Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

do not presume to intrude upon the "secret things which belong to the Lord our God," but only to explain "what has been revealed," as the Scriptures have revealed it; and to liberate the minds of Christian people from fearful and pernicious opinions on points relating to their present and future happiness. Such is the object of a preacher of the Church of England in extricating religion from the errors of Calvin; and if he pursues this object with a Christian temper, he is performing a sa cred duty.

Upon the whole it is very difficult to give a correct opinion of this discourse. It is in general well written, and contains many good observations; but we could earnestly wish that it had never been delivered from the university pulpit, nor indeed from any other. It is much more likely to create doubt, than to give satisfaction; and that part of it which insinuates that our Church is Calvinistic, or at least, that it is not worth while to defend her against the charge of Calvinism, is altogether unwarrantable.

66

The third Sermon on "the love of God and of our neigh bour" contains nothing worthy of particular observation. We feel disposed to thank the author for it, as a plain, practical, and unexceptionable composition. The fourth Sermon is of an higher cast, and is indeed an excellent discourse. It treats on the authority to retain or remit sins," and sets the subject in a very clear and satisfactory light. Mr. M. considers the extent and the utility of this commission granted by our Lord to his Apostles; and maintains, that it still continues for

"The confirmation of Christians in the faith and for the settlement and comfort of believers."-" Neither would the fact of its continuance probably have been disputed, any more than the perpetuity of the two sacraments, were it not, by some strange perversion of the authority to remit or to retain, supposed to convey a right to use it capriciously."

We would gladly make larger extracts from this Sermon, did we not remember that half the volume still remains to be examined. As the eighth Sermon will demand more than ordinary attention, we are compelled to dismiss the 5th, 6th, and 7th, with very brief observations. The fifth is founded on that weighty inference of St. Paul, Rom. iii. 28. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." We are not prepared to accord with the author in every minute particular which he has advanced, but upon the whole we think that the doctrine is correctly stated. In the 6th Sermon he explains

As great perplexity sometimes arises in the minds of conscientious men on the subject of justification, and as our limits will not

[blocks in formation]

explains St. Paul's assertion that "Christ Jesus is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption." Some good observations will here be found respecting the differ ence between justification and sanctification; and the following passage, which occurs in the 170th page, appears to us sound and forcible. The preacher had been speaking of the scheme of salvation as flowing entirely from Divine goodness, and thus endeavours to guard against a misapprehension of this doctrine.

"Have we then (it is sometimes asked contemptuously) have we then no part to act in the great business of our salvation? Are we to be degraded into passive machines, on whom supernatural influence is to produce a saving effect? By no means. No such inference fairly results from the doctrine in question. Jesus Christ is indeed made of God unto us both wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. But yet it is left to us to determine whether we will be wise and righteous and holy and redeemed. The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly, in the present world. But, though it bringeth salvation, it does not force it upon us; though it empowers, it does not compel, and, like the God who gives it, has no respect of persons.'

[ocr errors]

The seventh Sermon is upon Christian perfection. It is shorter and less elaborate than the others; and the substance of it may be briefly represented by extracting the concluding passage.

"Perfection, however, (after all it must be confessed) is an awful word. Who may attain it with all his zeal? Who can hope for it with all his faith? In the next life, by the mercies of Christ, any man; in the present, none. What degree of shortness of that final end, provided it be attended with sincerity, the Almighty will accept and pardon, I suppose no one will presume to determine. No one can set limits to that all-encircling goodness, which has no where limited itself. But neither does the determination of this point concern us. Though the purpose of Providence is inscrutable, our duty is clear; and, while we are certain that the Almighty will not punish any man for missing of a perfection which was permit us, on the present occasion, to enter into the question, we lay before our readers the following passage from Dr. Waterland's treatise on the subject, as the most concise and solid exposition we remember to have seen. "We are justified by God the Father, considered as principal and first mover; by God the Son, as meritorious purchaser; by God the Holy Ghost, as immediate efficient; by Baptism, as the ordinary instrument of conveyance; by faith of such a kind as the ordinary instrument of reception; and lastly, by faith and holiness, as the necessary qualifications and conditions in adults,' both for the first receiving, and for the perpetual preserving it. Such and so many are the concurring causes, operating in their order and degree, towards man's first or final justification." P. 56.

placed

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

placed beyond his grasp, the anger of God is revealed and determined against those who shroud their indolence under the plea of infirmity; who will not do what they can, because they cannot do what they would, and, because they despair of reaching, refuse to go on unto perfection,"

The last Sermon in the volume is on Baptism; a subject which has been grievously misrepresented by Dissenters of various kinds, and more especially by those professed members of the Church of England who hold the errors of Calvin. Deeply, indeed, do we regret, that a preacher of Mr. M.'s knowledge and attainments should undertake, in the very heart of the university, to impugn the doctrine of our Church, by maintaining that Baptism and Regeneration are perfectly distinct. Mr, M. endeavours to deduce this opinion from a passage in St. Peter's 1st Epistle, where the preservation of Noah in the ark is represented as a figure of Baptism. The words selected by Mr. M. as the foundation of his discourse, are these, "The long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein few (that is eight) souls were saved by water; the like figure whereunto, even baptism, doth also now save us, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God." Now it appears to us that this passage, as it stands at the head of Mr. M.'s sermon, does not give the exact sense of the original. We will tran scribe St. Peter's words at length, as they are written in the most correct and critical editions of the Greek Testament ""OTE ἅπαξ, ἐξεδέχετο ἡ τῇ Θεῖ μακροθυμία ἐν ἡμέραις Νώε, κατασκευα ζομένης κιβωτᾶ, εἰς ἣν ὀλίγαι (τετέςιν ὀκτὼ ψυχαὶ διεσώθησαν δι δαλος "Ω καὶ ἡμᾶς ἀνίλυπον νῦν σώζει βάπτισμα, (ε σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπε, ἀλλὰ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπερώτημα εἰς Θεὸν,) δι αναςάσεως Ιησε Χριςδ. Inos Xpis." These words are most correctly translated in our version, and the parenthesis (which Mr. M. has omitted) is there carefully preserved. The sense of the passage can not be better expressed than in Whitby's Paraphrase." The antitype of which ark is baptism, which doth also now save us (not merely as it is the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but as it is the answer or stipulation of a good conscience towards God:) and this salvation it works for us by virtue of the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

The observation of Hooker upon the passage may also be worthy of our attention. He is speaking of the conditions required of those who come to the baptismal laver.

"The declaration of Justin Martyr," says he, "concerning baptism, sheweth how such as the Church, in those days, did bap

tize,

σε Ὅσοι ἂν πειστ

* The passage alluded to is in the 1st Apology. θῶσι καὶ πισεύωσιν ἀληθῆ ταῦτα τὰ ὑφ' ἡμῶν διδασκόμενα καὶ λεγόμενα εἶναι,

και

tize, made profession of Christian belief, and undertook to live accordingly. Neither do I think it a matter easy for any man to prove, that ever baptism did use to be administered without interrogatories of these two kinds. Whereunto St. Peter (as it may be thought) alluding, hath said, that the baptism which saveth us is not (as legal purifications were) a cleansing of the flesh from outward impurity, but repúrnua, an interrogative trial of a good con science towards God *"

Another commentator on the words, says, "Baptismus autem nos servat per resurrectionem Christi, quia Christi resur→ rectio quandam nobis formam exhibet resurgendi ad vitæ novi. tatem, ad quam in baptismo regeneramur +

But as the highest authority, we may send this gentleman without further ceremony to Bishop Bull, Apol. pro Harm. Sect. iv. pericop. 9. p. 23. to learn the meaning of this text of St. Peter. After citing it, he proceeds

« Ubi συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπιρώτημα a doctis interpretibus optime vertitur, sponsio sive stipulatio bona conscientiæ, atque idem significat, quod ovyxzlábos apud Basilium. Nimirum in Baptismo interrogabat Episcopus: αποτάσσῃ τῷ Σατανᾶ ; respondebat baptizandus αποτάσσομαι Rursum interrogatus Συντάσσῃ τῷ Χριστῷ; respondebat oviraocouar Hanc sponsionem salutis vocat Tertullianus de Baptismo. Idem de Resur. carn. dixit, anima enim non lava. tione, sed responsione sancitur. Cyprianus interrogationem Bap tismi," vocat Epist. 80 and 76.

6

6

Mr. M. however understands St. Peter's language in a sense very different from the primitive Church, the fathers of the Reformation, or the Church of England. He affirms (p. 195), that it is "very clear, from the words of the Apostle, that the mere putting away of the filth of the flesh in baptism, does not include, produce, or convey the answer of a good conscience towards God. Baptism,' says he, doth now save us, but not the putting away of the filth of the flesh.'"-By this imperfect quotation, and by the dexterous insertion of the particle but, the drift of the Apostle's language is indeed totally changed. But even allowing that St. Peter's words were capable of such a construction (which we do not mean to concede) we should be still at a loss to conceive how Mr. M. could draw from them the conclusion at which he aims. "Baptism," he allows, "doth

καὶ βιῶν ὕτως δυνάσθαι ὑπισχνῶνται, εὔχεσθαί τε καὶ αἰτεῖν νηςεύοντες παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ τῶν προημαρτημένων ἄφεσιν διδάσκονται.---ἔπειτα ἄγονται ὑφ ̓ ἡμῶν ἔνθα ὕδωρ ἐςὶ, καὶ τρόπον ἀναγεννήσεως ὃν καὶ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὶ ἀναγεννήθησ μεν, ἀναγεννῶνται. ." Apol, I. Sect. 79, P. 116, of the Oxford edition of 1700.

Ecclesiastical Polity, Book v. 63,

+ Estius.

now

now save us," but the "putting away the filth of the flesh doth not. "Now the putting away the filth of the flesh," he afterwards says, is "synonymous with the outward rite of baptism." Therefore baptism does save us, but the outward rite of baptism does not. To such absurdities are men reduced when they endeavour to explain away the sense of Scripture, and to modify it according to their own devices.

66

Mr. M. however, seems perfectly satisfied with his own reasoning, and coolly observes, that "it would be unnecessary to argue a point, which appears so obvious, had not attempts been made by venerated names to connect regeneration with baptism, as though the two, the washing and the renewing, the sign and the thing signified, always went together." The tone of confidence in which this sentence is written merits the strongest censure. An inexperienced young man, who listened attentively to this discourse, would naturally suppose that the identity of baptism and regeneration, instead of being, as it is, the doctrine of the Church from the days of the Apostles to the present moment, is, in fact, nothing better, than a fanciful opinion of some modern divines, who had weakly "attempted" to defend it. Soon afterwards the same doctrine is termed an extraordinary notion." Whatever Mr. M.'s opinions may be, he ought to know that the doctrine which he combats is uniformly maintained by the best writers of the primitive Church, by the leaders of the Protestant Reformation, and especially by the Church of England. If he does know this, he ought not to have used the language above quoted. If he does not, we would seriously recommend him to consult the writings of Wall, Sharp, Bull, Bingham, Whitby, Hooker, Clagett, and Waterland; and we would especially call his attention to Wall's Introduction to his History of Infant Baptism, and Dr. Waterland's Sermon on Regeneration. In the notes annexed to the latter, he will find ample references to ancient and modern writers; and in the sermon itself, such an explanation of the whole subject, as will be far more likely to correct his error than any thing we can offer.

[ocr errors]

His next step in the hopeful undertaking of disproving baptismal regeneration, is to confute those passages of Scripture, which, as he expresses it, "look that way? The first he seJects is indeed an unfortunate one, for it is a decisive authority against him. It is that passage of St. Paul's Epistle to Titus (iii. 5.) on which Dr. Waterland's sermon above-mentioned is founded. Mr. M. very prudently does not come to close quarters with this text, but dismisses it with very little cereniony, saying, that "in fact baptism is here only alluded to." He then proceeds to St. Paul's vith chap. to the Romans; and to our Lord's declaration to Nicodemus,

[blocks in formation]
« ForrigeFortsæt »