Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

mony of the Spirit," who is to judge of that testimony, of that inward evidence, of that infallibility, but the individual who feels this assurance? For persons who belong to, or who countenance the Churches which hold the doctrine, to object to its natural consequences, or to strive to limit the operations of the Spirit within their boundaries, is as absurd as to suppose, that by the "imposition of hands," any Presbytery can convey to its licentiate the gift of the Holy Spirit of God.

One good has arisen from these meetings in London. The British Reformation Society has dismissed the Rev. N. Armstrong from its employment, for aiding and abetting this folly. His crusade against the Unitarians, the Catholic, and the Bible Society, must henceforth be carried on, on his own account. His zeal will cool wonderfully, we doubt not; his vituperation, at any rate, will be stingless. The consistency of the Society in turning him away, for the cause assigned, is questionable. Had they dissolved their connection with this reverend defainer, for his intolerance, his violations of decency, truth, and charity, they had acted more agreeably with their professions. That members of a Church who say they have received the Holy Ghost in regular succession from the Apostles, and who, by virtue of its possession, retain or remit sins, giving absolution to the dying, and anathematizing the erring,-that they should cast out a regularly constituted Priest, who thinks the manifestations of the Spirit have not ceased, and that Protestantism, as well as Popery, may have its signs and wonders-is only another illustration of the fact, that those who strain at a gnat, can, if occasion serve, also swallow a camel. The whole business, in Scotland as well as England, teems with evidence to show, that though the name of Popery is renounced, its substance is retained; and, that whilst certain doctrines are upheld as sacred truth, their legitimate consequences are condemned as heresy.

THE Rev. Henry Clarke having, during a visit of ten weeks, preached with great acceptance to the Unitarian Congregations of Carluke, Paisley, and Tillicoultry, and having also given religious services at Lanark and Kilmarnock, at both of which places earnest desire has been expressed for Unitarian worship;-the Committee of the Scottish Unitarian Christian Association transmitted to Mr. Clarke a unanimous invitation to undertake the office of Unitarian Missionary in Scotland. With sincere pleasure we now inform our readers, that Mr. Clarke has accepted that invitation, and that he will enter on the duties of his important and arduous office on the first Sunday of March.

SEVERAL Articles are unavoidably omitted; amongst which, are accounts of the Greengate Chapel Anniversary, and the interesting services at the settlement of the Rev. F. Howorth at Bury. Gladly shall we comply with the request of that respectable Congregation, by inserting in our next Number, the admirable Address delivered by the Rev. J. R. Beard on that occasion.

CHRISTIAN PIONEER.

No. 67.

MARCH, 1832.

Vol. VI.

Remarks on Paine's Age of Reason, in a series of Letters addressed to the Readers of the Christian Pioneer.

(Letter I. concluded from p. 194.)

BUT, says Mr. Paine, "This information so transmitted, is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other." The same ideas are iterated again and again in his work; let us inquire how far they are correct.

The term revelation, has three significations; and it is by blending these meanings, that Mr. Paine has been able to mystify a subject sufficiently clear in itself. Revelation may mean either the act of communicating information from God to man; or it may mean the thing so communicated; or, lastly, the evidence we have in favour of any opinion. It may be, then, the act of communication; thus, we say, God reveals his will; or the thing communicated, in other words, the revealed will of God; or the evidence in favour of an opinion, agreeably to which we may say, the evidence of revelation stamps a sentiment with the seal of truth. Now, in reference to the first of these, the act of communication, we know that it takes place in reference to individuals. God revealed himself to Christ: here, then, we agree with Mr. Paine, and say, that it is revelation to the first person only. But revelation means also the thing revealed, and in this sense is not restricted to the individual to whom it was first communicated; so far from it, that the object in making the communication, was, that others might hear and be benefitted by the revealed verities. In this case, then, revelation does not, as Mr. Paine asserts, restrict itself to the first individual. To illustrate these remarks: A command is given by a king to one of his servants, for the ordering of the whole kingdom. In one sense, it would be correct to say, that the command was a command to the first person only; because a command may signify the act of commanding, and to that first person only did the act take place. But would it be correct to say, that the thing commanded was limited to the first person, when the very

U

end of making it was, that it might be generally communicated? A revelation, then, it is clear, or, in other language, revealed truth, may come to you and to me, equally as to the first person to whom it was made.

There is yet a third sense in which the word revelation is used, and that is, to signify the evidence which attaches to a communication from God. Now, in reference to all information conveyed to us by another person, we have to consider several particulars: the source whence he drew his knowledge-the evidence by which he was satisfied of the correctness of the information-the fact whether or not he was competent to observe accurately, and to report faithfully. In regard to all these particulars, it is obvious, that I, in receiving information from another, have an interest. In reference to the source of the information, in the case of revelation, it is God. Now, information which rests upon such a basis, must be more satisfactory than that which is derived from man. Nor is the satisfaction confined, as Mr. Paine contends, to the first person. Would you not all repose with more confidence upon that which you knew proceeded from the Fountain of all wisdom, than upon that which came from fallible and erring man, though the communication had not been made directly to you? Do you not every day proportion your reliance to the nature of the source whence your information is drawn? And are you not conscious that you do so alike when the information is communicated immediately to you, and when through the medium of others also? But, it may be replied, how is it known that God is the source, except upon the testimony of those who transmit the information to you?-so that, after all, you rely on the assertions of others. Not so. Are there no ways by which a revelation may be discerned, other than the word of those to whom it was made? Assuredly. If the truths that are taught are worthy of the All-wise-if they are such as human ingenuity never devised, and yet such as the human heart approves-if they are calculated to develope the best affections of our nature, to arouse that which needs a spur, to check what requires restraint-if they are congenial to our bosom, suited to our wants, adapted to humanity in every stage to which in its progress towards excellence it is destined: to arrive; and if, moreover, they are such as the day in which they first appeared, was deeply inadequate to pro

duce; added to this, that the characters they develope are human, indeed, but superior in all their features to whatever was before or after their promulgation exhibited;— should a religion present itself to a well-regulated mind, bearing these excellences, and claiming to be of God, he could not fail to recognise the traces and operations of the God of nature and the Father of men.

A revelation, then, may carry its own evidence with it. The impress of the Deity may be so deeply stamped upon it, that age to age, in long succession, shall read and recognise the characters; and as the progress of the race developes the excellences of our nature, and clears our intellectual vision, and brightens the torch of reason, so shall these characters appear more distinct and glorious, because seen in the blaze of accumulated light. Such is most evidently a possible case. A revelation, as the heavens, may to every man, in every age, declare the divinity of its origin, and the glory of God. But what have I now been sketching, if not the character of Christianity? Yes, this sacred religion bears the blazing stamp of divine truth upon its features; and to believe that it is of God, we need not consult the opinions of the ancients, but only to read its illustrious pages, and to question our own hearts. Whether or not you acquiesce in this eulogy of Christianity, and the application of my argument to the particular case of that religion, matters little on the present occasion. What I have now asserted of Christianity, I have no doubt to be able hereafter fully to prove; and in the mean time, the argument I have adduced remains unimpeached, whatever sentiment you entertain respecting the application of it, and it is therefore certain that a revelation may carry with it the most cogent evidence of the divinity of its origin. In consequence, in regard to evidence also, revelation does not rest with the person to whom it is originally made. Every person in every age may observe the glory of God impressed upon a system, and especially in the application of that system to his heart, receive the most infallible assurance from the emotions of his own bosom, that an agent of the divinity is in operation within him, and remain convinced of the truth and divine origination of the system, with a certainty which is so much the more forcible and satisfactory, because it reposes, not on the decisions of the judgment merely, but is sustained and corroborated by the homage of the heart.

There were other considerations mentioned, in which I said, that in receiving information from another, I should feel an interest. What was the nature of the evidence which satisfied him? Was he competent to observe the facts recorded, and to weigh the evidence adduced in their favour? And was he disposed to report faithfully that of which he was well ascertained? Suppose, then, that your mind was satisfied as to all these particulars— that, after mature consideration, you had reason to believe that your informant had adequate evidence of that of which he apprized you, was alike free from the possibility of being deceived, and indisposed to impose upon others, would you think that man correct who told you that the evidence upon which you received such information was mere "hearsay"? Would he be authorised to denominate that "hearsay," which perhaps had never been communicated except in writing; and which, at all events, in your case, proceeded, not from oral, but from written communication? In mere hearsay there is no scrutiny of evidence—no investigation as to the competency of the first reporter-no examination of the channels through which the information was transmitted. What is heard, is believed; what is believed, is said; and a thousand tongues iterate and transmit the vague and baseless report. This is hearsay. How different this from that scrutiny of evidence that probing of facts-that estimation of probabilities that careful and lengthened induction of particulars, by which you are invited to ascertain the claims of a revelation to reception and observance! Whether or not such a procedure as that I have now described, will end favourably for Christianity, is not at present the question. I doubt not that it will, and only after such a scrutiny do I ask for belief; but with this we have now nothing to do. The question is, whether or not revelation, in any supposable case, is to a second person, to remote generations, mere "hearsay." After what has been said, such an opinion, I trust, cannot for one moment be held. Revelation, like every other histórical fact, is capable of historical proof, and admits of evidence sufficient to satisfy every reasonable man. Or, are we to say that the narratives of historians are to every one but themselves, mere "hearsay"? that the life of Cicero, however well attested the facts, and the life of Buonaparte, however recent the events, are to every one but those who saw the scenes

« AnteriorContinuar »