Page images
PDF
EPUB

OPINIONS OF CHILLINGWORTH, RAINOLDS, &c. ON THE

[ocr errors]

APOCRYPHA.

SIR,-Notwithstanding some inci dental evils and painful circumstances which have accompanied the discussion of "the Apocryphal Question," every friend of the Bible cause has reason to be thankful that this controversy has tended to throw a clearer light upon the inspired word, and may confidently expect that the result will bring glory to its Divine Author. With the simple view of contributing my mite to a cause, the most important (I will venture to affirm) that has occupied the attention of Protestants since the period of the Reformation, allow me to claim a place in the Christian Guardian for a few miscellaneous gleanings, which have been left for those who follow in the train of the more diligent reapers in this harvest. The authority of the Divine word itself, is that which ought to have the greatest weight with every Christian; and I cannot but think that it has been most clearly shewn that it forbids all undistinguished mixtures of inspired with human writings. However, as mankind are so greatly governed by opinion, the sentiments of the good and the learned have been appealed to by the respective disputants. Your readers will allow with me, that such appeals should be sustained by quotations, not only scrupulously accurate, but which faithfully represent the sentiments of their authors. How unfairly the great and "judicious" Hooker has been dealt with in this respect, has already been shewn *. It appears, also, that

* See_the_mis-quotation, of Hooker, noticed in Gorham's Statement, p. 49, note (); to which may be added the following remarkably applicable words of Chillingworth:-"Let the reader consult the place, and he shall find that he and Mr. Hooker have been much abused.... and that Mr. Hooker hath not one syllable to" the "pretended purpose, but much directly to the contrary." Chillingworth's Relig. of Protest., c. ii. § 30. NOV. 1825.

very

Chillingworth* has had no better fate. I must add a third name to the number of these champions for the truth, whose real sentiments have been partly misrepresented, partly kept back from the public; I mean, Dr. John Rainolds. The opinion of this great man is the more valuable to the members of the Bible Society, because it is to his urgent representation, in a personal conference with King James, that we owe that identical" Authorized Version," the circulation of which it is the object of our institution to encourage. Before I proceed to the quotations which I have more immediately in view, I must observe that Dr. Rainolds is improperly styled "the Apostle of the Puritans+." In the reigns of Elizabeth, of James, and the two Charleses, that name was indiscriminately applied, (like the modern term "Methodist,") to some of the most sincere members of the Establishment, distinguished for purity_of doctrine and holiness of life. Dr. Rainolds" was a strict observer of all the ordinances and forms of the church," and died in her communion. So great was his learning,

See the misrepresentation of Chillingworth's sentiments by the Eclectic Re

viewer, exposed in Christian Guardian, Sept. p. 389.That Chillingworth's "BIBLE ONLY" did mean the INSPIRED word exclusively, appears from innumerable passages in his immortal work, as well as from his whole argument. Let the following suffice: "The BIBLE, I say, the BIBLE only, is the religion of Protestants. Propose me any thing out of THIS BOOK, and require whether I believe or no, and seem it never so incomprehensible to human reason, I will subscribe it with hand and heart, as knowing no demonstration can be stronger than this GOD HATH SAID SO, therefore it is true.' "THE UNDOUBTED BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE evidently containeth, or rather is, our religion." Chillingworth's Relig. of Protest., c. vii. § 56. c. ii. § 101. + Venn's Remarks, p. 23.

See Cracenthorpe, Defen. Ecc. Angl. 1625, c. 69.

3 I

426

Opinions of Chillingworth, Rainolds, &c. on the Apocrypha.

that he was called "a living library,
and a third university *."
"The
memory, the reading of that man,
were near to a miracle;" observes
bishop Hall+. He was advanced
for his eminent talents to the Pre-
sidentship of Corpus Christi Col-
lege; and there it was that the
seven Oxford translators of the Pro-
phets met "once a week at his
lodgings to perfect the work," of
which the superintendance was com-
mitted to Dr. Rainolds by his
sovereign.

Such was the man who has been claimed and placed first in the list of authorities, as one who would have supported the dispersion of an intermingled Apocrypha ! Hoto fairly, let your readers judge from the following quotations. This great man delivered a course of lectures against the Apocrypha, in the schools at Oxford, as Sir Francis Walsyngham's first divinity reader. In one of these discourses, (read February 23, 1586,) the following passage occurs:

، Those books are read in our churches by the decree of our bishops; but, in their decree, in the London Synod, they are nevertheless esteemed apocryphal. We should take care, however, lest, in the lapse of time, like the Carthaginian + fathers, we should fall into the habit of at length admitting those books to be canonical, which are read in the church for edification. There is the greater necessity for being careful in this matter, since those writings are proposed to be read which manifestly contain falsehoods. This is the * Woods' Athenae Oxon. vol. ii. p. 13. edit. 1815.

f Hall's Decade of Epistles.

For the better understanding of this passage, it may be well to inform your readers, that the Council of Laodicea (A. D. 364) forbad any other books to be read in the church than those which were allowed to be inspired; but that the Council of Carthage (A. D. 419,) ordered that the Apocryphal books should also be read, under the name of canonical Scriptures, mischievously using that term (not, indeed, as synonymous with inspired, but) as intimating what fell with the rule for the public lections.

case in the Book of Judith, the whole of which is appointed to be read in the month of October; not excepting chapters v. and xvi. in the latter of which there is indisputably a falsehood, by the acknowledgment of our adversaries as well as ourselves. On which account, those reverend ministers and doctors of our churches, who are assembled in the London Synod, are the more to be exhorted, that, among their other cares, this should by no means be considered as the least; and that they should place before themselves the example of the Laodicean Council (one of remote date and of exemplary piety), and also of those fathers [who are] venerable by antiquity, and [were ] not inferior to the Carthaginian fathers in piety; I mean, that they should ordain that none but the canonical books should be read in the church. It is for me, however, to wish; it is for them to deliberate, and to decree what is proper*."

Now, one of the writers on the Apocryphal controversy, after referring (generally!) to this very passage, without quoting either volume or page, informs his unsuspecting readers that it conveys "a hint of the manner in which we should deal with the prejudices of established churches abroad †," by allowing the circulation of an undistinguished and intermixed Apocrypha! Be it observed, however, that of the above important quotation he has given no more than the last two lines, in the following manner, interpolating the word "ONLY;" "but it is my part only to express a wish; it is for them to consult and to determine upon what is right." I offer no further comment upon this misrepresentation than the following: Dr. Rainolds was so far from being contented with "modestly" (to use the misapplied phrase of the Cambridge Remarker,) and with " "only expressing a wish on this subject,

i.

* Rainoldus, Censura Apocryph. tom. pp. 234, 235, edit. 1611, 4to.

Venn's Remarks, p. 23, 8vo. edit.

n 1586, that he never wavered in his anti-apocryphal sentiments to the day of his death; and, in 1604, at the Hampton-Court Conference, he firmly, but decorously maintained his views in the presence of his king, and amidst the scorn of the prelates*. But, however measured might have been his opinion, with regard to reading Apocryphal lessons in the church, it is manifest that this is merely the outside of the question. I will take the liberty, therefore, of informing your readers what were the sentiments of this learned Hebraist and excellent man, on the real point at issue,-that of countenancing a volume in which human usurp the room and title of Divine writings." True it is that Dr. Rainolds, in common with every candid person, allows that these treatises contain many excellent things; "but," he adds," but even though we were to hold the Apocryphal Books in as great estimation as the Jews justly did the brazen serpent yet, if they were to intrude into the sanctuary of God, if they were to attempt to equalize themselves with the canonical books, if incense were to be offered to them as Divine and Canonical,– then IT WOULD BE PROPER TO CALL THEM WRETCHED AND BEGGARLY, IT WOULD BE PROPER TO THRUST

THEM OUT OF THE SANCTUARY OF Gop t.” Such were his sentiments in 1587; the very year following that in which, it has been stated, he

[ocr errors]

• Rainoldes complained " of the bookes Apocryphall; which the Common Praier Booke enioined to bee reade in the churche, albeit there are, in some of those chapters appointed, manifest errors, directly repugnant to the Scriptures.' Bishop Barlow's Sum of the Conference at Hampton Court, p. 59, et seq. He was so strenuous in his opposition to the introduction of the Apocrypha into the church lessons, that he met with "a serious checke" from King James, who desired him to "note those chapters in the Apocrypha booke, where those offensive places were." Ibid. p. 63.

† Rainoldus, Censura Apocrypha, tom. i. p. 878.

[blocks in formation]

"Not long after this time [A. D. 340] St. ATHANASIUS was made Archbishop of Alexandria; when the Nicene Council had appointed to write his letters unto all other churches, from year to year, that they might certainly know when to keep their Easter. And to that purpose the patriarchs of this see sent their Pascal Epistles abroad upon every annual return of the Epiphany. In these Epistles they were wont otherwhiles to give instructions likewise concerning any point of religion which they thought needful to be published unto the people. And because Athanasius had, among other things, understood that certain apocryphal* books went about in those days, under the name of Sacred and Divine Scriptures, he thought it a duty belonging to him, in that office of a patriarch, to inform the churches, throughout all Christendom, what were the certain and undoubted Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament. Therefore, in one of his Pascal Epistles, he giveth them a perfect catalogue.....naming them one after the other, in the same order in which we do now: then he addeth, That these books only be the fountains of salvation, from whence all doctrine

* I admit that the word " Apocryphal”. is here used by Dr. Cosin to denote some spurious writings different from our Apocrypha (which he calls, below, "Ecclesiastical books);" but St. Athanasius maintained that both these classes of human writings should be accurately distinguished from Inspired.

of piety and religion is preached, and whereunto none ought to add, nor none to detract any thing from them.". "St. CYRIL was Bishop of Jerusalem at the same time [A. D. 360] when St. Athanasius was patriarch of Alexandria;" and although their respective churches had not the use of the Hebrew Bible among them, but kept themselves only to the Greek translation of the LXX. (whereunto afterwards were commonly added those ecclesiastical books which the Hellenist Jews first introduced, and received into their churches, that so all the most eminent books of religion written in the Greek tongue before Christ's time might be put together

and contained in one volume); yet
nevertheless they were always care-
ful to preserve the honour of the
Hebrew canon, which consisted of
xxii. books only divinely inspired;
and ACCURATELY TO DISTINGUISH
them from the rest, which had but
ecclesiastical authority, A DISTINC-

TION WHICH OUR AND OTHER RE-
FORMED CHURCHES ARE STILL
CAREFUL TO KEEP UP AT THIS

DAY*."

May the distinction ever be maintained inviolate by the church of God!

*Cosin on the Canon, §§ 55, 58. Edit. 1672.

VIGIL.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE FALL OF ST. PETER.
Extracted from Boys's Commentary on Luke xxii. 31-71.

OUR Lord said to Simon Peter,
"Satan hath desired to have you,
that he may sift you as wheat: but
I have prayed for thee, that thy faith
fail not." It appears from these
words, that Peter, previous to his
fall and recovery, had been the
subject of a twofold application.
First, Satan had desired to have
him, with his companions, to sift
them like wheat: then, on the other
hand, Christ had prayed for him,
that his faith might not fail. It is
in viewing Peter as thus circum-
stanced, that we shall acquire just
notions both of his fall and reco-
very.

The transaction is one in which the enemy of our souls appears strong, but the Saviour of our souls far stronger. And we discern, in considering it, the power of Satan, but the greater power of Christ.

In all the particulars of the fall of Peter, we discern the power of Satan. Satan had sought, and in some degree obtained permission, to sift Peter (with his companions) as wheat. And as wheat is agitated by those who sift it, so do we see Peter, under the power of Satan,

was

agitated, shaken, driven to and fro, into all the extremities and all the varieties of opposite and violent temptations. When Christ tempted, the result was different. He had power within him to resist all the power of the evil one: and therefore, whether tempted to presume, to disbelieve, or to apostatize (and all this Satan tried, when he tempted Christ in the wilderness), the attack was in each case foiled. But not so when Peter is tempted. Here Satan has to do with a weak and sinful mortal; and, in every attack, succeeds. He tempts Peter to presume: and behold the Apostle, immediately after he is warned of his own weakness, boasting his readiness to go with Christ, both into prison and to death; immediately after he is warned of his denial, replying,

66

Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee."-Satan tempts him to disbelieve; and behold him, forgetful of the power of Christ to defend himself, or, if necessary, to summon legions of angels to his rescue, drawing his

sword on a civil officer, and committing an act of violence.-Satan tempts him to apostatize, and with what dreadful success! Peter now appears absolutely bewildered; a lost, helpless captive to Satan's will; and, yielding to temptation in every form, according to St. Matthew's account, first simply lies, then perjures himself, then curses; according to St. Luke's, first denies Christ, then the followers of Christ, and, last of all, himself! To the maid who says, "This man was also with him," he replies, "Woman, I know him not." Here he denies Christ. To the man who says, "Thou art also of them," he replies, “Man, I am not.” Here he denies the followers of Christ. To the other individual, who says, "Of a truth this fellow also was with him, for he is a Galilean," he replies, "Man, I know not what thou sayest." Here he denies himself. It seems as if the devil, in sifting this apostle, now that he has him in his power, like wheat, takes a delight in exhibiting him in every possible character of delinquency; omits no practical exhibition that can be imagined of the deficiencies of his faith; and thus agitates and drives him, this way and that, into all the contrarieties and inconsistencies of a heart left with none but its own resources, against the tremendous influence of satanic power. But let us not forget, that if one circumstance which attends the sifting of wheat be agitation, another is separation. The corn is separated from the chaff. The process, however violent, purifies it from extraneous matters. And, by an indirect operation, similar results were produced in the case of Peter and the rest of the eleven, in the present instance. The deficiencies in the character of the apostle are brought to light, but they are brought to light to be remedied. Satan had Judas, indeed, to winnow him as chaff, which was to be cast into the fire. But he could only have Peter

and the rest, to sift them as wheat, which, after all, was to be gathered into the Lord's garner.-Yet terrible was the process to which they thus became subject. And, when Satan desired to have them that he might sift them as wheat, the reason of his obtaining his desire was, that the wheat wanted sifting. Let us remember, then, that if the case be so with us, though we may not be finally lost, a fearful operation becomes necessary for our recovery. The wheat requires to be sifted : and, for aught we know, may be turned over, for this process, to hands that would gladly, if permitted, cast it forth with the chaff to be burned!

[ocr errors]

We have seen the power of Satan. Let us now proceed to contemplate the greater power of Christ.-It was

needful that Christ should interfere for the deliverance of his servant, for all other means were insufficient. Amidst the various delinquencies of Peter, we can but observe the various means of safeguard or recovery that presented themselves, and the failure of them all. He had previous warning from our Lord himself. "The cock shall not crow, before that thou shalt deny me."-He had the assurance of help. "I have prayed for thee."-He had moreover continual admonition, while his fall was in progress. "Watch and pray." "Behold, the hour is at hand." Nay, as Peter went on denying, the cock, though to no purpose, went on crowing. In vain did the proud bird clap his sonorous wings; and raise, with imitative zeal, his boastful note, to remind the Apostle of his high professions now made void.--He had also example to warn him, in the appalling treachery of Judas.-It may be added, that, even in the earlier stage of his declension, he had experience of consequences: for it was through his uncalled-for violence, probably, that he saw his Lord bound as a malefactor.-Besides this, he had the accomplishment of our Saviour's predictions: for he went on denying

« EelmineJätka »