desire to receive mercy in any Or we are prejudiced in favour of other than an honourable way, preconceived notions, and so are indicates a dishonest heart. Who- apt to stifle evidence. The preever, therefore, does not cordially judices of mankind, of both bad approve and embrace the salvation and good men, are almost infinite. of the Gospel, the reason is plain. There is not a mind in the world Perhaps it will be said, these without prejudice, in a greater or things are spoken of wicked men, less degree. And these are the and indicate the criminality of causes why the truth of God's their errors. But surely the errors word is not believed and obeyed. of good men arise from different We might as well plead weakness causes. Surely they may be in- for not obeying God's commands, nocent. It must be allowed that as for not believing his declaragood men have errors in judgment, tions. The one, as well as the as well as in practice; but that other, is a moral weakness; and the former, any more than the lat- that, strictly speaking, is not weakter, are innocent, does not appear.ness, but wickedness. Doubtless, I wish not to think worse of any there is such a thing as excusable man's errors than I do of my own, weakness, both in reference to or of him than of myself, for being obeying God's commands, and to in error. No doubt I have mis- believing his sacred truth. If a taken apprehensions of some things, man be afflicted, so as to be inas well as other people; though capable of attending the house of wherein is unknown to me: but I God, or if he be detained by the would abhor the thought of plead-afflictions of others, the command ing innocence in such affairs. If for publicly worshipping God my mistakes, be they what they ceases, at that time, to be binding. may, do not arise from the obscu- The same may be said of mental rity of Scripture, they must arise debility. If a man be in any way from some other cause. It is vain deprived of reason, his weakness, to allege that our errors arise from in proportion as it prevails, excuses weakness; for the Scriptures can him from blame, in not understandbe no otherwise plain and easy, ing and believing the truth. Nay, than as they are level with common I think persons of extremely weak capacities. If the Scriptures were capacities are comparatively exwritten for the bulk of mankind, cusable. If they be weak in other and yet the generality of men are things, as well as in religion, we too weak to understand them, in- are bound not to impute it to the stead of being plain and easy, they want of a disposition, any further must be essentially obscure. than their weakness in both may be imputed to the want of diligent application.

The truth is, our mistakes, as well as the ignorance of wicked The same may be men, arise from our criminal dis- said of persons who never had the positions. We are too careless means, or the opportunity of knowabout truth, and so do not search ing the truth. The heathen will for it as one searcheth for hid trea- not be condemned for rejecting the sure. Prov. ii. 1–9. Or we are Gospel, unless they have, or might self-sufficient, and think ourselves if they would, have heard it; but competent to find out the truth by for rejecting the light of nature. our own ingenuity and mere rea-Rom. i. 18–25.

son; and so neglect to pray for But I believe, if we examine, we the guidance of the Holy Spirit. shall find the far greater part of

66

our ignorance and error to arise | bers. If, for instance, a member from very different causes-causes of a church were to become a Soof which our Lord complains in his cinian, and the church were to own immediate disciples: Oh, blame him for what they accountfools, and slow of heart to believe ed apostacy from the truth, and all that the prophets have spoken." ultimately, if he continued in this Our ignorance and errors, like error, were to exclude him, this theirs, are owing in a great degree, would include a part of what is to that dulness to spiritual things, meant by "blame and punishment of which the best Christians have among men." And though it is sometimes reason to complain. The expressly said, "An heretic reLord Jesus, so remarkable for his ject, after the first and second tenderness, and especially to his admonition," Mr. R. would deny disciples, would not have rebuked that the church had any right to them so severely, for an error judge, in respect to others, what wherein they were blameless. Be- is heresy.* Herein I am of a sides, they were prejudiced in favour of another system. They had been long dreaming of an earthly kingdom, and (it is to be feared) of the figure they were to cut in it. Their pride, therefore, and carnal-mindedness, tended greatly to warp their judgments in this matter; so that all Christ had said (and he had said much) about his death and resurrection, seemed to stand for nothing. Their foolish minds were so dazzled with the false ideas of a temporal kingdom, that they were blinded to the true end of Christ's coming, and to all that the prophets declared concerning it.

different opinion: but as I may consider this subject more particularly in my next letter, on Liberty, I shall now offer a few more remarks on the above passage.

66

Variety of sentiment is the life of society." True, as one person discovers one truth, and another, another; as one views the same truth in this light, and another in that; and so all together become serviceable to each other: but this does not prove that a variety of false sentiments do any good. I greatly query if Mr. R. or any one else would hold this, when it affected themselves. Suppose, for instance, a variety of sentiment Mr. R. says"Variety of sen- concerning his character as a mitiment, which is the life of society, nister. One thinks he is a worthy cannot be destructive of real reli-minister of Christ, as well as a gion. Mere mental errors, if they learned, ingenious man, and an hobe not entirely innocent in the ac-nour to the Dissenting interest. count of the Supreme Governor of Another thinks him, though very mankind, cannot, however, be ingenious, not equally ingenuous; objects of blame and punishment and a third, for variety's sake, among men."*

So far as this relates to a cognizance of the civil powers, or any powers which inflict civil penalties, we are perfectly agreed. But I suppose Mr. R. means to extend it to the opinion and behaviour of churches towards individual mem

* Saurin's Sermons, vol. iii. Pref. p. 7.

*This is not mere supposition. It is well known, that Mr. R. espoused the cause of some who were expelled from the Homerton Academy, for what the tutors of that Institution thought heresy. Of their principles I know little or nothing, and therefore cannot judge: but Mr. R. has not only endeavoured to vindicate them from the charge of heresy, but he has also denied that the Society have any right to judge what is heresy!

might suggest that his principles | nology," or something of that kind : were even pernicious in their tend- but follow him into the company of ency. Now, it is very doubtful, if Arians and Socinians, and then his Mr. R., however he may admire variety of sentiment, would in his heart consider this variety of sentiment good, either in itself, or as tending to enliven society, It is a question if he would not greatly prefer that people should plod on, in the old, dull path of uniformity, and all cordially agree in believing him to be an honest man. And in the absence of evidence to the contrary, this uniformity of sentiment ought to exist. But why in this case only? Why should not people be obliged to unite in thinking highly and honourably of the Lord and Saviour of men, as well as of they are not endowed with the use a creature of yesterday? of reason, or that they are persons

66

meaning extends to their peculiar sentiments! This is founded on fact, and not on supposition. Indeed, it is plain, by his writings, life, and conduct, that he means to include Arianism and Socinianism. But to call these mere mental errors, in the innocent sense of the phrase, is begging the question : it is taking for granted, what remains to be proved, that such sentiments (if they be errors) are in that sense merely mental. Certainly it cannot be pleaded, in behalf of the generality of those who embrace these sentiments, that

،، But Mr. R. does not positively | of weak natural capacities, or affirm the entire innocence of men- that they have not opportunity to tal error, in the account of the obtain evidence. Supreme Governor of mankind." True; but he writes as if he thought it very nearly innocent, and as if it were very doubtful whether it is not entirely innocent: and in one sense, it seems, it is beneficial, as tending to enliven society.

دو

Should it be said that some of them have given proof of their being honest and sincere, by their frankness in declaring their sentiments, and relinquishing worldly emoluments for the sake of enjoying them; I answer, in the words of Waterland, "A man may be "But he guards his language, said to be sincere-1. When he by saying mere mental error; by speaks what he really thinks truth. which, may he not mean such 2. When he searches after truth errors only as arise from mental with impartiality and perseverweakness; and not from disposi-ance.' The former, we believe, tion?" If so, we are agreed as to many of these gentlemen possess ; its innocence. But if so, he would and we think it very commendable, not have scrupled to assert its en- far preferable to a mean-spirited tire innocence in the account of the concealment, or a doubtful and Supreme Governor of mankind. ambiguous declaration of sentiIt is plain, therefore, that by mere | ment. But to believe that any mental error, he means errors who fundamentally err, whether which have their existence in the they or ourselves, 66 search after mind merely, or which relate to truth with impartiality and perseprinciples, in distinction from those verance," is to disbelieve the prowhich relate to practice. If he mise of God, who declares, "the were accosted by a Calvinist, he meek will he guide in judgment; might illustrate his meaning by an the meek will he teach his way." error respecting "the weight of I wish it to be considered whethe shekel," or an error in chro-| ther, if not the whole, a great part

of divine truth may not be includ- | mark more.

Much has been said, ed under some such general topics of late years, about the Scriptures as these; viz. Truth concerning being the only rule of faith, in God, Christ, ourselves, sin, the opposition to all rules of human world, heaven, hell, &c. Now, imposition. In this I agree. But of which of these is it innocent for let it be considered whether the me to think falsely? Am I at li- avowal of the innocence of mental berty to think more meanly of God error, be not a virtual denial of than he has revealed himself?- the Scriptures being any rule of Can I think him such an one as faith at all. According to this myself, without offending him?- sentiment, faith seems to have no May I think more meanly of Christ rule-at least none that is obligathan the word of God exhibits tory; for there can be no obligahim? Can I detract from his ex- tion where deviation is no crime. cellence, and be blameless? Am If mental error be innocent, the I allowed to think more highly of mind can be subject to no law; myself than the word of God re- and if the mind, which has presents me? Can I be bloated up great an influence on the soul, and with false ideas of my own super- with which the will and all the excellence, and be innocent? May other powers constantly act in conI think better of sin than it de- cert-if this be without a law, it serves? Must I not view it as it is can be of very little consequence represented in the Bible? Am I at to the Supreme Legislator, wheliberty to put a false estimate on ther any thing else in man be left the good things of this life? Is not under his dominion or not. While too low an estimate of them ingra- we are so jealous then, lest others titude, and too high an estimate should infringe on our liberty, it idolatry? And can either of these becomes us to tremble lest we inbe innocent? May I undervalue fringe on the divine authority. the life to come? Ör ought I not, And while we are exclaiming," Call seeing God has called it a weight no man master," let us not forget, of glory," to give it its weight in" One is our Master, even Christ." determining my pursuits? Lastly, seeing that God has threatened everlasting destruction to the finally imponitent, am I at liberty to qualify these terms, and accommodate them, to my own wishes and feelings, and so administer comfort to God's enemies, as such? Am I not bound to believe that God means what he says? May I" Now the birth of Jesus Christ presume that the threatenings of was on this wise: When as his the Bible were never intended to mother Mary was espoused to Jobe executed, but were uttered seph, before they came together, merely to frighten the vulgar? she was found with child of the Ought I not to believe that God is Holy Ghost." as much in earnest when he threat- By the Holy Ghost coming upon ens, as when he promises! If the her, and the Highest overshadowBible is a plain book, can I mis-ing her, as stated by St. Luke understand it, and be innocent? (ch. i. 35.), whose circumstantial Let me conclude with one re- narrative, so little like that of St.

66

THE

Your's sincerely,

ANDREW FULLER.

HORA EVANGELICA.

(Continued from p. 59.)

GOSPEL OF ST. MATTHEW.
No. V.-Chap. i. 18.

transmitted through the family of Joseph and Mary; and that in Luke through the family or intimates of Zacharias and Elisabeth ; a supposition which furnishes a reason why the two narratives contain so little matter in common. It is objected also, that this doctrine is not alluded to in the other books of the New Testament. The same reason will account for the absence of reference to this miracle in the epistolary writings

Matthew, but terminating in the same result, might perhaps justly be adduced as an undesigned correspondence. It has been urged by Socinian writers, as an objection to the immaculate conception of our Lord, and especially by Mr. Belsham, that "if the relation given of the miraculous conception were 'true, it were utterly unaccountable that these extraordinary events should have been wholly omitted by Mark and John, and that there should not be a single of the New Testament, if that aballusion to them in the New Tes-sence be admitted to the full extament; and particularly in John's tent; for there is, at least, one history, that Jesus should be so fre- passage [rather two passages *] quently spoken of as the son of which appears to carry an impliJoseph and Mary, without any cation of the fact. The writer of comment, or the least hint that the Epistle to the Hebrews, in this statement was erroneous."- explaining the symbolical repreThis is most admirably answered sentations by which it pleased the by Dr. J. P. Smith, of whose la- Holy Spirit, under the former disbours we gladly avail ourselves on pensation, to prefigure the blessthis occasion. "This objection," ings of Christianity, seems to put he observes, "is plausible: but the interior sanctuary, or holy of we ask a fair attention to the fol- holies,' as the sign of the heavenly lowing considerations. The fact state; and the outer tabernacle, as in question was of the most private that of the flesh,' or human naand delicate nature possible, and, ture of the Messiah. (Heb. viii. 1, as to human attestation, it rested 2; ix. 11, 12.) As the Aaronical solely on the word of Mary her-high-priest, on the great anniverself, the person most deeply inte- sary of expiation, was first to offirested. Joseph's mind was satis-ciate in the tabernacle, offering fied with regard to her honour the sacrifices and sprinkling the and veracity, by a divine vision, blood of symbolical pardon and which, in whatever way it was evinced to him to be no delusion, was still a private and personal affair. But this was not the kind of facts to which the first teachers of Christianity were in the habit of appealing. The miracles on which they rested their claims were tered into the sanctuary, through such as had multiplied witnesses the greater and more perfect tato attest them, and generally ene-bernacle-his own blood.' Now, mies not less than friends. Here, of this tabernacle it is declared, then, we see a reason why Jesus and his disciples did not refer to this circumstance, so peculiar, and necessarily private. The account in St. Matthew had probably been

purification, and then was to advance, through the tabernacle, into the most holy place, the representation of the Divine Presence; so Christ, our "Great High Priest,' and Minister of the Sanctuary and of the true tabernacle,'

6

en

* Besides those adduced above, the following passages appear to bear a manifest, though indirect, allusion to the same great event: John i. 14; Gal. iv. 4; Heb. x. 5.