of its first abettors. But we may well wonder that some of its more recent advocates, even in our own times, viewing the actual state of religion in this and other countries, should have permitted the very limited success of their own labours to fill them with sanguine expectations of its almost universal acceptance, at no very distant period. Yet such is the power of self-complacency upon men otherwise the most inaccessible (in their own estimation at least) to the prejudices which beset ordinary minds.

A stranger phenomenon, however, than even this, must not pass unobserved. Infidelity itself can take up this parable against religion when it may serve its purpose. Rebels can foretell the downfall of the State, and Atheists the ruin of the Church, with all the confidence of a prophetical impulse: and when the work of disorder and mischief seems to prosper in their hands, who more ready than they to appeal, with unblushing effrontery, to this token of the will of Heaven? Need we search the records of ancient times in proof of this? Need we go further back than within the period of our own recollection, or even than the present moment, for examples which too plainly attest it? How did the French revolutionists triumph in this pre

tended manifestation of the goodness of their cause! and how loudly did the usurper who snatched the reins of empire from their hands assert this as his warrant from the throne of Heaven! And are there not, even now, among ourselves, those who shew their readiness to urge the same pretensions, whenever they for a moment obtain an imaginary triumph over the laws and sacred institutions of their country?

What has been said in this and the preceding Discourse tends to confirm a just and wise observation of an eminent Divine of our Church', that "success is one of those common-place arguments which is made much "too free with by every party, and for every

66

66

cause-and no one," he adds, "need be "told how frequently it hath been abused, "with a design to create in men a belief, that "God approves those actions and designs "which he is sometimes pleased to permit " and prosper."

There is, indeed, scarcely any species of proof brought forward in support of truth, of which falsehood has not some counterfeit prepared, to deceive the unwary. Whether it be miracles, prophecy, inspiration, or any other indication of Divine agency, the adversary

1 Dr. South.

seldom fails to set up some plausible tokens of a similar kind. Among these, none, perhaps, has been so frequently resorted to, as an appeal to the success of any religious persuasion in attestation of its truth. The complex nature of the argument, to render it a test of truth, is seldom sufficiently considered; and hence it seems to have arisen, that the real value of this kind of proof has been either unduly depreciated by sceptics and unbelievers, or rashly and unwarrantably magnified, in order to subserve the purposes of enthusiasm and imposture.

As a satisfactory evidence of the Divine support given to Christianity against every system hitherto opposed to it, it may (as has already been shewn) be urged with unhesitating confidence, because it stands connected with such direct and unequivocal tokens of supernatural interposition, as cannot be set aside without detracting from the attributes and perfections of God himself. As an evidence also in support of the pure faith of Protestant Churches, contrasted with the corruptions of the see of Rome, or with any other departure from primitive Christianity; although it assumes a somewhat different aspect, it is still substantially the same. Protestantism, indeed, pretends not to actually miracu

lous interposition in its behalf, but it makes a direct appeal to that primitive standard of faith and worship which was itself miraculously sanctioned; and it builds its claim to acceptance, not solely on the apparent inadequacy of human means to effect the result produced, but still more on its entire concurrence with that which had already, in times past, given manifold proofs of its Divine origin. This appears to have been the view generally taken by the reformers themselves. Even Luther, whose temper was sufficiently ardent, and his confidence of success proportionably sanguine, thus modestly expresses his sentiments respecting his own new doctrines, as they were then deemed to be. "If "the work," says he, "be not of God, I do "not pretend that it should be mine; let "it come to nothing, and be claimed by no

66

one. I ought to seek nothing else than "that I should not be the occasion of error "to any one!." This memorable sentiment

"Idcirco mei non oblitus, his verbis protestor, Me dis"putare, non determinare. Disputo, inquam, non assero, "ac disputo cum timore. Non quod eorum bullas et minas "timeam, qui, nullo prorsus timore tacti, quicquid vel som"niaverint, velut Evangelium credi volunt. Horum enim “audacia et inscitia simul coegit, fateor, etiam timori meo 66 non credere; quæ nisi tanta esset, nullus me præterquam "angulus meus cognovisset. Si opus ipsum non fuerit

was delivered at a time when almost by his own single exertions, his opinions had spread with great rapidity, and were received with much applause by a large body of his fellowcountrymen. Yet it clearly shews that he by no means considered the extraordinary prevalence or popularity of his opinions sufficient in itself to establish their foundation in truth. There is, indeed, abundant proof that he as well as the rest of the reformers, grounded their assurance of the Divine approbation of the work they had taken in hand, upon far higher principles. They founded it on their adherence to Scripture, and to “the faith "once delivered to the saints;" and whatever confidence they expressed in the issue of their labours, sprang from that holy and unexceptionable source, not from any blind and presumptuous expectation of the interposition of Heaven.

It were well if the same temperate and judicious conduct still characterized all who profess to follow in their steps. Nor will this caution be deemed unnecessary by those who

66

suum, omnino volo ut nec sit meum; sit vero nihil et nul"lius. Ego nihil debui quærere, nisi ut nulli essem erroris "occasio." Epistola D. H. Sculteto, Eccl. Brandeburg. Episc. anno 1518. Oper. edit. Jenæ, tom. I. pp. 63, 64.See Bower's Life of Luther, 1813. pp. 56-59.