Observer, Dec. 1, 75. the purposes for which Christ appointed it, and it becomes a snare to the undiscerning, a burden to the conscientious, and a scandal to the church. In vain, while such a plain departure from primitive Christianity is tolerated, will men labour for Christian union, and seek to restore the primitive oneness of the Church of God. In vain will they attempt by depreciating this important and divinely appointed institution, or by criminal compromises of truth in regard to it, to establish unity among believers. The true "unity of the Spirit" demands that there shall be one baptism," upon the same authority that it requires one faith;" and until this" one baptism," embracing all that baptism was in the primitive church and all that it now is in the scriptures of truth, shall be cheerfully accepted by the religious community, no successful issue can be expected from schemes and plans of union, however cunningly devised and plausibly advocated. Nor, without this unity, ordained by the Spirit himself, can the Gospel ever be restored to its original power in the conversion of the world. Chris. Stand. 66 REASON AND RELIGION. REASON is "the faculty of the mind by which men draw conclusions, and determine right and truth." Religion from "Religo, with all its Latin family, imports a binding again, or tying fast that which was dissolved." It involves also "the performance of our duties of love and obedience towards God." In the nature of things the one can never be opposed to the other. God is the originator of both. Both are inseparably connected in man's present state of existence as far as the knowledge of the Divine will is understood; and consequently that which is unreasonable is no part of religion. But reason has her proper sphere in relation to religion. There may be many things in religion beyond the grasp of reason which are not unreasonable. This is in keeping with what is universally acknowledged in relation to natural things. We know the world exists; but we cannot tell how God brought it into being. We see that bread of the same sort will be converted into one kind of flesh when eaten by a dog, and into another kind when consumed by a man, but we cannot tell how this is effected. We see two plants growing on the same soil, receiving the same sunshine and the same genial showers, and yet the one extracts deadly poison and the other yields fruit delicious and healthful. Reason can never explain this, but it would be utter folly to deny the facts because we cannot account for them. It is the duty of Reason to ascertain whether the Book containing our religion came from God; and this point being settled in the affirmative it is her duty to receive all the Creator has revealed, whether comprehended or otherwise. Our physical powers have their limits, and why should it not be so with the powers of the mind? Reason has sadly missed her way if she suppose anything else. For every thing we advance we ought to give a reason, but the highest reason that can be advanced is that God has declared it. The man who calls the veracity of his maker in question has lost all claim to reason. Admitting God to be the author of the Bible, reason and religion are not opposed, as may be seen by consulting Divine Revelation. Observer, Dec. 1, '75. 1. God Himself, although not obligated to His creatures, generally gives a reason for what He does. Adam having sinned, the Lord said to him, "Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying, thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake." (Gen. iii. 17.) The words "because" and "for" point out the reasons why God acted as He did. Israel having fallen into sin the Lord depicts their state and appeals to reason in order to effect a restoration. "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: but if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." (Isa. i. 18-20.) 2. Christ, in His teaching, constantly appealed to reason. In proof of His Divine mission He referred the Jews to their own books, which they acknowledged as being from God. Thus the Saviour said, "Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of Me." (John v. 39.) In relation to His miracles He said, "If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not." John) x. 37.) He did not come begging their belief without evidence, neither does He yet wish the consent of any man without proof. The miracles performed by the Saviour for three years and a half in their midst clearly demonstrated whence He came. This was perceived and acknowledged by Nicodemus. "Rabbi," he says, "we know that Thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him." (John iii. 2.) In conversation with His Disciples the Saviour said, "If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both Me and My Father." (John xv. 24.) When examined before the high priest having been struck by an officer Jesus answered him "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou Me." (John xviii. 23.) Thus, Jesus during the whole of His public ministry, constantly appealed to reason both in relation to Himself and others. : 3. The Apostles also imitated their Lord in this particular and enjoined all Christians to do the same. Witness Paul's method in proclaiming the Gospel. "Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews and Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ." (Acts xvii. 1-3.) In the presence of the Roman governor, Paul used the same weapon. "And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee." (Acts xxiv. 25.) When exhorting his brethren in the faith he says, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thess. v. 21.) Peter also shows the reasonableness of the Christian system, and the kind of evidence on which it rests. "We," says the Apostle, "have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming Observer, Dec. 1, '75. of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye-witnesses of His majesty." (2 Peter i. 16.) To all the followers of Christ the command is imperative, Sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear." (1 Peter iii. 15.) Thus we have seen that reason and religion are in unison. God Himself, the Saviour and the Apostles have each in their turn vindicated its claims by example, and have commanded all professors of religion to do the same. We may therefore conclude that if any doctrine be held for which there is not a sufficient reason, that it can be no part of the Christian institution. When Reason is fully satisfied that the Bible is from God she has then no more to do but to understand its lessons and carry them out in daily practice, neither adding to, nor taking from, nor in any way seeking to modify what the Divine Being has seen fit to reveal. The following remarks from "Coleridge's Aids to Reflection," pages 129, 130, may not be out of place : : "Enthusiasts find it an easy thing to heat the fancies of unlearned and unreflecting hearers; but when a sober man would be satisfied of the grounds from whence they speak, he shall not have one syllable or the least title of a pertinent answer. Only they will talk big of the SPIRIT, and inveigh against reason with bitter reproaches, calling it carnal or fleshly, though it be indeed no soft flesh, but endureth the penetrant steel, even the sword of the Spirit, and such as pierces to the heart. There are two very bad things in this resolving of men's faith and practice into the immediate suggestion of a Spirit not acting on our understandings, or rather into the illumination of such a Spirit as they can give no account of, such as does not enlighten their reason or enable them to render their doctrine intelligible to others. First, it defaces and makes useless that part of the image of God in us, which we call reason; and secondly, it takes away that advantage, which raises Christianity above all other religions, that she dare appeal to so solid a faculty." "It is wrong to represent faith as in itself opposed to reason in any of its forms. Faith may go far beyond intelligence, but it is not in itself repugnant to it. It is not good either for reason or faith that it should be alone. The former is in itself hard, bony, angular; and, unmarried to the other is apt to become opinionative, obstinate and dogmatic; the latter without her partner to lean on, would be facile, weak and impulsive, and given to partiality and favouritism. The one is a helpmeet provided for the other, and let there be no divorce of the former from the more flexible, or the more devout and affectionate from the more considerate and impartial." M'Cosh on the Intuitions of the Mind, p. 372-3. D. SCOTT. A BIRMINGHAM CLERGYMAN ADVOCATING DISESTABLISHMENT. THE Rev. Dr. Gregg, vicar of East Harborne, Birmingham, sends us a copy of a tract he has just issued, strongly advocating the disestablishment of the Church of England. He assigns various reasons for this conclusion, amongst them being the circumstance that "we alone, in the Observer, Dec. 1, '75. Church of England, as by law established, have neither the power, nor permission, to manage our own affairs;" and another being that “under the name of the Church of England is propagated a great deal of Romanism," the Establishment having, "to an alarming extent, become a nursery for sisterhoods' or convents, and many other institutions of Rome, to which, as a Protestant, I very strongly object." The Church, Dr. Gregg says, does not, as an Establishment, touch the masses of the people : "I am pained to observe the complacency and satisfaction with which the clergy, as a rule, and even some of the laity, express a contrary opinion. When people cry 'peace and safety' under such circumstances then 'sudden destruction' may not be so very far away. Let any man of common sense take his stand, as I have often done, amongst the people,' at a meeting in the Town Hall in Birmingham (or any other large town). Let him hear, and heed, the remarks made by shrewd, intelligent, thinking men of the so-called 'masses.' He will then be extraordinarily deaf if he do not hear something very different from many utterances made from Church platforms and pulpits. Oh,' you say, 'Birmingham is Radical.' Yes, I know it; and 'Radicals,' whatever may be their faults, speak their minds very plainly. They say what they think; and the people' are getting into the way of thinking aloud at public meetings, and (in the body of the hall) often speaking aloud. I have heard a very great deal in this way. I have moved unkown, not as a parson, but as a man, among the people, not only in the Birmingham Town Hall, but elsewhere, and, trying to see and hear things as they are, I have come to this conclusion-that the Church of England is not deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. On the contrary, while professing to be the National Church,' she has ceased to be the Church of the Nation, and only ministers to a minority of the people. My opinion is that 'the people' do not care one straw about the National Church,' as an establishment; and they are getting, by degrees, not only to think so, but to say so; and some day (not very far distant) they will say so in a very silent, though clear and distinct, way (at a general election) through the ballot boxes; and this Protestant nation will then strip the Church's teaching of the authority which it now derives from national sanctlon." As to disendowment, Dr. Gregg is less emphatic. "What have I to say on this point? I candidly confess that, although I have read a very great deal on this subject, I do not understand it; but this I do say very clearly-if the Church of England hold any money which belongs to the State, by all means she should give it up. If she do not hold State or national property, by all means she should not be deprived of what is her own. Let documents be produced. Let her hold what is her own, and give up what is not her own. One thing is very clear-if the Establishment be disestablished, truth cannot; and if the Establishment be disendowed, and if the Church be sent away pecuniarily empty, well, what the Church may lose by poverty she may gain in purity; and a poor Church, if pure, is better than a rich Church if rotten. This is merely a truism. I do not think that the Church of England is rotten. It is because she is sound at heart that she ought to be severed from all that now impedes her usefulness." The writer makes the following references to his own position :-" I do not belong to the Liberation Society. I know very little about it, except the name. Most probably I should not agree with many of its tenets. To the best of my knowledge, I have never read one of its publications, and I have never attended any of its meetings. I have been told and warned that if I express my sentiments I need never expect any advancement in the Church. Well, be it so. I feel very content as I am. I can afford to do without advancement, and, if Observer, Dec. 1, '75. needful, to live without holding a position in the Establishment; but I cannot afford to stifle the still, small voice' within, which says 'Speak, and hold not thy peace.' So far as advancement is concerned, I say, with all my heart, 'Perish all advancement, except the advancement of truth." The pamphlet, it seems, has been submitted in proof to Mr. Bright, who writes in reply, "the tract on the Church is good. I hope it may be read extensively. Daily Post. NOTES FOR THE SUNDAY SCHOOL. INTERNATIONAL SERIES OF LESSONS. "On the first day of the Note the fitness of the desig"They have taken away the December 5. JESUS AND MARY.-John xx. 1-18. week." From then to be known as the Lord's-day. nation. "Early." While yet dark. (Mark xvi. 2). Lord." The Disciples did not understand He was to rise from the dead. It was not by reasoning that they concluded He had risen, the fact was proved to them. They saw Him. "Linen clothes lying" in order. No mark of haste or confusion, and none of the body having been taken away. "Went in-and saw-and believed," i.e., believed the resurrection. "Touch Me not." Mary was not then to wait with Jesus, but to go forth on her mission to the brethren. We must learn to work for Christ as well as to enjoy His presence. She went and told the Disciples but they would not believe (Mark xvi.). Her heart must have been made sad by their unbelief. So now with those who love Jesus, the refusal of sinners to believe is a source of severe grief. December 12. JESUS AND THOMAS.-John xx. 19-31. "The same day." That on which He had been seen by Mary and her companions (Matt. xxviii. 9). "Peace be unto you." Reminding them of His promise to give them peace. His peace such as the world cannot give; full, satisfying, abiding. The world cannot take it away. "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" (properly Spirit). This preparatory to baptizing in the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. "Whosesoever sins ye remit." Sin may be remitted actually, declaratively, or legislatively. As to the first, God only can remit sin. As to the second, man can declare sin remitted when God has made known the conditions and they have been complied with. As to the third, the lawgiver remits sin when a way of pardon is enacted and promulgated. The Apostles by their baptism in the Holy Spirit were made to know the way of pardon graciously determined by God, and being commissioned by Jesus to announce, with authority, what was thus revealed to them, and to bind the same, they thus, legislatively, remitted sin. This they did once for all, and have no successors. Thomas saw and believed. Blessed are they who believe but do not see. All the signs and wonders done by Jesus were to produce that demonstration which enables us to believe. December 19. JESUS AND PETER.-John xxi. 1-18. "I go a fishing." Why not? They had seen the Lord, but as yet had no work for Him to enter upon. Food would be needful, and what better mode of getting it? The Saviour, when He came did not chide them, but directed where to cast the net that they might have a plentiful supply. "Come and dine." How loving to call Peter to that dinner party, who had denied Him with cursing! "Lovest thou Me more than these?" Peter had boasted that though all his fellow-disciples forsook Jesus yet he never would, thus declaring his love greater than theirs. But he had three times denied Him, and is, therefore, now, asked three times whether he loves Jesus. His answer, in effect, is Indeed, or truly, Lord Thou knowest that I love Thee. As he had thrice denied his Lord, and thrice reaffirmed his love, so he is thrice recommissioned to do the work of an Apostle in tending the sheep of Jesus. "Feed My Lambs." The word used by the Saviour means to tend rather than to feed, and includes all the watchfulness and care of a shepherd. Lambs refer not to young children, as such, but to young Christians-young converts to Christ. |