Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

himself of the doctrines contain- who desire the ministerial office

ed in confessions. We are ever ready to assert, that a Christian ought to receive that sentiment, which, upon impartial inquiry, appears most agreeable to Scripture, whether it is contained in confessions, or not. If we produce passages of Scripture, as Zonclusive proofs of the doctrines contained in creeds, let it not be supposed, that we would be followed at a venture. We have no design to fetter the understanding of others, or to bear down a rational inquiry by the weight of our decisions; but wish every one, with an unbiassed mind, to examine our faith, and judge whether it be accord, ing to Scripture.

We pretend not that a confession of faith, or any human composition is, properly speaking, a standard of orthodoxy, or a test, by which erroneous opinions can be certainly distinguish ed from those which are true. It is possible the truth may be on the other side, and that error may be found in the established creeds of the church. But although no church or society of fallible men have a right to determine any article of faith, or to fix the meaning of Scripture, so as to oblige others to submit to their decisions; yet those who constitute a Christian society have proper authority to determine, what articles of faith they themselves embrace, or in what manner they understand the Scriptures, and what they would have their ministers believe and preach; and consequently, they have authority to compose a body of doctrines, the belief of which they think an essential qualification of those,

or church communion among them. So that when any person is convicted of an opinion contrary to their confession, he is not to be considered as properly chargeable with absolute heresy, but as holding a principle which, in their view, is heresy, and which they are seriously persuaded is of such a pernicious tendency, that they cannot receive any man, as a minister or brother, who maintains it.

Hence it is manifest, that the determinations of any body of men concerning articles of faith, are not founded upon any supposed authority, which they have to govern the consciences of others, or to make creeds for them; but upon the natural right which all men and all societies have to follow the dictates of their own understanding, and to embrace and support that scheme of religion, in which they perceive the greatest evidence of divine truth. In a word, that use of confessions, which we believe to be proper and beneficial, rests upon that unalienable privilege of a rational creature, the right of private judgment. And all the consid erations, which the warmest advocates of freedom can urge to heighten its excellence, we shall cordially approve as important advantages to our own cause; since we shall thereby have at least the same liberty to value and support confessions, as oth ers have to despise and reject them.

If indeed churches should oblige any person to incorporate with them and subscribe to their constitutions; if they should either force him to give a sent to their established confes

as

sions at first, or afterwards punish him for altering his sentiments by depriving him of any advantages, to which he had a claim independently of them; this would be exceeding the bounds of private judgment, and lording it over another's faith. But the principles we adopt are not in the least exposed to this objection. We abhor persecu tion in every shape, believing that every man has an equal right with us to follow the light of his own understanding and the dictates of his conscience, and that confiscations, imprison ments, torture, and blood are not the arguments which Christian meekness and charity employ. These are the tools of ignorance and error, calculated to oppress humanity, and to extirpate all true religion. That use of confessions, for which we plead, is not built on such principles, nor does it tend to such consequences. Candid readers will easily perceive that the vehement exclamations, which have been uttered against usurped power and religious persecution, affect not our cause. Those frightful im ages of imposition, hierarchy, and tyranny, with which some labour to array confessions of faith, are creatures of fancy, and owe their being to mistaken apprehensions or wilful partiality, Indeed we have reason to complain that writers on the other side have not treated our opinions with that moderation and candour, of which they so often make their boast.

We go farther. It is not an unfounded observation, that the outcry made by the inveterate enemies of confessions tends to deprive the churches of the nat

[ocr errors]

ural right of private judgment, and grievously to oppress their consciences. Thus the extreme of imaginary liberty, for which they contend, is very near the opposite extreme of arbitrary power. This will be evident, if we consider the consequences, which naturally attend the scheme of those, who most rigidly oppose confessions. From their reasonings it plainly follows, that churches have not power to agree upon rules for their own government; that, although they are convinced in conscience, that such doctrines only are agreeable to revelation and ought to be preached to the people, and therefore incline to choose those only for pastors, and to receive those only for members, who believe them; yet they must be denied that liberty; they must be imposed upon, and forced to hear doctrines," which they think inconsistent with their edification; and when they desire to attend upon public worship, that they may make progress in religion, they must submit to an administration, which in their view tends rather to retard, than to advance them in the ways of holiness. They must have their ears grated by doctrines, which they reject as pernicious, or despise as useless, and must be robbed of those res ligious instructions, which are their greatest comfort.

It follows from the scheme of those, who make the fiercest opposition against confessions, that because they have a low opinion of the doctrines of Christianity, and are for allowing unbounded. latitude in matters of faith, thinking a man none the worse for his religious sentiments, whatever

they be; therefore, who think
otherwise, and believe the doc
trines of religion of great mo
ment,
, must act in contradiction
to our understandings, and, in
order to gratify their inclina-
tions. must be indifferent as to
the interests of truth, and give
ourselves little concern about
what ministers believe and teach.
It may be added as another
eonsequence of their reasonings,
that because they are fully satis
fied as to the orthodoxy of a man,
if he own the Scriptures and ex-
press his sentiments in the pre-
cise words found there, though
he decline giving his assent to
doctrines expressed in any other
terms; therefore we, who are
persuaded, that many men un-
derstand scripture phrases in a
manner quite opposite to what
we think the true sense, and un-
der that fair varnish conceal the
most unscriptural schemes;
we who accordingly believe, that
their using scripture phrases is
no evidence what kind of doc
trine they embrace, must, not-
withstanding, be content with
their false test of orthodoxy, and
if we act with serious caution,
must be stigmatized, as morose,
narrow-minded bigots.

and contempt of them, and would dictate its own airy notions in as magisterial and imperious a manner, as the pontificate ever as sumed.

Is there not ground for this rebuke? Have not the favourite words, liberty, freeinquiry, private judgment, charity, &c. been per verted to an uncertain and dangerous signification, and prostituted to the most unworthy purposes? Have they not been instruments of infidelity, and a fair mask, under which apostacy from Christianity and hatred of all goodness have disguised themselves? Do we not know that in the mouths, and in the lives of many, liberty means licentiousness, a contempt of the restraints of virtue and religion? Do we not see that the adversaries of creeds are as fond of their own notions, and as obstinate in maintaining them, and look with as much disdain on those who differ from them, as the most zealous devotees of orthodoxy? Are they not as impatient of contradiction? Do they not shew themselves capable of. as much warmth and rudeness ? What writers in all the world treat their opponents with more contempt, display an air of higher superiority, or are more fondly addicted to their own schemes, than those who make the loudest pretensions to candour and liberality?. PASTOR.

These are some of the wonderful benefits which we owe to them, who profess to be most zealous for liberty and the right of private judgment. This is the noble freedom, to which they would elevate us; a freedom which would dissolve the bonds THOUGHTS ON THE DIVINITY of Christian societies, and the unity of faith; a freedom which would confound truth and error, light and darkness, the church and the world; a freedom which would impose upon us, if not ar ticles of faith, at least a disbelief

OF CHRIST.

THE perfection of Christ's example, and the evidence thence arising in favour of the gospel, have been stated, in some preceding numbers of the Panoplist. May we not hence derive

an argument in favour of his proper divinity?

to his humanity, it is generally
conceded. But what was this
nature? Might it not be an
gelic? Need we suppose it to be
divine? Now, whatever difficul-
ty attends the latter supposition,
If there
attends the former.
was a union of different natures
to constitute his person, we may
as well believe, that the fulness
of the Godhead," as that the ful-
ness of an angel, or of a creature
superior to an angel, "dwelt in
him bodily." Either of the
unions would be to us inexplicas

both equally so. By denying his divinity, we neither explain, nor remove, nor diminish the mystery of the union, but leave it as great, as it was before.

Christ's perfect example proves, at least, that he was an extraordinary person. No other sinless and perfect character was over known among men. "There is not," nor has there ever been, ❝a just man on earth, who does good and sins not." Moses and Elijah were men endued with prophetic and miraculous gifts; they were favoured with immel diate inspiration; they were eminent for piety and virtue; they had near access to, and fable and incomprehensible; and miliar intercourse with God; but still they discovered human imperfection Moses, though distinguished by the meekness of his temper, yet, under great provocation, felt the impulse of passion, and spake unadvisedly with his lips. Elijah, though pre-eminent for his zeal and fortitude in the cause of God, yet ence, discouraged by opposition, and intimidated by danger, quit ted his work for a season, and retired to a cave. But Jesus, under vastly higher provocations, preserved his meekness; and in the face of more terrible danger and more violent opposition, maintained his fortitude and zeal. We must then conclude, that he was more than a man; for we see that the greatest and best of men-men endued with the most eminent abilities, gifts, and virtues, fell far below him. His example plainly confutes the Soeinian doctrine, that he was a mere man, authorized and furnished only to instruct and reform mankind by his doctrine and example.

That he was truly and properly a man, it is agreed; that there was some superior nature united

Besides, have we such information concerning the pertec, tion of angels, as will justify the conclusion, that the union of an angelic nature with humanity could have produced so perfect a character, as that of Jesus Christ? Angels are not impeccable. Multitudes of them have apostatized, and fallen into condemnas tion. Those, who have kept their first state, and who, we sup pose, are happily secured from detection, are certainly much inferior to Christ in purity as well as in dignity. They all worsnip him with humble views of themselves, and with admiring and adoring sentiments of his incomWhen Isaiah parable holiness. saw, in vision, the glory of the LORD, or, as St. John says, the glory of CHRIST, he thus spake of him; "I saw the Lord sitting on a throne high and lifted up) and his train filled the temple; and above it stood the Seruftüm,” or principal angels; "each one had six wings; and with twain

be covered his face, and with twain ne covered his feet," in token of his humility and reverence," and with twain he did fly," to execute his Lord's will; and one cried to another, saying, Holy, Holy, Holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory." Jesus is here called JEHOVAH, a name not given to any of the angels, except the angel of the covenant, the Lord Jesus.

He is elsewhere

called the Son of God; and “to which of the angels said God, at any time, Thou art my Son ?" "God chargeth his angels with folly." When has he thus charged "his beloved Son," in whom he has declared himself well pleased," and who professes to "have done always the things, which pleased him?"

The angels indeed are called holy; but still they are imperfect. They stand not in their own strength. It is the nature of a creature to be mutable. Had Jesus been mutable, he would have been incompetent to the work assigned him; for he might have failed, and the work miscarried. If, then, we suppose him to be a creature ever so perfect in his nature; we must suppose some kind of union with Divinity, to secure him from the possibility of error. And why may we not as well be lieve that Divinity was, in some mysterious way, united to the man Jesus, as believe that an angelic or superangelic nature was united to him, and this na ture, in a way equally mysterious, supported by Divinity? Will not the latter supposition rather involve, than unfold the great mystery of godliness? Will it not rather perplex, than

simplify a great and wonderful doctrine, taught in Scripture with as much simplicity, as its nature permits, and with as much perspicuity, as the faith of the humble Christian requires?

There are angels, who kept their first state. But they never were appointed to so momentous a work, and never were subjected to such tremendous trials, as was Jesus Christ. Had any one of them been sent, as Christ was, in the likeness of our sinful flesh, and placed in the same situation, in which he was, who can believe that this angel would have conducted with equa! digni ty and constancy, benevolence and meekness, humility and patience? If reason may be allowed to speak in a question of this nature, will she not give her judgment in favour of Christ's Divinity?

We need not say that Christ's perfect character alone, is a full and decisive proof of his proper Divinity. There are other proofs. But this has its weight. At least it opens the way for the positive evidences to come with greater force, and removes some principal objections. In the obs jections, which arise from certain metaphysical difficulties attending the union of different natures, we are not, at present, concerned; for, whatever hypothesis we assume, these still remain.

Let a man read the Bible, especially the New Testament, laying aside the fear of inexplicable mystery; and will he not believe that the Divinity of Christ is taught there? Admitting the doctrine to be true, what more, decisive modes of expression would he expect, than those

« AnteriorContinuar »