« ZurückWeiter »
As to Miss Taylor's testimony, positive and clear as it is, the mere improbability that the Duke would say what she states him to have said, is deemed amply sufficient to overthrow it. If any body were to state that the Duke occasionally took his Sunday dinner with two authors, two players, and two strumpets, the fact would assuredly be improbable, but it might, nevertheless, be true. To oppose probability to fuct may be very convenient, but is not very
honest. Has this blockhead to learn, that tout ce qui est VRAI n'est pas VRAISEMBLABLE?
It would be very easy, we apprehend, to prove that the contradictions with which Mrs. Clarke is reproached, and which are triumphantly related as destructive of her credit, arise partly from the incorrect report of the evidence in the daily papers, and may in a great degree be so reconciled or accounted for, as to destroy the inference here must insidiously attempted to be drawn froin them. We lament that our circumscribed limits prevent us from exposing this contemptible production as it deserves to be exposed. But what we are most anxious to deprecate and to condemn, is the spirit and the temper which the writer displays. character who has been examined, in support of the prosecution, is, without discrimination and without proof, impudently held up, as most infamous; the udulterous intercourse which, in defiance of religion and morals, and in contempt of all decency and decorum, the object of his venal panegyric has unblushingly maintained for years, is courteously softened down into mere “ indiscretion.” When we see this; and when we daily witness the profligate attempts, in the same quarter, to blazen forth to the world the notable exploits of the most noted prostitutes and adultresses, to invade the recesses of domestic privacy, to convert the columns of a newspaper into annals of fashionable depravity, and consequently to render them unfit for any modest woman to read; we must naturally be led to doubt, whether such a writer is the advocate of virtue or the pander of vice. At all events, we envy not the feelings of the commander-in-chief at having gained such a supporter. And let not the public be so misled, by seeing this statement in what is termed a ministerial print, as to admit, for a moment, the monstrous supposition that there is any one of his majesty's ministers who does not condemn the author as strongly as we do, and as, no doubt, every virtuous man in the kingdom
EOR THE ANTIJACOBIN REVIEW.
THE DISSENTERS' TRUE FRIEND;
AND OF DISSENTERS TO THE DIVINE FAVOUR,
(In a Series of Letters to the Rev. Dr. L .) Dear L--;
LETTER IV. HAVING hitherto, under colour of an address to you, laid before my Dissenting Brethren what I thought of the greatest consequence to them from the Old Testament that divine code of laws which we all of us revere, I now with awe and diffidence approach the confines of the New Testament -- that still more sacred code, and the peculiar work of Heaven itself! But, before I enter upon its plainer topics, I shall devote this letter to an explanation of a few rather obscure passages, which, when compared, appear to produce a new.and, I must think, a most important result. As you know, my dear friend, that I am very far from being inclined to dogmatisé, this explanation may perhaps be allowed to be in some measure conjectural. Let my arguments, however, be candidly and fairly weighed; and I only wish that those whom they most concern may be as ready to accede to them, if just, as I shall be to retract them, if they prove to be unfounded. I must first assume, that the New Testament, as being “the peculiar work of Heaven itself,” will be found, if closely observed, to possess a beautiful fitness and propriety of expression beyond any human composition whatsoever; and this proves it to be divine. In writings either suggested or superintended by the Holy Spirit, we shall naturally expect that all will be perfectly connected and consistent, that every word will be the best that could be found in its place, and that its place will be the properest that it could have occupied; and our expectation will not be disappointed.
In this point of view let us consider what is, in fact, the last precept of our Lord's admirable serinon on the Mount, for what comes after is merely a concluding simile. "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's cloathing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Not every one that sayeth unto me, Lord! Lord! shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord! Lord! have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew
de part from me, ye that work iniquity.” (Matt. vii. 15, 21, 22, 23.)
This may appear at first sight to be an exception to the above rule, since it begins with false prophets or teachers; for to prophesy, in the New Testament nieans to teach or preach (1 Cor. xiv. 3); and it seemingly ends with such persons as are fraudulent or unjust in their dealings-"ye that work iniquity;" which does not appear very consistent, or worthy of the Divine Inspirer. Let
us try, then, whether we can find a sense that will remove both these objections.
The word in the original, here translated iniquity, is anomia: but in the parallel passage,
Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity," (Luke, xiii. 27)--the original word is adikia ; and as this is by much the most frequently used of the two, I shall explain it first
. In its strictly literal sense adikia signifies unrighteousness, by which word. it is often translated. But then it is vell known that, in Scripture language especially, righteousness is currently put for truth, and unrighteousness for falsehood. Dr. Whitby assures us, that this very word adikia occurs above an hundred times in the Old Testament, in the sense of fuilsehood, or lies; and it is highly probable that it comes over proportionally as ofien in that sense in the New Testament. Thus, “ Fle that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness (falsehood) is in him" (adikia). (John, vii. 18.) In Rom. i. 18, the word adikia occurs twice in opposition to truth. “The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness, and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” And the opposition is perhaps still plainer in the following: “ But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness (adikia), indignation and wrath.” (Rom. ii. 8.) And lastly, that, when translated iniquity, this word has the very same import, is evident from what is said of charity, that it "rejoiceth not in iniquity (adikin), but rejoiceth in the truth.” (1 Cor. xiii. 6.) Sometimes indeed it bears its primary and strictly literal sense, as in “cleaose us from all unrighteousness *
(1 John, i. 9.) This the context will easily show: I only mean that the former is its more elegant, and I believe its more frequent signification t.
The other word in question, anomia, will be easily explained. St. Paul, iu a passage already quoted (Letter II. P. 214), warns us, that the incorruptible crown of glory, like the corruptible crown in the Gie. cian games,
will not be awarded to us unless we strive for it lawfully (nomimus), according to the law or rule laid down; and this comes from nomos, law; the opposite to which is (inomiu, or any thing contrary to some law or rule laid down, 117 one of our Lord's
prophecies, this word also is so connected with false prophets, that it seems to mean the fruits which these prophets would produce. “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity (unomia) shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.” (Matt. xxiv. 11, 12.) In short, if our Lord intended in this place to condemn such irregular preachers, as wholly subsist and
* Adikia here seems to mean exactly the same as amartin (sin), in the 7th verse.
But soon after, these words come close together : "All unrighteousness (adikia) is sin (amartia).” (1 John, v. 17.) I do not well see how we can prevent this from being tautology unless we affix to the former of these words the meaning above sea ested,
Sectarists themselves, when in power, have been ready; enough to apply the word iniquity in this sense, though for a bad purpose. This I have shown (p. 89 of the last volume), where I have placed this important word in capitals.
thrive by fomenting religious dissensions, what word could be more expressive or appropriate than either of the above? Thus the whole passage, instead of being unconnected, becomes remarkably consistent, beginning with “ false prophets,” and ending with what they must naturally introduce—an.“ iniquity of doctrine," and an
iniquity of worship."
I shall heve submit a short comment, which may serve, I hope, to throuy some new light ou the whole of this difficult passage. ware,” says our Lord, “of those among yourselves who will resemble the ancient false prophets, not only in assuming a ministry without commission, but also in not adhering to genuine and sound doctrine. They will seem to you meek and gentle; but I warn you that they are ravening wolves, who will rather devour and scatter the flock, than keep it together and feed it.” St. Paul uses the same word in the same sense ; for, addressing the assembled bishops of Asia, he prophetically tells them, “ I know this, that, after my departing, shali grierous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them.” (Acts, xx. 29, 30.) St. Peter also couples the old and the new false prophets." But there were," says he, “ false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies.” (2 Pet. ii. 1.) Surely then it is a perilous thing to quit the apostolical faith, lest we should be led unawares into some such heresy as the Holy Spirit himself here pronounces to be damnable*. These false prophets were to be remarkable for continually crying out, “The Lord Jesus! The Lord Jesus!” It is not this, however, says our Lord, that ill entitle them to heaven, but the doing "the will of my Father which is in heaven." And the will of God, in this particular case, must certainly be the UNITY of his church, that “there should be no divisions amongst us;” but that, as we are called in one body” (not one hundred bodies) (Col. iii. 15), so we should serve Him to ili unity of spirit.” (Ephe. iv. 3.) Besides this, such persons will also make vast pretensions to what they call gifts, such as a volubility of tongue, letentive memory, &c.; and these they will even produce as amounting to “a call to preach the Gospel!!” Here our Lord seems to allude to some wicked persons, who, at the first, for the furtherance of the Gospel, might even be permitted to work miracles. This may well be supposed, since Judas, when sent, worked miracles, and Balaam prophecied. But if even real miraculous gifts, without obedience, cannot be pleaded at the last day, much less such pretended gifts as these false prophets can set up. Wherefore the Judge
* A few verses are here omitted as not essential to the present argument. In those our Lord declares those false prophets to be
corrupt trees, which may be known by their fruits;” for “ do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" and finally that they shall be "hewn down and cast into the fire." What fruits such prophets actually did bring forth in the bloody days of Oliver, are well known, and might rerve to exemplify and illustrate our blessed Saviour's meaning, and this very awful denunciation!
himself fairly forewarns them, that He will not know them; that is, in Scripture language, He will not approve or uccept them; (Gen. xviii. 19: Ps. 1. 6: 1 Cor. viii. 3 :) and He will profess uuto item, I never knew you : depart from me, ye propagators of false doctrine, and promoters of schismatical sorship!
This interpretation, severe as some persons may think it, will acquire credibility from the following passage of St. Paul to Timothy. “Shua profane and vain babblings, for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as cloth a canker; of whom is Hymeneus and Philelus, who concerning the truth tave erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless, the foundation of God ståndeth sure, having this seal: The Lori knoweth them that are his; and, Let every one that naineth the name of Christ depart from intiputy." (adikia.) (2 Tim. ii. 16, et sea.) Here then we have a pernicious error, or heresy, plainly specified, and the word iniquity so applied, as clearly to denote not only that, but heresies in general, which seems conclusive as to its proper sense in all such passages. These heresies, brought about or increased hy vain babblings, inay orein throw the faith of some, but they will not be able finally to stake the solid foundation of Christian verity. We have here also two of these "workers of iniquity” actually mentioned, and condemned by name, Hymeneus and Philetus. And it is furiber very remarkable, that the Apostle plainly alludes to Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, as the prototypes of their heresy; for as Moses said to Corah and his company, “To-morro the Lord will show who are his, and who is holy.” (Numb. xvi. 5.) St. Paul adepis the same expression; and " the foundation of God standert sure, having this seal The Lord knoweth who are liis.". Hereby the Apostle insinuates, that, as the Lord protected Merses and Aaron against those first hereties, so lie will protect his true Apostles against tbeir successors; and these men, Hymeneus-and Philetus, may be looked upon as affording examples of those who, according to St. Jode, bave “perished in the gainsaying of Corah” (Jude, xi.); that is, throngh a contentjous, disputatious, and refractory spirit, similar to his. Wherefore the Apostle adds his affectionate advice and exhortation, that men would renounce and give up such religious oppositions; “Let every one that nameth the name of Christ lei ail those who profess and call themselves Christians - "I DEPART FROM INIQUITY."
Hence perhaps we may acquire a clearer insight than we seem to have at present, into an expression in the 2d chapter of the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. St. Paul is there foretelling the appearance of “ ihe Man of Sin and Son of Perdition," by which ive undoubtedly means the Pope of Rome.
By the way,
this person is said to come, “with all deceivableness of unrighteousness (adikia, false doctrine) in them that have not the love of the truth.” (v. 10.) And in v. 7 it is said, “For the mystery of iniquily (anomia) dotla already work." But what is the mystery of iniquity? Bishop Warburton, to explain it
, says, "Just so much was seen of the commencing event (the rise of Antichrist), as was sufficient to fix men's attention.” (Serin, vill. P. 262.) BQ12, 13, bat need was there for men's attention to be fixed? Besides, pipery was not to appear