Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

-and between the removal of the judicial penalty, and the healing of the spiritual disease, on the other side-appears to me of very great importance in the scheme of Christianity. The perpetual controversy between faith and works has arisen in a great measure from the neglect of this distinction." Mr. Erskine is too well informed not to know, that the distinction of which he speaks in this passage, is not peculiar to his scheme: every intelligent Christian. knows the difference between justification and sanctification; and what is the former but the "removal of the judicial penalty," or what involves it?-and what is the latter but "the healing of the spiritual disease?" It is not, then, from such a distinction as this that Mr. Erskine can expect to throw any new light upon the subject. In this distinction there is nothing novel. It is from his theory respecting pardon, as being irrespective of faith, and anterior to it, that he expects to relieve the Gospel from those misrepresentations of modern preachers, by which he thinks its lustre is tarnished, and its efficacy obstructed. If, however, upon examination, it appears, that the very objection was distinctly made to Paul's doctrine, which is made to the doctrine of those persons whom Mr. Erskine charges, in the present day, with presenting to their hearers an erroneous view of the Gospel, the fair presumption seems to be, that there is an identity between the two doctrines.This brings us to one of the most remarkable passages in Mr. Erskine's book-that, I mean, in which he presents a translation, "somewhat free," of the first part of the 7th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. If I had not read it with my own eyes, I could not have believed that such a man as Mr. Erskine could have imagined, that, in his translation of the passage, he was presenting to the English reader a faithful copy of the original. Mr. Erskine acknowledges, that the Apostle had, in the former chapter, given what he himself calls " a most magnificent view of the riches of divine grace"-and, after such a display of divine grace, what was the objection which might be fairly anticipated? Was it not one founded upon the supposed unholy tendency of the doctrine? I should think so. But Mr. Erskine is of a different opinion, and supposes that the Apostle proceeds formally to answer an objection, which does not seem to arise from the subject, and an objection, indeed, for which, under any circumstances, it would not be very easy to account. That a mind of peculiar construction might hesitate about taking comfort from the one atonement made for sin, and require a multiplication of sacrifices, corresponding to the number of individuals to be relieved, is certainly a supposable case; but that such a difficulty should so affect people in general, as to become the subject of a statement, and a formal explanation, is what it is not easy to imagine. Yet this is what Mr. Erskine supposes. Mr. Erskine was aware that the last clause in the question, "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" presented a serious obstacle to his mode of interpretation. And his method of getting rid of a difficulty so obvious, and so apparently unmanageable, is very singular. He supposes the Greek word xapis to signify, not

grace, but acts of grace, or grace multiplied into a number of acts producing as many atonements as there should be persons to enjoy the benefit. His translation is as follows: "Shall we continue under condemnation until grace be also multiplied, until the acts of atonement equal the number of forfeitures."

Mr. Erskine makes a distinction between πλεονάζω and περισ σEvw, and tells us that the former "relates to number and variety, the latter to quantity and extension." But there seems not to be any foundation for supposing that λɛova relates to number, as any one may satisfy himself, by observing where the term occurs in the New Testament. For example, in the 2d Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians i. 3" And the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth," Here Tλɛoval is applied to charity, and evidently denotes an increase of quantity, and not a a numerical multiplication. And so little connection is there between this word and numerical increase, that it occurs, with the preposition veр, in a place where number can have nothing to do. "And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant”—¿жɛρɛλɛovage.-1 Tim. i. 14. The Apostle is here speaking of his individual self; and his using the word in this place, in which nothing can be intended but an increase of quantity, is a plain proof that Mr. Erskine's distinction between the two verbs employed by the Apostle, has no foundation in fact, and that, in consequence, he has entirely failed in removing the objection to his interpretation, which naturally presents itself to every reader.

I confess I should be very unwilling to give up the argument founded upon this passage, understood in its ordinary sense, for the identity between the doctrine now called evangelical and that which the Apostles taught. I have been in the habit of reasoning with my hearers thus, on this subject: "You may perceive that the Apostles' doctrine lay open apparently to an objection, founded upon its supposed unholy tendency; for the Apostle Paul states the objection in the 1st verse of the 6th chapter of the Romans, and answers it. From which fact the inference is evident, namely -that no doctrine which does not appear liable to the same objection has any claim to be considered as identical with that of the Apostle. If this be admitted, the vulgar clamour raised against the doctrine of those who preach justification by faith, and not by works, as having an unholy tendency, is, as far as it goes, rather an evidence, that the doctrine taught by them is the same as that which the Apostles taught, or, at all events, a doctrine not apparently open to such an objection, cannot be the doctrine taught by the Apostles of Christ." Such was the mode of reasoning which I have always considered myself as warranted to employ on this subject; and I always found that it embarrassed, if it did not convince the opposer of the Gospel-he was forced to confess, that there was plausibility in the statement, if it was not conclusive. 1 should, therefore, I confess, be very unwilling to part with a text, which, in its present shape, furnishes an argument to the defender of the Gospel, of so much intrinsic value. Happily, however,

there is no necessity for doing so, nor is there the least foundation for the change proposed by Mr. Erskine.-First, It is against the scope of the context; for the objection to be expected was just such a one as agrees with the present translation. And, secondly, To sustain it, the plain meaning of words must be abandoned, and another adopted. Besides the objection to the change in the meaning of the word xapis, the word àμapria must be understood to signify, not sin, its ordinary meaning, but a state of condemnation, a very unusual sense, if it ever bears it. But that the principle of sin is in question, and not the state of the sinner, is evident, I think, from the 15th verse, where the Apostle restates the objection in another form: "What then, shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace ?" The answer to which question so plainly refers to the principle of sin, that to pursue the subject farther would be quite superfluous. I shall, therefore, beg leave for the present to conclude, subscribing myself, very truly, yours, Ť. K.

ON RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.

SIR-In this season of delivering controversial discourses for the purpose of emancipating members of the Church of Rome from spiritual thraldom, perhaps a few remarks from an unpractised writer, but from one deeply interested in the subject, may find a place in your journal. I conceive it must be manifest to most of those who are witnesses of the contest between light and darkness, the small proportion of converts from Popery, (at least in this city) contrasted with the great number of Roman Catholics who are addressed by controversial discourses. Now, in order to ascertain a probable reason for this disproportion, let us, in the first place enquire what are the barriers which oppose themselves to the conversion of the Roman Catholic from the constitution of his creed : and secondly, how far the means generally employed tend to accomplish this end. Then let it be held in recollection, that the errors of this respectable body are held mixed up with the truths of Christianity.

A sufficiency of the Saviour is retained, so as to hide the system from appearing in its true light of subverting the great work of redemption. Again, it presents to the eye of sense, palpable objects, as regulating powers of its devotions, which exhibit to the natural mind a substitution for that faith which is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen therefore, all its doctrines are in perfect unison with the state of man by nature for instance, does not human pride instinctively recoil to acknowledge the total depravity of the human heart, and consequently all the performances which issue from such a corrupt source, as filthy rags? Does not the natural man refuse to cast the burden of his sins on the

finished work of an invisible Saviour, and count all loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus? Now to the sincere member of the Church of Rome is presented a way of salvation that affords a full gratification to the darling propensity of selfrighteousness. In truth, the everlasting happiness of his soul and body is made to depend on a conditional obedience to the law of his Maker, every step of which performance glides along the smooth path of fallen nature. Further, does not the indolence of human nature prompt a refusal (even if permitted) to search the oracles of life to ascertain whether these things be so?-here then an infallible tribunal presents him with a religion ready made to his hand.

Thus we see the Roman Catholic the subject of a system which is in total conformity to the depraved bias of his nature; the machinery of which is strikingly calculated to feed innate self-esteem; and by a masterly adaptation of the god of this world, substituting human performances, dear to the performer, in the place of a work which brought the Son of God from heaven to the cross.

Now in this state the member of the Church of Rome comes before the preacher of controversy, whose object it is, under Divine Providence to convert him, and what method is generally adopted?

I believe the mode in most instances employed consists in the confutation of the doctrines of the Romish Church, from Scripture and reason, and in the exaltation of the Protestant faith. Now I would by no means wish to be understood as undervaluing this method of procedure-I only would wish to say, that alone it will totally fail in producing the desired effect; for this reason, because such labours can get no farther than the understanding of the individual addressed, and will not touch his heart. The religion of the Church of Rome is interwoven not only with hereditary and priestly prejudice, but also with every weakness of the human heart, and whatever weapon be used must penetrate to the seat of affection. And now what mighty means can effect this? I answer, the preaching of the cross; full, rich, and, above all, FREE pardon through the blood of atonement. And why does this plan succeed to the exclusion of all others? Because the Holy Spirit alone. recognizes the Saviour's work, and (so to speak) takes no notice of the other means, be they ever so agreeable to man's judgment. The Holy Ghost can change the heart, and acts on no other medium but Jesus, and him crucified. This Divine agent through the preaching of the cross, can, and does transplant this tree, the growth of Popery, from that soil most congenial to the nurture of the seed of error, unto the soul-fertilizing garden of Gethsemane. And, let me observe, that a man will not sever himself from a religion that has grown with his growth, he will not tear himself away from kindred, on the ground of his judgment being satisfied as to his creed being in many points erroneous. And if such did simply form the ground-work of this separation, I am persuaded flesh and blood, unsustained by the arm of Omnipotence (because not wedded to Christ) would eventually fail under the pressure of trials

which await the convert from his deserted communion, and from Protestants anathematized by the former, and received with suspicion by the latter. Now, is not the change alluded to, the true conversion to be aimed at, a consecration of the affections to the great Supreme, and not a mere change of nominal religion? As already intimated, I do not wish to supersede controversy altogether. But let the feeble light of error be contrasted with the Sun of Righteousness. In our anxiety to display Protestantism in the lofty attitude Divine revelation has placed it, let us never put off the mighty armoury for pulling down strong holds-Christ, the power of God, and the wisdom of God: and let our Roman Catholic brethren be collected in congregations, rather under the name of controversy, for the real purpose of scattering among them the seed of life. Allow me now to adduce a few facts illustrative of the principle I wish to impress on your readers-namely, that the Gospel alone constitutes the grand means for promoting the reformation.

An individual, a member of the Church of Rome, and connected with a family most devoted to her tenets, with whom the writer of this communication has been acquainted, is at this moment on the eve of separating from that communion. And through what instrumentality? the reading of an address delivered at a meeting of the Reformation Society, in which the grand doctrine of the atonement was prominently brought forward. I have also heard of another person of the same persuasion being converted to God by the reading of a discourse in which the Gospel of the grace of God was brought forward; introduced to her notice in a newspaper, forming the envelope of a parcel.

And to conclude, the writer of these observations has been a Roman Catholic, brought up in the strong holds of a Maynooth education, and with this preparation, without the aid of a single sermon on what is called controversial points, this individual, to the glory of the grace of God be it spoken, has been for upwards of four years delivered from this religion of human nature, and is now enjoying the glorious liberty of Christ's people. Now this grand revolution has been wrought in him by the gospel, preached in a house of mercy, being brought with power to his soul.

E.

ON PROPHECY.

To the Editor of THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.

There is at present in the religious world much anxiety on the subject of prophecy. I conceive it to be a subject worthy of the most serious consideration, from all who value the Revelation of God. It must, however, be admitted, that unfulfilled prophecy has its peculiar difficulties, and ought therefore to be approached with no ordinary' caution. It calls for a very attentive examination of Scripture language, and a candid weighing of the arguments on

« ZurückWeiter »