change impending. Now, a mere glance at existing controversies will shew that the whole question to which they relate has reference to the Word of God. In the Lutheran Reformation the case was that of "the Bible versus the Church;"-the cry was"The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible." The question has now resolved itself into this-Is not the Protestant Church, whose cry is "Nothing but the Bible," tending to regard the Bible itself as a nothing? Let me take a general and very brief review of the Controversy, and then of the position of this Society with regard to it.

First, with regard to the Roman Catholic Church. In a series of Letters on "The Colenso Controversy," by the President of St. Mary's College, Oscott, and the Professor of Mental Philosophy in the same College, I find this announcement, p. 39:

"We Catholics, indeed, have never professed to draw our religion from the Bible: we believe in one Holy Apostolic Church, the divinely appointed teacher, the pillar and ground of the Truth."

It then goes on to say

"Yet since we have always been taught to reverence the Bible as the work of men inspired by the Holy Ghost, as the written Word of God, it cannot be a matter of indifference to us to hear it held up to ridicule as full of contradictions and impossibilities."

The Bible, then, according to this admission, is "the work of men inspired by the Holy Ghost." Now what has the Roman Catholic Church to say concerning the nature of this Inspiration? The answer is given in the next page—

"The Church has really defined very little concerning the nature and extent of the Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures."

Well, then, when Roman Catholics ask-"If the Word of God is in the Bible, but not all that is in the Bible is the Word of God, what rule have Protestants whereby to distinguish one part from the other?"—we ask also-And what rule have Roman Catholics? The answer is thisWe Catholics, indeed, have never professed to draw our religion from the Bible. We, consequently, are in no dilemma: it is you Protestants

ADDRESS TO THE SWEDENBORG SOCIETY.

347

who are caught in your own snares; for if the Word of God be in the Bible, and yet not all that is in the Bible is the Word of God, what rule have you whereby to distinguish one part from the other?

The position, then, maintained by the Roman Catholic Church is this-"We Catholics have never professed to draw our religion from the Bible; the Church has defined very little with regard to its Inspiration; and if the Bible were swept away altogether, the Church would still remain." We may expect, therefore, that the Roman Catholic Church will take but a very subordinate interest in this controversy; it will be simply not a matter of indifference to them, and that is all; and there are indications of a party rising up in the Church of England who will take this view of the subject.

I now come to the position maintained by the Established Church of this country, for it is to this Church that the debate in Parliament principally had reference. Let me draw your attention to the latest phase of the Controversy, and to a work entitled "The Claims of the Bible and of Science," a correspondence between the Rev. Mr. Maurice and a Layman, a work just published. And here I would observe that many of the alleged heresies of the day are, in their origin, not so much doctrinal as scientific, arising from a supposed antagonism between Science and the Bible. The Bible is declared to be in a state of siege under an attack from Science.

You will remember that something of this kind happened in the time of Galileo. Galileo maintained this proposition-Terram non esse centrum mundi nec immobilem, sed moveri motu etiam diurno. This was pronounced to be Propositio absurda-falsa in philosophia, et erronea in fide. Now there is this difference between the alleged antagonism of Science and the Scriptures in the present day, and that of the time of Galileo. The Church declared the propositions of Galileo to be absurd, false, and erroneous; in the present day the Church is more cautious, and the propositions of Geology are not generally denounced as absurd, false, or erroneons, but declared to be for a great part in agreement with the Geology of the Scriptures, and the Geology of the Scriptures with that of Science; though another class of divines regard the two as entirely antagonistic. Mr. Maurice takes up an intermediate position. He does not think that the narrative in Genesis is either geological or was ever meant to be so; on the other hand, he does not in the least acknowledge any spiritual sense in the narrative: it is only just such a simple, child-like account as naturally occurs to any uninstructed shepherd-boy looking round on the universe.

What, then, shall we say of the Flood?

348

ADDRESS TO THE SWEDENBORG SOCIETY.

"It might," says Mr. Maurice (p. 109), "be true of a deluge covering a very small portion of the earth, that God saved a man and his family from perishing in it; that He gave him a warning of the calamity which was coming-before it came; that He taught him how to save his family, and how to save creatures of various kinds, in the same building in which he himself took refuge. All this might be a very simple child-like narrative of an historical fact, not in the least a legend. This you could easily suppose. But then you will say 'What is such a narrative worth? Who would care the least for it? How can a great Divine Book force such a story upon my notice?'"

What is Mr. Maurice's answer? A rather lengthy one, but substantially this (p. 111):

The story of Noah teaches that there is One who punishes men on this earth for their sins, and who redeems and restores the earth and the human race after He has punished it. "The story is familiar and prosaic. If you had no associations with the length and breadth of the earth to which it referred, you would not be inclined to doubt that it had occurred. Has then that length or breadth anything to do with it? I should say absolutely nothing;-the whole Bible is occupied about small areas, little families, contemptible tribes, shepherds, fishermen, One who was called a carpenter's son, upon whom the Roman soldiers put a purple robe and a crown of thorns in derision, who was nailed to a cross as slaves were-all is consistent. Perhaps you will say 'The doctrine so stated was very well for the childhood of the world; we have outgrown it.' I should hold, on the contrary, that it is more wanted for our manhood than it was wanted for our childhood."

Thus we see that both Creation and the Deluge are simple, child-like stories, teaching, indeed, a certain moral. There is not one word about any spiritual interpretation, which is completely ignored. But what shall we say of other parts of the Pentateuch, as, for instance, the sanitary laws?

Well, says he (p. 142)—" God does care for the sanitary condition, for the bodily circumstances, of the people of my land and of every land." That is his answer. There is no recognition of a spiritual sense, no mention of it even. Indeed he acknowledges that statutes which were adapted to the condition of an Eastern people may be bad for our condition; so that the very letter of the Law is in this respect abrogated: it remains-but only to teach us that "God does care for the bodily circumstances and sanitary condition of every people.”

After this, we naturally ask-What can be Mr. Maurice's notion of the nature of the Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures? He tells you plainly (p. 120):—

"That holy men of old spoke by the inspiration of God; that the same inspiration enables us to know what they said, to have any clear understanding of any kind: this has been the faith of the Church at all times. To control it by theories of ours, is to undermine it; to say that inspiration is confined to the writers of

ADDRESS TO THE SWEDENBORG SOCIETY.

849

the Bible, is formally and directly to contradict those writers; to determine in what measures they or any other men have possessed inspiration, is to tell Him who breathes where He listeth, how we suppose He must breathe or ought to breathe. He knows what inspiration is fitting for each of His servants; we cannot."

...

According to this account, the inspiration is of the writer, not of the writing; and the inspiration of the reader, enabling him to understand, is the same with the inspiration of the writer; and we ought to have no theory by which to distinguish between them. He says in another place (p. 140):

"I have acknowledged one foundation as laid for us all. That foundation is not the letter of any book. That foundation being our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, could not be shaken if the whole Bible were taken from us. I say this on the authority of the Bible. I should contradict the Bible if I said otherwise."

This position of Mr. Maurice is the same with that of the Roman Catholic Church; it is held by many in the Church of England beside the school of Mr. Maurice, and is the ground upon which many will regard the controversy at present prevailing, as of no great consequence after all, inasmuch as the foundation of the Church is not the letter of any Book. Now mark you, my friends- "I say this," says Mr. Maurice (p. 140), "on the authority of the Bible." Well then, Mr. Maurice, if the Bible be swept away, what becomes of your authority? Does not the authority go with it? Surely, then, the Bible ought to be of the utmost importance to Mr. Maurice after all. Mr. Maurice would have no authority for saying what he does if the Bible were gone, and this even upon his own shewing. But Mr. Maurice has not stated in what part of the Bible he finds this authority. Besides, if the Church be the steward of the Oracles of God, what sort of stewardship is it to say that the Church might dispense with them altogther? If this be the case, Bishop Colenso, and indeed all infidel writers, are not so bad after all. They have committed no such great crime against the Church in writing against the Bible, for-"We Catholics have never professed to draw our religion from the Bible. We believe in the one Holy Apostolical Church. We take no particular interest in the question. It is simply not a matter of indifference to us. If the whole Bible were swept away to-morrow, our Church would be as safe then as it is now." Of course, if the Book be not of so much importance, to hold any theory whatever concerning the inspiration of the Book is also not of much importance; the Bible Society is, after all, a society of no great importance to Christendom; and interpretations of the Bible, in like manner, and of course this Society, however true may be the works it publishes and circulates, of very little use.

« PoprzedniaDalej »