Page images
PDF
EPUB

blessing would follow it, on whatever day it was holden. The day might be altered without altering at all the substance of the institution.-Sermon cvi. pp. 13, 14. Was, then, the word Sabbath changed by the church for that of seventh by accident or design ? I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

B.

CONDITIONS OF SALVATION.-EPISTLE OF ST. BARNABAS.

SIR, The authorities quoted by "Candidus" for calling good works or obedience a condition of salvation, are taken from a list which I drew up and published a few months ago.* * A friend has since pointed out to me the two following passages, which, perhaps, you will have the kindness to lay before your readers :

ARCHBISHOP USHER.-"Obj.: Is there not requisite a condition of faith, and a condition of obedience?

"Ans. Neither of these, according to our common understanding, do hinder the fulness and the freedom of the grace of the gospel.

"Not faith, &c.

"Obedience hinders it not. I am required, may some say, to be a new man, a new creature; to lead a new life. I must alter my course, and is not this a great clog and burden? And do you account this free, when I must crucify lusts, mortify passions, &c.? Is this free, when a man must renounce his own will? Yes, it is as free as may be, &c. If the King give a pardon to a notorious rebel, for treason, so that he now must live obedient as a subject, the King need not, in regard to himself, to have given the pardon; if he give it, he takes not from his freeness by insisting that he must live like a subject afterwards: the very acceptance of the pardon implies it." (Serm. on Redemption by Christ. Eph. i. 13.)

SIMEON." Yet are faith and obedience indispensably necessary to our eternal salvation; nor need we be afraid of speaking of them as CONDITIONS of our salvation, provided we be careful to divest them of all idea of merit, or of being a price whereby ulterior blessings are purchased." (Vol. 1, p. 439.)

[N. B. The Italics are mine.]

I will take the present opportunity of replying to the question addressed to me by "Omega" on the subject of the epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas. Occasional parallelisms may, of course, be found in all writers, of all ages, every antithetical sentence being necessarily more or less of this form. But if the parallelic construction be a mode of composition peculiar,+ not "to the writers of the New Testament," but to Jews, then the discovery that instances of this construction abound in any composition amounts almost to a presumption that the author of that composition was a Jew. The force of this presumption depends entirely on the number of parallelisms in proportion to the length of the composition in which they are found, and is not materially lessened, if at all, by the discovery of a few parallelisms, however striking, in authors of a different age and nation.

[blocks in formation]

Authorities for calling Good Works a Condition of Salvation. Rivingtons. Price ld.

London:

+ I have used" Omega's" word. Perhaps we should rather say, a favourite mode of composition with them.

IN

USE OF THE WORD "MERIT,'' &c.

In your last Number, you speak in terms of high and well deserved approbation of a little pamphlet by the Rev. W. Barter, in reply to Mr. Bickersteth, on the progress of popery. It is from no inclination to detract from the character of those "observations"-the excellence of which I fully appreciate that I call your attention to a passage in which Mr. Barter seems to me to have made a rather hasty and uncalled for concession to the conventional phraseology of the new school. The passage is in page 17 :-"I have seen many books (of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,) of which I wholly disapprove; for instance, I have seen the expression, that we shall be rewarded according to our merits;' now, were this the case, who would escape? The believer will be rewarded according to his works, not according to his merits."

No doubt it is prudent to avoid the employment of the word "merits," as the object of future reward, at the present day, on account of the controversial character which that word has assumed, and the different significations which modern disputers attach to it,* (on those accounts I never would use it in conversation unaccompanied by some phrase to limit its signification); but it is one thing to decline the use of a particular term, where a synonyme or phrase is at hand, because it may be misunderstood, or may be provocative of discussion, or may offend a weak brother, and another to attach the most objectionable meaning to it, and hence to condemn its use, which, in this instance, would imply a censure on some of the most learned and most humble of our divines. Jeremy Taylor, for instance, employs the word exactly in the way here so unceremoniously condemned:"David took it for a great honour, that the daughter of his king was judged a reward of his valour. God surpasses this, and honours so much the service of his elect that he pays their merits with no less a reward than himself." Contempl. Lib. ii., cap. 2. See also the whole of the third chapter of Butler's Analogy; and Hooker (to name no more) at least twice defends the use of the word in the sense of attainment, by the authority of antiquity,-once in the sermon on "Justification," and once in the fifth Lib. of Eccl. Pol., where he has this remarkable passage:-"I will not, in this place, dispute whether voluntary fasting, with a virtuous purpose of mind, be any medicinable remedy of evil, or a duty acceptable unto God, and in the world to come even rewardable as other offices are which proceed from Christian piety, whether truly it may not be said, that penitent, both weeping and fasting, are means to blot out sin, means whereby, through God's unspeakable and undeserved mercy, we obtain and procure to ourselves pardon, which attainment unto any gracious benefit by him bestowed the phrase of antiquity useth to express by the name of "merit." t Thus used, and thus defended, by some of our most

Expertes, male ominates

Parcite verbis."-Hor. Od.

On which passage Mr. Keble quotes St. Amb. 63, 17.—“ Qui sunt hi præceptores novi, qui meritum excludant jejunii?" Even Bishop Burnet, objecting to the word "merit," admits that a "sense is given to it by many of the church of Rome to which no just exception can be made."-Art. xii.

standard writers, surely the word "merit" does not deserve to be quite so unceremoniously repudiated. Had, indeed, the writer of the tracts alluded to employed it to convey the absurd idea of abstract and proper merit on the part of a son of Adam, Mr. Barter would not, I am persuaded, have disapproved of it as "confused," but have condemned it as unchristian. In page 32, Mr. Bickersteth is said to ascribe to a "Leader in a protestant church" the expression, that the bible should not be circulated without the prayer-book as a safeguard, which Mr. Barter admits to be an "inconsiderate expression, and cannot agree with the man who recommends giving the bible, with the prayer-book as a safeguard against it." But why suppose this "protestant leader" to recommend the prayer-book as a safeguard "against the bible?” Do not the words, in their obvious sense, imply, that it is proposed to be given as the safeguard of the bible?-its office being to guard the bible from misconstruction on the part of the reader, and consequently the reader from the ill effects of that misconstruction; and as every misconception of the bible must be productive of evil to the misconceiving reader, he who provides a safeguard for the one supplies also a safeguard to the other, defending one from profane, the other from spiritual, injury. In this obvious sense men are permitted, and even enjoined, to be the humble guardians of revealed truth; so Timothy is admonished by St. Paul to keep (pvlažov, guard) that which was committed to his trust; but we do, indeed, abandon our argument, and lie at the mercy of our opponents, when we permit them thus to construe our terms as they please, to make them the signs of ideas which they were never intended to portray, and then to expatiate triumphantly on absurdities of their own creation, like a certain dramatic hero, "Who makes his giants first, and then he slays them." I am, dear Sir, yours very truly,

A MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. P.S.-The measure which Mr. Bickersteth deals to the Romanists of to-day, on account of their alleged disbelief in the doctrine of the Trinity, appears very hard, when we recal to mind that, a few centuries ago, they were accused of being unchristian because they did hold this doctrine-" And that the wonderful providence of God did bring to pass, that the bishop of the see of Rome should be famous for his triple crown, a sensible mark whereby the world might know him. to be that mystical beast spoken of in the Revelation to be the great and notorious Antichrist, in no one respect so much as in this, that he maintaineth the doctrine of the Trinity." Hooker's Eccl. Pol.,

Lib. iv., 8, speaking of the Socinians of Poland.

DAVID'S NUMBERING THE PEOPLE.

SIR, AS I was yesterday reading Prideaux's Connexion, I came to the following passage :-"Joab was nine months and twenty days in taking an account only of ten of the tribes of Israel, and of no more in them than of the men that were fit for the wars." Part 2, book 9.

The

learned Dean is combating the error of such as would argue that the historical and scriptural dates do not agree concerning the decree of Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed when Cyrenius was governor of Syria. But an idea came across me from the juxta position of Joab's name and Joseph's, that the sin of King David may be hereby understood. A numeration of the people of Israel was to be taken when the Prince Messiah should be on earth; his coming was to be marked by that political feature. Did David fancy himself that Prince, or hope to prove himself such by the numeration which he commanded? Sam. 2nd, ch. 24. L. V.

Coaley Vicarage, Gloucestershire.

DR. BUCKLAND.

MR. EDITOR,-The controversy that has arisen on the theory of Dr. Buckland and others, with regard to the period assigned to the creation, under the term days, does not appear a question of such importance to the truth of the Mosaic records as the opposers of it imagine. When prophetic days are admitted on all hands to stand for years, and when, moreover, a thousand years are with the Lord but as one day, a Christian, who is a firm believer in holy writ, but not a profound geologist, may see no reason to circumscribe the limits of creation within a solar day and night, when no sun or moon divided the day from the night, as was the case in the portion of time assigned to the first three days of the creation. In the "Bibliotheca Biblica," Genesis, ch. 1, v. 19, is the following note:-"In answer to that perverse objection of the Manichees, how could there have been three days before there was one sun? S. Austin very judiciously tells them that either by these three days we may understand so many portions of time commensurate with that of a day, or such periods and distinctions of time as God was pleased to divide his work of creation by." De Genes, &c.

Without entering into the discussion, which seems to have excited strong feelings in the disputants, I presume that such an authority as St. Augustin, whose belief in the letter of S. S. cannot be questioned, and on whom no philosophical theory on this subject had any influences, will abate the asperity of those whose zeal in a good cause may excite prejudices, or warp the judgment, in contradiction to opinions which others may consider at least harmless, and not inconsistent with Revelation. W.

ORIGIN OF DR. HAMPDEN'S THEORY.

MY DEAR SIR,-You know that I worship, only on this side of idolatry, that series of letters which appeared at first under the signature of "Cantabrigiensis,' and afterwards were published with the illustrious name of Richard Porson. Dr. John Jones speaks of a second series, that appeared under the signature of Gregory Blunt, as a jewel sparkling with wit and learning, which few men [he might

have said not two] in the whole nation are entitled, by erudition and talents, to claim as their own. It is a most hasty performance, and was never to be avowed; consequently, it shews nothing of that deeply meditated plan and consummate judgment displayed in the other set. But we have one great advantage in it: the mighty writer of these letters is not κρυψινους.

And it is from this source of plainly delivered sentiments that I presume a late theological system has been drawn. At all events, its author is entitled to the high authority of this great predecessor, if the Cambridge professor and he only learnt from one and the same school. I have been lately refreshing my memory of this "jewel," when I was much struck with the exact agreement; and I think that you will recognise the Oxford regius professor in the following extracts from Gregory Blunt :

:

Page 7.-"It is by such criticisms and such deductions, of which we now complain, that scholars and divines have so greatly impeded the gospel of Christ from having its free course, and from working conviction on the minds of sceptics and unbelievers."

Page 3.-"When I say Christianity, I do not mean practical Christianity, which, in my opinion, formed upon a careful perusal of my bible, though not, it seems, in yours, is the only real, genuine Christianity; containing all that Jesus and his apostles ever put into their religion. This Christianity, which, because it was so plain and simple, and had so little to do with learned systems, disputes, and controversies, was foolishness to the Greeks of old. Christianity you and I, and all of us, understand well enough, because the true religion of Jesus is so plain, that no one ever did, or could, misunderstand it."

[ocr errors]

this

Page 4.-"I mean theoretical Christianity-a thing which you and many others, for want of knowing better, suppose to be, in some shape or other, the Christianity of the scriptures, but which, in every shape that it can assume and it can and does occasionally assume a greater variety of forms than ever Proteus did-has nothing of Christianity belonging to it but the name. I mean the motley Christianity which men fabricate by sewing scraps and bits of texts together.

[ocr errors]

"We are told that apostolical Christianity, which is, to this, Hyperion to a satyr, was not hidden in a corner, (Acts, xxvi. 26,) but this thing of shreds and patches' is to be found nowhere in the bible, but in holes and corners.'

Page 6.-" All theoretical Christianity is man's device,' (Acts, xvii. 29,) the mere coinage of the brain, the trumpery' of fathers and councils, of theologues and schoolmen."

I trust, now, that due shame will be felt by the Oxford malignants, as the "Edinburgh Review" so well designated those bigoted adherents to a doctrine which Mr. Blunt says, page 4, "is pretty generally admitted to be in its wane, by critical scholars and rational Christians, when they find that the Docti et Prudentes' themselves advanced the principles which they have been opposing." And I trust that the bishops will unanimously require that the Oxford candidates for orders shall be duly imbued with the Porsonic school of divinity, so ably administered by the present regius professor, as well as the Porsonic school of criticism, which, as the Rev. Robert Taylor has shewn in his manifesto, teaches that the received text and the authorized version circulate, as the word of God, several passages, admitted by all to be forgeries and lies.

FRANCIS HUYSHE.

« EelmineJätka »