Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

the main, is a most invaluable work; and has done great justice to the subject. Christians, whether advocates for general or particular redemption, might have derived great service from this work, in explaining the epistle to the Romans: but the author's creed, who was an Arian, (for he certainly cannot be ranked among modern Unitatians) has prevented many from consulting his book.

"To bring the subject of this epistle before the reader into the fairest and most luminous point of view in my power, I think it right to nake a large extract from this Key, steering as clear as possible of those points in which my own creed is certainly at variance with that of my author; especially in the articles of original sin, the Atonenent and deity of Christ: but as these points are seldom directly touched in this introductory Key, the reader need be under no apprehension that he shall meet with any thing in hostility to the ortho doxy of his own creed. And it is thus far only I intend to quote or adopt any part of this Key."

This is the proof of the second part of our charge against the Ac minian. For Dr. Taylor, of Norwich, England, was a Unitarian, of that class called Arians; and the object of his Key, &c. was to explain the gospel scheme in such a manner as to deny, and prove to be false, every fundamental doctrine of grace. Original sin, the atonement, the deity of Christ, the Trinity, and every truth which Methodists as truly as Calvinists hold essential, are denied or explained away. That he denies these all-important doctrines we bear Dr. Clarke admit. And Dr. Taylor's view of Election, it must be kept in mind, was made to suit his whole gospel scheme. He, like all other Unitarians, did not consider the doctrine of Election as standing by itself. No, he viewed it as forming an harmonious part of that other gospel which he denies. He therefore labors to destroy the doctrine of Election by that very process of glossing aver plain passages, and explaining away positive declarations of the Bible, which he had employed to destroy the doctrines of original sin, the atonement, and deity of Christ. Yet it was here, in this Key, that Dr. Clarke found that "scope and design" of the Apostle in his Epistle to the Romans, which we are told "most obviously makes the subject of Election belong to the Jews as distinguished from the Gentiles, and to them only." And it is this gloss put upon the doctrine of Election, and thus forming a necessary. part of Dr. Taylor's false gospel scheme, Dr. Clarke himself being the judge of its falsehood, on the all important doctrines of "original sin, the atonement, and the deity of Christ"-it is this gloss upon the doctrine of Election, written by a Unitarian, and with such a

purpose, which Dr. Clarke, and many other Methodist preachers, bring before us as the fairest, and most luminous point of view" in which they can place Paul's Epistle to the Romans!

Dr. Clarke may smooth over the fact that his invaluable author, Dr. Taylor, was an unbeliever in the "true God and eternal life," by telling us, he was "a divine who yielded to few in command of temper, benevolent feelings, and deep acquaintance with the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures," and that although an Arian, he certainly cannot be ranked with modern Unitarians,' and that in making a large extract from this Key &c. "the reader need be under no appre hension that he shall meet with any thing in hostility to the orthodoxy of his own creed." Let all this be true, and let this Key be a most invaluable work' to Dr. Clarke-or let it be, as the venerable Scott has told us in his preface to the Epistle to the Romans, a publication which "darkens counsel with words without knowledge;-" here is, in this confession of Dr. Clarke, the testimony to complete our charge against the Arminian-viz:-That he, in order to make those passages upon which we rely as teaching the doctrine of Predestination, suit his scheme, explains away the plain and obvious meaning, upon the identical interpretation chosen by the Unitarian to overthrow those passages whose obvious meaning we adduce to maintain the deity of Christ, the Trinity, and every doctrine of grace. To be continued.]

For the Calvinistic Magazine.

THE MILLENNIUM.

Ross.

I have had the pleasure of perusing a Sermon on the Millenniun by Rev. Isaac Anderson, D. D. in the March number of the Calvin istic Magazine.

Many of the views are certainly excellent and sound, but I cannot coincide in the view taken by him of the period at which the papal power rose, nor consequently as to the period at which the downfall of the power as regards its dominion over the saints takes place.

I think Croly has rendered it extremely probable that this power had its origin A. D. 533. He cites the Edict of Justinian, by which the Bishop of Rome was made head of all the churches. Baronius, a popish author, has recorded this edict in his annals. But the fact of its existence does not rest on his authority alone. It is proved by other evidence. The edict itself is in existence, and shews a complete bestowment of that authority on the Bishop of Rome by Justinian, which it has been commonly supposed was first given in the tyrant Phocas, A. D. 606.

If this be a fact, it is a highly important fact; for I presume that it will be admitted that the period at which the Pope usurped this tremendous authority was the period which visibly marked the rise of the great Western Apostacy. If this be a fact, it will then follow that the 1260 days terminated in the year 1793. Which I think Croly makes extremely probable by the citation and examination of historical facts. My views differ in some considerable respects from those of Croly as to the events which are to take place during the period of 75 years, which is to elapse from the end of the dominion of Popery as a persecuting power, to the commencement of the Millennium. They coincide with him on other highly important points; that there will be a period of more destructive war, within the range of this 75 years, than the world has ever yet witnessed—that Popery, Mahomedanism, and Pagan superstitions, are to undergo in that period a complete destruction. But while Croly clearly admits the protection of the church, during this period, and the probability of considerable enlargement to it, I think the degree of its spiritual prosperity, and the number of conversions will greatly exceed what he seems to believe they will be. It will, in my view, be a period of incessant conflict; but the church will go from triumph to triumph. There will be many a hard fought battle, but the general result, from time to time, will be an accession of true believers to the church, and a diminution of the strength and numbers of the world. As Dr. Beecher has said in his sermon of December 1827, entitled, "The Memory of our Fathers," I believe that "Satan has commenced his retreat," but he will "fight on the retreat, and give many a desperate battle when he may seem to have been driven from the field; and will leave the world only when he is forced." I think, in short, that we are now living in precisely the period of preparation for the Millennium. In this period the vintage of the wrath of God against the enemies of the church is to take place, and the church itself is to be "purified and made white," and placed in magnificent triumph over sin, error, and all external opposition. At the end of this period of 75 years, the Millennium is to exist in a high degree of glory and happiness; for the pen of inspiration has said, "Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five years." That period will be beheld by the gratified vision of thousands and tens of thousands of happy, grateful, rejoicing christians. From that period I think we are just 40 years removed, and that the year 1868 will witness this blessed consummation. My view places the beginning of the Millennium 17 years before that at which Dr. Anderson thinks it will commence: VOL. II.

22

Take either hypothesis, and how important the period in which we live! It is, on either supposition, the preparation for the Millennium, and will be distinguished by very remarkable favor to the church, and terrible chastisements to its enemies.

For the Calvinistic Magazine.

A.

DIALOGUES ON CHURCH GOVERNMENT, BETWEEN A CITIZEN AND A METHODIST CIRCUIT-RIDER DIALOGUE III.

Preacher. Well, Sir, I hope you are at leisure, and disposed to tell us something about what you call the constitution and form of the church as settled by the Apostles.

Citizen. I am at leisure, and will cheerfully comply with your wish. And I must first observe, that Christ, again and again, ad monished his apostles, and other followers, to live as brethren and equals, not to affect superiority over their fellow disciples, or over one another. And when his disciples contended privately among themselves who should be the greatest, he took occasion to give them a lesson that never should be forgotten. In agreement with these admonitions of the Saviour, we will find that the apostles settled the church on a plan, that the right of voting in all church matters was secured to the people, as well as in freely choosing their own pastors or ministers, and that there was perfect equality among the ministers in office and authority.

Preacher. These are the very points on which I wish to hear

you.

Citizen. In the commencement of Christianity, the office of ministers is to be distinguished into extraordinary and ordinary. The first included Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists, who were endowed with extraordinary gifts, such as speaking tongues, and working miracles; these were to found the church. The ordinary ministers were those who were to be continued in the church to the, end of the world. See I. Cor. xii. 28, Eph. iv. 11. As the ordinary ministers are those who were to be permanent, it is about these alone we are to enquire. The Apostles, when they had established churches, upon the first convenient occasion, had the people to elect pastors and other officers; and until this was done, the people were supplied by Prophets or Evangelists.

Preacher. If you, now, can shew clearly what officers the Apos tles allowed to churches, and how made, you will be coming to the point.

Citizen. There are three terms most frequently applied to these officers in the New Testament, which we translate Bishop, Presbyter or Elder, and Deacon; and these are the only ecclesiastical officers known in the New Testament, except it may be a Deaconess. Now the question is, whether Bishop, and Presbyter or Elder, be two offices, or only two names for one office? It is agreed on all hands that Deacon is a distinct office. I think I will be able to shew to your satisfaction, that Bishop and Presbyter or Elder, are two names for one and the same office. In Acts xx. 17, we are told, Paul sent from Miletus to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the church, (in Greek Presbuterous, which may be translated Presbyters or Elders.) In the speech he made to them, v. 28, he has these words: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers." The Greek word here translated overseers, is elsewhere translated bishop, as in Titus i. 7. Here the same persons are called Presbyters and Bishops, and the reason is, because these are two terms for one and the same office. In the epistle to Titus, chap. i. 5, 6, 7, the Apostle says, "For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain Elders in every city:" "if any be blameless," &c. "For a Bishop must be blameless." Here again Bishop, and Elder or Presbyter, are the same thing. I. Pet. v. 1, 2. "The elders which are among you I exhort," &c. "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight"-(that is, according to the Greek, discharging the office of Bishops.) Bishop, (in Greek Episkopos) was the name of office. Elder or Presbyter was a title of respect borrowed from the Jews, who called the members of the city councils and of the Sanhedrim, elders or senators.

[ocr errors]

Preacher. Then it seems, that you think there are but two offices in the church, deacon, and minister who is called presbyter or bishop. Citizen. Just so. Accordingly Paul addresses his letter to the Philipians in these words: "To all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." Phil. i. 1. Also in his first epistle to Timothy, 3d chapter, he takes up seven verses describing the qualifications of a bishop, and the six following verses describing the qualificutions of a deacon. But, had there been six or seven orders of church officers, would Paul have passed them over in silence? Would the Holy Spirit have passed them over in silence? I admit that the persons who fill these offices may be called ministers, teachers, guides, pastors, &c.

Preacher. How does it happen, that several denominations, who seem to think, that having more than two offices in the church, is

« ForrigeFortsæt »