Page images
PDF
EPUB

Innumerable are the things that usurp the throne of reason, from the ferula in a country school to the finesse of a declaimer in a public assembly. To be sure every one knows best what pleases himself, and where nothing is at stake let men divert themselves with sophistry. But where men's dearest interests are in hand sophistry must be banished, and a close just reasoning pursued. How seldom is this the case!

In

Some mistake the question: as a late anonymous writer among the people called Baptists. The author addresses some of his brethren on the article of mixt communion, and endeavours to dissuade them from admitting to the Lord's supper any that had not been baptized by immersion: and thus to establish what he calls a strict communion. order to prove the necessity of this, the writer undertakes to prove that baptism was administered by immersion to all the members of the primitive churches. He examines the nature, the subject,'the mode, and the end of baptism; and by a too common inadvertence finishes the book without coming to the question. The question was not whether baptism was originally administered to adults on a profession of faith by immersion: In this it seems both agreed; but whether any indulgence ought to be granted to erring consciences and if any, how much? But these were articles the good man never thought of.

Some suppose in arguing what their opponents do not grant. Gregory the great was guilty of this sophism, where he enjoined the bishop of Cagliari

to force Heretics and Jews to be baptized into the catholic faith for, says his holiness, if these converts be hypocrites, yet much will be gained by it, because at least, their children will become good catholics. Really your holiness's infallibility has for once played you a slippery trick. Jews and heretics will not grant, and his Lordship of Cagliari must doubt whether, hypocrisy in a parent will nerate sincerity in a son.

ge

It is not worth while to class the various sophisms which have (inadvertently let it be hoped) dropped from the pens of some who have pleaded for intolerance against the petitioners. The profoundest respect is due to every man who contributes to the elucidation of a question of this kind, and though a freedom may be taken with the little excrescences and luxuriances of such writers, yet no disrespect is intended to their persons, nor any contempt cast on their doctrines, ministry, learning or benevolence. The qualities of their arguments, not of the men that use them, are in dispute.

[ocr errors]

Petitioning, say some, originated in principle. Some of the petitioners are arians. To them indeed a freedom from subscription may be desirable; but what have we to do with it, who subscribe nothing but what we believe? Beside, joining such men in such a request, would be doing all in our power to give them an opportunity of spreading false doctrine. It would be going back to popery by renouncing the doctrines of the reformation. It would reflect dishonour on his ma

[ocr errors]

jesty, and offend the clergy."-Loyalty to the king; respect to the clergy: faith in the thirty-nine articles: the piety of the reformers: the patronage of arianism what a bundle of sophisms are here! 1. Who can prove that petitioning originated in principle? The contrary indeed might be proved. It would be easy to show that an entire liberty of search is an idea prior to all that is meant by principle here. 2. Suppose it did originate in an arian, what then? unless it was a part of his arianism what signifies its originating in the man? Now this is no part of arianism. Arianism belongs to speculation and DOCTRINE, this to practice and DISCIPLINE. Suppose a man should say, Sir, I beg you would not meddle with music, optics, surveying, or gauging, all these are the inventions of geometers, and geometry originated in Egypt, and

if

you do not take care they will make a mummy of you, and send you somewhere to be shown when you are dead. That is, you would reply, the Egyptians, who first dealt in geometry, practised embalming also; cannot I receive one of their inventions without embracing both? 3. It is very questionable whether you do believe all you have subscribed upon oath. You make oath to the truth of so many articles, now their truth to you depends on their containing neither less nor more than you believe of the objects in question: but if the articles do really express your sentiments so exactly, how is it, when your ministers are received to ordination, that they read, and frequently print other creeds extremely different from what

they have subscribed? Allow you do believe all the articles, what is all that to the purpose? The petitioners do not enquire what you believe, but why you believe; not faith, but the power that produces it is the question. You do believe the established doctrines; the petitioners ask whether you believe them because they are established, and you answer, you do believe the doctrines. This is ingenious, but is it logical? 4. You say the arians need exemption from penal statutes, but you do not. Still this is questionable. Most certainly the doctrine preached in most places of worship does need toleration, and by the law is actually exposed to rigour. Pray does your church read Bel and the Dragon for example of life and instruction of manners? Ah! if Harry the VIIIth. should come again and want money, he would catch you all in a præmunire, all to a man without excepting one. Let it be granted that you are safe, is selfishness a part of your religion? and is it generous to forget your brethren now you are at court, as Pharaoh's butler forgat his friend Joseph? and after all, do you not know in your own consciences that liberty to be an arian, and liberty to be a calvinist, are cyons that grow out of the same stock? That is, they both proceed from a liberty of private judgment, which private judgment subjected to the magistrate deprives Calvin and Arminius, Arius and Socinus alike. At this rate, you have a right to be a calvinist only as long as the magistrate pleases; and should the magistrate think proper to reform the church again,

should he discard the thirty-nine articles, and establish the racovian catechism, how can you consistently with your own declarations complain? 5. Joining the petitioners, you add, is helping to spread false doctrine. No surely! Is arianism so self-evident that to propose is to propagate it? Is the divinity of Christ so badly supported by evidence that it must call in the sword? A fair opponent is not against granting his adversary every reasonable advantage, his conquest is the more glorious. Let the arians come forth boldly, let them propose all their objections, if the divinity of Christ be true, it will gloriously answer all : if not true, what interest have you in it? Spread false doctrine? As if the arians had reserved in petto some things not yet said? Why the subject has been exhausted, what can be added? Even say of all sorts of heretics, as one on another occasion, they have said; they do say; they will say; and let them say,

Nothing need be said to prove that truth has nothing to fear from examination in every point of light. If all parties would agree to a general search, perhaps all parties might lose something, but they would gain more than they lost, the truth would come out. A mind properly disposed to truth would not only not forbid any examination, but like some famous painters and printers, would reward such as could discover defects. But here lays the core of the misery, hold fast without wavering is the alpha and omega of every man's creed, be his creed composed when, where, by

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »