Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

who have adopted an erroneous view of Christian doctrine.

We know that pure Calvinism, carried to its legitimate consequences or, if any of your readers object to this declaration, I will say Antinomianism- does encourage acts of unrighteousness in many men, while it cherishes acts of virtue in none. I say we know that it does; for we have seen, often and often, that the doctrines of election and of reprobation, when admitted in their full extent, do not fail to produce this effect in a corrupt and wicked mind-and who shall exclude them from such a mind? -for with such, joined to an active imagination, they are most acceptable. But they do not generally produce this effect; and why do they not? There are many who hold these doctrines, in our view destructive of all moral distinctions, and yet are patterns of general virtue; and, while their religion teaches that all the actions of their lives are equally corrupt, and I might say vicious; and that none of them, be they what they may, have any merit in the sight of God; they give a decided preference to those which are pious and virtuous, admire them in others, and practise them themselves. There is an incongruity in such a line of conduct too palpable to escape notice. If a man believe from his heart that every thing which he does is alike corrupt, that in the final issue of things it will make no difference in what manner his present life is passed, for that he must owe his salvation to the redemption of the blood of Christ, or cannot obtain it at all, therefore, that his future welfare can be neither promoted nor prevented by any thing or by every thing he can do,-why should he not walk in the ways of his heart and in the sight of his eyes, in the assurance that for these things God will not call him into judgment?

It appears to me that the subject we are now upon explains to us why he does not. I think that while his theological system dictates to him one thing, his heart dictates another. It seems to me there is an open war declared between his creed and his feelings; and that while in his judgment he bows submissively to what he regards the written word of God,

he yields, and he cannot avoid yielding, a quiet submission to those dictates which are written by the finger of God upon his heart.

Happy is it for frail humanity that a weak head cannot always overcome the suggestions of a tender heart, and that the error which so easily obtains a seat in the mind, is not in general powerful enough to counteract those delightful feelings which are made the basis of human excellence, and which alone can make the society of mankind happy upon earth. One cannot help believing that, in order to convince man of his weakness, he is allowed to wander in the deepest mazes of error, and follow all the leadings of a wayward mind, but that a check is provided by his beneficent Creator to the evil that must assuredly arise from his weakness, in those kind affections which are implanted within him, and which no accumulation of falsehood and of bigotry can altogether destroy.

I have seen, Sir, the remarks of "A Calvinist" in your last number (Vol. XIX. p. 536). He writes much about a consistent Calvinist. This is a very equivocal term. The shades of what is called Calvinism are varied as the colours of the rainbow; and in whatever line a man may place himself, from the tender violet to the flaming red, I apprehend he thinks himself consistent. With his own principles he perhaps is so; but he must allow us to judge, not from his thoughts, which are not open to us, but from the creeds of Calvinistic churches, and catechisms, and those books which were written by the great men who have been held to be oracles of the party. There is high Calvinism, which is proper Calvinism, and there are modifications of it, which, in truth, are no Calvinism at all. These modified systems have been prevalent for more than two centuries among the Dissenters of England and in the Established Churches, in spite of all their Articles and Confessions of Faith; and they have been held by those respectable characters of the family in which I was born, whose Nonconformity I value, but whose theology, I must think, needed a purging not less efficient than that by which the forms of the Church

were purified by their virtuous energies.

With respect to "the doctrine of Divine influence in the conversion and sanctification of souls," is your correspondent a stranger in our Jerusalem, and does he not know that this doctrine has also its various shades; that our most respected friend and champion at Bristol has carried it somewhat farther than many of us can follow him (Mon. Repos. XIV. 545-550); and that there is a sense in which we may all be disposed to admit it? But suppose I do not admit it in any sense -shall I speak less respectfully of my ancestors because, being men, they held some errors? Surely not. I respect them for the virtues on account of which I have spoken in their praise; nor do I doubt that, if I knew your correspondent, "A Calvinist," better, I should find in him much to esteem. Already I believe that his heart is good; and if the admissions of his creed are false we know he is fallible-I am not sure that mine are not so too. I esteem and love many Calvinists; if I did not, I should be a most unworthy brother. I only desire, if I am in the right, that they were even as I am; and, while I think myself so, I shall offer up this prayer.

[ocr errors]

I. W.

P.S. In a letter just received from a friend, I read, "The Calvinist' of the Repository seems open to an assault on the ground of his bearing this questionable title, under the surmise that Le vieux Monsieur Chauvin, Législateur et Pasteur de Genève, fut absolument infaillible. To Christ, as an accredited plenipotentiary, we at tribute infallibility, and therefore profess to follow him implicitly in faith, hope and love. But is this follower of a blind guide prepared to admit that he is, to all intents and purposes, a soldier of Calvin's train bands? Is he devoted to his theory of tactics in his Institute, and resigned to his orders and generalship, as under the banner of another Messiah? Is not this Popery at Geneva, the Rome of the Reformation, as it has been called?"

[blocks in formation]

as one of their body. Generally they have not; but I confess for one, that when I have read his Sermon. on the Use of Scripture Language, and indeed his works passim, I have been inclined to suspect that he was no distinct believer in the peculiar doctrines of his Church. He subscribed the Articles, I apprehend, in his own sense, and as articles of peace. His posthumous Sermons savour more of" orthodoxy" than any thing which he published in his lifetime; but is not the orthodoxy here in words merely? Could not an Unitarian, of a large conscience and of a conciliatory temper, have said all that Paley preached to his parishioners?

That Paley has been claimed by some Unitarians, would appear from a passage in the Memoir of the Rev. Philip Chase, son of Bishop Chase, of Ohio, who was lately in this country, inserted in the Missionary Register for December. This young man, who died March 1, 1824, aged 25 years, was educated at Harvard University. Alluding to this heterodox Transatlantic seat of learning, the biographer says of Mr. Chase," He abhorred the attempt, so often made, to share in the Saviour's work; and made it a subject of incessant thanksgiving to God, that he had been so mercifully preserved from what he considered the melancholy error in the creed of the respectable University wherein he received his education."

To this passage is subjoined the following note:

[ocr errors]

"Mr. Chase always expressed the highest respect for many in the government of the College, (and particularly for President Kirkland,) both as scholars and governors. He thought very highly also of his Alma Mater,' in regard to literary advantages; but he always spoke with great warmth of the danger to which young men of talents were exposed from Unitarian sentiments. A classmate (who was not, however, in his division) says, 'It was related one day after recitation, that, on one of the Tutors or Professors mentioning to the class that Dr. Paley was a Unitarian, Mr. Chase modestly contradicted the assertion, and firmly stated some reasons for his denial of the fact.'"

Whatever credit be due to this an

ecdote, it is clear that by somebody or other Paley has been suspected of Unitarianizing (as the old divines would say); and indeed it is impossible that the out-and-out believer of the Thirty-nine Articles and the Three Creeds should be satisfied with (what Bishop Marsh calls) his generalized Christianity. You have told us from the Quarterly, that Mr. Biddulph, the leader of the " Evangelical" Church party, disowns him (p. 60); and I verily believe he would be disowned by all sticklers for things as they are, if it were not necessary to keep him, as Lardner is kept, in spite of his heresy, for his services as the advocate of external religion. Paley committed two sins for which he will never be forgiven; he denounced bigotry and he dared to reason.

[blocks in formation]

mediate attention.

The Church has a debt upon it by the erection of its new Chapel, so admired for its neatness and convenience. An old gentleman had promised to leave £250 for its liquidation, provided the remaining portion of the debt could be raised by the subscription of 100 persons, a guinea each, for three succeeding years. Several subscribers have been obtained, and the remainder will, no doubt, be procured in so good a work. But this should be directly accomplished, for the £250 will be advanced without delay, the donor finding that he cannot, by the Mortmain Act, leave it for such a purpose. This is so generously proffered, that any person disposed to come forward with his subscription will be so kind as to do it immediately. He gives twice who gives quickly, was a sage maxim of antiquity.

J. EVANS.

P.S. I thank Mr. Rutt for his communication respecting Dr. John Gale (Vol. XIX. p. 712). With him I was

aware that his Antitrinitarianism could not be inferred from his works. But perusing, many years ago, a very old church book belonging to the General Baptist Church at Barbican, one of its memorandums was to this purpose: "Received Dr. John Gale from the General Baptist Church at Deptford, where he had preached, but could preach no longer on account of his unsound notions on the Trinity, Original Sin, &c." These are not the exact words, but it is the substance; and ever since I have ranked Dr. Gale as no Trinitarian, though no precise ideas can be given of his views on the subject. The writer of the short Memoir prefixed to his Sermons, says, that he intended writing on Original Sin; but he died soon after; when this and other projected works remained unaccomplished.

Such is the ground on which I proceeded, and it satisfies my own mind, though it may not be so decisive as could wish on so important a subject. The Rev. William Foot, of Bristol, I have also stated to be an Antitrinitarian, though some of my friends doubted it; but his worthy daughter, Mrs. Foot, has assured me of the fact. It may not be generally known that this divine kept an academy for many he was on the article of the Trinity, years at Bristol; and, heterodox as he had the honour of having for his pupil the present Poet-laureat, Robert Southey, Esq., LL.D., so distinguished for his loyalty and orthodoxy! This gentleman, therefore, ought to have notwithstanding his zeal for the exsome respect for Unitarians; and, wards this intelligent and deserving tirpation of heretics, feel kindly toportion of the religious community. Verbum sat sapienti.

Adam asserting that these General With respect to the Rev. Robert Baptist Ministers were sound Trinitarians, it by no means follows that their successors and descendants should be so too, who have seen the error of their forefathers, and wisely corrected it. Their revolution of sentiment they deem an approximation to truth. This should be recorded, not to their disgrace, but to their honour. We have apostolical authority urging us on to perfection. And the great and good Dr. Isaac Watts has this declaration, which should be engraven in lasting

characters upon the mind of every professor, of every denomination, throughout the wide extent of Christendom: "It becomes the All-wise GOD, and not mortal man, to be unchangeable. It doth not belong to such poor, imperfect beings as we are, to remain for ever immoveable in all the same opinions that we have once indulged, nor to stamp every sentiment with immortality."

In the Second Epistle of Peter, i. 1, some manuscripts, instead of se, read Kupe; so that this passage, allowing the genuineness of the Epistle, cannot be confidently appealed to on the question. Your correspondent is right in considering the Common Version as incorrect. I should, without hesitation, render the passage as it is rendered in the Improved Version, and should extend to the word EwTnp the remark which I made in relation to

• Dr. Fordyce's stumbling at the Mar- the word Kupios, nor do I see any suf

SIR,

riage Service.

AMPLE, in relation to your limits,

as is the review of the "Memoir of the late Mrs. Fordyce," (pp. 44–47,) you have omitted one short extract which appears to me to be peculiarly worthy of a place in your Repository. It refers to the Doctor's marriage, which was celebrated by dispensation at his brother Alexander's seat at Roehampton, and is as follows: “ The Dean of * * * *, who had been engaged to perform the ceremony, began and continued to pronounce the words with impressive solemnity till the Doctor had to say, With my body I thee worship,' when he substituted the words, With my body I thee honour.' The Dean repeated worship; the Doctor repeated honour. Three times the Dean reiterated worship; and as often the Doctor, in a voice which inspired awe, repeated honour.' The dignitary paused; a momentary red suffused his cheek: but he proceeded; and the ceremony was concluded.". (P. 47.)

Here we see and must admire the struggling of a Presbyterian conscience; but let us admire also the candour of a Church-of-England dignitary, whose name ought to be known.

[blocks in formation]

ficient reason why it should not be thus extended. Indeed, when I made

the remark, I conceived that if there

[ocr errors]

were good reason to believe that the canon did not hold good with respect to ὁ Θεος ήμων και Κύριος Ιησες Χρισος, it could not hold good with respect to ὁ Θεος ήμων και σωτηρ Ιησες Χρισος. But your correspondent asks, "If Κύριος ήμων και σωτηρ Ιησες Χριςος is our Lord and Sacorrectly rendered viour Jesus Christ,' why should not ὁ Θεος ήμων και σωτηρ Ιησες Χρισος be rendered our God and Saviour Jesus Christ'?" To this question my former communication will give what, I think, may be considered as an answer; and if your correspondent will do me the favour to read it again, if I mistake not, he will perceive that, though the grammatical construction of the two passages is the same, yet when the general language of the apostolic writers is considered, there is a circumstance of difference between them which justifies an adherence to the canon in the former instance, and the neglect of it in the latter. It may moreover be observed, that when a writer can suspect no danger of being misunderstood, he may unconsciously fall into a construction which he would otherwise have avoided. I have reasoned, as your correspondent will perceive, upon the supposition that Peter was the author of the Epistle, and that he wrote ɛe, not Kupis.

Since I wrote my former paper, I have read Appendix, No. III., to Dr. Carpenter's third edition of Unitarianism the Doctrine of the Gospel; to which I would refer those of your readers who wish to see a full and judicious discussion of the subject.

E. COGAN.

[blocks in formation]

der the Unitarians, had reached me before I saw the Repository for January (p. 56). You have spoken of that intention in very appropriate terms. That there are individuals sufficiently regardless of their characters as men and as Christians to make such an attempt, I am not surprised; but I am loth to believe that it can be countenanced by the body of orthodox Dissenters. They will probably think twice before they proceed to acts of open hostility against us. They will consider well whether it be worth while to engage in a contest, of which the benefit they expect to derive must, to say the very least, be exceedingly doubtful, and which must inevitably have the effect of depriving them of the advantages which they derive by their occasional union and connexion with us. I will mention an instance or two. The Unitarian Chapel in this city was built during the ministry of Dr. John Taylor, "for the worship" (as he expresses it in the Sermon which he preached at the opening of it)" of the living and true God, through the one Mediator, Jesus Christ, according to the rules and spirit of genuine Christianity-that upon this ground the Society may be quite free to search the Scriptures, to discover, correct and reform, at any time, their own mistakes and deficiencies, and at liberty to exercise communion with any of their Christian brethren." During the period of his ministry, a pious and worthy lady of his congregation left a sum of money in the hands of trustees, members of that congregation, to be by them every year distributed in such way and to such Dissenting Ministers as they and their successors might think fit, with this restriction only, that they should be resident in Norfolk or Suffolk. Now, Sir, from that time to this, the sum so left has been distributed among Dissenting Ministers of the Three Denominations, without regard to their creed, the only aim of the trustees having been to give it where it was most wanted. Thousands of pounds have been thus distributed by Unitarian trustees to Independent and Baptist Ministers. This fact the or

[blocks in formation]

well aware that if the Baptists had it in their hands, not a sixpence would they ever receive; nor the Baptists, if the Independents had it. It is equally notorious here, that hundreds of the children of orthodox parents have enjoyed the advantages of gratuitous education in the excellent school which is attached to the Unitarian congregation here.

Twenty-five years ago, a Society was instituted in Norfolk for the Relief of aged Dissenting Ministers and their Widows and Orphans. To this Society the members of the Unitarian Chapel here largely contributed; for, as appeared by the printed accounts, within five years after the formation of the Society, they had given £225. 158., while the Independent congregation here had given only £87. 88. Now, from the period at which the Society was formed, up to the present moment, not a single claim has been made upon it by any Unitarian congregation or minister, But, I would ask, is it likely, can it be imagined, if this declaration of war be followed up, that Unitarians will go on to exercise the same liberal and friendly feeling towards their orthodox brethren as they now do? Have the latter reckoned up all the consequences which must result from the step they propose to adopt? Let them take care, They have as yet only proceeded to words, but the moment the sword is drawn, adieu to all the ties which now bind us to them as brother Nonconformists. I say nothing of the unkind feeling which must be engendered where friendship and good-will now exist; I speak merely of the gross folly of their intentions; and I would advise them, from mere motives of prudence, to desist. The zealots who urged on this pillaging scheme, have very little notion of the extent to which their friends throughout the kingdom will instantly suffer. There is yet time for the reflecting portion of the Calvinists to interpose and put a stop to it. If they neglect to do so, be the consequences upon their own heads.

EDWARD TAYLOR.

« PoprzedniaDalej »