« PreviousContinue »
manifested “ in the late friendly interposition" of the Legiflature, to relieve that useful “ Order from vexatious prosecutions,” is pointed out. The charges brought by the Calvinistic Faction against the Clergy of the establishment, for abandoning certain doctrines set forth in the s9 articles, are shewn to be unfounded. The matter of Residence, (in which the diocese of Rochester does not grievously offend,) is properly introduced, And the recent translation of Bishop Horsley to another See, and the confident expectation of the diocese to reap the best advantages from “ the ability, the vigilance, and firmness” of his successor (to whom the Charge is dedicated) are mentioned in manly terms, and with a fimplicity worthy of the venerable Archdeacon and the Prelates with whom he has been, and is, connected.
Archdeacon Law has “holden thirty Vistations." Long may his la. bours be indulged to the Diocese. Or foon may he be promoted to a sphere of more extended utility!
We subjoin a specimen or two of this excellent compofition.
« If it be said that the Clergy are guided by self-interest in opposing the theories of modern philosophers, we will not deny, but rather glory in the charge. For if the constitution in church and state can alone be upholden by the inaintenance of due subordination, and by the general virtue and good principles of its individual members, can we conceive that the Clergy are not greatly interested in the promo. tion and preservation of these? They have an interest in them, not only of that lower fort which urges every man to exert himself in repelling what is injurious, but an interelt founded on the duties and obligations of their holy office. While the throne and the altar have been overthrown in one kingdom, both have been unimpaired in our own; and when we look back to the consequences attending their destruction, and observe the far different effects that have arisen from their prelervation, every argument that a regard to private and general happiness can dictate, excites mankind to adopt the advice of a very competent judge of human nature; 66 Fear the Lord and the King; and meddle not with them that are given to change *.” There are precepts which the generality of the Clergy have industriously taught; and by which we shall ever, I hope, be guided. And while, by our incorporation with the state, we claim no exclusive privileges, no other exemption from public burdens, than such as are incompatible with our profession, why are we not to be fupposed as much concerned in fecuring the continuance of the just and legal rights of the people as any of the laity ? Admitting that our first folici. tude should be to attend to the spiritual concerns of our brethren, can we be deemed unmindful of these when we occafionally inculcate a proper fubmiffion to the laws and ordinances of man? In this point we follow the example of more than one of the inspired preachers of Christianity. And mould any modern teachers, whether within or without our pale, be zealous in propagating dissatisfaction and discontent-should they suffer their private prejudices and passions to interfere in the discharge of their public duty-their zeal is not that either of their heavenly Lawgiver, or of his immediate disciples; and they are little entitled to that coun: tenance and protection which good men are ever ready to thew to the faithful ministers of Christ.
* The charges indeed of infincerity, and of abandoning doctrines which we have solemnly undertaken to preach, we naturally with to repel; because a filent acquiescence under them may be represented as an acknowledgment of their truth. We beg therefore to assure our accusers, that we require no other latitude of interpretation in explaining the Articles of our church than what may be warranted by considering them as articles of peace, comprehensive in their nature, and in any mysterious point of doctrine to be received “ in such wise as that doctrine is geneTally set forth to us in the Holy Scripture t." History informs us, that in the * Proverbs xxiv. 21. † See conclusion of the XVIIth Article.
original compilation of this work there was a diversity of opinion on some of those points which are still agitated among the believers in the revealed will of God. And when the contender for justification by faith alone shelters himself under the article drawn up expressly on this very subject, we entreat him to extend his tearch to the article that immediately follows, wherein he will find that “ good works are termed the natural, nay the necessary effects of a true and lively faith t.".
" When it is judiciously advised to compare scripture with scripture, in order to elicite the true meaning of any doctrinal point, it may with equal propriery be ad vised to consider collectively the tenor of our Articles. In a work of this confruction, framed by the fallibility of human judgment, it is incumbent on us likewise to have recourse to the controverfies that were sublifting at the period when a rule of faith was agreed upon. And should it appear, as it undoubtedly will, that the minds of men were at that time much employed upon some abitruse and myiterious matters, little tending perhaps to edification, will it not be necessary to ascertain the sentiments which then prevailed, and to inquire whether mutual conceflions were not both demanded and complied with ?
" It is not my design to enter into any minute discussion of the Articles which our church has long since established, and which have never wanted able defenders, but merely to obviate in general the clamours that are too eagerly raised against us. If the aim of some of the separatists from our church be to reform the morals of the people, is not this object more likely to be attained by insisting on the inseparable union of piety with morality, than by creating such a distinction between them as serves to engender pride, and to encourage ideas of fancied superiority ? Independently of the charge of schism, and of making causeless divisions, it ought to be remembered, triat nothing tends so much to weaken our labours as the attempt to Teduce men from the established worship. They thereby become “unstable in their ways ;" they are often less affected to the government under which they live; and they are too readily dilposed to credit the misrepresentations of the " despisers of dominion.” I might appeal to experience for the truth of these observations; but though I mean not to return railing for railing, I feel myself justified in asserting, that neither the interests of religion, nor thole of civil fociety, have yet been promoted by the exertions of some of our modern reformers. Giving credit to many individuals among i hem for the fincerity of their ardor, we wish that they would be fellow-labourers with us, rather than unkindly traduce us; because we are persuaded that they would more effettually serve the caule of Christianity than by the methods they adopt."
Christian Benevolence enforced :-A Sermon preached in the parish Church of
St. Martin, Leicester, on Sunday, O&tober 3, 1803. By EDWARD THOMAS VAUGHAN, M. A. Vicar of St. Martin's and All Saints', Licefier, and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. For the Benefit of a Female Asylum, lately established in thut tuun.
Rivington, Hatchard, &c. THE object of this sermon is of so laudable a nature, that we willingly
.. give it all the publicity in our power. In an advertisement prefixed to the sermon, it is fiated, that “ many persons in the town and neighbourhood of Leicester, commiserating the case of poor girls, have opened an Asylum for them. The delign is to receive such, above the age of twelve years, as appear to be objects of compaflion, to preserve hem from those evils, to wbich they are peculiarly liable, to infill into eir minds principles of morality and religion, and to inure them to bits of industry and chearful obedience, by instructing and employing m in every kind of household work, sewing, getting up liner, &c. b. III. Churchm, Mag. Dec. 1802. B bb
which * See Article XII.
which may qualify them to become good servants, or to earn their support in a reputable manner. A house has been prepared for the purpose, into which twelve girls are received, and placed under the care of an intelligent and experienced matron, subject to the entire direction and controul of fubfcribers."
Such is the scheme of benevolence, which it is the laudable design of this Sernion to promote. We heartily with, that the scheme may be attended with success, and that the example may be followed in other places. Nothing can be more humane, or more wise, than the attempt to prevent evils, which experience has thown to be very difficult, if at all poflible, to be remedied. On the style and manner of the Sermon itself, which we consider as quite distinct from the object intended to be promoted by it, we wish to be indulged in making a few observations, - Though we are not displeased with the attempt at eloquence, which is visible in this Sermon, we do not think, that the preacher has exactly hit upon that species of eloquence, which is best adapted to the pulpit. His composition, indeed, rather gives us the idea of a college declamation, than a serious exhortation of a minister to his flock. We are aware, that, in confequence of a diversity of tastes among men, a difference of opi. nion will always prevail refpecting the kind of eloquence, which is most proper for the pulpit ; and perhaps it is safest to admit, that, within the limits, which are justly allowable, there is room for some variety of kinds. That would be too narrow a scale, which, while it took in the plainness and fimplicity of a Joriin, excluded the ornaments of an Atterbury or a Blair. It is to be remembered, however, that eloquence, when carried beyond a certain pitch, is always in danger of verging towards error or nonsense ; and that, as error will mislead, and nonsense disguit, a species of eloquence, which borders upon either, ought there to be very cauti, ously employed, where to be milled or disgusted may be of consequence to our eternal interests. Let the orator of the bar, or even of the senate. to answer some temporal purpose of importance, carry his argument, if he pleases, beyond its proper reach, and run the hazard of exciting the Sentiment of ridicule ; but let not the preacher of falvation, on any occafon, or to answer any purpose, utter more than the “ words of truth and toberneis.” In di!couries from the pulpit, whatever other indulgences may be conceded, we cannot difpcnfe with the observance of this rule, " that no facrifices be made to the fhrine of eloquence at the expence of truth.' On these grounds, we object to a passage or two in this Sermon. - Near the opening of it, occurs this question :-" That man was not destroyed in the instant of his rebellion, to whom does he owe this, but to the Redeemer of mankind ?” Is not this to imply, that the whole fcheme of man's redemption is to be referred to the Son, in exclusion of the Father ? But this, furely, is not the doctrine of Scripture. We are there told, that “ God 10 loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him thould not perith, but have everlasting life." In our gratitude to the Son, let us not forget our obligations to the Father. It was owing to the mercy of God the Father, that the mediation of his Son in our behalf was accepted ; and it was God the Father, who, in his mercy, fent his Son to be the propitiation for our fins. Our Saviour, in innumerable places, speaks of himself as “ fent by the Father ;” and he ipeaks of the Holy Ghoft as “he, whom the Father was to send in his name.” In considering, therefore, the works either of re
demption or fanctification, we ought never to lose sight of our obligations to God the Father. We cannot approve of exalting one of the divine proceedings at the expence of another, as this preacher seems inclined to do ; „much less can we approye of thus exalting one of the divine persons of the Holy Trinity at the expence of another. Mr. Vaughan will probably tell us, that it was not his intention to do so. This may be true; but still we contend, that his words naturally lead to such an interpretation, and are adapted to confound his hearers. He afterwards says, “ by a life of obedience and suffering, by a death of agony and infamy, he, who made man, procured pardon for the transgressors.” Having before excluded the Father from any concern in man’s redemption, he here proceeds to exclude him from any share in his creation. It is true, that God is said, in Scriyture, to have made the worlds by the instrumentality of the Son; yet the power of creation is ever considered as the peculiar attribute, not of the Son, but of the Father. A reference to the Catechism would have satisfied Mr. Vaughan of this. We are, therefore, of opinion, that he would not, on this occasion, have been less eloquent, and he certainly would have been nearer the truth, if, adhering more closely to the words of Scripture, he had said, “he, who was the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of his person, by whom also he made the worlds, condescended, by a life of obedience and suffering, by a death of agony and infamy, to procure pardon for the transgreffors." All men, indeed, are bound to “honour the Son, even as they honour the Father ;” but this does not excufe such confusion, as we frequently meet with, in considering the different parts of the gracious scheme of redemption, and the obligations we owe to the several perfons of the Holy Trinity.
We might add, as a further instance of facrificing too much for the fake of heightening the effect, that Mr. Vaughan, in applying (p. 12.) a pafsage of the gth psalm, leads his hearers to misinterpret the sense of the word hell. In that paffage, the word hell signifies the grave, not the place of torment appointed for the damned. If, content with using the words of our Saviour, he had said, “ the wicked fhall go away into everlasting punishment,” he would have had, in support of his argument, the senje as well as found of Scripture. .
We have extended these observations beyond what we at first intended; partly, because we think they may be beneficial to this preacher, who is probably a young man, or at least a young composer of fermons, whose judgment is not yet matured, and from whom, in time, we may expect better things; and, partly, because we think the observations applicable, not only to this individual preacher, but to no inconsiderable class of both preachers and writers,
The SIN OF SCHISM : « Sermon, preached at the parish church of Romp
stone, Nottinghamshire, on Sunday July 6, 1800. By EDWARD Pear
SON, B.D. Rector. Second edition, 12mo. pp. 36. N O person can have read the hiftory of the Christian church in the early
ages, or any of the writings of the fathers, without remarking the abhorrence in which was held the SIN OF SCHISM. The farther we advance to the fountain-head, the more solemn and impressive are the dehor- · Bbb 2
. tations of the Christian writers against this fin, which they regarded with horror as a dividing of the Body of Christ. Hence it is that separatists have always endeavoured to prejudice men's minds against the sentiments and characters of the Fathers, and to prevent the facts related by the best ecclefiaftical historians. In this age of error and division, we fall in vain stop the torrent of schism without convincing Christians of the danger of it as a sin. Many members of our church are disposed to treat it as a matter of indifference, and others encourage its progress by favouring the practices of new-fangled sectaries. Under the plausible pretence of forming a union among Christians, men of various communions are invited together into an afiociation, but while the epifcopalian is called to his feat among them, he is unconscious at the moment that he is breaking the unity of the church, for the whole groupe with whom he is aisembled, however divided they may be amongst themselves, are attracted by one fpirit, that of hatred to the Church of England. Where conventicles are established, many well-meaning persons of our communion are incautiously led thither, at times, and thus they prepare the way either for a final separation from the church on their own parts, or else they encourage it in others. We therefore wish the parochial clergy would frequently make church unity and full conformity the subject of their public discourses.
The reverend author of the excellent sermon before us has set a judicious example to his brethren in the ministry, and we hope that it will be generally adopted. The text is very appropriate, i Cor. i. 10. “I bejeech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jejus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you."
The arguments are plain, and scriptural, level to the most common capacities, and yet temperate and pathetic. After explaining the nature of “ religious and social union, or the communion of saints,” as an indispensable duty, Mr. Pearson properly observes that,
os If fuch an union be a duty founded on plain precepts of the Gospel, a breach of it, where it can be preserved, must be a great fin; which fin has obtained the name of fclism or division. If two or more particular churches set up different rules of faith, refuse to cominunicate with each other in worship, in breaking of bread and in prayer, and renounce each other's adminiftration, there is doubuleis a schism, a breach of Christian union, between them. In like manner, if any members of a particular church renounce it's worship and assernblies, refuse to communicate with it in the ordinances of religion, withdraw all obedience from the guides and pastors of it, and let up diitinct assemblies in opposition to it, there is evidently a schism between the members of the church ; a breach of that spiritual union and bond of peace, which the Christian religion prescribes. In these cases the only queltion is who are the Ichismatics, or on whom the guilt of such separation lies.
"Let us now apply these principles to the general case of those, who separate them. felves from the eltablished Church of England. There is evidently between us a breach of that communion of saints, of that union and spiritual fociety, which the Gospel requires among Christians. The congregations, to which they are joined and the national and parish church from which they feparate, hold no communion, but stand in opposition to each other. The teachers, whom they have chosen, and to whose guidance they have committed themselves, owo no relation to our society, but renounce all subjection to its rules and authority. In the language of the primitive church, here is altar set up against altar, worship against worship, pastor against pastor. If ever there was a schilm in any age or part of the Chriftian church, here is one between us : and if the Apostle to severely reproved the contentions, which arose in the church of Corinth, while one said I am of Paul, another Lam of 4 pollos, another I am of Cepbas, and declares them to be carnal, though the perfons,