Page images
PDF
EPUB

WANT OF A PROPER OBJECT INJURIOUS IN RELIGION.

keepers at home; let them visit the poor quietly, remembering it is their duty to advise, exhort, instruct them, with gentleness, meekness, long-suffering, and charity; to hear their tales and confessions, without repeating them unless occasion requires, and to bear their poor neighbours on their hearts at a throne of grace; let them thus labour with their hands, their heads, their hearts, quietly, privately, faithfully, and they shall receive a far greater reward

375

than the applause or admiration of friends. The heart is so deceitful, we must be ever jealous and suspicious of the motives from whence our apparently best exertions arise, and in these days of religious excitement we have need to be peculiarly on our guard lest we should trust to fleeting impressions, or be influenced by fashion, so as to rest in the outward forms which perish in the using, instead of the body which is of Christ.

THE WANT OF A PROPER OBJECT INJURIOUS IN RELIGION.

SIR, -The following thoughts were suggested by reading a valuable paper in your April number, entitled, On Inconstancy in Religion.'

The cause of many (perhaps of all) errors in religion, is the want of a proper object, and of undivided attention to it. The poet Cowper has justly said,

'None sends his arrow to the mark in
view,

Whose hand is feeble, or his aim
untrue.'

The inconstancy of many religious professors, and indeed of many sincere inquirers, may be traced directly to this cause, untrueness of aim. In the first Epistle to Timothy, (chap. i. verses 5, 6,) this is put in the clearest point of view. "Now the end of the commandment is charity (love) out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: from which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling." For swerved, the marginal translation reads not aiming at, and thus makes the apostle's intention, in giving this admonition, still plainer.

The original says, from which things, in the plural number;

whence we learn, that to deviate in our aim, at any one of these points, is to miss the proper object, and to turn aside unto vain jangling. If we swerve from unfeigned faith, or a good conscience, or a pure heart, the departure is most injurious to the soul, not to say absolutely fatal. In taking aim, it is not only necessary to send the arrow in a straight direction, but also to keep our eye fixed on the object at which we shoot. In the apostle's doctrine, this is LOVE, which is described as the end or object of the commandment.

This appears to refer to the short summary of the law, given in Deut. vi. and Matt. xxii. There we find that love is the end of both tables of the law; for the first is thus summed up, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and the second, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. So that in both cases, love is the end of the commandment, in the one instance toward God, and in the other toward man.

But is it not too plain, on surveying the Christian world, that professors of religion do not stedfastly keep this end in view, and make it their single aim? Most

of them have their party objects, their personal prejudices, and their Shibboleths; so that while they appear to be aiming at salvation, (the professed end of their faith,*) they have really turned aside unto vain jangling, noisy disputation, and unprofitable contention. They are intent upon something to which they have attached the name of Christ, while Christ himself has nothing to do with it. They substitute their passions for religion, forgetting what the end of the commandment is.

Hence it comes, that while many are learning, few arrive at the knowledge (except the head-knowledge) of the truth. Young inquirers are soon tainted with this spirit, and a blight is consequently upon them, almost from their setting out. In the mean time, the world conceives an erroneous opinion of the gospel, though, alas! a just one of its professors, and the adversaries of Christ are emboldened in their enmity. These things ought not so to be.

Let us, then, be careful to avoid this error. In taking aim, one eye must be closed, or we cannot see directly. The eye must be single. The eye of the old man must be shut, and only that of the new man

* 1 Peter i. 9.

open. Let us ascertain whether we are taking a direct aim, or whether we have deviated from the straight line of our mark: and if so, has it been in matters of faith, or of conscience, or of purity and sincerity, or through not keeping the end (namely, love) distinctly in view. Whatever it be, we must take a new and better aim, and may God direct and bless us in so doing.

It might be useful, if our pulpits were accustomed to set forth this important truth more prominently, as a corrective of men's views, and as a test of their Christian state. Perhaps by urging this truth, wanderers might be made to retrace their steps; inquirers might be warned against deviating from their proper aim, and taught to keep it in view; vain janglers, whom knowledge puffeth up, might be induced to cast aside their useless objects, and to give their whole attention to that charity (love) which edifieth. And if a person found that a habit of controversy was growing upon him, he might be led seriously to inquire, whether he had not somewhere swerved from the proper line, or forgotten the real end of the commandment. I am, &c.

S. E. L.

THE ZEALOT.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

ESSAYS AND DIALOGUES ON POPERY.

No. XVII.

THE IDOLATRY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME.

Prot. Our last conversation, though much prolonged, was still necessarily limited to a consideration of the principle discussed. Nothing was said of the practice which grows out of that principle. I endeavoured to show, that, even as described by your own casuists, the doctrine of the INVOCATION OF SAINTS was indefensible, and opposed to the whole spirit of Christianity. But we cannot stop here. We are compelled, if we would do justice to the subject, and to this inquiry, to consider also the doctrine as it is practically known among us. And this will be, in truth, the test to which the matter must be brought. I have alleged that the system of worship in the Romish church is idolatrous in its character and tendency. If I am right, we shall be sure to find the manifestation of that tendency, in the worship of those who adhere to that church. This, therefore, will naturally offer itself as the subject for our present consideration.

Inq. That is to say, you propose to shew that the worship of the church of Rome is not only founded on principles which lead to idolatry; but is actually seen, in the conduct of its adherents, to produce that result.

Prot. Such is my intention : I wish to direct your mind to the consideration of the real nature of the worship which is current in the church of Rome; as a system idolatrous throughout; a system which, from the one end to the other, constantly interposes some other object of worship between the creature and the Creator, and thus effectually precludes that intercourse and converse between God and man, which at first exOCTOBER, 1838.

isted in Eden,-which Adam lost by transgression,-and which it is the main object of the Gospel to

restore.

Rom. You forcibly remind me of Dr. Milner's xxth letter, in which he so clearly shews the vast advantage possessed by our church in the greater means of sanctity provided, in her sacraments, public services, confession, and prescribed private devotions. If you have looked at this part of Dr. Milner's work, I wonder that you should venture to institute a comparison between the two churches, on the point of their respective forms and uses of public and private worship.

Prot. There is one important distinction which you have forgotten to notice; to wit, that between worship of a laborious, costly, and splendid character, and worship rightly offered. I readily admit that the Romish church furnishes her votaries with many and most elaborate forms; with more sacraments than the Apostles ever knew; with penances and processions and pilgrimages which the Apostles would have abhorred; but all this is nothing to the purpose, or rather it only the more proves my position. I do not charge your church with abolishing, or discontinuing, or neglecting the services of the sanctuary, but with perverting them. And let me remind you that the cautions given in Scripture are more frequently directed against superstitious, pharisaical, or ill-directed worship, than against the neglect of worship altogether. The prophets were frequent in such warnings" To what purpose," says Isaiah, i. 11. "is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of

3 C

the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them."

In the same strain follows Amos

"I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. Though ye offer me burnt-offerings and your meat-offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the peace-offerings of your fat beasts." (ch. v. 21.)

But St. Paul must be our chief authority in this matter, as one who was especially "the Apostle of the Gentiles," and who was inspired to write no fewer than fourteen different Epistles, filled with instructions and warnings to the early Christian churches. And those instructions and warnings are most full and explicit against every one of those things in which Rome chiefly prides herself. I will just run over a short list of them.

1. Rome lays great stress on her multitude of holidays, most of which she makes positively obligatory. St. Paul dismisses the matter thus-" One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it." (Rom. xiv. 5, 6.)

2. Rome is most particular in forbidding meat on certain days in every week. St. Paul, on the contrary, leaves every man to his

own mind and conscience, "For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth." (Rom. xiv. 2, 3.) And in another place he says;

"For meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better ; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.” (1 Cor. viii. 8.) 3. Rome makes celibacy a duty appertaining to the Christian ministry. St. Paul says,

"Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?" (1 Cor. ix. 5.) In another place he says,

"A Bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife. (1 ``Tim. iii. 2.)

And with reference to both this and the last point, he warns Timothy that" in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." (1 Tim. iv. 1—3.)

4. Rome encourages the practice of following, as devotees, some particular saint, as leader or head, as St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. Augustine, and many others. Whereas St. Paul vehemently contends against this very practice.

"For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth ; but God that giveth the increase.” (1 Cor. iii. 4-7.)

5. And, while Rome prides herself on her" means of sanctity," as she denominates her elaborate ritual, her multitude of holidays, her holy water and consecrated oil, her various fastings and penances, and all the rest of her burdensome observances, St. Paul sums up the whole in one general condemnation,

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind:

Wherefore, if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using ;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (Col. ii. 16-23.)

The great thing to be borne in mind is, that all these forms and modes of worship, which the church of Rome makes all-important, are, after all, mere circumstances; and the essence, the reality of the worship, is in no way connected with any one of them. Our Lord directed the mind of the woman of Samaria to this fact, when she began to demand of him,

Is it here, or is it there,-is it according to this form, or to that, that we ought to worship?' He instantly turned her mind from places and forms, telling her that the time was at hand when " ye shall neither at Jerusalem, nor in this mountain, worship the Father; for that the hour cometh,

and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John iv. 23, 24.)

Now the main charge I have to bring against the Romish church is, that it hinders as far as possible, this spiritual worship, by interposing visible and present objects of worship; by interposing also invisible and absent, but false, mediators; and by elevating the priesthood itself into an object of worship.

Inq. Have the goodness to explain these three points a little more fully before you proceed.

In

Prot. Willingly. You will understand me most readily, by fixing your mind on the worship of the early Christian churches, as we find it described in Scripture, and in the earliest records, and on that of the Protestant churches, -and then contrasting this simple worship with the ritual and ceremonies of the Romish church. the writings of the apostles, in the practice of the early church, and in that of the Protestant churches of our own time, we constantly observe but one object of worship, the TRIUNE JEHOVAH, who is invisible, who is a Spirit, and who therefore must be approached by an effort of the mind, and soul, and spirit. The business of the worshipper is with HIM alone. This business can only be carried on, really, by the heart and mind, and only to any good purpose, by the assistance of the Holy Spirit. All' other helps will prove only bindrances. Place what you will between the soul and God, as an imaginary ladder or stepping-stone, the heart instantly rests on that, and ascends no higher. This Satan well knows, and therefore it is, that he has so artfully provided, in the Romish ritual,

1. A present God to be wor

« EelmineJätka »